The Georgia Legislature recently passed House Bill 336 to regulate and establish procedures for pre suit policy limits time demands in motor vehicle accident claims. The bill was initially drafted by a group of yet to be identified plaintiff and insurance defense lawyers and quickly passed both the House and the Senate. The bill has been submitted to Governor Nathan Deal for his signature. Once signed into a law a new code section , O.C.G.A 9-11-67.1, will be enacted that specifies certain requirements for a valid pre suit time demand.
Continue Reading…
Georgia Legislature Passes Bill to Regulate Pre Suit Time
Spoliation: Can it really work for the defense too?
Spoliation letters sent by plaintiff lawyers are commonplace in litigation. These letters typically demand that the defense “preserve” any and all evidence that might be relevant to contemplated or pending litigation, with the threat that if the evidence is not preserved the plaintiff will seek to have the Court sanction the defense (strike the answer). Wouldn’t it be nice if the defense could turn the tables on the plaintiffs and make them subject to sanctions for spoliation of evidence? Recently, we were able to do that and secure a dismissal of a case where the plaintiff was seeking more than $2 million in damages from our client.
Continue Reading…
I would like to make a reservation…
Holding the criminal accountable, even if the plaintiff’s lawyer doesn’t want to!
The GA Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a jury apportioning “fault” to a criminal in a case brought by the victim against the property owner. Couch v. Red Roof Inns, Inc. The result of this landmark decision will serve, potentially, to reduce the liability of a property owner and otherwise lower its share of money damages as to any plaintiff’s verdict in the given case.
Continue Reading…
The Legal Tender
If your company or insured gets sued over something “arising out of” a contract with another company, why should you have to pay to defend or settle the case? Shouldn’t the other company pay your tab? Well, perhaps they should!
If you are interested in how we made that happen in a recent case, click on the below link.
Loser Pays!
When the plaintiff wins, the defense pays money. When the defense wins . . .
When the defense wins, why should the defendant and insurer have to eat the defense bill? Why doesn’t the plaintiff who loses the case have to pay the defense fees and expenses? Is that fair?
Well, thanks to a recent appellate court ruling in one of our cases, a strategically secured defense win may require that losing plaintiff to pay!
Continue Reading…
Paying your fair share (but only your fair share)!
Did you know that the issue of jury apportionment of “fault” in premises liability, criminal attack cases is hanging in the balance and will be decided soon in our Georgia appellate courts? So, how will the upcoming decision impact you if you handle these cases for your insurer, TPA or company?
Continue Reading…
Apportionment in Premises Liability – A Defense Perspective
By Matthew G. Moffett and
Wayne S. Melnick,
Gray, Rust, St. Amand, Moffett & Brieske
Introduction
In a recent CaseMetrix editorial, an author presented his experiences regarding two “criminal attack” premises liability cases and how Georgia’s law regarding apportionment affected each of those trials. The editorial was written by a Plaintiff’s attorney sharing his perspective and experiences. This editorial is written not as a response to the previous one, but rather to present the perspective and experiences of attorneys from the defense side of the bar that have tried apportionment, premises liability cases involving criminal attacks.
Continue Reading…