Articles Tagged with Personal Injury

When I speak to potential clients about claims against government employees and entities, they are often startled to learn about the antiquated but harsh doctrine of sovereign immunity. Many states have made changes to their laws to minimize the impact of this legal doctrine upon the innocent. However, in many circumstances, states like Georgia still employ the doctrine to defeat the claims of those injured by government actors. While some improvements in the law have been made, regrettably, they have not been sufficient to address all claims against government actors.

The policy reason behind the doctrine of sovereign immunity is to protect the public purse from claims made by citizens against their government. The theory seems to be that if a citizen sues the government for acts of negligence and money is collected, then the bill will have to be paid by taxpayers out of the public purse. In today’s modern society, however, with insurance being available to protect all government agencies just as in the private sector, the reason behind the doctrine seem to be less than compelling. Succinctly stated, the only public monies being paid are the amount of the premiums and the public is not being called upon to pay the claims per se. This being the case, a strong argument could be made that the doctrine of sovereign immunity should be completely abolished. Nonetheless, it is alive and well in Georgia and elsewhere.

The principal exception to the doctrine of sovereign immunity involves governmental vehicles. If a government employee is driving a county, city or state vehicle and they injure a third party, then typically the doctrine of sovereign immunity has been waived in this state. Nonetheless, for many other claims, when a government actor or employee damages a third party through acts of negligence, oftentimes it is the case that no claim can be filed because unless there has been an express legislative waiver of the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the law presumes that the government cannot be sued and that its sovereign immunity is maintained.

Large vans are frequently used to transport college and other school sports teams, commuters, students, day care children, the elderly, and church groups. The accident rates for these vans are alarming.

According to the National Safety Transportation Board, between 1994 and 2004, there were 1,512 fatal crashes involving 15-passenger vans. In 2004 alone, 120 occupants of 15-passenger vans died in crashes involving these vehicles A total of 642 of these were single-vehicle crashes and 515 of the vehicles rolled over. More than half of the 15-passenger vans involved in single-vehicle accidents rolled over, compared to one-third of passenger cars.

A major problem with 15-passenger vans is that their tires are often underinflated, leading to higher tire temperatures, faster tire deterioration, and diminished driving stability. Adding passengers and cargo causes the center of gravity to move upward and rearward, increasing a vehicles tendency to roll over and increasing the potential for the driver to lose control in emergency maneuvers.

About 190,000 MacGregor and Mitre folding soccer goals were recalled Tuesday, after the death of a young child. The recalled goals were manufactured in China. Anyone having one of these goals should remove it immediately.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission said a 20-month-old boy from Texas was strangled when his head and arm became entangled in the net of one of the recalled goals.

The gaps in the recalled nets are about 20 square inches, which is a dangerous size according to the CPSC. The agency says netting should have gaps less than 17 square inches or greater than 28 square inches, to prevent dangerous entrapment and strangulation.

Spanair JK5022: Creo que le interesaría ver este video animado, el cual fue preparado por la firma Kreindler:

http://www.kreindler.com/kreindler_news/news_current/Spanair5022-Full-animation-video.html

Para una consulta gratis, favor de enviar su correo electronico precionando aqui (haga clic aqui).

In our serious injury practice, regrettably, we have seen more and more cases involving sexual assault. These cases arise in of a variety of contexts. We have seen assaults on minor children committed by third parties (such as school or church officials), we have seen sexual assaults on wards of mental institutions committed by employees entrusted with their care and we have seen sexual assault cases involving rape where there has been negligent or gross security by apartment complexes where, for example, the tenant is attacked in her apartment in situations where the apartment complex was on notice of possible dangers and failed to provide adequate security and protection for the tenant.

These cases are, obviously, very traumatic for the victims of these horrible crimes. The cases are all the more challenging because the trauma is not only in the past, but likely will endure for a lifetime. Indeed, in most all of these cases, the victim has to undergo quite a bit of counseling to help them deal with the trauma of the event plus the understandable emotions, confusion and stress disorders that arise thereafter. Rape victims are oftentimes so traumatized as to require a lifetime of such therapy.

In any case involving an intentional tort, particularly those involving sexual assaults against innocent victims, we strive to work closely with the victim, their family and healthcare professionals to assist in the healing process. The legal remedies available to such victims, of course, are many times dependent upon the facts. If the perpetrator, such as an uncle, a neighbor or a church official has personal assets, litigation may help to provide some financial relief to cover future medical costs and to provide some element of compensation for the trauma. Many times, we also work with the prosecuting authorities and try to obtain funds under the State Crime Victim Compensation Fund. In other cases, particularly those against apartment complexes or other third party entities that have failed to adequately protect the victim of a sexual assault from a foreseeable attack, there may be sufficient available insurance to provide compensation for the victim.

Highly respected Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the United States Federal District Court in Brooklyn decided on Friday to unseal confidential materials about Eli Lillys top-selling antipsychotic drug Zyprexa.

Judge Weinstein’s ruling was part of an order that gave class-action status to a case brought by insurance companies, pension funds and unions that allege Lilly owes them billions of dollars they spent on the drug. They allege that Lilly hid the side effects of the drug and marketed it for unapproved uses.

The Judge ordered that the documents be made public, against the desires of Lilly, citing “the health of hundreds of thousands of people” and “fundamental questions” about the way drugs are approved for new uses. Judge Weinstein found that “Lilly’s legitimate interest in confidentiality does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure at this stage.”

Last month, consumer, public interest and scientific groups applauded President Bush for signing product safety reform legislation into law that will overhaul the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, was passed overwhelmingly by Congress. The new law will make consumer products safer by requiring that toys and infant products be tested before they are sold, and by banning lead and other harmful chemicals in toys, by creating a comprehensive publicly accessible consumer complaint database, give the CPSC the resources it needs to protect the public, increase civil penalties that CPSC can assess against violators of CPSC laws, and protect whistleblowers who report product safety defects.

A key portion of the legislation, deals with the safety of juvenile products such as cribs, high chairs and strollers.

Yesterday, the Food and Drug Administration began posting a list of prescription drugs under investigation for potential safety problems.The first list is a bare-bones compilation naming 20 medications and the potential issue for each. It provides no indication of how widespread or serious the problems might be, leading some consumer advocates to question its usefulness, and prompting industry worries that skittish patients might stop taking a useful medication if they see it listed.

Food and Drug Administration officials said they are trying to walk a fine line in being more open to the public while avoiding needless scares. Congress, in a drug safety bill passed last year, ordered the agency to post quarterly listings of medications under investigation.

The FDA emphasized that the listing of a drug and a potential safety issue does not mean that FDA is suggesting prescribers should not prescribe the drug or that patients taking the drug should stop taking the medication.

A new website, The Hospital Compare Web, run by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, shows 80 U.S. hospitals listed as top performers in the mortality rates for patients admitted with heart attack, heart failure or pneumonia. No Georgia hospitals were among the best performers. Nine Georgia hospitals rated worse than national norms on death rates for pneumonia or heart failure. The number of poorly performing hospitals in Georgia was higher than any state other than California.

Mortality rates for hospitals across the nation were disclosed by the federal agency, which is expanding its report cards on the quality of health care. This is the first time consumers are able to compare hospital death rates for patients admitted for three conditions: pneumonia, heart failure and heart attack.

Nationwide, 103 hospitals, including the nine Georgia hospitals, were rated worse than the national average for one or more conditions. Eight of the nine in Georgia were poor performers in pneumonia.

Last week, Stanford University announced that it will severely restrict industry financing of doctors’ continuing education at its medical school. The school’s new policy stems from concern about the influence drug companies may have on medical education.

Most doctors in the United States must take annual refresher courses that drug makers have long paid for. While the industry says its money is intended solely to keep doctors up to date, critics charge that companies agree to support only classes that promote their products.

Stanford will no longer let drug and device companies specify which courses they wish to finance. Instead, companies will be asked to contribute only to a general pool of money that can be used for any class, even ones that never mention a company’s products.