http://news.yahoo.com/device-manufacturer-sued-again-superbug-outbreak-l-hospital-234742835–finance.html
In this case, a man was treated using a device that was infected by a “superbug” that then infected the patient and caused a great amount of harm to him.

I get these calls more often than you think, and it raises an interesting question:  Is there always negligence when someone gets sicker after they get treatment?

The answer is “no.”

Negligence is defined in these contexts as a failure to meet the standard of care.  So in situations where health care providers do everything that the local standard of care requires – like cleaning and using instruments per guidelines – and someone still gets sick, injured, or infected, that doesn’t mean there was negligence.  It just means stuff happens.

But sometimes there is negligence.  When providers re-use instruments or don’t clean them properly and injuries occur, that’s more like negligence.  But it can be hard to prove.  Will they write in their notes, “And then I wiped that scalpel with my dirty handkerchief and proceeded to cut the patient with it” ?  Probably not.

These cases can be complex and difficult to prove.  If you have a situation like this you should talk to an attorney.  I’m willing to talk, so call: 919-929-2992.

Please let me know what thoughts you have on this:  Twitter: @jahatty; Facebook: Jeffrey Allen Howard, Attorney at Law, PLLC.

https://business.google.com/u/0/b/103850759533204148050/reviews/l/12957712981367877311/r/4379281055340822697?service=plus&hl=en&utm_campaign=gmb_notifications&utm_source=local_review&utm_medium=desktop.email

Dang!  I’m floored by this review.  It feels really great to have a client that’s grateful for your service and feels like she got the benefit of her bargain.  She acknowledges that I wasn’t the cheapest but that she got a supreme level of service.  What more could an attorney ask for?

Thanks, clients.  You rock.

Short answer: Maybe.

Long answer: Whether or not you need an attorney for your auto accident claim really depends on many factors.  Do you have any experience handling these claims?  Do you have time?  Are you so injured that handling your own claim would be too taxing on you?  Do you work full time and have a family, so is adding more responsibility and duties to your workload really something you’re looking for?

One way I’ve approached this question is from an injury/treatment perspective.  My rule of thumb is that, generally, if you have more than one health care appointment it makes sense to have an attorney handle your claim, but if you only have one, then it may make less sense.

How so?

This comes from the value of the claim.  The value of the claim comes from several factors, but two of the main factors are health care costs and pain and suffering.  When you have multiple visits, you have higher costs, which makes your claim worth more.  When you have multiple visits, you tend to have more severe injuries that take you longer to recover from, which makes your claim worth more.

So why do you need an attorney more when your claim is worth more?

There are several reasons for that.  First, the more your claim is worth, the more you risk by letting an amateur (that’s you!) handle it.  Second, the more “meat on the bone” the more the attorney has to work with in terms of maximizing the value of your claim.  If you give an attorney a one urgent care trip kind of accident, it’s hard to argue a lot about your pain and suffering.  But if you give him a case where you go to the urgent care and then have three months of chiropractic, he can help you document your pain and suffering better and make a professional and persuasive argument about the value of that pain and suffering.

Of course, there are exceptions to every rule.  Broken ribs are horribly painful and debilitating injuries, but they are normally only associated with one visit for a diagnosis and that’s it.  But because of the intense pain of that injury and the way it affects one’s daily life, there’s  fair amount of “meat on the bone” to work with, so I would take on that case.

Generally speaking, though, it’s a good rule:  One health care visit, meh.  More than one, me.

So if you have an accident claim involving injuries, reach out to an attorney.  I’m one, so I count.  Call me!  919-929-2992.

I have said to potential clients many times that the decision to hire an attorney should be thought of in the way that Mr. Miyagi characterized the use of his karate: “Either you karate do ‘yes’, or you karate do ‘no’; You karate do ‘guess so’ … squished like grape.”

People wonder when they need to hire an attorney for their injury claim.  In short, the answer is as soon as possible. But why is that?

The moment your accident occurred, forces were set in motion that will govern the outcome of your claim.  There are many moving parts in this drama, and if all of them are not directed to your advantage, then they will be directed to your disadvantage.  Insurance companies have one goal, and that is to make money.  Your desire for compensation is counter to that goal and you better believe that they will be working to minimize the value of your claim.

Every second that goes by during which you have no attorney directing your claim is a second that the insurance company is stacking the odds against you.  Even worse is that you are very likely doing damage on top of the work the insurance company is putting in; you could be apologizing, making statements, failing to document certain things, failing to ask the right questions while answering the wrong ones.  Attorneys help you avoid those pitfalls while working to increase the chances that your claim will be successful.

So if you’re in an accident and you are injured, then you need an attorney at that moment, immediately, right freakin’ now! 

There are, and sadly will continue to be, many people who for whatever reason want to handle their claim on their own.  They think, “Well, I’ll just manage things for now and if I don’t like how they’re going I’ll hire an attorney then.”  Many times the insurance adjuster will tell them just that!  Why would you take their advice?

Don’t fall into that trap.

What I do as a personal injury attorney is work on your claim from the very beginning to the very end to maximize value and minimize difficulty.  If you don’t let me work on it from the beginning, you are working counter to that goal and you are very likely minimizing value and maximizing difficulty.  It’s sort of like trying to clean your floors with maple syrup, then calling a maid to come and clean things up.  Wouldn’t it have been better to just let the maid clean the floor from the beginning?

This brings us back to Mr. Miyagi.  If you have an auto accident, trucking accident, slip and fall, dog bite, or whatever, and you are injured as a result, you need an attorney.  At that point you should hire one.  Right then.  Immediately.

Either you attorney hire “yes” or you attorney hire “no.”  Either hire one or don’t.  If you think, “maybe I’ll hire one later” then you’re pretty much setting yourself up for a devalued claim and/or a necessary lawsuit.  Why set yourself up for failure?

Call me.  919-929-2992

Let’s face it:  There’s no shortage of attorneys.  You see them every day if you’re watching television and when you get in an auto accident you get tons of direct mail solicitations.  So how do you choose someone to help you?

When you are shopping for anything, finding what is right for you depends on what you are looking for.

I don’t know about you, but when I pick a service provider the main thing I’m looking for is communication.  I want someone who will be accessible, who will answer the phone, who will return messages and emails in a reasonable time frame, who will help me understand what’s going on, and help guide me to make the decision that’s right for me.

Accessibility is crucial to the attorney/client relationship, especially with auto accident and trucking accident injury claims.  So you’ll want to choose someone who is easy to get in touch with and who readily communicates with you.

Let’s veer off course for just a moment, but I promise we’ll be right back.  There are many ways to run a business but there are really only two ends to the spectrum: you can do the Wal-Mart strategy and go bulk, or you can do the boutique strategy and provide higher levels of service, but in lower quantity.

Let’s look at those business types and ask a few questions:

Who makes more money? Bulk retailers.

Does the fact that they make more money help you? No.

Who generally provides cheaper products?  Bulk retailers.

Does that help you?  Well, it might save you money, but would you be better off with a better product?  What if you could get a better product for the same price?

Who more often than not has hundreds of employees, none of which you find very helpful? Bulk retailers.

Does that make you want to do business there?

Alright, so back to the point…there are big law offices that do injury claims in bulk, and there are tiny boutique law offices that deal with cases on a much smaller scale.

Which do you think is right for you?

http://www.personalinjury.com/news/woman-awarded-nearly-80m-ethicon-surgical-stapler-lawsuit

This is a California injury case resulting from a products liability claim.  In NC you would have to show that the design was defective, and from the limited information I see here, you might be able to prevail.  It seems the device fired with more force than advertised and that led to serious, life-altering, permanent injuries for the victim, hence the monster award.

There are many people who want you to think that every lawsuit is frivolous.  If your butt was stapled accidentally and you couldn’t poop the normal way anymore, you’d want your pound of flesh, too.

All injury claims are not frivolous.  In fact, most aren’t.  Don’t listen to talking heads.  Listen to people in the trenches.

http://www.dmv.org/nc-north-carolina/safety-laws.php

Does your kid need to be in a child safety seat?  A booster? Probably!  There are so many people who count on accidents not happening and allow their kids to ride improperly (and illegally) restrained.

Getting a ticket should be the least of your worries.  We can handle that.  But what would happen if you were in a wreck and your child was injured more seriously than they would have been had you been following the law?  You don’t want to live with that sort of guilt.  Just follow the rules, folks.

Child Car Seat Laws

• Kids younger than 8 years old and weighing less than 80 pounds must ride in a car seat or booster.
• Depending on which comes first, kids can upgrade to a seat belt once they turn 8 years old or top 80 pounds.
• Car seats must be fastened in a rear seat if your child is under five, weighs less than 40 pounds, and if your car contains passenger-side airbags. You can bypass this requirement if your child’s safety seat is airbag-compatible.

Seat Belts

• Kids, younger than 16 years old, must wear a seat belt regardless of where they sit and follow the child safety law weight requirements above.
• Everyone 16 years old and older must wear a seat belt in any seat.

http://santamariatimes.com/news/national/govt-and-politics/utah-prison-settles-suit-after-inmate-missed-dialysis-died/article_dd1eb303-edd2-5ad3-a217-c76637720c55.html

There are so many things that are wrong here…

In a nutshell, this inmate was a dialysis patient who happened to be just a few days from being released on parole.   Prison officials – who have an obligation to provide health care – failed to get the dialysis team to him and he died as a result.

It is clearly wrong when anyone dies when they shouldn’t have to.  Granted, this man was a convicted rapist, so I certainly wouldn’t be jumping over pits of flaming crocodiles to help him.  Personally, I’m not sure how much I’d want him back out on the streets.  But still, prison officials have a duty to make sure their inmates are receiving adequate health care.  This inmate’s needs were no secret or surprise to this particular prison; the staff just dropped the ball and a man died due to the error.  It’s obvious negligence and there should be consequences.  Even convicts with horrible pasts have rights.

But as I’m writing this article it reminded me of the contradictions of American society.  Our prisons are over-crowded, and it’s acknowledged that for the most part this is due to the unwarranted prosecution of non-violent drug crime offenders.  Citizens are clamoring about not wanting to pay so much in taxes but we keep our prisons more than full, creating a huge burden on our coffers.  What’s more is that we are bound to provide health care for all of these inmates, which only serves to drain more money from taxpayer contributions.

Where it really gets wacky is when you think about American citizens’ rights to health care: There is, essentially, no “right” to health care held by American citizens. Emergency rooms are mandated to provide emergency care regardless of ability to pay, and in some part this is funded.  Medicare and Medicaid, for those that qualify, help to get care for people in particular circumstances (mostly the elderly and poor mothers and their children).  But the rest of the population has no right to basic preventative health care.

So where is the wrong here?  Maybe it’s everywhere. It’s wrong that a man died in prison because he didn’t get the health care he is guaranteed.  But what about the overwhelming numbers of citizens – who haven’t done anything to warrant incarceration – who need health care and can’t get it? What about them?  Why is health care a right to inmates but not to everyday citizens?  And why do we have to have so many people in prison?  Has anyone ever thought that maybe we should legalize marijuana, tax the bejesus out of it, and use that to fund a universal health care system?  I’m just spit-balling, but there are several birds right there and I think I can get ’em with just this one little rock.

I don’t have the answers, but it’s something to think about.

I get this question ALL the time:

“How long is it going to take to settle my injury claim?”

My response is this: “How long is it going to take for you to recover?”

I love answering questions with a question, mostly because I’m a jerk.  But this is a legitimate response.  The length of time it takes to handle an injury claim is intrinsically tied to the recovery of the victim.  It makes absolute sense that the value of a case where someone takes 1 week to recover is going to be less than the value of a case where it takes 1 year for them to recover.  How do we know early on which of those situations you have?  We don’t! We can’t!  What about lost wages?  Medical expenses?  Permanent impairment?  Scarring?  How do we find the real depth of these issues without allowing them to reach their nadir?

If you really want a fair valuation of your claim, you have to give it time to develop.

It’s trite, but true:  Do you want it done fast or do you want it done right?  With respect to injury claims if you want it done fast, you’re not going to get it done right.