I am a little late in posting today because I have been busy preparing for a speech and panel discussion in Knoxville. The Tennessee Journal of Law & Policy is honoring Justices Drowota, Anderson and Birch today; I have been invited to speak about the impact that these gentlemen have had on Tennessee tort law. I am honored to have the opportunity to participate in this program.

To get ready I read tort opinions for an hour or so last night and started again at 4:30 this morning. Tort law has come a long way in Tennessee since 1990, and these gentlemen played a major role in advancing the cause of justice in Tennessee.

Justice Drowota retired last year and Justices Anderson and Birch retire at the end of August. They will be sorely missed.

Surprise! You cannot collect a contingent fee if your client rejects a settlement offer and later collects nothing.

In this Louisana Supreme Court decision in the case of Cullpepper & Carroll v. Cole (No. 05-C-1136) attorneys sought a one-third fee of a rejected settlement proposal in an estate case.

Check this out: “Having found a contingent fee contract exists, we now turn to the question of whether Mr. Culpepper is entitled to recover any attorney’s fees under this contract. Pursuant to the parties’ agreement, Mr. Culpepper is entitled to one-third “of whatever additional property or money” he obtained on behalf of Mr. Cole. It is undisputed that Mr. Cole recovered no additional property or money as a result of the litigation against his mother’s estate. Because Mr. Cole obtained no recovery, it follows that Mr. Culpepper is not entitled to any contingent fee.

It is getting worse. A study of patients in our Medicare population has found an alarming number of incidents and deaths.

The study looked discharge records of Medicare patients and used 16 of “20 indicators for potentially preventable patient safety incidents that could be readily identified in hospital discharge data. This tool set of 20 evidence-based PSIs was created and released to the public in 2003 to be used by various healthcare stakeholders to assess and improve patient safety in U.S. hospitals.”

They found:

The jury returned a verdict in the New Jersey Vioxx trial yesterday afternoon.

The jury found that Merck had failed to warn the men about the risks of heart attack and stroke associated with Vioxx but found a causal link between the drug and a heart attack for only one plaintiff.

McDarby, who said he used the drug for four years, was awarded $3.0 million. His wife was awarded $1.5 million.

Contact Information