Attorneys Page Pate and Bernard Brody

July 2, 2009

Atlanta personal injury lawyer wins $1.5 million verdict against Home Depot in Marietta, Georgia

In 2005, a Cumming man shopping at a Marietta Home Depot was injured in a forklift accident. On Wednesday, a Cobb County jury awarded the man and his wife $1.5 million for injuries.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The complaint alleged that Larry Reece, 58, was at the Marietta store when a stack of plywood fell from a forklift. The wood fell from more than 20 feet and crashed down onto a barricade. The barricade then hit Reece, and Reece found himself buried under a pile of wood. As a result, Reece sustained neck and spine injuries including herniated discs.

Aside from the sheer pain and medical bills, Reece also lost his livelihood. He had been a construction worker all his life, but due to the permanent injuries he received, he was unable to return to work.

After a two-day trial, the jury’s award was issued. Of the $1.5 million verdict, the jury awarded $30,000 to Reece’s wife for loss of marital relations and $120,000 in medical expenses. The jury did not address punitive damages, since Reece had settled that issue with Home Depot.

Similar suits have been filed against Home Depot in the past.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

June 12, 2009

Georgia lawyers file suit alleging sewage run-off caused environmental damage to hunting plantation

The owners of a hunting plantation in Twiggs County have filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Jeffersonville for allegedly allowing storm water run-off from a wastewater treatment plant to flow onto their land. The concern is that the pollutants may harm the birds and hunting dogs on the plantation.

The Macon Telegraph has the story.

The owners of the plantation, Duggan Family Partnership LLP, argue that the run-off violates the federal Clean Water Act since pollutants from the plant have contaminated water on their land as well as the Ocmulgee River, Palmetto Creek, and Turkey Creek. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that the plant is not functioning properly and that storm water run-off, which contains microorganisms, chemicals, and suspended solids, is harming the plantation. The partnership is seeking punitive damages due to the harm.

Wastewater is treated in a series of ponds after which time it is pumped into sprinklers. Those sprinklers then distribute the water over land which filters the water before it returns to the groundwater. The treatment plant in question is located a half mile from Jeffersonville and immediately adjacent to the plantation’s property. In 2007 and 2008, the lawsuit alleges that three tests were performed which showed that run-off from the plant had in fact contaminated the land. However, Mayor Sonja Mallory stated that Jeffersonville tests the areas around the plant and the holding ponds on a regular basis and that the city has not any found problems.

In addition, the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) has not found evidence that the run-off is the result of the land application method of treating sewage. This finding by the EPD is important, since run-off caused by land application is a violation under the Clean Water Act. However, run-off due to rain does not fall under the Act.

In September of 2008, Dugan Family Partnership filed a similar lawsuit. That case was dismissed, since the plaintiffs failed to adequately notify the city before filing suit.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

June 4, 2009

Lawyers successfully settle claims that Bausch & Lomb lens cleaner causes harmful eye infections

Bausch & Lomb has settled nearly 600 lawsuits in connection with the contact lens cleaner ReNu with MoistureLoc. Experts believe the cleaner exposed many users to a potentially blinding fungal infection.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

Bausch & Lomb has already paid out $250 million in settlements and has dozens of more claims that have yet to be settled. Financial analysts believe the lens cleaner could end up costing the company $500 million. In some of the cases, the damage was irreversible. Seven people had to have an eye removed, and at least 60 people needed corneal transplants.

The infection, known as Fusarium keratitis, first appeared in Hong Kong in early 2005. It was not removed from shelves in the United States until April 2006. In May 2006, the company issued a worldwide recall. Many doctors had never seen the infection before and prescribed antibiotics and steroids which ultimately made the condition even worse. Victims say the infection began with a feeling of irritation which then turned into searing pain. How the infection occurred is still not entirely clear.

The impact has hit Bausch’s profits hard. MositureLoc had produced $100 million in annual sales. In October 2007, Bausch was acquired by the private equity firm Warburg Pincus in an attempt to get out of the public eye. Since the recall, Bausch has had to sell their older product ReNu MultiPlus which already has retailer-chain labels, and sales have dropped from $522 million in 2005 to $450 million in 2008.

Bausch is challenging another 500 lawsuits linking MoistureLoc to bacterial, viral, and parasitic conditions. A New York court is set to decide this week if there is a reliable scientific basis for establishing a link.

This is the second epidemic in the past few years stemming from a lens cleaner. In 2007, a popular formula made by Advanced Medical Optics was linked to a difficult parasitic infection. More than 170 people sued over that incident.

The FDA has stated that it is set to lay out more stringent testing requirements for lens solutions.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

June 4, 2009

Georgia crime victims receive restitution in Cobb County

During the past year, Cobb County Superior Court has handed out approximately $750,000 in restitution to crime victims from the past three decades. The money had been forgotten until a court clerk recently discovered it.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The chief deputy clerk of Cobb County Superior Court, Elva Dornbusch, was the one who discovered the forgotten account. Cobb County is using an internet database that provides current available contact information to locate those who are owed the funds. While, 4,100 people and businesses have received phone calls concerning restitution money owed to them, the court is still trying to locate around 800 more. Some of the money comes from cases that stem back to the 1980s, and many of the victims have since moved or gone out of businesses making the search difficult.

Those who are owed restitution still have a few more months to reclaim their money; however, funds that are not claimed will be turned over to the state. A state law requires unclaimed victim restitution money to go to the crime victims emergency fund which has raised over $400,000 since 2007. The fund helps crime victims with hospital bills, funerals, and other expenses. Money that was collected more than five years ago automatically goes into the fund. However, Dornbusch made the effort to find as many victims as possible before turning the money over to the state.

Our firm has helped crime victims recover restitution, both in criminal cases and civil lawsuits throughput Georgia, and we appreciate the efforts of this clerk to locate and compensate victims of crime. I'll bet there are a lot of crime victims in Cobb County that appreciate her, too.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

June 4, 2009

Atlanta lawyers at Pate & Brody file lawsuit for victim of identity fraud

This is one of our cases. The complaint was filed last week.

Our clients, a Ringgold, Georgia couple, have filed suit in Floyd County against a fire and water damage repair company for allegedly hiring an illegal immigrant who stole more than $10,000. The couple claims that the employee stole personal and financial information at their home which was then used to withdraw large sums of money.

The Rome News Tribune has the story here.

The couple experienced a fire at their home. Their insurance company contracted with a company called Servpro to clean the Barkers’ home which initially included boxing up the Barkers’ papers and files so that repairs could be made. During this phase of the cleanup, Nora Carillo Barcarel, an employee of Servpro, stole financial records which she then used to steal the Barkers’ identity. In total, Barcarel withdrew around $10,000 from the Barkers’ accounts and opened approximately 60 credit accounts.

Barcarel has pleaded guilty to charges of financial transaction fraud and forgery but still awaits sentencing. She could serve over 130 years in prison. At the time of the plea, Barcarel told the judge that it was common knowledge among illegal immigrants in the area that Servpro would hire workers without any documentation or background checks.

The lawsuit filed by our firm claims that Servpro is vicariously liable for Barcarel’s illegal acts and that Servpro is also liable for negligently hiring and retaining her. Additionally, the lawsuit states that Servpro is liable because it violated federal immigration and hiring laws.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

May 2, 2009

Atlanta lawyers win major product liability case in Dekalb County, Georgia

On Wednesday, a DeKalb County jury awarded Jessica Mundy $40 million dollars after being paralyzed when her Ford Explorer shifted out of park and ran her over.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

Specifically, the jury awarded $30 million in punitive damages, $9 million in compensatory damages, and $1 million for her husband. The suit was against Ford Motor Company and Legacy Ford in McDonough where Mundy purchased the Explorer in 2004.

Mundy claimed that a design defect in some Ford Explorers causes the vehicles to unexpectedly go in reverse after the driver puts the vehicle in park. In particular, Mundy claims that she put her Explorer into park and got out to mail a package in McDonough. The Explorer then apparently shifted into reverse and ran over Mundy which fractured her spine and paralyzed her.

Mundy’s attorneys showed the jury three depositions of people who had similar situations in which Explorers would suddenly shift out of park. In addition, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has begun an investigation into consumer complaints that 2002 to 2005 Explorers unexpectedly come out of park. Ford maintains that it was Mundy’s operation of the vehicle that led to her injuries and not a defect in the vehicle.

Since the accident, Mundy has been unable to return to her job as an accountant for the state. However, she says that the verdict has given her some peace of mind.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

April 29, 2009

Atlanta lawyer wins million dollar verdict in Fayette County medical malpractice case

A Henry County woman was awarded $1.05 million in a medical malpractice suit against a Fayetteville surgeon for a botched surgery.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

Cynthia Bennett, who is a Henry County nurse, claimed that she almost died when her surgeon injured her bowel during surgery. Bennett and her attorney also argued that the surgeon failed to diagnose and properly treat the injury.

The jury verdict of $1.05 million was against the Fayetteville surgeon JuDonn Adams and New Millennium Obstetrics and Gynecology LLC. Bennett had originally filed the suit back in December 2003. One of Bennett's attorneys was Brandon Hornsby, an Atlanta trial lawyer.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

April 26, 2009

Savannah Georgia man continues to litigate sex assault case against Catholic priest

Henry Bachmann of Port Wentworth won a $1.2 million verdict in 1999 against the Archdiocese of St. Louis for failing to supervise a priest who sexually assaulted him. An appellate court overturned that verdict a year later determining that the statute of limitations had expired. Bachmann’s attorney has appealed that decision.

The Savannah Morning News has the story.

Bachmann has battled with litigation against the church since 1994. He claims that in 1964 he was sexually assaulted by Rev. James Gummersbach at a St. Louis grade school. He says that he repressed the memory of the assaults until 1992, but that the abuse left a lasting and negative on his life. Since the abuse, Bachmann has dropped out of school, battled alcoholism, was diagnosed with predatory sexual disorders, spent time in jail and mental hospitals, and has attempted to take his own life. Recently, Bachmann has filed for bankruptcy and lost his job with the Georgia Ports Authority due to problems with authority.

The priest accused of the abuse sent Bachmann a letter in 1999 apologizing for his actions along with $25,000. However, Bachman says that he cannot forgive and he cannot forget. His attorney has appealed the appellate court’s decision on the grounds that it made an error when it calculated when the statute of limitations began to run. For now, it seems as though this 15 year legal saga for Bachmann will continue.

Proving sexual assault cases can be difficult, especially when the allegations involve incidents that occurred many years ago. Our firm, however, has the experience and skill to help sex crime victims recover substantial damages for the abuse they suffered at the hands of people they trusted. We have several cases like this pending now.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

April 23, 2009

Macon Georgia lawyers win appeal in case involving ante-litem notice requirements for lawsuits against state agencies

The Georgia Court of Appeals recently determined that a plaintiff’s failure to originally identify the correct governmental agencies in a personal injury suit against the state does not necessarily constitute grounds for dismissing the suit. The court held that the correct standard is to determine if the plaintiffs adequately investigated their claims or if the state had suffered prejudice.

In Young v. Georgia Dept. of Natural Resources, the plaintiff, Young, was injured at the Georgia National Fairgrounds in Perry, Georgia. Young brought suit for negligence and filed ante-litem notices with the Department of Administrative Services and the Georgia National Fairground. This ante-litem notice is a necessary step in suing the state for a tort. Upon realizing these were not the correct agencies sometime later, Young filed suit against the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Georgia Agricultural Exposition Authority (GAEA) which were the correct agencies.

The DNR and GAEA asked for the case to be dismissed, since Young had failed to identify the DNR and GAEA as the target agencies as required by the anti-litem statute. The trial court granted the motion by reasoning that a plaintiff must strictly comply with the anti-litem statute which waives the state’s sovereign immunity. The court further explained that the failure to include the DNR and GAEA rendered the original anti-litem notices invalid, and the plaintiff could not remedy the problem by later attaching the correct agencies.

The Court of Appeals disagreed. It held that the trial court should have conducted an inquiry into whether Young adequately investigated his claim or whether the state had suffered prejudice as a result of originally naming the wrong agencies. In doing so, the judgment was overturned and sent back to the trial court for the correct analysis to be conducted.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

April 19, 2009

Homeowner's insurance policy did not cover sexual assualt claims

The Georgia Court of Appeals was asked to decide if a homeowner’s insurance policy covered injuries stemming from intentional acts when the language only covered accidental occurrences. The court ruled that summary judgment for the insurance company was proper, since such language does not cover injuries arising from intentional actions.

In Perry v. State Farm, State Farm filed a declaratory judgment asking the trial court to find that one of their policies did not cover a personal injury claim. The policy holder, Blackwell, allegedly had sexual intercourse with a house guest, Perry, after she fell asleep on his couch while fully clothed. Perry also claims that Blackwell took photographs after Perry had been undressed. Perry claims that the actions were without her consent. As a result, Perry sued for battery, invasion of property, loss of consortium, negligence, and punitive damages.

After the complaint was filed, State Farm began to investigate and defend the lawsuit. When Blackwell was deposed, he stated that he woke in the middle of the night while sleeping with his wife and went to find Perry. Upon finding Perry, he began having oral and vaginal sex, but he stopped when he realized he did not have a condom. Blackwell stated that the two did not speak, but he believed that she was an active participant. Blackwell also admitted to being intoxicated. State Farm then sought the trial court to rule that it had no duty to indemnify him against Perry’s claims. The trial court agreed with State Farm. Blackwell argued on appeal that State Farm was required to indemnify him against Perry’s negligence claim.

The court of appeals noted that the policy protected against bodily injury caused by an “occurrence.” An occurrence was defined as “an accident” in the policy. The court determined that accident must mean an event that is an unexpected happening. The court further noted that the policy did not protect against an “accidental injury” which can arise from a conscious voluntary act. Here, any injuries were the result of Blackwell’s intentional actions. The court concluded that the policy covered an accidental occurrence but not an accidental injury. Thus, the policy did not require State farm to provide coverage for Blackwell’s intentional actions which included Perry’s claim for negligence.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims, people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices, or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

April 19, 2009

Georgia Court of Appeals allows defamation lawsuit to proceed to trial

The Georgia Court of Appeals recently had to determine if a defamation suit which alleged that a reporter published a plaintiff’s poor job performance should survive summary judgment. The court found that it should, since a jury could find that there was defamation.

In Gettner v. Fitzgerald, the plaintiff, Gettner, sued VNU Business Media, Inc. for defamation, because of a publication by VNU in which it was revealed that Gettner had been demoted based on poor performance. Gettner also sued his former employer, Fitzgerald & Company, for invasion of privacy, because the CEO told VNU about the nature of the demotion. Gettner claimed that he had been promoted to Executive Creative Director in 2001, but that he did not like dealing with subordinates. As a result, the company allowed him to return to his prior position as Group Creative Director in 2002. His company disputed this, and it claimed that he had been demoted due to poor performance. The company further argued that the company agreed to make it seem that it was Gettner’s decision in order for Gettner to save face. The form given to human resources showed that he had “stepped down.” The company even sent an email to its employees which gave a similar reason.

A reporter with Adweek investigated into the matter. The CEO of Fitzgerald told the reporter that Gettner lacked the qualities of an Executive Creative Director, but he also asked the reporter not to publish that information. In 2003, Fitzgerald had layoffs and let go Gettner. Adweek then released its annual report card for advertising agencies, and it gave Fitzgerald a “C” for management. The report explained this was due to Gettner’s poor performance. When Gettner confronted the reporter, she allegedly claimed to have known that Gettner stepped down voluntarily. Gettner then sued. The trial court granted motions for summary judgment in favor of both VNU and Fitzgerald.

The appellate court examined the four elements that make up defamation. First, the statement must be about the plaintiff. It was obvious that the statement was about Gettner. However, VNU argued it was only an opinion and not a statement of fact, but the court reasoned that the statement in question could be proven false which would make it not an opinion. Second, defamation requires that the statement made was false. Since Gettner put forth evidence that it was false, a jury could find that it was false. Third, the plaintiff must show that it was the defendant’s fault in publishing the statement. The court found that the reporter could have conducted a more thorough investigation, because she failed to verify the information with Gettner and others. Finally, the plaintiff must show some actual injury. VNU did not dispute this element. Thus, the summary judgment in favor of VNU was improper, and the appellate court’s decision will allow a jury to hear the decision.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims and people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine.

April 5, 2009

Georgia court holds that personal injury claims can be brought against police officers

The Georgia Supreme Court recently had to determine if the state is immune from liability when a police officer negligently strikes a vehicle while performing official duties. A divided Court ruled that the state was not immune to such a suit.

In Georgia Dept. of Public Safety v. Davis, the plaintiff, Davis, was injured by a police vehicle while driving her mail carrier pick-up truck. The state trooper was traveling behind Davis’ truck while running radar on vehicles approaching from the other lane. It is a technique known as blocking. Davis stopped in order to make a left turn; however, the trooper was not able to stop in time and collided with Davis’ truck. Davis was injured as a result of the accident, and she brought a suit for damages against the Department of Public Safety. The Department moved to dismiss the suit arguing that the state legislature did not intend to waive sovereign immunity for this type of incident. The trial court and the Court of Appeals disagreed, and the case was then appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court.

The Department leaned on a statute which reads: “The state shall have no liability for losses resulting from. . . the failure to provide, or the method of providing, law enforcement, police, or fire protection. . .” The Court adopted a test from Texas and West Virginia which asks if the losses resulted from the making or implementation of a policy decision. Thus, the state is immune if the injury is caused during the implementation of a policy that is defective. However, the state is not immune where its employee implements a non-defective policy in a negligent manner.

The Court reasoned that it is the policy of the Department of Public Safety to apprehend speeders. However, it is not policy for an officer to negligently strike a vehicle while apprehending speeders. Furthermore, a review board found that the trooper did not operate his car in a manner consistent with policy and training. Since the trooper’s negligence was not a part of any policy, the state can be held liable for injuries caused by the negligence.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for crime victims and people who have been defrauded by deceptive business practices or injured through the fault of others. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Our firm is also listed in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers by Martindale-Hubbell.