Author Archives: Robert I. Feinberg
Harambe and the Alligator – A Difference in the Eyes of the Law
This blog focuses on the very sharp differences in the knowledge of the parents who suffered the tragic loss as compared with the landowner, in this case, the corporate giant Disney.
The Recollection of a Percipient Witness
Today’s blog topic will be on witness recollection. I do exclusively personal injury cases so I will speak about witness recollection in that context. But you should keep in mind that this has a broader application than just in personal injury cases.
Presenting the Case
How do I put a case together? How do I present it in a comprehensive and thorough fashion to get the best result that I can for my personal injury client? Having done this for a number of years now, I have very strong feelings about how to answer those questions. It really involves a multi-disciplinary approach. I have recently blogged about brain injuries so I will focus on that injury in describing to you how I think your case should best be presented. The lessons can be applied to all forms of injury law.
Technology and Brain Injuries
We have been talking about brain injuries and particularly diffuse axonal injuries or shear injuries. These injuries are verified through technology and, in particular, a sophisticated form of MRI. I really want to bring the point home about technology. Technology frustrates a lot of people and its ever changing nature can be especially frustrating.
Brain Injuries
Today I would like to speak about brain injuries and a specific type of brain injury that is not uncommon: a diffuse axonal injury, often referred to as a shear injury. It is often seen in the car accident context and has been estimated to comprise about 50% of the traumatic brain injury hospitalizations.
Harambe, the Gorilla, and the Law of Injuries
It is no surprise to say that personal injury law and personal injury lawyers are not the most favored people or most favored thing in our society. I am proud of what I do. However, I do not feel that the stereotype or cliche fits me or the vast majority of my colleagues. In discussing that frightening incident in the Cincinnati Zoo, perhaps I can suggest to you that not all events result in a case, even though plaintiff lawyers are accused of such.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Has it Over the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the Handling of Third-Party Lawsuits
To anyone familiar with my blogs or website, it comes as no surprise that I have come to rely upon the law of 93A and 176D to help my personal injury clients. It has been an effective tool in dealing with insurance companies.
Three C’s: Civil, Civility, Closing
Let’s talk about the three C’s. The first is “civil”, those cases that I have always discussed with you and which is the focus of my website. Second, is “civility”, how you act in a courtroom or how you interact with people throughout the course of the case. Third, is “closing,”, for what a closing argument looks like in a civil case.
Common Arguments from Defendants in a Premises Accident Lawsuit
I recently resolved a case at mediation, very satisfactorily in my opinion. The case concerned a client who sustained a bad elbow injury as a result of a fall on an outside stairway leading from a side exit. The client was working as a security guard at the time of the fall. I think it is instructive to bring up the three arguments that I had to overcome -all presented for the first time at the mediation- to obtain the favorable recovery. The case was on for trial in a matter of weeks had we not settled it at the mediation. The three arguments that the defendant/insurance company put forth were:
People Who Have Been Hurt Out-Of-State but Live in State |People Who Have Been Hurt in State But Live Out-of-State
I have had occasion to represent Massachusetts residents who have been hurt of out-of-state and out-of-state residents who have been hurt in Massachusetts. Perhaps the second scenario is the easiest to deal with because if the case requires litigation, you bring the case in a Massachusetts court involving that out-of-state person. You could choose to do it a federal court because of diversity of citizenship or you could choose to bring a personal injury action in state court.