Personal Injury Archive
Watch Your P’s and Q’s on Facebook and Twitter
March 16th, 2010. By janem
If you have a potential personal injury suit, the first thing a lawyer will tell you is to “Keep your mouth shut”. They should also add -and many already do– “Stay off Facebook, Twitter, and any other social networking sites, including your own blog.”
Not only are more people than ever turning to Internet sources for news, a recent study from the Pew Internet and American Life Project show that, of people who do get their news online, 75 percent of them have links sent via email or social media. And that percentage includes private investigators, insurers, defense lawyers and judges.
Insurance companies see social media as a monitor or search for information about claimants. They are looking for information a claimant has posted regarding an accident, such as how it happened, who caused it, or even the claimant saying it was their fault.
They also look for information which might contradict what the injured person says about their injury.
Here are a few examples:
- In Ontario a woman who claimed she was disabled had Facebook photos of her dancing. The judge allowed the photos to be admitted as evidence in her personal injury case.
- A Florida woman claimed a back injury and couldn’t work. She went on a cruise with friends and they videotaped her whooping it up, including a videotape of her doing the limbo. The insurance company had been on her Facebook site, downloaded the video and was ready to show it to the jury. The case didn’t turn out to her liking.
- A Supreme Court judge ordered the production of records showing how often a plaintiff claiming a brain injury uses Facebook.
- In a Twitter libel case, you would need to choose 140 characters-at the most–very, very carefully. The promoters of “the Cookie Diet” allegedly claimed that celebutant Kim Kardashian is a fan But Kardashian disdainfully tweeted she would never be on such an “unhealthy diet.” The Cookies filed a defamation case against Kardashian.
And insurance companies look for general information to profile what kind of a person you are. So if you have photos posted on FaceBook or MySpace in a bar or doing something arguably illegal, judgment evidence will be made against you–more negative fodder that a jury might frown on. Value judgments will be made about you–and even a lawyer you hire might decide not to take your case.
It has long been established that electronic documents can be relevant. In one Ontario case, a judge scolded the insurer’s lawyer for failing to ask the plaintiff to produce her Facebook page as part of a sworn affidavit, or to bring up Facebook in cross-examination. In another case, a judge ordered up the release of Facebook. So now some lawyers are demanding Facebook photos in every suit.
Typically, courts in civil cases can only demand private Facebook pages, or a twitter here and there if the material is directly related to the case. But just to be on the safe side, take Everything Down! Especially photographs and videos. The e-trail doesn’t stop there so be diligent: it’s also important that all your online friends purge you from their accounts. If a photo is tagged by someone else, it is still accessible by searching. And strengthen your privacy settings. It’s BIG BROTHER on the Social Media Highway!
FDA Taking Baby Steps on BPA
January 21st, 2010. By Hunter West
Last week the US Food and Drug Administration did an about-face on its stance with regard to bisphenol-A (BPA), saying Friday that it has had “some concern about the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behavior and prostate gland of fetuses, infants and children,” and would join other federal health agencies in studying the chemical in both animals and humans.
This, in contrast to its report of 2008, when the agency deemed the chemical safe.
Not that the FDA is saying that BPA is unsafe. Far from it. ”If we thought it was unsafe, we would be taking strong regulatory action,” said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, the principal deputy commissioner of the drug agency, at a news briefing late last week.
However, it is a hint—baby steps here—that the FDA is taking a harder line on issues than it appeared to take previous to the Obama Administration. Needless to say safety advocates are buoyed by the change of position, short of being overjoyed given their entrenched view that the FDA has not gone far enough.
The chemical industry from whence the BPA originates, is also not happy with the news.
Hardly surprising, as both camps line up and defend their respective positions—the chemical industry saying that the FDA’s concerns are unfounded, while the safety advocates say the FDA hasn’t gone far enough. Then there’s the FDA, trying to come up in the middle and be fair to everybody.
But at least they’re looking. Rather than remain cocooned in a kind of Pleasantville (the movie, with apologies to any real ‘Pleasantvilles’ out there), outfitted with blinders and assuming that everybody, everywhere will be doing
Abuse is Abuse, Regardless of Gender
January 14th, 2010. By Hunter West
In late 2009 an upscale New York restaurant was hit with a lawsuit by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for alleged harassment against male employees by other male employees. The alleged abuse includes attempts to grab buttocks and genitals, pushing one’s body against another in a sexually suggestive fashion and the verbalization of crude, lewd and obscene comments.
In Arizona, another EEOC lawsuit charged that male employees in the kitchen at a food preparation facility abused other male employees—including allegations of simulated rape. That incident resulted in the payout of a settlement benefitting the allegedly harassed workers.
It used to be that harassment was all about abuse against women—which is serious, of course. But equally serious is abuse against men. And it’s about time.
Abuse, is abuse regardless of which gender is involved. And it’s a relief to see that men are now having the balls to admit to being harassed, either by male or female and are standing up for their rights.
Thus, the courts should reflect just what is going on out there. And what is going on out there, along with harassment against women, is harassment against men.
Face it, men have been abused for years. But the man never came forward. Doing so would be ‘unmanly,’ an
You can sue Tobacco, but it may cost you
January 13th, 2010. By AbiK
If you’ve been keeping up with the news on smoking lawsuits, you’ll know that Florida is the hotbed for action right now. Ever since the Florida Supreme Court threw out a $145 billion judgement against Philip Morris et al in 2006, the road has been opened up for smokers to file individual lawsuits against the tobacco company.
And so they have. But there’s a twist here.
Just yesterday, we learned that ex-smoker Jerome Cohen dropped his lawsuit against Philip Morris. Any time someone—a former smoker—drops their lawsuit against a tobacco company you begin to wonder why. Well, in this instance, Cohen’s lawyer, Philip Gerson, was quoted in the Associated Press as saying that Cohen’s health was the issue—he has lung cancer.
But other reports bring up another little-known—or little publicized—issue: in Florida, if a plaintiff refuses a settlement offer, continues on with their case and loses—or, according to smokersinfo.net, wins a judgement of at least 25 percent less than the defendant’s original offer, the defendant may seek attorney fees and costs from the plaintiff.
And that can be mucho dinero. Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris, said in a statement earlier in the week that two other Florida smokers recently had to cough up $100,000 and $30,000 respectively—to Philip Morris—upon losing their cases.
Hard to imagine, but true. And that may well give pause to some indivduals who might otherwise file a lawsuit against Philip Morris.
I tend to look at the consequences of smoking as a mixed responsibility thing—that is, if you started smoking prior to
Pole-Dancing Workout Leads to Lawsuit
January 8th, 2010. By AbiK
I’m on the fence (vs. the pole) on this one. Here’s the low-down (via nydailynews):
- NY Dermatologist Sue Ann Wee is suing Crunch gym (that’s not her, or Crunch in the vid).
- She was taking a pole-dancing workout class.
- She had signed up for a free class (aka, this was apparently her first go at the pole)
- Wee’s suit claims she was left un-spotted (or unsupervised) while upside down on the pole.
- She alleges to have asked her instructor for help.
- She fell.
- She got injured.
- She was out of work for 6 months.
Now, all I know is this (and I feel like I’m channeling Oprah’s , “What I know for sure”):
- If I’m taking a pole-dancing workout class, at the very least I want the equivalent of those mats you see pole vaulters flying into under me. I know that I am not a professional pole dancer.
- If I’m thinking of maintaining a professional career image, I’m not thinking I’ll have my lawsuit involving a pole dance blasted all over the media (time to channel Seinfeld: “Not that there’s anything wrong with that” (i.e., pole dancing)).
- If I’m taking a first-at-bat exercise class of any sort, I’m going into it fully mindful of any potential limitations my body–or whatever it might encounter–might have. I know I won’t be hanging upside-down from a pole between my legs, simulating some form of gyration or twist with the rest of my bod, and thinking, hey—next up: audition for Cirque du Soleil. I know hanging upside-down by my feet on the pole is an advanced pole dancing move (see the vid, from Polercise Tenerife).
Having said that, I am me and Sue Ann Wee is herself. We do not “know” the same things apparently. And, alas, Crunch gym is being sued. Not that they don’t have any responsibility in this—if the allegations are true, shame on them—particularly with a seemingly novice student. We’ll see where this one goes…
Share this Page
Links
Archive by Category
- Accidents (RSS)
- Airlines (RSS)
- Asbestos Mesothelioma (RSS)
- Automotive (RSS)
- Class Action (RSS)
- Consumer Fraud (RSS)
- Court of Public Opinion (RSS)
- Defective Products (RSS)
- Drugs/Medical (RSS)
- Emerging Issues (RSS)
- Employment (RSS)
- Environment (RSS)
- Financial (RSS)
- Food Illness (RSS)
- Insurance (RSS)
- Intellectual Property (RSS)
- Internet/E-commerce (RSS)
- lawsuits (RSS)
- Lawyers (RSS)
- Lex Levity (RSS)
- Personal Injury (RSS)
- Pleading Ignorance (RSS)
- Securities (RSS)
- Settlement (RSS)
- Totally Tortelicious (RSS)
- Veterans (RSS)
- Week Adjourned (RSS)