Published on:

In Atlanta, crimes such as shootings, rapes, robberies, or assaults occur on many commercial properties, including hotels and motels.  Under Georgia law, a victim of a crime that occurs on the property of an unsafe hotel or motel may be able to recover against the hotel or motel for negligent security.

Negligent security is a type of premises liability claim. Premises liability cases in Georgia rest on the principle that a property owner has the legal duty to make sure that lawful visitors or “invitees” to its property are safe from dangerous conditions.  An invitee of a hotel or motel includes guests, and dangerous conditions can include crimes that are committed by unrelated persons who come on to the property or even other motel or hotel guests.

Hotel and motel owners have the duty to protect its guests from “foreseeable” criminal acts, even if the crimes are committed by third parties.  Thus, one of the factors that a victim of a crime on an unsafe property has to prove is that the crime was foreseeable.  You may ask how anyone could predict the future to foresee the criminal act of a third party.  Some factors that show that a property owner should have foreseen a criminal act are past crimes that occurred on the property or complaints about criminal behavior from customers, employees, or other guests.

Published on:

Generally, the victim of a security guard’s bad acts or negligence (false imprisonment, excessive use of force, wrongful detention) may bring a civil lawsuit in Georgia to recover damages for the victim’s resulting injuries.  However, because recovering damages in a civil suit requires money, whether it be via a corporate entity with deep pockets or via insurance coverage, a more important question is, “can any corporate defendants also be held responsible for the individual security officer’s acts?”  When looking at corporate entities to sue in a case involving a bad acting security guard, Georgia attorneys should investigate the case to see if the property owner who hired the security guard and/or the security company who employed the guard can be held responsible for the guard’s behavior.

Under Georgia law, property owners have the ultimate duty of care, or the responsibility to its customers, tenants, visitors, or other people who are lawfully on the property, to keep the property safe.  This responsibility includes making sure that the security guard or security guard company is one that will properly ensure the safety of the people who are lawfully present on the property.  Under some circumstances, a property owner can be held liable for the security guards intentionally bad acts, crimes, or unintentional acts/negligent acts.  Examples of intentional bad acts include using excessive force, such as assaulting or shooting someone unnecessarily or wrongfully detaining or arresting someone.  Examples of negligence include not being on the property when required or failing to follow certain safety protocols and procedures.

Many property owners hire private security companies to keep their properties safe.  Thus, it is possible for a victim of a security guard’s bad or negligent acts to sue the security company that employed the guard.  Under the Georgia law of respondeat superior or vicarious liability, an employer can be held responsible for an employee’s wrongful acts, if the employee was working within the course and scope of his or her employment. Secondly, an employer, such as a security company that employs a bad security guard, may be held responsible for the negligent hiring, retention, supervision, and training of a security guard who acts negligently or wrongfully. Thus, an attorney handling the case against the security company should investigate whether the employer checked the guard’s criminal history or work history before hiring him.

Published on:

Yes, victims of crimes such as assaults, shootings, robberies, and rapes in Georgia may be able to sue property owners and operators where those crimes occur under the Georgia law of premises liability.  Victims may also sue the assailants, but, when looking at a civil suit, suing a corporate owner or operator of a premises gives the victim a better chance for monetary recovery, as most individuals, particularly criminals, probably do not have assets with which to pay their victims.

Under Georgia law, owners and operators of businesses owe a duty of care to the keep their premises safe for visitors and customers.  Where a business owner knows that there is a significant amount of violent crime on its property that could cause customers to be assaulted or even killed, a business owner is required to provide security or take measures to prevent such crimes.  Where such a business owner fails to provide adequate security, and a violent crime, such as a shooting or a rape occurs on its property, the property owner may be civilly liable and be required to pay the victim for the crime, even if the criminal is totally unrelated to the property owner.

Places such as business parking lots, parking decks, bars, hotels, and gas stations can be high crime areas where adequate security is a must.  Business owners who know about high crime on their property can make efforts such as providing well-trained security guards, controlled access, adequate lighting, fencing, warning signs, and security cameras.

Published on:

On May 3, 2017, a jury in New Orleans found in favor of the manufacturers of the blood thinner Xarelto in a lawsuit that Joseph Boudreaux filed against Bayer AG, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Johnson & Johnson after Mr. Boudreaux’s was hospitalized for gastrointestinal bleeding that required multiple blood transfusions.  The Boudreaux case was based on a failure to warn theory, where the plaintiff alleged that the manufacturers of the drug did not adequately warn him about the dangers and risks of Xarelto.  The defense of the case was based on the learned intermediary doctrine, which allows a drug manufacturer to warn a medical professional about the dangers of a drug rather than to the patient directly.

On June 12, 2017, the drug manufacturers won a second bellwether case based on the death of Sharyn Orr, who died after suffering from hemorrhaging in her brain after taking Xarelto.  Ms. Orr required surgery, but her doctor did not operate because Xarelto was still in her system; by the time she could have the surgery, it was too late, and Ms. Orr passed away.  The plaintiff’s lawyers alleged that the drug manufacturers not only failed to adequately warn Ms. Orr and her doctors, they also failed to create a monitoring plan and properly instruct doctors to conduct a blood test that would allow them to predict which patients are most susceptible to internal bleeding from taking Xarelto.

The Boudreaux and Orr cases are just two out of 40 or so “bellwether” trials (test trials that are conducted to help determine value where there are a heavy volume of similarly based cases, typically in multi district litigation) that are scheduled in the Xarelto multidistrict litigation.  Thus, there is still hope that plaintiffs will win some of the future Xarelto cases.  There are currently 18,000 or so Xarelto claims pending, and the results of the bellwether trials will help shape the future of the claims process.

Published on:

What Is Xarelto?

Xarelto is a prescription blood thinner that is prescribed to reduce blood clotting.  Unfortunately, Xarelto is also a potentially dangerous drug that has caused significant injuries to patients taking it.

How Does Xarelto Cause Injuries?

Published on:

What Is An IVC Filter?

IVC filters, which are manufactured by big medical device manufacturers such as Cook and Bard, have been known to cause significant injuries to patients because of safety issues with the IVC devices.  An IVC filter is a medical device in the shape of a cone with spider-like wire, that is implanted into the “inferior vena cava” (IVC). The IVC is the vein that transports deoxygenated blood from the lower/middle part of the body to the right atrium of the heart.  The IVC filter is implanted in order to prevent pulmonary embolisms from occurring; a pulmonary embolism is where the artery to your lungs is blocked (typically by a blood clot) and can cause shortness of breath, fainting, and even death.  The IVC filter is designed to catch blood clots trying to move to the heart and lungs.

How Do IVC Filters Cause Injuries?

Published on:

When it comes to personal injury claims in Georgia, determining the value of your case is complicated.  There is no set formula for valuing a case, but there are many factors that come into play.  Although the following list is not exhaustive, some of the factors that can determine how much your personal injury claim is worth are outlined below.

1.  Type of Injury/Damages

Personal injury claims in Georgia can vary from car accidents to medical malpractice to slip and falls.  The common theme, of course, is that you are injured because someone else acted negligently or carelessly.  The value of a case often hinges on just how badly you are hurt and how much your medical bills or lost wages are.  Injuries can range from a little whip lash to catastrophic injuries or even death.

Published on:

Do I Need an Attorney to Handle My Personal Injury Case?

If you are injured as a result of another person or company’s negligence, Georgia law allows you to recover compensation for your injuries.  Personal injury cases can vary drastically from a simple car accident to a complex products liability case against a medical device manufacturer.  Although generally, it is always much wiser to have any attorney represent you when you have any legal issue, the question of whether you need an attorney to handle your case depends on several factors, including:

•    The extent or seriousness of your injuries;

Published on:

Under Georgia law, owners of apartment complexes and other commercial properties owe a duty of care to tenants and visitors to keep the property safe from criminal activity. A property owner who knows that shootings, gang violence, drug activity, assaults, burglary and other dangerous crimes occur on its property is required to take the proper steps to secure the property for the safety of its tenants.

Thus, if you were injured during a crime that occurred in an unsafe apartment complex in the Hapeville or Atlanta area, you may have a claim against the owner of the apartment complex, especially if you or your neighbors complained about criminal activity, broken security gates, holes in fences, bad lighting or any type of issues with the building that could allow criminals to access the property.

If an apartment owner knows, whether through past similar incidents or through reports by tenants or frequent calls to the police, that unsafe crimes are occurring on the property, it should take actions such as:

Published on:

The pure volume of traffic in Atlanta makes multiple vehicle car accidents a common occurrence.  Multiple vehicle collisions often cause problems for making personal injury claims because the question of who is responsible is often disputed.

To make a personal injury claim under Georgia law, a claimant must show that s/he is not at fault, that the other driver’s negligence caused the accident, and the accident caused the claimant to suffer from injuries.  When there are more than 2 vehicles involved, negligence and fault can be difficult to prove, especially when insurance companies are quick to deny liability.

A classic example of a multiple vehicle collision is the domino effect rear end collision.  A vehicle rear ends the vehicle in front of it and then the vehicle in the back hits the middle vehicle.  In an everyday rear-end collision, the vehicle who rear-ends the car in front of it is usually at fault and is often cited for “following too closely.”  Add a third car, and it can complicate things because now there are more people to blame for the cause of the accident.  In theory, cars #2 and #3 were both following too closely, causing each of them to collide with the car in front of it.  And, if there are two impacts, the cause of the personal injury could be questioned:  was it the first impact or the second impact that caused the injuries?