September 24, 2009

Georgia crime victims hope for passage of new victim protection bill which would require background checks on employees sent to work in other people’s homes

In May of 2008, a man working for a trusted cleaning company knocked on the door of a home the company had serviced on many occasions. The nanny, who was watching the family’s 3-year-old, let the man into the home where he proceeded to beat and rape her. The victims would later come to find that the man had previously been convicted of six felonies. The Georgia Legislature is now considering passing a bill which would require employers to conduct criminal background checks on employees who go into the homes of others.

The Macon Telegraph has the story.

The man accused of the rape, Rudolph Valentino Smith, had previously been convicted of crimes ranging from robbery to voluntary manslaughter. In fact, he had been convicted of killing a man with a butcher knife in 1994 for which he served 12 years in prison. Victim advocates say the proposed bill would reduce the chances of such an attack from happening again.

In addition to requiring background checks, the bill would prohibit some offenders from attaining jobs that send them into the homes of others unless their civil rights have been reinstated. The proposed bill has had trouble gaining traction, since many are concerned that such a law would harm the chances of rehabilitated felons from re-entering the workplace. Much of the criticism centered on the original bill’s exclusion of all felons; however, the revamped version only excludes those convicted of a crime which falls under the seven deadly sins: murder, voluntary manslaughter, rape, aggravated sodomy, aggravated child molestation, aggravated battery, and armed robbery if committed with a firearm.

The bill failed to leave the House Agriculture and Consumer Affairs Committee before the end of the 2009 legislative session, but it is expected to be considered again in January. The mother of the 3-year-old and owner of the home where the rape occurred, Amy Scott, has been an ardent supporter of the legislation and testified before the committee earlier this year. For now, she awaits the trial of the accused rapist while trying to put the events of that day behind her.

Our victims’ rights attorneys have successfully represented victims of serious crimes throughout the state of Georgia. In most serious crimes, victims are afforded certain legal rights including compensation, restitution, notification of criminal legal proceedings and restraining orders. A victim may also bring a civil suit against those responsible. Many times a crime will occur due to the negligence of an apartment complex, restaurant or similar business. A victims’ rights attorney will work closely with prosecutors and investigators in an effort to hold such businesses accountable.

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.

Bookmark and Share

February 18, 2009

Atlanta lawyer files suit against hospital alleging that its employees sexually assaulted patients

A lawsuit was recently filed against WellStar Kennestone Hospital in Marietta alleging that the hospital failed to properly hire, train and supervise certain employees that may have sexually assaulted patients at the hospital.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The lawsuit alleges that three employees of the hospital sexually assaulted at least 6 patients and one visitor to the hospital. Apparently, other victims have come forward since the lawsuit was filed.

Our crime victim advocates and trial attorneys have assisted sex crime victims recover significant monetary damages that they could not have recovered if they just relied on the criminal justice system.

As this lawsuit claims, employers may be liable for the criminal acts of their employees if they have been negligent in their hiring, training or supervision of their employees. There may also be liability when the crime occurs within the scope of the employee's job.

It is important to remember that crime victims have rights that extend beyond the criminal justice system. An experienced attorney can often help crime victims recover at least a little of what they lost.

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.

Bookmark and Share

November 16, 2008

Inadequate security decision by Georgia appeals court upholds jury verdict against bar

In Georgia, a bar can sometimes be held liable for injuries suffered by bystanders when a fight breaks out.

In Mulligan's Bar & Grill v. Stanfield, the Court of Appeals affirmed a jury verdict in favor of Bruce Stanfield who filed suit against Mulligan’s Bar & Grill and the owner of the bar after being injured on the premises. A fight between two other patrons of the bar ended with Mr. Stanfield receiving severe facial injuries due to a beer bottle striking his face. The brawling patrons had given the staff at Mulligan’s trouble before the fight, and employees were aware that the fight between the two men had been brewing for hours. One employee stated that the men had been removed from the bar on several different occasions. Other employees believed that a fight would eventually break out between the two patrons on the night Mr. Stanfield’s injuries occurred. The owner even admitted that one of the patron’s should not have been there since he had been banned.

Other patrons could not understand why the bar did not resolve the problem before the fight, since they had seen the two men fight at Mulligan’s on prior occasions. In addition, evidence showed that the bar’s security officer had told the owner that security was inadequate.

As a result of the fight, Mr. Stanfield received two surgeries and other medical treatment that amounted to approximately $40,000. A jury sided with Mr. Stanfield and found Mulligan’s liable in the amount of $192,100 for knowingly providing an inadequately secured premises. The bar’s owner argued that Mr. Stanfield’s suit was barred by the Georgia Dram Shop Act which concerns a bar’s liability for serving alcohol. However, the court ruled that this case was about premises liability and not liquor liability, since even a bar has a duty to exercise ordinary care in keeping its premises safe.

To be found liable, Georgia law required that a prior incident be sufficient enough to attract the owner’s attention to the dangerous condition that resulted in Mr. Stanfield’s injuries. The court found that there was ample evidence to find that Mr. Stanfield’s injuries were foreseeable due to the prior behavior of the brawling patrons.

Bars are like any other business - they have a duty of reasonable care and adequate security. Our firm represents crime victims and people injured as a result of dangerous conditions and inadequate security. We hope this case will re-affirm the long-standing Georgia rule that holds businesses liable for failing to insure the security of their patrons.

Of course, it's always a good idea to avoid bar fights, and the bars where they occur.

Bookmark and Share