Richmond Virginia Personal Injury Lawyer

Protect Your Child After a Concussion

Michael Phelan — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:50:17 GMT

Kudos to Florida Governor Charlie Crist and dozens of state lawmakers across the country who are pushing for legislation in their states to improve awareness and treatment of concussions in youth sports. Last year Washington and Oregon passed the first concussion-specific laws covering scholastic sports. Each mandated education for coaches, immediate removal from play of any athlete suspected of a concussion in a game or practice and proper medical clearance before that athlete could return. Washington’s in particular — named after Zackery Lystedt, a teenager who in 2006 sustained a serious brain injury playing football — is a template for other states formulating similar legislation.

The trend will get a name next week when the Zackery Lystedt Brain Project is formally announced at the Super Bowl Spearheaded by the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation and the American College of Sports Medicine , the initiative will continue those organizations’ push for states to enact laws similar to Washington’s. Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York are among those with bills in the works.

“We are going to get maybe 24 states passing the laws or making serious headway this year,” said Patrick Donohue, founder of the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation. The national organization focused on youth brain injuries is named after his 4-year-old daughter, who was seriously injured when shaken by a nurse as an infant.

Donohue added: “Washington’s law is a work of art, and it took almost two years, but they’ve already done the hard work. We don’t need to take two years in every state.”

The laws cover youth sports beyond football; other contact sports, particularly girls soccer and basketball, have recently been recognized as breeding grounds for concussions that often go ignored or are mistreated.

About 1.2 million teenagers play high school football in the United States, with another three million participants ages 14 and younger. According to research out of Ohio State University, youth football players sustained about 140,000 concussions per year, with as many as 40 percent of them returned to the field sooner than modern guidelines would suggest. More states are pushing for laws like those in Washington and Oregon.

One of those is Florida, where Gov. Charles J. Crist Jr. plans to push for a Lystedt-type law in his state, and also to espouse its purpose to his fellow governors at their national meeting next month.

A challenge for many states, particularly rural ones, will be finding the medical personnel to comply with the laws. State Senator Daniel L. Squadron of New York, a Democrat and the sponsor of his state’s bill, said that requiring doctors on every sideline was distractingly costly for this first step.

“We are in a world where certain communities have the resources or knowledge of these issues, and others don’t, and it’s catch as catch can,” Squadron said. “The first piece is make sure that coaches catch the signs early to help prevent these injuries. And then make sure there’s an independent medical professional making the return-to-play decision so that you don’t have the issues of someone related to the team making the decision. Frankly, it makes life easier for the coaches and trainers.”

That's all well and good, but the people in the best position to observe whether a child has suffered a concussion are his/her parents. Too many parents succumb to the pressure from the child or his youth coach to send him back to practice soon after a concussion. Is it me or do more and more parents seem to be living their lives through their child's sports? In my day there were a couple of obnoxious "Little League" parents on every sideline. Today, it seems like the majority of parents behave as if the youth game has national ramifications. This explains why some parents are willing to rush their child back into full contact after a head injury.

Parents, let's face it, your son has a better chance of winning the lottery than playing in the NFL, so why risk further brain damage by rushing him back into full contact at the youth football level? Educate yourselves about the dangers of repeat concussions and make the tough decision to be unpopular and hold your kid out of practice until a brain injury specialist advises that it's safe for him to return.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

U.S. Bans Texting While Driving Trucks and Buses

Michael Phelan — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 21:22:15 GMT

In an effort to reduce the number of truck and bus crashes caused by distracted drivers, the federal government formally barred truckers and bus drivers from sending text messages while behind the wheel, putting its imprimatur on a prohibition embraced by many large trucking and transportation companies.

"We want the drivers of big rigs and buses and those who share the roads with them to be safe," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. "This is an important safety step, and we will be taking more to eliminate the threat of distracted driving."

LaHood has made the effort to curtail driver distractions a centerpiece of his tenure as the nation's top transportation official. LaHood's announcement followed a study published in July by Virginia Tech's Transportation Institute that found that when truckers text, they are 23 times more likely to be involved in a crash or close call.

Also Tuesday, a group of senators unveiled legislation that seeks to bar all texting while driving. "Although both houses of Congress are considering bills restricting texting and 19 states have banned the practice, LaHood said that existing rules on truckers and bus drivers give him the authority to issue the prohibition. LaHood said drivers of commercial vehicles caught texting could be fined up to $2,750. The question is whether the federal ban has any teeth.

Enforcement of LaHood's ban is problematic and might prove more symbolic than practical. "The enforcement problem here is enormous," said Russ Rader of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. "It's not clear this is going to make any difference on the road in terms of crashes." Rader said the challenge for police officers is daunting. "How does anybody spot a trucker or any driver on the road who is using some device that they're holding below window level?" Rader said.

Vernon Betkey, chairman of the GHSA and a retired Maryland State Police trooper, acknowledged the challenge and said he hoped federally funded demonstration projects in Connecticut and New York might develop better enforcement tools.

"Right now, law enforcement has to be somewhat creative," Betkey said. "A driver constantly looking down while they're driving might be a clue, or you might have some lane departures."

Two weeks ago, the National Safety Council reported that 28 percent of traffic accidents occur when drivers are talking on cellphones or sending text messages. The nonprofit council said that texting was to blame for 200,000 of the crashes, while cellphone conversations caused 1.4 million. Those numbers come in the context of federal statistics that show that about 812,000 drivers are using cellphones at any given moment during daylight hours.

In announcing the ban Tuesday, LaHood pointed to data compiled by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration last year, which show that drivers who send and receive text messages take their eyes off the road for an average of 4.6 seconds out of every six seconds while texting. At 55 mph, he said, that means that during that time, the driver travels the length of a football field, including the end zones, without looking at the road.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

"Homes For Our Troops" Prove Altruism is Alive and Well in America

Michael Phelan — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:26:24 GMT

Army Staff Sgt. Dwayne Cole was shot in the neck at close range while serving our country in Iraq. The bullet lodged in his spinal column, leaving him a quadraplegic. A fellow patient at Walter Reed Army Medical Center told Sgt. Cole about Homes for Our Troops and the Build Brigade program. Sgt. Cole and his wife applied and Homes for Our Troops accepted the mission of easing the effects of this catastrophic injury by building a specially adapted, barrier-free home for the Coles in Varina, Virginia. The group has built 50 such homes for wounded vets since 2004 and has another 30 under construction.

Tomorrow, Homes for Our Troops will complete the exterior of the four-bedroom, wheelchair accessible home, which, when finished is expected to be valued at $275,000. It will be presented to the Coles at no cost. During a ceremony at the construction site yesterday, Sgt. Cole took the microphone, but was too choked up to speak. Someone in the crowd reportedly shouted, "You've done enough," to which Cole replied, "If I had a chance, I'd do more."

It goes without saying that we civilians owe heroes like Sgt. Cole a tremendous debt of gratitude. It also deserves to be mentioned that we could all learn from Homes for Our Troops by volunteering for a cause for no other reason than to help others. Supporting organizations which turn around and send us business is not altruism, it's marketing. We should continue to support all of our favorite organizations, but also find time to help people like Sgt. Cole for no other reason than he deserves the help. Kudos to the good people involved with Homes for Our Troops (www.HomesForOurTroops.org) and the companies that have donated money and supplies to the organization, including: Dunkin' Donuts and Baskin Robins-Community Foundation which gave $100,000, and local Virginia companies, Pro-Build of Chester, S.B. Cox Inc., Riverside Brick & Supply, Simonton Windows, Marshall Mechanical, Ducts Unlimited, and Ferguson plumbing supply, which donated materials to the Cole project. Thank you too to Katherine Calos, reporter at the Richmond Times-Dispatch, for publicizing this important event.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

Doctor Accused of Faking Medical Research for Pfizer and Other Pharmas

Michael Phelan — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:49:20 GMT

Federal prosecutors filed a healthcare fraud charge against Scott Reuben, M.D., a Massachusetts doctor accused of faking research for a dozen years in published studies that suggested after-surgery benefits from painkillers. In a complaint against the former chief of acute pain at Baystate Medical Center in Massachusetts, the U.S. Attorney's Office says Dr. Reuben sought and received research grants from pharmaceutical companies but never performed the studies. The complaint alleges Reuben fabricated patient data and submitted inormation to anesthesia journals for publication. The hospital where Reuben was employed discovered the alleged fraud and turned him in.

Prosecutors are focusing on a $75,000 grant Reuben received from Pfizer in 2005 to study the effectiveness of the company's pain drug Celebrex [celecoxib] for use on patients following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. The complaint alleges that no patients were enrolled in the study, but that Reuben "submitted positive results to the company for publication in the journal Anesthesia & Analgesia that 'were wholly made up."

Readers may recall that Pfizer subsequently heavily marketed Celebrex based, in part, on these fake studies, turning Celebrex into a blockbuster, billion dollar product. Unfortunately, Celebrex turned out to cause Stevens Johnson Syndrome (SJS), and other problems, leading to nationwide pharmaceutical litigation involving the product. SJS is a terrible condition which can result in a rash-like burning of one's organs and skin from the inside-out. Victims of SJS sometimes appear as if they've been in a fire. Legitimatel studies involving Celebrex later revealed that it is no more effective than Tylenol or aspirin, but far more risky.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

China Shamelessly Poisons Our Children

Michael Phelan — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:18:22 GMT

On the same day that the Associated Press reported that China passed Germany as the world's top exporter of goods, I read that U.S. safety authorities are investigating Chinese manufacturers of children's jewelry for using the metal cadmium in the jewelry. Blog readers may recall that there was a big scare last year because Chinese toy manufacturers were using lead-based paint and lead in children's jewelry and toys such as the Thomas The Tank Engine toys. Our government pressured the U.S. toy companies who imported from China and the Chinese government to end this dangerous practice. Why is it dangerous to have lead in toys? Because lead is a neuro-toxin, which means if it gets into a child's blood stream, it can cause brain damage. How have the Chinese reacted to this pressure? Apparently by substituting cadmium for lead in cheap charm bracelets and pendants being sold throughout the United States. Everyone knows children put these things in their mouths. Cadmium is even more neuro-toxic than lead. One of the pieces of toy jewelry tested by the Consumer Product Safety Commission contained 91 per cent cadmium. The testing also showed that the toy items easily shed the heavy metal, increasing the liklihood of exposure to children. This is unconscionable. Ironically, the reports surfaced on the very day the CPSC Chairman was to address, via video, a toy safety meeting in Asia in which she was to laud manufacturers for effectively abandoning the use of lead in children's products. Be safe. Buy American.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

Concussions Cause Brain Damage: Just Ask Ex-La Salle Football Player

Michael Phelan — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:12:01 GMT

Four years ago, Preston Plevretes played in a football game for La Salle University a month after an earlier concussion. He collided head-on with an opposing player on a punt return at Duquesne University on Nov. 5, 2005. He was briefly knocked unconscious, awoke and was combative for a few minutes, then lapsed into a coma. He now spends his days mostly silent in a wheelchair, requiring the assistance of a home-health aid. Robert Cantu, M.D., a renowned Boston neurosurgeon who testified earlier this year at the Congressional hearings on NFL concussions, believes Preston's first concussion was not treated properly by the school, causing the later devastating brain damage from "second-impact syndrome."

Should concussions be taken more seriously? The NFL finally believes so. And, after years of evidence from concussed Iraq War veterans, so does the Pentagon. I wonder if college and high school coaches comprehend the problem. I understand that we do not yet know all the details surrounding the suspension of Texas Tech coach, Mike Leach, for allegedly confining one of his players who suffered a concussion to a dark utility room. If the story, as reported by ESPN, is true, it would appear that the coach was ostracizing the player for complaining of a concussion. Coach Leach claims there is another side to the story, and there may well be. I simply hope that he and all coaches take note of the statements of Dr. Cantu concerning what happened to Preston Plevretes:

He enters the game symptomatic (for concussion). That sets him up for another injury causing this malignant brain swelling," he said. Once a person is vulnerable, additional brain trauma does not always have to be severe to cause devastating damage, Cantu said.
"The second blow may be remarkably minor, perhaps only involving a blow to the chest that jerks the athlete's head and indirectly imparts accelerative forces to the brain," Cantu wrote. Death can occur within minutes when the brain ruptures from the brain stem.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

NTSB Recognizes Need to Better Monitor Truck Driver Fatigue

Michael Phelan — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:00:00 GMT

Last month, Deborah Hersman , Chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board, spoke in Washington to the National Press Club and stated that every day over 100 Americans die in transportation accidents, mostly on our highways. After her speech, the Chairwoman turned her comments to truck accident prevention.

Chairwoma Hersman recognized driver fatigue as a major cause of truck crashes and called for Electronic Onboard Recorders (EOBRs) on all commercial trucks. Her rationale for this safety device is that NTSB "investigate accidents on a regular basis where we find two sets of log books [with one being false]." In other words, even the NTSB recognizes that fudging driver log books is a common practice to enable drivers to be on duty for more hours than is legally permitted. While not fool proof, EOBRs are harder to fudge than paper driver logs. Monitoring driver fatigue is an important safety issue.

As I discussed in a recent blog, none of these monitoring devices are of any use in civil litigation unless the evidence is preserved. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations permit trucking companies to destroy this evidence six months after the crash. That's why truck accident vicitims should consult an experienced truck accident lawyer as soon as possible. The first thing the lawyer should do is send a letter to the truck company and its insurance carrier demanding that all evidence from the truck and the scene be preserved.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

Wal-Mart Settles Massive Wage & Hour Lawsuit

Zev Antell — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:59:17 GMT

According to an article in today’s Boston Globe, Wal-Mart has agreed to settle a wage and hour lawsuit which will net $40,000,000 to be divided amongst a class of tens of thousands of employees and former employees. The lawsuit alleged a cornucopia of violations including failure to pay overtime, denial of rest and meal breaks, and manipulation of employee time cards.

Companies that fail to pay overtime or who require workers to work “off the clock” run the risk of serious liability under state and federal law. Large companies like Wal-Mart with many different locations are wise to take stock of their wage practices because if violations exist, they are likely to be replicated throughout the company and not be isolated to a single location or even region.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Zev Antell

Experts Not Permitted to Testify Plaintiff is Faking or Exaggerating Symptoms

Michael Phelan — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:21:33 GMT

A written opinion issued earlier this month from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division slams shut the door on the defense practice of hiring a medical expert to accuse the plaintiff of malingering, symptom magnification, being motivated by secondary gain, having somatoform disorder or any of the other names used by defense doctors to imply that injured plaintiffs are faking or lying. In Kidd v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 3:09CV264, Magistrate Judge M. Hannah Lauck ruled that even if a medical expert possesses sufficient psychological expertise to offer expert testimony as to whether the plaintiff evinces symtom magnification or somatiform disorder, the Court would not permit the experts to opine whether the plaintiff has such disorder because "[s]uch testimony far too easily invades the province of the jury or comments on the credibility of the Plaintiff."

One often sees in defense neuropsychological reports opinions along the lines that the plaintiff's complaints have a functional component, are motivated by secondary gain, represent symptom magnification or malingering, etc. I make it a practice to move to exclude such opinions as being the type of testimony the goes to the truthfulness or credibility of a witness and invades the province of the jury. See Pritchett v. Commonwealth, 263 Va. 182, 186-187, 557 S.E.2nd 205, 208 (2002). Virginia state trial courts have been receptive to this argument, and it is good to see the federal district court following suit.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan

Ethical Law Firm Marketing?

Michael Phelan — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:51:49 GMT

The endless quest to improve search engine optimization may have landed one Wisconsin personal injury firm in hot water. Wisconsin’s largest personal injury law firm, Habush, Habush & Rottier, is suing another firm, Cannon & Dunphy alleging that Cannon has been hijacking Habush's name in Google searches. The suit claims that Cannon is paying Google and other search engines to direct people who search for Habush to the Cannon website. The suit says consumers could be confused when their search for the Habush law firm turns up a competitor. "Defendants' obtaining and using the keywords 'Habush' and 'Rottier' is an intentional and illegal effort to trade on the hard-earned names, personal reputations and good will" of the plaintiffs, the suit claims.

If these allegations are true, I hope the Habush firm prevails. Aside from the privacy right and consumer law implications, the alleged hijacking seems, in my opinion, to be plain wrong and unethical. I cannot imaging making the decision to try or allowing a SEO marketing company I hired to try to divert consumers searching for a competitor firm to my website. Aside from the obvious appearance of an impropriety, and the concern about false and misleading information, the activity is just wrong. I'm sure most lawyers know this and would never undertake such Rambo marketing tactics.

In fairness to Cannon & Dunphy, its name partner Patrick Dunphy said he thought a marketer made arrangements with search engines, and that his firm never requested that Habush and Rottier keywords bring up his firm in search results. On the other hand, Dunphy does not concede that there is anything wrong with the alleged diversionary tactic. If Dunphy's professed ingorance is true, I believe C &D should have instructed their marketer to stop the practice as soon as they learned about it.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Phelan