Day on Torts

July 15, 2009

SVMIC – 2008 Financial Results – Part 2

Our last post discussed State Volunteer Mutual Insurance Company’s $251,321,000 policyholder surplus. This post will discuss other aspects of the company’s finances.

As of December 31, 2008, SVMIC had total assets of $1,324,500,000 assets. (That’s $1.3 Billion). The vast majority of those assets are in government (federal, state and local) and corporate bonds, although the company does have some stock holdings ($53M). The conservative allocation of monies among these investment vehicles resulted in only a very small loss in investments in 2008. The loss on the value of these investments sold was only $1.7M, although the the investments that continued to be held had a decline in value of about $23M.

The total revenues of the company in 2008 were down about $12,000,000 to $246,000,000. It is important to note that the number of policyholders decreased from 16,155 to 15,501, which certainly had an impact on revenue.

July 14, 2009

Use of the Exhibit Stamp in Adobe

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

The Acrobat for Legal Professionals blog has a great post called "Add Dynamic Exhibit Stamps in Acrobat using a free stamp set." The electronic exhibit stamp has both a static graphic element and a changing numeric or alphabetic element and permits you to electronically stamp documents with exhibit numbers or letters. The tool is very helpful when filing papers in federal court.

July 13, 2009

SVMIC – 2008 Financial Results – Part 1

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

SVMIC continues to enjoy wonderful profitability, even as the number of physicians it insures declines.

SVMIC – State Volunteer Mutual Insurance Company – is a physician-owned insurance company that was created over 30 years ago. It has grown from a company with paid-in capital of $7,500,000 to a entity with a policyholder surplus (think: net worth) of $251,321,321.

Let me explain what that means. Policyholder surplus is determined by subtracting reserves for claims payments and claims expenses from assets. Each time a claim is made a reserve is set. The size of the reserve is based on the severity of the claim, the likelihood of payment and the anticipated defense costs. The amount reserved on a claim changes over time, but the idea is that the sum total of reserves should pay all existing claims and all future defense costs. There is also a category of reserves known as IBNR – Incurred But Not Reported. This is for claims that the company "knows" to be out there but have not yet been reported to the company.

July 13, 2009

David Mills Does It Again – A Reader Supplies the Caption

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

stickman-richie

David Mills, appellate lawyer and cartoonist from Ohio, supplied the cartoon. A reader supplied the caption. In fact, lots of readers suggested captions, and David choose this one.

I must admit that I was a fan of a caption suggested by Kpawss ("Surprisingly, a lineal descendant appeared during probate.") but I certainly cannot disagree with David’s choice written by J. Whitney.

Thanks, David, for sharing your work with us. See more of David’s work at Courtoons.

July 12, 2009

Thoughts About Efficiency in Law Practice

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

For lawyers, time is money. For lawyers who charge hourly rates, inefficiency may result in more fees on the front end but will result in a clients over time.

For contingent fee lawyers, efficient practice increases profitability. This blog post from Litigation Cost Control reminds us of the efficiencies that come from the use of forms and checklists.

The post is geared toward hourly rate lawyers working on complex litigation matters, but hose of us who work on a contingent fee can benefit from these words.

July 12, 2009

ER Docs in Arizona Get Special Treatment in Courtrooms

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

Torts Prof lets us know that the elected representatives in Arizona believe that ER doctors should not be held responsible for their negligence unless the patient can prove his case by clear and convincing evidence.

July 11, 2009

Do You Want to Go Paperless in Your Office?

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

Or at least move in that direction? Here is a great post from a lawyer who has figured out how to do it.

An an excerpt:

In the three years that I’ve been practicing as a solo lawyer I have been completely paperless. Before that, when I worked in a large firm, I kept the files that I worked on by myself in a completely paperless form. So, when I hear people say that it’s impossible to be completely paperless I know that’s not true. In addition to my own personal experience, I know several lawyers who have completely paperless law practices.

July 10, 2009

Post-Sale Duties

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

The current Brooklyn Law Review contains this article by Ken Ross and J. David Prince provides an overview of the post-sale duty sections of the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability.

The article

provides an overview of the Restatement (Third)’s post-sale duty sections. In addition, it discusses relevant case law and the impact of the Restatement (Third) on developing case law. Part II provides a background of the post-sale duty sections of the Restatement (Third). Parts III-IX look back to case law prior to the Restatement (Third) and analyze how courts at that time dealt with post-sale duty issues including negligence standards, post-sale knowledge, defect timing questions, identification of product users, the duty to inform of safety improvements, and the duty to recall. Part X examines case law decisions that post-date the Restatement (Third)’s drafting, divided according to whether the court accepted, rejected, or adopted some variation of the Restatement sections. And lastly, Part XI provides a brief discussion of regulatory post-sale duties.

July 10, 2009

Motion to Compel Defense Counsel to Wear Shoes Without Holes in the Soles

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

You read the title correctly. Apparently Bill Bone in Florida believes that his adversary "wears shoes with holes in the soles when he is in trial." He believed that defense counsel did so "as a ruse to impress the jury and make them believe that [his adversary] is humble and simple without sophistication."

Relief sought? The Court was asked to require defense counsel without holes in the soles of his shoes at trial.

Download file

July 7, 2009

West Virginia Rejects Claim That Ford Should Have Used Laminated Glass in Side Window

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

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia has ruled that a products liability claim was preempted by FMVSS 205, a safety standard that it says permits vehicle manufacturers to make a choice between tempered glass and laminated glass in side windows.

The court felt compelled to rely on Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., 529 U.S. 861 (2000), "the guiding law of the land," even though it felt that the decision was "flawed because it requires courts to look beyond the properly-enacted federal statute or law and divine an agency’s intent from extraneous materials to determine the preemptive effect of a regulation."

The bottom line: "the NHTSA gave manufacturers the option to choose to install either tempered glass or laminated glass in side windows of vehicles in FMVSS 205, permitting the plaintiff to proceed with a state tort action would foreclose that choice and would interfere with federal policy."