Atlanta Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Published on: December 3, 2014

Georgia Court Rejects Plaintiff’s Injury Claim After Fall on Icy Surface

Slip-and-fall negligence cases arise under many different sets of circumstances. Depending on the particular facts, a plaintiff who has been injured may or may not be entitled to a recovery. One aspect of liability concerns the relationship between the injured party and the entity or person who is allegedly at fault. According to Georgia law, a business owner owes a duty of ordinary care to its invitees. But courts have held that this non-delegable duty of care is not applicable to an independent contractor. While this may seem confusing, an experienced injury attorney would know precisely how the local laws will apply to your injury case. If you have been injured on another’s property, be sure to consult with an Atlanta injury lawyer as soon as possible after the incident.

In a recent negligence case, Davidson et al. v. Meticulously Clean Sweepers, LLC (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), plaintiff Nancy Davidson fell outside a “Dollar Tree” store, in a shopping center that was owned by three corporate entities, referred to here as “Rivergate.” After she was injured, the plaintiff and her husband brought an action against Dollar Tree, the manager of Dollar Tree, Rivergate, its property management company, and Meticulously Clean Sweepers (“MCS”) – an independent contractor that treated the area in question with a de-icing mixture the night before the plaintiff fell.

Published on: November 24, 2014

Georgia Court Finds Driver Not Working in Scope of Employment At Time of Accident

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

Car accidents have the potential to cause serious, long-lasting injuries. The injured party is often entitled to recover damages for any pain, suffering, and losses sustained as a result of another driver’s negligence. And in certain cases, the plaintiff may recover from the other driver and possibly that person’s employer, if he or she was acting in the scope of employment at the time of the collision. Clearly, the circumstances surrounding a car accident of any kind will play a significant role in the ultimate outcome of any claim. The best way to ensure that you have the most effective strategy for your particular case is to reach out to an experienced injury attorney from the local Atlanta area. A local lawyer who focuses on auto accident claims would have in-depth knowledge of the state laws and how they will apply to your case.

In a recent case, Mastec North America, Inc. v. Sanford et al. (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), the plaintiffs, Henry and Tina Sanford, brought a personal injury action (arising from a car accident) against Mastec North America, Inc. (“Mastec”), Direct TV, Inc., and the driver, Warnock. The plainitffs’ suit included allegations of negligence and gross negligence against Warnock and sought to recover damages from Mastec and Direct TV under the theory of respondeat superior. Mastec and Direct TV moved for summary judgment, arguing that Warnock was not acting within the course and scope of his employment when the accident occurred. The trial court denied their motion, and they appealed.

Published on: November 17, 2014

Personal Injury Claim Arising from Tractor-Trailer Accident Goes to the Jury

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

Victims in vehicle accidents often bring their claims for damages in Georgia courts. One type that occurs fairly often on highways in and around the Atlanta area is a “rear-end” collision. Courts have found that in rear-end accident cases, liability on the part of any driver involved in the collision depends on a factual determination of issues such as diligence, negligence, and proximate cause. Established case law in this jurisdiction requires that a jury – not a judge – have an opportunity to resolve and determine these issues. Since there are many important legal factors to consider and address in any vehicle accident case, it is important to consult an experienced injury attorney who is fully aware of the local laws affecting your case.

In a recent case, Dogan v. Buff et al. (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), the plaintiff was rear-ended by a tractor-trailer driven by the defendant. According to the evidence, the plaintiff was driving a van in the center lane of I-75, a five-lane highway. The defendant was driving a tractor-trailer (owned by his employer) behind the plaintiff. The defendant’s employer’s trucking manual dictated that drivers must keep at least one truck length between the driver’s truck and any vehicle in front of it for every 10 miles per hour of speed.

A collision of two other cars occurred directly in front of the plaintiff in the center lane. The plaintiff and the defendant both merged into the next lane to avoid the crash. The plaintiff stopped his van due to traffic. The defendant tried to brake in time to avoid hitting the plaintiff but rear-ended him. While both vehicles sustained damages, the plaintiff was physically injured and brought to the hospital. At the time of the collision, the defendant was only three car-lengths behind the plaintiff.

Published on: November 10, 2014

Georgia Court Ruled In Favor of Truck Driver in Accident Involving Motorcyclist

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

Accidents involving vehicles such as motorcycles, cars, and trucks occur with great frequency on Atlanta roadways. Unfortunately, vehicle accidents have the potential to cause serious injuries and even death to the people involved. In many cases, injured victims may be entitled to bring a lawsuit to recover compensation for any pain and suffering sustained. One of the fundamental issues to plead and prove in a personal injury case is negligence. Once a case makes it to trial, there are many legal steps to follow in order to successfully “try” the case. If you have been in a car or other vehicle accident, you may be entitled to recover for your losses. The best course of action is to contact an experienced injury attorney who will know the most effective approach and strategy under the circumstances of your case.

In a recent case, Young v. Griffin (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), the plaintiff was riding a motorcycle when he crashed into the defendant, who was driving a truck. The plaintiff brought an action against the defendant for his personal injuries. At trial, the plaintiff testified that he had been riding his motorcycle as he approached a railroad crossing. As he reached the tracks, the lights began flashing, and he crossed the tracks and crashed into the defendant’s truck on the opposite side of the tracks. The defendant testified that as he was heading toward the railroad tracks he saw the lights begin to flash and decided to make a U-turn to avoid waiting for the train to pass. Once he almost completed his turn, almost completely blocking the lane, he felt the impact of the plaintiff’s motorcycle crashing into his truck.

An eyewitness who was behind the truck at the railroad crossing testified that the crossing gate and flashing lights started before the defendant initiated his U-turn. Neither the defendant nor the witness saw the plaintiff crossing the tracks before the defendant started to make the turn. A police officer investigated the accident, saw skid marks left by the motorcycle, and testified that both the defendant and the witness said the plaintiff crossed the tracks as the “arm” was descending. He also determined that both parties were at fault.

Published on: November 3, 2014

Georgia Court Reviews Uninsured Motorist Law in Car Accident Claim

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

A victim injured in a car accident must adequately plead and prove several elements in order to recover damages for any resulting pain and suffering. In most cases, each driver’s automobile insurance carrier will be involved in the court action to some extent. Under certain circumstances, a driver’s insurance carrier could attempt to legally deny coverage, thereby rendering the driver “uninsured.” When this happens, the injured party could potentially seek “uninsured motorist” (“UM”) benefits from his or her own policy. Claims arising under a UM policy are complicated and require strict awareness and attention to detail. If you have been injured in a car accident, it is important to consult with an experienced Atlanta injury attorney, who is fully familiar with the most effective way to recover damages for your injuries under the local laws.

Under Georgia law, an insured motor vehicle could effectively become uninsured, when a driver’s liability carrier denies coverage, as long as that denial is legal. In a recent case, Castellanos v. Travelers Home & Marine Insurance Company (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), the plaintiff was injured in a car accident due to the negligence of another driver, Jose Santiago. The plaintiff’s car was insured by Travelers, and he was also a named insured under a UM policy. The plaintiff sued Santiago for his injures. Santiago’s insurance carrier, United Automobile Insurance Company (“United”), defended the case.

The plaintiff also served his UM carrier, Travelers. The case proceeded to trial, but Santiago did not attend, and a jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff then sought to recover payment of the judgment from United as Santiago’s liability carrier. United denied coverage, based on Santiago’s lack of cooperation in the defense of the lawsuit and the failure to attend the trial. The plaintiff then sought payment from Travelers under the UM policy. Once Travelers failed to pay UM benefits, the plaintiff filed this lawsuit, alleging, among other things, that Travelers’ refusal to pay UM benefits was made in bad faith.

Published on: October 27, 2014

Georgia Legislature Studies “Autonomous Vehicle Technology” – The Driverless Car

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

According to an article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution (“AJC”), Georgia lawmakers have created a House Study Committee on Autonomous Vehicle Technology. The five-member committee is studying the issues surrounding autonomous vehicles and will publish a report of its findings and recommendations by December 31, 2014. Apparently, legislators in other states are also considering the same technology. But the advent of this new technology brings with it many unanswered questions and concerns. One of the most significant issues concerns liability for any car accidents involving an autonomous vehicle. An experienced injury attorney who handles car accident cases would be in a good position to assess the state of the law and how it will apply to any type of auto accident claim.

Three of the people who presented information at the first hearing of the Georgia House Study Committee wrote articles on topics related to the future driverless car. One of the authors suggests that there are many benefits to the new technology. Commutes will be more productive, there will be less congestion and improved air quality, and certain restricted drivers (such as the elderly and medically or physically disabled) will have new transportation choices. All of these benefits are said to have the potential to create economic benefits as well. This same author points out, however, that one of the most important issues concerns “liability” – namely, that in the event of a crash, does the inattentive driver retain liability, or is the manufacturer of the technology liable?

Published on: October 20, 2014

Georgia Court Reviews Timeliness of Plaintiffs’ Personal Injury Claims Against County

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

A fundamental aspect of any car accident claim is the need to file the action in a timely manner. If a plaintiff fails to comply with the applicable “statute of limitations” for filing the action, a court could very well dismiss the complaint. The key word here is “applicable,” since the time period may not be the same for every type of case. The law can become quite complicated and impose different requirements depending on the facts and circumstances of the matter. If you have been injured in a car accident, the statute of limitations begins running from the moment of the incident. For this reason, in order to sufficiently protect your rights at the outset, you are encouraged to contact an experienced injury lawyer from the Atlanta area as soon as possible after the accident.

When an injured party seeks to file a claim against a local county, there are unique rules to follow. Under Georgia law § 36-11-1, all claims against counties must be presented within 12 months after they accrue. Unfortunately, in a recent case, Warnell et al. v. Unified Government of Athens-Clarke County (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), the plaintiffs filed their personal injury claims arising from a car accident 22 months after the incident occurred, and they were precluded from presenting their case. According to the record, in February 2011, the plaintiffs were driving near an intersection in Athens, Georgia when a police officer drove through a red light and collided with their vehicle. The County maintained an insurance policy on the patrol car in the amount of $1 million in automobile liability coverage.

Published on: October 13, 2014

Georgia Supreme Court Rules in Favor of State University in Premises Liability Case

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

Plaintiffs who are injured on another’s property, due to a slip-and-fall or trip-and-fall incident, may consider bringing an action against the owner to recover damages for injuries sustained. Depending on the circumstances of the case, including the potential defendants involved, there are many important legal issues to take into account. For example, if any of the defendants is a state entity, it may be able to assert a defense of sovereign immunity. But Georgia law provides for a limited waiver of the State’s immunity in tort actions. These cases are fact-specific, and the results may vary depending on the situation. If you have been injured on another’s property, you may be entitled to compensation for your suffering and losses. It is important that you contact an injury lawyer from the Atlanta area, who is fully aware of the local laws and procedures affecting your particular case.

When a party has a potential tort claim against the State, that person is required to provide the State with notice of the claim prior to filing the suit. The purpose of the law is to make certain that the State receives sufficient notice of the claim in order to facilitate settlement before a lawsuit is filed. Therefore, if a plaintiff fails to satisfy the notice requirements, the State does not waive sovereign immunity, and a court would lack subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Over time, Georgia courts have held that strict compliance with the notice statute is necessary.

In a recent Georgia Supreme Court case, Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia v. Myers, the plaintiff was injured after stepping in an un-repaired pothole in a parking lot of a college campus that is part of the University System of Georgia. The plaintiff sent a notice of claim to the defendant, the University System’s Board of Regents (the “Board”), under the Georgia Tort Claims Act. The plaintiff’s notice alleged a negligence claim against the Board, due to the unsafe condition of the parking lot at the College. While the plaintiff described the ensuing injury as a fractured ankle and torn tendons, she did not state the amount of the loss, since she was still incurring medical bills and was unsure of the extent of her injury.

Published on: October 6, 2014

Georgia Court Overturns Summary Judgment in Car Accident Case

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

Personal injury cases are integrally connected to the facts and circumstances surrounding the incident in question. Accordingly, plaintiffs who have been injured in a car collision or other vehicle accident must plead and prove a variety of elements in order to successfully bring a case for damages. Court are required to review the evidence, including affidavit testimony and other information, in deciding whether a plaintiff has successfully stated a cause of action for a jury to consider. Preparing the complaint and compiling the supporting evidence are complicated tasks requiring the assistance of an experienced injury attorney. In order to protect your right to a recovery, the best course of action is to contact a personal injury lawyer who is fully familiar with the laws and procedures affecting cases in and around the Atlanta area.

As we see from a recent case, Hall et al. v. Massally (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), courts have the authority to decide whether a plaintiff’s case for damages can survive a defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Here, three members of the Hall family were in an automobile accident with the defendant, Rachel Massally. Plaintiffs sued the defendant to recover for their personal injuries. As part of most injury cases, each side conducts “depositions” in order to gather information and evidence to support its position. Based on deposition testimony, Massally moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiffs failed to submit evidence that she (the defendant) did anything wrong to cause the collision.

The plaintiffs filed a response to the motion a week after the papers were due, since their attorney had withdrawn from the case. Plaintiffs presented an affidavit by a witness to the accident, who claimed that he saw the defendant driving about 90 M.P.H. just before the accident, witnessed the defendant’s car go over the median and skid into a parking lot, and that he saw the plaintiffs’ car go over the curb into the grass. Despite the untimeliness of the plaintiffs’ response, the trial court scheduled a hearing to determine the merits of the motion for summary judgment.

Published on: September 24, 2014

Georgia Court Rules in Favor of Property Owner in Premises Liability Case

By Stephen M. Ozcomert

A premises liability action may also be known as a “slip-and-fall” or “trip-and-fall” case. Property owners have a legal duty to maintain their premises in a reasonably safe condition. If a person is injured on another’s property, he or she may be able to bring a claim against the owner to recover for his or her suffering and losses. There are many elements to a premises liability action. By law, a plaintiff must plead and prove these elements in order to succeed with the claim. If you have been injured on another’s property, you are encouraged to contact a local injury attorney who is fully familiar with the laws applicable to cases brought in and around the Atlanta area.

Depending on the circumstances, an injured party may not be able to recover. In a recent case, Milledgeville Manor Partners, LLC v. Lewis (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), Lewis was a tenant of Milledgeville Manor Partners (“MMP”) when she was injured after falling in a hole on the property behind her apartment. Lewis brought this premises liability action against MMP to recover damages for her injuries. According to the facts of the case, Lewis was using a clothesline behind her apartment when she saw a small hole in the ground. Some weeks later, she realized that the hole was getting bigger and told another tenant (who was also the groundskeeper) about the hole, and pointed out where it was.

Lewis later informed another MMP employee about the hole. She did not check to see whether the hole had been repaired. Approximately two and a half weeks after informing the groundskeeper about the hole, Lewis left her apartment through the back door and walked near the clothesline and stepped into the hole. She fell and fractured her ankle. At this point, Lewis alleged that the hole was around six inches deep and obscured by grass that had grown to cover the hole. Continue reading