Troy Gott, after 13 years in practice, left Patterson Gott & Burk LC and his former partners have modified the law firm’s name to reflect the change.
Gary Patterson and Travis Burk say the personal injury firm, as of Jan. 1, is called Patterson | Burk LP.
“I left to pursue a different opportunity,” says Gott, who started Gott Law LLC. “Things were not working out.”
Both sides say the split was a mutual parting of ways, but philosophical differences about the business appear to be at the heart of the issue.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
First Personal Injury Fantastic
Posted: 26/02/10
email to a friend
Share
Accident Claims Solicitors, First Personal Injury has praised the latest phase of the Health and Safety Executive’s Shattered Lives safety campaign.
The latest phase of the campaign aims to raise awareness of the potential dangers of trips and falls in the workplace and features some graphic and hard hitting posters. The posters, typically featuring alarming images of workers ‘shattering’ upon impact following a fall, also feature safety information targeted at reducing such accidents.
Michael Jefferies of First Personal Injury believes the campaign has great potential for success. “The latest phase of Shattered Lives really hits a message home hard. The images are quite disturbing, yes, but sometimes that’s exactly what it takes to get a point across. Given the number of workplace accident victims we deal with here, we know how devastating slips and trips at work can be. What’s great about this campaign is that it uses graphics to convey that and then also provides the information people need to cut the numbers of injuries like this.”
And indeed the campaign is rich in information, with the Shattered Lives area of the HSE website offering a whole host of resources including industry specific posters for download, hazard spotting checklists and information kits.
Michael, who has previously spoken of his wish to see more Health and Safety resources available to employees, is keen to see the HSE build on this. “What is available is fantastic. There’s no denying that. But I honestly believe that building on this with some form of compulsory course for employees would make a really notable difference to the figures.”
For further information
Contact:
Michael Jefferies
First Personal Injury
0800 014 1629
email to a friend
Share
Accident Claims Solicitors, First Personal Injury has praised the latest phase of the Health and Safety Executive’s Shattered Lives safety campaign.
The latest phase of the campaign aims to raise awareness of the potential dangers of trips and falls in the workplace and features some graphic and hard hitting posters. The posters, typically featuring alarming images of workers ‘shattering’ upon impact following a fall, also feature safety information targeted at reducing such accidents.
Michael Jefferies of First Personal Injury believes the campaign has great potential for success. “The latest phase of Shattered Lives really hits a message home hard. The images are quite disturbing, yes, but sometimes that’s exactly what it takes to get a point across. Given the number of workplace accident victims we deal with here, we know how devastating slips and trips at work can be. What’s great about this campaign is that it uses graphics to convey that and then also provides the information people need to cut the numbers of injuries like this.”
And indeed the campaign is rich in information, with the Shattered Lives area of the HSE website offering a whole host of resources including industry specific posters for download, hazard spotting checklists and information kits.
Michael, who has previously spoken of his wish to see more Health and Safety resources available to employees, is keen to see the HSE build on this. “What is available is fantastic. There’s no denying that. But I honestly believe that building on this with some form of compulsory course for employees would make a really notable difference to the figures.”
For further information
Contact:
Michael Jefferies
First Personal Injury
0800 014 1629
Friday, February 26, 2010
San Francisco's Kelly Personal Injury Attorney
SAN FRANCISCO, CA, February 25, 2010 /24-7PressRelease/ -- Michael A. Kelly, a personal injury attorney with Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger, traveled across the country to provide representation in a Minnesota medical malpractice case that ended with the largest birth injury verdict in state history. On February 11, the plaintiff received a $23.3 million verdict, which set Minnesota records and joined the top reported birth injury rulings across the nation. In trying the case, Kelly worked with Minnesota lawyers Edward Matonich and Julie Matonich, of Matonich and Persson.
The lawsuit centered upon the injuries of Kylie Rogers, a two-year-old who suffers from spastic quadriplegia, cerebral palsy, visual impairment, seizures and neurological problems as a result of negligence during her birth. The child's mother filed suit after the attending doctor and nurses failed to recognize signs of fetal distress and administered extremely high doses of birth-inducing chemicals. In alleging medical malpractice, the mother claimed that the attending hospital staff should have recognized the futility of a vaginal birth and ordered an emergency C-section, thus avoiding the complications that ultimately led to Kylie's present condition.
Kelly's successful cross-examination of multiple defense medical experts helped to demonstrate that Kylie Rogers' birth injuries were preventable, and that the managing physician ( a Family Medicine specialist as opposed to an Obstetrician) as well as the local hospital's nurses, fell below accepted standards of care. In its verdict, the jury of six men and two women awarded the child $1.7 million for past health care expenses; $10 million for future health care expenses; $1 million for past and future pain, disability and emotional distress; $10 million for future pain disability and emotional distress; and $1.5 million for loss of earning capacity.
Kelly was quoted after the verdict commending the hard work and independence of the jurors and the fair and effective administration of the trial by the trial judge.
Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger is a nationally-known personal injury law firm based in San Francisco, whose attorneys participate in high profile litigation both locally and nationally. Michael A. Kelly is an award-winning attorney who most recently was voted the "Best Personal Injury Attorney " in San Francisco. He has been named to the list of the "Best Lawyers in America" for 15 consecutive years, and is a 7 time recipient of Northern California Super Lawyer recognition. Known as "The Million-Dollar Man," Kelly has been involved in over 150 cases resulting in at least a $1,000,000 verdict or settlement in favor of his client. Visit their Web site, http://www.walkuplawoffice.com for more information
The lawsuit centered upon the injuries of Kylie Rogers, a two-year-old who suffers from spastic quadriplegia, cerebral palsy, visual impairment, seizures and neurological problems as a result of negligence during her birth. The child's mother filed suit after the attending doctor and nurses failed to recognize signs of fetal distress and administered extremely high doses of birth-inducing chemicals. In alleging medical malpractice, the mother claimed that the attending hospital staff should have recognized the futility of a vaginal birth and ordered an emergency C-section, thus avoiding the complications that ultimately led to Kylie's present condition.
Kelly's successful cross-examination of multiple defense medical experts helped to demonstrate that Kylie Rogers' birth injuries were preventable, and that the managing physician ( a Family Medicine specialist as opposed to an Obstetrician) as well as the local hospital's nurses, fell below accepted standards of care. In its verdict, the jury of six men and two women awarded the child $1.7 million for past health care expenses; $10 million for future health care expenses; $1 million for past and future pain, disability and emotional distress; $10 million for future pain disability and emotional distress; and $1.5 million for loss of earning capacity.
Kelly was quoted after the verdict commending the hard work and independence of the jurors and the fair and effective administration of the trial by the trial judge.
Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger is a nationally-known personal injury law firm based in San Francisco, whose attorneys participate in high profile litigation both locally and nationally. Michael A. Kelly is an award-winning attorney who most recently was voted the "Best Personal Injury Attorney " in San Francisco. He has been named to the list of the "Best Lawyers in America" for 15 consecutive years, and is a 7 time recipient of Northern California Super Lawyer recognition. Known as "The Million-Dollar Man," Kelly has been involved in over 150 cases resulting in at least a $1,000,000 verdict or settlement in favor of his client. Visit their Web site, http://www.walkuplawoffice.com for more information
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Dust May Be a Health Hazard
“Residents of a luxury Manhattan apartment building, located on East 47th Street, are expressing concerns about their health after a report revealed that dust in their apartments contains high levels of carcinogens,” says George W. Ilchert, Esq., a partner with Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell and Ryan, LLP (www.limrlaw.com), a personal injury law firm based in New York City. “The dust, which covered the interior of some of these luxury apartments, was the result of construction work that had been done to the building's facade.”
The toxic substance contained in the construction dust is called crystalline silica, according to Ilchert, and has been known to cause silicosis, which is a serious and sometimes fatal lung disease.
“According to published reports, a leading environmental testing-company reportedly found elevated levels of crystalline silica in at least one tenant's apartment,” says Ilchert. “That resident claims that the dust from the recent construction caused him to have trouble breathing and eye irritation.”
Although the building’s management company has denied any wrongdoing, lawyers and investigators will have to ascertain if management allowed residents of the building to live in an unsafe environment, according to Ilchert.
“When it comes to construction being done on New York’s buildings, it is imperative that responsible parties ensure that they are safe for occupancy before allowing residents or the public back inside,” Ilchert says.
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and buses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
Contact
dZine It
Peter Crisafi
pete@dzineit.net
Tel: (718) 336-2660
The toxic substance contained in the construction dust is called crystalline silica, according to Ilchert, and has been known to cause silicosis, which is a serious and sometimes fatal lung disease.
“According to published reports, a leading environmental testing-company reportedly found elevated levels of crystalline silica in at least one tenant's apartment,” says Ilchert. “That resident claims that the dust from the recent construction caused him to have trouble breathing and eye irritation.”
Although the building’s management company has denied any wrongdoing, lawyers and investigators will have to ascertain if management allowed residents of the building to live in an unsafe environment, according to Ilchert.
“When it comes to construction being done on New York’s buildings, it is imperative that responsible parties ensure that they are safe for occupancy before allowing residents or the public back inside,” Ilchert says.
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and buses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
Contact
dZine It
Peter Crisafi
pete@dzineit.net
Tel: (718) 336-2660
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
New York Lawyers There to Help
2010-02-23 17:42:18 - NYC Personal Injury Lawyer represents victims of personal injury, accident injury and medical malpractice within New York City (NYC) including Queens, Bronx, Manhattan and Brooklyn.
NYC Personal Injury Law Firm - Frekhtman and Associates represents victims of personal injury within New York City. Visit us at www.866attylaw.com/personal_injury for more information.
Every single year, several accidents take place within New York (NY) and some of these can be termed as minor whereas others can result in serious and often fatal personal injuries. On most occasions, it is
seen that accidents can take place due to the negligence of the auto, car, motorcycle or truck drivers, pedestrians, driving conditions or it could be the result of drunken driving. It is sad that innocent people lose their lives due to negligence or even dangerous actions of individuals.
A personal injury class action lawsuit is filed by a person on behalf of him or her and a group of other people who suffered any personal injury. For instance, accident lawsuits, medical practice lawsuits and personal injury lawsuits, are all done as class action lawsuits and the settlement funding from these are meant to cover all those who signed up for the lawsuit and the representative is supposed to act in best interests of the group.
Following are some of the things that you will need to do before filing a personal injury lawsuit-
1. Proof of personal injury on account of negligence of some individual or authority
2. Once you identify your injury, you must go about gathering all documents that will prove your injuries
3. Gather all your records, pictures and videos and be prepared to show them in court
4. Find others who might have suffered similar injuries. Study the outcome of similar case as yours and you will be better prepared
5. Contact an NYC personal injury lawyer if you need to file your personal injury lawsuit within the Statute of Limitations. Thus, you must contact an accident attorney to get updated information before filing a personal injury lawsuit
Watch Video by New York Personal Injury Lawyer at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mSIXMcUJiY or contact us at 1-866-ATTY-LAW for more information about Frekhtman and Assocaites.
NYC Personal Injury Law Firm - Frekhtman and Associates represents victims of personal injury within New York City. Visit us at www.866attylaw.com/personal_injury for more information.
Every single year, several accidents take place within New York (NY) and some of these can be termed as minor whereas others can result in serious and often fatal personal injuries. On most occasions, it is
seen that accidents can take place due to the negligence of the auto, car, motorcycle or truck drivers, pedestrians, driving conditions or it could be the result of drunken driving. It is sad that innocent people lose their lives due to negligence or even dangerous actions of individuals.
A personal injury class action lawsuit is filed by a person on behalf of him or her and a group of other people who suffered any personal injury. For instance, accident lawsuits, medical practice lawsuits and personal injury lawsuits, are all done as class action lawsuits and the settlement funding from these are meant to cover all those who signed up for the lawsuit and the representative is supposed to act in best interests of the group.
Following are some of the things that you will need to do before filing a personal injury lawsuit-
1. Proof of personal injury on account of negligence of some individual or authority
2. Once you identify your injury, you must go about gathering all documents that will prove your injuries
3. Gather all your records, pictures and videos and be prepared to show them in court
4. Find others who might have suffered similar injuries. Study the outcome of similar case as yours and you will be better prepared
5. Contact an NYC personal injury lawyer if you need to file your personal injury lawsuit within the Statute of Limitations. Thus, you must contact an accident attorney to get updated information before filing a personal injury lawsuit
Watch Video by New York Personal Injury Lawyer at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mSIXMcUJiY or contact us at 1-866-ATTY-LAW for more information about Frekhtman and Assocaites.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Going After Drug Companies
According to George W. Ilchert, Esq., a partner with Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell and Ryan, LLP (www.limrlaw.com), a personal injury law firm with experience in pharmaceutical litigation, based on its knowledge of the risks that Avandia posed, GlaxoSmithKline had a duty to warn patients and the FDA in a timely manner, the Senate report said. However, the company did not.
“Instead of doing the right thing, GlaxoSmithKline downplayed their own findings that the drug could increase the risk of heart attacks and also downplayed the fact that a rival medication could reduce those risks,” says Ilchert. “In fact, there is evidence to suggest that the company knew of these risks for years before the evidence was made public.”
The recently released Senate report not only takes GlaxoSmithKline to task, says Ilchert, but it questions why the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allowed a clinical trial of Avandia to continue even after the agency estimated the drug had caused approximately 83,000 heart attacks between 1999 and 2007.
“The Senate’s findings are based on research studies, company documents, FDA documents, FDA employee interviews, and information from company whistle-blowers,” says Ilchert. “Although GlaxoSmithKline denies any wrongdoing and says that its own reports were taken out of context, the evidence against the drug manufacturer is mounting and, if there was deception involved then someone should be held responsible.”
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and busses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
“Instead of doing the right thing, GlaxoSmithKline downplayed their own findings that the drug could increase the risk of heart attacks and also downplayed the fact that a rival medication could reduce those risks,” says Ilchert. “In fact, there is evidence to suggest that the company knew of these risks for years before the evidence was made public.”
The recently released Senate report not only takes GlaxoSmithKline to task, says Ilchert, but it questions why the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allowed a clinical trial of Avandia to continue even after the agency estimated the drug had caused approximately 83,000 heart attacks between 1999 and 2007.
“The Senate’s findings are based on research studies, company documents, FDA documents, FDA employee interviews, and information from company whistle-blowers,” says Ilchert. “Although GlaxoSmithKline denies any wrongdoing and says that its own reports were taken out of context, the evidence against the drug manufacturer is mounting and, if there was deception involved then someone should be held responsible.”
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and busses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Cell Phone Analysis for Accidents by Phone
Dallas Personal Injury Attorney Nick Feizy Takes a Look at Cell Phone Ban Laws and Accident Frequencies
As most people may know, cell phone usage has tremendously increased in the last several years. Consequently, the use of cell phones while driving has increased as well. However, a new study by the Highway Loss Data Institute, a group in the insurance industry, suggests that laws created to ban cell phone usage while driving have not reduced the rate of motor vehicle accidents.
Dallas, TX (PRWEB) February 21, 2010 -- If anyone has had the unfortunate experience of being in an accident, whether it is a motorcycle accident, truck accident, 18 wheeler accident or other type of motorized vehicle accident, due to another driver's inattention because of talking on the cell phone or texting while driving, this article might be of interest. As common drivers, everyone has probably seen another driver talking on the phone or texting while driving. Quite often this person swerves into another lane or does not move when the light turns green or drives very slowly and does not pay attention to the other cars on the road because he or she is texting or is talking on the phone. Most people do not even realize what consequences their actions are having. However, the common perception is that if laws are created to ban such cell phone use then the rate of accidents will be reduced. Well as this study shows, this perception is not so accurate.
As average people ever involved in car accidents, one might be surprised to find out the result of this study. The Highway Loss Data Institute’s report was taken by reviewing insurance claims in Connecticut, Washington DC, California and New York that have cell phone bans and comparing these to other states that do not have cell phone bans. The report showed that there were no fluctuations in accidents prior to and after the laws were put into effect. Accordingly, the number of accidents in Washington DC that has laws banning cell phone use while driving was the same as in Virginia and Maryland that do not have laws banning cell phones usage while driving.
CNN quoted the president of Highway Loss Data Institute, Adrian Lund, talking about cell phone ban laws and motor vehicle accidents as saying that “the laws aren't reducing crashes, even though we know that such laws have reduced hand-held phone use, and several studies have established that phoning while driving increases crash risk.” Also, NPR quoted Lund saying that “whatever the reason, the key finding is that crashes aren't going down where hand-held phone use has been banned.” (CNN January 29, 2010, Study: Cell phone bans don’t reduce accidents) and (NPR January 29, 2010, Cell Phone Bans Don’t Reduce Accidents, Study Says by Brian Naylor).
whatever the reason, the key finding is that crashes aren't going down where hand-held phone use has been banned
Thus, contrary to the logical belief, according to this study, cell phone bans do not reduce the rate of car accidents. Dallas car wreck attorney, Nick Feizy, points out that the bans simply seem to reduce the rate that drivers talk on the phone or text while driving but not the actual rate of accidents. This is most likely because drivers do not want to receive a citation and then have to pay a fine. The study has caused some confusion as it deviates from common sense. One would think the reasonable outcome would be that cell phone usage bans while driving would lower accident rates but obviously this study begs to differ. All these bans seem to be doing is lowering cell phone usage while driving and not much more. Maybe in the future more studies are published that show whether this trend is changing or whether these bans are simply not effective in lowering auto collision rates. We will just have to wait and see what the future studies reveal, if anything.
About Nick Feizy, Dallas personal injury attorney and Feizy Law Office
A graduate of Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, Nick Feizy received his bachelors of business administration, double majoring in Finance and Real Estate Finance with a minor in Political Science. He then attended law school at the University of Tulsa School of Law in Tulsa, Oklahoma, obtaining his Juris Doctor degree. Upon passing the bar exam, Nick Feizy was licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas to practice law in all the courts of the State of Texas. Nick Feizy is also authorized to practice law in the Northern District Federal Court.
For more information on Feizy Law Office or for further professional personal injury advice regarding auto accidents, car accidents, car wrecks, 18-wheeler accidents, motorcycle accidents, motorcycle wrecks, slip and falls, fatal car accidents, fatal car wrecks, fatal collisions, fatal motorcycle accidents or other injuries, contact Nick Feizy, slip and fall attorney and visit the website below.
As most people may know, cell phone usage has tremendously increased in the last several years. Consequently, the use of cell phones while driving has increased as well. However, a new study by the Highway Loss Data Institute, a group in the insurance industry, suggests that laws created to ban cell phone usage while driving have not reduced the rate of motor vehicle accidents.
Dallas, TX (PRWEB) February 21, 2010 -- If anyone has had the unfortunate experience of being in an accident, whether it is a motorcycle accident, truck accident, 18 wheeler accident or other type of motorized vehicle accident, due to another driver's inattention because of talking on the cell phone or texting while driving, this article might be of interest. As common drivers, everyone has probably seen another driver talking on the phone or texting while driving. Quite often this person swerves into another lane or does not move when the light turns green or drives very slowly and does not pay attention to the other cars on the road because he or she is texting or is talking on the phone. Most people do not even realize what consequences their actions are having. However, the common perception is that if laws are created to ban such cell phone use then the rate of accidents will be reduced. Well as this study shows, this perception is not so accurate.
As average people ever involved in car accidents, one might be surprised to find out the result of this study. The Highway Loss Data Institute’s report was taken by reviewing insurance claims in Connecticut, Washington DC, California and New York that have cell phone bans and comparing these to other states that do not have cell phone bans. The report showed that there were no fluctuations in accidents prior to and after the laws were put into effect. Accordingly, the number of accidents in Washington DC that has laws banning cell phone use while driving was the same as in Virginia and Maryland that do not have laws banning cell phones usage while driving.
CNN quoted the president of Highway Loss Data Institute, Adrian Lund, talking about cell phone ban laws and motor vehicle accidents as saying that “the laws aren't reducing crashes, even though we know that such laws have reduced hand-held phone use, and several studies have established that phoning while driving increases crash risk.” Also, NPR quoted Lund saying that “whatever the reason, the key finding is that crashes aren't going down where hand-held phone use has been banned.” (CNN January 29, 2010, Study: Cell phone bans don’t reduce accidents) and (NPR January 29, 2010, Cell Phone Bans Don’t Reduce Accidents, Study Says by Brian Naylor).
whatever the reason, the key finding is that crashes aren't going down where hand-held phone use has been banned
Thus, contrary to the logical belief, according to this study, cell phone bans do not reduce the rate of car accidents. Dallas car wreck attorney, Nick Feizy, points out that the bans simply seem to reduce the rate that drivers talk on the phone or text while driving but not the actual rate of accidents. This is most likely because drivers do not want to receive a citation and then have to pay a fine. The study has caused some confusion as it deviates from common sense. One would think the reasonable outcome would be that cell phone usage bans while driving would lower accident rates but obviously this study begs to differ. All these bans seem to be doing is lowering cell phone usage while driving and not much more. Maybe in the future more studies are published that show whether this trend is changing or whether these bans are simply not effective in lowering auto collision rates. We will just have to wait and see what the future studies reveal, if anything.
About Nick Feizy, Dallas personal injury attorney and Feizy Law Office
A graduate of Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, Nick Feizy received his bachelors of business administration, double majoring in Finance and Real Estate Finance with a minor in Political Science. He then attended law school at the University of Tulsa School of Law in Tulsa, Oklahoma, obtaining his Juris Doctor degree. Upon passing the bar exam, Nick Feizy was licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas to practice law in all the courts of the State of Texas. Nick Feizy is also authorized to practice law in the Northern District Federal Court.
For more information on Feizy Law Office or for further professional personal injury advice regarding auto accidents, car accidents, car wrecks, 18-wheeler accidents, motorcycle accidents, motorcycle wrecks, slip and falls, fatal car accidents, fatal car wrecks, fatal collisions, fatal motorcycle accidents or other injuries, contact Nick Feizy, slip and fall attorney and visit the website below.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Personal Injury Questions Answered
New York Law Journal
February 22, 2010
Brought to you free by Tinari Economics Group.
Can Injured, Undocumented Construction Workers Recover Lost Wages?
David L. Scher, an associate at Block O'Toole & Murphy, and Stephen J. Murphy, a partner with the firm, write: The Balbuena decision was unquestionably a victory for undocumented workers disabled by workplace injuries, but it left open the question of whether an undocumented worker who obtained employment by presenting fraudulent documentation is entitled to recover lost wages. While the Court of Appeals has not yet weighed in, the First and Second Departments have expressed their opinions on that question.
The Gravity of the Labor Law
Kevin G. Faley, a partner with Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, writes: "Over the years, the Court of Appeals and the appellate divisions have dealt with thousands of claims invoking the protection of Labor Law §240(1). As the courts examine these very fact-driven cases against the backdrop of this well-worn statute, they have created not a bright line rule on what is or is not a 240(1) claim, but rather a line of varying shades of gray."
Effective Post-Verdict Motions
Ellen B. Fishman, a partner at Martin Clearwater & Bell, reviews the key steps that counsel should take in civil cases when the verdict goes against them. Moving to set aside a verdict can be a cost-effective route to getting relief from an adverse outcome, substantially reducing damages awards or setting the stage for a viable appeal.
Lead Paint Litigation: An Overview
Brian P. Heermance, a partner at Morrison Mahoney, and Kevin A. Hickman, an associate at the firm, write: Because of the substantial verdicts at stake, litigation over the responsibility for exposure to lead-based paint has been hotly contested throughout the country. Before engaging in any such litigation, counsel should be aware of the various peculiarities regarding lead paint cases in New York courts.
Failure to Act Quickly Harms False Arrest Claims
Joseph S. Bavaro, a partner at Salenger, Sack, Schwartz & Kimmel, and Carolyn Caccese, an associate at the firm, write: With criminal charges pending, a defendant is typically more concerned with the immediate legal battle for freedom than with suing the municipality for false arrest. As reasonable as that sounds, it is not a recognized excuse for filing a late notice of claim. Time is of the essence to get your client a just day in court.
February 22, 2010
Brought to you free by Tinari Economics Group.
Can Injured, Undocumented Construction Workers Recover Lost Wages?
David L. Scher, an associate at Block O'Toole & Murphy, and Stephen J. Murphy, a partner with the firm, write: The Balbuena decision was unquestionably a victory for undocumented workers disabled by workplace injuries, but it left open the question of whether an undocumented worker who obtained employment by presenting fraudulent documentation is entitled to recover lost wages. While the Court of Appeals has not yet weighed in, the First and Second Departments have expressed their opinions on that question.
The Gravity of the Labor Law
Kevin G. Faley, a partner with Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, writes: "Over the years, the Court of Appeals and the appellate divisions have dealt with thousands of claims invoking the protection of Labor Law §240(1). As the courts examine these very fact-driven cases against the backdrop of this well-worn statute, they have created not a bright line rule on what is or is not a 240(1) claim, but rather a line of varying shades of gray."
Effective Post-Verdict Motions
Ellen B. Fishman, a partner at Martin Clearwater & Bell, reviews the key steps that counsel should take in civil cases when the verdict goes against them. Moving to set aside a verdict can be a cost-effective route to getting relief from an adverse outcome, substantially reducing damages awards or setting the stage for a viable appeal.
Lead Paint Litigation: An Overview
Brian P. Heermance, a partner at Morrison Mahoney, and Kevin A. Hickman, an associate at the firm, write: Because of the substantial verdicts at stake, litigation over the responsibility for exposure to lead-based paint has been hotly contested throughout the country. Before engaging in any such litigation, counsel should be aware of the various peculiarities regarding lead paint cases in New York courts.
Failure to Act Quickly Harms False Arrest Claims
Joseph S. Bavaro, a partner at Salenger, Sack, Schwartz & Kimmel, and Carolyn Caccese, an associate at the firm, write: With criminal charges pending, a defendant is typically more concerned with the immediate legal battle for freedom than with suing the municipality for false arrest. As reasonable as that sounds, it is not a recognized excuse for filing a late notice of claim. Time is of the essence to get your client a just day in court.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Personal Injury Economics
In the recent years, Personal Injury cases demand the highest attention in the legal world with a just need of accuracy for any successful claim. EcoFin Inc, a reputed and leading company handling Economic and Financial leading services headed by Dr. Keith Fairchild.
( TX,USA- 22nd February, 2010) In the recent years, Personal Injury cases demand the highest attention in the legal world with a just need of accuracy for any successful claim. EcoFin Inc, a reputed and leading company handling Economic and Financial leading services headed by Dr. Keith Fairchild (Ph.D in Finance, University of Texas) introduces The Personal Injury Economist to offer a wide of support to develop case study and reports in such claims based on his vast experience and expertise that has stood testimony to various range of cases from corporate damages, wrongful death, fraud, many major cases of misdemeanor.
With the Personal Injury Economist, calculations related to life expectancies, employment benefits, earning capabilities, taxable income, insurance claims and household benefits can be calculated briskly and with ease by simply applying the minimal numbers of input parameters. Thus, the calculations are easily generated giving an accurate estimate which makes for a successful claim for not only personal injuries, but medical malpractices and product liabilities as well. Work that would have taken hours is hence achieved in the span of a few minutes.
The software is versatile and easy to use allowing anticipated changes and versatile parameters giving more body to the accuracy of the claim, such as the term life of insurance, while taking the minutest details into consideration like individual ages and the life cycle of income generation. The Personal Injury Economist is further elaborated with an easy to use and understand user’s manual, video tutorials and more. There is an introductory video guide, as well as an advanced tutorial with precise, guided, step by step instructions. The package also introduces working demo’s which can easily be downloaded from the website and comes highly recommended.
Moreover, the software comes loaded with a wide range of tools right from the pre-discussed parameter spreadsheet for easy calculations. Right from maintaining background information of the client specific household modules to understand and study the services and benefits while understanding the accurate estimate of damages and assessing the earning lost. To elaborate further on the case study, there is also the tool for the easy generation of comparative graphs to offer a more visually defined presentation in understanding the loss.
The program is recognized and recommended by experts in various fields like attorneys, judicial experts, finance specialists, economists, chartered accountants, and rehab experts who are recognized and famed in witness and testimony. The analytical expertise of the software allows them a definite success through the tools and options offered by the Personal Injury Economist, allowing case concise presentation and automated foot notes for reference and guidance. And above all, it lays the ground for a precise and highly accurate case that gives a whole new meaning to the word perfection.
EcoFin, Inc.
2610 Friar Tuck Road
San Antonio, TX 78209
1-866-4-ECOFIN
(1-866-432-6346)
Website : http://www.ecofininc.com/
support@ecofininc.com
( TX,USA- 22nd February, 2010) In the recent years, Personal Injury cases demand the highest attention in the legal world with a just need of accuracy for any successful claim. EcoFin Inc, a reputed and leading company handling Economic and Financial leading services headed by Dr. Keith Fairchild (Ph.D in Finance, University of Texas) introduces The Personal Injury Economist to offer a wide of support to develop case study and reports in such claims based on his vast experience and expertise that has stood testimony to various range of cases from corporate damages, wrongful death, fraud, many major cases of misdemeanor.
With the Personal Injury Economist, calculations related to life expectancies, employment benefits, earning capabilities, taxable income, insurance claims and household benefits can be calculated briskly and with ease by simply applying the minimal numbers of input parameters. Thus, the calculations are easily generated giving an accurate estimate which makes for a successful claim for not only personal injuries, but medical malpractices and product liabilities as well. Work that would have taken hours is hence achieved in the span of a few minutes.
The software is versatile and easy to use allowing anticipated changes and versatile parameters giving more body to the accuracy of the claim, such as the term life of insurance, while taking the minutest details into consideration like individual ages and the life cycle of income generation. The Personal Injury Economist is further elaborated with an easy to use and understand user’s manual, video tutorials and more. There is an introductory video guide, as well as an advanced tutorial with precise, guided, step by step instructions. The package also introduces working demo’s which can easily be downloaded from the website and comes highly recommended.
Moreover, the software comes loaded with a wide range of tools right from the pre-discussed parameter spreadsheet for easy calculations. Right from maintaining background information of the client specific household modules to understand and study the services and benefits while understanding the accurate estimate of damages and assessing the earning lost. To elaborate further on the case study, there is also the tool for the easy generation of comparative graphs to offer a more visually defined presentation in understanding the loss.
The program is recognized and recommended by experts in various fields like attorneys, judicial experts, finance specialists, economists, chartered accountants, and rehab experts who are recognized and famed in witness and testimony. The analytical expertise of the software allows them a definite success through the tools and options offered by the Personal Injury Economist, allowing case concise presentation and automated foot notes for reference and guidance. And above all, it lays the ground for a precise and highly accurate case that gives a whole new meaning to the word perfection.
EcoFin, Inc.
2610 Friar Tuck Road
San Antonio, TX 78209
1-866-4-ECOFIN
(1-866-432-6346)
Website : http://www.ecofininc.com/
support@ecofininc.com
Friday, February 19, 2010
New York Students Looking at PCB
According to George W. Ilchert, Esq., a partner with Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell and Ryan, LLP (http://www.limrlaw.com), a personal injury law firm based in Manhattan, PCBs were used as an additive in caulking before they were made illegal in 1977. As a result, it has been determined that approximately 90 schools in the New York area contain illegal levels of this toxic chemical.
“PCBs have long been determined to be toxic and in German schools, where high levels of the chemicals were found in caulking, PCBs were also found in the bloodstream of students,” says Ilchert. “The more exposure the students had to the contaminated caulking, the more PCBs were found their blood.”
According to Ilchert, approximately 60% of all public schools and commercial buildings in the United States, constructed during a period of peak PCB use, contain dangerously high levels of the toxins.
“One of the schools that will be targeted for cleanup will be PS178,” says Ilchert. “This New York City School was the subject of a lawsuit filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in an effort to get the agency to push for cleanup of the school.”
In 2008, lab tests revealed that there were 111,000 PCB parts-per-million in that school’s caulking.Under government regulations, Ilchert says, it is illegal for PCB levels to be above 50 parts-per-million.
“Nine New York City schools were tested during that investigation and six were found to have levels above the legal limit,” says Ilchert. “The caulking at another 85 New York City schools was tested between April 2008 and September 2009 and also found to have illegal PCB levels.”
According to Ilchert, anyone that has been knowingly exposed to a toxin or injured on public or private property may be entitled to seek compensation for medical bills or other related expenses.
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, A New York City Personal Injury Law Firm located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and buses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
“PCBs have long been determined to be toxic and in German schools, where high levels of the chemicals were found in caulking, PCBs were also found in the bloodstream of students,” says Ilchert. “The more exposure the students had to the contaminated caulking, the more PCBs were found their blood.”
According to Ilchert, approximately 60% of all public schools and commercial buildings in the United States, constructed during a period of peak PCB use, contain dangerously high levels of the toxins.
“One of the schools that will be targeted for cleanup will be PS178,” says Ilchert. “This New York City School was the subject of a lawsuit filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in an effort to get the agency to push for cleanup of the school.”
In 2008, lab tests revealed that there were 111,000 PCB parts-per-million in that school’s caulking.Under government regulations, Ilchert says, it is illegal for PCB levels to be above 50 parts-per-million.
“Nine New York City schools were tested during that investigation and six were found to have levels above the legal limit,” says Ilchert. “The caulking at another 85 New York City schools was tested between April 2008 and September 2009 and also found to have illegal PCB levels.”
According to Ilchert, anyone that has been knowingly exposed to a toxin or injured on public or private property may be entitled to seek compensation for medical bills or other related expenses.
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, A New York City Personal Injury Law Firm located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and buses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
New York Personal Injury Update
According to George W. Ilchert, Esq., a partner with Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell and Ryan, LLP (http://www.limrlaw.com), a personal injury law firm based in Manhattan, PCBs were used as an additive in caulking before they were made illegal in 1977. As a result, it has been determined that approximately 90 schools in the New York area contain illegal levels of this toxic chemical.
“PCBs have long been determined to be toxic and in German schools, where high levels of the chemicals were found in caulking, PCBs were also found in the bloodstream of students,” says Ilchert. “The more exposure the students had to the contaminated caulking, the more PCBs were found their blood.”
According to Ilchert, approximately 60% of all public schools and commercial buildings in the United States, constructed during a period of peak PCB use, contain dangerously high levels of the toxins.
“One of the schools that will be targeted for cleanup will be PS178,” says Ilchert. “This New York City School was the subject of a lawsuit filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in an effort to get the agency to push for cleanup of the school.”
In 2008, lab tests revealed that there were 111,000 PCB parts-per-million in that school’s caulking.Under government regulations, Ilchert says, it is illegal for PCB levels to be above 50 parts-per-million.
“Nine New York City schools were tested during that investigation and six were found to have levels above the legal limit,” says Ilchert. “The caulking at another 85 New York City schools was tested between April 2008 and September 2009 and also found to have illegal PCB levels.”
According to Ilchert, anyone that has been knowingly exposed to a toxin or injured on public or private property may be entitled to seek compensation for medical bills or other related expenses.
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, A New York City Personal Injury Law Firm located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and buses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
“PCBs have long been determined to be toxic and in German schools, where high levels of the chemicals were found in caulking, PCBs were also found in the bloodstream of students,” says Ilchert. “The more exposure the students had to the contaminated caulking, the more PCBs were found their blood.”
According to Ilchert, approximately 60% of all public schools and commercial buildings in the United States, constructed during a period of peak PCB use, contain dangerously high levels of the toxins.
“One of the schools that will be targeted for cleanup will be PS178,” says Ilchert. “This New York City School was the subject of a lawsuit filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in an effort to get the agency to push for cleanup of the school.”
In 2008, lab tests revealed that there were 111,000 PCB parts-per-million in that school’s caulking.Under government regulations, Ilchert says, it is illegal for PCB levels to be above 50 parts-per-million.
“Nine New York City schools were tested during that investigation and six were found to have levels above the legal limit,” says Ilchert. “The caulking at another 85 New York City schools was tested between April 2008 and September 2009 and also found to have illegal PCB levels.”
According to Ilchert, anyone that has been knowingly exposed to a toxin or injured on public or private property may be entitled to seek compensation for medical bills or other related expenses.
Established for more than 50 years, Lurie, Ilchert, Mac Donnell & Ryan LLP, A New York City Personal Injury Law Firm located at 475 Park Avenue South (32nd Street) New York, NY, 10016, specializes in representing victims of all types of accidents including construction and demolition, falls from ladders, scaffolds, and roofs, automobiles, trains, and buses, babies with cerebral palsy and other brain damage, general medical malpractice, saws and electrical tools without guards, and slip and fall cases. For more information, call 212-685-7417 or visit www.limrlaw.com.
The hiring of a law firm is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This press release is designed for general information only. The information presented in this release should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Attorney Advertising.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
New York Case Dismissed on Sports
Another New York School Sports Injury Lawsuit Dismissal Upheld on Appeal
Contributor: John Hochfelder
RSS
SUMMARY: Personal injury lawyers are often asked, "Can I sue?" I always answer, "Yes, of course." But the real question is whether the inquiring plaintiff will win and in school sports injury lawsuits the answer is almost always, "No way."
Time and again school kids are injured playing football, basketball, baseball and other sports in competition or just in gym class. And, too often, their parents, urged on by lawyers, end up suing school coaches and gym teachers on the theory that some obligation owed to the student was breached by the school personnel.
I say "too often" because most of these cases are dismissed before trial. And that's just what happened in the latest such case arising out of Pleasantville, New York - a bucolic village in Westchester County near the Hudson River established in 1695.
Please see full article below for more information.
Contributor: John Hochfelder
RSS
SUMMARY: Personal injury lawyers are often asked, "Can I sue?" I always answer, "Yes, of course." But the real question is whether the inquiring plaintiff will win and in school sports injury lawsuits the answer is almost always, "No way."
Time and again school kids are injured playing football, basketball, baseball and other sports in competition or just in gym class. And, too often, their parents, urged on by lawyers, end up suing school coaches and gym teachers on the theory that some obligation owed to the student was breached by the school personnel.
I say "too often" because most of these cases are dismissed before trial. And that's just what happened in the latest such case arising out of Pleasantville, New York - a bucolic village in Westchester County near the Hudson River established in 1695.
Please see full article below for more information.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Smoking Still a Legal Issue
February 13, 2010 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. A new study demonstrates the dangers of thirdhand smoke.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- study demonstrates health dangers of tobacco smoke exposure when combined with indoor air pollutant.
Palm Beach County, FL (News)—A recent study conducted by researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory suggests dangerous carcinogens can form when nitrous acid, an indoor air pollutant, reacts with the nicotine in tobacco smoke residue. The information collected through this study was published on Monday, February 8, 2010, according to information provided by MercuryNews.com.
New studies are being conducted as a means of furthering awareness on the negative health effects of firsthand, secondhand, and thirdhand tobacco smoke exposure. Reports describe “thirdhand” smoke as “a thin layer of toxic substances from tobacco smoke that settles on surfaces long after cigarettes have been extinguished”. The study at hand demonstrates how nitrous acid, stemming from gas appliances, car engines, and tobacco smoke, can create potent carcinogens when exposed to nicotine left on surfaces.
According to a study published in the Pediatrics journal, 65 percent of non-smokers reportedly believed infants and children could face potential health dangers when exposed to tobacco smoke residue left on surfaces. On the other hand, only 43 percent of smokers agreed. Researchers in the Berkeley Laboratory allegedly discovered that “when nitrous acid in the air reacts with nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, or TSNAs, are created. Unburned tobacco and tobacco smoke already contain TSNAs, which in 1989, the U.S. surgeon general listed among the carcinogens found in tobacco.” Although these carcinogens are already found in tobacco, levels of TSNAs were reportedly multiplied by 10 when exposed to the air chemical. Research shows that children are especially susceptible to the negative effects of thirdhand smoke since they can be physically exposed to household surfaces more frequently or more often than adults, which in a smoking environment, could be covered in harmful TSNAs.
More research into the harmful affects of thirdhand smoke are reported underway. The University of California’s Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program sponsored this particular study.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. A new study demonstrates the dangers of thirdhand smoke.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- study demonstrates health dangers of tobacco smoke exposure when combined with indoor air pollutant.
Palm Beach County, FL (News)—A recent study conducted by researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory suggests dangerous carcinogens can form when nitrous acid, an indoor air pollutant, reacts with the nicotine in tobacco smoke residue. The information collected through this study was published on Monday, February 8, 2010, according to information provided by MercuryNews.com.
New studies are being conducted as a means of furthering awareness on the negative health effects of firsthand, secondhand, and thirdhand tobacco smoke exposure. Reports describe “thirdhand” smoke as “a thin layer of toxic substances from tobacco smoke that settles on surfaces long after cigarettes have been extinguished”. The study at hand demonstrates how nitrous acid, stemming from gas appliances, car engines, and tobacco smoke, can create potent carcinogens when exposed to nicotine left on surfaces.
According to a study published in the Pediatrics journal, 65 percent of non-smokers reportedly believed infants and children could face potential health dangers when exposed to tobacco smoke residue left on surfaces. On the other hand, only 43 percent of smokers agreed. Researchers in the Berkeley Laboratory allegedly discovered that “when nitrous acid in the air reacts with nicotine, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, or TSNAs, are created. Unburned tobacco and tobacco smoke already contain TSNAs, which in 1989, the U.S. surgeon general listed among the carcinogens found in tobacco.” Although these carcinogens are already found in tobacco, levels of TSNAs were reportedly multiplied by 10 when exposed to the air chemical. Research shows that children are especially susceptible to the negative effects of thirdhand smoke since they can be physically exposed to household surfaces more frequently or more often than adults, which in a smoking environment, could be covered in harmful TSNAs.
More research into the harmful affects of thirdhand smoke are reported underway. The University of California’s Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program sponsored this particular study.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Fees Too High?
“Contingency fees, which are the fees lawyers deduct from accident cases are astronomically high” says Chris Lassen, Esq., a partner with The Lassen Law Firm (www.InjuryLawyerPhiladelphia.com), a preeminent personal injury law firm in Philadelphia which serves all of Pennsylvania.
“The typical contingency fees for accident cases range from 40 to 45 percent. Ten years ago you would not find a contingency fee for more than one third, or thirty three and a third percent”, maintains Chris Lassen, Esquire. “You would not let your real estate agent deduct a 45% fee, so why should you let your lawyer do so.” “The Lassen Law Firm finds these contingency fees grossly excessive, which is why we only deduct a mere 29% fee, and we do not deduct a single dollar in costs.”
“We feel that other Pennsylvania personal injury lawyers should follow our example. Why should the victim of a serious accident get hurt twice by paying an enormous fee?”, says Lassen. “Our firm not only deducts a 29% fee for accident cases, but we also reduce the fee to only 25% when the injury involves death or dismemberment.”
One of the most well respected personal injury law firms in Pennsylvania, The Lassen Law Firm, located at 1515 Market Street, Suite 1510, Philadelphia, PA 19102, concentrates its practice on representing victims of all types of accidents including Septa accidents, car accidents, truck accidents, construction accidents, defective products, and medical mistakes. For more information, call 215-510-6755 or visit www.InjuryLawyerPhiladelphia.com.
Contact
The Lassen Law Firm
Christian Lassen
lassenchris@yahoo.com
Tel: (215) 510-6755
“The typical contingency fees for accident cases range from 40 to 45 percent. Ten years ago you would not find a contingency fee for more than one third, or thirty three and a third percent”, maintains Chris Lassen, Esquire. “You would not let your real estate agent deduct a 45% fee, so why should you let your lawyer do so.” “The Lassen Law Firm finds these contingency fees grossly excessive, which is why we only deduct a mere 29% fee, and we do not deduct a single dollar in costs.”
“We feel that other Pennsylvania personal injury lawyers should follow our example. Why should the victim of a serious accident get hurt twice by paying an enormous fee?”, says Lassen. “Our firm not only deducts a 29% fee for accident cases, but we also reduce the fee to only 25% when the injury involves death or dismemberment.”
One of the most well respected personal injury law firms in Pennsylvania, The Lassen Law Firm, located at 1515 Market Street, Suite 1510, Philadelphia, PA 19102, concentrates its practice on representing victims of all types of accidents including Septa accidents, car accidents, truck accidents, construction accidents, defective products, and medical mistakes. For more information, call 215-510-6755 or visit www.InjuryLawyerPhiladelphia.com.
Contact
The Lassen Law Firm
Christian Lassen
lassenchris@yahoo.com
Tel: (215) 510-6755
Monday, February 15, 2010
Van Accident Causes Injuries
February 13, 2010 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. Six prison trustees were ejected from their transport van after the vehicle overturned on U.S. 41.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- Pasco County inmates suffered injuries in crash.
Land O’ Lakes, FL (News)— An inmate transport van was involved in a single-vehicle crash that injured six inmates and the van driver on Tuesday, February 9, 2010. The incident occurred in Pasco County, according to information provided by WTSP.com.
Officials from the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) allegedly reported that the van attempted to slow down as it was approaching the Shettle Road junction but instead lost control on the wet roadway. The van subsequently careened around and rolled over, ejecting six inmates as a result. The prison trustees occupying the van were reportedly “retuning from work detail in the county” when the motor vehicle accident happened.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews seemingly responded to the scene to transport the injured inmates to Bayonet Point Hospital to be treated for injuries that allegedly ranged from minor to critical. FHP troopers initially reported that 24-year-old inmate, Bobby J. Osborne was killed in the crash though later reports stated he suffered severe injuries but was indeed alive. Another inmate, identified as John F. Felcher, reportedly sustained critical injuries in the crash. The remaining four inmates and their driver, 50-year-old David Phaneuf, all received treatment by responding doctors and nurses for injuries described as minor. It was unknown whether any citations were issued in regards to the crash. The Florida Highway Patrol is investigating the wreck.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. Six prison trustees were ejected from their transport van after the vehicle overturned on U.S. 41.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- Pasco County inmates suffered injuries in crash.
Land O’ Lakes, FL (News)— An inmate transport van was involved in a single-vehicle crash that injured six inmates and the van driver on Tuesday, February 9, 2010. The incident occurred in Pasco County, according to information provided by WTSP.com.
Officials from the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) allegedly reported that the van attempted to slow down as it was approaching the Shettle Road junction but instead lost control on the wet roadway. The van subsequently careened around and rolled over, ejecting six inmates as a result. The prison trustees occupying the van were reportedly “retuning from work detail in the county” when the motor vehicle accident happened.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews seemingly responded to the scene to transport the injured inmates to Bayonet Point Hospital to be treated for injuries that allegedly ranged from minor to critical. FHP troopers initially reported that 24-year-old inmate, Bobby J. Osborne was killed in the crash though later reports stated he suffered severe injuries but was indeed alive. Another inmate, identified as John F. Felcher, reportedly sustained critical injuries in the crash. The remaining four inmates and their driver, 50-year-old David Phaneuf, all received treatment by responding doctors and nurses for injuries described as minor. It was unknown whether any citations were issued in regards to the crash. The Florida Highway Patrol is investigating the wreck.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Toyota Lawsuit Filed in Los Angeles
LOS ANGELES, Feb 12, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Robert J. Nelson of the national plaintiffs' law firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, announced that Jacquelyn Donoghue of Holdrege, Nebraska, filed a lawsuit against Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Sales, Inc., seeking compensation for injuries to herself and for the death of her husband John Donoghue in a sudden unintended acceleration accident. The complaint was filed today in Federal court in Los Angeles, California, where Toyota Motor Sales, Inc., has its headquarters.
Since 2001, the electronic throttle system in most Toyota vehicles, including the 2006 Toyota Prius driven by Jacquelyn Donoghue, has relied on sensors, microprocessors and electronic motors instead of a mechanical linkage, such as steel cable, to connect the accelerator pedal to the engine throttle plate.
Since 2001, the electronic throttle system in most Toyota vehicles, including the 2006 Toyota Prius driven by Jacquelyn Donoghue, has relied on sensors, microprocessors and electronic motors instead of a mechanical linkage, such as steel cable, to connect the accelerator pedal to the engine throttle plate.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Arizona Child Abuse Case Coming
Legal news for Arizona personal injury attorneys. A horrendous case of child abuse was reported in Phoenix.
Personal injury attorneys alert- Child Protective Services is investigating a shocking case of child neglect involving a 14-year-old girl.
Phoenix, AZ—A nightmarish story was reported on Tuesday, February 9, 2010, about a 14-year-old girl who was imprisoned like an animal with no running water for nearly two months by FoxNews.com. The girl’s father and stepmother kept her in what the parents called “lock-up” as a punishment for stealing food.
While in “lock-up” the terrified girl was forced to exercise until exhaustion, beaten with belts and metal rods, and they would even pull her by her hair if she stopped exercising. Her father and stepmother, Scott and Andrea Bass, gave her only a few cans of food, crackers and bread every couple of days. On January 24, 2010, the girl managed to escape her dungeon by crawling up a linen closet, into an attic crawl space where she kicked out a loose board, and then ran out the back door of the home. The girl ran for help and someone called the police for her. Officers and Child Protective Services rushed to the victim’s home to talk to her dad and stepmother. Once inside the home, officials found a bathroom locked from the outside. Scott, not realizing that his daughter had escaped, opened the door and was visibly shocked to see her missing. Inside the bathroom was a 5-gallon bucket with nearly 4 inches of urine, a blanket on the tile floor, and empty cans of food. Bass did admit to officials that he locked the girl in the bathroom for stealing food and cheating in home schooling. Investigators then uncovered that the girl has been forced to live and sleep outside on the patio during the summer time. She was also locked in a closet for a week with no light, and locked in a bathroom for a week. Andrea reportedly acknowledged the allegations, and stated, “She no longer wanted to have anything to do with [the victim.]”
After a medical evaluation, it was revealed that the 14-year-old girl was in the 25th percentile for weight and in the 50th percentile for height, when comparing to other girls her age. The Bass’ were arrested on February 4, on charges of unlawful imprisonment, kidnapping, failure to report neglect of a minor, and child abuse.
Personal injury attorneys alert- Child Protective Services is investigating a shocking case of child neglect involving a 14-year-old girl.
Phoenix, AZ—A nightmarish story was reported on Tuesday, February 9, 2010, about a 14-year-old girl who was imprisoned like an animal with no running water for nearly two months by FoxNews.com. The girl’s father and stepmother kept her in what the parents called “lock-up” as a punishment for stealing food.
While in “lock-up” the terrified girl was forced to exercise until exhaustion, beaten with belts and metal rods, and they would even pull her by her hair if she stopped exercising. Her father and stepmother, Scott and Andrea Bass, gave her only a few cans of food, crackers and bread every couple of days. On January 24, 2010, the girl managed to escape her dungeon by crawling up a linen closet, into an attic crawl space where she kicked out a loose board, and then ran out the back door of the home. The girl ran for help and someone called the police for her. Officers and Child Protective Services rushed to the victim’s home to talk to her dad and stepmother. Once inside the home, officials found a bathroom locked from the outside. Scott, not realizing that his daughter had escaped, opened the door and was visibly shocked to see her missing. Inside the bathroom was a 5-gallon bucket with nearly 4 inches of urine, a blanket on the tile floor, and empty cans of food. Bass did admit to officials that he locked the girl in the bathroom for stealing food and cheating in home schooling. Investigators then uncovered that the girl has been forced to live and sleep outside on the patio during the summer time. She was also locked in a closet for a week with no light, and locked in a bathroom for a week. Andrea reportedly acknowledged the allegations, and stated, “She no longer wanted to have anything to do with [the victim.]”
After a medical evaluation, it was revealed that the 14-year-old girl was in the 25th percentile for weight and in the 50th percentile for height, when comparing to other girls her age. The Bass’ were arrested on February 4, on charges of unlawful imprisonment, kidnapping, failure to report neglect of a minor, and child abuse.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
PCB Injury Lawsuit on the Horizon
/jcreiterlaw.com/Jonathan C. Reiter/ 02/05/2010
New York, NY - Leading New York premises liability lawyer, Jonathan C. Reiter, reports that the Department of Education has come to an agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) www.epa.gov to require New York City to take a deeper look at the risks of exposure to PCB’s and create a plan of action to remove it from the 90 known contaminated schools, according to New York Daily News.
The toxic chemicals, PCB’s were used as an additive in caulking used in buildings before it was made illegal in 1977. It was reported that more than 200 schools in New York City are likely to be extensively contaminated with the toxin. In schools in Germany, where high levels of the toxic chemicals were found in the caulking, PCB’s were also found in the children’s blood. The more the children spent time around the contaminated caulking, the more PCB’s accumulated in their blood.
“We know that approximately 60% of the public schools and commercial buildings in U.S that were constructed during the period of maximum PCB use,” said The Harvard School of Public Health. “In countries where they have conducted a national inventory, half of the masonry buildings constructed during this era had elevated PCB content in the caulking, and air testing in these buildings showed high PCB air levels.”
One of the first schools in the study will be the school Naomi Gonzalez’s daughter attends, due to the EPA’s settlement in a lawsuit filed by Gonzalez to force the city to clean up Public School 178. Tests on the caulking were performed in a lab to determine the amount of PCB contaminants in her daughter’s school in 2008. The results revealed the toxin contained 111,000 parts-per-million in her public school’s caulking. Under government regulations, it is illegal for the PCB levels to be above 50 parts-per-million because it is considered toxic waste. It was reported that levels beyond the legal limit were found in at least six of the nine schools tested in the investigation. Another 85 city schools’ caulking was tested between April 2008 and September 2009 and found to also have illegally high PCB levels.
The city claims that as long as the PCB’s are sealed in the caulking there is no risk that the children will be exposed and affected. However, it is known that PCB’s can turn into vapor in the air and can circulate surface dust in the air in the space where students and teachers are for 7 hours a day. Experienced premises liability attorney Jonathan C. Reiter, states if you are a loved one has been knowingly exposed to a toxin or injured on public or private property, you may be entitled to seek compensation for medical bills, lost wages, or other related expenses. Contacting a premises liability lawyer who has years of experience in litigating claims may help you to recover your livelihood.
Premises liability news by New York personal injury attorney Jonathan C. Reiter, who may be contacted at (212) 736-0979.
Press Release Contact Information:
New York City Personal Injury Lawyer /
350 5th Avenue
Suite 2811
New York, NY 10118
Phone: (212) 736-0979
New York, NY - Leading New York premises liability lawyer, Jonathan C. Reiter, reports that the Department of Education has come to an agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) www.epa.gov to require New York City to take a deeper look at the risks of exposure to PCB’s and create a plan of action to remove it from the 90 known contaminated schools, according to New York Daily News.
The toxic chemicals, PCB’s were used as an additive in caulking used in buildings before it was made illegal in 1977. It was reported that more than 200 schools in New York City are likely to be extensively contaminated with the toxin. In schools in Germany, where high levels of the toxic chemicals were found in the caulking, PCB’s were also found in the children’s blood. The more the children spent time around the contaminated caulking, the more PCB’s accumulated in their blood.
“We know that approximately 60% of the public schools and commercial buildings in U.S that were constructed during the period of maximum PCB use,” said The Harvard School of Public Health. “In countries where they have conducted a national inventory, half of the masonry buildings constructed during this era had elevated PCB content in the caulking, and air testing in these buildings showed high PCB air levels.”
One of the first schools in the study will be the school Naomi Gonzalez’s daughter attends, due to the EPA’s settlement in a lawsuit filed by Gonzalez to force the city to clean up Public School 178. Tests on the caulking were performed in a lab to determine the amount of PCB contaminants in her daughter’s school in 2008. The results revealed the toxin contained 111,000 parts-per-million in her public school’s caulking. Under government regulations, it is illegal for the PCB levels to be above 50 parts-per-million because it is considered toxic waste. It was reported that levels beyond the legal limit were found in at least six of the nine schools tested in the investigation. Another 85 city schools’ caulking was tested between April 2008 and September 2009 and found to also have illegally high PCB levels.
The city claims that as long as the PCB’s are sealed in the caulking there is no risk that the children will be exposed and affected. However, it is known that PCB’s can turn into vapor in the air and can circulate surface dust in the air in the space where students and teachers are for 7 hours a day. Experienced premises liability attorney Jonathan C. Reiter, states if you are a loved one has been knowingly exposed to a toxin or injured on public or private property, you may be entitled to seek compensation for medical bills, lost wages, or other related expenses. Contacting a premises liability lawyer who has years of experience in litigating claims may help you to recover your livelihood.
Premises liability news by New York personal injury attorney Jonathan C. Reiter, who may be contacted at (212) 736-0979.
Press Release Contact Information:
New York City Personal Injury Lawyer /
350 5th Avenue
Suite 2811
New York, NY 10118
Phone: (212) 736-0979
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Medical Malpractice in Illinois Remains Attractively Litigious
nois Supreme Court strikes down caps on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases
View original document | Send to colleague | Print
Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP
Ann Marie Walsh, Molly McGinnis Stine and Mark Deptula
USA
February 5 2010
Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP logo
Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital
The Illinois Supreme Court struck another blow to tort reform on February 4, 2010. The Court held in Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, 2010 WL 375190 (Ill. Feb. 4, 2010) that statutory caps on noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, in medical malpractice actions are unconstitutional for violating the separation of powers doctrine required by the Illinois Constitution. This is not the first time tort reform legislation was found unconstitutional by the Illinois Supreme Court. Notably, in Best v. Taylor Machine Works, 179 Ill.2d 367 (1997), the Court struck down the Illinois Tort Reform Act of 1995 and specifically the $500,000 cap on noneconomic damages in many kinds of cases. Following its reasoning in Best, the Lebron Court concluded that the medical malpractice caps infringe upon the “judiciary’s sphere of authority” and run “afoul of the separation of powers” required by the Illinois Constitution.
Background
The Court addressed the constitutionality of Section 2- 1706.5 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure which was adopted as part of Public Act 94-677. Section 2-1706.5 provides a noneconomic damages cap of $1,000,000 in awards against a hospital and its personnel or affiliates, and a cap of $500,000 for noneconomic damages against a physician and the physician’s business or corporate entity and personnel. 735 ILCS 2-1706.5(a)(1) and (2). At the trial court level, the Circuit Court of Cook County ruled that these statutory caps violated the separation of powers clause of the Illinois Constitution and declared the entire Act invalid, as it included an “inseverability provision.”
The plaintiffs, Abigaile Lebron and her mother, filed a medical malpractice and declaratory judgment action against Gottlieb Memorial Hospital and the physician and nurse who treated Abigaile’s mother during her pregnancy and delivery of Abigaile. Plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that Abigaile sustained severe brain injury, cerebral palsy, and cognitive mental impairment and that her damages for disfigurement and pain and suffering greatly exceeded the applicable limitations on noneconomic damages. Plaintiffs sought a judicial determination that Section 2-1706.5 violated the Illinois Constitution. The Circuit Court granted plaintiffs’ and denied defendants’ motions for partial judgment on the pleadings and found that Section 2-1706.5 operates as a legislative remittitur in violation of the constitutional separation of powers doctrine and, due to the inseverability provision, invalidated the Act in its entirety.
The defendants appealed directly to the Illinois Supreme Court. The defendants argued that the statute constituted a “valid exercise of the General Assembly’s police power in response to a public threat, as reflected in certain legislative findings, and that … the statute does not offend separation of powers principles.” The defendants also contended that the caps were a response to the “health-care crisis” in Illinois, including the rising cost of medical liability insurance which increased the financial burdens on physicians and hospitals and which is believed to have contributed to a reduction of available medical care in some areas of Illinois.
Holding
The Court began with an extensive analysis of its decision in Best where the Court found the $500,000 limit on noneconomic damages “arbitrary” and violated the special legislation clause of the Illinois Constitution. 179 Ill.2d 367 (1997). The Court ruled in Best that the limitation actually undermined the “stated goal of providing consistency and rationality to the civil justice system.” The Court also addressed the argument that the noneconomic damages cap invaded the province of the judiciary to assess on a case-by-case basis whether a jury’s award is excessive by imposing a “one-size-fits-all” legislative remittitur. The Court concluded in Best that the cap “undercuts the power, and obligation, of the judiciary to reduce excessive verdicts… [and] functions as a legislative remittitur... [that] disregards the jury’s careful deliberative process in determining damages….”
In Lebron, the defendants tried to distinguish Best and argued that it was not controlling because the statute in Best was part of a broader effort to reduce systemwide litigation costs whereas Section 2-1706.5 is narrowly tailored to address the health-care crisis specifically and therefore did not unduly encroach on the judiciary. The Lebron Court rejected this distinction finding that the encroachment upon the inherent power of the judiciary is the same in Lebron as it was in Best and Section 2-1706.5 still constitutes an unconstitutional legislative remittitur.
Quoting from Best, the Court concluded that Section 2-1706.5 “thus violates the separation of powers clause because it ‘unduly encroaches’ upon the fundamentally judicial prerogative of determining whether the jury’s assessment of damages is excessive within the meaning of the law.” Even though the cap may have served a legitimate legislative goal well intended to control litigation costs and address a health-care crisis, the Court ruled that the “crux of our analysis is whether the statute unduly infringes upon the inherent power of the judiciary.” While the legislature may change common law actions, such authority is not absolute and the legislature’s attempt to limit common law damages runs “afoul of the separation of powers clause.” The Court held that the limitation in Section 2- 1706.5 was unconstitutional and because of the inseverability provision in the Act, the entire Act was invalid and void in its entirety.
The Lebron opinion includes a dissent by Justice Karmeier, joined by Justice Garman, who questioned whether the Court even had jurisdiction to hear the case because the underlying case was still at the pleading stage and the likelihood of plaintiffs’ success of proving liability and noneconomic damages in excess of Section 2-1706.5 was therefore speculative. Justice Karmeier opined that the majority of the Court impermissibly overstepped its own constitutional bounds and had “no business” telling the General Assembly it exceeded its constitutional power while ignoring the constitutional constraints on its own authority. The dissent disagreed with Best and said that a statutory cap was not a remittitur since a cap does not involve a “substitution of the court’s judgment for that of the jury, but rather a determination that a higher award is not permitted as a matter of law ….” According to the dissent, this view has been adopted in a number of other state and federal courts, and should be adopted in Illinois. The dissent notes that a solution to the health care crisis “will not come from the judicial branch” and courts should not “stand as an obstacle to legitimate efforts by the legislature and others to find an answer.”
Commentary
The Lebron decision immediately and significantly affects the potential range of jury verdicts in medical malpractice cases in Illinois and may also spur the filing of additional such matters. These possibilities will be watched closely by both Illinois policyholders and their insurers. Groups involved in the state and national health care debates will also focus on the Lebron decision in continuing discussions about whether various so-called tort reform measures influence the availability and quality of medical care.
The potential impact of Lebron also extends beyond the medical malpractice context. There will undoubtedly be renewed efforts in the Illinois legislature to draft a law that would withstand judicial scrutiny and attempt to bring predictability to noneconomic damages in medical malpractice and perhaps other types of actions. If there is an increase in the size of verdicts and number of such verdicts, it may create an environment in which larger noneconomic jury verdicts find favor in other kinds of cases. This prospect means Illinois could continue to be viewed as an attractive forum for litigation, resulting in the filing of more cases with little connection to Illinois and only adding to the current reputation of certain Illinois counties as being very “pro-plaintiff.” Finally, other states have similar laws under judicial review, including, for example, Missouri whose Supreme Court heard oral argument on that state’s cap a few weeks ago. Opponents of caps in those jurisdictions will point to the Illinois decision in their efforts to have caps or other measures in those states overturned as well.
For medical malpractice matters and personal injury claims of various types, the possible repercussions of the Lebron decision warrant attention by both policyholders and insurers.
View original document | Send to colleague | Print
Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP
Ann Marie Walsh, Molly McGinnis Stine and Mark Deptula
USA
February 5 2010
Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP logo
Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital
The Illinois Supreme Court struck another blow to tort reform on February 4, 2010. The Court held in Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, 2010 WL 375190 (Ill. Feb. 4, 2010) that statutory caps on noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, in medical malpractice actions are unconstitutional for violating the separation of powers doctrine required by the Illinois Constitution. This is not the first time tort reform legislation was found unconstitutional by the Illinois Supreme Court. Notably, in Best v. Taylor Machine Works, 179 Ill.2d 367 (1997), the Court struck down the Illinois Tort Reform Act of 1995 and specifically the $500,000 cap on noneconomic damages in many kinds of cases. Following its reasoning in Best, the Lebron Court concluded that the medical malpractice caps infringe upon the “judiciary’s sphere of authority” and run “afoul of the separation of powers” required by the Illinois Constitution.
Background
The Court addressed the constitutionality of Section 2- 1706.5 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure which was adopted as part of Public Act 94-677. Section 2-1706.5 provides a noneconomic damages cap of $1,000,000 in awards against a hospital and its personnel or affiliates, and a cap of $500,000 for noneconomic damages against a physician and the physician’s business or corporate entity and personnel. 735 ILCS 2-1706.5(a)(1) and (2). At the trial court level, the Circuit Court of Cook County ruled that these statutory caps violated the separation of powers clause of the Illinois Constitution and declared the entire Act invalid, as it included an “inseverability provision.”
The plaintiffs, Abigaile Lebron and her mother, filed a medical malpractice and declaratory judgment action against Gottlieb Memorial Hospital and the physician and nurse who treated Abigaile’s mother during her pregnancy and delivery of Abigaile. Plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that Abigaile sustained severe brain injury, cerebral palsy, and cognitive mental impairment and that her damages for disfigurement and pain and suffering greatly exceeded the applicable limitations on noneconomic damages. Plaintiffs sought a judicial determination that Section 2-1706.5 violated the Illinois Constitution. The Circuit Court granted plaintiffs’ and denied defendants’ motions for partial judgment on the pleadings and found that Section 2-1706.5 operates as a legislative remittitur in violation of the constitutional separation of powers doctrine and, due to the inseverability provision, invalidated the Act in its entirety.
The defendants appealed directly to the Illinois Supreme Court. The defendants argued that the statute constituted a “valid exercise of the General Assembly’s police power in response to a public threat, as reflected in certain legislative findings, and that … the statute does not offend separation of powers principles.” The defendants also contended that the caps were a response to the “health-care crisis” in Illinois, including the rising cost of medical liability insurance which increased the financial burdens on physicians and hospitals and which is believed to have contributed to a reduction of available medical care in some areas of Illinois.
Holding
The Court began with an extensive analysis of its decision in Best where the Court found the $500,000 limit on noneconomic damages “arbitrary” and violated the special legislation clause of the Illinois Constitution. 179 Ill.2d 367 (1997). The Court ruled in Best that the limitation actually undermined the “stated goal of providing consistency and rationality to the civil justice system.” The Court also addressed the argument that the noneconomic damages cap invaded the province of the judiciary to assess on a case-by-case basis whether a jury’s award is excessive by imposing a “one-size-fits-all” legislative remittitur. The Court concluded in Best that the cap “undercuts the power, and obligation, of the judiciary to reduce excessive verdicts… [and] functions as a legislative remittitur... [that] disregards the jury’s careful deliberative process in determining damages….”
In Lebron, the defendants tried to distinguish Best and argued that it was not controlling because the statute in Best was part of a broader effort to reduce systemwide litigation costs whereas Section 2-1706.5 is narrowly tailored to address the health-care crisis specifically and therefore did not unduly encroach on the judiciary. The Lebron Court rejected this distinction finding that the encroachment upon the inherent power of the judiciary is the same in Lebron as it was in Best and Section 2-1706.5 still constitutes an unconstitutional legislative remittitur.
Quoting from Best, the Court concluded that Section 2-1706.5 “thus violates the separation of powers clause because it ‘unduly encroaches’ upon the fundamentally judicial prerogative of determining whether the jury’s assessment of damages is excessive within the meaning of the law.” Even though the cap may have served a legitimate legislative goal well intended to control litigation costs and address a health-care crisis, the Court ruled that the “crux of our analysis is whether the statute unduly infringes upon the inherent power of the judiciary.” While the legislature may change common law actions, such authority is not absolute and the legislature’s attempt to limit common law damages runs “afoul of the separation of powers clause.” The Court held that the limitation in Section 2- 1706.5 was unconstitutional and because of the inseverability provision in the Act, the entire Act was invalid and void in its entirety.
The Lebron opinion includes a dissent by Justice Karmeier, joined by Justice Garman, who questioned whether the Court even had jurisdiction to hear the case because the underlying case was still at the pleading stage and the likelihood of plaintiffs’ success of proving liability and noneconomic damages in excess of Section 2-1706.5 was therefore speculative. Justice Karmeier opined that the majority of the Court impermissibly overstepped its own constitutional bounds and had “no business” telling the General Assembly it exceeded its constitutional power while ignoring the constitutional constraints on its own authority. The dissent disagreed with Best and said that a statutory cap was not a remittitur since a cap does not involve a “substitution of the court’s judgment for that of the jury, but rather a determination that a higher award is not permitted as a matter of law ….” According to the dissent, this view has been adopted in a number of other state and federal courts, and should be adopted in Illinois. The dissent notes that a solution to the health care crisis “will not come from the judicial branch” and courts should not “stand as an obstacle to legitimate efforts by the legislature and others to find an answer.”
Commentary
The Lebron decision immediately and significantly affects the potential range of jury verdicts in medical malpractice cases in Illinois and may also spur the filing of additional such matters. These possibilities will be watched closely by both Illinois policyholders and their insurers. Groups involved in the state and national health care debates will also focus on the Lebron decision in continuing discussions about whether various so-called tort reform measures influence the availability and quality of medical care.
The potential impact of Lebron also extends beyond the medical malpractice context. There will undoubtedly be renewed efforts in the Illinois legislature to draft a law that would withstand judicial scrutiny and attempt to bring predictability to noneconomic damages in medical malpractice and perhaps other types of actions. If there is an increase in the size of verdicts and number of such verdicts, it may create an environment in which larger noneconomic jury verdicts find favor in other kinds of cases. This prospect means Illinois could continue to be viewed as an attractive forum for litigation, resulting in the filing of more cases with little connection to Illinois and only adding to the current reputation of certain Illinois counties as being very “pro-plaintiff.” Finally, other states have similar laws under judicial review, including, for example, Missouri whose Supreme Court heard oral argument on that state’s cap a few weeks ago. Opponents of caps in those jurisdictions will point to the Illinois decision in their efforts to have caps or other measures in those states overturned as well.
For medical malpractice matters and personal injury claims of various types, the possible repercussions of the Lebron decision warrant attention by both policyholders and insurers.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Toyota Personal Injury Cases are Coming
February 6, 2010 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Kentucky Personal Injury Lawyers. A recalled Toyota Camry became involved in a crash that injured four people.
Kentucky personal injury attorney alerts- Defective gas pedals caused a Toyota Camry to crash, resulting in possible spinal cord injury.
Louisville, KY—A single-vehicle crash involving a recalled 2010 Toyota Camry resulted in the hospitalization of four of the car’s occupants on Saturday night, January 30, 2010. The men in the vehicle reported they had no idea about the recall prior to the car wreck, according to information provided by WAVE3.com.
A Toyota Camry, driven by a Louisville man, identified as Todd Allen, was reportedly “pulling into a parking spot off Blue Lick and Preston in Okolona Saturday night when suddenly, for no reason at all, the car took off at high speed”, according to the Paula Allen, the motorist’s wife. The driver allegedly attempted to brake but was incapable of doing so, resulting in the violent car crash. The 2010 Toyota Camry he was driving, along with seven other models, were recalled due to defective gas pedals less than two weeks ago.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews allegedly transported four of the vehicles occupants to University Hospital to be treated for the injuries they suffered in the motor vehicle accident. Todd Allen was taken to the intensive care unit of the hospital allegedly lacking feeling in his legs. It was noted that he might have sustained a spinal cord injury in the wreck. Officials from the Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) have not yet issued a formal accident report, however, they did confirm its occurrence.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys.
News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Kentucky Personal Injury Lawyers. A recalled Toyota Camry became involved in a crash that injured four people.
Kentucky personal injury attorney alerts- Defective gas pedals caused a Toyota Camry to crash, resulting in possible spinal cord injury.
Louisville, KY—A single-vehicle crash involving a recalled 2010 Toyota Camry resulted in the hospitalization of four of the car’s occupants on Saturday night, January 30, 2010. The men in the vehicle reported they had no idea about the recall prior to the car wreck, according to information provided by WAVE3.com.
A Toyota Camry, driven by a Louisville man, identified as Todd Allen, was reportedly “pulling into a parking spot off Blue Lick and Preston in Okolona Saturday night when suddenly, for no reason at all, the car took off at high speed”, according to the Paula Allen, the motorist’s wife. The driver allegedly attempted to brake but was incapable of doing so, resulting in the violent car crash. The 2010 Toyota Camry he was driving, along with seven other models, were recalled due to defective gas pedals less than two weeks ago.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews allegedly transported four of the vehicles occupants to University Hospital to be treated for the injuries they suffered in the motor vehicle accident. Todd Allen was taken to the intensive care unit of the hospital allegedly lacking feeling in his legs. It was noted that he might have sustained a spinal cord injury in the wreck. Officials from the Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) have not yet issued a formal accident report, however, they did confirm its occurrence.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys.
News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Florida Bus Overturns with Soldiers Aboard
February 6, 2010 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. A bus carrying 30 National Guard soldiers overturned, consequently injuring 25.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- FHP officials are conducting crash investigations after soldiers were injured when bus rolled over.
Clay County, FL—Twenty-five soldiers sustained injuries when the Florida Army National Guard bus they were traveling in overturned near Camp Blanding. The incident occurred on Tuesday afternoon, February 2, 2010, according to information provided by the Gainesville Sun.
Officials from the Florida Highway Patrol allegedly reported 30 soldiers occupying the bus at the time of the wreck. The incident occurred when bus driver, 23-year-old Jason Robert Turner veered onto the grassy shoulder of the roadway after failing to immediately notice the slowing convoy traffic passing in front of the bus. Upon swerving to avoid a collision with the convoy, the bus rolled onto the passenger side. A FHP trooper reported that no other vehicles became involved in the crash.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews airlifted one soldier to Shands at the University of Florida via medical helicopter. He was to be treated for critical injuries in the trauma unit of the medical center. Eight additional soldiers were transported to hospitals including Shands at UF, the Orange Park Medical Center or Shands at Stark. Six more soldiers were transported back to Camp Blanding where medics treated them for minor injuries. All injuries, except those suffered by the man who was critically injured, were reportedly described as non-life threatening. No charges have yet to be filed in regards to the crash. Investigations are underway.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers.
News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. A bus carrying 30 National Guard soldiers overturned, consequently injuring 25.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- FHP officials are conducting crash investigations after soldiers were injured when bus rolled over.
Clay County, FL—Twenty-five soldiers sustained injuries when the Florida Army National Guard bus they were traveling in overturned near Camp Blanding. The incident occurred on Tuesday afternoon, February 2, 2010, according to information provided by the Gainesville Sun.
Officials from the Florida Highway Patrol allegedly reported 30 soldiers occupying the bus at the time of the wreck. The incident occurred when bus driver, 23-year-old Jason Robert Turner veered onto the grassy shoulder of the roadway after failing to immediately notice the slowing convoy traffic passing in front of the bus. Upon swerving to avoid a collision with the convoy, the bus rolled onto the passenger side. A FHP trooper reported that no other vehicles became involved in the crash.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews airlifted one soldier to Shands at the University of Florida via medical helicopter. He was to be treated for critical injuries in the trauma unit of the medical center. Eight additional soldiers were transported to hospitals including Shands at UF, the Orange Park Medical Center or Shands at Stark. Six more soldiers were transported back to Camp Blanding where medics treated them for minor injuries. All injuries, except those suffered by the man who was critically injured, were reportedly described as non-life threatening. No charges have yet to be filed in regards to the crash. Investigations are underway.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers.
News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Transportation Worker 2008 Settles Case
http://www.caller.com/news/2010/feb/05/state-settles-with-transportation-worker-in-suit/
CORPUS CHRISTI — Transportation worker Martin Garcia reached a $250,000 settlement Friday with the state involving a crash in which a state district judge was behind the wheel.
Nearly two years have passed since 105th District Judge J. Manuel Bañales lost control of his Cadillac, hitting a transportation truck and injuring Garcia, who was kneeling near it.
The two have never spoken.
On Friday Garcia smiled when he talked of his recovery and said the accident showed him how precious life is.
“I’m happy that I’m still alive,” he said.
He understands it was an accident.
“There’s no resentment toward Judge Bañales,” he said.
When Bañales heard about Garcia’s remarks, he paused and held back tears.
“I didn’t know he said that,” he said.
After the June 5, 2008, accident, the two were taken to the same hospital. At one point, Bañales said he went to see Garcia in his hospital room but Garcia was sedated. Garcia’s brother later visited Bañales’ room with a priest Bañales recognized and let him know the family knew it was an accident.
He said he has wanted to talk to Garcia but couldn’t because of the lawsuit. He hopes that one day they will meet.
“Since the accident, I prayed every day for him,” Bañales said. “I still do.”
Garcia, 36, endured several surgeries and extensive rehabilitation. He can now walk with a cane.
Bañales said he can’t help thinking about all the “What If” scenarios.
“I wish I could take it back,” he said. “I just wish that things are better for him.”
Both men said two things have helped them — faith and family support.
“In a weird kind of a way, (it has) been a blessing,” Garcia said. “I get a second chance.”
Garcia’s settlement amount was the maximum allowed by law in a suit against the state. Bañales wasn’t named as a defendant in the suit and didn’t appear at Friday’s hearing. He was on the bench in his courtroom on the same floor at the time.
Garcia’s attorney said the decision to sue the state and not the judge individually was because Bañales had been acting within the course of his employment with the state.
Of the $250,000 settlement, Garcia’s two children each will receive $10,000. Those funds will be put into trust accounts until they are adults. Garcia will be required to repay part of a workmen’s compensation lien, but in exchange will receive lifetime medical care as part of the agreement.
The rest of the settlement goes to Garcia. His attorney Richard Mithoff waived his fees and expenses in the case.
A spokesman for the Texas Attorney General’s Office, which represented the state, referred a call seeking comment to transportation department officials, who couldn’t be reached.
Garcia said he is nearly finished with physical therapy and now works in a clerical position for the transportation department.
He added that for him the suit was never about securing a hefty sum.
“Some people (may) say that it’s not enough but I’m not like that,” he said.
The suit alleged that Bañales was negligent when his car struck Garcia on a ramp connecting Interstate 37 and Padre Island Drive, and accused him of not paying attention, failing to brake in time to avoid the crash and of driving at an unreasonable speed. The state should be held liable for that negligence, according to the suit.
Bañales has said he tried to avoid the crash and applied the brakes.
He was ticketed for an unsafe change from a direct course and paid a fine.
Police cleared him of any criminal wrongdoing after an investigation that included a blood test, which showed no alcohol or drugs in his system.
CORPUS CHRISTI — Transportation worker Martin Garcia reached a $250,000 settlement Friday with the state involving a crash in which a state district judge was behind the wheel.
Nearly two years have passed since 105th District Judge J. Manuel Bañales lost control of his Cadillac, hitting a transportation truck and injuring Garcia, who was kneeling near it.
The two have never spoken.
On Friday Garcia smiled when he talked of his recovery and said the accident showed him how precious life is.
“I’m happy that I’m still alive,” he said.
He understands it was an accident.
“There’s no resentment toward Judge Bañales,” he said.
When Bañales heard about Garcia’s remarks, he paused and held back tears.
“I didn’t know he said that,” he said.
After the June 5, 2008, accident, the two were taken to the same hospital. At one point, Bañales said he went to see Garcia in his hospital room but Garcia was sedated. Garcia’s brother later visited Bañales’ room with a priest Bañales recognized and let him know the family knew it was an accident.
He said he has wanted to talk to Garcia but couldn’t because of the lawsuit. He hopes that one day they will meet.
“Since the accident, I prayed every day for him,” Bañales said. “I still do.”
Garcia, 36, endured several surgeries and extensive rehabilitation. He can now walk with a cane.
Bañales said he can’t help thinking about all the “What If” scenarios.
“I wish I could take it back,” he said. “I just wish that things are better for him.”
Both men said two things have helped them — faith and family support.
“In a weird kind of a way, (it has) been a blessing,” Garcia said. “I get a second chance.”
Garcia’s settlement amount was the maximum allowed by law in a suit against the state. Bañales wasn’t named as a defendant in the suit and didn’t appear at Friday’s hearing. He was on the bench in his courtroom on the same floor at the time.
Garcia’s attorney said the decision to sue the state and not the judge individually was because Bañales had been acting within the course of his employment with the state.
Of the $250,000 settlement, Garcia’s two children each will receive $10,000. Those funds will be put into trust accounts until they are adults. Garcia will be required to repay part of a workmen’s compensation lien, but in exchange will receive lifetime medical care as part of the agreement.
The rest of the settlement goes to Garcia. His attorney Richard Mithoff waived his fees and expenses in the case.
A spokesman for the Texas Attorney General’s Office, which represented the state, referred a call seeking comment to transportation department officials, who couldn’t be reached.
Garcia said he is nearly finished with physical therapy and now works in a clerical position for the transportation department.
He added that for him the suit was never about securing a hefty sum.
“Some people (may) say that it’s not enough but I’m not like that,” he said.
The suit alleged that Bañales was negligent when his car struck Garcia on a ramp connecting Interstate 37 and Padre Island Drive, and accused him of not paying attention, failing to brake in time to avoid the crash and of driving at an unreasonable speed. The state should be held liable for that negligence, according to the suit.
Bañales has said he tried to avoid the crash and applied the brakes.
He was ticketed for an unsafe change from a direct course and paid a fine.
Police cleared him of any criminal wrongdoing after an investigation that included a blood test, which showed no alcohol or drugs in his system.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Toyota Accident in Kentucky
Legal News for Kentucky Personal Injury Lawyers. A recalled Toyota Camry became involved in a crash that injured four people.
Kentucky personal injury attorney alerts- Defective gas pedals caused a Toyota Camry to crash, resulting in possible spinal cord injury.
Louisville, KY—A single-vehicle crash involving a recalled 2010 Toyota Camry resulted in the hospitalization of four of the car’s occupants on Saturday night, January 30, 2010. The men in the vehicle reported they had no idea about the recall prior to the car wreck, according to information provided by WAVE3.com.
A Toyota Camry, driven by a Louisville man, identified as Todd Allen, was reportedly “pulling into a parking spot off Blue Lick and Preston in Okolona Saturday night when suddenly, for no reason at all, the car took off at high speed”, according to the Paula Allen, the motorist’s wife. The driver allegedly attempted to brake but was incapable of doing so, resulting in the violent car crash. The 2010 Toyota Camry he was driving, along with seven other models, were recalled due to defective gas pedals less than two weeks ago.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews allegedly transported four of the vehicles occupants to University Hospital to be treated for the injuries they suffered in the motor vehicle accident. Todd Allen was taken to the intensive care unit of the hospital allegedly lacking feeling in his legs. It was noted that he might have sustained a spinal cord injury in the wreck. Officials from the Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) have not yet issued a formal accident report, however, they did confirm its occurrence.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys.
Tags: crash, gas pedals, Kentucky personal injury attorney, spinal cord injury, toyota camry
Written by sandraquinlan · Filed Under Justice News Flash, Personal Injury
Online Justice News Flash Legal News Distribution - JusticeNewsFlash.com
Kentucky personal injury attorney alerts- Defective gas pedals caused a Toyota Camry to crash, resulting in possible spinal cord injury.
Louisville, KY—A single-vehicle crash involving a recalled 2010 Toyota Camry resulted in the hospitalization of four of the car’s occupants on Saturday night, January 30, 2010. The men in the vehicle reported they had no idea about the recall prior to the car wreck, according to information provided by WAVE3.com.
A Toyota Camry, driven by a Louisville man, identified as Todd Allen, was reportedly “pulling into a parking spot off Blue Lick and Preston in Okolona Saturday night when suddenly, for no reason at all, the car took off at high speed”, according to the Paula Allen, the motorist’s wife. The driver allegedly attempted to brake but was incapable of doing so, resulting in the violent car crash. The 2010 Toyota Camry he was driving, along with seven other models, were recalled due to defective gas pedals less than two weeks ago.
Emergency medical services (EMS) crews allegedly transported four of the vehicles occupants to University Hospital to be treated for the injuries they suffered in the motor vehicle accident. Todd Allen was taken to the intensive care unit of the hospital allegedly lacking feeling in his legs. It was noted that he might have sustained a spinal cord injury in the wreck. Officials from the Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) have not yet issued a formal accident report, however, they did confirm its occurrence.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys.
Tags: crash, gas pedals, Kentucky personal injury attorney, spinal cord injury, toyota camry
Written by sandraquinlan · Filed Under Justice News Flash, Personal Injury
Online Justice News Flash Legal News Distribution - JusticeNewsFlash.com
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Car Accident Settlement in Pasadena California
PASADENA, California, Feb. 3, 2009—Pasadena personal injury attorneys, Ball & Roberts, have announced their recent multimillion-dollar lawsuit settlement on behalf of a woman who sustained upper arm nerve problems and psychiatric injuries from an automobile accident. The accident occurred as a result of an unsecured vehicle left on the side of the road that rolled back into traffic.
The case presented some novel issues concerning post-traumatic stress disorder, which became difficult to treat because of the physical pain from the arm injuries the woman sustained.
In addition, the woman, who was an Eastern European immigrant, had some pre-existing psychiatric problems due to language difficulties and cultural differences she has experienced since living here.
The case also raised an interesting legal issue over whether failure to re-arm an airbag (that had deployed in a previous accident) can be deemed negligence. The question was raised over whether, if the law does not require every car to have working airbags, someone can be faulted for not fixing an airbag that had been activated earlier. In response to this unique legal challenge, the team of personal injury attorneys at Ball & Roberts employed accident reconstruction experts and bio-medical experts to prove the defendant would have sustained the same—or worse—injuries had there been a working airbag.
The personal injury attorneys reached a confidential settlement with the defendant, a road construction company, one month before the commencement of a three-week trial.
About Ball & Roberts
Ball & Roberts is a Personal Injury Attorneys firm that helps California plaintiffs successfully resolve non-criminal cases in which they've been seriously physically or financially harmed. The experienced and respected California trial lawyers at the Pasadena law firm of Ball & Roberts represent clients throughout Southern California in communities such as Los Angeles, Glendale, Burbank, Van Nuys, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, Brentwood, Hollywood, Malibu, Santa Ana, Hollister, L.A. County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, Orange County, Ventura County and San Diego County, as well as SoCal regions such as the San Gabriel Valley, San Fernando Valley and the Inland Empire. For information on personal injury attorneys Ball & Roberts, visit http://www.pasadenalaw.com
The case presented some novel issues concerning post-traumatic stress disorder, which became difficult to treat because of the physical pain from the arm injuries the woman sustained.
In addition, the woman, who was an Eastern European immigrant, had some pre-existing psychiatric problems due to language difficulties and cultural differences she has experienced since living here.
The case also raised an interesting legal issue over whether failure to re-arm an airbag (that had deployed in a previous accident) can be deemed negligence. The question was raised over whether, if the law does not require every car to have working airbags, someone can be faulted for not fixing an airbag that had been activated earlier. In response to this unique legal challenge, the team of personal injury attorneys at Ball & Roberts employed accident reconstruction experts and bio-medical experts to prove the defendant would have sustained the same—or worse—injuries had there been a working airbag.
The personal injury attorneys reached a confidential settlement with the defendant, a road construction company, one month before the commencement of a three-week trial.
About Ball & Roberts
Ball & Roberts is a Personal Injury Attorneys firm that helps California plaintiffs successfully resolve non-criminal cases in which they've been seriously physically or financially harmed. The experienced and respected California trial lawyers at the Pasadena law firm of Ball & Roberts represent clients throughout Southern California in communities such as Los Angeles, Glendale, Burbank, Van Nuys, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, Brentwood, Hollywood, Malibu, Santa Ana, Hollister, L.A. County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, Orange County, Ventura County and San Diego County, as well as SoCal regions such as the San Gabriel Valley, San Fernando Valley and the Inland Empire. For information on personal injury attorneys Ball & Roberts, visit http://www.pasadenalaw.com
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Medical Malpractice an Issue for Attorneys
21:15:14 - New York, Bronx Medical Malpractice Law Firm represent victims of personal injury, accident injury and medical malpractice within New York State. If you or someone close to you has been a victim of medical malpractice then you must get in touch with a Medical Malpractice Lawyer at 1-866-ATTY-LAW.
New York Medical Malpractice Lawyer, Frekhtman & Associates represents victims of personal injuries and accident injuries within New York State. Visit www.866attylaw.com/medical_malpractice for more information or call (718) 529 – 2766 for a free legal consultation if you are a victim of medical malpractice within New York City (NYC).
Every year, anywhere between 44,000 to 98,000 people die on account of medical malpractice and negligence and moreover, medical malpractice compensation claims have increased over the last few years. Medical malpractice laws have two major objectives - providing financial compensation to the victims of medical malpractice and to deter and penalize acts of medical negligence by authorities, hospitals, and individual practitioners.
You should follow these guidelines if you or your loved ones have ever suffered personal injuries in New York State.
Step1: If you do not feel well after an operation or surgery, then consult a qualified medical practitioner or doctor. The doctor from a separate medical facility will examine your health status and let you know whether you were a victim of a medical mistake.
Step 2: You should find out the legal history of your medical practitioner from the New York State Department of Health and can contact them to inquire if there are other similar medical negligence complaints against your medical practitioner.
Step 3: Study the outcome of medical lawsuits similar to yours and also, gain information related to your medical and health status.
Step 4: You must file your New York medical malpractice lawsuit within the Statute of Limitations and that is two years and six months. Also, you cannot file a medical malpractice lawsuit once your State’s Statute of Limitations has expired.
Step 5: If you were a victim of medical negligence in New York State, then seek legal help @ www.866attylaw.com/medical_malpractice for a New York medical malpractice lawyer who can help you get justice and compensation. Most medical practitioners hire aggressive defense lawyers who deny genuine compensation claims and thus, it is important to contact a medical malpractice lawyer to help you steer clear of complexities arising from your medical malpractice lawsuit.
Step 6: You should not fake an injury and must always present the correct facts to your medical malpractice lawyer; and as such, also, present correct facts to the medical practitioner who will issue the medical report.
Call New York Medical Malpractice Lawyer at 1-866-ATTY-LAW for a free legal consultation. We will help you receive justice and compensation for your injuries.
New York Medical Malpractice Lawyer, Frekhtman & Associates represents victims of personal injuries and accident injuries within New York State. Visit www.866attylaw.com/medical_malpractice for more information or call (718) 529 – 2766 for a free legal consultation if you are a victim of medical malpractice within New York City (NYC).
Every year, anywhere between 44,000 to 98,000 people die on account of medical malpractice and negligence and moreover, medical malpractice compensation claims have increased over the last few years. Medical malpractice laws have two major objectives - providing financial compensation to the victims of medical malpractice and to deter and penalize acts of medical negligence by authorities, hospitals, and individual practitioners.
You should follow these guidelines if you or your loved ones have ever suffered personal injuries in New York State.
Step1: If you do not feel well after an operation or surgery, then consult a qualified medical practitioner or doctor. The doctor from a separate medical facility will examine your health status and let you know whether you were a victim of a medical mistake.
Step 2: You should find out the legal history of your medical practitioner from the New York State Department of Health and can contact them to inquire if there are other similar medical negligence complaints against your medical practitioner.
Step 3: Study the outcome of medical lawsuits similar to yours and also, gain information related to your medical and health status.
Step 4: You must file your New York medical malpractice lawsuit within the Statute of Limitations and that is two years and six months. Also, you cannot file a medical malpractice lawsuit once your State’s Statute of Limitations has expired.
Step 5: If you were a victim of medical negligence in New York State, then seek legal help @ www.866attylaw.com/medical_malpractice for a New York medical malpractice lawyer who can help you get justice and compensation. Most medical practitioners hire aggressive defense lawyers who deny genuine compensation claims and thus, it is important to contact a medical malpractice lawyer to help you steer clear of complexities arising from your medical malpractice lawsuit.
Step 6: You should not fake an injury and must always present the correct facts to your medical malpractice lawyer; and as such, also, present correct facts to the medical practitioner who will issue the medical report.
Call New York Medical Malpractice Lawyer at 1-866-ATTY-LAW for a free legal consultation. We will help you receive justice and compensation for your injuries.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Falling Furniture kills Child
Legal news for New Jersey personal injury attorneys—A toddler was fatally injured when furniture fell on top of him.
Newark, NJ (NewYorkInjuryNews.com) – A toddler was fatally injured in his own home in Newark when a dresser and a television set fell on top of him, reported January 25, 2010 by the Star-Ledger.
Police and emergency medical services (EMS) reported to the scene at 300 block of Clinton Place where the 2-year-old child was tragically found unconscious and unresponsive around 8 p.m. Police reported that the toddler was apparently watching TV with his older brother when the toddler managed to open one of the dresser drawers, which made the dresser and the television set topple over on him. The toddler was severely injured underneath the furniture.
The grandmother was reported to be in the front room watching another one of the family’s television sets at the time of the accident. Paramedics rushed to the scene to aid the boy. He was taken in an ambulance to University Hospital where doctors and nurses attempted to save his life. Sadly, his injuries proved fatal and he was pronounced dead.
Detectives reported that the parents of the child were not on the premises at the time of the incident. It appeared the grandmother was looking after the boys. Police continue to investigate this fatal and sad incident to determine what occurred.
Bridget Hom
www.NewYorkInjuryNews.com
Newark, NJ (NewYorkInjuryNews.com) – A toddler was fatally injured in his own home in Newark when a dresser and a television set fell on top of him, reported January 25, 2010 by the Star-Ledger.
Police and emergency medical services (EMS) reported to the scene at 300 block of Clinton Place where the 2-year-old child was tragically found unconscious and unresponsive around 8 p.m. Police reported that the toddler was apparently watching TV with his older brother when the toddler managed to open one of the dresser drawers, which made the dresser and the television set topple over on him. The toddler was severely injured underneath the furniture.
The grandmother was reported to be in the front room watching another one of the family’s television sets at the time of the accident. Paramedics rushed to the scene to aid the boy. He was taken in an ambulance to University Hospital where doctors and nurses attempted to save his life. Sadly, his injuries proved fatal and he was pronounced dead.
Detectives reported that the parents of the child were not on the premises at the time of the incident. It appeared the grandmother was looking after the boys. Police continue to investigate this fatal and sad incident to determine what occurred.
Bridget Hom
www.NewYorkInjuryNews.com
Monday, February 1, 2010
Blow Out the Candle Before Bed
January 30, 2010 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal news for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. Residential structure fire caused man and woman to suffer burns, smoke inhalation.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- Structure fire left woman with second degree burns; both suffered smoke inhalation.
Hollywood, FL—An early morning house blaze left a woman with second-degree burns in Hollywood, Florida on Wednesday, January 27, 2010. The inferno was reported at approximately 5 a.m. on the 3200 block of Harrison Street, according to the Sun-Sentinel.
Hollywood-Fire Rescue Department officials were allegedly dispatched to the scene of a residential fire where a woman and man allegedly woke up to the sound of a dog incessantly barking. The pair reportedly suffered smoke inhalation but managed to escape the home. Responding emergency medical services (EMS) personnel transported the woman to Memorial Regional Hospital after suffering smoke inhalation as well as second-degree burns to her hands and face. Medical professionals also allegedly treated the man for smoke inhalation. The residents reportedly claimed that a lit candle was left unattended before they fell asleep, a likely cause in the blaze.
According to information provided by the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA), residential structure fires accounted for about 84 percent of all fire-inflicted fatalities and 81 percent of injuries in 2008. Statistics for 2008 show that 2,780 people were fatally injured in a total of 403,000 residential structure blazes. It was estimated that approximately 399,800 fires break out each year, resulting in 2,995 deaths and 14,600 injuries.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal news for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. Residential structure fire caused man and woman to suffer burns, smoke inhalation.
Florida personal injury attorney alerts- Structure fire left woman with second degree burns; both suffered smoke inhalation.
Hollywood, FL—An early morning house blaze left a woman with second-degree burns in Hollywood, Florida on Wednesday, January 27, 2010. The inferno was reported at approximately 5 a.m. on the 3200 block of Harrison Street, according to the Sun-Sentinel.
Hollywood-Fire Rescue Department officials were allegedly dispatched to the scene of a residential fire where a woman and man allegedly woke up to the sound of a dog incessantly barking. The pair reportedly suffered smoke inhalation but managed to escape the home. Responding emergency medical services (EMS) personnel transported the woman to Memorial Regional Hospital after suffering smoke inhalation as well as second-degree burns to her hands and face. Medical professionals also allegedly treated the man for smoke inhalation. The residents reportedly claimed that a lit candle was left unattended before they fell asleep, a likely cause in the blaze.
According to information provided by the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA), residential structure fires accounted for about 84 percent of all fire-inflicted fatalities and 81 percent of injuries in 2008. Statistics for 2008 show that 2,780 people were fatally injured in a total of 403,000 residential structure blazes. It was estimated that approximately 399,800 fires break out each year, resulting in 2,995 deaths and 14,600 injuries.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)