• $10.8 Million resolution of a wrongful death professional negligence case.
  • $3,000,000 to the surviving spouse in a wrongful death / medical malpractice case
  • $1.75 Million for a 26 year old woman who was injured and the injury resulted in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) in her foot.
  • $1,900,000 to a man run over by a bus who sustained serious crush injuries to his legs
  • $1,120,000 for death of 48 year old man in a three vehicle collision
Published on:

By

Every negligence case must be evaluated by its own facts and circumstances.  It is precisely the facts of a case – and how they are interpreted according to the applicable law — that will determine whether an injured party will be eligible for a recovery. Whether a premises liability claim arises from an incident in Atlanta or anywhere throughout the state, Georgia law clearly sets forth the elements that must be pleaded and proven.  Presenting one’s case, in accordance with the local requirements, can significantly impact the outcome.  If you have been injured on another’s property, you may be entitled to damages. It is critical that you contact a local injury attorney (as soon as possible after the incident) who has experience handling premises liability claims.

A recent case, Pinder v. H & H Foods Services, LLC d/b/a Kentucky Fried Chicken (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), is a good example of how the facts of a case can impact the court’s findings.  Here, in a premises liability cause of action, the court of appeals reviewed a trial court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of the property owners. Plaintiff claimed that she suffered injuries from a fall in a Kentucky Fried Chicken parking lot that occurred around 7:30 in the evening, when it was “dark or getting dark.”  Plaintiff alleged that while stepping down off the curb, she caught her foot between a handicap ramp and a parking bumper, twisted, turned, fell into a vehicle and landed on her knee.

The trial court granted the defendants’ summary judgment motion finding that no issue of material fact existed regarding whether: 1) the handicap ramp was improperly constructed or designed, 2) the parking bumper (or the condition it was in) caused or was a factor in the fall, or 3) whether the lighting in the area was sufficient or not.  The court also found that plaintiff failed to present any issues of fact as to whether defendants had actual or constructive knowledge of the alleged condition (or superior knowledge of same) and, was negligent for walking in the dark.  Plaintiff appealed. Continue reading

Published on:

By

Georgia courts have been called upon to interpret any number of insurance policy claims arising from car accidents.  All of the facts and circumstances of each case are integral to the determination of whether the plaintiff is entitled to a recovery, and if so, to what extent.  Whether the claim is asserted under the allegedly negligent party’s automobile insurance policy or homeowner’s policy, the language of those agreements can be fairly tedious and complicated.  And the proper reading and interpretation of those provisions can impact the ultimate damages award.  Anyone who has been injured in a car accident is encouraged to contact an injury attorney from the Atlanta area who is highly experienced in handling car accident claims.

In a recent case, Sauls et al. v. Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Co., (Ga. Ct. of App. 2014), the court addressed whether a homeowner’s insurance policy provided coverage for wrongful death and personal injury claims arising from a car accident.  Here, plaintiffs Debbie and Eric Sauls (the “plaintiffs”) brought an action against Todd and Justin McAllister, among others, for the wrongful death and personal injuries of their daughter, Cheyenne, who died in a car accident after leaving the McAllister’s home. Plaintiffs allege that the McAllisters furnished alcoholic beverages at their home to the driver of the car involved in the accident, as well as to their daughter, both minors.

Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”) filed a declaratory judgment action for a determination of its liability under a homeowner’s insurance policy.  Allstate argued that the policy excludes coverage for bodily injury claims arising out of the use of any motor vehicle. Both Todd McAllister and his son Justin were named insureds under the policy. But the specific language of the Family Liability Protection section and the Guest Medical Protection section excludes coverage for bodily injury “arising out of the ownership, maintenance, use, occupancy, renting, loaning, entrusting, loading or unloading of any motor vehicle or trailer.”  The trial court ruled that the plaintiffs’ claims for injuries arose out of the use of a motor vehicle and therefore, were excluded from coverage under the policy. Continue reading

Published on:

By

A victim of a car accident may be able to bring a variety of claims against a negligent driver.  But Georgia law – like many states – sets forth certain limitations to recovery depending on the relative responsibility of the parties involved in the accident.  For example, under a Georgia statute, which applies to actions arising in Atlanta and throughout the state, a plaintiff in a “tort” action is not entitled to receive damages if he or she is found to be 50 percent or more responsible for the injury or damages alleged.  This issue and many others relating to car accidents involving negligent driving can be difficult to understand, especially with respect to how it applies to your particular case.  If you have been injured in a car accident it is important to contact an experienced Atlanta injury attorney who understands the local laws and procedures and can help to protect your rights to a recovery.

In a recent case, Reed et al. v. Carolina Casualty Insurance Co. et al., (Ga. Ct. App. 2014), plaintiff brought a wrongful death action on behalf of his son who died in a car crash on Interstate 285.  Plaintiff sought to recover damages for his son’s injuries and death.  According to the facts revealed at trial, at about 2:00 a.m. back in August 2008, Rimantas Labeika improperly parked a tractor-trailer in a prohibited area – the emergency lane on the right side of the highway, just past the entrance ramp. He parked there to rest after driving the maximum number of hours regulated by law.

About an hour later, Thomas Reed, II, was approaching the intersection of Interstate 285 in rainy conditions.  He had been drinking and had a blood alcohol level of .095.  As he entered the Interstate, taking the curve too fast for the weather conditions and his rate of speed, he lost control of the car. He struck the guardrail and ultimately crashed into the rear of tractor-trailer parked at the side of the road.  The impact caused the gas tank to rupture, resulting in a fire. The driver’s cause of death was blunt force trauma and thermal injuries. Continue reading

Published on:

By

Car accidents can occur under any number of circumstances, from multi-vehicle collisions to a single car crash.  No matter what the case, victims injured by another person’s negligent driving may be entitled to recover damages for their pain, suffering and other losses.  There are various state laws and court procedures that apply to car accident claims, depending on the facts of the case. To protect your rights to a recovery, it is critical that you contact an experienced Atlanta injury attorney who is fully familiar with the local laws and procedures that are applicable to all types of car accident claims.

There are many instances where provisions of the state’s uninsured motorist (“UM”) statute could affect a victim’s potential recovery amount. For instance, if an insured driver is injured in an accident with a person who has no automobile insurance, the UM statute could serve to increase the victim’s coverage.  The Georgia code also allows drivers in one-car accidents to obtain UM coverage, under certain specified circumstances. Under the law, a motor vehicle will be deemed to be uninsured if the owner or operator of the motor vehicle is unknown.

Drivers seeking such recovery are expected to show some evidence of physical contact between the insured’s vehicle and the unknown vehicle, or present eyewitness testimony corroborating the insured’s description of how the accident occurred.  In a recent case, Leslie v. Doe, Ga. Ct. of App. (2014), plaintiff claimed that he lost control of his vehicle when he swerved to avoid a car that had just pulled out in front of him.  As part of his case, plaintiff submitted an eyewitness affidavit corroborating his description of the accident: that an unknown driver and vehicle caused the one-car accident.  The defendant moved for summary judgment. Continue reading

Published on:

By

For most drivers on Georgia’s local highways, it is common knowledge that the left lane is considered the “passing lane.”  This means that the left lane should be used mainly for passing other cars in the middle or right lane.  Even if the driver in the left lane is operating their vehicle at the speed limit, he or she should still move over to the right, presumably to pass someone on their right.  Of course, this kind of passing lane etiquette is often ignored, which can annoy and anger other drivers on the road. Driving in this manner can lead to road rage incidences and worse, preventable car accidents.  If you have been injured in a car crash with a negligent driver, it is critical that you contact an experienced injury attorney in the Atlanta area.

Fortunately, legislators from the state of Georgia are currently working to rectify the problems associated with ignoring the generally understood passing lane etiquette. According to an article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Representative Bill Hitchens introduced House Bill 459, which would make it illegal for a person to drive in the left lane, unless they are passing or overtaking another vehicle on the road. Under the bill, it would be a misdemeanor for someone to drive in the left lane if another car approaches from behind, going faster.

Among other purposes, the Bill was created to foster “lane discipline” and to educate drivers about the need to move out of the way in the left lane.  Under H.R. 459, it would be illegal to drive in the left lane, unless one of the following circumstances exists: 1) a vehicle is passing another vehicle, 2) no other vehicle is directly behind the one in the left lane, 3) when traffic renders it impractical to drive in the right lane, 4) when weather conditions make it necessary to drive in the left lane, 5) when hazards or obstructions exist in the right lane, 6) when a vehicle changes lanes to comply with other laws, 7) when exiting to the left, 8) the need to go through a toll, or 9) when driving in the left lane in order to comply with traffic control. Continue reading

Published on:

By

Each personal injury action presents a different set of facts that have the potential to alter the outcome of the case. In slip and fall cases, also known as “premises liability” actions, plaintiffs must plead and prove certain required elements in order to establish liability and recover for their injuries. The extent to which a plaintiff successfully pleads and proves a negligence case will directly impact his or her right to a recovery for damages. If you have sustained an injury due to another’s negligence, it is critical that you contact an Atlanta area injury attorney as soon as possible after the incident occurs to preserve and protect your rights.

In a recent case, Austin v. Clark, et al., Ga. Sup. Ct. (2014), the Georgia Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on official immunity. Essentially, the Court allowed the case to move forward so that the parties would have ample opportunity to conduct a sufficient amount of discovery to either prove or disprove the asserted claims. Here, the plaintiff, Donna Austin, brought a personal injury action against the Superintendent of Peach County Schools and various other school administrators (hereinafter “Clark”), seeking damages that she allegedly sustained from a fall on a sidewalk at the high school after attending a graduation ceremony.

Specifically, plaintiff claimed that while she was on school district property, she stepped into a roadway from the sidewalk and her leg got caught in an opening on the area where water drains from the road. Austin alleged that the defendants in this case negligently performed the “ministerial” duties of inspection, maintenance and repair of the sidewalk and road where the accident occurred. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the claims were barred by the doctrine of official immunity. The trial court agreed with defendants and granted the motion. The court of appeals affirmed the decision. The Georgia Supreme Court agreed to hear the case to determine whether the defendants were entitled to the motion to dismiss based on the doctrine of official immunity. Continue reading

Published on:

By

Car accidents occur with some frequency in and around the Atlanta area.  People who are injured in a car crash due to the fault or negligence of another driver may be able to file a lawsuit to recover compensation for their suffering and losses.  There are many kinds of claims a plaintiff can assert, depending on the circumstances of the accident and the parties involved.  The local state laws and procedures will govern each step of the proceedings.  If you have been injured in a car accident, it is critical that you contact an experienced local injury attorney who will be able to help you achieve the best possible recovery in your case.

In a recent case, Mastec North America, Inc. et al., v. Wilson, Ga. Ct. of App. (2014), the plaintiff, Gilda Wilson, was seriously injured in a car accident with a vehicle operated by a person, Gregory Piccione, who was working at the time, driving a pick up truck owned by MasTec.  According to the trial court record, Wilson claimed that Piccione ran a red light and struck her car, causing her to sustain serious injuries.  Piccione denied that it was his fault, asserting that it was Wilson who ran the red light. Significant to this case is MasTec’s admission that Piccione was “in the course of employment” when the accident happened.

There were conflicting accounts of how the accident occurred.  Also, Piccione was talking on the phone at the time of the crash; he was using a hands-free device.  Wilson, who was ejected from the car upon impact, was not wearing a seatbelt at the time.  Wilson brought a suit against Piccione for negligence and against MasTec under a theory of “imputed liability.” As part of these claims, Wilson sought punitive damages against both defendants, while also asserting a claim against MasTec for negligent hiring, retention, supervision, training and entrustment.  She claimed that MasTec conducted a background check of Piccione at the time of hiring and had discovered assorted convictions for speeding and failing to obey a stop sign. These citations were issued while he was driving his own, personal vehicle. He had also never been in a car accident before this one. Additionally, Piccione had completed a defensive driving class while working at MasTec. Continue reading

Published on:

By

A fair amount of car accidents in the Atlanta area involve drivers with no automobile insurance coverage. Motorists who are injured in an accident with an uninsured driver would seem to be in an unfair situation.  But the law in Georgia contains certain provisions that serve to remedy such a situation. The primary purpose of the state’s uninsured motorist statute is to place the injured insured person in the same position as if the offending uninsured driver were actually covered by liability insurance.  There are many complicated legal issues to sort through in a car accident case.  In order to ensure that you receive the maximum recovery for your injuries and damages, it is critical that you contact an experienced injury attorney who is fully familiar with the local laws in Georgia.

Not every state’s laws are alike. The extent of a plaintiff’s recovery in a car accident case could depend on which state’s laws apply to the matter. In St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. v. Hughes, Ga. Ct. of App. (2013), the court was asked to determine whether Indiana or Georgia law applied to the dispute.  In this case, Hughes, a resident of Georgia, was involved in two-vehicle accident that occurred in Georgia.  At the time, he was driving a truck that was owned by his employer, Townsend Tree Service Co., Inc. (“Townsend”). Significant to this case was that although the truck was “principally used and garaged in Georgia,” it was registered in Indiana.

After suing the other driver, Hughes settled his claims for $25,000 (the policy limit). Next, he tried to recover uninsured motorist (“UM”) benefits from Ace American Insurance Company under the vehicle policy issued to Townsend. That policy, however, did not provide UM coverage because Townsend had rejected such coverage.  Hughes resorted to seeking UM benefits under the St. Paul Policy.  St. Paul moved for summary judgment arguing that Indiana law applied to the case, which did not require UM coverage at that time.  The trial court denied the argument and concluded that Georgia law applied to the case, noting that St. Paul is licensed in Georgia and the truck was principally garaged and used in Georgia. Continue reading

Published on:

By

Plaintiffs in a personal injury action arising from a car accident typically bring a negligence lawsuit against the other driver or drivers involved in the collision.  But negligence actions can arise from any number of circumstances, and the facts and parties involved can make a huge difference in the outcome of the proceedings.  In order to achieve the maximum recovery, it is critical that a person who has been injured in a car accident reach out to an experienced injury attorney who is fully apprised of the local laws, rules and procedures in the Atlanta court system.

In certain cases, a plaintiff may not be able to recover damages for injuries sustained in a car accident.  In a recent Georgia Supreme Court case, Stevenson v. City of Doraville, et al., Ga. Sup. Ct. (2013), the plaintiff was injured while driving on Interstate 285 during a rainstorm.  He was in the lane nearest the median of the six-lane highway when his car started malfunctioning.  The plaintiff tried to maneuver his car over to the right shoulder of the road, but he only reached the third lane from the right.  At that point, he saw a police vehicle with its emergency lights on near the right shoulder of the road. The officer turned on his flashing lights when he saw that the plaintiff was having car trouble.  Once the car stopped moving, the officer’s vehicle was to the right and behind the plaintiff’s.

The plaintiff turned on his hazard lights and waited in the car for the officer’s assistance.  The officer however reported the problem and decided not to try to approach the stalled vehicle due to the traffic on the road. After waiting for a few minutes without receiving any assistance, the plaintiff got out of his car and tried to get the attention of the officer.  Moments later a tractor-trailer truck hit his car, which next crashed into the plaintiff, resulting in a multi-vehicle accident.  The plaintiff sued the City of Doraville and the officer claiming that he was negligent in failing to redirect traffic away from the disabled car and thereby causing the traffic to move toward the plaintiff’s car by turning on his emergency lights while stopped at the outer lane of the highway right near the plaintiff’s car. Continue reading

Published on:

By

Motorists in and around Atlanta are expected to drive carefully on the roads.  Like most states, Georgia law requires all drivers to exercise “ordinary care” with respect to other drivers on (or users) of the highway. If a driver fails to exercise such care and causes an accident resulting in injuries and/or other damages, he or she may be liable.  There are many elements that must be proven to be successful in a negligence claim against another driver.  If you have been hurt in a car accident, it is critical that you reach out to an experienced injury attorney who is fully familiar with the local laws and rules governing personal injury actions.

Hiring an attorney who has the requisite experience to handle a negligence action cannot be overstated.  The right attorney will understand how to plead the essential elements in the action, as well as know the kind of evidence that is suitable to support those claims.  In the personal injury case, Eatmon v. Weeks, Ga. Ct. of App. (2013), neither party was found to be negligent.  Here, Princess Eatmon was driving in the left northbound lane of Dawson Road and Flaval Weeks was driving a pick up truck in the opposite direction as it veered across the turning lane that separated the south- and northbound roads.  Weeks’ pick up truck hit Eatmon’s car.

As a result of the crash, Eatmon suffered a broken leg and other injuries, and Weeks sustained a head wound.  Weeks was unable to tell the responding officer anything about the car accident.  In fact, a doctor diagnosed Weeks as having had a stroke that day, and he died a few weeks later.  Eatmon filed a negligence lawsuit against Weeks’ estate, which counterclaimed for the same.  The trial court denied both parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment.  The court of appeals reversed the lower court’s decision, granted both parties’ motions for summary judgment, and found that neither party presented evidence of the other’s negligence. Continue reading

Contact Information
Decatur Office
215 N McDonough St
Decatur, GA 30030
Phone: (404) 370-1000
Toll Free: (888) 373-9321
Fax: (404) 378-3656

* Please send all mail correspondence to this office.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Stephen M. Ozcomert
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design