April 20th, 2007

Personal Injury Law Round-Up #8

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog presents the week that was:

Just a few posts today as I’ve been too busy to search many blogs for personal injury material.

David Lowe reflects on showing up for jury selection, Jury Service– Seeing It From The Other Side, (InjuryBoard/Milwaukee), an experience significantly different than that of the personal injury attorney who appeared in one of my jury pools recently and talked himself off;

Ronald Miller at the Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog discusses medical malpractice cases by professional athletes against team doctors in Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Filed Against Carolina Panthers’ Team Doctor;

An article in the Chicago Tribune reports on Catholic Charities dropping its Chicago foster care program after its insurance company dropped them as a result of a $12M payout in a civil action from three abused minors. Christopher Hurley, one of the lawyers that obtained that settlement, wants to make sure you know The Truth About Catholic Charities Foster Care Settlement;

A new article on punitive damages is available at the Social Science Research Network, with extract courtesy of William Childs at TortsProf, Punitive Damages and Valuing Harm;

Dr. Paula Hartzell at MedicalEconomics shares her experience as a defendant who lost a medical malpractice case, in The Way I See It: Medicine is a blame game;

And, just moments ago, a Texas judge has apparently dismissed about 1,000 Vioxx claims, based on federal preemption. The text of the decision is not available at the moment.

Finally, at age 100, Richard Bird is still practicing law, Monday-Friday, 9-5.

(Submissions for next week’s edition may be made to blog[at]TurkewitzLaw.com)

 

April 13th, 2007

Personal Injury Law Round-Up #7

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog presents the week that was:

No discussion of personal injury law can take place without talking juries. And so, an interesting paper on medical malpractice juries by Philip Peters, Jr. at the Social Science Research Network, Doctors and Juries, is worth reading. One of its conclusions: “From the perspective of defendants at least, jury performance is remarkably good” (free download, and hat tip to Anne Reed‘s well-written Deliberations);

And since we discuss doctors and hospitals here, I want to point out something startling: A hospital CEO engaging in transparency. Paul Levy, CEO of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, who started Running a Hospital last year, blogged Central Line Infections, both better and worse for his own hospital. This post goes hand-in-hand with the trend of states to immunize doctors for saying they are sorry to patients. If this pattern keeps up, patients might actually feel better informed, and more tolerant when errors occur, causing a decrease in medical malpractice cases.

Tony Sebok at FindLaw has the second half of his series on reopening the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund for the thousands of relief workers who were injured in the aftermath;

Brian Wolfman at Public Citizen’s Consumer Law and Policy blog discusses a danger I had not previously heard of: 15-20 million lightweight stoves installed in kitchens around the country that have an awful tendency to tip over when weight was applied to the oven door.

William Childs at his TortsProf Blog notes a new abstract at the Social Sciences Research Network called “Judicial Tort Reform in Texas.” From the abstract, it appears the tort “reform” is judicially created rather than legislatively. I wonder if former Gov. George Bush will decry the judicial activism?

This Texas “reform” coincides with an article by Mimi Schwartz in Texas Monthly, Hurt? Injured? Need a Lawyer? Too Bad! (hat tip to TortDeform);

Moving on to the military, Jonathon Turley at the USA Today Blog writes about the immunity the military enjoys for negligent conduct, and how there is little deterrence for military negligence beyond self-regulation, bad publicity or a political scandal. And perhaps that military immunity is why the gov’t ignores dangers? Justinian Lane of TortDeform points out a story where the military is refusing to do a risk assessment of toxic fumes near 100 military family homes. Are the two connected?

Walter Olson at Point of Law discusses Ohio’s decision to follow Rhode Island in pursuing lead paint manufacturers. (Also Byron Stier at MassTortsProf; Jonathan Adler at Volokh) My question: If the states hire private counsel on a contingency bases for such a risky endeavor (Jane Genova at Law and More), and they prevail, will the states then try to renege on the fee agreement as was done in the smoking cases?

Also at Point of Law, Ted Frank discusses experts who cut their fees after a trial is lost, in the context of an improper contingency fee arrangement;

And yet more from Point of Law, Frank discusses the categories of class action Vioxx cases;

The big Vioxx news, however, will come next week when a Texas judge is expected to dismiss 1,000 Vioxx cases from state court. This means (among many other things) that Evan Schaeffer at his Legal Underground site will have to quickly update the schedule of upcoming Vioxx trial he posted just before this news broke late yesterday.

And from the world of tabloid stories, the Duke lacrosse case was dismissed. Carolyn Elefant at the Law.com Blog speculates on possible suits the Duke players might bring.

And finally, Bill Gratsch‘s Blawg’s Blawg lets loose with some interesting statistics about the size and growth of legal blogs.

Enjoy the weekend.

(Submissions for next week’s edition may be made to blog[at]TurkewitzLaw.com)

 

April 6th, 2007

Personal Injury Law Round-Up #6

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog presents the week that was:

We start with a patient that had the wrong testicle removed by the VA, (tip to Kevin, M.D), because I know that is one way to get your attention.

And I’ll try to keep that attention by turning to Randall Udelman of InjuryBoard (Phoenix) to talk about carnivals — referring not to Blawg Review #102, the April Fool’s Blawg Review Prequel, or a similar round-up of common-subject posts — but to talk of actual rides (fun!), and the problem of state laxity of control (OK, maybe not-so-fun) in Carnival Safety in Arizona;

From testicles and carnivals and into the courtroom: Charles Silver at TortDeform does an analysis of the “haircuts” that jury verdicts often receive after you have read about that big verdict in the papers; And there is a response to Professor Silver from Ted Frank at Point of Law on the subject;

Sticking with verdicts, John Day at Day on Torts has a summary of one state’s jury verdicts, and the low number of plaintiff’s verdicts for those cases that go all the way; he also brings up data that shows hospital errors are increasing, not decreasing, over the past few years;

Medical malpractice also brings up the difficult subject of “wrongful life,” which Ronen Perry wrote of at the Social Science Research Network;

From medical malpractice to legal: Andrew Bluestone writes of a doctor that is suing his defense lawyer for legal malpractice after a $217 million verdict in Florida at his New York Attorney Malpractice Blog. The original article is here. Seems the defense lawyer may have been doing the bidding of the insurance company instead of the doctor when he refused the offer to settle for the policy limits;

And since we talk of insurance companies, long a subject of complaints, Michael Stevens at the Kentucky Law Review discusses some of the eye-popping profits that insurance companies have been making;

Since all personal injury litigation involves evidence, almost all attorneys will ultimately face the issue of evidence spoliation, which includes anything from a wrecked car to a fetal monitor strip gone missing. Matthew Lerner at New York Civil Law notes that New York’s high court will hear argument on whether spoliation of evidence can exist as an independent cause of action;

And we close with John Bisnar at the California Injury Blog ruminating on Elderly drivers, how old is too old? It is worth checking out for an absolutely priceless deposition quote.

Enjoy the weekend.

(Submissions for next week’s edition may be made to blog[at]TurkewitzLaw.com)

 

March 31st, 2007

Personal Injury Law Round-Up #5

From the New York Personal Injury Law Blog, the week that was:

  • New York firm Napoli Bern Ripka found themselves in a story regarding possible ethics violations by apportioning the settlement in a manner designed to inflate the firm’s share of the funds, as Andrew Bluestone recounts at his New York Attorney Malpractice blog;
  • And just in case you want some additional reading, the Law Review of New York Law School has an edition all about the plaintiff’s bar, for which I’ve printed a small outake and links to the various articles: Plaintiffs Personal Injury Attorneys Get Analyzed.

Enjoy the weekend.

 

March 23rd, 2007

Personal Injury Law Round-Up #4

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog brings you the week that was:

We start with a non-PI case since this is a problem that could stop this blog cold: Law.com reports of a malpractice liability insurer (Executive Risk Specialty, a unit of Chubb) stopping lawyers from blogging out of a fear of legal malpractice concerns — Before You Blog, Check With Your Insurance Carrier. Does this mean their insured won’t also be able to write an article? Put up a web site? Give a CLE lecture? If you have Chubb as your carrier, you may want to tell them to take a powder before they tell you. And tell them why they have lost your business.

Moving right on to the juxtaposition of law and medicine –>> In the world of FDA regulation, Pharmalot not only reports on how the FDA will limit conflicts of interest with respect to drug and device manufacturers, but does so a day ahead of it being the lead article in the New York Times. If you have pharma cases, this new blog, started in January, is chock full of news, apparently aiming to be to pharma what Howard Bashman’s How Appealing is to lawyers;

From the FDA to cigarettes –> Byron Stier notes at the Mass Torts Blog that Tobacco Companies May Not Market Cigarettes As “Low Tar” or “Light” Overseas; while on the same blog Howard Erichson discusses the ethics involved in mass tort representation;

In hospital news, the WSJ Health Blog reports that at Massachusetts General Hospital it was found that doctors and nurses didn‘t wash their hands as often as they should. If that’s what it’s like at one of the best hospitals in the nation, what is going on in your neighborhood? (Though it’s still an improvement over practicing medicine with your fingernails.)

Also in medical malpractice, Kevin at LexBlog reports on a widow that warns of a hospital’s medical malpractice on her husband in a blog. The widow’s blog posting now seems to be a dead link, but Kevin’s is not. Once upon a time an angry customer might stand outside a store with a picket sign if she felt she was wronged. Now she can blog it to the world. What next, webcams in the hospital to watch your family?

Blogs also come up on the heels of last weeks $55M verdict against Chrysler, as the plaintiff’s attorneys are speaking out in the comments section of blogs to defend the verdict against what they apparently view as Chrysler propaganda. Ted Frank at Overlawyered had complained about the verdict, which resulted in a lengthy comment from plaintiff’s counsel and subsequent emails. He then put up a new post with the comments and responsive emails included, which was good to see since the folks that try a case are invariably in a better position to speak to merits than others. One of the plaintiff’s attorneys also wrote in responding to my own blog, Will DaimlerChrysler $50M Punitive Damage Verdict Withstand Review?.

From Chrysler to Ford, a $15M rollover verdict was tossed by a federal court in part due to the misconduct of plaintiff’s counsel;

While all those folks will likely be in appellate litigation for years to come, Ronald Miller has a piece on how to avoid just that for the less sensational suits, at the Trial Lawyer Resource Center blog, about negotiations and listening to insurance adjusters;

On more a more pedestrian front, Miller discusses at the Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog why it is so important to be choosy on slip and fall cases on ice and snow.

Still in Maryland, John Day from Day on Torts reports on a significant new ruling from the highest court on economic loss in tort cases;

Since weather obviously plays a role in so many personal injury cases, I might as well point out a good practice tip from the Kentucky Law Review on obtaining certified copies of past weather conditions from National Climatic Data Center;

Another practice tip comes from Evan Schaeffer at his Illinois Trial Practice Weblog regarding various technologies to keep track of trial and deposition testimony;

Anne Reed’s tips on voir dire questions at Deliberations reminds me of a question I heard a few years back from defense counsel in a med mal I was trying, which I am sure no potential juror was expecting: “What magazines to you subscribe to?” If the answer is Mother Jones or Guns and Ammo you may get insights you might have otherwise missed. Perhaps one might also ask these days, “Do you read any blogs, and if so, which ones?”

From voir dire and into trial, at Simple Justice new blogger Scott Greenfield writes about cameras in the courtroom in I’m Ready for my Close-up, Justice DeMille as the matter gets debated in our state capitol.

Shifting gears to a bit of constitutional law that reared its head regarding the federal Transportation Equity Act of 2005. This law attempts to preempt those state statutes that permit the owners of rented or leased motor vehicles to be vicariously liable for the negligence of the drivers. If valid, it would override New York’s own law to the contrary. But one state judge held in September 2006 that it was unconstitutional, asserting in Graham v. Dunkley that the Commerce Clause did not apply and that the federal government was seizing a state right in violation of the Tenth Amendment. Matthew Lerner at New York Civil Law discusses this week the precedential value of the case and how other courts have responded;

From Conlaw to Petlaw — >> Stephanie Mencimer writes in the Tortellini about tainted pet food in Whither the pet plaintiff. In New York, as in many places, damages are limited to the cost of the pet (assuming you could prove causation), making good lawsuits and discovery unlikely unless some type of class action could be brought. My gut feeling is that it would take a lot of creative lawyering to achieve anything beyond the costs of the food. This did not stop this one New York couple and their lawyer, which just filed suit for compensatory and punitive damages for their dog that they said has died from the tainted food. Since causation will have to be proved, the legal fee might not pay the rent even if they succeed on the compensatories, and punitive damages will no doubt be a difficult road. [Addendum: CNN reports that the first class action suit has been filed in Wisconsin]

Mencimer, who is the author of Blocking The Courthouse Door, is also interviewed in FailureMagazine, in And Justice For All? Debunking the Lawsuit Myth;

And finally, slightly off the personal injury page to employment discrimination, Monica at The Common Scold tips us off to a creative blog about the issues The Office manages to bring up in each episode in, That’s What She Said.

Enjoy the weekend.

(Submissions for next week’s edition may be made to blog[at]TurkewitzLaw.com)