Are you willing to give up your rights to be compensated fully for ALL of the damages caused by another?

If you are injured in an accident, you can be sure that you want to recover every dollar you are entitled to for your treatment and for your pain and suffering.

But insurance companies for years have been trying to fight you tooth and nail to minimize what they pay out to you for pain and suffering due to your injuries so they can maximize their profits at your expense.

This is why we are constantly being bombarded in the legal world with proposals for caps on pain and suffering awards for injured people – a maximum dollar amount that can be paid to injury victims based on numbers pulled out of a hat, rather than on reality. Those proposals come from insurance companies and their very active, highly-paid lobbyists, who want to keep the money from you so they can keep it for themselves.

Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/stuartbur

Caps are not fair for injury victims. They say that your pain and suffering, no matter how severe or long-term, has a finite value and that your case is not worth any more than the arbitrary figures designated by the caps. Such caps are only good for the insurance companies.

Caps have been introduced under the argument that they’re helping to control escalating health-care costs. But that’s not true. The costs of actual health care aren’t changing via such caps. The “savings” are only being seen in the payouts by insurance companies that are trying to pay out as little as possible to injury victims. That’s an insult to the victims.

Insurance companies argue that caps help them control costs for everyone by stopping inflated damage awards. If that were the case and if those lower payouts were saving them money, why don’t we all see lower insurance premiums as a result? Because they’re pocketing the savings to fatten their own wallets, all at the expense of victims who are seriously injured in accidents and are being limited by unfair caps on their damage awards.

If a cap on pain and suffering awards is set at $250,000, for instance, then an injury victim would be limited to only that amount for their case in their lifetime, even if their injuries were so severe from burns, a vehicle crash or other catastrophic event that they could no longer work. That is outrageous.

How about if we turn the whole world of injury payments upside down and put the onus on the real perpetrators? What if you are a victim of medical malpractice and are severely injured due to an error by your doctor or hospital? Then why not create a $250,000 maximum payment cap for your injuries from the insurance company, and force the errant doctor and hospital to pay for any and all medical treatment above that for the rest of your life? Then the ones who actually caused your grievous injuries are being forced to remember it each day because they’ll have to pay for your care. That might make it more real for them the next time they treat a patient.

In states across the nation, this issue of damage caps and their legality is being reviewed. A $500,000 cap on medical malpractice damage awards imposed several years ago in Illinois was struck down last month by the Illinois Supreme Court, according to a story in BusinessWeek.  The court found that “the limits set by the Legislature violate the state constitution’s separation of powers principle,” the story said.

This is a key theme in the fight in Congress today as the health care reform proposals continue to be batted around between Congress and the White House. Many Republicans in Congress continue to argue that such damage caps are a good way to rein in health costs. Well, that may sound like a great sound bite, but that will change the minute you are involved in a serious accident or are the victim of medical malpractice. That’s when you’ll realize that your rights are being limited all in the name of “solving the nation’s health care crisis.”

Instead, caps of pain and suffering damage awards are arbitrary and protect only the insurance companies, doctors and hospitals. They are not looking out for the victims of such tragedies. Instead, it’s an attempt to deprive innocent victims of their day in court.

Yes, as a personal injury attorney, I do have a vested interest in this emotional topic. But that doesn’t make my premise wrong. When you take away the rights of the individual in favor of a corporation, which is what damage caps are doing, then I can never side with the corporation. An individual’s rights are paramount to those of the insurance companies. I am not ashamed to say that.

After hearing all the evidence and rendering a decision, if a jury verdict is too high after a trial, there are natural controls to fix that problem and make the award fairer. The trial judge can lower the award, as can state Superior Court and Supreme Court judges, if necessary.

We don’t need caps. That’s a red herring.

At some point in your life,  you will probably need to hire a lawyer.

It may be for help when you are injured in a vehicle accident or fall, or if you are going through a divorce, tax dispute, criminal charges or custody or other legal issues.  It’s uncommon today if at some point you don’t have to at least consult an attorney about something in your life.

So if that happens, where in the world do you start?

At MyPhillyLawyer, we have some tips for you that can help you make the right decision to find the best legal counsel for your case.

Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/DNY59

First, look for attorneys who specialize in handling the kinds of cases you are pursuing, whether its a personal injury consultation, a tax issue, divorce or other matter. By finding someone who specializes, they’ll have the proper expertise to handle your case in a way that will get you the best outcome.  You can literally start with the telephone book and look through the advertisements for attorneys who handle specific cases. You can also check with your local Bar Association to ask about specific  attorneys, their qualifications and for information about their backgrounds.

Another good place to learn about attorneys is to ask friends, co-workers and others about their own experiences and see if they can recommend a lawyer who they have hired in the past. A real-life recommendation based on a personal experience can be very worthwhile and helpful to guide you to an attorney with a record of success and good client relationships.

Next, be sure to do your own due diligence. Scour the Internet using a search engine such as Google and carefully dive into the Web sites of any attorneys and law firms that you are considering. Check into their online case histories and details of settlements and verdicts in cases like your own. Read up on their approaches to their cases and find out if the have the depth and expertise that you require in your case. Make lists of questions to ask on the phone or during an initial meeting with attorneys who might make your first cut.

Those Web sites that you visit will also give you insights into the lawyers you are reviewing. Is the site information-filled and laid out in an organized and appealing way? Take a good look because what you see online will give you clear indications of the professionalism of the law firms that you are investigating. You should expect to find professional results of their casework, with statistics on their recovery and success rates, as well as helpful information on their philosophy of handling cases and working with their clients.

You want a law firm that works for you and places you and your case in the forefront of their work. You want great results from a law firm that will be there to support you during the proceedings of your case and let you know every step of the way how they are handling everything, from representing you in negotiations and in court to ultimately getting you the results that you are seeking.

One other place where you can learn about qualified attorneys — and those you might want to avoid — is by searching news media sites to find out about lawyers and their cases and settlements that are in the news. You want to find someone who can best represent you and be an effective advocate for your family.

Choosing a lawyer is not unlike buying a car or a house.  Don’t fall in love with the first one you see. Do your research. Ask a lot of questions. Visit many. Get recommendations from trusted friends.  And when you’re ready to decide on who to hire, listen to your gut and to your heart and go with the attorney who makes you feel represented, who makes you feel like they are on your side and involved in your case in every way.

It can be a legal jungle out there if you don’t have the right representation.  Take your time, organize your search and make the best decision you can based on the best information you can collect. You’re not alone when you have the right lawyer by your side.

You have our word on that.

You’re sitting in Starbucks having a coffee and relaxing when another customer walks in with a big, shiny handgun in a holster on his hip and heads over to the counter.

Do you:

A)    Hit the deck in the fear that there’s about to be a robbery?

B)     Feel uncomfortable because of the menacing presence of this stranger and his gun in such a non-traditional, non-threatening setting?

C)    Feel reassured due to the presence of an apparently law-abiding citizen who is there to protect you with his crime-deterring gun in case some bad guy shows up?

In many states, seeing a civilian man wearing an unconcealed gun and holster in public may not be such an unusual occurrence. Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/sleddogtwo

Think these are crazy scenarios?

Well, think again.

These kinds of questions are being asked and talked about across the U.S. as the pro-gun and anti-gun lobbies go head-to-head in communities with so-called “open carry” laws. That means that citizens are permitted to legally and openly carry a handgun with them, as long as it is holstered and visible. Some cities and other communities are exempt from such laws, making open carry weapons illegal. OpenCarry.org, a gun rights group that supports open carry rights, maintains a map on its Web site showing the laws in each state. In Pennsylvania, outside of Philadelphia and any communities that have their own restrictions, you are legally allowed to carry a handgun as long as it is visible, according to the Web site PaOpenCarry.org. You can’t, however, carry a gun with you in a vehicle unless you have a license to carry a firearm.

How does the open carry issue make you feel?

In a story yesterday in The Wall Street Journal, supporters and opponents on both sides of the highly emotional issue weighed in. The feelings on both sides are sobering.

The Starbucks scenario is not so abstract – in many states around the U.S., a person is allowed to legally carry a holstered weapon on their person in stores and other public places, unless the stores decide to ban guns on their properties, according to The Wall Street Journal story. That means that stores and chains like Starbucks are essentially being forced to take sides on the issue, which can cause havoc with supporters on both sides of the controversy. So far, Starbucks is choosing not to restrict open carry handguns in their stores. Other businesses have chosen to ban open carry guns on their premises.

There’s no easy legal answer here.

Yes, the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

But there are many interpretations of the amendment out there, and times have certainly changed since the ratification of the U.S. Constitution way back in 1788 and of its first 10 Amendments, also known as the Bill of Rights, in 1789.

So what to do?

More than anything, we think the safety of the public at large should be the central issue here, and that the best answer for that is getting and keeping both illegal and legal guns off our streets.

While guns are out there in our communities every day, whether concealed legally or illegally or carried in full view, their presence in a free society isn’t needed on a day to day basis.

Many gun advocates argue that having guns out in the general population makes society safer by having guns in the mix if criminals attempt to harm someone else.

But that isn’t necessarily the case. Having a gun available in many situations that escalate into violence or arguments would mean injecting a deadly option where it wouldn’t immediately have been available otherwise. Gun rights supporters, including the National Rifle Association (NRA),  insist that guns don’t kill people without the participation of a human being who fires the weapons. That’s true but that’s oversimplifying it.

If an argument happens in a Starbucks coffee store or anywhere else, the presence of a loaded gun now turns a possible fight into a potential powder keg that could have deadly consequences.

There are far too many illegal guns on America’s streets today, but that shouldn’t mean that we increase and encourage the spread of many more legal guns amid the population to balance out the threats.

There is a tipping point where more guns means more danger in society.

We have enough danger.

Instead of adding more open carry guns, we need to work harder to get illegal guns off of our streets, however difficult that is to do.

More guns on our streets, even if they are carried by law-abiding citizens, won’t make us safer.

Twice in the last three months, Philadelphia-area law enforcement officers have been involved in off-duty vehicle accidents that allegedly involve driving under the influence of alcohol.

For law enforcement officers, who absolutely, positively must be accountable to a higher standard than the people they are sworn to protect, that is unacceptable.

Last month, a 23-year-old off-duty Philadelphia Police officer was driving north on I-95 near Girard Avenue when his vehicle crashed into the rear of a state police car while two state troopers were assisting a tow truck driver who was preparing to remove an abandoned car, according to a story in The Philadelphia Inquirer. The two troopers and the two truck driver sustained injuries and the off-duty city officer was being investigated for DUI and was placed on desk duty.

Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/ftwitty

In January, a 47-year-old, Philadelphia-based DUI expert and corporal for the Pennsylvania State Police was charged with drunken driving, careless driving and an open container violation in connection with an accident Dec. 17 when his car struck a guardrail on Route 422, according to a story in the Philadelphia Daily News. He was placed on administrative leave while the incident was being investigated.

We know that police officers are human like the rest of us and that this doesn’t only occur here in Philadelphia, but individual law enforcement agencies across the nation must work harder to stop this problem, and quickly.

It’s bad enough being involved in a vehicle accident. What makes it even worse is if you are hit by a vehicle driven by a drunken police officer, who is supposed to be out there protecting us all – even if they are “off-duty.”

We need to have effective alcohol treatment programs to help law enforcement officers who have drinking problems. And deny it or not, if they are driving drunk, they have drinking problems.

We need to have better mechanisms inside police departments to help officers who are showing signs of such problems. That means counseling programs, rehab programs and other support for officers who are troubled.

Yes, police work is an incredibly stressful, often violent and difficult job, but overconsumption of alcohol and illegal drugs is not the answer.

We need to help officers who are having these kinds of problems and encourage better, more productive coping mechanisms.

Law enforcement officers, as part of their jobs and responsibilities, automatically must live up to this higher standard of behavior because we give them the powers to watch over us if we behave in such irresponsible ways. There is no credibility in the legal system if law enforcement officers can be arrested for drunken driving one day and then arrest any of us and charge us with drunken driving on a different day.

It’s bad enough when you are injured in an accident and then have to wait for a monetary settlement or verdict to compensate you for your injuries.

It’s even worse if you are victimized a second time by one of the many companies out there that are cashing in on the anticipated cash settlements of injured people by “loaning” them money up front and then taking huge windfalls from the settlements when the money is finally received.

When times get tough and predatory lenders are circling, you’ve got to watch out for yourself even more carefully.

High interest rates from settlement cash advance companies can be astronomical, leaving accident victims with far less money from their settlements than they anticipated. Image credit: © iStockphoto.com/ArchMen

These so-called cash advances on pending settlements look like a good thing because they can provide you with cash when you need it most after an injury. Then the companies reassure you that all will be OK because if you end up not receiving a settlement, you will owe them nothing.

The real problems come from the terms of the so-called cash advances, which usually carry incredibly high interest rates that have to be paid by the injury victim.  So if you are expecting a $15,000 settlement for your case, and your attorney receives $6,000 plus $1,000 for costs related to the case, your settlement comes in at about $8,000.  If you borrowed a few thousand dollars against that $8,000 balance with a settlement cash advance business, then you may have to pay them as much as $5,000 or more after their astronomical interest rates are figured in, leaving you only about $3,000 from the original settlement.

That’s just not fair to accident victims.

The better thing to do is to be patient and wait for the settlement to happen naturally, so you don’t lose a substantial part of the money to a cash advance scam.

I think this predatory practice by settlement cash advance companies is getting out of hand and accident victims need to be very aware of what they are getting involved in if making such a deal.

In fact, such settlement cash advance arrangements can also make it more complicated for your attorney to settle a case because there’s now a pending claim on part of the money before it’s ever received. And worse, accident victims then can feel victimized again when they learn how much they will lose to one of these companies once the bill comes due for the cash advance.

Yes, there are times when such an arrangement can be beneficial for an accident victim — such as when they have $30,000 in outstanding bills and are awaiting a large settlement of $1 million or more. In such  a case, there would not be a huge impact on the remaining funds once the cash advance loan was repaid. But since the typical accident settlement is more in the $15,000 range, the impact is much more severe once those loan fees start racking up for unsuspecting accident victims.

These companies are pandering to people who are desperate and who don’t really have the wherewithal to accurately measure the costs involved if they accept the settlement loans.

Our advice is to steer clear of such offers and keep your settlement for your needs and the needs of your family. Don’t do something that will make you feel victimized again.

As your attorneys, we are here to help you every step of the way with your case.

If you need anything, talk to us and let us continue to try to help you while your case is being moved forward.

At MyPhillyLawyer.com, that is our promise to you.

If your child has been injured during the birthing process, you may be entitled to financial compensation for their medical care. You may also receive compensation for suffering and loss of quality of life due to the birth injury.

In this month’s video blog, attorney Dean Weitzman of MyPhillyLawyer lists the three most common ways a birth injury occurs. He also emphasizes the firm’s role in securing compensation so that parents can maximize their child’s potential.