Los Angeles Injury Lawyer Blog

We hear a lot about frivolous lawsuits and the havoc they supposedly wreck on - well - everything, if the politicians and pundits are to be believed. But, what is a "frivolous lawsuit"? I've never heard anyone try to define what this means. Maybe it's one of those things that we think we will recognize when we see or hear about it.

From a legal standpoint, a frivolous lawsuit would be one that is without any merit. Someone making a legal claim has the burden of proving his or her case. If there is no evidence to support the claim, it could be said to be without merit or frivolous. These cases generally do not get to a jury because there are various procedures the Court uses to dismiss such claims.

Many of us think the McDonald's coffee case is the perfect example of a frivolous claim. What we heard in the media was that a lady spilled hot coffee on herself and a jury gave her millions. That just sounds wrong. Why would a jury of twelve supposedly rational people make someone who has made a frivolous claim rich? The answer is simple - because there is a whole lot more to the story than you probably heard about in the media.

Continue reading "What is a Frivolous Lawsuit? Revisiting the McDonald's Coffee Case" »

When my 16-year old daughter got her driver's license, the first thing I did was explain to her what she would need to do if she got into an automobile accident. I made a list of questions for her to get answers to: Where did the car accident occur? What was the name of the other driver? Were there any passengers and, if so, what were their names and addresses? Were there any witnesses? What was the year make, model and license plate number of the other car or cars involved? Simple questions that often go unanswered in the chaos that may ensue after a car crash occurs.

I also bought a disposable camera and put it into the glove box. Take pictures, I told her, of your car, the other cars and intersection or location of the accident. Today, I suppose, she would be able to use her cell phone for this purpose.

Within a week after she began driving, she was involved in her first accident. She was shaken and upset - the accident had been her fault - but she had all of the information necessary to assist our insurance company to process the claim.

Giving some thought to what information you are likely to need in the event of an automobile accident is a good way to prepare for something you hope never will happen. In the long run, doing so will make the whole experience less traumatic for you and for those you love. In the event you are injured in an accident that is not your fault, the information you collect at the scene will be invaluable to your lawyer.

We all pay for it - for our lives, health, home and automobiles. If we add it all up, paying for insurance takes a huge bite out of our earnings and every year that bite seems to be getting bigger while the benefits of coverage are shrinking. It isn't your imagination. The insurance industry is racking up record profits and paying less in claims.

Recently, the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) accused the country's largest insurers of "gouging" the public on their way to an estimated combined after-tax profit of nearly $60 billion in 2006, up from a record in 2005 of $48.8 billion, which shattered the 2004 record of $40.5 billion. Meanwhile, the amount of premiums being paid out to insureds for claims has dropped from about 75% in the late 1980's to 60%.

To add insult to injury, the federal government has subsidized the insurance industry to the tune of about $7 billion under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. The CFA is urging Congress to let the Act expire at the end of this year.

The insurance industry often cites trial lawyers and the clients we represent as the source of rising premiums. Clearly, this is not the case. The apparent cause of rising premiums, at least as far as homeowners' and auto insurance is concerned, is greed and the unchecked power of big insurance companies. This may be good for shareholders, but it is an increasing burden on the middle class and a problem that needs to be addressed through tighter regulation.

For more information, please go to: http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/0070-2006/upload/Lowerclaimshigherprofitsreport.pdf

I needed to have a physical examination done a couple of months ago, so I asked around and found the name of a respected internist in my community. When I appeared for my appointment several weeks later, I was given a clipboard with lots of documents to fill out and to sign.

One of the documents was a binding arbitration agreement. In effect, the doctor - whom I had not even met at this point - was asking me to agree to waive my Constitutional right to a jury trial in order to obtain health care from her. Because I am a lawyer and I understand why a patient should not be required to agree to binding arbitration, I was more than a little offended.

I told the nurse at the desk that no one had mentioned this to me when I made my appointment and that I objected to binding arbitration. She told me that the doctor couldn't see me unless I signed the paperwork, so I did - knowing that I had 30 days to send a letter to the doctor rescinding the agreement.

I liked the doctor a lot. She seemed genuinely interested in me and my health care concerns. I was impressed by her thoroughness. She reviewed some lab work I'd had done with me and we settled on a treatment plan for a possible thyroid problem. She gave me a prescription and we agreed I would see her again in three months. She also referred me to another doctor for some routine testing I knew I needed.

When I returned to my office, I wrote a letter to her office, rescinding the binding arbitration agreement and three days later, I got a certified letter dismissing me as her patient. Her insurance company would not permit her to treat patients unless they agreed to waive their right to a jury trial, her letter said.

Continue reading "Right to a Jury Trial? If You Need a Doctor, Maybe Not" »

Los Angeles trial lawyers join parents nationwide in a call for stricter safety standards for child safety seats.

The revelation recently, that child safety seats may not afford the protection we as parents expect them to when a crash occurs, was met with understandable concern by the public. Consumer Reports found that 10 of 12 popular child safety seats failed in crashes at speeds as low as 35 mph, putting the infant or child at risk of serious injury or death. Only two models, the Graco SnugRide and Baby Trend Flex-Loc, passed their testing.

Although it rates the safety of cars in various types of crashes and at speeds greater than 30 mph, the National Highway Traffic Safety Association (NHTSA) only tests the safety of child safety car seats in 30 mph front end collisions. The results of the Consumer Reports study exposed serious problems with this limited government testing.

We should note, however, that child safety seats have been responsible for saving the lives of many children involved in automobile accidents. For information on how to select and properly use a child safety seat, check out http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/babies-kids/child-car-booster-seats/reports/how-to-choose/index.htm

For more information on the safety of the car you drive, go to http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/ncap/

People consult trial lawyers like us because they or someone they love have been injured, often because of the carelessness of another person. When pedestrians are hit by automobiles, the injuries are often catastrophic. So, it is worth reminding the public of some basic safety rules, designed to protect pedestrians from injury.

(1) If you have the option, use the sidewalk. If there is no sidewalk and you must walk in the roadway, do so facing traffic so that you can monitor the approach of oncoming cars.

(2) Dress to be seen. During the day, light and/or bright colors make it easier for drivers to see you. If you walk at night, you should use reflective material to reflect the headlights of oncoming cars.

(3) Cross only at traffic signals or marked crosswalks and never begin to cross until you are sure that there is no traffic or that cars coming in both directions see you and are going to stop. This requires that you look both ways before stepping into the street.

We are happy to represent you in the event of an injury. But, we would prefer that you be safe and avoid the need for a lawsuit. For more information on pedestrian safety, go to http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/walk/Safety_Tips.htm

Personal injury lawyers are in the business of enforcing our civil laws when someone is needlessly hurt. Those laws require that we exercise "due care" in our dealings with one another. If I have a business that invites the public onto my property, I have a duty to ensure that the premises are reasonably safe so that my customers are not hurt.

A municipality - city, county or state - generally has the same responsibility, to take reasonable steps to make sure that its sidewalks, streets and highways do not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to those who are using them.

When a dangerous condition exists and is known to exist for a sufficient period of time that it could be corrected but is not, the property owner (or the person who occupies or controls the property) may be responsible if someone is injured.

Not only is this the law, I think it makes a lot of sense. As a society, we want to encourage individuals, businesses and governments to act responsibly - to take due care in dealing with others. It is, in effect, a codification of the Golden Rule. We generally treat others as we wish to be treated. This is a good thing, in my view.

It is better to have a dangerous condition corrected with no one hurt, than to have a lawsuit because someone did not do what the law required of them, causing injury to another. However, the threat of the lawsuit is often the impetus to correct a dangerous condition of public or private property. This is consistent with our free market economy. When maintaining the status quo - a dangerous condition, for example - is potentially more costly (because someone may get hurt and sue) than fixing it, repairs are more likely to get made and we, as a society, are collectively safer, as a result.

Although personal injury lawyers are often vilified in the press, we, at Rice & Bloomfield, consider the work that we do as important - not only to our clients, but to a society which values personal responsibility.

Caps on damages in medical negligence cases are making it increasingly difficult for a growing number of patients, injured by preventable medical mistakes, to access our courts.

When Dr. Smith saw Teresa, a 29-year-old single woman, in 2005, she was concerned about what felt like a small lump in her breast. Because she did not have a family history of breast cancer and because she was so young, Dr. Smith decided not to order a mammogram, even though good medical practice required that he do so.

Eighteen months later, Teresa is dying of breast cancer. The tumor she had has grown and spread. What would have been a treatable disease, if Dr. Smith had acted as a reasonably careful physician, is now a death sentence.

Under our civil justice system, Teresa suffered a serious harm for which the law says she should be compensated. Compensation is intended to accomplish two goals: the first is to hold Dr. Smith accountable for thr injury to Teresa caused by his negligence; the second is to discourage future negligence by Dr. Smith and others in similar circumstances.

In California, if Teresa files a lawsuit, the most she can recover because her doctor didn't order a routine test as he was required to do, is $250,000. After the cost of hiring expert witnesses, filing fees, court reporters and after attorneys' fees of 20-25% are paid, Teresa will receive compensation of perhaps $100,000 to $125,000 for the premature ending of her life due to a careless medical error.

Continue reading "A New Year; A New Look at MICRA" »

Two trends we see in medicine, especially in Southern California, are putting an entire population of patients at serious risk: the alarming increase in the incidence of malignant melanoma in the general population during the past twenty-five years and the reliance by most managed care organizations on primary care providers to determine under what circumstances a patient should be referred to a specialist. In no other area of medicine is the restriction of access potentially as deadly as it is in cases involving malignant melanoma.

Failure by primary health care providers, who do not have the extensive training that a dermatologist has, to diagnose and order a biopsy of a suspicious mole can be a potentially fatal medical mistake. Many or most family doctors are not aware of the incidence of malignant melanoma in the population, which has been rising over the past thirty years and is currently estimated to affect 1 in about 85 people in the United States. Alarmingly, while death from most other cancers has stabilized or declined, the mortality rate associated with malignant melanoma continues to rise.

Although fair-skinned individuals and those with many large moles have generally been thought to be at higher risk for developing the disease, an increase in melanoma among Hispanics, especially Hispanic men, has recently been documented. No one should be complacent about irregular-looking skin moles.

I would encourage anyone who has a suspicious-looking mole to immediately consult a dermatologist for evaluation. The National Cancer Institute explains what traits in a mole should cause some concern on the part of a patient. http://www.mpip.org/guide/suspindex.html

If you get your health care through an HMO which requires referral to a specialist, insist that such a referral be made promptly. Most of the cases I have handled over the years in which a failure to diagnose melanoma has occurred involved general practitioners, internists or physicians' assistants.

Melanoma is easily and successfully treated if detected early. Although there are new treatment protocols being developed for treatment of advanced melanoma, a delay in diagnosis is potentially deadly.

You are driving on the freeway, minding your own business and paying attention to traffic conditions. When the cars in front of you begin to slow, so do you. Unfortunately, the man in the car behind you, who has been following too closely and is talking on a cell phone, isn't paying attention and hits you from behind.

The law says that the guy who hit you is responsible for injuries he causes - to you and to your car. And, while you may not have any trouble getting the insurance company to pay to repair the damage to your car, it has become increasingly difficult for those injured in such accidents to get fair and reasonable compensation for their personal injuries.

Insurance companies make money by not paying claims. Over the past decade, those companies have made alot of money by not paying legitimate personal injury claims. As a result, some lawyers are reluctant to take these cases, knowing that if they have to take an auto accident case to trial, juries are no longer as sympathetic as they may have been in the past to claims of "pain and suffering." Or, the lawyer takes the case and settles it for whatever the insurance company is willing to pay - without regard to the impact the injury may have had.

When we take a car crash case, we know that it may be necessary to take the case to trial - not just to get reasonable compensation for our client, but to discourage the bad faith practices in which insurance companies are engaged to reduce the number and value of claims. If the cost of defending these cases increases dramatically because experienced trial lawyers like us are prepared to take them to trial, insurance companies may reconsider how they handle such claims.

When you select a lawyer to represent you in any personal injury case, make sure he or she has the experience, the will and the resources to take your case to trial if a fair and reasonable settlement is not offered to you.

Birth injuries occur in approximately 7 out of every 1000 births. The most common injuries are neurologic - they involve the brain or nervous system. Many are preventable; they occur because medical mistakes are made. The injuries may range from relatively minor - weakness in the hand or arm that can be addressed with therapy - to extremely severe. We have represented a number of children unable to walk, talk or care for themselves in any way because of medical malpractice.

The cause of birth injuries very often involve the failure to appropriately monitor the mother during pregnancy or the fetus during labor. Unfortunately, because our health care system is under stress and hospitals often do not have sufficient staff, tragic mistakes can and do occur.

If oxygen to the fetus is disrupted during labor and the problem is not recognized and addressed by doctors or nurses, long-term brain damage may occur. That child may then require life-long care.

A lawsuit may make it possible for the parents to get the help they need to provide around-the-clock care and therapy, which can improve the quality of life for both child and parents. We have helped many parents overwhelmed by the demands an unexpected birth injury can cause and we would be happy to help you or someone you know who is coping with this situation. The earlier we get the call, the more we may be able to do to help.

There are more than 60 million pet dogs in the United States. Each year, more than 800,000 people, half of them children, seek medical attention for dog bites and about a dozen die from the attack, most of them children.

Teaching children basic dog safety rules is one way to protect them from being injured. Some of these rules include: never approach a strange dog; do not pull on a dog's ears or fur; remain motionless if you are approached by a stray dog, do not run away screaming; if a dog knocks you over, curl up into a ball and lie still. For more safety tips, go to http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/biteprevention.htm

When you or someone you love is bitten by a dog, finding out who the owner is and getting prompt medical attention are of paramount importance. If you know who the owner is, you should be able to find out whether the dog has been vaccinated, which can make treatment of your injury much easier for your doctor.

If you own a dog, you should carefully check your homeowners' insurance policy. Many insurance carriers now exclude coverage for injuries caused by certain breeds of dogs. You need to know if your dog falls within such an exclusion. If it does and someone is injured, you may find that you are without insurance coverage to defend you or to compensate the victim for his or her personal injuries.

We would be happy to take a look at your homeowner's insurance policy for you, to determine what dog bite exclusions it may contain. Just give us a call. If you or someone you love is injured by a dog bite, please give us a call. We would be happy to help you as we have helped many others in the past.