Personal Injury & Wrongful Death

Dangers From MS Drug Tysabri

Many drugs which offer promising cures when first introduced later prove to be ineffective or even dangerous. One that falls in the dangerous category is Tysabri, manufactured by Biogen, Inc. Tysarbi is a prescription medicine approved for patients with relapsing forms of MS. It has been shown to slow the worsening of disability that is common in patients with MS and decrease the number of flare-ups or relapses of the disease.
However, Biogen recently reported the ninth confirmed case of progressive multifocal leukoencphalopathy (PML)
(more…)

ATV Liability – Do You Have Insurance Coverage Under Your Homeowners Policy?

The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have written before about the potential liability one may have for ATV accidents, especially if it involves riding passengers. Not only does the owner of the ATV risk being sued for injuries or death caused by their use of the ATV, but they may also find that there is no liability coverage available to them when they are sued. Last week, the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of summary judgment to Allstate

(more…)

Medical Errors At VA Hospital Concealed

Our Atlanta medical malpractice attorneys frequently see cases in which the practices engaged in by physicians are questionable. Yet in many instances the practices are so egregious that one has to wonder how the medical establishment could allow them to occur or continue. Yesterday, the New York Times reported just such a situation at a VA Hospital in Philadelphia.
In a common treatment for prostate cancer, doctors implant dozens of radioactive seeds in the prostate to attack the cancerous cells. But, according to reports,
(more…)

Representing Children in Serious Injury Cases

Over the years, our lawyers have handled many different cases involving serious injuries to children. These injuries arise in a myriad of contexts and are oftentimes heartbreaking. Over the years, we have had serious burn injury cases, dog bite cases,unsafe premises, sexual abuse cases, car accidents, medical malpractice cases, drowning accidents, playground injuries,unsafe consumer products, school injuries and the like, all involving young children. Some of these cases have resulted in wrongful deaths, comas, paralysis, burns and amputations. Presently, we are handling injuries to children
(more…)

Zicam Recalled for Dangerous Effects

Yesterday, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned consumers to stop using Zicam, a popular homeopathic cold remedy, because it could damage or destroy their sense of smell, a condition called anosmia.
The Food and Drug Administration received 130 reports from consumers and doctors of people losing their sense of smell after using one of the Zicam nasal products, which include Zicam Cold Remedy and Zicam Cold Remedy Swabs. The reports date to 1999, when Matrixx Initiatives of Scottsdale, Ariz., first introduced the products.
(more…)

ATV Accident Results in Serious Injury and Criminal Charge

The Georgia injury lawyers have written before that with the growing popularity of ATV’s or All-Terrain Vehicles, serious injury and death cases are on the increase in Georgia, especially among children. Today I read about a tragic case that occurred on May 16th in South Carolina. In that case, a 15- year-old girl was riding on the seat behind her 32 year old neighbor when the neighbor lost control of the vehicle and the two were ejected. As a result, the teen sustained
href=”https://www.finchmccranie.com/spinal-cord-injury-lawyer.html”>spinal cord injuries
and is now paralyzed. According to police, the driver was operating the ATV at a high rate of speed and neither of the riders was wearing a helmet. The ATV was not designed to carry passengers. Moreover, the driver allegedly tested positive for marijuana. As a result of the accident, the driver has been criminally charged by authorities. Almost all ATV fatalities or serious injuries occur while violating one or more of the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s “Rules of ATV Operation”and this case was no exception. These rules are as follows:
A. Children under sixteen should not ride adult-sized ATV (engines bigger than 90 cc’s).
B. Take a hands-on safety course.
C. Always wear a helmet while on an ATV.
D. Never drive an ATV on paved roads.
E. Never drive while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
F. Never drive an ATV with a passenger, and never ride as a passenger.
Despite these common sense rules, we continue to see children operating ATV’s and worse yet, operating them with passengers. Every new ATV that has come from the factory in recent years has a decal that warns the driver not to ride passengers. An adult who negligently rides a passenger on an ATV who is subsequently injured may subject themselves to civil liability for doing so. If you or a loved one has been seriously injured on an ATV, call the ATV injury lawyers at Finch McCranie LLP at 1 (800) 228-9159.

Medical Malpractice Awards Decrease

Medical malpractice claims in Georgia are constantly coming under fire from insurance companies and doctors who allege they raise the costs of medical care through increased insurance costs to doctors. For many years our Atlanta based attorneys have watched as these large insurance companies and medical groups spend massive sums to influence politicians to enact legislation eroding the rights of innocent victims of medical negligence.
A recent study in New York has exposed these false arguments.Data from the National Practitioner Data Bank show 1,882
(more…)

Police Chase For Non-Violent Crime Turns Deadly

We read yesterday in the paper about a tragic case in Charlotte, N.C. involving a police chase which resulted in the death of an innocent 84-year old woman who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and got caught up in the chase, resulting in her death. According to the news reports of the incident, the police were chasing a suspected shoplifter who had committed a petty offense at a local shopping mall. Although the news reports are sketchy, it appears that the merchant called the police and shortly thereafter the police spotted the vehicle being operated by the suspected thief. A three mile chase ensued at high speeds and during the chase, the suspect lost control of his vehicle and struck the vehicle being operated by the innocent victim. Her death resulted. The petty thief has now been charged with murder.
We have blogged before in the past about the reasons why there should be policies prohibiting these kinds of chases. The death penalty to the innocent is the end result and in our judgment the death of this innocent lady cannot be justified by the need to apprehend a suspected petty thief. The news reports are sketchy as to what was stolen, but it appears that it was merchandise probably worth less than $100.00. In order to apprehend a petty thief, the police made a decision to expose innocent members of the motoring public to the possibility of serious injury or death. When balancing the risk to the public caused by a dangerous high speed chase against the need to apprehend the offender, it is our judgment, and that of many experts in the field, that public policy demands that in such circumstances, when the police are chasing a non-violent offender, they should terminate such a chase because it is foreseeable that an innocent third party might be seriously injured or killed if they do not. Because this chase happened over a three mile span, the police should have known that the suspect was not going to pull over and that the risk to the public caused by the chase itself was a greater danger to the public than was the suspect himself.
The police are defending the chase, as they always do. They are stating that the suspect was found to be on probation and had a criminal record for other theft offenses. These facts, probably discovered after the fact, were probably not known to the pursuing officer. Facts discovered after an incident can hardly justify an officer’s actions at the time of the incident. In this case, according to the news accounts, the officer only knew that the suspect he was pursuing at high speeds was a petty thief. Why would the police condone a chase where a death occurs when the need to apprehend was so slight and the danger to the public presented by a petty thief was far less than the danger to the public presented by the chase itself?
Of course, we do not know all the facts surrounding this case and can only base our views on what little information has been publicly released. Nonetheless, it is our strong belief and that of many experts throughout the country, including many involved in law enforcement, that law enforcement must do a better job of policing itself and must not condone dangerous high speed police chases in the context of a non-violent offense where the suspect/offender poses little or no danger to the public and the chase itself poses considerable dangers, oftentimes resulting in serious injury or death. This tragic case in Charlotte is no different from many others throughout the country. Indeed, our firm is handling a similar case in Augusta where the police were chasing two shoplifters which resulted in the death of three individuals. We pose the question: Was the death penalty to the innocent justified by the need to apprehend the suspect and the danger to the public presented by the petty thief? We think not.

(more…)

Georgia Wrongful Death Actions:Who Has The Right To Sue? (Part IV)

In a wrongful death case where the deceased individual is survived neither by a spouse, child or parent, under Georgia law such a cause of action would vest in the Executor or Administrator of the Estate. In short, there will always be someone able to proceed on behalf of the “heirs-at-law” and such an individual, once duly appointed, will proceed in a fiduciary capacity to protect the rights of the heirs-at-law relative to the wrongful death action. Thus, if an individual dies and is neither
(more…)

Georgia Wrongful Death Actions:Who Has The Right To Sue? (Part III)

In Georgia, if an individual loses her or her life due to the negligence of a third party and is not survived either by a spouse or children, the cause of action for the wrongful death of such an individual vests in the surviving parents. If both parents are alive, the cause of action is vested jointly in the parents if they are living together. If one parent is deceased, the right is in the surviving parent. If both parents are living, but are
(more…)

What Damages Are Available In Wrongful Death Actions?

In Georgia when an innocent person is killed due to the negligence of a third person, the survivors have a claim for wrongful death damages. The full value of the life of the decedent includes both economic and non-economic components. The economic components are more readily deduced. If you take the earning capacity of the decedent, you multiply it over their projected work life expectancy and come up with a calculation as to what future lost wages would be due to the wrongful death.
(more…)

Challenges Associated With Serious Burn Injury Cases

Our firm regrettably has encountered several tragic cases involving serious burn injuries. These cases arise in a variety of contexts. Some of our clients have had chemical burns, others have had burns suffered in fires caused by defective products. We have handled wrongful death cases involving the death of young children due to defective air purifiers and serious disfigurement caused in automobile collisions and/or tractor-trailer accidents. Regardless of the factual context, for the victim who is innocent in the premises and suffers serious burn injuries
(more…)

Henry County Police Chase Ends In Death Of Teenage Passenger

On April 2 of this year, we blogged about an important decision rendered by the Georgia Court of Appeals on March 28, 2013 indicating that innocent passengers unwittingly involved in high speed police pursuits can file a claim for damages sustained if they prove a reckless disregard of proper police procedure by the police officer initiating or continuing the pursuit. The newspaper accounts of the incident in Henry County do not provide much by way of detail but apparently police officers were pursuing the
(more…)

Filing A Federal Tort Claims Act Case Against the United States

As is true of any other claim against the Federal Government, if a tort has been committed for which a government employee was negligent which caused injury or damages to an innocent third party, the procedures of the Federal Tort Claims Act govern the claim. A Standard Form 95 with all supporting documents needs to be filed with the appropriate government agency involved before the expiration of two years. Regardless of the agency involved, the form must to be received by the appropriate agency/department.
(more…)

Legal Liability For Emergency Vehicle Negligence

In urban America it is not uncommon to see speeding government vehicles heading toward a variety of locations. Whether the emergency vehicle be a fire truck, an ambulance or police vehicle this is a common day occurrence in places like Atlanta. Regrettably, during some of these responses, the emergency vehicles collide with innocent motorists. When this happens, obviously, the issue is whether there is legal liability for the operator of the emergency vehicle/government.
Under O.C.G.A. § 40-6-6, emergency vehicles are permitted to disregard traffic rules
(more…)

Innocent Passengers Involved In Police Chases Can Sue

On March 28 of this year, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that innocent passengers unwittingly involved in a high speed pursuit case can sue the police for damages caused, in part, by a reckless disregard of proper police procedure. In so ruling, the Court of Appeals noted that the police pursuit statute found at O.C.G.A. § 40-6-6(d)(2) was enacted by the Georgia Legislature to protect the rights of the innocent. Whether an innocent person is either inside or outside of a vehicle is not relevant. The question is, whether the injured party filing a claim against the police was innocent of wrongdoing. If innocent, whether a passenger inside the vehicle or a pedestrian outside the vehicle or any other third party, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that such a person could bring a claim, again, provided they were innocent and were injured, in part, by a reckless disregard of proper police procedure.
Fleeing suspects who are injured or killed as a result of a high speed pursuit may not bring a claim for damages even if the police violate proper police procedure during the pursuit. The simple reason is that drivers who flee cannot be innocent. They are violating the law by fleeing which is in Georgia a felony. A passenger who has nothing to do with the flight and who does not control the vehicle and, in fact, asks that the vehicle be stopped so that they are not involved in a pursuit can pursue a remedy if they suffer damages as a result of a reckless disregard of proper police procedure. In the cases of McCobb and Powell v. Clayton County, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that innocent passengers who are injured during a high speed pursuit can sue not only the fleeing driver but also the police provided, of course, that not only are they innocent but that there is evidence of a reckless disregard of proper police procedure either during the decision to initiate the pursuit or continue the pursuit which contributed to or caused their damages.
Most high speed pursuits involve non-violent suspects who are either violating traffic laws or are wanted for some other non-violent offense. If during a pursuit third parties are unnecessarily and recklessly endangered thereby, proper police procedure requires that such a pursuit be terminated. It is not worth killing innocent persons to apprehend a suspect for a non-violent offense. However, if the suspect being pursued is a murderer, rapist or armed robber and is otherwise known to be dangerous and violent, then the dangers to the public can be justified even during a high speed pursuit because the need to apprehend is equal to or greater than the danger to the public caused by the pursuit.

(more…)

The Value Of Demonstrative Evidence

There is an old saying that a picture is worth a thousand words. In legal cases presented to a jury, this is particularly true. If you have photographs of an automobile collision’s aftermath and can graphically demonstrate the damage to the vehicles involved, this is much better and more persuasive evidence than is an oral description of the same damage. Likewise, if there are x-rays or photographs of a client’s injuries, this too is very persuasive. Where original photographic evidence or videotaped evidence is not
(more…)

Achieving Justice In A Personal Injury Case

Oftentimes clients like to refer to news articles about some substantial jury verdict or settlement in favor of a plaintiff in a particular case. Our advice when these comments are made is that it is very dangerous to compare apples to oranges. Literally speaking, no two cases are alike and it is difficult to compare one person’s case to another. On the other hand, the paramount goal of our attorneys is to make sure that our clients receive the best possible result given the facts of their particular case. Here, we like to compare apples to apples insofar as possible.
In order to achieve justice for our clients, we have to conduct an investigation of the facts, analyze all available and pertinent materials, compare them with the database of hundreds, if not thousands, of jury verdict research services concerning verdicts and settlements of similar cases in the past and then try to advise our clients what fair compensation would mean for their particular case. Each case has its own settlement value. If a case has clear liability such as a drunk driver running a stop sign and clear damages such as broken bones, which can be demonstrated with x-rays and other diagnostic tests, such a case is fairly easy to evaluate, however, if the case involves disputed issues of liability such as who ran the stop sign or who failed to yield and disputed issues of damages, such as did the plaintiff have a pre-existing back injury, was the back injury aggravated or is the back injury either new or non-existing injury, the case is more difficult to evaluate. As can be seen, the facts largely dictate what would constitute reasonable compensation for a particular case.
Our advice to our clients is that if they can get a settlement offer during settlement negotiations which is equivalent to or better than what a jury is likely to return in a verdict, then they should strongly consider accepting such an offer. If the offer made is less, in our judgment, than what a jury would likely award, then we usually advise our clients that they could consider rejecting such an offer. Oftentimes clients wish to settle cases even though we may not advise that they accept the offer and in some instances, clients want more than we recommend is reasonable.

(more…)

Georgia’s New Rules Of Evidence

Effective January 1, 2013, Georgia’s New Rules of Evidence go into effect. The new provisions are found generally at O.C.G.A. Title 24, Chapter 1 through 10. The new code applies to all cases filed on/or after 1/01/13 and to all trials commenced on/or after said date. What this means is that the new Rules of Evidence will apply to any case in Georgia beginning on January 1, 2013, and going forward.
By in large Georgia’s New Rules of Evidence are patterned after the Federal Rules of Evidence. This is a change in the right direction for trial lawyers because the Rules of Evidence are now codified. Previously, Georgia Rules of Evidence were a hodge-podge of various statutory and common law rulings which had to be located in different sections of the code. Now the Rules of Evidence are codified in a single title in ten (10) chapters. Because the new rules are patterned after the Federal Rules there is an abundance of case authority interpreting these rules for practitioners to rely upon when determining whether a particular piece of evidence is or is not admissible under the rules.
All the Rules of Evidence are designed to insure that only reliable evidence is presented for a jury’s consideration. The purpose of the rules is to make sure that in any dispute, whether it is civil or criminal, that a jury only be given reliable evidence which is trustworthy. Unreliable, prejudicial evidence is generally excluded under these rules. Because there are many different types of evidence offered during jury trials whether the evidence be from video recordings, medical records, financial records or otherwise the new rules are designed to make sure that evidence will only be admitted from trustworthy and reliable sources and that any verdict rendered based on such evidence is likewise more reliable than would otherwise be the case.

(more…)

Excessive Force Used In Detaining A Shoplifter

Today we read newspaper accounts about a suspected shoplifter being killed by security personnel at a local Walmart here in Georgia. According to news accounts, the suspected shoplifter allegedly took some merchandise with him outside the store at which point he was tackled to the ground and then held in a “choke hold” for an undetermined period of time. When the police arrived the suspect was motionless and determined to be dead, apparently from trauma inflicted when he was subdued.
Under Georgia law, shopkeepers have
(more…)