Articles Posted in Legal News

Last week, I wrote an upbeat post about a U.S. District Court in Arizona opinion in Haro v. Sebelius as hopefully a harbinger for a less Draconian system governing the logistics of dealing with Medicare/Medicaid liens in personal injury cases.medicare lien opinion

But the rain is getting a little heavier before the rainbow. Medicare/Medicaid has stopped sending Rights and Responsibility (RAR) and demand letters while trying to figure out just how to deal with Haro v. Sebelius. So trying to get Medicare on the phone for information is a challenge squared. My office spent two hours – literally on hold – last week. “On hold” is the operative phrase – lien resolutions are at a standstill which is tough medicine for everyone.

Continue reading

The Washington Post reports that a Maryland personal injury attorney pleaded guilty yesterday to insurance fraud. The lawyer worked with a chiropractor to submit false car insurance claims. Not content to cheat just for his clients, he brought his own bike accident claim and got an $11,000 settlement from an insurance company.lawyer guilty fraud

Wild story. It is very easy to get up on a soapbox and condemn, but it is too easy of a target. It is like writing a rant that Charlie Sheen is crazy. Everyone gets it.

This lawyer has “admitted full responsibility”, according to his lawyer. This is good. But, respectfully, criminal lawyers always talk too much. “[He] is devastated by his terrible judgment,” the lawyer added.

Almost two years ago now, Medicaid/Medicare liens became even more difficult to deal with as the law pushed to the lawyers and insurance companies the obligation of confirmation and resolution of Medicare/Medicaid liens. I’m sure betting an insurance company has yet to receive a fine for not verifying a lien before paying a personal injury settlement. But nobody wants to be the first.medicare lien law

Medicare, Medicaid and State Children’s Health Insurance Program Extension Act of 2007 created so many headaches people starting fighting back. In Haro v. Sebelius, an Arizona case in U.S. District Court, Medicare beneficiaries (and, interestingly, a personal injury lawyer in his own capacity) challenged – as a class – two things: (1) Can Medicare/Medicaid (hereinafter “Medicare because I’m sick of the slash) “require prepayment of a reimbursement claim before the correct amount is administratively determined where the beneficiary either appeals or seeks a waiver of the MSP reimbursement claim?, and (2) Are personal injury lawyers financially responsible for reimbursement if they do not hold or immediately turn over to Medicare their clients’ personal injury settlement awards.

Personal injury lawyers are completely in a pickle on these liens. Our clients want their money; we want to get them the money they are entitled to get. The question is whether personal injury attorneys are precluded from giving the clients their settlement money until after Medicare’s claim has been satisfied, and, let’s be honest, whether Medicare can recover the reimbursement claim directly from the attorney if the client cannot pay the reimbursement claim after the settlement money has been turned over to the client.

Continue reading

A lawyer at DeCaro, Doran, Siciliano, Gallagher & DeBlasis, a good Bowie law firm that we have a good deal of respect for that does a lot of insurance defense work, got a speeding camera speeding ticket in Montgomery County. He decided to fight it. The basis? He found a typo, a “(b)” instead of a “(d)” in the Montgomery County law dealing with speed cameras. He won.

Continue reading

The 10th Circuit yesterday decided a Ford F-150 product defect case in which it reversed the trial court’s entry of summary judgment but sent the case back down to the District Court. I love it when courts do that.

The issue in this wrongful death case was whether plaintiffs’ expert could flip his deposition testimony after getting boxed into a causation corner. The 10th Circuit said they could not, adopting a line from the District Court that I like: “[Plaintiffs] treated the deposition as a ‘take home examination.'”

This case’s issue is like the issue addressed in Pittman v. Atlantic Realty, a lead paint case I won on summary judgment for the defendant before Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge David B. Mitchell that was reversed by the Maryland Court of Appeals.

I started my argument in Pittman with this line about how the Plaintiffs were delivering their case the way Nathaniel Hawthorne delivered his novels; sending out one chapter at a time. I thought it was so clever. Boy, I was stupid. (And I don’t even think I ever completed the full Cliff Notes of a Hawthorne novel.) I could have saved 10 pages of transcript by saying, “Plaintiffs treated this case like a take-home deposition.” Still, I won.

Continue reading

Is it just me or does every get excited seeing everyone’s crazy aunts and uncles come out of the basement and try to top each other with a more ridiculous, insane proposals for dealing with frivolous lawsuits? The Overlawyered commenters are out and about after reports of a lawsuit over the right to wear unbelievably awful t-shirts to public school.frivolous lawsuits excitement

Can I play too? We should execute anyone who we suspect is thinking of filing a frivolous lawsuit. There is a precedent for this. Remember the Minority Report?

I agree with the implied premise of the post that people shouldn’t be filing lawsuits defending the right of kids to wear offensive t-shirts to a public school. (Particularly if the girl’s parents are making her wear the shirt. Good golly.) Truly, it is a beyond insane lawsuit. It should be renounced. (I guess. We could also just look away, I suppose. We have 300 million people in this county. Do we have to report on every random idiot who burns the Koran?)

But the feeding frenzy that follows reports of these outlier cases operates under the assumption that frivolous lawsuits are the rule rather than the exception. The “free market” that I’m sure the commenters idolize takes care of lawyers who are recidivist filers of frivolous lawsuits: it puts them out of business. Continue reading

The parents of a 13-year-old girl that committed suicide have sued a school system alleging the school should have been able to prevent her suicide.sexting suicide lawsuit

Teenagers have been taking their own lives as long as history can remember. This tragedy has a modern twist. The girl did something that lots of young people are doing now: sexting. She texted a topless photo of herself to a boy. You know what happened. Teenage boys are not known for their discretion. Then the media picks up the story. Now, they don’t name names but anyone within 5 miles of the girl knows who it is. All of this culminates in the girl’s suicide. The parents’ wrongful death lawsuit alleges the school did not do enough to prevent the girl from committing suicide.

Continue reading

I read an interesting article in the Washington Post yesterday about the downfall of big Washington, D.C. law firm heavyweight Howrey, who closed its doors earlier this month. It is an unbelievably steep fall for a law firm that had $570 million in revenue in 2008.law firm closing

In my heart, I really wished and wish this law firm and all the people in it the very best. It’s true, scout’s honor. But every plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer gets a little feeling of validation for their career path as news continued to percolate about the demise of big defense law firms.

But that validation got stopped in its tracks when I read this sentence:

Revenue in the litigation business tends to be lumpy. You get paid only when there is a case to be tried and then often only after the trial is over. Howrey, in particular, had come to rely increasingly on revenue from such contingency fee cases, which rose to $35 million in 2008 and then fell to $2 million a year later.

Quickly, I had to jump off my high horse. That’s our business model. Continue reading

Todd Lamb, executive director of Maryland Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, and Ellen Valentino write an editorial in the Maryland Daily Record on the apocalypse that would occur if Maryland joined 90% of states and adopted a comparative negligence standard. Essentially, the authors’ argument makes two points: (1) comparative negligence should not be adopted by anyone other than the Maryland legislature and (2) comparative negligence would cause great economic hardship for Maryland.maryland comparative negligence

I understand the authors’ point that any change in the standard should come from the legislature. I think most of the Maryland Court of Appeals will agree with the authors on this. As Judge Bell pointed out in commissioning a study on contributory/comparative negligence, Maryland’s contributory negligence rule is a common-law rule. Arguably, the legislature’s failure to act is not an approbation of contributory negligence. Can the court never change a rule because the legislature has not changed it for them? But I’m getting too far afield… I can see arguments on both sides of this issue.

That Maryland’s economy will suffer from comparative negligence is just plain silly. Maryland, Virginia, Washington, D.C., Alabama, and North Carolina are the only jurisdictions in the country that have retained contributory negligence. Has any serious economist – which I define for these purposes as someone who has taken an introductory economics course – suggested that these economies are meaningfully stronger and have lower inflation because of contributory negligence? Please.

Continue reading

Contact Information