The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

One of the largest complaints by home owners is that lenders can continue to foreclose on a home even if a homeowner has enrolled in the relief program. If the new policies go into effect, a mortgage company would be required to halt any legal proceedings as soon as a borrower enrolls. Moreover, if a borrower is rejected from the program, he or she may appeal the decision within 30 days. During those 30 days, a lender would not be able to carry out a foreclosure sale.

At Pate & Brody, we have seen many homeowners who have not been treated fairly by their mortgage companies. When a home owner is not being treated fairly, we can often step in and stop a foreclosure sale from taking place. It may also be appropriate to file suit against the mortgage company to recover damages for the harm caused to the home owner. The amount of recovery in such cases can often be significant.

Georgia Public Broadcasting has the story.

Georgia’s Department of Health and Human Services found that the Senior Care Center did not address pressure sores and failed to monitor bowel movements. Moreover, investigators found that the Center was managing patient funds without ever receiving permission to do so. The state agency has recommended a fine of $550 per day until the violations have been brought into compliance with federal law.

The 200-bed nursing home was originally shut down by the state in 2007 for safety reasons. Southeast Georgia Health System then bought the nursing home in 2008.

Our personal injury attorneys have been fighting on behalf of abused nursing home patients for years. Georgia law provides nursing home residents with a Bill of Rights that entitles every resident to adequate and appropriate treatment and care. Residents are also entitled to treatment and care that is in compliance with all laws and regulations. When a resident is injured, suffers or dies because a nursing home failed to provide adequate care, the resident or resident’s family may bring a civil suit against the home for damages. By filing a civil suit, an abused resident can often recover a significant sum of money as well as prevent the abuse of future residents.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The idea that a person who possesses an image depicting child pornography is somehow responsible for the harm caused to the child is a novel one. Some federal courts have denied awarding victims any money at all. Others have scolded prosecutors for not seeking restitution. For federal courts that do allow for restitution, the amount can be significant. For instance, two Florida courts awarded victims over $3.2 million. Another Connecticut court awarded a victim $130,000.

Victims are notified when a person is caught with an image of them due to the Crime Victims Rights Act of 2004. Prior to the Act, victims had no way of knowing when someone was caught with their photographs or videos. Now, a victim in Georgia may seek restitution from someone convicted of downloading their images online on the other side of the country.
Advocates believe that restitution is a powerful tool in the fight against child pornography. Moreover, many victims desperately need the money for medical bills, psychiatric counseling, lost wages and attorneys’ fees.

On the other side of the coin, some defense attorneys would point out that only the people who produced the images caused the damage. Others say that the matter should be taken up in civil court. And while it may take the courts years to come to a consensus on the law, some victims are using this window of opportunity to punish those who obtained their illegal images.

Our crime victims attorneys have been successfully representing sex crime victims for years. In our experience, the criminal justice system often excludes victims from court proceedings. Allowing victims to seek restitution in criminal cases can give them a voice in court and give them a chance to recover the damage that was done to them. A good victims’ rights attorney will educate and pressure prosecutors and the courts to seek and award restitution on behalf of victims. The early intervention of a victims’ rights attorney may also save victims the pain and expense of having to file suit in civil court.

The Macon Telegraph has the story.

The patient, Mearlene Hall, had a surgically implanted pump designed to administer pain medication. The pump had been implanted after she suffered serious back injuries. In May of 2006, a nurse from Option Care of Middle Georgia was refilling the pump with pain medication when Mearlene complained of a tingling sensation in her fingers. Despite Mearlene’s complaints, the nurse continued the procedure. Mearlene eventually went unconscious and slipped into a coma. She died 25 days later.

The family’s personal injury lawyer, Tim Hall of Macon, was able to convince the jury that the nurse was negligent for continuing the procedure after Mearlene began to complain. Hall presented evidence that tingling of the fingers is a sign of a pain medication overdose. He also showed the jury that the pump was working properly.

Aside from the $1 million verdict, prejudgment interest was also awarded in the amount of $278,321.

For years, our personal injury attorneys have been helping injured patients and their families recover damages from negligent health care providers. In many of these cases, a nurse or physician does not recognize or simply overlooks obvious warning signs. Patients who have been negligently injured can recover damages for medical bills as well as pain and suffering. If a death results, a patient may be able to recover for wrongful death which is the full value of the patient’s life. As in this case, damages can be significant.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The design defect within the Prius’ braking system causes the brakes to become unresponsive for a brief period of time. The company noted that when the vehicle moves over an uneven or wet surface there is a lag due to the vehicle switching from hydraulic brakes to electronic brakes.

In the US, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has received around 100 complaints so far. Of those complaints, at least two involved accidents with reported injuries. It is unclear how many other crashes and injuries may be related to the Prius’ breaking system.

Prius drivers who believe that they have been injured due to the Prius’ breaking system should know that they may have a product liability claim against Toyota. When a manufacturer creates a defective product and the defect causes an injury, the law generally entitles the injured consumer to money damages for the harm he or she suffered. In many cases, the monetary award can be significant.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The problem involved excessive friction between two accelerator mechanisms. When the friction reached a certain level, the gas pedal became stuck causing the vehicle to move forward. Toyota's fix is a steel shim that is installed behind the gas pedal.

Consumers who believe that they have been injured due to a sticking gas pedal on their Toyota need to know that they may have certain legal rights. When a consumer is injured due to a defective product, the consumer may bring suit against the manufacturer to recover medical bills as well as pain and suffering. If a death occurs, a claim for wrongful death may be appropriate. In many of these cases, an injured consumer can receive a hefty monetary award. Moreover, product liability suits often force the manufacturer to design a safer product which can cut down on the number of future injuries.

The story in Georgia is no different. In one recent Georgia case, an Athens psychologist was convicted after swindling Medicaid out of more than $550,000. The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

One reason for the tremendous amount of fraud, and why it keeps growing, is that there are simply too many businesses and individuals who cheat the government for law enforcement to handle. In response, Congress and various states, including Georgia, passed powerful whistle blower laws which allow an individual to bring suit against a company that files a false claim with the government. While anyone may bring such a suit, employees are often in the best position to disclose the fraud.

In order to bring a successful qui tam action, an employee must have independent and direct knowledge of the government being defrauded by their employer. The whistleblower employee is typically entitled to 15 to 30 percent of the money recovered. In qui tam actions involving large businesses, it is not uncommon for the employee bringing the suit to recover millions of dollars.

It is important to understand that fraud can come in many forms. Some employers defraud the government by over billing for services or goods, billing for services or goods that never existed, or by producing inferior goods. In the health care setting, a health provider may also defraud the government by prescribing unnecessary prescriptions and procedures or even by stealing someone else’s identifying information and claiming that person as a patient for Medicare purposes.

In the recent Athens case, the convicted psychologist submitted thousands of claims for therapy work he never performed for real patients as well as for people that he never treated. Although this case was investigated by the Georgia Attorney General's office and federal officials, a whistleblower complaint could have been brought if timely filed by an employee or other insider with knowledge of the fraud.

Our whistle blower attorneys are able to help individuals report their employers for filing false claims with the government. Many times employees are hesitant to blow the whistle due to fear of reprisal by their employer. However, federal law protects whistle blowers against retaliation for investigating or prosecuting a potential qui tam claim.

The Marietta Daily Journal featured the story in an article called “American Nightmare.”

Although the client was to be kicked out of her house right before Christmas, Attorney Jennifer Jordan of our firm took immediate action and helped our client keep her home. Based on the actions of Wells Fargo, we also filed a complaint against the company alleging wrongful foreclosure and breach of contract. Among other things, the complaint seeks recovery of damages and attorneys fees.

The case is currently pending in Gwinnett County. No trial date has been set.

This case presents allegations of abuse that are similar to issues raised in a recent Atlanta Journal Constitution article about other problems in foster homes in Fulton and DeKalb County.

As the article reports, independent inspectors have found a high rate of abuse among foster children in DeKalb and Fulton Counties. These findings were made in a report that was prepared as part of a settlement deal stemming from a 2005 federal lawsuit against Georgia which called for reforms in Georgia’s child welfare system. The lawsuit was brought by an organization called Children’s Rights, which has voiced much concern over DFCS failures to protect foster kids.

This report also expressed concern over DFCS’ lax monitoring of private homes that are contracted out by the state. In particular, DFCS has decreased the amount of staff which monitors such homes.

In the case of Turning Point Homes, our complaint alleges that the sexual abuse went on over a period of two years without any action being taken. Turrning Point Homes did not report any such incidents to the police, and the company did not counsel the children or tell their adoptive families of the alleged abuse.

Georgia law provides that foster homes, like Turning Point, generally have a duty to supervise, care for and protect the well-being of children while they are under the care of the home. Our complaint alleges that Turning Homes failed to live up to this duty and, therefore, violated the rights of these children and their adoptive family.

The complaint, filed in Dekalb County, requests damages, including punitive damages, and a jury trial.

In addition to the five amputations, two other children received lacerations on their fingertips. The amputations and cuts occurred when the children placed their fingers in the canopy hinge while the canopy was being closed or opened.

Recalled strollers include various model numbers of the Spree, Alano, Passage, and Travel Systems models which were made between October 2004 and February 2008. The affected strollers were sold between October 2004 and December 2009 at retail stores across the country including Walmart, Target, Sears, Kmart and Toys R Us. Consumers can find manufacturing dates and model numbers above the back wheels on the rear frame.

Graco has released a statement telling consumers to stop using the potentially dangerous strollers and to contact Graco for free hinge covers. Consumers can also visit http://www.cpsc.gov to learn more. Graco is a division of Newell Rubbermaid, an Atlanta based company. A similar recall occurred last November which involved a million Maclaren strollers. Prior to that recall, twelve children received severed fingertips.

Our product liability attorneys represent children and their families who have been injured by dangerous and defective products. It is important for parents and families of children injured by defective products to know that they may be entitled to significant monetary damages. Damages may include medical bills as well as emotional and physical suffering. In order to receive such damages, an injured plaintiff must generally show that the product was defective and that the defect caused the child’s injury.

In a Georgia lawsuit filed last month, AT&T employees claimed that the company broke the law by classifying first-level managers as exempt from overtime pay. Such lawsuits have increased in Georgia and around the country due to a change in federal regulations as well as a struggling economy.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

Overtime pay is codified in the Fair Labor Standards Act. The main issue in the majority of overtime lawsuits is how a company classifies its workers. Generally, whether an employee must receive overtime hinges on their job functions and whether their job is exempt. Employees who work in an administrative, executive or professional function are generally exempt. Computer workers, those in outside sales, or workers who are highly compensated are also generally exempt. Each category also has its own requirements for exemption to apply.

Among the grayer areas of this law is how to classify managers. For an executive exemption to apply, the employer must show that an employee’s principal role is to manage a customarily recognized department or subdivision of the business. The company must also show that the employee manages at least two full-time employees and be able to weigh in on the hiring or promotion of lower level employees.

In the Georgia AT&T case, plaintiffs argued that AT&T classified first-level managers as exempt even though their jobs largely involved non-managerial duties.

The Georgia AT&T case is part of a recent trend of overtime lawsuits against major corporations. In 2004, the Department of Labor adjusted regulations which caused some workers who were previously exempt to become misclassified. This factor combined with a poor economy has sparked an increase in the number of overtime lawsuits which experts predict will continue to grow.

Our attorneys have successfully handled cases in which employees were wrongfully denied overtime pay. As this article suggests, the FLSA is an incredibly complex and intricate law. However, it is also a very worker-friendly law. The law allows an employee two years to bring a suit against his or her employer for violating overtime laws. This time period is extended to three years for willful violations. Furthermore, successful plaintiffs can recover significant monetary damages including back pay, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees and court costs.

Investigators with the Cobb County Police Department have determined that a rotten tire caused a car accident on I-20 which killed two people.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The wreck occurred just a couple days before Christmas. Police say a tire on a Ford SUV blew out causing the vehicle to roll over. As a result, two of the six passengers inside were killed. Investigators discovered that the tire was manufactured in 1996 and had literally rotted away even though the tread appeared normal. Police have decided not to hold the tire maker at fault.

Rotting can occur when a tire sits on a shelf for a long period of time. When a tire suffers from dry rot, it can simply give out as seen in this case. Consumers are advised to look for small fractures on the sidewall and tread which can be a warning sign of dry rot. Drivers should also check the last four digits of the 12 digits on their tires in order to determine the tire’s age.

While police have decided not to hold the tire manufacturer at fault, the manufacturer may still be liable for civil damages. Our product liability lawyers have successfully won several cases in which a defective vehicle part led to serious injuries and deaths. If the injured parties in this case can show that the tire was defective and that it caused their injuries, Georgia law would allow them to recover significant monetary damages.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

On Christmas morning in 2005, Lynn Wheeler and her husband were on their way to church when their 2002 Ford Explorer was struck head-on by another vehicle. Lynn was wearing a lap-only seat belt at the time of the accident. She sustained grave injuries and is now a quadriplegic.

Attorneys for the Columbus and Atlanta law firm Butler, Wooten & Fryhoffer argued before a Clayton County jury that Ford had created a defective seat belt system which failed to properly restrain Lynn. The jury agreed and returned a 16.4 million verdict against Ford on December 18. The jury also determined that it should award punitive damages since Ford had shown a reckless disregard for safety. However, the parties settled before punitive damages could be awarded.

Our product liability lawyers have also represented clients who have been seriously injured in car accidents due to a defect within a vehicle. Injured consumers should know that Georgia provides powerful laws which give them the right to sue companies involved in the manufacture or sale of a defective product. As in this case, a products liability suit can often result in a substantial monetary award and force the offending company to create safer products in the future. While vehicles are the classic example in a products liability case, a defective product may include virtually anything a manufacturer puts into the market place including lawn equipment, eye glasses and household appliances.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The incident occurred around lunchtime at the Wal-Mart on Ashford Dunwoody Road. According to authorities, a Wal-Mart loss prevention officer initially grabbed Mr. Jones after suspecting him of shoplifting. A shopper then apparently intervened which led to an altercation. From that point, a “pile-up” ensured in which an undisclosed number of people attempted to pin Mr. Jones to the ground.

When police arrived at 1 p.m., Mr. Jones was receiving CPR from two bystanders. He was then transported to Northside Hospital where he was pronounced dead. Authorities hope that an autopsy will shed more light on the injuries that Mr. Jones sustained.

Our personal injury attorneys have helped several clients recover significant monetary damages after they were wrongfully detained or assaulted by private security employees. It is important for customers who have been assaulted by store employees to understand that a store, such as Wal-Mart, can detain a customer it reasonably suspects of shoplifting. However, under Georgia law, a store may generally only detain a suspected shoplifter in a manner and for a length of time that is reasonable. In our experience, detention by store security that results in grave bodily injury or death is almost never reasonable, and in those cases, the injured customer or the customer’s family may be able to recover a significant amount of money from the business and its employees.

In Jones v. Warner, the plaintiff, Chastity Jones, was eating at a KFC in downtown Atlanta with two friends when she decided that she wanted to visit Atlantic Station. Jones noticed a police van outside in which Officer Adriane Warner was sitting. Jones walked to the van and asked Warner for directions to Atlantic Station while Warner was on the radio. Warner failed to respond and Jones asked for directions a second time. Warner raised her finger instructing Jones to wait. Warner then stated “17th Street” and pointed to the right. Jones asked, “Where is that?” to which Warner responded, “Can’t you see I am on my radio?” While walking back to the restaurant, Jones stated, “You didn’t have to be so rude about it.”

Warner followed Jones into the KFC and told her that she needed to speak with her. Jones apologized for disturbing the radio call and turned to walk to her table. Warner then stated, “Don’t walk away from me when I’m talking to you.” At that time, Warner pulled Jones out of the KFC and held her arm to the wall. Jones again apologized. Warner then put Jones in handcuffs and asked for an ID. Jones stated she didn’t have an ID but later found it on her person. At the precinct, Warner discovered that Jones had a warrant for failure to appear. Jones was then charged with violating the Atlanta City ordinance for disorderly conduct. The ordinance, which was later changed, prohibited the interference “by acts of physical obstruction, [with] another’s pursuit of a lawful occupation.” The Solicitor eventually moved to dismiss the charges which the municipal court granted.

Jones then sued for false arrest and malicious prosecution. Warner testified that Jones stated “damn officers” as she walked back to the KFC, and that once inside she cursed in front of children which gave her probable cause to arrest. However, Warner never mentioned any cursing in her initial report and even stated in her deposition that she had no reasonable grounds for believing a crime had been committed prior to Jones’ re-entry into the KFC. Furthermore, one of Jones’ friends testified that she was calm and never cursed. Nonetheless, the trial court granted Warner’s motions for summary judgment.

False arrest arises when an arrest occurs without probable cause and when made maliciously. A lack of probable cause exists when a reasonable man would believe that the officer had no grounds for proceeding with the arrest except out of a desire to injure the arrestee. The additional element of malice may be inferred from a total lack of probable cause. Because Warner could not provide any undisputed evidence showing that the arrest for disorderly conduct was justified, the appellate court ruled that the trial court should have allowed a jury to decide the question.

Moreover, the court ruled that the claim for malicious prosecution should have also reached the jury. Whether malicious prosecution exists depends on whether the facts, as they existed at the time of instituting the prosecution, were such as to lead a person of ordinary caution to entertain a belief that the accused was guilty of the offense charged. If probable cause existed, the malicious prosecution claim will fail. Since a question of fact remains as to whether there was probable cause and a prosecution had been initiated, the appellate court held that summary judgment was improper.

Our victims’ rights attorneys have successfully represented several clients who have fallen victim to abusive police practices. In our experience, false arrest and malicious prosecution are not uncommon occurrences and many victims fail to exercise their rights under Georgia and federal laws which are designed to protect and compensate those who have been wrongfully arrested or prosecuted. While it can often be a difficult task to get such a case to the jury stage, juries can and do award significant monetary damages in such cases. It is our hope that cases like this one will allow more victims to exercise their rights and eventually prevent future abusive police practices.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon, Madison and Savannah. 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.