Atlanta Injury Lawyers Blog

In order to maintain an action for negligence in Georgia, the plaintiff must show that the defendants' conduct was directly responsible for the injury complained of. Many times, there is more than one wrongful act which cause the injury. In these situations, the plaintiff carries the burden against each defendant by proving that each wrongful act caused "or substantially contributed to" the injury. In other words, in order for the plaintiff to prevail at trial, she must show that it is more likely than not that the defendants' actions, either alone or in concert, caused her injuries. Singleton v. Phillips, 494 S.E.2d 66 (Ga.App. 1997).

Many times, this issue is fiercely litigated in Georgia injury cases. In fact, this precise issue arouse in a recent Fulton County State Court case and the Judge gave the following charge to the jury:

"In order for the plaintiff to recover, you must find that the Defendant's negligence was the proximate cause of her injuries. Proximate cause is a legal term. When a person's act or failure to act directly and immediately causes an injury, it is the "proximate
cause" of that injury.

The proximate cause of an injury must be more than a remote or trivial factor. However, it does not have to be the only cause of harm. Liability may be imposed when a defendant's conduct played a substantial part in bringing about the injury, even if some other forces for which the actor was not responsible contributed to
the harm in some way."

This is the proper charge and it illustrates very effectively how the jury should view the issue of negligence. While this is not the only way to charge the jury on this issue, it is the most appropriate.

Continue reading " Georgia Law on Proximate Cause An Essential Element of Persona Injury Cases " »

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has just published the results of a study conducted by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. The report has findings that should be of interest to Atlanta car accident attorneys. According to the study, most drivers are fully aware of the risks from hazardous driving behaviors, like talking on a cell phone while driving and speeding, but that doesn't stop them from indulging in these practices at the wheel.

The study is based on a poll conducted of more than 2,000 motorists above the age of 16. Some of the findings:
• 92% believed cell phone use at the wheel was hazardous, and two-thirds said that other people using the cell phone while driving was hazardous to their safety. However, 24% admitted to using the cell phone at the wheel over the past month.
• Two thirds of the respondents believed that running red lights is dangerous, but at least one third said that they had done so.
• 96% of the drivers found it unacceptable for drivers to operate a vehicle while fatigued, but more than 25% of them had operated a vehicle in a drowsy state over the past month.
• Two thirds believed it was unacceptable for people to be driving 15 mph above the posted limit, but 46% said they had broken those limits over the past month.
• Just about every respondent in the study found drunk driving extremely hazardous to public safety, but 11% said they had had operated a vehicle during the past month when their blood alcohol level was close to, or at the .08% limit.

Continue reading " Despite Knowledge of Accident Risks, Georgia Motorists Drive Dangerously " »

According to a recent City of Atlanta press release, the automated Red Light Cameras at numerous Atlanta intersections are there to "promote public safety." As an Atlanta injury firm which handles many car wreck cases, we have doubted the accuracy of this statement, since it was made. Now, with the help of the Georgia State Department of Transportation, recent research shows that this is simply not the case.

The City petitioned the state department of transportation to allow it to keep the red light camera at the intersection of Freedom Parkway and Boulevard. Part of the rationale employed by the City of Atlanta to allow the automated ticket writer to stay was that the red light camera cut down on catastrophic accidents such as T-bone collisions at the intersection. The Georgia Department of Transportation studied the impact of the red light camera at this intersection and concluded there was little evidence that the device cut down on the type of collisions caused by cars running a red light at the intersection.

In addition, WXIA-TV performed its own investigation and found that T-bone collisions actually INCREASED at five intersections in which the City of Atlanta had installed red light cameras. Despite these findings, the City of Atlanta petitioned the Georgia Department of Transportation to allow it to keep the red light camera at the Freedom Parkway intersection.

Continue reading " Atlanta Red Light Cameras Do Not Promote Safety " »

The following is a reproduction of an actual pleading filed in a business dispute lawsuit to enjoin the other party from continuing its unlawful acts.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA

Plaintiff Corporation, Inc., )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) CIVIL ACTION
)
Defendant ) FILE No.

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTION AND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Plaintiff files this Complaint and shows the following:

1.

Defendant is a resident of Fulton County, Georgia, and is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court.
2.
Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of an agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant. Exhibit 1 is incorporated herein for all purposes by this reference. Despite the existence of a valid and enforceable agreement prohibiting Defendant from “soliciting or taking any action to take customers away from XXX ,” Defendant has contacted numerous XXX customers and attempted to persuade them to not do business with XXX . Upon information and belief, Defendant continues this wrongful conduct.
3.
As shown from the facts contained herein, unless defendant is immediately restrained from contacting Plaintiff’s customers, plaintiff will suffer immediate and irreparable injury in that some customers have stated they will use Plaintiff’s competitors instead of Plaintiff after talking to Defendant and other customers will do the same.
4.
Attached hereto is the certificate of plaintiff’s attorney showing efforts to give notice and reasons why notice should not be required.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for the following:
That the Court issue a temporary restraining order prohibiting defendant from communicating with any XXX customers or companies that appeared on any customer lists while Defendant was employed by Plaintiff;
That the Court set down at the earliest possible time a hearing on an interlocutory injunction in this cause;
That upon said hearing in this cause that the Court issue an interlocutory injunction prohibiting defendant from communicating with any XXX customers or companies that appeared on any customer lists while Defendant was employed by Plaintiff;
That upon a final hearing in this cause, that said interlocutory injunction be made permanent;
For such other and further relief that the Court deems just and proper under the circumstances.
This _____ day of _________, 2010.
Respectfully submitted,

__________________
Robert J. Fleming
Georgia Bar No. 263475
Attorney for Plaintiff

Katz Stepp Wright & Fleming LLC
2260 Resurgens Plaza
945 East Paces Ferry Road N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30326
(404) 923-7497

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA

Plaintiff Corporation, Inc., )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) CIVIL ACTION
)
Defendant ) FILE No.

VERIFICATION
Personally appeared before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths, came Ivonne Cranford who states under oath that she is the authorized corporate representative of the plaintiff named in the above and foregoing Complaint and that the facts contained within said Complaint are true and correct.

_____________________________
AAA Representative

Sworn to and subscribed before me this

____________ day of January, 2010.

_________________________
Notary Public

My Commission Expires:

Continue reading " Sample of Georgia Complaint for Injunctive Relief " »

Radiation diagnostic procedures have always been sparingly used among children and adolescents because of the risk of overexposure to cancer-causing radiation. However, the same kinds of precautions are not taken when children are in a dentist's chair, getting an x-ray or a scan before a routine dental procedure. This is in spite of the fact that many dentists continue to use outdated x-ray film that expose patients to unnecessary excessive amounts of radiation.

That is not the only thing that should concern any Atlanta dental malpractice lawyer. According to the New York Times, more and more orthodontists and dental specialists around the country are now using a new scanning device that releases much more radiation than conventional diagnostic machines. The device is called a cone beam CT scanner, and is meant to provide 3-D images of the skull, including teeth, roots and jaw.

The technology has been heavily promoted by manufacturers, who say that it gives orthodontists and other dental specialist the chance to identify specific and precise problems, and devise treatment strategies more efficiently. What they don't mention in all their marketing jargon, is that there is little scientific research to prove that these machines are safe. There've been few tests that have been conducted on the scanners to determine their efficiency that have not been sponsored or promoted by the manufactures of the scanners.

Continue reading " Have Radiation Risks from Atlanta Dental Scans Been Underestimated? " »

Sometimes, a strategic decision is made by plaintiffs to try their case to a judge only and not puruse a jury trial. Some plaintiff lawyers relax their approach to these types of trials. However, a relaxed approach should be avoided for a number of reasons. The Georgia rules of evidence provides a framework for preserving error. These rules of evidence are in place and should be complied with by Georgia litigators in order to allow the appellate court to determine whether any of the evidentiary rulings by the trial court were error--and if so, was it reversible error which mandates a new trial; and (from a more practical standpoint) allows the trial judge to re-consider an erroneous ruling once she has had an opportunity to hear the evidence being offered.

Continue reading " Preserving Error on Rulings in Georgia Bench Trials Under Georgia Code Title 24 " »

In Georgia, the insured owns a bad faith claim against his insurance company if the insurer does not accept the insured's time-limited demand to settle within the policy limits. This claim was established by the seminal case in Georgia of Southern General Insurance Company v. Holt.

This scenario usually arises in a a situation when there is a very serious personal injury which far exceeds the policy limits of the at-fault insured. The plaintiff's attorney will usually send all the information that the insurance company could reasonably need to evaluate the case and make a 10-day demand to settle the case for the policy limits. This is commonly referred to by Georgia injury lawyers as a time-limited Holt Demand.

Continue reading " Southern General v. Holt Holds Georgia Insurance Companies Liable For Bad Faith " »

On Friday, the FDA announced that the maker of Darvon (and the similar drug, Darvocet) has voluntarily stopped all marketing of the drugs in the United States. Both drugs have been accused of causing deadly side-effects for decades. The reason for the current recall: A cardiac study conducted by the manufacturer at the FDA's bequest showed that Darvon caused irregular heart rhythms. In other words, the doses of Darvon and Darvocet normally prescribed by doctors and taken by patients is harmful to the heart. Couple this with the unacceptable propensity of patients to abuse the drug (i.e., taking more than the prescribed amount) and the risk of heart damage is simply too great to keep the drug on the market.

This recall follows bans in England and the European Union based on a different reason: The long-held belief that the use of Darvon and Darvocet lead to unacceptable risks of suicides and overdoses. Many safety advocates in the U.S. have been calling for the ban of these drugs since at least 1978, but the FDA has refused until now.

Continue reading " Darvon Painkillers Pulled From Market by Order of FDA " »

On November 2, 2010, Georgia voters approved a constitutional amendment which allows for much stricter constraints of trade for Georgia workers. The new law allows Georgia courts to "blue pencil" restrictive covenants in employment contracts. In other words, no matter how onerous and restrictive an employer writes a non-compete clause or non-solicitation clause, it will now be enforced to the extent that the law allows. This changes the current law which calls for the entire restrictive covenant to be held unenforceable, if any portions of it were beyond the scope of what was permissible (either overly broad in time, geography or scope).

The new law is suspect because the drafters of Georgia House Bill 173 stated it would be effective on November 3, 2010. However, the Georgia Constitution states that the new laws such as this one must take effect on January 1 of the following year.

Continue reading " New Georgia Law on Non-compete Agreements Exposed to Legal Challenge " »

Head injuries are some of the most serious injuries arising out of an Atlanta car accident. These have the potential to leave behind long-term and life altering consequences, unless treatment is begun immediately.

A head injury can refer to any injury that involves the scalp, skull or brain. Atlanta car accident lawyers come across both open injuries where the skull is broken, or closed injuries, where there is no penetration of the skull.

Head injuries can be of many types.

Concussions
These are the most common head injuries. While concussions have been underestimated as brain injuries in the past, new research shows that these mild brain injuries must be treated with plenty of rest. A person who suffers a concussion, and suffers a second head injury soon after, is more likely to suffer complications. Avid sports fans are well-aware that many football players are forced to retire after receiving too many concussions. The reason: once you have suffered one major concussion, subsequent concussions tend to cause much more severe damage.

Contusions or bruises on the brain

Subdural hematoma or bleeding in the brain. These are serious brain injuries and can even lead to death. Symptoms include slurring, confused speech, headaches, lethargic, confusion, nausea, vomiting, weakness, visual disturbances, and seizures.

Subarachnoid hemorrhage refers to bleeding in the subarachnoid space, which is the area between the brain and the tissues that cover the brain. A person who suffers a subarachnoid hemorrhage may suddenly lose consciousness. There may be loss of sensation, and difficulty in movement. The person may display personality and mood changes. He may suffer from stiffness in the neck, nausea, vomiting, and seizures. He may develop double vision, blind spots or temporary loss of vision. His eyelids may begin to droop, and the pupils may be of unequal size.

Continue reading " Head Injuries Can Have Life Altering Consequences " »

Car accidents are difficult situations, even when everyone involved acts responsibly. The recent trial of Aimee Michaels — the Atlanta driver in the so-called Easter Crash — is a sobering reminder of the importance of knowing your obligations as a driver before you find yourself in a potentially overwhelming situation.

Under Georgia Law, if a person fails to stop after being part of an accident where someone is seriously injured, they escalate their legal difficulties from a possible civil suit into the realm of criminal law. A hit and run resulting in serious injury or death is a felony.

In the event that you are involved in an Atlanta accident, Georgia law requires that you stop immediately at the scene, or as close as possible. This is true for any driver involved, not just drivers of the primary cars in the crash. Bellamy v. Edwards, 181 Ga. App. 887, 354 S.E.2d 434 (1987). Drivers should exchange information, including name, address, and registration numbers. If someone is hurt, it is the responsibility of the other driver to offer reasonable assistance — including notification of emergency services such and calling the police, or even transporting the injured person to the nearest emergency room.

Continue reading " Georgia Legal Requirements For Those Involved in Serious Car Accidents " »