Archive for June, 2009

Since the announcement of Chrysler’s bankruptcy plan nearly a month ago, opponents have gathered to express outrage at the injustice of this plan. As we discussed previously, the Chrysler bankruptcy plan leaves people who are injured as the result of defective Chrysler vehicles without legal claims against the “new” emerging company.

This outrage did little to alter the fate of Chrysler; the bankruptcy was approved with minimal interruptions. Chrysler has emerged from bankruptcy without liability for product defect clams. However, this outrage has made a difference.

Originally GM was expected to follow the path forged by Chrysler, eliminating all responsibility for product liability claims as part of the bankruptcy settlement. In the initial bankruptcy filing, the company proposed precisely this course of action.

Under pressure from state attorneys general, consumer groups, and injured victims though, GM has reconsidered. According to recently filed court documents, “new GM” will honor product liability claims arising after the company emerges from bankruptcy.

This is certainly a step in the right direction. When a company’s negligence results in injuries, the injured people should not be left alone to face the consequences. However, this is only a partial solution. The amendments do nothing to change the effects of the proposed bankruptcy on people with existing product liability claims. Even with this amended plan, several hundred individuals with catastrophic injuries caused by the negligence of GM will have nowhere to turn.

With this amendment it seems quite likely that GM will be able to emerge quickly from bankruptcy. The amendments have placated many of the most vocal critics, who are willing to compromise as a matter of practicality. Unfortunately,  this will leave already-injured victims among those shouldering the burden of the bankruptcy.

For years, DUI defense attorneys have questioned the reliability of breath test results used as evidence of alcohol intoxication in DUI cases. Criminal defense attorneys across the nation have suggested that the source code used to program alcohol breath test machines have errors that make the machines render unreliable results in certain circumstances.

Reliability of the results is important because in a criminal prosecution, defendants have a right to cross-examine witnesses against them. But for evidence provided from a machine, however, the defendant cannot cross examine the machine, although it provides evidence against the defendant.

The New Jersey Supreme Court has considered the reliability of these machines and analyzed whether the source code—the programming code used to run the breath test machines—accurately programs the machines to provide reliable results. Ultimately, the New Jersey Supreme Court considered the breath test machine used in that state, the Alcotest, manufactured by Draeger, Inc., to be reliable. Courts in Minnesota and Arizona have also considered the source code issue as it relates to the breath test machines used in those states—both use versions of the Intoxilyzer, manufactured by CMI.

In Pennsylvania, law enforcement officers also use a version of the Intoxilyzer in breath tests of drivers they suspect of drunken driving. But Pennsylvania courts have apparently not considered the source code issue yet. Cases in which a court considers the source code for a breath test machine can have far-reaching effects. A finding that the machine renders unreliable results of intoxication because of mistakes in the source code can affect any driver that is currently facing charges of drunken driving based on evidence of a breath test taken on the machine. Future challenges to drunken driving charges in Pennsylvania based on source code could change the way that DUI offenses are investigated and prosecuted in Pennsylvania.

Last Saturday, the New York Times published an article about rampant medical negligence in a Philadelphia hospital, drawing national attention to a terrible local problem. According to the article, with broken equipment and minimal oversight, a “rogue cancer unit” at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center botched 92 of 116 procedures intended to help prostate cancer patients.

The article cites many problems, from a regulatory system that allowed the doctor to revise his surgical plan after the procedure so that it would match his results to a unit completely lacking a peer-review system, but fails to truly explain how such problems could persist. The record of failure spans more than 6 years.

Shining light on a broken system is important; highlighting the problems of this hospital may help future patients to inquire further and to speak up when concerned about the treatment they’re receiving. The problem is, this light does little to help those patients who have already been harmed by the hospital errors. For the already injured, medical malpractice lawsuits provide the recourse that is so desperately needed following clear displays of medical negligence.

Last week, President Obama addressed the American Medical Association. In his speech, he indicated that he intends to reform the health care system, and that part as part of this reform he plans to work with doctors to limit their vulnerability to malpractice lawsuits. He expressly noted that he doesn’t intend to impose caps for medical malpractice awards, but he did not elaborate on the particular types of reforms he hopes to enact.

No one questions that the current health care system has flaws. The New York Times article provides but one example of the problems; a cursory search of any news source reveals many, many more. However, one must hope that when enacting any reforms, the current administration is careful to not to sacrifice the rights of injured victims.

If you have been injured in a car accident, a work-related injury or other personal injury accident or hurt by medical malpractice, you may be wondering how you will pay your medical expenses, keep up with your own bills and heal from your injury.

For information on personal injury matters, what makes a good case, how to retain an attorney without fronting the costs, and other common client questions, you can watch and listen to attorney Dean Weitzman of MyPhillyLawyer answer various questions about his personal injury practice.

What a racket.

Private companies come in to operate two juvenile detention facilities in Luzerne County and Butler County. Then two Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas judges allegedly accept kickbacks from the juvenile detention facilities to send juveniles for lengthy, profitable stays, regardless of the facts of the legal cases against the kids.

It’s like a bad made-for-TV movie script.

But the worst part of it is, that’s exactly what federal prosecutors say actually happened. The Pennsylvania Federal District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania has since ordered that a special master be appointed to get to the bottom of the sordid mess and make recommendations to resolve the injustices that have occurred.

The two judges, Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. and Michael T. Conahan pleaded guilty in February to charges of corruption and tax fraud, according to a story in The Philadelphia Inquirer. The two are going to spend the next seven years in jail, but now the legal wheels are rolling to figure out the status of the kids who got enmeshed in the judges’ scheme.

This is so outrageous, so incomprehensible, that it boggles the mind.

The juveniles involved were taken in to a system that was tilted against them from the start, no matter what the “facts” were in each of their cases.

There must be a higher accounting, a higher responsibility for judges in our court system.

So now, what’s needed?

These children, and their families, who have been illegally detained by these corrupt, evil judges, must be compensated for their grave losses. They lost their freedom. They were taken away and locked up under bogus punishments. Their rights were violated by the very judges who were supposed to protect them.

Money damages resulting from successful lawsuits can’t give them back that lost time in juvenile detention, but it is the only way these children and their families can be compensated for some of the pain and suffering they have endured. This must never happen again, and justice must be served for every child who was unfairly and illegally victimized by these former judges. Someone must be held accountable. It is our responsibility to these kids.

A careening car, four young victims – was it a police chase?

Even as the police investigation continues, questions persist in the deaths of three young children and a 22-year-old woman in Philadelphia’s Feltonville neighborhood on June 10, where an attempted vehicle stop by police resulted in a vehicle chase, a fleeing car and a tragedy that has rocked the city. According to an account of the crash in The Philadelphia Inquirer, officers were responding to a 9-1-1 report about a motorcyclist who was attacked by two men in a gray Pontiac Grand Am. One of the men stole the victim’s motorcycle while the man was stopped at an intersection, then fled as the Pontiac was driven away simultaneously by an accomplice. Soon after police got the report, an officer pulled up behind the car nearby and pursued it, according to the newspaper. Read the rest of this entry »