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:

Today was an especially difficult day for me. I met with a potential new client who drove from Columbus, Ga to meet with me in Atlanta. She had been clearly mistreated and hurt by security guards at a hospital in Columbus. I could tell after meeting with her for almost two hours and reviewing all of her medical records, that this incident greatly affected her physically and emotionally. This woman explained to me that she was “searching for one of the best lawyers in Atlanta” to handle her case. The case is currently in litigation in federal court in the Middle District of Georgia and her former lawyer died. She needs a lawyer to step in, conduct pre-trial discovery, prepare the case for trial and try the case. Due to a number of concerns, including how the case had been handled up to this point, I had to make the difficult decision that we could not take on this case.

As an Atlanta Injury Lawyer, I meet with many potential new clients. Often, they have been seriously injured or have lost a family member due to someone else’s negligence. I have successfully handled cases involving all types of catastrophic injuries, including blindness, loss of a baby and death due to medical malpractice; permanent numbness, disfigurement and nerve injuries due to dental malpractice; and brain injuries, herniated discs, and other severe spinal cord injuries due to automobile accidents. Many of these injured victims are unable to work and came to me in physical, emotional and financial distress. I have always taken great pride in being able to help these clients in times of need.

These are challenging situations, to say the least. The opportunity to help injured people in these situations makes being a lawyer exciting and rewarding. Trust me when I tell you this: the injuries and losses suffered by these accident victims transcends the physical injuries and affects almost every part of their lives. That is why I am a personal injury lawyer. That is why I represent plaintiffs. I can’t turn back the clock. I can’t heal their injuries. But I can help get their lives back on track. I can get them the money and resources they need to cope with their injuries and losses. They soon learn that I am more than “just another Atlanta personal injury lawyer.” They soon learn that I genuinely care about them and that I can play a large role in helping them recover and move on with their lives. Many times, my clients become close friends and we stay in touch over the years. To me, that is what makes personal injury law worthwhile.

So why the tough day. Well, as a lawyer, all I have is my time. We only have so much time and so many resources. As I explained, I practice law as a profession, not a business. I want to help those in need. Unfortunately, potential clients come to us seeking representation and they are severely injured. However, their case lacks merit in some important aspects. Because of this, we cannot take the case. This is frustrating and disappointing to me personally.
Continue reading

Published on:

A 5-year-old Georgia girl died after being administered a lethal dose of the local anesthesia called lidocaine in June of this year. The girl’s family had taken her to Family Medical Clinic after she broke her arm in an accident. While trying to set her arm, the clinic workers gave the child too much lidocaine and she died.

As an Atlanta personal injury law firm which specializes in medical malpractice, we have seen a recent proliferation of injuries and deaths caused by improper delivery of anesthesia. Many of these injuries are caused by dentists who are causing nerve injuries by using an anesthesia called Septocaine. Our Atlanta Dental Malpractice lawyers are currently representing clients who have been injured in this fashion, either by the dentist severing the lingual or inferior alveolar nerves during the injection or by the nerves being damaged by the anesthesia itself. In either case, the nerve damage is often debilitating and permanent. This results in permanent numbness and pain in the tongue, chin, lips, cheeks, teeth and mouth.

Other type of cases that we see resulting in nerve damage are eye trauma cases, and severe traumatic injuries which stretch many nerves in the body which, if not treated quickly, can result in permanent nerve damage.

According to WebMD, there can be a wide array of symptoms related to nerve damage. Which ones you may have depends on the location and type of nerves that are affected. Damage can occur to nerves in your brain and spinal cord. It can also occur in the peripheral nerves, which are located throughout the rest of your body.

Autonomic nerve damage may produce the following symptoms:

  • Inability to sense chest pain, such as angina or heart attack
  • Too much, or too little, sweating
  • light-headedness
  • Dry eyes and mouth
  • Constipation
  • Bladder dysfunction
  • Sexual dysfunction

Damage to motor nerves may produce the following symptoms:

  • Weakness
  • Muscle atrophy
  • Twitching
  • Paralysis

Sensory nerve damage may produce the following symptoms:

  • Pain
  • Sensitivity
  • Numbness
  • Tingling or prickling
  • Burning
  • Problems with positional awareness

In some instances, people with nerve damage will have symptoms that indicate damage to two, or even three, different types of nerves. For instance, you might experience weakness and burning of your legs at the same time. Other times, you may experience pain and numbness at the same time.
Continue reading

Published on:

Many dental procedures can be painful, and your dentist will use an anesthetic to numb the pain. Unfortunately, dental anesthetics may come with side effects that patients are not always aware of.

One the most common side effects of dental anesthesia is the development of hematomas. A dental anesthetic is administered by an injection, and if the needle pricks a blood vessel, then blood can begin to collect below the gum tissue. The result can be a painful swelling. This swelling can cause compression of nerves and other anatomical structures in the mouth and face. Sometimes this can lead to paresthesia, numbness, pain or a combination of all of these signs and symptoms of a dental injury. While this can often lead to these signs and symptoms, not every injury sustained is the result of dental negligence of dental malpractice. To determine whether malpractice played a role in your injury requires a complete review of all records (which typically include the office notes, x-rays, MRI’s, cat scans, and any other tests performed). Once these records are gathered, and expert in the field or specialty as that of the treating dentist will be in a position to review all of the records, the facts of your case and make a determination of whether, in his or her opinion, there was dental malpractice and whether the malpractice caused your injuries.

It’s also not entirely unheard of for ingredients in your dental aesthetic to be absorbed into your bloodstream and travel through your body. These compounds can be toxic, and can affect the central nervous system. When this happens, there may be a number of alarming side effects. The person may feel excitable or irritable, and there may be acceleration of the heartbeat. A person may have excessive sweating and hot and cold flashes. More serious side effects of this toxicity can include blurred or double vision, confusion, disorientation, seizures or convulsions.
Continue reading

Published on:

Atlanta dental malpractice attorneys know that persons with certain medical conditions are not eligible for dental procedures. A dental procedure likely contributed to the declining mental health of popular British TV actor Peter Falk, eventually leading to his death. Falk died in June at the age of eighty-three from Alzheimer’s disease.

He had lived with the disease for years, but was mentally lucid enough to continue to work. His condition took a turn for the worse in 2007 after he underwent a series of dental procedures. According to family, within weeks, his condition worsened rapidly, and he slipped into dementia. He no longer recognized people or objects, and required full-time care. His family had to apply for legal guardianship because his condition had become so poor. Then in 2001, he underwent hip replacement surgery, contributing to a further decline in his condition.

His family struggled to understand the sudden onset of dementia symptoms, and did not make the connection between his dental procedure and the onset of dementia. However, the results of new studies published in the Journal Urology revealed that surgical procedures can exacerbate the onset of Alzheimer’s disease, and exacerbate the disease in those who already have it.
Continue reading

Published on:

It’s not the kind of case that Atlanta medical malpractice lawyers often come across. A Gwinnett County man has filed a lawsuit alleging medical malpractice against his son’s psychiatrist. The case has triggered debate over whether a criminal suspect’s family is eligible for damages in a civil action.

The son, in this case, is mentally ill, and has been accused and charged with allegedly stabbing his mother to death. In 2001, the son, began receiving treatment for a number of conditions, including violent tendencies, from a psychiatrist in Gwinnett County. The treatment seemed to help him, and expert witnesses testified as much during the trial.

In May 2002 however, the defendant in the civil medical malpractice lawsuit allegedly eliminated at least two powerful medications from the patient’s medication program, because he believed that these could be contributing to the development of dangerous symptoms. Soon, the patient’s mental condition began to worsen. He suffered recurrent nightmares, and began hallucinating that the devil was ordering him to do bad things.
Continue reading

Published on:

Many Georgia car accidents result in the accident victim suffering severe injuries which can require hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills. Unfortunately, some at-fault parties may have only $25,000 in insurance liability coverage. This presents a challenge to Atlanta auto accident lawyers. However, there are many other sources of recovery that can be used to compensate the client, the trick is being diligent and finding the money. Because someone is seriously injured, the incentive is great to do all we can as lawyers to find these extra sources and ensure that our clients are adequately compensated.

One source of extra insurance is uninsured/underinsured (“UM”) motorist coverage. This coverage will apply for all of the client’s insurance policies. It is possible that UM coverage may be available under the client’s umbrella policy. It should also be noted that UM coverage will be deemed to exist if the automobile insurer did not comply with O.C.G.A. § 33-7-11 and produce evidence that the insured rejected UM coverage. Additional source of UM coverage may be found on other cars or other vehicles (such as motorcycles) owned by the client (in which case the coverage would “stack”).

If the injured client lives with a resident relative who is insured and has a UM policy, the client is covered under the resident relative’s UM under O.C.G.A. § 33-7-11(b)(1)(B). Finally, if the injured client was in a work vehicle at the time of the accident, the employer’s automobile insurance policy may provide UM coverage as well.

The full text of O.C.G.A. § 33-7-11 (2010) is as follows:
33-7-11. Uninsured motorist coverage under motor vehicle liability policies

(a) (1) No automobile liability policy or motor vehicle liability policy shall be issued or delivered in this state to the owner of such vehicle or shall be issued or delivered by any insurer licensed in this state upon any motor vehicle then principally garaged or principally used in this state unless it contains an endorsement or provisions undertaking to pay the insured damages for bodily injury, loss of consortium or death of an insured, or for injury to or destruction of property of an insured under the named insured’s policy sustained from the owner or operator of an uninsured motor vehicle, within limits exclusive of interests and costs which at the option of the insured shall be:

(A) Not less than $25,000.00 because of bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident, and, subject to such limit for one person, $50,000.00 because of bodily injury to or death of two or more persons in any one accident, and $25,000.00 because of injury to or destruction of property; or

(B) Equal to the limits of liability because of bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident and of two or more persons in any one accident, and because of injury to or destruction of property of the insured which is contained in the insured’s personal coverage in the automobile liability policy or motor vehicle liability policy issued by the insurer to the insured if those limits of liability exceed the limits of liability set forth in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph. In any event, the insured may affirmatively choose uninsured motorist limits in an amount less than the limits of liability.

(2) The coverages for bodily injury or death or for injury to or destruction of property of an insured person, as provided in paragraph (1) of this subsection, may be subject to deductible amounts as follows:

(A) For bodily injury or death, deductibles of $250.00, $500.00, or $1,000.00, at the option of any named insured in the policy. Deductibles above $1,000.00 may be offered, subject to approval of the Commissioner;

(B) For injury to or destruction of property of the insured, deductibles of $250.00, $500.00, or $1,000.00, at the option of any named insured in the policy. Deductibles above $1,000.00 may be offered, subject to the approval of the Commissioner;

(C) Deductible amounts shown in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph may not be reduced below $250.00;

(D) Deductible amounts shown in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph shall be made available at a reduced premium; and

(E) Where an insurer has combined into one single limit the coverages required under paragraph (1) of this subsection, any deductible selected under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph shall be combined, and the resultant total shall be construed to be a single aggregate deductible.

(3) The coverage required under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not be applicable where any insured named in the policy shall reject the coverage in writing. The coverage required under paragraph (1) of this subsection excludes umbrella or excess liability policies unless affirmatively provided for in such policies or in a policy endorsement. The coverage need not be provided in or supplemental to a renewal policy where the named insured had rejected the coverage in connection with a policy previously issued to said insured by the same insurer. The amount of coverage need not be increased in a renewal policy from the amount shown on the declarations page for coverage existing prior to July 1, 2001. The amount of coverage need not be increased from the amounts shown on the declarations page on renewal once coverage is issued.

(4) The filing of a petition for relief in bankruptcy under a chapter of Title 11 of the United States Code by an uninsured motorist as defined in this Code section, or the appointment of a trustee in bankruptcy for an uninsured motorist as defined in this Code section, or the discharge in bankruptcy of an uninsured motorist as defined in this Code section shall not affect the legal liability of an uninsured motorist as the term “legal liability” is used in this Code section, and such filing of a petition for relief in voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy, the appointment of a trustee in bankruptcy, or the discharge in bankruptcy of such an uninsured motorist shall not be pleaded by the insurance carrier providing uninsured motorist protection in bar of any claim of an insured person as defined in this Code section so as to defeat payment for damages sustained by any insured person by the insurance company providing uninsured motorist protection and coverage under the terms of this chapter as now or hereafter amended; but the insurance company or companies shall have the right to defend any such action in its own name or in the name of the uninsured motorist and shall make payment of any judgment up to the limits of the applicable uninsured motorist insurance protection afforded by its policy. In those cases, the uninsured motorist upon being discharged in bankruptcy may plead the discharge in bankruptcy against any subrogation claim of any uninsured motorist carrier making payment of a claim or judgment in favor of an uninsured person, and the uninsured motorist may plead said motorist’s discharge in bankruptcy in bar of all amounts of an insured person’s claim in excess of uninsured motorist protection available to the insured person.
(b)(1) As used in this Code section, the term:

(A) “Bodily injury” shall include death resulting from bodily injury.

(B) “Insured” means the named insured and, while resident of the same household, the spouse of any such named insured and relatives of either, while in a motor vehicle or otherwise; any person who uses, with the expressed or implied consent of the named insured, the motor vehicle to which the policy applies; a guest in such motor vehicle to which the policy applies; or the personal representatives of any of the above. For policies issued or renewed on or after July 1, 2006, the term “insured” shall also mean a foster child or ward residing in the household of the named insured pursuant to a court order, guardianship, or placement by the Department of Family and Children Services or other department or agency of the state, while in a motor vehicle or otherwise.

(C) “Property of the insured” as used in subsection (a) of this Code section means the insured motor vehicle and includes the personal property owned by the insured and contained in the insured motor vehicle.

(D) “Uninsured motor vehicle” means a motor vehicle, other than a motor vehicle owned by or furnished for the regular use of the named insured, the spouse of the named insured, and, while residents of the same household, the relative of either, as to which there is:

(i) No bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance;

(ii) Bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance and the insured has uninsured motorist coverage provided under the insured’s motor vehicle insurance policy; the motor vehicle shall be considered uninsured, and the amount of available coverages shall be as follows:

(I) Such motor vehicle shall be considered uninsured to the full extent of the limits of the uninsured motorist coverage provided under the insured’s motor vehicle insurance policies, and such coverages shall apply to the insured’s losses in addition to the amounts payable under any available bodily injury liability and property damage liability insurance coverages. The insured’s uninsured motorist coverage shall not be used to duplicate payments made under any available bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance coverages but instead shall be available as additional insurance coverage in excess of any available bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance coverages; provided, however, that the insured’s combined recovery from the insured’s uninsured motorist coverages and the available coverages under the bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance on such uninsured motor vehicle shall not exceed the sum of all economic and noneconomic losses sustained by the insured. For purposes of this subdivision, available coverages under the bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance coverages on such motor vehicle shall be the limits of coverage less any amounts by which the maximum amounts payable under such limits of coverage have, by reason of payment of other claims or otherwise, been reduced below the limits of coverage;

(II) Provided, however, that an insured may reject the coverage referenced in subdivision (I) of this division and select in writing coverage for the occurrence of sustaining losses from the owner or operator of an uninsured motor vehicle that considers such motor vehicle to be uninsured only for the amount of the difference between the available coverages under the bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance coverages on such motor vehicle and the limits of the uninsured motorist coverages provided under the insured’s motor vehicle insurance policies; and, for purposes of this subdivision, available coverages under the bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance coverages on such motor vehicle shall be the limits of coverage less any amounts by which the maximum amounts payable under such limits of coverage have, by reason of payment of other claims or otherwise, been reduced below the limits of coverage; and

(III) Neither coverage under subdivision (I) nor (II) of this division shall be applicable if the insured rejects such coverages as provided in paragraph (3) of subsection (a) of this Code section. For private passenger motor vehicle insurance policies in effect on January 1, 2009, insurers shall send to their insureds who have not rejected coverage pursuant to paragraph (3) of subsection (a) of this Code section a notice at least 45 days before the first renewal of such policies advising of the coverage options set forth in this division. Such notice shall not be required for any subsequent renewals for policies in effect on January 1, 2009, or for any renewals for policies issued after January 1, 2009. The coverage set forth in subdivision (I) of this division need not be provided in or supplemental to a renewal policy where the named insured has rejected the coverage set forth in subdivision (I) of this division and selected the coverage set forth in subdivision (II) of this division in connection with a policy previously issued to said insured by the same insurer;

(iii) Bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance in existence but the insurance company writing the insurance has legally denied coverage under its policy;

(iv) Bodily injury liability and property damage liability insurance in existence but the insurance company writing the insurance is unable, because of being insolvent, to make either full or partial payment with respect to the legal liability of its insured, provided that in the event that a partial payment is made by or on behalf of the insolvent insurer with respect to the legal liability of its insured, then the motor vehicle shall only be considered to be uninsured for the amount of the difference between the partial payment and the limits of the uninsured motorist coverage provided under the insured’s motor vehicle insurance policy; or

(v) No bond or deposit of cash or securities in lieu of bodily injury and property damage liability insurance.

(2) A motor vehicle shall be deemed to be uninsured if the owner or operator of the motor vehicle is unknown. In those cases, recovery under the endorsement or provisions shall be subject to the conditions set forth in subsections (c) through (j) of this Code section, and, in order for the insured to recover under the endorsement where the owner or operator of any motor vehicle which causes bodily injury or property damage to the insured is unknown, actual physical contact shall have occurred between the motor vehicle owned or operated by the unknown person and the person or property of the insured. Such physical contact shall not be required if the description by the claimant of how the occurrence occurred is corroborated by an eyewitness to the occurrence other than the claimant.

(c) If the owner or operator of any motor vehicle which causes bodily injury or property damage to the insured is unknown, the insured, or someone on his behalf, or in the event of a death claim someone on behalf of the party having the claim, in order for the insured to recover under the endorsement, shall report the accident as required by Code Section 40-6-273.

(d) In cases where the owner or operator of any vehicle causing injury or damages is known, and either or both are named as defendants in any action for such injury or damages, and a reasonable belief exists that the vehicle is an uninsured motor vehicle under subparagraph (b)(1)(D) of this Code section, a copy of the action and all pleadings thereto shall be served as prescribed by law upon the insurance company issuing the policy as though the insurance company were actually named as a party defendant. If facts arise after an action has been commenced which create a reasonable belief that a vehicle is an uninsured motor vehicle under subparagraph (b)(1)(D) of this Code section and no such reasonable belief existed prior to the commencement of the action against the defendant, and the complaint was timely served on the defendant, the insurance company issuing the policy shall be served within either the remainder of the time allowed for valid service on the defendant or 90 days after the date on which the party seeking relief discovered, or in the exercise of due diligence should have discovered, that the vehicle was uninsured or underinsured, whichever period is greater. The uninsured motorist carrier may conduct discovery as a matter of right for a period of not less than 120 days after service prior to any hearing on the merits of the action. If either the owner or operator of any vehicle causing injury or damages is unknown, an action may be instituted against the unknown defendant as “John Doe,” and a copy of the action and all pleadings thereto shall be served as prescribed by law upon the insurance company issuing the policy as though the insurance company were actually named as a party defendant; and the insurance company shall have the right to file pleadings and take other action allowable by law in the name of “John Doe” or itself. In any case arising under this Code section where service upon an insurance company is prescribed, the clerk of the court in which the action is brought shall have such service accomplished by issuing a duplicate original copy for the sheriff or marshal to place his or her return of service in the same form and manner as prescribed by law for a party defendant. The return of service upon the insurance company shall in no case appear upon the original pleadings in such case. In the case of a known owner or operator of such vehicle, either or both of whom are named as a defendant in such action, the insurance company issuing the policy shall have the right to file pleadings and take other action allowable by law in the name of either the known owner or operator or both or itself.

(1) In cases where the owner or operator of a vehicle causing injury or damages is unknown and an action is instituted against the unknown defendant as “John Doe,” the residence of such “John Doe” defendant shall be presumed to be in the county in which the accident causing injury or damages occurred, or in the county of residence of the plaintiff, at the election of the plaintiff in the action.

(2) A motor vehicle shall not be deemed to be an uninsured motor vehicle within the meaning of this Code section when the owner or operator of such motor vehicle has deposited security, pursuant to Code Section 40-9-32, in the amounts specified in subparagraph (a)(1)(A) of this Code section.

(e) In cases where the owner or operator of any vehicle causing injury or damage is known and either or both are named as defendants in any action for such injury or damages but the person resides out of the state, has departed from the state, cannot after due diligence be found within the state, or conceals himself to avoid the service of summons, and this fact shall appear by affidavit to the satisfaction of the judge of the court, and it shall appear either by affidavit or by a verified complaint on file that a claim exists against the owner or driver in respect to whom service is to be made and that he is a necessary or proper party to the action, the judge may grant an order that the service be made on the owner or driver by the publication of summons. A copy of any action filed and all pleadings thereto shall be served as prescribed by law upon the insurance company issuing the policy as though the insurance company issuing the policy were actually named as a party defendant. Subsection (d) of this Code section shall govern the rights of the insurance company, the duties of the clerk of court concerning duplicate original copies of the pleadings, and the return of service. Following service on the owner or driver by the publication of the summons as provided in this subsection and service as prescribed by law upon the insurance company issuing the policy, the plaintiff shall have a continuing duty to exercise diligence in attempting to locate the owner or driver against whom the claim exists, but such obligation of diligence shall not extend beyond a period of 12 months following service upon the owner or driver by publication of the summons. However, regardless of such time limitations, should the plaintiff learn of the location of the owner or driver against whom the claim exists, the plaintiff shall exercise due diligence to effect service of process upon that owner or driver within a reasonable time period after receiving such information.

(f) An insurer paying a claim under the endorsement or provisions required by subsection (a) of this Code section shall be subrogated to the rights of the insured to whom the claim was paid against the person causing such injury, death, or damage to the extent that payment was made, including the proceeds recoverable from the assets of the insolvent insurer, provided that the bringing of an action against the unknown owner or operator as “John Doe” or the conclusion of such an action shall not constitute a bar to the insured, if the identity of the owner or operator who caused the injury or damages complained of becomes known, bringing an action against the owner or operator theretofore proceeded against as “John Doe”; provided, further, that any recovery against such owner or operator shall be paid to the insurance company to the extent that the insurance company paid the named insured in the action brought against the owner or operator as “John Doe,” except that the insurance company shall pay its proportionate part of any reasonable costs and expense incurred in connection therewith, including reasonable attorney’s fees. Nothing in an endorsement or provisions made under this Code section nor any other provision of law shall operate to prevent the joining in an action against “John Doe” or the owner or operator of the motor vehicle causing such injury as a party defendant, and joinder is specifically authorized.

(g) No endorsement or provisions shall contain a provision requiring arbitration of any claim arising under any endorsement or provisions, nor may anything be required of the insured, subject to the other provisions of the policy or contract, except the establishment of legal liability; nor shall the insured be restricted or prevented, in any manner, from employing legal counsel or instituting legal proceedings.

(h) Before a motor vehicle shall be deemed to be uninsured because of the insolvency of an insurance company under division (b)(1)(D)(iv) of this Code section, an insurer under the uninsured motorists endorsement provisions of subsection (a) of this Code section must be given notice within a reasonable time by its insured of the pendency of any legal proceeding against such insurance company of which he may have knowledge, and before the insured enters into any negotiation or arrangement with the insurance company, and before the insurer is prejudiced by any action or nonaction of the insured with respect to the determinations of the insolvency of the insurance company.

(i) In addition to any offsets or reductions contained in the provisions of division (b)(1)(D)(ii) of this Code section, an endorsement or the provisions of the policy providing the coverage required by this Code section may contain provisions which exclude any liability of the insurer for injury to or destruction of property of the insured for which such insured has been compensated by other property or physical damage insurance and may contain provisions which exclude any liability of the insurer for personal or bodily injury or death for which the insured has been compensated pursuant to “medical payments coverage,” as such term is defined in paragraph (1) of Code Section 33-34-2, or compensated pursuant to workers’ compensation laws.

(j) If the insurer shall refuse to pay any insured any loss covered by this Code section within 60 days after a demand has been made by the insured and a finding has been made that such refusal was made in bad faith, the insurer shall be liable to the insured in addition to any recovery under this Code section for not more than 25 percent of the recovery and all reasonable attorney’s fees for the prosecution of the case under this Code section. The question of bad faith, the amount of the penalty, if any, and the reasonable attorney’s fees, if any, shall be determined in a separate action filed by the insured against the insurer after a judgment has been rendered against the uninsured motorist in the original tort action. The attorney’s fees shall be fixed on the basis of competent expert evidence as to the reasonable value of the services, based on the time spent and legal and factual issues involved, in accordance with prevailing fees in the locality where the action is pending. The trial court shall have the discretion, if it finds such jury verdict fixing attorney’s fees to be greatly excessive or inadequate, to review and amend such portion of the verdict fixing attorney’s fees without the necessity of disapproving the entire verdict. The limitations contained in this subsection in reference to the amount of attorney’s fees are not controlling as to the fees which may be agreed upon by the plaintiff and his attorney for the services of the attorney in the action against the insurer.

Issues related to insurance coverage are complex. If you or a loved one have been involved in a serious automobile accident in Georgia, you should contact an experienced injury attorney as soon as possible. A thorough investigation of the facts of the case can often lead to more available insurance coverage.
Continue reading

Published on:

Georgia victims of dental malpractice should be aware that a number of dental nerve injuries may be caused by the anesthesia injection-as well as from dental malpractice. Paresthesia is an adverse event which has been linked in a much higher reported incidence rate with the 4% concentration drugs known as Septocaine, Articaine and Prilocaine.

Several U.S. studies now strongly suggest that nerve damage to the lingual nerve or inferior alveolar nerve during dental work depends on whether the 4 percent local anesthetic drugs are used. These findings are consistent with other studies conducted on these drugs in other countries. Until further studies indicate otherwise, dentists should consider this higher incidence rate before using these numbing agents.
Continue reading

Published on:

On July 5, 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether Georgia’s Dram Shop Act (“GDSA”), O.C.G.A. § 51-1-40, applies when a convenience store sells alcohol not intended to be consumed on the premises. The Court held that the convenience store is liable, if they sell alcohol to a visibly intoxicated patron and the patron later causes and accident. Florez v. Exprezit! Stores 98-Georgia, 304 Ga. App. 333 (696 SE. 2d 125) (2010).

The GDSA (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-40) provides in relevant part that:

(a) The General Assembly finds and declares that the consumption of alcoholic beverages, rather than the sale or furnishing or serving of such beverages, is the proximate cause of any injury, including death and property damage, inflicted by an intoxicated person upon himself or upon another person, except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this Code section.

Published on:

Over 12% of patients who have received a Depuy hip implant must have an additional surgery to repair the implanted device. This, among other reasons, is the basis for the ongoing class action lawsuit.

Plaintiffs have alleged that DePuy’s parent company, Johnson & Johnson, failed to properly test the hip implant devices prior to marketing them, and that Johnson & Johnson knew about these problems for over two years prior to recalling the implants.

In August 2010, Depuy recalled the ASR XL Acetabular System and ASR Hip Resurfacing System hip implants due to the above stated problems. The FDA had received over 400 reports of problems with the ASP devices prior to the recall.

According to the FDA, a hip implant may be recalled by the manufacturer for a number of reasons. If your hip implant is recalled, this does not necessarily mean that the implant needs to be removed and replaced. In some cases the recall recommends different or more frequent monitoring. It is important to discuss the reason for the recall with your orthopaedic surgeon to determine the most appropriate course of action. However, while this might be accurate, the opposite is also true, i.e., your recalled hip implant may need to be removed to protect your health.
Continue reading

Published on:

Effective July 1, 2011, all children passengers 8-years-old or younger must be placed in a suitable baby seat or booster seat and ride in the rear seat of the car. Drivers who do not follow this new Georgia law will face fines and points against their license, if cited by the police.

According to the Georgia Attorney General’s website:

  • ALL children under the age of 8 whose height is less than 57 inches must ride in the backseat of a car.  A child is safer in the back and farthest away from the force of an airbag.  Remember that airbags are designed to save adults, and since they deploy with great force they can be fatal to children.
  • Children under the age of 8 are required to be in either a car seat or a booster seat suitable for their age and height.
  • If there is not a back seat in the vehicle (e.g., a truck) or if other restrained children are in the back seat, Georgia law permits a child under the age of 8 to sit in front if restrained in the proper car seat or booster and the child weighs at least 40 pounds.
  • Georgia’s Primary Safety Belt Law allows law enforcement officers to issue a citation if they OBSERVE a seat belt offense.  They do not need to stop the driver for another traffic violation first, as in some other states.
  • Violating these laws can result in a fine of up to $50 and one point against your license per improperly restrained child.  A second incident may double the fines and points.

Beyond the Law
Experts suggest several other tips to ensure your child’s safety while riding in a motor vehicle:

  • Children under the age of 13 should ride in the backseat.
  • Holding a child in your lap or placing a car seat in the front seat instead of the back could put your child’s life in serious danger.
  • Avoid using a used child car seat or one that has been in an accident.
  • Buckle up even on short trips around the corner.  Most car accidents occur within a 5 mile radius of the home, according to a 2001 study by Progressive Insurance.

This is a great new law which helps protect children from being seriously injured or killed if they are involved in a Georgia accident. Normal seat belts do not adequately protect our children because they are designed for adults. While children who are taller than 4 feet 9 inches are exempt from the law, the better practice is to continue to use booster seats placed in the rear seats for all children.
Continue reading

Awards
Contact Information