Another state has ruled tht a plaintiff “may present to the jury the amount that her health care providers initially billed for services rendered” rather than the amount paid by the plaintiff’s insurer.
The case is Arthur v. Catour; read the opinion of the Illinois Supreme Court here. The decision cites to the law of other jurisdictions on the issue.
Believe it or not there are people who get there news from Pat Robertson. This man, who runs a tax-exempt empire that he holds out as a church, now has called for the assassination of the leader of a foreign country.
What does the rest of the world – particularly the Muslim world – think about America when one of us who is prominent to have his own TV show calls for the murder of a foreign leader? When a nut in the Muslim world does this we call him a savage and a terrorist.
See the words and watch the video of “our” nut here. And then think about the fact that right now in some cave in Pakistan this video is being shown to a bunch of angry young men with guns, bombs, and a willingness to sacrifice their lives in the name of their religion.
The Illinois Court of Appeals remanded a wrongful death case for trial on behalf of a child who died in a fire started by a lighter that lacked child-resistent features. Name of the lighter: “Aim ‘n Flame.”
The court found that the jury could have reasonably concluded that the risks of the lighter as manufactured outweighed the benefits of it, making it defective. The court affirmed dismissal of the negligence and failure to warn claims.
Read the opinion here
The next Vioxx trial in September 12 in New Jersey.
This represents my best guess of what the tort reformers would have wrote if Merck had won the Texas Vioxx trial:
“Well, the greedy plaintiff’s lawyers did their best but they could not fool the good people of Texas. Mark Lanier, who is supposed to be a star of the plaintiff’s bar, was rumored by the liberal media to be winning the case, which only shows how out-of-touch they are with mainstream America. Real people can see right through a huckster like Lanier, who apparently left his alleged trial advocacy skills in his plane.
Sooner or later the socialists who have (temporarily) captured the American media will learn that jurors will not fall for the sympathy plays used by Lanier and his ilk. No – jurors listen to and evaluate the facts. They listen to scientific experts and disregard those who create new “science” for the purposes of litigation. The American people are not dummies, notwithstanding the pabulum that they have been served by a media that assumes they are ignorant.
A pre-trial brief takes a lot of effort, but it can really set the stage for success before you walk into the courtroom – particularly in a bench trial.
Preparing for trial is exhausting enough, so it’s tempting to put the pre-trial brief on the backburner. Don’t. Give the court all of the information that should be necessary for you to win, and then a little bit more. Acknowledge the weaknesses in your case so the court isn’t surprised when you walk into trial with half as good a case as your brief would suggest.
Here is an example of a brief Brandon Bass of our office recently used in a construction negligence case where a driver was critically injured in a car wreck on an Interstate exit ramp. We alleged that the State failed to use appropriate signs and other markings to advise drivers and that the failure to do so left the intersection confusing and dangerous. We used photos in the text of the brief to help her understand the confusing nature of the intersection without having to like flip back and forth to an appendix.
I watched some of the news coverage on the Vioxx verdict and have some more thoughts….
First, Merck lost $5B in market cap in a few hours. I am not sure the losses are over. It is clear that the jury did not believe Merck. The jurors I saw interviewed seemed intelligent. They were just outraged that Merck knew about a problem and tell not warn about it. Any investor who saw juror interviews would be more concerned about the value of the company than he or she was before seeing the interviews.
Second, we all know now that thanks to the lobbyists and the Texas legislature the punitive verdict will be cut down below $2,000,000. My guess is that the compensatory verdict will be cut, too – it certainly would be cut in Tennessee.
Many of you have read about the silicosis case in Texas that a judge threw out of court. This case will have repercussions for all plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ lawyers, as explained in this article from Bloomberg.com.
I do not know if the allegations against the plaintiff’s lawyers in the silicosis case are true. I have read portions of the opinion and must admit that what I read there was troubling. If lawyers worked with doctors to manufacture cases the punishment should be swift and significant. We simply cannot allow lawyers to create claims that don’t otherwise exist. It is one thing to advise people of their rights. It is ok to try to advance the law. It is quite another to create “injuries.”
This case is the mass tort McDonald’s case, folks. You will see it used as a tool to hurt the cause of all PI claims, especially those in the mass tort field. You can count on it.
There is a change coming in fire safety codes – sprinkler systems will now be required in nursing homes, certain nightclubs and 1-2 family dwellings. The changes were adopted by the National Fire Protection Association and go into effect August 18, 2005. You can read about the changes in this article.
Here is the press release, with links to the changes themselves, from the NFPA.
The Vioxx jury has asked to see the testimony of the pathologist. Read more here.
