Atlanta Car Accident Lawyer Blog

I'm sorry to defy expectations and side with the insurance company on this one, but I really really have to.

There is a piece in today's New York Times on the "woes" of passengers of US Airways Flight 1549. Flight 1549 was the jet that landed in the Hudson River just after taking off from New York's LaGuardia Airport last January. I have just read this article and have to tell someone how annoyed I am.

The article in question tells the story of a handful of passengers who have made claims against US Airways and have run into trouble getting what they want from the airline's insurer. You can read the article here:

A.I.G. Balks at Claims From Jet Ditching in Hudson

Let me first say this: I fully sympathize with all of the 155 passengers that were saved off Flight 1549. I am certain they were traumatized by the ordeal and will take the awful memories of that day with them to their grave.

But . . . they were saved. SAVED. By the US Airways crew. From certain death.

The New York Times article rubs me all the wrong ways. Take this excerpt for instance:

"When a homeowner has a burglary or a driver has a crash, all it normally takes is a call to the insurance company and a description of the loss to activate the policy. But aviation liability insurance is different. It is activated by a finding of negligence on the part of an airline. If there is no negligence, then arguably there is no liability, and no obligation to pay claims. "

Huh?! I'd like to know where the homeowner or auto insurance company is that steps right up to the pay plate as soon as they get a phone call reporting a loss. That is not how it works. Aviation insurance is different? Noooo . . . all insurance is pretty much the same. They get a report of a loss and they investigate. They investigate all sorts of things. It takes time. It takes money. It takes time. Oh, I said that.

I'm not one to defend insurers. I know they delay, draw out, and deflect. But there is not one shred of evidence adduced or even alluded to in this piece that the airline did anything wrong. Instead there is an unstated assumption that if a person is hurt (or their stuff is damaged/lost) while on a plane that crashes they should automatically get compensated. I disagree fundamentally.

Our legal system is not a welfare state. Nor is it a lottery. It is founded on principles of fairness and equity. Do we want people who suffer losses in a crash to be compensated? Yes, if it is fair and equitable. Forcing an airline who arguably met their duty to care for passengers to pay for events beyond everyone's control - is that fair or equitable? No - that's extortion.

Now, perhaps evidence will come to light that the airline did something wrong and does bear some fault for the crash. I am not privy to the intimate details of the incident. But I object to the unstated assumption present in this article that damaged people always deserve compensation. No, no and no! That is wrong on so many levels.

Listen to what one of the passengers has to say about why she deserves compensation:

“Why should we be paying out of pocket?” she said. “That’s why they’re there. They’re the insurer.”

Actually no. A casualty/liability insurer is there to pay losses for which their policyholder is legally liable. They are not there as the payor of last resort (or first resort). They are not your health insurer. They ain't your daddy. Why should you be paying out of pocket? I dunno - maybe because they are your bills?

I'm sorry and I maybe I shouldn't be sarcastic - but the entitlement mentality galls me. Hey - listen, life is hard. It is full of accidents, small and gigantic. Sometimes we get hurt. We all feel bad when someone gets hurt. If someone hurt you and they are to blame - by all means they should compensate you. But the mere fact that you got hurt doesn't entitle you to compensation. Where is the gratitude that you are still alive and that it wasn't worse?

Anyway - read the article for yourself and reach your own conclusions. Maybe I just got up on the wrong side of the bed today.

Attorney Peter Pearson is an Atlanta personal injury attorney who has extensive experience representing injury victims in soft tissue/connective tissue injury, Bulging/Ruptured/Herniated Disc/Pinched Nerve injury, and Broken Bone and Fracture injury cases. Attorney Pearson offers a free initial consultation to all prospective clients. Contact him by using this Contact Form or calling his Atlanta personal injury law firm at (404) 292-5225.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Aviation Accidents

Bookmark:

What do you get when you combine long delays on an airplane with passengers who are served drink after drink? Drunken chaos. Read these excerpts from an actual lawsuit we handled involving just that set of facts.

IN THE STATE COURT OF FULTON COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX Plaintiff,

v.

AIRTRAN AIRWAYS, INC.

Defendant.
__________________________________________________________

COMPLAINT FOR INJURIES AND DAMAGES
__________________________________________________________

COMES NOW Plaintiff in the above-styled action, and shows unto this Court the following:

PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

1.
Plaintiff is a resident of the State of Kansas, and resides at 237 Quail Run, Airfax, KS 72455.

2.
Defendant Airtran Airways, Inc. is a foreign profit corporation, which is, and was at all times referenced within this Complaint, licensed to do business in the State of Georgia, and doing business in the State of Georgia.

3.
Defendant may be served with process by and through its registered agent, C.T. Corporation, 1201 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia 30361, and may be served at that address.

4.
Defendant is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court.

5.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Defendant AirTran Airways, Inc.

6.
Venue is proper as to Defendant.

FACTS AND LIABILITY OF DEFENDANT

7.
On or about 7/17/2008, the Plaintiff was a passenger on AirTran Flight 937 departing from Washington D.C. to Atlanta, Georgia.

8.
On that date, AirTran Flight 937 was delayed some 5 hours.

9.
During the delayed flight, AirTran personnel served excessive
amounts of alcohol to restless passengers.

10.
After AirTran Flight 937 belatedly arrived in Atlanta, AirTran personnel urged passengers to quickly exit the plane in order to make their connecting flights.

11.
At said time and place, Plaintiff attempted to exit the plane as directed and was knocked down and trampled in the rush caused by AirTran’s service of excessive amounts of alcohol and directions to quickly exit the plane.

12.
As a result of this incident, the Plaintiff suffered severe pain and injuries.

13.
AirTran Airways, Inc., as a carrier of passengers, is bound under Georgia law to exercise the highest degree of care, foresight, prudence and extraordinary diligence to protect the lives and persons of its passengers.

14.
Defendant failed to meet its duty to the Plaintiff and said negligence was the proximate cause of his injuries.

15.
All of Plaintiff's injuries and damages were proximately caused by the negligence of Defendant.

DAMAGES
16.
Plaintiff claims general damages from Defendant, so as to compensate Plaintiff for all pain and suffering, injuries, and mental and emotional suffering resulting from the incident complained of, past, present, and future.

17.
Plaintiff claims special damages for medical expenses, past and future, for medical treatment and attention which has been required and will be required in the future as a result of the incident complained of, and additionally, claims lost wages, past and future, in such an amount as shall be proven at trial.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following:

(a) That summons issue requiring the Defendant to appear as provided by law to answer each and every allegation in this instant Complaint;

(b) That Plaintiff have and recover general damages from such Defendant, as the jury deems are liable to Plaintiff, and in such an amount as the jury deems just and appropriate to fully and completely compensate Plaintiff for all of his injuries and pain and suffering, mental, physical, and emotional, past, present, and future;

(c) That Plaintiff have and recover from Defendant, special damages for past and future medical expenses and loss of income in the past and future in such an amount as shall be proven at trial;

(d) That this matter be tried to a jury;

(e) That all costs be cast against the Defendants;

(f) For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and appropriate.

This the _____________ day of ______________________ 2009.

DUPEE & PEARSON, L.L.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiff

________________________
DAVID D. DUPEE
Georgia Bar #: XXXXXX
PETER J. PEARSON
Georgia Bar #: XXXXXX

DUPEE & PEARSON. L.L.C.
P.O. BOX 450642
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 31145
404-292-5225

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Aviation Accidents

Bookmark:

Earlier this week I blogged about Judge Craig Schwall, a Fulton Superior Court judge who has been nominated for promotion to the Georgia Supreme Court. Here is the conclusion of my thoughts on the matter.

Consider this comment from an attorney who was involved in one case I mentioned in my last post - the case where Judge Schwall banned a doctor from testifying for life:

" . . . there is such a thing as judicial temperament. It assures the public that a judge is making rational decisions instead of just spouting off unsupported views to degrade people who cannot defend themselves. Unfortunately this judge does not have it and he never will."

Saying "he never will" develop judicial temperament is a little strong for my taste. I for one hope very much that we will see a change for the better in Judge Schwall. No one is beyond redemption, no one beyond the reach of grace.

But I think it would be wiser to give Judge Schwall some time off the bench so he can work on developing the necessary attributes and temperament rather than promoting him to higher office.

I have seen Judge Schwall in action and can personally attest to his demeanor on the bench.

I had a wrongful death case in his courtroom when he was on the State Court bench. I went in to defend a motion to dismiss my client's case and Judge Schwall let the other side make their argument but did not permit me to make my argument. When it came time for our oral argument he turned into devil's advocate and I didn't get to present our response. He gave every impression of having no intention of giving us a fair hearing.

We dismissed that case and re-filed in Superior Court to get a judge who would listen. This caused much delay and unneccesary additional court costs for my clients.

Interestingly, Judge Schwall's office somehow didn't have a record of our dismissal and months after we dismissed and re-filed in a different court we got an Order from him granting the defendant's motion to dismiss the case. His Order was moot at that point, thank God!

Here is the rub - the case went on to settle for close to half a million dollars! The case had merit (Judge Schwall said it did not). The case had value (Judge Schwall said it had none). The clients deserved their day in court (Judge Schwall tried to deny them that).

That experience with Judge Schwall is the worst I've ever had with a judge becoming an advocate for one side.

I hope others have better things to report about Judge Schwall, I truly do. But I can not support his candidacy and am constrained to oppose it.

Attorney Peter Pearson is an Atlanta personal injury attorney who has extensive experience representing injury victims in soft tissue/connective tissue injury, Bulging/Ruptured/Herniated Disc/Pinched Nerve injury, and Broken Bone and Fracture injury cases. Attorney Pearson offers a free initial consultation to all prospective clients. Contact him by using this Contact Form or calling his Atlanta personal injury law firm at (404) 292-5225.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Georgia Judiciary

Bookmark:

The Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct, which governs conduct of judges in the State of Georgia and is binding on them, contains the following statements:

"Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us." (From the Preamble).

"An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society." (From Canon 1)

"Judges shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary." (From Canon 2).

"Judges shall perform the duties of their office impartially and diligently." (From Canon 3)

Fairness. Honor. Impartiality. These are more than aspirational goals - they are non-negotiable attributes that must be present in a judge or he is not qualified to sit on the bench.

Judge Craig Schwall has been nominated to fill the vacancy created by Justice Leah Ward Sears on the Georgia Supreme Court. The vacancy will be filled by the appointment of Governor Sonny Purdue sometime soon.

I oppose Judge Schwall's appointment to the highest court in Georgia.

I believe that Judge Schwall's track record on the bench reveals an egregious lack of fairness, honor, and impartiality. I do not believe the man is qualified to hold higher office.

Why would I publicly oppose Judge Schwall?

Judge Schwall has been publicly rebuked by the Georgia Supreme Court (the very court he may be appointed to) for "violating rules of judicial conduct" when he stepped out of his role as impartial judge and "into that of an advocate."

Fulton Judge Rebuked By Georgia Supreme Court

Less than a year later the Georgia Supreme Court rebuked Judge Schwall again, this time for his failure to follow basic procedure.

Georgia Supreme Court takes Judge Schwall To Woodshed Again, Saying Judge Had Rushed To Judgment

Another case where Judge Schwall apparently stepped out of his role as impartial judge and into that of an advocate involved MARTA. The Judge blocked MARTA from defending itself and told the jury to simply decide how much MARTA should pay a woman who had been kidnapped from a MARTA parking garage and raped elsewhere.

Woman Who Sued MARTA Over Rape Awarded 1.7 Million

Here is more evidence of Judge Schwall's decision-making style, an instance in which the Judge bans a doctor from testifying in his court for life for making changes to his earlier testimony, changes that were explicitly contemplated by legislation passed by the Georgia Assembly (if this isn't an instance of brazen judicial activism, what is?).

Judge Bans Physician For Life

In my opinion Judge Schwall also lacks judicial temperament - this lack is evident in comments he has made publicly and privately about persons appearing in and out of his courtroom.

In the following piece the writer suggests that Judge Schwall's style might be better suited to reality TV than a courtroom setting. The writer comments on one disturbing aspect of Judge Schwall's style: railing at uneducated, low-income, mostly minority persons who come before a white, upper class judge.

The Non-Existent Child-Molester Lobby

And here is a video of Judge Schwall railing at a non-party in the referenced child molestation case. While I would agree that the mother of the victims in this case behaved in a reprehensible manner, it is not appropriate for a judge to publicly excoriating a sexual assault victim's mother. A judge needs to keep his focus! Show some self-control! You don't need to say everything you feel! You are supposed to apply the law not preach at people you find distasteful! In short, demonstrate judicial restraint and temperament.

On another occasion Judge Schwall sent an e-mail to other members of the Fulton bench describing another judge as a "fool" and an "embarrassment."

Ga. Judge Blasts Judge in Courthouse Murder Case as a 'Fool' and 'Embarrassment'

Attorney Peter Pearson is an Atlanta personal injury attorney who has represents injury victims in burn injury, scarring injury, and spinal cord injury cases. Attorney Pearson offers a free initial consultation to all prospective clients. Contact him by using this Contact Form or calling his Atlanta personal injury law firm at (404) 292-5225.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Georgia Judiciary

Bookmark:

On Wednesday, in Atlanta Auto Accident Victims Should Not Give A Recorded Statement To Any Insurance Company - They Will Use It to Impeach You Later, I blogged about one reason not to agree to allow an insurance company to record your version of how an accident occurred or what injuries you sustained.

Another reason to say "No" when an insurance company asks you if you will let them record your version of the incident (or write it down for them) is that invariably these requests are used to "box" you in. If you leave out an important detail or forget one of your symptoms you have a problem. Try to go back later and correct the mistake and the insurance company will very likely tell you that since you did not mention that detail the first time around they aren't sure it is accurate.

The best strategy is to keep your options open. I suggest that you agree to speak on the phone with the insurance company on a date in the future on the condition that it not be recorded or transcribed in any form or fashion. Tell the insurance company that as soon as you receive a letter confirming they agree to that term you will call them and tell them what they need to know. This approach allows you to help the insurance company to gather the information they need in order to process your claim while protecting you.

By the way - this advice applies to your own insurance company. Don't think that because you are talking to your own company you can let your guard down. I had a case years ago where my client allowed his own company to take a recorded statement. What he did not know was that his company would later provide a copy of his statement to the opposing insurance company! Ouch!

Here is a final tip: don't just go along with what the insurance company says you need to do. Insurance adjusters are very good at making people feel like things must be done the way the insurance company wants them done. Adjusters can be manipulative. They are not on your side no matter how nice they talk on the phone. So be cautious. Be slow to agree to anything. Be wise!

Please call me if you have questions about this or any injury related topic. I am Atlanta Attorney Peter Pearson and my passion is to help people who have been injured.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accidents , Georgia Automobile Insurance

Bookmark:

Georgia car accident victims should not let an insurance company record them over the phone or in person. It is also unwise to give an insurance company a written statement of any kind, including filling out a form provided by an insurance company that asks you to summarize how the accident happened or how you were injured.

Why do I give this advice?

No matter how "open and shut" your claim seems to you at this time simpler cases have ended up going to trial. And if you ever find yourself in a courtroom testifying any earlier statements given by you could be used against you.

If your trial testimony is identical with what you said in your earlier statement there might be no problem. The problem is that no one tells a story the same way twice. We all make little changes. Those little changes can be used by a defense attorney to make you look like a liar.

Please trust me on this. If I had a nickel for every client who was convinced they would never contradict earlier testimony at trial and then contradicted themselves all over the place - I'd be a wealthy man.

Defense attorneys are experts at making mountains out of mole hills. They study your medical records and statements given by you for inconsistencies and they turn mole hills into mountains. They are experts at destroying your credibility using your own words. So use as few words as you can! Avoid giving the defense ammunition to use against you.

More on this topic next time I blog.

Attorney Peter Pearson is an Atlanta personal injury attorney who has extensive experience representing injury victims in soft tissue/connective tissue injury, Bulging/Ruptured/Herniated Disc/Pinched Nerve injury, and Broken Bone and Fracture injury cases. Attorney Pearson offers a free initial consultation to all prospective clients. Contact him by using this Contact Form or calling his Atlanta personal injury law firm at (404) 292-5225.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accidents , Georgia Automobile Insurance

Bookmark:

Georgia drivers who carry Medical Payments Insurance on their automobile insurance policy should inform their company by phone AND in writing as soon as possible after an accidental injury occurs. Failure to notify your company promptly can result in the loss of any rights and benefits you would otherwise have been entitled to under the terms of your insurance contract.

The best practice is to notify your insurance company by certified mail. That way there can be no dispute later about whether you notified them in a timely manner. Keep that certified receipt in a safe place - it is your only proof!

When you first contact your insurance company to report an injury they will gather information from you about how the injury happened, what parts of your body were effected, what doctors you are seeing, whether you are missing time from work, etc . . . so be prepared to answer those types of questions when you call.

BEWARE! It is common for the insurance company to ask your permission to RECORD your conversation. Under no circumstances should you consent. Recorded statements, as they are called, can be disastrous for your claim and there is simply no requirement that you consent to give one. Offer to give all the details over the phone about your injury but clarify that no recording will be made.

You should tell your insurance company that you would like to use your medical payments coverage in the first conversation you have with them after the injury.

Of course I am assuming you purchased medical payments coverage at the time you bought your policy (or added it later). If you did not then the advice in this post is not going to be very pertinent for you. If you are reading this and do not know if you have medical payments coverage - please check now! And if you do not currently have this type of coverage, please add it! Yes, even if you have health insurance!!

Once you notify your insurance company that you want to use your medical payments coverage you should receive a letter in the mail that may include an "application for benefits" or similarly titled document. This is the way some insurers collect information regarding your injuries so they can begin obtaining and processing your bills. Often they will also ask you to sign a "medical authorization" in order for them to obtain copies of your accident related doctor's bills.

Your insurance company should assign a "claims adjuster" to you who is responsible for collecting, reviewing, and paying your doctor's bills. That adjuster should be able to give you an idea how long the process will take - it varies from company to company and case to case.

This has been a very general overview of how to go about filing a medical payments claim following a car accident in the State of Georgia. There are many other details that could come up on a given claim. If you find the information in this post helpful but not complete in addressing your questions, please e-mail me and I will do my best to respond if I think I can help you.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accidents , Georgia Automobile Insurance , Medical Payments Coverage

Bookmark:

When you are injured in a Georgia automobile accident and incur medical bills you need a way to get them paid! One little known fact is that if you wait for the at-fault driver's insurance company to pay your medical bills you may well end up in debt collections.

Why won't the at-fault driver's insurance pay your medical bills? The at-fault driver is to blame - why wouldn't their insurance company pay?

The answer has to do with the timing and nature of settlements in personal injury claims. Keep in mind that the insurance company is going to focus on one thing: maneuvering the claim so that they can get the injured person's agreement to accept a settlement. The insurance company has no obligation to take care of your finances and no duty to pay your medical bills when they come due. Their obligation is to their customer (the person who hurt you) and they do this by settling claims.

Generally an insurance company will refuse to pay any of your bills until you agree to a lump sump settlement on all your claims. An injury claim is made up of at least three components - your medical bills, your loss of earnings, and your human factor damages (pain and suffering). They generally view a lump sum settlement as the optimal way to encourage injured persons to settle.

An injured person will often have medical bills coming due long before they are ready to settle their case. This creates a need to find some source other than the at-fault driver's insurance company to pay the bills in a timely manner.

One source used by many of my clients is MPC (also known as medical payments coverage or simply "medpay"). MPC is insurance you purchase when you buy an automobile policy that pays your medical bills up to a designated limit. You can purchase MPC insurance in increments. Typically it is offered by insurance companies in the following increments: $1,000, $2,000, $5,000, $10,000, $25,000, $50,000 and $100,000.

Filing a MPC claim can relieve a lot of financial stress! Your bills get paid and you no longer have to feel any pressure from the at-fault driver's insurance company to settle your claim prematurely just to get out from under medical debt.

So have I convinced you to file a MPC claim? Next time I will go over the mechanics of filing such a claim.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accidents , Georgia Automobile Insurance , Medical Payments Coverage

Bookmark:

Atlanta car accident clients (and others from elsewhere in Georgia) sometimes feel it is unfair that they should have to use their own insurance to pay doctor's bills after being injured in a car accident. They did nothing wrong - why should they have to use their insurance at all?

It is an understandable sentiment. It does seem unjust. Shouldn't the other driver's insurance company pay for EVERYTHING?

In an ideal world the at-fault driver's insurance company WOULD pay for everything. But insurance companies do all they can to avoid paying full value for injury claims. You need all the help you can get to see that your bills get paid and there is something left over to compensate you for your loss of earnings and human losses.

Using your medical payments coverage increases your ultimate recovery. An example may clarify how.

Consider a personal injury claim with doctor bills of $4,500, a settlement of $9,000, and attorney's fee of one third, or $3,000. Without medical payments, your insurance pays none of the bills, so you pay $4,500 to the doctor, $3,000 to the attorney, and are left with $1,500.

With medical payments, your insurance pays the doctor the full amount of $4,500, your attorney gets $3,000, and you get to keep $6,000. This is the way medical payments coverage is supposed to work.

The difference in how much a client receives is significant!

More to come soon on this topic.

Attorney Peter Pearson is an Atlanta personal injury attorney who has extensive experience representing injury victims in soft tissue/connective tissue injury, Bulging/Ruptured/Herniated Disc/Pinched Nerve injury, and Broken Bone and Fracture injury cases. Attorney Pearson offers a free initial consultation to all prospective clients. Contact him by using this Contact Form or calling his Atlanta personal injury law firm at (404) 292-5225.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accidents , Georgia Automobile Insurance , Medical Payments Coverage

Bookmark:

This post is the 4th in a series that began with GEORGIA DOG BITE LAW - Part I and continued with GEORGIA DOG BITE LAW - Part II and GEORGIA DOG BITE LAW - Part III

I told you in my first and second posts that the traditional rule in Georgia was the "first bite rule" and that rule was often viewed as a "one free bite" rule. I have also discussed how that rule has changed over recent decades.

One rationale behind the traditional "one free bite" rule was that the owner of a dog should not be blamed for an unforeseen and unforeseeable act of an animal. Proof of prior knowledge of the dog's "vicious propensity" should be required before holding an owner responsible for injuries caused by the animal.

Recent court decisions, while upholding the rationale behind the traditional Georgia rule, have moved toward softening the application of it. Recent decisions have tended to replace the traditional rule with a new rule that places a duty on the owner to take "reasonable steps" to protect the public from a dog if the owner has "superior knowledge" of the dog's vicious tendency even if the dog has never bitten in the past.

These recent court decision have focused less on requiring the injury victim to prove a prior similar incident or attack and more on the owner's knowledge of the dog's aggressive temperament. Thus in recent years we have seen a relaxing of the traditional requirement that the injured person prove a prior similar incident.

Another avenue injured persons have used to hold an owner liable for injuries caused by a dog is a legal theory called "negligent undertaking." The reasoning behind this theory is that if an owner voluntarily agrees to restrain a dog and then fails to do so properly and an injury results, the owner can be held liable even if there is no evidence of "vicious propensity or a violation of the "leash law."

Dog bite cases are very fact specific - by which I mean the outcome depends a great deal on many factors that are discovered as the case moves forward. The cases that interpret Georgia's dog liability statute can be difficult to apply to a given set of facts.

If you have read this series of posts and still have questions I hope you will contact me. I will do my best to be of assistance.

Attorney Peter Pearson is an Atlanta personal injury attorney who helps injury victims in loss of limb, loss of sight, and loss of hearing cases. Attorney Pearson offers a free initial consultation to all prospective clients. Contact him by using this Contact Form or calling his Atlanta personal injury law firm at (404) 292-5225.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Injury , Dog Bites , Georgia Legislation

Bookmark:

This post is the 3rd in a series that began with GEORGIA DOG BITE LAW - Part I and continued with GEORGIA DOG BITE LAW - Part II.

Happily, Georgia dog bite law has grown more favorable to injury victims over the last few decades.

In 1985 the Georgia General Assembly (our state legislature) amended the dog liability statute to include the following provision:

"In proving vicious propensity, it shall be sufficient to show that the animal was required to be at heel or on a leash by an ordinance of a city, county, or consolidated government, and the said animal was at the time of the occurrence not at heel or on a leash."

The 1985 amendment relaxed the traditional Georgia rule that the owner or keeper of a dog had to have knowledge of the dog's vicious propensity. It did not do away with that requirement altogether, however. It carved out an exception to it. The law since 1985 has been that if the injured person can show that the owner or keeper committed a violation of an applicable "leash law" than no actual knowledge of vicious propensity is required. Vicious propensity is inferred if the owner/keeper violates the leash law.

Subsequent appellate cases have interpreted the 1985 amendment to apply not only to "leash laws" but also restrictive ordinances that require an owner to keep a dog confined to the property.

The bottom line change with the 1985 amendment? If you or someone you love has been bitten by a dog and you suspect the owner of keeper of that dog has been violating a "leash law" research the owner/keeper's local leash laws. You should check city and city ordinances to see if (a) a "leash law" was in effect and (b) what the law requires owners/keepers of dogs to do.

I will finish up this series of posts on Georgia dog liability law next time.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Injury , Dog Bites , Georgia Legislation

Bookmark:

Attorney Peter Pearson is an Atlanta personal injury attorney who represents injury victims in dog bite, scarring injury, and spinal cord injury cases. Attorney Pearson offers a free initial consultation to all prospective clients. Contact him by using this Contact Form or calling his Atlanta personal injury law firm at (404) 292-5225.

This post builds on my previous post GEORGIA DOG BITE LAW - Part I.

Georgia's historic "first bite rule" didn't mean quite what it sounds like. Though it may sound as if a dog had to have actually bitten a person in the past in order for an owner or keeper to be liable for injuries, that is not how the rule worked. What an injured person had to prove was that the animal had demonstrated a propensity to do the particular act that caused their injury.

The prior incident did not have to involve identical acts as the acts that led to the later injury. But there did have to be evidence of vicious propensity and the evidence that was required was a prior incident or incidents which would put a prudent man on notice to anticipate the event which occurred (the later injury).

Interestingly, if a dog is part wolf or other wild animal, there is a different rule. In this instance there is legal authority for holding the owner or keeper strictly liable - which means the owner/keeper is responsible regardless of the animal's past history.

Another interesting tidbit is that since a cat is a domestic animal, cat bites or attacks are governed by the same set of rules as a dog.

Back to discussing dogs! An owner or keeper is not liable if the dog has bitten or attacked a person in the past but that bite or attack was provoked by teasing or other actions that incited the dog to attack.

Next time I post I will get into the relaxing of the traditional "one free bite" rule both by amendment to the Georgia dog liability statute and case law developments over the last several decades.

Posted by Peter J. Pearson | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Injury , Dog Bites , Georgia Legislation

Bookmark: