The Poppe Law Firm Blog http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/ The Poppe Law Firm Blog en-us 2012 The Poppe Law Firm, All Rights Reserved, Reproduced with Permission http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/ Thu, 17 May 2012 04:45:00 GMT The Poppe Law Firm Blog http://www.poppelawfirm.com/images/logoprint.gif http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/ <![CDATA[Faulty Electronic Ciagrette Blows Up in Florida Man's Mouth Severely Injuring Him]]> Early reports indicate a defective battery is to blame for the explosion but the brand of battery or cigarette is not yet known, or at least the information has not yet been released to the public.  I can only assume once the information is known the manufacturers will be sued for the injuries their defective product caused. 

Not only did the defective cigarette or battery nearly blow a man’s face off, the explosion caught his home on fire.   When it exploded pieces shot out from the cigarette and landed around his office, some pieces hot enough to melt carpet.  Firefighters immediately came to put out the fire.  Investigators are now trying to identify the type of cigarette and battery and are searching for other fires or explosions that might have been caused by electronic cigarettes.

Thomas Kiklas, co-founder of the Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association, said the industry knows of no problems with the cigarettes or batteries exploding.  The electronic cigarette industry reports that approximately 2.5 Americans used electronic cigarettes last year.  Most people use the product to try to stop smoking because they believe the device releases less nicotine than regular cigarettes. Nicotine is released from them in a water vapor, which is released with battery power when the cigarette is puffed. 

Most people see electronic cigarettes as a way to kick the habit and some simply use the product as a “healthier” way to smoke. Some say there is no proof that the devices actually help people stop smoking or that they are safe, or safer than regular cigarettes.  Also, some tests have revealed chemicals such as antifreeze in the vapor put out by the cigarettes. They are currently unregulated by the FDA but the FDA posted a warning saying they were addictive, contained nicotine and might encourage teenagers to use nicotine products.  After this incident, the FDA now might consider the regulation of this product. 

Fortunately, the man injured by the defective product is recovering in an Alabama hospital.  
]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/faulty%2Delectronic%2Dciagrette%2Dblows%2Dup%2Din%2Dflorida%2Dman%2Ds%2Dmouth%2Dseverely%2Dinjuring%2Dhim%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-75453 Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Injured Passengers of Cruise Lines Might be Without Compensation]]> Lawyers from two U.S.law firms as well as the Italian consumer group, Codacons, are expected to file a class action lawsuit in Miami on behalf of passengers on board the Costa Concordia cruise liner. The lawsuit will likely name Costa Cruises and its parent company, Carnival Cruise Lines.  Attorneys for the passengers state they will ask for approximately $160,000 per passenger in damages.  Typically, damages include items such as the injured person’s medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering.  Many passengers report bodily injuries and mental anguish as a result of the crash.  For example, one passenger and her daughter say they are unable to sleep well and relive the memory of the incident daily. 

The liner went down off the coast of Italy last week after hitting a sand bar.  After the ship hit the bar and began to sink, there was reportedly utter chaos on board, and it took hours to get passengers off the ship.  Reportedly, the ship’s captain left the vessel with most passengers still on board.  Some passengers report being forced to jump from the ship and swim to shore, others got into life boats and made it safely ashore.  Sadly, other passengers were not as fortunate and at least 16 bodies have been recovered from the ship to date, and approximately 20 people are still missing.

At least 16 people needlessly lost their lives, and many of the 4,500 passengers on board were injured by the cruise line’s negligence.  But, due to legal maneuvering by the cruise line, passengers may never be fully compensated for their injuries.  Usually, all types of damages would be part of what an injured person is compensated for during a lawsuit.  However, in cases where people are injured on cruise ships, passengers’ tickets could be preventing them from being fully compensated for their injuries.  Passengers’ tickets are actually contracts with the cruise line and contain much more information than most people realize. These contracts often release cruise lines from being responsible for passenger injuries without the passenger ever realizing it.  Most often, the contracts contain provisions that prevent passengers from making claims for pain and suffering after they are injured by a cruise line.  Passengers agree to these provisions and waive their rights to be fully compensated when they purchase the ticket from the cruise line. 

Also included in the language of many tickets is what is called a forum selection clause.  This means the cruise liner states the country and court system any lawsuit or claim for injuries must be filed.   Most likely, the tickets held by passengers of the Costa Concordia state claims for injuries must be brought inItaly, not theUnited States.  This creates a huge burden on passengers from around the world and is another obstacle to prevent cruise lines from paying for the injuries they cause.  Why, then, is the lawsuit being filed inMiami?  I am not involved in this case and can only speculate, but I suspect it is in hopes of finding ways around the clauses put into passenger contracts by the cruise line. 

Reportedly, Costa Cruises is offering passengers a full refund, travel expenses, reimbursement for any on-board expenses and credit card charges, and full payment for documented medical expenses.  However, such an arrangement does not fully compensate passengers for their injuries.  Most notably, the cruise line is offering nothing for passengers’ pain and suffering, such as the mental effects of what is described as a chaotic and terrible situation on board.  The offer also does not include longer-term care options such as for future medical expenses.

So, even if the attorneys are successful in brining the lawsuit inMiami, there are likely still obstacles to the amount and types of damages passengers can recover.  I will be following the lawsuit as it progresses. 

]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/injured%2Dpassengers%2Dof%2Dcruise%2Dlines%2Dmight%2Dbe%2Dwithout%2Dcompensation%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-73745 Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[West Virginia Over Louisville, Really?]]>
The University of Louisville (herein Louisville) was the frontrunner for the last spot in the Big 12 for months so people have wondered why Louisville will not be playing host to football powerhouses Texas and Oklahoma in 2015. Well it is because of the mastermind Tom Jurich. Many scold him for not taking the invitation immediately, but Jurich made a decision that was in the best interest of his school. 

To understand Jurich's decision, you have to look at the bigger picture. The University of Texas wanted a national television network and they wanted a change. This prompted them to attempt a changeover from the Big 12 to the newly formed PAC-12. Had this occurred, it was said that Oklahoma would go with them leaving Big 12 football with.........Texas A&M? Kansas State? That doesn't seem very exciting for a school trying to prove it's worth (Louisville) and certainly does not give an impression that the Big 12 has everything under control. So why would Jurich want to leave a stable conference (at that time) for a seemingly unstable one? Exactly, he wouldn't. The first invitation came when the Big East was intact. 

Well, just like any rich kid who was used to getting their way as soon as they wanted the Big 12 got tired of waiting on Jurich and invited the University of West Virginia, the small town, couch burning school from Morgantown. Now what did West Virginia have that Louisville wasn't already better at? Oh right, football! That's it. They didn't have better academics, their overall sports were worse, and, let's face it, Morgantown vs. Louisville? Really? Burns Hargis, the Oklahoma State University President and chairman of the Big 12 board of directors said, "The addition of West Virginia, while expanding the reach of the Big 12, brings an impressive institution with esteemed academics and a proud athletic tradition into the Conference. This is another step in building a strong foundation for the future of the Big 12," It seems Mr. Hargis is trying to make a credible defense for adding West Virginia over Louisville, but it is clear that the reason for the invitation is their consistency in the top 25 (hyperlink) and not because they bring great academics.
The most intriguing time during this situation was when politics became involved. Kentucky’s longtime Republican senator, Mitch McConnell, stepped up to the plate. As an alumnus of UofL, he made phone calls to Big 12 officials to try and convince them to change their minds. Now I am usually not a fan of Mr. McConnell but this was one time I was proud to call him my senator. But then Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia decided to step in and voice his opinion as well. This was all funny and interesting at the same time because it was said that the Big 12 was set to officially invite West Virginia to join, but this was put to a halt because of the political game that was being played for a short time.
Unfortunately, soon after the Senator’s interference those Mountaineers got the call that every Louisville fan dreaded would come. They accepted their bid to the Big 12 almost immediately, which Louisville would have also done had they been offered a bid at this time rather than months prior. Now in a few years West Virginia gets to host the Longhorns and Sooners, while the Cardinals are stuck with exciting new programs that include (but are not limited to!) Southern MethodistUniversity and Central Florida.
To add icing to the cake above all of this is that West Virginia has the audacity to try and sue the Big East, claiming that the conference has not maintained a balance between the football and basketball schools in the conference. It is argued (and I agree) that West Virginia is attempting to sue to get out of having to pay a $10 million exit that the Big East has recently required of it’s members that are leaving while still under contract. With all the recent problems West Virginia has caused the Big East, I say good riddance and from a UofL fan I will tell the  Big 12 that I will see you within five years.
]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/west%2Dvirginia%2Dover%2Dlouisville%2Dreally%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-72660 Fri, 06 Jan 2012 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Saint Joseph London Stent Case WHAS News Video]]> Watch the WHAS 11 Investigation Team News Story about the lawsuit filed by the Poppe Law Firm against Saint Joseph London, Catholic Health Initiative, and Drs. Patil, Chalhoub, and Patil alleging they were involved in recommending, performing and allowing Edward Marshall to undergo numerous unnecessary heart surgeries including stents and a pacemaker. 
The lawsuit is similar to claims made against Saint Joseph Towson Maryland and Dr. Mark Medei for the performance of hundreds of unnecessary stents in order to increase revenue for the hospital. 

hans]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/saint%2Djoseph%2Dlondon%2Dstent%2Dcase%2Dwhas%2Dnews%2Dvideo%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-65794 Fri, 30 Sep 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Saint Joseph London Stent Case News Video]]> Watch the video and read about it here.

hp
]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/saint%2Djoseph%2Dlondon%2Dstent%2Dcase%2Dnews%2Dvideo%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-65676 Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Sentinel Echo Writes About Saint Joseph London Stenting Lawsuit]]> Here is a link to the Sentinel Echo article on the unnecessary stenting lawsuit we recently filed in London, Kentucky.  The suit alleges various London, Kentucky cardiologists were performing unnecessary stenting procedures, catheterizations, and other heart procedures on patients that did not need them.  Saint Joseph and Saint Joseph-London are named as defendants along with Drs. Chatterjee, Chalhoub, and Patil and their medical groups  You can read the lawsuit here
hp

]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/sentinel%2Decho%2Dwrites%2Dabout%2Dsaint%2Djoseph%2Dlondon%2Dstenting%2Dlawsuit%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-65208 Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Unnecessary Stenting Lawsuit Filed In Kentucky]]> Complaint here.  The suit alleges CATHOLIC HEALTH INITIATIVES, INC., SAINT JOSEPH HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., SAINT JOSEPH-LONDON, PREMIER HEART AND VASCULAR CENTER, CARDIOVASULAR SPECIALISTS OF THE CUMBERLANDS, PLLC, THE MEDICAL SPECIALISTS OF KENTUCKY, P.S.C, MANAGEMENT SERVICE ORGANIZATION OF KENTUCKY, INC., M.S.O. OF KENTUCKY, INC., SATYABRATA CHATTERJEE, M.D., SANDESH PATIL M.D., and ANIS CHALHOUB M.D. were all involved in scheme to profit by perfoming unnecessary stenting and other heart procedures on patients. 
Recently, Saint Josephs agreed to pay the federal government $22 million dollars to resolve similar claims arising out of unnecessary stenting procedures at a facility in Towson, Maryland.  The money was paid to resovle claims by the federal goverment that the facility engaged in and profited from improper and unnecessary cardiac stenting procedures performed by Dr. Mark Midei, a cardiologist at St. Joseph Medical Center in Towson, MD.  Dr. Midei lost his license to practice medicine.

I'd like to know what you think about doctors performing unnecessary heart surgery on patients that don't need it.

hp 
]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/unnecessary%2Dstenting%2Dlawsuit%2Dfiled%2Din%2Dkentucky%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-65182 Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Why We Haven't Been Blogging]]>
Norton's could have some serious liability for a heat stroke death; and

UofL hospital merger, who is really in charge of this place any way?

be back soon,
hp

]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/why%2Dwe%2Dhavent%2Dbeen%2Dblogging%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-61297 Tue, 02 Aug 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Kentucky Bar Votes to Disbar Famous Lawyer Stan Chesley]]> famed class action lawyer Stan Chesley is facing disbarment for his role in the litigation and settlement of the Fen Phen class action.  You can read the Trial Commisioner's february recommendation Here.

Yesterday, the KBA Board of Governers agreed with the Trial Commissioner and voted to disbar Chesley. Chesley has also ben ordered to pay back millions of dollars to his former clients that the KBA claims Chesley was not entitled to.

You can read the entire article at the Courier Journal website:

A trial has also been set for next year in another matter against Chesley claiming he improperly handled the settlement of another Kentucky class action against the Covington Diocese for childhood sexual abuse claims.

hans]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/kentucky%2Dbar%2Dvotes%2Dto%2Ddisbar%2Dfamous%2Dlawyer%2Dstan%2Dchesley%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-57260 Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[U.S. Government Claims Immunity in Tort Claim]]> Ferrari, a 1995 F50, was being stored in Lexington, Kentucky as part of an investigation on stolen vehicles.  In May 2009 an FBI agent went for a ride in the car when he lost control and landed against bushes and a tree.

The Ferrari is insured by Motors Insurance Co. who is suing the U.S. Justice Department for $750,000.  Motors Insurance claims the vehicle is a total loss.  The Justice Department, however, is refusing to pay the claim because the goverment says it is immune to tort claims when certain goods are handled by law enforcement.

The next court date in the case is June 13.   ]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/us%2Dgovernment%2Dclaims%2Dimmunity%2Din%2Dtort%2Dclaim%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-57145 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Hulk Hogan Lawsuit Dismissed by Florida Judge]]> Wells Fargo and his ex-wife was dismissed by a Florida judge this month.

Hulk Hogan sued Wells Fargo and his ex-wfie, Linda, last year.  Hogan alleged in the suit Wells Fargo Southeast did not inform him of an additional umbrella policy to cover his assets.  The suit also alleges his ex-wife, as his manager, did not obtain the right insurance for Hogan.

The suit stems from Hogan's son's 2007 car accident where a passenger suffered a serious brain injury.  Hogan was liable on the injured passenger's claim because he signed for his son's driver's license and Hogan's insurance was inadequate.  Hogan settled the claims related to teh accident, including an out of pocket payment.

Because of the out of pocket payment, Hogan alleges his insurnace broker at Wells Fargo did not protect his wealth.  Hogan says the broker, whom he relied on for ten years to provide his insurance, could have protected him by telling him about additional insurance policies.   
 ]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/hulk%2Dhogan%2Dlawsuit%2Ddismissed%2Dby%2Dflorida%2Djudge%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-57146 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Prior Traffic Violations Predict Truck Drivers Likelihood of Future Accidents]]> 582,772 truck drivers were studied between 2007 and 2009, and a driver’s risk of a future accident increased by more than 50% when he/she had certain prior traffic convictions.

A prior accident ranked second, with an 88% probability, in the study conducted by the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI).  Tied for second place was an improper passing violation.  Down the list: improper turn conviction came in at an 84% risk, improper or erratic lane change at 80%, improper lane or location and failure to obey a traffic sign both at 68%, speeding at more than 15 mph over the speed limit at 67%, any prior driving conviction at 65%, and finally, reckless careless inattentive or negligent driving came in at 64%. 

So, what’s the violation that gave truck drivers the greatest chance of being involved in a future accident?  Failure to use a turn signal!  The study found that a driver with a prior citation for failure to use a turn signal increased his/her chance of being in a future accident by 96%!

Despite these statistics, truck on car collision rates are at an all time low, according to Dan Murray, Vice President of Research at ATRI.  The “fundamentals of good driving behavior” is crucial to keeping up the downward trend, he says.  And, the rate of truck driver’s convictions for a variety of offenses has also been on the decline in recent years. 

What does this mean for all of us on the roads across the country everyday?  Hopefully what this indicates is that truck drivers are practicing safer driving techniques, making everyone on the roads safer and decreasing your risk of being involved in a collision with a semi.]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/prior%2Dtraffic%2Dviolations%2Dpredict%2Dtruck%2Ddrivers%2Dlikelihood%2Dof%2Dfuture%2Daccidents%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-55792 Thu, 26 May 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[What Do Charlie Sheen, Nursing Homes And ABC Have in Common....]]> one late night talk show with a rambling Charlie Sheen explaining that, despite his shambled appearance, he is "Winning" and explaining that "[CBS] picked a fight with a warlock."  You probably also know his late night antics got him fired from his show, Two and a Half Men.  Sheen is fighting back and filed a lawsuit claiming the show breached his contract by firing him when he was sick (has anyone figured out what is wrong with him? Both Dr. Phil, and Dr. Drew have weighed in already.. paging Dr. Seuss....)
Anyways, so what exactly does the self proclaimed "bi-winning" "F-18" "rock star from Mars" actor's lawsuit have to do with YOU?  More than you might think!
You see, CBS has lawyers.  Lots and lots and lots of good lawyers (some are probably even as good as me!) And you see, these smart lawyers have a job, and that is to protect CBS from lawsuits because lawsuits place common every day people on equally footing with million dollar corporations.  They don't like that.  So, these good smart, corporate lawyers look for ways to avoid being taken to court before they are sued.  You see, the CBS lawyers inserted something into Charlie's contract to prevent him from suing CBS in court.  It's called an Arbitration Clause. 
Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution.  That's a fancy way of saying "If you sign this you can't sue us in court and tell your case to a jury."  Arbitration forces you to bring you claim to an arbitrator  or a panel of arbitrators who then listen to both sides and decide the case.  The decision is final and neither side can appeal.  This is important because this means You lose accountability.  The arbitrator is not accountable to a higher court, like a judge or jury would be.  The arbitrator is the final decision maker.  According to Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, had this to say about the bias in favor of corporations that is built into the system:

For the most part, however, we believe the bias is built into the system, not the result of conscious decisions to favor big business. First of all, a fee structure that imposes costs disproportionately on claimants rather than defendants will necessarily favor defendants, because it discourages claims.

Second, arbitrator panels that consist primarily of business executives and corporate lawyers are less likely to have sympathy for claimants.

Third, businesses are more likely to be repeat customers of arbitrators, so there is a disincentive for an arbitrator to displease them.

The evidence that the second and third factors produce bias is the award amounts. Side-by-side comparisons of arbitrator awards to jury verdicts in similar types of cases consistently show that claimants in arbitration are awarded less than plaintiffs in court.

In fact, courts in some states have determined that some arbitration groups were so biased tthey should no longer be allowed to arbitrate consumer disputes in those states.  An example of just one such case came out of Minnesota where the Attorney General sued the National Arbitration Forum for consumer fraud, deceptive trade practices, and false advertising. The civil suit, filed in state district court in Minneapolis, alleged conflicting ties between the NAF and debt-collection law firms that represented major credit-card companies. The suit also alleged that New York hedge fund Accretive LLC owned stakes in such collection law firms and the NAF, sending arbitration business between the two. Ultimately the NAF agreed to stop conducting consumer arbitration of credit card disputes and healthcare litigation.

So, what does this have to do with You?  Our firm is seeing arbitration clauses popping up more and more frequently and no where are we seeing them more frequently than in nursing home admission paperwork and hospital admission paperwork.  DO NOT SIGN AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE!!!!  A nursing home or hospital cannot deny admission to a patient because they refuse to sign an arbitration clause--- so there is absolutely no reason to sign one, it only benefits the corporation that owns the nursing home or hospital because they know they will never have to expalin their conduct (or the profitability of their misconduct) to a jury.

DON'T SIGN ARBITRATION CLAUSES.

Now, back to our friend Charlie.  For reasons too complicated to get into here, I predict he will lose his suit and I don't think it matters if he gets a trial or is forced to go to arbitration.  It also appears his "comedy show" titled "My Violent Torpedo of Truth/Defeat Is Not an Option" appears to have bombed in Detroit.  But no worries, he has twenty shows left to figure it out

hp

 

 

]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/what%2Ddo%2Dcharlie%2Dsheen%2Dnursing%2Dhomes%2Dand%2Dwarner%2Dbrothers%2Dhave%2Din%2Dcommon%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-52386 Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Why Did This Huge Law Firm Fork Over $25 Million to the Franklin Mint.....?]]>
Stewart and Lynda Resnick used to own the Franklin Mint, which is a creator and supplier of coins, diecast models, jewelry, collectible dolls and other novelties.  According to the Wall Street Journal, "The Franklin Mint, which produced a commemorative plate, purse, and porcelain doll using [Princess Diana's] likeness after she was killed in a 1997 car crash in Paris. Manatt and IP partner Mark Lee — representing Diana’s estate and a memorial fund set up in her name — sued The Franklin Mint for trademark dilution and false advertising, claiming that their client’s likeness had been used without permission to market memorabilia. 

A Los Angeles federal judge dismissed the case against the mInt in 2000, calling it “groundless” and “unreasonable,” and awarded the mint $2.3 million in legal fees. But the mint didn’t stop there. It sued Manatt, Lee, and their client for malicious prosecution in 2002, claiming that the litigation was an attempt to hurt the company’s Diana-related sales.  According to AmLaw, the mint was particularly exercised over about a passage in Manatt’s complaint comparing the company to “vultures feeding on the dead.” Franklin Mint’s lawyers at Loeb & Loeb argued that such an allegation damaged their clients’ reputation. 

Diana’s estate and charity trust fund settled in 2004 for $25 million. The Resnicks donated all of the money to charity.  Manatt, however, continued to fight. It won at the lower-court level, lost the appeal, and lost an attempt to have the California Supreme Court take the case up. Ultimately, the firm settled for $25 million, which the Resnicks also say they’ll give to charity.

In a statement on behalf of firm CEO and managing partner William Quicksilver, Manatt said: “This settlement will not have an adverse impact on us, and Manatt is well positioned for growth moving forward. While we continue to believe in our legal position, it was in the firm’s best interest to settle this matter and put it behind us . . . . We are pleased that the settlement proceeds are going to charity.”

Said Stewart Resnick, in a statement:

“We were committed to seeing this through to the end to prove the point that lawyers must have higher ethical standards and can’t take advantage of companies solely to enrich themselves.”

Hans

]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/why%2Ddid%2Dthis%2Dhuge%2Dlaw%2Dfirm%2Dfork%2Dover%2D25%2Dmillion%2Dto%2Dthe%2Dfranklin%2Dmint%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-47277 Sun, 23 Jan 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Judge Holds Louisville Doctor In Contempt for Lying Under Oath]]> Read the full story here:

hp
]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/judge%2Dholds%2Dlouisville%2Ddoctor%2Din%2Dcontempt%2Dfor%2Dlying%2Dunder%2Doath%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-46668 Wed, 12 Jan 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Fen Phen Lawyer Indicted....AGAIN]]> previous criminal indictments against the lawyers. Well, one of them has been indicted over statements he made to his legal malpractice insurance company. 

According to the Lexington Herald-Leader, "Disbarred lawyer Melbourne Mills Jr., who represented clients in a multimillion-dollar diet drug settlement, was indicted Tuesday on a fraudulent insurance acts charge by a Fayette County grand jury. The felony count stems from an incident on or about Aug. 11, 2003. The indictment alleges that Mills knew that a statement made to an insurer, board of claims or agent for the purpose of obtaining, renewing or replacing an insurance policy contained false, incomplete or misleading information Fayette Commonwealth's Attorney Ray Larson said he could not comment on the case. The name of the insurer, board of claims or agent was not listed in the indictment. Mills has been involved in a federal court case with Continental Casualty Co., which issued a liability policy to his firm and paid for his defense in a lawsuit against him by his former fen-phen clients. Senior U.S. District Judge Joseph Hood said in March that Mills committed "material misrepresentations or omissions of fact" in a 2003 application to the company. In 2006, a judge ruled that Mills and lawyers William Gallion and Shirley Cunningham had to pay $42 million to clients whom they had swindled in the diet drug settlement. Mills was acquitted of criminal charges in the case, but the state bar association voted to disbar him"

All of the above stems from an application for legal malpractice insurance Mills' completed and submitted to his insurance company during the fen-phen fiasco.  According to Judge Hood, in a declaratory judgment action filed by Mill's insurance company, "Mills’s 2003 Application for insurance, which resulted in Continental issuing the Policy of insurance, contained misrepresentations or omissions which satisfy at least one of the three criteria found in KRS 304.14-110. When asked in question 4 of the 2003 Application if any attorney had been “disbarred, suspended, formally reprimanded or subject to any disciplinary inquiry, complaint or proceeding for any reason other than nonpayment of dues during the expiring policy period,” (emphasis added) Mills answered “NO.” Mills’s answer to question number 4 is clearly a misrepresentation or omission. Mills knew that a bar complaint had been filed against him in early 2002, and he admitted that as of the date he signed and certified the 2003 Application, the KBA’s investigation was ongoing. Not only was Mills aware that an investigation was ongoing, his attorney attended a hearing held by the KBA Inquiry Commission, which resulted in Mills being served with a subpoena duces tecum requesting records related to the Fen- Phen Action." 

Read more: http://www.kentucky.com/2011/01/11/1595373/melbourne-mills-jr-is-indicted.html#ixzz1AmiGnTgR
]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/fen%2Dphen%2Dlawyer%2Dindictedagain%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-46581 Tue, 11 Jan 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[The Truth About the "Litigation Crisis"]]>

South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com

Why should we trust insurance companies?

By Gary Farmer

January 2, 2011

 

Earlier this month, the insurance industry spin machine started up again. If you believe them, every woe in our state — from traffic in South Florida to the cold weather in the Panhandle — is somehow the result of lawsuits. Some even call Florida a "judicial hellhole," claiming that Florida can lower costs for consumers and create jobs simply by reducing lawsuits.

Well, ask yourself this one question: Why in the world would you trust anything your insurance company says? Here are the facts:

"Trial lawyer" lawsuits make up a mere fraction of lawsuits in Florida. In 2009, nearly 90 percent of all lawsuits were either business versus business suits or home foreclosures.

"Malpractice" lawsuits make up an even smaller fraction. In 2009, out of the 547,194 lawsuits filed in Florida, just 1,286 were related to "professional malpractice"— including medical malpractice. That's less than 0.4 percent of all civil court cases.

The percentage of "trial lawyer" cases is dropping. Over the last decade, the percentage of civil cases related to malpractice, auto accidents and product liability has shrunk as corporate litigation and foreclosures are skyrocketing.

Punitive Damages are very rare and for only the most egregious cases. In 1999, Florida enacted restrictions on punitive damages and capped the limits in most cases.

For example, they want to change Florida's laws to bailout auto manufacturers after known defects in their automobiles led to serious injuries. Currently, an injured driver can hold an out-of-state car manufacturer accountable for knowingly selling a car with defects that result in occupants being seriously injured and killed. Ever since Ford manufactured the Pinto automobile with a known defect that resulted in car fires that killed consumers, courts have provided an avenue for consumers to seek accountability. Allowing automobile manufacturers to escape accountability will lead to one thing — reduced safety and greater risk and danger of injury to you and me.

Perhaps the most outrageous proposal is the insurance industry's demand that we further restrict the rights their customers have when they act in bad faith. Small businesses and individuals buy liability insurance to protect themselves from the potential for a catastrophic lawsuit against them. But too often, when the worst happens, the insurance company fails to promptly settle the claim. Now the insurance customer — who could have been fully protected if the insurer had acted in good faith — ends up losing everything they have worked for because the insurance company did not act in good faith.

If the insurance company acts in bad faith in failing to settle these horrible claims when they should, who should pay that excess? The customer who supposedly bought insurance to protect themselves? Or the insurance company that acted in bad faithIf there is a lawsuit problem, it is because out-of-state corporations use our courts to fight with those they contract with, and the banks use them to foreclose on homes — not because consumers use the courts to protect their own rights when negligent behavior has caused harm to them or their family.

Don't allow a dishonest industry to manipulate the truth just to avoid accountability to consumers.

Gary Farmer is an officer with the Florida Justice Association and attorney in Broward County .

Copyright © 2010, South Florida Sun-Sentinel

]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/the%2Dtruth%2Dabout%2Dthe%2Dlitigation%2Dcrisis%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-46002 Mon, 03 Jan 2011 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Is Karen Sypher Finally Going to Jail Over the Pitino Fiasco....]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/is%2Dkaren%2Dsypher%2Dfinally%2Dgoing%2Dto%2Djail%2Dover%2Dthe%2Dpitino%2Dfiasco%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-45605 Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[The Night Before Christmas (As Written by a Lawyer)]]> THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS in Legalese
(Author unknown)

Whereas, on or about the night prior to Christmas, there did occur at a certain improved piece of real property (hereinafter "the House") a general lack of stirring by all creatures therein, including, but not limited to a mouse.

A variety of foot apparel, e.g., stocking, socks, etc., had been affixed by and around the chimney in said House in the hope and/or belief that St. Nick a/k/a/ St. Nicholas a/k/a/ Santa Claus (hereinafter "Claus") would arrive at sometime thereafter. The minor residents, i.e. the children, of the aforementioned House were located in their individual beds and were engaged in nocturnal hallucinations, i.e. dreams, wherein vision of confectionery treats, including, but not limited to, candies, nuts and/or sugar plums, did dance, cavort and otherwise appear in said dreams.

Whereupon the party of the first part (sometimes hereinafter referred to as ("I"), being the joint-owner in fee simple of the House with the party of the second part (hereinafter "Mamma"), and said Mamma had retired for a sustained period of sleep. (At such time, the parties were clad in various forms of headgear, e.g., kerchief and cap.

Suddenly, and without prior notice or warning, there did occur upon the unimproved real property adjacent and appurtenant to said House, i.e., the lawn, a certain disruption of unknown nature, cause and/or circumstance. The party of the first part did immediately rush to a window in the House to investigate the cause of such disturbance.

At that time, the party of the first part did observe, with some degree of wonder and/or disbelief, a miniature sleigh (hereinafter "the Vehicle") being pulled and/or drawn very rapidly through the air by approximately eight (8) reindeer. The driver of the Vehicle appeared to be and in fact was, the previously referenced Claus.

Said Claus was providing specific direction, instruction and guidance to the approximately eight (8) reindeer and specifically identified the animal co-conspirators by name: Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Donner and Blitzen (hereinafter "the Deer"). (Upon information and belief, it is further asserted that an additional co- conspirator named "Rudolph" may have been involved.)

The party of the first part witnessed Claus, the Vehicle and the Deer intentionally and willfully trespass upon the roofs of several residences located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the House, and noted that the Vehicle was heavily laden with packages, toys and other items of unknown origin or nature. Suddenly, without prior invitation or permission, either express or implied, the Vehicle arrived at the House, and Claus entered said House via the chimney.

Said Claus was clad in a red fur suit, which was partially covered with residue from the chimney, and he carried a large sack containing a portion of the aforementioned packages, toys, and other unknown items. He was smoking what appeared to be tobacco in a small pipe in blatant violation of local ordinances and health regulations.

Claus did not speak, but immediately began to fill the stocking of the minor children, which hung adjacent to the chimney, with toys and other small gifts. (Said items did not, however, constitute "gifts" to said minor pursuant to the applicable provisions of the U.S. Tax Code.)

Upon completion of such task, Claus touched the side of his nose and flew, rose and/or ascended up the chimney of the House to the roof where the Vehicle and Deer waited and/or served as "lookouts." Claus immediately departed for an unknown destination.

However, prior to the departure of the Vehicle, Deer and Claus from said House, the party of the first part did hear Claus state and/or exclaim: "Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night!" Or words to that effect. ]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/the%2Dnight%2Dbefore%2Dchristmas%2Das%2Dwritten%2Dby%2Da%2Dlawyer%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-45389 Mon, 20 Dec 2010 08:00:00 GMT <![CDATA[Legal Malpractice Claims on The RIse]]> legal malpractice claims, I found this recent article by the Insurance Law Journal very interesting.  According to the Journal, legal malpractice claims (claims by clients against their former lawyers) are on the rise.  The Journal speculates the reason has to do with more and more lawyers struggling to find business in the current economy and feeling the need to practice "door" law; meaning the feel the need to take any and every case that comes in the door.  The problem with this is not every lawyer can handle every type of case.  Plain and simple.  I don't handle divorce cases, because I don't know how.  I don't handle criminal cases, because I don't know how.  Unfortunately, and I see this in my practice all the time, domestic relations lawyers and criminal lawyers far too often think they can handle a personal injury case.  "How hard could it be" they ask themselves. 
The answer is "very."  Personal injury cases are filled with landmines that pose potential legal malpractice implications to lawyers unexperienced in this area.  I consistently see clients that have gone to their traffic ticket lawyer or the lawyer that wrote their will with their personal injury case and he or she has missed the statute of limitations, or failed to get the defendant served, or missed a key piece of evidence, or failed to take into consideration the effect of insurance subrogation lien.  Often times, I am unable to assist this clients with their current case because it has been mishandled so badly.  Our only hope of making the client whole is to bring a claim against their former lawyer for legal malpractice. 
What's more troubling is that it doesn't have to be this way.  Most states allow lawyers to share fees in cases.  This means that the divorce lawyer or traffice ticket lawyer can refer the case to an experienced personal injury lawyer to handle the case and share in any fees generated.  It's a "win-win."  The client gets the best represenation, the referring lawyer gets a portion of the fee and doesn't risk commiting malpractice or harming the client's case.  Hopefully, although not likely, this article will entice lawyers to do the right thing. 

hp]]> http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/legal%2Dmalpractice%2Dclaims%2Don%2Dthe%2Drise%2Ecfm www.poppelawfirm.com-44925 Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:00:00 GMT