Dallas car accident lawyer Kris Barber is a Texas Trial Lawyer
Car accident attorney Kris Barber helps those injured victims throughout Dallas Texas
 
Bookmark and Share

Archive for March, 2009

Why You Should Hire a Personal Injury Lawyer – Part 2

Friday, March 27th, 2009

Here is Part 2 of the CNN report on the auto insurance industry.  With all of the major insurance companies constantly marketing how well they treat people, it is refreshing to see a media outlet report the truth regarding the manner in which most personal injury victims are really treated by insurance companies.

People who have been injured through the negligence of another should immediately contact a personal injury lawyer to protect their legal rights.  We offer free legal consultations on all personal injury cases. 

Why You Should Hire a Personal Injury Lawyer

Friday, March 20th, 2009

This is Part 1 of a CNN investigative report (courtesy of You Tube).  It explains why personal injury victims need an effective and experienced personal injury attorney who is not afraid to take the case to trial if that is what it takes to maximize the recovery from the insurance company.

I offer free initial legal consultations on personal injury cases.   If you have been injured, you should immediately contact a personal injury lawyer so that you will know what insurance coverage is in place to cover your medical expenses and lost wages, and you can take steps to protect your legal rights.

“How Much Is My Personal Injury Case Worth?”

Wednesday, March 18th, 2009

This question is one of the first that most personal injury clients ask about their case.  Regardless of whether they were injured in an automobile accident, a trucking collision, a work-related accident, or by medical malpractice, personal injury clients want to know the value of their claim.

Unfortunately, some personal injury attorneys will give unrealistic answers to such questions, usually for the purpose of trying to convince a potential client to retain their services. A good attorney, however, will usually not provide a detailed response to these questions at first.  The reason: a case’s value cannot be determined until the case has been investigated and all of the critical facts have been analyzed.

There are many factors that determine the ultimate value of a personal injury lawsuit. The strength of the liability, causation, and damages facts are some of the most important. To maximize your recovery, a personal injury lawyer needs to begin gathering evidence early in the process, and to advise the client on how to keep the records needed to prove damages.

If the facts are good, a personal injury attorney who has the proper skill set can maximize the recovery for the client. If the facts are bad (i.e., little or no insurance, bad evidence on liability, etc.), then the lawyer has to work through different set of circumstances, which could affect the end result for the client.

The better question for a client to ask is: Do I have a lawyer that has the skill set to maximize the recovery for my personal injury case? A qualified and experienced attorney can analyze the case and obtain a proper result. The facts play a big factor in the end result, but a skilled lawyer can guide the client through the process and take the proper steps to obtain a favorable result.

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Limits on Drug Lawsuits

Thursday, March 5th, 2009
This week, the Supreme Court sustained a $6.7 million jury verdict award to a woman who lost her arm because of improper use of the anti-nausea medication, Phenegran. In a 6-3 ruling the high court rejected arguments from Wyeth Pharmaceuticals that it was protected from personal injury claims because drug labeling for its medicine had been approved by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA).

In Wyeth v. Levine, the Court noted that directly injecting the drug into a patient’s vein significantly increased the risk of “catastrophic consequences.”  The Plaintiff argued that even though Phenegran’s labeling warned of the danger of gangrene and amputation following injection, it failed to instruct physicians to use an IV-drip method. In August 2004, a trial court found in favor of the Plaintiff.

Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens noted that the trial court “determined that there was no direct conflict between FDA regulations and Levine’s state-law claims because those regulations permit strengthened warnings without FDA approval on an interim basis and the record contained evidence of the at least 20 reports of amputations similar to Levine’s since the 1960s.” Stevens concluded that, “In short, Wyeth has not persuaded us that failure-to-warn claims like Levine’s obstruct the federal regulation of drug labeling. Congress has repeatedly declined to pre-empt state law, and the FDA’s recently adopted position that state tort suits interfere with its statutory mandate is entitled to no weight. Although we recognize that some state-law claims might well frustrate the achievement of congressional objectives, this is not such a case.” 

 

1