Will Social Security Go Bankrupt?

 

There is a great deal of pessimism regarding Social Security benefits. In survey after survey, people in their twenties and thirties believe that by the time they are old enough to be eligible for Social Security, there won’t be any money left. Many of our clients have a tendency to believe this too.  A significant part of our practice involves helping the disabled navigate through the Social Security Disability process. Many of them have asked “Why bother applying for Social Security? There’s no way it’s going to last that long.”

We can certainly see how they would believe it. There are plenty of news stories and press releases from politicians who believe that Social Security is doomed. Even President Bush said so in his 2005 State of The Union address.

President Bush’s alternative to “save” Social Security was to allow people to set up their own “investment accounts,” which would have meant that everyone would have been able to invest their Social Security money into private stocks. We can’t imagine that would have been a good thing, especially when you consider how badly the stock market has performed over the past three years.

 

As a real-world example as to how bad an idea privatization can be, consider what happened to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. This is an independent government agency that has a function similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, except that while FDIC guarantees bank deposits up to $100,000, the PBGC guarantees pension programs. In other words, if your pension plan goes belly up due to bad investments, the PBGC is there to guarantee that you will receive your retirement money.

One of the reasons that the PBGC is able to do this is because they keep their money in bonds and securities, specifically bonds and securities that are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. At least, they did until 2008. It was at this point that PBGC head Charles Millard thought that it would be a good idea to create a new “investment strategy,” which involved moving 45% of the PBGC’s assets into the stock market. The timing couldn’t have been worse.

From theAssociated Press, October 24, 2008:

WASHINGTON — The federal agency charged with backstopping pension benefits for 44 million Americans lost almost $5 billion from investments in stocks in the budget year that ended Sept. 30, the agency head acknowledged Friday.

The Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. will lose 6 percent to 7 percent on its entire investment portfolio, PBGC Director Charles Millard told the House Education and Labor Committee. It lost a significantly higher percentage of its investments in equities.

In other words, Mr. Millard thought it would be a good idea to put pension guaranty funds into stocks instead of boring old bonds. And as everybody knows, stocks can turn valueless practically overnight. Can you imagine what would have happened to the retirement savings of millions of Americans if they had put their money in the stock market? What if their investor told them that mortgage backed securities were the way to go? Or to pool their resources so they could get in on what this guy Bernard Madoff had going on?

Privatization or turning the retirement money of Social Security over to everyone in America is not any way to “save” it. In fact, we aren’t even convinced that it needs to be “saved.” Many people are under the impression that when the money for Social Security is taken out of your paycheck, it is then put in a specific account for you. But that isn’t what happens, any more than an insurance company would take your premium dollars and put it aside for you specifically when you get into an accident. The money that you put into Social Security is used to pay the benefits of current recipients, and what is left over is put into the Social Security Trust Fund.

To be sure, sometimes the government borrows money from the Social Security Trust Fund. But they pay it back with interest. And while the mass retirement of the baby boomers might cause the United States to occasionally dip into the trust fund, the only way that it could be completely depleted would be if it were completely deprived of income. If you can foresee a future where absolutely nobody in the United States is working at all, then you can imagine Social Security “running out of money.” If you can also make the assumption that absolutely everyone in America will live to be 100 years old, then you can imagine that Social Security will run out of money. And if you can further make the assumption that absolutely everyone in America will make it to the age of 65 to begin collecting Social Security benefits, then you can imagine that Social Security will go bankrupt. If you can imagine that the economy will continue to be in bad shape for the next 40 years and nobody will pay in as much, then you can imagine that Social Security will go bankrupt.

We don’t practice disability law with the vision of all of those scenarios taking place, so we can’t imagine Social Security going bankrupt. When we help our clients get Social Security disability benefits, we do so with full confidence in the funding.

Greenberg and Bederman is a personal injury and Social Security disability law firm located in Silver Spring, Maryland. We are currently offering legal assistance to the newly disabled, particularly those who have been injured due to no fault of their own. If you or a loved one in Virginia, Maryland or D.C. needs the services of an injury lawyer, contact Greenberg & Bederman for a free consultation.

H.R. 5 Bill on Medical Malpractice Caps

 

The House Subcommittee on Health had a hearing on Capitol Hill this morning. The official name of the hearing is “The Cost of the Medical Liability System Proposals for Reform, including H.R. 5, the Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2011.” For those of you who don’t know, H.R. 5 is a bill that was placed into consideration early in the legislative term. The bill has quite a few ambitions, but the main thrust of this legislation is to place a cap of $250,000 on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases.

This is nothing new. Proponents of tort reform have turned caps on damages into the cure all for any and all problems that exist in our health care system. The idea here is that if you put a limit on the amount of damages that a plaintiff can receive in a medical malpractice case, then this would allow medical malpractice insurance companies to lower their rates. Proponents of this theory also state that these caps would allow doctors and surgeons to work without the fear of being sued.

 

There are quite a few things wrong with these assumptions. In the first place, we have yet to see medical malpractice insurance companies dramatically lower their rates in states where these caps have been put in place. Nor have patients who have been injured by their doctors suddenly stopped filing lawsuits. It seems to us that the only people who are helped by caps on damages in medical malpractice cases are the medical malpractice insurance companies, and considering that malpractice insurers are more profitable than 99% of all Fortune 500 companies, it doesn’t seem like they need much help at all.

Another troubling element about these caps is that they seem to favor those who are financially well off but completely disregards the suffering of those who are not. Economic damages basically compensate you for the amount of money that you lost due to the negligent actions of your doctor or surgeon. This can be a significant amount if you happen to be a stock broker, airline pilot, or if you happen to be a doctor yourself. That amount can be even more if the actions of the doctor or surgeon prevent you from returning to your job. But if you happen to be a retail worker or if you happen to work in a restaurant, the amount of compensation won’t amount to much, particularly once your insurance company goes through its usual round of claim rejections. So for those of us who don’t make millions of dollars a year, non-economic compensation is particularly important. Ultimately, what these caps do is make it incredibly hard for malpractice injury victims to collect for damages suffered as a result of negligence. Plaintiffs have to hire attorneys if they’ve been wrongfully injured, and these attorneys work on a contingency basis. Often expensive expert witnesses have to be hired. If there is a strict cap on non-economic damages, quite often the process of bringing a malpractice case to court becomes financially impossible. So while this legislation would not specifically make it illegal to file a medical malpractice case, it might certainly make it impossible financially. A malpractice suit would become the equivalent of buying a Lamborghini. Theoretically, anyone is able to buy one. But there are very few of us who can actually afford to do so.

The memorandum for today’s hearing gives us the inevitable mention of “frivolous lawsuits,” which to us is simply corporate-speak for “lawsuits that do not benefit us directly.” Coincidentally, today we also read a story from Northern Virginia Daily which gives a little more perspective on the sort of cases that would essentially no longer exist in America if H.R. 5 were to become law.

A 29 year old woman in Winchester, Virginia was suffering from persistent diarrhea and went to see a doctor. The doctor decided to perform a colonoscopy. When she was given a preparation medication before the colonoscopy took place, she had a great deal of difficulty handling it. She was suffering from nausea, abdominal pain and cramping. Rather than ascertain the cause of this pain, the doctor simply gave her Demoral and went ahead with the colonoscopy. The end result of this was that the woman had her colon perforated, which only added to her already existing medical problems. The woman came very close to dying.

If the allegations in the official complaint are correct, the doctor failed the patient in a number of ways, and her injuries are extensive. But let’s say that these medical malpractice caps are put into place. What are her options? She could still sue the doctor, of course. But what does she do for a living? Does she manage a bank? Is she an executive with Lockheed Martin? Is she a housewife? Is she a waitress? With H.R. 5 as established law of the land, that could matter more than the extent of her injuries,whether or not the doctor was guilty of negligence.

Greenberg and Bederman is a medical malpractice law firm located in Silver Spring, Maryland. We are currently offering legal assistance to those who have been injured due to the negligence or incompetence of a medical professional. We have helped hundreds of medical malpractice victims in Maryland, D.C. and Virginia receive fair treatment from the court system. If you or a loved one has been injured due to an instance of medical malpractice,  contact Greenberg & Bederman for a free medical malpractice legal consultation.

 

 

Frivolous Lawsuits

A word on frivolous lawsuits: They exist.

Nobody in their right mind could claim that they don’t. Does everybody remember Roy Pearson, the D.C. judge who sued a dry cleaner for $54 million over a pair of lost pants? Or what about Jonathan Lee Riches? This inmate in Lexington, Kentucky who has filed over 3,800 lawsuits over the past few years. He has sued New England Patriots Coach Bill Bellichik, American Idol judge Simon Cowell (and his fiancé,) Somalian pirates, Plato, Bernie Madoff, and basically everyone who happens to garner any bit of media attention, no matter how big or small. The charges against this diverse group of defendants include “hurting my feelings” and “offending me.”

As you probably know by now, Judge Pearson’s lawsuit was not successful, and all of Mr. Riches’ suits get dismissed out of hand, as well they should have. Those suits are supremely ridiculous and a waste of time. But inevitably, these two folks serve as the poster children for tort reform groups. Their absurd (and ultimately unsuccessful) lawsuits are trotted out and given much more airtime and column inches than they deserve, mainly because corporate interests want you to believe that the vast majority of lawsuits belong in the same category as Mr. Riches or Judge Pearson’s. They are most assuredly not.

The wonderful thing about living in a democracy is that our court system is designed to give a fair hearing to everyone, and unfortunately that includes the assorted cranks, attention grabbers and time wasters. The law doesn’t say that only certain types of people can petition the court for redress of grievances, or certain types of cases.  The law says that we all can. We view this as a good thing. If you could outlaw certain types of lawsuits, where would you start? Lawsuits against businesses? Corporations? Individuals? Would you just do away with lawsuits altogether? It might seem like a good idea when you listen to the stories about Mr. Riches or Judge Pearson, but it will certainly not seem like one in the event that you have to use the court system.

Another thing that should be considered is that in almost all of these stupid lawsuits, you will find that only a miniscule amount of them are represented by legitimate attorneys. In the case of Mr. Riches, for example, not only does he represent himself, but his filings are all scrawled out by hand on a tablet of paper. And Judge Pearson’s suit was so outlandish that the only possible person who could have represented him was himself. There are no “greedy trial lawyers” involved in these cases, because they aren’t cases. They are jokes.

For those of you who don’t know, trial attorneys operate on a contingency basis. This means that they agree to act as the plaintiff’s legal representation not for an hourly rate, but rather for a percentage of whatever money is collected. And that means that if the plaintiff gets nothing, his or her attorneys get a percentage of nothing, which is still nothing. With that in mind, why would any attorney who bases his livelihood on winning cases take on a case that has no chance of being successful?

Personal injury attorneys don’t throw cases against the wall just to see what sticks. Attorneys who represent the injured for a living know this is a bad business model and a waste of time. Sometimes we wonder if the ultimate goal of tort reformers in not just restrictions on some lawsuits, but restrictions on all lawsuits in general. And the best way for them to do that is to paint with the broadest brush possible, and to focus on the handful of actual frivolous cases as if they were the rule and not the exception.

Greenberg and Bederman is a personal injury firm located in Silver Spring, Maryland, and we offer legal assistance to injury victims all over Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C. We help those who have been seriously injured due to car accidents, medical malpractice and dangerous pharmaceutical drugs. If you or a loved one has been injured, contact Greenberg and Bederman for a free legal consultation today.

Medical Malpractice Damage Caps Debate

There are gubernatorial elections going on in quite a few states this year, but the debate between the two major candidates for Governor of Georgia caught our eye recently. The two candidates were on different sides of everything, which was not at all surprising. But we quite liked one particular quote from Democratic Party candidate Roy Barnes on the subject of tort reform:

"I find it somewhat ironic that we say that jurors - drawn from registered voter rolls - don't have enough sense to decide a case of damages. But, they do have enough sense to decide who is president, governor or even who has the very breath of life taken from them in a criminal case."


 That is a point that is not brought up very often, which is a shame because we believe it to be a good one. Medical Malpractice Damage caps (which are essentially artificial and arbitrary limits placed on the amount of financial compensation that a victim of medical malpractice can receive) completely negate the judgment and intelligence of juries, who are trusted enough to vote in officials and put people to death, yet they are not to be trusted with a fair estimate of exactly how badly a human being has suffered.

These caps also tie the hands of judges, who might otherwise decide that a victim of medical malpractice has suffered so much that he or she certainly deserves more than the $200,000 or $300,000 that is the limit in states that have these caps.

There are similar policies in place that have also negated the opinions of judges and juries. Many drug cases in this country are decided based on what are called mandatory minimum sentences, which means a uniform standard of punishment for drug related offences. What this means is that a person who is caught with a certain amount of drugs gets a standard prison sentence, regardless of what the circumstances are. If a person who has no criminal record is caught with three ounces of cocaine, he or she would get the exact same prison sentence as a person with multiple prior convictions. Even if the judge or jury thinks that the person convicted deserves a much lighter sentence, the juries’ opinion is meaningless and the judge’s hands are tied. Even if the defendant pleads guilty and co-operates with the police, the sentence would be the same if the defendant clammed up and forced the state to go through a trial that lasted months.  It is justice by rubber stamp, or justice by conversion chart.

These sentencing guidelines and damage caps essentially work under the idea that all of the cases are exactly alike, and therefore any sentences or judgments should be exactly alike. But we can tell you from  experience that no medical malpractice case is identical. There is no set limit of ways for doctors to make mistakes, and there is no set limit of the amount of suffering that a victim of medical malpractice has to go through. It only makes sense that there should be no set amount of compensation for which a medical malpractice victim is eligible.

It is also important to realize that these caps don’t change anything about the practices of doctors. A good and conscientious doctor who  makes an effort not to deviate from the standard of care, or immediately fixes the mistakes that he makes will not alter his habits because his insurance company has less of a financial liability. Doctors do not benefit from damage caps, and patients certainly don’t either. Insurance companies are the only people in this equation with anything to gain here, and why we as a nation have decided to essentially remove the function of juries and judges in order to benefit malpractice insurance companies is beyond us.

Greenberg and Bederman is a medical malpractice injury firm located in Silver Spring, Maryland. We serve the entire Washington, D.C. and Baltimore area, and that includes Fairfax, Arlington, Alexandria, Prince William County and all of Northern Virginia. If you or a loved one has been injured due to medical malpractice, contact Greenberg and Bederman for a free legal consultation today.

To learn more about our medical malpractice attorney, John Sellinger, please read hisbio, or watch his Youtube video.

Medical Malpractice Damage Caps Debate

There are gubernatorial elections going on in quite a few states this year, but the debate between the two major candidates for Governor of Georgia caught our eye recently. The two candidates were on different sides of everything, which was not at all surprising. But we quite liked one particular quote from Democratic Party candidate Roy Barnes on the subject of tort reform:

"I find it somewhat ironic that we say that jurors - drawn from registered voter rolls - don't have enough sense to decide a case of damages. But, they do have enough sense to decide who is president, governor or even who has the very breath of life taken from them in a criminal case."


 That is a point that is not brought up very often, which is a shame because we believe it to be a good one. Medical Malpractice Damage caps (which are essentially artificial and arbitrary limits placed on the amount of financial compensation that a victim of medical malpractice can receive) completely negate the judgment and intelligence of juries, who are trusted enough to vote in officials and put people to death, yet they are not to be trusted with a fair estimate of exactly how badly a human being has suffered.

These caps also tie the hands of judges, who might otherwise decide that a victim of medical malpractice has suffered so much that he or she certainly deserves more than the $200,000 or $300,000 that is the limit in states that have these caps.

There are similar policies in place that have also negated the opinions of judges and juries. Many drug cases in this country are decided based on what are called mandatory minimum sentences, which means a uniform standard of punishment for drug related offences. What this means is that a person who is caught with a certain amount of drugs gets a standard prison sentence, regardless of what the circumstances are. If a person who has no criminal record is caught with three ounces of cocaine, he or she would get the exact same prison sentence as a person with multiple prior convictions. Even if the judge or jury thinks that the person convicted deserves a much lighter sentence, the juries’ opinion is meaningless and the judge’s hands are tied. Even if the defendant pleads guilty and co-operates with the police, the sentence would be the same if the defendant clammed up and forced the state to go through a trial that lasted months.  It is justice by rubber stamp, or justice by conversion chart.

These sentencing guidelines and damage caps essentially work under the idea that all of the cases are exactly alike, and therefore any sentences or judgments should be exactly alike. But we can tell you from  experience that no medical malpractice case is identical. There is no set limit of ways for doctors to make mistakes, and there is no set limit of the amount of suffering that a victim of medical malpractice has to go through. It only makes sense that there should be no set amount of compensation for which a medical malpractice victim is eligible.

It is also important to realize that these caps don’t change anything about the practices of doctors. A good and conscientious doctor who  makes an effort not to deviate from the standard of care, or immediately fixes the mistakes that he makes will not alter his habits because his insurance company has less of a financial liability. Doctors do not benefit from damage caps, and patients certainly don’t either. Insurance companies are the only people in this equation with anything to gain here, and why we as a nation have decided to essentially remove the function of juries and judges in order to benefit malpractice insurance companies is beyond us.

Greenberg and Bederman is a medical malpractice injury firm located in Silver Spring, Maryland. We serve the entire Washington, D.C. and Baltimore area, and that includes Fairfax, Arlington, Alexandria, Prince William County and all of Northern Virginia. If you or a loved one has been injured due to medical malpractice, contact Greenberg and Bederman for a free legal consultation today.

To learn more about our medical malpractice attorney, John Sellinger, please read hisbio, or watch his Youtube video.

DC Metro Escalator Safety

WMATA seems to be gambling with the safety of its passengers. That might seem like a  heavy handed statement, but right now it is one that we feel comfortable making.

The first and most obvious problem is its antiquated and outdated sensor equipment on the subway tracks. This is supposed to act as a failsafe that prevents collisions between trains. As we all learned last year, it isn’t working properly. Last June there was a terrible accident on the Red Line where one train slammed directly into the back of another. 9 people died and 76 were injured.

Since the accident has occurred, the National Transportation Safety Board has made several recommendations to fix some of the more glaring errors, but according to an article in The Washington Post, not much has been done:

"There are significant deficiencies in their safety culture," said Deborah A.P. Hersman, chairman of the NTSB. "We do not see the frequency of accidents on other properties that we are seeing on Metro.

"The most disappointing . . . is when we issue recommendations and those issues do not get corrected. For us, that is a big concern about Metro," she said. Nine NTSB recommendations issued to Metro in July and September, in the aftermath of the accident, remain open, according to NTSB records.

We aren’t exactly sure why Metro is dragging its feet about making these corrections. It might be money. It might be politics. It might be a combination of the two. State politicians in Annapolis and Richmond might have a problem with paying state funds for a transit system that their immediate constituents never use. We can certainly imagine that a state delegate from Lynchburg, Virginia or Havre de Grace, Maryland would fail to see the urgency.

Whatever the reason, WMATA has continued on as if that horrible train accident never happened. We can absolutely assure them that it did. In fact, we have a few injured clients who can verify that on that day in June, there was a catastrophic system failure that resulted in 9 deaths and 76 injuries.

The second serious safety hazard doesn’t involve the trains, but instead involves escalators that allow passengers to safely get in and out of the stations. Specifically speaking, they don’t work, and the scope and size of both the number of breakdowns and the escalators themselves makes this state of affairs an accident waiting to happen.

The Washington, D.C. subway system has 570 escalators. This is more than any other subway system in the world. Due to the fact that this area was built on what was essentially marshland, our subway system has to go very deep underground. The escalator at Wheaton, for instance, goes down 230 feet. Believe it or not, this is actually the longest escalator in the Western Hemisphere. The escalators at Bethesda, DuPont Circle and Woodley Park are also incredibly long. And while the escalators at Rosslyn and Clarendon don’t necessarily set records, they still are long enough to eat up over a full minute to get from the street to the station.

The way we see it, there are two potential dangers with broken escalators. The first would be the hazards involved with these escalators suddenly stopping. The stop wouldn’t even have to be a particularly jarring one for disaster to strike. One person falling down an escalator of that size and length would be catastrophic, not just for the person falling but also for anyone who happens to be on the escalator below the person falling. People can get badly hurt by falling off of a five inch curb on the side of the road, so the idea of someone falling down a crowded 230 foot escalator is so grim that it’s terrifying to think about.

The second danger is not going down, but going up. Metro might not have noticed, but not everyone who rides the subway is spry and athletic. Many of the passengers are elderly and infirm. Making them climb up 230 feet, particularly in heat that reaches upwards of 90 degrees, is something that could adversely affect their health. And if the elevators are broken (as they often are,) many passengers have no choice but to trudge up that enormous incline.

As of this writing, the escalator report for the entire WMATA system lists 62 escalators as being out of service, as well as 8 separate elevators. This reflects very poorly on WMATA. It is inconvenient, stressful, disrespectful of passengers and extremely dangerous. Among the many faults of the DC Metro system, this one is particularly galling.

Greenberg and Bederman is aninjury law firm based in Washington, D.C. We are currently offering legal help to anyone who has been injured due to negligence or poor management by the WMATA. This includes anyone who was injured while riding the subway, or anyone who was injured due to an escalator-related accident. If you or a loved one was injured on the Washington, D.C. subway system in Maryland, Washington, D.C. or Virginia, contact Greenberg & Bederman for a free accident legal consultation.

Virignia Drunk Driving Accident Sentenced - Barely

 

This story comes from WAVY down in Virginia Beach:

A 24-year-old woman who seriously injured two people in a drunk driving head-on collision in March 2009 was sentenced Wednesday to serve four years and six months in prison.

Lisa Marie Schettler, a Virginia Beach native, had a blood alcohol level of .44 that night in March. With that much alcohol in your system, you shouldn’t even be allowed to leave the house, much less get behind the wheel of a car. Yet that’s exactly what Ms. Schettler did. Her car drifted across the double yellow line on Bird Neck Road and slammed directly into the front of another car, which was occupied by Donald and Elaine Gay. According to the news report, all three of them were seriously injured.

Ms. Schettler is lucky that there were only injuries involved, and it’s hard to imagine that the Gay’s feel lucky at all, although they should count themselves lucky to be alive. What you had here was just about the purest form of vehicular negligence that exists. It’s dangerous enough to drink even a minor amount of alcohol and then get behind the wheel of a car; Ms. Schettler drank enough to the point where she shouldn’t have been able to see straight.

The news report doesn’t say anything about Ms. Schettler’s weight, but with a BAC of .44, we could make a fair guess that she had at least nine drinks, which is more than enough to impair someone’s ability to drive a car.

So as a result of this act of irresponsibility, two completely innocent people were badly injured. They went through painful and expensive medical treatment, they were unable to go to work and earn a living for themselves, and they had to go through a prolonged and painful recuperation process. And all they did to deserve this ordeal was to simply get in their car.

If you take the numbers available for drunk driving related accidents in Virginia as a whole, you actually get somewhat of an encouraging scenario. The earliest numbers available at the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles are from 1984, when the Old Dominion had a staggering 19,371 alcohol related vehicle accidents. This was 15.7% of all vehicle crashes. In other words, if you got into a car wreck in Virginia in 1984, there was just under a 16% chance that the other driver had been drinking.

Things have improved drastically over the following 26 years. In 2009, the total number of alcohol related crashes was 9,366, which is almost exactly 10,000 less alcohol related crashes in Virginia. We can take that to mean that raising awareness of the dangers of drunken driving and increasing the penalties for drunken driving have made a difference in Virginia. But sadly, the awareness in Virginia didn’t make enough a difference to stop Lisa Marie Schettler from getting behind the wheel of a car after nine drinks and a blood alcohol content of .44.

The definition of negligence is when one person or party does not live up to the reasonable expectations of keeping someone else from getting hurt. For instance, if you are in possession of a loaded gun, you would not fire it in public for no apparent reason. Similarly, if you have been drinking a large volume of alcohol, you would not get behind the wheel of a car. You can’t make the argument that you didn’t know that drinking and driving was illegal. You can’t make the argument that you didn’t plan on hurting anybody. A person who drinks and drives is a perfect example of someone engaging in negligent behavior.

As injury attorneys based in the Washington, D.C. area, Virginia is right in our back yard. In our twenty five years as an injury law firm, we have represented countless Virginians who were injured due to the negligence of another driver. So even though Virginia Beach is a few hours away from our offices in Silver Spring, the story of Ms. Schettler and Mr. and Mrs. Gay caught our attention.

We have dedicated a significant portion of our practice to helping car accident victims in Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C. get fair compensation when they get injured due to no fault of their own, and that includes people who have been injured due to drunk drivers. We help our clients get past the artificially low settlement offers and delaying tactics that insurance companies use to avoid paying injury victims what they deserve. If you or a loved one has been injured in a car accident in Virginia, Maryland or Washington, D.C. and you feel that you need legal counsel, contact Greenberg & Bederman for a free accident injury consultation.

To learn more about auto accidents and auto injury, please read our auto accident page, or our injury page, or watch our accident videos on Youtube.

DC Metro Wants Wrongful Death Lawsuit Dismissed

 

It’s been exactly one year and one day since the Red Line Metro accident that killed nine people and injured seventy.  Due to faulty signaling systems and a host of other systematic safety failures, one red line train slammed into the back of another.

Like many Washingtonians, this accident hit particularly close to home for us. The offices of Greenberg and Bederman are right next to the Silver Spring Metro station on the red line, which many of us here ride into work every day.  It could have very easily been one of the people in our office who got injured or killed.

This accident was more than a personal tragedy for the families of the victims.  In fact, it could hardly be categorized an “accident.” The safety systems of the entire Metro subway system in the D.C. area were so neglected and out of date that any “accident” should have been called“inevitability.”

The National Transportation Safety Board initiated a study on how WMATA operates, and in their final report they determined that there were over 100 serious problems in our Metro system that have yet to be addressed, even as we are reaching the one year anniversary of the deadliest crash in the history of WMATA.

What makes matters even worse is that WMATA has decided to avoid culpability in this case by filing a motion to dismiss awrongful death andnegligence lawsuit filed by most of the victims’ families.  It’s as if they are pretending that these deaths and injuries were just some random, freak occurrence rather than the result of a system wide failure of technology and personnel.

According to Metro Spokeswoman Lisa Farbstein, this motion to dismiss the case was “partial” and “routine:”

“Even if granted, this would not deprive anyone of their day in court or their right to a jury trial. Neither of our motions separately or together seeks dismissal of the suit against Metro in its entirety."

Why bother to file a motion to dismiss at all? What about this lawsuit does WMATA find unfair or excessive? There are nine people who are no longer living because WMATA had not bothered to do proper maintenance on their outdated sensor system. There are sons and daughters, mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters who have lost someone due to utter negligence. Which “part” of that does WMATA not understand?

Judging by the progress that they have made in terms of making safety improvements, we suspect that there is a great deal that they don’t understand. They seem to be looking at this disaster not in terms of human life and human suffering, but rather in dollars and cents. It appears to be too expensive to make necessary safety improvements. It appears to be too expensive to compensate the families of the victims fairly. So put off the improvements and repairs. File those motions to dismiss. Just roll the dice and see if you can avoid responsibility altogether.

Call us crazy, but we’re pretty sure that’s not the attitude that a public transportation agency is supposed to take. We’re also pretty sure that anything that involves getting members of the public from one place to another should be as safe as humanly possible. Safety inspections and improvements should not be put off or deliberated. They should be done early and often. The consequences for not doing so became tragically evident exactly one year ago today.

Greenberg and Bederman is an injury law firm based in Washington, D.C. We are currently representing injury victims from the Red Line Metro crash, and are also offering legal help to anyone who has been injured while riding any form of public transportation in the D.C. area. If you or a loved one has been injured on a bus, streetcar or subway in Maryland, Virginia or D.C, contact Greenberg and Bederman for a free legal consultation today.

Personal Injury Law

 

The premise behind personal injury law is a fairly simple one. If a person is badly injured due to no fault of his or her own, then that person should be compensated for any costs or losses. That includes initial medical costs, the costs of any rehabilitative therapy, the costs of any lost or damaged property, lost wages from an inability to work, and compensation for any pain and suffering that the victim went through.

This is not unreasonable. Would you like to live in the sort of country where someone who is badly injured due to no fault of their own is greeted with indifference? Could you imagine getting severely injured in a car accident that wasn’t your fault at all and having the whole thing ruin you financially? Imagine losing your job because you are too injured to work. Imagine losing your house because you are unable to make the mortgage payments. Imagine having your whole life drastically and irrevocably altered because somebody else wasn’t paying attention behind the wheel, and then imagine being told “Tough luck.”

Injury law exists in America because Americans are mindful of the fact that truly dreadful things can and do happen to innocent people. Someone could get hit by a drunk or distracted driver. A doctor can make a preventable mistake. A pharmaceutical company could market a drug with deadly side effects. Since all of these scenarios fall under the category of “preventable errors,” you can’t write them off as “acts of God,” or “just something that happened.”

 

 

As personal injury attorneys who serve the injured in the Washington, D.C. area, we can tell you from experience that accidents rarely “just happen.” In fact, we have found that most accidents are caused. And when people get severely hurt as the result of these caused accidents, the last thing anyone should be able to do is write them off as “just one of those things.”

Yet this is exactly the scenario that injury victims often face when they attempt to seek fair compensation for their injuries. They often have to deal with insurance companies who have no interest in treating injury victims fairly, but are instead concerned with paying out as little as possible. Car insurance companies often offer injury victims settlements that are far less than what would be needed to cover the medical costs and any lingering effects, and most of the time they don’t offer anything for pain and suffering. Medical malpractice insurance companies are notorious for not wanting to settle, but rather take the issue to court. And, quite often when they do settle, it is a paltry settlement offer.  Pharmaceutical companies have no qualms about not offering any compensation for injuries at all unless they are forced to by a court.

An injury victim who tries to deal directly with the insurance company is risking not having their individual situation monitored and protected by an injury lawyer. The insurance company has lawyers to protect their interests, so should an injury victim. Facing an insurance company on your own means you have to know all the legal angles, understand a myriad of laws that if you don’t understand could harm your injury case, leaving you potentially being treated un-fairly. Despite all of the advertising about being a good neighbor, the truth of the matter is that insurance companies are not in the business of sending out checks for the maximum value. They make money holding down costs and adding new members.

The law firm of Greenberg and Bederman has been protecting the rights of injury victims in the Washington, D.C. area since 1985, and all of our injury attorneys are dedicated to helping our clients get fair and realistic compensation for their injuries. We make it a point to address all of our clients injury needs when we deal with the insurance companies.

Our attorneys are currently offering legal counsel for the following areas:

Car Accidents:Our attorneys have decades of combined legal experience in helping victims of all types of car accidents, including accidents caused by drunk drivers, accidents due to reckless driving, rollover accidents, pedestrians who have been hit by cars, collisions, and accidents due to automotive malfunctions, and passengers in a car accident. 

Medical Malpractice:John Sellinger is known and respected throughout the country as a medical malpractice attorney who puts his clients’ interests first. In his thirty five years of legal experience, this former President of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association has helped hundreds of victims of medical malpractice, including victims of wrong diagnosis, surgical errors, wrongful death, delay of treatment and birth trauma.

Pharmaceutical Liability: For all the good things that modern pharmaceuticals have done for humanity, it cannot be denied that there is a dark side to the pharmaceutical industry. There have been several instances over the past few years where heavily marketed and prescribed pills have resulted in serious injuries among patients who used them in good faith. The most recent example is Yaz, which is a line of birth control pills that has caused strokes, heart attacks and gall bladder disease among women who use it. Our attorneys are currently representing women who were injured and hospitalized due to the use of these birth control pills.

Social Security Disability Denial: It is not uncommon to be denied for Social Security Disability Benefits.  If you are disabled by either disease or injury, and your disability is expected to last at least a year, you may be entitled to Social Security Disability Disability or SSI. To learn more about Social Security Disability law, please read our Social Security Disability FAQ page.

Greenberg and Bederman is a personal injury law firm located one half block from the downtown metro in Silver Spring, Maryland, one mile from the Washington, DC line. We are perfectly situated to help injury victims all over the Washington/Baltimore metropolitan area. If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident, contact Greenberg & Bederman for a free consultation.

Police Officers in PG County Lost Their Discipline

Being a police officer is a dangerous and difficult job. It involves long hours and often involves performing thankless but necessary tasks. To be sure, law enforcement officers often receive our  thanks, but almost never while in the process of performing their duties. This is because their duties involve apprehending people who break the law, and those who do so are not likely to be thrilled about being caught.  As an example, when was the last time you thanked a police officer for writing you a ticket? Have you ever heard of a burglar or car thief who thanked the officer who caught him for his hard work?

It is sobering to think about what your average police force has to deal with on a daily basis. They get verbally abused, they often have to break up fights, and they have to stop crimes in progress, both minor and major, often while putting themselves in harm’s way in order to do so. And, most importantly, they have to do all these things within the defined parameters of the law. The police are not free to apprehend criminals in any way they see fit. For instance, if they think someone is receiving stolen property, the police can’t just kick open that person’s front door and arrest him. They have to have cause to request a warrant for the search, and they have to have a judge agree to their reasons.

 

Police are also under strict procedural standards. A “Dirty Harry” shoots first and asks questions later type of police officer would not be on the force for very long, and would probably end up in prison. The use of physical force by the police is tightly regulated. They aren’t supposed to beat people up for no reason, they aren’t supposed to use a taser or pepper spray on people who are not resisting arrest, and they most certainly aren’t supposed to use their clubs to pummel someone who is simply standing on the sidewalk.

It should be mentioned that for every instance of police brutality that occurs, there are tens of thousands of instances where police maintain their composure and do their jobs with professionalism, patience and restraint. What happened recently in College Park, Maryland is certainly NOT an example of this high professional standard.

For those of us who live in the Washington, D.C. region, we are familiar with how rowdy things can get after a Maryland Terrapins basketball game. The students in the area seem to create quite a ruckus whenever the Terps win (or sometimes when they lose) an important game. In 2002, College Park erupted in a riot after Maryland won the NCAA Basketball Tournament. And it does seem that burning mattresses in the streets seems to be the preferred method of celebration of victory or protest of defeat. It is a pointless way to celebrate, but the Prince Georges County Police certainly can’t say that they were unaware that such a thing was possible.

The celebrations after a victory against Duke got out of hand, and the police were called in, and there were some arrests, but the video footage of this beating (and really, there is no other word for what occurred) shows that the police reacted in exactly the wrong way. Without any apparent physical provocation, two officers slammed a student against a wall, threw him to the ground, and clubbed him repeatedly over the head until he was unconscious.

Was the student drunk? He might have been, but that alone is no reason to have beaten him senseless. Was he threatening? That seems doubtful. Literally seconds before the beating he was dancing a goofy celebratory jig with a friend. It didn’t even look like he knew the police were there. In fact, it seems like he danced down the street, looked up and found himself feet away from a mounted police officer. It certainly didn’t look like he made any threatening gestures.

Did he perhaps say something threatening? It is impossible to tell. But even if he had, surely four Prince Georges County police officers could have arrested one student without delivering such a brutal beating. You can’t hear anything that was said over the noise of the crowd, but what is significant is that on the audio of the tape (which was shot from some distance away,) you can hear the sound of a nightstick repeatedly smacking this student’s head and body.

This was a complete breakdown of officer discipline. And to make matters worse, it appears that the officers responsible for the beating trumped up charges and claimed that the student “..struck mounted officers and their horses, causing minor injuries.” They further claimed that the reason that the student was injured was because he had been kicked by the horse. The video proves all of these statements by the arresting officers to be completely false.

This is the sort of behavior that you would expect from the police force in a country living under a dictatorship. A brutal and unnecessary beating followed by trumped up charges is not something that is supposed to happen in America, and it certainly isn’t supposed to happen in a suburb of Washington, D.C.

The student has obtained the services of an attorney, which is his right, and he is currently seeking financial damages against the Prince Georges County Police Department, which is something that he is completely justified in doing. He received an unnecessary and brutal beating, for which there was no warning or proper explanation given by the police. This is one of the most obvious cases of police brutality that we have ever seen.

Greenberg and Bederman is an injury law firm that helps people in Maryland, Virginia and Washington, D.C. who have been injured due to no fault ornegligence of their own. This includes those who have been unnecessarily injured while being arrested or while in custody of law enforcement. Being arrested by the police does not mean that you surrender your rights as an American citizen. There is no excuse for unwarranted force by law enforcement. If you or a loved one has sustained injuries from the police, contact Greenberg & Bederman for a free consultation.

 

NASA May Help Solve Toyota Accelerator Defect

If you need brainpower in the United States of America, you can’t do much better than the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Since it’s beginning in 1958, NASA has been responsible for any and all space exploration undertaken by the United States. That includes the first manned multiple orbit of the earth, the first manned flight around the moon, the first landing on the moon, the first satellite to leave our solar system, the first re-usable manned spacecraft, and any manner of advancements in satellite technology.

Anything involving spaceflight takes a mastery of multiple scientific disciplines. There has to be a mastery of chemistry (rocket fuel and lubricants, to name only a few applications,) physics (launching the spacecraft and keeping on a correct trajectory,) biology and environmental sciences (keeping the astronauts alive during the mission,) To give you an idea as to how impressive the minds are over at NASA, consider what had to be done for each of the Apollo lunar missions.

 

The vehicle that the astronauts were travelling in had to essentially break in half, and then one of the two sections had to do a 180 degree turn, and then gently thrust back towards the other section, where they re-attached. Bear in mind that this had to be done while they were travelling through the vacuum of space at thousands of miles an hour. Another stunning feat was the reattachment of the lunar module, which essentially launched itself from the surface of the moon (with two astronauts inside) and attached itself to the orbit module which was zooming along at thousands of feet above the surface. If you want a real life equivalent of how difficult that is, try hitting a bird flying overhead with a rock. If you also consider that these amazing things were done in the late sixties, which was practically the Stone Age in terms of computer technology, that gives you an idea as to how smart the NASA people are.

Any endeavor into outer space has to involve all manner of computers. All of the systems on any spacecraft are run by them, including steering, thrust, life support and navigation. Without the advent of computers, it would be impossible for us to imagine getting into space at all. If you consider that your average space craft is run by electronic systems that are often controlled from thousands (sometimes hundreds of thousands) of miles away, you would have to assume that NASA knows what it is doing when it comes to computers.

This is why we consider it a good thing that Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has brought in scientists from NASA to investigate the recent alleged unintended acceleration incidents that have occurred in so many Toyota vehicles. The NASA scientists are specialists in computer controlled electronic systems, electromagnetic interference, software integrity and hardware. In other words, they are the folks who you can expect to get to the bottom of what has been going wrong.

It might seem a little drastic, bringing in space shuttle mechanics to examine the inner workings of a Toyota Tercel, but one of the reasons that they have to be drastic is that Toyota itself isn’t talking. They are fiercely protective of their design and data, and are equally tight lipped when it comes to allowing crash data to be studied. Part of this might be because they are genuinely concerned about somebody making off with proprietary software or design, but we suspect it also has something to do with Toyota not wanting to directly provide any evidence of culpability on their parts. In other words, they want to make it as difficult as possible for any victims of random accelerations, brake failures or steering problems to be fairly compensated for their injuries and damaged property.

Toyota has shown a willingness to put profits over driver safety before. In what was probably one of the darkest moments in government consumer protection history, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration allowed Toyota to “negotiate” a 2007 recall that was limited to defective floor mats rather than move forward with a more extensive recall that could have possibly saved quite a few lives. Internal documents from Toyota referred to this as a “win.”  

 

We aren’t sure what the outcome will be of this NASA investigation, but what we are sure of is that too many people have been injured or even killed due to defective Toyotas for this to be considered a random, freak occurrence. Based on the evidence that has been gathered and the incidents that have been reported, we believe that Toyota not only put out a defective product, but also were aware of these defects and the dangers that they posed to the general public.

Greenberg and Bederman is a Washington, D.C. based injury law firm that is currently offering legal assistance to those who have been hurt due to Toyota malfunctions. We can help anyone in Maryland, Virginia, or Washington, D.C.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a Toyota accident, contact Greenberg and Bederman for a free legal consultation today.

Fosamax Bone Injury

Washington, D.C. Attorneys Helping Victims of Broken Bones Due to Fosamax, Bisphosphenates

 

The human body has a natural tendency to decline with age. Sprains, aches and a lessening of mobility and agility happen to all of us. These symptoms are simply part of getting older.

One condition that often occurs in women as they get older is called osteoporosis, which causesthe thinning of bone tissue and loss of bone density over time. This means that bones are prone to fractures and breaks. It is a condition that makes life difficult for the victims, mainly because they have to begin to live their lives as if they were made of glass. Activities that were taken for granted have to be curtailed or stopped altogether because of the risk of bone injury.

The pharmaceutical giant Merck released and marketed a drug called Fosamax in order to help victims of this bone thinning condition, and several other pharmaceutical companies followed suit with similar drugs. Sonofi Aventis released and marketed a drug called Actonel and Roche released a drug called Boniva.

While there were minor differences in the chemical make up of each of these drugs, they were all marketed as “bisphospenates,” which, in a general sense, meant that they were drugs that were supposed to increase bone density.

Just as with many other drugs, things apparently did not go according to plan. Some of the first noticeable problems occurred when some people who were taking Fosamax began to suffer from what is known as “osteonecrosis of the jaw,” or “bone death.” This is as bad and as painful as it sounds. Most of the Fosamax users who suffered from bone death in the jaw had undergone dental surgery, which means that it is possible that Fosamax could strengthen the bones in the legs, arms, hips and ribs at the expense of the strength of the bones in the jaw.

Or maybe it’s simply bad for both. According to an article in USA Today, two recent studies have shown that women who take these bisphosphonates over a long period risk having the medications stop working, which means that the bones would be just as brittle as they were before the women started taking the pills in the first place. According to the study done by Columbia University:

"In the early treatment period, patients using bisphosphonates experienced improvements in all parameters, including decreased buckling ratio and increased cross-sectional area," Melvin Rosenwasser, an orthopaedic surgeon for Columbia University Medical Center, said in a statement. "However, after four years of use, these trends reversed, revealing an association between prolonged therapies and declining cortical bone structural integrity."

The problem here is that these pills are essentially made to be taken for long periods of time. Osteoporosis is the sort of condition that isn’t cured, but is managed. People who take these pills fully expect to take them for the rest of their lives. If the shelf life of effective treatment with this medication is only a few years, then the makers of these drugs have a responsibility to tell their customers that this is the case.

As of right now the Food and Drug Administration is currently running a safety review of Fosamax, Boniva and other bone building drugs in order to see if there is an increase of femur fractures among people who have been taking the drug over extended periods of time. But thousands of people who have been hurt as the result of using Fosamax for years have already filed lawsuits against Merck and other pharmaceutical companies.

A jury trial in New Jersey will be held on July 12, 2010, and this case is meant to be a “bell-weather trial,” for victims of Fosamax and other bisphosphonates all over the country. Greenberg and Bederman is a Washington, D.C. law firm that is currently offering legal assistance to people who have suffered from osteonecrosis of the jaw or other bone fractures due to the use of Fosamax, Boniva, Actonel, or any of the generic versions of these drugs.

Greenberg and Bederman have offices in Silver Spring, Maryland and Baltimore, and are capable of representing injury victims in the entire Washington-Baltimore metropolitan area. That includes Northern Virginia.

Our attorneys have decades of legal experience, and have helped thousands of injury victims in the D.C. area receive fair compensation for their injuries. If you or a loved one has been injured due to the use of Fosamax or any other bisphosphonate, contact Greenberg and Bederman for a free Fosamax legal consultation today.

To learn more about fosamax injury, please see our fosamax page on our website.