Virginia Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice Blog

VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT REJECTS DISABLED MAN'S CHALLENGE TO CHARITABLE IMMUNITY LAW

VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT REJECTS DISABLED MAN'S CHALLENGE TO CHARITABLE IMMUNITY LAW

The Supreme Court of Virginia has rejected a disabled adult's challenge to Virginia's charitable immunity law in a case filed against Didlake, Inc.

Juan R. Jimenez, a 25-year-old man with severe mental and physical disabilities had alleged in a lawsuit that employees of Didlake, Inc., a major provider of services and jobs for the disabled in Virginia, caused a severe leg fracture when handling him on April 13, 2007.

Didlake denied that it was responsible in any way and asserted that it was immune from being sued because it was a charitable corporation. Jimenez, through his attorney, Benjamin Glass, asserted that Didlake was "big business" doing approximately $32 million a year in revenue and that the charitable immunity laws were never intended to protect a major corporate enterprise.

Charitable immunity is a common law doctrine abolished by most states. This doctrine provides that a charitable entity cannot be sued by a beneficiary who is injured while in its care.
Glass III, a personal-injury lawyer based in Fairfax, Va., says:

"In some ways Virginia is still in the dark ages when it comes to who it grants immunity from lawsuit to. The law, carried over from England, was designed to ensure that money donated to a charity was not used to pay lawsuits. Didlake receives less than .02 percent of its revenue from donations, and it is fully insured."

Jimenez's mother, Iris N. Figueroa-Jimenez, said:

"I am very disappointed that we will never know exactly what happened to Juan that day. Because of his condition he cannot speak and relies 100% on other people to care for him. I sent him to Didlake in good condition that day and he ended up needing surgery and a rod placed in his leg. I don't understand how the law could say that the courthouse doors are closed to someone like him."

To schedule an interview with Attorney Benjamin Glass, call 703-591-9829. A Q&A sheet on this case is available.
# # #

Didlake, Inc asks attorney blogger to remove factual post about lawsuit

The blogging world will appreciate this.

Our firm handled a case against a local company that cares for disabled adults. We alleged that the negligence of the staff of Didlake, Inc. caused serious injury to a disabled adult, necessitating surgery to install a titanium rod into his leg. Didlake denied the claim, denied it was responsible and took the position that it couldn't be sued because it was a "charitable organization" entitled to charitable immunity.

The trial court ruled that Didlake was right and that this severely disabled adult could not sue it.

We took the case to the Supreme Court of Virginia and lost. We were challenging Didlake's assertion, as a multi-million dollar organization, that it was entitled to "charitable immunity.

Didlake won the argumemt and full credit to them for asserting the winning argument this time.

However, the case is important. In our view charitable immunity is a relic from the dark ages, especially in a world of insurance (which Didlake has) and the fact that the charitable immunity doctrine singles out ONLY those who are receiving the benefit of the charity, and makes them the sacrificial lambs in the interest of something as ill-defined and nebulous as the "public interest."

Anyway, several bloggers picked up on our press release and blogs and of course, there is a court opinion on the case. The opinion is favorable to Didlake.

So its just very interesting that Didlake is trying to convince bloggers to take down factual, truthful, blogs.

Here's Seattle Personal injury attorney Jason Epstein's blog on the issue.

Here's a report in the general press about the lawsuit against Didlake, Inc.

Here's another blog on the lawsuit against Didlake.


Here is Didlake's letter to the attorney blogger.