For over three decades I have personally handled truck accident cases throughout Texas. Truck accident cases are much more complex than auto accidents and require specialized knowledge and experience. Perhaps the complexity of these cases is why many attorneys who advertise for tractor-trailer accidents cases actually refer them to an experienced firm like ours.

The convergence of a number of major highways in the Tyler area coupled with it being an East Texas regional shopping and business center results in a large number of commercial and private vehicles coming together often with disastrous results.

Trucking companies and drivers are regulated by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Drivers' hours of service are strictly regulated. There are numerous equipment regulations regarding 18-wheelers. These accidents often involve catastrophic injuries and complicated accident reconstructions. Only an attorney who is experienced in these areas can effectively represent you when you have been involved in an accident with one of these tractor-trailer rigs.

Accidents involving tankers oftentimes focus on the total weight combination. A tractor pulling a tank trailer is subject to maximum legal weight limitations. East Texas oilfield trucking companies that use tank trucks often calculate weights using the weight of water which is less dense and weighs less than many other liquids. An attorney handling a tanker accident must be knowledgeable regarding the physics and dynamics that are unique to tank trucks.

Trucking companies have learned that drivers who are paid a salary tend to drive slower than those who are paid by the mile. Thus most companies pay their drivers by the mile. The obvious result is that the faster a truck is going the more the driver is earning. Unfortunately, speed also increases the number and severity of accidents. Companies also dispatch their drivers with delivery deadlines that are impossible to meet unless the truck driver substantially exceeds the speed limit while on the open road. While the average speed for the total number of miles traveled may be below the speed limit, traffic delays, fuel stops and small towns force truck drivers to travel at excessive speeds while on the open highway. An attorney handling a truck accident involving long-haul trucking must be familiar with the factors that go into reconstructing the speed of the tractor-trailer not only at the time of the accident but also during the entire trip.

One of the most dangerous things that we do in our daily lives is share the public roadways with commercial trucks. Trucking companies continue to place ever increasing pressure on their drivers to go farther and faster. The resulting driver fatigue leads to driver error. When the operator of an 80,000 lb. rig makes a mistake the results are often catastrophic. Studies show that drivers' fatigue is a huge factor. Truck drivers are required to log their hours and are limited to a maximum of ten hours "on duty" before they must rest. However, detailed analysis of their log books, fuel tickets, dispatch records, phone records, and other trip documents often shows that they are fatigued because they have exceeded the maximum allowable hours of service regardless of what is written in their log books. An attorney handling cases involving driver error must look beyond the actual facts of the accident and the driver's log book and discover the underlying cause of the driver fatigue.

We have handled numerous accident cases in Tyler, Rusk, Henderson, Nacogdoches, Carthage, Marshall, Longview, Gilmore, Pittsburg, Mineola, Quitman, Canton, Athens, Palestine, Jacksonville, and the rest of East Texas.

We have collected many millions of dollars for our clients who have sustained injuries which were caused by commercial trucks. Good settlements in these cases are not an accident. They are the result of our knowledge, experience and thorough development of the case.

Our firm has handled motorcycle accidents involving catastrophic injuries for over 30 years. If you have sustained serious injuries in a motorcycle accident and need help you should look for an attorney who has successfully handled vehicular accidents involving catastrophic injuries or death.

Earl Drott has collected many millions of dollars for our clients in motorcycle, auto and truck accident cases. The traffic laws and statutes that apply to a motorcycle accident are the same laws that apply to any other accident which occurs on a public roadway. However, the dynamics involved in a motorcycle case give rise to different tactical considerations.

The first response of many East Texas drivers who negligently cause a wreck with a motorcycle is "I didn't see it." These drivers' statements often are made in a way which implies that they didn't see the motorcycle because it wasn't where the rider said it was or that because a motorcycle is smaller and less noticeable than other vehicles that it is simply not their responsibility to see a motorcycle. It is important that these callous East Texas attitudes toward motorcycles be documented and developed as a cause of the accident.

Another very common excuse made by East Texas drivers who cause accidents with motorcycles is that the motorcycle was going too fast. Even if a motorcycle is going too fast it is nonetheless negligent to sideswipe, cut-off, pull in front of, run over, T-bone, or fail to yield the right of way to a motorcycle. There is a subtle attitude in many areas of East Texas that a larger vehicle, usually a truck, has some sort of inherent right of way over a smaller vehicle such as a motorcycle.

Understanding and developing this attitude can be very beneficial to the success of a motorcycle case. Because the other drivers in a motorcycle crash so often deny responsibility and make excuses it is important that witnesses be identified and contacted promptly. It is also necessary that the evidence from the scene such as skid marks, glass and debris, vehicle damage, and road conditions be preserved.

We work with accident reconstructionists and other experts to recreate the accident. Because motorcycles provide their riders with little protection from the larger and heavier vehicles that hit them motorcycle accidents usually result in severe injuries. We work with the health care providers to document and explain injuries, life care planners to identify long-term medical needs, and economists to calculate lost wages and the economic impact of an accident. In cases resulting in death we also make claims on behalf of family members.

We have handled numerous motorcycle accidents in Tyler, Rusk, Henderson, Nacogdoches, Carthage, Marshall, Longview, Gilmore, Pittsburg, Mineola, Quitman, Canton, Athens, Palestine, Jacksonville and the rest of East Texas.

The loss of a loved one in Texas gives rise to both Wrongful Death and Survival claims. A Wrongful Death claim is the claim that is brought by the parents, spouse, and children of a deceased accident victim. Wrongful Death claimants have a right under Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code Chapter 71 to recover damages for the loss of care, comfort, society, and financial support which they suffer as a result of the loss of a family member. Dependent children have lost the care, comfort and guidance of a parent. A surviving spouse has lost the love and companionship of a lifetime partner. Parents suffer the loss of a child in a way unlike any of the other wrongful death claimants. All of these unique losses must be considered and compensated.

A Survival Claim is the claim that is brought by the Estate of the deceased accident victim to recover the normal personal injury damages that the accident victim suffered prior to the time that they passed away. The name Survival Claim comes from the fact that the victim's right to make a personal injury claim survives their death and becomes part of their Estate. The Estate of the deceased also has a right to make a claim for funeral and burial expenses.

Over the years our Earl Drott have helped many East Texas families develop wrongful death claims after the tragic loss of a family member. We have successfully handled wrongful death claims arising out of:

• Auto Accidents
• Electrocutions
• Motorcycle Accidents
• Trucking/18-Wheeler Crashes
• Oilfield Accidents
• Explosions
• Nursing Home Abuse
• Premises Defects
• Construction Accidents
• DWI/DUI Alcohol Related Wrecks
• Workplace Injuries
• Criminal Assaults

The proper handling of a Wrongful Death claim involves not only the issues of a normal personal injury claim but also the documentation of the personal and financial relationships of the wrongful death claimants with the deceased accident victim. Wrongful Death claims often focus on the recovery of loss of support. The laws and rules regarding the recovery of loss of support damages are complex and require the expertise of an experienced wrongful death attorney. Our firm works with accountants, economists and vocational experts to maximize our clients' loss of support recovery and has successfully recovered many millions of dollars in loss of support damages in wrongful death cases.

Many of our wrongful death claims involve not only negligence and carelessness but also recklessness and gross negligence. This is particularly true in our texting and DWI/ DUI wrongful death claims. The proper handling of a gross negligence wrongful death claim requires experience and expertise in the development of gross negligence evidence, the discovery of the Defendant's net worth, and the presentation of the case to the insurance company and jury. Our Wrongful Death Lawyers are skilled regarding all aspects of the handling of gross negligence wrongful death cases and have been very successful in the recovery of punitive damages for our clients.

We have handled wrongful death claims for more than a quarter century in Tyler, Smith County, Jacksonville, Rusk, Cherokee County, Palestine, Anderson County, Athens, Henderson County, Canton, Van Zandt County, Mineola, Quitman, Wood County, Gilmer, Upshur County, Longview, Gregg County, Kilgore, Henderson, Rusk County, Marshall, Harrison County, Carthage, Panola County, and all the surrounding cities and counties East Texas.

Losing a family member suddenly and unexpectedly is a traumatic and disorienting experience. During this time you need an experienced wrongful death attorney to whom you can simply hand off your legal matters so that you can focus on adjusting and healing.

This case involved the tragic death of a father and husband while on his way to work in Tyler. The accident occurred on Highway 271 to the north of Tyler. The Defendant, a district sales manager for an East Texas company with offices in Longview and Lufkin, was traveling from his home in Tyler to the Longview office for a sales meeting. The Defendant crossed the center median and struck the Plaintiff head-on. The Plaintiff died at the scene. The Defendant was unconscious at the scene and died sometime later in a Longview hospital. The Defendant's blood analysis was obtained from the Smith County District Attorney's criminal investigation. The blood analysis showed no presence of alcohol or any illicit drug. The Defendant's cell phone records showed no activity around the time of the accident. The download of the blackbox data recorder in Defendant's vehicle likewise gave no explanation for why the accident occurred. The witnesses testified that the Defendant veered suddenly across the median and struck the Plaintiff's vehicle. The Defendant's alleged that the Plaintiff failed to take proper evasive action and argued that the Plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence.

The Commercial General Liability Carrier (CGL) for the Defendants' company argued that the Defendant was not on-the-job at the time of the accident and that the CGL policy thus did not cover the accident. The standard for whether an employee is “on-the-job” is whether the employee is acting in furtherance of the employers' business purposes at the time and place of the subject accident. Texas law generally holds that employees are not on-the-job while traveling between their home and place of employment. At the time of the accident the Defendant was driving a company owned vehicle and was using a company credit card for fuel and expenses. He was transporting several boxes of sales literature and a sales training film from the Lufkin facility to the Longview facility. The sales meeting was to be conducted at a time and place designated by the owner of the company. The CGL carrier initially filed a Declaratory Judgment Action seeking a determination that there was no coverage for the accident and thus no duty to defend the Wrongful Death action brought by the parents, widow and minor children of the deceased. However, as the evidence developed, it become increasingly obvious that the Defendant was acting in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident and the CGL carrier conceded coverage.

The Plaintiff had a business degree from the University of Texas at Tyler and was earning about $65,000 per year as the Office Manager of a medium sized medical practice in Tyler. A vocational expert and an economist were retained to evaluate the Plaintiff's lost earnings. The vocational expert reviewed the Plaintiffs education and work history and projected the Plaintiffs' probable career path. The economist determined the probable income at each stage of the Plaintiff's career and calculated the net present, after-tax value of the lifetime earnings that the Plaintiff would have contributed to his wife and children at $3.65 million.

The CGL carrier and the insurance defense attorneys focused on trying to discredit the widow and the relationship of the Plaintiff with his children. However, the Plaintiff had been a loyal husband and was actively involved in the sports and church activities of his children. The insurance defense attorneys hired investigators to ask questions of members of the community suggesting that the widow had engaged in extramarital affairs and that the marriage was unstable. However, the Plaintiff and the widow had been together since they were in high school and evidence was developed showing the committed nature of their relationship. About one and one half years after the accident the widow entered into a romantic relationship with a man from her church and the defense attorneys once again attempted to place pressure on the widow by investigating her relationship. However, Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code Section 71.005 prohibits the defense from "directly or indirectly mentioning or alluding to a ... extramarital relationship ...". The spouse of an accident victim has a right to continue on with his/her life and unless and until the surviving spouse remarries the defense may not mention or allude to post-accident relationships.

At the time of the accident the Defendant carried a $1million CGL and a $1million excess policy. The Plaintiff carried a $100,000 underinsured motorist policy. The Court ordered the parties to engage in mediation and the matter settled at mediation for a confidential amount.

Construction sites present numerous safety hazards. A construction site is a dynamic environment where the workers are literally building their workplace as they go. This constantly changing work environment produces unsafe situations without warning resulting in frequent and serious injuries. The fluid nature of construction sites requires extensive safety precautions and strict adherence to safety rules.

A good example of a construction accident caused by the failure to use safe practices is a case which involved what should have been an inconsequential fall. An East Texas construction worker on a high rise building slipped and fell from one floor to the next and would have sustained no more than superficial bruises. However, the employees of a Tyler subcontractor had left exposed steel rebar standing erect on the floor below. Furthermore, neither the subcontractor nor the general contractor had required safety end caps to be placed on the exposed rebar. Rather than receiving superficial bruises the worker that fell from the floor above was impaled on the rebar and died.

Earl Drott has successfully handled a large number of construction accident cases involving falls, collapses, heavy equipment, electrocutions, and falling objects. When safety takes a back seat to production on a construction site workers get injured.

The Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act (DTPA) was enacted into law in 1973 to provide a cost effective means for consumers to protect themselves from abuses. It is codified in Chapter 17 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code.

The DTPA protects against false, misleading, and deceptive business practices, unconscionable actions, and breaches of warranty in connection with the sale of a good or service. In addition to generally prohibited conduct the Act sets forth a list of specifically prohibited conduct in Section 17.46.

One of the most valuable features of the DTPA is the special damage provisions. Section 17.50 provides that a consumer may recover actual economic damages. If a Judge or jury finds that the Defendant's conduct was committed “knowingly” the consumer may recover not only economic damages but also mental anguish damages in addition an additional amount up to three times the economic damages. If the conduct of the Defendant is found to be “intentional” under the DTPA then the consumer may recover economic damages, mental anguish damages, plus additional damages in an amount not to exceed three times the combined total of the economic and mental anguish damages. Prevailing consumers may also recover costs of court and attorneys' fees.

The Deceptive Trade Practices Act protects any “consumer” which includes any individual, partnership, or corporation with assets of less than $25 million or which is owned by an entity with assets less than $25 million. The Act is a potent tool for the protection of both individuals and small businesses.

Most waivers of consumer rights under the DTPA are void as contrary to public policy. Any violation of Texas Insurance Code Chapter 541 automatically qualifies as a violation of the DTPA. Section 17.505 requires that consumers give potential defendants a 60 notice and demand setting forth the details and amounts of the complaint and giving the defendant an opportunity to resolve the matter by payment of actual damages and attorneys' fees. Section 17.49(c) exempts from the DTPA claims for professional services which primarily involve the rendering of advice, judgment, opinion, or similar professional skill. Most services rendered by attorneys and physicians are exempt from the Act. However, an attorney that acted unconscionable or a doctor that misrepresented a treatment or probable result would nonetheless be liable under the DTPA. Section 17.49(e) exempts traditional personal injury claims from the scope of the Act. However, a deceptive trade practice that results in personal injuries falls within the scope of the Act subject to the damage limitations of the Act. Section 17.49(f) excludes written contracts covering transactions involving more than $100,000 and Section 17.49(g) exempts transactions for more than $500,000. However, these exemptions do not apply to residential real estate transactions.

Good examples of actionable deceptive trade practices are the representation that property was not in the flood plain when in fact the property was in the 100 year flood plain, that a new car had never been wrecked when in fact it had been wrecked requiring substantial repairs, or that an investment had specific features that were not part of the investment.

The Deceptive Trade Practices Act provides a remedy which allows an abused consumer to potentially recover economic damages, mental anguish damages, treble damages, costs, and attorneys fees.

The majority of product related injuries arise out of either a defectively designed or defectively manufactured product. A good example of a design defect is the propensity of certain 4-wheelers to flip over forward at certain speeds even though they may operate normally at both faster and slower speeds.

When the 4-wheeler hits a bump at a faster speed the momentum is sufficient to keep the rear shocks compressed all the way through the bump. At low speeds the momentum is not sufficient to compress the shocks and the 4-wheeler rides over the bump. However, at intermediate speeds the shocks compress but the momentum is not sufficient to keep the shocks compressed all the way through the bump causing the stored energy to release as the rear wheels ride over the bump effectively throwing the 4-wheeler over forward.

As a Tyler Injury Lawyer, I have successfully handled just such a case where an East Texas college student rode his 4-wheeler over the same terrain for hours without incident and then had the 4-wheeler suddenly flip forward when he slowed to a lower speed. Unfortunately, his cervical vertebrae were crushed rendering him a quadriplegic.

Manufacturing defects usually involve a material defect or error in the manufacturing process. A good example of a material defect is a case in which an automobile's seat belt had a weak area. When the vehicle was involved in a significant impact the seat belt webbing severed at the weak point allowing the victim to be thrown from the vehicle resulting in his death.

A good example of a defectively manufactured component is illustrated by an air bag malfunction case recently handled by my law firm. An automobile struck a medium sized dog in the roadway causing minimal property damage and resulting in very little reduction in the speed of the vehicle.

The air bag inertia switch was designed to be triggered by deceleration of approximately 30 mph. Even though the speed of the vehicle was reduced by the impact by only a few miles an hour, a manufacturing defect in the inertia switch caused it to trip the air bag. The unexpected and unnecessary inflation of the air bag broke the leg of a Tyler man who was one of the passengers in the vehicle.

Our country has experienced a huge influx of cheap, defective foreign made products many of which have dangerous manufacturing defects.

Many women have experienced significant problems after undergoing pelvic organ prolapse repair surgery with trans-vaginal mesh. One of the most common surgeries is a bladder suspension accomplished through the vagina using a mesh sling to address stress-urinary incontinence. Common problems caused by mesh defects include:

• Infection
• Pain during sex
• Mesh erosion
• Urinary complications
• Bleeding
• Vaginal scarring
• Perforation of the blood vessels, bowel and bladder

The FDA reports that the most common complication is erosion of the mesh through the vaginal wall. This causes serious problems and at best may require multiple surgeries to correct. Another frequently reported problem is mesh contraction which can cause vaginal shortening, vaginal pain and vaginal tightening. Mesh contraction may result in painful intercourse, severe pelvic pain and irritation.

The manufacturers of the surgical mesh products failed to disclose known complications to the FDA resulting in these complications being actionable.

The first of the vaginal mesh settlements was completed by Endo International which reportedly settled approximately 10,000 claims for more than $400,000,000.00. The pace of the litigation is increasing rapidly.

If you have had a trans-vaginal mesh procedure performed and are experiencing problems you should act promptly. There are time limits. Contact us today. We may be able to help you obtain compensation for your injuries.

Experienced trial attorneys always get the best settlements for their injury clients. After more than thirty-seven years and thousands of personal injury cases there is virtually nothing that we haven't seen and successfully handled.

As a Tyler Accident and Injury Attorney, I know the corporate and insurance world continues to engage in many heavy handed or simply illegal practices based on the assumption that the amounts of money involved will not result in legal action.

The Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the Texas Insurance Code, and the common law doctrines regarding breach of contract all provide relief for consumers and small businesses in situations involving moderate amounts of damages. The Texas Insurance Code provides for the recovery of not only actual damages but also statutory penalties and attorneys' fees for many violations of the insurance code regardless of the amount of money at issue. The Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act not only sets out a long list of specifically prohibited practices but also generally prohibits false, misleading or deceptive trade practices. The DTPA is a particularly potent consumer protection tool because of the additional damages authorized by the Act. The additional DTPA damages are triggered by a 60 day demand letter. If the demand is not paid within the time allowed by the statute and a violation of the DTPA is found then the Act authorizes the trebling of the damages if a "knowing" violation is found, and requires the payment of reasonable and necessary costs and attorneys' fees. Most material misrepresentations made in connection with the sale of a good or service qualify under the DTPA for treble damages, costs and attorneys' fees.

The common law doctrines regarding breach of contract also offer remedies where a Defendant fails to perform as promised and usually includes the payment of attorneys' fees. The parties to a Texas contract have a duty of "good faith and fair dealing" in connection with the performance of the contract. The breach of this duty is often referred to as "bad faith". Bad faith claims are often asserted in connection with construction contracts, health and liability insurance policies, residential real estate contracts, and a variety of service contracts.

These special Acts and doctrines are valuable tools which we have used to force corporate wrongdoers to "do the right thing" and pay damages and attorneys' fees in situations involving smaller amounts of damages.

From the initial exploration to the end refining of the oil and gas everything about the oil industry is potentially dangerous. Modern seismic exploration often includes low flying helicopters and the use of explosives. Drilling involves heavy equipment, high pressures, fatigued workers and tight schedules. The refining of the product involves an extreme risk of explosion and burns. Overshadowing everything is the large dollars at stake and the huge potential profits involved which oftentimes causes safety to be pushed aside.

With years of experience as a Tyler Accident Lawyer, I have learned that oilfield and refinery accidents often involve equipment failures, fires, tong injuries, high pressure line ruptures, OSHA violations, blowouts, explosions, electrocutions, derrick collapses, or toxic exposure. The rushed work environment often results in a fatal lack of communication between rig operators, heavy equipment operators, and the other contractors operating on site. Oilfield and refinery accidents frequently involve severe injuries or death.

The pressure to accomplish a task quickly often causes companies to take chances. A good example of this occurred in an East Texas case handled by our firm. An oilfield service contractor was moving a wellhead across an oilfield with a gin pole truck when they encountered a low hanging high voltage power line. When they lowered the boom to clear the line the increased leverage raised the front wheels of the gin pole truck off of the ground. Rather than stop and wait for the power company to raise the line the decision was made that the truck would be driven on two wheels under the low hanging power line. As the truck lurched forward the boom struck the low hanging high voltage line and electrocuted the two workers who were steadying the swinging wellhead. Our firm made a substantial recovery on behalf of the spouses and children of the electrocuted workers.

Sexual abuse, or child molestation, is one of the more heinous crimes in our society. Child molestation robs children of their innocence. The emotional scars from sexual abuse often last a lifetime. The perpetrators of child abuse are manipulative sociopaths that have developed the ability to manipulate their victims into allowing the abuse and believing that the abuse is somehow the fault of the victim. Thus the victim must not only deal with the psychological damage from the abuse itself but also must overcome the mistaken belief that they caused the abuse. This burden often causes shame, guilt, depression, anxiety, panic attacks, sleep problems, sexual dysfunction, and self-destructive behaviors. The damage is aggravated by the fact that the victim usually knows and trusts the perpetrator. The perpetrator uses the victim's false sense of guilt and shame to keep the victim quiet and maintain control over the victim for the purpose of repeated abuse.

The most common sexual molestation scenario in East Texas is the abuse of a stepdaughter by a stepfather or the abuse of a daughter by her mother's live-in boyfriend. However, abuse occurs in many contexts and the perpetrators include teachers, priests, clergy, coaches, daycare workers, therapists, medical doctors, family members, and even the counselors that treat abuse victims. One of the greatest impediments to curtailing the damage caused by sexual abuse is getting the victims to come forward and report the abuse. The manipulative sociopaths that sexually abuse children are so good at convincing their victims that the abuse is the victim's fault that it is often years before the victim breaks the silence, if ever.

Sexual predators tend to be repeat offenders. Sadly, in all the years of representing victims of sexual abuse we have never represented a perpetrator's first victim. During the cases we have always learned of prior victims that have not been able to come forward. It is important that victims break their silence as soon as possible. Coming forward halts the abuse, may prevent the perpetrator from abusing additional victims, and starts the healing process.

While the criminal justice system will punish a child molester, the victims and their families must file a lawsuit in civil court in order to recover financial compensation for their damages. No amount of financial compensation can ever right this wrong or erase the damage caused by child molestation. However, money damages can help victims of sexual assault regain control of their lives by paying for counseling and removing other stressors from their lives.

Large verdicts and settlements call attention to the problem of child abuse and cause individuals and organizations to be more careful with the lives of our children. Large verdicts and settlements also encourage other victims to come forward, stop the cycle of abuse, and start the healing process.

Our firm and its Personal Injury Attorneys in Tyler, Texas have been pioneers in compensating victims of sexual abuse in East Texas. In 1990 Earl Drott coauthored two articles, Compensating the Sexual Molestation Victim Under the Texas Homeowner's Policy. Texas Trial Lawyers Forum; Vol. 24, No.2, 1990; and, Compensating the Sexually Abused Child: Homeowner's Policy Can Provide Funds for Treatment. American Trial Lawyers Association, July 1990 , regarding the proper handling of sexual abuse cases under Texas homeowner's policies.

Earl Drott also tried one of the early cases under the Texas homeowner's policies, obtaining a $3.5 million verdict in a Tyler court in 1992 on behalf of two sisters who were abused by their stepfather.

Sexual harassment in the workplace is nothing new in Texas. Sexual harassment falls under the regulations of §21 of the Texas Labor Code. Sexual harassment is unwelcome, offensive conduct directed at or committed in the presence of an employee.

As a Tyler Injury Lawyer, I have handled sexual harassment cases which arose out of a broad variety of perverted conduct including:

• Lewd comments or behavior
• Demands for sexual favors or sexual performance
• “Quid pro quo” demands for sexual favors in exchange for job benefits
• Sexually suggestive comments
• Offensive touching, groping, or other unwelcome and offensive physical contact
• Sending sexually explicit e-mails to employees or co-workers
• Sexting which is the sending of a text containing a sexually explicit picture
• Requesting or causing an employee or co-worker to view pornographic material
• Requesting or suggesting that an employee give sexual favors to a customer or business associate.

The cause of action for sexual harassment in the workplace is, in essence, a cause of action based upon the failure of management to take corrective action once properly placed upon notice of the offensive, unwelcome conduct. For this reason it is important that victims of sexual harassment give management notice in writing in order to give management an opportunity to correct the situation. In some situations notice of the misconduct is not necessary, such as when the perpetrator is an officer, director, or owner of the company. Earl Drott Law handled a case of this nature in which an East Texas dentist placed a video camera in a restroom. Notice was not necessary since the perpetrator was both the owner and supervisor of the sexually harassed employee.

Texas Labor Code §21 provides that a Texas victim of sexual harassment may recover past and future medical expenses, past and future mental anguish damages, past and future lost wages, past and future punitive damages, costs, and attorney's fees from the employer.

Furthermore, pursuant to Waffle House v. Williams , 313 S.W. 3rd 796 (Tex. 2010), unwanted and unwelcome sexual physical conduct gives rise to a cause of action against the individual perpetrator for assault and battery and the claim against the individual is not governed by the Texas Labor Code.

Although most torts are governed by a two year statute of limitations sexual harassment claims are subject to the “continuing violation doctrine” which provides that if any of an ongoing course of misconduct falls within the applicable statute of limitations then a claim for all of the acts is considered timely.

Separate and apart from the claim against the employer pursuant to Texas Labor Code §21 or the assault and battery claim, the offensive and unwelcome sexual contact with an employee or co-worker may constitute public lewdness in violation of Texas Penal Code § 21.07, indecent exposure pursuant to Texas Penal Code §21.08, and/or a criminal assault under Texas Penal Code §22.01(3).

Domestic violence is an often misunderstood problem in our society that is frequently blamed on external forces. As an experienced Injury Attorney in Tyler, TX, I understand violence causes bad relationships and problems and not the other way around. A common myth is that drug and alcohol abuse causes spousal abuse. While substance abuse is commonly present in abusive relationships drug and alcohol abuse is at most a symptom and not a cause of violence. Another common, and equally invalid, excuse is that spousal abuse is caused by stress. While external forces such as unemployment, financial problems, family issues, or life's daily frustrations may aggravate a violent situation they do not alone cause abuse. Some people deal with stress and frustration by using drugs or alcohol. Others work out stress by focusing on a stress relieving sport or hobby. Stress or frustration is not an excuse or justification for domestic violence.

Spousal abuse is an under-appreciated problem because it tends to remain hidden. Battered women often have no resources of their own. Their children need them and they have come to believe that the only way that they have to provide for their children is to quietly stay in an abusive relationship. Some hide the abuse because of a false sense of shame. Others endure out of fear. One has only to walk the halls of the East Texas Crisis Center in Tyler to appreciate the gravity of the problem.

Physical assault or battery is a crime, whether it occurs inside or outside of the family. The police have the power and authority to protect victims from physical attack. The East Texas Crisis Center in Tyler offers shelter and guidance. The first step is stopping the abuse by reporting it to the proper authorities. The next step is retaining a civil attorney to obtain financial damages for the victim. No amount of money can right the wrong of spousal abuse but money damages will pay rent, buy food and clothing, provide transportation and help the victim get back in control of her life.

Domestic violence cases give rise to unique tactical considerations. Our firm has both successfully tried and settled a number of East Texas spousal abuse cases. We work closely with the authorities and oftentimes with the victim's divorce attorney.

In Tyler, Longview and the surrounding East Texas area we are all exposed to a host of toxic substances that didn't even exist not long ago and many substances that were once thought to be safe have been proven to be deadly. DDT and Chlordane were both thought to be safe. We now know that toxic chemicals affect not only those who work with them but also those who live near a manufacturing facility that manufactures or uses toxic chemicals.

Workers in manufacturing, automotive, and industrial careers may be exposed to toxic chemicals that have been proven to cause deadly diseases. Prolonged exposure to asbestos is a known cause of asbestosis and mesothelioma. Benzene exposure has been tied to leukemia. Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) can lead to angiosarcoma or lung cancer. Silica dust has been proven to cause silicosis.

Polluters that discharge toxic materials into the environment, either the atmosphere or the groundwater, have a dramatic effect on the health, livelihood, and property values of those in the vicinity. Sometimes the pollution of the environment occurs slowly over time, such as in the case of gasoline leaking from an underground storage tank. Other times the environmental pollution is catastrophic such as in the case of an accident at an oil refinery or chemical plant.

Whenever heavy equipment and labor work in close proximity to one another the parties responsible for workplace safety must do their jobs or accidents will result. When managers become more concerned about production than the safety of the people doing the work then accidents happen, often with catastrophic results.

An East Texas warehouse is a good example of a work environment where men and dangerous equipment are forced to work close to one another. When forklifts, pallet jacks and other product moving equipment are operated in the midst of warehouse workers in the warehouse environment safety must be the first consideration or serious injuries will occur.

Forklifts and motorized pallet jacks are usually equipped with flashing lights or warning beacons and warning beepers or sirens. Operators often become annoyed by these safety features and disconnect them. As Accident Lawyers in Tyler, we have handled a number of forklift accident cases in Tyler, Longview and the surrounding East Texas area in which unsuspecting workers were run over and severely injured by forklifts that had the warning beepers and lights disconnected.

Warehouse equipment operators are often on quotas or production incentives which cause them to place production over safety. We have handled a number of cases in which forklift and motorized pallet jack operators who were hurriedly loading or unloading trucks in an effort to make bonus ran over or knocked pallets of product onto workers causing serious injuries.

A loading dock is a busy, dangerous environment where commercial trucks, drivers, workers, and loading equipment converge. Warehouse doors, dock plates, trucks and equipment often get damaged in this hurried environment and frequently get rigged and used rather than taken out of service until they can be properly repaired. We have been involved in a number of cases where drivers, operators and workers were injured by bent doors, sprung dock plates, or damaged equipment.

As the more aggressive breeds such as Pit Bulldogs and Rottweilers become more popular in East Texas dog attacks are becoming an increasing problem. Our Tyler Injury Attorneys have handled cases involving many different breeds of dogs including Pit Bulldogs, Rottweilers, Malamutes, Dalmatians, Doberman Pinchers, German Shepherds, Daschshunds, Terriers, and a variety of mixed breeds.

The most common dog attack occurs when a small child squats down to pet a weenie dog and gets bit in the face, often resulting in shredded lips and permanent scars. The worst injuries seem to come from the pit bulldog attacks because the pit bulls are powerful and are relentless as they maul their victims. Many times a pit bulldog that has been beaten back will renew the attack and inflict additional injuries or even kill the victim. Dog attacks often require extensive medical care and plastic surgery.

Dog bites also cause emotional damage that should not be taken lightly. We all grow up believing that a dog is a man's best friend. When one of our man's best friends mauls us it often causes an emotional scarring and a fear of dogs that lasts a lifetime. Many people also mistakenly believe that the first bite is free. This saying is simply not true. While legal liability for the second or third time that a dog bites someone is a foregone conclusion the first bite is still not free.

Different breeds of dogs have breed personalities. The easy going disposition of Labrador Retrievers makes it very unusual for a lab to bite someone. By the same token the temperament of some of the more aggressive breeds such as pit bulls and Rottweilers make them common culprits in dog attacks. Likewise, individual dogs of any particular breed have their own personality and disposition.

By the time that a dog bites its first victim it has usually given its owner ample warning of its aggressive tendencies. A thorough investigation of the dog and the individuals that have been around it in the past usually reveals signs of the dog's aggressive nature and the owner can be held legally responsible for the injuries.

Drug defect claims and the associated litigation are complex and varied. All drugs sold for human consumption must be approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Those injured by defective drugs must prove that the defect that injured them was not disclosed to the FDA by the drug manufacturer during the FDA approval process. Defective drug claims are rarely pursued as individual lawsuits. Drug cases are sometimes pursued as federal class actions but are more often pursued in multiparty multidistrict litigation commonly referred to as MDLs. MDLs are managed by the federal courts and each has their own rules and procedures. As an experienced Tyler Injury Lawyer, I understand drug cases that are originally filed in Tyler or other East Texas courts are often combined into a single case in another area of the country.

While there may be thousands of lawyers representing the victims in a particular defective drug MDL the litigation itself will be managed by a committee of victims' lawyers. Our firm has represented victims of a variety of defective drugs including Fen-Phen, Vioxx, and Celebrex.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reported that a number of studies have suggested a link between common anti-depressants and serious birth defects. Research has shown that a number of birth defects are caused by SSRIs which are more commonly referred to as anti-depressants. SSRI stands for Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitor which is a class of drugs used mainly to treat depression but also used to treat other conditions. When SSRIs are taken during pregnancy they often lead to serious birth defects.

The more common anti-depressants and their generic equivalents are:

• Celexa/citalopram
• Effexor/venlafaxine
• Zoloft/sertraline
• Prozac/fluoxetine
• Paxil/paroxetine

These prescription drugs are primarily prescribed for depression, anxiety, bulimia, anorexia, post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), obsessive compulsive disorder(OCD), migraines, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. However, SSRIs/anti-depressants are prescribed for a wide range of conditions and it is irrelevant why they were prescribed. The only important fact is that they were prescribed for use during pregnancy.

One of the most serious birth defects known to be caused by SSRIs is Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension of the Newborn (PPHN). PPHN affects a newborn's heart and lungs and can result in multiple organ damage, brain damage and death. Separate from PPHN SSRIs can cause developmental heart defects by causing septal defects or holes in the walls of the heart. SSRIs have been linked to neural tube defects and malformation of the skull and brain which usually results in death a short period after birth. A more commonly known birth defect is cleft palate/lip. SSRIs also cause and increased incidence of autism.

If you or a loved one took an anti-depressant for any reason during pregnancy and your child was born with and SSRI related birth defect you should contact us. We may be able to help you obtain compensation.

When you enter a Tyler business or commercial property such as a mall, store, restaurant, theatre, hospital or bank the owner or operator of the premises owes a duty to you to warn you of hidden dangers or correct those dangers. The owner of a business premises has a duty to make a reasonable effort to identify hidden defects or dangers in the premises. In simple terms the business owner must make a reasonable effort to make the premises safe for their customers.

As a Tyler Injury Lawyer, I know that premises liability cases take many forms. The most common premises liability case is the slip and fall case which occurs because the business either places a slippery substance on the floor or fails to make reasonable efforts to remove a slippery substance that was spilled on the floor. Another common type of premises liability case is a trip and fall case which occurs as a result of uneven floor surfaces, poorly marked changes in elevation, broken sidewalks, broken or worn steps, or unnoticeable foreign objects on the floor.

Malfunctioning elevators injure many people both when they stop above or below the floor causing customers to fall and when they close on customers. Mechanical doors close on patrons, often breaking fingers, hands, feet and arms. Exposed pinch points in doors traumatically amputate fingers. There are many negligent merchandising cases in which poorly arranged or stacked merchandise falls on customers.

An East Texas business owner also has a duty to take reasonable security measures in light of the circumstances. In high crime areas businesses are often held liable for failing to provide adequate lighting or failing to have a security guard.

As an experienced Injury Lawyer in Tyler, I know on the job injuries can occur in any occupation but are much more likely to occur in the more dangerous industries such as the construction, oilfield, or manufacturing industries. To qualify as on-the-job injury the accident must have taken place while the injured worker was acting in furtherance of the business purposes of the employer. Thus if the injured employee was performing some part of the job for which they were hired or other activity which benefited the employer then they will likely be found to be acting in the course and scope of their employment. Employer liability for on-the-job injuries is fault based. Thus the injured employee must prove that some act or omission of the employer which amounted to negligence caused the accident and the resulting injuries.

There are many misunderstandings about fault-based employer liability for on-the-job injuries because of the prevalence in Texas of workers' compensation insurance. Workers' compensation insurance is completely different than a direct action against an employer. Injured workers must first determine if their employer is a “subscriber” to the Texas Workers' Compensation program. An employer becomes a subscriber by purchasing an approved policy from an insurance carrier licensed to sell an insurance policy approved by the Texas Workers' Compensation Act. Workers' compensation policies are “no fault.” It is irrelevant whether the act or omissions of the employer, a co-worker, or the injured worker himself actually caused the accident because the worker is nonetheless entitled to benefits.

Workers' compensation benefits are comprised mainly of limited lost wage benefits which are calculated pursuant to a formula and medical benefits for reasonable and necessary accident related medical care. If an employer purchases an approved policy then the employer is entitled to immunity from negligence lawsuits which result in non-fatal injuries to employees. Employers may establish a “self-insured” workers' compensation program but the program must be specifically approved under the mandates of the Texas Workers' Compensation Act. This is an option which is used by only the largest of employers.

Injured workers should be aware of “look-alike” or imitation workers' compensation programs. Many employers have sought to avoid high workers' compensation insurance premiums by purchasing a policy which looks somewhat the same and provides more limited wage and medical benefits. Although these programs may be presented to the employee as a workers' compensation program they do not qualify the employer for immunity and the employer may still be sued for ordinary negligence. Some common tell-tale signs these look-a-like programs are the employer's right to make decisions regarding the payment of wage or medical benefits and the employer's right to designate the treating physicians.

There are several very important exceptions to the immunity an employer obtains by purchasing workers' compensation insurance. There's no immunity for intentional acts by or at the direction of the employer. There's also no immunity for fatal injuries to an employee which were caused by the gross negligence of the employer. In a gross negligence death case the family of the injured worker has a right to recover both workers' compensation benefits and to sue the employer for punitive damages. The gross negligence cause of action accrues to the spouse and heirs of the body of the deceased worker.

Gross negligence claims against subscriber employers are governed by Texas Labor Code Section 408.001(b). The family of the deceased worker must establish that:

1. The employer's act or omissions created an extreme degree of risks;
2. That the employer had actual subjected awareness of the extreme degree of risks created by their conduct;
3. That the employer nonetheless proceeded with conscience indifference to the safety and well-being of the worker.

Gross negligence must be established by clear and convincing evidence. The grant of immunity to employers who carry workers' compensation insurance has caused some employers to be lax about safety resulting in an increasing number of gross negligence death cases.

If a Texas employer elects not to carry workers' compensation insurance then they are said to be going “bare.” A bare employer loses their right to assert their common law defenses of contributory negligence and assumption of the risk. The common law defense of contributory negligence would normally give the negligent employer the right to assert that the accident was caused in part by the contributory negligence of the injured worker thereby reducing the amount of the damages that the worker could recover from the employer. The common law defense of the assumption of the risk would normally give the employer the right to assert that the injured worker was actually aware of the risk associated with their job and assumed or accepted that risk thereby precluding them from recovering from the employer. Without these two common law defenses an injured employee may recover all of their damages from an employer if the negligence of the employer caused any part of the accident and resulting injuries.

Texas employers have a non-delegable duty to provide a safe work environment and safe instrumentalities with which an employee performs their job related duties. Thus an employer that does not subscribe to the Texas Workers' Compensation system may be held liable for an accident and injuries caused by defects in stairways, walkways, lighting or other utilities, the lack of or the failure to enforce safety rules and procedures, or the faulty condition of trucks, forklifts, or other equipment.

The best way to select a personal injury attorney is to obtain the recommendation of other members of the legal community. The other lawyers still know which personal injury attorneys do a good job for their clients. Most of my clients are referred to my law firm by other East Texas attorneys. You should also look for a personal injury attorney that is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law. Although there are many fine attorneys that are not Board Certified, an attorney who is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law has shown a commitment to representing injured people. I have been Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization since 1990.

Look for a personal injury attorney who has years of experience. It takes years to learn how to handle all the insurance company games and tricks. They don't teach you these things in law school. I have been handling personal injury cases in East Texas since 1985 and have handled thousands of individual cases for my clients.

Look for a personal injury lawyer that goes to trial. Even if you don't want to go to trial you are better off with a lawyer who has established himself in the legal community as a lawyer who takes his cases to trial if the settlement offers are too low. Having a personal injury TRIAL lawyer represent you makes it more likely that your case will be settled.

Most importantly, find a personal injury lawyer that you respect and trust because at certain points in your case you are simply going to have to trust your lawyer's judgment and have faith that he is looking out for your best interests.

No, not unless you're just in the mood to be skinned. Insurance adjusters take recorded statements in an effort to find an excuse not to pay a claim. By giving a recorded statement you won't help and you may hurt yourself.

As a Tyler injury attorney I am regularly requested by insurance companies, particularly in auto accident cases, to allow an adjuster to take a recorded statement from my client. As a general rule I do not allow my clients to give recorded statements. I will listen to the adjuster and consider their request for a recorded statement if they present a rational basis for their request.

A good example of when I might allow my client to give a recorded statement is the situation where a drunk driver caused an accident, got out of the wrecked car and fled on foot and then hired a criminal defense lawyer who advised him not to give any information to anyone out of fear of criminal prosecution. In that situation the adjuster might have a legitimate need to have my client specifically describe the driver of the at-fault vehicle in order to confirm that the drunken driver was one of their named insureds, or at least someone authorized to be driving the car, and that there was thus coverage for the accident. If the insurance carrier is not able to confirm that the intoxicated driver was covered by their insurance policy they may very well not be willing to proceed with the matter and thus it may be in my client's best interest to give a statement.

However, insurance adjusters generally request recorded statements in an effort to find an excuse not to pay benefits. They are not seeking the truth. This is why so many recorded statements focus on questions about unrelated injuries, preexisting conditions or things that the victim might have done which contributed in some small way to the accident. In order to illustrate an insurance adjusters lack of any real interest in the truth I have often times told them that I think recorded statements are a wonderful idea and if they will bring their insured to my offices I will have my client come in and we can each take a recorded statement of the other driver and determine what really happened in the accident. In my 37 years as a Tyler auto accident attorney I have never had an insurance adjuster accept this proposal.

No. When you are the innocent party in an auto accident, Texas law requires that the at-fault driver pay the lesser of the reasonable cost of repair or the fair market value of your vehicle at the time of the accident. Current Texas law allows the other driver's insurance company to make the decision regarding whether a vehicle is totaled.

As a Tyler auto accident attorney I am frequently confronted with the situation wherein my client is driving a new car and is involved in a substantial accident. My client understandably does not want a car that is often only a few months old that has sustained substantial damages and undergone extensive repairs. Unfortunately, Texas law simply does not allow us to force the at-fault driver or his insurance company to provide the victim with a new vehicle in this situation.

Most insurance companies have a formula pursuant to which they determine whether a vehicle is a “total loss”. If the cost of the repair of the damaged vehicle plus the salvage value of the damaged vehicle exceeds the fair market value of the vehicle prior to the accident then obviously it does not make sense to repair the vehicle and it is “totaled”. For example, if a $30,000.00 vehicle is involved in a substantial auto accident and sustains damage which will cost $20,000.00 to repair and the damaged vehicle has a salvage value of $15,000.00 then the vehicle is totaled.

This analysis gets a little more complicated in many situations because most insurance companies total a vehicle at a number somewhat less than the fair market value of the vehicle. A common “total” amount is 85% of the fair market value of the vehicle. This is because the cost of repair is initially assessed prior to the time that the repairs begin and it is not uncommon for additional damage to be found after repairs begin and the vehicle is disassembled. Thus if the total of the salvage and the cost of repair gets anywhere close to the fair market value of the vehicle the insurance company will likely total the vehicle. Otherwise they would frequently find themselves in a situation where the cost of repair was considerably more than anticipated and they were going to lose money because they did not total the vehicle.

I often suggest to my clients that one of the best ways to deal with the fact that we cannot make the insurance company total their vehicle is to get the absolute best repair possible. Automobile manufacturers produce a lot of new vehicles which contain defects in workmanship and the simple reality is that a top notch auto repair shop is going to give your vehicle a lot more personal attention than it received from the manufacturer. Properly repaired by a top notch repair shop your vehicle will likely be in better condition than it was on the showroom floor.

Studies show that settlements account for more than 99% of all cases. If your case is properly prepared by a good lawyer it is extremely likely that it will be resolved by settlement.

As a Tyler injury attorney I am frequently asked by my clients if I think they are going to have to go to trial. One statewide study indicated that out of all personal injury claims only two-tenths of 1% of those cases actually went to jury trial. Two tenths of 1% is two out of a thousand. Thus if you have an injury case in Texas it is extremely unlikely that you will have to go through a jury trial. However, I caution my clients that someone has to be the two out of a thousand and they just may be one of those two.

There are also some other considerations which should be taken into consideration when evaluating these statistics. There are a number of high volume law firms, particularly in Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio, which handle a large number of accident claims and never file a lawsuit or go to trial. The sheer volume of claims handled in this manner tends to skew the statistics. The good news is that these law firms are more likely to get your case settled without filing a lawsuit or going to trial. The bad news is that these law firms typically accomplish this by settling for lesser amounts.

As a Tyler injury attorney it has been my experience that about one out of 50 or about 2% of the cases need to be tried to a jury. The paradox is that if an injury attorney is willing to go to trial and prepares his cases with the anticipation that he may go to trial the insurance companies will evaluate this fact and are more likely to offer a reasonable settlement. Clients who are considering hiring a Tyler injury attorney would be well advised to ask that attorney when the last time was that he tried a personal injury case to verdict, how often he tries personal injury cases to verdict, and how many times he has tried personal injury cases to verdict. Personal injury attorneys that go to trial get better settlements.

It depends on the facts of the case. Some car wreck claims are worth a great deal. I settled one car wreck claim for $6,000,000.00.Other car wreck claims are not worth anything. I have seen studies that indicate that the majority of car wreck claims involving soft tissue injuries settle for an amount between $5,000.00 and $15,000.00.

The value of a car wreck claim simply depends on the facts and circumstances surrounding the wreck and the extent and duration of the injuries. There is no one answer or rule of thumb that works in every case.

Every Tyler auto accident attorney values car wreck claims a little differently. First, let me debunk a myth. As a Tyler injury attorney I've many times been asked if it is true that a car wreck claim is worth three times the medical bills. The short answer is “no”. In the 37 years that I have handled injury claims in Tyler, Longview and the surrounding East Texas area I have never found that to be true. Some claims end up being settled for an amount equal to three times the medical bills but the amount is due to other factors and not a multiplier.

Let's discuss two examples that illustrate that cases are individually evaluated. I recently tried a case to jury verdict in which a little boy was bitten by a dog. He received emergency room treatment only at a cost of a little over $4,000.00 but was left with a nasty 5 inch permanent scar on his head. The total jury verdict was a little over $150,000.00 which was more than 35 times the medical expenses.

Contrast the previous example with the case of a client who was involved in an auto accident and struck her head on the door jam. Emergency room testing showed no brain damage or bleeding and the client sustained no other injuries. Several weeks later the client began to have quite severe headaches which appeared sporadically for several months. Each time the client had a headache episode extensive medical testing was performed. Although the headaches were thought to be related to the automobile accident the testing never revealed the source or the cause of the headaches nor tied them to the automobile accident. The client's total medical expenses were a little over $33,000.00. Because there was no objective medical connection to the automobile accident this case settled for $50,000.00 which was about 1 ½ times the reasonable medical expenses.

Each personal injury case much be individually evaluated on its' on unique set of facts.

Personal Injury Protection (PIP) is a no-fault, no subrogation interest, medical payments coverage that pays for the accident related medical expenses, lost wages, and certain other expenses, of all persons who are injured in a covered auto accident. PIP pays for accident related medical expenses regardless of whether there are other applicable insurance coverages.

Premiums that you pay for PIP coverage take into account the fact that PIP does not have any subrogation interest and that there may be other insurance that might otherwise pay for the applicable medical expenses. PIP coverage is oftentimes likened to life insurance. If someone with three life insurance policies dies then all three policies pay the specified benefits. PIP insurance is designed to pay an amount equal to your auto accident related medical expenses regardless of fault or the availability of other insurance coverage.

Yes. Over the 20 plus years that I have handled personal injury claims in East Texas I have handled many motorcycle accident cases including a number that involved catastrophic injuries. I recently concluded a motorcycle accident case that occurred when the motorcycle struck construction debris in the roadway causing the motorcycle to crash resulting in head injuries to the motorcycle rider. The life care plan exceeded 15 million dollars. The case was favorably settled for a confidential amount.

I have had extensive experience as a Tyler motorcycle accident attorney. For a number of years I represented members of a national motorcycle riders association. Most of these motorcycle riders were members of clubs comprised of members who shared their passion for touring. A number of my clients have been hard-core Harley Davidson enthusiasts who would not even consider riding anything but a vintage Harley Davidson motorcycle. Others have been motorcycle riders who simply chose a motorcycle as their primary means of transportation. Some have been younger people who enjoyed the thrill of faster, high-performance motorcycles.

I've handled far too many motorcycle accident cases to discuss them all. A few examples are the case of an East Texas physician who lost the use of his right arm when a driver pulled in front of his touring bike while he was on an out-of-state trip, the case of a middle-aged restaurant owner who sustained a serious brain injury when his vintage Harley Davidson struck construction debris in the roadway, the case of a young athlete who lost his life when another motorist cut him off while he was riding his high-performance motorcycle, and the case of a mechanic who was severely injured while on his way to work when an 18-wheeler turned across his lane of travel.

No. Motorcycles fall under the same laws and regulations as other motor vehicles for the most part. However, motorcycle accident cases involve tactical considerations unique to motorcycle cases.

If you have been involved in a motorcycle accident you would be well-advised to find an experienced trial lawyer who has handled a number of motorcycle accident cases.

Strategically, handling motorcycle claims is a little different than handling auto accident claims or truck accident claims. Every motorcycle rider knows that there is a little bit of bias in East Texas against motorcycle riders and the insurance companies that handle motorcycle claims have that same bias. Adjusters handling motorcycle accident claims will often stonewall a motorcycle accident attorney in order to see if the injury lawyer is willing to fight to get maximum damages for their clients or is just looking for an easy settlement.

Dealing with an insurance adjuster in a motorcycle accident claim is a little bit like the old story about the farmer who explains that when dealing with a mule that you first need to hit them with something solid so that they know you are serious. Motorcycle accident injuries are usually serious and should be taken seriously by the insurance adjusters that evaluate them. An East Texas motorcycle accident attorney should come out swinging in these cases and keep swinging until the claim is fairly resolved.

A lawyer is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law if he has completed all the requirements for Board Certification as set forth by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. The Texas Board of Legal Specialization is a division of the State Bar of Texas. The State Bar of Texas is the professional and regulatory organization that oversees the practice of law in the State of Texas.

Very few of the Tyler injury attorneys are board certified in personal injury trial law. This is particularly true of Tyler auto accident attorneys. Statewide, only about 5% of Texas attorneys are board certified. As a Tyler injury attorney who is board certified in personal injury trial law I have often been asked by non lawyers why more lawyers aren't board certified. I've always been an advocate of professional growth and development and have been involved in a number of discussions around East Texas regarding this issue.

While some of lawyers simply choose not to be board certified or have a broad practice which doesn't allow them to specialize in one area, the most common reason that I have been given for East Texas personal injury attorneys not being board certified is that they have not tried enough personal injury cases. In order to be eligible to sit for the personal injury board certification exam an attorney must have tried ten personal injury cases to a verdict. The simple reality is that most East Texas personal injury attorneys have not tried ten personal injury cases and thus are not eligible for board certification.

Board Certification requires both experience and the successful completion of a written examination.

To be eligible to sit for the Board Certification exam a lawyer must

1. have practiced for at least five (5) years and devoted a substantial part of his practice to personal injury cases
2. have tried at least ten (10) trials to verdict and,
3. receive favorable recommendations from fellow lawyers and judges.

The Board Certification examination for Personal Injury Trial Law involves a rigorous day long written examination covering all areas of both state and federal law and procedure applicable to personal injury cases. About one out of every four lawyers who take the Board Certification exam for Personal Injury Trial Law fails the exam.

The only incentive that the defendant's insurance company has to pay any funds to an injured person is to finally settle the claim. If they paid for your medical treatment they would be helping you document your injuries and relieving your financial pressure. The insurance companies want you to be financially stressed in hopes that you will feel pressure to settle your case cheaply in order to pay your medical bills.

As a Tyler injury attorney I have quite a few times had new clients show up in my office and tell me that the insurance adjuster for the driver that caused the accident is paying their medical expenses. However, when I investigate the matter, I almost always find that the insurance adjuster's promise to pay the accident related medical expenses is not in writing, that the healthcare providers have not heard anything of the sort from the defendant's insurance company, and that none of the medical bills have been paid. You have to listen very closely to what insurance adjusters say in this type of as situation. If an insurance adjuster tells you that “we'll take care of everything” or “we'll pay for all of your damages” that doesn't mean that they are going to pay your medical bills along the way. The insurance adjuster would argue that their statement simply meant that they would pay what they felt like was a reasonable amount of damages when the case is settled. You will probably not agree with the insurance company's opinion regarding a “reasonable amount of damages”.

The primary purpose of an insurance adjuster giving an accident victim any sort of reassurance is to lead them to believe that they can handle the matter on their own and that they don't need the assistance of an injury attorney. However, the adjusters have been trained to be very careful not to obligate themselves and not to put these kinds of promises in writing.

I've often said that you shouldn't listen to what an insurance company says but rather you should listen to what they do. If they are not already paying your accident related medical expenses then it is unlikely that they are going to do so until you force their hand and that probably means hiring a Tyler injury attorney.

Texas law requires that a claim be made directly against the at-fault party. This is true even though the at-fault party will not ultimately pay any part of the settlement or verdict.

Many states have a "direct action" statute that allows an injured party to make a claim directly against the responsible insurance company. Thus far the insurance lobby in Texas has prevented Texas from having such a direct action statute.

This law infuriates many East Texans. As a Tyler injury attorney I've had a number of situations where the at-fault driver's insurance company refused to make any reasonable settlement offers and forced my law firm to file a lawsuit against their insured and serve their insured with suit papers. Several times these insureds have called my offices and explained that they had insurance, that we mistakenly sued them, and if we are unhappy with their insured company that we should sue their insurance company. When I explained to them that under Texas law we had to sue them and that their insurance company got to hide behind them they were initially in disbelief and subsequently angry with their insurance company for getting them personally sued after having paid high premiums to their insurance company for many years.

Even Louisiana has a direct action statute pursuant to which auto accident victims may sue the automobile liability insurance company which will ultimately be responsible for paying the damages. Thus far, the Texas insurance lobby has prohibited Texas from having such a law.

In most cases Texas law prohibits the jury from knowing that insurance covers the injured person's damages. This law is a testament to the power of the insurance lobby in Texas.

Texas insurance companies want to trick juries into believing that the individual defendant will have to personally pay the verdict. Insurance companies hope that by deceiving the jury a lower verdict will result than if the jury knew the truth.

I've often referred to this law, even in open court, as the “jury fraud law”. This law requires us to commit fraud upon Texas juries when trying personal injury cases.

For example, if a college student causes an accident and injures another motorist and the student's insurance company refuses to pay for the victim's injuries and damages then we must file a lawsuit directly against the student. At trial we are required to pretend as if the college student is going to have to pay the jury verdict out of his pocket without any mention of insurance whatsoever. I usually have to explain this law multiple times to my clients because the law is so unjust that people simply cannot accept it as true without additional explanation.

The insurance companies want to use the sympathy that a jury might feel for the college student in hopes that it will result in a lower verdict. Insurance companies thus seek to use bias, prejudice, and sympathy to their favor. The insurance companies argue that if a jury knew that an insurance company was going to pay the victim's injuries and damages that a jury would award more damages because of the bias and prejudice against insurance companies. The insurance industry is telling us that they are perfectly willing to have bias and prejudice be a part of the system but only if that bias and prejudice works in their favor.

I've always been an advocate of the truth. The truth is that in almost all automobile accident claims as well as other injury claims an insurance company is the real party in interest and should be present in the courtroom as a party to the case.

Yes. If the employer does not have worker's compensation insurance then the employer is a "nonsubscriber" and the injured employee may bring an ordinary negligence claim and recover monetary damages for pain and suffering, physical impairment, disfigurement, loss of wage earning capacity, and medical expenses.

Furthermore, a negligent employer that does not maintain worker's compensation insurance loses the right to reduce the injured worker's recovery by alleging that the accident was the result of the injured worker's own negligence unless the injured worker's negligence was the sole cause of the incident.

If an employer carries worker's compensation insurance the injured worker cannot sue the employer for an on the job injury.

There are two exceptions to the immunity granted by the worker's compensation law to negligent employers. An injured employee can sue an employer for an intentional injury and the dependent family members of a deceased employee can sue an employer to recover punitive damages if the employer's gross negligence causes the worker's death.

Your insurance company has a duty to handle your claim promptly, reasonably, and in "good faith." A "bad faith" lawsuit is really a lawsuit for the breach of the common law duty of good faith and fair dealing in the performance of a contract under Texas law. If an insurance company fails or refuses to honor its contract and pay a valid claim, you may have the right to bring a civil action for damages against that insurance company. The primary Texas statute that regulates the conduct of insurance companies in Texas is Chapter 541 of the Texas Insurance Code.

As a Tyler injury attorney I am often asked just exactly what is “bad faith”? It is probably more instructive to give an example of bad faith than an abstract definition. Take for example the case of a Tyler man who was traveling on a State Highway when a drunk driver crossed the center line and struck his vehicle causing him serious injuries which ultimately caused him to incur in excess of $100,000.00 in medical expenses. The drunk driver had only $25,000.00 in liability insurance which his insurance company paid.

The Tyler man had automobile insurance which included underinsured motorist coverage. The underinsured motorist policy had a single limit of liability of $25,000.00. The underinsured motorist carrier retained a surgeon to review all of the Tyler man's medical treatment and expenses. The surgeon issued a written report concluding that all of the injured victim's injuries were caused by the accident and that all of his treatment was reasonable and necessary to treat his accident related injuries. The underinsured motorist carrier then chose to ignore their own medical expert's report and refused to pay underinsured motorists benefits. This is an excellent example of bad faith conduct by an insurance company.

If your insurance company wrongfully refuses to pay a valid claim, engages in delay tactics, fails to pay a reasonable amount, or commits one of any number of the other abusive tactics that are so commonly used by insurance companies then you may recover not only the amount that you are entitled to receive under the contract but also extra-contractual damages.

Extra-contractual damages caused by your insurance company's bad faith claims handling practices may include economic damages caused by the bad faith conduct, mental anguish damages caused by the bad faith conduct, attorney's fees, and punitive damages. Some insurance company misconduct falls under the regulation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act.

If an insurance company commits a "false, misleading of deceptive trade practice" as defined by the Act then the misbehaving insurance company may be forced to pay actual damages, double damages, treble damages, attorney's fees and costs of court.

Under Texas law the parties to a contract must act in good faith in the performance of a contract. Thus, in most situations your insurance company is legally obligated to act in "good faith" while they are dealing with you regarding a claim on your own insurance policy. Unfortunately, insurance companies often ignore their legal obligations until you hold their feet to the fire.

As a Tyler injury attorney I often hear complaints about the bad faith conduct of an insurance adjuster who works for the insurance company that insured the driver that caused the accident. The legal relationship between the injured victim and the insurance company that is guilty of bad faith determines the remedies that the injured victim has or doesn't have against that insurance company. In Texas when you buy automobile insurance you enter into a contract with your insurance company. If you make a claim for benefits under your automobile insurance policy then you are making what is often referred to as a “first party claim.” By contrast, if you are hit by a drunk driver and make a claim against the drunk driver's insurance policy you are not a party to the insurance contract between the drunk driver and his insurance company. You are a “third party” to that contract and thus you are making what is referred to as a “third party claim.”

Up until the mid 1990s, insurance adjusters handling third party claims had a legal duty to conduct themselves in good faith and could be sued for bad faith if they failed to conduct themselves properly. However, during the 1990s the Texas Supreme Court eliminated the duty of good faith and fair dealing in connection with the handling of third party claims. Thus an insurance adjuster handling a third party claim can misbehave quite badly and your only remedy is to cease negotiations with them and proceed to trial on the underlying claim.

In connection with first party claims, such as when you make an underinsured motorist claim under your own insurance policy, the insurance company still has a duty to deal with you in good faith. Unfortunately, the insurance adjusters that handle first party claims are usually the same adjusters that handle third party claims and they treat all claimants the same and frequently are guilty of bad faith. Under current Texas law the procedure for making a bad faith claim against your own insurance company is that you must complete the litigation of the underlying claim, prevail on that underlying claim, and then you may file a bad faith lawsuit against your insurance company for misconduct committed during the handling of the initial claim.

Because recent insurance friendly changes to Texas law have eliminated the ability of the personal injury lawyers who police the insurance industry to sue the insurance companies for bad faith until after the primary underinsured/ uninsured motorists claim is resolved.

The duty of good faith and fair dealing in the performance of the contract still applies to your insurance company when they are dealing with you while you are making a claim under you own insurance policy.

However, like most of the legal doctrines that regulate insurance companies in Texas this area of the law has been eroded by the insurance friendly courts over the last 15 years.

If you are injured by the negligence of an uninsured or underinsured motorist and you have uninsured or underinsured coverage then you have a right to make a claim for those benefits.

In the past if your insurance company drug their feet, ignored you, took ridiculous positions, or engaged in other dilatory conduct as they are prone to do then you could sue them immediately for "bad faith."

This immediate consequence made insurance companies behave. Now you must first file a lawsuit for UM/UIM benefits, go to trial, and prove that you are entitled to the benefits before you can sue your insurance company for their bad faith conduct during your UM/UIM claim.

The insurance companies aren't stupid. They know that many lawyers rarely or have never tried a personal injury or insurance case and thus the chance of one of these lawyers holding them accountable at trial for bad faith is very remote.

If you're having trouble with an insurance company and are considering hiring a lawyer to help you then you may want to ask the lawyer how many personal injury or insurance cases he has tried to verdict. The insurance companies will know whether your lawyer goes to trial and you should too.

In Texas, parties to a contract have a duty of good faith and fair dealing in the performance of the contract. Until the 1990's this duty applied to not only the parties to the contract but also to the "intended beneficiaries" of the contract. In the past, if you were injured by someone else's negligence and they had insurance covering their conduct then you were considered to be an intended beneficiary of the contract and the insurance company and their adjusters were obligated to act in good faith in handling the matter.

If the insurance adjusters got out of line then they could be sued for "bad faith" which is really just the breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. Using the bad faith laws the personal injury lawyers did a good job of policing the insurance companies and making them behave.

However, over the last 15 years the Texas courts have become increasingly "insurance friendly" and during the 1990's the duty of an insurance company to conduct themselves in good faith while handling claims against their negligent insureds was eliminated.

At this point if you have been hurt by someone else's negligence and their insurance company is treating you unfairly then your choice is either to just accept the abuse or to hire a lawyer that will file a lawsuit.

Many lawyers do not go to trial and the insurance companies take this into account when settling their client's claims. My law firm files lawsuits and goes to trial when necessary.

Hospitals frequently refuse to file on an accident victim's health insurance and instead file a grossly inflated hospital lien against the insurance of the person causing the accident. This practice is a violation of Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code Chapter 146.

Years ago Chapter 55 of the Texas Property Code was enacted giving Texas hospitals a lien for the "reasonable and regular" charges for emergency medical services upon the insurance of the person at fault in causing an accident.

The idea was that because Texas hospitals are obligated to provide emergency medical care to injured persons who present with emergency medical needs at an emergency room that the hospital should in exchange have a lien for the cost of these emergency medical services upon the insurance of the person causing the accident.

Unfortunately, most hospitals "regularly" send out bills that are inflated by several times more than the "reasonable" charges. A recent study concluded that hospitals initially charge approximately 250% of the reasonable and necessary charge for emergency medical services.

If the hospital submits the inflated bill to private health insurance then they will be reimbursed only the reasonable and necessary charge.

A Texas hospital bill is like a Texas prison sentence, it doesn't mean what it says. However, if the hospital files a lien for the full amount and gets away with it then they have gotten a 250% "bonus".

Employers that purchase worker's compensation insurance policies which comply with the terms and conditions of the Texas Workers' Compensation Act receive a grant of immunity from the ordinary negligence claims of their employees. However, the grant of immunity is not absolute and there are several exceptions. Employers are not immune from the claims of their employees based on the intentional acts or omissions of the employer. Furthermore, employers are not immune from punitive damages for the grossly negligent conduct of the employer which causes the death of an employee. These claims are not really “Wrongful Death” claims. Gross negligence death claims seeking punitive damages are often referred to as “Employers B” cases. This is because the authority for these claims comes from Subpart (B) of Texas Labor Code Section 408.001 which authorizes the spouse and heirs of the body of a deceased worker to bring a gross negligence claim against an employer seeking punitive damages.

Another way that a Texas employer might be responsible for damages in connection with the death of an employee is if the employer did not maintain workers' compensation insurance. In such a situation the employer is sued for both wrongful death and survival claims pursuant to the provisions of Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 71. Such a claim is no different from any other wrongful death and survival claim except that a nonsubscriber employer may not assert the common law defenses of assumption of the risk or contributory negligence.

After more than thirty-seven years and thousands of personal injury cases there is virtually nothing that we haven't seen and successfully handled. There is no substitute for experience. If you want the assistance of an experienced Board Certified Personal Injury Attorney in the Tyler / Longview / East Texas area contact us today.