San Antonio Injury Lawyer & Attorney : The McKinney Law Firm : Auto Accidents, Wrongful Death, Work Accidents : Bexar County, Travis County, South Texas

Houston TV station KHOU has a very interesting piece out investigating the correlation between contributions by big business to Supreme Court justices and opinions issued by the Court in favor of these very same companies. 

You can watch the video here and then leave us a comment and tell us what you think. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The minimum amount of automobile liability insurance Texas drivers are required to carry for bodily injury/property damage increased on April 1st from the previous $20,000/$40,000/$15,000 (“20/40/15”) coverage to “25/50/25” coverage.

Texas law requires people who drive in Texas to be financially responsible for the accidents they cause. Most drivers do this by buying auto liability insurance. Liability insurance pays to repair or replace the other driver’s vehicle and pays the medical expenses of the other party; it does not pay to repair or replace the policyholder’s vehicle.

The previous minimum amount of liability insurance required by law was $20,000 for each person injured in an accident, up to a total of $40,000 for everyone injured in an accident, and $15,000 for property damage per accident. The limits have now increased to $25,000 of coverage for each injured person, up to a total of $50,000 per accident, and $25,000 for property damage.

The 80th Legislature amended the current financial responsibility law in 2007 to increase the auto liability limits amid concerns that the current limits aren’t enough to cover the costs of an accident resulting in severe injury or major vehicle damage.

The limits will increase again on January 1, 2011, to $30,000 of coverage for each injured person, up to a total of $60,000 per accident, and $25,000 for property damage per accident (30/60/25).

Drivers who carry minimum limits will begin to notice the new limits as they renew their auto policies or buy a new policy, but they won’t need to take any action unless contacted by their insurance company.

There are severe penalties for violating the state’s financial responsibility law. A first conviction will result in a fine between $175 and $350. Subsequent convictions could result in fines of $350 to $1,000, suspension of your driver’s license, and impoundment of your vehicle. The state of Texas will implement the new Texas Financial Responsibility Verification Program this spring that will allow law enforcement officers to immediately verify whether a driver has car insurance.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Remember that the insurance company is not your friend.

Insurance companies go out of the way to advertise how fast, neighborly, generous, kind, understanding, patient, and friendly they are -- especially when they are trying to sell you one of their policies. It continues to be true for as long as you make your insurance premium payments on time without asking for anything in return. However, policyholders forced to present a claim often learn that this is more advertising PR than reality. 

If you are injured in an accident, get medical attention immediately. At the same time, to the extent you can you should be keeping a record that will help protect you should you need to file a claim.  File a police report, either at the scene or as soon as possible afterward. Try to get names and contact information from any witnesses. If you’re able, write down exactly what happened as soon as possible after the event.

Accident scene photographs often provide valuable evidence that can’t be duplicated after the fact. And, of course, talk to a a good lawyer as soon as possible so that you can get advice about how to proceed, what kind of records you should be keeping, and how to handle the inevitable phone calls from the insurance company, trying to get you to sign a release. 

Here is a quick checklist:

• Photograph your injuries
• Keep notes, including
  • Medical appointments/treatment
  • Medications
  • Physical Therapy sessions (including progress & limitations)
  • Record lost work time
  • Note pain and limitations
  • Record expenses incurred as a result of injuries/limitations
• Document conversations/information received from
  • Doctors and other medical professionals
  • The insurance company
• Keep all receipts, prescription records, etc.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Dallas Morning News has the story that Texas drivers involved in accidents will no longer be required to furnish telephone numbers for crash reports under an agreement between two state agencies trying to pull the plug on phone solicitations by telemarketers.

This is an important change because telemarketers generally try to drum up business for chiropractors, lawyers and body shops and these people will often say absolutely anything to get someone into the office.  This results in citizens being funneled to service providers that may not be the most competent for the job. 

"It is getting to the point where every person involved in a reported traffic accident is being solicited," said Mark Hanna, a spokesman for the Texas Committee on Insurance Fraud, a panel created by the insurance industry and the Texas Department of Insurance.

"The telemarketers say whatever it takes to get crash victims into the doctor's office. They are today's lazy ambulance chasers, doing it all by phone. We are trying to put a stop to these calls or at least slow them down." said Hanna according to the article.

I am all in favor of this long-needed change.  If you need a quality body shop or a competent lawyer, don't go to anyone based on a phone solicitation.  Get on the internet and do your own research and ask your friends about their experiences.   Such decisions are way too important to base it on an unsolicited phone call. 

Source for Article: Dallas Morning News

Extra:  See the statewide standard accident report form. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Today’s The American Civil Liberties Union newsletter commends the House Ways and Means Committee for holding a hearing today on the backlog of Social Security disability claims. The ACLU has submitted a written statement to the committee.

Social Security disability backlogs are at an all-time high, with the average wait time lasting 499 days and in some regions upwards of 700 days. At the same time, the Social Security Administration (SSA) staffing levels are at their lowest levels since 1972. All this translates into unreasonable delays in Social Security disability claims processing, with thousands of people with disabilities facing tremendous economic hardship including bankruptcy, homelessness, and in some cases suicide.

Read more here.

Hat Tip: Disability Links Blog

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

    Time and time again, we have run into the same story of drug manufacturers covering up known dangers regarding drugs they develop in order to get FDA approval.  One recent example: The Ortho Ebra birth Control Patch.
 
    According to recent newspaper accounts, Johnson & Johnson obscured evidence for years that its popular Ortho Evra birth control patch delivered much more estrogen than standard birth control pills, potentially increasing the risk of blood clots and strokes, according to internal company documents.  

  But because the Food and Drug Administration approved the patch, the company is arguing in court that it cannot be sued by women who claim that they were injured by the product — even though its old label inaccurately described the amount of estrogen it released.

    This legal argument is called pre-emption. After decades of being dismissed by courts, the tactic now appears to be on the verge of success in the U.S. Supreme Court, lawyers for plaintiffs and drug companies say.

    According to a recent article in the New York Times, documents and e-mail messages from Johnson & Johnson, made public as part of the lawsuits against the company, show that even before the drug agency approved the product in 2001, the company’s own researchers found that the patch delivered far more estrogen each day than low-dose pills. When it reported the results publicly, the company lied and reduced the numbers by 40 percent.
  
    Despite this egregious behavior, however, Johnson & Johnson may be allowed to simply walk away from the harm it caused without any liability whatsoever.  The pre-emption doctrine being argued for by the drug companies and Republicans holds that the F.D.A. is the only agency with enough expertise to regulate drug makers and that its decisions should not be second-guessed by courts.  This would be the case even when the company obtained FDA approval by lying to the agency.  The Supreme Court is to rule on a case next term that could make pre-emption a legal standard for drug cases. The court already ruled in February that many suits against the makers of medical devices like pacemakers are pre-empted.
  
    This means that the hundreds of women that have been injured due to Johnson & Johnson's conduct (and the families of the 50 women whose death has been directly associated with the drug) would have no legal recourse. 

Source: New York Times

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A recent study provides scientific proof that car accident victims aren't nuts, aren't faking, aren't gaming the system; they really are in pain.

In a study published last week in the journal Archives of Surgery, researchers tracked 3,047 patients ages 18 to 84 from 14 U.S. states who survived an acute traumatic injury.  A year after the injury, 63 percent reported that they still experienced pain related to the injury, with most having pain in more than one region of the body.

On average, the patients assessed their pain at 5.5 on a 10-point scale -- a level at which they would be expected to have moderate to severe interference with daily activities.

The American Pain Foundation, a Baltimore-based advocacy group, said the financial cost exacted by chronic pain in the United States -- including health-care expenses, lost income and lost productivity -- is estimated at $100 billion a year.

Source: Reuters

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) or Nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy is a rare and serious syndrome that involves fibrosis of skin, joints, eyes, and internal organs. Its cause is associated with exposure to gadolinium (which is frequently used as a contrast substance for MRIs) in patients with severe kidney failure. It does not have a genetic basis.  NSF causes thickening or tightening of the skin and connective tissues, which severely limits a patient’s ability to move, and it also causes pain, muscle weakness, scarring of internal organs and difficulty bending joints. It seems that patients’ lives are potentially at risk because of the damage to their organs, and destroyed by their inability to move.

Last year the FDA asked manufacturers to include a new boxed warning with gadolinium contrast informing health care providers that patients with severe kidney insufficiency who receive gadolinium contrast are at risk for developing NSF/NFD. Additionally, the warning states that patients with liver problems are also at risk for developing NSF/NFD if they are experiencing kidney problems.

Legal action is now being taken against the manufacturers of Gadolinium based on the premise that these companies knew that gadolinium is toxic and, if misused, could lead to serious injury. Accordingly, these companies should have properly designed and tested the gadolinium MRI contrast and given more consideration to vulnerabilities of the different types of patients who would be using the contrast, in this case, patients with kidney disease or renal dysfunction.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks