Attorney Blog

Sobering Facts on Drunk Driving

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)37671 — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 08:00:00 EST

While driving down the road, it is a common occurrence to see signs dedicated to the memory of someone killed by a drunk driver with the notice “please don’t drink and drive”. Though many of us breathe a sigh of disappointment and sadness whenever we encounter these signs, it amazes me how the dangers of drunk driving still don’t phase thousands of people, even with the dire consequences.

In my line of work as a personal injury lawyer, I am constantly interacting with individuals tragically affected by drunk drivers. If the tragic loss of life, and the physical and psychological injuries suffered by the victims isn’t enough reason to stay sober behind the wheel, I don’t know what is.

Here are some sobering facts on drunk driving.  

Roughly 65% of fatal car accidents in the United States is brought on by drunk drivers.
There are two million alcohol-related auto accidents every year.
The average drunk driver has a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) of .20, which is double the legal limit.
In order for a 180 lb man to reach this level, he would have to consume 14 drinks of 86-proof liquor over a 4-hour period.
Between 7 p.m. and 3 a.m., 10% of all drivers are over the limit.
80% of alcohol- consuming adults admit to drinking and driving.

Though drunk driving has been on a steady decline for the last ten years, intoxicated drivers still contribute to 37% of deadly car accidents every year. In fact, there is a 60% chance that you will fall victim to a drunk driver. But how are you to protect yourself against the reckless behavior of an intoxicated driver? The recent article, Top Ways to Spot a Drunk Driver by Seattle personal injury lawyer Jason Epstein, at the Seattle car accident law firm, Premier Law Group, tackles this issue and will help you identify and protect yourself from drunk drivers.

Getting Hit by a Bat is a Risk You Take When at a Baseball Game

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)37049 — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:00:00 EST

Another dumb lawsuit has been filed. This time, it involves a New York Mets’ fan.

50-year-old James Falzon is suing over injuries he allegedly sustained after he was struck by a bat during a baseball game at Shea Stadium. The baseball fan claims that he was hit in the face and “suffered significant injuries.”

The incident occurred three years ago when Luis Castillo swung the Rawlings bat, which broke apart and smashed into the face of Mr. Falzon. He was sitting in the visitor’s dugout when he was struck. Allegedly, Mr. Falzon broke his nose and eye socket and now has permanent metal plates and pins.

Luis Castillo, the Mets, Major League Baseball and the maker of the bat are all named as defendants. However, Mr. Falzon didn’t stop there. He is also suing Ramon Castro, the player who owned the bat at the time.

Mr. Falzon told the New York Post that he was watching the ball and that the shards from the bat hit him in the face and knocked him off his chair.

While you might feel sorry for this guy after he was hit in the face with a bat, his lawsuit is still dumb. Being struck by a bat (or a ball for that matter) is a risk of attending a baseball game. It’s just like when you go to a hockey game there is a chance you will come face-to-face with a hockey puck. It’s the risk you take when attending a sporting event.

Who Pays for Damages When You Are Hit By An Illegal Immigrant Who Is Drunk?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)36958 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 08:00:00 EST

A tragic story in Prince William has brought up many questions and concerns.

On August 1, 2010, 66-year-old Jeanette M. Mosier, a Catholic nun also known in her Benedictine Order as Sister Denise Mosier, was hit and killed by an alleged drunk driver. It turns out that the driver, Carlos A. Martinelly Montano, is in the country illegally.

This was Mr. Montano’s third DUI in five years. He is now being charged with involuntary manslaughter.

While this sad story has ignited heated debate regarding immigration policies, it has also left people wondering what happens when you are hit and injured by an illegal immigrant. There is a strong likelihood that Mr. Montano had no insurance or only minimal coverage, due to the fact that he had been convicted of drunk driving before.

All too often, people are hit and either killed or injured in Virginia car accidents. Many of these accidents involve motorists who have little to no insurance. That means that there may not be enough insurance to even cover the claim. The insurance that would apply in these types of situations is underinsured motorist coverage. In fact, underinsured motorist coverage was designed for this specific circumstance and can help offset damages resulting from an accident.

I explain all of this in my book, Buying Car Insurance in Virginia, which can be ordered free at theinsurancebook.com.

We also provide free car insurance reviews. All you have to do is fax our office at 703-783-0686.

Ben Glass Selected for Inclusion in Best Lawyers 2011

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)36886 — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 08:00:00 EST

Dear Benjamin W. Glass III:

Congratulations on having been selected by your peers for inclusion in the 2011 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® in the practice areas of Legal Malpractice Law, Medical Malpractice Law and Personal Injury Litigation. For over a quarter of a century, Best Lawyers® has been regarded - by both the profession and the public - as the definitive guide to legal excellence in the United States.

Selection to Best Lawyers is based on an exhaustive and rigorous peer-review survey comprising more than 3.1 million confidential evaluations by the top attorneys in the country. Because no fee or purchase is required, being listed in Best Lawyers is considered a singular honor. Our annual, advertisement-free publication has been described by The American Lawyer as "the most respected referral list of attorneys in practice."

Again, congratulations on being selected by your peers to be included in Best Lawyers.

Sincerely,

Steven Naifeh
President
Best Lawyers

What Happens If You Get Injured Following Google's Walking Directions

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)36501 — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 08:00:00 EST

So this lady wants to go on a walk. She gets walking directions from "Google Maps" and uses her smartphone to start walking.

She ends up walking on a busy highway and gets hit.

Who do you sue?

Google, of course.

Read the lawsuit at DumbLawSuitofTheMonth.com

Motorcycle Accidents are Especially Dangerous

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)36237 — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

The following is a guest post from the Premier Law Group, a Seattle auto accident law firm:

Working as personal injury lawyers and helping the victims of severe motorcycle accidents regularly, we know firsthand how dangerous these motorcycle accidents are and how difficult the recovery process can be. The over 4 million motorcyclists registered in the United States are drawn in by the fuel efficiency and freedom the bike provides, but not having the protective metal barrier other vehicles possess, motorcyclists are 16 times more likely to be killed and 3 times more likely to be injured in an accident.    

There are many things that can lead to a motorcycle accident: speed, alcohol, helmet usage and road and weather conditions all can contribute to a collision. Often enough, however, the accident is of no fault of the motorcyclist and is due to the inattention of another vehicle. According to recent studies, 92% of motorcyclist involved in accidents were self-taught riders or riders who learned the ways of the bike from family or friends. By attending formal training riders not only reduce their chances of being involved in a self-created accident -they also learn to avoid accidents created by other motorists, and how to navigate through tough road and weather conditions. Those who attend such classes also decrease their risk of injury from an accident dramatically, as they learn how to deal with chaotic situations in the best way possible.   

When a motorcycle accident does occur, there are some necessary steps to take that you may not be familiar with. Seattle personal injury attorney, Jason G. Epstein, with the Seattle auto accident law firm, Premier Law Group, has written a book, The Truth About Washington Motorcycle Accidents. The book discusses the ins and outs of a motorcycle accident claim and can help you decide the best course of action to take with your case. This book is being offered FREE to Washington State residents.

Driving Under the Influence of Prescription Drugs

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)36241 — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

The following is a guest post from the Premier Law Group, a Seattle auto accident law firm:

Individuals driving under the influence often cause horrific accidents. With 2 million alcohol-related accidents occurring every year in the United States, it is understandable that drunk driving takes the lime light in auto accident discussions. In the last ten years, however, another drug has crept up and is posing as serious a threat to drivers as the drunk driving epidemic. The new intoxicated driving method—prescription medications.    

You may be wondering how relevant this issue is to everyday life since medications are prescribed under the direction of a doctor. How bad can they be, right? Recently, there was a Seattle car accident case won through the Bellevue personal injury law office, Premier Law Group, in which a construction worker was run over and drug 20 feet by a man who had fallen asleep at the wheel. Sure, you think people get drowsy at the wheel without impairment all the time, but this particular driver was under the influence of prescription medication. And what’s more, the medication had not been prescribed to him.    

The construction worker suffered massive injuries, which not only sent him to the hospital for an extensive period of time, also disabled him from returning to his chosen profession and he had to learn another trade.   

Recent statistics show that 6 million Americans have likewise used prescription drugs for non-medical related purposes and the majority of these have driven while under the influence of the medication. But why is this growing problem never really addressed in society and how dangerous can prescription drugs really be? The article, Drugs and Driving, written by Seattle car accident attorney, Jason G. Epstein, discusses this growing epidemic and sheds some light on the grave dangers prescription drug abusers put themselves and other motorists in every day.

Man Falls Off Operating Table...Hospital Says It's "Conducting an Investigation"

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35817 — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

Even the most nervous patient, who has imagined every possible worst-case scenario involving surgery, probably couldn’t have anticipated this one. A Minnesota man died after rolling off the operating table. The 61-year-old patient was sedated at the time of his fatal fall. But, no cause for alarm regarding patient safety at St. Joseph’s Hospital in St. Paul, Minnesota, because it is “conducting an investigation.”

Max DeVries was scheduled for a routine procedure when he rolled off the operating table and struck his head on the ground. He hit his head in the very spot where doctors had removed a portion of his skull due to brain swelling. Apparently the Velcro straps that had secured the 300-pound man failed.

Mr. DeVries later died. A lawsuit has been filed by his family, which states that the hospital didn’t use proper procedures and equipment to protect Mr. DeVries. According to the lawsuit, the fall was the “direct cause of, or contributed to” his death.

What did the hospital have to say?

According to the Minnesota Star Tribune, the hospital released a statement saying, "St. Joseph's Hospital and HealthEast Care System take this situation and this family's concerns very seriously. We extend sincere sympathy to the family of Max DeVries. St. Joseph's Hospital and HealthEast Care System have a strong commitment to patient safety and have been nationally recognized for providing the highest quality patient care. When there are patient safety concerns, we always conduct a thorough internal investigation to ensure that our processes meet rigorous standards for safety and implement improvements that we believe will advance safety."

It’s been months after this accident, how can the hospital be conducting an investigation?

This is an event that should never have happened. Put it up there with other “never should have happened” events, like wrong site surgery.

Doctors Aren't Reporting Impaired & Incompetent Colleagues, According to Survey

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35407 — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association will make you think twice when you are receiving medical care.

According to the survey of nearly 3,000 physicians, the monitoring of impaired and incompetent doctors is not considered common. Thirty-six percent of the survey respondents said that they do not feel obligated by professional commitment to report impaired or incompetent physicians. It also appeared that physicians with greater experience, of 20 years or more, were not as likely to feel a responsibility to report fellow practitioners.

Catherine DesRoches, lead author of the study, was quoted as saying, “self-regulation is the main way to protect patients from harm and make sure that impaired and incompetent physicians get the help they need.”

When it comes to explaining why physicians don’t feel obligated to report other doctors, DesRoches says, “it’s possible that there’s a cultural issue here. It’s a topic that might not have been addressed back when they were in medical school, so they do not know how to handle it.”

What was even more frightening about this study is that the question posed by researchers wasn’t necessarily hypothetical. Researchers found that in the last three years, 17 percent of the survey respondents had direct knowledge of an impaired or incompetent colleague.

The results of this survey give all the more reason why we need lawyers to protect patients with malpractice claims.

Joint Commission Works to Prevent Wrong Site Surgery

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)16391 — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

The Joint Commission Board of Commissioners originally approved the Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong Procedure and Wrong Person Surgery^TM in July 2003, and it became effective July 1, 2004 for all accredited hospitals, ambulatory care and office-based surgery facilities. The Universal Protocol was created to address the continuing occurrence of wrong site, wrong procedure and wrong person surgery in Joint Commission accredited organizations. The Universal Protocol drew upon, and expanded and integrated, a series of requirements under The Joint Commission's 2003 and 2004 National Patient Safety Goals. There are three principal components of the Universal Protocol: conducting a preprocedure verification process, marking the procedure site, and performing a time-out before the procedure.

Joint Commission Works to Prevent Wrong Site Surgery

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)16392 — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

If You Didn't Like the Agreement Associated with the Apple iPhone, You Should Have Just Walked Away

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35405 — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

Another frivolous lawsuit has been filed. This time, it involves Apple Inc. and AT&T Inc.

A federal judge has allowed a case against Apple and AT&T to move forward as a class action. The companies are being accused of monopoly abuse. This lawsuit will consolidate several that have been filed by consumers who purchased iPhones beginning in 2007.

Here are some of the issues that are raised in this ridiculous lawsuit:

The amount of control Apple has over the applications iPhone owners are allowed to install on the devices.
Apple’s practice of “locking” iPhones so that they could only be used on AT&T’s network.
The claim that Apple secretly made AT&T its exclusive iPhone partner in the United States for five years.
Consumers agreed to two-year contracts with the wireless carrier, but were “in effect locked into a five-year relationship with AT&T.”
These actions by the companies allegedly "hurt competition and drove up prices for consumers."

According to court documents, portions of the lawsuit that address violations of antitrust law will continue on as a class action. The class is comprised of all consumers who purchased iPhones with a two-year AT&T agreement since June 2007.

This lawsuit is stupid. If you didn’t like the idea of a two-year agreement with AT&T, which was apparently required to get the iPhone, you should have just walked away. This is Apple’s business. Making the decision to purchase an iPhone is completely voluntary.

Physicians are Apparently Talking About "Defensive Medicine"

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35404 — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

It is amazing to me that doctors would actually admit to insurance fraud. Basically, whenever you read a study or survey stating that XX% of doctors regularly practice defensive medicine, what they are really saying is “yes, I commit fraud on a regular basis by ordering excessive tests and procedures.”

A study was published in the June 28th issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine that showed “91% of physician practice defensive medicine.” In actuality, this was a survey of 2,416 physicians asking if they agree with a couple of statements. This “91%” figure wasn't based on medical records or some other concrete fact; it was calculated based on doctors’ opinions.

In March 2010, Medscape.com posted an article, Physicians Are Talking About: The Culture of Defensive Medicine. It included information from an all-physician discussion group, which had asked the question - “Do you practice defensive medicine?”

One neurologist said, “here in southern Michigan, home of (notable) malpractice attorneys, we practice defensive medicine every day, with every patient.”

A radiologist was also quoted in the article as saying, “defensive medicine is practiced everywhere, everyday. And the costs have got to be simply enormous.”

There are many attempts to prove defensive medicine with surveys and general opinions. However, I have yet to read anything that is based on medical records that show that tests, which weren’t warranted by the medical conditions, were ordered. If the medical community is claiming there is defensive medicine going on, why don’t they offer up their medical records to prove it?

Defensive Medicine Costs $210 Billion Annually â€“ Where are the Medical Records?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35403 — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

A study by PricewaterhouseCoopers’ Health Research Institute has come to the conclusion that $210 billion is spent annually on defensive medicine. According to the report, The Price of Excess: Identifying waste in healthcare spending, this deduction is based on interviews with 20 health industry and government executives, a survey of 1,000 U.S. consumers and a review of over 35 studies. The description of the research methodology used doesn’t mention the review of medical records. You would think that would be a good place to look.

The report stated that “according to a PricewaterhouseCoopers’ study with America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), 10% of health costs are attributed to too much care in the form of defensive medicine and associated legal costs. The study suggested that the costs stretch across physician, outpatient, hospital, drugs and other medical services.”

The question that I would like to ask the researchers is where are the medical records that back this claim? I would like to see proof that the patients’ medical conditions didn’t warrant the tests and procedures used.

When it comes to medical care, it is a team effort between the doctor and patient. The doctor diagnoses the condition and recommends a treatment plan. The standard of care requires that the physician explain both the risks and benefits of the treatment. It is then up to the patient to decide whether to pursue the treatment or not.

You can read more about recent research into so-called “defensive medicine,” in the article, What the Doctors in the “Defensive Medicine” Study are Really Saying.

The Adjuster Might Not Be Upfront About Who Pays the Medical Bills After a Virginia Car Accident

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35032 — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

Recently, I talked with a woman who had been injured in a Virginia car accident. She had been following the rules in my guide, 31 Tips for Handling Your Personal Injury Case Without a Lawyer, and had been given some misinformation from the insurance adjuster.

Apparently, the insurance adjuster told her that the insurer didn’t have to pay her medical bills, because her health insurance policy had paid the expenses. That is a lie. Even though her own health insurance company covered her bills, it doesn’t mean the other driver should get credit for it. In fact, what often ends up happening is that the health insurance company will want to be repaid if there is a recovery.

The insurance adjuster had tried to trick the injury victim. Unfortunately, this type of scenario happens all the time. If you have been in an accident, it is therefore crucial that you educate yourself regarding the legal process and understand the rights you have.

For more information, order a copy of my book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim. This book is offered for free to Virginia residents and it is one the insurance company does not want you to read.

We have many other articles that provide insight into dealing with the insurance company, such as Don't Let the Adjuster Try to Intimidate You After a Virginia Car Accident and Dealing With Tricky Virginia Insurance Adjusters.

Is There a Magic Formula Used in Virginia Auto Accident Settlements? Find Out Here.

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35026 — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

A lot of people I talk with share the same common misconceptions regarding Virginia car accidents, including that there is a formula used to determine settlements. The truth is there is no magic formula when it comes to calculating insurance settlements, as each case is unique.

If you were hurt in an auto accident, your case will be different than “the other guy.” The way the accident impacted your life, the amount of medical bills you have incurred and even the time you have had to take away from work will all be considered when determining the value of your claim.

While the insurance company isn’t going to be using a one-size-fits-all formula to settle your claim, the insurance adjuster will have a settlement range that he or she will work within. As you can imagine, the adjuster will start at the low end of the scale.

When serious injuries are involved, it is generally a good idea to work with a Virginia car accident lawyer. An attorney will be able to negotiate with the insurance company on your behalf and take your case to trial, if necessary.

For information regarding what mistakes you need to avoid following an accident, order a copy of my book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim. This book is free to Virginia residents and it is one book that the insurance company won’t want you to read.

What the Doctors in the "Defensive Medicine" Study are Really Saying

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35191 — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

The debate over "defensive medicine" is back in the headlines with the release of a recent survey. Researchers claim that 91 percent of physicians practice “defensive medicine.” On the surface you might think, “Wow, really? 91 percent?” However, let's take a look at what this number portrays.

The survey by Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York asked doctors their opinions about the following statements:

“Doctors order more tests and procedures than patients need to protect themselves against malpractice suits,” and
“Unnecessary use of diagnostic tests will not decrease without protections for physicians against unwarranted malpractice suits.”

The Physicians’ Views on Defensive Medicine: A National Survey was published in the June 28th issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine. To me, the findings are worthless. These doctors were simply answering a question. Any doctor who says that he or she orders unnecessary tests is ultimately admitting to insurance fraud.

You can’t validate a case for “defensive medicine” solely on some doctors’ opinions. Show me the medical records that back up this 91 percent figure that is being promoted. I want proof that these tests and procedures weren’t justified by the medical conditions.

According to Tara Bishop, MD, associate, Division of General Internal Medicine at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and coauthor of the study, “the study shows that an overwhelming majority of physicians support tort reform to decrease malpractice lawsuits and that unnecessary testing, a contributor to rising healthcare costs, will not decrease without it.”

That’s not what this study is telling me. There is a problem, but it doesn’t have to do with medical malpractice claims. It has to do with the healthcare industry. Doctors are working harder and getting paid less, because insurers are under reimbursing physicians. Will tort reform fix that issue?

"I'm Sorry," Aren't the Best Words to Say After a Virginia Car Accident

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)35023 — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

It’s hard to imagine that “I’m sorry” are two words that should generally be avoided after a Virginia car accident.

When you are involved in a collision, there is often a lot of confusion that ensues and it is difficult to know what caused the crash. Emotions tend to run high and it is easy to point the finger at someone else or to even quickly start apologizing for your role in the accident. The thing you need to understand is that there are many factors that are typically involved in an auto accident and accepting blame could hurt your case.

Even if you feel that it is your wrongdoing that caused the accident, don’t admit fault. The statements you make can be held against you in court, which is unfortunate considering you made them when you were under a lot of stress. Be sure to keep the conversation with the other driver limited to only facts and the exchange of information.

You may or may not need a Virginia car accident attorney following your crash. It depends on the severity of your injury and other factors. For more information order a copy of my book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim. This book is free to Virginia residents.

Louisiana Residents' Mental Health May Be At Risk from Oil Spill

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34910 — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

July 9, 2010 - There are many factors that Louisiana health officials are investigating when it comes to the health impact the recent Deepwater Horizon oil spill will have on humans. Air quality and skin contamination are the obvious effects being researched, but now the mental health of residents along the Gulf Coast is becoming a matter of concern.

A $10 million funding request has been brought forth to provide help to the state of Louisiana's "Louisiana Spirit" outreach teams, a subdivision of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals - Office of Mental Health. The program was implemented after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 to combat the associated mental health fallout from the disaster.

Now as the state of Louisiana faces yet another disaster, officials fear that an increase of stress, anxiety, domestic abuse, substance abuse, depression, and suicide may be a result. Cases of Gulf residents suffering mental health conditions have already surfaced. One of the more widely publicized being the suicide of William Kruse, an Alabama boat captain whose charter boat business was in danger from the oil spill.

The $10 million would come from BP, although it is unclear whether the funds would be from the $20 billion fund set aside for settlements and compensation to victims impacted by the spill, or if it would be part of the growing expenses of the cleanup effort.

Doctors involved in the Louisiana Spirit program are optimistic that BP will honor their need and provide the funding necessary to help protect the citizens of Louisiana from the psychological impact the spill may have.

Similar to other traumatic events that may lead to future mental health issues, such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), we may be seeing more cases of mental afflictions 10 or 20 years down the road from current Gulf shore residents. This can cause a rise in medical malpractice cases if doctors fail to properly diagnose and treat these conditions.

Ben Glass Law provides updates on current news stories regarding liability caps and medical malpractice as a service to our clients. We are active with Virginia medical malpractice liability cap cases and have been long involved in reforming their negative impact on deserving victims who have been shortchanged by their limitations. For help with your medical malpractice claims, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Gulf Oil Spill Cleanup Workers at Risk for Health Issues

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34911 — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

July 9, 2010 - An ongoing concern with the BP Gulf oil spill disaster is the health of the workers involved in the cleanup. With these cleanup crews, and independent volunteers coming in direct contact with the aftermath early on in the cleanup process, the long-term effects of exposure are unknown.

Fox News reports that only 2 months into the cleanup efforts more than 400 cases of exposure complaints have been recorded by the American Association of Poison Control Centers. In Louisiana alone, more than 100 oil spill-related cases were reported, 74 of them from workers hired by BP.

Early symptoms from exposure include nausea, dizziness, severe headaches, skin irritation and difficulty breathing, all indications of chemical exposure. The exposure to the contaminants isn't the only danger facing workers - heat index at cleanup sites can reach well over 100 degrees and heat exhaustion is another growing concern.

New measures to screen and train workers prior to cleanup duties have been implemented to try and limit the health impact on those involved. However, because the U.S. has not previously faced an oil disaster this massive, there is still concern about the long-term health risks that may not manifest for several years.

In the last 50 years, at least 400 smaller oil spills have occurred around the world, but only 7 seriously studied for long-term impact on both environment and nearby life. This lack of information to work with is spurring on health surveillance organizations in the Gulf States to properly document the current disaster.

One of the most ambitious programs implemented by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health is the tracking of nearly 15,000 of the 35,000 oil spill response workers. These workers volunteered to be part of a long-term health tracking system that is hopeful in providing analysis and support of those directly in contact with cleanup efforts and exposure.

Unfortunately, one of the potential risks these health concerns bring is the misdiagnosis of future complications from the oil spill exposure. Fears that 20 years from now, doctors will neglect to connect patient health issues to the Gulf oil disaster may cause a rise in medical malpractice claims.

Ben Glass Law provides updates on current news stories regarding liability caps and medical malpractice as a service to our clients. We are active with Virginia medical malpractice liability cap cases and have been long involved in reforming their negative impact on deserving victims who have been shortchanged by their limitations. For help with your medical malpractice claims, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Watching Your Medical Malpractice Settlement Dwindle

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34908 — Sat, 10 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

Just like dangling a carrot on a stick in front of a race horse, a fair settlement to your medical malpractice may be hanging just beyond your reach. As your claim is being settled, you are told by the jury the settlement amount and feel as if you're finally getting the due compensation your family deserves.

As the paperwork is finalized, you may soon face the facts that liability caps have reduced your settlement to the legal limits. Suddenly your plans to use the money awarded for your damages to help redesign your house for handicap access, or pay for plastic surgery to correct a disfigurement has gone out the window. The laws have snatched your carrot away.

I think it's completely absurd that medical malpractice claims can be settled in court, your non-economic damages awarded and approved by the jury, and in the end, the laws can still step in and reduce your settlement. Why bother allowing the jury to offer this pseudo-award in the first place? It only gives victims false hope that they're getting the settlement they're entitled to.

I write for a great blog chronicling the numerous sad tales of how medical malpractice settlements have been whittled away to nothing by Virginia liability caps. These are only a few of the stories that have hit the news in recent months; I'm sure there are plenty more unpublicized cases out there.

Most people can live their lives without worrying about how liability caps may affect them or their loved ones. However, if you are considering a medical malpractice suit, you should read my article to understand how liability caps can affect your settlement. The more you know about the current laws of medical malpractice, the better prepared you can be to see your case through to settlement.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas for their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Liability Caps Hurt the Victims Even After Their Injury

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34909 — Sat, 10 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

It's almost safe to say that if your Virginia medical malpractice settlement reaches beyond the $2 million mark, to hold off on counting your chickens just yet. It's rare to see a Virginia medical malpractice case settle for more than $2 million because of the liability cap designed to protect doctors and hospitals from being sued beyond that amount.

After months, sometimes even years, of going through trial to conclude your medical malpractice case, you finally hear the jury verdict and settlement amount. Finally, you and your family can breathe a sigh of relief that your medical expenses are taken care of and you have a safe financial cushion to help take care of your future needs.

Think again.

The portion of your settlement that is awarded for non-economic damages is subject to the $2 million liability cap imposed by the state of Virginia. If the jury feels you deserve more than $2 million for your pain and suffering, the state says otherwise. They'll let the jury tell you that your non-economic damages are worth $2.5 million, but they won't let them give it to you.

The final amount will be reduced to the state's limits and that's that. Suddenly the funds you were going to use to make your quality of life - which has been diminished by the medical issues you've wrongfully experienced - better have been chipped away to what the state considers fair.

If you are considering a medical malpractice lawsuit, you should read my article to understand how liability caps can affect your settlement. The more you know about the current laws of medical malpractice, the better prepared you can be to see your case through to settlement.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas for their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Do Liability Caps Pose a Safety Threat?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34906 — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

It's a horrible thought, but if there were minimal consequences for you performing your job less than adequately or safely, would you really put all your effort into it? This is the rationale many fear that companies and professionals are taking when it comes to dealing with their duties to consumer safety in regards to liability caps.

While no one will come out and say: "I'm not going to be overly cautious in my safety measures because the liability caps prevent me from being sued beyond $X amount of damages," many of us fear that it could be the case in many industries.

Consider the recent Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf. Investigations have shown that many of their safety measures and inspections were ignored or mishandled. The hope is that if the $75 million liability cap were lifted for the oil industry, the unlimited threat of liability would pressure companies into being more diligent in their safety measures.

In the world of medicine, the hope with the removal of liability caps is that doctors would take extra care to suggest preventative tests and procedures to avoid failure to diagnose or treat a condition, a common malpractice claim. It would also hopefully increase the safety procedures taken before and during an operation to avoid accidents.

My article on the dangers of liability caps explains their impact on companies and professionals, as well as the dangers to consumers. It's important to understand the general purpose of liability claims and how they impact both sides of a lawsuit.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas for their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Opposing Arguments on Lifting Liability Caps

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34907 — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

A common argument against removing or increasing current liability caps is that it will push the smaller, less financially stable companies and professionals out of business. Companies that would be in danger of going bankrupt from a multi-million dollar lawsuit may have to close if they cannot afford the insurance to offer them further protection.

Doctors especially are among the many voices against lifting liability caps for medical malpractice, as many fear their malpractice insurance would skyrocket. Their only options would be to somehow afford the insurance, potentially raising fees and losing clients, or to close completely and avoid a potentially bankrupting lawsuit.

The real matter is that these companies and professionals should focus more on the safe operation of their practices rather than whether or not they're going to get sued for all they are worth. If they'd take more measures to prevent serious accidents, they wouldn't always have to worry about lawsuits dealing with liability caps.

There are many like me that fear the lower liability caps out there are only giving companies and professionals an excuse to be a bit less concerned about causing incidents that would warrant a lawsuit. While it's true that a limitless liability system could potentially turn some companies away from being in business, do you really want a company drilling for oil that can't be financially responsible for the potential risks their operation comes with?

My article on the dangers of liability caps explains their impact on companies and professionals, as well as the dangers to consumers. It's important to understand the general purpose of liability claims and how they impact both sides of a lawsuit.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas for their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Two New Virginia Traffic Laws Took Effect in July

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)15926 — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

Two new Virginia traffic laws went into effect on July 1, 2010, one in which every parent should know about.

16- and 17-Year-Old Passengers Have to Buckle Up
One of the new laws requires passengers age 16 and 17 to wear seatbelts when they are riding in the back seat of a vehicle. Before this law took effect, only young people 15-years-old and under were required to wear seat belts in the back seat.

This bill was suggested by a high school teacher from Herndon, who had known numerous students killed or seriously hurt in car crashes. Police officers now have the authority to pull over a car and issue a ticket if they notice a failure to comply with this law, which is known as primary enforcement.

Move Over if You See a Tow Truck or Highway Maintenance Vehicle
The other new Virginia traffic law requires drivers to change lanes when they approach a tow truck or highway maintenance vehicle displaying amber lights. If they can’t change lanes safely, they need to proceed cautiously.

This bill was accelerated after a tow truck driver was killed in Newport News in August 2009. The tow truck driver was helping a motorist on I-64 when he was hit and killed by another vehicle.

U.S. House Panel Votes to Remove $75 Million Liability Cap

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34576 — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

July 2nd, 2010 - The April 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil disaster that is still spilling millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico has caused lawmakers to reevaluate the 1990 Oil Pollution Act that placed a $75 million liability cap on disasters like this.

A vote yesterday in the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved a bill that discards the current $75 million liability cap on claims for damage produced by oil spills such as the Deepwater Horizon case. The bill also raises the minimum amount of insurance that facilities must hold to $1.5 billion, a substantial increase from the previous amount of $150 million.

Congress is reportedly in favor of eliminating the liability cap in light of the huge public outcry against the tragic explosion that cost 11 rig workers their lives and is currently still spilling oil into the gulf waters, threatening commerce, tourism, and wildlife in the area. A Senate panel recently cleared a bill to toss out liability caps.

The removal of the liability caps set in place by the Oil Pollution Act have been met with some resistance. Some officials fear that the unlimited liability will allow only the largest oil companies to remain in operation and prevent smaller companies from operating due to the uncapped threat of lawsuits. The fate of the liability cap removal at the Senate level remains unclear as they also discuss a broader energy package and House panels fight over who has claim to jurisdiction over oil spill legislation.

Ben Glass Law provides updates on current news stories regarding liability caps as a service to our clients. We are active with Virginia medical malpractice liability cap cases and have been long involved in reforming their negative impact on deserving victims who have been shortchanged by their limitations. For help with your medical malpractice claims, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

West Virginia Liability Cap under Fire from Supreme Court

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34577 — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

June 1st, 2010 - The current West Virginia medical malpractice liability cap set in 2003 limits noneconomic damages to $250,000 in most cases and $500,000 in actions involving serious or traumatic injuries.

The current liability cap came under fire in April of this year when a case challenging the law's constitutionality came into light. The case in question came before the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals and involved a $1.6 million jury verdict in 2008 to James MacDonald and his wife. MacDonald was diagnosed with severe muscle damage following a pneumonia treatment at City Hospital in Martinsburg, WV.

MacDonald alleged the hospital and doctor put him on a drug regimen that worsened his prior kidney transplant and associated conditions, causing the muscle damage. The doctor and hospital both denied any negligence.

The Berkeley County trial court reduced the noneconomic portion of the award, $1.5 million, to the $500,000 cap and rejected arguments from the plaintiffs that the limit violated their jury trial and equal protection rights.

Following this case, the high court directly took up the MacDonald's appeal of the ruling, causing several members of the W. Virginia medical community to gear up for the legal battle.

Ben Glass Law provides updates on current news stories regarding liability caps as a service to our clients. We are active with Virginia medical malpractice liability cap cases and have been long involved in reforming their negative impact on deserving victims who have been shortchanged by their limitations. For help with your medical malpractice claims, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Liability Caps Give Little Incentive for Safety

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34574 — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

There's two sides to the liability caps coin: one side shows that if we threaten with a big penalty for liability, the amount of incidents and malpractice will go down. On the other side, if a company or individual knows that their liability is capped at a certain amount they can afford, there's little incentive to make sure they never have to meet those liability caps.

Liability caps are designed to enforce the responsibility of high-risk fields such as oil companies and medical practitioners. In these fields where lawsuits and mishaps resulting in millions of dollars in damages occur on a fairly regular basis, the idea of liability caps came into play.

The purpose was to protect the companies and doctors from frivolous lawsuits that over claimed for non-economical damages - commonly known as "pain and suffering" or "emotional damages." The problem is that liability caps can work both ways - they deter companies/doctors that can't afford their maximum cap in liability from operating, or they allow those who can easily afford the cap to not worry about safety as much because they'll only be liable to a point.

My issue with medical malpractice liability caps is that they limit the amount of compensation deserving victims and their families are allowed. Liability caps provide little incentive to perform exceptionally because they limit the liability a doctor faces, especially if they also carry malpractice insurance. If you knew you could be liable for an infinite amount of damages should you wrongfully harm a patient, wouldn't you take extra precautions?

It's not just medical malpractice that suffers from liability caps allowing for a bit of slacking off in the safety and responsibility department. My article on the oil industry and liability caps talks more about the effect liability caps has on an industry that, as we've seen, has the potential to cause billions of dollars of damages in a matter of weeks.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas for their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Don't Raise Liability Caps â€“ Eliminate Them

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34575 — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

Trial and error is often the tactic used to determine how effective a regulation is. Over time, new laws and legislation is tested by comparing statistics and doing analysis of impact to determine if the parameters of the law are adequately set. While this seems like a good idea in some respects, would you like this guess-and-check strategy applied to serious matters like the gulf oil spill?

The current $75 million liability cap is considered to be too low by some, and there's a proposal to raise it to $10 billion. Seeing as how BP has been able to offer up $20 billion in additional claims coverage, $10 billion doesn't look like it will scare oil giants like them at all. There's even some that are saying the liability cap shouldn't be changed, or even lowered, because high liability caps deter smaller, less financially sound companies from operating.

I don't think I want an under-funded, small oil company drilling off MY shores, do you?

Oil companies, airlines, and doctors alike need to be held liable for their negligence no matter what the cost. Just by performing due diligence in safety measures and extra caution when operating will decrease the amount of tragic accidents and eliminate the fear of liability. If you can be sued for all you're worth, you'd take a few extra steps to ensure you're doing your job, right?

It's not just medical malpractice that suffers from liability caps allowing for a bit of slacking off in the safety and responsibility department. My article on the oil industry and liability caps talks more about the effect liability caps has on an industry that, as we've seen, has the potential to cause billions of dollars of damages in a matter of weeks.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas for their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

Study Finds Serious Problems with Infection Control at U.S. Surgery Centers

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34237 — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

You go in for a simple foot operation and end up with a serious infection. It wasn’t what you signed up for and it certainly wasn’t what you expected following your surgery.

According to a new federal study, surgery centers that offer same-day procedures have major infection control issues. Some of the potential culprits include the failure to wash hands, wear gloves and clean blood glucose meters. If that weren’t bad enough, researchers discovered that there were clinics that actually reused devices meant for one patient or dipped into single-dose medicine vials for numerous people.

The study’s findings were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which implied that these sloppy infection controls could be occurring in the country’s nearly 5,000 outpatient centers.

Among the centers studied, researchers found that 67 percent had at least one lapse in infection control and 57 percent were noted as having deficiencies. Researchers did not evaluate whether these problems led to infections in patients.

The lead author of the study, Dr. Melissa Schaefer of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was quoted as saying, “these are basic fundamentals of infection control, things like cleaning your hands, cleaning surfaces in patient care areas. It’s all surprising and somewhat disappointing.”

Outpatient centers are a growing area of the U.S. healthcare system that conduct over 6 million procedures each year. These procedures range from exams to plastic surgery.

If you believe you have been harmed by medical malpractice in Virginia, be sure to order a free copy of my book, Why Most Medical Malpractice Victims Never Recover a Dime.

The Purpose of Liability Caps

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34572 — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

It seems like the news media loves a juicy story about outlandishly large lawsuits that are either for absurd matters or for ridiculous settlements. Even the entertainment industry often dramatizes lawsuit settlements, often giving the world of litigation a bad reputation.

In an effort to stop frivolous or inappropriate lawsuits, many industries have established liability caps to limit the amount individuals or companies can be sued for. While at face value this sounds like a good way to protect people like doctors from being sued to the point of bankruptcy, liability caps aren't always as effective as they like to think they are.

In the world of medical malpractice, the liability caps set by each state are in place to protect the doctors from losing too much of their livelihood should an issue arise. While most medical malpractice lawsuits settle for well under the liability cap, there are still many instances where the victim or their family really need and deserve a settlement above the liability cap.

No one likes the threat of a lawsuit hanging over their head; that's why people form limited liability companies and why many contracts include specific clauses about who is liable for what. Liability is a serious issue when there is a threat of large damages resulting from an accident. My article on liability caps gives the basics of what they are and how they affect lawsuits.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas during their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

The Effects of Liability Caps on The Public

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34573 — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:00:00 EST

Each state carries its own limits when it comes to a liability cap for medical malpractice, some more generous than others. In Virginia, our medical malpractice liability cap is set at $2 million, which seems like a large sum until you look at the details of a serious malpractice claim.

Expenses and losses can add up quickly when calculating damages from a medical malpractice claim. How would you like to be a grieving family suffering the unexpected loss of a family member from malpractice, only to find that a liability cap is preventing your family from collecting the appropriate damages to cover these expenses?

When laws like liability caps are created they take into consideration the general, projected effect they will have on the people governed by these laws. Unfortunately, the only way to determine how effective (or ineffective) these laws are is with trial and error and time. We don't get the specific cases we can cite until someone-or multiple parties-experience the negative effects of a liability cap.

Regrettably, in my years as a Virginia medical malpractice attorney, I've seen my fair share of families devastated by the injury or loss of a loved one as a result of malpractice. I've also bore witness to several cases settling above the Virginia $2 million liability cap that are shorted at the end to comply with this law. Being awarded a fair settlement only to have it snipped off by the liability cap is just plain cruel to these families.

While I'm by no means a proponent of frivolous lawsuits, I do see many instances of how the Virginia liability cap for medical malpractice harms well-deserving families. My article on liability caps gives the basics of what they are and how they affect lawsuits.

Understanding liability caps is important when you are seeking to file a lawsuit, especially for medical malpractice. Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass has been fighting to help victims in the Virginia and D.C. areas for their medical malpractice claims. For more information, contact us today - 703-591-9829.

2 MORE Actions That Can Hurt Your Richmond Car Accident Claim

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34235 — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

In a previous blog post, 3 Actions That Can Hurt Your Richmond Car Accident Claim, I talked about some of the things that could negatively impact your case. That was just a partial list. You need to be aware of two more actions that could make the difference in the outcome of your Richmond auto accident claim.

Not having accurate tax returns. When it comes to a personal injury claim, you have to be able to show the amount of income you have lost due to the car accident. Your past tax returns are used to back up your lost income. You therefore need to be prepared to produce your tax returns if you plan on filing a lawsuit and claiming lost wages. These tax returns need to be pristine.
Misrepresenting your amount of activity. It may seem shocking that insurance companies would actually hire private investigators to follow claimants, but it does happen. You may be unaware that you are under video surveillance. If you weren’t forthcoming about your activity level and you are caught on tape doing something that contradicts your injuries, you could have just lost your case.

For more information regarding what to avoid after a Richmond car crash, order a copy of the book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim.

3 Actions That Can Hurt Your Richmond Car Accident Claim

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)34232 — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

You probably know that there are certain things you need to do following a Richmond car accident, like making sure there is a police report filed and seeking the appropriate medical care. What you might not be aware of is that there are actions that can negatively impact your chances of recovering compensation.

It hardly seems fair that you could mistakenly do things that would hurt your claim. After all, how are you supposed to know what you should and shouldn’t do?

Below is a list of actions that could wreck your case:

Going to a doctor who you were referred to by your Richmond car accident attorney. This practice is so detrimental to an injury claim that some local judges call it “the kiss of death” to a case.
Forgetting to tell your lawyer about past accidents. Once your case begins, the other side is going to be looking into your past accidents. They have easy access to this information. Therefore, you need to make sure your attorney is informed of any previous crashes. That will help him or her determine if the accident history will affect your case or not.
Hiding previous injuries from your attorney. If you have ever been evaluated or treated for a medical condition, there will be a record. That means the insurance company will know about it too and so should your lawyer. As long as your attorney knows this information upfront, he or she can deal with it properly.

For more information regarding what to avoid after a Richmond auto accident, order a copy of the book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim.

4 Tips on Finding a Richmond Car Accident Attorney

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)33964 — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

You have undoubtedly heard countless lawyer advertisements on television and radio. You have probably passed numerous attorney billboards as you drove along the highway. Yet, you most likely didn’t pay attention to these marketing messages, because at the time, you didn’t need a Richmond car accident attorney. Now that you do, it can be quite overwhelming hiring the right lawyer for your case.

Here are some tips to help you with the process:

1.    Get a referral from an attorney you know. If you have a friend, family member or acquaintance who is a lawyer, it is a good place to start. Even if this person doesn’t practice the area of law you need, he or she might know someone who does.

2.    Contact the local bar association. Generally, the local bar association will have a lawyer referral service.

3.    Beware of the attorney who solicits you first. If you are contacted by a lawyer following your Richmond car accident, be careful. Many attorneys will contact injured people for the sole purpose of soliciting claims. They might use a “runner,” who will go to the hospital to encourage victims to sign contracts with attorneys.

4.    Interview several Richmond car accident lawyers. Don’t be afraid to ask questions regarding their background, experience and whether any significant verdicts or settlements have been achieved. Also, ask them to send you a written informational package.

For more information on hiring a lawyer and what is involved in Richmond accident claims, order your free copy of the book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim.

Insurance Company Tricks That Might Be Used on Your Richmond Car Accident Claim

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)33962 — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

The insurance company has a “bag of tricks” that it is just waiting to use to either deny your Richmond car accident claim or lower its value. You have to be aware of these tactics and do what you can to avoid becoming a victim of the insurance company.

Some of these insurance company tricks include the following:

1.    Telling you to go through the other driver’s insurance company to get your car appraised or fixed. Your own insurance company might tell you that you have to go this route because it was the other guy’s fault. You have insurance for a reason and it is often much quicker to have your car fixed by utilizing your own coverage.

2.    Secretly videotaping you. Insurance companies have been known to hire private investigators to take video surveillance of accident victims. The hope is that they will catch you doing something that can be used against you during settlement negotiations.

3.    Going through YouTube, Google and social networking sites. The insurance company will be looking at your postings and videos of activity. The insurer may go as far as attempting to be your “cyber-buddy” to try to get you to admit to certain facts.

4.    Failing to settle claims for a fair amount. The insurance company might put you at risk of financial disaster by either failing to offer a fair settlement or by delaying your claim.

5.    Dissuading you from talking to a Richmond car accident lawyer. The insurance company knows that you have a better chance of receiving a higher settlement if a lawyer represents you.

For more information on insurance company tricks following a Richmond auto accident, order a copy of my book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim.

I Bet You Didn't Know You Were at War Following Your Virginia Auto Accident

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)33465 — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

Insurance companies appear so accommodating in their television commercials and radio advertisements. They make is seem as though they are there to help you and are on your side, which may be true – until you became injured. The day you were injured in your Virginia auto accident you stepped into a war zone.

Basically, insurance companies have declared war on injured people and their Virginia car accident attorneys. Juries and verdicts have even been impacted by this waged war. Insurance companies have been so successful in tainting the minds of jurors that they often don’t offer fair settlements until you show that you are more than ready and willing to go to trial.

If this concept sounds like a stretch, let me ask you this question – what was your view of auto accident lawyers and people who file personal injury lawsuits? The millions of dollars the insurance companies threw towards advertising may have unknowingly influenced you. Maybe you thought that a personal injury lawyer was a bad person and that people who file lawsuits after car accidents are trying to steal from society. If that is how you felt, I’m sure your view changed once you were the one who became injured.

You are at war. So, make sure that you are ready for the battle.

For more information, order a free copy of my book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim.

Uninsured Motorist Coverage May Not Have Seemed Important â€“ Until You Were in a Virginia Car Accident

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)33463 — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

There are so many careless drivers on the road today. You can see these people texting and driving, talking on cell phones, eating and even grooming, when they should be paying attention to the road. What is even more alarming is that some of these individuals may be driving recklessly without car insurance.

People can legally drive in Virginia with no auto insurance, as our state has a strange law where they can get away with paying a $500 fee in lieu of purchasing insurance coverage. It’s a stupid thing to do, but you would be surprised at the number of people who go this route. That means there are countless drivers on the road without means to pay if they cause serious injury to someone else. If you get in an accident with an irresponsible driver, you better hope your insurance will cover your damages.

Even for drivers who do have auto insurance, Virginia law only requires a minimum coverage of $25,000 for bodily injury or death of one person or $50,000 per collision. That is not a lot of money when you are left with a lifelong injury that requires extensive medical treatment and long-term care.

You need to have uninsured motorist coverage as part of your policy and you need to have a high limit. Otherwise, if you end up in a Virginia car accident with some person who decided not to pay the money for insurance, you will be left with a mountain of bills. And believe me, it does happen.

For tips on purchasing auto insurance, order a free copy of my book, Buying Car Insurance: The Ultimate Guide to Protecting Your Family from Irresponsible Drivers in Virginia.

The Dangers of Delivery Trucks

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)33481 — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

The following is a guest post from the Illinois truck accident lawyers of Dolan Law Offices:

Big rig truck accidents are routinely reported in the news because they often cause serious injuries and fatalities. However, other types of truck accidents can be just as dangerous.

Consider, for example, delivery trucks. In the age of Internet shopping, delivery trucks such as those driven by large companies like UPS and FedEx, are prevalent on our roadways.

Common Causes of Delivery Truck Accidents
Unlike tractor-trailers, delivery trucks often travel on local roads where there are many other cars, bikers, and pedestrians. Drivers are required to deliver packages as quickly as possible and are often rushing from stop to stop. They are also distracted looking for the next house or business for delivery. Each day brings a slightly different route with different stops for most delivery truck drivers, which makes things even more dangerous.

Liability for Delivery Truck Accidents
The delivery truck driver and/or the delivery company that employs that driver may be liable for damages caused in an accident. An experienced truck accident lawyer will thoroughly investigate your case and determine the cause of the accident. Your damages may include compensation for past and future medical costs, rehabilitation costs, lost income, out of pocket expenses and pain and suffering. Your truck accident lawyer will work hard to provide you with a fair and equitable settlement for your delivery truck accident injuries.

Dolan Law Offices represents victims of Illinois truck accidents, including victims of delivery truck accidents.

Words You Don't Want To See In Your Long-Term Disability Insurance Policy

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)32902 — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

Years ago, the United States Supreme Court made the decision to allow insurance companies to “reserve discretion” for benefits available under disability insurance plans sponsored by employers. If you see the phrase, “we have discretion to determine benefits,” in your policy, you need to recognize that these are dangerous words.

This discretionary clause often causes big problems for people applying for benefits. Basically, the Supreme Court’s ruling gave insurance companies the power to add this clause into their own policies, which in essence, makes their decisions nearly irreversible by courts. If you are looking to file a claim for long-term disability benefits in Virginia, you need to keep in mind that you are not on a level playing field with the insurance company.

When you take the insurance company to court because you were found not to be disabled, you have a huge obstacle to overcome. It is not going to be easy to bear that heavy burden.

This discretionary clause is not required by the law and unfortunately, many employers do not understand the impact it has on their employees. Employers need to insist that these clauses are not in their long-term disability policies.

If you have filed for long-term disability or are contemplating making a claim, it would be wise to talk with a Virginia disability insurance attorney who has experience in ERISA disability claims.

For more information about Virginia, long-term disability claims order a copy of my book Robbery Without a Gun.

What You Need to Know About Long-Term Disability Insurance Companies

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)32901 — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

Before you were injured or became too ill to work, you probably didn’t have a lot of concern about what would happen in this type of event. You knew you had disability insurance through your employer, so you felt confident that you and your family would be protected. If you have already been denied long-term disability benefits in Virginia, you were most likely taken off guard and who wouldn’t be?

Here is what you need to understand about insurance companies – they exist for one reason only, which is to make a profit for their shareholders. Just because you write a letter and are being reasonable, doesn’t mean you are going to get paid.

Insurance company forms are frequently used for the intent of denying disability claims. These forms ask for information from you, which is later used against you and as a basis to deny your claim.

The insurance company may offer an appeal process, but it is not fair and unbiased. When you really dissect the appeal process, you can see that the insurance company would still be in charge of paying money and therefore there is an incentive to continue to deny your claim.

Even judges have acknowledged that claimants are not on the same level playing field with the insurance companies.

If you have filed for long-term disability or are contemplating making a claim, it would be wise to talk with a Virginia disability insurance lawyer who has experience in ERISA disability claims.

For more information on disability claims and insurance companies, order a copy of my book Robbery Without a Gun.

Wondering How To Reduce Your Risk of a Virginia Distracted Driving Accident?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)32505 — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

There’s a lot of summer travel advice out there already, but one of the most important safety tips has to do with cell phones.

Families in Virginia and across the nation will be packing up and hitting the roads on their way to vacation destinations. While cell phones are great for emergencies and provide a lot of useful applications and tools, drivers should think twice before using these devices.

According to the official U.S. government website for distracted driving, Distraction.gov, driving while using a cell phone lowers brain activity that is associated with driving by 37 percent. If that statistic isn’t frightening enough to make you put away your cell phone when you are behind the wheel, here is another alarming fact – drivers who use hand-held cell phones are four times as likely to get into collisions that cause injury.

There has been major concern among safety experts regarding the dangers of cell phones and the potential to cause crashes. In Virginia, texting and driving is not allowed, but unfortunately, drivers still do it. However, texting and driving isn’t the only problem. Using a cell phone while driving, no matter if it is a hand-held or hands free device, delays a driver’s reactions at the same level as having a blood alcohol concentration at the legal limit of .08 percent, according to the University of Utah.

To reduce your risk of a Virginia distracted driving accident this summer, put away the cell phone while you are driving. Also, be on the lookout for other drivers who may not be paying attention to the road.

Hiding Past Accidents & Injuries From Your Virginia Accident Attorney is a Huge Mistake

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)32493 — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 08:00:00 EST

The insurance company will basically stop at nothing to either minimize or deny your injury claim. That is why it is so crucial to be honest and upfront with your Virginia car accident attorney.

We once had a client who failed to tell us about prior car accidents because she didn’t think it mattered. You better believe that the insurance company already knew this information and of course they told the judge. The case was over. If we had known about her accident history, we would have been prepared and she may not have lost $75,000.

Insurance companies have access to an extensive database that lets them know about your past accidents. Generally, the only reason they will ask you if you have been in previous crashes is to see if you are an honest person.

It is also vital that you disclose your medical history to your lawyer. The insurance company will examine your medical records and will find out if you have had any injuries. As long as your attorney knows this information, he can deal with it appropriately.

When you file an insurance claim, your life becomes an open book. Your privacy is already gone, so you better be as transparent and upfront with your lawyer as possible.

For more information, order a copy of my book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim.

How Our Clients Rank the Most Important Factors in Hiring a Virginia Personal Injury Lawyer

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)32096 — Wed, 26 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

Choosing a Virginia personal injury attorney is one of the biggest decisions you will make in regards to your case. Your lawyer makes all the difference when it comes to your case’s outcome.

For most people, choosing the right attorney is overwhelming and confusing. If you don’t already know someone in the legal field, you need to take the appropriate steps to finding a qualified lawyer.

First, you need to learn about your legal problem, which is not difficult with the tremendous amount of knowledge available on the Internet. Second, you need to gather names of potential lawyers and then call them to request written information. Once you have narrowed down your list of prospective attorneys, you should interview them in person.

It’s the final step in the process that often challenges people and that is ranking the information that has been gathered in terms of importance. Here are some of the ranking factors that our clients have told us are the most important:

1.    Consistent results in the past
2.    Experience
3.    Board certification
4.    Listed in the Best Lawyers in America book
5.    Martindale Hubbell “AV” rating
6.    Teaching at continuing legal education events
7.    Active participation in trial lawyer associations

For more information on how to choose an injury attorney for your case, order a copy of my book, The Truth About Lawyer Advertising.

Your Beliefs About Virginia Disability Insurance Might Be Wrong

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)32075 — Mon, 24 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

If you have disability insurance through your employer, you probably feel comfortable knowing you will be covered in the event you are too injured or sick to work. After all, isn’t that what disability insurance is for?

What happens to so many people is that when it comes time to take advantage of their disability coverage they are surprised to discover it’s not that easy to obtain benefits.

Below is a list of common misconceptions about Virginia disability insurance claims. These may be things that you have believed about your disability insurance coverage.

You will receive a fair settlement offer from the insurance company, as long as you write a letter to them and are reasonable with your request.
All you have to do to obtain benefits is fill out the insurance form and drop it in the mail.
You won’t have any trouble obtaining long-term disability benefits, even though you have been awarded Social Security disability benefits.
The insurer sent you an “activity log” only because they are interested in what you are doing each day.
If you have to go to trial, your doctors will testify on your behalf and convince the judge that you are disabled.
When your employer tells the insurance company that you are too disabled to work, you will automatically receive benefits.

This list is a sample taken from my book, Robbery Without a Gun. For more information, be sure to order your copy.

Why Do So Many Medical Malpractice Attorneys Wait Until the Last Minute?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)31678 — Fri, 21 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

There are some legitimate reasons for waiting to file a lawsuit, but there is no excuse for the practice that many attorneys seem to follow. They often wait until the last minute to file a Virginia medical malpractice lawsuit for the sole purpose of seeing if the insurance company will settle.

It is risky to wait until the last moment to file a suit, as there is a statute of limitations (a.k.a. deadline) for these types of cases. Lawyers have been known to delay, only to find out later that they named the wrong defendant or someone else was to blame.

Many out-of-state attorneys will wait to file claims and when the insurance companies don’t settle, they become panicked. They rush to find a Virginia medical malpractice attorney to help them file the case on time. We receive plenty of these last minute calls and to be honest, we reject them immediately.

At my office, we generally file lawsuits before the negotiations take place. That way, if the insurer doesn’t settle, we already have a trial date in place and can move forward.

For more information regarding Virginia medical negligence lawsuits, order my book, Why Most Medical Malpractice Victims Never Recover A Dime. This book discusses the factors involved in medical malpractice cases, answers commonly asked questions and provides insight into how to find the right lawyer for your case.

The Biggest Risk for Teenage Drivers Isn't Alcohol, Speed or Lack of Seat Belt Use

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)31676 — Mon, 17 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

There is a tremendous danger that teenage drivers face on a regular basis and despite what many people have previously believed, it has nothing to do with drinking, speeding or failing to use a seatbelt. According to a recent national 10-year study on highway deaths, it has to do with nighttime driving. Driving after dark is the biggest hazard for teenage drivers.

The study was performed by the Texas Transportation Institute. Researchers analyzed the traffic fatality rates from 1999 to 2008. During this time period, the number of traffic deaths actually went down across the nation, with the exception of nighttime fatalities. This issue caused researchers to delve deeper. Apparently the answer they came up with had to do with teenage drivers using cell phones at night.

“Everything points in the same direction for this age group, and that it is due to the use of cell phones behind the wheel. Whenever you combine the nighttime danger and the cell phone danger with inexperience, you have created a perfect storm,” said Bernie Fette, one of the authors of the study. Fette went on to say in an article in the Washington Post that teenagers are very comfortable with cell phones in their hands and this level of comfort can lead to a false sense of security.

Teens require more sleep than drivers who are in older age groups. When a fatigued teenage driver gets behind the wheel, it’s similar to being intoxicated. Combining this risk with the high level of cell phone use among this age group, the outcome can be deadly.

The lesson that can be learned from this study – teen drivers need to put away their cell phones and pay attention to the road.

Disability Insurers' Tactics Are Often A Double-Edged Sword

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)31284 — Wed, 12 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

The insurance industry doesn’t have the best reputation when it comes to handling disability claims and there is no question as to why. Insurance companies are known for denying disability benefits and scrutinizing claimants, among other things.

According to the article in the March 2010 issue of SmartMoney magazine, “Too Sick to Work? They Disagree,” in 2004 and 2005, Unum Group agreed to pay $24 million in fines to regulators because of its handling of disability claims. Since then, the insurer has emphasized a training program for case managers regarding how to encourage employees to get back to work, without appearing too aggressive. While this approach sounds fine, patient advocates have called such tactics used in the insurance industry as a “double-edged sword.”

Supposedly, there are some insurance companies that have hired people to assist seriously disabled workers in applying for Social Security disability benefits. That may seem innocent enough, but the insurers have a significant interest in the worker obtaining government benefits. Insurers don’t have to pay for whatever portion is covered by the government.

Not surprisingly, insurance companies might initially act friendly, but the helpfulness typically doesn’t last. Reportedly, there have been cases where insurance companies have stopped paying as soon as the individual qualified for government assistance, which could mean a 50 percent cut in benefits. It’s amazing how quickly the insurer’s goodwill can come to an end.

For more information regarding Virginia long-term disability claims and why they are often denied, order a copy of my book, Robbery Without A Gun.

Contributed to Your Virginia Medical Malpractice Injury? Don't Except To Recover Anything

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)31282 — Mon, 10 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

Guess what? If your doctor was negligent and caused you harm, but somehow you also contributed to your injury, you might not recover a dime. Virginia is one of the few states that still follows the antiquated doctrine of contributory negligence. In fact, this law is centuries old.

Contributory negligence means that if you were negligent or careless in any way and it was a factor in your injury, you probably will not be able to obtain compensation. Your doctor could be 99 percent responsible for your painful injury, but if you were 1 percent to blame, you won’t win your case. It may not seem fair, but it is the law.

In most other states, the doctrine of comparative negligence is used and damages are based on the percentage of negligence. For example, if the jury decides that you were partially responsible for your own injuries, your damages would be reduced proportionately.

Even though Virginia’s contributory negligence law is not ideal for plaintiffs, it will most likely be in place for years to come. Virginia will therefore continue to be one of the toughest states in the nation to recover damages in medical malpractice claims.

For more information regarding Virginia medical malpractice lawsuits and why these cases are so difficult to win, order a copy of my book, Why Most Medical Malpractice Victims Never Recover a Dime.

You Might Not Have a Virginia Medical Malpractice Claim. Find Out Why

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30963 — Fri, 07 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

You went to the doctor for treatment of your illness. Instead of getting better, you got worse and blame your physician. Maybe you think that your doctor could have done more and that could be true. However, people get sick and some never recover, but that does not mean that medical malpractice occurred.

Virginia medical malpractice claims are some of the most difficult cases to prove. According to studies, only about 23 to 39 percent of cases will be successful when tried in front of a jury. These cases are challenging because you have to prove that your doctor or hospital strayed so far away from the accepted standards in the medical field that you ended up becoming injured. That’s not enough to win your case though. You also have to show that the medical provider’s negligence was the main cause of your injury.

Expert testimony is used to prove medical malpractice claims. That means that a doctor in the same type of medical practice has to be willing to say that the defendant’s conduct fell below accepted standards. Mistakes happen and unfortunately, that is not sufficient to win your case. The mistake has to be major, resulting in serious injuries.

For more information about Virginia medical malpractice cases, order a copy of my book, Why Most Medical Malpractice Victims Never Recover a Dime. The book is free and it is definitely something you should read if you think you might have a medical malpractice claim.

Insurers Have the Upper Hand in Virginia Disability Insurance Lawsuits

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30959 — Wed, 05 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

While the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) may have been originally enacted to protect the money in your retirement fund, it now generally protects insurers’ profits more than it does employees. This is especially apparent in employer-sponsored long-term disability insurance policies.

Nearly all of the employer-sponsored disability insurance plans fall under ERISA. This law gives you the right to file a lawsuit in federal court if your Virginia disability claim is denied, but guess what? The insurance company still has the upper hand.

Courts have given insurance companies a special “ACE” card that they can use, which is known as “reservation of discretion.” This special card basically makes it harder for you to prove your side. For example, you will not win your lawsuit against the insurance company if there is any evidence that supports the insurer’s decision. In other types of legal cases, you only have to have more than 50 percent of the evidence in your favor (known as preponderance of evidence). Based on ERISA, you have to have 85 percent of the evidence, leaving the insurer with only 15 percent. What does that mean for you, as the claimant? It means you lose your case.

For more information about ERISA disability claims and your rights, order a copy of my book, Robbery Without a Gun: Why Your Employer's Long-Term Disability Plan May be a Scam.

Former Conrad Case Allowed to Move Forward Against Insurance Company

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30942 — Mon, 03 May 2010 08:00:00 EST

A judge has allowed a case to keep going against a car insurance company, after the plaintiff’s lawyer, Stephen Conrad allegedly pocketed the settlement.

Prince William County Circuit Judge William D. Hamblen has allowed a plaintiff to re-open her personal injury claim involving a 2003 auto accident, which is the first one of Conrad’s original cases that has been permitted to continue against an insurance company. Nicole Andrews, who is now 22, had sustained facial fractures and was left with scars, according to her attorney.

Nicole’s parents had hired Conrad to represent the case. Supposedly, he settled two claims totaling $80,000, but never informed his client. Instead he held on to the money, which allegedly wasn’t the first time Conrad had done that. He was accused of settling cases without telling his clients and then stealing their money. It is believed that he stole from more than 250 clients.

In 2007, Conrad was disbarred and in 2008, he pleaded guilty to fraud after he allegedly stole almost $4 million in settlements similar to Nicole’s case. He is now in federal prison, serving an 11-year sentence.

Judges have continued to reject plaintiffs’ attempts to re-open their claims, stating that insurance companies reasonably relied on Conrad’s authority to negotiate claims for his clients. Fairfax County Circuit Judge Jane Marum Roush had said that the insurance company shouldn’t be responsible for the loss, since the client was the one who “accredited” Conrad by hiring him.

Judge Hamblen cited a Supreme Court of Virginia decision from 1926 that “the apparent authority must be the product of a belief that is ‘traceable to the principal’s manifestations.’” What does that mean? Basically, Judge Hamblen was saying that there must be some action by the client that would show that he or she relied on the lawyer’s apparent authority.

Conrad was a dishonest lawyer and there are others out there. That is why consumers must be educated about the lawyer hiring process. It’s also why I wrote the book, The Truth About Lawyer Advertising.

We're Sponsors of Teens Against Distracted Driving

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30579 — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Texting and driving is a major problem that is plaguing the youth in this country. Teen drivers often fail to recognize the dangers of texting and driving and will participate in this behavior. Recently, a Texas jury ordered a student to pay nearly $22 million in damages in a wrongful death suit. Jason Reed Vestal had been involved in a car accident that claimed the life of another student. His cell phone records indicated that in the 45 minutes he was driving prior to the fatal crash, he made seven phone calls and sent and received 15 text messages.

The Texas texting-related crash is not an isolated case. In an effort to draw awareness to teens regarding the dangers of texting and driving, one of my mastermind members, Seattle car accident lawyer Jason Epstein, created Teens Against Distracted Driving (TADD). According to TADD’s website, Jason started this organization “to encourage and promote safe driving practices by everyone, but especially our youngest drivers, who are also the ones most likely to text while driving.” The website goes on to make a powerful statement, “we have to save our kids from the epidemic of texting while driving.”

Through TADD, teens have the opportunity to make a pledge to completely stop texting and using their cell phones while driving. They can also obtain orange bracelets showing that they have made this commitment.

I firmly believe in Jason’s efforts and am sponsoring TADD. You can check out the website here: http://teensagainstdistracteddriving.com/.

Judge Reduces Award In Severed Finger Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30846 — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

The Virginia Verdict Reporter recently featured a case out of Loudoun County Circuit Court in which the plaintiff was returning a 6800-pound hydraulic hammer to the Defendant company. While an employee of the Defendant company used a fork lift to unload the giant hammer from the plaintiff's truck the hammer slipped causing some loose boards to slam down onto the plaintiff's hand. The plaintiff's left index finger was partially severed by the blow and he was immediately taken to a nearby emergency room where doctors were unable to reattach the finger. The plaintiff claimed a 37% impairment to his left arm as a result of the injury and incurred medical bills around $4,000.

The defendant argued that the plaintiff was careless in placing his hand in a dangerous area during an obviously dangerous procedure. They also argued that the damages were limited as the plaintiff was able to return to work despite his injuries.

After 2 hours of deliberation the jury awarded the plaintiff $375,000. Unfortunately for the plaintiff, the judge, Hon. Thomas D. Horne, felt that there was not enough evidence to support such a large award and remitted the award to $175,000.

The case has now been appealed by both parties. The defense has appealed the liability verdict and damages while the plaintiff has appealed the remittance of the award.

The case is William Woodson v. Alban Tractor Co. Plaintiff's attorney in this case is James Magner of Leiser, Leiser, & Hennessy.

Nah, an insurance company wouldn't lie to the court...

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30751 — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Its injured eople and their lawyers that file frivolous cases, right? They are the bad guys who drive up the cost of insurnance, right?

Think again.

You Can Now Volunteer Your Family for Tort Reform

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)14352 — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Virginia attorney Ben Glass has figured out a way for you (and the politicians you love) to volunteer for tort reform.

Volunteer your family for medical malpractice tort reform.

Insurer Didn't Want to Take Responsibility in Patient's Wrong-Site Surgery Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30561 — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

A Virginia medical malpractice case involving a patient who was harmed by a wrong-site surgery has recently been filed. Lexi Fincher, had a small mass on the back of her right shoulder that was causing her pain. She went to see Dr. Michael Snedden at the Central Virginia Orthopedics & Sports Medicine office, who diagnosed the mass as a benign tumor, also known as lipoma. Surgery was scheduled for May 2008, to remove the mass at the Fredericksburg Ambulatory Surgery Center.

What should have been a routine surgery, turned into a fiasco. The nurses at the surgery center prepped the back of the patient's shoulder for surgery. However, the problem started after Ms. Fincher was under anesthesia. Dr. Snedden examined both sides of her shoulder and could not locate the lipoma. After examining the MRI that was conducted beforehand, he decided that the lump was on the front of her shoulder, despite that a radiologist had reported that the lipoma was on her back.

Dr. Snedden went on an exploration trying to find the lipoma. He unnecessarily split muscle and tissue. Even with all that probing and splitting of tissue and muscle, the lipoma was not removed.

Ms. Fincher returned to Snedden’s office the next day. When the dressing was taken off, she could still see the lipoma. Dr. Snedden admitted to the mistake. However, the surgeon’s medical malpractice insurance company claimed that the surgeon didn’t do anything wrong and denied the patient’s attempt to settle the case.

While this might be a smaller medical malpractice case, Ms. Fincher wants to make a point. You’ve got to stand up and take responsibility when you make a mistake.

Here’s my take - we have to stand for something and that something is you can't scream for tort reform and deny valid claims.

WellPoint Allegedly Targeted Policyholders Who Were Diagnosed With Breast Cancer

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30530 — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

A recent story has hit the news involving WellPoint, one of the largest health insurance companies in the country. It has been alleged that this company was using a computer algorithm that automatically targets any policyholder who has been diagnosed with breast cancer. According to government regulators and investigators, WellPoint’s software prompted an immediate fraud investigation, as the insurer looked for some excuse to drop these policyholders.

For the women insured by subsidiaries of WellPoint, they thought that their insurance coverage was cancelled by mistake. After all, they had paid their insurance premiums on time and never had trouble with their insurance before their breast cancer diagnosis.

Law enforcement agencies, state regulators and a congressional committee have discovered that tens of thousands of Americans lost their insurance coverage following a diagnosis of a life-threatening condition. Last year, a congressional committee stated that WellPoint was allegedly one of the worst offenders of this practice, referred to as rescission.

Federal investigators claim that WellPoint purposely went after women who were diagnosed with breast cancer, by aggressively investigating their policies with the intent to cancel their coverage. What is surprising about these allegations is that WellPoint’s CEO and president, Angela Braly, has been applauded for how the company has improved the medical care of policyholders with breast cancer.

If these allegations against WellPoint are true, they are horrible and the company should be subject to lawsuits for punitive damages.

One of the Largest Jury Verdicts in a Texting While Driving Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30190 — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Hopefully, people will think twice before texting and driving after hearing about a recent jury verdict.

A Robertson County, Texas jury has ordered that a graduate student pay nearly $22 million in damages in a wrongful death suit. The jury came to the conclusion that Jason Reed Vestal was texting and driving, which led to a fatal car accident in November 2007. This verdict is one of the largest in history in a texting-while-driving case.

According to phone records, Vestal sent and received 15 text messages and made seven phone calls during the 45 minutes he was driving before the deadly collision took place. The car accident claimed the life of 21-year-old Megan Small of Houston, who was a senior at Baylor University. Vestal’s truck collided with Small’s vehicle head-on.

Vestal said that he doesn’t remember anything from the accident and that it is really difficult to prove whether his texting really caused it. He said that his phone records only prove that there were text messages and phone calls occurring while he was driving.

Hunter Craft, the attorney representing the Small family, called this a landmark case. “No. 1 it’s the first time a Texas jury has spoken out and spoken loudly about their thoughts with regard to texting and driving. It was also the largest wrongful death verdict ever to come out of Robertson County. I think that’s probably synonymous with the egregious nature of Reed Vestal’s conduct in the case,” said Craft.

The Small family wants to use publicity about this case to urge Texas lawmakers to make texting while driving illegal in the state.

31 Tips to Handle Your Personal Injury Case Without an Attorney

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30408 — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Virginia personal injury attorney Ben Glass has published a guide to handling your car accident case without an attorney. The free report contains 31 tips any consumer can use to deal with their own personal injury claim without the services of a board certified attorney.

You can get the guide here:

31 Tips To Handling Your Car Accident Case Without an Attorney

Fredericksbur Paper Reports on Surgeon who Operated on Wrong Side

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)14185 — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

We are involved in a lawsuit where we alledge that the surgeon operated on the wrong side of the shoulder.

Our video blog on this case is here.

The Free Lance Star article is here.

The medical malpractice claim states that the orthopedic surgeon failed to take the right steps to identify and mark the operative site and then failed to wake the patient up and terminate the surgery once he realized that he couldn’t recall where he had planned to operate. As a result, the patient had to undergo an additional surgery.

Health Conditions That May Lead To Virginia Disability Claim Denials

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30180 — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Disability claims are denied on a regular basis. One of the largest insurance companies, Unum Group, has admitted that it denies nearly 10 percent of the claims it receives. While you can be denied disability benefits for just about any ailment, some health conditions appear to be rejected more often than others.

According to the article, “Too Sick to Work? They Disagree,” which appeared in the March 2010 issue of SmartMoney, these commonly denied medical conditions include the following:

Back Pain: The Council for Disability Awareness states that musculoskeletal disorders account for 23 percent of new disability claims every year. Insurers closely scrutinize people who file for disability based on back pain. They have even been known to do video surveillance on claimants to see if these disabled workers are doing activities that would allude they are healthy.

Pregnancy Complications: About 9 percent of disability claims involve maternity-related issues. Many of these claims are denied, including those associated with complications that require extensive bed rest.

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: This condition is incredibly painful and often requires surgery. However, when people elect not to have surgery, insurers will sometimes deny their benefits, saying they are ineligible.

Mental Health: People who are receiving disability benefits due to a mental health condition have to be careful about what they say to their therapists, since insurers are allowed to review the notes made by these medical professionals. If someone says that he or she has had a few good weeks, it could be interpreted the wrong way and benefits could stop.

For more information on why disability claims are denied, order my book, Robbery Without a Gun: Why Your Employer's Long-Term Disability Plan May be a Scam.

Tragic Story Serves As a Warning to Life Time Fitness Members

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30179 — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

In 2008, a 4-year-old boy drowned in a Life Time Fitness swimming pool, even though there were lifeguards on duty and numerous adults nearby.

This tragic story began when the boy, Colin Holst, and his mother, Jana Holst, went to a Life Time Fitness club on June 13, 2008 to pick up the boy’s sister. While they were at the gym, they decided to go swimming with Jennie Stafford, Deborah Stack and their children, not knowing that this decision would lead to Colin’s death.

According to a wrongful death lawsuit filed by Jeff and Jana Holst, at approximately 5:30 PM, Colin started having difficulty swimming and was “frantically splashing in distress.” The lawsuit claims that the lifeguards didn’t notice Colin struggling in the kiddie pool and failed to render him aid. A patron of Life Time noticed the boy floating face down in the water.

Colin’s parents pursued a $25 million wrongful death suit against Life Time. In response, the company filed a lawsuit against Colin’s mother and her two friends, accusing them of trespassing, fraud and breach of contract. Life Time’s lawsuit claims that they did not follow the gym’s guest policy and that these three women should pay damages, court costs and other expenses relating to the lawsuits regarding Colin’s death.

These people never should have been at the Life Time Fitness pool to begin with and maybe Colin’s mother should have kept a closer eye on her son. Apparently, there is a little known provision in the membership contract that makes the member responsible for any legal costs Life Time incurs if a guest sues.

This is one of those examples were something seems like a good idea to the lawyers who drafted the provision and an even better idea when it is found by the defense lawyers. However, it is probably going to turn into a public relations nightmare for Life Time Fitness, because it appears so cold-hearted.

Here’s a warning to all fellow Life Time members – you better follow the guest rules or you may be on the receiving end of a lawsuit.

"No Boys With Cars" Case Settles For $1.75 Million

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30185 — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

I blogged a bit ago about the "No Boys To Drive" case from Richmond, VA. That blog post came with the finding by the Supreme Court of Virginia that the case had grounds enough to proceed.

Today, I revisit the case because it was just settled for $1.75 million.

The case stems from a sleepover which only occurred on the condition that the host parents not allow the guest daughter to ride in any cars with boys driving. The host mother allowed her daughter and her 14-year-old friend to ride with a young male driver who crashed his car, killing the sleepover guest. The parents of the young girl sued the parents of her sleepover host. The case went to the Supreme Court of VA to determine if there was sufficient law to hold the parents negligent. It was determined this past August that it did and now has settled.

As I mentioned in my last blog on this case, it sends a strong message to parents that when you're caring for another persons child there is an obligation to keep your promises and ensure their childs safety. And now there is very relevant caselaw to backup any dispute that you can be held responsible in a civil court.

BenGlassLaw April 2010 Personal Injury Newsletter

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)14109 — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

her driver’s license for only a few months started to drive away from the drive-in window where she had picked up her Big Mac order. She stomped on the accelerator too hard, panicked and tried to slam on the brakes, but succeeded only in hitting the accelerator even harder.

Read more about this case of insurance company frivolous defense and fraud here.

Virginia Disability Coverage is a Little Less Comfortable

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29875 — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

It is hard to imagine that in the past, companies maintained a hands-off approach to workers on disability. All the employees needed to do was provide a doctor’s note and they could stay home until they felt well enough to go back to work, while collecting a percentage of their income and receiving health insurance benefits. Well, those days are gone. Now employers and insurance companies basically put disabled workers under a microscope.

According to the article, “Too Sick to Work? They Disagree,” which appeared in the March 2010 issue of SmartMoney, “disability coverage is getting noticeably less comfortable.” In the past, it was standard for a disability plan offered at the workplace to pay workers 70 percent of their income while they recovered. As the economy continues to slump, workers are often getting less than 40 percent. For many people, this amount is hardly enough to live off of, so some employees have opted to purchase supplemental coverage. However, this coverage can be expensive.

The lowered coverage isn’t the only issue that disabled workers face. Insurers are being pickier on the claims they will pay. Insurance companies have been known to deny disability claims after sending medical records to third-party firms that don’t take the time to examine the patient, let alone speak to him or her.

If you find yourself in a battle over your Virginia disability benefits, you need to get a copy of my book, Robbery Without a Gun: Why Your Employer's Long-Term Disability Plan May be a Scam. The insurance company and your employer will not want you to read this book.

Driver Stops for Geese and Gets Rear-ended

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)30028 — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

So there was a somewhat recent case in which a driver and his passenger were rear-ended after stopping for a flock of geese crossing the road. They suffered some minor injuries and filed suit in Fairfax General District Court. They lost as the judge found that they were contributorily negligent in stopping for the geese, failing to give the driver behind them proper warning resulting in the accident.

The plaintiff appealed arguing that they were required by law to stop for the geese as it is illegal to "cause the death of a migratory bird" as the Canadian geese were.

Now, I'm not advocating killing birds or any other animal for that matter, but what if the injuries weren't so minor? What if one of the plaintiffs had died as a result of the accident? I certainly understand the spirit of the law that it should be illegal to murder animals but when driving a vehicle and the choice is between your safety and their life you should always choose your safety. Not to say that you can't try to avoid them or slow down, but slamming on your brakes as they did in this case is simply not worth it and they're lucky on two counts. One, that their injuries were minor. And, two, that they were able to collect for their medical bills, which ended up being the only award received.

Virginia Homeowners Entitled to Damages in Chinese Drywall Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29869 — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Chinese drywall has been a hot topic in the news, as homeowners have been complaining about strange gas smells, corrosion of metal objects and the breaking down of appliances and electrical devices in their homes.

The alleged problem began when drywall that had been manufactured in China was brought into the United States during the housing boom from 2004 through 2006. This Chinese drywall was mainly used in homes in the Gulf Coast and East Coast. People eventually started reporting numerous problems and even health issues that they believed were caused by the drywall. As a result, various lawsuits were filed by homeowners against homebuilders, developers, manufacturers and other parties who were involved with the Chinese drywall. One of these lawsuits included the case of Germano, et al. v. Taishan Gypsum Co. Ltd., et al.

In the case against Taishan, the judge ruled that that the defendant’s negligence injured the plaintiffs’ interests in their real properties. The court opinion states that Taishan was negligent in “producing a defective product, and that they are entitled to recover the damages proximately caused by the same.”

The plaintiffs’ claims were not barred by Virginia’s economic loss rule. Based on Virginia law, they can recover the cost of repair and the loss of property value after the repairs have been made.

You can read more about this case and the court’s opinion here, Drywall Opinion.

If you are a Virginia homeowner who has been harmed by Chinese drywall, you should contact attorney Richard Serpe. He’ll be able to explain your options.

Allstate Loses In Front Of Supreme Court

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29923 — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Allstate may have been knowingly violating the law, or they may have just have forgotten to pay claims in a timely manner as required by New York insurance law. According to the complaint in the class action suit of Shady Grove Orthopaedic Associates v. Allstate, the insurance company was required to pay no-fault claims within 30 days of receipt or pay interest on those claims. The complaint alleges that Allstate has been witholding payment on legitimate claims, witholding the required interest on those no-fault claims once they are eventually paid, and that Allstate is often dishonest about their receiving of documents that would start the clock ticking on the 30 day payment requirement.

Doesn't sound very good for Allstate, especially now that the Supreme Court ruled that the suit could continue in Federal court. The issue that the Supreme Court faced was one of a possible conflict of rules. In New York, a class action lawsuit is barred from seeking relief in the form of statutory penalties (in this case, interest). SCOTUS came to the conclusion that the law being procedural and not substantive only barred the claim in NY State Courts and that because it is a diversity case (parties from different states) it could continue in Federal court.

Really makes you wonder if Allstate was just backed up with claims or if they were well aware of the New York rule and were relying on it to avoid a massive class-sized payout. The amounts for each claim are probably small, which explains why Allstate may have refused to pay out interest, who was going to challenge their refusal over such small amounts? And with the class-action bar to statutory penalty recovery they probably thought they were in the clear in New York. While recovery may be limited, some class-action lawsuits such as this one are important in keeping massive corporations in line. Others, such as the lawnmower case I just blogged about, are ridiculous. This case is a warning to Allstate and all others that insurance code is there to be followed, not flippantly disregarded. We will see how this case plays out now that it's passed muster with highest court.

Here's the original complaint that alleges Allstate's bad behavior and unlawful denial of interest.

I'm Tired of Stupid Class Action Lawsuits

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29865 — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

Have you ever gotten a notice in the mail that informs you that you could be entitled to receive benefits from a class action settlement? I recently received a card, letting me know about a class action settlement involving my lawnmower. To be honest, I didn’t even know that I was a part of this class action lawsuit. I didn’t even know there was a problem with my lawnmower.

This class action lawsuit had nothing to do with the product’s safety. Neither my family nor I were in jeopardy because of our lawnmower. This ridiculous lawsuit was over “claims that the Defendants misrepresented and overstated the horsepower of their lawnmowers and lawnmower engines.” Although the defendants deny these claims, they did agree to settle.

In this particular class action case, the lawyers intend to collect over $14 million in fees.

Here is the problem I have with these types of class action lawsuits – I never knew I was harmed by my lawnmower and I bet the hundreds of thousands of consumers who bought these products between January 1, 1994 and April 12, 2010 never knew they were harmed either. It is a prime example of lawsuits gone crazy. Cases like this one jam the court system and prevent the timely resolution of legitimate claims.

Stupid class action lawsuits are an abomination of the tort system. Tort claims should only be made by people who have actually suffered harm and are not part of an unknown class of individuals who weren’t harmed, never once thought they were harmed and did not go out and hire an attorney to file a lawsuit.

New Jersey Motorists May Proceed with His Claims Against Honda

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29466 — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

A judge has ruled that a motorist may proceed with his claims that American Honda Motor Co. was fraudulent and breached warranties over Honda and Acura vehicles sold or leased between 2000 and 2009. Honda will now have to defend itself in the lawsuit.

Jon Alin, the plaintiff in this case, has filed a lawsuit against Honda, claiming the auto manufacturer knowingly sold vehicles with defective air conditioners and would not pay for expenses relating to the repair.

Last week in Newark, New Jersey, U.S. District Judge Katharine Hayden granted Honda’s request to dismiss two of the eight counts in Alin’s complaint, which was filed under the Class Action Fairness Act. According to the opinion, Alin claims that following his lease of a 2006 Odyssey, the air conditioner would no longer work and a technician with Honda informed him that he was “experiencing a common problem.”

Hayden’s ruling, which is found in a 28-page opinion, states, “A fair reading of the complaint establishes that Alin has alleged that Honda affirmatively acted in concealing a flaw in its vehicles. Honda implemented its warranty policy with the intent that it would not honor it when damages stemming from the defective A/C systems arose.”

Even though Hayden dismissed Alin’s claims of breach of implied warranty and unjust enrichment against Honda, she did rule that Alin sufficiently presented claims that the auto maker breached a duty of good faith and fair dealing and an express warranty, as well as violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and committed a common law fraud.

Frivolous Defense Leads to Attorney Sanctions

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29747 — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

I've been thinking a lot about frivolous defenses lately and I'll most likely post more on the subject later but I just wanted to share this case real quick, Ford Motor Company v. Benitez. It's Supreme Court of Virginia opinion from 2007 that upheld monetary sanctions against an attorney who submitted grounds for defense that were not based in fact and the attorney knew it.

The attorney claimed that he was only stating defenses that he thought might be used should the facts arise. Problem is that he was the same attorney who was on the case before when it was non-suited after the completion of discovery. Meaning: he already had all the facts of the case but still went ahead and tried to include several affirmative defenses. This was an products liability case dealing with a faulty airbag. A few of the defenses deemed to be "completely groundless" were those of contributory negligence, assumption of the risk, negligence of third parties, failure to state a cause of action, lack of notice of warranty claims, and failure to mitigate damages. At the hearing to strike those defenses, the sanctioned attorney admitted that "In those defenses there were not sufficient facts."

Lately, I seem to be running into a lot of these defenses in which there are not sufficient facts. More later, stay tuned.

Local Politicians Lobbying for Obama to Visit Homes Impacted by Chinese Drywall in Newport News

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29463 — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

President Obama is scheduled for the Hampton University commencement address on May 9 and many local politicians are pushing for him to visit nearby homes impacted by toxic Chinese drywall during his visit.

State Del. Glenn Oder, R- Newport News, joined the effort by U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland and he feels that a visit by the president would most likely boost the cause.

Toxic Chinese drywall isn’t a problem that affects just Virginia. Oder says that it is an issue affecting people in 37 states.

"We are so quick to help Third World countries, fixing areas that have been devastated. And I support that. But how can we ignore what is happening to people right here in our own country? We have to help them," said Oder.

There is a special Virginia task force that has been working on finding solutions to the problems associated with Chinese drywall. The first meeting of the task force, which has about 15 members, occurred in Richmond on Wednesday, March 31, 2010.

Numerous homeowners have complained about gases that emit from this drywall. Reportedly, it has caused several health problems that are forcing Virginia residents out of their homes. These Chinese drywall gases are also believed to corrode metal and wiring in many homes.

The drywall was mainly used in the mid-2000s, during the housing boom, as there was a shortage of building materials. One of the issues that homeowners are facing is that despite the fact that they can’t live in their homes, they are still responsible for their mortgage payments.

Oder said that everything is on hold until the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission makes a ruling regarding the drywall issue and creates protocols on how to repair the homes that have been impacted.

Family of a Patient Who Died of Sepsis is Awarded $1.44 Million

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29461 — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

A jury recently awarded the family of 59-year-old Thomas Murphy, a man who died of sepsis at St. Joseph Medical Center in Towson, Maryland, $1.44 million. This medical malpractice verdict came about because the doctor failed to provide Murphy with proper care, according to the jury ruling.

Dr. Richard Tempel, two other doctors and St. Joseph, were all named in the lawsuit that was initiated in Baltimore County Circuit Court.

The lawyer representing the Murphy family, Julia R. Arfaa, stated that Tempel performed numerous tests, which included an x-ray and CT scan. Arfaa said that these tests showed that Murphy was suffering from sepsis. Just one day after he was admitted to the hospital, he died.

According to Ronald Shaw, Tempel’s lawyer, the doctor believed that Murphy had some type of infection, such as pneumonia. Tempel treated Murphy with a broad-spectrum antibiotic and admitted him to the hospital. Shaw did say that Tempel had considered sepsis at the time, but wasn’t sure of a source. He said that Tempel gave the appropriate treatment and that Murphy had been sick for several days before going to the hospital.

“He sees patients with a multitude of problems. He makes an initial diagnosis and decides to send them to the hospital,” said Shaw.

St. Joseph and the other two doctors settled out of court.

Virginia Med Mal Plaintiff Allowed to Add Court Costs to $1.8 Million Jury Award

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29139 — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:00:00 EST

A Richmond federal court recently stated that a Virginia medical malpractice plaintiff is allowed to add court costs to his $1.8 million jury award, which basically means court costs are not calculated into the state's statutory cap.

Wendell Waggener had filed a lawsuit against Dr. Steven J. Oltermann and Northern Neck Surgical Services, claiming that Oltermann did not diagnose a colonic obstruction and perform an emergency procedure in a timely manner. The jury awarded Waggener, who was represented by Richmond attorney John Petty, $2 million, which was dropped to $1.8 million due the cap on medical malpractice damages.

Waggener requested an award for $2,706.88 in court costs, but the defendants objected to his request. The defendants made the argument that the state’s statutory damage cap prohibited the federal court from taxing costs in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P.54(d), since the judgment would at that point go above the cap.

U.S. District Judge Robert Payne rejected the defendants’ claim that awarding the court costs would push the plaintiff’s award higher than Virginia’s cap. According to Payne, federal courts have continuously held that taxation of costs is an issue of federal procedure, not state substantive law.

Petty said he was not able to find any opinions in federal or state court regarding this issue.

Tort Reform Should be Voluntary

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29129 — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

As the details of the healthcare bill continue to be worked out, there have been numerous questions regarding tort reform and a lot of heated debate.

Last fall, President Obama stated that he would at least consider the thought of urging Congress to include some type of tort reform provision in the healthcare bill. So, did the tort reform provision make it into the 2,000+ pages of the healthcare bill? According to The Wall Street Journal, “the Senate included a provision that would provide $50 million for grants to states that want to launch these projects (to test medical tort reform). And since the House effectively approved the Senate version of the bill, this is what we’re left with on the tort-reform front: $50 million in demonstration projects.”

The Senate bill requires states that obtain this grant money to create an alternative to current tort litigation.

I have yet to hear of any unbiased evidence that imposing Draconian caps on recovery for seriously injured people would reduce medical costs. In reality, it is this group of people who would be impacted the most by these caps and there is a strong probability that they would ultimately be forced to rely on public assistance.

Here’s what I think about tort reform – it should be voluntary. If you think that tort reform is a good idea, then why not contract with your medical provider in advance of your surgery to limit your recovery, just in case medical malpractice is committed? You are free to do so, but I doubt you would be comfortable with making such a contract.

40 Percent Contingency Fee in a Virginia Car Accident Case â€“ That's Outrageous

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)29124 — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

Insurance companies have been using tactics to dissuade people from contacting a lawyer following a Virginia car accident. These insurers are making lowball settlement offers and making comments like, “are you going to work with us and take this $5,000.00 or let an attorney take 40 percent?” The thing is, very few lawyers charge a 40 percent contingency fee. Plus, it doesn’t cost 40 percent to talk with an attorney after an accident.

In my opinion, a 40 percent contingency fee for an auto accident case is outrageous and far beyond what is considered average in the industry. If you have consulted with a Virginia accident attorney who is quoting you a 40 percent fee to handle your case, you need to understand that you can negotiate. In fact, all attorney fees are negotiable.

When you are choosing a lawyer to represent you, you need to keep in mind that the fee for representation should be only one factor in your decision making process. You need to look at the entire package of information regarding the attorney when making your decision. Selecting the right Virginia car accident attorney is one of the biggest decisions you will make and it can significantly impact the outcome of your case.

Our law firm charges as low as 25 percent of the amount that is recovered, if a case can be settled before the defendant answers a lawsuit.

Before you hire a lawyer to represent you, order your copy of my book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim.

Virginia Divorce Lawyer Sues His Malpractice Carrier and Wins

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)28782 — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

Terry Batzli, a family law practitioner, was recently awarded damages in a lawsuit filed against his legal malpractice carrier. A Richmond federal jury found in favor of Batzli and his firm and consequently awarded $8,400 in damages.

Batzli had represented Richard Chasen in 2006 in his divorce from Karen Chasen. Richard claims he told Batzli that he wanted Karen’s 20 percent interest in the family business. That proposal was made to Karen, but there was no response, so Batzli drafted an agreement that Richard would receive only “his” interest, instead of both his and Karen’s interest. This agreement was signed before the error was found. Batzli tried to correct the mistake by filing a “motion to correct scrivener’s error” in August 2006. The Richmond Circuit Court denied the motion and the denial was later upheld by the Virginia Court of Appeals.

Richard sued Batzli for legal malpractice in 2009. Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company, Batzli’s malpractice carrier, was notified of the suit. However, the malpractice carrier stated that the notice of the claim was too late and filed a dec action in Richmond U.S. District Court.

Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company made the allegation that Batzli had knowledge of sufficient facts that could have supported a claim “more than two years prior to the date of notice” to the carrier. Batzli made a counterclaim for breach of contract and brought his claim for damages to a jury, which ended up finding in his favor.

Court nixes Charitable Status for Hospital

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)28942 — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court of Illinois has rejected a hospital's quest for preferential tax treatment because it was "charitable." The status of "charitable" can give enormous benefit in our courts and tax system, allowing entities to in essence, "get away with" a lot that normal everyday corporations (and individuals) cannot.

Find out why the Illinois Supreme Court said "no way" in this "charitable hospital" case

Truck Driver Awarded Damages in Lawsuit Against Interstate Van Lines

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)13577 — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

An employer can’t take the law into its own hands and swear out an arrest warrant, just because it has a civil dispute with an employee. That is basically what a Fairfax jury concluded.

A Fairfax Circuit Court jury awarded Eugene Brye Jr. nearly $600,000 in a lawsuit against Fairfax County-based Interstate Van Lines. Brye, a 43-year-old truck driver, had sued his former employer for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment.

In 2008, Brye submitted a written notice to Interstate Van Lines that he intended to quite, effective in three weeks. Brye sent this notice after two years of driving as an independent contractor for the company. Just six days following the notice, as he headed from Interstate Van Lines’ headquarters in Springfield to his home in Alabama, he received a phone call from Interstate President John D. Morrissette. It was reported that Morrissette told Brye to bring back his trailer by saying, “if you do not turn around immediately, you will not like the consequences.”

Brye decided not to turn around at that point, hung up on Morrissette and stopped answering his calls. Interstate Van Lines contacted the Fairfax County police and made the allegation that Brye was a terminated employee with a stolen trailer. State troopers stopped Brye in Alabama and arrested him at gunpoint, according to Brye’s lawyers.

After spending 34 days in Macon County jail, Brye returned to Fairfax, where prosecutors immediately dropped his charges. Brye filed a lawsuit against Interstate Van Lines and was awarded $50,000 in damages for malicious prosecution, $200,000 for false imprisonment and $340,000 in punitive damages.

This case just illustrates the fact that you never want to resolve a civil dispute by calling the police and making a false claim. The jury is taking this same position through the verdict.

Don't Let the Adjuster Try to Intimidate You After a Virginia Car Accident

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)28716 — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

Recently, it seems like we keep hearing more and more people being offered lowball settlements by insurance companies within days of their Virginia car accidents. Insurers are telling them things like, “are you going to work with us and accept this offer of $5,000 or are you going to hire a Virginia car accident attorney and pay a fee of 40 percent?”

Insurance companies are looking to hold on to more money, which is one reason why there has been such an increase in these low settlement offers. They hope that you accept their initial offer, so that they can pay you as little as possible. Insurers also know that if you hire an accident lawyer, chances are, you will get a higher settlement.

Here is what you need to remember about contacting a Virginia personal injury attorney after a collision – you are probably not going to be charged a fee just for having him or her look over your offer. In fact, at my law firm, we will help anyone evaluate a settlement offer that has been made by the insurance company for free.

It is important to understand that very few attorneys charge 40 percent for a personal injury case. Don’t let the insurance adjuster intimidate you or try to persuade you not to look into your rights. As someone who has been injured in a car accident, you need to learn about your rights and legal options. That is why we wrote the book, Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Injury Claim. The book is free to Virginia residents.

Virginia Tort Reform Allows Insurance Company to Gamble

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)13519 — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

A recent medical malpractice case in Fairfax County once again demonstrates just how unfairly Virginia law treats medical malpractice victims.

A man suffered a perforated esophagus while eating. A radiologist using "tele-medicine" misdiagnosed him and an anesthesia group allegedly caused a heart attack. The man eventually died, leaving a wife and two children.

Totally unneccessary death. A jury carefully considered the evidence and awarded the family almost $3 million. Not a lot of money, frankly. The law took a huge chunk of that money and, in essence, gave it back to the insurance company for the radiologist. "Here's a present."

I've blogged more details about the untold side of Virginia's medical malpractice law. The side that is kept hidden from juries and, for the most part, the public.

Go here to read more about the $1.15 million robbery in this Virginia malpractice case.

Here's another case where someone who was supposed to be operated on instead caught fire in operating room. The law stole from her, too. This time it was $2.25 million.

Docs Facing Malpractice & Fraud Charges After Breast Augmentation Goes Wrong

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)28522 — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

In a recent case out of Roanoke a female patient had a series of difficulties following her breast augmentation surgery. First, the surgeon, Dr. Carol Wray, left a sponge under the implant that allegedly lead to several complications necessitating the removal of the implant.

According to the recent opinion, Dr. Wray told the patient about the sponge but said that the complications were not related to the sponge. One of the nurses at the Lewis-Gale Clinic, Katherine Vaughan, confirmed this to the patient and told them that there was no legal claim because the sponge wasn't the cause of the problems.

They retried the surgery (on the Clinic's dollar) and again the implant had the same problems and was removed. Finally, they did another surgery to insert an expander to make room for a future implant and ease the acceptance process. Right before she was sent into the OR for this surgery, the patient was given a release and a check for the cost of the original surgery. That release was an agreement holding the defendants not liable in return for the cost of the surgery.

Now that's shady. I wonder if it happens a lot or if this is just an aberration. Let's hope it is.

The latest I've seen on this medical malpractice and medical fraud case can be found here.

VA Beach Doc Gets Prison For Billing Fraud

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)28344 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

Dr. Robert Poulin is finally facing the music for defrauding tax payers out of $1.3 million through billing fraud. Poulin, an oncologist from Virginia Beach, would charge the government programs for excess amounts of drugs and then split them between patients receiving full-price for half doses. The doctor would also bill the programs for more chemo drugs than were administered. He was sentenced to 63 months (just over 5 years) in jail for his crimes.

The crime that Dr. Poulin was found guilty of is very difficult to detect. In this day and age where all the blame of escalating costs go towards "defensive medicine" its tough to get a word in edgewise about fraud. I know that most doctors don't participate in this sort of thing but the case-at-hand just goes to show how easily doctors can defraud not just government programs but insurance companies. The FBI was tracking Dr. Poulin as he defrauded a government agency by charging for drugs he didn't use. Who knows if the same scrutiny is being applied to physicians who may be defrauding insurance agencies? Detecting over-billing for unadministered drugs is one thing, but what about detecting billing for unnecessary treatments under the guise of so-called "defensive medicine"? It's no secret that doctors get paid per-service. The more check-ups and tests you undergo the more they rake in. Sounds more like "offensive medicine" to me: run more tests, get more money. Who's going to catch you? It's not like you're billing for a test you didn't run.

Again, we know there is fraud out there, we see it in this case. Most doctors don't fudge their numbers or overtreat, just like most attorneys won't bring frivolous cases, but unfortunately there are some out there who do. I'm simply saying that the system we have now is ripe for the kind of thing Dr. Poulin was doing.

Fore more on this check out the news article by clicking on the title of this entry or check out my article "The High Cost of Defensive Medicine."

Relationship Between Law Firm and Medical Providers Described as "Cozy"

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)28241 — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

A woman in Louisville, Kentucky, has made the allegation that her lawyers referred her to a healthcare provider that they had a relationship with, which ultimately cost her money and deprived her of the right to treatment by her doctors. The relationship between the law firm and medical provider was allegedly not disclosed. Sharon Langford filed the lawsuit against the law firm of Winters Yonker & Rousselle and a Louisville clinic.

According to Langford’s claim, she went to see the law firm after a car accident in June 2008. The law firm allegedly informed Langford that her health insurance company wouldn’t cover her injuries, but that she could get the medical treatment she needed at 1st Physician Rehabilitation Inc. Langford claims that she was later flown to a Florida clinic for surgery. Both clinics are owned by Gary Kompothecras, which Langford eventually discovered. Kompothecras is a chiropractor who also owns the referral service, 1-800-ASK-GARY. Winters Yonker & Rousselle is one of the law firms in which this service refers business.

Sam Carl, one of Langford’s attorneys, said that the law firm of Winters Yonker & Rousselle settled her case for $200,000, paid itself $70,000 and paid the healthcare providers $64,518. Langford received $62,738.

Langford said in an interview, “I felt they weren’t honest with me.”

The Kentucky Courier-Journal reviewed court records and discovered several other car accident and slip and fall cases where clients of Winters Yonker & Rousselle received treatment at 1st Physician.

Brian Clear, a former employee of Winters Yonker & Rousselle, said that he worked for the firm for a year signing up clients and that there was an expectation that clients would be sent to 1st Physician or a few other clinics that referred business to them.

This practice that the law firm allegedly became involved in – referring clients to medical providers, has been described in cases as “the kiss of death” by Northern Virginia judges. Be leery if your lawyer refers you to a physician.

When Hartford comes a calling....

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)28105 — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

Wow..our office has recently taken a rash of calls and letters about Hartford insurance company either terminating benefits or showing up at people's houses for a "little interview," then springing the secretly taped video on them.

Here are our tips for dealing with The Hartford and their video surveillance tactics:

1. As always, you must be brutally honest with your claim. You cannot misrepresent your activity level to The Hartford or to your doctors. They are looking for a way to terminate your benefits and one of the easiest ways for them to do so is to find misrepresentations between what you say you do and what the video shows you doing.

2. If Hartford sends you an "activities questionaire" and ask you to log your activiites over the next couple of weeks, understand that there is an almost 100% certainty that you will be secretly videotaped during those two weeks.

3. If Hartford calls to arrange a "field visit" with you in your home there is an almost 100% certainty that they have already videotaped you. The claims person interviewing you will talk to you for 60-90 minutes, ask you a whole bunch of specific questions, and then spring the video tape on you.

Don't panic. Be honest. If you are misrepresenting your disability it may be that you are not entitled to benefits anyway.

Podiatrists Soon Able to Make Diagnoses! They Couldn't Before?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)27999 — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

Podiatry, as currently defined by the Virginia General Assembly, involves the medical, mechanical, and physical treatment of conditions of the foot and ankle. What it has noticeably been lacking for some time is the inclusion of "diagnosis" as part of the practice of podiatry. In other words, under VA Code, Doctors of Podiatric Medicine (DPMs/Podiatrists) officially are unable make conclusions about what has caused a foot problem they are simply able treat it. What that has meant is that a podiatrist can't testify in court that an injury was caused by one thing or another as that would be a diagnosis. The making of diagnoses has been reserved for MDs until now.

"Until now" because the VA General Assembly is finally ready to pass a law that amends the definition of podiatry to include diagnosis, freeing podiatrists to testify to the cause of a foot or ankle injury. I suppose it makes sense that a DPM (a foot and ankle expert) can now officially make a foot/ankle diagnosis.

The law does also limit podiatrists, however. Podiatrists will now be unable to testify against MDs in medical malpractice cases. Basically this means that only MDs can testify against MDs while MDs and DPMs can both testify against podiatrists.

A recent Supreme Court of Virginia case, Hollingsworth v. Norfolk Southern, brings the legal standing of podiatrists and their testimony into question and has brought attention to the General Assembly's pending change.po

VA Supreme Court Sends Message To Trial Judges On Premature Dismissal

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)27746 — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court of Virginia released a bunch of decisions recently and in two tort cases they reversed and remanded dismissed cases after the trial judges jumped the gun on dismissing as a matter of law.

In the first case a tenant claimed a landlord was responsible for his eye injury due to mold after the landlord negligently repaired the property. The judge dismissed the case because he felt that their was no claim for negligence as the eye injury was caused by the prior existence of mold and not any failed repairs.

The second case involved a cyclist who was hit by a vehicle turning left across his path. The judge dismissed the case deeming that the cyclist was contributorily negligent because he looked down at his speedometer right before the impact.

From the SCoVA: "[W]e take the opportunity to again stress the principle of tort litigation that issues of negligence and proximate cause ordinarily are questions of fact for the jury to determine, rather than questions to be determined by the trial court as a matter of law."

Lawyer Sues Wrong Doctor - VA Supreme Court Upholds Reprimand

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)27747 — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 08:00:00 EST

"Bob Vaughan" was the one attorney Michael Weatherbee meant to sue in a Warren county medical malpractice case, but he ended up suing Dr. Ward Vaughan. Big mistake.

Weatherbee's suit against Dr. Ward Vaughan was dismissed as "frivolous" and Weatherbee got a public reprimand from the VA State Bar.

Not sure how you get "Bob" and "Ward" mixed up but it just goes to show why you need an experienced medical malpractice attorney to handle your case.

Here's the VA State Bar's reprimand of Michael Weatherbee. It explains in depth how he violated the standard of care for handling medical malpractice cases.

Weatherbee appealed the reprimand to the SCoVA but they upheld the reprimand. Good for them.

You Can't Get More Than You Sue For

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)27243 — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 08:00:00 EST

The appellate case of Addison v. D'Amour was heard recently by the Supreme Court of Virginia. The matter in question was the amount of damages awarded. D'Amour originally sued Addison for $50,000 but was awarded almost $80,000 by the circuit court. Following trial, D'Amour successfully amended the ad damnum clause of his complaint so that it was greater than the verdict, thus allowing him to receive the full amount. Addison appealed on the grounds that the amendment never should have been allowed after the trial.

The Supreme Court of VA agreed with Addison claiming that the granting of the motion to amend the ad damnum clause violated the long-standing rule that you cannot receive more than you sue for. For this reason, most attorneys sue for inflated numbers as it ensures the award will not be limited by their ad damnum clause.

So next time you see a lawsuit filed for an amount much greater than what you believe it's worth, know that it's not a sign of greedy lawyers and plaintiffs, but of smart litigation.

In Virginia, you cannot amend the ad damnum clause post-verdict, thus you cannot recover more than sue for.

It May Cost You More to File a Civil Action in Virginia

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)27210 — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:00:00 EST

Our Virginia lawmakers are at it again. In an attempt to generate money for the state budget, the Senate Courts of Justice Committee approved a bill that would greatly increase the cost of filing a civil action in Virginia court. It passed with a vote of 23-17. The bill is now heading for the House.

It is estimated that Senate Bill 329 would generate millions of dollars for Virginia’s cash-short budget, with a lot of the proceeds going to law enforcement.

Let me just say, I hope this bill does not get passed in the House. If it does, Virginia would have the highest filing fees in the country. Senator John S. Edwards, put it best when he said the bill would make it difficult for the “average guy to go to court.”

There is no question that these new filing fees would make it tough for individuals and small business owners to file lawsuits, even when they are only trying to collect money that is owed to them. Some of the filing fees could even triple, costing in upwards of a thousand dollars to pursue a claim.

This proposed bill would significantly impact people who are looking to file a Virginia civil lawsuit. If you have been injured because of someone else’s carelessness and are on the fence about pursing a civil action, you should get moving before this bill is passed.

Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Alleges Doctor Forgot Where to Operate, but Went Ahead Anyway

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)26994 — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 08:00:00 EST

A lawsuit filed in the City of Fredericksburg alleges that a local orthopedic surgeon who was to remove a cyst from the back of a woman's shoulder, forget where the cyst was located and operated on the front of her shoulder, causing additional scarring and disfigurement.

The lawsuit, filed by Lexie Fincher against Michael Snedden, MD, alleges that Snedden failed to follow standard steps necessary to pre-operatively mark the surgical site and make an incorrect decision to continue with the surgery once he realized he had forgotten where the cyst he was to remove was.

A press release on this Fredericksburg, Virginia Medical Malpractice case is here.

"ERISA Sucks" Judge Refuses to Vacate Order

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)26645 — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:00:00 EST

You remember Judge Acker, the judge whose ruling I talked about in my recent blog about why ERISA sucks? Well, he's somehow managed to get even further on my good side.

In the same case in which he tore apart ERISA in his opinion, post-trial the defense cut a deal with the plaintiff that they wouldn't appeal the case if they agreed to have the opinion vacated. So the two parties called in to the judge's clerk to submit the motion to vacate over the phone. Judge Acker didn't take too kindly to their attempt, calling it "if not contemptuous, unlike any motion submitted to [me] during [my] twenty-eight years on the bench."

Insurance companies often refuse to settle, go to trial, lose, then settle after trial in the hopes of keeping the adverse decision under wraps. Here's to Judge Acker, a man who is unwilling to bury justive alive to serve the interests of the insurance companies.

Here's Judge Acker's brief order denying the motion to vacate.

Hospital Thwarted in Attempt to Hide Stunning Facts of Patient's Death

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)26401 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:00:00 EST

Some medical malpractice defendants will stop at nothing to hide the truth about patient death and injury. Here is a very interesting case going on in Suffolk Virginia involving Sentara Obici Hospital.

According to blog posts by attorney Sandy Waterman, the hospital claimed that a woman's death was "mysterious." It further disclosed that an incident report about the woman's death was created but that it was "irrelevant to the facts about the woman's death."

Read the Virginia Malpractice News and then Waterman's blog posts and make your own decision about whether this defendant is playing the cards "straight."

Insurance companies and the challenge to your integrity

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)25913 — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 08:00:00 EST

I talk to potential clients all the time. You'd think that based on what you read in the newspapers that everyone who has the misfortune to be in a car accident is a greedy, malingering, fraud just thanking their lucky stars they got rear ended by a drunk driver!

Here's what I hear from people who end up hiring us to represent them:

1. At first they thought that they could handle the case themselves with the insurance adjuster.

2. The first inkling of a problem is when the adjuster told them that the "usual" recovery time for "their" injury was 4-6 weeks.

3. Then the adjuster starts to insinuate that they couldn't really be THAT hurt because "most people aren't even injured at all by THIS amount of property damage."

4. Then the adjuster outright challenges their intergrity and honesty.

5. Then the adjuster gets nasty and insulting.

Now, this isn't ALL adjustsers obviously--but it's amazing to me how many people call with the same story line.. they couldn't all be making this up.

Notice to car insurance adjusters: If some of you would just use common sense and human kindness you'd save a lot more money for your company!

But, keep doing it YOUR way... we like helping people get their lives back in order.

Ben Glass

Why Does USAA remind me of a Chinese silk market?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)25912 — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 08:00:00 EST

I swing back and forth on being "nice" to car insurance companies that want to "try to settle this case" before we file suit. Right now I'm thinking that I'm wasting my time with these companies.

Here's why USAA reminds me of a Chinese Silk Market.

VA House Bill HB-93 Aims To Close Insurance Loophole

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)25822 — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 08:00:00 EST

Yesterday the Virginia House Courts of Justice Committee unanimously passed HB-93, a bill aimed at closing an insurance loophole being abused by Virginia's underinsured motorist (UIM) carriers.

In Virginia, a UIM carrier has no duty to pay on a claim until the underinsured motorist has a judgment entered against them. Therefore, there is no incentive for the UIM carrier to settle even if the liability insurer has done so. As it stands now, even if a liability insurer has paid its full coverage, it is still responsible for the costs and expenses of continued litigation and trial if the UIM carrier chooses not to settle. The UIM carrier holds onto its money for a longer period of time at the expense of time and money to the court and taxpayers.

The bill proposes to shift the burden of cost for continued litigation after a liability insurer has paid out its maximum amount from the liability insurer to the UIM carrier. This means that UIM carriers will either have to settle or pay the costs to continue the case after the liability insurer has settled.

The benefits to this loophole being closed are numerous, saving time and money for the state, while forcing insurers to timely payout on the policies they've issued.

Here are some more arguments for VA House Bill HB-93 and changes to the Virginia underinsured motorist insurance law.

HB-93 could be heard by the full House of Delegates as early as this week.

MedMal Cases Misrepresented in Virginia's Largest Verdicts

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)25765 — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:00:00 EST

Virginia Lawyers Weekly recently released their list of the largest Virginia Verdicts of 2009. The list had 21 verdicts (a verdict has to be at least $1 million to make the list) with 7 of them listed as medical malpractice verdicts. The malpractice verdicts ranked at 4, 5, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 20 with the highest award among them listed at $7.4 million! That is quite a sum.

However, that $7.4 million is not what the plaintiff was awarded, simply what the jury thought the case was worth. Unfortunately, the jury's verdict was reduced to the applicable Virginia medical malpractice cap of $1.6 million (meaning the malpractice occurred between July 1, 2001 and July 1, 2002) making it only the 15th highest verdict in Virginia for 2009.

The story is the same for each of the other medical malpractice cases listed. In fact, if you factor in the caps applied to each medical malpractice verdict, only one case makes the top 10, a $1.85 million verdict, and it's ranked number 10. Combined, the million dollar medmal verdicts from Virginia in 2009 total $11.72 million, not even equal to the largest 2009 verdict in the state, a $13.5 million false advertising claim.

Food for thought the next time someone tells you that medical malpractice reform is needed. Unfortunately it's already here and has been serving to deny plaintiff's their just recovery since 1999.

Psychologist's Report Withheld By State Farm Results In New Trial

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)25621 — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:00:00 EST

State Farm withheld an important report in an Arlington PI case in which they were the UIM carrier defending liability and were investigating into treatment for MedPay benefits. The MedPay unit received a report from a psychologist on the last day of trial, a report that greatly strengthened the plaintiff's claim of traumatic brain injury. The report was not received by the plaintiff until after they'd lost.

A judge granted a new trial despite State Farms protests that their liability department didn't have the report, and only their MedPay did, thus they weren't in violation of process.

Looks like State Farm got their wires crossed while trying to perform their dual-roles.

For more on this instance of State Farm withholding key reports and documents check out this link.

A Federal Judge Explains Why ERISA Sucks (Believe Me, It Does)

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)25479 — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:00:00 EST

If you're interested in the full opinion of Blankenship v. MetLife, be prepared for an astute critique of the problems and shortcomings of ERISA.

Judge William Acker, Jr. of the USDC Northern District of Alabama continued his assault on the judicial application of ERISA recently with his opinion on Blankenship v. Metlife.

Blankenship was a manager at a large Sears Roebuck department store in Alabama who had a significant cardiac history and suffered from advanced heart disease. His treating physicians determined that he was unable to continue working in the stressful environment of his job and he filed for disability. After several reversals on MetLife's part, benefits were denied.

A short time later Blankenship underwent knee surgery and was granted benefits based on that condition. MetLife continued to review the claim and had a vocational specialist review Blankenship's job capabilities. The specialist ignored his heart problem and focused solely on jobs that were open to someone with knee problems. The specialist found several jobs, all of which would have been precluded by his heart condition, and his claim was again denied.

Blankenship appealed again and MetLife had a cardiologist review the file. The cardiologist never addressed the main concern of Blankenship's treating physicians, that the stress of work would cause him further cardiac episodes. Based on the report, MetLife denied the appeal.

In his opinion, Judge Acker is critical of ERISA on several points. First, he cites the problem with ERISA cases being based solely on paper and the fact that the courts purport to make "credibility determinations to resolve disputes between irreconcilable unsworn written testimony."Along with this, the judge questions the weight given to experts for the insurance companies. These experts often present their opinions following a simple file review and without ever having examined the claimant. The opinions of these doctors is then pitted equally against that of the treating physicians.

Second, Acker discusses the inherent conflict of interest that faces the insurers in ERISA cases. The insurers who determine whether or not benefits should be awarded are also the ones that pay out the benefits. The possibility of this conflict and the apparent actions of insurers is certainly enough to suspect that it is indeed an active conflict. Employees make decisions whether or not to give out their employer's money. This conflict also extends to the doctors hired to review the files as many are non-practicing and make their living solely on insurance file reviews. A conflict exists because a doctor who is unwilling to "deny, deny, deny" will lose the insurance company's business and suffer financial loss.

Lastly, the judge harps on the perversion of ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, a law meant to protect the benefits of American employees by giving them access to the courts following insurance denial. Unfortunately, the courts have defied the spirit of the law and it is now used as a bastion for insurance companies rather than a reprieve for the insured.

LexisNexis Fair Credit Reporting Lawsuit-Class Action Mayhem

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)24341 — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 08:00:00 EST

I think I'm like most Americans. I rip of those stupid "you're a winner because you are a member of a class action lawsuit" notices I get. I can't stand it that somehow a company has been shaken down, its customers given $25 coupons while the lawyers make off with millions. The class action lawsuit shakedown has gotten even worse recently.

An article in Virginia Lawyers Weekly reports of what has happened to settlement funds in a case that was settled in June, 2008. Apparently LexisNexis Management agreed to pay over $20 million to a class of folks who had been "injured" under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Apparently over $4 million worth of the funds could not be paid because the 'injured' either could not be located or refused to cash their $25 checks.

Here's what gets me. Was the $4 million refused by the 'victims' returned to Lexis/Nexis?

Nope.... it was redistributed to consumer, legal or public policy groups. These groups (like Public Justice, The Identify Theft Resource Center and Somaly Mam Foundation, among others) had nothing to do with the lawsuit. They are just groups. Nor more entitled to free money from Lexis/Nexis than the next group.

Hey, its "good thing" these "good groups" got free money. Or is it? This wasn't a criminal action. Lexis/Nexis wasn't being 'punished' by the state. This was a civil action filed on behalf of allegedly "injured people. When they either couldn't be found or refused to cash their "winnings" the money should have been returned to Lexis/Nexis.

Lady Hit By Train says "Railroad Should Have Warned Me"

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)24095 — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here is a lawsuit filed in Mississippi by lady who was standing on the tracks taking pictures when a train came up behind her... she tried to get out of the way but couldn't. Bad injury, but is this a case?

I've always wondered how people get hit on trains....every time I've ever been around a moving train it seems loud and makes the ground "move."

Anyway, as you can see by reading this complaint filed by the lady who was hit by the train while taking pictures, she blames the railroad for failing to warn her that she should not be trespassing.

I'm afraid this case may end up as more tort reform fodder.

What do you think?

An Example of How Medical Malpractice Cases Should Be Handled

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)23811 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

A case in which a spine surgeon operated at the wrong level and performed a two-level fusion when a patient only needed a single level lumbar diskectomy and fusion was recently settled for $350,000. Because of the surgeon's mistake the plaintiff had to have a second surgery to correct the mistake and have the proper procedure done. The plaintiff's medical bills amounted to just under $155,000.

The reason this is a great example of how medical malpractice should be handled is because the case was settled BEFORE experts were brought in. Experts are the main reason that litigating medical malpractice can be so expensive and exclusive to those who can afford it. In this case the insurance company recognized that their insured was liable and that was that. In hundreds of other cases where liability is equally evident insurance companies will fight tooth and nail to avoid paying out.

I commend the insurance companies if they do that when a claim is frivolous, but when it's this obvious it should be handled expediently at least expense for both parties. If there are problems with the legal process that raise the cost of healthcare it's not frivolous lawsuits... it's these frivolous defenses that cost tens of thousands and are exposed in the end.

Stop Lawsuit Abuse

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)23534 — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

There's a radio ad in Northern Virginia that promotes some "Stop Lawsuit Abuse.com" website. The site has a bunch of stories of how the tort system is crippling America.

When is someone going to start a web site that exposes the insurance company and defendant tactics of delay and spend? I think more time, energy and money is spent on litigating frivolous defenses, frivolous defense objections and just silly advocacy.

In a case in Montana, Nissan Diesel America just got a realy tongue lashing for some really obstructive and expensive tactics employed by its attorneys.

See why Nissan Diesel America was sanctioned big time for its counsel's deposition antics.

Supreme Court: Privacy of Text Messages? You got to be kidding!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)23418 — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court of the United States will hear a case next year that answers this question:

If your employer issues you a cell phone/pager and you send personal messages on it, do you have an expectation of privacy?

My answer: "heck no!"

Apparently a policeman in Ontario, California was using his pager to send secually explicit emails to his girlfriend. His boss found out and bad things happened.

His argument? "I had to pay for the personal messages...so I expected that they would be private?"

This argument doesn't make sense on any level. How, exactly, did he think that anyone would ever be able to decide what was "personal" and what was "work related?"

Now...how did the case get there? The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals...(a circuit that includes California) decided that the search of this guy's explicit personal emails violated the 4th Amendment.

My prediction: slam dunk reversal and a clear ruling that if you mess around with what your employer gave you you stand to lose your job.

Allstate Pays Dearly for Drunk Driver Who Caused Virginia Accident

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)11686 — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

Even though their driver was drunk and almost thrown in jail by a judge, Allstate insurance Co. did not think this case had much value at first. Thanks to great work by smart attorneys, Allstate increased its initial offer offer over four times. Virginia car accident victims can draw their own conclusions about whether they should hire an attorney to prosecute a claim against Allstate insurance Company.

Here is the report on the Virginia drunk driving personal injury settlement.

"Help, I Want to Rip Up My Accident Settlement"

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)23227 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

What happens if you settle your case without an attorney, based on "advice" you get at "Ask a Lawyer" sites? Does the insurance adjuster have to make sure you don't make a huge mistake?

Read about this Virginia car accident settlement nightmare.

Doctor operates on wrong side and his insurance company says "we didn't do anything wrong!"

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)22903 — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

What do you think a medical malpractice insurance company would say if a doctor

1. gets "lost" and operates on the wrong side of the shoulder

2. removes tissue that didn't need to be removed while leaving the orginal problem in place (to be fixed by another surgeon, later)

3. Causes unneccessary scarring and additional medical care

4. Admits to the patient he made a major error and he's sorry

The patient then makes a very reasonable settlement proposal in an effort to not "clog the system" with another case?

The insurance company, known for its "position" of taking every case to trial, said

"our doctor didn't do anything wrong." (almost like it has a form letter for all cases!)

Ok, here we come.

Here's more information on How a Virginia Medical Malpractice Insurance Company said "we won't pay" on a wrong sided surgery case.

Top Virginia and D.C. Trial Lawyers Attend Important Seminar on Expert Witnesses

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)22775 — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:00:00 EST

Our thanks to Herndon attorney Doug Landau for posting this cool photo and blog about this event attended by Ben Glass.

Here is a photo of Ben Glass, Sandra Rohrstaff and Tom Curcio--all of whom have been representing injury victims agains the insurance companies for more years than we want to remember!

Fairfax Jury Awards $2.25 Million in Malpratice Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)22668 — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

According to published reports, a Fairfax Circuit Court jury has awarded the estate of a former employee of Inova Fair Oaks Hospital nearly $2.25 million dollars following and operation to repair a failed Nissen fundoplication. The verdict was later reduced in accordance with Virginia's cap on damages.

This very sad case involved the death of a single mother of a 17 year old daughter.

You can read more about this Fairfax Virginia malpractice verdict here.

Texas Daycare Lawsuit Exposes Dangerous Loophole

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)11320 — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

A lawsuit filed against Woodbridge Day school may play an important role in changing laws and regulations related to daycare owners in Texas. The lawsuit alleges that two-year-old Isabella Estep died in 2008 after ingesting a rock in the classroom. The suit alleges that her teacher failed to attend to her while she lay on the floor, unconscious and dying.

An investigation by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services revealed that not only was the teacher not trained in first aid but that the owner of the day school, Neyse Hall, had no high school education or first aid training -- both of which are violations of Texas state law.

According to the Texas investigation the owner also made inflammatory comments to the licensing investigator stating that she hoped the investigator's "legs would be broken so that she would never have to see the investigator again." The investigation also revealed over 20 other deficiencies at the school.

Texas personal injury attorney Jeff Rasansky says that "we hope to play a part in bringing about change to this unfair loophole in Texas daycare licensing so that some justice can come out of this unimaginable tragedy." The loophole that RRasanskyhopes to change is a law that removes all references to deficiencies and violations from the Texas Department of Family and Protective Serviceswebsite if the facility is sold.

Ridiculous verdict, aluminum baseball bat manufacturer loses big time

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)22042 — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

A Montana jury a baseball bat manufacturer liable in the very sad and unfortunate death of a pitcher. The jury did not find that the bat was defective, the manufacturer had "failed to warn" of the danger.

Sorry, this is one of the dumbest verdicts I've ever seen.

Read the article that I have linked to. Apparently, according to the testimony, the ball flew off the bat faster , by less than a milisecond, then it would've flown off of a wood bat. Who should the manufacturer have warned?

The batter? The pitcher?

I wonder what kind of bat the pitcher used when he batted?

If the manufacturer had issued a warning what with the league have done, ban the bats?

Look, this is a very very sad death but I don't see any way that the baseball bat manufacturer can be held responsible for this young man's death. To me, this is just the sort of lawsuit and verdict that fuels the fire of tort reform and makes it tougher for anyone else who is injured.

Unum Orders Functional Capacity Exam, Then Ignores It

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)11303 — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

A federal court has ruled that it was an abuse of discretion for Unum insurance company to first, order, then ignore a functional capacity exam when determining whether a claimant was entitled to benefits.

You can read more about Unum's loss here.

Sun Life Could Not Simply Ignore Social Security Award

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)11304 — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

Sun life lost a case involving rheumatoid arthritis. The court pointed to a favorable social security disability determination and found that since the insurer had encouraged the plaintiff's application it could not simply ignore the award of benefits. The court also was critical of the insurance company's reliance on a file review rather than an examination.

You can read more about this case against Sun Life here.

Settlement for Family of Child Killed When Soccer Goal Tips Over

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)11305 — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

On May 7, 2007 Hayden Ellias was killed during a soccer scrimmage at Millbrook High School in Winchester Virginia. ArIn 1995 Consumer Products Safety commission had published guidelines for soccer goals, determining that the goals were dangerous and should be properly secured with anchors or sandbags and should be designed to includecounter-weighting into the actual design of the goal itself.

Virginia Board of Medicine reprimands doctor who feel to order appropriate tests for rectal bleeding

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)21768 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

The Virginia Board of medicine has recommended Dr. Alan Joshua for his failure to order appropriate testing for a patient who complained of rectal bleeding. The Board of medicine found that Dr. Joshua had violated during his treatment of the patient from 2001 to 2003.

This case was handled by attorney Ben Glass who filed a medical malpractice case on behalf of the patient.earlier, a Fairfax County jury had awarded the patient $1 million after he underwent surgery for the rectal cancer.

You can read the Board of Medicine's order reprimanding Dr. Joshua here.

Pay Cash--Doctor Scam

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)21620 — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

If your doctor asks you to pay cash after a car accident he may be scamming you in breaking his contract with an insurance company. Some health care providers are involved in a "pay us cash" car accidents scam.

Doctor's medical license revoked after failing to order appropriate tests

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)21621 — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

According to the disciplinary order "despite the patient's history, symptoms, and a finding of atypical cells during a urine cytology taken in October 2004, Dr. Chavez failed during this period to order appropriate diagnostic tests to determine the cause of the patient's hematuria." In December 2006 Patient A was found to have high-grade muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma, a highly aggressive cancer with a very bad prognosis.

Virginia Supreme Court upholds verdict following a fire in the operating room

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)11236 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:00:00 EST

After an unthinkable fire caused horrendous injuries for a woman undergoing simple thyroid surgery a trial resulted in a $4 million verdict. The verdict was reduced per Virginia's "reform" statutes but the defendant surgeon who is found responsible for the fire appealed. Recently, the Supreme Court of Virginia dismissed her appeal has been filed too late. You can read the rest of the story involving an operating room fire here.

Defective Coleman Heater Alleged in California Trial

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)20778 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

Trial starts Monday in a California case in which an 11-year-old boy and his family claim that the boy was injured when a Coleman propane heater malfunctioned and caused a fire to break out in the family's camping trailer.

Almost 4 years ago Trevor Dennis suffered extensive burns which have required ongoing medical care and resulted in permanent disabling health issues, according to a press release issued by California defector product attorneys Bisnar Chase.

The lawsuit alleges that Coleman used a faulty design and had received complaints about the safety of the heater in the past.

The trial will take place in Orange County Superior Court.

Finally, Justice for Family through Relentless Work by Good Attorneys

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)11058 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

Congratulations to attorneys Craig Davis, Walter

Emrock and Charlie Cuthbert Jr. for their work in securing justice for the families of two people killed by an illegal alien who was driving his employer's truck while intoxicated, according to Lawyers Weekly Virginia.

The insurance company who ensured the employer initially denied that the driver had permission to operate the vehicle. Through their hard work however these attorneys discovered that the driver was actually a foreman who had been issued a cell phone, a Visa credit card and fleet gas cards in the business's name and was regularly allowed to drive company-owned vehicles at work and at home despite the employer's knowledge that he was an illegal alien without a valid drivers license.

According to the article, Erie Insurance Exchange

ultimately agreed to pay $1 million to each family. The case was settled in mediation.

Is a parent resposible for the actions of his 4 year old?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)20436 — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

We recently got a question about an unfortunate injury to a young child. The injury was caused by another young child. The question was: "what can be done?"

Here's the answer to the question of whether a parent is responsible for the actions of another child.

Prudential insurance company loses another disability case

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10930 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

In this case out of the federal court in Connecticut Prudential had denied a claim based on fibromyalgia. Prudential had relied on Dr. Paul Howard and his analysis that included a statement that "the pain of fibromyalgia is never sufficient to result in a qualifying disability." That particular position has been rebutted time and time again.

The court said that Prudential's sole reliance upon Dr. Howard's report which articulated a test for disability under which debilitating fibromyalgia induced pain alone could never qualify constituted an arbitrary and capricious eligibility determination. In short the court rejected Prudential's claim that no matter how severe the pain from fibromyalgia is the cannot be disabling.

This case is Lanoue v. Prudential insurance Co. of America and it was decided on September 25, 2009.

Another miscarriage of justice in Virginia medical malpractice claims

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)20410 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

A Richmond Circuit Court Judge has ruled that a radiology group that allegedly misread studies for years cannot be sued because the statute of limitations had expired.

In this case filed against, Radiology Associates of Richmond, Inc., the patient alleged that the defendants negligently performed and interpreted various radiological studies from December 2002 to October 2005. She alleged that during this time she exhibited symptoms consistent with a tumor in the trigeminal nerve of the brain on the right side of her face.

The Richmond Circuit Court rejected an argument that the "continuous treatment rule" applies to discrete radiologic studies. The court ruled that there was in essence no "assumption of ongoing treatment."

This case likely interprets Virginia law properly however the law is anachronistic and outdated. It is incredible that in this day and age a patient could, relying on years after years of radiologists report, be denied an opportunity for justice when it turns out that all along the patient was harboring a tumor.

That's Virginia tort reform in a nutshell.

You can read the court's opinion here

MetLife Hammered in Disability Case After Ignoring Treating Physician Opinion

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10870 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

A Pennsylvania federal judge hammered Met life for its disability insurance determination. The Court held that where the insured's treating physicians' disability opinion is unequivocal and based on a long-term physician-patient relationship, reliance on a non-examining physician's opinion premised on a records review alone is suspect and suggest that the insurer is looking for a reason to deny benefits.

Here is the court was highly critical of Met life and its doctor for failing to give a rationale for its conclusion that the claimant was able to work at a sedentary job and the court pointed out that MetLife's doctor ignored a functional capacity evaluation that supported the claim. The court also was critical of the fact that the reviewing doctors disregarded the plaintiff's job requirements, and only knew that the job was "sedentary."

This case was Kauffman versus MetLife and it was decided on September 24, 2009.

Doctor Misdiagnoses Cancer and Cuts Off Leg

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10805 — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

This poor woman had her leg cut off in England after an erroneous pathology report. In the United States, if national tort reform passes, she would be entitled to about $275,000. Is this what we want?

Here is the article about the woman who had a healthy leg cut off after a pathology error.

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

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)19787 — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

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.

Woman Who Abused Legal System Will Have Time to Think About Her Crimes

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10711 — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

Please don't ever think you can get away with staging fake accidents in Virginia. First, the insurace companies are pretty smart and do all they can to diminish legitimate claims.

But fake an accident?

Then put your kids in the car and tell them to pretend they are injured.

There are some real sleazy characters in this world.

This woman will spend years in a federal penitentiary (somewhere, apparently, that she is somewhat familiar with already.)

Virginia Attorney Ben Glass Launches New Lawyer Referral Service

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10721 — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

Virginia attorney Ben Glass announces the launch of a new, improved lawyer referral service for Virginia residents. Glass says that the market is not well-served by current models for helping consumers find an attorney in their area.

For more information about the Virginia Lawyer Referral Service Launched by Fairfax attorney Ben Glass.

State Bar Shuts Down Local Bankrupty Attorney

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10653 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

Yet another attorney shut down for improper practices. I wonder how many other lawyers out there practice in a similar manner and are able to slide by. Here's a link to the Anne Miller story.

The lesson to take from this is to know about who you're hiring before you hire them. Read my book The Truth About Lawyer Advertising

Seattle Children's Hospital Admits Error in Death of 15 Year Old Autistic Child

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10663 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

Seattle Children's Hospital director David Fisher admitted to the family of a 15 year old autistic child who died following a simple dental procedure that the "hospital had failed its patient" according to a lawsuit filed against the hospital and dentist Barbara Sheller, DDS.

The lawsuit, filed by Seattle Personal Injury Attorney Christopher Davis, alleges that 15 year old Michael Blankenship died following a massive dose of the narcotic, Fentanyl, delivered through a "pain patch." The lawsuit alleges that never before had Dr. Sheller prescribed a Fentanyl pain patch to any patient.

In 2008, a Florida jury awarded over $13 million to the family of a woman who's death was caused by a Fentanyl pain patch.

The Complaint against Seattle Children's Hospital can be found here.

National Tort Reform Would Arbitrarily Tell This Family "Tough Luck"

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)19398 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:00:00 EST

As the debate over "health care reform" continues into Fall, the clanging voices of the tort reformers get louder.

"We can reduce the cost of medical care if we could just limit our liability when we kill people," they argue.

The next time you hear an argument about the government arbitrarily imposing a "cap" on medical malpractice damages, close your eyes and thing about 15 year old Michael Blankenship and the family he left behind.

Blankenship was a fighter. All his life he battled his autism. He was a winner.

He was a winner until his health care providers killed him with an overdose of narcotic medication. They killed him because, (their own words now) our processes failed at multiple points.

Yes, mistakes happen and this was an awful error made by several health care providers.

The real question is this: should the government arbitrarily decide that young Michael's valiant life was worth XX dollars before you know even one fact about he and his family or one fact about the comedy of errors that caused his death?

The answer is no-- this is a question for juries to decide.

You can read a news report about the tragic death of Michael Blankenship and view the actual lawsuit here.

Another Sad Story of a Lawyer Disbarred for Stealing

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10617 — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

A Grundy, Virginia lawywer has had his license revoked for stealing.

This is a shame.

Here is the link to the breaking story. Good for the Virginia State Bar for nailing the guy.

Judge Calls Hartford's Review of File "Incomplete, Selective and Unreasonable"

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10627 — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's a recent opinion in an ERISA long term disability claim involving Hartford.

The Hartford ERISA disability opinion is long but is well worth reading.

A respected federal judge called Hartford's assessment of the claim "selective"

Attorney Ben Glass's Letter to the Editor Regarding Payee Notification Statute

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)19218 — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Virginia injury attorney Ben Glass has previously made his views known on the issue of "payee notification."

Payee notification would require an insurance company to mail notice of a settlement to the claimant at the same time that it mails the settlement check to the claimant's attorney.

This simple idea makes a lot of sense, in part, because it would prevent that tiny percentage of attorneys who steal money from getting away with their crimes and it would have absolutely no cost to attorneys. Steve Conrad was one and he's doing big time jail time now.

Instead, some "alternatives" to payee notification involve costs of either time or money to all attorneys.

Which makes more sense to you?

Here is Ben Glass's letter to the editor in Virginia Lawyers Weekly on the subject.

Staunton, VA Doc Punished For Assault & Battery

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10495 — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Staunton doctor, Charles Weisman, was found guilty of simple assault and battery yesterday but the judge agreed to take the charges under consideration for a 12-month probationary period. Weisman was arrested in February after two female former employees of his brought allegations that he had touched them inappropriately.

In one instance Weisman was accused of grabbing one of the womens behinds and in the other instance Weisman was accused of pulling a woman's pants down and playing with her underwear. Because the charges have been taken under consideration they may be dropped after 12-months if Weisman stays out of trouble.

As for his professional future, Weisman has a long way to go to recover. His practice, Blue Ridge Family Medicine, was shut down after his arrest and the Virginia Board of Medicine has taken away his license accusing Weisman of even further misconduct. The VBM accuses Weisman of alcohol and drug abuse at his practice after it was alleged that he had wine, tequila, and parts of marijuana plants at his office. He is also accused of asking an office manager to take a urine test for him.

Furthermore, the VBM contests that Weisman provided false information on his application for a medical license, failing to mention that he was asked to withdraw from three residency programs. Other accusations are that Weisman lacks the mental capacity to practice medicine as evidenced by a 1993 neuropsychological assessment and that he "roughed-up" a 5-year-old patient.

Here is the website for the now-closed offices of Dr. Weisman, Blue Ridge Family Medicine.

"Certificate of Merit" Requirement Ruled Unconstitutional In Washington State

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18885 — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Big news out of Washington state. The Supreme Court there recently ruled that one of the states latest tort reform laws is unconstitutional.

The law required that plaintiffs submit a "Certificate of Merit" along with any suit alleging medical malpractice. The "Certificate of Merit" is a document that must be signed by a medical professional with expertise in the defendant's field. By signing the Certificate that doctor is basically saying that he feels there is a probability that the standard of care was violated. In order for malpractice to occur the standard of care has to be violated, then that violation has to be the cause of the injury.

The court opined that requiring plaintiffs to produce evidence before discovery (the period during which the two sides trade documents and information) placed an undue burden on the plaintiff. The court also determined that the requirement passed by the legislation interfered too much with the judicial branch and access to the courts thus it was unconstitutional.

With politicians all over the place talking about "tort reform" it's important to realize that what they're really talking about is taking away rights of the patient. As if the medical malpractice deck wasn't stacked high enough already. At least now it's one card lower, but only in Washington.

Here's the entire opinion of Putnam v. Wenatchee declaring Certificates of Merit unconstitutional.

Wall Street Journal -- Response to Tort Reform

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18637 — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Whenever the Wall Street Journal talks about tort reform, it gets irrational and non-objective. Here's attorney Ben Glass's video response to a recent Wall Street Journal editorial about medical malpractice reform.

Hulk Hogan Lawsuit Has Teaching Tips for Consumers

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18621 — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Legendary celebrity wrestler Hulk Hogan has filed a lawsuit against his family's former lawyers.

His claim?

That they didn't tell him that he should call his own car insurance company after his son was involved in a very serious accident.

Interesting case. The Hulk Hogan Lawsuit is here.

Case Against Hulk Hogan And Son - Not In VA!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18518 — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

I recently blogged about Hulk Hogan and a lawsuit he filed against his former attorneys who represented him in a civil case following a 2007 accident in which Nick Hogan was the driver and his passenger a 22 year old Marine was left in a permanent vegetative state.

Neither of these lawsuits would have happened in VA. The first lawsuit alleges that Nick Hogan is liable for the injuries sustained by his passenger. Nick had been drinking and was racing against another car of his that a friend was driving. Nick's passenger was a member of his car racing pit crew and had also been drinking. In Virginia if you're found to be even 1% negligent for your own injuries then you're case is worthless. The passenger had been drinking, agreed to get into a car with an underage intoxicated driver, and he knew that the driver was likely to drive fast and possibly race (there were four friends, Nick and 3 of his pit-crew, split between two fast cars on their way to dinner), and he made the decision to not wear his seatbelt. That seems pretty negligent on the passengers part for putting himself in that position and I think a Virginia judge and jury would agree that his actions contributed to his injuries. No case, not in this great state.

The important thing here is not the Virginia law and whether it's "right" or "wrong" but that it's very easy to ruin a case before it even exists by not being cautious. If you don't wear your seatbelt and you get hit, you can guarantee your case will be weak. If you get in the car with a drunk driver and get injured, you have no case. Don't put yourself in positions to be injured with little to no legal recourse, especially not in Virginia.

Weight Watchers Brings Frivolous Trademark Lawsuit Against Nestle

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18541 — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's the latest in lawsuits clogging up the US court system. Weight Watchers is suing Nestle for allegedly misusing Weight Watchers trademarks including their logo and "points" system. They want to recover for improper profits, triple damages, and have the court halt Nestle's use of their trademarks.

This is a prime example of a frivolous lawsuit. It may not be "frivolous" in the most common use of the word, having no basis. But it is frivolous in that it is an unimportant minor case between two heavy-weights worth millions of dollars that will take time away from other more important court cases. In the long run this case won't matter at all, Weight Watchers will get fractionally richer or everything will stay the same and the companies lose out on legal fees. In the meantime legitimate cases that have real effects on people or businesses are pushed to the back burner. And everyone wonders why the judicial process takes so long!

Here's the CNN Money article on Weight Watchers lawsuit against Nestle, Inc.

Woman Dies From Burns Incurred In Surgery

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18543 — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's an article about a woman in Illinois who recently passed from injuries incurred during surgery. The cause of death? "Complications from thermal burns" according to the Tennessee state medical examiner.

Burns? Incurred in surgery? That's right, the woman, 65-year-old Janice McCall, caught on fire in the OR. What caused the fire? Either they don't know or they're not saying. Either way this will be an interesting medical malpractice case to follow. Presumably "lighting the patient on fire" is not within the standard of care regardless of the condition. The next determination will be whether it was negligence on the part of the hospital that caused the fire. If it wasn't gross negligence on the hospital's part I'd be very interested to know the coincidences that lead up to combustion.

Either way, if you're going into surgery, make sure there's a fire extinguisher in the room. Here's the Fox News article on the surgery burn case.

May An Attorney Provide A Second Opinion To A Client Of Another Attorney?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18559 — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

According to Leslie A. T. Haley, Assistant Ethics Counsel for the Virginia State Bar, in a recent article published in the Journal of the Virginia Trial Lawyer Association:

"Clients at all times retain the right to counsel of their own choosing. That right includes the right to fire and replace their attorneys at any time. As part of that right, a client may need to consult another attorney regarding the case to eb able to make an informed decision as to whether a change in attorney is warranted. Comment to Rule 4.2 makes clear that it is not improper for an attorney to speak with a represented party regarding that person's legal matter. Of course, an attorney would be prohibited from such contact if he represented any other party in the matter. Whle an attorney may provide a consultation in the manner of a second opinion, he should take no action in the matter and decline actual representation of the person unless and until te orginal lawyer is fired, withdraws or agrees to joint representation as co-counsel. [See, LEOs 369, & 1328]"

I, Ben Glass, offer "second opinion" consultations under the rules of the Virginia State Bar. If you are interested in having a second attorney take a look at your case please don't hesitate to contact me for information regarding fees and availability. To do so, call my office at (703) 591-9829.

New Trial Ordered In Case Against Hampton, Virginia Surgeon

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18570 — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

In medical malpractice cases it is the responsibility of the plaintiff to prove that the defendant violated the applicable standard of care and that the negligent acts were a proximate cause of the injury. In the recent case of Howell v. Sobhan, heard in the Circuit Court of the City of Hampton, Virginia, a judge threw out the plaintiff's case after the defense moved to have it struck because it "did not prove proximate cause." Unable to prove proximate cause the case was lost. Judges have the ability to throw out a med mal case when they find that reasonable people could not construe the evidence in a manner in favor of the plaintiff.

The Circuit Court ruled today that the judges actions were improper and that the issue of proximate cause was not entirely clear. Meaning that reasonable people could come to different conclusions as to whether or not the doctors actions were the proximate cause of the injuries. Thus, the question is one for the jury and the court remanded the case for a new trial.

Goes to show just how fragile medical malpractice cases are... Don't let yours get wrecked under similar circumstances.

Here's the courts opinion remanding this Hampton, Virginia medical malpractice case.

Hulk Hogan Sues His Son's Former Lawyers

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18516 — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

The famed wrestler Hulk Hogan is entering a whole new fight. He recently filed suit in south Florida against the attorneys who represented he and his son, Nick Bollea, in major car wreck case in 2007. Read more about Nick Bollea's 2007 car wreck.

Hogan's auto-insurance policy through Progressive offered an all-expenses-paid defense but he didn't know that and hired the firm of Zuckerman Spaeder to defend he and his son. Zuckerman Spaeder ended up charging Hulk over $1.5 million in costs and fees! Now Hogan has brought suit claiming that the firm should have told him that there was the "free" option from Progressive. The complaint is quite extensive at 44 pages in length and charges 8 counts of malpractice and intentional breach of fiduciary duty agains the firm and its lawyers.

The important lesson here is to know what's in your policy. Hulk didn't and now he has a second lawsuit to tend to because of it. Another lesson to take from it is to promptly speak to your insurance company. Hogan had representatives and lawyers speak to the insurance company, those who would gain from him not knowing about the "free" option, and wasn't able to hear his options straight from the one's who knew them best, Progressive. Finally, Hogan was under-insured with only $500k, any settlement or judgment greater than that and he'll have to pay out of pocket. Million dollar policies aren't that expensive and it's a shock that a celebrity like this doesn't have at least that.

Here's the press release for Hulk Hogan's lawsuit along with the complaint. Here are the exhibits in support of the the suit including correspondence between Hulk Hogan and his lawyers.

VA Worker's Comp Commission Rules Facebook To Be Protected

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18428 — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

A recent article in the Richmond Times-Dispatch highlights the burgeoning world of technology and the ways in which the law is trying to catch up. The article focuses on a recent Virginia Worker's Compensation Commission case in which Facebook was subpoenaed to provide the personal information of a worker's comp claimant.

Facebook refused to comply with the subpoena (at a cost of $200/day) on the grounds that it would invalidate the privacy agreement on the site, that they were protected by federal statutes prohibiting information release, and on the principal that the site is "built on trust" and to give in to the subpoena would undermine the site's basis.

The Deputy Commissioner, Randolph Tabb, agreed with Facebook on the grounds that the Federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act protected the member's of the site and that their information was not able to be attained through subpoena.

With technology and social media becoming ever present in our lives it's interesting to see how the courts adjust to the changes and advances. In this case the claimant went ahead and allowed access to her info anyway, but anyone who doesn't want to is now protected. Here's a link to the article on Facebook defeating the subpoena .

Do I Have To Do Everything My Insurance Company Requests?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18381 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Your insurance company may ask you to do a variety of things from taking tests to giving interviews and possibly even seeing one of their doctors. Should you go along with all of this? See the answer to this disability question and then check out my FAQ section for more answers to possible questions you might have.

If your question isn't there you might be able to find the answer in my disability book titled Robbery Without A Gun.

Ten Common Medical Errors Everyone Should Know About

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18392 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's a link to blog by a nurse practitioner. The latest article has some good info on some common medical errors that take place in hospitals. Read it now just in case you might need it later.

10 Common Medical Errors Everyone Should Know About

First UNUM Finally Loses 15 Year Old Disability Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18393 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

First UNUM finally lost a disability insurance claim case that has been going on for the last 15 years. John McCauley filed for disability all the way back in 1994 and has finally been awarded the ruling he was looking for. After UNUM first denied his claim in the mid-90s McCauley was forced to return to work for financial reasons but was only able to fight through his debilitating pain for 8 months. UNUM claimed this period meant that McCauley could not recover benefits because he had worked more than 6 months. The court was able to determine that UNUM's denial forced the client into work and that UNUM was using that work to deny benefits was an "unconscionable" practice and that the 6 month clause was to be ignored because of it.

Courts can ignore portions of contracts that they see as "unconscionable" or "so grossly unreasonable or unconscionable in the light of the mores and business practices of the time and place as to be unenforceable according to its liberal terms." The court did this and remanded the case to determine just how much UNUM owes in back benefits to McCauley.

For the entire opinion follow this link to my disability insurance book site.

What If My Doctor Refuses To Cooperate With Me In A Claim For Disability?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18323 — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Well the short of it is that it's very bad for the claim, for the long of it go to my disability FAQ section to figure out how you might be able to remedy the situation.

You can also check out my disability insurance book titled Robbery Without A Gun: Why Your Employer's Long-Term Disability Plan May Be A Scam

What If My Termination Letter Says I Missed A Deadline, Is My Case Lost?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18197 — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

If the termination letter says you've missed a deadline your case is not necessarily lost. Read my in-depth answer to this disability question to find out how it can be saved and to find out what I might be able to do for you if your benefit is terminated.

Does ERISA Apply If I Work For A Government Agency?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18146 — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

The short answer is generally no. But check out the in-depth answer regarding ERISA and government agencies, and check out my other answers to disability FAQs on my FAQ page.

If I'm Involved In A Disability Lawsuit, How Long Will It Take To Resolve?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18068 — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

More great questions with what I hope you'll think are great answers!

If I am involved in a lawsuit, how long will it take to reach a conclusion?

What are offset provisions?

What should I do when I get a letter terminating my benefit?

More info in my disability insurance book titled Robbery Without a Gun: Why Your Employer's Long-Term Disability Plan May Be A Scam.

Another very sad traffic death at Christopher Newport University

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)18000 — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Our prayers goes out for the Burke, Virginia family of Christopher Newport University sophomore, Peter Morgan. Peter died in a traffic accident last night. Peter was a classmate of my son at Christopher Newport. My daughter plays field hockey at Robinson with his sister.

Peter was a football player at Christopher Newport and at Robinson Secondary school, where he was a team captain.

This is the second very sad death for the Christopher Newport, Robinson Seconday community in the last year. In November, 2008 Cameron Schlifke was killed in a car accident.

Is the Insurance Company Watching Me? And Other Questions?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17970 — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Hot off the press!

Is the insurance company likely to put me under surveillance?

If I am involved in a lawsuit, how long will it take to reach a conclusion?

I have been awarded Social Security disability benefits. But the insurer of my disability policy has denied my claim. Can the insurer do that?

Visit my FAQ section for past questions and order my disability insurance book to answer ALL (okay MOST) of your LTD questions!

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

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17915 — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

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.
# # #

Congratulations to Attorney Brian Glass

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10230 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

Congratulations to Ben Glass's son, Brian, for taking Allstate to trial and winning big for his client. Now, each case is different but Brian's client was clearly injured by the Allstate driver and had clear medical bills of $4,900. Brian tried to get the case settled but all Allstate could offer was $5,700. In other words, just a little bit more than the medical bills.

Allstate was giving little or no consideration the plaintiff's pain and suffering, inconvenience, hassle with even having to go to doctors and miss work, or what the plaintiff was paying Brian for his representation.

I've recently written about how difficult it is to settle a Virginia personal injury case with Allstate. In my opinion, they drive up the costs of litigation for everyone (and then complain about lawsuits in the newspaper and on TV.)

Well, Brian didn't back down and his client was awarded $15,000 (remember again, we aren't saying your case will do as well.) It was a good day for his client.

p.s. Allstate will probably appeal and spend more time and money, again, increasing costs for all. We'll see.

Slip and Fall Cases in Virgina Get Even Tougher

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)10231 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

A Federal Judge has ruled that a slip and fall lawsuit that did not allege

(1) how the victim slipped and fell:
(2) what the nature of the liquid on the floor was;
(3) an allegation that the liquid caused the fall;
(4) specific allegations as to what injuries she suffered

has her case dismissed.

In the case, Judge Norman Moon, in Lynchburg, ruled that the lady could refile her case with better allegations.

I've attached this slip and fall opinion here. The problem, with my view, is that Judge Moon (very respected jurist) seems to be looking at this case as though all of the evidence is in....not as an initial pleading. Even very diligent lawyers aren't going to know all of the facts of a case like this before they file it.. That's why there is "discovery" in lawsuits.

This case may have a very chilling effect on lawsuits in Virginia. Some will say that's a good idea. It looks to me like we are reversing hundreds of years of Virginia jurisprudence....

Just my opinion.

What Does It Mean To Be Actively Treated, Am I? And Other Questions

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17801 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

More questions and answers!

I've heard that to receive benefits you have to being actively treated. My doctor has told me that I'm not a candidate for surgery and the best thing I can do is lose weight. How do I justify seeing him on a regular basis if he's not doing anything? Will the insurance carrier inquire as to what’s going on as far treatment, or can I just see him every 6 months for a check-up?

Can I cancel a policy within in the first 2 years or so even though the policy is non-cancellable until age 65?

I would like to know exactly what the insurance company says my disability is because I want to make sure the insurance company and I have the same criteria for my disability. Will they send me this information? Can I request a copy of the policy that pertains to my disability?

And remember to check out my book Robbery Without A Gun for more on disbability insurance claims!

What Date You Claim Disability Is Important! - Find Out Why

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17802 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:00:00 EST

More important info on your disability insurance claim:

What date should I put on the disability claim form as to when my condition started? I have a ninety day wait period and a requirement that a notice of claim be made within twenty days or 'as soon as reasonably possible.'

I’ve heard that insurance companies continue to check on your status. Do I have to go thru this whole thing again with having my doctors fill out forms confirming my sickness? I have not been working at all, so that is one issue that they won't hassle me about.

Under what conditions will the insurance company have to pay my attorney fees?

Can you really settle a case with Allstate before the day of trial

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17644 — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Those of you who have followed my blogs, read my book on Virginia car accidents, read this website, etc. know that I am one who says that you don't always need a lawyer to settle your case. I encourage people, especially if the case is small, to try to get things worked out with the insurance company. I'm prepared to give everyone the benefit of the doubt.

I have a different opinion about Allstate. Remember, they are the company that for years, sent a letter to claimants basically encouraging them to not get a lawyer because "a lawyer will just take a huge portion of your settlement."

Let me tell you about a recent case our office handled. Remember, each case is different and you can draw your own conclusions.

I got a call from a lady who had been in an accident with an Allstate insured. The accident was clearly the other person's fault. The injury victim had never sued anyone before, had never been in an accident before and was in perfect health before the accident. She had a good job making over $100,000 a year.

Her injuries were fairly serious but would resolve with time and good treatment. I told her that even though here case wasn't "small" that she should go throught treatment, get better and try to work the case out with Allstate.

She followed my directions.

She followed the doctors orders.

She got better over time and approached Allstate with a very reasonable settlement proposal. She gave Allstate all of her medical records, lost wage forms, and medicial bills.

Allstate then proceeded to offer to repay her medical bills, only. Essentially they weren't offering her anything for pain and suffering, inconvenience and the like.

She came back to me and we filed suit. Allstate did very little to defend the case. It sent out a bunch of subpoenas but it admitted that its insured was at fault. It took the deposition of our client. Allstate did not even request that a doctor perform an independant medical examination, probably because the medical picture was so clear.

A couple of weeks before trial Allstate essentially TRIPLED its offer and the case settled.

My point is that there is no reason the victim should have had to hire an attorney to get fair compensation. The case did not change at all. The medical picture at the time the case settled was exactly the same as the picture on the day the claimant tried to get the case settled.

My advice. If you've been hit by an Allstate insured. Get a lawyer. They won't listen to you until you do.

Just my opinion. Each case is different. Come to your own conclusion.

What Do I Do If I Suspect Medical Malpractice Has Occurred? And Other Important Questions

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17486 — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's a few of the typical questions I get about medical malpractice, click for the answers...

What do I do if I suspect medical malpractice has occurred?

Do medical malpractice cases take longer than others? Why?

What damages can be recovered for medical malpractice?

Like I do for disability questions, feel free to submit your own and I'll try to get to them in a timely manner, for a quicker response try my online chatbox on the homepage!

A Psychiatric Disability Case Gone Wrong For AT&T

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17427 — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's a great case out of Tennessee in which the insurance doctor made a decision to deny with hardly any information. That's dangerous because what if they then miss information that makes it an obviously valid claim? Well then they get sued and taken to court and that's exactly what happened.

It was a psychiatric disability case and those are tricky and require a bit more attention from the disability insurer. Dr. Grimes, the reviewing psychiatrist made the decision to deny based on the opinion that the claimant was able to perform her job. She made that decision without any knowledge of the claimant's job, without interviewing the claimant, and without consulting with all of the claimant's treating mental health professionals.

That might fly in physical disability cases because often the records can speak for themselves, but when they're dealing with psychiatric disability it's important to have a physician actually meet with the claimant to determine the extent of the disability. Unfortunately that's not how the insurance companies want to do it, so they don't. Trying to save a little time and money and they're asking for litigation. Well, again, they got it. Next time they should take the time to actually review the claim and save everyone the hassle of court by accepting the initial claim.

Click here to read the full opinion of Allen v. AT&T Disability Income Program, the case in question.

Disability FAQ - More Answers To Your Questions

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17362 — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

The latest in my attempts to answer any and all questions you might have about disability insurance law.

A doctor who only met with me for 15 minutes checked-off "work related" on an examination form, even though my illness is in no way work related. My disability carrier is now saying "given that the doctor checked-off 'work-related,' you may not be covered under your employer's STD policy." What should I do if I get turned-down for STD?

I was being treated by a doctor who specializes in my condition, but I recently switched to another specialist. Do I need to inform the LTD company that I have a new physician or can I wait until a new set of forms need to be filled out and then have my new doctor complete and return the forms?

I recently got a paper to fill out saying I was being reviewed. The paperwork with it says I will hear from my local office soon, but I have heard nothing so far. Should I have heard something by now or should I be doing something to ensure that my payments continue?

Remember to send in your own question if you have one. I'll do my best to get to it in a timely manner! In the meantime you can order my disability insurance book, titled Robbery Without A Gun: Why Your Employer's Long Term Disability Plan May Be A Scam, for more information that might answer your questions!

Marriot Withdraws "blame the victime" defense in rape case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17298 — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Kudos to the Marriott International corporation who firmly rejected a defense to a lawsuit which one of its defense attorney teams had asserted.

A Connecticut woman who was allegedly raped at gunpoint in front of her children in a hotel parking garage. The assailant went to jail.

Whether or not you believe that Marriott had any responsibility to prevent a criminal act (we don't know all the facts) the wizards on the defense team inserted typical boilerplate language in the defense of the case that asserted that this mom was herself resonsible for the criminal act because she "failed to exercise due care for her own safety."

As you can imagine, this boilerplate defense, inserted by lawyers paid by an insurance company, was NOT a good thing for Marriot's public relations. After all, why would you go to a hotel that thought so little of its customers?

Good of Marriott to say to its own defense team, in effect, you guys are morons.

Whether its a company that tells its customers that they need to go to another state to sue them or a health facility that says to the disabled, you aren't allowed to sue us...corporations must know that the defenses they assert in lawsuits have meaning beyond the current case.

As we see them, we will continue to expose them, as we expose those cases we deem frivolous.

Disability Insurance Info

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17219 — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

You thought I was done answering Disability questions? Not while there are still so many unanswered! Here's the latest batch:

Should I be seen by my MD for reassessment of the condition to avoid potential problems from my ERISA insurer? If so, how do I approach my doctor?

If I do some work in another profession, is my claim closed? If the work is part time and temporary, what happens when I stop working? If the claim is closed, do I have to go through the whole process again? Can they cancel my policy?

A judge ruled in favor of my disability claim as a closed period and I would receive back pay for that time period, but I will not receive a monthly benefit because I went back to work and make more than $1,000. My LTD group plan wants to recoup what they call an offset of social security in the sum of $15,000. This is basically the entire amount of the back pay. Is there any legal recourse in this matter such as filing bankruptcy? If I don't pay it back will and can they sue for this money? Can this amount be 'settled' as insurance companies do on a regular basis?


Keep 'em coming!

More Disability Q&A - Ask And I Will Tell

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17122 — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Continuing in my attempts to provide up-to-date responses to all of your questions here are few new answers to your questions. You can also find them in the FAQ section of the site. Enjoy and remember to submit your questions!

Can the LTD company make me go to court even though I am working again? If SSD determines that I was not disabled, is it possible that I can still get money from my LTD carrier for the time when I was sick and not working?

Unum has offered me a buyout of $38,000. I have 10 more years to draw $600/month, so this seems to be a low offer to me. Can they offer more or is this what I would be only entitled to? Is the life insurance I have with them cancelled if I accept the buyout?

I was just approved for Social Security Disability. It took a year, so I will receive a lump sum payment for back benefits. Up until now, Unum paid benefits to me through my former employer's disability policy. Do I have to repay those benefits to Unum or my employer?

I have gotten several conflicting recommendations from my doctor: first that I am not a candidate for surgery and then that I should undergo extensive surgery. I have filed for SSD and am getting LTD from insurance carrier. If I refuse surgery and go with the first diagnosis what will happen with SSD and LTD?

The insurance company requiring an IME and there are no doctors within a 75 mile radius that does that sort of testing. What should I do to appeal the matter?

Keep 'em coming and I'll keep answering! And remember you can always order my Disability Insurance book and get all the info you need!

Disability Insurance - Q & A

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17084 — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

More questions that I often get from clients and some submitted to the site. Submit your own and I'll try to answer it as soon as possible. Here's some of the latest questions I've answered, click the question for the answer.

Do state statutes of limitation apply to Federal lawsuits? So, under ERISA, would every lawsuit be filed in Federal court?

I accidentally told my LTD Company that I have an attorney that is reviewing my LTD claim. Until now they did not know I had a lawyer. Will this cause the insurance company to investigate my case more intensely?

About a year ago I slipped and fell at work, but my case was not diagnosed as a serious condition until six months later. Now I am having trouble paying for my medication, getting a job (because of my condition) and keeping my job (because some days I can’t get out of bed. Would I qualify for Social Security Insurance?

I just starting receiving LTD payments, by way of my bank, and my bank is trying to take the money to pay a charged-off loan. Is this legal?

I just found out from my disability claim reviewer that I should be receiving 60% of my pay instead of the 40% that I am currently receiving. I am currently receiving Social Security Disability as well. The numbers that they are quoting me don’t seem right and I am afraid that they will come after me in the future to get their money back. What should I do?

What is the standard procedure for informing an insurance company of a retirement? Will the fact that he is resigning/retiring have any impact on his claim?

For more information check out my Disability Insurance book titled Robbery Without A Gun: Why Your Employers Long-Term Disability Insurance Plan May Be A Scam

UNUM Defeated Again For Behaving Badly

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)17026 — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

    Here's another case in which we see insurance companies behaving badly. Patricia Galvin, a Tax Attorney from Northern California was rear ended by a speeder and suffered back injuries that would lead to chronic debilitating back pain. Every doctor seen by Ms. Galvin concluded that she could not work due to the pain.

    The only doctor to say she could work was UNUM's own Dr. Stephen Jacobson who claimed that Ms. Galvin's pain was subjective and that there was no objective medical evidence that the pain was at the level she described. UNUM also claimed that the cause of Galvin's inability to work was not her injuries from the accident but from depression exacerbated by a hostile working environment (which was created by her inability to function after her injuries).

    So UNUM is claiming that her inability to work is caused by her hostile working environment. Ignoring the fact that the hostile working environment was created by her attempts to remain working despite her disability. Another catch-22 crafted by the insurance company to deny a legitimate claim. This time the court agreed with the plaintiff but California is a generous state when it comes to dealing with insurance companies and it certainly isn't the case that a similar result could be expected in similar circumstances elsewhere.

Read more on the complete opinion and more on Galvin v. UNUM and ERISA cases here.

Threats by Disability Insurance Company

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16952 — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

I've got a potential client who may have a claim against one of the major long term disability insurance companies for lifetime benefits. (Yes, these policies exist--written long ago...collected premiums all these years...they just hate it when a claim is made)

Anyway, the claims rep tells him "you know, if you make this claim we are going to bug you and pester you for the rest of your life. We'll not only require every form known to man but you'll never know when the truck down the street is hiding our video surveillance."

The potential client, to his great credit, didn't take the bait and argue with the guy.

He just said: that's exactly what Ben Glass told me you would say!"

"No Boys to Drive" Lawsuit to Proceed

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16897 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court of Virginia has ruled that a mother who hosted a teen age girl for a sleepover, and who made a promise to the parents that "I won't let you daughter be driven by a boy" may be sued when the young girl died in an accident later that night when being driven by a teen age male driver.

This case should send a strong warning to parents that they have an obligation to keep their promises.

Read more about this very sad case involving a wrongful death during a sleepover here.

UPDATE: The case settled for $1.75 million in April, 2010. Check out my blog on the settlement for this wrongful death case.

Virginia Supreme Court sets argument in Didlake Charitable Immunity Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16902 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

BenGlassLaw announces that argument has been set in the Supreme Court of Virginia on a challenge to the state's charitable immunity laws. Glass represents a 25 year old mentally and physically disabled man who alleges that he was injured while under the care of employees of Didlake, Inc.

Read more details about the charitable immunity case is here.

Disability Insurance Company Knew All Client's Golf Scores for last 5 years

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16923 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Got an interesting call recently. A client who is a medical surgeon who's disability involves fine motor skills still plays golf. (That's OK, hitting a golf ball into the woods does not compromise patient safety!0

He has a claim with a major disability insurance company. The field rep came around for a visit and asked about golf. The client answered appropriately and truthfully.

The disability investigator said "that's exactly what all these golf scores say!"

Pretty scary stuff. Your life is an open book.

What happens if after an accident if I don't have health insurance?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16936 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

The most frustating thing is to be injured because of someone else's carelessness, but not be able to afford treatment because of a lack of health insurance. Here are some tips for the uninsured accident victim.

Little League Baseball Settles Nutty Lawsuit

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16670 — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

The tournaments leading up to the Little League World Series have been happening all summer and the actual 16-team tournament kicks off in about 11 days. I really enjoy watching the LLWS and I'd hate to see it go which is why I'm so concerned by the latest legal news involving Little League Baseball Incorporated in which they settled a case for $125,000 up in Staten Island, NY.

The injury? Some ligament damage that a 12-year old suffered from sliding into second base. The family sued almost three years after the fact on the grounds that the coach was negligent in not teaching the kid proper sliding technique. Absolutely ridiculous. If a coach lets a kid take batting practice without a helmet then I can see a problem and certainly some negligence, but proper sliding technique? C'mon!

If coaches are going to get sued every time a player gets injured then who in their right mind is going to coach? It's hard enough as it is to get parents to take the time to coach these teams add in financial risk and watch the pool of potentials dry up.

By playing sports you assume some risk of injury, it happens. Even star athletes using perfected techniques end up injured. So why did Little League Incorporated settle? It seems like they're trying to keep that under wraps but they're only hurting themselves. If Little League Baseball Inc. doesn't fess up to why they settled such a weak case it's only going to hurt them in the long run and encourage others to file frivolous suits which can only end up causing fewer coaches, fewer teams, and less opportunities for kids to play a great game in a great environment. Your move Little League.

Help! Hartford wants my social security payments!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16639 — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

What happens if you are getting disability payments from your disability insurance company and you win your social security case?

Here's the answer and it ain't pretty.

Ben Glass

Find The Answer To Your Question Regarding Virginia Medical Malpractice Cases!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16509 — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

I've received more frequently asked questions regarding Virginia Medical Malpractice cases and here are some specific links to a few of the choice questions and answers:

Is there a statute of limitation on a malpractice suit? How long after a malpractice injury do you have legal claim?

Do most medical malpractice cases result in a verdict in favor of the patient?

Does a bad outcome mean that medical malpractice has occurred?

Are most medical malpractice awards subject to a cap on damages, if so, which damages are capped?

Can anything be recovered if medical malpractice causes the patient to die?

What do I have to prove in my medical malpractice case?

Is a misdiagnosis malpractice?

For a complete list of questions you might have about your MedMal case visit my Medical Malpractice Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) Page . Feel free to submit your own questions and I will try to get to them!

You've Got Personal Injury Questions, I've Got Personal Injury Answers

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16431 — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

I've updated my Personal Injury FAQ section with some new questions and answers. Take a look and you'll find updated answers to:

Can't I just estimate the cost of my injuries right away?

What if an Insurance Adjuster offers me a settlement?

Should I talk with the insurance company representative?

Should i give a statement to the other insurance company?

Can I sue for what might have happened?

Along with a few others. If you've got questions, I've got answers. Feel free to submit your own and I'll try to get to it.

While I'm Waiting to Recover Damages How Do I Get My Medical Bills Paid?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16332 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Three ways:

- Get your health insurance provider to pay for them (they won't want to)
- Your automobile insurance might have a MedPay clause with some cash for treatment
- Some doctors will hold off billing until after you receive your settlement or award

Read more specifics on the process and how it works in my personal injury and medical malpractice FAQ section

Virginia's Contributory Negligence: If It's At All Your Fault, You Don't Have A Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16335 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

A lot of people get confused on whether or not they have a case if they're partially at fault for the accident in which they sustained their injuries. The confusion lies in Virginia's unique way of addressing the question of shared negligence. Find out about comparative and contributory negligence in my updated FAQ section.

What's The Difference Between Compensatory And Punitive Damages?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16337 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

It's all in the name, in the sense that the name explains the purpose of each type of damages.

Compensatory damages are meant to compensate the plaintiff

while

Punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant.

Learn more about the two and see some examples of compensatory and punitive damages in my updated FAQ.

Success in America - Speech at Christopher Newport University

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16378 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

Virginia personal injury attorney and serial entrepreneur Ben Glass announces the release of his new CD recording, Success in America. Recorded live at Christopher Newport University, Glass sets out the steps that young people need to take in order to stand out.

Recognizing that 80% of people are perfectly happy living average, non-extraordinary lives, Glass urges the students in attendance to resist the temptation to not excel, a temptation, he says, that is promoted by mass media.

You can get your copy of Success in America here.

The best type of personal injury client for BenGlassLaw

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16253 — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 08:00:00 EST

I got asked this question the other day on a radio interview:

What is the best type of personal injury client for BenGlassLaw?

My answer:

The best personal injury client for our law firm is someone who takes the hiring of a personal injury attorney very seriously. They aren't trolling the yellow pages and hiring the first lawyer who answers the phone. The are asking questions about national board certification, substantial verdict and settlement experience and specialization in persona injury law. They typically are retaining us after having read our Virginia car accident and personal injury package. They have read The Truth About Lawyer Advertising in Virginia.

In short, they take their time before deciding. These clients tend to have the more serious cases requiring more expertise and experience then someone who does personal injury law as an "add-on."

Every Parent's Nightmare--You leave you child for a sleepover and she dies

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16163 — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here is one of the saddest cases I've come across in a long time.

Parents left their 14 year old daughter with another parent for a sleepover. The host parent promised to supervise and enforce the rule that "my daughter is not to be driven by any young male drivers. This is the rule we have at home."

The promise was made, then broken.

You can read this very sad car accident case from the Supreme Court of Virginia here.

Doctors Making Diagnoses By Proxy

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16181 — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

It's actually quite possible that your disability case will be determined by something a doctor you've never even met has to say. IMEs generally don't meet or examine the people who they're asked to assess. Instead, they review the files you've sent to the insurance company and, once in a blue moon, speak to your treating physicians. It's no wonder why they do it. It's difficult to get doctors and patients together over great distances, it lessens the possibility of a plaintiff unduly affecting or trying to embellish results (which they can tell), and it depersonalizes the process so they don't have to feel bad about denying benefits to people they like and feel sorry for.

But in this case they go beyond that. They don't even contact the treating physicians, those who have medical knowledge and know the facts of the case the best. Of course they're going to deny benefits if all they're doing is reading a piece of paper. They can come up with hundreds of excuses to discredit written words because words can't argue back like another doctor can. Not contacting treating physicians, or trying to contact them when they know they'll be unavailable (i.e. around lunchtime), simply makes the IME's job easier and it's no shock that it's incredibly common in this industry of the underhanded.

In the case of Schully v. Continental Casualty Company this was exactly the case. Click the link to read a news blurb followed by a press release and the entire opinion on the case involving IMEs and their diagnoses by proxy .

Judge Attacks University Disability Consortium's Advertising and Policies

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16027 — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

The University Disability Consortium (UDC) gets hired by insurance companies to independently review medical claims. They advertise that their service will most likely result in "improved denial and closure rates at a reduced cost."

Translated: "If you hire us, we will deny claims to save you money."

And they'll do it in a plethora of ways. In the case of Velikanov vs. Union Security Insurance, UDC's Dr. Brian Mercer used the "close-enough" method. As in he addressed a condition that the claimant didn't have, but hey, the condition he wrote about and the condition the claimant had (two different types of cysts) were "close enough" that they could be misconstrued by anyone without a medical degree. Either he's not doing his job right (misreading files) or he IS doing his job right (finding ways to deny legitimate claims).

The judge basically threw out Dr. Mercer's opinions because he found them to be "inherently bias." I have a feeling that that term could be applied to most if not all insurance docs but as of now it seems their pseudo-medical opinions are still generally accepted in the courtroom. Read more on Velikanov vs. Union Security and see how UDC gets scolded.

How to find the best personal injury attorney for YOUR case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16054 — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here is an article that appeared in a local magazine. Its a consumer guide to finding the right lawyer for your case, authored by Virginia Personal Injury Attorney Ben Glass.

How to Find the Right Virginia Attorney For Your Injury Case

Court rules that case brought within 2 years in another state satisfied Virginia's statute of limitations

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16090 — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here is an unusual situation:

The plaintiff was injured in Virginia in a car accident with a resident of Ohio. He filed suit within 2 years in Ohio and he filed an identical suit here in Virginia after two years had passed.

After much legal wrangling, the Virginia court said that the lawsuit filed in Ohio (even though that Court ordered the case transferred to Virginia) was good enough to stop the running of the statue of limitations.

In this case an action was filed in the Ohio court one day before the running of the statute of limitations. The fact that the original action was filed in another state, and perhaps in an improper venue, is of no concern to this Court. The plain language of the tolling statute contemplates "any action" commenced within two years. Code § 8.01-229(E)(1). The commencement of the Ohio action falls within the statute.

This action was also brought within the remaining period allowed by the statute of limitations once the original action had ended, in this case one day. The fact that this action was commenced before the tolling period ended is not of consequence.

Thornton v. Estes Express Lines, 15 Cir. CL0800086500, 77 Va. Cir. 455 (2009)

Lawsuit Claims Doctor Injected Patients with Substance Not Approved for Human Use

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)16095 — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

A local judge is allowing a lawsuit to continue against a local doctor who claims that his former patients waited too long to file suit against him for injecting them with a non FDA approved product. His claim that the patients should somehow have figure out what he allegedly hid from them will continue, according to a Loudoun County judge.

Read more about David Berman, MD and the lawsuit against Dulles Cosmetic Surgery and Skin Care Center.

Payee Notification Would Have Prevented Most of Conrad Fraud

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15978 — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

The Virginia State Bar has just reported that it's Client Protection Fund has paid out an astonishing $411,165 in claims to former clients of former Virginia personal injury attorney Stephen ("the felon") Conrad.

There's a simple procedure, now being proposed in Virginia, that would have prevented most of this fraud. Its called payee notification and what it says is that if the insurance company sends your lawyer a settlement check of $5,000 or more, they send you a notice that they've paid your lawyer.

Like an old ad I remember: "simple, inexpensive, and it works."

Trouble is, some Virginia lawyers are opposed to this consumer protection statute . In fact, as of this writing the official position of the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association (of which I am a member) is "opposed."

Sorry, but there's not a consumer out there who thinks that payee notification is a BAD idea.

By the way...who do you think pays for the money that goes into the fund?

The lawyer members of the Virginia State Bar. Who does that cost get passed to? The consumer/client.

Thus, it seems rather simple that a reduction in claims by virtually preventing the type of fraud Conrad engaged in (i.e. he was settling your case and forging your name on checks and never telling you, the client) will reduce the cost of legal services in Virginia.

I'm still waiting to hear the rational basis for the argument against this law...HINT: the basis can't begin "it will hurt our (lawyers) feelings!"

IMEs Once Again Discredited By USDC Judge

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15895 — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Another good bit of news for those seeking disability benefits. In the recent case of Toth v. INA a judge granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment based on the fact that CIGNA's medical team, made up of Drs. Dan Gerstenblitt and Paul Seiferth, didn't offer any evidence to back up their opinions of non-disability other than pointing out that the plaintiff's treating physicians lacked objective evidence. Maybe the CIGNA doctors should leave the lawyering to the lawyers.

In a lot of these cases one of the major problems is that many debilitating disorders and syndromes are beyond current means of objective testing. The insurance docs, such as CIGNA's, use this fact to claim that there is no evidence of disability, when in reality the level of evidence they want is unattainable with current medical technology.

In this case, the judge decided that this wasn't good enough for CIGNA to deny benefits and that the overwhelming record from the treating physicians was more than enough to justify benefits despite that much of it was based on "self-reports" from the plaintiff. This a great ruling in that it basically recognizes the impossibility of attaining a certain level of proof that insurance claim as necessary for granting benefits.
Read more, including entire opinion on Toth v. INA, on how treating physicians opinions can hold more weight than insurance doctors.

Voluntary Ignorance: The Insurance Doctor's Last Bastion

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15791 — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Another case in which an insurance doctor rides the line between ethical an unethical. A doctor for the infamous University Disability Consortium (UDC), Dr. Beth Aaronson, reviewed a file for a claimant who suffered from a left arm disability, temporal lobe epilepsy, protein S deficiency, and deep vein thrombosis.

I suppose it's possible that she missed the last three on that list, which would be grossly negligent, but I trust in Dr. Aaronson's skills and find it much more likely that she ignored them on purpose because she either couldn't contend against them or couldn't bring herself to come up the bogus medical opinion it would take to discount the evidence. Either way, she only addressed the left arm disability. I guess if they can't use whack medicine to discount a claim they just ignore it, great strategy!

I've written more on insurance doctors telling half-truths and outright ignoring complaints .

Case Highlights The Insurance Company's Two-Faced Approach

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15717 — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's a case that highlights the insurance company's contradictory policies. On the one hand, they're doing their darndest to deny your claim while on the other hand they're paying for a lawyer to prove to Social Security that you're as disabled as could be.

Most LTD plans have a clause that says LTD payments from the insurer can be offset by Social Security disabilit benefits and they require you to apply for it if you're granted benefits. It's a good idea to know all about your policy. Does it have something like this in it? If it does, expect a similar battle.

Click here for more on the case and the opinion itself on this disability insurance and social security disability benefits conundrum .

Virginia Slip & Fall Cases: A Closer Look

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15719 — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

After hearing about slip and fall cases quite a bit recently and blogging on a case against Food Lion being allowed to go to trial I decided it might be worth it to take a closer look at the status of slip-and-fall litigation in Virginia. It's often said that Virginia is among the most difficult states to prove slip-and-fall liability.

Here's my take on slip-and-fall cases in Virginia and key components that make up a successful claim .

Insurance Company's Defamation and Copyright Suit Against Blogger Thrown Out

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15723 — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

A recent suit filed by Sedgwick Claims Management Services against blogger Robert Delsman has been thrown out by Northern California District Judge.

The blogger actually represented himself in this case and filed the motion that the court construed as a motion to dismiss. While it wasn't exactly eloquent or artful it did the trick and showed that Sedgwick was using the lawsuit to intimidate him and infringe on his freedom of speech. A California law, known as the SLAPP Act, protects citizens from intimidation through litigation brought by private interests.

Read the full opinion on the case involving bloggers, copyright infringement, and defamation of a insurance claims management company .

SuperPages SuperGuarantee: It's A Lot Harder To Get Paid Than You Think

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15736 — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Have you seen those ads from SuperPages promoting their new SuperGuarantee?

The commercial sounds great, unfortunately, the six pages of fineprint that govern the program are enough kill the buzz.

I've written a piece on Why The SuperPages SuperGuarantee is a SuperHassle and it links to the Terms and Conditions of the program. Check it out!

MetLife Reprimanded For "Independent" Medical Reviewer Link

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15664 — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

A recent case out of the USDC of Sourthern New York was won by plaintiff Tracy Solomon. Ms. Solomon was granted LTD benefits from her plan with MetLife.

One of the highlights of the case was the relationship of the medical reviewer with MetLife. Dr. Amy Hopkins was hired my MetLife to be an independent medical reviewer and to determine if Ms. Solomon was disabled. The decision to terminate benefits was based largely on Dr. Hopkins' report that Solomon was able to work. Solomon contested the validity of Hopkins as an independent medical reviewer due to her close ties with MetLife. Upon further review it was found that Dr. Hopkins earned well over half of her income from doing independent medical work for MetLife. The judge determined that this was a relationship that went beyond what is acceptable for a reviewer to be regarded as "independent."

The inherent bias of having to determine disability payments from your employer casts doubt on the validity of Dr. Hopkins' opinion. In the cutthroat world of insurance, companies favor those doctors who give them the best chance at legitimate denial. With such a vested interest in maintaining a relationship with MetLife, her largest beneficiary, the possibility of bias and the solid medical evidence that contradicts Dr. Hopkins' opinion is enough to determine that her report is flawed. This judge set it right, let's hope others follow suit and insurance companies learn to use legitimately independent doctors. Here's the entire Solomon v. MetLife opinion .

Dish Network's End Run Fails In Virginia Sex Offender Suit

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15490 — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Dish Network is being sued by a family who say their child was molested by one of the company's installers. The family claims that Dish Network is liable because they knew that the employee was a sex offender but went ahead and hired him anyways for a job that would give him access to people's homes. It looks good for the family because juries don't exactly take kindly to child molesters and those who give them the opportunities to operate.

However, the defendant's lawyer recently tried to challenge the jurisdiction of the case, probably their last resort, by claiming that the case should be in Federal court rather than VA State Courts. Their argument was that there existed a "diversity of citizenship" because the offender had previously resided in Maryland. How long ago did he live in Maryland?

Well he was arrested in 2005, served time in VA, and had been living in Richmond since 2001 at the latest with countless documents listing his residence in Virginia. Needless to say, the court ruled that the man was a citizen of Virginia for all intents and purposes and the case was remanded to VA courts. Talk about a last ditch effort, not even sure what the point was anyways. It's hard to find any court that looks anything close to favorably on sex offenders. Read the entire court opinion on this child molester case here .

Great New DUI Blog Site in Virginia

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)9453 — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

For the most up to date news and information about Virginia drunk driving news and information visit the Fairfax DUI Attorney Blog.

I'm biased, of course, but I think this is the best DUI/Drunk Driving Information Site in Virginia.

Trip and Fall Lawsuit Against Food Lion Allowed to Proceed

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15436 — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court of Virginia has reversed a lower court ruling dismissing a trip and fall case involving a Roanoke area Food Lion. The court ruled that a jury issue was presented when a woman triped on rails that ran along the floor of the Food Lion.

The complete Virginia Supreme Court trip and fall opinion and commentary are here.

I slipped at the grocery store and injured myself. Can I recover

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15159 — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

In Virginia, slip and fall cases in grocer stores are tough cases. The building owner is only responsible if he was careless. Thus, you must prove that the slippery substance was either put there by the owner or one of his employees or was there long enough to have been noticed.

Here is some other important information about slip and fall cases in Virginia.

Virginia Text Message Ban While Driving--what nonsense

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15144 — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Virginia's new highly publicized ban on text messaging while driving is another perfect example of how lawmakers with no guts pass a law then pat themselves on the back for promoting safety.

If they truly wanted to make Virginia roads safer, they would ban cell phone use.

But they won't. They'll just continue to waste taxpayer money "debating" silly, unenforceable laws like this one.

Here's the rest of my rant on the Virginia Ban on Text Messaging.

Soft Tissue Car Accident Injury--Bunk--Right?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15118 — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

I can't tell you how many times I've had a client tell me that an insurance adjuster laughed when using the phrase but its just a soft tissue case .

Let me tell you a little story about what a new client learned recently. She used to think that soft tissue car accident cases were bunk.

Ben Glass

Payee Notification in Virginia--Some Lawyers Oppose It and They are Wrong

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)15135 — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

There's a simply way to prevent those few lawyers who deliberately steal from clients. These folks figure out a good scheme to steal millions...and they usually get away with it for long enough to devastate the clients they steal from.

There's a simple solution and its called payee notification in Virginia.

Amazingly, some lawyers in Virginia oppose this consumer protection statute.

You'll have to ask them why.

I'd invite them to "join the conversation" at this blog and express their opinions as to why Virginia should not enact payee notication now.

Insurance Companies And Their Doctors Are At It Again!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14888 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

I was just doing some follow-up research on my most recent blog post, IMEs Beware! Your Time Has Come! And I stumbled upon this gem of a case. Aetna decided to deny a woman's disability claim on the basis of only one doctor, an IME, who didn't even believe the disease she complained of existed! How on earth does the insurance company expect objectivity when the docs they hire are predisposed to deny deny deny? The short answer is, they don't. Now the plaintiff hasn't won the case, simply shown that it needs to go to trial. Read the decision to deny summary judgment in Hoffpauir v. Aetna here.

Ben Glass's Theory on why we are back to low-ball offers in clear liability car accident cases

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14955 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here we go again. Very low offers and a "we'll take it to trial" attitude by most all of the major car insurance companies in Virginia in personal injury cases.

Here's my take on why the companies have turned so stingy in car accident cases this time.

Stop Exaggerating -- and other car accident mistakes

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14958 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Wow.

You've been in a car accident. This is the first time this has happened and you have questions. You may be getting well-meaning advice from your friends about how to handle the medical side of your case.

Here's some advice as to what not to do in a Virginia Car Accident.

IMEs Beware! Your Time Has Come

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14884 — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

IMEs. Independent Medical Examiners. Those are the docs the insurance company pays to "objectively" analyze your claim. Let me run that by you again. The insurance company gives money to the doctor, the doctor examines you, the doctor tells them whether or not you should get benefits or compensation. Doesn't exactly sound very "independent," does it?

Read Ben Glass' take on the IME - Insurance company "rackett" and how courts are fighting it and take a look at a recent case showing that fight in action, Ritchie v. Krasner , 2009 .

Payee Notification-Good For Consumers-Why Do Some Trial Lawyers Oppose

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14716 — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

A simple and smart consumer protection statute that would have prevented the theft of millions by now imprisoned attorney Stephen Conrad is opposed by some Virginia trial lawyers. They appear to oppose the statute out of their own self concern about reputation of the trial bar.

I argue that supporting the measure would enhance, not diminish the reputation of trial lawyers, because supporting the measure is the right thing to do and no consumer of legal services would think this is a bad idea.

You can read my thought on the Virginia debate surrounding the proposed payee notification statute here.

Doctor paid over $250k by same lawyer for patient care..is this a problem

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14754 — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:00:00 EST

Some lawyers advertise that if you call them after an accident, they will get you into the right hands in terms of doctors.

Think this sort of a referal system is a good idea?

Maybe not.

Virginia attorney Ben Glass comments on a recent accident case where the judge threw out the doctor's testimony.

One of the Five Deadly Sins--the Lawyer Refers the Client to a Doctor

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14461 — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

Some folks don't really believe us when we write, in Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Virginia Car Accident Case, that getting a referal from your lawyer to your doctor is a bad thing.

It was for a plaintiff in a recent Virginia case involving a car wreck.

The judge found that the lawyer made the referal and then later failed to file the correct report with the court.

The judge would not let the doctor testify.

That's really bad news.

MetLife Gets Reamed By New York Judge

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)14188 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's a case involving MetLife's group disability plan for Eastman Kodak. The plaintiff suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and was initially given full benefits.

MetLife decided to review the case and, well, they didn't do a very good job of it. The doctors they had evaluate the plaintiff didn't really use any evidence and when they did, they did so selectively.

There is no one test that can be used for CFS because it is an amalgam of several symptoms rather than a disease. So all the tests that the plaintiff's primary care physician said pointed to CFS, MetLife's docs said they didn't, claiming that there was not objective proof of the condition. And when they were asked repeatedly what the plaintiff could do to provide objective proof (remember there is no test for CFS) the question was ignored.

Brilliant. The insurance companies want a level of proof that's not possible. A definitive result from a non-existent CFS test.

The opinion, linked above, is quite a good read. The judge really goes after MetLife on some of its self-contradictions and gets after a MetLife doc's report saying it "can be characterized as shoddy and incomplete."

The whole point is that insurance companies have to be responsive and specific when they deny a claim. They have to answer the question of why the claim was denied and also explain what they would need to accept it. If they don't, something's up.

Wisconsin DUI Laws Are A Joke!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13969 — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal about Wisconsin's drunk driving laws and the reforms some legislators are trying to push through.

41% of Wisconsin's traffic deaths are alcohol related and NOW they're finally going to do something about it. So they decided to take the "drastic" step of requiring first time offenders with at least 0.15% BAC (almost twice the legal limit) to install "ignition interlocks" in their cars. Oh, and they're also going to bolster penalties for repeat offenders and expand their alcohol treatent program... Wow.

Those are some mighty big changes going on up north. I mean, I realize Wisconsin is like the home of beer and they love their Milwaukee Brewers but enough is enough! First offenders getting traffic citations and fines? Police are bound by law to refrain from setting up sobriety checkpoints? This is stuff from a decade or two ago and it's gotta be fixed. Chuck Hurley of MADD says it nicely, that "only in Wisconsin" are the reforms they instituted a sign of progress.

But let's not kid ourselves. Virginia isn't all that great when it comes to DUI laws either. We have the ignition interlock, stiffer penalties for higher BACs, and sobriety checkpoints but what we don't have is penalties for the places getting people drunk.

It's time that bars start taking some of the blame for drunk driving. I don't mean to say that bars should stop operating but you'd think that good common sense would hold that the workers of an establishment know not to let someone drive when it's obvious they've had too much. Bars get in trouble if they serve underage kids, they lose their ABC license. Why not have it be the same for DUIs? If a bar serves a guy too much and lets him drive home, BOOM no more liquor license. I know there's a lot of grey area there but at least it's a start to finally getting the bar and restaurant industry to pick up part of the tab for the mess they help create.

"Stacking" Allowed Under Uninsured/Under-Insured Motorist Coverage Plan

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13610 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

Many attorneys would have said "there's not enough coverage", but recently one attorney "dug deep" to discover a way to vastly increase the insurance coverage available to his client. And the way he did it means great news for the plaintiff’s bar! The Supreme Court of Virginia ruled earlier this week that “stacking”, or combining, the Uninsured Motorist/Under-Insured Motorist coverage in a policy is allowed.

In the case at issue a young girl was badly injured in a car wreck but both the car she was riding in (a friends) and the car at fault were underinsured. Her father’s policy covered three other vehicles for a total of $850k for bodily injuries (split $300k, $300k, and $250k).

The insurance company argued that they had included provisions disallowing “stacking” meaning that the most they could offer in coverage was $300k for one vehicle.

The Court held that the insurance company had not appropriately excluded stacking and that the plaintiff was entitled to the full value of the policy.

With the SCVa’s ruling it opens up a window of litigation for plaintiff’s until the insurance companies are able to modify their policies to properly disallow “stacking.” This case could prove to be quite important as attorneys will now be scrutinizing “stacking” clauses much closer to make sure they are up to snuff. Of course, if you consult with an experienced personal injury attorney before you even buy your plan, you probably wouldn't need to rely on a "litigation window" to be successful in your claim.

My disability company wants to give me a "free lawyer" to pursue social security benefits

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13824 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

My disability company wants to refer me to a social security lawyer to pursue SSDI benefits. They way it will be free. Is that a good idea?

No. In my view it is most often a very bad idea and offers you no benefit whatsoever.

To see why disability attorney Ben Glass says "no" to "free" social security lawyers, go here.

Delhaize America and Food Lion Bit By VA Supreme Court Contributory Negligence Ruling

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13609 — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

Some lady was at a Food Lion in Roanoke with her grandson. She went to use the ATM and while she was doing so her grandson started to wander away. The lady went to go after him and tripped over some metal bars that stick out from the sides of the ATM.

She sued Delhaize America, Food Lion’s parent company, and originally was determined to be “contributorily negligent” because the black metal bars 5-inches off the ground presented an “open and obvious hazard.”

And that ruling was made only based on briefs! Not even a trial to determine exactly what happened and how distracted or focused the plaintiff might have been.

Now that’s a dangerous precedent to set, determining a person’s state of mind at the moment of incident simply from words on paper!

Thank goodness the Supreme Court of VA agreed with me and overturned the decision to grant judgment without trial (summary judgment). At least now the process will be allowed to continue on its course.

Supreme Court of VA Overturns Circuit In PI Legal Malpractice Suit

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13608 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court of Virginia ruled the other day in an interesting legal malpractice suit. Some personal injury attorney had a client and forgot to file the case within the two year statute of limitations probably costing the guy a good bit of money.

The lawyers for the lawyer (yes, we have lawyers too) argued that the plaintiff could still sue another defendant in another state with a longer statute and so the lawyer couldn’t be considered negligent as the case wasn’t completely lost.

The Circuit Court ruled in favor of the lawyer, but the Supreme Court overturned their decision determining that the lawyer’s failure to file the suit on time was the proximate cause of the plaintiff needing to sue in another state. Basically, the lawyer argued that he didn’t commit malpractice because his failure timely to file only destroyed the plaintiff’s case in Virginia. Hopefully they’ll get this one right now that it’s been remanded for a trial.

Record Enterprises Inc. Foiled In Attempt to Bully Lawyers With Feigned Bar Complaints

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13386 — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

I read an interesting article in the latest issue of Lawyer’s Weekly. Some of my attorney-friends down at Gilbert & Albiston in Norfolk were recently threatened with a complaint to the Virginia State Bar by a medical records company, Record Enterprises Inc. The complaint alleged the firm hadn’t paid a bill of $66.45.

Well, it turns out they didn’t owe a single cent and that the records company never even sent in the complaint, just faxed a copy to the firm.

“Buz” Gilbert then turned around and sued Record Enterprises for libel! The article was published just now because the two sides settled for a cool $2,500. The main argument was over the fact that the company never actually sent the complaint in. The defense argued that publication was required for libel but Gilbert went all the way back to VA Code from 1888 which holds that slander doesn’t have to be heard by a third party and libel does not require publication.

The cited law was originally intended to give legal recourse to an insulted party so as discourage dueling. Good thing too because I can’t imagine “Buz” and the CEO of the records company doing pistols at high noon.

Korean Language Virginia Accident Book published

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8909 — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

Personal injury attorney Ben Glass announces that The Ultimate Guide to Virginia Accident Cases has now been translated into Korean by Fairfax attorney David Marks.

This is a remarkable book and an important tool for all accident victims. The fact that the book is in English and Korean should be of major benefit to Northern Virginia accident victims.

Members of the Virginia Korean community should speak to an experienced personal injury attorney and, more importantly, should order this book before speaking to the insurance adjuster.

The Korean Accident Book book can be ordered HERE.

Spam Alert 877-827-7861 National Health Care Association

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13132 — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

I'm tired of folks cold calling me on my cell phone.

So this guy Sam Parker from "National Health Care Association" calls about National Health Care Program.

Leaves this number .. 877-827-7861

I don't know....is it fishing for confidential medical information?

Is this pure fraud? Don't know.

But I know this... no legitimate company needs to cold-call folks on their cell phones.

Maybe they need a smart marketing director.

Tired of it.

Here's another report on National Health Care Association

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13136 — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

Suze Orman Sued for Fraud -- Read the Fine Print

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)13138 — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 08:00:00 EST

Looks like Suze Orman is finding herself in a bit of hot water out in California. She's being sued for "civil fraud, conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty" for an insurance deal she set up in 1999. She was the insured's financial advisor AND insurance salesperson, talk about conflict of interest. Check out the article, linked above, and you'll see what I mean.

It's not all negative though. This provides an important lesson to those purchasing insurance plans. The fancy brochure used to sell this policy said one thing and the fine print said another - typical stuff. The sales people don't even know what they're selling. Always make sure to read your policy thoroughly, especially the fine print, and if need be, get an attorney to help you do so.

Obama's search for Suprme Court Justice

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)12498 — Sun, 24 May 2009 08:00:00 EST

In this morning's Washington Post, President Obama describing what he is looking for in a Supreme Court Justice:

1. "someone with common sense and a sense of how American society works"

2. "who can not only understand the lives of ordinary people but also grasp the practical consequences of rulings on businesses."

3. "You have to have not only the intellect to be able to apply the law to cases before you, but be able to stand in somebody's else shoes and see through their eyes and get a sense of how the law might work or not work in practical day-to-day living."

These ARE NOT criteria for a Supreme Court justice. They are what legislators do and ought to be. It sounds like Obama is saying that even if the law is clear a ruling should be based more on "common sense."

That's simply not the role of a Supreme Court justice. A Supreme Court is there to interpret existing law and either throw it out because it is in conflict with our Consitution or rule on the facts and law before them.

Coleman Propane Heater at Center of Appeal

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8660 — Tue, 19 May 2009 08:00:00 EST

A Coleman propane heater is at the center of a legal dispute in which a 9 year old boy alleges that he was severely burned. In the lawsuit attorneys for the burn victim sought documents from Coleman that may show whether Coleman knowingly violated a California statute, Health and Safety Code Section 19881.

A trial court ordered the production of the documents and Coleman appealed that order.

According to the boy's attorney, John Bisnar, "This appears to be a case of a manufacturer using a faulty design, sub-par critical parts and inadequate quality control leading to the catastrophic injury of a then 7-year-old boy."

An appeals court in California is expected to rule today.

Bisnar Chase is an Orange County, California, personal injury law firm that represents people who have been very seriously injured or lost a family member due to an accident, defective product or negligence.

Lawsuit win by Gulf Stream Coach May Come Back to Haunt McGeorge's Rolling Hills RV Superstore

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)12017 — Thu, 14 May 2009 08:00:00 EST

An interesting "win" by a Virginia RV dealer may turn out to be a big loss in the long run.

According to a decision out of the federal court in Richmond, Virginia, a couple purchased an RV from McGeorge's Rolling Hills RV SuperStore in Ashland, Virginia. The RV was manufactured by Gulf Stream Coach, Inc.

A dispute arose over an alleged defect in the vehicle and the purchaser eventually sued for damages.

This is where it gets interesting:

In the contract of sale was a clause that said, in essence "if you sue us because you are dissatisfied with this vehicle, you have to sue us only in Indiana."

When they sued the company said, even though you bought it right here in Virginia and even though you don't live in Indiana the ONLY place you can sue us is in Indiana.

The court accepted the argument (the purchase had, after all, signed the agreement) and transferred the case.

I'll bet they were breaking out the champaign bottles with this "victory."

The company is, of course, free to state the terms of doing business with them but this has to be one of the dumbest moves in corporate history!

Who would buy knowing that if there is a dispute (and we always hope there is no dispute), you can't litigate it unless you can afford to litigate it hundreds if not thousands of miles from your home.

Gulf Stream Coach has just said to the world, "we are putting up one more barrier to prevent sales."

Next, they'll be looking for a bailout and wondering why.

The case is Garrett v. Gulf Stream Coach, Inc.

Virginia Supreme Court Affirms Verdict for Doctor

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8486 — Fri, 08 May 2009 08:00:00 EST

In this wrongful death action, the question was whether the circuit court erred in denying a jury instruction proffered by the plaintiff. Because the instruction was not a correct statement of the law, as it removes a question of fact from the jury, the Supreme Court of Virginia concluded that the circuit court did not err in refusing to give the instruction.

NANCY WHITE SMITH v. BYUNGKI KIM, M.D., ET AL.

Attorney Rachel Kugel is doing a marketing teleseminar for attorneys

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8419 — Mon, 04 May 2009 08:00:00 EST

Attorney Rachel Kugel has announced that she is doing a marketing teleseminar for attorneys.

There's more information about the Rachel Kugel Marketing Teleseminar here.

Virginia Personal Injury Attorney Ben Glass offers Free Books to Fairfax Woman Readers

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8423 — Mon, 04 May 2009 08:00:00 EST

Fairfax Virginia personal injury attorney Ben Glass has teamed up with Fairfax Magazine to offer two outstanding consumer books, The Truth About Lawyer Advertising and Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Car Accident Case.

These books are available to readers of Fairfax Woman Magazine here.

Ben Glass Legal Marketing SuperConference now Open for Registration

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8273 — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:00:00 EST

I have a small confession to make: While many attorneys say I'm the marketing guru that made a major difference in their lives, I don't know everything, nor do I pretend to. The truth is, it's impossible for one person to master every type of offline and online marketing technique.

That's why I've assembled my own team of marketing all stars. I don't want you to miss out on any powerful marketing technique or tactic - and you won't when you hear these speakers.

Find out more about the Great Legal Marketing Super Conference, the best legal marketing seminar in 2009

New Accident Information package available to Richmond car accident victims

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8230 — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 08:00:00 EST

Richmond, Virginia accident victims now have access to a complete accident information package before they talk to the insurance adjuster. This package is being offered by Richmond attorney Bob Battle, in conjunction with Virginia car accident attorney Ben Glass.

Richmond car accident victims can order their information package here.

WMAL's Fred Grandy to Offer The Truth About Lawyer Advertising

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8200 — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 08:00:00 EST

WMAL's Fred Grandy, one of the most popular radio talk show hosts in the nation, is teaming up with Ben Glass to give away copies of The Truth About Lawyer Advertising to WMAL listeners.

Fairfax personal injury attorney Ben Glass says that he is excited about the prospect of reaching a much broader audience to get his message out about how consumers can interpret lawyer advertising.

"Most lawyer advertising gives the consumer no useful information and leaves it to chance whether your lawyer will actually be experienced in the area of law necessary" says Glass.

WMAL listeners can get their copy of The Truth About Lawyer Advertising here.

April 2009 BenGlassLaw Newsletter is now available

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8195 — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:00:00 EST

Fairfax personal injury attorney Ben Glass has released the April, 2009 BenGlassLaw newsletter.

BenGlassLaw to sponsor Potomac Nationals for 2009 season

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8196 — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:00:00 EST

BenGlassLaw announces that it has become a sponsor of the Potomac Nationals minor league baseball team and will be offering free books throughout the season at the stadium and via this website.

Potomac Nationals fans can order a free copy of Ben's popular consumer book on lawyer advertising here.

John Murtha's Private Airport, Why We Protest

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)11079 — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:00:00 EST

As many know, Ben Glass teaches Northern Virginia entrepreneurs how to grow more profitable businesses. He blogs on this topic (and others) at this site for Northern Virginia Small Business Owners and Enterpreneurs.

Here, Ben rants about one of the perfect examples of why some taxpayers are so upset with rampant government misuse of our dollars and why we need to keep holding Tea Party revolts.

Chris Plante Leaving WMAL

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)8043 — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:00:00 EST

Like many of Chris Plante's loyal listeners, we were stunned to hear today that his show on WMAL 630 talk radio had been cancelled today. We hope we can catch up with Chris shortly.

Chris' live reads of our ads, in which we are giving away a free book, The Truth About Lawyer Advertising, generated a ton of response. (So much, in fact, that we had to place an emergency order for new books.

We'd like to extend to Chris's raving fans another opportunity to get a free copy of this book.

Go here to get The Truth About Lawyer Advertising as advertised by WMAL 630's Chris Plante.

Ben Glass

Suit Against Didlake, Inc Heading to Supreme Court--Charitable Immunity Challenged

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)7949 — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

A mentally and physically disabled Northern Virginia man is appealing to the Virginia Supreme Court a Prince William County judge's decision to dismiss his personal-injury case against Didlake, Inc. Juan R. Jimenez, a 25-year-old man disabled since childhood, had alleged in his lawsuit that he was injured while receiving rehabilitative services at Didlake in April 2007. He claimed he suffered a femoral fracture which required surgery when he was moved by Didlake employees. On March 11, 2009, Circuit Court Judge Mary Grace O'Brien dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that Didlake was entitled to full immunity.

The full story on Jimenez v. Didlake, Inc. is here.

Tough times got you down? Time to Get Your Head on Straight and Thrive

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)10354 — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

My life isn't all about the law. I'm not one of those 80 hour a week, to heck with the family type of lawyers. I've got bigger things in store.

One thing I like to do is to talk to young people. High school students. College students. Law students.

I talk to them about success. About achievement. About being successful in a world that sometimes seems to conspire against and even condemn success.

I've posted some of my articles on the success mindset for entrepreneurs here. Thought you might be interested.

Prosecution drops DUI charge after Judge orders Intoxilizer 5000 examined

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)7778 — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

Richmond Virginia DUI attorney Bob Battle forced the prosecutor to produce the Intoxilator 5000 for testing. Bob wanted to know whether it was working properly. Thousands of people have been convicted when this machine was used.

Rather than produce the machine, the prosecutor dropped the DUI charge.

Wonder why???

Yale Student Sues over Lost X-Box -- Frivolous Case of the Week

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)9865 — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

Here's the knucklehead lawsuit of the month.

A Yale College student (just what are they teaching these kids in school today?) has sued U.S. Airwarys for $1 million for losing his X-Box.

Poor baby.

I'd love to know whether this guy had a lawyer or not. If he does, shame on the lawyer. Its this sort of thing that gives all lawyers a bad name and makes it tougher for people will legitimate claims to get heard in court.

Here's the story of the Yale Student Who is Suing for $1 million for his X-Box.

Ben

BenGlassLaw March Newsletter is now available

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)7675 — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

Fairfax, Virginia attorney discusses interesting news both legal and otherwise, and inspires readers to succeed in a crisis with this law office newsletter.

Unsolicted emails from AskMyLawyerNow.com

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)7683 — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

Someone from AskMyLawyer now is sending unsolicited emails to members of Great Legal Marketing. They are using my name but don't even get the name right. We don't endorse them, didn't suggest they use my name and have no clue what they are offering.

Here's the link to a form email AskMyLawyer.com is sending.

15 Years for Drunk Driving Death and Not a Penny to Pay for The Restaurant who Helped Kill

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)9717 — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

A local Fairfax Circuit court has sentenced a drunk driver who consumed 12 beers then killed a father of five to 15 years in prison. The family of Robert L. Thomas, however, will have no recourse against the restaurant who (must have) knowingly overserved the criminal, Alfredo Martinez Rivera. Fairfax attorney Ben Glass explains why here.

Ben Glass Named To America's Premier Experts

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)7633 — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

Ben Glass, practicing personal injury and medical malpractice attorney and legal marketing
specialist is one of only a handful of participants selected for America’s PremierExperts™ class
of 2009 and participating in The Ultimate Celebrity Branding Experience™.

"Pearl Shucked" Clients -- Ready for You!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)9558 — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

I've written before about those spam emails that lawyers get from advertising services offering to serve up "pearl shucked" clients.. I wondered..."if you are a client, why would you want to go to a lawyer who advertised that way?"

My post on this rather unique marketing message has been commented on elsewhere.

Got an email today from the "pearl shucked lawyer group."

Get a life Ben-you shouldn't let my ads intimidate you like that.
It will take your eye of the speeding ambulance racing by.
Jesse

Here's my response:

Dear Jesse:

I invite you to attend one of my two day conferences on effective, ethical and outside the box marketing.

There you will meet a roomful of lawyer and their staff who do have a life and who don't chase ambulances or sit around waiting for pearl shucked clients.

Ben

Glazer-Kennedy Virginia Entrepreneur Blog Started

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)9510 — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:00:00 EST

The new Glazer-Kennedy local chapter is now operational in Northern Virginia. Ben Glass and Tom Foster run this group for local small business entrepreneurs who are unwilling to wait around for "rescue."

Vist the Glazer-Kennedy IBA - Virginia blog here.

Kid Gets Drunk, Gets Hurt, Then Sues--Another Stupid Lawsuit

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)7475 — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 08:00:00 EST

Its amazing what folks can get away with in some states. In Illinois, a kid snuck beer into a house, got drunk with some friends, then got into a car with one of those friends. Predictably, the friend crashed. The kid was paralyzed (which IS horrible) but he sued the lady who owned the home, contending that she should have known he snuck beer in, got drunk and left with his drunk friend. You won't believe how this turned out.

One of the largest verdicts in Virginia

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)7442 — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 08:00:00 EST

Fairfax, Virginia medical malpractice attorney Ben Glass had one of the largest verdicts in Virginia.

Here is the report of this Virginia misdiagnosis of cancer case.

Why Solo and Small Firm Lawyers Matter

ljperr@wm.edu (blog Author)8360 — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 08:00:00 EST

Carolyn Elefant, (MyShingle.com), solicited input from solo and small firm attorneys across the United States as to why what they do "matters."

I thought you like to see the contest winners. Its inspiring to all of those, in any business or endeavor, who may be struggling or questioning why they do what they do.

The MyShingle "Why What I Do Matters" entries are here.

Kentucky Personal Injury Attorney Reminds you to check your own car insurance to protect you from uninsured drivers

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)8290 — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 08:00:00 EST

In this economy, many people in Virginia are letting their car insurance lapse, or are renewing at lower rates by buying lower limits. Kentucky personal injury attorney Mike Schafer remind us of this in his Kentucky Injury Blog.

The folks selling you the insurance don't do a great job of explaining to you why you need to buy higher amounts of uninsured motorist coverage. Look, its the cheapest extra insurance you can buy.

When you are in a car accident your health insurance company is, in many cases, going to look to be reimbursed for what they paid for your medical bills. You need to make sure there is enough insurance money to go around and its YOUR responsibility to make sure you protect yourself and your family.

If you are seriously hurt, and you visit a lawyer who reviews all of the insurance, and it turns out that there isn't enough insurance to adequately protect you...its YOUR fault. Its not the other person's responsibility to adequately insure themself. In Virginia its perfectly legal to drive WITHOUT insurance.

Dirty Little Secrets the Car Insuarnce Companies Don't Want You To Know

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)8200 — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:00 EST

Richomond personal injury attorne Wayne O'Bryan does a good job of exposing the secrets of the Virginia car insurance companies over at his Richmond Accident Lawyer Blog.

The truth is that after an accident, the insurance company is hoping that they can get a claim closed before you (1) realize your rights or (2) realize the extent of your injuries.

There's usually no rush. That's why I wrote Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Virginia Accident Case.

Get free information first. Make decisions about settling your case and/or hiring a lawyer to assist you, later.

Virginia accident attorney Ben Glass

Ben Glass Law December 2008 Newsletter

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)6743 — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

The Ben Glass Law December 2008 firm newsletter is now online

Ben Glass Law December 2008 Newsletter

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)6744 — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

The Ben Glass Law December 2008 firm newsletter is now online

Frivolous Lawsuits--and Frivolous Claims by Insurance Companies

ljperr@wm.edu (blog Author)7466 — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

Here's an incredible story involving Great American Insurance Company.

They insure building owners. There's a fire and three people die from smoke inhalation from the fire.

Covered or not?

Not, according to Great American.

We don't cover "pollution" claims.

True story, not urban legend.

Check out the Great American We Won't Pay Because they Died of Pollution Defense.

More Praise for Robbery Without a Gun, Why Your Employer's Long-Term Disability Policy May be a Sham

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)7415 — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

North Carolina personal injury attorney Brent Adams has this to say about Robbery Without a Gun, my popular book which exposes the disability insurance companies' tricks:

At first blush, you may feel the title is outrageous. However, upon reading the book, you will realize that Glass has probably understated the mass deception that results from employers and insurance companies “stealing” hundreds of millions of dollars each year in disability insurance benefits which should have gone into the pockets of disabled employees and their families.

You can read more about what Brent Adams said about Robbery Without a Gun here.

Wall Street Journal: More Drivers Foregoing Car Insurance

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)6710 — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

Have you checked your uninsured motorist coverage lately? The Wall Street Journal says that the recession is causing many drivers to drop their insurance altogether. That would be really bad news if the day after they did not renew they crash into you. I've written on this sad topic before.

You will need to rely on your own car insurance policy. Its the biggest secret in the insurance industry.

You can download my paper on How to Buy Car Insurance in Virginia. Its Free.

The Insurance Company Will Spy on You--You can bet your money on it

ljperr@wm.edu (blog Author)7349 — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

Nancy Cavey has a great discussion about disability insurance companies spying on you and videotaping your activities. There are some real clues to know when this will happen and Nancy discusses this here.

$1.6 Million Dollar Settlement

blog@www.vamedmal.com (news Author)6687 — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

On May 1, 2006, the plaintiff was operating a Roll-Off truck and entered Lorton landfill to dispose of the load of construction debris in his truck. Upon entereing the landfill, he was directed by a Lorton employee to a specific location to park and unload his waste. At the same time that the Plaintiff was about to unload his debris, a Kenworth demolition tractor trailer operated by Bradley Breeden, an employee of Seneca, was also preparing to unload. Breeden was directed by Weldon Cox, an employee of Lorton as to where to park and unload. While the Seneca tractor trailer bed was elevated at its highest point, the debris became stuck and unable to flow out of the tail end. The tractor trailer became top-heavy and tipped over directly onto the cab of Plaintiff's vehicle where the Plaintiff was seated.

Congratulations to David Marks on the settlement.

Who Pays?

ljperr@wm.edu (blog Author)7228 — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

After an accident you should be submitting your medical bills to both your own health insurance company and to you car insurance company (if you bought medical payments coverage.)

The defendant's insurance company is not going to pay your bills as they are incurred.

You don't want your bills to go into collections.

Your own health insurance company may be entitled to be reimbursed later.

November 2008 BenGlassLaw newsletter available

ljperr@wm.edu (blog Author)6889 — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 08:00:00 EST

The November 2008 newsletter written by Virginia personal injury attorney Ben Glass is now available.

Topics include

Marine Corp Marathon update

The bailout and mental health care

The Truth About Today's Mortgage Market

and

"Should I report this minor claim to my insurance company?"

Read the BenGlassLaw newsletter here.

Chiropractor Billing Scam

ljperr@wm.edu (blog Author)6551 — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Here's a scam we are seeing with some frequency. While we see it with health care providers in different specialties we see it mos often with chiropractors.

If you have been injured in an accident and are being treated by a chiropractor, pay attention as this may affect how much money you get from your case.

Here's how the chiropractic billing scam works:

You are in an accident and you seek out chiropractor for services.

You have excellent health insurance/health benefits for which you are paying a premium. Ordinarily your bills (or most of them would be covered).

Chiropractor asks you to sign a "lien agreement" or assignemtn of proceeds of the case to him. He then NEVER bills your insurance company but seeks to collect full amount of his bill from you.

Why would he do that? Typically the insurance company pays a set fee to the chiropractor which is less than the full amount of the bill. Understand that if the chiropractor accepts insurance he has already agreed to accept less than his full bill and he has agreed that he cannot bill you for the rest (or else what would be the purpose in having insurance?)

The chiropractor, knowing there is a personal injury case involved then "forgets" (or deliberately decides) to bill your insurance company because he want to bill YOU for the whole amount after your case settles.

What is WRONG with this scenario is that you have paid an insurance premium for the trade that you won't get stuck with the whole bill. Just because you were in a car accident doesn't change things but some chiropractors (and other health care providers) see your auto case as their big payday.

Its wrong and its your responsibility to make sure that you stay on top of whether the chiropractor is actually sending the bills to the insurance company. This will avoid a big surprise and FIGHT at the end of your case.

They laughed when she sued for plastic surgery malpractice...

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)52 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

A Richmond, Virginia plastic surgeon who cut facial nerves during a facelift has been ordered to pay $1.4 million dollars to the lady he injured.

As usual in Virginia, there was no offer of settlement before the trial started.

The rest of the story is here.

Getting Disability Benefits? Get Thee to An Accountant, Ophelia!

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)66 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Getting ERISA disability benefits is difficult enough without trying to figure out the taxation of the darn things. This is an area where you really need to track down your accountant (which for some may mean getting an accountant). Here's a short article and an interesting new case on the subject.

IME docs can be sued for malpractice

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)93 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The Virginia Supreme Court has ruled that an doctor who is hired to do a so-called indepedent medical examination of a plaintiff in a lawsuit can be sured for injuries he allegedly caused during the examination. This brings Virginia in line with every state that has considered the issue. A synopsis and the full opinion are available by following this link.

The West Virginia Lawyer Advertising Controvery

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)101 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

There are lawyer advertising ethics issues breaking out all over the country. Here are my comments and an article regarding the controversy in West Virginia.

Summary of Virginia Personal Injury Verdicts Updated

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)106 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

While Virginia juries tend to be very conservative and the insurance companies take advantage of this (and feed that conservatism by their lobbying, advertising and outright lies) our experience is that juries will compensate those with real, provable injuries. You can get some sense of how some Virginia personal injury cases are turning out. Personal Injury Verdicts and Settlements are Here.

Virginia Medical Malpractice Verdicts and Settlements

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)107 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Virginia medical malpractice laws have a notoriously low "cap" on recovery. One that doesn't even take into consideration the fact that medical bills may be millions of dollars. Virginia's laws virtually guarantee bankruptcy to the most seriously injured patients. Here we summarize recent verdicts and settlements in Virginia medical malpractice cases.

Doctors, Lawyers Under FBI Probe

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)111 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

I understand the sometimes the reputation and prestige of lawyers in the community isn't stellar. But sometimes we do it to ourselves. This story, out of Las Vegas, alleges that lawyers and doctors have colluded to defraud the insurance companies. I emphasize that this is simply on ongoing investigation at this time, but this is almost unbelievable.

Read how doctors and lawyers allegedly conspired to prosecute personal injury claims.

All the more reason for Virginia consumers to read my book on Lawyer Advertising before hiring any lawyer to prosecute their case.

Should Cameras Be Allowed in the Delivery Room?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)112 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The February 20 issue of Newsweek carries an article about hospitals banning camerals in the delivery room. According to the article the "official reasons" are privacy and safety concerns. The real reason, though, must be because videotapes sometimes do yield evidence of medical malpractice. So are the hospital's afraid of what the tapes would show? We certainly have seen cases where fetal heart monitor strips have "dissapeared" after a child is injured at birth.

What do you think? Should videotapes be allowed in the delivery room. Why don't we make videotaping mandatory for all deliveries? How about all surgeries. If their was no malpractice (as is the case most of the time) then the doctors should be happy. Heck, most responsible doctors should WANT the videotape running.

D.C. Examiner Exposes Lawyer Advertising

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)115 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The conservative newspaper, D.C. Examiner, wrote an interesting editorial exposing sleezy lawyer advertising.

I thought it was interesting and consistent with my views, and replied:

I'm a plaintiff's personal injury and medical malpractice attorney in Fairfax. I fully agree with the position you take calling for courts, legislatures and state bars to reign in lawyer advertising.

You correctly identify the "lottery mentality" that ads featuring million dollar bills evoke. Here are some other problems with ads that depict large sums of money, pit bulls, flying saucers and gory accident scenes:

1. Jurors are often biased against even legitimate claims because of the tasteless advertising of the few.

2. Such advertising provides no useful information for a consumer. Consumers have no real way of knowing whether they are hiring a legitimate, experienced trial lawyer willing to take their cases to court or whether what they are getting is a "settle everything with paralegals" type attorney with a slick advertising campaign. The insurance companies do know who settles everything for 50% on the dollar!

3. The expectations of my clients are unreasonably raised when they see someone else's ads featuring "quick cash, no office visit, no court" (as one ad in the Tidewater area of Virginia boasts.) The reality is that in Virginia at least, most jurors are fairly conservative and most cases tough. My clients say "why can't you do that for me?"

4. The problem with the 1-800-Sue-Them type phone numbers and "exclusive territories" again, is that often the only "qualification" the attorney at the other end of the phone line has is a big advertising budget.

5. The "Find a lawyer" websites suffer from the same problem in that case inquiries are often routed to the lawyer who has paid the most for a "spot" on the site.

Consumers need to do their part as well. They often spend more time researching a new refrigerator than they do a lawyer.

To help consumers fight back against this lawyer advertising non-sense, I wrote a book that I give away for free. It's called the "Truth About Lawyer Advertising." It exposes sleazy and misleading advertising for what it is and explains what questions a consumer should really be asking before hiring a lawyer.

The book is free and available at www.TheTruthAboutLawyerAdvertising.com

Ephedra Maker to Pay $34 Million

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)127 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

A New Jersey supplement maker has agreed to pay $34 million dollars to settle claims related to the sale of Ephedra containing supplements in diet pills.

This payment will settle 138 cases.

Accoring to the article in the Star-Ledger (New Jersey)

Perhaps the most well-known complaint came from the family of Baltimore Orioles pitcher Steve Bechler, who died in February 2003 of heat stroke. His death was partly blamed on his use of Xenadrine. Court documents show that lawsuit is part of the global settlement; however, specific amounts for each case are confidential.

Government Going After Lawyers and Referral Fees

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)128 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The government will indict two very rich plaintiff's class action lawyers, within the next month, according to a press release issued by their law firm, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman and reported by Boomberg.com.

The indictment will allege that these leading securities fraud class action lawyers participated in a scheme that not only paid referal fees to other lawyers (which is OK, so long as client consents) but directed some of the fees to the clients.

This will be a very interesting case to watch as this law form reportedly has settled over $30 billion, yes billion in cases.

$3.5 Million Defamation Verdict

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)134 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

A Fairfax jury as returned a $3.5 million verdict for a defamatory performance evaluation. The verdict was returned against Raytheon Corporation.

The plaintiff contended that the company brought in a recruiting company to evaluate the performance of president of one of Raytheon's subidiaries. She was told that her comments would be confidential but they eventually made their way back to the president.

She then contended that he retaliated and defamed her in a performance evaluation. She was subsequently terminated from Raytheon for reasons she contended (and the jury accepted) were false.

Ratheon had offered $300,000 to settle prior to trial. The case is being appealed to the Surpreme Court of Virginia.

Rockingham County Malpractice Verdict

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)135 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

A Rockingham County (VA) jury decided that a physician's treatment of a collapsed lung in a woman who suffered from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome was improper, and awarded the woman $300,000 after a recent four day trial.

Read more about this Virginia medical malpractice verdict.

Low Impact Does Not Mean No Injury

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)153 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Here's an interesting new opinion from New Jersey. Typically, in car accident cases where there is little property damage to the car, the insurance defense attorney holds up pictures of the cars and says "we couldn't have done that much damage to her neck, just look at the cars."

A New Jersey appellate court has now held that this type of argument in auto accident personal injury cases, is forbidden, without expert evidence supporting the argument.

Tort Reform Now

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)155 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

I was in my doctor's office the other day and saw one of those "scary" posters on his wall about fighting medical malpractice lawsuits. You know what I mean, one of those that "warns" you that your medical bills will increase unless we continue to change the laws in Virginia.

I wonder if these folks ever really think about what they are saying. Do they really understand what "tort reform" is and how it would devastate their families if they had a claim?

I doubt it. Anyway, I think tort reform is a good idea, for anyone who truly understands it and voluntarily signs away their rights. So I've develope a medical malpractice tort reform form. Go ahead. Print it out and give it to your doctor before he takes your child to surgery. Have a real in-depth discussion with him based on the form.

Supreme Court Refuses to Help "PitBull" Lawyers

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)163 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

According to an article on Reuters this morning, two Florida lawyers on Monday lost a U.S. Supreme Court appeal that argued the state violated their free-speech rights by disciplining them for their television advertisements featuring a pit bull dog.

The petition for certiori to the United States Supreme Court was authored by Rodney Smolla.

The Reuters article on lawyer advertising is here.

Suffolk Malpractice Case Sent Back for New Trial

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)195 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court of Virginia has ruled that a Suffolk jury should not have been permitted to reduce its verdict based on the patient's choice of hospital after his signs of impending stroke worsened.

Virginia State Bar to Crack Down on Deceptive Advertising

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)196 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The Virginia State Bar is cracking down on deceptive lawyer advertising that confuses the public.

This time its those lawyers who advertise for cases they don't intend to handle themselves.

Why would a lawyer advertise for a case he has no intention of handling?

Is This Advice From GEICO Any Good?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)224 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Just got off the phone with a potential client. She was rear-ended an injured by a truck. GEICO is her own insurance company. The truck is insured by a different company. GEICO purportedly advised her that she should contact the truck's insurance company directly and settle her case without a lawyer because a lawyer would only cut into her recovery. If this reported conversation is true (and the potential client sounded very credible) GEICO is basically practicing law without a license. GEICO may be right. Some cases don't need a lawyer and yes, in some minor injury cases the client can get more money by not getting a lawywer involved. The problem is that NOBODY can make that judgment within days of an accident, with no investigation. I find it incredible that a reputable company like GEICO would give this advice to one of their own insureds. The fact is that if you have been injured you may not need a lawyer, but you darn well better get some quality legal advice before making the decision to deal with the insurance company on your own. I challenge GEICO and all other Virginia insurance companies to make my book available to it's own insureds who are injured in a Virginia accident. Hell, I'll make it available for free. You can get a copy of the Ultimate Guide To Virginia Accident Cases here.

Your Disability Policy May Be a Sham

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)241 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

While many employers do provide good, solid long-term disability insurance coverage some policies aren't worth the cost of the fancy paper they are printed on. People are often shocked to find that even though their doctors fully support their disability and, in some cases, they have been awarded disability benefits by the Social Security Administration, their employer's plans are so bad that the insurance company does not have to pay benefits. We believe that the vast majority of these bad policies represent employers who simply have been duped by the insurance companies. Our experience is that employers and human resource personnel often have no real idea of how bad their own disability program is. Find out more about what provisions you don't want to see

Disability Policy Discretionary Clauses

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)242 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Imagine this, you make a claim for disability benefits from a major disability insurance company. The claim is denied. You are allowed an appeal of that claim, but your appeal goes back to the same insurance company that just denied your claim. Under federal law you are allowed to file a law suit against the disability insurance plan, but under those same laws that give you permission to file a law suit, you learn that the decision of the insurance company is presumed to be correct – you must prove that the insurance company was not just wrong, but completely wrong and unreasonable. Read more about disability insurance company discretionary provisions.

Virginia Cracks Down On Underage Drinking

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)243 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

On July 1, 2006, several new laws aimed at curbing underage drinking take effect in Virginia. House Bill 1208 This bill, sponsored by Delagate Brian Moran, D-Alexandria, would require that a person must be 21 years old or older or to be accompanied by his parent, guardian, or spouse in order to be served alcohol in another person's home. Governor Kaine signed the legislation, which is effective July 1, 2006. House Bill 1210 This bill, sponsored by Delagate Brian Moran, D-Alexandria, would require that underage drinkers who purchase or possess alcohol or people who purchase alcohol for underage drinkers, would have a mandatory six month suspension of their driver's license. It has passed the House and the Senate. HB 114 is incorporated in the bill. Governor Kaine signed the bill which is effective July 1, 2006. Senate Bill 396 This bill prohibits people from serving alcoholic beverages to underage guests in their homes. The measure is aimed at curbing underage drinking at high school graduation parties and fraternity keg parties. The bill, sponsored by Senator Ryan McDougle, makes an exception for adults serving alcohol to their children or to underage guests accompanied by a parent, guardian, or spouse over 21. Governor Kaine signed the legislation which is effective in July 1, 2006. Benjamin W. Glass, III & Associates fully supports the efforts to cut down on underage drinking. Parents should be advised that is is now a clear (and more easily proven) offense to host a beer party (or for that matter to turn a blind eye to one) in their homes.

More Doctors Doing Plastic Surgery?

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)248 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The Washington Post Health Section had a good article on July 4th about how more and more doctors are "branching out" to do plastic surgery in their offices. The reason? Money. You see, most cosmetic plastic surgery is not covered by insurance. This means that the doctor can charge for, and collect, full price. This is not necessarily a bad thing but more and more we are seeing cosmetic plastic surgery malpractice claims arising from doctors who really have no business doing the surgery. They are not plastic surgeons! As with attorneys, you really ought to pick a board certified specialist to do your surgery. Why would you go to a family doctor who has taken a weekend course in "vein stripping" just because it is convenient. Alexandria, Virginia Plastic Surgeon Eric Desman has a terrific website with really good information about how you can pick the right surgeon for your care.

Federal Judge Highly Critical of MetLife

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)256 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

This ERISA long-term disability case against MetLife is almost unbelievable. We applaud Michigan Federal Judge Richard Enslen for telling it like it is. This case is a "must read" for anyone who thinks there is a balanced playing field when filing for disability insurance benefits under ERISA. Here are some quotes from the opinion (which follows) What the Federal Judge Said About MetLife's "Formula" for Operating a Profitable Business Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has arrived at a formula for operating a profitable insurance business. It simply does not allow piddling things like facts to intrude upon its employee benefit claims decisions. You can read more about MetLife and a denial of long term disability benefits to a disabled claimant.

Driving While Intoxicated in Virginia

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)259 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Driving While Intoxicated and being charged with DWI/DUI in Virginia are very serious offenses. If you drive drunk and hurt someone you could face jail time, loss of your license, enormous increases in your car insurance and punitive damages up to $350,000. If you have been charged with DUI/DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) in Virginia you should contact the person Ben Glass believes is Virginia's Premier DUI/DWI Driving While Intoxicated Attorney, Bob Battle.

Who Can Testify In a Brain Injury Case

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)260 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

One of the most frequently asked questions about brain injury cases in Virginia is "who is qualified to testify about a victim's brain injury?" The Supreme Court of Virginia has answered this question, at least as it involves a psychologist who tried to testify about some testing and his conclusion about the brain injury.

Late Diagnosis of Colon Cancer

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)262 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

In any misdiagnosis of cancer case the patient must prove that the healthcare provider failed to take the steps necessary to start on a path to diagnosing the cancer and the patient must prove that had the cancer been diagnosed earlier his treatment options and ultimate care and prognosis would have been substantial different. We often see cases where it is clear that a cancer has been missed, but the time delay to the actual diagnosis of the cancer is so short that the treatment would have been exactly the same. Read More About the Late Diagnosis of Colon and Rectal Cancer

Woman Wins After Lack of Consent for Hysterectomy

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)272 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

A judge has let stand nearly $1.6 million of a $1.75 million Washington medical malpractice award jury award to a 26-year-old woman who said she did not give proper consent when an osteopathic doctor performed a hysterecomy on her three years ago. In granting the hospital a new trial, the judge reduced the original $1.75 million jury award to $1.575 million by subtracting the amount associated with the hospital's responsibility. Seattle Pi.com has the story on this medical malpractice case.

More Insurance Company Lies

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)278 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

I still can't believe the lies that claims adjusters make to accident victims. I spoke to a potential client last night about her Virginia car accident case. She was rear-ended, and her SUV was totalled. The defendant is insured by a major automobile insurance company with a reputation for being "on your side." The potential client had given this insurance company authorization to go and poke around in her medical records (probably a bad move--we don't recomend giving insurance companies unfettered access to your medical records--especially when you have not reviewed those records yourself yet. Here's what happened. (Insurance company does not have the records yet but medical bills exceed $5,000) Call from adjuster to accident victim: Adjuster: I'd like to offer you $1,400 for your inconvenience to settle your claim. Victim: How can I settle? I'm not better and I'm not finished treatment? Adjuster: most people settle in the first thirty days. Victim: Why do they settle Adjuster: Because if they don't settle in the first thirty days it takes a long time to settle and most people can't afford to go that long without paying their medical bills Comment from Ben Glass: not only is this a lie but it borders on the unauthorized practice of law. An attorney advising a client would help the client identify all sources of coverage for the medical bills, including health insurance and medical payments coverage under their own car insurance policy. I've seen enough of these "we'll offer you a little something for your inconvenience" cases to figure out that this is a pattern of conning accident victims in to signing binding releases which protect the insurance company. You should never sign an insurance company release without understanding what you are giving away. Most personal injury lawyers will chat with you for free to make sure you understand your rights. Ben Glass, Fairfax, Virginia

The High Cost of Malpractice Insurance--Explained

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)291 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Here we go again. The public is constantly bombarded with misinformation from insurance companies about "the high cost of insurance." What you don't see are the really, really stupid decisions that insurance companies make that lead to them paying more for their lawyers and then more to the patient. Case in point. We represent a very nice gentleman who underwent an operation earlier this year. During the operation a sponge was left inside his body and for several months he suffered. He then had to undergo another (totally unnessary) operation to remove the sponge. There are some lawyers who would immediatly file suit, issue a press release and cause all sorts of commotion. We wrote the hospital and the surgeon, making a reasonable settlement demand. Here's what happens next: Hospital gets lawyer who says, "contact surgeon, it's his fault." We get letter from surgeon's nit-wit insurance company that says "hospital's fault--not my job to count sponges." (In case you think I kid, you can see the letter here.) So there will be a lawsuit and again, there will be cries of "too many lawsuits." Who's to blame?

Virginia Still In Dark Ages with Drunk Drivers

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)369 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Virginia remains in the dark ages regarding the responsibility of adults to NOT serve alcohol to minors. According to news reports, defendants in a recent Fairfax County civil lawsuit had knowingly served alcohol to minors in their homes. They then allowed the minors to leave the house, driving their cars. One of the cars was then involved in a fatal accident. Question: which of these theories of liabilities will hold the adults responsible for their negligence? --negligent failure to exercise ordinary care for the safety of minors --negligent failure to assess the age of the minors they were serving alcohol to --child neglect --contributing to the deliquency of a minor Answer: NONE Following well established Virginia law, Fairfax County judge Kathleen McKay through out the lawsuit against these adults. Virginia needs to come into the this century. According to an article on liability for serving alcoholMost states impose liability on social hosts where: Alcohol is served to a minor The host was reckless in serving alcohol or should have recognized the extent of the guest's intoxication and not served him or her more alcohol.

You'll Get More Money Without An Attorney

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)374 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Many of the calls we get come from claimants have become fed up with insurance company tactics. What we hear is that some claims adjusters have made statements that disparage the claimant, her doctor or personal injury attorneys. A Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company made some statements that disparaged a particular personal injury attorney. The Supreme Court of Virginia has ruled that the statements were not matters of opinion and that the attorney's defamation lawsuit against the adjuster and the insurance company could go forward. Read More About how ""You'll Get More Money Without a Personal Injury Attorney" may end up costing Nationwide Insurance Company a lot of money.

WHEN IS AN ACCIDENT NOT AN ACCIDENT.

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)406 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

The answer is that if you have many types of health insurance which only pay if you are "accidentally" injured you will not get the benefit of that policy if you are a drunk driver. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has recently reaffirmed longstanding law that an insurance policy may properly deny coverage for your medical bills if you were drunk and driving when the accident occurred. The case involved an accident in Parkersburg, West Virginia and the drunk driver had a blood alcohol level of 0.15 percent. This was 50 percent higher than the legal limit in West Virginia. The court held that it was reasonably foreseeable and thus not an accident that a drunk driver would hurt himself. This follows a national trend in which almost 100 percent of the courts who have ruled on the issue have held that the denial is proper. The case is Eckelberry v. ReliaStar Life Insurance Company. If you have been injured in an accident then you should read The Five Deadly Sins That Can Wreck Your Virginia Car Accident Case, (free to Virginia residents.)

Whoops, Wrong Sided Surgery

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)407 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

Surgery that occurs on the wrong patient, or on the wrong side is apparently a lot more common than reported in the medical literature. According to the Archives of Surgery, in fact, you'll read more about it in the general press than in the medical literature. (They appear to attribute that fact to "shame." The article suggests that surgery on the wrong patient, or the wrong side is preventable--I sure hope so! The researchers looked at several databases demonstrates that WSPEs occur across all specialties, with high numbers noted in orthopedic and dental surgery. Here's a web site I found that's devoted to this form of medical malpractice. Here's what on doctor says about the study and how he prevents wrong sided surgery from happening to his patients.

ERISA Disability Benefits Denied

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)414 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

A Federal District Court Judge in Alexandria has ruled in favor of Hartford Life Insurance Company on a claim brought under a long-term disability policy that it issued. ERISA governed this long term disability benefits claim. Even though the claimant was receiving Social Security Disability Benefits the court found that the claimant had not proven that he is disabled from working in any occupation. The court found it persuasive that the claimant's primary treating physician for his back problems, and the only physician who had ever placed restrictions on claimant's ability to work, agreed that the claimant was capable of working in a light occupation. The insurance company also produced two independent medical reviews that supported the denial of the claim. Virginia residents can get their copy of the free book Virginia Disability Attorney Ben Glass has written by going to www.TheDisabilityBook.com

Feedback from "Why Most Malpractice Victims..."

Ben@BenGlassLaw.com (blog Author)415 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:00:00 EST

As most visitors to www.BenGlassLaw.com know, we strive to provide the best information to consumers before they hire a lawyer or deal with the insurance company themselves. Here is some feedback that we got recently regarding "Why Most Medical Malpractice Victims Never Recover a Dime." "I did get the book and several booklets. Read every word by the way. I discussed the pertinent facts with several members of my family, which I had outlined in brief summary in my message to you. Finally I spoke with my wife, who was the person most directly effected by the errors of the several surgeons. At any rate, despite acknowledged issues arising from the case - mostly time, pain and suffering plus the added medical expenses, her (our) greatest need is for an honest admission of wrong doing - in short - an apology from the doctors. She realizes this is unlikely to happen and has no desire to pursue the case, regardless of its merits. I defer to her choice in this matter.. She feels that the doctors are not incompetent jerks - they simply made mistakes and demonstrated unsound judgement which resulted in unfortunate consequences.