Marietta Injury Lawyer Blog

Stores Not Liable for “Rainy Day” Slip-and-Fall Accidents

May 29, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

A business owner has a duty under Georgia law to exercise “ordinary care” in maintaining a safe premises for customers. This does not mean a business owner is liable for any and all safety hazards on the premises. Rather, it means an owner who has “superior knowledge” of a hazard and fails to act may be held responsible if that hazard injures a customer.

In cases where the owner and customer have equal knowledge of a hazard—or are presumed by law to have equal knowledge—the owner is not liable. This question often comes up in “slip-and-fall” cases when owners and customers disagree as to whether the owner had superior or equal knowledge. A recent decision by a federal appeals court illustrates how judges deal with these questions.

Womack-Sang v. Publix Super Markets, Inc.

Federal Government Report Highlights Danger to Children of Using All-Terrain Vehicles

May 19, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

Not all motor vehicle accidents include an automobile or truck. Off-road or all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) are involved of hundreds of accidents and fatalities each year. The staff of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recently released a report on ATV accidents that took place between 1982 and 2012. The CPSC has regulated ATV safety standards in the United States since 2009.

The CPSC’s Findings

The CPSC defines an ATV as “an off-road, motorized vehicle having three or four low-pressure tires, a straddle seat for the operator, and handlebars for steering control.” New ATVs must be four-wheel vehicles, as CPSC regulations ban the importation or sale of three-wheel ATVs. Vehicles with steering wheels and bucket seats, such as a golf cart, are not classified as ATVs.

Georgia Appeals Court Says Police Officer May Be Liable for K-9 Attack on Child

May 12, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

According to the American Humane Association, nearly 50% of dog attacks in the United States each year involve children under the age of 12. Bite rates tend to be higher for younger children. Young boys are also more susceptible to dog bites than girls.

Georgia law holds the owner of any “vicious or dangerous animal” liable for injuries caused in an unprovoked attack when the owner is careless or allows the animal “to go at liberty.” Many Georgia counties also require outdoor animals to be leashed or otherwise restrained. The existence of such laws is sufficient to prove the animal has a “vicious propensity” for purposes of liability.

Eshleman v. Key

Georgia Appeals Court Reinstates Wrongful Death Lawsuit Arising from Illegally Parked Trailer

May 5, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

In a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit, it is not enough to show the defendant was at fault for the plaintiff’s injuries. Under Georgia law, a plaintiff cannot recover damages if he or she is “50 percent or more responsible” for the injuries suffered. The question of responsibility is typically decided by a jury. In some cases, a trial judge may grant one party summary judgment if he or she determines there is no genuine dispute over the facts. But judges must be careful not to short-circuit the trial process, as the Georgia Court of Appeals explained in one recent case.

Reed v. Carolina Casualty Insurance Company

In 2008, a commercial tractor-trailer driver parked his vehicle in an emergency lane at the intersection of Interstate 285 and Interstate 75 in Cobb County. It was early in the morning and the driver wanted to rest. Nevertheless, parking in an emergency lane violates Georgia traffic laws.

Can a Jury Rule for a Plaintiff but Award Zero Damages?

April 24, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

In civil cases, such as personal injury or wrongful death lawsuits, a jury must determine the defendant’s liability and what damages, if any, are owed the plaintiff. Juries must reach a unanimous verdict on both issues. And while unanimity may require a certain level of bargaining among jurors, there are cases where a “compromise verdict” must be rejected by trial judges and appellate courts. In particular, a court will not allow a jury to hold a defendant liable while deliberately awarding “inadequate damages” to compensate a plaintiff.

A federal appeals court in Atlanta recently ordered a new trial in a negligence lawsuit because of just such a compromise verdict. The appellate panel found the trial judge improperly instructed the jury, which in turn led to a verdict where the plaintiff “won” but received zero damages.

Collins v. Marriott International, Inc.

Will General Motors Be Held Accountable for Selling Defective Vehicles?

April 21, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

General Motors recently issued a sweeping recall for a more than 2.5 million vehicles sold between 2005 and 2011. The recall includes the Chevrolet Cobalt, Pontiac G5, Saturn Ion, Chevrolet HHR, Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky models. According to GM, the vehicles have a defective ignition switch that affects the operation of the airbag system.

This is not a minor safety issue. GM itself acknowledged their faulty ignition switches can be linked to at least 31 motor vehicle accidents and 13 deaths. The Detroit-based automaker now faces a number of lawsuits, including a class action complaint filed in Texas seeking upwards of $10 billion for GM customers who purchased the defective vehicles. Another lawsuit, filed in San Francisco, claims GM’s efforts to fix the recalled vehicles are “insufficient” and that there is a second ignition-switch defect the company has yet to address. Altogether, GM has been been named a defendant in at least 37 cases spanning 17 separate federal courts. In addition to litigation, multiple government agencies, including the United States Department of Justice and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, have opened investigations into GM’s mismanagement.

Will GM Escape Responsibility?

Georgia Appeals Court Chides Trial Judge for Siding with Physician in Malpractice Case

April 14, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

Medical malpractice occurs when a physician fails to observe a commonly accepted “standard of care” and that failure is the “proximate cause” of a subsequent injury sustained by the patient. The question of causation is normally decided by a jury. If a plaintiff fails to provide any evidence of either element–breach of standard of care or causation–a judge will not allow a malpractice case to go to the jury. However, judges must also be careful not to cavalierly dismiss cases, as a recent decision from the Georgia Court of Appeals illustrates.

Moore v. Singh

Rosemary Moore was a diabetic who died in 2010 from renal disease. In December 2008, Moore fell in her home and injured her knee. The emergency department at Henry Medical Center diagnosed her with a knee sprain. Moore could not stand or walk, but she was released.

Georgia Appeals Court Absolves Hotel Chain of Liability in Bathtub Accident

April 4, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

Most hotels and motels are affiliated with a national brand such as Hilton or Marriott. This means that individual hotels are owned and operated locally but comply with certain standards imposed by the national brand. Recently, the Georgia Court of Appeals considered the issue of whether a national brand could be held liable for injuries sustained by a customer at a locally owned hotel.

Bright v. Sandstone Hospitality, LLC

Wingate by Wyndham is a brand name used by more than a dozen mid-priced hotels in Georgia (and about 100 throughout the country). In 2008, the plaintiff in this case checked into a Wingate owned and operated by Sandstone Hospitality, LLC. After taking a morning bath in his room, the plaintiff attempted to use the grab bar to lift himself from the tub. The bar separated from the wall, causing the plaintiff to fall and injure his lower back. He subsequently required surgery.

Georgia Appeals Court Reinstates “Phantom Driver” Lawsuit

March 31, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

What happens when you get in an automobile accident where the other driver is never identified? If you have uninsured motorist coverage, your insurer should cover the damages. Georgia law defines a vehicle as uninsured when “the owner or operator of the motor vehicle is unknown.” But there must be adequate proof an accident occurred. This was the subject of a recent Georgia Court of Appeals decision, which illustrates the legal burden of proof in these so-called “phantom driver” cases.

Leslie v. Doe

The plaintiff in this case was driving down Highway 138 near a shopping center in Fulton County. He lost control of his vehicle when he swerved to avoid an unidentified vehicle that had just pulled out of the shopping center’s parking lot. The sudden swerving caused the driver to lose control of his vehicle, which flipped over several times and crashed. The other vehicle continued without stopping and was never identified.

Georgia Appeals Court Dismisses Lawsuit Against State University Over Notice Requirement

March 21, 2014 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

Process matters when bringing a personal injury lawsuit. This goes double when the defendant is a state government agency. The Georgia Tort Claims Act (GTCA) governs personal injury lawsuits against the state for torts committed by its employees. Normally any government enjoys “sovereign immunity” from lawsuits in its own courts. The GTCA creates a limited waiver of that immunity provided its requirements are followed to the letter. A recent Georgia Court of Appeals decision illustrates what happens when those requirements are not followed.

Driscoll v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

The GTCA applies to all state agencies, including the University System of Georgia and its member colleges and universities. Four years ago, a van owned by Georgia State University was traveling down an eastbound lane on Interstate 285. A tire flew off the van, crossed the median wall and struck a Hyundai Sonata and another car. The driver of the Sonata was killed.