June 30, 2009

No Injuries or Deaths Reported Following Georgia Parking Deck Collapse

Miraculously, there have been no reported injuries or deaths following an accident in Atlanta, Georgia. Yesterday a portion of a concrete parking deck in downtown Atlanta collapsed near the intersection of Spring and 5th Streets, damaging or destroying 38 vehicles. The deck is a pre-fabricated, pre-cast concrete structure that was built eight years ago. The cause of the “pancake collapse,” where a section of the fourth floor fell onto the third, second and first floors, is still under investigation. Although the pre-cast concrete components of the structure were reportedly designed and manufactured by Greenville, S.C.-based Metromont Corp., Hardin Construction Company was the general contractor. Hardin Construction was also the general contractor in charge of building a bridge in Piedmont Park that collapsed earlier this year resulting in the on-the-job death of one worker.
Georgia residents may recall a somewhat similar accident a few years ago when the Phillips Arena was being constructed. Unfortunately two workers were crushed to death when some of the huge pre-fabricated, pre-cast concrete bleacher sections collapsed on top of one another after being welded into position. In a professional negligence case, the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP represented the widow of an ironworker who was killed. By working with experts who had been involved in large construction projects such as the Georgia Dome and Turner Field, we uncovered the reasons for the collapse. In litigation against eleven participants in the Arena construction, we obtained a very favorable settlement for our client.
The Georgia Injury Lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have over 40 years of experience pursuing wrongful death lawsuits, some of which have involved highway and road defects. If you have lost a loved one and feel you have a wrongful death claim, call our experienced attorneys at 1-800-228-9159 for a free consultation.

June 27, 2009

Judge Rules Grout Cleaner Liability Suits Can Go Forward On Negligence Claims

Georgia injury lawyers see people seriously injured by dangerous products of all types. Many dangerous products result in the wrongful death of their users. A grout cleaner which was once sold by Home Depot is one product alleged to have been dangerous. Dozens of product liability lawsuits over injuries allegedly caused by the tile grout cleaning product will go forward as general negligence claims, a federal judge has decided. However, in ruling on the multi-district litigation, U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. granted summary judgment in favor of Home Depot and five companies tied to the manufacturer and distribution of Stand ‘N Seal regarding consumer product safety claims. Although Home Depot didn’t manufacture the grout sealer, it is alleged that they did not remove the product from store shelves and continued to sell it to the public after they knew or should have know it was dangerous. The case is In re: Stand ‘N Seal Products liability litigation.
If you are a loved one has been injured as a result of using a dangerous product, contact the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP for a free consultation.

June 3, 2009

Forklift Accidents: Usually Serious And Oftentimes Deadly

When I was in high school, I was hired as a forklift driver at a textile plant. I was given no training whatsoever, had never operated a forklift and within hours was lifting huge pallets of heavy materials high into the air for placement on warehouse shelving. Fortunately, I did not injury anyone or kill myself, but I easily could have. Indeed, that same summer a high school friend of mine lost his life when he accidently drove a forklift backwards off of a loading ramp, killing himself in the process.

Just a month or two ago, here in Atlanta, I read about a news story where one employee at a car dealership was training another employee on how to drive a forklift when the co-worker overran the employee killing him. Here at Finch McCranie, we have represented individuals who were involved in industrial accidents where they were struck by forklifts inside of manufacturing facilities. These cases typically result in very serious personal injuries involving amputations, paralysis or death. Incredibility, my experience in high school is repeated over and over again as oftentimes the operator of these forklifts has been provided little or no training. Today, this is a violation of OSHA regulations. It was not in the 70's and 80's.

Forklifts are very heavy and very dangerous industrial vehicles involved every year in a large number of deaths and serious injuries in the workplace. Many of the injuries and fatalities committed while these vehicles are being operated could have been prevented if the operators had been properly trained and/or had properly protected themselves. Oftentimes, the operators of these vehicles are not wearing seatbelts and/or seatbelts are not even provided for their use. If such a vehicle overturns, because of its weight, the operator can be crushed.

Because many of these industrial accidents are preventable, proper training standards should include specified training, seatbelts, overhead protective devices, alarms and proper maintenance of these forklift trucks. If these dangerous vehicles are not properly maintained and/or the operator is not properly trained, serious accidents are foreseeable.

One reason the public may not be as aware of these types of accidents is because they are typically covered by workers’ compensation where lawsuits are not involved. If one employee injuries a co-employee, the claim is covered by workers’ compensation laws not by liability statutes. However, our firm has been involved in cases where a forklift driver injured a third party, not a co-employee, such as a truck driver or another person present on a plant’s premises when the forklift was being operated. In such cases, litigation oftentimes ensues, again, because the injuries are very serious and the victim typically is permanently disabled and unable to work again. Lawsuits can be a determent to other claims but this provides little comfort for the victim, as we have seen in the past.

If one goes on any search engine one will find the term “forklift accidents” to be somewhat ubiquitous. This is proof in and of itself that these heavy industrial machines are capable of inflicting serious injury and wrongful death if not properly operated. Regrettably, based on the number of these industrial accidents each year, we anticipate that third parties will continue to be injured by these dangerous instrumentalities at an ever increasing pace until and unless there is a greater state or federal penalty for failing to properly train the operators of these machines. OSHA penalties are typically small. Therefore, the biggest financial penalty that can be imposed as a determent may be a lawsuit and jury verdict.

May 25, 2009

Product Liability Claims And Other Claims Related To Dangerous Machinery

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.

May 15, 2009

Workers Compensation Injuries - Is There A Premises Liability and Negligent Security Third Party Claims?

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.

May 6, 2009

Workers Compensation Injury - Is There A Third Party Liability Case

When the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP represent an injured employee in a workers compensation case we always look to see if there is a liable third party that can be sued. Under Georgia law, workers compensation benefits are limited and rarely, if ever, fully compensate an injured worker for all of the injuries and damages sustained.

Recently I read about a Chicago area wrongful death case involving a BMW car salesman who was killed in an automobile accident while accompanying a 20 year old potential car buyer on a test drive of a BMW automobile. According to court testimony, the driver was driving at 95 miles per hour when he crashed the car, killing the car salesman. The family of the salesman sued and a Chicago jury returned a verdict of 13.7 million dollars in their favor.

Other potential third party cases might involve defective or dangerous products that a worker might be using that cause serious injury or death. If you or a loved one has been serious injured in an on-the-job injury you should consult with the workers compensation lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP to protect your rights.

May 4, 2009

Limiting The Chance For Serious Injury Or Death From Grinding Wheel Explosions

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
and replace with a new wheel.

* Perform a ring test. Wipe the wheel clean. Hold the wheel through the center hole with one finger. Using the plastic end (not rubber coated) of a screwdriver, tap the wheel on side. If it gives a metallic ring, the wheel is fine. If it is cracked, it will give a dull ring, or no ring at all.

* Always adjust the tool rest to sit no more than one-eighth (1/8) of an inch from the wheel. If it cannot be adjusted to sit at that width, the wheel is probably worn and should be replaced.

* Follow manufacturer’s instructions on replacing a wheel.

* Make sure that the new grinding wheel is rated to operate at the maximum speed of the grinder. Do not surpass the maximum speed.

* When beginning grinding, do not grind on a “cold” wheel. Apply the work gradually to “warm up” the wheel.

* Always wear the proper personal protective equipment: safety glasses/face shield, gloves, aprons.

* Use the guard at all times, no matter how small the job. Never alter or remove the guard.

* Before using a new wheel, turn it on, stand to the side, and watch for any abnormalities. It is recommended that a user allow the grinder to run for a minute before beginning to grind.

If you or a loved one has been seriously injured as a result of a grinding wheel failure, it is critically important to preserve whatever evidence is available. Accordingly, not only should the tool itself be preserved for inspection but also all of the fragments of the grinding wheel should be collected and kept so that they can be analyzed by an expert. As always, the product liability lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP stand ready to consult with you about dangerous products.

April 25, 2009

Injury Victims of Automobile & Truck Accidents and Abusive Bill Collection

As Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP representing victims of trucking accidents, automobile accidents, and workers compensation accidents we often see our clients who cannot work because of serious injuries, fall behind in paying their bills. When that happens they often start getting calls from collection agencies and even lawyers attempting to collect. Sometimes these collections people cross the line and violate the law.

This week I read an article about a man with a disabling brain injury and no money who told a debt collection lawyers that the time for seeking payment had expired and that the suit that had previously been filed to collect the debt had been dismissed. Notwithstanding that conversation, the law firm sued him anyway, trying to collect a credit card debt on behalf of the creditor. He hired a lawyer, got the collections suit dismissed and then sued the collections law firm for violating debt collections laws. A jury awarded him $311,000.00!

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, often referred to as the "FDCPA", was passed by Congress in 1977 in response to abusive conduct by collection agencies, and concern that the abuses were causing an increase in the filings of personal bankruptcies. The purpose of the Act is to provide guidelines for collection agencies which are seeking to collect legitimate debts, while providing protections and remedies for debtors. The FDCPA applies to personal, family, and household debts, including debts associated with the purchase of a car, for medical care, for retail financing, for first and second mortgages, and for money owed on credit card accounts. Please note that most states have similar laws, which typically proscribe the same types of misconduct by debt collectors and which may cover a broader range of debts than the federal law.

The Act regulates the conduct of debt collectors: any person who regularly collects debts owed to others. This definition includes lawyers who perform debt collection services on a regular basis. Even where money is legitimately owed, a debt collector's conduct is restricted by this law. In-house collection agents are not ordinarily covered by the Act. For example, if you have a store credit card, and the store's own collection department contacts you, the FDCPA does not apply. However if the same store uses an outside collection agency to contact you in relation to that same debt, the outside agency's conduct is restricted by the FDCPA. Similarly, if the same store uses an in-house collection agent, but suggests to you that the collection is being performed by a third party, the FDCPA may apply to them as a result of that representation. Please note that there may be other laws in your state which restrict the conduct of in-house collection agents.

In order to prove violations of collections laws a consumer MUST document all communication with the collector. If you do not have a way to record telephone calls coming into your home - get one and don’t erase anything on it.

April 12, 2009

What Brain Injury Lawyers Need To Know About TBI And Depression

The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have represented many victims of traumatic brain injury resulting from serious automobile accidents, tractor trailer accidents, workers compensation accidents, ATV/All Terrain Vehicle accidents, motorcycle accidents and premises liability accidents. A traumatic brain injury (TBI) is caused by a blow or jolt to the head or a penetrating head injury that disrupts the normal function of the brain. Not all blows or jolts to the head result in a TBI. The severity of a TBI may range from “mild,” i.e., a brief change in mental status or consciousness to “severe,” i.e., an extended period of unconsciousness or amnesia after the injury.

What many people do not realize is that major depression is a complication seen in about one-third of patients within the first year of a TBI and when present, is associated with poor psychosocial functioning and persisting post-concussive symptoms. Major depression is associated with substantial psychosocial dysfunction and post-concussive symptomatology following traumatic brain injury. Medication has been and is still prescribed to treat this complication; however, in a recent large clinical sample of patients with symptoms of major depression, anti-depressant medication has been shown to lead to the remission of symptoms in a minority of patients.

March 24, 2009

Worker’s Compensation Claims Overview


In Georgia, worker’s compensation is essentially an insurance program regulated by the state and required of most employers. Worker’s compensation pays medical bills and lost wages for employees who have had work related accidents resulting in illness or injury.

Employees with work-related conditions or injuries are entitled, but not limited, to:

• Reimbursement of travel expenses, including mileage to and from medical appointments

• Prescription reimbursements

• Two-thirds of your weekly wage while you are unable to work and are off work up to a maximum amount (currently $500.00) set by the State

• Two-thirds of the difference between what you were earning at the time of your injury and what you are earning at the time you reach maximum medical improvement up to a maximum amount (currently $ 334.00) set by the State, if you return to work at a lesser paying, modified job.

• A physical impairment rating if your work-related condition is permanent

• Penalties if the worker’s compensation carrier does not follow certain rules

If you have had a work related accident in Atlanta, or anywhere in Georgia, contact the worker’s compensation lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP in order to discuss your worker’s compensation claim and your benefits.


March 23, 2009

Victims of Medical Malpractice Are Still Victims of Georgia’s “Tort Reform”

As a Georgia injury lawyer I continue to be outraged by the “tort reform” laws passed by the mostly Republican, pro business legislature in this State. Most ordinary citizens, Republican and Democrat, have no idea what the medical profession, insurance industry and Georgia politicians have done to limit, if not eliminate their ability to be fully compensated in the event that they are injured and damaged as a result of the negligence of someone. Only when they are injured as a result of automobile accidents, tractor trailer accidents or medical malpractice, do they find out how their rights have been seriously curtailed or eliminated. Only then do they become outraged. Unfortunately, by then it is too late.
A prime example of the damage done by the Georgia Legislature is the case of Cheon Park, a retired, 59-year old restaurant owner who fell from a ladder at his home in 2006. After falling, he was taken to WellStar Douglas Hospital, Park complaining of neck, shoulder and pelvis pain. He was x-rayed, treated for a dislocated shoulder and discharged that same day. Later that day, Park’s pain grew worse. He began showing signs of neurological damage and was taken to Grady Hospital where they found massive damage to his spine-damage that left him a quadriplegic. Park sued WellStar for medical negligence, challenging the $350,000.00 cap on non-economic damages that was approved as part of Georgia’s Tort Reform in 2005. Non-economic damages are compensable for intangible injuries, such as pain and suffering, disfigurement, and loss of the enjoyment of life. In April 2008, Fulton County Judge Marvin Arrington, Sr. overturned the $350,000.00 cap, on the basis that the statute did not guarantee “equal protection” and reasonable compensation for people in Park’s situation. WellStar appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Georgia; however, four (4) days before they were due in Court, WellStar withdrew the appeal and settled the case with Park for an undisclosed sum. As a result, the $350,000.00 cap remains in place because no case has yet to make it through the appellate system to have the statute declared unconstitutional. Hopefully, the right case will eventually reach Georgia’s highest court so that people who are injured by medical negligence through no fault of their own can be awarded enough damages to make them whole to the extent that can be accomplished with money.

March 16, 2009

Post Accident Vision Problems Could Be Sign Of Brain Injury

Georgia injury lawyers who have handled automobile accidents, trucking accidents, and even workers compensation cases, where a person has suffered a serious injury to the head, often hear their clients complain about the same symptoms. We recently represented a women whose automobile was rear-ended by another vehicle. Upon impact, her head slammed into the headrest of the seat. Although she did not immediately experience visual problems, she began to experience double vision within a day of the collision. Experience demonstrates and the medical literature documents that a person who has suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI) or cerebral vascular accident (CVA) may often experience difficulties with balance, spacial orientation, coordination, cognitive function, and speech. In most cases, a referral for visual consultation only occurs if there is an injury to an eye or if ocular pathology is suspected. Persons with TBI or CVA frequently will experience double vision, movement of print or stationary objects such as walls and floors, eye strain, visual fatigue, headaches and problems with balance, to name several. Frequently, people will report problems with their vision to rehabilitation professionals and be referred for eye examination. Unfortunately, many will be told that there is nothing wrong with their eyes and that it is the effects of their TBI or CVA. Others will be told that their symptoms are not related to their vision. Visual problems are among the most common sequella following a TBI or CVA, but frequently not dealt with I a timely manner. If you or a loved one have been involved in an accident of any type involving trauma to the head, you should be aware of the many symptoms that might indicate a TBI. The injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP are experienced at handling TBI cases. If you have been injured as a result of the negligence of someone, please call us at (800) 228-9159.

March 16, 2009

Post Accident Visual Problems Could Be Sign of Brain Injury

Georgia injury lawyers who have handled automobile accidents, trucking accidents, and even workers compensation cases, where a person has suffered a serious injury to the head, often hear their clients complain about the same symptoms. We recently represented a women whose automobile was rear-ended by another vehicle. Upon impact, her head slammed into the headrest of the seat. Although she did not immediately experience visual problems, she began to experience double vision within a day of the collision. Experience demonstrates and the medical literature documents that a person who has suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI) or cerebral vascular accident (CVA) may often experience difficulties with balance, spacial orientation, coordination, cognitive function, and speech. In most cases, a referral for visual consultation only occurs if there is an injury to an eye or if ocular pathology is suspected. Persons with TBI or CVA frequently will experience double vision, movement of print or stationary objects such as walls and floors, eye strain, visual fatigue, headaches and problems with balance, to name several. Frequently, people will report problems with their vision to rehabilitation professionals and be referred for eye examination. Unfortunately, many will be told that there is nothing wrong with their eyes and that it is the effects of their TBI or CVA. Others will be told that their symptoms are not related to their vision. Visual problems are among the most common sequella following a TBI or CVA, but frequently not dealt with I a timely manner. If you or a loved one have been involved in an accident of any type involving trauma to the head, you should be aware of the many symptoms that might indicate a TBI. The injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP are experienced at handling TBI cases. If you have been injured as a result of the negligence of someone, please call us at (800) 228-9159.

February 25, 2009

Signs And Symptoms Of A Traumatic Brain Injury

The Georgia Injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have seen many automobile accidents and tractor trailer accidents which have left victims with a diagnosis of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Some clients have suffered from major, catastrophic brain injury while others have what would be considered as mild TBI. The signs and symptoms of a TBI can be subtle. Symptoms of a TBI may not appear until days or weeks following the injury or may even be missed as people may look fine even thought they may act or feel differently. The following are some common signs and symptoms of a TBI:

Headache or neck pain that do not go away;
Difficulty remembering, concentrating, or making decisions;
Slowness in thinking, speaking, acting, or reading;
Getting lost or easily confused;
Feeling tired all of the time, having no energy or motivation;
Mood changes (feeling sad or angry for no reason);
Changes in sleep patterns (sleeping a lot more or having a hard time sleeping); Lightheadedness, dizziness, or loss of balance;
Urge to vomit (nausea);
Increased sensitivity to lights, sounds, or distractions;
Blurred vision or eyes that tire easily;
Loss of sense of smell or taste; and
Ringing in the ears.

If you or a loved one have been involved in an accident of any type involving trauma to the head, you should be aware of the many symptoms that might indicate a TBI. The injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP are experienced at handling TBI cases. If you have been injured as a result of the negligence of someone, please call us at (800) 228-9159.

February 17, 2009

Traumatic Brain Injury

Not a month goes by that the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP don’t run into serious automobile accident or tractor trailer accident cases where our client has sustained a traumatic brain injury to some degree. These can occur from all types of accidents, including workers compensation accidents, ATV/All Terrain Vehicle accidents, motorcycle accidents and premises liability accidents.

A traumatic brain injury (TBI) is caused by a blow or jolt to the head or a penetrating head injury that disrupts the normal function of the brain. Not all blows or jolts to the head result in a TBI. The severity of a TBI may range from “mild,” i.e., a brief change in mental status or consciousness to “severe,” i.e., an extended period of unconsciousness or amnesia after the injury. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), TBIs contribute to a substantial number of deaths and cases of permanent disability annually. Of the 1.4 million people who sustain a TBI each year in the United States, 50,000 die; 235,000 are hospitalized; and 1.1 million are treated and released from an emergency department. Among children, ages 0 to 14 years, TBI results in an estimated 2,685 deaths; 37,000 hospitalizations; and 435,000 emergency department visits annually. The number of people with TBI who are not seen in an emergency department or who receive no care is unknown. Interestingly, the two leading causes of TBI are falls (28%) and motor vehicle crashes (20%).

If you or a loved one has sustained a severe head injury in an accident, contact the experienced lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP. (800) 228-9159

November 11, 2008

Spinal Cord Injury in Georgia

Georgia injury lawyers who represent victims of spinal cord injury (SCI) see the devasting results of truck accidents, automobile accidents and on-the-job or workers compensation accidents. According to the National Spinal Cord Injury Association, as many as 450,000 people in the United States are living with a spinal cord injury (SCI). Every year, an estimated 11,000 SCI's occur in the United States. Most of these are caused by trauma to the vertebral column, thereby affecting the spinal cord's ability to send and receive messages from the brain to the body’s systems that control sensory, motor and autonomic function below the level of injury.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), SCI costs the nation an estimated $9.7 billion each year. Pressure/bed sores alone, a common secondary condition among people with SCI, costs an estimate $1.2 billion. While there are advances in emergency care and rehabilitation which allow many SCI patients to survive, methods for reducing the extent of the injury and for restoring function are still limited. Currently there is no cure for SCI. Therefore, prevention of SCI from happening in the first place is key.

October 20, 2008

Work Related Injuries: Compensation From Third Parties

There is a common misconception that all work related injuries are solely covered by Workers’ Compensation statutory benefits. While it is true that any employee who is injured on the job while working for their employer is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits, this does not necessarily mean that the injured worker is limited to the recovery of such benefits. If a third party, such as an independent contractor unrelated to the employer, participates in a negligent or wrongful act that results in a injury to the innocent victim, there may be a claim that can be filed against that third party separate and distinct from the workers’ compensation benefits available to the injured employee for the on-the-job injury.

Oftentimes in our practice, we see situations where clients have been represented by other attorneys who have only recovered workers’ compensation benefits for them, notwithstanding the fact that there was a potential third party claim. As an example, if an employee is injured in a manufacturing plant due to a defective machine, there may be a third party product liability claim against the company that manufactured or maintained the defective machine. If the injured employee is hurt on the job because of the negligence of a third party vendor or supplier, there may be a liability claim that can be asserted by counsel for the injured employee against that third party.

It is always important in any on-the-job injury case that counsel diligently explore the possibility of pursuing third party claims. Workers’ compensation benefits are quite minimal, particularly where catastrophic injuries are involved. While the injured employee is entitled to receive repayment of their medical expenses, lost wage benefits are less than $500.00 a week. Accordingly, if someone is catastrophically injured, the only available recovery for pain and suffering and lost earning potential will be a third-party liability suit assuming a third party was a participant in the underlying act that lead to the on-the-job injury.

When dealing with a work related injury case, the victim in such a circumstance should always make sure that they confer with counsel about the possibility of third party claims relative to their workers’ compensation case. This cannot be stressed enough because often there are other avenues of recovery which experienced counsel can explore and later exploit for the injured employee. Indeed, in many catastrophic and serious injury cases, were it not for the availability of a third party recovery, the injured employee would hardly be compensated in any just manner.

October 15, 2008

Georgia Serious Injury Victims Are Treated Best At A Trauma Center

Our firm’s Georgia attorney’s have represented serious injury accident victims for many years who have been treated at various trauma centers. In Atlanta, most trauma patients are treated at Grady which is a Level-I facility. Trauma is any life-threatening occurrence, either accidental or intentional, that causes injuries. The leading causes of trauma are motor vehicle accidents, falls, and assaults. Trauma is the leading cause of death among Americans under 44 years of age. A trauma center is a hospital equipped to provide comprehensive emergency medical services to patients suffering traumatic injuries. Trauma centers were established as the medical establishment realized that traumatic injuries often require complex and multi-disciplinary treatment, including surgery in order to give the victim the best possible chance for survival and recovery.

In order to qualify as a trauma center, a hospital must meet certain criteria as established by the American College of Surgeons (ACS). Trauma centers vary in their specific capabilities and are identified by “Level” designation; Level-I (Level-1) being the highest to Level III (Level 3) being the lowest (some states have four designated levels, in which case Level IV (Level 4) is the lowest).

Higher levels of trauma centers will have trauma surgeons available, including those trained in such specialties as neurosurgeons and orthopaedic surgeons as well as highly sophisticated medical diagnostic equipment. Lower levels of trauma centers may only be able to provide initial care and stablisation of a traumatic injury and arrange for transfer of the victim to a higher level of trauma care. The operation of a trauma center is extremely expensive. Some areas are under-served by trauma centers because of this expense. For example, in Florida, Orlando Regional Medical Center was built to serve five counties but currently serves more than 20. A trauma center will often have a helipad for receiving patients that have been airlifted to the hospital. In many cases, persons injured in remote areas and transported to a distant trauma center by helicopter can receive faster and better medical care than if they had been transported by ground ambulance to a closer hospital which is not designated as a trauma center. In almost every case, the sooner a trauma patient receives the expert care afforded by a trauma center, the better the outcome.

October 12, 2008

Traumatic Brain Injury - Hopeful Therapy For The Future

As Georgia injury lawyers we have seen the devastating effects of brain injuries which often result from automobile and truck accidents as well as on-the-job (workers compensation) injuries. A person who sustains a severe head injury and gets immediate, expert treatment has a better chance of having a more satisfactory outcome.

New research is being done with respect to effective treatment of head injuries immediately following head trauma. It has been reported in BioMed Central’s Journal of Biological Engineering that severe brain injury due to blunt force trauma could be reduced by application of a simple polymer, Polyethylene glycol or PEG, mixed in sterile water and injected into the blood stream. Andrew Koob and Richard Borgens from Purdue University, Indiana, performed experiments in rats which showed that PEG was effective in limiting damage if administered within four hours after the head injury. However, if treatment was delayed for a further two hours, the beneficial effects were lost. During the experiment, rats were injured with a falling weight and then PEG was administered fifteen minutes, two hours, four hours, or six hours later. The authors then carried out a series of behaviourial tests on the rats to determine the effectiveness of the PEG treatment.
According to Borgens, "These data suggest that PEG may be clinically useful to victims of traumatic brain injury if delivered as rapidly as possible after an injury". Such a treatment could be feasibly be carried out at the scene of an accident where PEG could be delivered as a component of IV fluids thus reducing long term brain injury.

May 28, 2008

Amputations and Infections

Our personal injury lawyers unfortunately have seen far too many cases involving traumatic amputations. In many of these cases, the tragedy is compounded by infection that sets in shortly after the original trauma. If one loses a leg below the knee, for example, and there is an immediate amputation after the traumatic event, it is not uncommon to see subsequent amputations due to the development of infection. In some cases we have handled, there have been problems with gangrene, which required multiple amputations. The patient may start off with a below the knee amputation and end up with one above the knee.

All amputation cases arising from trauma are serious cases and must be handled with the utmost care and attention to detail. Obviously, the medical professionals have to deal with the complications caused by infections subsequent to the traumatic event but counsel must also be alert to the complicating features of such developments in each case. For example, when one develops an infection shortly after a traumatic event, they are not typically eligible to be fitted with a prosthetic device. The longer the infection lingers and the treatment necessary to treat it, the longer it is before the patient is eligible to receive the prosthesis. Studies have indicated that the length of time from the passage of the original traumatic event to the time when the patient is fitted with a prosthesis is very important because the longer the wait, the greater the difficulty for the patient. Indeed, this is one of the problems with infection because it delays the fitting of the prosthesis and thus delays the patient’s rehabilitation, sometimes with long term effects.

Whether the amputation be to a finger or a limb, the complexities of these cases are always unique to the individual patient and the case. It is imperative that counsel understand the long term sequelae of infection because such infections can have a bearing on a client’s long term prognosis and therefore their long term medical needs and vocational, physical and emotional challenges.

May 21, 2008

Traumatic Electrical Injuries

Traumatically induced electrical injuries are not only a common form of trauma but also complex and potentially devastating to the victim. The physical and emotional manifestations and severity of electrical trauma encompass a wide spectrum of symptoms ranging from a brief unpleasant sensation due to contact with a low intensity household current to instant death and/or massive injury from high voltage electrocution. Unlike a thermal burn, electrical injuries commonly involve multiple body systems and organs which are very difficult to manage and treat. In our serious injury and wrongful death practice we have encountered many such injuries and can attest to the fact that these cases are often complex, both legally and medically.

One of the difficulties for the victims of such injuries is the physical side. Injury due to electricity may include burns to the skin and deeper tissues, heart disturbances, and neurological problems. The higher the voltage involved, typically the worse the injury and the worse the outcome. It is not uncommon for there to be amputations associated with such occurrences.

Our firm has handled wrongful death electrocution cases where workers have been electrocuted on the job due to negligence of third parties. We have also handled serious electrical injuries where the victim survives but is left with a mountain of medical problems and bills, not to mention lost wages. As is true of any serious injury case, it is imperative that competent counsel be engaged at the earliest opportunity to protect the victim’s rights. While the victim will face a long ordeal in recovering from his or her injuries, a prompt and thorough investigation of the incident which caused the injury many times will enable competent legal counsel to provide legal relief for the victim.

The myriad forms in which these injuries can occur defy any general description. Victims can come into contact with high voltage wires, can be electrocuted by equipment and can be injured in a variety of ways while on the job. While workers’ compensation benefits are available to those who are injured on the job, where a third party is involved, in a typical liability case involving third parties, lengthy litigation may be required because an assessment of the past, present and future medical issues and associated lost wage problems necessitates a slower and more prudent approach to the resolution of such claims.

March 22, 2008

Imperial Sugar Plant Case Becomes More Complicated

Thirteen (13) people have died (and many more injured) as a result of burns and other injuries sustained in the explosion at the Imperial Plant in Port Wentworth, Georgia. Investigators have expressed the opinion that sugar dust ignited and caused the explosion which resulted in these injuries and deaths. Because most of the people burned, injured or killed as a result of the explosion were employees of Imperial Sugar, unfortunately, they will be barred by law from suing their own employer. This is the state of law in Georgia. Workers’ Compensation benefits are available to injured employees but injured employees cannot sue their employer. The one exception to this “non-suit” rule is where a third party’s acts contributed to the injuries and/or caused the same. The employer still cannot be sued, but other “third party” companies can be sued if their acts contributed to the damages sustained.

From newspaper reports, it appears that Imperial Sugar contracted with a company called Stokes Contracting to clean sugar dust at the plant. Obviously, a full investigation would be required to see what the contractual duties and undertakings were, but assuming the newspaper reports are true, those injured and/or killed may have claims against Stokes Contracting and/or any other entity that provided such cleaning services. If the failure to properly clean the sugar dust out of the plant was a proximate cause of the explosion, then there could be third party liability claims brought against that third party, in this instance, apparently, Stokes Contracting.

Cases of this nature are always tragic for the families involved and for those seriously burned or injured. While only time will tell whether there are valid third party claims to be made, one would hope that the injured and severely burned would have remedies other than those provided under Georgia’s Workers’ Compensation statutory scheme. The Georgia Worker’s Compensation statutory scheme is quite limited in the remedies it provides to those injured on the job. For example, pain and suffering is not awarded at all and lost wage benefits are typically quite low, usually below $500.00 per week, which is very difficult for those who have been injured to live on. While Workers’ Compensation medical benefits are good, because these types of burn injuries can last for years and years, it is evident that those involved in these incidents will suffer for a lifetime and yet they receive no pain and suffering compensation under Georgia’s Workers’ Compensation scheme. This it is why it is important that someone involved in an incident of this nature confer with competent counsel to make sure that any third party remedies against third parties who may be also liable for their damages can be pursued.

February 8, 2008

Sugar Refinery Blast Leaves Many Dead - Others Injured

Our Georgia injury lawyers are accustomed to seeing cases involving horrible injury and cases of death caused by all types of accidents but burn cases are at the top of the list. We were discussing the news accounts today in Savannah reporting that firefighters found three, and perhaps as many as six, bodies in the wreckage of a still-burning sugar refinery leveled by an explosion overnight. In addition to the death cases, dozens of employees have been injured, many critically burned. Officials suspect sugar dust, which can be volatile, as the cause of the explosion. Reportedly the explosion happened in a storage silo where refined sugar is stored until it is packaged.

Obviously all of the injured employees will immediately be entitled to workers compensation benefits, including payment of all medical bills but given the very limited disability benefits available under the workers compensation laws of Georgia, this is very little consolation to the injured. Having litigated products liability cases involving injury and death, we wonder whether there are some third parties who may be liable for this explosion. Surely, this huge sugar refinery was aware of the potential danger posed by sugar dust. Was there a system in place which failed? Was ventilation machinery defective or not properly maintained by third party entities hired by the refinery? All of these questions and more need to be explored in order to adequately protect the interests of injured workers and the families of those who died in this tragedy.

October 17, 2007

Wrongful Death, Serious Injuries and Uninsured Drivers:

One of the most tragic circumstances we as lawyers face in our daily practice is representing clients who have suffered serious personal injury or the wrongful death of a loved one due to the negligence of an uninsured (or underinsured) driver. Regrettably, we have seen this far too many times. The results of being involved in a collision with an uninsured driver are particularly tragic because in such cases there simply are no available funds to compensate the innocent victims. This, of course, reminds us once again of the importance of uninsured/underinsured insurance coverage for those who can afford it as part of their budget. Without such coverage, if a serious injury or wrongful death occurs, the likelihood of recovery when dealing an uninsured driver is remote.

We were retained just two weeks ago to represent a man who lost his wife in an accident involving a drunk driver. In this particular case, the driver was not completely uninsured, but rather underinsured. He had the absolute minimum statutory limits of $25,000 in available coverage per person, $50,000 per accident. The medical bills alone for this man and his wife both exceeded these minimum limits. Regrettably, our client had no uninsured/underinsured coverage under his own policy. What this means of course is that the $50,000 which is available will have to be used to satisfy Hospital Liens and literally there will be no money to pay even for funeral bills, much less compensate the family for the losses sustained. The “at fault” driver, while responsible for all of these expenses, is very likely judgment proof working at a job with a minimal salary with no ability to pay any judgment that might be obtained in the case. Thus, we have the situation we have seen far too many times where innocent people are seriously injured or suffer the death of a loved one due to the negligence of an uninsured/underinsured driver.

Of course, the statutory scheme is set up such that drivers in Georgia are no longer allowed to get their tags without having proof of insurance coverage. Nonetheless, as stated, the statutory minimum in Georgia is $25,000 per person, $50,000 per accident. In any case involving a serious injury or wrongful death, such limits are woefully inadequate to address medical expenses or lost wages, much less compensation for pain and suffering or a death. Thus, we reiterate that all Georgia citizens should consider purchasing uninsured/underinsured insurance coverage to protect themselves from either the completely uninsured driver or the underinsured driver. With respect to underinsured drivers, obviously, the minimum limits of $25,000 per person coverage, $50,000 per accident are grossly inadequate to address the kinds of damages we see here in our practice all the time in serious injury cases. We have blogged about this topic before (See Uninsured Motorist Blog dated June 8, 2007) and would once again recommend to the motoring public that they protect themselves with their own uninsured/underinsured insurance coverage because many, many drivers have the absolute minimum limits of coverage and are themselves judgment proof, thus leaving the innocent victim to his own resources in the event they are involved in a collision with an uninsured/underinsured driver.

June 11, 2007

Georgia Workers Compensation Act Needs Amending To Help Injured Workers

Uninsured Employers is a growing problem for injured workers in Georgia. In our practice we have seen a growing number of employees who have been seriously injured only to discover that their employers have no workers’ compensation insurance coverage. Many of those employers have no real assets and they are therefore “judgment proof.”

I recently read that on November 9, 2006, the Governor of Pennsylvania signed into law a significant change in the Pennsylvania Workers Compensation Act. Like Georgia, the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act covers all injuries to employees at work. It is a no-fault system, with the injured employee only having to prove that he was injured while working in the scope of his employment and is disabled. In Georgia, all employers who have three (3) or more employees are required to carry workers’ compensation insurance. However, some do not in violation of the Georgia Workers’ Compensation Act. Many injured employees who work for small business can never collect if the employer did not carry workers’ compensation insurance.

Under the new Pennsylvania law, a fund was created for an injured worker to collect, even if the employer had no insurance. This fund, called the “Guaranty Fund”, was created so that employees that have worked for irresponsible, uninsured employers, now have a remedy. This is a huge benefit for such injured workers and the Georgia’s Workers’ Compensation Act needs to be amended in a similar manner to provide a safety net for Georgia’s injured workers.

March 31, 2007

Workers Compensation Decision Good For Injured Workers Who Travel For Employers

The Georgia Supreme Court issued a sharply divided ruling on Monday which is a great decision for employees who travel. The 4-3 decision turned on an interpretation of the “continuous employment” doctrine. The High Court upheld an award of workers’ compensation benefits to the 11 year old son of a man killed as a result of an automobile accident in Georgia. The employer had put the Florida resident up in an apartment in Fayetteville, Georgia while he was working as a construction superintendent here. The employer also provided him with a company truck that he was driving at the time of the accident. The employer and it’s workers insurer had denied the claim for death benefits on the ground that the employee was not acting in the course of his employment when the accident occurred. At the time of the accident, he was on sick leave and had been delivering family furniture to his storage shed in Alamo, Georgia.

Four of seven Justices on the Supreme Court of Georgia said that because King had returned to the general Fayetteville/Jackson area when he was killed in the motor vehicle accident, his minor son had a valid death claim.

The significance of this ruling is that it expands the “continuous employment” doctrine and makes it more likely that workers traveling away from home on business will be covered under their employers workers’ compensation insurance if they are injured.

March 20, 2007

FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY EVALUATIONS OF INJURED WORKERS IN GEORGIA


In Georgia employees who become disabled, due to injury, and remain out of work for any significant period of time are likely to be sent for a functional capacity evaluation. An FCE is a systematic evaluation process to determine an individual’s tolerance for physical work activities. These evaluations take on many forms. The most common evaluations involve a series of standardized tasks with measured weights and distances, and a trained and presumably an experienced observer to administer the tests. Other methods involve the use of machines to measure peak performance and range of motion. The results of these evaluations are frequently used to direct treatment and rehabilitation efforts, and in legal proceedings, to determine work capacity and eligibility for indemnity benefits.

Physicians, employers, insurers, and claims adjusters often rely upon functional capacity evaluations to determine musculoskeletal capacity to perform physical work, often with legal or occupational consequences. Despite their widespread use in Georgia, a number of scientific, legal and practical concerns persist. FCE’s are based upon a theoretical model of comparing job demands to worker capabilities. The validity of FCE results is best with accurate job simulation and detailed, intensive, assessments of specific work activities. Many times the person performing this evaluation does not know or understand an injured worker’s job. When test criteria are unrelated to an injured employee’s actual job performance, or subjective evaluation criteria are employed, the validity of results is questionable. Many times, the person administering the evaluation makes comments in the final written report about whether or not the worker has put forth maximum effort, even inferring malingering on occasion. The evaluation of sincerity of effort, ability to perform complex or variable jobs, and prediction of injury based on FCE data is problematic and in our opinion subjective and unreliable.

An injured worker who is asked to undergo an FCE should retain counsel to represent them in a workers compensation case. Lawyers should scrutinize both the methodology of the evaluation and the qualifications of the person administering the evaluation. In some cases, the FCE results may be inadmissible under Daubert v. Merrell, 509 U.S. 579 (1993)

March 15, 2007

Your Duties Under The Georgia Workers' Compensation Act

We cannot tell people how many times unrepresented, injured workers sabotage their cases by failing to comply with their own obligations under the Georgia Workers’ Compensation Act. At a minimum an employee who sustains an on-the-job injury must do the following:

1. Report any on-the-job injury within 30 days of the date of the injury. Although the law provides that an employee should notify the employer within 30 days, any injury should be reported immediately. If you do not report your injury immediately, you may afford the employer and insurance company a defense that they would not otherwise have.
2. Determine on your own whether the employer has the required panel list of authorized physicians posted.
3. Seek medical treatment from authorized treating physicians only.

As with most other aspects of the law, there are many exceptions to the general rules of the Georgia Workers' Compensation Act. If a personal does not understand their rights or if they feel that they are being taken advantage of, it is best to consult an attorney for advice early on in the case. The earlier an injured worker gets legal advice, the better the chance there will be a favorable outcome for the worker.

March 14, 2007

Basic Overview of Benefits Available Under the Georgia Workers' Compensation Act

Many people are unaware of what benefits are available to an injured worker in Georgia. Accordingly we thought it might be helpful to clients or potential clients to have an overview of the basic benefits.

(A) TEMPORARY TOTAL DISABILITY WEEKLY INCOME BENEFITS:
If you are injured and begin losing time from work, you are entitled to receive 2/3 of your average weekly wage up to a maximum of $450.00 per week. The first seven days of compensation are not payable until or unless you have missed 21 days from work. In other words, you are not entitled to weekly benefits if you miss 7 or less days from work. If you miss at least 21 days from work, you will be paid for the first 7. The first payment of weekly benefits, including the first 7 days, is due on the 21st day of disability.
For non-catastrophic injuries occurring on or after July 1, 1992, there is a maximum period of 400 weeks from the date of the injury for entitlement to this benefit. A catastrophic injury is defined as one of the following:
1. Spinal cord injury involving severe paralysis of an arm, a leg, or the trunk;
2. Amputation of an arm, a hand, a foot, or a leg involving the effective loss of use of that appendage;
3. Severe brain or closed head injury as evidenced by :
a) Severe sensory or motor disturbances;
b) Severe communication disturbances;
c) Severe complex integrated disturbances of cerebral function;
d) Severe disturbance of consciousness;
e) Severe episodic neurological disorders;
f) Other conditions at least as severe in nature as any condition provided in subparagraphs a) though e) of this paragraph;
4. Second or third degree burns over 25% of the body as a whole or third degree burns to 5% or more of the face or hands.
5. Total or industrial blindness;

For catastrophic injuries there is no limit to the number of weeks that you may draw benefits.

(B) TEMPORARY/PARTIAL DISABILITY BENEFITS:
If you are able to return to work but because of your injury you are not able to earn as much money as you were prior to the date of your on-the-job injury, then you are entitled to receive 2/3 of the difference between what you made before you were injured and what you are able to make after your injury up to $300.00 per week. This benefit is payable for a maximum of 350 weeks.

(C) PERMANENT/PARTIAL DISABILITY BENEFITS:
If you have sustained a permanent impairment or loss of use of any part of your body as a result of your on-the-job injury you are entitled to be compensated for that permanent impairment. The amount that you are entitled to would depend on the percentage of permanent impairment that your doctor assigns. The Worker's Compensation Act assigns maximum values (denominated as weeks) to various parts of the body such as a leg, hand, eye, arm, etc... The Act also assigns a maximum value to the body as a whole (300 weeks)
Example: If you have sustained an injury to your back, have reached maximum medical improvement, and have been assigned a 10% permanent impairment rating to the body as a whole, then you are entitled to receive 10% of 300 weeks (the maximum assigned value of the body) or 30 weeks. If your compensation rate is $300.00 then you would multiply $300.00 times 30 weeks for a total of $9,000.00.

(D) MEDICAL BENEFITS:
The employer/insurer is obligated to pay 100% of the cost of medical treatment required to effect a cure or give relief to an injured worker; however, the employer/insurer also has the right, within limitations, to designate the provider of that treatment. By law, an employer must post a panel list of 4 doctors in a prominent or conspicuous place upon the business premises. The law also requires that the employer take all reasonable measures to ensure that the employees are aware of the existence of the panel, and their right to select a treating physician from it. The law also requires that the employers give employees appropriate assistance in contacting panel physicians when necessary.
If an employer fails to post a panel list of physicians as required by law, then you may go to the physician of your choice. If you go to a physician who is not on the panel list or is otherwise authorized, then you will be responsible for payment of the bill. There is no dollar limit on the amount of medical bills that an employer/insurer is liable to pay and under certain conditions, the employer and its insurer remain liable for payment of medical bills related to your injury for the rest of your life.
In the case of a compensable work-related injury, the employer and its insurer are also liable for certain travel expenses. You should keep a list of your trips to the various medical providers, showing the date the trip was made, the name of the medical provider, and the total round trip mileage. You will be reimbursed at the applicable rate per mile.

(E) VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION:
The Workers' Compensation Act provides, in the event of a catastrophic injury,that the employer shall furnish an injured employee reasonable and necessary rehabilitation services.
The value of vocational rehabilitation services range widely. They may include:

1. Vocational evaluation and vocational counseling;
2. Psychological testing and evaluation;
3. Job analysis; job placement and job modification;
4. Additional training.

An injured employee should make certain that the rehabilitation counselor has his/her best interests at heart and can exercise his/her independent judgment. Vocational rehabilitation providers are paid by insurance companies.

As always, it is best to consult an attorney who practices in this area of the law to discuss the facts which are specific and applicable to your case.

March 13, 2007

Bias In The So Called "Independent Medical Examination"

For over twenty years, we have handled personal injury claims and workers compensation claims of all types. Anyone who has done the same has witnessed the perversion of our system of justice by medical doctors who are performing so called “independent medical exams” for insurance companies and their lawyers. It has always amazed us that medical doctors who spent years of hard work to be able to exercise their own independent judgment in diagnosing and treating injured or sick people are so ready, willing and able to misrepresent, if not lie about either an injured persons condition or the cause thereof, in order to keep the insurance company dollars coming. People who are involved in litigation know who these doctors are because they show up over and over again. There is big money in these evaluations for orthopedic surgeons, neurologist, neurosurgeons and others who are in the business of performing them.

Unfortunately, jurors are often unaware of the extent to which these physicians are used by the insurance industry and unaware of their bias. Insurance defense lawyers portray these doctors as “objective” and “independent”. Recently, a well known IME doctor admitted that he had done over 1500 independent medical examinations since 1991. He gives approximately 40 depositions a year, testifies for the defense 95% of the time and has made over $1.2 million doing this in the last eight years. In the trial of personal injury cases, including workers compensation cases, a significant issue a judge or jury must evaluate is whether the testimony of theses defense experts is objective and/or whether the doctors have a hidden bias, to wit: a propensity and motive to testify favorably to the parties hiring their alleged professional services. In Lancaster v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company, 232 Ga. App. 805, 502 S.E.2nd 752 (1998), Justice Blackburn wrote:

I write separately to point out a systemic problem in the general use of “independent” experts in the litigation process. This problem, while not limited thereto, is greatest where insurance companies use “independent” medical experts’ opinions to deny or limit payment of claims. The inherent weakness of this process is that the insurance company which controls the flow of business to “independent” medical services providers has a financial interest in the negative finding of such provider ... Where companies are established for the sole purpose of providing or selecting medical experts for insurance companies, either individually or as an industry, they can by no means be deemed to be independent.

Lawyers representing injured workers should dig deep to explore and expose this bias on the part of these paid “experts” who are harming innocent victims of accidents and subverting justice for our clients.

March 12, 2007

Georgia Firefighter With Heart Attack Awarded Workers Compensation Benefits

Recently, we successfully represented a Georgia firefighter in a workers compensation claim against the county for which he worked. The injury he sustained was a heart attack. Needless to say, the employer denied his claim and took the position that his job had nothing whatsoever to do with the injury to his heart. In researching this injury, we learned that forty percent of on-duty firefighter deaths in the last decade were due to heart attack, according to a recent U.S. Fire Administration report. This is an astounding statistic. The fact of the matter is that firefighters are at great risk of suffering a heart attack because of the extreme stress and exertion under which they work when responding to a call.

In our case, our client got a call about a home on fire. With his adrenalin pumping, he jumped into his truck and headed out to the fire. When he arrived, he donned heavy gear and climbed a hill to access the home. He inhaled smoke which filled the air outside of the home and struggled to pull-start a large fan used in the doorway of the home. Ultimately the fire was extinguished and the EMS unit which had been dispatched as a matter of routine, left the scene to head back to the firehouse. As my client began to put equipment on his truck, he felt shortness of breath and a tightening and burning in his chest. EMS returned to the scene. He was later airlifted to a major hospital where he underwent testing and stent placement. In this case, our client’s heart attack occurred a day later, while undergoing a stress test on a treadmill.


In our opinion, the case turned on the testimony of his cardiologist who we deposed early on in the case. It was the cardiologist’s explanation of the mechanism of injury which made the difference in this case. He testified that most people have atherosclerosis and that there are events that cause the atherosclerotic plaque to rupture. When the plaque ruptures, the endothelium denudes itself and exposes collagen to the bloodstream. Platelets attach to the collagen and recruit a blood clot to form, which causes the obstruction/blockage. He further testified the stress of fighting a fire raises your blood pressure, anxiety associated with it, smoke in the lungs; all of these are precipitating events. He went on to explain how smoke inhalation precipitates a heart attack. “The smoke contains carbon monoxide. It helps increase inflammation. Inflammation causes the plaque to become soft and split. This process can occur over an acute time period of an hour or it can be kind of a smoldering process, as it occurred in this case.”

Getting the doctor’s medical opinion on the record early, before the insurance company and their lawyer was able to influence the cardiologist was important. If a firefighter has a heart attack, it is crucial that he or she retain a workers compensation lawyer immediately.

March 2, 2007

Workers Compensation Claims/Uninsured Georgia Employers And The Problems They Cause For Claimants

There is an ever increasing problem for many Georgia workers who become injured and disabled as a result of work injuries. The problem is uninsured employers. We recently got a call about a new workers compensation claim from a worker who was seriously injured as a result of a fall. In fact, this worker had been in the trauma unit of a hospital for several months at the time of this call. He had multiple orthopedic injuries, including leg and arm fractures requiring many surgeries. The worst of his injuries is a serious spinal cord injury. This worker is now paralyzed from the waist down and is permanently and totally disabled. Unfortunately, his employer had no workers’ compensation insurance even though the State of Georgia requires an employer to have such coverage if they have three or more employees. Even though he sustained catastrophic injuries, he could not find a lawyer who would represent him because there was no insurance.

This is a growing problem in Georgia which needs to be remedied. There needs to be a change in Georgia law which gives an injured worker real recourse against an uninsured employer. As the law stands now, an employee can request a hearing before the State Board of Workers Compensation and seek an award of medical bills, weekly disability payments, attorneys’ fees and assessment of various civil penalties for the employer’s failure to have coverage. Even if an injured worker prevails and is awarded these benefits, the chances of collecting from an uninsured business or employer are slim to none.

Ironically the law provides if an employer has three or more employees they are subject to the Workers Compensation Act and must have insurance coverage. Unfortunately for the injured workers, the law also provides if they are subject to the Act, they cannot be sued and enjoy protection from civil liability under the exclusive remedy provisions of the Act.

It is time that the Georgia legislature remedy this problem by providing that if an employer is subject to the Workers Compensation Act and fails to have insurance coverage to protect an injured employee that he or she can sue the business and each owner, officer or director for their failure to comply with the law. This would begin to solve this very serious problem.