Fairfax & Loudoun Personal Injury Lawyer - brain Injury

Managing Brain Injury - new Guide now available from the National Rehabilitation Hospital

Doug Landau — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:26:00 GMT

In his continuing efforts to help those with traumatic brain injury and disabled from head trauma, Herndon Reston lawyer Doug Landau receives and reviews materials from the National Rehabilitation Hospital ("NRH"), Brain Injury Services, the Brain Injury Association and the Virginia Trial Lawyers Brain Injury Retreat. The NRH Press latest book offering is "Managing Brain Injury: A Guide to Living Well with Brain Injury."

This is the 4th book in a series of useful guides to help people face the challenges of life following brain injury. As Landau and the ABRAMS LANDAU trial team has worked with many victims of traumatic brain injury ("TBI") and closed head injury, they understand the importance of having resources such as this available for disabled clients and their families. This new NRH guide is intended to help make sense of the roller coaster ride of emotional and physical changes that can overwhelm patients and health care providers. To order this helpful book, visit NRH Rehab or call 202-877-1776

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

Time lost is brain lost after a stroke

Doug Landau — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:17:00 GMT

With a stroke, time lost is brain lost

This was the crux of a notice Ashburn, South Riding and Broadlands brain injury lawyer Doug Landau received in Charlottesville, Virginia. The Stroke Association wants people to know that:

strokes are the #3 killer in this country, yet many people don't even know what they are. They don't know that more of the brain can be saved if a stroke is detected and treatment is received immediately. Strokes begin when a blood vessel in the brain becomes blocked or bursts. Blow flow is cut off. Tissue is starved for oxygen, and parts of the brain die. If not treated quickly, abilities and productive life can be lost. Learn to spot the warning signs of a stroke or call 1-888-4-STROKE, and act quickly. Your brain is your most prized possession. Guard it with your life.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

"Independent Medical Exams" are not !

Doug Landau — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:37:04 GMT

Almost every single case involving serious injury, permanent disability, head trauma or significant wage loss is confronted by an insurance company lawyer demanding an "Independent Medical Examination." The exam is usually not independent. It is not for treatment of the orthopedic or brain injuries, so the "medical" part of the phrase is intellectually dishonest. And as for an "examination," it's often more of a cross-examination than a genuine physical exam.

"Independent" medical exams ("IMEs") are commonplace in personal litigation, workers compensation, and occupational disease cases handled by ABRAMS LANDAU, Ltd. Because these are not truly "Independent" (as we see the same doctors performing exams for the same insurance companies who pay their bills, we refer to these as "defense medical exams" ("DME") or "insurance medical exams." A 3/31/09 New York Times investigation titled "Exams of Injured Workers Feed Mutual Mistrust," reported that, "Often IME doctors are hired by brokers that then have clerical staffs prepare reports based on dictation or checklists completed by the doctors, who often do not read the reports before signing them. The article gives examples of doctors signing reports on exams they never performed. One of the ways Herndon Reston area injury lawyer Doug Landau anticipates this practice is by offering the insurance company a physical exam early in the case, sometimes even before a lawsuit is filed. "The case we select involve serious, objective and usually permanent injuries," Landau notes. Because we have nothing to hide, I will offer to have my injured client submit to a voluntary physical exam with a qualified doctor, at a reasonable time and place, in lieu of a later examination after suit is filed." In effect, it is a "put up or shut up" move by the multi-state trial lawyer, known for his unique and innovative techniques.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

Fatal robe fire kills elderly woman; flammable fabrics

Doug Landau — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:29:00 GMT

Having experienced firsthand what happens when an elderly parent's robe ignites and catches fire, I came across notification of a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of the estate of an 80-year-old woman who died after her robe caught fire while making tea in Connecticut. The lawsuit was filed against the company that sold the garment. According to the suit papers, a Pennsylvania-based company sold the imported chenille robes despite knowledge that they were highly flammable. Defendant Blair Corporation has recalled more than 300,000 garments since April because of fire hazards.

The U.S. Consumer Products Safety Commission expanded a recall after nine women died of burns from defective Blair chenille robes, jackets and tops. Many of the products, which include items made in Pakistan, pose risk of fatal burns and do not meet the standards set under the Federal Flammable Fabrics Act. For complete information about the lawsuit and the product recalls, visit flammablefabrics.org

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

After car crashes, patients with health insurance sued by hospitals for medical bills

Doug Landau — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 11:23:00 GMT

Loudoun, Fairfax & Leesburg injury lawyer Doug Landau was shocked to hear this month how hospitals are suing patients for not paying bills. The shocking part is that these patients had valid insurance coverage. These patients wanted the bills paid and had given their health coverage information to the hospital staff. However, the hospital did not bill the patient's health insurance and accept the negotiated rates. Instead, the hospital waited, and then sued the patients in the local court, where they send a lawyer with stacks of files to collect on these outrageous lawsuits.

A fellow Virginia Trial Lawyer reports sitting in the Stafford court saw a local hospital taking patients to court and suing them for the medical bills ! Numerous patients, now defendants being sued by their hospital, said that they had presented their insurance cards to the hospital. They told the judge that they did not know that their insurance company had not been billed. Furthermore, these patients were not told until it was too late to have their valid health insurance policies pay because of the deadline in the insurance policy to report claims had passed. These people got judgments against them for !00% of the bills plus interest and attorney's fees ! If you are injured in an accident, make sure that the hospital, doctor and other health care providers have your current health insurance information and that this insurance THAT YOU OR YOUR LOVED ONES HAVE PAID FOR is actually billed and pays for your care. You do not want to end up in court being sued by the doctors or hospital that treated you for your injuries.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

Hospitals not billing truck crash and injured car accident victims' insurance !

Doug Landau — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:17:00 GMT

Notified that some local hospitals are taking crash victims' health insurance information and then ignoring it, Loudoun, Fairfax & Leesburg injury lawyer Doug Landau believes that this is tantamount to fraud. One such hospital outright refuses to bill a patient’s health insurance, despite the fact that they obtain this information during the intake process, which fraudulently misleads the patient to believe that it will be billed – and that the billing will be timely. When the health insurance is not billed, the patient frequently is unaware of this and the submission deadline for health insurance may pass. When this occurs, the innocent patient is left holding the bag for the entire amount of the hospital bill !

The hospitals have a contract with each of the health insurance carriers. The contract sets the rates that the insurance company will pay for health care provided to its policy holders and their covered family members. The contract also requires the hospital to accept that insurance payment. People pay for health insurance so that they do not get hit with enormous medical bills. Some plans have deductibles or co-pays, but these are known ahead of time, when the policy holder buys the coverage.

The requirement that the hospital or doctor accept the previously agreed upon insurance reimbursement rate and not "balance bill" the patient is one of the main reasons a worker or their family would buy health insurance. Health insurance purchasers have a reasonable expectation that they will get the basis of that bargain between their insurance company and the health care providers. By not taking the insurance, the hospital is breaching their contractual obligation to the insurer. Find out tomorrow what happened to patients whose health insurance was not billed by the hospital...

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

Virginia City Government Agrees to Settle Teenager's Brain and Skull Injury Claims

Doug Landau — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:14:00 GMT

The City of Norfolk Virginia settled with the mother of a teenager who suffered permanent brain damage after being struck by a city truck for $7,500,000 one week prior to trial. Because the teenage Plaintiff will never be able to work or care for himself, this lawsuit was filed on his behalf by his mother.

In December 2006, the Plaintiff was 17 years old. He was standing in the median, on his way to a job interview. He was hit by truck. Plaintiff's mother alleged that the Defendant truck driver was negligent in the operation of his vehicle and the Defendant City of Norfolk, Virginia was liable for their employee's actions under the doctrine of respondeat superior. There was no dispute as to the facts that: the truck was owned and operated by the Defendant City of Norfolk and that the Defendant driver was their employee, acting in the course and scope of his employment at the time of this tragic truck accident.

The Plaintiff suffered a serious brain injury requiring three months of hospitalization. The Plaintiff's sustained severe brain injury with swelling, which necessitated the removal of a portion of the skull to relieve the pressure. Plaintiff was left with the mental capacity of an 11 year old and was not expected to be able to hold a job or live by himself at any point in the future. At the time of this settlement, plaintiff lived with and was cared for by his mother.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

Who is to blame? - Negligent Entrustment

Doug Landau — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:00:27 GMT

“An unfit driver borrowed a friend’s car and hit me. Can I sue the friends for putting him behind the wheel?”

In a recent Arlington Circuit Court case, the defendant allegedly knew that the 17-year-old, who was entrusted with her vehicle, was an inexperienced driver on a restricted license due to her speeding and racing habits. The plaintiff, who was injured by the unfit driver in an accident, brought a negligent entrustment case against the car owner to court.

Negligent entrustment in these cases can arise where a parent lends or "entrusts" a car (or other dangerous machinery) to an underage or unfit person, and that person causes injury to an innocent victim.

In this claim, the plaintiff must prove that

The defendant expressly or impliedly permitted the driver to drive his or her vehicle
The driver was an unfit driver
*The defendant knew or should have known the driver was unfit
*The driver was negligent as a result of the unfitness
*The driver’s negligence was a proximate cause of the plaintiffs’ injuries.

In the Arlington case, the court ruled in favor of the defendants, and therefore, the car owners did not have to pay even though the plaintiff had evidence that entrusting their friend with a vehicle, when they knew the friend was a bad driver, was the reason the driver caused the accident.

The best way to determine what claims can be made (and won) and who may be responsible for your losses is by consulting an experienced trial lawyer.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

Horseplay is not fun: Workers Compensation claim frozen in its tracks

Doug Landau — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:01:00 GMT

Joking around becomes no laughing matter when someone gets hurt. But in a recent workers compensation case, ice throwing at work resulted in a serious injury.

A male waiter entered the kitchen of the restaurant where he worked and began to input meal orders into a computer. Three idle co-workers threw ice at the waiter. He turned around when a piece of ice hit him in the back of his head. He was continually hit in the head and chest as he faced forward. He threw his left arm up to block the ice and his left shoulder dislocated. He suffered an injury and underwent surgery, as a result of the incident.

But even more shocking than the facts of the case is the decision of the Virginia Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor of the employer. The employer's insurance company argued: “there was no casual connection between the injury and the conditions under which the employer required the work to be done”.

Attorney Doug Landau, who has won cases involving horseplay, playing at work and injuries occurring off the premises and "off the clock," knows Workers Compensation claims can be tricky. But with this particular case we see that just because someone is hurt at work, while they are working, does not mean they always get the restitution they deserve under the state's Workers Compensation law.

See VA court of appeals

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Doug Landau

80,000 Social Security recipients lose their benefits

Danielle Landau — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:12:00 GMT

What would you do if the Social Security payments that you relied on to survive were taken away at the drop of a hat? What would you do if this resulted from a felony charge that you were not aware of or never attained? Just days ago, the San Francisco Chronicle reported on the case:

A judge tentatively approved a settlement Tuesday to repay 80,000 Social Security recipients more than $500 million that the federal government lopped from their benefits, thanks to an anti-fugitive program that went haywire.

The problem arose from a law denying Social Security benefits to anyone fleeing from prosecution for a felony or who had been convicted and was on the run. To enforce it, the Social Security Administration ordered its staff to withhold money from anyone who was named in an arrest warrant for any state or federal felony.

The result, according to lawyers for plaintiffs in a class-action suit, was the cutoff of payments to tens of thousands of people who never fled prosecution. Most were unaware of the warrants, and some hadn't even been charged with crimes, the lawyers said.

Several courts declared the policy illegal, and the agency revoked it as part of the settlement April 1. It now withholds benefits only for people charged with fleeing to avoid prosecution or escape custody.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Danielle Landau