Moore & Wolfe Attorney Explains Victim's Rights to Educators

Moore & Wolfe attorney, Karlos Finley recently visited Blount High School to speak with teachers and administrators at the school regarding the protection of their rights following a motor vehicle accident. Mr. Finley spoke on the importance of first seeking medical treatment and then legal advice prior to signing any paperwork following an accident. The group of educators seemed surprised to hear that liability insurance adjusters will contact individuals who have been involved in auto accidents shortly after the accident and try to have them sign a release prior to getting any medical care or legal advice regarding their rights. The adjusters will often offer a few dollars to the victim as money for the victim’s "inconvenience." To get the money they tell the victim he or she must just simply sign some paperwork so the funds can be delivered. Mr. Finley laid out the typical scenario as follows:

ADJUSTER: Hello, Mr. Doe. This the adjuster with XYZ Insurance Company. I understand that you were in an automobile accident earlier today where my client ran into the back of your car. How do you feel?

MR. DOE: Oh, I’m fine. Just a little soreness in my neck and my low back’s a little stiff. It’ll probably go away in the next few days.

ADJUSTER: Well good Mr. Doe, I’m glad to hear that. Well I know you had to miss some time from work today because of this accident and it looks like our insured is at fault. I’d like to send you $75.00 today for your inconvenience. I just need you to sign some paperwork for my company so they can issue you the check........Oh by the way, I’m going to be out of town working some other claims for the next several weeks, so we need to take care of this today so I can get the check issued before I leave town. Are you near a fax machine?

MR. DOE: Yes sir! As a matter of fact, you can send it here to my work.

ADJUSTER: Good! I will fax this waiver over to you. You can sign it, and fax it back and I will put the check in the mail today.

MR. DOE: Well thank you very much sir. I appreciate that greatly.

Well of course Mr. Doe signs the waiver and release and Mr. Adjuster sends the check. By time the check gets to Mr. Doe, he is so sore that he can’t walk. It feels like his back is stiff and there are sharp shooting pains going down his back and legs. He calls Mr. Adjuster, only to receive a voice mail alerting him that all calls will be returned within 24 hours. Mr. Doe doesn’t know what to do next. So he waits 24 hours and calls back. The conversation goes something like this.

MR. DOE: Yes, Mr. Adjuster, my back and neck have really taken a turn for the worse. I’m experiencing a lot of pain now. I think I need some medical attention.

ADJUSTER: Well, Mr. Doe I’m really sorry to hear that, but our file has been closed on this claim.

MR. DOE: But what about the doctors bills I’m going to have to incur? I need go to the doctor. The pain has spread from my neck down my entire back and into my thighs.

ADJUSTER: Well I don’t know sir, if you have health insurance, they may cover it.

MR. DOE: But what about you? Your insured caused this accident. Aren’t you responsible for this.

ADJUSTER: No sir, remember the paperwork you signed a few days ago. That paperwork releases our company from any further liability as it relates to this accident. That was all explained in the paperwork you signed. We have nothing further to do with this situation.
MR. DOE: Well I think that I’m going to see a lawyer. I don’t think that’s right.

ADJUSTER: Well sir you go right ahead and talk to a lawyer. Just make sure you tell them you signed a Release of All Claims and cashed the check we sent you. They’ll tell you under Alabama law there’s nothing that you can do. As I said before, this claim has been closed and this company has no further obligation to you. Good day.


Mr. Finley explained that, unfortunately, this scenario happens all too often in our State. In Alabama our Appellate Courts have strictly construed releases and documents signed by victims and consumers. Simply put when you sign a document in our State you are deemed to have read and understood the terms and conditions in that document, no matter what someone else tells you the document says or means. See, Foremost Insurance Company v. Parham, 693 So.2d 409 (Ala. 1997). This means adjusters are free to work loosely with facts and implications in order to secure a victim’s signature on a Release. Mr. Finley concluded his presentation by explaining to the group that the above scenario had recently occured to one of their members. That memeber had invited Mr. Finley to address the group so others would not be victimized in the future.

DEBUNKING THE CIVIL LITIGATION MYTHS

Debunking the CIVIL LITIGATION Myths
from the American Association for Justice

Drug, oil, and insurance companies have spent millions of dollars to generate myths about how lawsuits are out of control and responsible for all of America’s ills. The facts tell a much different story.

Myth: The number of lawsuits filed is skyrocketing.
Not true. According to the Justice Department under President George W. Bush, the number of federal tort (personal injury) cases resolved in U.S. District Courts fell by 79 percent between 1985 and 2003. In 1985, 3,600 tort trials were decided by a judge or jury in U.S. District Courts. By 2003, that number had dropped to less than 800.(1)
Additionally, the most recent statistics from the Administration’s Bureau of Justice Statistics show the number of tort trials at the state level has decreased. These statistics were compiled as part of the Bureau’s survey of state civil justice systems in the nation’s largest 75 counties. Among these counties, the number of tort trials decreased 31.8 percent between 1992 and 2001. (2)

Myth: Health care costs are rising and doctors are unable to practice due to litigation.
Health care costs are rising; however, medical malpractice litigation has nothing to do with it. According to the Congressional Budget Office, medical malpractice amounted to less than 2 percent of overall health care spending.(3) The Government Accountability Office also found that malpractice cases have not widely affected access to health care. (4)
According to the American Medical Association, the overall number of physicians is up more than 40 percent since 19905, while over the same time, the U.S. population increased by only 18 percent.(6) The number of emergency physicians, neurosurgeons, and OB/GYNs has also increased significantly over the same time period.

Myth: Legal reform is needed because lawsuits hurt small businesses.
Wrong. Multiple surveys have shown that lawsuits are not a concern for small business owners. A survey from the National Association of Manufacturers suggests that “lawsuit abuse” ranks at the bottom of concerns for manufacturers.(7) A 2008 survey from National Federation of Independent Business had similar results, with “costs and frequency of lawsuits / threatened suits” ranking 65th on a list of small business owners’ worries. (8)
In reality, only big corporations and their front groups want to destroy the legal system so they can’t be held accountable for negligence and misconduct. Drug, oil, and insurance companies have tried to hide behind small business owners to accomplish this; however, these surveys reveal their true intentions.

Myth: Trial attorneys are trying to drive corporations out of business.
Absolutely not. Corporations, large and small, are all entitled to have profitable businesses. Most do so without being negligent or engaging in misconduct.
A strong civil justice system allows deserving individuals to get justice and hold wrongdoers accountable. Civil justice attorneys work to make sure all people have a fair chance through the legal system – even when it means taking on the most powerful corporations.

Myth: Lawsuits are out of control. Someone even sued because they spilled hot coffee on their lap!
Those looking to destroy the civil justice have continually mocked Stella Liebeck and the McDonald’s coffee case. Unfortunately, the actual facts of this case make it no laughing matter.
Ms. Liebeck’s injuries include third degree burns—the most severe—to her groin, inner thighs, and buttocks. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting and debridement treatments (the surgical removal of tissue).
Ms. Liebeck sought to settle her claim with McDonald’s for $20,000, but they refused. McDonald’s eventually produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1993, some involving third degree burns similar to Ms. Liebeck. This history documented McDonald’s knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard. McDonald’s own quality assurance manager testified that a burn hazard exists with any food served above 140 degrees; their coffee was kept warm at 185 degrees.
A jury awarded Ms. Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages, but reduced it to $160,000 because they found her 20 percent at fault for the spill. The jury also awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages, equal to two days of McDonald’s coffee sales. This was eventually reduced to $480,000, even though the judge called McDonald’s conduct reckless, callous, and willful. Jurors expressed similar sentiments in interviews after the trial. Ms. Liebeck and McDonald’s eventually entered a post-verdict settlement.

Myth: Trial attorneys are charging outrageous hourly fees and leave victims with nothing if they win.
Civil justice attorneys do not charge by the hour like most other attorneys. Instead, their clients pay on what is called a “contingency fee basis.”
For over 200 years the contingency fee system has provided Americans who must go to court with a degree of access to justice that is unheard of in most other countries. Our system allows people who cannot afford to pay legal fees to obtain representation on a contingency fee basis. In personal injury and death cases, and in certain other types of litigation, the fee is based on a percentage of any money damages that are recovered.

Myth: My insurance rates are skyrocketing because of lawsuits.
Your insurance premiums may be going up, but it has nothing to do with lawsuits. Look no further than the insurance industry’s annual profit reporting. In 2007, insurance companies reported a near-record profit of $61.9 billion. In comparison, the insurance industry’s 2004 profit was $38.7 billion, which broke all previous records. Their profits continue to rise, and unfortunately, your premiums are following suit.
The insurance industry has also made the argument that awards and damages should be limited; however, have later admitted that caps will not lower premiums. For example, American Insurance Association spokesman Dennis Kelly told the Chicago Tribune in 2005 that, “We have not promised price reductions with tort reform.”

Myth: Lawsuits cost taxpayers X hundreds of dollars each year.
Several so-called “independent” think tanks or organizations have devised the notion that American families pay a yearly “tort tax,” or that the cost of litigation is passed on to taxpayers. These organizations, funded by oil, drug, tobacco, and insurance companies, produce studies that are a prime example of junk science. There is no methodology or academic basis for their results. Trying to pass off these organizations and their studies as legitimate is yet another scheme by corporations to avoid accountability in the courtroom and stack the deck against every day Americans.

Myth: Schools are canceling recess because they are afraid of litigation.
Wrong. School districts across the country are almost universal in blaming the elimination of recess on the need to meet requirements for teaching and testing hours.(9)

Myth: People aren’t volunteering to help with Little League, Boy / Girl Scouts, etc., because they are afraid of lawsuits.
Wrong again. Similar to the previous myth, these lies are peddled by groups interested in destroying the civil justice system.
The Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 was passed to provide immunity for volunteers of nonprofits in the course of their charity work.

____________________________________________________________________
Sources:
1. "Federal Tort Trials and Verdicts, 2002-03”, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 8/17/05
2. "Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts in Large Counties, 2001”, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 4/04
3. "Congressional Budget Office, “Limiting Tort Liability for Medical Malpractice,” 1/08/04
4. “Medical Malpractice: Implications of Rising Premiums on Access to Health Care,” GAO, 9/29/03, www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-836
5. “Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the U.S.,” American Medical Association, 2006 edition, p.312
6. U.S. Census Bureau data: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFPopulation?_submenuId=population_0&_sse=on; http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=PEP_2005_EST&-mt_name=PEP_2005_EST_G2005_T001
7. “National Manufacturing Week 2006 Annual Survey Results,” National Association of Manufacturers, http://www.nam.org/s_nam/doc1.asp?CID=6&DID=236617
8. “Small Business Problems and Priorities,” National Federation of Independent Business, http://www.nfib.com/object/2008problemspriorities.html
9. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/31/AR2006053101949_pf.html; http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/191407_recess18.html; http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116044203663787613-OWTfLOXAilkTcNPcqP3tS75OWcE_20061108.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top


size=2 width="100%" align=left>

Wolfe Speaks at New Jersey Seminar

Moore & Wolfe attorney, Mark Wolfe recently did a presentation for New Jersey attorneys on Practice Building. The presentation was done in Atlantic City at the New Jersey Association for Justice's annual Boardwalk seminar. The Boardwalk seminar is one the largest programs in the United States for personal injury attorneys and consumer advocate attorneys. This year's program had over 1100 attorneys register according to Christie Reha of AAJ-NJ. The two day program featured speakers from all over the United States.

GMAC Insurance Adjuster Fails to Disclose Facts

When a GMAC Insurance adjuster offered a claimant $1,742.88 to settle her bodily injury claim, the adjuster led the claimant to believe that would all be her money. The adjuster failed to tell the claimant she would have to repay her health insurance company out of that money. Lucky for the claimant, before she accepted the settlement proceeds and signed the release, she contacted Steve Moore at Moore & Wolfe. Steve reviewed the facts of the motor vehicle collision and the claim with her. He pointed out the fine print in the proposed release that said the claimant would have to pay back her health insurance company from the settlement proceeds. "In this case, it appears the health insurance company's subrogation claim will exceed the $1700 offer, so she would've received no benefit from the settlement," said Moore.

In Alabama bodily injury claimants have two things working against them when trying to deal with an insurance adjuster. First, liability insurance adjusters are considered adversaries and therefore claimants are not entitled to rely on statements made by adjusters. In some stunning case law, our Courts have said claimants should know better than to rely on a representation made by a liability adjuster. The second factor that works against claimants is that a signed document trumps an oral representation. This is because in Alabama if you sign your name to a document, you are deemed to have read and understood the content and terms of the document, no matter what somone may have told you.

In the situation above, even though the adjuster said or implied the settlement funds would belong to the claimant, the release said otherwise. If she had signed the release and accepted the funds, then she would have been stuck paying her health insurance company back even though the adjuster may have said or implied otherwise.

This just another example of the difficulties faced by personal injury victims and claimants in Alabama. At M&W we have been advocating and lobbying for an Insurance Claimant's Bill of Rights for many years. Simply put, we need legislation to protect claimants in these type situations. Moore said, "we see situations every day where legitimate claimants suffer because the rules and regulations of our State benefit the insurance companies over the rights of the victim."

Finley Attends Ala Constitution Convention

Karlos Finley of Moore& Wolfe recently attended the Mock Constitution Convention sponsored by the Alabama Citizens For Constitutional Reform Foundation (ACCR) at the Marriott Legends Conference Center in Prattville, Alabama. The Honorable Albert Brewer and The Honorable Gorman Houston served as Convention Deans. Karlos served as a delegate for House District 97. 105 citizens representing each of Alabama’s House Districts convened to discuss drafting a new State Constitution that would replace the current one which was drafted and ratified at the Constitution Convention of 1901. The issues that got the most attention were the state’s tax structure (Property v. Sales), home rule, education funding, racist language contained within the current constitution, and the cost of amending the current constitution close to 800 times. State Representative Demetrius Newton spoke to the group about the proposed House Resolution (HJR-91) that is before the legislature now. It would allow the citizens of Alabama to vote on allowing a Constitutional Convention to be held in order to replace the 1901 document. "A Constitutional Convention is our best chance to adequately address all of the issues that our current constitution has.", expressed Mr. Newton. The documentary "It’s a Thick Book", was shown and given a standing ovation. It is available for viewing, along with Alabama’s 1901 Constitution at the ACCR website, http://www.constitutionalreform.org./ The group will meet again in the State’s Capital on April 25-26, 2009 for a second session to build on the work of this session. The Delegates will unveil the final product of the Mock Convention on August 27, 2009.

Dangerous Drugs and Medical Devices

The following drugs and/or medical devices have been linked to injuries and/or death of patients. Many are now the subject of mass tort actions. If you think you may have a claim, please contact our office and we can help you locate the primary attorneys and law firms handling these claims and cases: mcw2@moore-wolfe.com

Accutane - (isotretinoin) used as an acne treatment but has shown to have side effects of depression, suicidal thoughts/actions, birth defects and may cause inflammatory bowel disease resulting in severe permanent complications.

Bextra - (valbecoxib) used as a treatment for mild to severe arthritis (osteoarthritis & rheumatoid arthritis) and other chronic pain. Bextra has been linked to heart attacks, strokes, gastrointestinal problems and Steven Johnson syndrome, a potentially fatal skin condition. Drug recalled in April 2005.

Boniva - ibandronate sodium tablet taken once-a-month to treat or prevent osteoporosis. Boniva, a bisphosonate, the family of drugs shown to cause osteonecrosis (death) of the jaw bone.

Digitek - (digoxin tablets) used in the treatment of congestive heart failure and other heart-related problems. In April 2008, healthcare professionals were notified of a recall of all strengths of Digitek due to the possibility that the tablets may contain twice the approved level of the active ingredient. Digitalis toxicity can cause nausea, vomiting, dizziness, low blood pressure and cardiac instability.

Fosamax - (alendronate sodium) used for bone pain, fractures and bone loss. Side effects linked to Fosamax have been; osteoneocrosis of the jaw (dead jawbone), muscle & joint pain, headaches, abdominal problems, eye discomfort or skin rash.

Gadolinium - serves as a contrasting agent within the patient's body during MRI or MRA. Gadolinium became popular with the medical community because it aided doctors in seeing the patient's internal structures more clearly. Prolonged exposure to gladolinium can result in the development of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF - a.k.a., Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy or NFD.) The results of these disorders lead to thick, coarse, hard skin, severely restricting the movement of joints.

Ketek - (telithromycin) in the class of drugs called ketolide antibiotics and is used for treating bacterial infections of the sinuses and lungs. Associated side effects have been, liver damage, liver disease, liver failure and hepatitis.

Kugel Mesh Patch - designed to make hernia operations easier and to reduce post-op surgical pain. Problems started to surface in 2002 shortly after the introduction of the large and x-large models of the hernia mesh patch. The flexible plastic "memory recoil ring" is prone to breakage causing injury to internal organs & tissue, bowel perforations, bowel obstructions and chronic enteric fistulas.

Ortho Evra - transdermal system birth control, better known as "The Patch." In November 2005, FDA warned that the patch exposes women to higher levels of estrogen than most birth control pills and puts the user at an increased risk for blood clots, strokes and heart attacks.

Paxil - (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor - SSRI) used as a treatment for depression, anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). This drug is linked with suicidal behavior, violent behavior and a rare birth defect (if taken at 20 weeks of a pregnancy or later) called persistent pulmonary hypertension (PPHN).

Prisma Dialysis - a type of kidney dialysis system with built-in alarms that alert the user of potential fluid imbalance that has occurred during the course of the dialysis treatment. If these alarms are missed, ignored or unresolved, excessive fluid may be removed from the patient resulting in serious injury or death.

Quinine - typically used to treat malaria, quinine was also used for the treatment of nocturnal leg cramps. In 1994, the FDA banned the use of quinine as a night-time leg cramp treatment, but, in spite of the ban, several pharmaceutical companies that manufactured the drug continued to promote, market and sell quinine as a treatment for nocturnal leg cramps. Use of quinine for treating leg cramps can lead to cardiac arrhythmia, renal failure, blindness, hearing loss, and quinine related blood disorders.

ReNu - ReNu with MoistureLoc® Solution is a saline solution used with contact lenses. The makers of this solution issued a recall in April 2006 because the solution was linked with a serious fungal eye infection, Fusarium keratitis. This infection is an inflammation of the eye's cornea and, if not properly treated, can lead to blindness.

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome - (SJS) usually results from a drug-related allergic reaction. SJS symptoms are characterized by facial swelling, tongue swelling, hives, skin pain, red or purple rash that spreads, blisters on the skin (especially mucous membranes, nose, mouth & eyes) and shedding (sloughing) of skin.

Tequin - (gatifloxacin) used to treat lung, sinus and other bacterial infections and is linked to hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) and hyperglycemia (high blood sugar), which can lead to seizure, coma or death. The maker of Tequin stopped selling the drug as of April 27, 2006.Trasylol - (aprotinin) used to help reduce blood loss during heart bypass surgery. Use of the drug is now linked with an increased risk of kidney failure, heart attack, stroke and death.

Viagra - (sildenafil) used for impotency and erectile dysfunction. Viagra has been linked to vision problems, blindness and deadly nitrate interaction.

Vioxx - (rofecoxib) prescribed for rheumatoid arthritis and chronic pain. Side effects have been gastrointestinal problems, heart attacks, strokes and death. Vioxx was recalled in September 2004.

Zelnorm - (tegaserod maleate) for short-term treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic constipation. Sales of Zelnorm were suspended in March 2007 after reports of adverse side effects such as, heart attack and stroke. As of April 2008, Zelnorm is now further restricted to treating only the sickest patients who have IBS.

Health Insurance Companies May Be Under Paying Claims

What happens if you are traveling and have to visit a hospital or doctor? Or what happens if you need to see a local doctor immediately who may not be in your health insurance company's “approved network of doctors?” You would expect your health insurance company to pay a reasonable amount towards those bills, wouldn’t you? But that doesn’t always happen.

Recent cases from across the country indicate health insurance companies may be significantly under paying out-of-network claims. This means consumers are unfairly left to pay the balance of these charges. In a recent Federal case, California based Health Net Inc. agreed to repay $215 million to its customers for using an out dated and lower than reasonable payment schedule for out-of-network claims. The company also agreed to spend $40 million to update its claims processing protocol to avoid this problem in the future.

DO YOU THINK YOU’VE BEEN THE VICTIM OF AN UNDERPAYMENT FOR AN OUT-OF-NETWORK CLAIM? Please call us or e-mail us at mcw2@moore-wolfe.com and put “underpayment” in the subject line. You may be entitled to a refund.

State Farm Must Pay Victim

A Mobile County jury ruled against State Farm and in favor of their insured in a civil trial that concluded on January 7th. Moore & Wolfe attorneys, Steve Moore and Karlos Finley, represented Francilla Ridgeway during the two day trial. Ms. Ridgeway was the victim of a serious motor vehicle collision that occured on Novemebr 14, 2006 near Chickasaw. The collision occured as she moved into an intersection with a green light and was hit by an Alabama State Trooper vehicle that was involved in a high speed chase. The jury concluded after only about an hour and a half of deliberation that State Farm owed their insured $100,000.

The trooper was pursuing Daniel Keith Gibson who, just seconds before the collision, had gone through the intersection at over 90 miles per hour and was headed directly towards a school zone just a block away. Ms. Ridgeway testified at trial that she did not see or hear the approaching trooper vehicle. When pressed on cross examination by State Farm's attorney, Ms. Ridgeway said she was distracted by Gibson's vehicle and when her light turned green she moved into the intersection but was looking down the road in the direction of the fleeing vehicle. That afternoon, Gibson led law enforcement officers on a high speed chase through Mobile, Saraland and Chickasaw. He admitted to speeds in excess of 140 miles per hour and said he attempted to ellude police because he, "didn't want another speeding ticket."

State Farm, who provided underinsured motorist coverage to Ms. Ridgeway, never offered her any of those benefits under the policy, claiming Daniel Keith Gibson was not at-fault in causing the collision which left Ms. Ridgeway with over $24,000 in medical bills. They maintained this position even though Mr. Gibson's insurance carrier had earlier paid his policy limits to Ms. Ridgeway. "Underinsured motorist coverage is a safety net that you pay a premium for," explained Steve Moore. "If you are injured through the fault of someone else and they don't have enough insurance to cover all of your damages, then you can use your underinsured motorist coverage to make up the difference," he explained.

Besides incurring over $24,000 in medical expenses, Ms. Ridgeway lost almost $8,000 in wages as she recovered from shoulder surgery necessitated by the collision. At trial, State Farm said the accident was not the fault of Mr. Gibson but rather the fault of Ms. Ridgeway, in closing argument State Farm's attorney even implied that Ms. Ridgeway lied under oath when she said she was not on her cell phone at the time of the collision as he suggested maybe she was distracted by talking on her cell phone.

"For over two years State Farm has refused to pay the benefits owed under this policy by continuously blaming Ms. Ridgeway for this accident. She was an innocent victim of Mr. Gibson's idiotic decison to run from the police," said Moore in closing argument. Ms. Ridgeway is a single mother of four with her oldest son in college at the University of South Alabama. She testified that every month for years and years she struggled to pay her insurance premiums to State Farm, which she said were about $70 per month. "At her income level she had to work about 10 hours every month just to cover her premiums and this is what she gets for her hard work," her attorneys told jurors in closing argument referencing State Farm's blaming her for the collision.

For additional information on this story visit the Mobile Register online.

Innocent Victim of High Speed Chase has to sue her own Insurance Carrier for Benefits

The Mobile Press Register recently reported on an interesting case pending in Mobile County involving a State Farm insured who was an innocent victim of a high speed chase. On November 14, 2006 Francilla Ridgeway was injured when a State Trooper vehicle collided with her vehicle at an intersection in Chickasaw, AL. Ms. Ridgeway entered the intersection on a green light and did not see or hear the approaching Trooper vehicle. The Trooper was engaged in a high speed pursuit of a fleeing motorist who had led law enforcement on a 30-40 minute high speed chase throughout the Mobile, Saraland and Chickasaw area. The fleeing motorist, Daniel Gibson, was driving a highly modified Ford Focus and admitted to traveiling in excess of 140 miles per hour and driving recklessly as he attempted to evade the pursuing law enforcement officers.

Ms. Ridgeway originally named Gibson as a defendant in the civil action claiming his negligence or wantonness caused the collision with the Trooper vehicle. Mr Gibson's insurance company paid their liability limits but the amount was insufficient to cover the full extent of Ms. Ridgeway's injuries. Under her policy with State Farm, Ms. Ridgeway has "underinsured" motorist coverage which provides additional benefits if an at-fault driver does not have enough liability coverage. State Farm denied Ms. Ridgeway's claim and never offered any underinsured motorist benefits to her claiming the collision was not Mr. Gibson's fault but rather Ms. Ridgeway's fault for not seeing the oncoming Trooper even though she entered the intersection with a green light.

Steve Moore, Ms. Ridgeway's attorney said he elected not to sue the Trooper involved in the incident because he did not believe he did anything wrong. "While some people may look at this situation and say the Trooper should have backed off from the pursuit or maybe he should have gone through the red light at a slower speed, I just felt legally the person who should be accountable is the person who caused this situation to begin with and that is Daniel Gibson." State Farm "stands in the shoes" of Mr. Gibson for any damages he may legally owe Ms. Ridgeway per the terms and conditions of the underinsured motorist provisions of their policy with Ms. Ridgeway. "They do not want to pay benefits that Ms. Ridgeway paid a premium for so they argue that the accident wasn't Mr. Gibson's fault and have forced their insured to litigate this case," said Moore.

The Mobile Press Register online at al.com has more on this story.

Warning About Holiday Drinking and Driving.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has released data showing that from 2002 to 2006, nearly 4 in 10 roadway fatalities in the last two weeks of December were related to alcohol use. NHTSA Acting Administrator David Kelly called drunk driving "one of the most serious, and preventable, dangers we face on our roadways," as he launched the administration's holiday crackdown on December 17.

NHTSA research shows that drivers aged 21-24 were most likely to be alcohol impaired when involved in a fatal car accident. Thirty-five percent of drivers in this age group were alcohol-impaired when their accident occurred, as opposed to 18 % of 15-20 year-olds and 29 % of 25-34 year-olds. In Alabama, this percentage is even higher, with 38 % of 21 to 24 year-olds being alcohol impaired when involved in a fatal accident.

This data also follows an NHTSA report earlier this year that restricting the drinking age to 21 has probably saved a total of nearly 4500 lives nationwide during the five year period from 2003 to 2007. This is in addition to the estimated 15,000 lives saved every year by seat belts. In Alabama alone it is estimated that seat belts save 400 lives a year, and that another 188 could be saved by full seatbelt use.

For more information about accidents involving impaired drivers, please click this link to the Moore & Wolfe MVA Resource Center.

Wolfe Article Published

The December edition of TRIAL will feature an article written by Mark Wolfe. TRIAL is a monthly legal journal for trial lawyers published by the American Association of Justice. Wolfe's article is a practical guideline for attorneys to better help their clients when responding to written discovery. This is the third article Wolfe has had published in a legal journal and he currently has another article under submission. Wolfe is a frequent speaker at Continuing Education Seminars for lawyers and says most of the articles he has had published or written come from seminar papers. "When you speak at a CLE seminar the topics are current and these topics often lend themselves to journal articles," said Wolfe.

Wolfe will serve as a moderator at a CLE seminar in Birmingham on December 12th and he is the moderator and a speaker for the South Alabama Trial Lawyers Association's Winter CLE on December 19th. In January he will be a speaker at the Alabama Association for Justice's Mid-Winter Conference.

M&W Charity Wine Tasting 2008

On October 26th, M&W held its third annual charity wine tasting. This year's beneficiary was the Mobile Bar Association's Volunteer Lawyers Program (pro bono program). The event raised over $10,500. The Volunteer Lawyers Program (VLP) is one of the top free legal service programs in the United States and assists hundreds of clients each year with civil legal matters. After Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the VLP assisted thousands of victims with property and title issues so they could secure government assistance. Over 50% of the Mobile Bar Association attorneys donate their time to the VLP each year. The funds raised from this year's event will go towards office supplies and various incidental operational expenses. The event was held at the Bakery Cafe and Market at 1104 Dauphin Street in mid-town Mobile.

In 2006 the proceeds from the first M&W Charity Wine Tasting helped build a playground in mid-town Mobile at Central Presbyterian Church for use by children of residents of the Family Promise Network and summer camp participants. In 2007 the proceeds from the M&W Charity Wine Tasting went to buy computers and school supplies for the USA Children's and Women's Hospital Class Act program. That program provides full time teachers to children in the hospital so they can maintain school attendance credit and keep up with their classwork while in the hospital. In 2009 the beneficiary will be Victory Health Partners which provides low cost medical services to people without health insurance.

A special thanks to our friends at Russell Thompson Butler & Houston CPAs and Cormier Chiropractic and Physical Therapy for again being platinum sponsors for this year's event.

Where to Vote

With the election just a week away, many voters may not be familiar with where they go to vote. The link below can help you find your polling place.

http://www.alabamavotes.gov/

M&W Atty Steve Moore Secures $32 Million Judgment

M&W attorney, Steve Moore, recently secured a $32 million judgment against an at-fault driver who has been charged with DUI related to the crash. The victim, a 50 year old woman, suffered severe life altering injuries and requires constant medical attention. The women and her husband understand the judgment will probably never be collected but asked Steve to consider prosecuting the civil claim in hopes it will send a message to others in the community about the dangers of driving under the influence. "I applaud their courage and desire to try and make something positive occur from this terrible event," said Moore. The judgment, which includes $8 million for compensatory damages and $24 million in punitive damages, will now be recorded against the defendant. Read more on this story on al.com.

This is not the first time the attorneys at M&W have undertaken to help victims of DUI drivers at no charge. In 2001 they helped the family of 4 year Joia White, and other victims, obtain a $3 million judgment against a DUI driver who ran a red light and crashed into the vehicle occupied by Joia and her family. Joia and her grandfather were killed in the collision and her 4 siblings had multiple injuries and hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills. The firm also handled that case at no charge. Since then, the back cover of the law firm's Victim's Handbook has been dedicated to the memory of Joia White with a reminder of the dangers of driving under the influence.

Knox Boteler on Law Call

M&W attorney, Knox Boteler, will be the featured guest on Law Call on Sunday night October 11th. The 30 minute show will focus on traffic accidents and related insurance claims. The show will air immediately following the Sunday night football game on WPMI - NBC-15. "Knox's years of experience in the area of motor vehicle collisions and insurance claims, makes him an excellent guest for this topic," said Mike Rush the program's host. Please mark your calender and tune in on Sunday night, Oct. 11th. Advance questions can be sent to jkb@moore-wolfe.com

Ju$tice for $ale in Alabama?

Interesting Article from the Anniston Star.

Corporate money and courts
By Robert Leslie PalmerSpecial to The Star
09-28-2008

In electing the next Alabama Supreme Court justice, Alabamians should bear in mind the Dutch proverb that "promises make debt, and debt makes promises," for it is now virtually impossible to run for judicial office in this state without acquiring substantial political "debt."
Alabama ranks at the very top in the cost of judicial campaigns, which commonly exceed a million dollars. If we think that all of that money has no effect on the quality of justice, then we are only deluding ourselves.
But how did this come about? Last December, a Harper's Magazine article, "The Best Justice Money Can Buy," observed that it was Karl Rove who "put the Supreme Court elections in Alabama 'on the map' in national political terms." The article then detailed how in 1992, Rove masterminded a strategy by which the Republican party seized control of the Alabama Supreme Court.
That strategy involved substantial infusions of cash into judicial campaigns by corporate interests. According to the non-profit organization, Justice at Stake, Alabama Supreme Court candidates raised $54 million between 1993 and 2006, the highest total in the nation. As a result, 16 years later all but one of the nine Alabama Supreme Court justices is a Republican.
Despite the near complete domination of Alabama Supreme Court elections by corporate interests, the cash spigot is still running. More important, the flow of corporate money has had a demonstrable effect on the quality of justice. In the fall 2008 Alabama Association for Justice Journal, an article, "Is There Any Hope?", has removed the rhetoric from the struggle between corporate interests and trial lawyers by painstakingly detailing objective facts rather than subjective opinion.
For example, the article demonstrates that in the past five years, the court has either reversed or reversed in part nearly four times as many jury verdicts as it has affirmed, and that there is an astonishing correlation between the percentage of campaign contributions received from corporate interests and votes to reverse a jury verdict.
Thus, by methodically detailing fundraising and election results, individual justice's votes on plaintiffs' damage verdicts, and the degree to which campaign contributions correlate with judicial decision-making, the article demonstrates objectively and authoritatively that all that corporate money has "made it harder for civil plaintiffs in Alabama to get and keep jury verdicts" compensating them for their injuries. In short, the article lifts the Court's skirt to reveal the red boots of a brazen streetwalker.
A wise person once admonished us that the "accomplice to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifference." If we remain indifferent to the wholesale purchase of our highest court by corporate interests, then we will all be accomplices to every unjust decision that the court renders.
It is in this context that we must consider the campaign contributions in this year's only Supreme Court race. To date, Greg Shaw has raised $591,269 from 188 contributors, for an average of $3,145 per contribution. In sharp contrast, Deborah Bell Paseur has raised $521,009 from 1,417 contributors, for an average of $367 per contribution. Thus, even though Paseur raised just 88 percent of the total contributions that Shaw raised, the number of her contributors outnumbers Shaw's 7.5 to 1.
Shaw was able to exceed Paseur's total campaign contributions only because his campaign contributions on average are nearly 9 times as large Paseur's. In short, Shaw has raised more cash from decidedly fewer sources.
More disturbing, however, is the degree to which Shaw's contributions come from political action committees. In contrast to Paseur's campaign contributions, less than 11 percent of which come from PACs, a whopping 95 percent of Shaw's campaign contributions come from PACs. And if that is not enough to make you ill, a full 62 percent of Shaw's contributions come from PACs run by one person, Thomas Dart, a lobbyist for the Automobile Dealers Association of Alabama. Every time you watch a commercial or read an ad for Shaw, remember that the pitch is being made by car dealers.
Unlike Shaw, Paseur has collected campaign contributions primarily from individuals rather than PACs, and half of her contributors are women. When couples are included, the number rises above 61 percent.
Alabama, you should vote for Shaw only if you truly believe that juries — composed of ordinary citizens like you — are wrong more than 80 percent of the time, and that the Alabama Supreme Court needs one more justice whose sympathies lie with corporations rather than people. You should vote for Shaw only if you are comfortable buying your next Supreme Court justice from a used car salesman.
But if instead you can see the plain facts before you, and if you are concerned that corporate money threatens the sanctity of our judicial system, then you should stand up for an independent judiciary and vote for Deborah Bell Paseur.

(See previous commentary on this subject from the Anniston Star.)

Legally Speaking

The latest edition of Legally Speaking is now available on-line. This quarter's edition includes bio information on Karlos Finley (M&W's newest attorney), traffic safety, a recent case history and events at the firm. Legally Speaking has been published every quarter for the last 10 years by M&W and is dedicated to promoting important information for consumers and injury victims. It also reports on important traffic safety news. To be added to the regular mailing list please contact Mark Wolfe at mcw2@moore-wolfe.com.

Finley and Wolfe Attend ALA Banquet

On Sept 19 and 20th Karlos Finley and Mark Wolfe attended the Alabama Lawyer Association's (ALA) annual seminar and banquet. The ALA was established in 1971 to assist African-American attorneys in Alabama. This year's event celebrated 35 years of service. At the evening banquet ceremony, which was held at the Renaissance Ross Bridge Golf and Spa Resort in Hoover, Alabama, Karlos was installed as the Southeast Regional coordinator for ALA. Long time attorney and civil rights activist Demetrius Newton also received a life time achievement award and Judge John England was honored for his continuous legal and judicial service for Alabamians. M&W were proud to be sponsors for this year's event.

From the Birmingham News; 9-18-08

The race for the Alabama Supreme Court has reached $1.1 million in contributions
Thursday, September 18, 2008
ERIC VELASCO
News staff writer

Political action committees have substantially underwritten Greg Shaw's campaign for Alabama Supreme Court, while hundreds of women contributed to Deborah Bell Paseur, campaign disclosure forms show.
The two candidates for an open seat on the state's highest court passed $1.1 million in combined fundraising since campaigning began. They have collectively spent $968,000.
Shaw, a Republican, reported raising nearly $468,000 in cash and other sources between June 7 and Sept. 4, according to his latest disclosure form, posted Wednesday. He also reported spending more than $440,000 in that period, 81 percent of which was for advertising.
Paseur, a Democrat, reported raising nearly $257,000 in cash and in-kind services between June 3 and Sept. 12, according to disclosure forms sent this week to the state Secretary of State's Office. She spent more than $282,000, 58 percent of which went for ads.
Both candidates filed ahead of Monday's deadline for reporting this summer's contributions and spending. It is the only Supreme Court race on the Nov. 4 ballot.
PACs gave $439,000 in cash and in-kind services during the current reporting period to Shaw, a judge on the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. PACs provided 94 percent of his intake since June.
Nearly half of that PAC money came from the Alabama Civil Justice Reform Committee, traditionally the largest contributor to Republican judicial candidates. It is run by Thomas Dart, a lobbyist for the Automobile Dealers Association of Alabama.
Three other PACs run by Dart - Lawsuit Reform, Pro Business and Automobile Dealers Association - contributed a total of $75,000 to Shaw. Dart's PACs provided 62 percent of Shaw's contributions this summer, disclosure forms show.
Shaw has collected nearly $600,000 in cash, in-kind and other sources since his campaign began, 95 percent from PACs. Total spending for his entire campaign is just above $519,000.
Half of the contributors to Paseur's campaign this summer were women, her disclosure forms show. When couples are included, the number is above 61 percent.
Individual contributors provided nearly $206,000 since June to the retired Lauderdale County District Court judge, almost 85 percent of her total money in that period.
Less than 15 percent of Paseur's contributions came from PACs. Of the $37,000 she received from political action committees, $25,000 came from the state Democratic Party Executive Committee.
Paseur has received nearly $538,000 in cash and in-kind contributions since her campaign began. Women dominate the overall contributor list. Less than 11 percent of her money has come from PACs.
Paseur's total spending since her campaign started is almost $449,000.
In Alabama, the most expensive state in the nation to run for Supreme Court, million-dollar judicial campaigns are routine. The $7.7 million race for chief justice in 2006 was the second-most expensive judicial campaign in U.S. history.

Judge Deborah Bell for Ala Supreme Court

No she doesn't have a Hollywood celebrity doing her voice overs in her comercials like her opponent, but she's a great person and a top notch Judge who will be a blessing to our State as a Justice on the Alabama Supreme Court. Please watch this clip.

http://www.youtube.com/judgedeborahbell