Georgia Injury Lawyer Blog

http://www.georgiainjurylawyers.net/Truck-Accidents.cfmWhen a truck accident or automobile accident causes serious personal injuries or wrongful death, you may have a tort or wrongful death claim that you can bring against the vehicle owner and driver. In some cases, you may have a claim you can bring against a negligent third party such as a tire manufacturer. As Georgia injury lawyers, we always investigate motor vehicle collision cases carefully to determine whether there is a negligent third party to sue. We recently read that on September 10, 2009, a jury in Willacy County, Texas, returned a verdict against Michelin and awarded $11,964,000.00 in damages. The care arose out of an incident when a Ford F-250 pickup suffered a partial left front tread belt detachment of a BF Goodrich All-terrain TA Tire. The tire had been built in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. The tread belt detachment caused the F-250 to travel into oncoming traffic causing a head-on collision with a Chervolet Suburban. All six (6) people in the Suburban were killed and a young passenger in the F-250 was left a paraplegic. Several manufacturing defects, which allowed moisture and other contaminants into the time components prior to manufacture, were alleged by the plaintiffs. It appears the moisture came from a leaky roof in the Tuscaloosa plant. Testimony revealed that moisture created a blister of trapped air or steam that caused a defect in the finished tire and caused the tread to separate. Evidence at trial also showed that misplaced or poorly spliced belts affected the real world performance of the tire and in this case caused the tread to separate.

If you are a victim of a truck accident or an automobile accident, you may be entitled to compensation for loss of wages, pain and suffering and medical bills. Contact Georgia injury lawyers Finch McCranie, LLP Toll Free 1-800-228-9159 to learn about your options for your truck accident or automobile accident injury recovery.

It seems that everyday when our personal injury lawyers open the paper, we read about another wrongful death in the context of a high speed police chase. Today, we read about another tragic police chase, this one in Montana. The Billings Gazette reported that the family of a Billings nurse killed by a drunken teenager who was fleeing from police has filed a wrongful death and negligence lawsuit, claiming city officers and county deputies violated their own pursuit policies. Stahl died shortly before 7 a.m. on April 18, 2008, when her car was hit broadside by a GMC Jimmy driven by 17-year-old Brian Houston. Stahl was on her way to work as an operating-room nurse at Billings Clinic. The collision happened when the Jimmy went through a stop sign and hit Stahl's car.The lawsuit also claims that after the crash that killed 27-year-old Lillian Stahl, city and county law enforcement agencies lied to the public by stating that the sheriff's deputy leading the pursuit called off the chase several blocks before the fatal collision. According to the article, allegations against the law enforcement agencies in the lawsuit include: the first city officer involved in the incident was driving an unmarked police car; the chase was unwarranted because the driver was suspected of committing only misdemeanor offenses and had been partially identified; that numerous patrol cars from both agencies converged on the area and joined in the chase; and that a city officer's written report and patrol car video "don't match up." The teenager was charged as an adult with negligent vehicular homicide and other felonies. He eventually plead guilty and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. The full article in the Billings Gazette can be found at http://billingsgazette.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/article_8b672cea-bf8d-11de-b6fa-001cc4c002e0.html. A photograph of the innocent victim should remind readers that all citizens are vulnerable to being killed by these senseless and reckless chases. Once again, a high speed police chase occurred involving a non-violent felony and an innocent person paid the price for this reckless disregard of proper police procedure with their life. What the public does not realize is that the number of victims nationwide in high speed pursuits is greater than the number of victims killed in the 911 destruction of the World Trade Towers. Indeed, the number of those killed and maimed in high speed pursuits are similar to the number of those killed and maimed in the Iraq war. This is a nationwide problem which is particularly acute here in Georgia. And yet, the chases (for non-violent offenders) continue and the innocent die. All of these cases read the same - only the names change. As of the writing of this entry to our blog, our lawyers have filed 6 different lawsuits involving 8 deaths in Georgia, all arising in the context of high speed police pursuits.

Our attorneys at Finch McCranie, LLP will continue to represent the interests of innocent victims. Hopefully, litigation will curb these unwarranted and dangerous police chases. The goal is to get the police community to recognize that they should only chase for violent offenders and should not chase when the danger to the public caused by the chase outweighs the danger presented by the suspect. If enough Georgia juries intervene and condemn these chases with their verdicts, hopefully, lives in Georgia will be saved.

THere are many Off –Road recreational vehicles, ROVs in use in Georgia. Now, they are going to be subject to new safety rules promulgated by the federal government. We have previously written about efforts of consumer and safety advocates to encourage the Consumer Product Safety Commission to regulate these vehicles. Now, after scores of deaths and injuries due to product defects, the Consumer Product Safety Commission voted last Wednesday to write mandatory rules regulating the four-wheel vehicles.

There are more than 100 deaths involving ROVs since 2003and numerous injuries some leading to amputations.

ROVs, also called side-by-sides, are two-passenger motorized vehicles designed for drivers 16 years and older. They resemble a cross between a rugged-looking golf cart and a miniature-Jeep, and have a roll cage of metal bars framing the cab.

The industry proposed voluntary regulations for ROVs, but CPSC staffers said they fell short. Agency staff have expressed concern about the vehicles and rollover risks.
The CPSC will solicit comments from industry, consumer advocates and others as it writes the rules. This process could take many months.

ROVs first appeared on the market in the late 1990s. Since 2003, CPSC says 116 people have died, including young children, and more than 150 have been injured. Injuries have involved crushing fractures to legs, feet and arms and some riders have lost limbs.

Safety advocates say the commission's vote puts the industry on notice.
In March, Yamaha Motor Corp. USA recalled more than 100,000 of its Rhino off-highway recreational vehicles for repairs after two models were linked to 46 deaths in the past six years. In many cases, riders were not wearing seat belts, the commission said. And in a number of incidents, rollovers happened on level ground at relatively slow speeds, the agency said.

About 140,000 ROVs were sold last year in the United States.

As Georgia injury lawyers, we are well aware that citizens can no longer rely on the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) to be the guardian of public safety when it comes to new drugs that come to market. Every year, the cash rich pharmaceutical companies, with their high powered lobbyist market and sell dangerous drugs and medical devices to the public. The Coalition Against Bayer Dangers, a consumer watchdog group, has demanded an ban of “third generation” contraceptive pills with increased rates of side effects. Studies recently published in the British Medical Journal found that pills which contained the hormones Drospirenone or Desogestrel carry twice the risk of potentially fatal injuries than the second generation medication first used in the 1970's. The study showed that contraceptive pills such as Yaz and Yasmin, manufactured by Bayer, caused a 6-fold increase in the risk of blood clots, which cause serious injuries such as Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and Pulmonary Embolism (PE). These pills may also cause gallbladder disease requiring surgical removal. Bayer is the world market leader in hormonal contraceptives. Sales of Yaz and Yasmin were more than one billion dollars last year.

If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of taking Yaz or Yasmin, manufactured by Bayer, contact the Georgia Injury Lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP for a free consultation.

As Georgia injury lawyers, we have seen our share of serious burn injury cases. Burn injuries vary widely in both their cause and severity. Many burn accidents occur as a result of the negligence of someone other than the victim. For that reason, anytime someone is severely burned, it is crucial to determine how the accident occurred and who was at fault. Many burn injuries are caused by defective or dangerous products for which the manufacturer of the product may be liable. As an example, this year two U.S. senators introduced a bill to congress which would require that all stoves sold in the United States be sold with brackets which would prevent them from tipping over. In addition the bill would require that the devices be installed. Over the past twenty years, a hundred people have been seriously injured or killed because a stove tipped over on them. Some stove tipping victims were severely burned due to hot foods and liquids spilling onto them and a few people have been crushed to death by a stove. U.S. Congressmen Bart Stupak (D-MI) and Vito Fossella (R-NY) presented H.R. 5753 to Congress this last April. In a $546 million class action settlement agreement, Sears has agreed to provide anti-tip devices for free for 4 million stoves that they sold. See http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2611, visited on October 26, 2009.

If you or a loved one have sustained a serious burn injury because of the negligence of another, contact the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP. We have more than 40 years experience in representing the victims of a serious personal injuries due to defective products. Contact us today for a free case consultation.

Potentially dangerous and ineffective drugs have been allowed to stay on the market by the Food and Drug Administration even when follow-up studies showed they didn't perform as advertised.

In a report released yesterday, the Government Accountability Office shows that the FDA has never pulled a drug off the market due to a lack of required follow-up about its actual benefits, even when such information is more than a decade overdue.

The GAO says the FDA should do more to track whether drugs approved based on preliminary results actually have lived up to their promise. The FDA responded that the report paints an overly negative picture of its so-called "accelerated approval" program, which is only used to approve drugs for the most serious diseases, and said they have no plans to get more aggressive.

In 1992, the FDA began speeding up the approval of novel drugs based on so-called surrogate endpoints, or laboratory measures that suggest the drug will make real improvements in patient health. HIV drugs, for example, are cleared based on their virus-lowering power, a predictor of increased survival.

Drugmakers favor the program because it helps them get products to market sooner, without conducting long-term patient studies that can take years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. A condition of quicker approvals is that drugmakers conduct follow-up studies to show the drug's benefits actually panned out.

But the GAO report identified several drugs still on the market that never lived up to their initial promise. And in the 16 years that the FDA has used accelerated approval, it has never once pulled a drug off the market due to missing or unimpressive follow-up data.

According to the report, of the 144 studies the FDA has required under the program since 1992, 64 percent have been completed and more than one-third are still pending.

The GAO report cites the case of Shire Laboratories' low blood pressure treatment ProAmatine The GAO found that ProAmatine has generated more than $257 million in sales, even though "the clinical benefit of the drug has never been established." Yet, the the required study has gone incomplete for more than 13 years. The GAO found numerous other instances in which the FDA has failed to act even when company’s own studies show drugs did not improve patient outcomes.

For example, the FDA approved AstraZeneca's lung cancer drug Iressa in 2003 based on early results showing it reduced the size of tumors. But later studies showed the drug did not significantly extend patient lives. The FDA has left the drug on the market, despite hundreds of reports of a sometimes fatal pneumonia.

The GAO concluded that the FDA has no policy for pulling drugs off the market that were approved using surrogate endpoints. When GAO investigators confronted FDA officials about this lack of enforcement, they reportedly said it would be difficult, if not impossible to draft a standard policy for withdrawals, given the unique circumstances of individual drugs.

Nursing home neglect and nursing home negligence leading to the wrongful death or serious injury of the elderly is a growing problem. With the number of aging baby boomers steadily increasing, it is likely to continue to be a problem. Neglect takes many forms. Recently, we read that an Illinois woman involved in a lawsuit over the alleged wrongful death of an 89-year old Alzheimer patient has pleaded guilty to criminal neglect, according to the Chicago Tribune. Sara Wentworth died of hypothermia earlier this year after wandering out of the Arbor Of Itasca Nursing Home in freezing temperatures. Heidi Leon, the nursing assistant on duty at the time, failed to respond when Wentworth triggered an alarm, prosecutors said. A wrongful death lawsuit is currently pending against the facility.

For 45 years, the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have represented victims of nursing home negligence in personal injury cases and wrongful death actions. If your loved one has been injured as a result of the negligence of a nursing home, call us to discuss your rights at 800 228-9159.

Chicago Tribune

Pleading standards in Federal Courts have been dramatically impacted by two recent United States Supreme Court decisions. These decisions, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, raised the standard that parties bringing a lawsuit must meet to avoid having their cases dismissed.

At issue is how specific a pleading must be under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 8 requires that a complaint include "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Rule 12 allows for the dismissal of complaints that are vague or that fail to state a claim. Under Iqbal, a 5-4 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, many courts are now requiring an almost impossible to meet standard demanding specific facts that aren't often available until the discovery phase.

Congress is now preparing to become involved in this controversy over the pleading standard for civil lawsuits. Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., filed legislation Wednesday designed to return the standard to what it was prior to 2007.

Specter has accused the Court's majorities of making an end run around longstanding precedent with the two recent cases. He issued the following statement.

"The effect of the Court's actions will no doubt be to deny many plaintiffs with meritorious claims access to the federal courts and, with it, any legal redress for their injuries. I think that is an especially unwelcome development at a time when, with the litigating resources of our executive-branch and administrative agencies stretched thin, the enforcement of federal antitrust, consumer protection, civil rights and other laws that benefit the public will fall increasingly to private litigants."

Specter has introduced a bill which directs federal courts to interpret the rules as the Supreme Court did in the 1957 decision in Conley v. Gibson. The bill falls within the jurisdiction of the Senate Judiciary Committee on which Specter sits. The bill is certain to garner strong opposition from big business groups, and, support from consumer groups.

The Supreme Court rulings seem ironic in that the conservative majority claims to embrace precedent, yet was eager to throw it away in these two rulings which are seen as very beneficial to big business.

As Georgia injury lawyers, we have seen a number of electrocution cases over the years. Some of the electrocutions result in serious injury and many result in death. Electrocution injury can cause many problems which include, tingling, pain, tetany, palpitations, chest pain, respiratory arrest, amnesia, seizures, altered mental state, coma, blistering and wounds. This week we had occasion to investigate the electrocution of a client who is a lineman for an electric utility company. He was seriously injured when he came into contact with a “hot” wire while climbing a pole. Fortunately, he survived; however, he has been seriously and permanently injured. In his case he not only sustained serious burns, but the incident resulted in the amputation of a leg. When electricity passes from any source and into the body it can result in damage including burns. The amount of damage is determined by the strength of the current and the length of exposure. Death from electric currents passing through the body can result from fatal effects on the heart, severe external and/or internal burns or from other organ damage.
Many electrocution cases result from work-related accidents in which case the victim would have a workers compensation claim. Unfortunately, the benefits available under most workers compensation laws are woefully inadequate to compensate an injured person for all of his or her damages. Accordingly, it is important to investigate the circumstances of the incident thoroughly to determine whether the electrocution was caused by the negligence of a third-party.

The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have, over our 45 years, represented victims of electrocution or their families when the accident result in wrongful death. We have a proven track record of success. If you or a loved one are injured or suffer a wrongful death as a result of an electrocution, you may have a legal claim against the manufacturer of a product or a negligent third-party. Call us for a free consultation at 800 228-9159.

On Wednesday of this week, the House Financial Services Committee of the United States Congress voted for a bill to create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) by a vote of 39 to 29. The proposed agency, which is part of a larger financial overhaul developed by the Obama Administration and Congress this year, will now move to the full House floor for a vote.

Consumer advocates such as Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports magazine, have long advocated for stronger regulatory oversight to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive, and abusive financial products and practices.

The proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency would ensure that credit; deposit and payment products and services are offered in a fair, sustainable and transparent manner. The CFPA would also create baseline federal consumer protection standards that would apply whether the product is offered by a big bank, small bank, or non-bank lender or other financial company. States would have powers to create and enforce new consumer protection standards.

As the bill moves to the House floor for a vote, increased efforts are being made by financial industry lobbyists to water it down with more exemptions, weakened powers for examination and enforcement, and more restrictions on the role of states in consumer protection.

Consumers Union applauded the vote and issued a statement that “for years, do-nothing federal bank regulators stood by while risky financial products that triggered the mortgage meltdown grew and flourished. This bill rejects business as usual and creates real oversight of banks and lenders to protect consumers.”

The product liability injury lawyers at Finch McCranie,LLP have handled many wrongful death cases stemming from dangerous products. These products take many different forms. The Associated Press reported this week that full-lenght women's chenille robes made in Pakistan are being recalled because they are highly flammable and are now linked to nine deaths of women, most of whom were in their 70's and 80's. Most of the incidents occurred while the victims were cooking.

Our firm has seen many wrongful death cases resulting from a variety of defective products. Sometimes seatbelts do not function, airbags do not deploy and products which normally are safe become deadly. We have seen product liability cases in a variety of contexts, including not only motor vehicle accidents, but also defective space heaters, defective liftgates on trucks, dangerous drugs, defective humidifiers and the like. If you or a loved one are injured or suffer a wrongful death as a result of a defective product, you may have a legal claim against the manufacturer of the product. Georgia law has long held that where a defective product results in serious injury or wrongful death, the manufacturer of the product may be liable for damages caused by a defect in the product.

Doctors who have committed crimes are still being paid by taxpayers for doing work for the Food and Drug Administration according to a report in the Wall Street Journal. This work ranges from conducting research for the agency or overseeing the safety of patients in clinical trials. The report takes the FDA to task for slowness in debarring ,( disqualifying ), health professionals who have been convicted of crimes.

The FDA has the authority to debar doctors from overseeing the safety of patients in clinical trials if those health professional flout federal regulations. It is required to disqualify doctors who are convicted of fraud or other crimes. However, it takes the agency an average of four years to disqualify a doctor according to a report issued by the independent Government Accountability Office.

In one instance, according to the article, it took the FDA 11 years to debar a doctor who had been convicted of 53 counts of criminal offenses including bribing an employee to conceal information about the attempted suicide of a clinical-trial patient and prescribing a drug without a license.

Types of misconduct that can get doctors disqualified include submitting false information to the FDA, forging patient consent forms and not reporting when a patient has an adverse reaction to an experimental drug.

The report discloses that even when the FDA bars a doctor from participating in a clinical trial for a drug, that doctor is still allowed to oversee patients in experimental trials that involve medical devices. And, a doctor disqualified from overseeing trials involving medical devices can still participate in drug trials.

The article points out a case in which it took the FDA about five years to disqualify an Alabama doctor who pled guilty to mail fraud and was sentenced to more than four years in jail related to a clinical drug trial.

The GAO report recommends that the FDA be given debarment authority for medical devices, and that regulations be rewritten so any doctor debarred from one area of agency regulation is barred from participating in all others.

Recently our firm posted a blog about a tragic accident in Georgia where an 11-year old girl lost her life due to an apparent malfunctioning cruise control switch on a Ford Econoline Van. Last week, we noted with great interest that shortly after this tragic event occurred, the Ford Motor Company recalled 4.5 million vehicles over “faulty cruise control switches.” According to the recall, the faulty cruise control switches being recalled could cause a fire in the vehicle which was the stated reason for the recall. Apparently, the cruise control switch is made by Texas Instruments, Inc. and can allegedly cause hydraulic fluid to overheat, smoke and then burn. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has advised Ford drivers to look for possible warning signs of fires including “malfunctioning cruise control systems.” In the tragic case we blogged about, it appears that a cruise control switch may have been malfunctioning prior to catching fire which may have resulted in the wrongful death of a child.

In addition to 1992 through 2003 Econoline Vans, the recall includes Explorers, Ranger Pickups, Winstar Mini-Vans, Mercury Mountaineers and Excursion Sport Utility Vehicles. Any person owning such a vehicle should check with the Ford Motor Company or NITSA’s Vehicle Safety Hot Line at 1-888-327-4236. The public may also visit http://www.safercar.gov for further information concerning the recall.

We read today about a tragic case in which an 11-year old girl was killed in an accident that may have resulted from a defective product. According to news accounts, a 1997 Ford Econoline Van lost control near the intersection of U.S. 441 and Interstate 16 while the van was being operated by the child’s grandfather. The grandfather reported to the Georgia State Patrol that the cruise control had gotten stuck and that he could not cut it off. As the driver took the exit off of 441, he struck the curb, a tire blew out and the result was that the van went across both lanes of traffic on Highway 441 causing it to veer off the roadway and crash down a steep embankment where it hit a tree and caught fire. The Georgia State Patrol is still attempting to corroborate the statements of the grandfather, but given that the fact occurred during midday and the grandfather had no prior medical conditions, it appears that this tragic incident may have occurred as a result of a defective product.

Our firm has seen many wrongful death cases resulting from a variety of defective products. Sometimes seatbelts do not function, airbags do not deploy and products which normally are safe become deadly. We have seen product liability cases in a variety of contexts, including not only motor vehicle accidents, but also defective space heaters, defective liftgates on trucks, dangerous drugs, defective humidifiers and the like. If you or a loved one are injured or suffer a wrongful death as a result of a defective product, you may have a legal claim against the manufacturer of the product. Georgia law has long held that where a defective product results in serious injury or wrongful death, the manufacturer of the product may be liable for damages caused by a defect in the product.

Over the years our firm has handled a variety of legal cases involving serious burn injuries to children. These cases can be extremely tragic and some of the cases we have handled have involved the death of young children due to defective products inside a home which caught on fire. We have handled burn cases where children were injured in automobile accidents, where they were injured in motels, where they were injured and burned as a result of medical malpractice, where they were injured by defective unsafe clothing which caught on fire all too readily and/or sustained chemical burns due to unsafe products. In short, there are many different contexts in which a burn injury can occur involving a child and, of course, safety is always paramount when it comes to these types of situations. Regrettably, many products are flammable and are defective and unsafe which can result in serious injury or wrongful death.

According to the United States Fire Administration, each year, there are approximately 3,700 deaths and close to 20,000 fire related injuries. Many legal cases involving burn injuries to children are entirely preventable. As stated, such cases can arise because of a defective space heater, for example, in a closed, confined area which catches on fire and causes serious injury or wrongful death to a child that is unable to escape the fire. If electrical or mechanical equipment is improperly installed or maintained, a fire can result and children oftentimes are the victims of such preventable negligence.

For those lucky enough to survive a fire, the treatment of a burn injury can be extremely expensive, not to mention extremely painful and emotionally traumatic. Some burn victims are horribly burned and the consequences of preventable negligence can last a lifetime. Obviously, specialists have to be involved in the care of burn wounds and when children are involved, these injuries can be heartbreaking and life altering. Thus, in the context of a preventable burn injury to a child, resort to the legal process may be necessary in order to provide for a lifetime of medical care associated with the injury.

If there is a defective product or some other act of negligence which results in the injury to the child, a burn injury victim through his or her parents may be entitled to compensation for the medical expenses and the pain and suffering attendant to a burn injury ordeal. Because most plaintiff lawyers work on a contingent fee basis, typically such cases can be handled without the client having to pay up front for legal representation. Sometimes the immediate cause of an unexplained fire may be unknown and parents may not even know they have a products liability claim or claims for an unsafe condition caused by the negligence of a third party. This is why, in some cases, parents may wish to confer with legal counsel when in doubt.

If you or any member of your family is the victim of a burn injury and need representation by a firm who has handled burn injuries to both children and adults, please feel free to call on of our attorneys at our toll free number 1-800-228-9159.

Our Atlanta attorneys frequently review cases involving recreational off-road vehicles which involve death and serious injury. The Consumer Product Safety Commission staff has recommended that the agency set mandatory rules to regulate recreational off-road vehicles.
The CPSC's five commissioners received the written recommendation this week, and must propose a rulemaking before any rules could be implemented. An agency spokesman said the commissioners could vote on whether to proceed with the rulemaking as early as Wednesday of this week.

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

ROVs aren't subject to the safety standards for longer-established ATVs, or all-terrain vehicles, because of certain design differences. Voluntary safety standards for ATVs became mandatory this year, after a federal product-safety law mandated them.

Many products are governed by voluntary standards set by industry experts. The CPSC sets mandatory standards for products that potentially pose the biggest safety hazards to consumers.

Some consumer-safety advocates blame the ROV accidents on lax regulation by government, claiming it has allowed young people to ride vehicles that are too large and too fast for their safety. Some riders have also alleged poor design, which they say allows certain vehicles to roll over easily.

In April, Yamaha Motor agreed to suspend sales of its Rhino 450, 660 and 700 recreational off-road vehicles, and to offer free modifications to Rhinos already in service, to make them less prone to rollover accidents.

The move followed a CPSC investigation of more than 50 incidents involving Rhino 450 and 660 models that had resulted in 46 driver and passenger deaths. More than two-thirds of the cases involved rollovers, many with unbelted occupants.

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

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

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

At the national level the Chamber is a well oiled lobbying machine willing to spend millions and do whatever it takes to protect the large insurance companies and mega corporations which control it. The goal of this Chamber is entirely anti-consumer.

Confronting the chamber head on, president Obama stated “ They’re doing what they always do- descending on Congress and using every bit of influence they have to maintain the status quo that has maximized their profits at the expense of American consumers.”

Even liberal democratic Congressman Barney Frank, who is chairman of the committee considering the bill, has been swayed by the threat of the Chamber’s influence. Fearing that he may not have the votes to get the proposed bill out of committee, he has made a number of substantial changes which weaken the bill. He stripped the bill of the much-promoted “plain vanilla” provision, which would have forced mortgage brokers to offer customers a 30-year fixed mortgage alongside any exotic option A.R.M. mortgage they wanted to push.

He changed the nature of an oversight panel, so that it would consist of the top bank regulators, the very same regulators who allowed the housing crisis to occur. He altered the way the agency will be financed, making it less onerous for the banking industry and more onerous for nonbank financial institutions. And, almost incredibly, due to Chamber pressure, he abandoned the reasonableness standard, which would have forced bankers to make sure their customers both understood the products they were buying and could afford them.

Even with these changes the Chamber continues its multimillion dollar campaign to scuttle this important legislation. This issue is so important to the country that every citizen should contact their Representative in Congress to urge passage. You can be sure the Chamber already pressured them to defeat it.

Georgia injury lawyers who represent victims of tractor trailer accidents have long since known that driver fatigue may be the number one safety problem in the trucking industry today, and is a factor in nearly 40% of all crashes nationwide. These crashes almost always lead to the serious injury or wrongful death of innocent people. On Monday, a Georgia trucker, 47-year-old Michael Stinson of Williamson, Georgia was killed in a fiery crash on a south Georgia interstate. The accident occurred on I-75 near Lake Park around 12:30 am. Although the Georgia State Patrol Specialized Crash Reconstruction Team is still investigating, it appears that Stinson’s truck slammed into the back of another tractor trailer, overturned and caught on fire. Other truckers speculate that Stinson could have dosed off.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulates the trucking industry and places limits on the number of hours a truck driver can be in service. Based upon current regulations, a driver carrying property cannot drive more than 11 hours following 10 consecutive hours off-duty. A driver cannot operate a commercial vehicle for any period after having been on duty for 14 hours following ten consecutive hours off-duty.

The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP has been representing the victims of fatigued truck drivers for many years. If you have been injured or you have lost a loved one as a result of a trucking accident, call our experienced trial lawyers at (800) 228-9159 to discuss your rights.

Today I attended the funeral of Thomas E. Magill, a well respected insurance defense attorney in Atlanta. Tom was a absolute pleasure to work with as a defense attorney. Even though his clients were always large insurance companies, Tom dedicated himself to the administration of justice. He was always fair minded, hard working, competent and professional in every sense of the word. I told his wife at his funeral today that working with Tom made me proud to be a lawyer. There were many lawyers in attendance at his funeral who echoed similar sentiments.

The legal profession often is derided by the public for being greedy, insensitive, focused on money and things of that nature. When you reflect on the life of a man like Tom Magill, you see that some of the lawyer jokes and stereotypes are completely misplaced. Tom Magill is the type of man that makes us here at our firm proud to be lawyers. Tom was an active member of his church and community, he was a selfless worker for making sure that justice was served in the cases that he handled for his clients and he always did so with grace, competence and the highest sense of ethics and professionalism. He was a role model for all attorneys.

It is appropriate that we pay tribute to Tom Magill here in our blog. We can only hope and aspire to achieve the many things that Tom did throughout his life. He was truly a very wonderful man and stalwart member of the Georgia Bar. His grace and sense of humor, ever present optimism and kind nature will be missed. May he rest in peace.

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

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

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

The House bill is named for Carmelo Rodriguez, a Marine Corps sergeant who died in January 2007 after battle with skin cancer. Military doctors first diagnosed the cancer 10 years earlier, but a series of military doctors failed to warn him of the lillness for nearly eight years. When his family tried to sue to force changes in medical notifications, the courts turned them away.

Critics of Hinchey's bill say the measure opens the door for time-consuming, frivolous lawsuits and will discourage potential recruits from joining the military.

But in a statement yesterday, the American Association for Justice called the proposal a basic issue of fairness.

“Currently, the law unfairly treats our brave servicemen and women as second-class citizens,” said Anthony Tarricone, president of the association. “But this legislation would restore their basic legal rights and protect them from injuries they receive as a result of preventable medical errors.”

This past week, the Georgia Supreme Court issued a ruling that was favorable to victims of crime who have civil tort claims arising out of the criminal acts perpetrated against them. The Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations is tolled for victims of crime for any claims arising out of the criminal acts perpetrated against them until such time as the criminal prosecution of the perpetrator is terminated. See Beneke v. Parker, ___ Ga. ___ No. S08G2078, (2009).

What is interesting about this new Supreme Court opinion is that our law firm had written an article about the Victim’s Right Statute enacted by the Legislature and codified in O.C.G.A. § 9-3-99 over one year before this opinion was rendered. In this article which was published in the Georgia Trial Lawyers magazine “The Verdict”, our firm had presaged this opinion by stating that it was likely that the statute might protect victims of traffic crimes by tolling the statute of limitations in their cases. It was pointed out to members of Bar that if they had a case where there client had been victimized by a traffic violations they might be able to circumvent the statute of limitations by relying on the new statute. We specifically pointed out in our article that the Victim’s Crime Act could be used in cases where there were violations of criminal laws as pertains to the operation of a motor vehicle.

The lawyer in the Beneke case read our article and used our arguments to win this case for his client. In the Beneke v. Parker case, the Supreme Court held that the plain language of O.C.G.A. § 9-3-99 encompasses a violation of the Uniform Rules of the Road. The Court wrote to impose a more stringent definition of “crime” within the context of the statute would render superfluous its language that “the statute of limitation is tolled from the date of the alleged crime or “the act” giving rise to such action in tort” until the prosecution or other termination of such crime or “act.” In short, even a traffic violation which results in criminal charges being filed against the perpetrator can be used under this new statute to toll the statute of limitations for the victim of the crime until such time as the criminal perpetrator’s case has been disposed of in the criminal system.

To see a copy of our article, please hit the link provided for further detail on the possible impact this new statute may have on you or a member of your family if you are a victim of a crime.

Continue reading "Georgia Supreme Court Issues Ruling Favorable to Victims of Crime" »

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

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

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

If you, a member of your family or any friend have been in a Toyota vehicle and have suffered serious personal injuries from a stuck accelerator, you may have a claim under Georgia’s product liability laws. Georgia has long recognized civil liability for defective products which includes claims for defective design. You may call our toll free number at 1-800-228-9159 for a free consultation if you think you have such a claim.

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

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

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

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

Patients in these facilities suffer from a variety of conditions which make them risks for falling.

These include:

1. Dementia associated with "sundowner" syndrome. Commonly, a patient wakes up in the middle of the night, not knowing where he or she is, experience a drop in blood pressure from arising too quickly, have a momentary dizzy spell or loss of consciousness and fall.

2. Visual disturbance where a patient cannot see well enough.

3. A history of stroke associated with weakness, partial paralysis and loss of balance.

4. Multiple medications that cause drops in blood pressure, medications which cause sleepiness and confusion, and diabetic medications which cause low blood sugars

Of course there are also environmental factors which can lead to falls. These include such things as slippery floors, uneven surfaces, poor lighting, and improperly place rails.
Many times simple precautions can prevent these tragic falls, such as anti-skid strips around beds and bathrooms. Beds should be lowered at night and bed rails raised. Mobility and balance evaluations are important methods of assessing individual risks and point to specific, patient- oriented interventions.