901.372.5003 24/7 Live Call Answering
In General

CA Update: Millington election lawsuit – There may be no need for a re-vote.

CA Update: Millington election lawsuit – There may be no need for a re-vote.

The Commercial Appeal ran a story today about the status of the election challenge lawsuit that the attorneys at Patterson Bray are handling on behalf of the City of Millington.

We’ve spent the last several days reviewing election commission records and tabulations, and we are hopeful and believe that ultimately the City of Millington will be able to avoid a re-vote.  Indeed, as quoted in the story:

“We’re not ready to concede that once you throw out the invalid votes that it doesn’t conclusively prove that, in fact, it prevailed, and you can prove that to a mathematical certainty,” he said. “So, there is no need for a revote. We believe that will be the case, and that’s what we are prepared to argue.”

In other words, once the improper votes are identified and isolated, we believe that we’ll be able to show with mathematical certainty that the municipal schools sales tax referendum did, in fact, actually pass.  We hope to have a motion filed in court … Read the rest

Continue Reading
September 14, 2012
In Business Litigation, Civil Litigation, Contracts, General

Why it Pays for Small Business to Use a Small Law Firm

 

Why it Pays for Small Business to Use a Small Law Firm

If you run a small business, you have no doubt heard the usual reasons why you should consider taking your legal problems to a small law firm instead of a mega-firm:

  • Lower hourly rates (no subsidization of fancy offices, boxes at FedEx Forum, flashy overhead, etc.)
  • Better responsiveness (no “big shot” partner egos to deal with)
  • More attention (smaller pond = bigger fish)

All of which is true.  But how about this one:  BETTER SOLUTIONS!  We are a small law firm for small business.

Small Business + Small Law Firm = SUCCESS

Here is a real-life example of how a small law firm ended up being a better fit for the needs of small business.

A construction contractor client came to our firm with a problem.  Business had gotten slow, and the business decided to terminate a few employees, including one of its carpenters.  The client allowed the employee to finish out the workweek and went ahead and cut his final paycheck through the end of that

… Read the rest Continue Reading
August 18, 2012
In Business Litigation, Civil Litigation, Estate Planning, General

Legal Problem Solving: Does Your Lawyer Merely Work the Problem? Or Solve the Problem?

Legal Problem Solving: Does Your Lawyer Merely Work the Problem? Or Solve the Problem?

Let’s discuss legal problem solving. Does your lawyer merely work the problem, or solve the problem? There’s a difference, you know.

  • A cookie-cutter response vs. a creative solution
  • Reaction vs. a plan of action
  • “Winning” the lawsuit vs. avoiding the lawsuit
  • Churning legal fees vs. finding a cost-effective solution up front

I saw a blog post once detailing a masterful stroke of legal genius by the lawyers for Jack Daniels, and wanted to share it. It’s a prime example of the type of culture and approach we cultivate at Patterson Bray– solving the problem vs. merely working the problem.

Legal Problem Solving at Patterson Bray

Our clients don’t just want legal answers.  They want solutions.  So at every stage our goal is to focus on the following question to the client:

“What do you ultimately want to accomplish?”

Sometimes that means we have to act not just as legal advisors, but also legal counselors – asking questions, raising issues the client may not have considered, … Read the rest

Continue Reading
August 13, 2012
In Auto Accident, Personal Injury

Partially at Fault in a Car Wreck in Tennessee?

Partially at Fault in a Car Wreck in Tennessee?

Law FAQ: I was in a car wreck in Tennessee, and I may be partially at fault. Do I still have a legal claim?

ANSWER:   Maybe.

You can take comfort in the fact that “slam dunk” cases rarely exist.  There are 2 sides to almost every story.  Indeed, real life is never quite so neat and tidy.  Many car crashes are the result of a number of related factors, circumstances and events on both sides that – when combined together – cause accidents to occur.

For example, someone might have run a red light and pulled out in front of you; however, you might have contributed to the problem by speeding, or not wearing your seat belt, or not paying as close attention to the road as perhaps you should have been.  Thus, while you didn’t necessarily cause the wreck, you may be wondering whether your own speed or inattention may have increased the amount of damage or injury caused.

And so the question is: do you still have a legal … Read the rest

Continue Reading
May 22, 2012
In General

Law FAQ: Negligence – Is the Other Driver At Fault for the Car Wreck? (Part II)

Law FAQ: Negligence – Is the Other Driver At Fault for the Car Wreck? (Part II)

In yesterday’s blog post, I listed the 5 basic elements for a negligence claim: duty, breach, injury, causation, and proximate/legal cause.

Today’s post will focus on the first 2 elements which, for the most part, comprise the most interesting and difficult issues that arise in connection with negligence claims:  duty and breach.

Negligence is commonly referred to as the “reasonable man” standard.  Stated differently, a driver involved in a car wreck would be considered negligent if taking some action that most average people would deem unreasonable under the circumstances.  Negligence can be predicated both on acts of commission (e.g. running a red light), as well as acts of omission (e.g. failing to pay appropriate attention to the road).

Basically, the rules of negligence boil down to requiring people to follow society’s basic “rules of the road” for reasonable conduct.  For the most part, it’s commonsense-type stuff.  The law of negligence is about reasonableness and balance.  It does recognize, for example, that some injuries are … Read the rest

Continue Reading
April 26, 2012
In Auto Accident

Car Wreck Case- What is negligence by the other driver?

Car Wreck Case- What is negligence by the other driver?

In a car wreck case, or any other case, “negligence” is the legal term for failing to exercise reasonable care and caution under a given set of circumstances.  It is commonly referred to as “the ordinary, reasonable person” standard.  Legal liability is assessed when a person fails to follow society’s most basic “rules of the road” so to speak.

Examples of negligence

Some examples of negligence might include:

  • Running a red light and causing a car wreck.
  • A hurried doctor who fails to follow correct protocol and thus fails to diagnose a curable disease.
  • A nurse who fails to check the medical chart and who then dispenses the wrong medication.
  • A store owner who fails to mop up a known puddle on the floor.
  • A pharmacist who dispenses the wrong dosage of medication.
  • A contractor who fails to adhere to building plans or skirts building codes.
  • A child care center that fails to conduct background checks before hiring employees to care for children unsupervised.
  • A lawyer who fails to
… Read the rest Continue Reading
April 25, 2012
In General

Politics in the Workplace: Wiseman Quoted in Memphis Daily News

Let’s talk politics. Or not. Regardless of the outcome, the 2016 Presidential Election is set to go down in history.  You have probably learned about (or are inundated with!) the political positions of many of your friends through social media accounts like Facebook and Twitter.

But what about politics in the workplace?

In 2012, Reporter Andy Meek wrote an insightful article for the Memphis Daily News about the need for employers to carefully monitor the discussion of politics in the workplace. It’s worth pointing out again during this election cycle.

Patterson Bray PLLC

8001 Centerview Parkway, Suite 103

Memphis, Tennessee 38018

(901) 372-5003 Office

www.pattersonbray.com

The Attorneys of Patterson Bray handle personal injury cases, auto accidents, apartment crime cases, estate planning, asset protection, charitable planning, business litigation, business organization, business counseling, and many other general legal services.  Please visit our website to learn more about our attorneys and the work we do for our clients.

 

… Read the rest Continue Reading
March 30, 2012
In Uncategorized

ObamaCare at the Supreme Court: Day 3 Recap

ObamaCare at the Supreme Court

Sorry to be running late with this post concerning the final day of argument at the Supreme Court yesterday, but I wanted to again pass along the post by my friend Hans von Spakovsky at the Heritage Foundation who’s been following the hearings in DC.

There’s been lots of talk by pundits and prognosticators about how the seeming skepticism expressed by the Justices during oral argument means that the ObamaCare law will inevitably be struck down.  I disagree.  Not because I believe it will be upheld, but rather because I believe there’s no way to tell much of anything simply by listening to the questions asked by Judges during their hearing of an appeal.

Mind you, while some of the questioning in this particular case has been unusually illuminating, I’ve been involved in numerous appellate hearings, many of which occurred while I was “on the inside” as a law clerk working for Judge on the federal Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.  And based on my experience, I can tell you that a Judge’s questioning is … Read the rest

Continue Reading
March 29, 2012
In Uncategorized

ObamaCare at the Supreme Court: Recap of Day 2

ObamaCare at the Supreme Court: Recap of Day 2

My friend Hans von Spakovsky has been attending the oral argument at the Supreme Court and has summary of what how things went yesterday in his article over at PJ Media.

One interesting quote in particular from the article:

Both before and after the arguments, I had revealing conversations with a liberal professor in the courtroom.  He agreed that the government’s chief problem is that it had not provided a limiting factor or boundary line in any of its previous arguments.  Thus, if the Supreme Court agrees that Congress has the power to compel the purchase of an insurance policy from a private company, it could compel the purchase of virtually anything considered good or prudent.  After the arguments ended, the professor agreed that Verrelli had been unable to come up with a concise and reasonable answer to that question, which was asked of him multiple times by different justices.… Read the rest

Continue Reading
March 28, 2012
In General

ObamaCare Before Supreme Court Starting Today: Brief Guide

ObamaCare Before Supreme Court Starting Today: Brief Guide

My friend Hans Von Spakovsky has a great rundown of the Supreme Court’s schedule as they hear argument over the course of the next three days on the various legal issues implicated by ObamaCare.  Check out the article over at PJ Media.

As for the most pressing substantive issue in the case — the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution — there is a very good summary of the “evolution” of the Court’s interpretation of the Clause over the course of the past century over at The Atlantic.… Read the rest

Continue Reading
March 26, 2012