I will admit that one of the reasons I handle traffic tickets is because, relatively speaking, they are simple to resolve.  Once you know the various laws regarding moving violations, insurance points, etc., learn how to read a driving record, and gain familiarity with each judicial district’s policies, you can get some reasonable outcomes for your clients.

But, my goodness, are there some really, really weird contradictions and strange inconsistencies in this sort of law.  Here are some for your befuddlement:

In Wake County, if you run a stop sign and crash into someone, you can probably get your ticket dismissed.  However, if you run a stop sign, even if it’s just a California stop, and do not cause an accident, you cannot get that ticket dismissed and at best will have to burn a PJC.

Let’s keep picking on Wake County…for years the DA there, Colin Willoughby, refused to offer reductions of speeding tickets to the very helpful non-moving violation of improper equipment, even though most other DAs in the state allow this.  As a result, the elected judges kept traffic ticket fines exceptionally low ($0 or $10 when in other counties the same ticket would get $25, $50, or more).  Remember, fines go to the school district! Colin’s “tough on tickets” approach may have looked good in the papers, but it cost the Wake Co. Public School System millions of dollars over time because of the lower fines.  Moreover, not only did the school system not get this money, but insurance companies got to profit because of the points the drivers were given.  Way to stick it to your voters, homey.

Now that Colin is gone, Wake County does allow reductions to improper equipment, but there are a ton of hurdles.  This is not unusual, as most counties have requirements to qualify for that sort of reduction.  But in Wake, it’s somewhat absurd.  The most absurd requirement is the “certification” of a driving record.  When I pull records, I get them from the local police station, and in the report it reads “certified copy.”  This is not, however, good enough for the Wake ADAs.  The balm we have used to cure this is the records custodian at the local police station had a stamp made that says “certified” and that passes muster.  So, if the DMV prints it and it says it’s certified, that’s not kosher; but if any yahoo goes and gets a stamp made at Staples to say it’s certified, then that is OK. Yikes.

Most people don’t know this, but there are two separate points systems in the traffic ticket world. There are DMV points and there are Insurance points.  To make it extra exciting, offenses give you different points.  For example, a 70 in a 55 conviction gives you 3 DMV points and 4 insurance points.   DMV points do nothing, except when you accumulate 12 of them, you lose your license.  But if you have 11 you’re OK.  Insurance points, on the other hand, are cumulative, so every one you get hurts you more.  See this link for more info on that.  There isn’t exactly any absurdity here, only unnecessary complication and confusion. Why can’t they give the same number of points for each offense?  And many insurance companies don’t get NC’s system, so they might try to jack your rates when they shouldn’t.  Do we think this is confusing on purpose?  Maybe.

I could probably come up with more, but this is a blog post, not a book.  Let me know if you need me, kids.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/10/nascar-stewart-lawsuit-idUSL1N10I2KL20150810

You’ve undoubtedly heard about this.  Last year, at a lower-level, non-NASCAR event, NASCAR driver Tony Stewart ran into a fellow driver who was out of his car at the time, killing him.

The family of the deceased 20 year old driver have filed a wrongful death claim against Tony Stewart in New York.

Of course, jurisdictions differ, so I can’t really give you any insight as to how this case will go up there.  But I can tell you that in North Carolina, I don’t see how this one survives.

This is a blog post, by the way, not a Law Review article or anything fancy, so I’m just hitting up some random points about this case, were if filed in North Carolina, that I find interesting, and you might, too.  Enjoy:

• It is noted in the article that there is an allegation that Stewart acted with, “wanton, reckless and malicious intent and negligence.” There are three separate allegations there:  He was acting negligently, he was acting with intent to kill him, or he was acting recklessly, or in our parlance, “grossly negligent.” But which one was it?  Good luck proving intent.  Short of Stewart admitting he swerved to hit him, I don’t see how you do that.  As for negligence and gross negligence, he’s driving a race car on a race track in a race.  How is he supposed to anticipate another driver walking on the track?
• North Carolina is a contributory negligence state, so if the plaintiff is found to be even 1% at fault in causing his injuries, he gets 0.  If they are alleging negligence, then contrib is a defense.  The fact that the decedent appeared to walk towards and point at Stewart shows that he wasn’t really acting reasonably to preserve his own safety; the fact that he tested positive for marijuana in an amount signficant “enough to impair judgment” makes it even less of a good look for the decedent.
• North Carolina typically doesn’t allow Assumption of the Risk as a defense.  However, it can be allowed in the course of “inherently dangerous activities.”  I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that racing cars fits that description.
• Stewart is the only defendant named.  In every description I’ve heard of this event they’ve described the track as “dark” or “poorly lit.”  Why not name the track?  Couldn’t they be at least partially to blame?

These are just a few thoughts about why I think this case wouldn’t fly in NC.  That doesn’t mean it won’t fly in NY. Who knows?  In the end, I would imagine that they will reach some sort of settlement given how much Tony Stewart is worth; he may not want to risk some sort of “punish the millionaire” type of verdict.

Would I have taken this case?  That’s a hard question to answer.  But if you have one like it, you should definitely call me.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2015/aug/05/second-lawsuit-filed-against-truck-driver-deadly-i-75-crash/318323/

This accident occurred a while back, but it’s hit the news again due to a new lawsuit against the driver and the trucking company.

In summary, it was another of those trucking tragedies you hear about all the time…trucker who is overdoing it to get his job done more quickly causes horrific accident.

In this case 6 people were killed and more badly injured.  Sadly, not only had this driver driven for 65 hours with only a 12 hour break after the first 50, but he was apparently on narcotics at the same time.  And of course, he tried to fudge his reports afterword.  There’s a saying that it’s not the crime, but the cover-up, that gets you.  In this case, it will be the crime AND the cover-up.

In TN you may apparently list out how much money you want, whereas in NC we are limited to pleading amounts “not to exceed” or “in excess of” certain threshold amounts depending on the court you desire (Superior or District).  In the TN case the victims are asking for $2.5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages.

For the uninitiated, compensatory damages are to pay back the victim for their financial losses resulting from the incident.  Medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering are the traditional big three.  In wrongful death cases the heirs may also recover loss of companionship and future earnings.  Punitive damages, on the other hand, are not (exactly) based on compensatory damages; this category is meant to punish the behavior that led to the incident and to hopefully give pause to the next person who is considering such behavior.  In North Carolina punitive damages are in one way influenced statutorily by the amount of compensatory damages.  They are capped at the greater of $250,000 or three times the compensatory damages.  To me, that’s absolute BS.  But it’s the law.  However, there is one gloriously fair exception to that limitation, and that is for punitive damages from auto accident claims that came about due to driving while intoxicated.  I love that one.

If you were killed in an auto accident, how much money do you think your family should get?  Do you think punitive damages should be limited?  How do you feel about the DWI exception?  This is stuff I like to talk about.  Let me know your thoughts.  And of course, if you have an injury claim, holla!

I avoid amusement park rides like the plague.  Seriously, who thinks these things are safe?

OK, statistically, we’re not talking Russian Roulette here.  I know.  For the number of successful rides, particularly at big, established parks, compared to the number of incidents (overwhelmingly at local/traveling events) you have a pretty good chance of not getting injured riding these rides.

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newschannel5/news/Woman-Files-Lawsuit-After-Beech-Bend-Ride-Flips-Over-319067981.html

But that doesn’t mean you can’t be injured.  The above article talks about a woman and child being injured when a ride flipped over.  The whole ride flipped over!  Would you want to take that little jaunt?  Not me.

Tons of stuff can go wrong on these things.  Belts slip, bolts loosen, carnies are carnies, so you never really no for sure if the ride you’re on is safe.  There are organizations that provide tips for ride safety:

http://www.iaapa.org/safety-and-advocacy/safety/amusement-ride-safety/amusement-ride-safety-tips

But most of those tips deal with obeying rules.  Sure, do that.  But that’s your minimum standard.  I have my own set of rules:

1. Just don’t ride ’em. There. You’re safe.

2. If you must ride an amusement park ride, considering the following:

a) If it’s mobile (meaning the ride itself can be picked up and moved to the next county), don’t ride it.

b) But if you must ride it, look at who is in charge of it.  If you’d trust him/her to help you on the side of the road, OK.  If not, trust your gut.

There’s a great chance that you’re going to be fine riding any carnival or amusement park ride.  But just remember to obey the rules and trust your gut.

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/how-the-size-of-your-wallet-protects-you-in-a-car-123390976917.html

Check out this article above.  To summarize, it appears that the more expensive your car is, generally, the safer it is in a crash.

From the article:

“We found that vehicle type, curb weight and price are all significant predictors of personal injury cost,” said Dietrich Jehle, a professor of medicine and biomedical research at the University of Buffalo. “For every additional $10,000 you spend, injuries go down by almost 12 percent. We also found that for every 1,000-pound increase in weight, vehicles were 19 percent safer.”

That’s pretty compelling stuff.

So if you’re interested in keeping yourself and your family safer on the road, spend more on a car.  More specifically, spend more on a heavier car.

Now, where did all of those Hummer dealerships go…?

I got a call from a great old client this morning.  His wife had gotten a stop light ticket and was wondering if she should pay it off.

No.  You should not pay off a stop light or stop sign ticket.

Paying off = pleading guilty.  Guilty = conviction.  Conviction = 1 insurance point.  1 insurance point = a 30% increase of your insurance rates for 3 years!

So, no.  Don’t pay those off!

If you get a stop light/stop sign ticket, particularly in the counties listed above, call me to discuss your option.  For a few hundred bucks I can probably save you a lot more!

One of these things is not like the other.  One of these things does not belong.

Strict Liability refers to claims that a government might designate as having no need to prove that an act or omission on the part of the defendant led to the injury; if the event happened, you’re liable.  For example, technically under strict liability tenets, if your dog bites someone, you’re on the hook.  Period.  It doesn’t matter if he was on a leash, it doesn’t matter if it was a creepy vacuum cleaner salesman who stepped into your door uninvited.

In North Carolina premises liability claims – claims for injuries suffered on someone’s property – are NOT strict liability.  In other words, you have to prove that the property owner/manager’s negligent act or omission was the cause of your injury.

A slip & fall case is merely a type of premises liability claim, and is probably the most common, so I deal with these more than any other premises liability claim.  These are NOT strict liability.  So if you slip/trip and fall on someone’s property they are not automatically responsible for whatever injuries you suffer.  You have to prove that some negligent act or omission caused you to slip and fall.

If you are going to remember anything from this article, you should remember the last two sentences above.  Go read them again.

For example, you’re going up a set of stairs at a restaurant and you miss a step and get hurt.  Why did you miss a step?  If you don’t know why, or it’s because you just did, they don’t owe you for that.  If it’s because the steps were too shallow according to code, there was a loose tile, there was a banana peel, or whatever, then maybe they do owe you.

So, if you’re ever hurt somewhere, think about why you’re hurt.  Is it because you’re a clumsy oaf?  If so, then you aren’t owed anything.  But if it’s because the owner left some spent uranium in the middle of the floor, then you might have something.

What do you really need to know about an attorney before you hire one?  What are the most important things to ask?

No, you don’t ask her where she went to law school.  That is irrelevant. If you must know, look at her diploma.  But who cares?

Newsflash: We all pretty much learn the same stuff.

In my experience, it’s far more important what your prospective attorney does after law school, particularly with their clients and their practice.  These are the things that really matter:

1. Is my type of case your main practice area?

The days of the generalist are essentially done.  No longer do you go to the same attorney for your will, your divorce, your accident case, your worker’s comp issue, your bankruptcy, and your weed ticket.  Sure, there are people around that still practice this way, but I think it’s wiser to hire someone who has a practice focus.  That doesn’t mean they only do one thing necessarily, it just means they limit their practice to two or three areas of law at most.  Think about it: the more you spread yourself out, the thinner your knowledge base is likely to be. You don’t want shallow knowledge.  You want deep knowledge.

2. Who in your office will most of my communication be with? 

This is very important.  You’re looking to hire an attorney. You are not looking to hire a paralegal, or a case manager (whatever the hell that is).  You want to be able to communicate quickly and efficiently with your attorney to help get you the best results.  If you’re looking at a prospect with tons of staff for her to delegate to, do you really think that attorney is going to be fielding your phone calls/emails?  You want to deal directly with your attorney.  Your case is far too important not to.

Here’s a great tip:  After the interview but before you hire them, call to speak to the attorney you interviewed with.  If you get to talk to them (then, or if they return your call shortly) that’s a good sign.  If they won’t talk with you to get your business, you know darn well they won’t be talking with you when they already have you signed up. 

3. What is your main goal with cases like mine?

No one ever asks this question.  Ever.  And it boggles my mind.  What they DO ask in the personal injury context is “how much is my case worth?”  but that’s a different question.  What is your attorney’s goal with your type of case?  Many won’t have a good answer (because they don’t think about it and are never asked).  I think about it all the time.  In fact, even if they don’t ask (and they don’t) I tend to tell clients anyway:  My answer, particularly for personal injury cases (auto accidents, dog bites, etc.) is to have a client who feels happy with my work, regardless of outcome, so that he will refer his friends and family when the time comes.  That’s my goal. I want my client to feel like I did everything I could to make sure they were treated fairly.  Sure, I want to win.  Sure, I want to get my clients a lot of money.  But in the end, the financial goal isn’t the main one.  I want the client to feel good about my work.

That’s it.  Don’t worry about what their “win percentage” is, and don’t worry about what their biggest settlement is.  Don’t worry about if they routinely get people out of DWIs.  Worry about their familiarity with your type of case.  Worry about their willingness to communicate with you.  Worry about whether or not they are worried about what you think of them after you case is done.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go communicate with my clients.

Everyone has heard about the original “hot coffee” case of Stella Liebeck against McDonalds.  Many people think they know what that case is about, but they probably know virtually nothing about the facts.  If you’re looking for an education on that particular case and the vitriol of “tort reform” that followed it, I urge you to watch http://www.hotcoffeethemovie.com/ but discussion of that movie is for a different day.

In North Carolina a case was recently taken to trial wherein a man sued Starbucks for burns he received when the lid of a coffee he’d gotten from Starbucks came off.  http://abc11.com/news/starbucks-not-liable-for-raleigh-police-officers-burns/713613/

Sadly for him the jury sided with Starbucks.

Let me first say that I’m not the world’s foremost expert on hot coffee or coffee burn cases.  But I have handled them before and the best advice you can get before making a claim against a coffee retailer is this:  Know when to hold ’em and know when to fold ’em.

What I mean by the Kenny Rogers reference is that, like with any case, you have to know when you have a good argument and when you don’t.  To get deeper into the meaning of this advice though, consider this little nugget.  Dan Cox is considered by many to be the go-to expert on hot coffee or coffee burn cases, mostly for the defendants (the retailers) and in his book Hot Coffee he essentially says there are two types of coffee burn cases (and this is my summary of his statement, not a quote):  When the employee spills the coffee on the patron, they need to settle that case, but when the patron spills it on himself, the retailer may be beetter off fighting it. 

Is this gospel from on high?  Of course not.  But it is based on a rather detailed investigation of the many coffee cases across the nation.  For the most part, juries don’t seem to have much sympathy (with some exceptions) for people who spill coffee on themselves.  But they do have sympathy for people who have coffee spilled on them.  And when I think about it like that, it makes complete since.

I wonder if this case would have played out differently if the employee had spilled it.  If other cases are any predictor, it might have.  But that wasn’t the scenario he had…

Be careful with your coffee, and don’t get burned by it.