Jonesboro Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics - Most Commented

US Airways Flight 1549:Tort Reform and the Media Bias

Paul Ford — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:51:53 GMT

We can all vividly recall the news of the "Miracle on the Hudson" when the US Airways miraculously landed in the Hudson River just minutes after takeoff from LaGuardia Airport. The story saturated the media over the next couple of days.

One interesting story I saw was on the O'Reilly Factor. Bill O'Reilly stated that he was going to be looking for any sleazy lawyer that would file a suit over this plane crash and indicated he would publicly lampoon him/her if such a suit were filed. He was on the tort reform bandwagon bashing lawyers. He simply assumed any suit would be filed by a "greedy trial lawyer" and such a suit would be frivolous. As I watched, I was enraged. I thought I should write him a nasty e-mail and defend reputable trial lawyers. Having been involved in airplane litigation, I knew there would be a complete investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board to determine how and why this plane crash occurred. I knew the rush to judgement made by Bill O'Reilly was just that, a rush to judgment.

Last night, my beliefs were confirmed. The same Bill O'Reilly told his viewing audience that the same plane that crashed into the Hudson had, just two days previously, suffered engine failures, and had been ordered to go through a full safety inspection. O'Reilly went on to say he thought US Airways was involved in a cover-up and that this plane was could not have been properly inspected and repaired in a 48 hour period. He strongly asserted wrongdoing on the part of US Airways, and that he would continue to monitor this situation.

There was, however, no retratction of the derogatory remarks about lawyers filing suit. He clearly was wrong to make such statments, but, like many others, has found it is popular to bash lawyers. But, as the truth comes out, we learn that there may in fact be negligence involved. Good trial lawyers do just that. They investigate the facts. And then and only then do they file suit. So, the next time you hear someone criticizing a trial lawyer, remember that all the facts may not be known.

Bottom line, when choosing an attorney, make sure you select one who will examine all the facts, and having done so, makes a sound determination about whether a suit should in fact be filed. And when you hear someone bashing a lawyer, remember, he may not have all the facts. And he may be wrong, just like Bill O'Reilly was wrong.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Ford

Hospital Negligence: Yes, Hospitals are Dangerous Places

Paul Ford — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:32:20 GMT

A trip to your local emergency room can be a very dangerous experience. Hospital negligence is of epidemic proportions. And this in not the opinion of lawyers. It is the opinion of the medical community.

Current research done by the medical community suggests that nearly 200,000 patients die each year in hospitals as victims of medical mistakes.

Furthermore, there is little evidence that this stagering statistic has improved.

The 2008 study referenced above was conducted by a review of Medicare patient records, usually the poorest members of our society. Can one conclude that economics plays a role in the level and quality of healthcare one receives? Perhaps. But what is certain is that hospitals are dangerous places and medical errors do occur.

Imagine the uproar that would occur if 390 jumbo jets loaded with passengers were to crash and kill all of the passengers over the rest of the year 2009. The level of scrutiny would be unprecedented. The news coverage would be nonstop. People would be demanding that the system be fixed. Yet, as the 2004 study pointed out, that is the number of deaths occurring in American hospitals as a result of preventable errors.

It is not uncommon to pick up a newspaper or turn on the news and hear someone talking about the problems created by the filing of medical malpractice actions. Yet, when reviewing the studies referenced above, it is clear that the real epidemic is in the number of preventable medical errors occuring in hospitals. And the numbers cited above are for DEATHS, not injuries that the patient recovers from. When those numbers are added, the number of preventable errors in American hospitals each year is mind-numbing.

Perhaps you or a loved one has had a similar experience. If so, I would love to learn more about your experience. It is important to share this information. Further, I invite you to check back to this site as we post additional articles, written by a doctor and a nurse, about things you can do to help prevent such medical injuries and protect yourself and your loved ones.

GOLDEN, Colo. (April 8, 2008)

– Patient safety incidents cost the federal Medicare program $8.8 billion and resulted in 238,337 potentially preventable deaths during 2004 through 2006, according to HealthGrades' fifth annual Patient Safety in American Hospitals Study.

HealthGrades' analysis of 41 million Medicare patient records found that patients treated at topperforming hospitals had, on average, a 43 percent lower chance of experiencing one or moremedical errors compared to the poorest-performing hospitals

– An average of 195,000 people in the U.S. died due to potentially preventable, in-hospital medical errors in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to a new study of 37 million patient records that was released today by HealthGrades, the healthcare quality company

Lakewood, Colo. (July 27, 2004)

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Ford

What do I do After I Have been Involved in a Car Accident?

Paul Ford — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:16:43 GMT

In 2006, government statistics revealed that an automobile accident occurs every 11 minutes. That is a stagering statistic. Because they happen so often, it only makes sense to know what to do if and when you are involved in one. This is particularly true in today's legal environment of advertising, direct mail solicitation, aggressive and hostile insurance tactics, or even worse, runners.

What is a runner? A runner is an individual working with an attorney and/or a doctor (this includes chiropractors) to run down new clients using unethical and, many times, illegal methods. In the information age in which we live, these folks obtain your information from the Accident Report that is prepared by the police agency responding to the accident. They then contact you in a "race" to get the new client.

But not only are certain lawyers and doctors racing to the new "client/patient" for their own financial gain, insurance companies are, likewise, "racing" to the scene in an effort to "assist" you. Do not be fooled. These insurance adjusters are looking out for the best interests of the insurance company, not yours.

So, what should I do? First and foremost, seek medical attention from a trusted source. Your local hospital or a doctor (including chiropractors) you already have a patient/doctor relationship with. The recent death of actress Natasha Richardson is a clear reminder that some injuries are much greater than they may seem at first.

Secondly, JUST SAY NO!! Say "NO" to recorded statements. DO NOT let anyone record your version of the facts before you have spoken to an attorney. And when choosing an attorney, I suggest you choose one based upon a referral or reputation....not advertising or solicitation letters.

And finally, check out this link on the InjuryBoard.com website on what to do after a car accident. You will find some very helpful information in this article.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Ford

A Car Wreck with an Uninsured Driver: What do I do?

Paul Ford — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:03:03 GMT

More and more drivers do not have insurance. The law refers to these people as uninsured motorists. And being in a car wreck with such a motorist can be extremely damaging to you, beyond the injuries you may have suffered. So, how can you protect yourself?

First, you should have full coverage. Both uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage. Having minimum "liability only" coverage can cost you significantly. For example, you only have liability coverage and you are hit by a driver who ran a red light; then to make matters worse, this negligent driver does not have insurance. Because you had liability coverage only, there will be no insurance proceeds to repair your car, nor coverage for your injuries.

If you had uninsured motorist coverage, there would be coverage for both your car repair and any injuries you and/or your family may have suffered.

So, why have underinsured coverage? The State of Arkansas only requires a minimum of $25,000 in coverage per claim, $50,000 per occurrence. If that same driver that ran the red light only had the minimum coverage and you or a passenger were (unfortunatley) seriously injured, there may not be enough coverage to cover your medical bills, much less any lost wages or pain and suffering. By having underinsured coverage, you have provided extra coverage to protect you from these losses.

While it is my sincere hope that you are never involved in a car wreck, you may very well be in one some day...I sure have. And if that unfortunate event does in fact occur, not having sufficeint insurance coverage will only make it worse. So, protect yourself and your family and discuss these matters with your insurance agent. And I bet you will be surprised how little this very valuable and added coverage will cost.

Finally, when driving, be safe and buckle up!

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Ford

Medical Helicopters, Are They Safe?

Frank Bailey — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:22:22 GMT

Medical helicopters can save lives and they can also take lives. Sixteen people have died in crashes this year alone. There have been a total of seven crashes. Thirteen of these deaths occurred in May and June.

We have about 750 medical helicopters nationwide. That amount is double what we had ten years ago.

The National Transportation Safety Board began to investigate the industry after a rash of accidents in 2004 and 2005. It found operators failed to develop comprehensive flight risk programs; operators did not have good weather information; and there was a lack of equipment to alert operators of dangerous terrain.

The F.A.A. is putting new weather requirements for flights and stricter rules for pilot instrument competency in place, but too late to save the lives taken this year.

Can companies eager to profit from flights be sending helicopters to pick up patients who could have been transported safer by ground ambulance? Is this another case of profit over safety?

The crash on Sunday involved two Bell 407 models. Two days earlier a medical helicopter crashed just outside Prescott, Arizona. And in early June four people were killed when a helicopter crashed near Huntsville, Texas.

There have also been crashes near La Crosse, Wisconsin and South Padre Island in Texas.

I rode on lots of helicopters in Viet Nam when I was young. I for one am not going to press my luck and will ask for a ground ambulance if the need arises.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

Are Cell Phones Dangerous?

Drew Dixon — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:14:00 GMT

With more and more people talking on cell phones each day the question arises "What are the long term effects on the brain from cell phone use going to be?" Are brain tumors caused by cell phones just a myth or is there something to the doctors claims that using a cell phone increase one's risk of a Brain tumor.

Contradicting what was previously believed, Doctors now say that using a cell phone for more than an hour a day for a decade increased the risk of a tumor on the side of the head where the phone is held most. The study also noted that children who use cell phones are probably at the greatest risk. Their skulls are thinner and their brains are continuing to develop through the teenage years.

The study showed that people who used cell phones for more than 10 years were 20% more likely to get an acoustic neuroma and 30% more likely to get a glioma. Because cell phone usage has not been wide spread for more than 10 years, the full effect of their usage on the brain cannot be fully determined.

While recent advances in technology is believed to cause cell phones to emit less radiation than they previously have, Doctors suggest that patients use their cell phones less and when they have to make a call to use hand free devices as much as possible.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Drew Dixon

Tumble Tower Infant Rattles Recalled

Jeanie Oliver — Mon, 19 May 2008 16:51:56 GMT

When a post is about a defective product recall, I find that a picture would be worth a 1000 words. For most of us, hearing or reading that a certain baby rattle can cause choking leaves a blank space in the memory. More importantly, who remembers what the brand name was on the toy you purchased a month ago? I am not certain, either, that I would recognize the dangerous item from a written or spoken description. So I tried an interesting experiment. I tried drawing the tumble tower rattle from the description at the U.S.Consumer Product Safety website. The reality is I would have missed this in the toy box. Then I went to Google images and pulled up a picture since the toy is still sold on internet sites. Even if it has been pulled from sales, it doesn't mean that it was magically pulled from the toy basket. Now I was faced with the dilemma of getting you, the reader, a picture or a link to one. I hope this all worked as I think the minute you see it, you'll know whether you have one at home. Or, once seeing the tumble tower rattle, you can inform someone else of the hazard presented if the blue end caps break and choking results.

So to recap:

Tumble Tower Infant Rattle

Manufactured by the Manhattan Group LLC, of Minneapolis, Minn.

Manufactured in China

Danger of the 5 inch long baby rattle incurring breakage in the two blue endcaps-Choking

For a more in-depth description, click on the link provided for the US Consumer Product Safety Commission, go to recalls for May. A huge picture of the defective rattle will be at the bottom of the page entitled, "Manhattan Group Recalls Infant Rattles Due to Choking Hazard".

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeanie Oliver

Senate Doesn't Agree on Aviation Safety Bill

Drew Dixon — Wed, 07 May 2008 17:32:53 GMT

Sometimes party ties mean more to Senators than consumer safety. With the upcoming Presidential election only months away, partisan fighting is at an all time high causing important bills to stall in the Senate. The most recent bill to fall victim to this partisan squabble is legislation to modernize and fund the Federal Aviation Administration including such provisions as money for a satellite-based air traffic control system and a mandatory two-year prohibition on official contact between the agency and former FAA inspectors who go to work for airlines.

The bill, which had already passed the House, came as a result of an investigation showing a close relationship between airlines and FAA inspectors which had led to serious lapses in FAA's oversight. In fact, in April, a failure to comply with airworthiness directives caused American Airlines to ground more than 3,000 flights affecting more than a quarter-million passengers.

The bill also included provisions that would have provided water and food to passengers stranded for more than four hours, it would have strengthened the voluntary self-disclosure program, and it would included an independent review board to investigate air safety issues.

Both parties continue to claim that the bill may come to live again, but are we really ready to wait as passengers until the parties work out their differences.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Drew Dixon

Tort Reform: Why Conservatives Should Oppose It

Paul Ford — Wed, 06 May 2009 09:51:18 GMT

I recently attended a legal seminar and heard Ken Connor, an attorney from Florida, speak. Ken is a conservative trial lawyer. And his perspective on tort reform and people of conservative ideology was extremely insightful. I have thought about his message many times and have come to conclude that conservatives are being sold a bill of goods on the subject of tort reform; and in fact, are departing from traditional conservative values when supporting Tort Reform.

Conservatives believe that the government closest to the people serves the people best. Thomas Jefferson established this core value and conservatives to this day hold to its truth. Conservatives do not want politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. or their state capitol making decisions that control their local school board. Conservatives believe that the size of government makes it subject to ineffeceincy, and even corruption. Money buys influence. Yet, in the support of tort reform, one must be willing to allow politicians, who are swayed by lobbyists, to determine that tort claims should be capped, for example, at $250,000. Yet the politicians know nothing about the particular case. This is a prime example of a government that is not serving its people, but instead is being influenced by the desire to control costs and increase profits.

Furthermore, conservatives believe that money is a motivator and that accountability leads to responsibility. Many conservatives will agree that society sets rules and that those who violate those rules should be held accountable and required to pay the damages caused by the violation of society's rules. Yet the core premise behind tort reform is to limit the amount one must pay, despite the true damage caused. That does not promote accountability. It destroys it.

Many conservatives, when asked, will tell you that if you do not punish bad behavior, you get more of it. Many conservatives believe in spanking their kids to teach them not to do the wrong thing. They believe that if you do not punish in proper relation to the extent of the wrong doing that you send the wrong message. That is exactly why tort reform sends the wrong message. Particularly when it comes to an artificial damage cap determined by politicians. It sends the message that no matter how wrong your behavior is and no matter how much damage is causes, you will only have to pay so much. That is a free pass and it promotes wrong behavior.

It certainly does not promote accountability and responsibility.

So, I encourage conservatives to consider the true impact of tort reform. It allows corporations to use their financial influence in the political arena to promote their own selfish agenda. Turn on the television, pick up a newspaper, or read online; and when you do so, the overwhelming truth is that companies will stop at nothing to make a profit. In fact, many will argue that the current financial crisis is brought on by corporate greed. Unregulated corporate greed. And tort reform is nothing more than another example of corporations seeking to be protected from regulation....protected from the voice of the people....the voice of a jury.

So, conservatives, rise up and speak out against tort reform before it is too late.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Ford

Bicycle Safety Tips and Resources to Avoid Serious Injury

Margaret Embry — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:55:30 GMT

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),

In 2007, 698 pedalcyclists were killed and an additional 44,000 were injured in traffic crashes. Pedalcyclist deaths accounted for 2 percent of all traffic fatalities, and pedalcyclists made up 2 percent of all the people injured in traffic crashes during the year.

Pedalcyclist fatalities occurred more frequently in urban areas (72%), at non-intersection locations (64%), between the hours of 5 and 9 p.m. (26%), and during the months of June (11%) and September (11%).

In order to avoid serious injury or death while riding a bicycle, it is important to take a look at safety guidelines for cycling. The NHTSA provides educational information on how to bike safely, called the 10 Smart Routes to Bicycle Safety. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC), a national clearinghouse for information about health and safety, engineering, advocacy, education, enforcement, access, and mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists, is also a great resource for learning more about bicycle safety.

The PBIC also has a Bikeability Checklist on their website which allows a biker to evaluate their neighborhood's bikeability. In addition to the questions, the Checklist provides both immediate answers and long-term solutions to a neighborhood's potential problems.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Margaret Embry