Atlanta Injury Attorney Blog

Royalston v. Middlebrooks (A10A0314) - Auto Accident

At 7:00 a.m. on July 28, 2005, John S. Royalston, who was driving a truck for the Georgia Sandwich Company, Inc. (GSC), struck Collie Middlebrooks's pickup truck. Middlebrooks suffered severe and permanent injuries as a result of the accident and brought a personal injury action against Royalston and GSC.

An eyewitness testified that Royalston was "speeding" and "repeatedly changed lanes and passed vehicles." Additionally, a traffic accident reconstructionist testified that based on his investigation, Royalston could have avoided the collision if he had been driving the speed limit or paying attention. Royalston testified that he had two speeding tickets on his record when he was hired by GSC and that he had received six additional speeding tickets between the time he was hired by GSC and the time of the accident. The evidence showed that GSC had knowledge of Royalston's driving habits.

The jury awarded Middlebrooks $3.06M in compensatory damages, $1M in punitive damages, and $621.78K in attorneys' fees. In May 2010, the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment against Royalston and GSC and held that the damages were not unreasonable.

Georgia corporations can be held responsible for their negligent decisions to hire and retain reckless drivers.

If you've been injured in an auto accident, contact the Delius Law Firm at 404-352-3400 today.

Judge James V. Selna of Santa Ana, California has hand-picked twenty-six attorneys to lead the nationwide litigation against Toyota Motor Corp. Toyota has recalled more than eight million of its vehicles due to sudden and uncontrolled acceleration. The litigation against Toyota includes 200 lawsuits. Most of the lawsuits seek economic damages for consumer classes whose recalled vehicles have lost value, the rest are personal injury claims on behalf of individuals who were injured or died when their cars accelerated out of control.

Judge Selna appointed twenty-two plaintiffs' lawyers and four defense lawyers for Toyota. Most of the attorneys have worked together in the past and all have handled complex litigation. Many of the attorneys were involved in the massive tobacco litigation in the 1990s and lead the litigation over recalled painkillers Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra. Others spearheaded the litigation against Ford and Firestone over recalled tires linked to Ford Explorer accidents. A few of the attorneys were picked for their expertise in handling airplane and train crash litigation.

All of the appointed attorneys are "familiar with the difficult terrain of personal injury cases," particularly those involving automobiles. Toyota's two lawyers who will be defending the economic loss claims come from Atlanta.

The outcome of the litigation will determine Toyota's liability and serve as a guide for future lawsuits against the auto-maker.

Chrysler has announced that it will begin a recall of almost 600,000 minivans and Jeep Wranglers later this month. About 289,000 Jeep Wranglers manufactured in 2006-2010 will be recalled due to a potential brake fluid leak. Additionally, about 285,000 Dodge Grand Caravan and Chrysler Town & Country minivans, from 2008 and 2009, will be recalled due to a wiring problem that can cause a fire inside the sliding doors.

Chrysler will notify owners and dealers about the repairs and will repair the vehicles free of charge. Although no injuries or deaths have occurred yet, Chrysler seems eager to avoid the liability Toyota faces for its malfunctioning automobile parts.

Flores v. Exprezit! Stores 98-Ga. LLC (A10A0703)

Billy Joe Grundell lost control of his car, drove it across the median, and collided head-on with a van, killing six people and seriously injuring three. Grundell's blood alcohol level proved he was intoxicated at the time of the accident. Four hours prior to the collision, an Exprezit convenience store employee sold packaged beer to Grundell. Grundell was noticeably intoxicated at the time and the employee knew he would be driving a car soon.

The Georgia Dram Shop Act (GDSA) provides that "when a person sells alcoholic beverages to a noticeably intoxicated buyer, who the seller knows will soon be driving a motor vehicle, the seller may be liable for resulting injury or damage when the buyer drives while intoxicated from consumption of those alcoholic beverages." Liability will be imposed upon an alcohol supplier when the alcohol is supplied for legal consumption on the supplier's premises. In this case, however, the alcohol sold by Exprezit was not intended to be consumed on the store premises. In fact, it was illegal for Grundell to consume the alcohol on the store's premises or in his vehicle.

The court held Exprezit was not liable for the accident because the alcohol was not supplied for consumption on Exprezit's premises. Furthermore, the GDSA did not require that before selling the beer, the Exprezit employee investigate when and where Grundell would drink the beer. Exprezit did not have a duty to determine whether Grundell would drink the alcohol before driving.

The GDSA imposes liability on alcohol suppliers for serving intoxicated individuals who they know will be driving, but limits that liability to suppliers who sell for purposes of direct consumption on their property.

Call the Delius Law Firm for help with your Georgia Dram Shop case at 404-352-3400.

From Atlanta Car Accident Attorney Scott Delius.

With the announcement of increased recalls on Toyota vehicles, including the recent Prius recall, many Atlanta drivers have expressed that they do not feel safe driving on the road with the potentially dangerous vehicles. Recently, a DeKalb Country woman drove her Toyota Camry into her neighbor's home after she claimed that she could not stop the vehicle. With the growing number of incidents and the rising fear amongst drivers, many feel that the roads are not the place for the potentially out of control cars. Some drivers have even gone to the extreme that they will try to avoid Toyotas when they seem them on the roads. As one driver states, "I go around them, bob and weave in and out of traffic. If I see a Toyota, I keep it moving, I try to get away from them," said driver Florida Jay.
Although this sentiment is in no way representative of the general feeling amongst drivers, it does show that the concern for these vehicles' safety isn't restricted to only those who drive a Toyota. Of course, erratic driving by others to avoid Toyotas is very dangerous. Although these drivers may feel they are making a safer decision, their own driving patterns make them more of a danger to those around them than the Toyota that has slim chances of actually being faulty.
Many Toyota drivers do not feel too much concern regarding the recalls. Many say that it has been made clear as to how to stop the vehicle should it be defected. Some drivers feel that the recalls have been overblown and still claim that they feel safe in their vehicle.

By Atlanta car accident lawyer Scott Delius.

A Clayton County, Georgia State Court jury returned a verdict of $17, 716,401 for a passenger injured in a Ford Explorer accident. The passenger was seated in the middle seat, which only had a lap belt. When the Explorer was struck head on the passenger's head was driven into the back of the front seat, paralyzing her.

The Plaintiff alleged that Ford was negligent in deciding to install a lap belt instead of the customary three point seatbelt with a shoulder restraint. She also alleged that the rear seat was too close to the front seat.

The jury found that Ford was also liable for punitive damages, but the parties reached a confidential settlement during punitive damages deliberations

If time permits, we will do our best to settle your Georgia auto accident case for a fair amount with the other driver's auto insurance company. However, if there is not enough time to settle the case, or the settlement offer is not enough, then we may have to file a lawsuit against the other driver.

Clients are sometimes under the impression that we actually sue the other driver's insurance company. That is usually not the case. Normally, we have to sue the other driver personally, and then their insurance company hires a lawyer to defend them. If you have been involved in a car wreck in Georgia with a commercial vehicle or if you have been in a tractor trailer accident or truck accident, then we would sue the driver and the company that they worked for at the time of the wreck.

The lawyer for the insurance company will file what is called an "Answer" in response to the car wreck lawsuit. The Answer has the other driver's responses to each element of the lawsuit. The other driver will either admit or deny liability and usually will dispute the kind of injuries that you suffered in the auto wreck. How does the other driver know about your injuries? They don't. However, they do so just so they can reserve that defense if they need it later.

Even though we sue the other driver personally, his or her car insurance company dictates or "calls the shots" for them during the litigation. In other words, the car insurance company decides whether to fight the case, to settle or to take the case to trial. The other driver doesn't really have much input. The car insurance adjuster tells the other driver's lawyer what to do, even though the other driver is really the lawyer's client.

After the Defendant is served with the lawsuit, they file an "Answer" to the lawsuit. After the Answer to a lawsuit is filed, the parties to a car wreck case start a process called "discovery." During discovery, the parties exchange non-privileged information about the case. Typically we will give the other side all of the medical bills and medical records related to your auto accident. Often times the insurance company will ask for all of your medical records even before the accident to determine whether you have any pre-existing injuries. We deal with those kinds of requests on a case by case basis.

During discovery, you will most likely have to attend your deposition. A deposition is where the insurance company lawyer comes to our office to ask you questions about the car accident under oath. Mr. Delius will be there to represent you and object if there are any improper questions. A court reporter will also be present to write down everything that is said. Mr. Delius will prepare you thoroughly for your deposition so that you know what to expect.

Typical deposition questions involve your work history, your health history and detailed questioning regarding the car wreck. You will be required to tell how the accident happened. Was it a rear end wreck? Did another vehicle cross the center line and hit you? Was the other driver speeding or driving recklessly before the accident? What were the road conditions like? Was it raining right before or during the auto accident? Did the other driver receive a ticket? Was the other driver drunk or driving under the influence before the wreck? What did the investigating police officer say after the accident? These are some questions that you can expect to encounter during your auto accident deposition.

The Georgia courts are very busy. Although the discovery period is only supposed to last for six months in Georgia, it can take up to a year or more for your case to reach a jury trial. We have tried many cases all over the State of Georgia, in metro Atlanta counties like Fulton, DeKalb, Gwinnett, Cobb, Clayton, Douglas and Henry. We have also tried cases in other corners of the state, such as Rabun, Lowndes, Hall, Whitfield, and Bibb. No matter whether your car wreck happened in Atlanta, Augusta, Albany, Columbus, Macon, Gainesville, Savannah or Valdosta, we can handle it.

So what happens during a car accident trial? No matter where the case is being tried, we almost always ask for a jury to decide whether to award compensation and how much compensation to award a car wreck victim. We usually spend a day "striking" a jury. This is a process by which the jury members are selected. The lawyers actually "strike" or eliminate people within the jury pool. Once each side has used up its strikes, we are left with a jury of twelve and maybe a couple of alternates. These jurors will hear your car accident case.

During an automobile accident trial, both sides call witnesses and cross examine each other's witnesses. After all the evidence has been given to the jury, they decide the case. They decide whether the other party is at fault, and if so, how much compensation they should be ordered to pay the car wreck victim.

This brings up an interesting and little known fact. The jury never gets to hear about the other driver's insurance company, or how much liability insurance coverage the other driver has. In fact, the word "insurance" is never mentioned during a car accident jury trial. If it is, a mistrial is usually declared and the process must start all over again.

Why is the word "insurance" never spoken during a car crash trial? Because the law says that a jury must consider each party as individuals, and if the jury knew that one individual has insurance coverage, the jury might be more inclined to punish them if the jury knows they have coverage. So the jury never gets to hear whether the responsible driver has insurance or how much liability insurance they have.

Once the jury has made its decision, it will announce its verdict. This is the end of the case unless one of the parties decides to appeal, which involves another long process which we will discuss in another article.

If you have questions about your car accident injuries or Georgia car accident litigation, please call the Delius Law Firm today. We look forward to helping you.

"Dram shop" is the legal name for a bar or a place that serves alcohol. Georgia's Dram Shop law says that a person "who knowingly sells, furnishes, or serves alcoholic beverages to a person who is in a state of noticeable intoxication, knowing that such person will soon be driving a motor vehicle, may become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such . . . person when the sale, furnishing, or serving is the proximate cause of such injury or damage."
O.C.G.A. § 51-1-40(b).

Georgia's Dram Shop law applies not only to commercial establishments, but also to private citizens. The bottom line is that no person should serve alcohol to someone who is noticeably intoxicated. If they do, they could face civil liability. This often happens in the form of a drunk driving accident.

Please contact us if you have been injured in a drunk driving accident in Atlanta or a drunk driving accident in Georgia.