270.781.6500

lawsuit

Select a Category
  • Select a Category
  • Blog
  • Firm News
  • Legal Updates
  • Podcasts
  • Presentations
07.13.2017

Tennessee personal injury case highlights importance of timeliness of filing lawsuit

Compared to some states, Tennessee has a very short statute of limitations for the filing of claims involving personal injury: just one year. If a claim is not filed within this time period, the plaintiff's case will be dismissed regardless of its merits. In addition to filing his or her claim in court within one year of the accident, the plaintiff must also serve a summons and a copy of the complaint on the defendant within a certain time period. A recent Tennessee personal injury case illustrates the difficulties that a claimant faced when his opponent not only moved out of the county but also filed for bankruptcy protection. Read More

05.24.2017

ELPO wins major victory in Court of Appeals in car accident case

By Kyle Roby, Attorney and Partner English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP Would you consider an ATV – an all-terrain vehicle – a motor vehicle? Kentucky law and some insurance companies do not – and that’s what the case we recently won for a client concluded, to the client’s benefit. The client, Thomas Robertson, was driving an ATV on a public roadway in Metcalfe County. Stacy Morgan was driving a vehicle on the same road, and as she attempted to pass Robertson, he turned left, and she collided with his ATV. Both were injured in the accident. Robertson did not have insurance, but Morgan did. Robertson, driving the ATV, sought Basic Reparations Benefits (BRBs) from the insurance company that insured Morgan’s vehicle. Under the terms of Morgan’s insurance, Robertson was considered to be a pedestrian, and pedestrians are entitled to basic reparations benefits. Read More

01.13.2017

Tennessee Court of Appeals affirms dismissal of plaintiff’s motor vehicle accident case

Since there are so many variables and complexities involved in a motor vehicle accident case, it is always best for those who are injured in car crashes to consult with an attorney as early in the process as possible. Issues such as the statute of limitations, notice requirements, and other matters concerning timeliness must be dealt with promptly. The courts do not favor those who don't exercise their rights to sue in a timely manner. Recently, a Tennessee appellate court was called upon to decide whether an insurance company (which stood in for its insured, to which it had paid damages arising from a motor vehicle accident) had forfeited its right to recover from the responsible party because it failed to file their case after the defendant appealed a verdict for the plaintiff to circuit court. Read More

01.05.2017

Kentucky Court reverses Summary Judgment to defendants in grocery store fall case

Say the words "slip and fall" and "grocery store," and a mental image of a shopper sliding across the produce section on a banana peel inevitably comes to mind. It's so cliché that it's almost humorous - unless you are a person who broke a bone or herniated a disc in a fall. The fact is that there are many serious injuries in grocery stores in Kentucky and across the nation each year, many of which could have been avoided had the store fulfilled its duty of care to the customer. Read More

11.02.2016

Talcum powder case brings $70 million verdict against Johnson and Johnson

By Jessica Surber, attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP A Missouri jury found in favor of a woman who developed ovarian cancer after long-term use of talcum powder in her genital area, awarding her $70 million in damages in late October. This is the third large verdict against Johnson and Johnson in 2016, with two other juries handing out $55 million and $72 million verdicts to women or their families who were affected by ovarian cancer after the women’s long-term use of talcum powder products. Johnson and Johnson is the maker of Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, both products containing talc that have been used by women in the genital area for decades. The public recently learned that Johnson and Johnson and other companies knew of this product’s link to ovarian cancer, but continued to market the product as safe for such use. Read More

06.21.2016

Tennessee Court allows estranged husband to bring wrongful death suit but allocates of proceeds to back child support

Depending upon the law of the state in which a person dies, it may be possible for his or her survivors to file a wrongful death lawsuit, a survival action, or both. Typically, state law also dictates who has the right to file suit, the appropriate lawsuit(s), the types of damages that may be sought, and how the proceeds will be divided among the various interested parties. Difficulties sometimes arise in identifying the proper party to bring the suit. When this happens, it is up to the trial court judge to apply the law to the particular facts of the case. If any litigant is dissatisfied with the judge's ruling, he or she may seek relief in the court of appeals, or thereafter the state supreme court. Read More

07.09.2015

Tennessee injury accident brings lawsuit against driver, owner of vehicle

If you drive or ride in an automobile, there's a pretty good chance that you will be involved in an accident at some point in your life. If and when this happens, it pays to seek legal counsel early in the process, even if the negligent driver's insurance company seems cooperative. This is because the legal process can be complex. This Tennessee injury accident case shows why it is important to have a qualified attorney involved in your lawsuit as soon as possible. Unexpected issues such as the timeliness of service of process or the determination of whether a negligent driver is covered under a vehicle owner's insurance policy can pop up even in a seemingly simple car accident case in which fault is clear. Read More

06.10.2015

Tennessee Appellate Court Upholds Verdict Against Uninsured Motorist Carrier in Car Accident Case

Most drivers carry at least some uninsured/underinsured motorist protection, but many do not understand the difficulties that may arise when it comes time to make a claim under this coverage. Unfortunately, simply having an accident with an uninsured or underinsured motorist does not automatically result in a payout by the insurance company, even when the insured's injuries are catastrophic or fatal. Instead, the insured person (or his or her family, in the event of a wrongful death), must negotiate a settlement with the insurance company or proceed to trial against the uninsured person and obtain a verdict. Even then, the insurance company has a right to appeal the verdict on the grounds that it was improper or excessive. This is exactly what happened in the recent Tennessee case of Monypeny v. Kheiv. Read More

12.31.2014

Kentucky Federal Court Rules in Favor of Medical Device Manufacturer; Injured Man Failed to Participate in Discovery

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky recently ruled in favor of a medical device manufacturer in a products liability case in which the plaintiff did not participate in written discovery. In Johnson v. Zimmer Holdings, Inc., a man had four medical devices implanted into his body when he underwent hip surgery in 2010. Unfortunately, the man’s hip dislocated at least six times between 2010 and 2012. About two years after his initial surgery, the man underwent a second procedure to replace three of the four medical products. Following the second surgery, the man filed a products liability lawsuit in a Kentucky federal court against the manufacturer of the medical devices that were initially implanted into his body. According to his complaint, the man experienced pain, suffering, emotional distress, and unnecessary surgery as a result of the medical device manufacturer’s defective products. Pursuant to the Eastern District of Kentucky’s scheduling order, the parties entered into the discovery stage of the lawsuit. This is a pre-trial phase of a case in which each party is entitled to request certain relevant information from the opposing side. Discovery may include depositions, interrogatory and document requests, and more. Although the medical device manufacturer served the allegedly harmed man with written discovery requests, he failed to submit any discovery requests prior to the deadline that was imposed by the court. As a result, the medical device manufacturer filed a motion for summary judgment in the case. Read More

10.16.2014

Western District of Kentucky Says Man’s Medical Device Lawsuit is Not Preempted by Federal Law: Waltenburg v. St. Jude Medical, Inc.

In Waltenburg v. St. Jude Medical, Inc., a man received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (“ICD”) that was manufactured by St. Jude Medical, Inc. The electrical ICD device was inserted into the man’s body through a vein and then attached to his heart in an effort to correct irregular heart rhythms. Not long after the device was implanted into the man’s chest, he apparently began experiencing unexpected and unnecessary electrical shocks. Several years later, the man’s physicians reportedly told him that the ICD device implanted into his body was faulty, but it was too risky to remove it. The man filed a products liability lawsuit seeking damages for physical injury and emotional distress from the manufacturer of the ICD in the Western District of Kentucky. In his complaint, the man claimed the medical device manufacturer was strictly liable for the allegedly defective ICD. He also claimed the company manufactured the product in a negligent fashion, negligently failed to warn him about the product defect, and alternately should be held accountable through the doctrine of negligence per se. A negligence per se cause of action normally arises when someone is injured after another party violates a law that was designed to protect the public or a specific class of individuals from the type of harm that the injured person sustained. In general, negligence per se is easier to prove than other types of negligence because the reasonableness of an at-fault actor’s conduct is not at issue. The medical device manufacturer countered by alleging the man’s claims were preempted by the Medical Device Amendments (“MDA”) to the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and argued the lawsuit should be dismissed because the man failed to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Preemption occurs when a state law conflicts with a federal law in such a way that the purpose of the federal law is thwarted. According to the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, federal law controls in such cases. Read More

Select a Category
  • Select a Category
  • Blog
  • Firm News
  • Legal Updates
  • Podcasts
  • Presentations