A thought or two about branding

What is a lawyer's brand? Many of us resort to consultants or marketing professionals to help us address this basic question. In some ways it is an annual problem when it comes time to update a website or renew an ad in the Yellow Pages.

According to this article, it takes more than just frustration with your current situation or a bucket of money to throw at the problem.

"You see it in professional spin-offs all the time… Two or three key architects in an established firm leave with a few clients, just knowing they can do it better on their own. But then they go out and start a company that’s cut from the exact same cloth as the last place they worked. They use the same accounting software, the same processes, the same fee structure, and even the same spiel in their pitches. The only thing that’s changed is the location and the letterhead."

Author Michael Gerber, in his book "The E-Myth," tackles this problem head on.

If you are looking for a holiday gift for a lawyer with a branding issue, consider this easy to read, but thought provoking book.

Receive Levi's Calls by Text

News from Keep Georgia Safe shows how technology helps with alerts like a Levi's call:

What is a Levi's Call? - Georgia's AMBER Alert

A Levi's Call is an emergency bulletin that is issued whenever a child has been abducted and is in imminent danger of harm or death. The goal is simple: To locate the child and the abductor expeditiously before any harm comes to the child. In Georgia, this alert is known as "Levi's Call" in memory of 11 year old Levi Frady.

Get a real-time text of alerts:

To receive real-time notification of Levi's Call, Georgia's AMBER alert, Mattie's Call, elderly or disabled missing person alert, and Kimberly's Call, dangerous fugitive alert, via text on your cell phone, go to their site and enroll. You can read more about the other types of alerts on their site.

With your help, you can become a part of the Keep Georgia Safe wireless network.

Recall Alert: Infant Gas Relief Eye Drops

Johnson & Johnson and Merck Consumer Pharmaceuticals Company announce the voluntarily recall of approximately 12,000 units of Infants' MYLICON® GAS RELIEF DYE FREE drops (simethicone-antigas) non-staining sold in 1 oz. plastic bottles that were distributed after October 5, 2008 nationwide.

The company is taking this action in consultation with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The recall was announced as a precaution after determining that some bottles could include metal fragments that were generated during the manufacturing process. If any medical events were to occur, most are expected to be temporary and resolve without medical treatment. Parents who have given the product to their infant and are concerned should contact their health care provider immediately.

Lot numbers are: SMF007 and SMF008.

Consumers who purchased Infants' MYLICON® GAS RELIEF DYE FREE drops non-staining included in this recall should immediately stop using the product and contact the company at 1-800-222-9435 (Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 8:00 p.m. EST) or via the internet at www.mylicon.com for instructions regarding how to dispose of the product and request a replacement or refund.

Source.

Recall Alert: ReliOn Syringe Recall

The FDA reports this week that ReliOn syringes have been recalled. Here is the report from the FDA site:

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is notifying health care professionals and patients that Tyco Healthcare Group LP (Covidien) is recalling one lot of ReliOn sterile, single-use, disposable, hypodermic syringes with permanently affixed hypodermic needles due to possible mislabeling. The use of these syringes may lead to patients receiving an overdose of as much as 2.5 times the intended dose, which may lead to hypoglycemia, serious health consequences, and even death.

The recall applies to the following lot number and product information:

-- Lot Number 813900
-- ReliOn 1cc, 31-gauge, 100 units for use with U-100 insulin

Only ReliOn syringes from this lot number and labeled as 100 units for use with U-100 insulin are the subject of the recall.

These syringes are distributed by Can-Am Care Corp and sold only by Wal-Mart at Wal-Mart stores and Sam's Clubs under the ReliOn name. Wal-Mart requests that all users of ReliOn 31-gauge, 1cc syringes return those labeled as 100 units for use with U-100 insulin from Lot Number 813900 to their local Wal-Mart store or Sam's Club pharmacy. Customers will be provided with replacement product.

The FDA urges patients and health care professionals to check their syringe packaging carefully for syringes labeled as 100 units for use with U-100 insulin from Lot Number 813900.

Consumers and health care professionals who suspect they have the recalled product may also contact Covidien at 866-780-5436 or www.relion.com/recall for more information.

ReliOn Insulin Syringes consist of a syringe barrel, a plunger rod, and a hypodermic needle attached to the tip of the syringe.

During the packaging process for this lot, some syringes labeled for use with U-40 insulin were mixed with syringes labeled for use with U-100 insulin, then all packaged individually and in boxes as 100 units for use with U-100 insulin.

The manufacturer has distributed 4,710 boxes in the recalled lot, which equals 471,000 individual syringes. Wal-Mart sold the syringes at Wal-Mart stores and Sam's Clubs from Aug. 1, 2008, until Oct. 8, 2008.

Tyco Healthcare Group LP (Covidien) voluntarily recalled this lot of syringes on Oct. 9, 2008, asking that any units of the affected product be removed from inventory and placed in quarantine. Wal-Mart posted the recall announcement in Wal-Mart stores and Sam's Clubs, as well as on its Web site, and sent letters to more than 16,500 customers notifying them of the recall.

The manufacturer has received one adverse report related to a syringe from this product lot.
Health care professionals and consumers may report serious adverse events (side effects) or product quality problems with the use of this product to the FDA's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program either online, by regular mail, fax or phone.

Caps on Damages Case Settles

For Immediate Release
October 31, 2008
rdehart@gtla.org

Caps on Damages Case Settles in Favor of Mr. Park

Atlanta, Georgia—Yesterday afternoon, the case of Park v WellStar Hospital settled for an undisclosed amount. The case was on appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court following a Fulton Superior Court ruling that Georgia’s statutory limit on damages in a medical malpractice case was unconstitutional. The defendants’ appeal was scheduled for oral argument before the Georgia Supreme Court next Monday.

“We are pleased that the Park family has received justice,” said Rob Roll, an attorney for Park. “This case truly represented the uphill battle facing Georgia’s families since SB 3 became law. While this case was closely watched, we have never lost sight of the paramount importance of the best interest of our clients. It is clear that the defendants did not want the caps provision to be scrutinized by the Georgia Supreme Court. And the Parks deserved and received justice.”

The case was filed by Plaintiff Cheon Park, 59, who fell from a ladder at his home in late 2006. He was taken to WellStar Douglas Hospital by ambulance with complaints of pain in his neck, shoulder, arm and pelvis. Once at the hospital, doctors treated Park for a dislocated shoulder and then released him that same evening. Upon his discharge, Park could not stand on his own and had to be lifted by hospital staffers and his loved ones into his car. Just a few days later Park, still in pain, was taken to Grady Hospital where X-Rays revealed he had a severely damaged spine. Park is a now a C4 quadriplegic and confined to a wheelchair.

The Parks filed suit in Fulton County Superior Court against the Hospital. During that tumultuous time, the Parks learned of SB 3. In 2005, the Georgia Legislature passed a sweeping, so-called “tort reform” measure. Claims of “jack-pot-justice” and “frivolous lawsuits” flooded the halls of the Gold Dome. In one fell swoop, SB 3 drastically compromised the Constitutional Rights of all Georgians. In some aspects SB 3 attempted to limit Georgia citizens’ Constitutional Rights and in other aspects those Rights were completely eradicated.

After receiving the news that a chance for a financial recovery had been destroyed just one year before, the Park family asked the judge for a ruling on the two main components of SB 3— the application of a gross negligence standard in emergency rooms and the cap on ‘non-economic,’ or ‘quality of life,’ damages. Last May, Judge Marvin Arrington ruled that Georgia’s medical malpractice cap on non-economic damages was indeed unconstitutional. He had yet to release his decision on the gross negligence standard.

“Judge Arrington’s decision addressed several aspects of caps on damages that could not pass Constitutional muster,” said Trent Speckhals, an attorney for the Park family. “His ruling addresses this state’s—and this nation’s—fundamental value of a citizen’s right to trial by jury. His commonsense ruling balances the rights of all Georgians, young and old, rich and poor, and restores the guarantees set forth in our Constitution.”

Judge Arrington’s decision may still be used as a persuasive decision in future civil suits.

“This conversation about the unconstitutionality of SB 3 is not over. But what is most important now is that the Park family can try to piece their lives back together,” said GTLA President, Fred Orr. “Trial lawyers are an impressive bunch of people. And this latest case proves that. Our profession knows that there is nothing more important than the client you were hired to obtain justice for. The Park family may have struggled for the next several years while their case played out in court. Instead, now they can put this behind them and start rebuilding their future. I commend the attorneys who represented this deserving family.”

Rob Roll and the attorneys at Watkins, Lourie, Roll & Chance, PC, Trent Speckhals of Speckhals and Cora, Michael Terry and Frank Lowry of Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore, and Ned Miltenberg of the Center for Constitutional Litigation, PC were all instrumental in the representation of the Parks in this case.

###

The Georgia Trial Lawyers Association
Protecting the Constitutional Promise of Justice for all by
Guaranteeing the Right to Trial by Jury,
Preserving an Independent Judiciary, and
Providing Access to the Courts for all Georgians

www.gtla.org

GTLA Honors Georgia's Judiciary

For Immediate Release
(404) 376-3495, Rebecca DeHart

rdehart@gtla.org

A Great Escape and a Great Man
The Georgia Trial Lawyers Association honors Judge Anthony A. Alaimo

Atlanta, GA—Hailed as what will be the largest gathering of judges and attorneys in the history of the state of Georgia, the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association [GTLA] is hosting The Height of Excellence—an event honoring excellence in Georgia’s judiciary and where Judge Anthony A. Alaimo, a Senior United States District Court Judge of the Southern District of Georgia, will be the first recipient of the inaugural Anthony A. Alaimo Award for Judicial Excellence.

“It is very appropriate that the first award given by the members of GTLA for judicial excellence carries the name of Judge Anthony A. Alaimo and that he will be the very first recipient,” said GTLA President Fred Orr. “Judge Alaimo, at age 88, remains one of the hardest working judges in the entire country. He is among the most beloved and respected judges of the federal judiciary. He is a true American Hero.”

Before beginning his distinguished judicial career, Judge Alaimo served in the U.S. Army Air Corps flying a B26 as a member of the 322nd Bomb Group during WWII. His plane was shot down over the North Sea and Alaimo was captured by the Germans. It was his numerous daring escapes from a German POW camp that inspired the 1963 film, “The Great Escape,” starring Steve McQueen.

An American war hero, Alaimo returned to Georgia, married his high school sweetheart, graduated from Emory Law School and was admitted to the Georgia Bar in 1948. In 1968, Alaimo became the 8th President of GTLA and founded the quarterly magazine, “The Verdict.”

In 1971 President Richard Nixon appointed Judge Alaimo to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia where he served as Chief Judge until 1990 and took senior status in 1991.

“Judge Alaimo is highly regarded as one of the most diligent judges in the entire federal judiciary,” stated Orr. “Judge Alaimo is often called to preside over complex cases and lengthy disputes. He is known to conclude cases that were thought to be never-ending in days—if not hours. His judicial skill is simply unmatched.”

Judge Alaimo has been recognized by the Chief Justice of the United States with appointments to most of the leadership positions that exist within the federal judiciary including service on the Judicial Conference on Records Disposition, the Judicial Conference Committee on the Judicial Branch, the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Executive Committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States. He is a member in good standing of the State Bar of Georgia and is a Life Member of GTLA.

The Height of Excellence will take place on Thursday, September 18th at the Ritz Carlton, Buckhead. The black-tie optional gala begins at 6:30 pm. Tickets for members of GTLA and their guests are $35 and $50 for all others. Anyone who would like to pay tribute to this great American Hero and to the entire Georgia judiciary is welcome to attend. Please contact GTLA Headquarters at (404) 522-8487 for more information.

###

The Georgia Trial Lawyers Association
Protecting the Constitutional Promise of Justice for all by
Guaranteeing the Right to Trial by Jury,
Preserving an Independent Judiciary, and
Providing Access to the Courts for all Georgians

www.gtla.org

FDA Sides with Drug Companies

For Immediate Release
Contact: Cecelia Prewett, Jennifer Fuson

202-965-3500 x369AAJ Press Room

Preemption Clause Would Grant Blanket Immunity

from Lawsuits Involving Drugs Used by Pregnant Women

Washington, DC – Drug and device manufacturers will have immunity from lawsuits even if they fail to update warning labels to include dangerous side effects for pregnant and breast-feeding women if a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed rule is made final. The American Association for Justice (AAJ) today submitted comments on the new label requirements.

“The civil justice system and regulatory authority are meant to complement each other to protect consumers. Instead, we are seeing the same complete immunity preemption language over and over again that would allow manufacturers to escape accountability for hazardous drugs and take away the right of consumers to seek justice in the courts,” said American Association for Justice (AAJ) President Les Weisbrod.

AAJ is asking the final rule eliminate any reference to giving complete immunity to manufacturers. Seven federal agencies have issued over 59 rules with preemption language in the preamble of the rule. Congress has expressed intent to permit consumers to bring state law claims against drug manufacturers in the Food and Drug Administration Amendments of 2007 and in numerous floor statements.

“There is no guarantee the FDA’s new labeling requirements will compel manufacturers to disclose product hazards,” said Weisbrod. “This new policy will only hurt patients and relieve drug manufacturers of the obligation to compensate those that are harmed by their products before ever testing if the new labeling system works properly. The FDA needs shift their focus back to the safety of pregnant women and their children and not protecting the drug companies.”

For a copy of AAJ’s comments, see www.justice.org

###

As the world's largest trial bar, the American Association for Justice (formerly known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America) works to make sure people have a fair chance to receive justice through the legal system when they are injured by the negligence or misconduct of others--even when it means taking on the most powerful corporations.
Visit http://www.justice.org

Lawsuit not 'frivolous' to the one injured

By: Deric Beaudoin
Attorney at Law and GTLA Member

**The following is a response to a guest column printed in the AJC on 7-30.

A grueling mistrial? Perhaps. A frivolous lawsuit? Not a chance.

While I can certainly understand the frustration Mr. Pitfield has felt as a result of his juror experience, I don’t think it is fair to consider the time spent by everyone involved in this case as being anything near frivolous. I am thankful that this jury devoted so much of their time trying to reach a unanimous decision in this case and I am thankful that we have people in our community like Mr. Pitfield that are willing to share their opinions openly. The fact that twelve people that did not know either party to the case spent two days of their lives (after three days of hearing evidence and argument) trying to reach a decision that would have been fair to both parties is a testament that there are indeed plenty of good people left in our society.

At trial, I represented the plaintiff. My client, a married Korean born 20 + year Cobb County resident and stay-at-home mother of two, had incurred over $65,000 in medical bills as a result of the negligent driving of the defendant. There was no question that the defendant caused the accident because at the scene she received a citation from law enforcement which she pled guilty to and never challenged the ticket.

My client’s Ford Taurus wagon had damage to the unibody which is made of steel and takes the place of what has been traditionally referred to as the frame of a car. The accident caused spinal injuries requiring significant medical attention and for which there is essentially no cure. Hurt through no fault of her own, my client cannot be the person that she once was.

The life changing effect of this wreck and the amount of medical bills that Ms. Kim’s family has racked up as a result of this wreck are anything but “frivolous." The pain that Ms. Kim endures on a daily basis as a result of the defendant pulling out in front of her and stopping in the middle of the road is anything but "frivolous."

With the rising costs of gas, an unsteady economy, and everyday financial worries, the idea of being saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in medical expenses for injuries caused in an accident that was undeniably the fault of another is unbearable. Making a mistake that hurts somebody is one thing, but refusing to accept responsibility for hurting somebody the way Bonnie Kim was hurt is an insult.

Our jury system is designed to offer a fair and just decision for the parties involved in a case. Sometimes, they cannot reach agreement. However, that lack of consensus does not indicate a “frivolous” case. My client is a real person—a mother, a wife, a neighbor, a PTA member. Her family has incurred medical costs that would not have been necessary but for the negligence of the defendant. We did not go into that Courtroom and ask for a million dollars, all we asked for was that Ms. Kim’s medical bills be paid and that the jury award whatever they felt fair and reasonable for her other human losses in light of the evidence presented at trial.

Obviously we affected some of the jurors enough to keep them busy for two days trying to reach a unanimous verdict. It would be interesting to see what some of the “unreasonable” jurors would have to say about the experience. I appreciate Mr. Pitfield’s time on our jury and thank him for sharing his thoughts and opinions with us both after the trial and in his comments to the editor.

I regret however, that Mr. Pitfield did not comment on the civility of the trial and the incredible emotion felt by the parties, the attorneys and the jurors at various times of the trial. I personally have never had a better trial experience between opposing counsel and the defendant and perhaps I never will. Everything about our trial was professional and civil and our judge was exceptional.

If cases like this one are "frivolous," then we need to come up with a new word for lawsuits that have absolutely no merit, because this one, I can assure you, was not one of them.

Jury System is the fair way to solve a dispute

By: Andy Childers
Atlanta Attorney

** The following is a Letter to the Editor to the AJC in response to a guest column published on July 30, 2008.

If I were blindsided on the highway on the way home from work tonight by a negligent driver, I would much rather have members of my community step inside my shoes and deliberate what equates fairness rather than some insurance company cog who gets bonuses for denying claims. While it may cause frustration to those on the jury, like it did for Tex Pitfield an Oil Company CEO and jury foreman on a recent Cobb County trial, at least I would be getting a fair shake.

Insurance companies are ruthless in denying claims. From the atrocities of Hurricane Katrina to what Mr. Pitfield calls, “a very minor traffic accident,” our fates are controlled by corporations who view us as an inconvenient story on a piece of paper rather than real people with families and jobs who are struggling to make ends meet like nearly everyone else. That is, nearly everyone else but Insurance CEOs who continue to rake in record profits while the rest of us struggle to fill up our gas tanks.

While it sounds like Mr. Pitfield was annoyed by his jury summons, I commend him for fulfilling his civic duty. I commend the other jurors who were as convinced of their verdict as he was. We are blessed to live in a nation that constitutionally protects the rights of people to participate in their government. Without that, we’d all be doomed to existing simply as a blurb on a scrap of paper that corporate insiders with more means, money and power than we have, could just willy-nilly throw away.

Senior move closer to being protected from one-sided mandatory arbitraion in long-term care

For Immediate Release:
202-965-3500 x369
AAJ Press Room

Washington, DC— Seniors and their families who have been harmed by mandatory arbitration in nursing home contracts overcame another hurdle in the fight to seek justice from negligent nursing home corporations as the House Judiciary Committee set to pass the Fairness in Nursing Home Arbitration Act (H.R. 6126) this week.

This bill would stop nursing home corporations from burying mandatory arbitration clauses in the stack of papers that patients must sign in order to be admitted into a nursing home. When families face the tragic neglect of a loved one due to negligent care, these clauses force families into a private system of justice in which the “judge” is picked by the corporation and families are left without any appeal.

Mandatory arbitration in nursing home contracts has a real life impact on American families every day. Wisconsin resident David Kurth witnessed the one-sided system of mandatory arbitration first hand when a nursing home corporation refused to be held accountable for the neglect of his father, William Kurth. David’s father suffered bedsores so severe they lead to his eventual death. The nurse treating David’s father was found guilty of criminal negligence. Even though the nursing home admitted responsibility to the Kurth family, they continue to hide behind a mandatory arbitration agreement.

“Our members speak for families who have been harmed by mandatory arbitration enforced by the very people that they trusted to protect the health and safety of their loved ones,” said American Association for Justice President Les Weisbrod. “We want to ensure that that no other family has to suffer the compounded injustice suffered by the Kurth family and many others.”

“Mandatory arbitration agreements in nursing home contracts place families in an unfair system where corporations pick the players, make all the rules and leave families without any appeal. Most importantly, it allows nursing home corporations to sweep their unlawful and negligent behavior under a rug and out of the public eye.”

For additional examples of how nursing home arbitration harms families please contract the AAJ press shop at 202-965-3500 x. 369.

###

As the world's largest trial bar, the American Association for Justice (formerly known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America) works to make sure people have a fair chance to receive justice through the legal system when they are injured by the negligence or misconduct of others--even when it means taking on the most powerful corporations. Visit http://www.justice.org.