Confidential Settlement for Premises Liability Accident
Confidential Settlement for Motorcycle Wreck
$705,000 Verdict in Commission Dispute Case
Confidential Settlement in Golf Cart Injury
$1.9 Million Recovered in Pay Dispute
Confidential Settlement For Atlanta Chiropractic Malpractice
Confidential Settlement in Commission Pay Dispute
Confidential Settlement In Dental Malpractice Case
$3.25 Million For Alleged Fraud in Sale of Business
$5.5 Million Medical Malpractice Verdict
Published on:

The first-ever CDC scooter study will  look at how scooter accidents can be prevented. The scooter study was launched in December when three CDC epidemiologists spent two weeks in Austin, TX reviewing incidents and scooter-related injuries during a 60-day period from September to November. They began contacting the 258 individuals identified through EMS calls or who visited emergency rooms with a scooter-related injury. Findings from this study will likely be released in March and could have far-reaching effects as cities such as Atlanta across the country grapple with reports of injuries from these e-scooters.

“We don’t know if there’s something unique about Austin or the population there that may be different from other parts of the United States or globally,” said the chief of the Atlanta-based CDC Epidemic Intelligence Service, which is conducting the probe. “The rate of scooter injuries in Austin may be consistent with what’s being noticed in other places, or it may be much higher.” In Atlanta, the number of injuries per month has increased from about 30 to about 100, said the chief of emergency medicine at Grady Health System, which includes Grady Memorial Hospital, the largest hospital in Georgia. Grady, which is among the nation’s busiest Level 1 trauma centers, is looking at the rise and scope of scooter injuries as a new internal project. “I’m concerned people are riding these things without helmets and on roads in busier traffic,” he said “As opposed to motorcycles, these wheels are pretty small. Certainly, hitting a pothole can send someone over.” This is a big distinction for a number of reasons, not only are the scooter wheels much smaller, the riders are not familiar with the scooters (as they would be with their own bicycle, scooter or motorcycle) which tends to lead to unsafe conditions. Couple this with questionable inspection and maintenance programs for some of the scooter companies and the rise in accidents is certain to continue.

We have seen a spike in the number of serious injuries on e-scooter such as Lime and Bird, especially on and around college campuses such as Emory, Georgia State University and Oglethorpe. Many students rely on these scooters as stop-gap transportation but fully appreciate the dangers associated with them.

Published on:

In a remarkable example of activist interference from the bench, the judge who sat for the jury trial of a police shooting has attempted to set aside the jury’s verdict and reject their award of damages to the family of the victim in the deadly shooting.

The judge, last week overturned a jury’s decision that granted more damages to the family of a woman who was fatally shot by police after an hours long standoff that had been partly streamed live on social media. Cases like this have occurred in Georgia and resulted in large recoveries, mainly due to the police not taking reasonable steps or acting reasonably under the circumstances. Most people refer to this as unreasonable force.

The judge has made it clear that he would become “the 13th juror” and has specifically tried to side-step the jury’s verdict. The woman was shot several times by a police officer in as she sat in her apartment with her toddler son. In fact, her son was so close to her when the officer opened fire, that  her son was struck in the face by the officer’s gunfire.

Published on:

The Justice Department and the SEC are investigating Johnson & Johnson over concerns the company’s baby powder may have contained asbestos in addition to talc. J&J was subpoenaed in the wake of several jury trials that awarded millions in damages to plaintiffs who claimed the J&J’s talc products including Shower to Shower and Johnson’s Baby Powder were tainted with asbestos and caused their cancers. The agencies seek documents that may shed more light on those matters and other suits Johnson & Johnson faces filed by shareholders and pension holders over the situation.

About 13,000 plaintiffs have filed claims in pending lawsuits involving talc-based body powders. “The Company is cooperating with these government inquiries and will be producing documents in response,” Johnson & Johnson said in an SEC filing Wednesday.

In some of the earliest trials that usually set a barometer for future settlement negotiations, state courts in New Jersey and California awarded damages to plaintiffs who claimed Johnson & Johnson talc products contained asbestos and caused their mesothelioma. In July, a St. Louis jury awarded $4.7 billion to 22 women who said asbestos in the company’s talc powder contributed to their ovarian cancer. In the SEC filing, Johnson & Johnson said, “The Company believes that it has strong grounds on appeal to overturn these verdicts.” According to J&J, “Decades of independent tests by regulators and the world’s leading labs prove Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder is safe and asbestos-free, and does not cause cancer. We intend to cooperate fully with these inquiries and will continue to defend the Company in the talc-related litigation.” This comes on the heels of reports in The New York Times and the Reuters business journal which revealed documents suggesting the company knew about the risk of asbestos in its powders for decades and sought to keep the issue quiet. If true, this is indicative or a decades-long effort by Johnson & Johnson to potentially mislead regulators and consumers about the safety its talc products, which may have resulted in long-term harm for men, women and children who used Johnson & Johnson baby powder.

Published on:

In a highly unusual case, a nurse charged with reckless homicide after a medication error killed a patient pleaded not guilty in a state courtroom packed with other nurses who came in scrubs to show their support for the accused nurse defendant. The medication error occurred when the nurse injected the patient with a paralytic medication instead of the sedative Versed. This case is unusual because most of the cases involving medication errors are resolved in the civil action through a Plaintiff bringing a civil lawsuit for damages caused by the error. Some errors are negligence, some are gross negligence, and in this particular case, the allegation is that it is criminal. Obviously, that begs the question: what is a medication error. Many publications have focused on this and there are some accepted definitions.

Medication errors can occur at many stages of the medical care, including writing the wrong prescription or giving the wrong medication when the prescription is correct. They can also occur in many different settings, such as at a doctor’s office, urgent care facility, ER, hospital, or pharmacy. Still other prescription errors occur in the patient’s home when the home health aids give the wrong medication. A prescription is a written order, which includes detailed instructions of what medicine should be given to whom, in what formulation and dosage, by what route, when, how frequently, and for how long. A prescription error can be thought of as a failure in the prescription writing process that results in a wrong instruction about one or more of the normal features of a prescription. The prescription should include, at a minimum, the identity of the patient, the drug being prescribed, the dose, and the route, timing, frequency and duration of administration.

Adapting the definition of a medication error, a prescribing fault can be defined as a failure in the prescribing process that leads to, or has the potential to lead to, harm to the patient. A previous definition, stated that ‘a clinically meaningful prescribing error occurs when, as a result of a prescribing decision or prescription writing process, there is an unintentional significant (i) reduction in the probability of treatment being timely and effective; or (ii) increase in the risk of harm when compared with generally accepted practice’. However, this rules out prescribing faults that do not result in harm, and ignores the fact that it is desirable to detect and examine all errors, whether ‘clinically meaningful’ or significant, since an error indicates a weakness in the system, which might on a future occasion lead to an error of clinical relevance.

Published on:

If you live or work in or around Atlanta, you have undoubtedly seen uncovered holes like the one below. Far too often, the City of Atlanta workers will not cover make the necessary repairs on these hazards, even after being  repeatedly notified of the dangerous condition (Full disclosure: the picture below is from DeKalb County and was in the section of the AJC entitled “What’s not working around Metro Atlanta”).

Dangerous conditions like this are a hazardous condition. When an innocent person is injured by this hazard, they can sue the city of Atlanta or DeKalb County for negligence. However, once a city of county is made aware of the dangerous condition, the injured person can sue the city of county under and additional basis of negligence called nuisance. Nuisance, is essentially when a city of county is aware of a dangerous condition and allows it to continue to be unsafe instead of simply correcting the problem and eliminating the nuisance.

My firm recently tried a case in DeKalb County against the City of Decatur for a serious injury that was caused by the failure of the City of Decatur to properly maintain and repair its sidewalks. The fall occurred right outside the courthouse square. During the trial, my partners were able to establish that the City of Decatur did not proactively inspect and fix it sidewalks, but apparently just waited until someone reported an unsafe sidewalk condition (or, as in the lawsuit, was injured) before they would make repairs. The jury sided with our client and awarded an almost $200,000 verdict against the City.

Published on:

Many people think that workers in Georgia have little protection. While they may not have as much protection under state laws as workers in more worker friendly states such as California and New York, Georgia workers are protected, the full extent of federal employment laws, from unlawful discrimination. One law that is fairly new but which has quite a bit of teeth is the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978. Below is the text of the Act. But, in sum, the act protects mothers from being discriminated against because of the fact that they are pregnant, which includes due to being pregnant, giving birth or related medical conditions due to being pregnant. Georgia workers are fully covered by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 and should never stand for discrimination based on pregnancy.

If you have been discriminated against for any reason, including for being pregnant, and you feel that this is unlawful, call (404) 923-7497 today for a free consultation. No one should stand for any type of mistreatment in the workforce.

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978

Published on:

Sometimes, an isolated incident of dental medical negligence can cascade into a horrible situation which ends in permanent injury or even death. As happened in another case that an out-of state law firm handled, clients have gone for treatment for what would be considered a routine dental procedure such as treatment for chronic decay around and under a crown (Note: this is usually caused by the crown margins not being sealed properly). In a case like this, the general dentist will remove the crown and the post (which is used to provide stability to the crown), removed the decay, and then reinstall the post and crown to complete this, very common and non-complex treatment.

However, in the above-mentioned case according to the attorneys who prosecuted the case, the dentist performing this procedure did not use the same pilot hole when installing the new post. Instead, he drilled a second pilot hole, which was drilled on an angle, resulting in  perforation of the tooth. A perforation is dangerous because it almost always leads to tooth loss and/or infection.

As a result of drilling at a crooked angle, the risk of perforating the wall of the tooth was increased dramatically, which is what happened. The dentist placed the new post into the new post hole, and because of the perforation, the tip of the new post was seated in the  jawbone (maxilla). In other words, the dentist drilled right through the tooth and then place the post in the hole which was coming out of the tooth (clearly, treatment that is below the standard of care for a number of reasons). This perforation of the tooth lead to an infection which lasted for several months. During this time the patient complained of pain and swelling which the dentist negligently dismissed as irritation from the new crown and did nothing to address the perforation, possible infection or other possible sources of the increased pain. The patient was eventually referred to a specialist about 4 months after the crown post was negligently seated, who performed a Cone Beam CT scan (3d x-ray of the tooth), diagnosed the condition as a perforation and extracted the tooth.

Published on:

An Improperly Installed Dental Implant Is The Result of Dental Error

Dental implants must be placed carefully to ensure that they will heal properly and be able to bear the stress of biting and chewing. Common errors made by dentists, oral surgeons and periodontists who incorrectly install implants include placing the implant in areas without sufficient bone density or placing the implant too deep in the jaw so that it impinges on the nerves in the lower jaw or the sinus cavity in the upper jaw. In both instances, this is a result of dental malpractice. These mistakes can be avoided by using an experienced dentist who utilizes 3D CT scans and mapping to plan the placement of the implants prior to installing them.

Not All Dentists Are Created Equal

Published on:

Root Canals Are Common Procedures In Georgia

Root canals are a common dental procedure performed in Georgia by general dentists and endodontists. If the root canal is not performed correctly, the plaintiff in a lawsuit will allege that the defendant dentist was negligent in performing a root canal and the malpractice resulted in the plaintiff suffering permanent nerve damage. In most cases, the permanent nerve damage causes the plaintiff to endure constant pain in addition to the numbness and, in some instances, intermittent spiking sharp pain. While this may sound odd: i.e., numbness and pain at the same time, it is relatively common for dental nerve injuries such as a lingual nerve injury or inferior alveolar nerve injury from a root canal. Not only is this a common result of dental malpractice, often the numbness and pain are permanent.

Most Complications Involve Root Canals on Back Teeth and Women

Published on:

When should you hire a Georgia Commission Dispute Lawyer?

You are working on commission and you are not being fully paid for the sales you have made. Or, your commission plan (the one that your employer made you sign when you agreed to the job) is not being honored by the company. Contrary to what you might believe, it is acceptable, and may be in your best interests, to hire a lawyer to represent you in regard to your commission dispute, even while you still work at the company with whom you are having the pay dispute.

Even though this may be necessary, salespeople are often hesitant to hire a lawyer while still employed for three reasons. First, there is the expense of hiring the lawyer and people often think they can work the situation out on their own. Hiring a lawyer for advice is usually not cheap, but it is often money well spent and can be viewed, in many instances, as an investment or as insurance from being taken advantage of by your employer.  For instance, if you sense that you are going to be terminated and that the company will try to not fully pay your for the commissions owed to you, hiring a lawyer to advise you during this process can prove to be invaluable and well worth the expense. If there is a way to circumvent that situation or to negotiate a favorable payout before (or right after) you are terminated, this is something to consider.  Second, workers fear retaliation for hiring a lawyer to confront their employer.  That is a legitimate fear. But under many statues, an employer cannot retaliate against you for engaging in your legal rights. Often, when you hire counsel and your lawyer assists you in notifying your employer about a possible claim, you are engaging in “protected activity” as the law defines it. And even if your are not, it is sometimes best to hire a Georgia commissions lawyer to advise you behind the scenes to determine how strong your claims for commissions are; or how to structure your situation to put you in the best situation possible to get paid all of the commissions that are due and owed. In addition, if you are protected from retaliation and your company fires you anyway, they have just created an additional claim for you to assert, in addition to the cause of action that you have for the commissions earned but not paid. Finally, many workers simply don’t trust lawyers. While this may be the sad reality, the true fact is that there are many trustworthy lawyers who do their best to protect their clients’ interests and do what is best for the client. The best way to deal with the concern is to interview the Georgia Commission Lawyers and hire the lawyer who you feel comfortable with and trust.