November 16, 2008 by Zale.

It has been suggested to me that I should take just about any injury case that comes up, even if I don’t see merit in the case.  I disagree with this approach.  I only take cases that I believe have merit.  To do otherwise would support frivolous litigation.  It also does a disservice to the client.  If they have a bad case, the attorney should be the first to tell them.

Posted in Litigation, Injury Law, Insurance Law | No Comments »

November 10, 2008 by Zale.

I Corinthians 6:1-6 (NIV) states:

If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church!  I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers!  (Scripture thanks to Biblegateway)

Unfortunately, churches seem to forget about this scripture when money or property is involved.  The latest case of this is Avondale Church of Christ v. Merrill Lynch.  In this case the Court of Appeals found that this case deals with ecclesiastical (church) law and the trial court had no jurisdiction.

So, what do we learn from this?

1. If you are a church that claims to be an independent congregation, have some sort of written operating agreement.
2. Read the scripture.  There are plenty of us who are Christian attorneys who can mediate or arbitrate your church disputes.  Don’t take the matter to court.

Here’s another scripture:

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will. Romans 12:2 (NIV)

Posted in Litigation, General Law | No Comments »

November 9, 2008 by Zale.

Most attorneys in Tennessee do not take slip and fall cases without taking a long hard look at them.  For me, I won’t just take one to add to my file count.  I want to make sure that the hazard is NOT open and obvious.  I prefer having proof that the property owner was aware of the hazard.  I also prefer for my client to be completely free of any fault in fall.

Normally, the above is not the case.  Most of the cases I was involved with as an adjuster, the injured person who fell was simply not watching what they were doing.

So, if you have a slip and fall, I will be happy to talk with you about it, but don’t get offended if I don’t take it.

Posted in Injury Law | No Comments »

October 29, 2008 by Zale.

Here’s a great discussion of Planned Parenthood’s connection to racism and the overall injustice known as Abortion.

Posted in Right To Life, General Law | No Comments »

October 14, 2008 by Zale.

Punitive damages are those that punish another party for fraudulent, intentional, reckless or malicious behavior.  Recently plaintiff Mohr received a verdict over $53M for the deaths of his family members as a result of a motor vehicle accident.  However, he, as the administrator of the estates of the deceased, will not be able to collect all of that.

The courts don’t like, what they consider, excessive punitive damage awards.  Ever since State Farm v. Campbell, the court likes to keep punitive damage awards under 9 times the compensatory damage award.

In Mr. Mohr’s instance, the Tennessee Court of Appeals said that a 4 times multiplier would be sufficient under the U.S. Constitution, so he loses $13.8M.  At the end of the day, Mohr’s attorneys did a good job of finding the issues with the design of the Mohr’s vehicle and enabling the estate to collect more than it would have, had this just been your average car wreck.  However, had Chrysler taken better care of designing the Caravan in question, maybe Mr. Mohr would not have had to fight this battle in court, and maybe he would still have his loved ones.

In case you want to read the whole case, here it is.

If you have lost a family member due to an automobile accident in Tennessee, contact our office to discuss your case.  Fatalities are never easy or comfortable to deal with, but after being an insurance adjuster for over 11 years,  I’ve dealt with many of them.

Posted in Litigation, Injury Law | 1 Comment »

October 13, 2008 by Zale.

I’m hoping that this will be a fun activity for all.  I have a pretty good number of subscribers to this blog, but I’ve not gotten many comments.  So, that tells me that I have a good number of passive readers.  Thank you to all.

Here’s where you get to participate.  What’s your question?  Surely you have to have some legal question you would like to  have addressed.  So here’s your chance.  I’ll address the questions in upcoming posts.

I look forward to hearing from you!

Posted in Criminal Law, Litigation, Negotiations, Diminished Value, Injury Law, Insurance Practices, Business Law, Right To Life, Insurance Law, General Law | No Comments »

October 10, 2008 by Zale.

I know that I’m a bit of an anomaly, since I am a conservative trial lawyer (yes, we do exist and I will tell Sasquatch and Nessi hello for you).  Like many Americans, frivolous litigation just drives me nuts.

Here’s a good example.  The headline is: “Judge Tosses Hair Dye Lawsuit for Blonde Who Had Less Fun as Brunette”.  Apparently this lady had to be on anti-depressants since she claimed that brown hair dye was in a box labeled “blonde”.  “Oh the humanity!”  I’m pretty sure that if this lady was on anti-depressants, it wasn’t solely due to this hair incident.  Wouldn’t it have made more sense just to go to the salon instead of the shrink?

Posted in You've got to be kidding!, Litigation | No Comments »

October 6, 2008 by Zale.

Medicare has announced that it is not paying for medical errors, also known as medical malpractice.  Huh?  What happens if there is a dispute as to whether or not there was actually a medical error?  Sounds to me like the patient is going to be the loser in that battle.

I see a two pronged problem here.  I don’t believe in big government programs, so I don’t really like Medicare in the first place, BUT there are those that have come to rely on it whether or not its a good program.  So, the first problem is this big government program in which governmnet is inept at running.  The second problem here has to do with Medicare’s ability to subrogate.

Subrogation is how insurers get their money back from the liable party.  If Medicare were effective at subrogation, then they would not need to do this.  They have every advantage in the world at collecting their subrogation, and still it appears that they are ineffective.

So what we have here is a government program that is ineffective at part of what it should be able to do, so its going to push those costs off onto the patient.  Unfortunately, this is why people need their own attorney in dealing the medical malpractice.

Here’s the article if you would like to read more.

Posted in Injury Law, Insurance Practices, Insurance Law | No Comments »

September 30, 2008 by Zale.

Slip and falls are some of the hardest cases for plaintiffs to win in Tennessee.  In order to win, one of the key elements the plaintiff my prove is that the premises owner knew or should have known of the hazard.  You also have to show that you, the person who is injured, should not have seen or noticed the condition, especially if it is “open and obvious”.

In my eleven years of handling insurance claims, I handled quite a few slip and fall claims.  Only a few truly seemed valid.  Here’s a recent case where the plaintiff was unsuccessful in proving the above.

Posted in Litigation, Injury Law | No Comments »

September 30, 2008 by Zale.

Be careful if you do.  Here’s a recent Tennessee Court of Appeals case where Farmers asserted an exclusion against one of their policyholders.

Everyday individuals trying to make a living use their personal automobiles to conduct business.  Often, this is encouraged by their employers.  Its good for those individuals to check their insurance policy to make sure their business activities are covered.

It seems to be a fairly rare instance where the insurer for a personal auto policy asserts this type of business use exclusion, since they are usually fairly narrow exclusions.  The point of the exclusion is for the vehicle owner to get a commercial auto policy, which is designed for business use vehicle.

In this instance, the exclusion stated:  “[w]hile used in employment by any person whose primary duties are the delivery of products or services[.]”  Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals agreed with Farmers on this one and the policyholder was out of luck.

Posted in Litigation, Injury Law, Insurance Practices, Insurance Law | No Comments »