Lawyers USA published an article this month entitled, "Jurors increasingly seek recusal for financial hardship". The article, written by Correy Stephenson, explored the fact that people are trying to avoid jury duty because of the economy.

Anne Reed, a trial lawyer and jury consultant, noted that during a recent trial “hands went up all over the box” when asked about financial hardship.

While many people are struggling, serving on a jury is a very important civic duty. During a recent car wreck personal injury trial in Fulton County before Judge Brenda Cole, I was very pleased by the jury who answered questions regarding jury service. Only a few of the 40 present sought to be excused because of financial hardship. I'm hopeful that the economy will improve shortly. For now, jury duty is a sacrifice that is greatly appreciated.

Labels: Fulton County, Georgia, jury, verdicts

In an April 1, 2009 NY Times article, "A World of Hurt - Exams of Injured Workers Fuel Mutual Mistrust" by By N. R. KLEINFIELD - the insurance doctor examination was assessed.

Dr. Hershel Samuels, an independent medical examiner in the New York state workers’ compensation system stated, “If you did a truly pure report you’d be out on your ears and the insurers wouldn’t pay for it. You have to give them what they want, or you’re in Florida. That’s the game, baby.”

For the full article - see http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/nyregion/01comp.html?_r=1

The above is very disappointing news for the majority of folks that are injured due to someone else's negligence. However, there are a few doctors in Georgia who make a lot of money testifying on behalf of insurance companies in personal injury lawsuits. Injury victims need experienced injury attorneys who are comfortable asking the right questions to show that the doctor may have ulterior motives for what is contained in his report.

Labels: Georgia personal injury lawyer, insurance claims, negligence, personal injury

http://www.abanet.org/tips/contingent/MedMalReport092004DCW2.pdf

The ABA prepared a report on the benefits of contingency attorney fees. In a 66 page report, it concluded that

Limitations on attorney contingency fees risks locking the little guy out of court. "Without the prospect of reasonable fees, competent counsel would be unwilling to assume the high cost burden associated with typically complex medical malpractice actions."

Also, "The right of people who have suffered injury as a result of medical
malpractice to seek redress for their injuries in the courts must be
ensured. A fair and reasonable contingent fee is essential to preserve
that right."

The report also noted that only a small percentage of true medical malpractice events ever becomes the subject of a claim. Most doctors have only a small exposure to medical malpractice claims.

Labels: contingency attorney fee, medical malpractice