Birmingham Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics - Most Commented

AIG - Workers Compensation - The Bailout

Jon Lewis — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:24:55 GMT

Well, I have just seen first hand what the bailout has done for AIG: made them even more heartless and cold than ever before. We represent a family who lives in Mexico. Their son was employed by a company in Atlanta, and he was killed on the job. The company is insured by AIG, and it is a clear liability case. What is AIG's response?

First, they made this man's parents travel across Mexico, obtain a special permit to enter our country, and come to Atlanta to give a deposition with a translator. They do not speak English. These individuals live in a two bedroom, aluminum house with 8 family members. We cannot imagine the life they live.

They cried at their deposition over the loss of their son. This was VERY emotional for them. They went back to Mexico, and the defense attorney and I discussed the possibiliity of settling the case.

I learned today that AIG is not interested in settling this case because they want to make it hard on this family. They know how difficult it is for them to travel back to this country, and they know it's difficult to get them back into this country. It's a foregone conclusion that the case will be won, but AIG doesn't care. They want to hold on to their money until the last possible date.

So, not only does AIG know the case is a loser from their standpoint, but they want to make it difficult on a very poor family in Mexico who just lost their son while he was working hard for AIG's insured. Furthermore, AIG knows that they have nothing to lose by doing this because the worst that can happen is they pay what they should pay anyway. The Judge cannot rule that they owe more than what the workers compensation statute says they owe so what do they care.

I ask you the following questions:

1. Is this right?
2. Is this humane?
3. Should AIG be punished for taking this stance?
4. Should AIG's insured have to endure further litigation because AIG wants to hold onto its money?
5. Should my client's family be made to suffer further?
6. Should they have to spend more money to come back to this country?
7. How should our system handle these situations?

The next time you hear about trial attorneys and tort reform, think about this case. It is insurance companies that drag out litigation and increase costs. It is insurance companies that turn down fair settlement offers and make their insured's go through the litigation process. It is insurance companies that make us take doctor depositions. AND, it is insurance companies that blame everything on the trial lawyers of America.

Isn't it time someone started holding these insurance companies accountable? AIG received billions of dollars of our tax money, and yet, this is how they treat human beings while they go to their spas and on their English hunting trips. It is time for these companies and the individuals operating them who have fleeced America to start paying the price.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Riding a Bicycle without a helmet is just not smart

Danny Feldman — Sun, 17 May 2009 13:00:16 GMT

This is the second in a six part series regarding dangerous and annoying cycling behaviors. Although motorists may not much care one way or another about cyclists who don't wear helmets, it should matter to the cyclist. Riding a bicycle without wearing a helmet simply is not a smart thing to do - and fortunately, almost without exception, most regular cyclists do not ride without a helmet on, period.

I do not have the statistics readily in front of me, but suffice it to say that the statistics show that wearing a helmet saves lives. The most serious cycling injuries, and the injuries that most often result in death, are traumas to the head. When a serious head trauma occurs, the brain swells and/or bleeds (hemorrhage), and unless that pressure can be relieved immediately (that is, a neurosurgeon is there to remove the skull) the person is very likely to die. A helmet absorbs the impact that the skull simply cannot - and as a result, a person who otherwise may have died is left with a slight headache.

Sometimes people ride and because they are going a short way decide to forgo a helmet. The problem is we just do not know when an incident may occur and this short helmetless ride may be your last. I have a very good (albeit not terribly coordinated friend) in the medical profession, who upon receiving a bike as a Christmas gift took it out for a short spin around the block. When he had not returned some 20 minutes later, his wife and small children found him in a daze literally a couple of houses down the street. Apparently, he had hit the curb, went down and struck his head, knocking himself out for several minutes. Luckily, he did not injure himself worse. He no longer rides without a helmet - even for a short distance.

I certainly understand the liberating feeling that comes from riding your bike with the wind blowing your hair (actually, in truth, I remember that feeling given that I don't ride without a helmet anymore and neither do I have much hair to speak of anymore). And, I recognize the fact that a helmet is not a 100% guarantee against a serious head injury. I have, however, gone down head first at about 20 - 25 miles per hour and cracked my helmet from one end to the other. Although I had a pretty badly broken thumb that required surgery, my head was just fine (despite what my wife may think). Looking at the cracked helmet, I could not help but think that but for that helmet, I would no longer be here.

Two last points - always replace a helmet once it has been compromised (been in any kind of impact) as it will no longer protect like it should. Finally, in Alabama, and in certain municipalities in the State, helmets are mandatory - especially for minors. While I personally am unaware of these laws being rigorously enforced, and while I understand the controversy that may exist regarding them (similar to mandatory seat-belt laws), I do believe these laws are helpful if for no other reason than to educate the public and to inform new cyclists about the risks of riding without a helmet.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Danny Feldman

Social Security Disability: It's Not Just Physical

Stuart McAtee — Mon, 11 May 2009 08:00:00 GMT

When most people think of a disability, they think of a physical disability which disallows a person from working, thus perhaps qualifying for Social Security benefits through the Social Security Administration(SSA). However, a recent Forbes.com article cites research that notes about 27 percent of people receiving Social Security Disability Insurance benefits are mentally ill. read article: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/hscout/2009/05/05/hscout626791.html

Even more amazing, in a special edition of the May/June issue of Health Affairs focusing on mental health care in the United States, one study found that about HALF of Americans suffering from mental illness in a given year don't receive treatment, and another 25 percent receive treatment that's not consistent with evidence-based guidelines. It is tragic to think Americans with mental illnesses are not properly diagnosed and treated. Moreover, it's logical to think a good portion of those Americans not treated may qualify for SSD benefits if they apply. If you have a loved one who may qualify for SSD benefits because of a mental disability, please help them apply immediately. If you, or a loved one, have been turned down for benefits, please contact our law firm as soon as practical. We may be able to get you the benefits you deserve.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Stuart McAtee

Are they Really Accidents?

Jon Lewis — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:52:36 GMT

I just finished a book called "Safety 24/7 - Building an Incident-free Culture". The authors, Gregor M. Anderson and Robert L. Lorber, Ph.D, make it clear that there are very few true "accidents". In the book, they call them "incidents". What's the difference? In the book, they define the difference as follows:

Incident vs. Accident: an accident implies the result is outside a person's control. In 97 percent of the cases, what happens - the incident - is easily within someone's control.

Somewhere along the line, we started calling "incidents" "accidents". Why? When someone runs a red light and causes a collision, is it an accident? When someone is texting on their cell phone and has a crash, is it an accident? When someone drinks and drives, is it an accident?

These aren't accidents. These are choices people make. We choose whether to pay attention to the roadway. We choose whether to look at the radio or look at the road. We choose whether to drive defensively. These are choices, and the term "accident" implies we have no choices.

When we are in a court of law, you will hear the defense attorneys constantly refer to the term "accident". Plaintiff attorneys will use the terms "collision," "wreck," or "crash". Which is more accurate?

In future posts, I will discuss more of the theme of this book. It does not only apply to car wrecks. it also applies to the workplace, public stores, and other commercial establishments. If you are interested in the book, you can purchase it from Amazon.com.

Or, you may call or e-mail our firm, Lewis, Feldman, Lehane & McAtee, LLC, for your free copy.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Hydroxycut Kills and Injures!

Jon Lewis — Sun, 03 May 2009 22:23:21 GMT

The FDA has warned consumers to stop using the dietary supplement Hydroxycut. This drug is manufactured by Iovate Health Sciences, Inc., and they are recalling all of the Hydroxycut products. These include Max Drink Packets, Caffeine-Free Rapid Release Caplets, and Max Aqua Shed. The injuries involve the liver. There has been one death reported.

If you have taken these dangerous products, return them IMMEDIATELY!!! Why does this happen? Americans want the easy way out. We want the lazy way. We want to be entertained, and we want to do as little as possible to get what we want. We want easy money - gambling, lotteries (I'm not against these either). We want our sports. We want our movies. We want quick food (microwaves). We want more for less. And, more importantly, with respect to Hydroxycut, we want to lose weight without having to work for it.

How do you lose weight? Output greater than input. There is no secret. There is no miracle drug, or if there is, it usually kills or injures (see Phen fen). Exercise more than you eat. Eat in moderation. Work hard, and you will get there.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Alabama Neck Injuries - Low Impact Car Accidents

Jon Lewis — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:40:47 GMT

Can your neck be injured in a car crash with a low impact? Most defense attorneys and insurance companies would have you believe that it's impossible. They make many arguments to jurors that it's impossible and that these are just preexisting injuries. But, they are wrong!! Don't be fooled!

There are two examples I can give that will illustrate the force applied even at low speeds: 1) would you put your hand on the back of a stopped vehicle and let another car roll into your hand at 5 miles per hour? Of course not. It would crush your hand. 2) Have you ever played with the ball pendulum game (commonly called kinetic balls or Newton's Cradle)? This game demonstrate newton's third law of motion: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When one ball is pulled back and strikes the next ball, the force is great enough to travel through the three others and kick the last one up.

When your car is hit from the rear, the force travels through the car, jerks your body, and typically, your head snaps back and then forward. This force can trigger symptoms that were not present prior to the impact. It can also cause damage. This is commonly referred to as whiplash, but that term has been used so critically that it is better to use the proper medical terminology of "cervical strain", "bulging disk", or "herniated disk", depending on what your condition is. If you were already susceptible to an injury due to degeneration in your neck, this force causes the symptoms to present themselves through pain and, sometimes, through numbness and tingling.

Do you have an experience where you were involved in a low impact car crash and experienced significant pain and injury to your neck? Did the insurance company or defense attorney argue such a condition couldn't result from such a low impact? Did they make you feel awful - like you were lying? Let us know. We want to hear your story. The more people who talk about the possibilities show how real they are. Please give us your comments even if they are contrary to the above (maybe you were involved in a low impact car crash and had no pain). We want to know.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Club Liable for Stripper's Car Accident?

Jon Lewis — Wed, 28 May 2008 11:00:00 GMT

This is an interesting case. The Birmingham News reported in its May 27 edition that Patsy Hamaker has sued her employer, the Furnace, as a result of a single car collision which occurred after work one evening. According to the article, the club encourages dancers to increase liquor sales by giving them a percentage of the drink sales. As a result, Ms. Hamaker allegedly became highly intoxicated and was allowed to leave work in that state.

Without knowing more facts, it is difficult to assess whether the Furnace would have liability in this situation. Surely, the club's owners will deny the allegations. Furthermore, even if they agree that they encouraged their dancers to increase drink sales of customers, they will most certainly argue that they do not encourage their dancers to actually drink the beverages and get drunk.

While I would not argue that this is a frivolous case, it will definitely lead to such arguments simply given the facts, and the tort reformers are probably licking their chops. They will argue that the employee should be responsible and not get intoxicated. But, this is a business which allegedly encourages intoxication because it leads to more money. Whether you approve of strip clubs or not, an employer of such a business should never allow an employee to leave work intoxicated. In fact, the employer should have a duty not to allow an employee to leave work intoxicated. This should be the case not only to protect the employee but, also, to protect the other motorists.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Won Your Workers Compensation Case? Not so Fast

Jon Lewis — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:02:11 GMT

What are the insurance companies doing now? They are using "Utilization Review" in order to cut off workers compensation benefits. How does that work?

Well, the Alabama Workers Compensation Act allows for "Utilization Review". That means that the workers compensation insurance carrier can submit your medical records to a third party physician to review and determine if they are related to the injury. If that third party physician says, "No", the workers compensation carrier cuts off the injured employee's benefits.

How does this work in practice? Take my client for example. She had surgery approximately ten (10) years ago. Her workers compensation case was settled, and her medical was left open for future treatment. Typically, that is what happens in workers compensation cases. The person receives medical treatment for the related injuries for the rest of her life.

For ten (10) years, my client has been receiving prescriptions and medical treatment for her injuries. Out of the blue, the insurance carrier sends her records to a foreign doctor in El Paso, Texas who opines that her injuries and medical treatment are not related. So, the insurance carrier, under the "utilization review" provision, cuts off her medical treatment.

Why did they wait ten (10) years? How can this doctor supersede my client's local doctor's opinion when he hasn't even examined her. Shouldn't the "Authorized treating" physician have the final say? The insurance carrier approved her "Authorized Treating" Physician.

This is ridiculous and unfair, but that is how the insurance industry works. Insurance covers everything but the loss. All they want is their money and to hell with everything else - morals, humanity, sympathy, kindness, and generosity. It is all about the bottom line. People talk about "greedy trial attorneys" when they should be talking about "greedy insurance companies".

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Homicides Predict Traffic Deaths

Jon Lewis — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:42:37 GMT

Do State Homicide rates predict traffic fatalities? According to a University of Michigan study, they do. The study found that there was a parallel with the number of homicides and the number of traffic deaths. What seems to be the reason for this? Aggression.

The study looked at ten factors and "found that seven of them accounted for 71 percent of the variance in traffic fatality rates." Those seven are "homicide rates, proportion of male drivers, proportion of older drivers, number of alcohol-related liver failures (as a proxy for intoxicated driving), density of physicians, seat-belt use rate, and income." Apparently, the strongest predictor of these seven are homicides because homicides relate to aggression which relates to aggressive driving.

What does this teach us? We need to respect others on the roadways. We can't be in a hurry all of the time. We cannot drive while we are doing several other things: texting, playing with the radio, putting on makeup, using the telephone, changing CD's, and having too much noise and distractions in the car. We need to realize that we share the road with others, and we need to understand that different people have different driving styles just as different people have different psychological makeups.

During this holiday season, think before you act. Take a few miles per hour off your speedometer. Leave a little early for that appointment or meeting so you aren't in a rush. Be more passive on the roadways, and maybe you will save a life.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Don't Die in a Chrysler

Jon Lewis — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:27:27 GMT

Today, it was reported on CNN.com that Honda is issuing a recall on 440,000 vehicles. According to the article, there is a potential defect in driver-side airbags in 2001-02 Honda Accords, 2001 Civics and 2002-03 Acura TLs. Already, six injuries and one death have been reported.

So, what does this recall have to do with Chrysler?

Well, this article points out the flaw in the bankruptcy court's decision to absolve Fiat and Chrysler of any liability for injuries or deaths resulting from defective Chryslers which were bought before the bankruptcy. This would have been the case in all 440,000 Hondas which have been recalled.

Couldn't the bankruptcy court have been more thoughtful about the decision? Most times, bankruptcy courts require the debtor to purchase insurance in order to cover such liabilities. Why didn't Fiat or Chrysler purchase insurance so that the consumer doesn't suffer? Families who purchased Chryslers before the bankruptcy will suffer an undue hardship if a loved one is seriously injured or killed as a result of a defect in the car, truck or SUV. Shouldn't that cost be shifted to the new entity through insurance?

If you want more information regarding defective products, please contact our office, and we will send you a report on legal issues in Alabama regarding defective products: Recognizing and Preserving Evidence in Automotive Product Liability Cases.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis