Articles Tagged with Personal Injury

Our Atlanta attorneys frequently review cases involving recreational off-road vehicles which involve death and serious injury. The Consumer Product Safety Commission staff has recommended that the agency set mandatory rules to regulate recreational off-road vehicles.

The CPSC’s five commissioners received the written recommendation this week, and must propose a rulemaking before any rules could be implemented. An agency spokesman said the commissioners could vote on whether to proceed with the rulemaking as early as Wednesday of this week.

The off-road vehicles, also known as ROVs, generally have four or more low-pressure tires, seat one or more persons, and are intended mainly for recreational use. ROVs have surged in popularity with more than 416,000 in use at the end of 2008 compared with less than 45,000 in 2003. According to the CPSC 181 accidents occurred between 2003 and August of this year, resulting in 152 injuries and 116 deaths.

Consumers have been battered by the fall of the economy, and a great deal of the blame for the collapse can be laid squarely on banks and other large financial institutions. Having been saved by the federal government bailout, many are now opposing reforms which would protect consumers and help prevent these disasters from happening again.

Tomorrow, the House Financial Services Committee will take up a number of reforms proposed by the Obama administration. Among the proposals the committee will tackle is the establishment of a new consumer financial protection agency.

As proposed the new agency would regulate mortgages, credit cards, debit cards, installment loans and any other product issued by a financial institution. However, leading the opposition to this new agency which would protect consumers is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Make no mistake about it, this is not your local Chamber which fosters new business and donates to charitable causes.

Today I attended the funeral of Thomas E. Magill, a well respected insurance defense attorney in Atlanta. Tom was a absolute pleasure to work with as a defense attorney. Even though his clients were always large insurance companies, Tom dedicated himself to the administration of justice. He was always fair minded, hard working, competent and professional in every sense of the word. I told his wife at his funeral today that working with Tom made me proud to be a lawyer. There were many lawyers in attendance at his funeral who echoed similar sentiments.
The legal profession often is derided by the public for being greedy, insensitive, focused on money and things of that nature. When you reflect on the life of a man like Tom Magill, you see that some of the lawyer jokes and stereotypes are completely misplaced. Tom Magill is the type of man that makes us here at our firm proud to be lawyers. Tom was an active member of his church and community, he was a selfless worker for making sure that justice was served in the cases that he handled for his clients and he always did so with grace, competence and the highest sense of ethics and professionalism. He was a role model for all attorneys.
It is appropriate that we pay tribute to Tom Magill here in our blog. We can only hope and aspire to achieve the many things that Tom did throughout his life. He was truly a very wonderful man and stalwart member of the Georgia Bar. His grace and sense of humor, ever present optimism and kind nature will be missed. May he rest in peace.

Medical malpractice has long been condoned if perpetrated against a service member. Now, in an effort to rectify this grossly unfair situation involving those serving their country, members of the House Judiciary Committee forwarded a bill to the full House of Representatives which would permit servicemembers to sue the military in certain cases of medical malpractice.

While this is a step in the right direction, it appears doubtful the full House and Senate (a companion bill, sponsored by Sen. Charles Schumer, is working through the Senate) will take action to pass this bill. The bill would allow civil lawsuits against military doctors in cases of clear medical negligence, something that’s currently prohibited under federal law.

The current prohibition on servicemembers is based upon the Feres Doctrine, a legal precedent from the 1947 death of active-duty soldier Lt. Rudolph Feres who was killed in a barracks fire. His widow sued the Army for negligence, claiming the facility had a defective heating plant and substandard fire safety controls. But the Supreme Court ruled that servicemembers performing military duties do not fall under federal rules allowing lawsuits against the government.

This past week, the Georgia Supreme Court issued a ruling that was favorable to victims of crime who have civil tort claims arising out of the criminal acts perpetrated against them. The Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations is tolled for victims of crime for any claims arising out of the criminal acts perpetrated against them until such time as the criminal prosecution of the perpetrator is terminated. See Beneke v. Parker, ___ Ga. ___ No. S08G2078, (2009).
What is interesting about this new Supreme Court opinion is that our law firm had written an article about the Victim’s Right Statute enacted by the Legislature and codified in O.C.G.A. § 9-3-99 over one year before this opinion was rendered. In this article which was published in the Georgia Trial Lawyers magazine “The Verdict”, our firm had presaged this opinion by stating that it was likely that the statute might protect victims of traffic crimes by tolling the statute of limitations in their cases. It was pointed out to members of Bar that if they had a case where there client had been victimized by a traffic violations they might be able to circumvent the statute of limitations by relying on the new statute. We specifically pointed out in our article that the Victim’s Crime Act could be used in cases where there were violations of criminal laws as pertains to the operation of a motor vehicle.
The lawyer in the Beneke case read our article and used our arguments to win this case for his client. In the Beneke v. Parker case, the Supreme Court held that the plain language of O.C.G.A. § 9-3-99 encompasses a violation of the Uniform Rules of the Road. The Court wrote to impose a more stringent definition of “crime” within the context of the statute would render superfluous its language that “the statute of limitation is tolled from the date of the alleged crime or “the act” giving rise to such action in tort” until the prosecution or other termination of such crime or “act.” In short, even a traffic violation which results in criminal charges being filed against the perpetrator can be used under this new statute to toll the statute of limitations for the victim of the crime until such time as the criminal perpetrator’s case has been disposed of in the criminal system.
To see a copy of our article, please hit the link provided for further detail on the possible impact this new statute may have on you or a member of your family if you are a victim of a crime.

Continue reading

In early September, a veteran of the California Highway Patrol was provided a loaner vehicle from a Lexus dealer while his car was being serviced. After leaving the dealership, this 19-year law enforcement officer, whose job included safety inspections, was faced with a tragic situation. The vehicle he was driving suddenly and unexpectedly began to accelerate out of control. It appears from the investigation conducted to date that the officer was unable to stop the vehicle. Witnesses stated that the car was traveling in excess of 100 miles per hour when it crashed. Prior to the collision, one of the passengers inside the vehicle had called 911 to report a stuck accelerator on the vehicle. Regrettably, not only was the officer killed but also three members of his family.

Last week, perhaps in response to this fatal collision, Toyota announced the biggest recall in its history. It now appears that federal investigators are looking into over 100 accidents allegedly caused by stuck gas pedals on Toyota vehicles. According to news accounts, there are four possible reasons for these sudden unintended accelerations of Toyota vehicles: 1) the floor mats are too long and/or too thick; 2) the mats are not properly secured on the floor; 3) the gas pedal design is flawed; or 4) the floor’s geometry is defective in and of itself. Poorly designed floor mats have been suspected to be the problem for some time. Last week the Japanese automaker issued a safety advisory urging Toyota owners of over 3.8 million cars and trucks to remove driver side mats from their vehicles. Obviously, the Company is concerned that its customers could be placed in a similar situation as was the family of this highway patrol officer who lost their lives due to unintended sudden acceleration.

Toyota’s warning affects various models from 2006 to 2010. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has apparently received reports of 102 incidents in which the accelerator may have become stuck on Toyota manufactured vehicles. This sudden acceleration problem has resulted in 13 crashes, 17 injuries and at least 5 fatalities. (It is not known whether the NHTSA statistics which were publicly reported included the 4 reported deaths which recently occurred in California.)

The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have represented many clients who have sustained serious injuries as a result of falling in hospitals, nursing homes and extended care facilities. Patients who are long term residents in skilled nursing facilities are by definition in a compromised state of health, usually from multiple chronic medical problems. These patients are often weak, are subject to lightheaded spells, become confused and have significant deficiencies of mobility and balance. Falling, sometimes frequent falling is thus a common occurrence for these patients. The consequence of these events can range from simple, inconsequential bruising to severe complications such as broken bones to intracranial hemorrhages. Furthermore, even relatively simple additional stresses imposed on an already debilitated state can have long term effects on a patient’s overall medical condition over and above the specific effects of the fall itself. For example, it is well known that such patients who sustain a fractured hip have much higher 6 month mortality even after the fracture has healed and baseline mobility has been re-established. Although skilled nursing facilities and other medical providers are well aware of the risks to elderly patients who fall, they are often negligent in a variety of ways, including failing to adopt safety measures to protect patients.
If your loved on has been injured as a result of the negligence of a nursing home or other skilled nursing facility, contact the experienced Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP at (800) 228-9159.

Everyday patients fall in Georgia nursing homes. Our Atlanta attorneys have successfully tried cases against nursing homes and other skilled care facilities in which patients have suffered severe injuries due to preventable falls.

Patients who are in long term nursing homes are by definition in a compromised state of health, usually from multiple chronic medical problems. These patients are often weak, are subject to lightheaded spells, become confused and have significant deficiencies of mobility and balance. Falling is a common occurrence for these patients. The consequence of these events can range from simple, inconsequential bruising to severe complications such as broken bones to severe head injuries.

Even relatively simple additional stresses imposed on an already weak person can have long term and devastating effects on a patient’s overall medical condition. It is a fact that such patients who sustain a fractured hip have a much higher 6 month death rate even after the fracture has healed.

Every year Georgia citizens purchase and take millions of dollars worth of prescription medication, thinking that it is safe to do so. Georgia injury lawyers know that unfortunately, many of these medications are dangerous drugs, notwithstanding the fact that the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has “approved” them. As we have seen, many of these dangerous drugs cause serious injuries and sometimes result in the wrongful death of the consumer. An example of such a drug is Vioxx. Fortunately, some victims and their families are getting justice. The Philadelphia Inquirer just reported that New Jersey’s highest court has upheld $4.5 million in Vioxx-related damages against drug maker Merck & Co. The lawsuit was filed by the widow of John McDarby who developed heart problems after taking the drug and ultimately died of a heart attack. The original $13.9 million award in the case was later reduced to $4.5 million. Read Article: Philadelphia Inquirer
If you or a loved one has been seriously injured as a result of taking a dangerous drug, call the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP for a free consultation. We have been representing victims of serious injuries and wrongful death for over 40 years.

Georgia injury lawyers know that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is hardly the consumer safety “watchdog” that it was in prior years. In fact, just because a product has been approved by the FDA does not mean that it is a safe product! The influence drug manufacturers have over regulators, politicians and Congress is enormous. The Washington Post recently reported in an article (The Washington Post) that the FDA approved a controversial knee-surgery device after receiving pressure from lawmakers and lobbyists. According to a report released last week by the FDA, regulators seem to have buckled under political pressure from four New Jersey lawmakers with financial ties to ReGen Biologics. The report noted that FDA staff had previously opposed approval of the device.
The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have been representing the victims of dangerous drugs and medical devices and other dangerous products for many years. If you or a loved one have been injured as a result of a dangerous products, call us for a free consultation at (800) 228-9159.