Recently in General Injury Category

June 21, 2010

Punitive Damage Awards in Indiana

gavel.jpgIn a personal injury case, most plaintiffs are seeking damages to compensate them for an injury caused by another party. For example, in a simple car crash an injured driver might seek money from the negligent driver to pay for his medical bills, lost wages and pain and suffering. These monetary awards are called compensatory damages as they compensate the injured party for the harm they suffered.

In some instances, courts will also award a plaintiff with punitive damages. Punitive damages are not meant to compensate the victim but rather are meant to punish the guilty party. In these instances, a plaintiff can receive a higher damage amount than the injuries they sustained in order to deter the defendant from acting in the same manner again. Punitive damages can typically be obtained only when the wrongdoer's behavior is especially egregious and our society deems it necessary to penalize them with excess damages. To obtain a punitive damage award in Indiana, a plaintiff must show more than mere negligence on the part of the defendant and prove with "clear and convincing" evidence that he "acted with malice, fraud, gross negligence or oppressiveness." This is a rather high standard.

However, with the growing support in the tort reform movement, many jurisdictions have shied away from awarding excess punitive damages and have even placed caps or limits on the amount of punitive damage awards. Like many states, Indiana has adopted its own punitive damage statute that limits both the amount of punitive damages that can be awarded and the amount the plaintiff can receive from the judgment.

Continue reading "Punitive Damage Awards in Indiana" »

Bookmark and Share
May 6, 2010

Bayer updates label warnings for Yaz, Yasmin birth control pills

yaz.jpgIn the wake of over 1,000 lawsuits filed by women who claim to have suffered serious injuries from the effects of birth control pills Yaz and Yasmin, German manufacturer Bayer has updated labelling information on those products regarding the risks of their use. The new information, which was recently approved by the FDA in April, highlights the risk of thromboembolism (blood clots migrating through the venous or arterial system and causing occlusion) in women using Yasmin compared to those in women using oral contraceptives containing other progestins.

A progestin is a steroid hormone used to produce the effect of the female hormone progesterone. Different birth control pills may use different progestins to produce the contraceptive effect. A recent study conducted in the Netherlands, which compared the effects of a variety of oral contraceptives in a population of over 1500 women and was published in the British Medical Journal highlights an increased risk of venous thrombosis for women using all types of birth control compared to women who use no contraception, but observed a 6.3-fold increased risk of thrombosis in women using newer contraceptives composed of the fourth-generation progestin called drospirenone, which is used in Yasmin. Other contraceptives which use the earlier-generation progestin levonorgestrel noticed a smaller increase in risk (3.8-fold).

Continue reading "Bayer updates label warnings for Yaz, Yasmin birth control pills" »

Bookmark and Share
April 9, 2010

Indiana Supreme Court Opinion Clarifies the Limitations of Lay Witness and Expert Testimony

A recent Indiana Supreme Court opinion has clarified the role of an injured party's ability to express opinions about their injury and what a defense medical expert can say about the medical treatment received in an Indiana personal injury case. In Sibbing v. Cave, 2010 WL 744928 (Ind.) the plaintiff, Mrs. Cave, brought suit after she was injured in a motor vehicle collision with the defendant, Mr. Sibbing. Mr. Sibbing admitted liability but argued that Mrs. Cave's injuries were not caused by the crash. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff, Mrs. Cave. The defendant, Mr. Sibbing, appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by allowing Mrs. Cave to give her own opinion on the cause of her pain. Mr. Sibbing also argued that the trial court erred by excluding his hired medical expert to testify that the plaintiff really didn't need all the medical treatment she received.

The Indiana Supreme Court found that Mrs. Cave's own opinion as to the cause of her pain qualified as permissible testimony by a lay witness pursuant to Indiana Rule of Evidence 701. Upon direct examination, Mrs. Cave was asked what she believed was causing her pain. She replied that her lower back pain was due to a bulging disk. The defendant objected under Indiana Rule of Evidence 803(4) and 702. The Court, however, found that the Mrs. Cave could describe what she believed to be causing her pain, even if it does include aspects of medical diagnosis.

Continue reading "Indiana Supreme Court Opinion Clarifies the Limitations of Lay Witness and Expert Testimony" »

Bookmark and Share
March 23, 2010

Traffic Tickets: Admissible Evidence in Personal Injury Litigation?

In Indiana auto accident or large truck accident litigation the potential for a traffic ticket to be admitted into evidence at trial is truly a double edged sword. Evidence of a traffic violation issued against the plaintiff, or lack of a ticket to a defendant, which reaches the jury can destroy your client's credibility and ultimately his or her case. Conversely, getting the judge to let in a traffic violation against the defendant in a hotly disputed liability case can tip the scales in a plaintiff's favor. In order to tackle this issue, consider the following two scenarios.

Scenario 1: Keep It Out

Ticket Issued To A Plaintiff

yield.jpgThe presentation of your injured plaintiff's case to the jury has gone well. Your client made a good impression, a witness described a horrendous collision, the doctors described the injury with a clearly understandable precision. Then, the defense calls a police officer to the stand and aks him if he gave out any traffic tickets related to the accident, and the answer is "yes, I cited Mr. Plaintiff for failure to yield." Although you know your client pleaded nolo contendre to the ticket, you can feel the wind go out of your sails as you look at the jury and realize the negative impact a traffic citation has made. While you try to save the day on cross, the jury has already made up their mind that police officers don't give out tickets unless a person broke the law. To them a police officer's testimony about a ticket is the gospel, to you it is the kiss of death for your case.

Continue reading "Traffic Tickets: Admissible Evidence in Personal Injury Litigation?" »

Bookmark and Share
January 6, 2010

Truck Accidents in Indiana

semisreduced2.jpgAccidents involving semi trucks can involve legal issues which are quite different from traffic accidents which involve small vehicles and private individuals.

Indianapolis in particular, nicknamed the "Crossroads of America", is a major hub for cross-country freeway traffic, with trucks heading north, south, east, west and all points of the compass on Interstates 65, 69, 70 and 74. In 2006 there were well over 1,600 injuries caused by truck crashes in Indiana, including 140 fatalities.

Injuries and the subsequent recovery periods from truck accidents involving small vehicles can also be far more serious than small vehicle accidents for a number of reasons, primarily from the fact that a loaded semi can weigh up to 40 tons. Also, such accidents often occur at a high rate of speed, trucks and semi tractor-trailers are harder to control in bad weather and they have large blind spots. Any and all of these factors can lead to serious accidents.

Indianapolis.jpgAn accident between a large truck and a passenger car is more likely to inflict serious damage such as brain and spinal cord injuries. Such injuries can be extremely costly to the victim and involve extensive recovery and rehabilitation. Currently federal insurance regulations require a far higher level of coverage for an interstate commercial vehicle than state regulations require for passenger cars.

Continue reading "Truck Accidents in Indiana" »

Bookmark and Share
December 9, 2009

Indiana Supreme Court affirms rebuttable presumption for 7- to 14-year olds

Indiana wrongful death attorneys were pleased to hear of a unanimous ruling in favor of the plaintiff on November 30th in the case of Clay City Consolidated School Corp. v. Ronna Timberman and John Pipes II. With the recent ruling the Indiana State Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's ruling in favor of the family of a boy who died during basketball practice.

Kodi Pipes had recently blacked out during practice and was not cleared by the doctor to participate. Kodi later participated in a running drill in which he collapsed and died. The family filed suit against Clay City schools alleging that the school was negligent under the Indiana Child Wrongful Death statute.

The trial court's verdict found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded the Pipes family damages. The Indiana Court of Appeals later reversed the trial court's ruling in the case and ordered a new trial, ruling that the trial court had erred by instructing the jury that Indiana law recognized a rebuttable presumption of law for 7- to 14-year olds. The rebuttable presumption in this case was that a minor between the ages of 7 to 14 years old cannot legally be held accountable for negligence, though this presumption can be challenged under certain circumstances. Had the jury found the boy negligent, the affirmative defense of contributory negligence would have barred any chance for recovery. In this case it is fortunate that the Indiana Supreme Court reaffirmed that Indiana does indeed recognize a rebuttable presumption for minors of this age and reversed the appellate court's ruling.

Under Indiana law contributory negligence can serve as a complete bar to recovery in a tort claims act case. If a defendant is a medical provider or government institution (as in this case), a finding of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff could prevent any and all recovery of damages. However, because the Supreme Court affirmed the rebuttable presumption for a minor, Kodi was found free of negligence. The appellate court ruling was overturned and the original trial court's ruling was affirmed, allowing the Pipes family to recover damages.

Bookmark and Share
September 30, 2009

Birth control drugs Yasmin, Yaz and Ocella associated with serious side effects including death

Yasmin and YAZ are two varieties of combination type birth control pills (BCP) produced by Bayer Healthcare. Yasmin was approved for sale in the US by the FDA in 2001 while YAZ was approved in 2006. Both YAZ and Yasmin contain 3 mg of drospirenone, a progestin, which is combined with 30 mcg of ethinyl estradiol in Yasmin and 20 mcg of this estrogen in YAZ. The estrogen component of these BCPs has been in common use since the 1970s. Drospirenone is a relatively new fourth generation progestin which has been shown to have an anti mineralocorticoid effect. This effect leads to diuresis, (increased urination) while retaining potassium which can lead to elevated serum potassium levels (hyperkalemia). It is suspected that this progestin is the cause of a notable increase in certain adverse effects which include death, arrhythmias, venous and arterial blood clots, gallbladder disease, pancreatitis, liver or kidney failure, dehydration and hypertension. The serious cardiovascular side effect are markedly increased in those who smoke and with advancing age particularly beyond age 35.

yaz.jpgThe FDA sent a warning letter to Bayer in August 2008 demanding a campaign to correct misleading direct to consumer marketing which had been promoting the use of YAZ for conditions other than those for which it had obtained FDA approval. YAZ had been approved for birth control, for women who suffered from premenstrual dysphoric disorder PMDD (a markedly depressed mood, anxiety or tension affective lability and persistent anger or irritability) and for the treatment of moderate acne vulgaris in women who also desire pregnancy prevention. The advertising in question seemed to give the message that YAZ was indicated for PMS ( a much milder constellation of symptoms than PMDD) and all severities of acne rather than the specific approved indications. The FDA also sent a warning letter to correct misleading advertising to Berlex labs, the original producer of Yasmin in 2003. Bayer acquired the rights to market Yasmin in 2006. In February of 2009 Bayer settled with the FDA and the attorneys general of 27 states to mount a $20,000,000 campaign to correct the misconceptions it had created. The corrective ads ran from February through late July 0f 2009. During the period of ads labeled misleading by the FDA, YAZ sales nearly tripled from the 262 million in 2007 sales.

Continue reading "Birth control drugs Yasmin, Yaz and Ocella associated with serious side effects including death" »

Bookmark and Share
August 11, 2009

The Pros and Cons of Structured Settlements

In Indiana personal injury law large personal injury jury awards and settlement amounts for cases such as brain injuries, spinal cord injuries or medical malpractice are often paid in part by means of a structured settlement. The way structured settlements work can vary, but usually, the paying party purchases an annuity from an insurance company and the injured party receives payments over a period of years. The total amount of the structured settlement is general far more than what the injured party would receive with a straight cash settlement.

This arrangement can have both advantages and disadvantages, and the person receiving the payments has to carefully consider whether or not to accept a structured settlement.
writingcheck.jpg
The primary advantage and disadvantage of receiving a lump sum payment are really the same: liquidity. Someone suddenly has a whole lot of cash. Like with winning the lottery, this may or may not be a good situation depending on the level of responsibility and financial knowledge of the person who controls the money. Statistics seem to indicate that most people spend through their lump sum settlements in a far shorter time than they would have received their annuity payments.

The primary advantage of a structured settlement, besides the limitations on profligacy, is the tax-free status of the earnings involved. All PI settlements are tax free, but invest that money, earn interest, and that interest earned is taxable. The interest earned from the annuity of a properly structured settlement is not taxable; it is all considered a part of the settlement.

Continue reading "The Pros and Cons of Structured Settlements" »

Bookmark and Share
July 29, 2009

Using Experts to Assess Future Damages in a Personal Injury Case

In determining damages in an Indiana personal injury case, juries can factor in possible lost future earnings and potential future expenses in determining a figure that reflects the actual known damages in a case, as well as probable future damages. Also, those future damages can also be used by negotiating attorneys to help determine an appropriate settlement amount for future pain and suffering.

Determining future damages may involve the use of many expert witnesses, including some of the ones discussed below.

Vocational Experts - These experts can help determine the future earning capacity and work ability of an injured party. They look at various factors of the future work capacity of the claimant, including physical and mental work requirements; national and local labor market trends, changes, and statistics; employment practices and expectations of past or potential employers; and vocational and job skill requirements and transferability issues.

Most of the time, a vocational expert will want to interview the client, and also review tax filings, educational background, personnel files, and other documents to help get a picture of the injured party's future income capacity.

Forensic Economists - These experts apply economic theories to the facts of a case to determine damages, both past and future. Most of them have a graduate degree in economics.

According to the National Association of Forensic Economists, topics within forensic economics include: (1) the analysis of claims involving persons, workers, firms, or markets for evidence concerning damage liability; (2) the calculation of damages in personal and commercial litigation; and, (3) the development and use of generally accepted forensic economic methodologies and principles.

Certified Life Care Planners - A Life Care Planner typically is a nurse who is specially trained and certified in evaluating the costs of the future health care of a personal injury victim. Their evaluation methods work with the basic principles that funds need to be available to address an individual's future medical needs, focusing on the prevention of complications and value-added outcomes.

According to the American Association of Nurse Life Care Planners, the practitioner of this discipline uses knowledge, judgment and skills based on the principles of biological physiological, behavioral, social and the holistic perspective of nursing science in the development of a Life Care Plan.

Continue reading "Using Experts to Assess Future Damages in a Personal Injury Case " »

Bookmark and Share