Georgia Injury Lawyer Blog

Victims of the wrongful death of their loved ones testified this week before Congress concerning adulterated supplies of Heparin. One of the largest suppliers of this drug, which is used in kidney dialysis and various other surgeries to prevent dangerous blood clots, is Baxter International, Inc. Not only did the victims of families who have been damaged by this product testify before Congress, representatives from Baxter were also subpoenaed by the Energy and Commerce Committee which is reviewing the Food and Drug Administration’s response to this scandal.

While the evidence is still unclear, it appears that the Heparin product manufactured by Baxter International, Inc. was derived from factories in China that had not been properly audited and inspected. There is also evidence that a particular sulfate product used in the manufacture of Heparin was deliberately substituted because it was less expensive to use than a safer sulfate ingredient. Regardless of the final results of Congress’ investigation, it was clear from victim testimony that the lack of oversight by Baxter relative to the activities of its foreign operations has lead to a tremendous amount of suffering for the victims’ families.

To date, 81 people have died from using contaminated Heparin. One gentleman who testified before Congress not only lost his wife but also his son who were undergoing kidney dialysis in Ohio. This man’s wife and son died within one month of each other. Thus, the wrongful deaths caused by this dangerous product clearly are deserving of congressional scrutiny so that other unwitting victims of products imported from abroad will be spared similar fates.

We have written before on this blog about dangerous products that harm the American public. This seems to be yet another example of where the U. S. Food and Drug Administration has failed the American public in failing to insure that medical supplies are safe for public use and consumption. Not only may Baxter International have failed the American public, the government itself in its oversight role, may have also contributed to these tragedies. Even though Baxter, which had supplied about half of the U. S. Heparin market recalled most of its products in February of this year, the fact remains that 81 deaths have occurred and tremendous suffering which could have been avoided has been experienced as a result of the failure of proper oversight for these dangerous products.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Dangerous Drugs , Products Liability , Torts , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Our personal injury practice reflects pretty much what we see in national statistics concerning the rising rate of motorcycle injuries and accidents. We are seeing more and more clients seriously injured in motorcycle accidents. In large part, this is primarily due to increased numbers of motorcycle riders. Motorcycle registrations have more than doubled since 1997. In 2006, almost 6.5 million motorcycles were registered in this country. The good news is that the number of deaths and injuries resulting from these 6.5 million motorcycles is no greater than the number of deaths when 5 million registrations existed in 1986. The bad news is that even though motorcycles make up 2% of the vehicles on the road, they also make up close to 10% of vehicular accidents.

If you ride a motorcycle in this country, you are 37 times more likely to die in a crash than someone in a passenger car. Even though the number of motorcycle registrations have gone up dramatically, which would explain why motorcycle deaths have more than doubled in the past 10 years, motorcycle accidents kill more Americans each year than all those caused by much higher profile plane crashes, ship disasters, and railway accidents combined.

With increasing gas prices, we are likely to see a continuing rise in motorcycle usage. While many states require that motorcyclists wear helmets, in some cases, a helmet would make no difference. Nonetheless, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimated that between 1984 and 2000, 19,000 motorcyclists were saved by their helmets. These statistics are, of course, hard to quantify on a case by case basis but given the lack of protection that a motorcyclist has when involved in an accident, it seems a safe bet that helmets do matter. What matters even more, however, is motorcycle safety and rider education. Widespread motorist awareness campaigns educate the general motoring public to be aware of motorcycles. Increasing public awareness campaigns will be needed as more and more people register motorcycles in view of rising gas costs. Regrettably, our personal injury lawyers will probably continue to see a rise in the number of those that walk through our firm’s doors who have been seriously injured and/or who have had family members die as a result of their motorcycle usage. In short, the more people that ride, the more accidents that will occur and the more tragedies that will be suffered. As always, the operative watch words for motorcycle riders remains the same: Safety, Safety and Safety.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Torts , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Our firm concluded a wrongful death case this year on behalf of the family of a 40-year old man who was killed when a bicycle he was riding became entangled in loose utility wires which completely obstructed a city sidewalk adjacent to Peachtree Road in Atlanta. The injuries this young man received in the accident cost him his life. Subsequent thereto, our firm filed a lawsuit against the City of Atlanta for negligent maintenance of the City’s sidewalk and against two utility companies for their alleged involvement in failing to properly maintain the hazardous utility wires which obstructed the city sidewalk at the time of the incident. While the case was resolved by means of compromise, obviously, the pain from the incident still remains with the family because of the untimely and wrongful death of this young man. Notwithstanding this terrible tragedy to the family, however, as we have seen in other similar tragic cases, good can emerge from bad particularly where good people work together to accomplish common goals.

In late March of this year, a pedestrian advocacy group in Atlanta by the name of PEDS (Pedestrians Educating Driver Safety) conducted a Scavenger Utility Wire Hunt in which volunteers were asked to spread out throughout Atlanta to look for detached wires or cables that might block or obstruct city sidewalks. Thirty-five volunteers participated in this event and pictures were taken of more than 225 sites where loose or detached wires or cables blocked sidewalks. Once these pictures were in hand, PEDS digitally sent them to the City’s Department of Public Works and has asked for a meeting not only with them but also with representatives from the various utility companies that conduct business in Atlanta.

As one of the victim’s brothers stated to the press, “It’s all about accountability. If we can get the utilities and the City to take a more proactive approach to finding and fixing these dangerous sites, [my brother] will not have died in vain.” One person’s unnecessary and preventable death is one too many. Hopefully, this joint effort by volunteers pursuing a common goal can bring about good and other potential victims spared the fate suffered by our client’s family.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Many wrongful death lawsuits have been brought against the manufacturer of the popular police taser device but according to the manufacturer’s boasts which are in the public record, no such lawsuits have been successful. And yet, practically every week it seems, another person is killed by the use of this product.

Our wrongful death and injury lawyers read last week a news article about a teenager who was killed by the use of a taser after an altercation inside of a grocery store near Charlotte, North Carolina. Apparently, a 17-year old teenager got into an argument with one of his supervisors at a grocery store and police officers were summoned to the scene. When the officers arrived, the teenager allegedly was highly agitated and allegedly refused all verbal demands. A police officer used a taser on the teen to subdue him. The taser killed the teenager, age 17. It appears from the news accounts of this incident, the death of this teenager was not warranted by his non-violent conduct as he had not committed nor was he charged with any crime. He was merely upset and agitated and was not a threat to anyone as he apparently had no weapons on his person.

Over and over again it seems that people are killed by this device and yet the device continues to be used by the police. While every case is different, of course, in many cases we read about the use of these tasers in cases where the suspect is not known to be violent, has committed no major felony or other violent crime, and yet is intentionally stunned with this product, sometimes with fatal results.

We would encourage the law enforcement community to reconsider its use of this product. Despite the protestations of the manufacturer, there is abundant anecdotal evidence in the public domain which suggests that this product can kill healthy people including healthy teenagers. The use of such deadly force in a context where the suspect is not known to be violent nor is armed seems questionable at best thus calling upon a review by the law enforcement community of their procedures and their use of this product.

Many times, litigation is the best tool available to address products like these. Other lawyers have tried to sue the manufacturer, apparently without success. Whether a successful wrongful death lawsuit can be brought based on this most recent incident remains to be seen but clearly there needs to be further review of this potentially dangerous product. Non violent persons encountered by the police should not be subject to the “death penalty” caused by the use of an unreasonably dangerous product.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Products Liability , Torts , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

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.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Premises Liability , Torts , Workers Compensation , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Our Atlanta personal injury lawyers know that truck accidents on Georgia’s freeways continue to leave a legacy of death, paralysis, closed head brain damage and other personal injuries for numerous innocent victims.
I have read that almost 5,000 people are killed each year in truck-related crashes. Because of their size and often dangerous pay loads, automobile accidents involving commercial trucks are devastating to pedestrians and occupants of other vehicles. I was recently reading about the increase in Mexican truck traffic on U.S. highways since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). By way of a little history, a 1982 U.S. ban kept Mexican trucks off most of the highways of our southern border states, leaving truck accidents to the domestic trucking industry. However, even after NAFTA took effect in 1994, the ban held until a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court ruling removed the ban and opened wide the gates to Mexican truck traffic. Despite efforts by consumer organizations concerned about truck accidents, car accidents, exhaust pollution and other public-safety issues, eventually Mexico-based trucks were allowed freely onto America’s roads. Given the likely substandard condition of these trucks, the likely lack of regulation of that industry in Mexico and the likely absence of driver training one has to wonder what the future holds. The reality is that we are all at greater risk of car accidents.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Brain Injury , Truck and Tractor Trailer Accidents , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

There is a well-kept secret of the insurance industry - one unknown to most personal injury victims of car accidents, truck accidents, SUV roll-overs and other motor vehicle crashes: Namely, Georgia state law automatically includes “uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage” (UM/UIM) in the typical auto liability insurance policy. However, in Georgia, that is not the case if the policyholder rejects that coverage in writing at the time the liability coverage is purchased or renewed. Uninsured motorist coverage or Underinsured motorist coverage exists to provide the policyholder (and certain others) with protection from “the other guy” who either has no liability insurance coverage, or has less coverage than the total of all of the personal injury victim’s legal losses - - called “damages” - such as pain and suffering, mental anguish and so on. In Georgia, each policy should have a minimum of $25,000.00 of such UM/UIM coverage.

It has been our experience that uninsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage is usually quite cheap. Given the number of uninsured drivers and drivers with the minimum required coverage ($25,000.00) on Georgia’s roads, this coverage is a bargain. It is our belief that because the coverage is cheap and the chances that they will have to pay uninsured motorist claims is high, insurance companies rarely try to sell this coverage and are more than happy to have you waive your right to the coverage. Never decline uninsured motorist coverage and always try to purchase additional coverage if possible.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Truck and Tractor Trailer Accidents , Uninsured Motorist Coverage , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

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.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Premises Liability , Products Liability , Torts , Workers Compensation , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Truck wrecks occur more often than one would think in and near a busy city like Atlanta. When they do occur people often sustain very serious injuries and many such accidents result in the death of innocent people. The injury lawyers in our firm have “seen it all” when it comes to the causes of these tragedies. These causes run the gamut and include everything from simply not paying attention to driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol. We have even had a case where the driver switched seats with another driver while speeding down an interstate highway with a trailer loaded with steel.

When evaluating an injury or death case a lawyer must consider which theories of liability he will employ to hold the driver and the trucking company responsible. These may include: (1) negligent hiring, entrustment or retention of a driver, (2) negligent inspection, maintenance or repair of the truck and violations of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Many times, insurance companies that insure trucking companies actually make hiring decisions of drivers. Depending on the facts of a case, there may even be a negligent entrustment claim that can be made against the insurance company for the motor carrier. A good lawyer will leave no stone unturned when handling a truck wreck case.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Brain Injury , Truck and Tractor Trailer Accidents , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

This blog will continue in our series of providing our readers with answers to frequently asked questions in the context of a serious injury case. This blog will address FAQ number 10:

10. Is my case likely to settle or will it go to trial and, if so, how long will the process take?

Answer: Over 90% of all serious injury claims are settled by means of compromise. While every case is different and dependent upon the facts involved, most cases do settle but sometimes it takes considerable time to achieve a settlement. This is because there are always unique issues concerning whether the at fault defendant’s liability is indisputably established and whether they have sufficient insurance coverage to pay all damages caused by their negligence. If there is sufficient coverage, and damages are clearly demonstrated, settlements can occur on a quicker basis than those cases where liability is disputed and/or the damages are difficult to assess.

Many times, injured individuals have prior medical histories which complicate settlement discussions. If someone with a bad back is injured in a hypothetical automobile collision, in such a case it is always difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. Was the back already injured such that the new injury merely constituted an aggravation and, if so, to what extent was the problem aggravated by the trauma? These are difficult questions to resolve and many time reasonable men can differ over the value of such claims. The good news, again, is that in 90% of all cases, a compromise is worked out and a settlement achieved.

The time it takes to resolve a serious injury case, again, is dependent upon the facts involved. The clearer the evidence the quicker the settlement. The more ambiguities are involved in the case with respect to the issue of liability for the damages and the damages, the longer the process takes.

Continue reading "Georgia Serious Injury Cases: Frequently Asked Question Number 10" »

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Torts , Truck and Tractor Trailer Accidents , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Our Atlanta truck wreck lawyers handle automobile accidents involving personal injury and death claims frequently. Many of those accidents involve tractor trailers owned and operated by trucking companies, also known as motor carriers. These trucking companies fall into two categories: (1) interstate carriers and (2) intrastate carriers. Interstate carriers are those that operate and carry cargo across state lines and intrastate carriers operate entirely within the boundaries of a particular state. Those trucking companies that operate across state lines are required to register with the federal government and comply with various federal laws. Intrastate carriers need only comply with state laws although some states have adopted federal regulations as their own. Lawyers who litigate truck wreck cases are familiar with these laws and carefully scrutinize the facts of a case to determine whether there has been compliance by the truck driver and the trucking company. There are very important differences between the federal regulations that apply to interstate carriers and those regulations that apply only to intrastate carriers, none the least is the difference in the amount of liability insurance they are required to carry.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Truck and Tractor Trailer Accidents , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

This blog will continue in our series of providing our readers with answers to frequently asked questions in the context of a serious injury case. This blog will address FAQ number 9:

8. If I am injured by a third party, but I am also working on the job at the time, am I entitled to both workers’ compensation coverage and a liability settlement?

Answer: The answer is yes although there may be a claim for subrogation made by the workers’ compensation insurance carrier. If an employee is injured while working for an employer and their injury comes about as a result of the acts of a third party, the injured individual may obtain both workers’ compensation benefits and liability insurance coverage to the extent the at fault defendant has such coverage. If a settlement is eventually obtained from the liability insurance carrier for the at fault defendant, the issue arises as to whether a portion of the settlement has to be repaid to the workers’ compensation insurance carrier for the employer. The general law in Georgia is that there is no right of subrogation unless the injured individual is first “made whole” for all of his/her damages which includes complete compensation for pain and suffering, past, present and future, complete compensation for medical expenses past, present and future, and complete compensation for lost wages, past, present and future. Unless an injured employee is “made whole” for all such damages, even if they have received workers’ compensation benefits and a liability settlement arising out of a hypothetical automobile accident, the injured individual will not be required to repay his or her employer’s insurance carrier for workers’ compensation benefits received. In the context of a case where an injured individual is not made whole, there is no right of subrogation. Accordingly, in many cases, the employee injured on the job with a valid claim against a third party may receive both workers’ compensation benefits and liability protection from the third party.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Torts , Uninsured Motorist Coverage , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

This blog will continue in our series of providing our readers with answers to frequently asked questions in the context of a serious injury case. This blog will address FAQ number 8:

9. If I have no health insurance and the at fault driver has little or no liability insurance coverage, what happens if my medical bills exceed available coverages?

Answer: This is a sad case that we see far too often in our practice. The hypothetical at fault driver has run the stop sign or red light and has caused serious injuries. The at fault driver has minimum limits of $25,000.00 which are insufficient to pay the medical expenses incurred. The injured individual has no health insurance. Thus, medical expenses exceed all forms of available coverage. What happens? Typically, lots of problems. If the medical expenses exceed available coverage then counsel will attempt to negotiate some type of settlement with the hospital and healthcare providers because there is simply not enough money to go around and what is available needs to be divided on an equitable basis. Sometimes this works and sometimes it does not. If there is a Hospital Lien, for example, the Hospital Lien takes priority by operation of law and all of the settlement funds might have to be paid to the hospital leaving the injured individual with nothing. Again, these are sad and complicated cases requiring careful review by experienced counsel. This, of course, is why it is so important that the public protect itself through Medical Payments coverage, health insurance coverage, disability coverage and/or any other forms of coverage such as uninsured motorist coverage if such coverage can be purchased and is affordable. If such coverage is not affordable and the injured individual has nothing then literally they are at the mercy of the resources of the at fault defendant which in many cases are themselves grossly insufficient to pay for medical expenses, much less pain and suffering and lost wages.

It is quite possible in these sad and tragic cases that the injured individual ends up declaring bankruptcy if the medical expenses are huge. In a serious injury case, medical expenses can literally be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. It is easy to see that if the at fault driver only has $25,000.00 and medical expenses are in excess of $200,000.00 that there is simply not enough money to go around. If the injured client has no heath insurance and the at fault driver only as $25,000.00, in the hypothetical case cited, there would be unpaid medical bills in the amount of $175,000.00. Bankruptcy might be the best alternative in such a case if something cannot be worked out by and between the healthcare provider and counsel for the client. This is the reality of any case where the client has no protection for himself and the at fault driver has little or no coverage either. Again, the best way to protect against such a catastrophe is to purchase healthcare coverage and uninsured motorist coverage if at all possible.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Torts , Uninsured Motorist Coverage , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

This blog will continue in our series of providing our readers with answers to frequently asked questions in the context of a serious injury case. This blog will address FAQ number 7:

7. If the at fault driver has no insurance coverage whatsoever, can I recover for my injuries under my own policy?

Answer: The answer is yes but only if you have uninsured/underinsured coverage under your own automobile policy. If an at fault driver is driving illegally without insurance, he or she is considered to be uninsured by operation of law. There simply is no insurance coverage and therefore they meet the definition of an uninsured driver. Thus, if you are injured by an at fault driver who has no insurance coverage policy at all, if you have been wise enough to purchase uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage as part of your own policy, you can file a claim against your carrier.

The good news here is that the premiums for an innocent insured cannot be raised if a claim is made for uninsured motorist coverage. Thus, in a hypothetical case where an individual causes an accident and he or she has no insurance coverage, one can make an application under one’s own policy for uninsured motorist coverage without a rise in their premiums. The law forbids an insurance company from raising the premiums of their insured simply because a claim is made particularly in the context of a claim being made by an innocent third party who has done nothing wrong but has only made a claim for paid coverage, the claim being necessitated by the acts of an at fault third party.

All of our readers are well advised to review their insurance policies carefully to determine whether they have uninsured/underinsured coverage. If they do not, we would recommend that they meet with their insurance agent, review their budget and purchase as much uninsured/underinsured coverage as is possible. This type of coverage protects the policyholder from the situation where the at fault driver has no insurance coverage or is underinsured, meaning that they have less insurance coverage than would provide complete compensation for the damage inflicted. We encourage all of our clients to study their policies to make sure that they have carefully reviewed this very significant issue and in situations where the family budget will allow the purchase of such coverage, it is a wise investment and form of protection that may be needed and could be crucial in a particular case, particularly where serious injuries are involved.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Torts , Truck and Tractor Trailer Accidents , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

This blog will continue in our series of providing our readers with answers to frequently asked questions in the context of a serious injury case. This blog will address FAQ number 6:

6. Can my spouse recover damages if I am seriously injured and he/she misses time from work caring for me?

Answer: A spouse does not have a legal claim for their own lost wages while they miss work caring for their injured spouse. However, under Georgia law, a spouse does have a claim for loss of consortium. Loss of consortium means the loss incurred by the innocent spouse when they are deprived of their injured spouse’s “society, affection and companionship.” This is not limited to the loss of conjugal services but includes the loss of all services provided to the spouse and the intangible value of the injured spouse’s contribution to their “affection, society, comfort and companionship.” Thus, while one cannot literally file a claim for the uninjured spouse based on that spouse’s lost wages, compensation can be obtained in a serious injury case for lost of consortium which can provide a measure of compensation for other losses.

Posted by Finch McCranie, LLP | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Automobile Accidents , Torts , Uninsured Motorist Coverage , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

This blog will continue in our series of providing our readers with answers to frequently asked questions in the context of a serious injury case. This blog will address FAQ number 5:

5. Who will pay my lost wages while I