901.372.5003 24/7 Live Call Answering
In Personal Injury

Proposed Change in Seat Belt Law Hurts Tennessee Accident Victims

Proposed Change in Seat Belt Law Hurts Tennessee Accident Victims

A proposed bill in the Tennessee Legislature would change a decades-old law that was designed to protect accident victims and protect the taxpayors.

 

Since 1986, the law made it inadmissible in court whether an injured person was wearing his seat belt.  This legal rule makes perfect sense if you stop and think about it for a minute.  Indeed, if a negligent driver causes an accident – let’s say, for example, because he was texting while driving, or perhaps because he was drunk – should he somehow bear LESS responsibility for his actions because the innocent person he crashes into wasn’t wearing a seat belt?

 

Of course not.
… Read the rest

Continue Reading
March 12, 2013
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, Personal Injury

Outrageous & Frivolous Lawsuit Verdicts – Fact or Urban Myth?

Outrageous & Frivolous Lawsuit Verdicts – Fact or Urban Myth?

Everybody has probably seen them at one time or another — The Stella Awards — an annual list of the most outrageous lawsuits. The Awards are named after Stella Liebeck, the lady who sued and won a multi-million dollar verdict against McDonald’s for spilling hot coffee on herself.

Some of the more noteworthy Stella Award winners include:

  • The woman who won $1.7 million from Winnebago after putting her RV on cruise control at 70 mph, and then getting up to go make herself a sandwich in the back. She claimed that Winnebago should have warned her that she couldn’t leave the driver’s seat after putting the cruise control on.
  • A 19 year old in Los Angeles won $74,000 in medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord while the teenager was trying to steal a hubcap.
  • A woman who was awarded $80,000 after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store, even though the toddler was her own son.
… Read the rest Continue Reading
March 8, 2012
In General, Personal Injury

Scalded Privates: The Short (But Real) Story Behind the Supposedly "Frivolous" McDonald’s Hot Coffee Lawsuit

Scalded Privates: The Short (But Real) Story Behind the Supposedly “Frivolous” McDonald’s Hot Coffee Lawsuit

“Can you believe it?  Some lady got millions for burning herself with her own hot coffee from McDonald’s!” 

You’ve no doubt heard all the talk before.  The case has become the poster child for so-called frivolous lawsuits and politicians screaming for silly tort reform.  The verdict supposedly represents everything that’s wrong with America and the legal system.

Of course, there’s only one problem: the legend has outgrown the truth.

As Paul Harvey used to say: “And now, here’s the rest of the story.”

  • The plaintiff was Ms. Stella Liebeck.  She was a grandmother who attempted multiple times to settle her case with McDonald’s.  They refused.
  • She wasn’t driving down the street when she got burned.  She was a passenger in a stopped vehicle.  They had ordered coffee at the drive-thru window.  After receiving the order, her grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that she could add cream and sugar. The coffee spilled when she was attempting to remove that hard plastic lid from
… Read the rest Continue Reading
March 5, 2012
In Personal Injury

Law Talk Series: The Legal Issues in the Sandusky-Penn State Saga

Law Talk Series: The Legal Issues in the Sandusky-Penn State Saga

I regularly follow the Litigation & Trial Blog of Pennsylvania lawyer Max Kennerly.  He frequently provides tips and discusses legal issues relevant to the work of trial lawyers.

Being on the ground there in Pennsylvania, Mr. Kennerly is uniquely positioned to follow and explain the Pennsylvania law applicable to the various civil and criminal aspects of the sordid tale of Jerry Sandusky and Penn State.  His most recent post summarizing the current state of events is a must-read article for those interested in understanding the saga as seen through the eyes of a Pennsylvania lawyer.… Read the rest

Continue Reading
January 4, 2012
In Auto Accident, Business Litigation, Civil Litigation, Contracts, General, Personal Injury

What is a Deposition? Law FAQ

What is a Deposition?

A deposition is similar to a witness testifying in court, except that it occurs in an out-of-court setting.  A witness at a deposition is referred to as the “deponent.”  A deposition usually takes place in a lawyer’s conference room, although I’ve personally been involved in depositions that took place in homes, hospitals, and even over the telephone.

It’s a chance for lawyers to ask questions and get answers from a witness under oath.  A court reporter is present to make a record of the questions and answers, which is then usually reduced to writing in what’s called a “transcript” of the proceedings. Sometimes a videographer will also be there to film the testimony.

Depositions are part of the “discovery” process of a lawsuit.  Each side has the right to discover information about the other side’s allegations. This is accomplished by things like written questions, production of documents, inspection of property, independent medical exams, and depositions.  Rule 30 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure governs depositions in Tennessee.

Do

… Read the rest Continue Reading
December 16, 2011
In Personal Injury

Law FAQ: What is negligence? What is a legal duty? (Part 2)

Law FAQ: What is negligence? What is a legal duty? (Part 2)

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.

As noted yesterday, negligence is commonly referred to as the “reasonable man” standard.  Stated differently, you would be considered negligent if you took an action that most average people would deem unreasonable under the circumstances.  Moreover, negligence can be predicated both on acts of commission (e.g. running a red light) and also acts of omission (e.g. a chiropractor failing to follow correct protocols).

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 simply unforeseeable and/or sometimes unavoidable.

Stated … Read the rest

Continue Reading
November 29, 2011
In Personal Injury

Law FAQ: What is negligence?

Law FAQ: What is negligence?

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 man” standard.  Legal liability is assessed when a person fails to follow society’s most basic “rules of the road” so to speak.

Some examples of negligence might include:

  • Running a red light and causing a 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 file his client’s lawsuit before the statute of limitations expires.

In a negligence case, a plaintiff is required to … Read the rest

Continue Reading
November 28, 2011
In Personal Injury

LAW FAQ: I was hurt at work in a freak accident that wasn’t really anybody’s fault. Does that mean I can’t get work comp benefits?

LAW FAQ: I was hurt at work in a freak accident that wasn’t really anybody’s fault. Does that mean I can’t get work comp benefits?

I got hurt on the job and it’s getting tough to pay the bills because I haven’t been able to work for a few weeks.  I need some help, but my injury was a freak accident that wasn’t really anybody’s fault. Does that mean I can’t get work comp benefits?

No.  Work comp benefits are available regardless of fault or negligence.  In fact, you can receive work comp benefits even if a workplace accident is due to your own mistake.

That may or may not seem fair that employers are liable for claims regardless of fault; however, most employers are required by law to carry work comp insurance to cover such claims.  Plus, there’s a trade off at play here.  There are inherent risks involved with working, and the employer creates, controls and ultimately benefits from the work environment.  Moreover, in exchange for covering all workplace injuries without regard to fault, the law provides a … Read the rest

Continue Reading
October 14, 2011
In General, Medical Malpractice, Personal Injury

Be careful what you ask for at the Chiropractor

Be careful what you ask for at the Chiropractor

Many people visit the chiropractor for an alternative treatment to many issues ranging from back pain and headaches to allergies and fatigue. An experienced chiropractor will spend time determining why someone is experiencing such poor health and offer a treatment regimen designed to address those specific symptoms.  The examination will likely include x-rays and the treatment may involve spinal manipulation. Spinal misalignments can be a major cause of a person’s pain and spinal manipulations are designed to address these problems.

While millions of folks successfully visit their chiropractor on a regular basis for the maintenance of their good health, there are those instances when things can and do go very wrong.

One serious complication that can occur after spinal manipulation is a stroke.  Manipulations of the cervical region of the neck/back can cause a pinching or tearing of the arteries that feed blood to the brain.   If an artery to the brain becomes blocked or ruptures by a clot that has been stretched or from a rotation of the cervical spine, this could lead to a stroke.

As … Read the rest

Continue Reading
October 13, 2011