Boston Injury Lawyer Blog

The McDonald's scalding coffee case received lots of media attention a few years ago, but what Massachusetts injury victims should know is that a lot of the "news" was false and misleading. In the movie Hot Coffee, filmmaker Susan Saladoff "investigates the civil justice system" pointing out how "[b]ig business has brewed an insidious concoction of manipulation and lies to protect its interests, and media lapdogs have stirred the cup." Massachusetts jury trials results reflect that trend. In a blog article we posted on June 21, 2010, we pointed out that "half of the counties had zero plaintiff verdicts in 2009." Further, one judge, who calculated some statistics of his own, found that only 16 of 151 personal injury trials resulted in a jury verdict higher than the pre-trial offer.

The case is a wonderful example of the media distorting reality. For example, the victim in the case tried to settle for her medical bills for a serious injury. Further, the coffee machine was set significantly hotter than recommended.

Continue reading "Injury Victims in Massachusetts Should See the Movie "Hot Coffee"" »

Massachusetts plaintiffs need to beware that borrowing money during their personal injury lawsuits can be detrimental to their pocketbooks. Victims of Massachusetts personal injury cases need also to know if and when their lawyers borrow monies to pay for experts. The lending to plaintiff industry is generally unregulated and there are reports of interest rates up to 100%! The New York Times
and Center for Public Integrity undertook a study informing that interest rates on these loans generally exceed 15% and that there are approximately $1 billion of outstanding lawsuit loans at the time! This may or may not be high, however, when the lawyer takes out the loan, the issue become whether the lawyer has advised the client of the loan. An outstanding loan on a personal injury lawsuit may have an effect on the pressure to resolve the case; certainly the client should know all of the factors that go into settlement discussions. There are also confidentiality concerns as the lawyers must give the lenders a vast amount of information before money is lent.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Victims of Law Suit Lenders" »

In a recent case in Fall River, Massachusetts, Trial Judge Welch held that the victim of personal injury could not exclude the defendant's civil engineer expert testimony as to the methodology to determine the speed of the vehicles involved in a collision. The appellate court held that Judge Welch's decision to allow the testimony was "within the discretion of the trial judge and will be reversed only where it constitutes an abuse of discretion or error of law." This is notwithstanding the fact that the methodology was questionable, the defense "expert" had not viewed the vehicles, and his training was in civil engineering and had only taken a class in accident reconstruction. Further, the court found that even though the "treatise" with the critical equations was not put into evidence at trial.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Personal Injury Trial Expert's Testimony Limited" »

We often encourage clients to file their consumer cases in Small Claims Court. This is relatively easy in the local district courts and trials are quick. For many years, however, the limit for damages that could be claimed was $2,000. The exception was for property damage to motor vehicles. Now, in the Economic Development Bill, the legislature has raised the small claims damages limit to $7,000. The way the bill was drafted it will go into effect immediately.

While this will help consumers with claims up to $7,000, we feel that it may also help our personal injury clients who have claims that may fall into this category. The insurance companies often offer nominal monies for soft tissue claims such as neck and back injuries. With this new law, we may have some ammunition to fight back!

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, sitting in Boston, Massachusetts, has had a busy week handing down significant case law. The Law Office of Neil Burns reported earlier regarding slip and fall injuries on ice and snow, and the change in the law in evaluating those cases. Also this week, the Court changed how the medical bills of a personal injury plaintiff, someone injured a car accident, for example, are submitted into evidence at trial.

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court came down against personal injury plaintiffs in proving damages. In a typical trial, the plaintiff gets his medical bills certified and they are presented to the jury a proof of the costs of medical care. This is pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 233, Section 79G. However, medical bills are usually negotiated by the insurance carrier, such as Harvard Vanguard or Blue Cross, so that the insurance carrier only pays a portion of the bill. This does not typically happen with PIP; Personal Injury Protection insurance from your motor vehicle insurance company.

Under the new court ruling, the defendant may now produce evidence that the bills should have been within a "range" of payments. Thus, in a case with significant medical bills, the defendant can, and likely will, hire an expert to show that the medical bills would only be paid in a lower amount by a typical insurance company.

A case recently decided in Boston and upheld by the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found no merit in an employee's personal injury lawsuit, where claim she should be able to sue her employer because at the time of her injury she was working for a wholly-owned subsidiary of her employer. The Boston attorneys at the Law Office of Neil Burns have successfully resolved cases for employees injured at work through no fault of their when liability rests with a party other than the employer. We can evaluate your work injury claim to determine if this option is available to you.

In this case the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts granted summary judgment in favor of Delta Airlines. The issue was whether a person was an employee. In Massachusetts, employees cannot sue their employers for personal injury: they must use the so-called workers compensation system. However, in this case, the worker claimed that she was not an employee, but a contractor. The Court, however, found her to be a "loaned servant" , finding that it was immune from personal liability because the claimant was a "loaned servant" and therefore, could not avail herself to the court, but must use the much less remunerable workers' compensation statute.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Employee Barred From Suing Employer" »