Trial Attorney Blog

Last Friday the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington essentially upheld a landmark ruling that found cigarette makers deceived the public for decades about the health hazards of smoking.

The Court of Appeals upheld the major elements of a 2006 ruling that found the nation’s top tobacco companies guilty of fraud and violating racketeering laws. The ruling said manufacturers must change the way they market cigarettes. It bans labels such as “low tar,” “light,” “ultra light” or “mild,” because such cigarettes have been found to be no safer than others because of how people smoke them.

It also requires the companies to publish “corrective statements” on the adverse health effects and addictiveness of smoking and nicotine. The requirements have been stayed or dealyed while the case has been under appeal.

The attorney general of Alabama has announced that 14 major drug companies will pay Alabama $89 million to settle a lawsuit accusing them of defrauding the state Medicaid agency. This lawsuit brought on behalf of the taxpayers of the state of Alabama is one of many throughout the United States brought by state’s Attorney Generals accusing drug manufactures of overcharging and defrauding states for the purchase of drugs used in state sponsored medicaid and health care programs. The lawsuits essentially allege a pattern of fraud by drug manufacturers over many years.

The Alabama settlement followed a series of trial victories in Montgomery County Circuit Court against other drug companies accused of similar activities. The state of Alabama was represented by private law firms who undertook the representation and absorbed the risk of a losing verdict.

The companies agreeing to the Alabama settlement are: Abbott Laboratories, Schering-Plough Corp., Warrick Pharmaceuticals Corp., TEVA Pharmaceuticals USA, IVAX Corp., IVAX Pharmaceuticals, Barr Laboratories, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Aventis Behring, ZLB Behring, Sanofi-Synthelabo, Forest Laboratories, Forest Pharmaceuticals, Baxter Healthcare Corp. and Baxter International.

Georgia injury lawyers, handling a claim for a catastrophically injured employee or the family of a deceased employee, our investigation will often reveal that the employee received injuries while working on or around a piece of machinery that caused the death, some traumatic amputation or other trauma to the employee. In such a case, the attorney must consider potential product liability claims, such as defective design, manufacture, assembly, testing or failure to warn or misrepresentation. The Supreme Court of Georgia has outlined the test for whether a product is defective in terms of risk-utility analysis. There are three (3) principal basis of recovery in product liability actions: Negligence; Breach of Warranty; and Strict Liability.
Like any other claim, actions for damages based on product liability are governed by statutes of limitations. For personal injury actions based on negligence or strict liability related to product liability, a two year statute of limitations applies. However, there is an additional limitation that an attorney representing an employee injured by a product of any kind must consider as soon as he is retained. This is the statute of repose and it functions in addition to the statute of limitations. This statute of repose is a complete band to strict liability and negligence actions filed more than ten (10) years after the date of the first sale or use or consumption of the products, regardless of when the injury occurred. Thus, an injured employee’s time to file a case could be much less than two years. The statute of repose does not apply to claims based on failure of the manufacturer to warn of product related damage.
If you or a loved one has been seriously injured on-the-job, call the Georgia workers compensation lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP for a free consultation.

Georgia and South Carolina injury lawyers are seeing ATV accidents involving serious injury and sometimes death are on the rise with the return of warm weather. Tragically many, if not most are preventable by using common sense and obeying ATV rules. Just this week, I read about a Summerville, South Carolina teenager who is fighting for her life as a result of being thrown from the back of a fast moving ATV. According to witnesses, neither the 32 year old ATV driver or the teenage passenger were wearing helmuts.

Almost all ATV fatalities or serious injuries occur while violating one or more of the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s “Rules of ATV Operation”. Those rules are as follows:

1. Children under sixteen (16) should not ride adult-sized ATV (engines bigger than 90 cc’s).

Our Atlanta based lawyers are constantly involved in cases involving brain injury and brain death. As tragic as these cases are, the families and loved ones are many times faced with the decision whether to cease life support after there has been a medical determination of brain death.

In general, brain death is considered to be the irreversible loss of brain function. The exact definition has changed throughout the years and is still subject to debate. The brainstem controls brain function and is responsible for regulating breathing, heart rate, reflexes, withdrawal from pain. Thus, diagnosing brain death requires the absence of brainstem function.

Most states have adopted a version of the Uniform Determination of Death Act thereby establishing a definition of brain death. The Uniform Act defines brain death as follows:

Defective medical devices can lead to the serious injury or death of innocent people. For this reason Georgia injury lawyers representing victims of defective and dangerous products were dismayed when the Supreme Court decision in Riegel v. Medtronic, held that consumers can’t sue medical device companies over medical devices that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Now, victims of these dangerous products who say they were injured by faulty medical devices want Congress to pass legislation called the Medical Device Safety Act, that would override the Supreme Court decision.
Congressional Lawmakers are scheduled to hold a hearing this week on legislation that would nullify a Supreme Court decision that prevents consumers from seeking damages for injuries caused by federally approved medical devices. Support for the Medical Device Safety Act has been fueled by news of the Sprint Fidelis Pacemaker Wire and other faulty medical devices. Although device makers argue that the Bill will have a chilling effect on medical innovation and patient safety, there is no evidence to support such a conclusion. To the contrary, such a bill would enhance patient safety and make manufacturers accountable for faulty medical devices
If you or a loved one have been seriously injured as a result of a faulty medical device, contact the product liability lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP for a free consultation..

The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP who handle workers compensation cases always investigate the possibility that there is a negligent third party who can be sued and held accountable for the client’s injuries and damages. As any injured worker knows, the income benefits available under the Georgia Workers Compensation Act are limited. A worker with serious injuries is never made whole with workers compensation benefits alone. Many serious on-the-job injuries or deaths are attributable to the negligence of someone other than the employer.
For instance, increasingly, employers do not own or solely occupy the premises of an injured worker’s place of work. As a consequence, an injured worker may have claims against the owner of the premises or an entity that may jointly occupy the premises with the injured worker’s employer. The owner or occupier of a premise is liable for injuries caused by his failure to exercise ordinary care in keeping the premises and approaches safe. The owners of the premises may have a duty, under a contract, to keep the premises in safe repair or repair certain equipment associated with the premises. Likewise, the owner may have actual or constructive knowledge of a dangerous condition existing on the premises.
Accordingly, when a client is injured on-the-job, careful attention should be paid to the facts to determine whether there is a viable third party to go after for full compensation. The injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have extensive experience in handling these cases. If you or a loved one has been seriously injured in an on-the-job injury, call us for a free consultation.

As the popularity of ATV’s (all-terrain vehicles) increases the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP see more ATV accidents resulting in death and serious injuries each year. Even experienced riders must be very careful when operating an ATV. On April 18th of this year, former Utah Congressman Bill Orton, age 60, died while operating his ATV. According to authorities, he was riding out on the sand and went off a very steep sand dune, and when he impacted the bottom, the front end of the four-wheeler flipped on top of him, fatally injuring him. At the time of his accident, he was wearing a helmet.
According to ATVSafety.gov, a web site maintained by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, there were 268 “reported” ATV deaths in Georgia 1982 and 2007; however, this figure is likely low.
Experience is important when operating an ATV. All new riders should take a training course. These courses are offered nationwide and are usually offered free when purchasing an ATV from a dealer. Although many ATV injuries or deaths result from careless operation of the machine, many result from the negligence of third parties. Some accidents are the result of dangerous products like faulty brakes or steering components. If you or a loved one has been injured on an ATV, take care to preserve the ATV, including all parts, and consult one of the Georgia ATV injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP.

Many automobile crashes which our Georgia lawyers investigate involve serious injury and deaths which are caused by roof collapses in rollover situations. Tragically, many of these victims would have been less seriously injured or survived had the roof of the vehicle not collapsed. For many years, safety advocates have urged auto makers and the federal government to increase the minimal standards for vehicle roof strength.

Now, under pressure from Congress, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has issued increased roof-strength requirements. The long-awaited federal upgrade of the 35-year-old regulation governing vehicle roof strength will save 135 lives and prevent more than 1,000 injuries according to the United States Department of Transportation.

This is encouraging news. But, at the same time, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued lower requirements for the heaviest vehicles and added a phase-in period. The final regulation boosts the requirement to three times the weight for vehicles up to 6,000 pounds. Vehicles 6,000-10,000 pounds must meet a 1.5 times standard. NHTSA says 135 lives will be saved and 1,065 injuries. The new regulation is estimated to add $54 per vehicle in design costs and another $15 to $62 in added fuel costs. NHTSA has been working with updating the current regulation for more than a decade.

The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have previously posted on the danger posed by defective grinding wheels that explode or disintegrate. When a grinding wheel comes apart, it can result in serious eye injury and even death. Although there are several reasons why these wheels fail, it is thought that many of these are inferior, imported products.

To prevent injuries, the following procedures are recommended when using grinding wheels:

* Check the wheel before each use for any cracks or chips. If any are found, discard