Tennessee Injury Law Center

February 23, 2014

Graco Child Seats Recalled

Roughly 3.8 million child seats are being recalled by Graco because the buckles may fail to unlatch. Graco has explained the buckles get jammed by food particles and sticky drinks like juice getting into the latch area. What is interesting about the recall is that Graco is not recalling another 1.8 million child seats that have the same buckle. Graco defends this decision by pointing out that the non-recalled child seats are rear-facing and infants do not get food or drinks on their seats.

Say what? It seems the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) is not buying that explanation either. And why should they when both the NHTSA and Graco have received customer complaints about the rear-facing buckles and harnesses. In a harsh response, the NHTSA accused Graco of providing “incomplete and misleading” documents in response to the investigation.

If you have a Graco child seat, go to the NHTA’s website for full recall information. Obviously, these child seats could pose a serious risk of harm in certain types of car accidents. Even in the absence of an accident, some parents have been forced to cut the straps of the car seat in order to be able to remove their child.

February 21, 2014

Do You Know the Number One Cause of Spinal Cord Injuries And Who Is Most At Risk?

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Surprisingly, falls have now overtaken car accidents as the number one cause of spinal cord injuries. And, the average age for a spinal cord injury victim has risen by a decade to age 51. Most researchers believe there is a combination of factors at play in these new findings: (1) older Americans are more active than ever; (2) better safety protection in the form of seat belts and airbags; and (3) the increased age of the general population.

While the most common cause and the average age for a spinal cord injury have changed, one thing remains constant: spinal cord injuries exact a devastating toll on the victim and the entire familiy. And the burdens are not just the obvious physical limitations but also financial and emotional costs. From 2007 to 2009, just a two year period, the cost of emergency room charges for spinal cord injuries in the U.S. totaled $1.6 billion. And emergency room costs for victims and their families is just the beginning. Spinal cord injury victims require a lifetime of care and the cost of that care can range from $1million to $5 million, according to The National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center.

Emotionally, the change in lifestyle and limitations can understandably lead to depression and anger for the victim and family members. Economic difficulties associated with the tremendous medical care and the loss of a wage earner for the family can cause anxiety and fear.

February 20, 2014

Wine in Grocery Stores and Liquor Liability in Tennessee

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Today, Tennessee saw a historic change in its liquor laws. The House passed a bill to allow grocery stores to sell wine. The Senate had previously passed its version of the bill last month and proponents anticipate the Senate will approve the minor changes made by the House. As for the final step, Governor Haslam is expected to sign the bill as he has previously indicated he would defer to the Legislature on this issue.

Whether you are for or against the passage of the law, one thing is for sure: the privilege of being able to sell wine also carries some responsibility. Let’s review the basics of Tennessee liquor liability law, which were passed by the Tennessee Legislature. The statutes make it quite clear that the consumption of alcohol, rather than the furnishing of it, is the proximate cause of any injury. What does this mean? It means if you go to the grocery store, buy and then drink a bottle of wine and somehow injure yourself due to your intoxication, then you have no claim against the grocery store who sold you the wine. And the law goes one step further: if you go to the grocery store, buy and drink a bottle of wine and then cause a car accident in which you hurt someone else, the grocery store is still not liable.

But, there are exceptions to these general rules: you may have a claim against a grocery store if the grocery store sold wine to a minor or if the grocery store sold wine to an “obviously intoxicated” person. Proof of one of these exceptions must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a much higher burden than the ordinary civil case. In most civil cases, the injured party must only prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

February 20, 2014

More Sex Abuse Settlements By The Roman Catholic Church

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

The Diocese of San Bernardino has announced a $3.8 million settlement in two lawsuits which alleged a former Catholic priest sexually abused two children. The priest at the center of the scandal is now 60 years old and defrocked. He pled guilty to lewd and lascivious acts with a 12 year old boy. He served a mere eight months in jail for his crimes.

This was a criminal act by a sick man. The fact that he was a priest is not a mitigating factor but instead an aggravating one as church should be the safest place a child can be outside the care of his or her own family. At The Law Offices of John Day, P.C., we are passionate about the rights of victims of sexual abuse. We have successfully made new law in the Tennessee Supreme Court in a sexual abuse case against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Nashville, and John Day has been asked to speak at a seminar hosted by The National Center for Crime Victims to help educate crime victim advocates about protecting victims’ rights through the civil court system.

If you would like to confidentially discuss a sexual abuse case, simply fill out this form to schedule an appointment or call us anytime at 615-742-4880 or toll-free at 866-812-8787 for a free, no-obligation consultation with one of our award-winning lawyers. You can meet with either a male or female lawyer, whichever makes you feel most comfortable to discuss your case.

February 14, 2014

Memphis, Shelby County Trial and Verdict Statistics in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

It is Friday and we are covering verdict and trial statistics for the last of the largest four cities in Tennessee — Memphis/Shelby County, the Thirtieth Judicial District.

Last fiscal year, 1,747 new tort cases (lawsuits for personal injury or wrongful death) were filed in Shelby County courts and 1,817 were resolved. Shelby County had more trials than any other county in the State with 76 — 53 jury trials and 23 bench trials. Of those 76 trials, the injured party won 44 of the cases. In the other 32 cases, the injured party did not receive any compensation whatsoever.

In terms of verdicts, the total dollar amount awarded in all 44 trials was $10,891,198.00 for an average award of $247,527.00. The verdicts can be broken down even further: 37 of the trials resulted in verdicts of less than $100,000.00; 5 of the trials resulted in verdicts ranging between $100,000.00 to $999,999.99; and 2 of the trials resulted in verdicts that exceeded One Million Dollars. Obviously, a relatively small number of large verdicts had a significant impact on the average verdict figure.

February 13, 2014

Chattanooga Trial and Verdict Statistics in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Today, we are looking at trial and verdict information for Chattanooga/Hamilton County, which is the Eleventh Judicial District. The Administrative Office of the Courts’ report reveals 711 tort lawsuits (claims for personal injury or wrongful death) were filed in Chattanooga during the last fiscal year and Chattanooga courts disposed of 693 tort cases. During the last year, 37 cases went to trial in Chattanooga with 21 jury trials and 16 bench or judge trials. Of the 37 cases went that actually went to trial, only 10 resulted in the injured party receiving any money. So in more than 2/3 of the trials, the injured party received nothing.

And in the cases the injured party actually won, the verdict news is similarly bleak. Not a single case resulted in a verdict of $100,000.00 or more. The total dollars awarded for all ten cases was $303,648.00 so the average award in each case was $30.365.00. Of course, we do not know the facts of each one of those cases but we do know this: there is a reason they call it a trial. It is hard, emotionally-draining and exhausting for the parties and their attorneys. And most injured people who go through a trial expect their recovery to be more than that, and it should be if they have serious injuries.

We really can not emphasize enough how important it is for you to select an experienced and well-qualified lawyer. Of course, we hope you hire us and we believe our awards and client testimonials speak for themselves. But even if you do not hire us, use this information sheet to help you find a skilled lawyer who can help maximize your recovery. If you would like to schedule a free and no-obligation consultation, simply fill out this form or call us anytime at 615-742-4880 or toll-free at 866-812-8787. We handle all personal injury and wrongful death cases on a contingency basis so we only get paid if we recover money for you.

February 12, 2014

Knoxville, Tennessee Injury and Wrongful Death Verdict Statistics

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

This week, we are examining trial and case statistics from the Administrative Office of the Court’s yearly report, Annual Report of the Tennessee Judiciary for the Fiscal Year 2012-2013. Today, we take a closer look at Knoxville.

Last year, 938 tort lawsuits (claims for personal injury or wrongful death) were filed in Knox County. 38 cases went to trial — 23 of them were jury trials and 15 were judge or bench trials. Of the 38 case that went to trial, the injured party recovered money in less than half of those trials (18 of 38).

Of the 18 cases that actually went to trial and resulted in a verdict for the injured or deceased party, 14 of those cases had an award in the range of $0 to $99,999.99. Three cases had verdicts in the range of $100,000.00 to $999,999.99 and only one case had a verdict in excess of $1,000,000.00. The average award for verdicts in Knox County, Tennessee was $149,205.00, a number driven significantly upward by the one verdict that was in excess of $1,000,000.

February 11, 2014

Injury and Death Trial and Verdict Statistics for Nashville, Tennessee

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Last week, we told you that the Administrative Office of the Courts had published the Annual Report of the Tennessee Judiciary for the Fiscal Year 2012-2013. The report provides information on the number of tort filings (lawsuits alleging personal injury or wrongful death), the number of trials and verdict information.

Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee are in the Twentieth Judicial District. For the year ending June 30, 2013, 1,571 tort cases were filed in the Twentieth Judicial District and 1,441 tort cases were disposed of by either trial, motion, dismissal, etc. Only 66 cases went to trial in Davidson County – 35 were jury trials and 31 were bench or judge trials. Of the 66 cases that went to trial, 43 resulted in a verdict for the injured party. Here is the breakdown of the awards:

· The vast majority of the cases (34 of them) resulted in verdicts that were less than $100,000.00.

February 7, 2014

Statistics on Trial Results in Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice Cases in Tennessee

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

The Administrative Office of the Courts has released the Annual Report of the Tennessee Judiciary for the Fiscal Year 2012-2013. The report provides detailed information on each judicial district in the state. For instance, the report indicates the number of tort cases (claims for personal injury or wrongful death) filed in each district. It also provides information on how quickly cases are being disposed of in each district, the number of jury trials, the number of bench or judge trials, the average jury award, etc.

At The Law Offices of John Day, P.C., we carefully review this report looking for trends in tort cases or in a particular judicial district. Over the next few days, we will be posting summaries from the report about the big four: Nashville, Memphis, Chattanooga and Knoxville. And over the next few weeks, we will be updating our website to reflect the new data for individual judicial districts.

But for today, here are the statewide numbers for the fiscal year 2012-2013:

February 6, 2014

Negligent Hiring and Due Diligence as an Employer

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

In Manhattan this week, jurors are debating whether Matthew Martoma is guilty of insider trading while at SAC Capital Advisors, a prominent hedge-fund. For an injury lawyer, Mr. Martoma’s trial raises an interesting question: what kind of background searches are being performed these days?

I ask this question because Mr. Martoma’s background contains some serious red flags. While attending Harvard Law School, Mr. Martoma forged his transcript in an attempt to get a clerkship with a federal judge. When the fraud was discovered, he was expelled from Harvard. Thereafter, he changed his name — prior to that time, he had been Mr. Ajai Mathew Thomas. Despite being expelled from Harvard, Mr. Thomas aka Mr. Martoma was admitted to Stanford, a highly-competitive school that has its choice of candidates and certainly does not need to take disgraced students out of some type of financial necessity. And after leaving Stanford, Mr. Martoma found his was to SAC Capital Advisors. So one is left to wonder if Stanford or SAC Capital Advisors performed any type of due diligence in researching Mr. Martoma’s background before accepting him as a student or hiring him as an employee.

Failing to perform a background search in some instances can result in liability. For instance, if a daycare hires someone with a history of a sexual abuse and then the employee sexually abuses a child at the daycare, then the daycare could be held liable for the assault under a theory of negligent hiring. By failing to perform due diligence before hiring the employee, the daycare placed a person unsuited for the job in a position where they could inflict harm on a student in their care.