| Read Time: 2 minutes | Defective Consumer Devices

Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Appeal in $2 Billion Jury Award Against Johnson & Johnson

June 7, 2021 – On June 1, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from Johnson & Johnson meant to reverse a $2 billion jury award given to the ovarian cancer victims claiming that the company’s talc-based baby powder was contaminated with asbestos was the cause of their cancer.  Not to be mistaken with the Court finding in favor of the plaintiffs, the Justices rejected Johnson & Johnson’s petition for a writ of certiorari or a review of the lower court’s decision.  Two Justices, Brett Kavanaugh, and Samuel Alito were unable to be a part of the decision due to connections in the case that could cause a conflict of interest.  By declining to hear the appeal, the Supreme Court allowed the current judgment to stand. The case Johnson & Johnson was looking to appeal was Johnson & Johnson, et al., Petitioners v. Gail L. Ingham, et al., in which a St. Louis jury decided in favor of the plaintiffs. At the time (2018), the jury decided to award $4.7 billion to the 22 plaintiffs involved. Johnson & Johnson asked a Missouri appeals court to throw out the judgment entirely in June 2020, with the court declining to do so, noting that “there was significant reprehensibility in defendants’ conduct” and that “the harm suffered by plaintiffs was physical, not just economic.”  The Missouri appeals court did, however, decide that not all of the 22 plaintiffs should have been included in the original trial since not all of them had the legal standing to file a lawsuit of this nature in the state of Missouri. Because of this, the appeals court removed two of the plaintiffs from the lawsuit and decreased the judgment to $2.1 billion, the Associated Press reported. Since the Missouri appeals court did not reverse the judgment, Johnson & Johnson needed to seek a higher court’s judgment, leading the company to file the petition for a writ of certiorari in March 2021. The argument based on which Johnson & Johnson requested the Supreme Court to review the decision was, as NBC News reported, “that the Missouri courts unfairly combined the cases of nearly two dozen women from several states whose cancer severity varied widely” instead of trying cases individually, in some instances in other states. Johnson & Johnson cited concerns over “jury confusion” related to the consolidation of multiple plaintiffs into one trial. Another question Johnson & Johnson’s petition had asked the Supreme Court to consider had it taken up the case was whether the punitive damages awarded in this case had “violate[d] due process.” Reference: “Talc Lawsuit Update JUNE 2021: Supreme Court Declines to Hear Appeal in $2 Billion Jury Award against j&j.” The National Law Review, www.natlawreview.com/article/talc-lawsuit-update-june-2021-supreme-court-declines-to-hear-appeal-2-billion-jury#:~:text=Talc%20Lawsuit%20Update%20June%202021,Billion%20Jury%20Award%20Against%20J%26J&text=With%20%242%20billion%20on%20the,cancer%20patients%20and%20their%20families

Continue Reading

| Read Time: 2 minutes | Defective Consumer Devices

Alaska Files Lawsuit Against Companies Linked To PFAS and AFFF

April 22, 2021 — On April 7, 2021, Alaska’s Attorney general filed a lawsuit against over thirty companies seeking damages for pollution due to PFAs. The specific pollution in the suit is only linked to two of the thousands of different PFAs, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), but the damages are likely to be in the hundreds of millions. The results of the lawsuit will be greatly anticipated by both states who are also wanting to sue for PFA damage and companies that have either made PFAs or used them during other manufacturing.   The Alaska lawsuit is against three types of companies:  (1) PFAS manufacturers; (2) PFAS distributors and (3) aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) manufacturers and suppliers. Several theories of liability are alleged, including negligence, nuisance, trespass, and products liability. The damages sought include costs associated with Alaska’s past, present, and future efforts to end PFOA and PFOS pollution. The future costs would include investigative costs to determine the scale of the pollution, remediation costs, proper disposal of PFAS-contaminated water and solids, and monitoring for future pollution. The state seeks triple the damages under its state statutes in addition to the punitive damages that would punish the behavior of the companies.  The remediation by itself could result in hundreds of millions of dollars, but if Alaska could receive punitive damages or triple damages, the amount could go over a billion dollars. While the Alaska lawsuit targets PFAS manufacturers and AFFF manufacturers, other companies should not underestimate the power of the lawsuit to impact them as well. Such companies in other states have been directly named as defendants in lawsuits seeking billions of dollars in PFAS remediation costs. Companies should not ignore the dangerous environmental issues that PFAS poses as a number of different entities, from states to private citizens, are actively seeking damages. It is in the best interest of all if companies of all types started conducting a complete compliance audit to best understand areas of concern for PFAS liability issues. Reference: “Alaska PFAS Lawsuit Latest State Action On PFAS.” The National Law Review, www.natlawreview.com/article/alaska-pfas-lawsuit-latest-state-action-pfas

Continue Reading

| Read Time: 2 minutes | Dangerous Drugs

Manufacturer Sanofi Destroys Emails Linked To Zantac Recall

May 11, 2021 — Manufacturer Sanofi destroyed internal emails linked to a 2019 recall of Zantac, according to lawyers for over 70,000 former patients who sued the company in the U.S. The deleted emails, including those of Michael Bailey, the head of regulatory affairs for Sanofi’s U.S. Consumer Healthcare division, will make it more challenging for plaintiffs to show that Sanofi and other drugmakers allowed a suspected carcinogen to affect Zantac, according to a May 7 court filing. The mishandling of emails has “resulted in the delay and/or postponement of many key Sanofi depositions,” lawyers for former patients reported. They have requested more time to prepare for their first trials from the judge overseeing their cases, which are set to start next year. Sanofi initiated an internal probe about the email deletion and is scheduled to report to the same judge in August 2021. “Although Sanofi has already provided hundreds of thousands of pages of relevant discovery to the plaintiffs, Sanofi has voluntarily disclosed that certain emails requested by plaintiffs were not preserved as intended,” Ashleigh Koss, a U.S. spokeswoman, stated in an email Tuesday. “There was no intentional destruction of data,” she said. “Sanofi is working to obtain as much of the data as possible from alternative sources. This issue has no impact on the strong defenses Sanofi has in this litigation, and the company remains fully confident in the safety of Zantac.” Though Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline Plc, and Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, in addition to 33 generic drug makers, 25 retailers, and four distributors, are accused in the lawsuits of failing to properly warn users about Zantac’s health risks, only Sanofi has been accused in the filings of destroying emails. Former consumers have complained that GlaxoSmithKline Plc and Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH have been slow to give records during the pre-trial stage of the Zantac lawsuits, however.  Over 1,300 suits involving claims by more than 70,000 former Zantac users have been consolidated before U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg in Florida, making it one of the largest consolidations in the U.S. Rosenberg is overseeing information exchanges and early trials to test the merits of the claims against manufacturers. She has already thrown out some claims, including those saying Zantac was defectively designed.  The Zantac case is In Re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, 20-MD-2924, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach). Plaintiffs’ attorneys want Rosenberg to create two class-action cases for former Zantac consumers. The first would be for cancer patients who endured economic losses linked to the medicine. The second would include those who haven’t been diagnosed with cancer and seek compensation for medical monitoring in the future. Reference:  “Sanofi Accused Of Destroying Internal Emails.” Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-11/sanofi-accused-of-destroying-internal-emails-about-zantac-recall

Continue Reading

| Read Time: < 1 minute | Defective Consumer Devices

Juul Lawsuits On The Rise

April 15, 2021 — As of April 15, there are over 2000 Juul cases pending.  The case number was around 750 only a few months ago, signifying that the number of Juul lawsuits is dramatically increasing. Reference:  Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation | United States, 16 June 2021, www.jpml.uscourts.gov/

Continue Reading

| Read Time: 4 minutes | Car Accident

8 Tips for Hiring a Lawyer After a Car Accident

We all know that car accidents are an unfortunate reality of daily life. Yet no one ever plans to be one of the approximately 4.4 million Americans who are seriously injured in car accidents every year. Nor do most people think about the fact that car accidents are a leading cause of death for people under the age of 55.  So if you’ve been in a car accident, your life has probably been turned upside down. When that happens, you need a lawyer to help you get your life back on track. And not just any lawyer.  Here are 8 tips to keep in mind so you know when to hire an attorney after a car accident.  Tip #1: When to Hire an Attorney After a Car Accident Unless your car accident caused no injuries and little or no property damage, we strongly recommend that you consult an attorney. There are several reasons for this. For one, even minor fender-benders can result in expensive damage to your property, a pile of medical bills, and even lost wages. Second, an attorney has the legal expertise to serve as your advocate, help you understand your case, and work to maximize your compensation. They will also be familiar with how to persuade judges and juries in your favor.  Tip #2: Don’t Wait to Get an Attorney Sometimes people will wait to hire an attorney after a car accident because they’re worried about finances or want to try to figure things out on their own.  Do not make this mistake.  Getting a car accident attorney right away helps you preserve your legal options. Most states have a time limit called a statute of limitations that restricts your ability to file a claim after a certain period of time. So if you wait too long, your claim might be thrown out of court even if it is otherwise sound. Getting a lawyer immediately also helps protect you from being low-balled by insurance companies or hassled by any other third parties (like the other side’s attorneys).  Tip #3: Do Your Research First Not all attorneys are created equal.  Some are experienced, while others are just out of law school. Others may have a lot of experience in another area of law, but won’t be very familiar with car accident claims. And some attorneys just have a bad reputation.  For these reasons and more, it is important to research the attorneys in your area before contacting any of them. Look for attorneys that have outstanding reviews and years (or decades) of experience handling car accidents. Another good idea is to reach out to family and friends and learn about their experiences with local car accident attorneys. And while you can use online reviews, make sure that any reviews (positive or negative) are from verified customers, and not from anonymous sources.  Tip #4: Consider What Size Law Firm You Are Looking For Attorneys can either practice on their own or as part of a firm. Law firms range in size from having just a handful of attorneys to having hundreds of attorneys. There are advantages and disadvantages to both small law firms and large law firms.  Generally, small law firms are likely to give you more personal attention. However, they are sometimes limited in the kinds of cases that they offer and can vary in quality. Larger law firms tend to have legal specialists and the resources to prosecute more complex cases. At the same time, large law firms are more expensive and also more likely to charge an hourly rate as compared to working with you on a contingency basis.  Tip #5: Prepare for Your Consultations Make sure you are professional, courteous, and thorough when you consult with an attorney.  No matter what kind of attorney you speak with, they will have questions about your claim.  Be ready to discuss the critical facts of your case and show the attorney any evidence you have.  Tip #6: Speak with Several Attorneys Before Hiring One It’s essential to find an attorney that you can trust and be completely honest with. If you are able to get along with your attorney, it will make their representation smoother and more effective. Occasionally, an unsavory attorney might try to pressure you into hiring them before you consult with other potential firms. Avoid this kind of attorney at all costs. Also, make sure that you don’t sign any documents during a consultation unless you fully understand and agree to them.  Tip #7: Ask the Right Questions Before you hire any car accident lawyer, you need to ask several critical questions: What are the various potential outcomes for your case? Does the lawyer prefer to settle your kind of case or litigate in court? How long will it take to resolve your case? Does the attorney charge on an hourly basis, or on a contingency basis? How much does the attorney charge? How will the lawyer communicate the progress of your case with you? How long has the attorney been handling car accident claims? By asking these questions, you’ll quickly get a sense of whether the attorney is right for you.  Tip #8: Set Boundaries When you hire a car accident lawyer, it’s important to explain your expectations. Even the most skilled attorney won’t be able to guess how much you expect to receive from your case. Therefore, it’s best to discuss the following issues with your attorney: Your ideal outcome for the case; The minimum amount you are willing to settle your case for; The worst possible outcome of your case; and The potential disruptions to your life because of the lawsuit.  By having these conversations, you can hopefully get a realistic sense of how your case will unfold.  Why Should I Choose Gerling Law? Gerling Law is not just any law firm. Our experienced car accident lawyers know how difficult it is to put the pieces of your life together after a car accident. Unlike many other attorneys, we have decades of...

Continue Reading

| Read Time: 2 minutes | Defective Medical Devices

Three New Lawsuits Come Forward Against Paragard IUD

July 14, 2020 – Three new lawsuits alleging that Paragard is defective and causes severe complications and injuries were filed against Teva Pharmaceuticals.   The first lawsuit, a ten-count complaint, was filed on May 11, 2020 in the US District Court for the Eastern District of California.  As of July 14, 2020, the case was before Magistrate Judge William B. Shubb.   Notable claims were negligence, strict liability design defect, strict liability manufacturing defect, and strict liability failure to warn.  In her lawsuit, the plaintiff reported that she had the Paragard IUD for approximately two years after its implantation before she requested for its removal.  Her doctor removed the IUD following the manufacturer’s instructions to find one arm of the device gone, which then required the doctor to search and recover the part via a hysteroscope.   The second lawsuit was filed on May 26, 2020, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. As of July 14, 2020, the case was before Judge Gregory H. Woods.  Notable claims were negligence, design defect, and manufacturing defect.  The second plaintiff had the Paragard IUD for approximately five years after its implantation before she experienced uterine pain.  Similar to the first plaintiff, the second plaintiff requested for the IUD to be removed only for the doctor to find that it was missing an arm when they removed it.  The plaintiff claimed that Teva Pharmaceuticals “knew or should have known that Paragard can and does cause serious harm to individuals who use it, due to the risk of the Paragard’s arm breaking upon removal.” The third lawsuit, an eleven-count complaint, was filed on May 28, 2020, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois in the East St. Louis Division. As of July 14, 2020, the case was before Judge J. Phil Gilbert after being reassigned to him on June 24, 2020. Notable claims were negligence, failure to warn, violation of consumer protection laws, and gross negligence. The plaintiff was implanted with the Paragard IUD in 2008. In 2018, when her doctor attempted to remove the device according to Teva’s instructions, the device was missing an arm. The plaintiff underwent two procedures before the device was successfully removed. The plaintiff claims that “Paragard is inherently dangerous and defective, unfit and unsafe for its intended use.” All three plaintiffs claim that they were in good health when the Paragard IUD was implanted. When the IUD broke off while inside each plaintiff, they all required invasive procedures to remove the fragments. The plaintiffs allege that Teva Pharmaceuticals was aware of the dangers of the Paragard device and failed to warn the public about its risks. No trial date has been set in any of the three cases, yet they clearly depict the need for justice in the lives of those consumers who were burdened with serious injuries from their Paragard IUDs. Reference: “Paragard IUD Alleged to Cause Serious Injuries.” The National Law Review, www.natlawreview.com/article/paragard-iud-alleged-to-cause-serious-injuries.

Continue Reading

| Read Time: < 1 minute | Defective Consumer Devices

Jury Trial Date Set For Syngenta Weedkiller Case

June 28, 2021 — The federal judge coordinating the proceedings for claims that Syngenta AG’s paraquat weedkillers cause Parkinson’s disease, US Judge Nancy Rosenstengel of the Southern District of Illinois, announced that she was setting a jury trial date for November 15, 2022.  The order was issued in an initial hearing with lawyers representing the people filing such lawsuits.  There are 157 cases pending in state and federal courts around the country according to a June 22 court filing. The central claim is that Syngenta knew of its products’ risks, but failed to warn users.  The company has denied the allegations and any liability along with the other defendants, which include Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP, and Chevron USA, Inc. The case number for the multidistrict litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois is 3:21-md-03004-NJR. More than 100 cases move forward, but several are in the process of settling. A “notice of settlement” was filed on June 18 in California, stating that the parties in 16 cases pending in that state had reached an agreement on settlement terms. Reference: Gillam, Carey. “Jury Trial Date Set for Lawsuits Against Syngenta Alleging Weedkiller Causes Parkinson’s Disease • Children’s Health Defense.” Children’s Health Defense, childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/trial-date-syngenta-roundup-paraquat-parkinson-disease/.

Continue Reading

| Read Time: 3 minutes | Defective Consumer Devices

Juul to Pay $40 Million in North Carolina Settlement

June 28, 2021 — Juul Labs has agreed to pay North Carolina $40 million to settle the first lawsuit of thousands claiming the e-cigarette company’s advertising encouraged a significant increase in nicotine addiction among young people and caused a public health crisis.  The settlement announced on June 28, 2021, permits the company to avert a jury trial later this summer while the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decides whether Juul’s vaping and e-cigarette products can remain on the market.  The money will be paid over six years and used to fund programs that will help people quit e-cigarettes, prevent e-cigarette addiction, and research vaping devices.  The settlement also requires Juul to sell its products from behind the counter in North Carolina stores and to use third-party age verification systems for online sales. Juul must send young “mystery shoppers” to 1,000 stores each year to determine if the stores are selling to minors. The company is also banned from using models younger than 35 in advertisements, with no advertisements allowed to be posted near schools. Thirteen other states including California, New York, and Massachusetts have filed similar lawsuits, which leaves the number of cases against Juul surmounting to around 2,600.  The central claim in each lawsuit is that the company was either aware of or should have been aware of its products being bought, resold, and consumed by underage teenagers in a concerningly high and increasing amount.  In addition to the lawsuits, a group of 39 attorneys general from both Republican- and Democratic-led states have been investigating Juul’s advertising practices for over a year. “For years, Juul targeted young people, including teens, with highly addictive e-cigarettes,” Josh Stein, the North Carolina attorney general, who sued Juul in May 2019, said in a statement announcing the settlement. “It lit the spark and fanned the flames of a vaping epidemic among our children — one that you can see in any high school in North Carolina.” But the company was able to reach the settlement deal without admitting to the allegations, which was one of its main goals to avoid further trouble in other lawsuits or the FDA review. In Juul’s statement, Joshua Raffel, a company spokesman, said: “This settlement is consistent with our ongoing effort to reset our company and its relationship with our stakeholders, as we continue to combat underage usage and advance the opportunity for harm reduction for adult smokers.” Juul had fervently pursued a settlement in the North Carolina trial, which was set for July 12.  If Juul did not reach a settlement, the company would have been in court battling the testimonies from parents and children while the FDA was deciding its fate, which must be done by early September.   Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, who teaches product liability, said the settlement bodes well for the other states suing Juul.  “This opens a similar possibility to every state going forward,” he said. “North Carolina has been in the vanguard and deserves some credit. I think this has huge financial and other implications.” Despite this, Tobias said was not surprised that Juul did not admit the allegations against it.  “That almost always happens in these kinds of settlements — that’s a standard clause,” he said. Because none of the other lawsuits against Juul have been scheduled to begin during 2021, the company has not started any other serious settlement talks.  Juul is awaiting the FDA ruling before deciding what its next move is; if the FDA allows Juul products to remain on the market with the purpose of helping adult smokers quit, the company’s arguments will hold more weight.  Though Juul will have more negotiating power, settling with multiple plaintiffs would be expensive and possibly an expense the company cannot afford.  According to analysts, the private company has seen a dramatic decrease during the past year. Marc Scheineson, a lawyer with Alston & Bird, whose practice includes small tobacco companies, called the $40 million in the North Carolina settlement “a relatively small sum to pay to avoid mounting legal fees and the plaintiff pile-on syndrome.”  He also pointed out how most of the steps Juul agreed to take, such as not advertising near schools and behind-the-counter sales, are actions that it has already taken in hopes of gaining more public approval.  Scheineson also said that e-cigarettes, “still have an important public health use by adults as a proven effective tool to quit smoking more harmful cigarettes.” Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said that the North Carolina settlement was a positive step that holds Juul to the same accountability and enforces similar restrictions that already apply to other tobacco companies.  “But,” he added, “these measures will not solve the youth e-cigarette crisis. Nothing short of F.D.A. action will reverse the youth e-cigarette epidemic.” Reference:  Kaplan, Sheila. “Juul to Pay $40 Million to Settle N.C. Vaping Case.” The New York Times, 28 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/28/health/juul-vaping-settlement-north-carolina.html.

Continue Reading

| Read Time: 3 minutes | Personal Injury

Should I Hire a Construction Accident Lawyer?

Construction workers have one of the most dangerous jobs in the country. For that reason, the law takes the safety of construction workers very seriously. Under laws like OSHA, construction employers protect their employees by giving them personal protective equipment. Employers also work to adequately train their workers to handle dangerous equipment and work environments. Despite the law’s requirements, employers and contractors sometimes fail to protect their workers. When that happens, debilitating injuries and even deaths can result.  If you have been injured while working at a construction site, the disruptions to your quality of life can be serious. That’s why you should seriously consider hiring a construction accident lawyer today. Our experienced construction accident attorneys can help you defend your rights and provide you with the personal attention that your case requires.  Why Should I Get a Construction Site Accident Lawyer? Having an attorney provides you with several essential benefits. An Attorney Will Be Your Advocate After a construction accident, it’s almost guaranteed that you will have to deal with various third parties like contractors, insurance companies, and medical providers. None of these third parties are on your side or have any obligation to help defend your rights. Instead, these entities fight to save money for themselves or otherwise advance their own interests.  A construction accident lawyer knows how to stand up to these groups and negotiate effectively on your behalf. This will not only save you the trouble and stress of dealing with these groups, but will also help you get a better outcome for your case. An Attorney Can Help You Get the Compensation You Deserve Even relatively minor construction accidents frequently lead to lost wages, expensive medical bills, and permanent injuries. More serious accidents like falls, burns, and electric shocks can cause debilitating medical conditions like paralysis that change your life forever. No matter whether your injuries are crippling or relatively minor, an attorney will help you understand how much compensation you can receive. An Attorney Can Help You Understand Your Options and What Is at Stake You may be tempted to avoid hiring a construction site accident lawyer, especially if you don’t think your case is very serious. Yet the major reason you should consult an attorney is that their legal expertise allows them to see your case in a different light.  Even if the law requires your employer to respect your rights, there’s no guarantee that they will.  A construction site attorney is different. From the moment you attend your initial consultation, they will help you understand your rights under the law and your employer’s duties to you.  For example, what may seem like a trivial safety violation may be critical for helping you win your case. An attorney can also help you understand how to preserve your legal options and protect yourself from potential retaliation. Finally, an experienced construction accident lawyer knows the various kinds of construction accident claims and can give you guidance on what remedies you may have. An Attorney Can Obtain the Information You Need An experienced construction accident attorney is well-versed in state and federal laws concerning employers’ safety obligations and workers’ compensation. They know how to get the information you need to have the best chance of success. They will also investigate the circumstances of your case, collect helpful evidence, and interview witnesses. Once they’ve assembled all of this information, an attorney can persuasively present your case before a judge and jury if necessary.  How Do I Choose the Right Construction Accident Lawyer for My Claim? Maybe by now, you’ve decided to consult an attorney. However, it’s essential to pick the right attorney. So before you hire one, you need to consider several details. Does the attorney you want to hire have years or decades of experience, or did they just get out of law school? Do they have experience with construction accidents, or do they specialize in some other kind of law? How much do they charge? Do they charge their clients by the hour or only if they win your case? The ideal construction site attorney: Has many positive client reviews and testimonies; Has experience with your type of claim; Works on a contingency fee basis; Offers free initial consultations; and Has been successful at winning their clients’ cases.  A construction site attorney that meets these criteria can make all the difference between winning and losing your case.  Why Should I Choose Gerling Law? Gerling Law Injury Attorneys is not just any law firm. Our experienced construction accident lawyers know how difficult it is to put the pieces of your life together after being injured. As our client testimonials show, we’ll work with you to thoroughly investigate your case and ensure that you’re treated as a person rather than just a number. On top of that, we’ll draw upon our extensive experience to help you get the results you deserve in your case. And we won’t bill you for any legal fees unless and until we win your case. Even if you still aren’t sure your case needs an attorney, contact us today. Initial consultations are always free, so you have nothing to lose by reaching out. Go with Experience. Go with Gerling. ®

Continue Reading

| Read Time: 5 minutes | Personal Injury

Can I Get Compensation for Pain and Suffering?

If you were injured due to the careless or intentional acts of someone else, there is a good chance that you will be coping with more than just the financial pain of your injuries. You may be wondering if pain and suffering damages are available.  What Is Pain and Suffering? The term “pain and suffering” refers to the physical and emotional pain caused by the injury that you would not have had to endure had the negligent action not taken place. Injuries can be costly financially, but there can also be significant implications for your quality of life. Compensation for what you are going through is pain and suffering damages. This type of recovery falls under the umbrella of non-economic damages.  Economic vs Non-Economic Damages Both economic and non-economic damages are considered “compensatory” damages because you are being compensated for things that never should have been an issue in the first place.  Economic Damages Injuries can be costly to treat, and property can be costly to repair. Economic damages cover the actual expenses that result from the incident that injured you. The goal of economic damages is to restore you to the financial position you would have been in had the negligence not occurred. Some of the things that economic damages cover include: Medical costs; Physical therapy;  Rehabilitation equipment;  Lost wages;  Caregiver expenses;  Property damage; Transportation to distant doctor visits; and  Medications.  These costs can be compiled and proven using receipts, invoices, pay stubs, and the like. This makes them very easy to calculate. Non-Economic Damages Not all effects of your injuries will be this easy to quantify. Non-economic damages are those that impact your mental state and wellbeing. These are often things that cannot be changed with money. Nor can they be solved with a simple apology. And even though money cannot fix all wrongs, financial compensation is the only way the law has of compensating victims for these losses. Pain and suffering damages are included in non-economic damages, along with some of the following: Mental anguish,  Post-traumatic stress,  Depression,  Anxiety,  Embarrassment,  Loss of consortium, and Loss of quality of life.  Sometimes the mental aspect of what you have been through or the severity of your injuries can prevent you from living life as you once did. Therapy is often necessary after a traumatic accident. That alone is enough to constitute non-economic damages. If you are injured to the point that you are unable to do the things you love most in life, you are likely experiencing varying degrees of loss of quality of life and should be compensated accordingly.  Proving Pain and Suffering Damages Unlike economic damages that come with a price tag, pain and suffering damages are more complicated to prove but very relevant to your case. In order to prove pain and suffering damages, you will need to provide supportive evidence about the extent of your injury and the limitations it imposes on your normal day-to-day activities and lifestyle. Potential evidence may include:  Detailed police reports from the incident that caused the injury; Photos from the accident to demonstrate severity; Medical records from all treatment you have undergone; Testimonials from medical doctors; Testimonials from therapists; A list of long-term medications;  Visual proof of your previous lifestyle, which can include photos or video demonstrating the activities you did but can no longer take part in; Testimonials from friends or family members about the effects of your injury; Co-worker or supervisor testimonials regarding changes to your ability to do your job; and Expert analysis regarding limitations on earning capacity.  Gathering this type of evidence is an important part of achieving fair compensation and can be even more crucial if your case goes to trial. An experienced personal injury attorney will understand and make informed recommendations on the best way to present your case to get the pain and suffering damages you deserve. Calculating Pain and Suffering Damages There are a number of factors that go into determining the amount of damages a court should award for pain and suffering. Whether you are negotiating with an insurance company or presenting your case before a judge and jury, some things to be considered include the:  Severity of your injuries;  Required past and future medical treatment; Egregiousness of the behavior that caused the injury; Overall physical and mental pain suffered and reasonably expected into the future;   Impact on your quality of life;  Changes and limitations to employment; and Long-term prognosis of the injury.  Each injury is unique, so there are no set standards for how much compensation you will receive for pain and suffering. However, there are two different types of calculations commonly used to determine pain and suffering damages.  Pain and Suffering Per Diem Method This method of calculating pain and suffering damages assigns a specific monetary value to each day from the date of the injuries to the date of “maximum medical improvement” or MMI. A medical expert determines this date by asserting that the condition has improved as much as it possibly can and will not continue to heal. It can also be the date that the injury completely heals.  Pain and Suffering Multiplier Method  This is the more common of the two methods for calculating pain and suffering damages. Here are the general steps to using this calculation: Add up the total amount of your medical bills; Determine a number between 1.5 and 5, based on the severity of your injuries; and  Multiply your medical bills by this number.  It really takes an experienced attorney to arrive at a feasible multiplier number. The more severe the injuries, the higher your multiplier will be. The degree of negligence in the action that caused the injury can also be a determining factor. Complications with using this method arise when the multiplier number is in dispute or the treatment is not extremely costly, but the long-term impact is.  Pain and Suffering Settlement Examples There are a lot of potential situations where the injury results in long-term suffering. Here are some...

Continue Reading