A big event is about to take place. No, Faithful Reader, it's not this article being written after I have finally found the time and creativity to conjure up another post. It's even bigger. It's the ultimate in bi-annual American competition. Where the stakes are high and the competitors pull out all the stops to win at all costs. No, it's not the Olympics. It's even more competitive. A fight for glory that makes Tyson and Holyfield look like a pair of school yard girls slapping each other silly. What is it, you ask? It's Election Day.
For months incumbents and prospects have been hiking across their respective states, counties and districts in the hopes of securing the title and power of their respective seats. CNN, MSNBC, Fox "News", and the rest of the cable "news" networks have been salivating over the battles for just as long; enlisting former and current politicians and countless pundits and alleged experts to dissect and analyze every single race possible. These are not civil battles. There is no polite clapping, civilized behavior, and whispered insightful analysis like you will find on the greens of Augusta. These are war zones.
If you are like me, you find this to be both an anticipated and dreaded time of year. I eagerly await election day every two years to cast my vote. This vote, like all others, decides who we as Americans feel will do the best job of representing us; who will stand for us in government and ensure our interests and well-being are the primary concerns of the government. Or, do they?
I dread this time of year because of all the ads. I don't mind if an incumbent or prospect wants to tell me what they want to accomplish in office and how they plan to accomplish it. I actually prefer this, as it helps me make an informed vote. However, over the years politicians have stopped telling us this and instead spread messages of fear, hate, and untruths. I can't tell you a single thing about what a certain U.S. House of Representative candidate for my district has done or will do; but, I can sure tell you why that candidate feels that I should not vote for his opponent and all the bad, scary things that opponent has done. Let's also ignore the fact that often the two sentence blurb about the bad, scary things is not the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In my humble opinion, not as a lawyer, but rather as a political scientist, today's political arena is filled with little more than petty individuals and fear mongers.
As a voter you should make an informed decision. Voting is not something that should be taken lightly; it is one of our most sacred rights as Americans. It is a right millions of our fellow citizens have died protecting and a right millions more across the world are currently fighting and dying to get. Exercise this right. Get out and vote. But, before you do, make sure you are casting an informed and educated vote. The stakes are too high and the result is too important not to.
The fliers, commercials, radio ads, pundits, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, Nancy Grace, George Stephanopoulous, Big Bird, and Snuffalufagus will not help you do that. Read a newspaper, look at the candidate's websites, watch the debates, talk to the candidates (if they won't talk to you and listen to you, then they don't deserve the privilege of getting your vote), and educate yourself through credible and factual means.
We all have easy access to information and debates concerning our elected legislatures, but I find that many know little or nothing about the judges that they are electing here in North Carolina. Judges are just as, if not more important, to the functioning of our government and society as the legislatures. If you are unsure of which candidate to vote for in your particular judicial race, you may find that clicking here can be a good start to educating yourself.
A friend of mine in college voted for George W. Bush because, in her words, "I thought he was cute." An uncle of mine recently went on a Tea-Partier rant on my Facebook page about how he shouldn't have to pay for someone else's health care with his taxes (even though he already does because those costs of unpaid bills get passed to the consumer). Before you vote, think about what candidate will do what's best for your entire district, state and most importantly our country as a whole. Remember, the quote is "We, the People" and not "I, the Individual."
We at Leone Noble & Seate, L.L.P. are passionate about defending your rights. You have one right, however, that can only be truly defended by exercising it. So, regardless of whether you are a member of the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, a Libertarian, an Independent, a Tea Partier, or just feel the Rent is Too Damn High, get out and vote on Tuesday, November 2, 2010.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. The author does not endorse any particular candidate or political party. The author agrees with James Madison with regard to political parties and special interests groups, thus he is registered to vote as "unaffiliated." In the spirit of disclosure, the author has not educated himself thoroughly about the Rent is Too Damn High Party because it is not a party in his state and there is no candidate on his ballot belonging to this party. The author does know, however, that they have a very catchy theme song on their website. The author has previously informed his friends and family that if a certain former vice presidential candidate wins the presidency in 2012 he will move to Canada. The author is reconsidering his position after seeing in the video below that politics up there appear to be in no better shape.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
I Love You, You Love Me
I would like to begin this post by apologizing to you, Faithful Reader. I would first like to apologize for the long absence to the few of you that actually read this blog on a regular basis. I was unable to post for such a long time because I was attending Gerry Spence's Trial Lawyers College in Wyoming. There is no Internet or cell service at the College, so it was impossible for me to post. It was also quite traumatic for a young professional hopelessly addicted to 3G coverage and Wi-Fi. After being home again for over a week, I still find myself waking at night in a cold sweat clutching my iPhone as if it were a winning Powerball ticket.
I would also like to apologize for the title of this post. For those of you who were alive and paying attention in the slightest during the 1990s, you will note that it is the theme song from the popular kids show Barney. As I was browsing through my previous posts looking for ideas to write about (I like to be "green" and recycle), I realized that I have referenced many an annoying song over the past few months: the Barney theme song, the Numa Numa song, the theme song to The Golden Girls, Let's Get Physical by Olivia Newton John, Singing in the Rain by Gene Kelley, Time After Time by Cindy Lauper, Dakota Fanning, and Sally Field. Okay, so the last two aren't songs but they're still arguably annoying. There is no doubt that at least some of you have gotten these songs stuck in your head for a day or so after reading the references in these posts. You are entitled to be annoyed and maybe angry with me, but I still ask that you refrain from assault and battery should we run into each other out on the street or in my office.
During the 23 days I spent in Wyoming at the College, we learned essentially how not be lawyers anymore. How to prepare our cases with a human element and to tell our client's story in a way that is, well, not so darn lawyerly. The first week of the college taught us that proper preparation involves truly learning to like, understand, and love your client. One of the methods we use to discover the client's story and understand the client better is called reversing roles. It's a way to walk in the other individual's shoes. Learning to reverse roles allows us to understand the world around us.
For the two of you out there that are regular readers of this blog (Hi, Mom!), you may have noticed that I tend to write a lot about the importance of communication in the attorney-client relationship. This is a frequent topic for me because it is so vitally important to the success of the case. But, communication and true understanding is also vitally important in all our relationships. This is true whether you're in an attorney-client relationship, husband-wife relationship, employer-employee relationship, etc.
In our hectic daily lives it's easy to get caught up solely in ourselves. Heck, getting caught up in ourselves is the sole reason Twitter exists. But, it's also important to put yourself in the shoes of the people you deal with on a regular basis. For me, that includes clients, insurance adjusters, and insurance defense lawyers. For you, that may include waiters, customer service reps, that annoying co-worker you secretly hate, and that delightfully unmotivated Wal-Mart cashier. Try to imagine what it's like to be in their position, to understand and empathize with that person before you get hostile with them for bringing you the wrong salad dressing. Or, before you assault and batter them for running out of chicken nuggets. You may be surprised at the results and how much more you can get accomplished. You may also be able to brighten someone's day; and, let's face it, we can all use some good karma.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This blog post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author's wife has taught him that role reversal can sometimes be tricky. Said wife had a bad day at work and the author listened, understood, empathized, and reversed roles. He even muted the television and put down his iPhone to do so, which is very uncharacteristic. She then rolled her eyes and went to bed. While the author apologizes for the references to so many annoying songs that may get stuck in your head, he does not promise that he will stop making said references. For the record, the author does not listen to such music on a regular basis. He is normally the victim of some TV commercial or unfortunate DJ selection on the radio or, and quite worse, his wife's iTunes playlist. The author typically and arguably listens to good music such as Jimmy Buffett, Dave Matthews Band, Aerosmith, and ZZ Top.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Let's Get Physical
My wife is a nurse in the Heart & Vascular Center at a well-known local hospital, and while our professions are very different, both of our careers share one large thing in common: we both read, interpret and analyze medical records on a daily basis. Obviously, in any personal injury case one's medical treatment related to the injuries complained of is in issue. What most clients don't fully realize, however, is that once litigation begins you put your medical history in dispute. It is not uncommon for the defense to ask for, and the Courts to require, that a claimant's medical records for the five to ten years before the collision be produced in order to see if any similar medical issues have presented themselves in the past.
However, since medical records must be obtained from every provider seen, no matter what the symptoms complained of were, that means I get to know my clients' medical histories very well. In my years of reading and analyzing records, I have learned a great deal about the human body and the various ailments it can suffer. Fortunately, unlike my wife, I do not have to treat said ailments, some of which can frankly be just plain nasty. I never wanted to be a doctor, so it goes without saying that over the years I have learned more than I ever wanted to know about diabetes, GERD, migraines, acid reflux, sinus infections, prostate issues, shingles, MRSA, and the rest of the Physician's Desk Reference. One particular medical condition I see fairly frequently noted by physicians is obesity.
Obesity has become a well-documented and studied problem globally. It can cause health complications that include, but are certainly not limited to: diabetes, osteoarthritis, heart disease, sleep apnea, depression, and even some types of cancers. And these are just the physical complications. Let's not forget the social stigma attached to being overweight, and the shame that can arise from it. There's also added psychological and sociological pressure from the constant media bombardment of what Paris Hilton terms "Hotness." People Magazine's new issue exemplifies my point.
In the early stages of their personal injury case, clients will often ask if we need them to do anything. I always tell them to focus on getting better, as their health should always be their primary concern. At this point, Reader, I would like you to briefly look at the picture to your right and then return your focus here. Done? Good. That, as you may have surmised, is a picture of me. Now, quite obviously, due to a serious love affair with buffalo wings, pizza, and beer, I am not in the best of shape. So, I recently decided to take my own advice and start focusing more on my health by getting back into a shape which does not resemble a sphere.
I chose P90X because I'm a "Give a 110%" type of person. You may have heard about this home fitness program through the infommerical, or read about it on the Internet, or had a friend or relative who did it. Since I started the program five days ago, a lot of my friends have been curious as to what it's like. You may be curious as well, so allow me to share brief thoughts on my workouts so far:
However, since medical records must be obtained from every provider seen, no matter what the symptoms complained of were, that means I get to know my clients' medical histories very well. In my years of reading and analyzing records, I have learned a great deal about the human body and the various ailments it can suffer. Fortunately, unlike my wife, I do not have to treat said ailments, some of which can frankly be just plain nasty. I never wanted to be a doctor, so it goes without saying that over the years I have learned more than I ever wanted to know about diabetes, GERD, migraines, acid reflux, sinus infections, prostate issues, shingles, MRSA, and the rest of the Physician's Desk Reference. One particular medical condition I see fairly frequently noted by physicians is obesity.
Obesity has become a well-documented and studied problem globally. It can cause health complications that include, but are certainly not limited to: diabetes, osteoarthritis, heart disease, sleep apnea, depression, and even some types of cancers. And these are just the physical complications. Let's not forget the social stigma attached to being overweight, and the shame that can arise from it. There's also added psychological and sociological pressure from the constant media bombardment of what Paris Hilton terms "Hotness." People Magazine's new issue exemplifies my point.
In the early stages of their personal injury case, clients will often ask if we need them to do anything. I always tell them to focus on getting better, as their health should always be their primary concern. At this point, Reader, I would like you to briefly look at the picture to your right and then return your focus here. Done? Good. That, as you may have surmised, is a picture of me. Now, quite obviously, due to a serious love affair with buffalo wings, pizza, and beer, I am not in the best of shape. So, I recently decided to take my own advice and start focusing more on my health by getting back into a shape which does not resemble a sphere.
I chose P90X because I'm a "Give a 110%" type of person. You may have heard about this home fitness program through the infommerical, or read about it on the Internet, or had a friend or relative who did it. Since I started the program five days ago, a lot of my friends have been curious as to what it's like. You may be curious as well, so allow me to share brief thoughts on my workouts so far:
- Day 1: Chest & Back: This overly energetic man who I've never met is trying to kill me through the TV.
- Day 2: Plyometrics: I have lost any and all ability to move my lower extremities. Including my toes.
- Day 3: Shoulders & Arms: Ouch.
- Day 4: Yoga X: 90 minutes of yoga in which I pulled many, many muscles I didn't even know existed.
- Day 5: Legs, Back & Ab Ripper X: [Expletive Censored][Expletive Censored][Expletive Censored]
While it is too early to tell a change in my physical appearance, since I started the program I do have more energy, am sleeping better, and just generally feel better. These are just a few of the benefits that exercise can bring about. Exercise is only half of the equation, however, so make sure you are eating healthier as well.
Whether you are a recovering victim of negligence, or are somebody like me and millions of others around the world, you can benefit from focusing on your health. Victims of negligence should focus on getting treatment and following the medical advice they are given until they are healthy again. The rest of us can, in the immortal words of Olivia Newton John, get physical.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This blog post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. This blog post is further not intended to convey any specific medical advice upon any specific individual. If you have been paying attention, it is quite obvious the author is not a medical professional. Before beginning any exercise program or diet, you should consult a physician. If you are obstinate like the author when it comes to seeing physicians, perhaps marrying a health professional will solve your problem. Unfortunately for the author, the author's wife's advice is usually limited to an eye roll and a terse statement something to the effect of, "You're an idiot. Go see your doctor." The author will admit that his new focus on fitness is not entirely related to health. The author's need for larger pants also played a role. While writing this, the author has become annoyed as Olivia Newton John and Sue Sylvester's "Let's Get Physical" is now stuck in his head. He is a Gleek. Don't judge him.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Thank You For Being a Friend
One pleasant day in 2004, I walked into the office of the Student Government Association at UNC Wilmington. My plan was to review some fee increase proposals various departments had submitted. As the Treasurer at the time, part of my job was to sit on the Student Fee Committee which is comprised of student representatives, faculty, and administrators and decides whether student fees can be increased to provide support for student services and other areas of University life. The work of the committee directly impacts the wallets of over 10,000 students.
About the time I sat down at my desk, the Student Body Vice President (or maybe it was the President, I don't remember), came up to me and showed me a new website that was spreading through college campuses like wildfire. The website rocked my world. I was intrigued, amazed, and soon became utterly engrossed.
What was this website? No, it wasn't the Numa Numa kid. It was something even more awesome. It was Facebook. As a first generation Facebook user, I've seen the site evolve for better and for worse. Back "in the day" it was open only to college students and you belonged to groups to show your support for something. Then high school students were welcomed in. Then came the rest of the world, including corporations, politicians, advocacy groups, and even law firms. Instead of belonging to groups, I became a "Fan" of things and now I just plain "Like" things.
The introduction of the Newsfeed brought with it instant updates about friends all streaming into a single location. It was a stalker's paradise, and it's evolved into a full out intelligence gathering powerhouse. Over the past few days, all 395 of my closest friends knew the following about me:
On the other hand, I knew the following about some of my friends:
Who cares? Well, judging by the comments and the “Likes” a lot of people do.
For newer users out there, imagine a world without the Newsfeed or Mafia Wars or Farmville or whatever it is that you do to waste hours of your precious short time on this earth. Imagine a world without the iPhone or Blackberry App (gasp!!). There was none of that back then. There was, however, less ads, less "accessing" of your profile by third-party apps, and generally a whole lot more privacy.
And privacy on social media sites is the key, especially if you're involved in litigation. More and more attorneys throughout the country are turning to Facebook, Myspace, Twitter and the other time wasters out there to discover more information about litigants. This may pose a problem for a client who posts embarrassing or compromising pictures on the site, posts things on their wall for the world to see about the accident, or unwittingly does anything that could affect the case.
I personally have used Facebook to dig up information on trial witnesses I knew little about beforehand and discovered some useful information. In one case, I remember having a difficult time locating a defendant for service through our more conventional methods. Luckily, this guy had a Myspace page that was open to anybody and it listed the current town he was living in and the college he was attending. With little effort knowing that information, I was finally able to track down a valid address for him. You've been served, sir!
Let's say Jennifer from above had instead posted, "I was rear ended this morning but am okay. Good thing I wasn't injured!" It is not uncommon for soft tissue injuries to manifest themselves a few days after the traumatic event occurs. If Jennifer has an open profile, she may arm the defense attorney or insurance company with a harmful admission from her own profile that will assist them in defending the claim.
Clients will occasionally ask me what to do about their Facebook page. I remain unsure of how to answer them because the law is often very slow to catch up with technology and I haven't seen Facebook used that much by opposing counsel. If you find yourself involved in litigation and have a Facebook page, then you should use common sense. Personally, I feel its common sense for everyone to only allow those people you truly know to be able to find out the sensitive personal information we publish to our "friends" online. Check your social media outlet's privacy policy and the tools at your disposal to ensure they are giving you the maximum protection they can. You never know who may be out there looking.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This blog post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author wastes copious amounts of time on Facebook (off the clock, of course). He has been known to utilize the chat feature with his wife. While they're both sitting in the home office. Less than two feet apart. The author realizes this is extremely pathetic, but he is a product of his generation. The author has thus far resisted the urge to join Twitter because he still thinks tweeting is for twits, but he must admit it's getting more appealing by the day. If you like reading this blog, the author suggests you become a fan of (or he thinks the proper term is now "Like") Leone Noble & Seate to receive the latest updates from the firm and relevant legal topics. Nothing on the firm's Facebook page should be construed as legal advice, and if you are a client we strongly discourage posting case-specific questions to the Wall.
Author's Note: If you are a client, the firm has a policy that does not allow staff members to accept friend requests from clients past or present on their personal Facebook pages. This is done for your protection as well as ours, and helps us to also maintain the professionalism expected in our attorney-client relationship. Thank you for your understanding.
Special Note: R.I.P. Blanche. Thank you for being a friend.
About the time I sat down at my desk, the Student Body Vice President (or maybe it was the President, I don't remember), came up to me and showed me a new website that was spreading through college campuses like wildfire. The website rocked my world. I was intrigued, amazed, and soon became utterly engrossed.
What was this website? No, it wasn't the Numa Numa kid. It was something even more awesome. It was Facebook. As a first generation Facebook user, I've seen the site evolve for better and for worse. Back "in the day" it was open only to college students and you belonged to groups to show your support for something. Then high school students were welcomed in. Then came the rest of the world, including corporations, politicians, advocacy groups, and even law firms. Instead of belonging to groups, I became a "Fan" of things and now I just plain "Like" things.
The introduction of the Newsfeed brought with it instant updates about friends all streaming into a single location. It was a stalker's paradise, and it's evolved into a full out intelligence gathering powerhouse. Over the past few days, all 395 of my closest friends knew the following about me:
"Michael commented on Kerstin (Name Redacted)'s status."
"Michael Rothrock just caved to the oddly strong power of the infomercial
and ordered P90X. This could get interesting..."
"Michael Rothrock is at Killers with the wife."
On the other hand, I knew the following about some of my friends:
Joshua (Name Redacted) joined the group 1,000,000 People
Who Want to Plug the BP Oil Spill with Sarah Palin.
Jennifer (Name Redacted) Is super sore after being rear ended outside
of first federal this morning.
Greg (Name Redacted) is livin' the dream
Beth Leone Noble loves Chocolate Cherios!
Who cares? Well, judging by the comments and the “Likes” a lot of people do.
For newer users out there, imagine a world without the Newsfeed or Mafia Wars or Farmville or whatever it is that you do to waste hours of your precious short time on this earth. Imagine a world without the iPhone or Blackberry App (gasp!!). There was none of that back then. There was, however, less ads, less "accessing" of your profile by third-party apps, and generally a whole lot more privacy.
And privacy on social media sites is the key, especially if you're involved in litigation. More and more attorneys throughout the country are turning to Facebook, Myspace, Twitter and the other time wasters out there to discover more information about litigants. This may pose a problem for a client who posts embarrassing or compromising pictures on the site, posts things on their wall for the world to see about the accident, or unwittingly does anything that could affect the case.
I personally have used Facebook to dig up information on trial witnesses I knew little about beforehand and discovered some useful information. In one case, I remember having a difficult time locating a defendant for service through our more conventional methods. Luckily, this guy had a Myspace page that was open to anybody and it listed the current town he was living in and the college he was attending. With little effort knowing that information, I was finally able to track down a valid address for him. You've been served, sir!
Let's say Jennifer from above had instead posted, "I was rear ended this morning but am okay. Good thing I wasn't injured!" It is not uncommon for soft tissue injuries to manifest themselves a few days after the traumatic event occurs. If Jennifer has an open profile, she may arm the defense attorney or insurance company with a harmful admission from her own profile that will assist them in defending the claim.
Clients will occasionally ask me what to do about their Facebook page. I remain unsure of how to answer them because the law is often very slow to catch up with technology and I haven't seen Facebook used that much by opposing counsel. If you find yourself involved in litigation and have a Facebook page, then you should use common sense. Personally, I feel its common sense for everyone to only allow those people you truly know to be able to find out the sensitive personal information we publish to our "friends" online. Check your social media outlet's privacy policy and the tools at your disposal to ensure they are giving you the maximum protection they can. You never know who may be out there looking.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This blog post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author wastes copious amounts of time on Facebook (off the clock, of course). He has been known to utilize the chat feature with his wife. While they're both sitting in the home office. Less than two feet apart. The author realizes this is extremely pathetic, but he is a product of his generation. The author has thus far resisted the urge to join Twitter because he still thinks tweeting is for twits, but he must admit it's getting more appealing by the day. If you like reading this blog, the author suggests you become a fan of (or he thinks the proper term is now "Like") Leone Noble & Seate to receive the latest updates from the firm and relevant legal topics. Nothing on the firm's Facebook page should be construed as legal advice, and if you are a client we strongly discourage posting case-specific questions to the Wall.
Author's Note: If you are a client, the firm has a policy that does not allow staff members to accept friend requests from clients past or present on their personal Facebook pages. This is done for your protection as well as ours, and helps us to also maintain the professionalism expected in our attorney-client relationship. Thank you for your understanding.
Special Note: R.I.P. Blanche. Thank you for being a friend.
Monday, June 7, 2010
I've Got Gas
There was an explosion at my house a few nights ago. My wife decided to operate the grill and make us dinner, when normally the grilling is left to me. Our grill is a gas grill, and my wife neglected to shut the propane tank's valve after she was done grilling our chicken and corn. This obviously presents a problem since we routinely eat outside on our deck and light citronella candles to keep the insects away. In case you missed the visit by the local fire department on Safety Day in first grade, propane gas and an open flame mix about as well as oil and water.
While I do spend a lot of time in my office, I lucked out in not having to live there this week. I was able to fortuitously discover my wife's omission before the back half of our house disappeared in a ball of flames. When asked why she did such a thing, she replied, "I forgot." I will say, I did not handle this marital situation with the most diplomatic approach, and hence the "explosion." I hope my wife is not reading this, as it's still a touchy subject.
Like my wife, many of us often overlook things throughout the course of our days, weeks, and months. These things might be trivial, such as forgetting to buy stamps. Or, they might be substantial, like forgetting to shut off an explosive gas source less than 10 feet from an open flame and the back of one's humble abode. We often don't mean to, but in today's society life is fast-paced and things get overlooked.
Litigation is unfortunately not a quick process. Sometimes, depositions occur over a year or even two after a collision. Trial can be even further away. It's not uncommon for many of my clients to forget details about the collision, their medical treatment, and how it affected them.
Forgetting things is not in and of itself a problem in litigation. We have resources like recorded statements, client interviews, accident reports, and medical records to help refresh a client's memory. What I find clients have the most difficulty remembering is the pain and suffering they endured. As time passes, they forget what the pain felt like and their daily struggle to deal with it.
The passage of time and the forgetfulness it often brings presents a problem in this area. Pain and suffering comprises a large portion of a case's value, but that value doesn't amount to much when all the client can articulate a few years later is that they couldn't do "stuff." Stuff doesn't equate to monetary compensation in a juror's mind. It equates to "who cares?"
A jury will likely not be inclined to put a premium on your pain and suffering if you cannot articulate what you went through. I find that my clients tend to lose the ability to articulate the details as time passes. Hopefully, the client has contacted us sooner rather than later and we can document what the client tells us they are going through as they recover from their injuries. Sometimes, however, that doesn't happen.
If you have been the victim of someone's negligence, it is important that you strive to remember what you had to go through during your recovery as time passes. All of us have different methods to remember different things, so you should do whatever works best for you. The most common method I find clients utilize is keeping a diary, which is often a good resource later down the road. It should be noted, however, that there is precedent in North Carolina that suggests that such a diary is not necessarily considered "work-product," so you should keep in mind that diary may one day been seen by someone other than just you and your attorney.
The ability to recall how your injuries affected you is crucial in a personal injury case. The more details you can provide as to how your life was affected, the more fuel your attorney will have in arguing to the jury on your behalf.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This blog post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author's wife is in good company. In his hometown, the local fire station once burned down because the firemen forgot to turn off the stove when they went out on a call. The ironic humor still makes the author chuckle. Gasoline, natural gas, and oil are dangerous substances that should be handled with absolute caution. This is especially important to remember if you're British Petroleum.
While I do spend a lot of time in my office, I lucked out in not having to live there this week. I was able to fortuitously discover my wife's omission before the back half of our house disappeared in a ball of flames. When asked why she did such a thing, she replied, "I forgot." I will say, I did not handle this marital situation with the most diplomatic approach, and hence the "explosion." I hope my wife is not reading this, as it's still a touchy subject.
Like my wife, many of us often overlook things throughout the course of our days, weeks, and months. These things might be trivial, such as forgetting to buy stamps. Or, they might be substantial, like forgetting to shut off an explosive gas source less than 10 feet from an open flame and the back of one's humble abode. We often don't mean to, but in today's society life is fast-paced and things get overlooked.
Litigation is unfortunately not a quick process. Sometimes, depositions occur over a year or even two after a collision. Trial can be even further away. It's not uncommon for many of my clients to forget details about the collision, their medical treatment, and how it affected them.
Forgetting things is not in and of itself a problem in litigation. We have resources like recorded statements, client interviews, accident reports, and medical records to help refresh a client's memory. What I find clients have the most difficulty remembering is the pain and suffering they endured. As time passes, they forget what the pain felt like and their daily struggle to deal with it.
The passage of time and the forgetfulness it often brings presents a problem in this area. Pain and suffering comprises a large portion of a case's value, but that value doesn't amount to much when all the client can articulate a few years later is that they couldn't do "stuff." Stuff doesn't equate to monetary compensation in a juror's mind. It equates to "who cares?"
A jury will likely not be inclined to put a premium on your pain and suffering if you cannot articulate what you went through. I find that my clients tend to lose the ability to articulate the details as time passes. Hopefully, the client has contacted us sooner rather than later and we can document what the client tells us they are going through as they recover from their injuries. Sometimes, however, that doesn't happen.
If you have been the victim of someone's negligence, it is important that you strive to remember what you had to go through during your recovery as time passes. All of us have different methods to remember different things, so you should do whatever works best for you. The most common method I find clients utilize is keeping a diary, which is often a good resource later down the road. It should be noted, however, that there is precedent in North Carolina that suggests that such a diary is not necessarily considered "work-product," so you should keep in mind that diary may one day been seen by someone other than just you and your attorney.
The ability to recall how your injuries affected you is crucial in a personal injury case. The more details you can provide as to how your life was affected, the more fuel your attorney will have in arguing to the jury on your behalf.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This blog post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author's wife is in good company. In his hometown, the local fire station once burned down because the firemen forgot to turn off the stove when they went out on a call. The ironic humor still makes the author chuckle. Gasoline, natural gas, and oil are dangerous substances that should be handled with absolute caution. This is especially important to remember if you're British Petroleum.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Thinking Caps
Sometimes, we say things without thinking the statement through. For example, once my wife asked me that annoying and baited question, "Does this make me look fat?" Surely, somebody with as much education and training in "quick thinking" as myself wouldn't answer this question incorrectly. "A little bit," was my response. I'm still not sure why I said it, but I am quite sure I didn't fully think my response through before uttering it. I didn't think about the silence, the icy stare, and how uncomfortable the couch can be to sleep on.
I once had a client who testified, "I don't remember" in a deposition. The answer to the follow up question was, "I don't know." These are not inappropriate responses in a deposition. However, they are perplexing responses when the two questions being asked are, "How old are you?" and "What is your birth date?" The client was nervous, and unfortunately he didn't think his answers through. And again, I really can't make this stuff up.
Currently, a battle is being waged in the North Carolina General Assembly. Citizens, special interest groups, and many lawyers are fighting to replace North Carolina's doctrine of contributory negligence with the doctrine of comparative negligence. North Carolina is one of only four jurisdictions in the nation that still has this antiquated and harsh law. It essentially holds that if an individual is even slightly (as little as one-percent) at fault for their injuries then they may recover nothing as a matter of law. The vast majority of the country reduces the award by the amount of the injured individual's negligence assuming that contribution is not more than fifty percent. The insurance industry is strongly opposed to this fairer and more just law.
Across the State there have been many letters to the editor published concerning contributory v. comparative negligence. The op-ed pieces have been interesting, and the responses even more so. What I find interesting as well are the collateral matters that are being mentioned in these op-eds and editorial comments. In the Beaufort Observer's May 18, 2010 piece on the subject, the author closes his examination of the issue with a suggestion that we should "rein in the John Edwards awards to lawyers, both in personal injury and in medical malpractice."
This is nothing I haven't heard before. Citizens routinely bemoan the much publicized "excessive" personal injury awards given to individuals in courts across the country (of course, you rarely hear about the stories where laws like contributory negligence fail our citizens, which you can read about by clicking here). Caps on awards in personal injury and medical malpractice claims are routinely brought up in the Tort Reform debates that have taken place across this country for many years now, and a lot of individuals seem to support them.
I have to wonder, however, whether the people who advocate for caps on compensatory awards really think their statements through before making them. So, let's put our thinking caps on and explore a hypothetical:
An individual is driving down a two lane highway. A car approaches from the opposite direction, being driven by a person named Negligent Nancy. Nancy is driving above the speed limit and is talking on her phone. She drops her phone due to her greasy fingers from the fries she's eating on the go as well, and reaches over into the adjacent seat to retrieve it. In the process of doing so she crosses the center line and collides head-on into our individual. The cars mangle and tangle, and both drivers have to be pried out and airlifted to the local hospital.
Our individual spends over two weeks in the ICU suffering from shattered legs, a shattered pelvis, broken ribs, and various torn muscles and ligaments throughout their body. They have deep lacerations across their face and chest from the broken windshield glass flying in their face. After being discharged from the ICU, our individual spends another six months in the hospital and various rehabilitation facilities. Their medical bills top the $300,000.00 mark.
Our individual's bruises and fractures heal and the plastic surgeon tells them that the scars will one day fade "a little." What will not heal, however, is the damage to their spinal column. Our individual will never walk again. Our individual files suit against Negligent Nancy to recover for their medical bills and harms and losses.
Our individual and Negligent Nancy live in the State of Injustice. Injustice places a cap on compensatory damages of $100,000.00 over the medical bills. This is what the jury awards our individual, the full medical bills and the full amount they are allowed to award by law for pain and suffering.
You may say, "So what? No amount of money will ever make our individual walk again and I'd be pretty content with a $100,000.00 in the bank." You would be correct. You may also say, "I think that's more than fair." On this point, you would be incorrect.
Money will never allow our individual to walk again, but it can help them make up for what they have lost. It can help them buy a motorized wheel chair so they have easier and greater mobility. It can help them remodel their home so that it can be handicapped accessible; replacing the bath tub, toilet, installing a lift for the stairs, and installing a ramp, just among a few of the necessary renovations. It can help them buy a handicapable vehicle so they can drive and live independently. It can help ease the emotional pain that will come with never being whole again. With the social stigma and pity from strangers that they will experience for the rest of their lives. The hurt that will come when small children stare, cry out of fear, or run away from them. The hurt that will occur when their friends and family walk the other direction when they roll down the street because they're too afraid that our individual will ask them for yet more help. The hurt that will occur when their spouse leaves them because the new stress and life adjustments are just too much to bear.
You may be still asking the questions from above the last paragraph, but I hope you have the curiosity to ask another: "Who is 'our individual?'" They're your mother, father, brother, sister, son, and daughter. They're your best friend. They're your neighbor. They're your favorite coworker. They're you.
Is $100,000.00 still enough when you sit in Our Individual's wheelchair? The world is full of Negligent Nancys, and it truly could happen to you and your loved ones.
It's easy to throw arbitrary proposals out into the public forum when we don't have to live in the shoes of the serious injury victim. It's even easier when we allow ourselves to forget that what these cases are truly about is a fellow human being who has been affected for the rest of their time on this earth. It's easy to play Monday Morning Quarterback.
The jury is the cornerstone of our judicial system. Those 12 jurors are people selected from the community at random who hear the testimony, examine the evidence, and are instructed on the law by the judge. They are the 12 people who deliberate, debate, and argue all the facts of the case. They are the ones in the best position to think justice through before speaking their verdict. Let's think that through and stop playing Monday Morning Quarterback.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. Nothing in this post is intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author's wife is not fat. Not even a little. The author, however, has horrible dietary and exercise habits so he is not sure the same can be said of him. The author is not aware of any actual proposed legislation impleting a damages cap in North Carolina, with the exception of the cap on punitive damages currently in effect. $100,000.00 is an arbitrary amount tossed out by the author. The author may have stepped on the soapbox a little during this post. You have a right to disagree with him. The author's wife has pointed out that this post is a little more serious than the author's normal witty banter. That can occasionally happen, as pointed out by the author's dear college friend Katelyn who once compared the author to Will Ferrell in this scene from Old School:
If this comparison concerns you, you should know that the author is deeply professional in his career and role as a lawyer. However, the author does routinely remind people that life is just too short to take too serioulsy outside of the workplace.
I once had a client who testified, "I don't remember" in a deposition. The answer to the follow up question was, "I don't know." These are not inappropriate responses in a deposition. However, they are perplexing responses when the two questions being asked are, "How old are you?" and "What is your birth date?" The client was nervous, and unfortunately he didn't think his answers through. And again, I really can't make this stuff up.
Currently, a battle is being waged in the North Carolina General Assembly. Citizens, special interest groups, and many lawyers are fighting to replace North Carolina's doctrine of contributory negligence with the doctrine of comparative negligence. North Carolina is one of only four jurisdictions in the nation that still has this antiquated and harsh law. It essentially holds that if an individual is even slightly (as little as one-percent) at fault for their injuries then they may recover nothing as a matter of law. The vast majority of the country reduces the award by the amount of the injured individual's negligence assuming that contribution is not more than fifty percent. The insurance industry is strongly opposed to this fairer and more just law.
Across the State there have been many letters to the editor published concerning contributory v. comparative negligence. The op-ed pieces have been interesting, and the responses even more so. What I find interesting as well are the collateral matters that are being mentioned in these op-eds and editorial comments. In the Beaufort Observer's May 18, 2010 piece on the subject, the author closes his examination of the issue with a suggestion that we should "rein in the John Edwards awards to lawyers, both in personal injury and in medical malpractice."
This is nothing I haven't heard before. Citizens routinely bemoan the much publicized "excessive" personal injury awards given to individuals in courts across the country (of course, you rarely hear about the stories where laws like contributory negligence fail our citizens, which you can read about by clicking here). Caps on awards in personal injury and medical malpractice claims are routinely brought up in the Tort Reform debates that have taken place across this country for many years now, and a lot of individuals seem to support them.
I have to wonder, however, whether the people who advocate for caps on compensatory awards really think their statements through before making them. So, let's put our thinking caps on and explore a hypothetical:
An individual is driving down a two lane highway. A car approaches from the opposite direction, being driven by a person named Negligent Nancy. Nancy is driving above the speed limit and is talking on her phone. She drops her phone due to her greasy fingers from the fries she's eating on the go as well, and reaches over into the adjacent seat to retrieve it. In the process of doing so she crosses the center line and collides head-on into our individual. The cars mangle and tangle, and both drivers have to be pried out and airlifted to the local hospital.
Our individual spends over two weeks in the ICU suffering from shattered legs, a shattered pelvis, broken ribs, and various torn muscles and ligaments throughout their body. They have deep lacerations across their face and chest from the broken windshield glass flying in their face. After being discharged from the ICU, our individual spends another six months in the hospital and various rehabilitation facilities. Their medical bills top the $300,000.00 mark.
Our individual's bruises and fractures heal and the plastic surgeon tells them that the scars will one day fade "a little." What will not heal, however, is the damage to their spinal column. Our individual will never walk again. Our individual files suit against Negligent Nancy to recover for their medical bills and harms and losses.
Our individual and Negligent Nancy live in the State of Injustice. Injustice places a cap on compensatory damages of $100,000.00 over the medical bills. This is what the jury awards our individual, the full medical bills and the full amount they are allowed to award by law for pain and suffering.
You may say, "So what? No amount of money will ever make our individual walk again and I'd be pretty content with a $100,000.00 in the bank." You would be correct. You may also say, "I think that's more than fair." On this point, you would be incorrect.
Money will never allow our individual to walk again, but it can help them make up for what they have lost. It can help them buy a motorized wheel chair so they have easier and greater mobility. It can help them remodel their home so that it can be handicapped accessible; replacing the bath tub, toilet, installing a lift for the stairs, and installing a ramp, just among a few of the necessary renovations. It can help them buy a handicapable vehicle so they can drive and live independently. It can help ease the emotional pain that will come with never being whole again. With the social stigma and pity from strangers that they will experience for the rest of their lives. The hurt that will come when small children stare, cry out of fear, or run away from them. The hurt that will occur when their friends and family walk the other direction when they roll down the street because they're too afraid that our individual will ask them for yet more help. The hurt that will occur when their spouse leaves them because the new stress and life adjustments are just too much to bear.
You may be still asking the questions from above the last paragraph, but I hope you have the curiosity to ask another: "Who is 'our individual?'" They're your mother, father, brother, sister, son, and daughter. They're your best friend. They're your neighbor. They're your favorite coworker. They're you.
Is $100,000.00 still enough when you sit in Our Individual's wheelchair? The world is full of Negligent Nancys, and it truly could happen to you and your loved ones.
It's easy to throw arbitrary proposals out into the public forum when we don't have to live in the shoes of the serious injury victim. It's even easier when we allow ourselves to forget that what these cases are truly about is a fellow human being who has been affected for the rest of their time on this earth. It's easy to play Monday Morning Quarterback.
The jury is the cornerstone of our judicial system. Those 12 jurors are people selected from the community at random who hear the testimony, examine the evidence, and are instructed on the law by the judge. They are the 12 people who deliberate, debate, and argue all the facts of the case. They are the ones in the best position to think justice through before speaking their verdict. Let's think that through and stop playing Monday Morning Quarterback.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. Nothing in this post is intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author's wife is not fat. Not even a little. The author, however, has horrible dietary and exercise habits so he is not sure the same can be said of him. The author is not aware of any actual proposed legislation impleting a damages cap in North Carolina, with the exception of the cap on punitive damages currently in effect. $100,000.00 is an arbitrary amount tossed out by the author. The author may have stepped on the soapbox a little during this post. You have a right to disagree with him. The author's wife has pointed out that this post is a little more serious than the author's normal witty banter. That can occasionally happen, as pointed out by the author's dear college friend Katelyn who once compared the author to Will Ferrell in this scene from Old School:
If this comparison concerns you, you should know that the author is deeply professional in his career and role as a lawyer. However, the author does routinely remind people that life is just too short to take too serioulsy outside of the workplace.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Judging Books by Their Covers
They say you shouldn't judge a book by its cover. I feel confident in saying that "they" are authors who were paired by their publishers with really crappy cover jacket artists. We all judge one another. Some people are even lucky enough to make obscene amounts of money doing so. It's why a pair of Jehovah's witnesses asked me, "Are your parents home?" when they knocked on my door about a month or so ago. They judged by my youthful appearance that I was not old enough to own my house.
The courtroom is a place for judging, and I'm not talking about the man or woman in the unflattering robe. The jurors are the true judges in the courtroom. Fair or not, people judge one another by their appearance and their demeanor in addition to their substance. The first impression of someone is mightily important. Don't believe me? Google "Importance of First Impressions" and scan through the over 1.1 million websites devoted to helping you make a good one.
My most memorable first impression in the courtroom comes from before I was even a lawyer. I was a high school student back home in New Bern job shadowing with a local district attorney when a pro se defendant's case was called. The man began walking up to the table dressed in Timberland's, baggy dark blue jeans, and a black Bob Marley t-shirt. Completing his ensemble was a rather large gold chain necklace, attached to which was a rather large gold marijuana leaf (I really can't make this stuff up, I promise). What brought the man to court in the first place? Yep, you guessed it, a charge for possession of a controlled substance. I think everybody in the courtroom that day can sum up our first impression of this man in one word: Guilty.
In every trial preparation session, I always make a point to ask, "what do you plan on wearing?" Sometimes no further conversation on the topic is needed, sometimes I feel I need to call Stacy and Clinton. For the later situations, the trick is to get the client to dress appropriately, but also in a way that fits their personality. I don't want a landscaper to dress like a corporate executive; he'll be uncomfortable and his confidence will be gone. At the same time, I don't want him to dress in a manner that creates false impressions with the jury or shows a disrespect for the seriousness of the courtroom.
If you're facing courtroom testimony anytime soon, how should you dress? The answer is deceptively easy. You should dress comfortably, unpretentiously, and nicely. No matter what your income level or background, you have something in your closet or can find something fairly cheap at your local Wal-mart or Target that fits that description. There is no need for you to dress as if you're going to a State dinner at the White House. You need not rush off to Brooks Brothers and charge a brand new and quite frankly overly expensive suit just for the occasion. This is not a fashion show.
My wife is a big fan of accessories. Her favorite accessories are shoes. Lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and a lot more shoes. Expensive shoes. I'm actually quite offended Mr. Cole Haan does not send me a Christmas card each year. She also likes designer handbags and jewelry as well. My experience in my fairly short life has been that most women, and even some men, like such things as well. These things are fine in your normal life, but leave them at home if you're a Plaintiff in the courtroom. Sometimes a client will look at me quizzically when I bestow this advice upon them. In turn, I simply ask them what sense at all it makes to walk into a courtroom and ask 12 strangers for money when you look like you already have a million dollars. Trade that Rolex for a Timex.
First impressions do not end with your appearance. I normally know it's time to take a day off or go on vacation when JoDee Messina's song "My Give A Damn's Busted" gets stuck in my head. If yours is busted right before trial, then you better fix it. At the very minimum act like you still care. I've had clients fall asleep and/or just plain look miserable, frustrated, and fed up in the courtroom or an arbitration hearing. The results are usually disasterous for the case. If the jury doesn't think you care about your own case, then why should they care? If they don't think you're a decent person, then why should they champion your cause in the jury room?
First impressions are important in life and we all want to make good ones. In your negligence case, the most critical first impression you can make is with the jury who will be judging you from the moment they sit in that box.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author, sensing protest from his wife, would like to immediately state that his beautiful wife is not materialistic and buys most of her fancy things on sale. Of course, "sale" can have a rather loose meaning at Saks. To be fair, the author will state that he owns more Cole Haan shoes than his wife. That makes her mad, but the author's feet happily comfortable. The author refuses to admit that he watches anything called "What Not to Wear" and only knows of Stacy and Clinton because of his wife's obsession with TLC. If credible evidence can be produced showing that he does watch such a show regularly, the author maintains that he does not enjoy it.
Author's Note: Sorry for the long absence, Faithful Readers. My writing has necessarily had to focus on opening and closing statements recently.
The courtroom is a place for judging, and I'm not talking about the man or woman in the unflattering robe. The jurors are the true judges in the courtroom. Fair or not, people judge one another by their appearance and their demeanor in addition to their substance. The first impression of someone is mightily important. Don't believe me? Google "Importance of First Impressions" and scan through the over 1.1 million websites devoted to helping you make a good one.
My most memorable first impression in the courtroom comes from before I was even a lawyer. I was a high school student back home in New Bern job shadowing with a local district attorney when a pro se defendant's case was called. The man began walking up to the table dressed in Timberland's, baggy dark blue jeans, and a black Bob Marley t-shirt. Completing his ensemble was a rather large gold chain necklace, attached to which was a rather large gold marijuana leaf (I really can't make this stuff up, I promise). What brought the man to court in the first place? Yep, you guessed it, a charge for possession of a controlled substance. I think everybody in the courtroom that day can sum up our first impression of this man in one word: Guilty.
In every trial preparation session, I always make a point to ask, "what do you plan on wearing?" Sometimes no further conversation on the topic is needed, sometimes I feel I need to call Stacy and Clinton. For the later situations, the trick is to get the client to dress appropriately, but also in a way that fits their personality. I don't want a landscaper to dress like a corporate executive; he'll be uncomfortable and his confidence will be gone. At the same time, I don't want him to dress in a manner that creates false impressions with the jury or shows a disrespect for the seriousness of the courtroom.
If you're facing courtroom testimony anytime soon, how should you dress? The answer is deceptively easy. You should dress comfortably, unpretentiously, and nicely. No matter what your income level or background, you have something in your closet or can find something fairly cheap at your local Wal-mart or Target that fits that description. There is no need for you to dress as if you're going to a State dinner at the White House. You need not rush off to Brooks Brothers and charge a brand new and quite frankly overly expensive suit just for the occasion. This is not a fashion show.
My wife is a big fan of accessories. Her favorite accessories are shoes. Lots, and lots, and lots, and lots, and a lot more shoes. Expensive shoes. I'm actually quite offended Mr. Cole Haan does not send me a Christmas card each year. She also likes designer handbags and jewelry as well. My experience in my fairly short life has been that most women, and even some men, like such things as well. These things are fine in your normal life, but leave them at home if you're a Plaintiff in the courtroom. Sometimes a client will look at me quizzically when I bestow this advice upon them. In turn, I simply ask them what sense at all it makes to walk into a courtroom and ask 12 strangers for money when you look like you already have a million dollars. Trade that Rolex for a Timex.
First impressions do not end with your appearance. I normally know it's time to take a day off or go on vacation when JoDee Messina's song "My Give A Damn's Busted" gets stuck in my head. If yours is busted right before trial, then you better fix it. At the very minimum act like you still care. I've had clients fall asleep and/or just plain look miserable, frustrated, and fed up in the courtroom or an arbitration hearing. The results are usually disasterous for the case. If the jury doesn't think you care about your own case, then why should they care? If they don't think you're a decent person, then why should they champion your cause in the jury room?
First impressions are important in life and we all want to make good ones. In your negligence case, the most critical first impression you can make is with the jury who will be judging you from the moment they sit in that box.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author, sensing protest from his wife, would like to immediately state that his beautiful wife is not materialistic and buys most of her fancy things on sale. Of course, "sale" can have a rather loose meaning at Saks. To be fair, the author will state that he owns more Cole Haan shoes than his wife. That makes her mad, but the author's feet happily comfortable. The author refuses to admit that he watches anything called "What Not to Wear" and only knows of Stacy and Clinton because of his wife's obsession with TLC. If credible evidence can be produced showing that he does watch such a show regularly, the author maintains that he does not enjoy it.
Author's Note: Sorry for the long absence, Faithful Readers. My writing has necessarily had to focus on opening and closing statements recently.
Monday, April 26, 2010
For Better and For Worse
Sometimes, I scream like a little girl. I do this most frequently while riding in the passenger seat of my wife's car. When she's driving. There have been occasions when I am sitting in the passenger seat, white-knuckled and grasping the OSH ("Oh, shoot!" handle) while emitting a high-pitch scream that would make Dakota Fanning jealous. Most of these occasions involve us traveling through an intersection while the light is red for our direction of travel. Other occasions involve when my beautiful, patient, and forgiving wife gets frustrated in a parking lot and flies down the lane at 100 m.p.h. (Clearly exaggerating here, of course. Note the emphasis on forgiving, honey!). So, if you've ever heard a faint screaming similar to what you hear next to a roller coaster at the amusement park, we were likely somewhere nearby. It's a small world, after all.
It has come to my attention I may not be the only person who is sometimes afraid of their spouse's driving habits. Occasionally, individuals will ask, "Can I sue my spouse for an auto accident?" The answer is yes. North Carolina law allows a husband and wife to maintain claims against each other as if they were two unmarried individuals. So, if you are injured riding in your wife's car when she causes an accident, you can sue her to recover for your harms and losses just as you could any other individual. Items that you can recover for include (but may not be limited to) medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering.
Of course, these cases present unique issues from a litigation perspective. If the claim does not settle with the insurance company out of court, then litigation may be the only option in an attempt to recover. Then, among a variety of other issues, it will be your job and your lawyer's job to try to explain to a jury why you are suing your spouse. With the prohibition against mentioning insurance at trial in North Carolina, this could require considerable flexing of your creative muscles in certain circumstances.
Many people might ask, "Why would you want to sue your spouse for an auto accident?" Well, assume that the husband and wife do not have any health insurance. Also assume that there is no medical payments coverage on the auto policy. In situations like these, the couple could be faced with paying medical bills totaling $5,000.00 or more depending on the severity of the auto accident and injuries that the individual sustained. For most American families, this is a sizable chunk of change. In my experience, this couple likely will find that nobody is Neighborly, nobody is On Their Side, and they are not In Good Hands. The couple may want to file a claim under their auto insurance policy in an attempt to help alleviate the financial burden those bills place on the household. This ultimately may lead to litigation.
Married couples take a vow to stand by each other "for better or for worse." Hopefully, the years of marriage are happy ones and there are more "better" times than "worse" times. However, if you should find that an auto accident has caused one of those darker times in your marriage, then consider consulting with an experienced attorney.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This article is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author is happily married. He hopes to remain that way. The author has considered adding this blog to the "Restricted Sites" on his wife's Internet browser, but then realized that would bring his readership down to 2 (mom & boss being the 2). The author is currently shopping online to mitigate this posting with his wife. The author loves his wife. The author's wife is the coolest, most patient, most intelligent, most forgiving, most beautiful, most awesome, etc., etc., etc. person that he has ever known and arguably that has ever existed on this planet in the history of the universe. For the record, the author's wife has never been in an at-fault accident. Her driving record is better than the author's. The author refuses to elaborate on his driving record and asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege.
It has come to my attention I may not be the only person who is sometimes afraid of their spouse's driving habits. Occasionally, individuals will ask, "Can I sue my spouse for an auto accident?" The answer is yes. North Carolina law allows a husband and wife to maintain claims against each other as if they were two unmarried individuals. So, if you are injured riding in your wife's car when she causes an accident, you can sue her to recover for your harms and losses just as you could any other individual. Items that you can recover for include (but may not be limited to) medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering.
Of course, these cases present unique issues from a litigation perspective. If the claim does not settle with the insurance company out of court, then litigation may be the only option in an attempt to recover. Then, among a variety of other issues, it will be your job and your lawyer's job to try to explain to a jury why you are suing your spouse. With the prohibition against mentioning insurance at trial in North Carolina, this could require considerable flexing of your creative muscles in certain circumstances.
Many people might ask, "Why would you want to sue your spouse for an auto accident?" Well, assume that the husband and wife do not have any health insurance. Also assume that there is no medical payments coverage on the auto policy. In situations like these, the couple could be faced with paying medical bills totaling $5,000.00 or more depending on the severity of the auto accident and injuries that the individual sustained. For most American families, this is a sizable chunk of change. In my experience, this couple likely will find that nobody is Neighborly, nobody is On Their Side, and they are not In Good Hands. The couple may want to file a claim under their auto insurance policy in an attempt to help alleviate the financial burden those bills place on the household. This ultimately may lead to litigation.
Married couples take a vow to stand by each other "for better or for worse." Hopefully, the years of marriage are happy ones and there are more "better" times than "worse" times. However, if you should find that an auto accident has caused one of those darker times in your marriage, then consider consulting with an experienced attorney.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This article is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author is happily married. He hopes to remain that way. The author has considered adding this blog to the "Restricted Sites" on his wife's Internet browser, but then realized that would bring his readership down to 2 (mom & boss being the 2). The author is currently shopping online to mitigate this posting with his wife. The author loves his wife. The author's wife is the coolest, most patient, most intelligent, most forgiving, most beautiful, most awesome, etc., etc., etc. person that he has ever known and arguably that has ever existed on this planet in the history of the universe. For the record, the author's wife has never been in an at-fault accident. Her driving record is better than the author's. The author refuses to elaborate on his driving record and asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
On the Road Again...
I have done a lot of traveling over the past few weeks for both professional and personal reasons (one of the reasons for the conspicuous lack of postings). I continue to be dismayed by what I see during my travels, as it appears that negligent driving abounds anywhere I go. As I sit now in the safety of my home office and ponder the cornucopia of negligent acts I have witnessed over the past few weeks, I think negligent drivers can be categorized into four main areas:
1. The Bar Raiser: This is the individual who appears to have their phone permanently affixed to their head. They talk incessantly and pay more attention to the conversation than the road. They make the phone companies regret the "Unlimited Plan."
2. The Librarian: This is the individual who likes to read anything while driving except for traffic signs. The most common reading material is the text message, Tweet, Facebook update, and e-mail. However, some "old school" members of this group really enjoy their newspapers and are determined not to let a silly thing like a green light prevent them from finishing George Will's latest column. Some of the most dedicated of this group even dare to read full books while stopped at intersections. Once in a New Moon (pun intended), they may actually pay attention.
3. The Space Cadet: This is the individual who for whatever reason ponders many questions while driving and focuses on anything but the road. Their thought process may include: Who am I? Where am I? What is the meaning of life? Why are bunnies fluffy? That green light is pretty. I will sit here and admire its prettiness. Why is that man's car behind me making loud noises? Doesn't he see the green is pretty?
4. The Taser: This is the individual who does something so stupid, so careless, and so utterly befuddling that were you a patrol officer you would pull them over and summarily tase them in the face just for having the audacity to get behind the wheel.
Some of you may ask why these drivers upset me so. After all, aren't I in the business of negligence as a personal injury lawyer? To some extent, that's true. But, negligence upsets me because I'm on the road with these people. My wife is on the road with these people. My family and friends are on the road with these people. You are on the road with these people. Eventually, the odds are one of us will be a victim of this negligence, which could lead to injury or worse.
I was reading the December 2009 issue of Men's Health the other day (just slightly behind in my subscription reading) and in it was a great article by Oliver Broudy entitled "Dead Man Driving." The beginning of the article poses the following question:
"Car crashes happen to other guys, right? Maybe they don't have your quick reaction time or uncanny ability to multitask behind the wheel. Or maybe they're simply lesser drivers."
This question is such a great way to start that article (which detailed the causes and effects of a crash that left a wife widowed) because I believe its how many of us think when we're behind the wheel. I know I certainly do; when I might occasionally glance at my iPhone while flying down the interstate. I know full well that's how the four drivers described above think. It's only natural for us to be confident in our abilities with a task that is so routine in our lives.
But, consider the following statistics that the article outlined:
2: Percentage of people who are able to drive safely while multitasking. (study by the University of Utah)
78: Percentage of crashes caused by driver distractions. (study by Virginia Tech Transportation Institute)
33: Percentage of traffic fatalities that are related to speeding. (study by NHTSA)
271: In feet, the stopping distance of the average car traveling at 60 mph. That's almost the length of a football field. (Edmunds.com)
23x: Increase in crash risk if you text while driving. (study by Virginia Tech Transportation Institute)
3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Friday: Time of day and day of the week when most crashes occur (study by the NHTSA).
I find these statistics to be somewhat alarming. I hope you do as well. Negligent driving can create far-reaching and serious consequences for both the negligent driver and the victim. Each of the cases that have come across my desk can attest to that.
In my experience, should you find yourself the victim of The Bar Raiser, The Librarian, The Space Cadet, or The Taser, you'll find it to be a lonely place. Few will be Neighborly, few will Do the Responsible Thing, few will be On Your Side, and you likely will not be In Good Hands. I hope you never find yourself in that position, Faithful Reader; but, should you do please know that we're here to help.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This article is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any specific individual. The author does not condone, sanction, advocate, or support the unauthorized use of violence. He will occasionally enjoy a lively game of Call of Duty, but that is fantasy. Tasers are dangerous weapons and should only be used by those with proper training. The author's description of "The Taser" is a hyperbolic description used to illustrate a point and perhaps elicit a chuckle in its unreasonableness. For those of you would would agree to such a statement in seriousness, the author will state criminal and civil liability could potentially result from such conduct. Consulting with an experienced attorney may be beneficial should you have questions regarding this. Many people do not understand self-defense laws, and the author may one day attempt to explain them on this blog. In the meantime, in the words of a University of Florida scholar, "Don't Tase me, bro'!"
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Hail Cesar!
I think my two year old is absolutely adorable. Each morning, we share breakfast and a cup of coffee together. He has his own special breakfast, but always stares longingly at mine. After breakfast, we high-five each other and I go about my day and he goes about his. At night, we usually curl up together on the couch and he eventually falls asleep with his head in my lap.
But, while he is adorable, he is also a handful and quite frankly just a plain old jerk sometimes. He makes other peoples' two year olds cry and run away. He is loud and unruly, and he makes other people scream with fright and run for the hills as if he were one of the Children of the Corn. So, to control his aberrant behavior my wife and I decided to enroll him in a basic manners class before he caused so much trouble he got us sued. Imagine our dismay when the owner of said class emailed me one day and said that our particular two year old was too much of a handful for the basic manners class. He wasn't welcome there and instead would have to go to a "special" class.
At this point, I think it's probably important to mention that my two year old isn't what you might think him to be. Did you know that he's actually a dog? A German Shepard to be exact. So, my wife, myself, and Brody went through four weeks of intensive Feisty Fido classes and now my two year old is (slightly) less feisty. My wife and I were also comforted to know that Brody truly is not the worst behaved dog in the City of Raleigh.
Many people, especially those with puppies like mine, often wonder if they will be on the hook for someone's medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering should their feisty Fido get a little too feisty with somebody's hand or leg or other appendage. The answer to those queries is very lawyerly: it depends. There are a wide variety of specific state and local laws that govern domestic animals such as dogs.
Generally, North Carolina as a whole follows the same rule of law for domestic animals that most other jurisdictions follow. That is, the owner of a domestic animal (dog) will be liable for injuries caused by that animal if the owner knew or should know of the animal's vicious propensities (i.e., it has bitten someone before and/or snarls at anybody who comes within a few feet of it). In addition, North Carolina provides by statute that the owner of a dog will be strictly liable (no fault needed) for injuries or property damage inflicted by a "dangerous dog." The term dangerous dog has a very specific meaning set out in the statute, which you can find here.
Most dogs bark and act "aggressive" because they are afraid and/or they're just overly excited. And certain breeds can certainly be more intimidating than others. For example, while I see a cute and cuddly puppy who wants to play, you may see a jumping, barking, and lunging German Shepard. The same type of dog that police use to catch and bite criminals. Owners of dogs can avoid potential legal issues by exercising reasonable care, common sense and courtesy, and taking the necessary steps to properly train their dog. This, we have discovered, takes quite a bit of patience and practice.
But, there are some dogs that are owned by people who are not as responsible as my wife and I. Their dogs do not resemble anything that Cesar Millan has trained. More likely, their dog resembles something Michael Vick has trained. This is very unfortunate for the animal and it's unfortunately a large problem in certain areas. If you have found yourself confronted and injured by a dog like this, then consider consulting with an experienced attorney to protect your legal rights.
Disclaimer: The author's views are his own. This blog post is not intended to convey specific legal advice upon anyone. The author's dog, Brody, has never attacked anyone. It is a track record the author is proud of. The author's dog loves to watch old Rin Tin Tin movies and loves police officers. Therefore, the author cannot guarantee that this trend will continue should you try to break into the author's humble abode. The author thinks Cesar Millan is a god-like person who deserves some type of Nobel award. Cesar Millan, the author believes, does not live in North Carolina, but the author used a company that is equally as good and recommends it to anybody. The author has attached pictures of his dog to show off said dog as he has no actual children. The author understands that displaying pictures to anybody who will look is the appropriate dorky parent thing to do.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Please, Watch Your Step
Spend a day fielding new callers in any personal injury law firm and you’ll quickly realize that there are many members of the general public that have yet to master the fine art of walking. They seem to have the most difficulty in grocery stores and retail giants like Wal-Mart.
Premise liability cases, the most common of which are the “slip and falls,” can present unique challenges and are often difficult to prosecute. Generally, owners of property are required to exercise reasonable care toward all lawful visitors. This includes, but is not necessarily limited to, keeping the property reasonably safe for the benefit of the visitor. To do this, the property owner should warn the visitor of non-obvious and dangerous conditions known to the landowner, and to make reasonable inspections to discover dangerous conditions and to thereafter make them safe. The duty to make safe dangerous conditions on the property is usually satisfied if a reasonable warning has been given.
This does not mean, however, that negligence on the part of the landowner is automatic if you happen to fall down on their property because of some defect or unsafe condition and no warning has been given. There is no duty to warn if the dangerous condition is so obvious that the visitor should reasonably have been aware of it (i.e., a gaping pothole in the parking lot, red Kool-Aid spilled all over the white aisle floor). All of us have a responsibility to see what ought to be seen. In essence, to watch where we're going. For example, if you’re walking around in the garden department of a store and you see a gigantic puddle of water in the floor, the store is more than likely not liable if you happen to voluntarily walk through the puddle and slip in the water.
Contributory negligence is almost always an issue in the standard slip and fall case. The nagging question in the back of jurors' minds is often how did the person not see that or where were they looking? A claimant seeking to recover in the standard premise liability case will often have to have a legitimate and logical reason for failing to see the condition that caused them to fall and be injured. If inattentiveness, a lack of due care, or running or fooling around are involved then the chances of recovery are likely very small.
What is reasonable in the premise liability case ultimately rests with the jury, as is the case with all negligence cases. For example, it is likely not going to be considered reasonable to expect the landowner to clean up all spills in the store immediately upon occurrence. It may, however, be reasonable to expect the landowner to have found and cleaned the spill after being on the floor for an extended period or time, or at the very least to place warning signs for the protection of visitors.
Slip and falls only comprise a portion of the wide variety of cases that fall into the Premise Liability category. Regardless of their type, premise liability cases can require quite a bit of investigation to successfully prosecute, and obtaining the evidence needed can sometimes be tricky. If you have had an incident on someone's property, then consider consulting with an experienced attorney to ensure that your rights are properly protected.
Premise liability cases, the most common of which are the “slip and falls,” can present unique challenges and are often difficult to prosecute. Generally, owners of property are required to exercise reasonable care toward all lawful visitors. This includes, but is not necessarily limited to, keeping the property reasonably safe for the benefit of the visitor. To do this, the property owner should warn the visitor of non-obvious and dangerous conditions known to the landowner, and to make reasonable inspections to discover dangerous conditions and to thereafter make them safe. The duty to make safe dangerous conditions on the property is usually satisfied if a reasonable warning has been given.
This does not mean, however, that negligence on the part of the landowner is automatic if you happen to fall down on their property because of some defect or unsafe condition and no warning has been given. There is no duty to warn if the dangerous condition is so obvious that the visitor should reasonably have been aware of it (i.e., a gaping pothole in the parking lot, red Kool-Aid spilled all over the white aisle floor). All of us have a responsibility to see what ought to be seen. In essence, to watch where we're going. For example, if you’re walking around in the garden department of a store and you see a gigantic puddle of water in the floor, the store is more than likely not liable if you happen to voluntarily walk through the puddle and slip in the water.
Contributory negligence is almost always an issue in the standard slip and fall case. The nagging question in the back of jurors' minds is often how did the person not see that or where were they looking? A claimant seeking to recover in the standard premise liability case will often have to have a legitimate and logical reason for failing to see the condition that caused them to fall and be injured. If inattentiveness, a lack of due care, or running or fooling around are involved then the chances of recovery are likely very small.
What is reasonable in the premise liability case ultimately rests with the jury, as is the case with all negligence cases. For example, it is likely not going to be considered reasonable to expect the landowner to clean up all spills in the store immediately upon occurrence. It may, however, be reasonable to expect the landowner to have found and cleaned the spill after being on the floor for an extended period or time, or at the very least to place warning signs for the protection of visitors.
Slip and falls only comprise a portion of the wide variety of cases that fall into the Premise Liability category. Regardless of their type, premise liability cases can require quite a bit of investigation to successfully prosecute, and obtaining the evidence needed can sometimes be tricky. If you have had an incident on someone's property, then consider consulting with an experienced attorney to ensure that your rights are properly protected.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Um...well...ah...
Very early in any attorney's legal career (let's say, oh, about 30 seconds after announcing one's intention to go to law school), friends, family, coworkers, long-lost relatives, hobos and anybody that can speak, write or otherwise communicate will seek to extract nuggets of legal advice and tips. These individuals the young attorney or attorney-to-be comes in contact with may or may not even been in the same jurisdiction (each State has its own laws). It's true that in law school we learn the basics (sometimes more) of just about every area of law out there. It is also true that the Bar exam tests of a wide variety of legal topics. However, not every lawyer out there can answer every legal question that arises.
While there are many, many lawyers out there classified as "general practitioners," and while anybody with a law degree could conceivably research and represent you for your particular problem, it is important and often wise to choose an attorney that focuses or even specializes in the particular field. It's kind of like with doctors: you wouldn't go see a podiatrist if you needed brain surgery performed. You may think you are asking me, a personal injury trial lawyer, "I want to leave this piece of land in my family when I die and provide for my great grandchildren as well. But, I Googled some stuff and heard about the Rules Against Perpetuities and wonder if you can tell me more about that and if it applies here?" In reality, what you are really asking me is, "Can you please refer me to an attorney that knows about this particular estate law issue since you haven't even thought about the Rule Against Perpetuities in several years?" I'll be happy to oblige your request.
When you are presented with some sort of legal issue, and we all are from time to time, make sure you find an attorney that can diligently, competently, and zealously represent you for the matter. It's also important that you find an attorney with the experience necessary to help you navigate the nuances of your particular case to ensure the best possible result for you.
While there are many, many lawyers out there classified as "general practitioners," and while anybody with a law degree could conceivably research and represent you for your particular problem, it is important and often wise to choose an attorney that focuses or even specializes in the particular field. It's kind of like with doctors: you wouldn't go see a podiatrist if you needed brain surgery performed. You may think you are asking me, a personal injury trial lawyer, "I want to leave this piece of land in my family when I die and provide for my great grandchildren as well. But, I Googled some stuff and heard about the Rules Against Perpetuities and wonder if you can tell me more about that and if it applies here?" In reality, what you are really asking me is, "Can you please refer me to an attorney that knows about this particular estate law issue since you haven't even thought about the Rule Against Perpetuities in several years?" I'll be happy to oblige your request.
When you are presented with some sort of legal issue, and we all are from time to time, make sure you find an attorney that can diligently, competently, and zealously represent you for the matter. It's also important that you find an attorney with the experience necessary to help you navigate the nuances of your particular case to ensure the best possible result for you.
Monday, March 29, 2010
From Red to Green
My mother repeatedly asks where these blog posts originate from. Always a "smarty-pants," I say that they start with an idea, followed quickly by answering the following question: Will this get me fired? Hence the conspicuous absence of postings over the last week. Last week I was on the road quite a bit (go ahead...it's okay to make your ambulance chasing jokes), and as you may have guessed from recent postings, I am not the world's most patient driver. Therefore, I decided that posting entries to this blog after hours of sitting in traffic would likely result in an unfortunate answer to the above-mentioned question due to the angst and inappropriate language that would likely spill over into said posting. This, I have decided, would not result in a smart career move.
Last Wednesday, I spent a considerable part of my late afternoon sitting still on Interstate 540 in Raleigh for who knows what reason. I presume negligence and curiosity was afoot. As a highly educated lawyer, I thought I would be smart and exit the city's largest parking lot onto Lumley Road and take an alternate route back to my home in North Raleigh. Apparently, every other driver on Interstate 540 that day was also a highly educated lawyer as much more sitting ensued after exiting the interstate. Between furious eye twitching and much hair pulling brought on by annoyance, I noticed all the driving habits that used to enrage me: tailgating; abrupt lane changes; inattentiveness (this means you text messaging mini van driver on Lumley Road who took forever to realize the light had finally turned green); and, the token jerk who weaves in and out of traffic just so he can beat us all to the next traffic light by a quarter of a second (Woohoo!!!! Watch out Jeff Gordon! We got ourselves a contender here!).
Before I became an attorney, experiences like these would result in my car horn wishing it was fighting Mike Tyson so it could take less abuse, and the tendons and ligaments in my middle fingers becoming the most developed muscles in my body. But over the years, my "road rage" has tempered and I have become more patient with the world's negligent drivers. And patience is what those other drivers need to learn as well.
Drivers in situations like the one last Wednesday should endeavor not to see red in rage that leads to impatience, but rather think about the green that negligent driving can cost them. Negligent driving can result in court costs, lawyer fees, repair costs, and insurance rate increases. Not to mention the fact that you can injure another person. If you have been the victim of somebody's negligent driving, then consider consulting with an experienced attorney to protect and defend your legal rights.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. Nothing in this post should be construed as providing legal advice to any specific individual. The author's wife has pointed out that the author from time to time may have been the token jerk, text messaging driver, tailgater, and/or the abrupt lane changer. The author would say, "Ditto," in response. The author further would point out that this is irrelevant and renews his objection to further inquiry into his driving habits in that the information sought is protected by his Fifth Amendment privilege and it is irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome, and a bunch of other legal junk that would preclude his having to provide specific details.
Last Wednesday, I spent a considerable part of my late afternoon sitting still on Interstate 540 in Raleigh for who knows what reason. I presume negligence and curiosity was afoot. As a highly educated lawyer, I thought I would be smart and exit the city's largest parking lot onto Lumley Road and take an alternate route back to my home in North Raleigh. Apparently, every other driver on Interstate 540 that day was also a highly educated lawyer as much more sitting ensued after exiting the interstate. Between furious eye twitching and much hair pulling brought on by annoyance, I noticed all the driving habits that used to enrage me: tailgating; abrupt lane changes; inattentiveness (this means you text messaging mini van driver on Lumley Road who took forever to realize the light had finally turned green); and, the token jerk who weaves in and out of traffic just so he can beat us all to the next traffic light by a quarter of a second (Woohoo!!!! Watch out Jeff Gordon! We got ourselves a contender here!).
Before I became an attorney, experiences like these would result in my car horn wishing it was fighting Mike Tyson so it could take less abuse, and the tendons and ligaments in my middle fingers becoming the most developed muscles in my body. But over the years, my "road rage" has tempered and I have become more patient with the world's negligent drivers. And patience is what those other drivers need to learn as well.
Drivers in situations like the one last Wednesday should endeavor not to see red in rage that leads to impatience, but rather think about the green that negligent driving can cost them. Negligent driving can result in court costs, lawyer fees, repair costs, and insurance rate increases. Not to mention the fact that you can injure another person. If you have been the victim of somebody's negligent driving, then consider consulting with an experienced attorney to protect and defend your legal rights.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. Nothing in this post should be construed as providing legal advice to any specific individual. The author's wife has pointed out that the author from time to time may have been the token jerk, text messaging driver, tailgater, and/or the abrupt lane changer. The author would say, "Ditto," in response. The author further would point out that this is irrelevant and renews his objection to further inquiry into his driving habits in that the information sought is protected by his Fifth Amendment privilege and it is irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome, and a bunch of other legal junk that would preclude his having to provide specific details.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
I Heart Lawyers
I don’t get to have a lot of Sally Field moments. That is, I don’t often get the opportunity to say, “You like me! You really like me!” As a trial lawyer, the opposite is true quite a bit. Do you know what a great way to ruin a party is? Answer “trial lawyer” to the question of what it is you do for a living. This is especially so if said party is one filled with doctors who work with your nurse wife, and who politely utter “oh," followed quickly by some half-serious joke about medical malpractice attorneys. Then walk away. Stat.
And we’ve all heard the jokes, most of which end up with the lawyer being dead:
How do you stop a lawyer from drowning? Shoot him before he hits the water.
What do you do if you run over a lawyer? Back over him to make sure.
Where can you find a good lawyer? In a cemetery.
Hear about the terrorist that hijacked a 747 full of lawyers? He threatened to release one every hour until his demands were met.
There are a lot of people out there who don't seem to like lawyers. I know this because jurors tell me they don't like lawyers and the lawsuits we file when I ask them about it in jury selection. But, I will submit to you that those beliefs are mostly unfounded. For the most part, lawyers are in the profession to help people and make a difference and not because of a desire for fame or fortune. This is especially so with trial lawyers, who often represent injured individuals or the accused.
Lawyers from my firm routinely volunteer their time to help the community. Professional lawyer associations like the North Carolina Bar Association and the North Carolina Advocates for Justice sponsor events where lawyers can donate their time to help the community as well.
Now the point of this post is not to whine about how people don't like my profession. I enjoy a lawyer joke as much as the next person and there are some lawyers who I also don't like. Rather, the point is that before you bash a trial lawyer for being a trial lawyer, think about all the good things we do as well. Few of us actually live up to those stereotypes.
And remember, you shouldn't tell lawyer jokes. Lawyers don't find them funny and other people don't think its a joke. :-)
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. Some cynical readers out there may point out that lawyers do make a relatively good living doing what they do despite wanting to "help people." They are entitled to this belief and the author will concede their point to some degree. It is true that the author could have helped people by joining the Peace Corps. However, this was unappealing to his wife. The author blames Coach, Tiffany & Co., Saks, and Target for his wife's disapproval.
Author's Note: This blog will transition from a daily blog to a kind-of-sort-of daily blog.
Correction: In his blog regarding the 2010 Census, entitled "Count, Barackula," the author stated that he "does not endorse nor is affiliated with any particular party, group, or candidate." The author's wife pointed out that the author is wrong, which she frequently does with great pleasure. The author thinks its her main hobby. Anywho, the author is a fan of the Facebook pages Elaine Marshall for U.S. Senate and Kerry Sutton for Durham County District Court Judge. The author is also an active member of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice, which is an organization that also engages in political activity from time to time. The author apologizes for any confusion. Oopsy.
And we’ve all heard the jokes, most of which end up with the lawyer being dead:
How do you stop a lawyer from drowning? Shoot him before he hits the water.
What do you do if you run over a lawyer? Back over him to make sure.
Where can you find a good lawyer? In a cemetery.
Hear about the terrorist that hijacked a 747 full of lawyers? He threatened to release one every hour until his demands were met.
There are a lot of people out there who don't seem to like lawyers. I know this because jurors tell me they don't like lawyers and the lawsuits we file when I ask them about it in jury selection. But, I will submit to you that those beliefs are mostly unfounded. For the most part, lawyers are in the profession to help people and make a difference and not because of a desire for fame or fortune. This is especially so with trial lawyers, who often represent injured individuals or the accused.
Lawyers from my firm routinely volunteer their time to help the community. Professional lawyer associations like the North Carolina Bar Association and the North Carolina Advocates for Justice sponsor events where lawyers can donate their time to help the community as well.
Now the point of this post is not to whine about how people don't like my profession. I enjoy a lawyer joke as much as the next person and there are some lawyers who I also don't like. Rather, the point is that before you bash a trial lawyer for being a trial lawyer, think about all the good things we do as well. Few of us actually live up to those stereotypes.
And remember, you shouldn't tell lawyer jokes. Lawyers don't find them funny and other people don't think its a joke. :-)
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. Some cynical readers out there may point out that lawyers do make a relatively good living doing what they do despite wanting to "help people." They are entitled to this belief and the author will concede their point to some degree. It is true that the author could have helped people by joining the Peace Corps. However, this was unappealing to his wife. The author blames Coach, Tiffany & Co., Saks, and Target for his wife's disapproval.
Author's Note: This blog will transition from a daily blog to a kind-of-sort-of daily blog.
Correction: In his blog regarding the 2010 Census, entitled "Count, Barackula," the author stated that he "does not endorse nor is affiliated with any particular party, group, or candidate." The author's wife pointed out that the author is wrong, which she frequently does with great pleasure. The author thinks its her main hobby. Anywho, the author is a fan of the Facebook pages Elaine Marshall for U.S. Senate and Kerry Sutton for Durham County District Court Judge. The author is also an active member of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice, which is an organization that also engages in political activity from time to time. The author apologizes for any confusion. Oopsy.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Count, Barackula
A week ago the government sent me a letter. “Uh-oh,” was my first thought. Fortunately, the letter was not from the IRS. It told me that this week they would be sending me a form to fill out. Well, thanks Uncle Sam, but why didn’t you just send me the form now and save a tree (and some taxpayer money)? This letter, along with the $15 billion (yes, BILLION) Census budget misled me about what to expect when I opened my Census form last night.
The Super Bowl ad directed by Christopher Guest and starring Ed Begley, Jr., the other commercials, the letters, the blogs, the news coverage, and all the rest of the hype led me to believe that the 2010 Census would be an onerous task; that I would need to disclose everything and anything about my household. When I got last week’s letter, I immediately began preparing for the Census by counting things they would allegedly want to know about my household. Let’s see: 2 people, 1 dog, 2 cats, 2 televisions, I’m a PC, she’s a Mac, 2 cars, Cottonelle, Coke, Crest, 57 dust bunnies under 1 couch, 62 under the other couch, have an Oreck, apparently need a Dyson, 3 gray hairs, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. I was certain that with this amount of effort and this much money poured into reminding me to answer the questions that Uncle Sam, the NSA, Big Brother, and Jack Bauer wanted to know about me and my household that the Census questionnaire would be epic. It would be a massive government survey that would drain the life blood out of me like a vampire as I spent hour after hour after hour answering it.
So imagine my surprise when I opened my Census form last night and it was only 16 questions long: four preliminary questions and six questions each for myself and my wife. They were benign questions: name, race, relationship, Hispanic origin, and some other basic demographic questions. I, a big privacy advocate, had no problem answering any of them except my phone number. $15 billion of taxpayer money was spent on what essentially amounts to ten questions. The population of the United States, according to the Census Bureau (of course) is approximately 300 million people. Therefore, President Obama owes me about another $50.00 back on my taxes this year.
All joking, cynicism, and government criticism aside, the Census is a vitally important function of the Government. It is so important it is mandated by the United States Constitution. As a lawyer, I am an officer of one of the branches of government (the judiciary) and often get asked questions that do not strictly deal with personal injury law. Sometimes, I can answer them: Yes, you are obligated under federal law to answer the Census form. The Census determines how congressional districts are apportioned, which makes a difference in who represents us in Congress and how over $400 billion in federal funds are wasted (um...I meant to say “allocated.” I apologize, Senator Stevens). It is an important task and you should do your civic duty and answer it. It doesn’t take long; I answered mine in less than five minutes. There is no need to try to get out of it like you would try to get out of jury duty (which you also shouldn’t do!).
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. You have a right to disagree with him. His wife frequently exercises this right. Now that the Bush Administration has ended, we all have the right to criticize the government free from the fear of prosecution and a trip to Guantanamo. The author does not endorse nor is affiliated with any particular party, group, or candidate. He is friends with Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and the like. He has great respect for all Members of Congress and other elected and appointed officials. He is, however, slightly afraid of Nancy Pelosi. The author would like you to know that the fact that John Edwards and many other disgraced politicians are also lawyers is just a coincidence.
The Super Bowl ad directed by Christopher Guest and starring Ed Begley, Jr., the other commercials, the letters, the blogs, the news coverage, and all the rest of the hype led me to believe that the 2010 Census would be an onerous task; that I would need to disclose everything and anything about my household. When I got last week’s letter, I immediately began preparing for the Census by counting things they would allegedly want to know about my household. Let’s see: 2 people, 1 dog, 2 cats, 2 televisions, I’m a PC, she’s a Mac, 2 cars, Cottonelle, Coke, Crest, 57 dust bunnies under 1 couch, 62 under the other couch, have an Oreck, apparently need a Dyson, 3 gray hairs, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. I was certain that with this amount of effort and this much money poured into reminding me to answer the questions that Uncle Sam, the NSA, Big Brother, and Jack Bauer wanted to know about me and my household that the Census questionnaire would be epic. It would be a massive government survey that would drain the life blood out of me like a vampire as I spent hour after hour after hour answering it.
So imagine my surprise when I opened my Census form last night and it was only 16 questions long: four preliminary questions and six questions each for myself and my wife. They were benign questions: name, race, relationship, Hispanic origin, and some other basic demographic questions. I, a big privacy advocate, had no problem answering any of them except my phone number. $15 billion of taxpayer money was spent on what essentially amounts to ten questions. The population of the United States, according to the Census Bureau (of course) is approximately 300 million people. Therefore, President Obama owes me about another $50.00 back on my taxes this year.
All joking, cynicism, and government criticism aside, the Census is a vitally important function of the Government. It is so important it is mandated by the United States Constitution. As a lawyer, I am an officer of one of the branches of government (the judiciary) and often get asked questions that do not strictly deal with personal injury law. Sometimes, I can answer them: Yes, you are obligated under federal law to answer the Census form. The Census determines how congressional districts are apportioned, which makes a difference in who represents us in Congress and how over $400 billion in federal funds are wasted (um...I meant to say “allocated.” I apologize, Senator Stevens). It is an important task and you should do your civic duty and answer it. It doesn’t take long; I answered mine in less than five minutes. There is no need to try to get out of it like you would try to get out of jury duty (which you also shouldn’t do!).
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. You have a right to disagree with him. His wife frequently exercises this right. Now that the Bush Administration has ended, we all have the right to criticize the government free from the fear of prosecution and a trip to Guantanamo. The author does not endorse nor is affiliated with any particular party, group, or candidate. He is friends with Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and the like. He has great respect for all Members of Congress and other elected and appointed officials. He is, however, slightly afraid of Nancy Pelosi. The author would like you to know that the fact that John Edwards and many other disgraced politicians are also lawyers is just a coincidence.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Put Some Lead in Your Foot
Outside of a monster truck rally or a Nascar race, there are few driving-related experiences that are louder than a drive with my father and I in the same car. If I am driving, the conversations (read: loud, unruly arguments) typically go something like this:
Dad: Slow down or you'll get a ticket.
Me: So what?
Dad: You're following too close. If you rear-end somebody it's automatically your fault.
Me: False.
Dad: I'm just trying to tell you something and give you some advice!
Me: Do you want to drive?!
If he's driving, the conversation normally goes something like this:
Me: You really need to go faster.
Cars whiz past in both the lanes on the left and right of our car on the Interstate.
Dad (to me gruffly): I'm fine.
Horns honk at us.
Dad (to horn honker): Fool.
Horns honk louder at us and middle fingers fly. My eye twitches incessantly in annoyance.
Dad (to finger flippers): Dumb a**es.
Me: You really need to speed up. At least go the speed limit.
Dad (to me): Do you want to drive?!
Safe driving is important. It's important to your driving history, your criminal record, and your insurance premiums. If you're an unsafe driver (such as a chronic speeder or a chronic tailgater) then it could cost you quite a bit of money in legal fees, attorney fees, and insurance rate increases.
To most people, safe driving begins with going the speed limit. Some very clever and literate people realize that the speed limit is just that, a limit. It's the maximum speed that you are allowed to go in a given area. As such, they often drive underneath the speed limit. This often occurs on Spring Forest Road in Raleigh at about, oh, say 7:45ish in the morning while I'm headed to work and causes me much angst.
What a lot of people do not realize, however, is that there is also a speed minimum in North Carolina. No person should drive their car at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic (this means you, Dad). Additionally, if there are signs posting a minimum speed, then you shall not drive below that just as you should not drive above the posted speed limit.
Speed is a big deal with driving. You are operating a piece of machinery weighing several tons at a high rate of speed. As a result, if you drive your vehicle in an unsafe manner, then you could potentially cause personal injury to yourself or others. So, you should always ensure that you are operating your vehicle at a speed that is reasonable and prudent for the circumstances. If you are unsure as to what that is, then use the flow of traffic and the speed limit as your guide.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any individual. As with all posts on this blog, parts of this entry were intended more for entertainment value than informative value. If one should have specific questions regarding the motor vehicle laws for their specific situation, then they should consult a qualified attorney. For the record, the author's father is a (fairly) good driver with a spotless driving record. The author asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege with regard to his driving habits and objects to further inquiry herein as it is irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome, and a bunch of other legal junk that would preclude his having to provide specific details. The author apologizes to weekday motorists on Spring Forest Road, including but not limited to his trusty assistant, Pete, who also commutes that way, and may have fallen victim to the author's road rage in the form of cussing, tailgating, horn honking, etc., often while the author was not properly caffienated.
Dad: Slow down or you'll get a ticket.
Me: So what?
Dad: You're following too close. If you rear-end somebody it's automatically your fault.
Me: False.
Dad: I'm just trying to tell you something and give you some advice!
Me: Do you want to drive?!
If he's driving, the conversation normally goes something like this:
Me: You really need to go faster.
Cars whiz past in both the lanes on the left and right of our car on the Interstate.
Dad (to me gruffly): I'm fine.
Horns honk at us.
Dad (to horn honker): Fool.
Horns honk louder at us and middle fingers fly. My eye twitches incessantly in annoyance.
Dad (to finger flippers): Dumb a**es.
Me: You really need to speed up. At least go the speed limit.
Dad (to me): Do you want to drive?!
Safe driving is important. It's important to your driving history, your criminal record, and your insurance premiums. If you're an unsafe driver (such as a chronic speeder or a chronic tailgater) then it could cost you quite a bit of money in legal fees, attorney fees, and insurance rate increases.
To most people, safe driving begins with going the speed limit. Some very clever and literate people realize that the speed limit is just that, a limit. It's the maximum speed that you are allowed to go in a given area. As such, they often drive underneath the speed limit. This often occurs on Spring Forest Road in Raleigh at about, oh, say 7:45ish in the morning while I'm headed to work and causes me much angst.
What a lot of people do not realize, however, is that there is also a speed minimum in North Carolina. No person should drive their car at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic (this means you, Dad). Additionally, if there are signs posting a minimum speed, then you shall not drive below that just as you should not drive above the posted speed limit.
Speed is a big deal with driving. You are operating a piece of machinery weighing several tons at a high rate of speed. As a result, if you drive your vehicle in an unsafe manner, then you could potentially cause personal injury to yourself or others. So, you should always ensure that you are operating your vehicle at a speed that is reasonable and prudent for the circumstances. If you are unsure as to what that is, then use the flow of traffic and the speed limit as your guide.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. This post is not intended to convey any specific legal advice upon any individual. As with all posts on this blog, parts of this entry were intended more for entertainment value than informative value. If one should have specific questions regarding the motor vehicle laws for their specific situation, then they should consult a qualified attorney. For the record, the author's father is a (fairly) good driver with a spotless driving record. The author asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege with regard to his driving habits and objects to further inquiry herein as it is irrelevant, overly broad, unduly burdensome, and a bunch of other legal junk that would preclude his having to provide specific details. The author apologizes to weekday motorists on Spring Forest Road, including but not limited to his trusty assistant, Pete, who also commutes that way, and may have fallen victim to the author's road rage in the form of cussing, tailgating, horn honking, etc., often while the author was not properly caffienated.
Friday, March 12, 2010
Dude Feels like a Lady
I feel like Lady Gaga today. This statement quite obviously deserves further explanation. No, I did not wear an outfit like this to work today (you are quite welcome, co-workers). What I mean to say is that I can relate to her new single, Telephone, where she sings: “Stop callin’, Stop callin’, I don’t wanna think anymore!” It’s been a long week Faithful Readers and I for one am more than ready for the weekend. It occurs to me that some of you may be having one of those so-called weeks as well (I know for a fact some of you in my office are).
Did you know that forty percent of workers nationally report their job is very or extremely stressful? Twenty-six percent report that they often or very often feel burned out or stressed out by their work. There are many, many different causes of job stress and it not only has a physical toll on our health, it also has a toll on our national economic health. Stress in the workplace can lead to headaches, appetite disturbance, sleep disturbance, low productivity, low morale, job dissatisfaction, an upset stomach, a short temper, and many other issues. We lawyers seem to be particularly stressed out, and studies show that we have a higher rate of suicide and substance abuse because of it. The State Bar actually requires us to take continuing legal education classes in substance abuse and mental health issues because of these statistics.
Depressed yet? Well, I’m sure there’s some very expensive pill your health insurance (if you’re even lucky enough to have it) won’t pay for to help you with that. The point of this post, however, is not to moan or boohoo about my life, your life, your neighbor’s life or your coworker’s life. It’s intended to do for you what the painting of Homer Simpson in my office does for me each day: to serve as a reminder not to take life too seriously (a chronic problem for us lawyers).
Unless you want to become a statistic, you need to find ways of coping with that stress. At work, maybe you take a few more breaks and get a collection of nifty stress balls. Update your Facebook status and surf the web for a few (short) minutes. Maybe you go into your file room and sob quietly to yourself. Whatever works for you. Outside of your work find physical and mental activities that give you a release. I mountain bike and write. I’ve also recently started taking karate classes and highly recommend that as a great workout and great stress reliever. One caveat, however: if you should start taking karate, please restrain yourself from using your new Chuck Norris skills on your bosses and co-workers (this means you, mother).
The weather is finally warmer Readers. Daylight savings time starts Sunday and the first day of Spring is March 20. Get out of your offices and homes this weekend and enjoy it. Bad weather on the horizon? Who cares…when’s the last time you pulled a Gene Kelly? Have fun. See a movie (not Avatar). Go shopping, or do whatever else makes you feel good and take some of that stress off of yourself. It’s Friday, after all.
Did you know that forty percent of workers nationally report their job is very or extremely stressful? Twenty-six percent report that they often or very often feel burned out or stressed out by their work. There are many, many different causes of job stress and it not only has a physical toll on our health, it also has a toll on our national economic health. Stress in the workplace can lead to headaches, appetite disturbance, sleep disturbance, low productivity, low morale, job dissatisfaction, an upset stomach, a short temper, and many other issues. We lawyers seem to be particularly stressed out, and studies show that we have a higher rate of suicide and substance abuse because of it. The State Bar actually requires us to take continuing legal education classes in substance abuse and mental health issues because of these statistics.
Depressed yet? Well, I’m sure there’s some very expensive pill your health insurance (if you’re even lucky enough to have it) won’t pay for to help you with that. The point of this post, however, is not to moan or boohoo about my life, your life, your neighbor’s life or your coworker’s life. It’s intended to do for you what the painting of Homer Simpson in my office does for me each day: to serve as a reminder not to take life too seriously (a chronic problem for us lawyers).
Unless you want to become a statistic, you need to find ways of coping with that stress. At work, maybe you take a few more breaks and get a collection of nifty stress balls. Update your Facebook status and surf the web for a few (short) minutes. Maybe you go into your file room and sob quietly to yourself. Whatever works for you. Outside of your work find physical and mental activities that give you a release. I mountain bike and write. I’ve also recently started taking karate classes and highly recommend that as a great workout and great stress reliever. One caveat, however: if you should start taking karate, please restrain yourself from using your new Chuck Norris skills on your bosses and co-workers (this means you, mother).
The weather is finally warmer Readers. Daylight savings time starts Sunday and the first day of Spring is March 20. Get out of your offices and homes this weekend and enjoy it. Bad weather on the horizon? Who cares…when’s the last time you pulled a Gene Kelly? Have fun. See a movie (not Avatar). Go shopping, or do whatever else makes you feel good and take some of that stress off of yourself. It’s Friday, after all.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Inquisitive Idiots
A high school teacher of mine always reminded us that there are no stupid questions. Rather, there are only inquisitive idiots. As a group, we lawyers are often some of the most idiotic of inquisitors. So, why do we ask so many seemingly stupid questions? Sometimes the court requires us to. For example, have you ever seen a lawyer do this?:
Lawyer: Your Honor, we call John Smith to the stand.
(witness approaches and is sworn)
Lawyer: Good morning, Mr. Smith. Can you please state your full name for the record?
Mr. Smith: John Smith.
Lawyer: Thank you, Mr. Smith.
If the jury didn’t know Mr. Smith was the witness’s name, they sure as heck do now. I think it’s boring to the jury and a complete waste of time to have a witness state their full name for the record when you’ve already called them by their name at least twice prior to asking the question. It’s a stupid question. I generally skip this part and just go into the testimony. Some judges, however, will make me go through the traditional spiel and that's their prerogative.
The other reason we inquisitive idiots ask the nonsensical questions we do is that it’s hard not to do so sometimes. In a deposition, for example, the lawyer is simultaneously asking a question, taking notes, listening to the deponent’s response, and thinking about their next question. Sometimes (often with too little coffee in our system) we ask some dumb questions as a result. It happens to all of us as some point in our careers (except me if you happen to be both simultaneously my boss and reading this). Here are some of my favorite dumb questions that lawyers have asked, taken from a variety of sources around the Internet:
1. “Were you alone or by yourself?”
2. “Was it you or your brother that was killed in the war?”
3. “Now doctor, isn’t it true that in most cases when a person dies in his sleep he just quietly passes and doesn’t know anything about it until the next morning?”
4. “Doctor, how many autopsies have you performed on dead people?”
5. “How many times have you committed suicide?”
All humor aside, if you have a question for your lawyer then ask it. No matter how small or trivial it may seem, your lawyer should not be too busy to take the time to get an answer to you. And don’t be afraid of asking a “stupid question,” your lawyer has done the same at least once in their lifetime.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Get the Heel Out of My Way
There are millions of reasons why I dislike (okay, hate) the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Pedestrians are reason number 1,867,423. Every time I find myself unfortunate enough to have to drive through that campus, I am constantly slamming on my brakes, raising a certain finger, and mashing down on my horn. It’s almost as if the administration proudly proclaims each morning, “Extra credit on all exams for jaywalking!” Unfortunately, a lot of people it seems have the "they’ll stop" mentality, and there is a large misconception that pedestrians always have the right of way. That’s not true in North Carolina.
The motor vehicle laws of North Carolina generally provide that a pedestrian must follow the special “pedestrian-control signs” at an intersection (e.g., “Walk,” “Don’t Walk”). If there are no such signals, the pedestrian should follow the traffic signal lights (e.g., “Green means go,” “Red means stop”). At no time under the motor vehicle laws should a pedestrian either 1) cross a roadway outside of a crosswalk, 2) if there is no marked crosswalk, cross outside of the unmarked crosswalk (intersection boarder where the marked crosswalk would normally go). Most generally, this means that the kids at Carolina and other people shouldn’t be walking out in the middle of a street or crossing an intersection on a “Don’t Walk” or red light. If they do so, they are probably failing to yield the right of way to vehicular traffic. This also means that a jury could potentially find that they are contributorily negligent in any civil claim arising from the incident.
Now, if you’re like me and not a fan of jaywalking, this does not mean you have a license to run down wayward pedestrians. The motor vehicle laws also provide that despite the duties of pedestrians, every driver must take care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian on the roadway and should sound the horn as a warning when necessary (finger optional).
There are many laws concerning the use of the road by both vehicles and pedestrians alike. If you’ve found yourself struck by a car while walking, then you should consult an attorney to determine what your rights are. As a person who is sometimes a pedestrian, I always recommend people pay attention to their surroundings, walk facing oncoming traffic, and cross the road at the intersection in the crosswalk. Do not walk out into traffic and always make sure a car has plenty of time to stop. Drivers and pedestrians should be courteous to each other, and the pedestrain should remember that they as a walker have a much better chance of stopping on a dime than a moving vehicle weighing several tons.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. His wife, an employee of UNC Hospitals, loves Carolina as they allow her to buy pretty things via her salary. UNC is allegedly a very good institution of higher education. U.S. News & World Report thinks its one of the best colleges in the country. Current students and alumni think it’s a splendiferous place, and may or may not be lobbying Disney for the rights to call the campus the "Happiest Place on Earth" and the Dean Dome the "Magical Kingdom." The lobbying part is the author's attempt at humor and should not be taken seriously.
The motor vehicle laws of North Carolina generally provide that a pedestrian must follow the special “pedestrian-control signs” at an intersection (e.g., “Walk,” “Don’t Walk”). If there are no such signals, the pedestrian should follow the traffic signal lights (e.g., “Green means go,” “Red means stop”). At no time under the motor vehicle laws should a pedestrian either 1) cross a roadway outside of a crosswalk, 2) if there is no marked crosswalk, cross outside of the unmarked crosswalk (intersection boarder where the marked crosswalk would normally go). Most generally, this means that the kids at Carolina and other people shouldn’t be walking out in the middle of a street or crossing an intersection on a “Don’t Walk” or red light. If they do so, they are probably failing to yield the right of way to vehicular traffic. This also means that a jury could potentially find that they are contributorily negligent in any civil claim arising from the incident.
Now, if you’re like me and not a fan of jaywalking, this does not mean you have a license to run down wayward pedestrians. The motor vehicle laws also provide that despite the duties of pedestrians, every driver must take care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian on the roadway and should sound the horn as a warning when necessary (finger optional).
There are many laws concerning the use of the road by both vehicles and pedestrians alike. If you’ve found yourself struck by a car while walking, then you should consult an attorney to determine what your rights are. As a person who is sometimes a pedestrian, I always recommend people pay attention to their surroundings, walk facing oncoming traffic, and cross the road at the intersection in the crosswalk. Do not walk out into traffic and always make sure a car has plenty of time to stop. Drivers and pedestrians should be courteous to each other, and the pedestrain should remember that they as a walker have a much better chance of stopping on a dime than a moving vehicle weighing several tons.
Disclaimer: The views of the author are his own. His wife, an employee of UNC Hospitals, loves Carolina as they allow her to buy pretty things via her salary. UNC is allegedly a very good institution of higher education. U.S. News & World Report thinks its one of the best colleges in the country. Current students and alumni think it’s a splendiferous place, and may or may not be lobbying Disney for the rights to call the campus the "Happiest Place on Earth" and the Dean Dome the "Magical Kingdom." The lobbying part is the author's attempt at humor and should not be taken seriously.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
