This post is from Attorney Edward A. (“Ted”) Bills who can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

Almost everyone will get a speeding ticket at some time. Some individuals even get multiple tickets and suffer the consequences (fines, insurance premium increases, even loss of a job). Still, very few people even think about fighting the ticket or hiring a layer to do the fighting.

More people should fight, however, for if you know what to do the fight can often be won.

Some interesting facts:

1.  The city is really interested only in the money and will seldom give up on that issue; and

2.  Points, on the other hand, are of little importance to the city; and

3.  Traffic courts are crowded and busy and the courts are always looking for ways to shorten their work load.

It is not unusual for a police officer to sit in one location for hours at a time writing multiple tickets and making money for the city. The officer generally does not think that the driver (or the other drivers given tickets that day) are a danger to the community. The office is simply playing a role. The officer is writing tickets and assuming the driver will not fight the ticket or that, if the driver does fight the ticket, the driver will come into the courtroom with a poor defense. In either case, the city will make its money.

The real winner is the auto insurance company as they have a big financial interest in having tickets written. When their customers get  tickets they get a valid argument for raising insurance premiums.

Like the police officer who writes the ticket, judges also understand their role. Their job is to find the driver guilty and help the city secure money. Many people make it very easy for the judge as they do not offer much of a defense. In fact, most people make it even easier – by not fighting the ticket at all.

With, or without, an attorney the prospect of going to court prepared and knowledgeable can produce a much better result.

My law firm provides clients with aggressive traffic law violation defense and, as a result, even if our clients pay a fine (the city really want the money) the fine will generally be lower. While the client also pays a fee for our legal servies – the results can often be significantly different with no (or lower) points and, perhaps, the ticket entirely expunged. Most importantly, clients represented by attorneys are often moved to the head of the line meaning that they are in and out of court in short order, saving valueable time.

I could tell some great stories of my days in traffic court but that would entail disclosure of matters protected by attorney-client privilege – or I could give you even more tips on how to beat a ticket but that would entail giving legal advise and this web site is designed for informational purposes and not for legal advise.

In conclusion: individuals should always fight speeding tickets and, ideally, with the help of a knowledgable lawyer.

This post is from Attorney Edward A. (“Ted”) Bills who can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

Here are some questions I just received from an individual who found me through my web site. This issue could be of interest to many individuals (and maybe an attorney or two):

The individual said, “An Insurance Company just called me and wanted to interview me over the telephone about my claim regarding some stolen property. I have heard that many insurance companies record such conversations and then test them with “stress analyzers” to see if the other party is telling the truth. Here are my questions:

1.  Can they record the conversation without asking me for my approval?

2.  If they do ask me, can I refuse to allow them to record the conversation?

3.  Can I insist that the conversation be monitored by an attorney representing me?

4.  Can the recorded conversation be used in court?

These are really great questions and since my answer was: “It depends!” and since the detailed answer was given in confidence, I am not going to publish my detailed answer here for all to read. Yes, I know that sound like lawyer-speak but what else would you expect from an attorney? There is also that thing about “Attorney-Client” privilege or in Las Vegas lingo “What is said to an attorney, stays with that attorney.” More importantly, this blog is designed to be informative, to give me a place to ventilate, and it is not designed to serve as legal advise. So, if this topic is of interest to you personally and you want to know the laws in your state, please call a lawyer in your state and ask him or her those questions.

I said ‘it depends’ based on the facts regarding the law in the state where the individual lives. I only practice law in the state of Colorado, so anything I say in this blog has first been run through my “Colorado” filter and could have little value to someone living in another state where the statutes might be different.

At first, the question of whether or not to record a telephone call seems like an issue of personal preference. Some insurance companies see recording telephone interview as an indispensable tool, while many attorneys do not like the formality it may impose during such an interview. Many individuals are prone to tworry that saying ‘no’ could translate into “I have something to hide.” There is also the little issue known as the ”Miranda Ruling” that says: “You have the right to remain silent.” Some individuals and insurance companies would not consider taping a call without asking for consent, others do it routinely.

But there is ALWAYS an opposing counsel when lawyers get involved and much like criminal cases, where any attorney would tell a client to keep his or her mouth shut and NEVER answer any questions without an attorney being present, allowing time for the lawyer to object or to advise the client not to answer – especially if the person you are talking with is with the police or in the cell next to you – you also need to think carefully before agreeing to a recorded interview or putting anything in writing without first talking to a lawyer.

I know of a non-attorney individual who once lost a major malpractice case just because the non-attorney individual said, in a letter to the other party, “you have some responsibility here…” and the court interpreted that comment as putting the other party on notice that they should have known of the potential for a malpractice claim and so advised their insurance carrier.

There are important questions of law that must be addressed since both federal and state statutes govern the use of electronic recording equipment. The unlawful use of such equipment can give rise not only to civil claims by the “injured” party, but also the risk of criminal prosecution.

Accordingly, it is critical that a person understand the statutes and since it is highly unlikely that a non-attorney would know the statutes, it is wise, perhaps essential, to call and talk with an attorney BEFORE agreeing to such a request (or any other request for that matter) from an insurance company.

Your lawyer will advise you regarding your rights and the responsibilities of the insurance company regarding recording and disclosing communications. You always have the right to say to the insurance company something like “I will get back to you on that request” and then call a lawyer for legal advise. 

This post is from Attorney Edward A. (“Ted”) Bills who can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

Sometimes lawyers get so busy working for their paying clients that they forget their responsibility to perform some pro bono work in their community. Now don’t let anyone think that being a lawyer isn’t hard work, the hours are long, the work tedious, and, as all lawyers know, the rewards are few.

Yet, here comes a story about the Tennessee Bar Association (TBA) honoring Betsy Prendergast, a third-year law student at the University of Memphis. The TBA recently gave Ms. Prendergast an award as the “Law Student Volunteer of the Year” at their annual public service luncheon in Nashville.

The TBA selected Ms. Prendergast for her three years of outstanding volunteer service work with an organization that’s dedicated to representing the indigent – in this case, Memphis’ Community Legal Center, a nonprofit organization housed within the Metropolitan Inter-Faith Association.

Doing pro bono work is a bit like either teaching your children about family values or helping your aging parents with some heavy lifting. The children tend to remember what you teach and the parents tend to be thankful that you’re just around; even with all the grief, heartache, and money you cost them over the years.

Ms. Prendergast has a lot to teach many of us in the legal profession about values and how it is important to never forget our responsibility to the community we serve.

This post is from Attorney Edward A. (“Ted”) Bills who can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

When you suffer a personal injury, you may be entitled to compensation for your injuries. Legal responsibility, called “liability,” revolves around the fact that most injuries happen because someone was careless or “negligent.” Even if you were partly responsible for your own injury, it is still possible to get some compensation if someone else was also careless and partly responsible for your injury.

Common injuries in personal injury cases include head injuries, brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, burn injuries, broken bones, fractures, knee injuries, neck injuries, back injuries, shoulder injuries, muscle and ligament injuries, herniated or bulging disks, reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), paralysis, paraplegia, and quadriplegia. Personal injury law areas of practice generally include motor vehicle accidents, auto accidents, motorcycle crashes, semi-truck collisions, 18-wheeler wrecks, SUV rollover accidents, drunk driving accidents, slip, trip and fall injuries, premises liability claims, construction site accidents, job-related accidents, industrial accidents, dangerous and defective products, as well as dog bites and animal attacks.

When you’re injured, you need all the help you can get, and you need it as soon as possible. Still, it’s important to pick an attorney who will care more about your well-being than in getting a quick, but low, settlement – someone that will understand that it is not just you who has issues, but your spouse, your children, and other family members.

Many personal injury lawyers provide initial consultations free of charge. Through such a process you can interview the lawyer before making a decision. What is important is how comfortable you are with the lawyer you select. Care should be taken, however, to make your selection in a relatively short period of time since the law provides strict limits and specific time period in which suit may be brought. Once engaged, an attorney should be responsive to your needs; answer questions satisfactorily, return telephone calls promptly, have an experienced administrative staff and, most importantly, represent your interests zealously. If at any time you are dissatisfied with your lawyer, you should be able to change attorneys without penalty.

While most personal injury claims are settled out of court, knowing that an attorney is both willing and able to try a case in court, if that becomes necessary, should add an additional dimension to your overall sense of security. Then if the case does fail to settle, strong and shrewd litigation skills can almost certainly precipitate a better outcome.

So what does it cost?

Most personal injury lawyers work on a contingent-fee basis, which means that you pay nothing unless the attorney wins the case or secures a settlement acceptable to you. Typical contingent fees range from thirty to forty percent of the amount of damages recovered. While it may be tempting to choose a lawyer based solely on who will take the lowest percentage, fees alone should not be the determining factor since it is often the most experienced lawyer that will ask for, deserve and earn, the higher fees.

All legal cases have associated costs and such costs need to be paid. In personal injury cases, costs are generally paid first from the settlement funds, but it there is no settlement, costs are paid by the client. Costs include such items as filing fees, expert testimony fees, deposition fees, arbitration fees, legal research fees, postage, administrative and other related costs.

This post is from Attorney Edward A. (“Ted”) Bills who can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

This post is likely of greater interest to lawyers since it addresses a major milestone in federal court administration.

For years, the federal courts have issued “unpublished” oppinions and then precluded lawyers from citing them as precedent – that is not the case – or it will be no longer the case starting January 1, 2007, unless Congress countermands it before December 1.

So what caused the Supreme Court to adopt this historic rule change?

It appears that Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Alito may have played crucial rules in bringing about this long overdue change.

Some time ago when debating this issues, 9th Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, the leading opponent of the rule change, said unpublished opinions were so designated for a reason: They are drafted “entirely” by law clerks and staff attorneys. He added, “When the people making the sausage tell you it’s not safe for human consumption, it seems strange indeed to have a committee in Washington tell people to go ahead and eat it anyway.”

The committee Kozinski was referring to, the Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, was chaired at the time by then-3rd Circuity Judge Samuel Alito Jr., and one of its members was then-D.C. Circuit Judge John Robers Jr. Both supported the change while on the committee, and now that both serve on the Supreme Court, Wednesday’s vote may have been unsurprising.

The advisory committee’s original recommendation was to allow the citation of all unpublished opinions, both past and future, but a Judicial Conference added an amendment to make the rule prospective, allowing the citation only of those rulings issued on or after next January 1. The high court adopted that amendment.

So how does one go about finding an unpublished case while doing legal research? Simple: the “unpublished” cases are readily available electronically, on Westlaw and Lexis. 

This blog is provided by http://www.SpringsAttorney.com the moderator is Attorney Edward A. (”Ted”) Bills, a personal/bodily injury attorney with offices in Colorado Springs, CO 80906. If you would like to talk with Attorney Bills, please call 719.444.1000 

In my personal and professional opinion it is the insurance companies – not personal injury lawyers – who are gouging doctors and the public.

Anyone with a television set has seen the airwaves flooded with commercials about how doctors are being driven away by lawyers and personal injury malpractice lawsuits. TV stations show doctors actually picketing and blaming trial lawyers for the skyrocketing premiums they have to pay. Doctors threaten to quit the practice of medicine and to move to other states with lower insurance premiums.

This is a story as familiar as it is misleading. When I reviewed statements filed by medical malpractice insurers in the Washington, DC area they show that lawsuits are actually going down, claims are going down, but rates are still going up.

It is hard to understand how attacking personal injury lawyers, taking away injured patients legal rights, imposing “caps” on jury awards, or any of the other things that have been advanced as “explanations” for this will help the situation.

The statistics in DC mirror what is occurring around the nation. An analysis of a national study of the 15 leading malpractice insurer carriers showed that premiums doubled – doubled! – yet paid claims remained flat since 2000.

In a recent issue of the Washington Monthly, Stephanie Mencimer debunked the myth of the so-called Personal injury “lawsuit crisis” and disclosed how the media played along. With anti-trial lawyer rhetoric reaching a fever pitch, this important article rebuts the lies that are being told about personal injury lawyers, so-called ‘frivolous lawsuits’ and the fictitious notion of a ‘lawsuit crisis’ in this country.
In her article, Ms. Mencimer noted “Last December, Newsweek featured a cover package by Stuart Taylor and Evan Thomas that blared: “Lawsuit Hell: Doctors, Teachers, Coaches, [and] Ministers. They all share a common fear: being sued on the job.” Paired with a weeklong tie-in on NBC News and online chats on MSNBC.com, the article [in Newsweek] claimed that because “Americans will sue each other at the slightest provocation,” the country is suffering from an “onslaught of litigation” that costs Americans $200 billion a year. The story was full of tales claiming to illustrate Americans’ overarching sense of legal entitlement and desire to “win a jackpot from a system that allows sympathetic juries to award plaintiffs not just real damages” but millions more for the impossible-to-measure ‘pain and suffering’ and highly arbitrary ‘punitive damages.’

“Among others, the story featured a softball tournament organizer, a minister, and a doctor who all claimed to have modified their behavior because they were terrified of lawsuits. Ryan Warner, an insurance salesman in Page, Ariz., told Newsweek that he had recently cancelled an annual charity softball tournament because an injured player had sued the city of Page for $100,000. Warner said that he worried he might be added as a defendant.

“The story as published, though, lacks a few critical details. Newsweek didn’t mention, for instance, that the 1997 federal Volunteer Protection Act ensures that people like Warner are immunized from these types of lawsuits. The article also excluded the injured man, Richard Sawyer, a locomotive engineer who suffered a dislocated ankle and a spiral fracture to the fibula–and missed months of work as a result–after he slid into a base that was supposed to break away on impact but didn’t because the city hadn’t followed the manufacturer’s instructions for maintaining these fixtures properly, according to Kevin Garrison, Sawyer’s lawyer.

“The event organizers had insurance–required by the city–to protect against exactly this kind of situation, but Warner cancelled the tournament anyway because he says the lawsuit was “a hassle.” Canceling the tournament proved a smart PR move, as it brought out an immense amount of pressure on Sawyer to drop his suit, says Garrison. The case was settled this January for an undisclosed amount and Warner was never named. In fact, the tournament has been revived and scheduled for early September.

“Not only were the particulars of the Newsweek story misleading. The essence of the story was wrong, too. Newsweek’s “onslaught” of lawsuits simply hasn’t happened. According to the National Center for State Courts, a research group funded by state courts, personal injury and other tort filings, when controlled for population growth, have declined nationally by 8 percent since the 1975, and have been falling steadily in real numbers since 1996. The numbers are even more dramatic in places with rapid population growth, like Texas, where the rate of tort filings fell 37 percent between 1990 and 2000. Even in liberal California, the rate of filings has plummeted 45 percent over the past decade. And those overly sympathetic juries Newsweek derides as so eager to dole out big bucks to injured victims?

In 2001, they voted against plaintiffs in 75 percent of all medical malpractice trials, according to the federal government’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In an interview, Taylor dismisses these numbers as insignificant compared with the tort system’s $200 billion drag on the economy. “The costs of the tort system to society have gone up astronomically,” he says. That figure, though, comes from the insurance-industry consulting firm Tillinghast-Towers Perrin (TTP), which includes in its definition of the “tort system” insurance company administrative costs and overhead and the salaries of highly paid insurance company CEOs (Maurice “Hank” Greenberg, chairman of AIG, one of the world’s largest insurance companies, makes $29 million a year). One thing TTP doesn’t include: court budgets, which makes its study seem a lot more like an assessment of the insurance industry than of the legal system.

It’s not as though Newsweek wasn’t aware of these facts. On Friday, Dec. 5, a day before the story went to press, Taylor contacted the Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) for a quote. ATLA relayed the request to the nonprofit Center for Justice and Democracy (CJD), whose director, Joanne Doroshow, emailed Taylor information that contradicted some of the assertions in the story, including the state court data and a critique of the TTP study. (Doroshow provided the entire email exchange to The Washington Monthly.) Taylor dismissed it all, telling Doroshow, “Based on your many emails to me over the past 24 hours, you have very little thoughtful analysis to contribute to that debate.”

Taylor did, however, take lots of his information from Philip K. Howard, the founder of Common Good, a group funded by corporations and physicians seeking to limit their legal liability for wrongdoing. Common Good’s agenda includes advocating for legislation that would end the civil jury’s role in many lawsuits. To advance the cause, Common Good helps reporters generate anti-lawsuit articles by distributing colorful litigation horror stories from around the country–the story from the Arizona Sun about Warner’s softball tournament, for instance, was linked on Common Good’s Web site a few months before the Newsweek story appeared.

Incidentally, Howard also works for the law firm of Covington & Burling, which represents Newsweek’s parent company. Post-Newsweek Inc. has been sued a number of times for employment discrimination and was hit with an $8.3 million verdict in 1999, a fact that Newsweek didn’t mention in the story.”