Johnny CH Chang Attorney

Injury Claims Lawyer

Johnny CH Chang Attorney - Injury Claims Lawyer

What You Should Know About Fall At Work Claims

atlanta-workers-compensation-attorneyBeing injured while on the job can be a very stressful situation.  You do not want to injure the relationship with the company that provides you with your income, and yet you deserve compensation when you are hurt and it is clearly their fault.  If you have recently been injured on the job, or just like to know your rights, the information below will help you.

More than one-fifth of the claims filed against employers for injuries are fall at work claims.  The results of a fall can range from simple bruising and muscle soreness to severe breaks and even brain damage.  Regardless of your level of injury, it is the law that you should be compensated for your time off of the job as well as any medical expenses that have been incurred.

It is essential that you report your injuries immediately to your employer.  If they do not send you to be checked out by a medical professional at that time you should express to them that you wish to have it done.  Documenting exactly what happened and what injuries you are facing will go a long way if you are forced to take your case to court.

Once you have been seen by a medical professional you should seek the advice of an attorney.  Fall at work claims can be handled at times without their help, but ensuring that you have the right information is important so that you know what kind of compensation that you deserve.  With many injuries you may feel fine at first, only to realize days later that some long term damage to your body has occurred.

If the attorneys that you consult agree that you should have professional representation you should adhere to that advice.  They are experienced in these types of cases and know when you may be facing a bigger situation than you can handle on your own.  From there you should pick from a few different options by finding out who has the best reputation for winning their cases and being completely honest.

You can determine this by looking for reviews of their firms online as well as by asking anyone that you know that has been hurt at work who they used.  You definitely do not want to hire the firm with the biggest ad or the fanciest office.  These are not determinants of whether or not they treat all their cases the same way.  Take time to do research to get the best results in your personal situation.

Now that you have read the information above you know that there is a good amount that you must do in order to get the compensation you deserve in a worker’s compensation case.  Follow the above advice so that you are treated fairly by your employer.  As long as you do this, you should get the money that you deserve for your medical expenses, time missed at work and any suffering that you may have endured.

Contact an Atlanta Workers Compensation Lawyer for assistance if you have been injured on the job.

Associate Lawyer

Do you consider yourself the “best of the best?” Wish to belong of something truly unique? Michael Sullivan & & Associates LLP is setting bench high with regard to the method it serves its clients and settles its cases. We are changing the way that Workers Compensation cases are being settled in the State by setting new standards and impacting the method these kinds of cases are being solved. As we continue to grow and broaden the practice, we are now seeking an Partner Lawyer with 3+ years of experience to practice in our El Segundo office.

We do not just employ lawyers and toss a stack of cases at them! We supply on-going training and advancement so MS&A Lawyer become experts in the field of Workers’ Compensation.

As an Associate Attorney you would handle the legal defense of workers’ compensation claims from beginning to last resolution, consisting of all aspects of discovery and litigation. The attorneys work closely with insurance companies and third-party administrators.



bachelor’s and Juris Doctor degrees;
member, State Bar of California;
superior research, analytical, and working out ability;
excellent composed and oral interaction;
dedication to proactive case management.

If you have the above experience and qualities, we would like to learn through you! Please send your resume and cover letter through e-mail just to: No calls or faxes, please.

Read More

Does the Employees’ Compensation Court have Unique Jurisdiction to Decide Concerns of Employment?

On June 11, 2015, the Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division’s choice in the Estate of Myroslava Kotsovska v. Saul Liebman case and held that the trial court was right in awarding wrongful survivor benefit to the estate. In this case, Ms. Kotsovska was employed by Saul Liebman’s child to supply in house look after her father, who was 89 years of ages. She agreed to prepare meals, do laundry and do light housekeeping in exchange for being paid $100 each day, money. There was absolutely nothing in writing to formalize the contract between the parties. On December 8, 2008, Liebman and Kotsovska were running errands and stopped for lunch at a regional restaurant. Liebman was driving. He dropped Kotsovska off on the sidewalk in front of the diner while he pulled into a parking area in front of where she was standing. Liebman unintentionally pushed the accelerator, causing the car to pin Kotsovska versus a wall. Sadly, she passed away from her injuries.
Ms. Kotsovska’s estate filed a wrongful death suit against Mr. Liebman, but did not submit an employees’ payment claim. Liebman said that the case should be transferred to the Department of Employees’ Compensation for a decision of Kotsovska’s status as a staff member versus an independent service provider. Mr. Liebman’s house owner’s provider specified that the mishap occurred from Kotsovska’s work.

In Superior Court, the trial judge discovered that Ms. Kotsovska was an independent professional and awarded a total of $525,000 to her estate. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed, finding that the matter needs to have been moved to the Division of Workers’ Compensation on the problem of whether Ms. Kotsovska was a staff member or independent specialist at the time of her death.
Most recently, the Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division’s choice, and concurred with the high court that an award should be gone into in favor of the estate, without the requirement of the matter being moved to the Division of Workers’ Payment to determine employment status. They reasoned that this case was different from other cases because “… Petitioner did not apply for employees’ compensation with the Division. Thus, as the high court noted, there was no claim pending before the Department over which it might assert jurisdiction.” This fact convinced the Supreme Court that the Superior Court had jurisdiction to decide the employment concern.
One needs to wonder how this case would have been resolved if the analysis was performed in the Division of Workers’ Compensation. It is most likely than not that Ms. Kotsovska would have been found to be a staff member, and the workers’ compensation bar would have prevented her estate from filing a wrongful death fit against her employer. The bottom line of this case is that the Division of Employees’ Compensation does not have main jurisdiction if the injured worker just files match in Superior Court.
If you or somebody you understand may have a possible employees’ compensation case, it is necessary that you speak with legal counsel to talk about the details of your event.

Court views remarkable bus crash video in $30M suit

Story by Jana Eschbach/CBS12

FORT PIERCE (CBS12)– In opening statements Wednesday in the jury civil trial seeking $30 million in damages in the death of 9 year old Aaron Beauchamp, the lawyer for the Beauchamp asked the jury, “exactly what are you going to do about it?”

“The motorist felt he needed to hurry and didn’t keep eyes on the roadway,” stated Lance Ivey, lawyer for the family of Beauchamp. “Mr. Sanctuary confessed nothing was blocking his view and he would only have to wait 20 seconds for truck. But he was running 20 minutes late.”

The driver, Albert Hazen, was mentioned for failure to yield when turning onto Midway Road from Okeechobee Roadway.

Hazen was fined $1,000 and had his license suspended for six months after the deadly crash on March 26, 2012.

“The driver has actually given clashing statements in this case,” Ivey stated. “Initially he said he didn’t see it. Then he stated believed he had time- looked like they were far enough away.”

Ivey claims the district’s culture of rushing bus drivers and adding routes added to the crash.

“We agree that had Mr. Haven not made that turn this accident would not have taken place. We agree, as his employer, we bear some part of the duty,” Allen Sang, the attorney for St. Lucie County Schools stated. “Hazen let the parents know he would be late, he had not been in a hurry. He pulls into left hand turn lane and he began making his turn. Why Mr. Hazen did not appreciate the truck coming would be a problem for him, we might never ever know.”

“He speeds up the bus to clear the intersection and get the bus throughout the intersection,” Sang stated. “While we accept obligation, the trucking business, Cypress Trucking, must accept duty as well.”

The district declares malfunctioning brakes in the sod truck that hit the bus belonged to the cause of the lethal crash that killed Beauchamp and injured 16 others.

The district keeps in mind Cypress Trucking, the truck driver, had defective brakes. “IC bus company created a malfunctioning seat,” Sang said, noting other parties are irresponsible in Aaron’s death. “We bare our part of the responsibility, however we are not the only ones.”

The Beauchamp family settled a claim with Cypress Trucking this summer season.

The Beauchamp parents are expected to take the stand Wednesday afternoon after the jury sees the cam recording of the crash from inside the school bus.

Four cameras inside the bus recorded the crash that resulted in Aaron’s death. The bus motorist is seen searching in the rear-view mirror throughout the crash, and not at the roadway.Court views dramatic bus crash video in$30M suit

Read More

Case Closed: The Current State of Lien Resolution in Florida Employees' ' Compensation Claims

Unsettled lawyer’s charge liens can hinder a settlement of future benefits in Florida employees’ payment cases, as well as expose an employer/carrier to civil liability. This post talks about the different symptoms of these liens, how lienholders perfect their liens, how employer/carriers can proactively identify and deal with any fee/cost liens, so about close the file and safeguard it versus future claims.

We start with the maxim that “the best file is a closed file.” A file can not really be closed until all aspects of Fla. Stat. § 440 are resolved. The majority of cases generally include “one claimant, one lawyer”. But what are the consequences if the claimant discharges several lawyers prior to the conclusion of the case? Plenty … if the prior attorney(s) files a lien alleging he/she is entitled to charges or expenses (or both) for work done on the file prior to resolution of concerns or the whole case.

Are You Seeing More Lien Litigation?

Claimants’ lawyer charges and costs are codified in Fla. Stat. § 440.34; different modifications throughout the years have resulted in the present controversy between the claimant’s bar and employer/carriers. Presently, expectancy (and anxiety) is unprecedented pending the Florida Supreme Court’s decision on the constitutionality of the 2009 modification to § 440.34 limiting costs to a statutory portion of benefits gotten rather than a hourly rate as argued in Castellanos v. Next Door, Inc. The 2009 statutory costs reduced the expense of claims; and we have actually seen, perhaps not coincidentally, a boost in the number of controversial lien fights. Litigation emerges frequently when a case is settled without fixing a previous attorney’s lien.

In the majority of situations, the claims professional administering a file will certainly understand a lien is pending. Typically, when there is a modification in counsel, the new attorney will certainly notify the employer/carrier or if the matter is pending prior to the Judge of Compensation Claims, an official specification for replacement of counsel reserving on lawyer’s fees and costs and developing a lien is included in the Order approving the substitution. (Guideline 60Q-6.104, F.A.C.) Care must be taken by the claims professional and defense counsel, if any, to keep in mind the identity of the discharged attorney and to make inquiries of that individual as to what type of lien is asserted. The lien could be for an employer/carrier-paid fee based upon advantages protected as an outcome of submitting a Petition, a quantum meruit lien (or “charging lien”) or a fee based upon all advantages paid after overcoming a rejection of compensability. Understanding the different kinds of liens will certainly make it possible for the claims expert to identify liens which is the initial step at solving them.

1. Liens for employer/carrier-paid fees/costs

Generally, the complaintant is liable for his/her lawyer’s costs and expenses unless specific exceptions as identified in Fla. Stat. § 440.34( 3)are satisfied. However what takes place if a lawyer is discharged prior to resolution of past or pending problems or in the event of a Fla. Stat. § 440.20(11)(c) settlement of future benefits? The discharged lawyer might file a lien for any employer/carrier-paid cost that would have been due throughout his/her representation of the complaintant. Just recently, Florida’s First District Court of Appeals held that these charges related to dominating on claims raised via a Petition for Advantages are subject to termination for absence of prosecution pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 440.25(4)(i). Limith v. Lenox on the Lake, 163 So. 3d 616 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).

2. Quantum Meruit Liens (Charging liens)

If the claimant discharges an attorney without cause, and no advantages were secured, the attorney would be entitled to a “charging” lien for a lawyer cost under the equitable theory of quantum meruit (“exactly what one has actually made”). Quantum meruit charges have actually been long recognized in Florida and were normally paid by the plaintiff.

Frequently, lien problems emerge when a subsequent attorney settles the entire case and charges are paid; if known liens are not safeguarded, the employer/carrier could be “on the hook” to the previous attorney or attorneys. Excellence of a quantum meruit lien requires only timely notice to the affected parties. Zaldivar v. Okeelanta Corp., 877 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) The lien “ripens” when there are settlement profits to which the lien can connect.

If the attorney’s lien has actually ripened, and he was provided notification of the settlement, then failure to solve or prosecute the lien can lead to termination of the lien through the application of the equitable doctrine of laches (but not a motion for absence of prosecution, as the quantum meruit lien is not a “claim” for attorney’s fees raised by petition). Limith v. Lenox on the Lake, 163 So. 3d 616 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).

3. “Overall Advantages Secured” liens

This type of lien is based upon the principle that “benefits protected” can be determined on the basis of the overall benefits protected as an outcome of a rejection of compensability. § 440.34(3)(c), Fla. Stat.(2009

)In these scenarios, because the full amount of the benefits to be paid in the future might be unknown, the court has actually held that the claimant’s attorney should be permitted to decide when she or he will have the quantum of the fee figured out. Zaldivar v. Fla. Transp. 1982, Inc., 19 So. 3d 1093 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).

Best Practices for Resolution

Generally, Florida workers’ compensation cases settle at mediation. The claims expert or defense counsel need to supply notification to any previous attorneys of the mediation conference and invite them to get involved; because fashion, the attorney’s claim will be made recognized and can be dealt with and fixed in writing in the mediation arrangement. In fact, some lawyers will not get involved and will not provide lien information to the parties or the mediator. In those cases, provisions ought to be made in a mediation arrangement regarding which celebration (claimant or employer/carrier) will certainly be accountable for any known asserted liens. When a settlement is reached, any liens have ripened as the Florida appellate court explained in Zaldivar v. Okeelanta Corp. At this point, the employer/carrier can force the lienholder to submit a Verified Motion for Lawyer’s Costs pursuant to Fla. Admin. C. Guideline, 60Q-6.124(4). Therefore, prior to disbursement of settlement proceeds, any unresolved lien/attorney cost issues should be brought before the JCC and dealt with through a proper Last Order.

Current Administrative Guideline Modifications

Prior to changes to the Florida Administrative Code which worked November 1, 2006 and enhanced efficient November 10, 2014, there was no statutory or procedural requirement that a lien be adjudicated. This exposed concerns which might not be compelled to be heard by the Judge of Payment Claims unless the attorney brought the claim prior to the JCC … with the result being employer/carrier claim files were exposed. The Florida procedural guidelines (Rule 60Q-6.124(4) and since November 10, 2014 subsection (5), F.A.C.) require the filing of a validated cost petition upon suitable movement, (usually by employer/carrier) to adjudicate the lien. A suitable movement filed with the JCC and served upon all celebrations and lawyers, consisting of those lawyers asserting liens which have not been fixed, is the preferred vehicle to “compel close” the pending lien.

Prior to Guideline 60Q-6.124(4) ending up being reliable on November 1, 2006, there was no system to need that an attorney asserting a lien file a Verified Petition to adjudicate the lien. Hence, liens might continue to be forever “in limbo”. These new procedural amendments, particularly the 2014’s modification, offer strong ammunition to the employer/carrier to require the filing of a confirmed motion for attorney charges and expenses even if entitlement is challenged, upon presentation of suitable truths. Furthermore as the Limith court showed, if the charge is petition-based, a movement to dismiss for absence of prosecution can be filed so that attorney’s costs do not keep the file open forever, tolling the statute of restrictions.


If, as part of the negotiation of the settlement, the employer/carrier accepts be liable for liens of prior lawyers, prompt resolution of the lien should be made prior to the Judge of Compensation Claims. The attorney claiming the lien has the problem of evidence that he/she was either discharged without cause (which generates the basis for the “charging”/ quantum meruit liens noted above), or showing up that an employer/carrier-paid charge is due for securing benefits on behalf of the complaintant.

Moreover, the best security against future civil lawsuits for tortious disturbance with a company relationship is to need the lienholder to solve his lien prior to the JCC authorizing the current lawyer’s costs and costs for underlying settlement. Because the lien is now ripe, and attached to the settlement profits, all the parties to the settlement (claimant, complaintant’s current lawyer, and the employer/carrier) have a responsibility to the prior lawyer(s) to safeguard their lien.

Strunin_RobertRobert J. Strunin, senior partner, Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder & & Carson LLP. Strunin’s primary areas of practice consist of analysis, discovery, technique and trial involving the defense of workers’ payment declares in addition to properties liability and vehicle negligence in the tort arena.

Ready_MicheleMichele E. Ready, partner, Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder & & Carson LLP. Ready’s main area of practice is insurance defense, employees’ payment litigation, consisting of an emphasis on Medicare Secondary Payer compliance. Ready likewise specializes in workers’ payment appellate matters.

Read More

Sr. Claims Examiner

The Employees’ Payment Department, situated in Fullerton, California has an opening for a Sr. Claims Examiner

Qualifications: The following are preferred or preferred unless particularly stated:

– 4-year college degree or equivalent expert experience.
– 3 years Claims Examiner experience with knowledge of Employees’ Compensation Statutes, medical terminology, and treatment protocol, PD score system, litigation and attending WCAB hearings.
– Problem analysis and fixing, decision making, and working out skills.
– Personal computer and automated claims system experience.
– Exceptional oral and written communication abilities.
– Able to work independently or with a group, handle numerous assignments, focus on, organize, and fulfill due dates.
– Great interpersonal skills with strong consumer focus.
– Knowledge of OSHA and state reporting requirements.
– Experience with ADR claims useful.

Secret Obligations include, however are not restricted to:

– Apply case management skills designated to avoid and equitably resolve litigation.
– Forecast future liability as mandated by Self Insurance Strategies.
– Insure all WCAB findings are prompt, deal with WCAB management queries, and go to WCAB hearings.
– Work with injured workers and physicians to assist in the go back to full or customized work duties.
– Investigate claims, assess exposure, and identify whether advantages are payable.
– Supply permission and direct activities of outdoors detectives and legal counsel.
– Supply timely and accurate advantages to the injured worker
– Daily data entry updates, upkeep of diary system, and keep an eye on computer reports for accuracy.
– Authorize, control, and process medical treatment; audit company costs.
– Use case analysis type to define history and plan the next strategy.
– Communicate and communicate with hurt employees, attorneys, doctors, vendors, special needs examination bureau, WCAB, facility management, and Department Workplace personnel.
– Work out settlements with lawyers and hurt workers, carry out settlement documents, and concern settlement advantages as authorized by the WCAB.
– Respond to different management questions from the Division of Industrial Accidents. Workplace Address:1421 Manhattan Ave Fullerton, CA 92381

Read More

Horseplay during a Lull in the Day Found Compensable (Part 2): Major Deviation from Work

House > > Injury Law > > Horseplay during a Lull in the Workday Found Compensable (Part 2): Major Discrepancy from Work The New Jersey courts, like the court in South Dakota, have the tendency to focus on whether horseplay makes up a major variance from work when evaluating compensability of injuries. In Trotter v. City of Monmouth, 144 N.J. Super. 430 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 73 N.J. 42 (1976) the Appellate Division dealt with the concern of major deviation.
In Trotter, the petitioner was a county roadway department employee. During a break from cutting grass in the summer season heat, the petitioner and a number of colleagues started tossing water at one another to cool down. The petitioner disrupted this water battle by driving a colleagues bike that had actually been parked close by on and off county property. The petitioner ultimately drove the motorcycle up a hillside, blew up of it and crashed suffering different injuries. The staff member’s petition was rejected by the Appellate Division because:
The bike was not provided by the company;
The motorcycle was not devices utilized in the course of the employer’s company; and,.
The petitioner’s conduct was up until now a deviation as to make up a desertion of his employment.
When talking about the Trotter case, the Appellate Department counted on Professor Larson’s Workmen’s Payment Law manual, which examines the gravity of a variance from employment based upon the following aspects:.
The degree and seriousness of the discrepancy;.
The efficiency of the variance (whether it associated to petitioner’s efficiency of task or involved a desertion of task);.
The level to which the practice of horseplay had ended up being an accepted part of the work; and.
The extent to which the nature of the work might be anticipated to consist of some such horseplay.
Regrettably, the application of the major/minor discrepancy test is naturally subjective and does not include much order to the chaos. Despite the occupation or working conditions, a particular quantity of horseplay is always to be anticipated in any work environment. If the horseplay increases to the level of a major discrepancy, like it did in Trotter, you can expect workers’ compensation advantages to be denied.
If you have been injured at work, regardless of the cause, and have concerns about your rights or what advantages you might be entitled to, please consult with a lawyer immediately. At Stark & & Stark, our skilled attorneys and legal personnel can assist you comprehend your rights.

Mrs. Jody Townsend to speak at the 2015 Claims College School of Workers Compensation

(MENAFN Press).

Mrs. Jody Townsend Claim Supervisor RTW Inc. will certainly be speaking at the CLM 2015 Claims College School of Employees’ Payment. The 2015 Claims College will certainly be held in Philadelphia Pennsylvania September 9-12.

Each school is comprised of three levels and successful conclusion of all levels in a specific school will certainly earn individuals an appreciated and sought after designation which will become the market standard for identifying superior claims experts. For individual schools levels include pre-course reading materials in-class guideline group jobs and an examination. The Claims College is not an industry workshop or conference this is a true educational experience designed to aid educate and grow the claims occupation.

Jody Townsend is a Claim Manager in the Employees Payment field at RTW Inc./ State Auto Insurance coverage Companies. She handles employees payment adjusters in multi-state jurisdictions that manage all the regulatory state form filing and payments as well as the day to day claim managing with aggressive go back to work and litigation strategies. In addition she is actively participated in Medicare Section 111 Reporting Conditional Payment Liens and Medicare Set-Asides.

Jody started her insurance coverage profession in 1996 when she took a position as an Office Systems Organizer at RTW Inc.. Since that time she worked as a Billing Testimonial Expert Claims Coordinator and Claim Adjuster. Jody has actually been successful in managing the litigation process and managing workers’ compensation claims to closure to minimize claims expenses. Among her locations of competence is that of claim compliance. She has actually provided claim oversight and assistance for the nationwide claims procedure to make sure consistent claims practices. Jody got her Bachelor’s degree degree from Minnesota State University Mankato in 1993. She majored in Office Systems Management/ Company Education and minored in Company Administration.

Jody lives in southern Minnesota with her partner and kid. She is the President of an Emergency Medical Responder crew licensed by Minnesota Emergency Medical Services Regulatory Board.

About the CLM

The Claims and Litigation Management Alliance (CLM) promotes and furthers the highest standards of claims and litigation management and brings together the thought leaders in both industries. CLM’s Members and Fellows consist of risk and litigation managers insurance and asserts professionals corporate counsel outside counsel and 3rd party vendors. The CLM sponsors educational programs provides resources and promotes interaction among all in the industry. To get more information about the CLM kindly go to


Susan Wisbey-Smith Communications Manager

Claims and Litigation Management Alliance


About is

a press release distribution service that disperses press releases to online news sites and blog sites to assist consumers with search engine optimization and develop buzz about their website, news or company.

Read More

Texas Household Granted $165 Million in Deadly I-10 Crash

Dallas, Tx, 08/25/2015/ SubmitPressRelease123/

A Texas family was recently granted $165 million by a Santa Fe grand jury in connection with a deadly car accident. The triple-fatal crash happened when a FedEx big rig truck strike a parked GMC pickup truck on Interstate 10. In addition to a female and kid being eliminated in the crash, the driver of the tractor-trailer was likewise eliminated.


: CBS 4 Report “El Paso family awarded $165.5 M tied to lethal I-10 crash”

“EL PASO, Texas-An El Paso household was compensated more than 3 years after their daughter and granddaughter are killed in a vehicle crash including a FedEx truck … A Santa Fe grand jury granted the household a$165.5 million verdict Friday in connection with the triple-fatal crash west of Las Cruces. “To find out more check out The crash happened in 2011 and the lawsuit was filed against FedEx and two of its service providers a year later implicating the parties of carelessness. Typical Types of Neglect That Cause Office Truck Wrecks According to the Department of Transport an approximated 500,000 trucking mishaps take place in the United States each

year. These mishaps leave thousands of victims in their wake, with 98 percent of all of those killed in industrial truck accidents being motorists or other persons who remain in the traveler vehicles included. Texas based truck

accident attorney Amy Witherite, who is not connected to the El Paso truck accident case, states that numerous of these accidents result due to negligence on the part of truck drivers and trucking companies. Witherite says”many times truck drivers have actually driven over the permitted variety of hours at a time, run improperly kept trucks, speed, or engage in other acts of neglect without consideration for the lives they are putting at risk in doing so. “The personal injury legal representative has worked with many Texas truck mishap injury

victims and states that in the state, statistics show that a casualty happens at a rate of 1.29 deaths per each 100 miles took a trip. The number is greater relating to those who sustain a non-fatal injury in these types of crashes. The CBS 4 report did not indicate the type of neglect alleged in the civil lawsuit, or the specific reason for the mishap. Legal Options for Texas Truck Wreck Victims Texas truck accident victims have legal options for getting recuperation in case they were hurt as an outcome of the neglect of a truck motorist or trucking business Witherite states. The attorney says that there are 2 key things truck mishap victims need to act on instantly in the consequences of these events, which are: Getting medical interest– Witherite says that getting medical attention instantly after a truck crash is essential no matter how severe a person believes

their injuries may be. The lawyer says”there are cases where one’s injuries are undoubtedly significant, then there are instances where an individual might be suffering an internal injury that doesn” t present symptoms right away. It is essential to get


medical interest regardless.” Contacting a truck accident attorney– A truck accident lawyer can be called right away to a crash scene to begin the procedure of assisting a victim who might be eligible to seek legal compensation for any damages they incur, according to Witherite who says,”numerous injured truck wreck victims don’t know that there can be a preliminary call made and think they have to wait up until after a police

report is issued before contacting an attorney. Nevertheless, this isn’t really true. In most cases it is best to have a lawyer on board from the beginning so that the right steps are required to ensure the very best outcome. At our company we have set up a 24 hour helpline for victims who can call us at any time for assistance.”More details about exploring one’s legal options in Texas truck accident cases can be discovered by seeing Media Contact: Lucy Tiseo Eberstein Witherite LLP Phone: 866-774-5410 Connect with Eberstein Witherite on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Google+. Newsroom powered by Online Press Release Distribution– Like United states on Facebook

Read More

Pedestrian Pitfalls and Other Threats for the Unwary

Junk food restaurants are an American staple. Drive down any significant highway in the US and you’re bound to see an indicator or advertisement for some fast food chain’s dining establishment. Although these dining establishments can offer tasty meals at a cost effective rate, they have actually also been the topic of numerous injury suits over the years. The McDonald’s “hot coffee” claim is one case that many individuals think of when the subject of junk food dining establishment suits shows up. What numerous do not realize, though, is that fast food restaurants have been the topic of accident claims for other factors. For instance, these restaurants’ floors are commonly made from tile, which can develop hazardous slip hazards to clients. In one current case, a female and her family went to eat at a regional hamburger dining establishment. As she was walking back from the bathroom, she slipped and landeded on grease that was on the floor. She was identified with a back sprain and a contusion to her left elbow. Regrettably, in spite of physical treatment, she established extreme, persistent elbow pain. She was later on diagnosed with intricate regional discomfort syndrome, a chronic long-term condition that caused her to suffer electric-shock-like discomfort, swelling, and burning to her arm. Her past medical expenses totaled about $36,000, and her future medical costs are approximated to be about $359,400.
She attempted to return to her task, but was unable to continue to be on a lowered schedule and instead went on temporary disability. Her past lost profits totaled about $94,600, and her future financial loss is approximated around $1.71 million.

She took legal action against the restaurant, alleging that the grease on the floor constituted a harmful condition and that the dining establishment’s employees were aware of the danger however failed to remove it or warn clients. The complainant was prepared to present surveillance video, recorded simply minutes prior to her fall, revealing two dining establishment workers talking and pointing to the area where she later on fell. The video then showed one employee trying to clean the floor because area with a squeegee. The complainant alleged that the squeegee did not eliminate any of the grease however simply moved it around. The parties settled prior to trial for $1.5 million.
Sadly, incidents like this one are more typical than one would think. Although slips and falls in dining establishments rarely make the news, they occur rather regularly. Grease utilized in cooking can often wind up on employees’ shoes and be tracked into the client area of the restaurant. This coupled with that customers are continuously strolling in and out of the restaurants carrying food, condiments and beverages creates many opportunities for slips and falls to happen on the difficult floors.
Often, people track water out of the restroom and onto the floors with their shoes; or other times, rainwater gets tracked in from the outside onto the tile floors of the restaurants. All of these produce risks for the unwary. An easy fall can result in a busted hip, or in this case, an elbow injury, that can cause something far even worse.
The next time you remain in a fast food restaurant, or any public place where individuals are constantly walking in and out, be aware of exactly what is on the floor. Watch out for any puddles or liquids, dropped food and other items that might develop a risk. A path of water on the floor in the flower area of a supermarket can develop a harmful slip and fall danger to clients. A spilled beer on the steps of a sports location can cause comparable threats.
The intent of this short article is to help make you end up being more familiar with the threats that exist for pedestrians. Do not let another person’s carelessness cause you to end up being injured. If you or someone you know has been hurt in a slip and fall as an outcome of another person’s negligence, we advise you seek advice from legal counsel to discuss your situation.

Law practice expands employees payment practice in Florida

Eagleville, Pennsylvania-based The Chartwell Law Workplaces L.L.P. has broadened its workers’ payment practice with 3 new offices in Florida and 7 new lawyers.

Chartwell supplies legal representation to insurers, self-insured entities, 3rd party administrators, banks, and lenders. Its new Florida offices are based in Tallahassee, Orlando, and Jupiter, Florida,, and the existing Fort Myers place now offers employees payment defense, Chartwell stated Thursday in a statement.

Brian S. Bartley and Amanda Mitteer Bartley have joined the Fort Myers workplace as partners, with Mr. Bartley representing insurers, self-insured employers, towns and 3rd party administrators in workers compensation and insurance coverage defense matters, and Ms. Bartley focusing on workers compensation litigation defense for insurers and employers.

Tom Marchese will lead the Tallahassee workplace as a partner, safeguarding insurance providers and self-insured employers throughout northern Florida in employees payment matters, Chartwell said in the statement.

Sean Crosby, a partner at Chartwell, will lead the Orlando workplace. Lisa Cunningham-Harvey likewise will certainly join the Orlando workplace, focusing on the defense of insured and self-insured entities in Florida employees comp matters, according to the statement.

In addition, partner Chris Riggio will certainly lead the Jupiter workplace. Heather L. Hatch likewise signs up with the Jupiter office as a partner and trial lawyer concentrating on representation of employers, self-insured companies, and their insurance providers in workers payment claims and employment-related matters, according to the statement.

Read More