Atlanta Injury Attorney BlogThank you all for the opportunity to speak to the South Carolina Bar. Just click on the link below to download the powerpoint from my presentation and feel free to email me with any questions.
Chris
Georgia Court of Appeals Tackles Apartment Drowning Case
The guiding principle of negligence liability is that one should be accountable for injuries occasioned by a failure to act with reasonable care. Since reasonableness is the guiding principle for negligence liability, it follows that one should not be held liable when the events leading to the injury, even if foreseeable in theory, are not likely to occur such that there is no reasonable expectation that one should prepare for them. This underlying principle was at the heart of a recent decision from the Georgia Court of Appeals, Allan v. Jefferson Lakeside L.P., which addressed whether the owner of an apartment complex could be liable for failing to install guardrails around an artificial lake on the property.
The tragic events at issue in this case occurred in May 1, 2010 at an apartment complex owned by the defendant. The plaintiffs had moved into the complex a few months earlier, and on this day the uncle of the plaintiffs’ son came to pick up the child and the child’s father, who was the brother of the driver. This was not the uncle’s first visit to the complex. While driving down the access road with his brother and the child, who was strapped in the backseat, he stopped on the side of the access road in order to retrieve cigarettes from the glove compartment. When his brother opened the glove compartment, the driver saw his navigation system and asked his brother to hand it to him. While he was mounting the navigation system on the dashboard, the driver unintentionally released his foot from the brake and pressed the accelerator, which caused the car to jump the curb and go down a slope that led to an artificial lake that was about only 14 feet from the curb. The car submerged, and although the driver and his brother were able to escape, the child drowned.
There is no Tolling During Demand for GTCA Cases
In the “what were you thinking” department, the Supreme Court gave the final smackdown to a lawyer who filed a lawsuit after the 2 year statute of limitations after a bus crash against the Georgia Regional Transportation Agency. The lawyer tried to wiggle out of missing the Statute by arguing that one part of OCGA § 50–21–27(e) says that “All provisions relating to the tolling of limitations of actions, as provided elsewhere in this Code, shall apply to causes of action brought pursuant to [the GTCA].” The lazy plaintiff’s lawyer tried to argue that the “all provisions” language meant any provision anywhere in the Georgia Code. She argued that OCGA § 36–33–5(d)3 , a tolling provision for lawsuits against municipal corporations should apply and, because the State never responded to her ante litem notice, she argued, the Statute of Limitations was tolled and the suit could proceed.
Although the trial court bought her argument, the Court of Appeals and the Georgia Supreme Court gave it the royal beat down. You can read the case, Foster v. Georgia Regional Transportation Agency.
Insurance Companies May Charge Based on Whether You Will Leave Them
Because we handle car accidents as part of our daily business, we think about insurance policies and pricing often. Most consumers, however, give little thought to their insurance needs or even which company they send their premiums to every month. I get the sense that most people pick one company (probably the one their parents have used for decades) early on in their driving years and stick with that company for many years. However, a new push from a consumer advocacy group suggests that being loyal to one insurance company is likely not the best strategy to get the best bang for your buck.
Earlier this week, the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) publicly announced its position in support of a ban on an insurance pricing tactic known as “price optimization.” This pricing strategy looks at data designed to measure a customer’s loyalty to a particular insurance company and whether that customer is likely to stay with the same insurer, even if being charged more. According to CFA, the result of this data mining has allowed insurance companies to charge long-time customers higher rates because they know they can get away with it. Meanwhile, customers deemed more likely to shop around are given a better deal. It seems as though loyalty doesn’t always pay.
CFA’s position is that this price optimization is inherently unfair to consumers and should be prohibited. According to the group’s statement, “the purpose of price optimization is to extract as much profit as possible from policyholders who are often required to purchase insurance policies.”
Speed Cameras in Georgia?
Speed Cameras: Coming to a Road Near You?
Last week, detailed research from the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety demonstrated a new program aimed at saving thousands of American lives each year. The idea is simple- end speeding on our roads. Speed is a factor in over 50% of all fatal crash reports. Curtail speeding, and you reduce the likelihood of a deadly crash.
The program presented in this research concerned a system of portable, automated speed cameras. These cameras have been utilized in Montgomery County, Maryland since 2007. Since their implementation, the cameras have been credited with reducing the urge to drive 10mph above the posted speed limit by 59% when compared with counties not using these same devices. The study concludes that if these cameras were introduced nationwide, more than 21,000 deaths or catastrophic injuries could be prevented.
Secrets to a Successful Personal Injury Practice Seminar Materials
How to Start Your Own
Law Firm
Chris Simon
Christopher Simon Attorney at Law, PC
Should I Open a Law Firm?
- Where will you get clients from?
- Are you experienced enough to properly serve them?
- Fill out a financial plan and figure out how much it will cost you to a) get started and b) operate monthly (your “nut”)
- Courtesy of the ABA
- What are you going to bill an hour? How many hours must you bill to be able to meet the monthly nut? How many months can you last on just that. What is your burn rate? What will it take to become profitable?
- Here is a more detailed budget: http://www.practicepro.ca/practice/PDF/SampleBudgetSpreadsheet.pdf
Trucking Reforms Would Help Accident Victims in Georgia
A recent op-ed in the New York Times has highlighted a problem trial lawyers and our clients have known for years- major reforms and updated regulation are needed in our nation’s trucking industry. According to this article, more people will die in 2015 from traffic wrecks involving large trucks than in all of the domestic commercial airline crashes over the past 45 years- an alarming statistic, especially when you stop to consider just how much emphasis is placed on airline safety when compared to tractor-trailers and other large trucks.
Congress has consistently resisted tougher restrictions on trucking companies, even in the face of disturbing data- (1) the death toll in truck crashes rose 17 percent from 2009 to 2013; (2) fatalities in truck crashes have risen four years in a row, reaching 3,964 in 2013; and (3) the CDC has estimated the cost of truck and bus crashes to have a $99 billion impact on the economy.
Furthermore, while trucks accounted for less than 10 percent of total miles traveled during 2013, the N.T.S.B. recently reported that they were involved in one in eight of all fatal accidents.
Georgia Court of Appeals Reverses Trial Court and Dismisses Personal Injury Case against Officer
The scope of police authority in interactions with citizens has been a commonly discussed topic in media coverage in recent months. Although at the forefront of the modern discussion, the use of force is not a novel concept in the law. Indeed, law enforcement use of force is among the more commonly litigated issues in both state and federal court, and as many lawyers know, officers have some immunity from suit. This immunity, official immunity, is an affirmative defense, and the scope of the immunity is almost invariably at issue in cases brought against law enforcement. As demonstrated in the Georgia Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Vidal v. Leavell, the scope of official immunity is quite broad under Georgia law, a reality for which potential litigants should be prepared.
The facts at issue in Vidal occurred on April 23, 2011. On that day, the plaintiff in this case was at an IHOP in Buckhead with a friend. Shortly after being seated, the plaintiff noticed that the defendant in this case, an off-duty police officer hired by IHOP to provide security, approached a booth occupied by a group of young women. The plaintiff said she could not hear what words were being exchanged between the officer and the women but that she did see the officer force himself into the booth and push two of the women into the wall. The officer was attempting to arrest the patrons in the booth, and the plaintiff began to videotape the incident because she believed the officer was acting too aggressively. Another officer arrived and apparently engaged the defendant to halt his interaction with the patrons. The plaintiff testified that she touched the officer so that he would realize she was recording him. The officer then slapped the plaintiff, and the video shows that the plaintiff then took retaliatory swings at the officer. While the second officer held her arms back, the officer punched the plaintiff in the head and then threw her to the floor, dragged her to the door, and handcuffed her. The plaintiff was arrested for obstruction and assault. Other patrons at the IHOP videotaped the incident.
Uber for Tractor Trailers?
By now, almost everyone in a major American city has either heard of or taken advantage of Uber, the popular, highly efficient, low-cost alternative to traditional taxi cabs and car services. Now, this kind of technology is making its way into the trucking industry, with the goal of improving efficiency for a huge segment of the economy that relies on trucks to haul a majority of our freight from coast to coast.
These Uber-like apps would connect manufacturers and shippers of goods with a trucker nearby who is heading to the intended destination. Truck drivers will be happy because they can get additional freight that they would not otherwise have been able to acquire on an on-the-fly basis, and the shipper gets a better deal because they can ship goods on an on-demand basis. Much like Uber, payment is transferred swiftly between the two parties.
A recent study found that by 2025, $26.4 billion of all truck freight movement will come from mobile app freight brokering. The growth potential here is astounding, and some established companies like Volvo and UPS have begun investing in this sector. Many hope that this technology can also attract younger truck drivers to an industry that is facing a serious shortage of available truck drivers in the years ahead as many aging drivers near retirement age.
Self Driving Car Accidents in Atlanta Baffle Lawyers
Last week, Google revealed the news that one of its much anticipated self-driving cars was involved in a car wreck with injuries for the very first time. Certainly, this wasn’t the first time one of Google’s prototypes had been in a collision, but this was the first such crash that left passengers walking away with complaints of pain.This particular crash occurred when a Lexus SVU made over with all of Google’s technology was rear-ended in Mountain View, CA. The three Google employees inside all complained of whiplash injuries. The car’s sensors showed that the Lexus was traveling at about 15mph in self-driving mode behind two other vehicles when it had to slow for traffic further ahead on the road. The vehicle behind the Lexus then struck the rear bumper traveling at approximately 17mph.
According to Google, this was only the 14th wreck in six years of testing involving its self-driving cars and that none of its own vehicles have ever caused any of these crashes. 11 of these 14 crashes involved rear-end collisions similar to this latest incident. Clearly, the problem with these kinds of collision is distracted or inattentive driving- something a Google self-driving car can’t control when it’s coming from other vehicles on the road.
While these statistics are impressive, the day is coming when self-driving cars are going to be all over the road, and when that happens, these lofty numbers are going to take a hit. Not only will these autonomous vehicles have to account for the poor driving of others on the road, but they will have to make calculated driving maneuvers on the fly that may cause crashes themselves. It is only a matter of time before Google gets tagged with a claim when one of its cars makes an incorrect calculation that leads to a serious injury. This first injury crash is merely a harbinger of things to come.