For years, malpractice insurance companies have argued that lawsuits are driving doctors out of business or out of the state. They argue that unless we limit damage awards to victims of malpractice – doctors will flee to states with caps on malpractice damages. Or, they argue, the doctors will not specialize in fields like Obstetrics. It’s a powerful argument – but is it true?
New research demonstrates that it is not true. The American Association for Justice, recently studied statistics assembled by the American Medical Association to find the real story. What they found is that doctors are not fleeing from the profession. Rather, the number of doctors continues to rise in every state. In fact, there are now twice as many doctors as when the AMA began tracking physician numbers in the 1960’s. In addition, there were substantial increases in the number of doctors specializing in neurosurgery, ob-gyn and emergency medicine.
They also found that in states which did not have caps on malpractice damages, there were actually 13% more physicians per capita than in states with caps.. In other words, doctors are not fleeing to states without caps.
Separate research by the Commonwealth Fund and the American College of Emergency Physicians demonstrates that health care quality and patient safety are far worse in states that have enacted so-called “tort reform.”
So if doctors are not being run out of town by lawsuits – who keeps raising this argument? The answer is insurance companies. The companies that insure doctors would like to limit what they have to pay to victims of malpractice. Maybe we should figure out a way to run them out of town.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
Helpful Information About Nursing Home Neglect
Nursing homes can be a tremendous help in caring for family members, or they can be a nightmare. Separating out the good homes from the bad is a daunting task. Stotis & Baird provides some information that can help you in this process. Visit our Elder Law Blog at http://www.chicagoelderlaw.blogspot.com/ for recent safety violations by Chicago area nursing homes. The blog also includes articles on general elder law topics. Our website, www.stotis-baird.com also includes a library of articles on elder law, along with a page with links to other resources.
What Jurors Don't Know Can Hurt You
Written by Michael S. Baird
Illinois law requires that everyone who drives a car must have insurance. I know that and you know that, but some jurors don’t seem to know that. Most judges don’t allow the lawyers to even say the word “insurance” during a trial. The fear is that if the jurors knew that the defendant’s insurance will have to pay the verdict, they might award more money. So the judge pretends that the lawyer sitting at the defense table was hired by the guy who ran the red light. The defense lawyer pretends that any money awarded to the injured person will come out of the other driver’s pocket. In reality, the defense lawyer is an employee of the insurance company, and the driver will not have to pay anything.
At the end of a recent trial, I had a juror ask me “Why didn’t you just sue the insurance company?” The answer is that in Illinois, an injured person has to sue the person who caused the injury. If the person who is sued has insurance, the insurance company takes over and defends the case. The defendant has to cooperate with the insurance company, or can risk losing insurance coverage for the accident. If the person sued has no insurance, most lawyers who represent injured people will probably recommend that the suit be dropped. In such a case, the injured person has a better remedy under their own insurance policy for uninsured motorist coverage.
So, if there is a jury trial with an injured party seeking monetary damages, the insurance company is sitting at the defense table. But they are hiding. The jury will never hear about it. In my experience, when information is withheld from a jury, they will fill in the blanks. They will conclude that since no one has said anything about insurance, there must not be any insurance. They will think that the person sitting at the defense table will lose his house if they award damages. Insurance companies build big buildings with the money they save when information is withheld from a jury.
Jurors also have a problem with medical bills and medical insurance. The injured party ends up with $25,000 in medical bills. The lawyer for the injured party asks the jury to award $25,000 for these bills. The jurors suspect that the injured person did not have to pay $25,000 out of his pocket, and that most, if not all of the bills were paid by his health insurance company. Some jurors wonder where the money goes if they award $25,000. I have heard jurors say that they calculated the award for medical bills based on what they suspect the injured party’s deductible was.
In reality, the lawyer for the injured party asks the jury to award the total amount of the medical bills. If any part of the medical bills was paid by insurance, the insurance company paying the bills will get their money back out of any money awarded. The injured party only gets what is left after the health insurance company gets reimbursed.
It is common for facts to be kept from the jury. There are subjects considered too hot for the jurors to handle. Sometimes, it is true. But there is a price to be paid. If jurors are not given all of the facts, they will supply the missing pieces themselves. Sometimes, they will guess wrong. I don’t want to think that somebody’s case may come down to a juror’s bad guess. But it happens.
Illinois law requires that everyone who drives a car must have insurance. I know that and you know that, but some jurors don’t seem to know that. Most judges don’t allow the lawyers to even say the word “insurance” during a trial. The fear is that if the jurors knew that the defendant’s insurance will have to pay the verdict, they might award more money. So the judge pretends that the lawyer sitting at the defense table was hired by the guy who ran the red light. The defense lawyer pretends that any money awarded to the injured person will come out of the other driver’s pocket. In reality, the defense lawyer is an employee of the insurance company, and the driver will not have to pay anything.
At the end of a recent trial, I had a juror ask me “Why didn’t you just sue the insurance company?” The answer is that in Illinois, an injured person has to sue the person who caused the injury. If the person who is sued has insurance, the insurance company takes over and defends the case. The defendant has to cooperate with the insurance company, or can risk losing insurance coverage for the accident. If the person sued has no insurance, most lawyers who represent injured people will probably recommend that the suit be dropped. In such a case, the injured person has a better remedy under their own insurance policy for uninsured motorist coverage.
So, if there is a jury trial with an injured party seeking monetary damages, the insurance company is sitting at the defense table. But they are hiding. The jury will never hear about it. In my experience, when information is withheld from a jury, they will fill in the blanks. They will conclude that since no one has said anything about insurance, there must not be any insurance. They will think that the person sitting at the defense table will lose his house if they award damages. Insurance companies build big buildings with the money they save when information is withheld from a jury.
Jurors also have a problem with medical bills and medical insurance. The injured party ends up with $25,000 in medical bills. The lawyer for the injured party asks the jury to award $25,000 for these bills. The jurors suspect that the injured person did not have to pay $25,000 out of his pocket, and that most, if not all of the bills were paid by his health insurance company. Some jurors wonder where the money goes if they award $25,000. I have heard jurors say that they calculated the award for medical bills based on what they suspect the injured party’s deductible was.
In reality, the lawyer for the injured party asks the jury to award the total amount of the medical bills. If any part of the medical bills was paid by insurance, the insurance company paying the bills will get their money back out of any money awarded. The injured party only gets what is left after the health insurance company gets reimbursed.
It is common for facts to be kept from the jury. There are subjects considered too hot for the jurors to handle. Sometimes, it is true. But there is a price to be paid. If jurors are not given all of the facts, they will supply the missing pieces themselves. Sometimes, they will guess wrong. I don’t want to think that somebody’s case may come down to a juror’s bad guess. But it happens.
Friday, April 3, 2009
An Explosion of Personal Injury Lawsuits? What Explosion? (written by Michael Baird)
Most of the failures of the Bush administration can be traced to a single repeated mistake. He made up his mind, not based on information, but based on what he wanted the facts to be. Once his mind was made up, he refused to accept it when the facts showed that he was wrong. It would be like someone deciding to drive to an island without looking at a map. After leaving home, his wife pulls out a map and shows him that there is no bridge and you can't get there by car. Most husbands would swallow hard and go back home. George Bush kept driving.
While he was in the White House, Bush publicly blamed personal injury cases and the lawyers who file them for causing an explosion of lawsuits. His administration investigated the effect of personal injury suits on the court system, and prepared a report of the findings. The report was not released to the public until after Bush left office. It is no surprise, since the report found that each of Bush's claims was wrong.
In a pattern that repeated itself during his administration, Bush made up his mind first, then had some one investigate to see if he was right. When the report concluded that he was wrong, Bush ignored the report.
The study ordered by Bush found that there was no explosion of personal injury cases. Instead, the number of personal injury cases filed actually went down 21% from 1997 to 2006. Bush claimed that the important work of the courts was delayed by all of the injury cases. In fact, judges had plenty of time to get to the other cases, since only 1% of the federal court cases and only 6% of the state court cases involved injury claims.
Manufacturers were not motivated by fear of litigation, as claimed by Bush.
The report polled manufacturers to see where they ranked "fear of litigation" as a concern. "Fear of litigation" came in dead last on manufacturer's list of worries, well behind material costs, energy prices, foreign competition and taxes. And the average award for personal injury cases? Researchers found that the average award was $24,000, or about $976,000 less than was suggested by Bush.
The mess we are in now was not all Bush's fault. However, it should not be a surprise that his "shoot first - ask questions later" approach didn't help. First, we need to find out what the facts are. Then, we need to plan a course of action based on the true facts. At least now we have someone in charge that is willing to look at a map.
While he was in the White House, Bush publicly blamed personal injury cases and the lawyers who file them for causing an explosion of lawsuits. His administration investigated the effect of personal injury suits on the court system, and prepared a report of the findings. The report was not released to the public until after Bush left office. It is no surprise, since the report found that each of Bush's claims was wrong.
In a pattern that repeated itself during his administration, Bush made up his mind first, then had some one investigate to see if he was right. When the report concluded that he was wrong, Bush ignored the report.
The study ordered by Bush found that there was no explosion of personal injury cases. Instead, the number of personal injury cases filed actually went down 21% from 1997 to 2006. Bush claimed that the important work of the courts was delayed by all of the injury cases. In fact, judges had plenty of time to get to the other cases, since only 1% of the federal court cases and only 6% of the state court cases involved injury claims.
Manufacturers were not motivated by fear of litigation, as claimed by Bush.
The report polled manufacturers to see where they ranked "fear of litigation" as a concern. "Fear of litigation" came in dead last on manufacturer's list of worries, well behind material costs, energy prices, foreign competition and taxes. And the average award for personal injury cases? Researchers found that the average award was $24,000, or about $976,000 less than was suggested by Bush.
The mess we are in now was not all Bush's fault. However, it should not be a surprise that his "shoot first - ask questions later" approach didn't help. First, we need to find out what the facts are. Then, we need to plan a course of action based on the true facts. At least now we have someone in charge that is willing to look at a map.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Understanding Contingency Fees
When hiring a lawyer, it is always important to understand what their services will cost. A traditional attorney’s fee is billed at an hourly rate and paid monthly by the client. That’s fine if you are a corporation or a successful business owner, but many people cannot afford to pay a monthly bill. Nevertheless, they may need legal services. For these people, a contingency fee can be a good option.
A contingency fee is based upon the amount of money the lawyer recovers for you. If they recover nothing, you pay no attorneys fees. A typical contingency fee is one third of the total recovery, plus costs. The fee is payable at the time the case is concluded. The contingency fee allows you to protect your legal rights even if you cannot pay for representation up front. .
It is important to understand the basic bargain that makes up a contingency fee. The lawyer is taking a risk that they may lose the case and receive nothing for their work. The client is taking a risk that the lawyer may recover a substantial amount without spending a great deal of time. Some cases are resolved easily with a substantial fee. Other cases may involve a great deal of work with no compensation. It is important for everyone to understand the agreement at the outset.
Here are some common questions about contingency fees:
Are there things that are not covered by the contingency fee?
Your attorney should provide you with a written fee agreement. That agreement should answer this question. In a typical agreement, the attorney’s fees will not exceeed the percentage shown in the agreement. You will, however, need to repay any litigation costs.
What are “Costs?”
Costs are out-of-pocket expenses that the attorney pays to get the case to trial. Although attorneys typically advance these costs rather than asking the client to pay them, they are entitled to repayment at the end of the case. An example is the cost of hiring a court reporter to attend depositions or the cost of ordering medical records. Costs can be a small amount early in the case, but they may become more substantial if the case progresses to trial.
When is a contingency fee a bad idea?
If you have a very strong case and you can afford to pay hourly for legal services, then a contingency fee may not be the best option. If you have a strong breach of contract claim for $60,000, it may cost you $5000 to litigate the case on an hourly basis and recover the money. If you can afford to pay the $5000, this would be a better option than paying a $20,000 contingency fee. When you do this, you are taking the risk of advancing the money, and you are taking the risk that you might pay for legal fees and still lose the case. If the case, is strong, that me be a worthwhile risk to save money on attorney’s fees
Will I get my attorneys fees back in the lawsuit?
Generally No. In the American legal system, the winning party does not normally receive attorney’s fees from the losing party. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but generally, your opponent will not be required to pay your attorney’s fees.
What else comes out of my settlement or verdict?
The answer to this depends on the type of case. The most common type of contingency fee case is a personal injury lawsuit. In injury cases, you will typically be required to pay 1) the contingency fee, 2) the litigation costs and 3) your medical bills. Many people do not realize that they are required to repay medical bills. Even if your medical bills were paid by somebody else (such as an insurance company), you will usually be required to repay the bills. Most health insurance contracts require policy holders to repay medical bills if they win a lawsuit or settlement against another person.
In a typical car collision lawsuit that goes to trial, the ultimate breakdown might look something like this:
Total Jury Verdict $ 45,000
Attorney’s Fees -$ 15,000
Litigation costs -$ 1,500
Repayment of Medical Bills -$ 13,500
_____________________
Net to Client $15,000
Is it Worth the Cost to Hire a Lawyer?
The answer to this question really depends on your case. If you have a serious injury, it is almost always necessary to get a lawyer. Most clients call a lawyer because the insurance company has offered them nothing or refused to respond at all. In that case, a lawyer may be the only option. If you have a minor dispute and the insurance company has made you a reasonable offer to resolve it – then it may make sense to resolve the case yourself. If you have some question about whether an offer is fair, consult with a lawyer and ask them. A good lawyer will tell you when you don’t need them.
If you have more questions about contingency fees or lawsuits generally – feel free to contact a lawyer at Stotis & Baird Chartered via the web or on the phone at 312-461-1000.
A contingency fee is based upon the amount of money the lawyer recovers for you. If they recover nothing, you pay no attorneys fees. A typical contingency fee is one third of the total recovery, plus costs. The fee is payable at the time the case is concluded. The contingency fee allows you to protect your legal rights even if you cannot pay for representation up front. .
It is important to understand the basic bargain that makes up a contingency fee. The lawyer is taking a risk that they may lose the case and receive nothing for their work. The client is taking a risk that the lawyer may recover a substantial amount without spending a great deal of time. Some cases are resolved easily with a substantial fee. Other cases may involve a great deal of work with no compensation. It is important for everyone to understand the agreement at the outset.
Here are some common questions about contingency fees:
Are there things that are not covered by the contingency fee?
Your attorney should provide you with a written fee agreement. That agreement should answer this question. In a typical agreement, the attorney’s fees will not exceeed the percentage shown in the agreement. You will, however, need to repay any litigation costs.
What are “Costs?”
Costs are out-of-pocket expenses that the attorney pays to get the case to trial. Although attorneys typically advance these costs rather than asking the client to pay them, they are entitled to repayment at the end of the case. An example is the cost of hiring a court reporter to attend depositions or the cost of ordering medical records. Costs can be a small amount early in the case, but they may become more substantial if the case progresses to trial.
When is a contingency fee a bad idea?
If you have a very strong case and you can afford to pay hourly for legal services, then a contingency fee may not be the best option. If you have a strong breach of contract claim for $60,000, it may cost you $5000 to litigate the case on an hourly basis and recover the money. If you can afford to pay the $5000, this would be a better option than paying a $20,000 contingency fee. When you do this, you are taking the risk of advancing the money, and you are taking the risk that you might pay for legal fees and still lose the case. If the case, is strong, that me be a worthwhile risk to save money on attorney’s fees
Will I get my attorneys fees back in the lawsuit?
Generally No. In the American legal system, the winning party does not normally receive attorney’s fees from the losing party. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but generally, your opponent will not be required to pay your attorney’s fees.
What else comes out of my settlement or verdict?
The answer to this depends on the type of case. The most common type of contingency fee case is a personal injury lawsuit. In injury cases, you will typically be required to pay 1) the contingency fee, 2) the litigation costs and 3) your medical bills. Many people do not realize that they are required to repay medical bills. Even if your medical bills were paid by somebody else (such as an insurance company), you will usually be required to repay the bills. Most health insurance contracts require policy holders to repay medical bills if they win a lawsuit or settlement against another person.
In a typical car collision lawsuit that goes to trial, the ultimate breakdown might look something like this:
Total Jury Verdict $ 45,000
Attorney’s Fees -$ 15,000
Litigation costs -$ 1,500
Repayment of Medical Bills -$ 13,500
_____________________
Net to Client $15,000
Is it Worth the Cost to Hire a Lawyer?
The answer to this question really depends on your case. If you have a serious injury, it is almost always necessary to get a lawyer. Most clients call a lawyer because the insurance company has offered them nothing or refused to respond at all. In that case, a lawyer may be the only option. If you have a minor dispute and the insurance company has made you a reasonable offer to resolve it – then it may make sense to resolve the case yourself. If you have some question about whether an offer is fair, consult with a lawyer and ask them. A good lawyer will tell you when you don’t need them.
If you have more questions about contingency fees or lawsuits generally – feel free to contact a lawyer at Stotis & Baird Chartered via the web or on the phone at 312-461-1000.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Anderson Cooper Investigates Hardball Insurance Tactics
Here is a YouTube clip featuring an Anderson Cooper 360 investigation into the insurance industry's hardball tactics it uses to "deny, delay and defend" claims in order to avoid paying legitimate claims:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvPW087RiJ8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvPW087RiJ8
Monday, December 29, 2008
Oversize Morphine Tablets May Be Deadly
In November of 2008, the Ethex Corporation issued a recall of five types of medications, including morphine, distributed between March 2006 and May of 2008. According to the FDA the drugs were recalled because of a concern that oversized tablets could have been released. The tablets may contain as much as two times the normal active ingredient.
The problem is particularly dangerous because Morphine is a powerful drug. Overdoses can depress breathing and cause death. Many consumers received their first notification of the problem when pharmacies began sending notices in November and December of 2008. Because the drugs in question were produced as far back as March of 2006, the notices may have come too late.
The specific drugs recalled are as follows:
Morphine Sulfate ER Tablets, 15 mg
Morphine Sulfate IR tablets, 15 mg and 30 mg
Dextroamphetamine Sulfate Tablets, 10 mg
Isosorbide ER Tablets, 30 mg and 60 mg
Propafenone HCI Tablets 150 mg, 225 mg and 300 mg
Earlier this year, Ethex recalled Morphine Sulfate ER 30mg and 60 mg tablets for the same reason.
If you believe that you filled a prescription for any of these drugs, contact your pharmacist or doctor immediately.
The problem is particularly dangerous because Morphine is a powerful drug. Overdoses can depress breathing and cause death. Many consumers received their first notification of the problem when pharmacies began sending notices in November and December of 2008. Because the drugs in question were produced as far back as March of 2006, the notices may have come too late.
The specific drugs recalled are as follows:
Morphine Sulfate ER Tablets, 15 mg
Morphine Sulfate IR tablets, 15 mg and 30 mg
Dextroamphetamine Sulfate Tablets, 10 mg
Isosorbide ER Tablets, 30 mg and 60 mg
Propafenone HCI Tablets 150 mg, 225 mg and 300 mg
Earlier this year, Ethex recalled Morphine Sulfate ER 30mg and 60 mg tablets for the same reason.
If you believe that you filled a prescription for any of these drugs, contact your pharmacist or doctor immediately.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
