Dog Attacks/Dog Bites: Which Dogs Attack Humans The Most?

This is an older article, which was recently pointed out to me, tries to identify the dog breeds that have attacked the most.  The results probably won’t surprise you much.  According to the article, the top 5 breeds for most attacks on people are:

  1. Pit Bull
  2. Rottweiler
  3. German Shepherd
  4. Siberian Husky
  5. Akita

These results would follow what we’ve found in our practice.  Most of the attacks we see involve either Pit Bulls or Rottweilers.  The worst dog attack case we worked on involved a Bull Mastiff, another large dog that has been bred to be a guard dog.

There is a caveat in this article and in my findings.  The article is based on a study about reported dog bites or dog attacks.  I’m sure there are many smaller breeds who are also involved in a significant number of bites or attacks.  But because these dogs don’t do the damage that these dogs can do, the bites or attacks may go unreported.  Similarly, when we are asked to represent victims of dog attacks, they are usually from serious injuries, more likely to be caused by big dogs.

To see if others agreed with the dangerous breed list, I did a quick Google search to see what others might be saying.  In doing so, I found a couple of results that were a bit surprising.

This article from Europe found that labradors were most likely to be involved in attacks.  Part of this might have to do with the sheer number of labradors as pets.  In fact, the article noted that the labrador was the most popular dog in Europe.

This article, also from Europe, found that police officers were more likely to be bitten by Jack Russell Terriers.

These articles only go to show that persons should be cautious around any types of dogs.  In the wrong situation, dogs of any breeds can attack and cause significant, and perhaps fatal, injuries.

My MRI or CT Scan Was Negative. Does This Mean I Don’t Have A Brain Injury?

This is another question I’ve recently received from potential clients.  They were involved in an incident — a car wreck, a slip and fall, or something similar.  They went to the ER, and the ER performed an MRI or a CT san looking for problems, but scan came back negative.  Does this mean that the was no brain injury?

Absolutely not.

While an MRI or a CT scan can find some brain bleeds or some damage, they don’t find most problems.  As a result, the vast majority of people who have brain injuries have a normal (what we call negative) MRI or CT scan.

Indeed, while insurance companies sometimes try to argue about claims when you have a normal MRI or CT scan, virtually all scientific literature and all neurologists agree that you can still have a normal scan.  Not only that, virtually all neurologists will agree that most of the patients they see for brain injuries have normal scans.

So if you feel like you’re off or your family members are telling you that you’re different after a car wreck, a fall, or another event, don’t rule out a possible brain injury just because you had a normal CT scan or MRI.  You may very well still have a mild traumatic brain injury that needs to be treated

The Emergency Room Didn’t Say Anything About A Concussion. Does That Mean I Don’t Have A Brain Injury?

This is a question I’ve seemed to be answering for clients lately.  You are in a wreck or other event.  You go to the emergency room.  They look you over, they never say anything about a brain injury, and they send you home.  Does this mean you don’t have some type of brain injury?

Absolutely not.

Emergency rooms (and even other doctors) are notoriously bad at diagnosing brain injuries.  Why is that?

First, emergency rooms are triage facilities.  They are only really looking for the things that are life-threatening or need to be treated immediately.  Too often, this means that they don’t look for brain injuries unless the brain injury is the type that’s completely obvious.

Second, emergency rooms (and most other doctors) don’t know you.  For the most part, there’s not a readily available test that we can use during a doctor’s visit to say whether you have a brain injury.  The first time a brain injury is diagnosed is usually based on your complaints of your symptoms and comparisons of how you were before you got hurt to how you are after you got hurt.  Doctors can compare your symptoms to common brain injury symptoms, but the doctors have to be looking to put two and two together.  And doctors usually don’t know you well enough to compare your condition from before the wreck to your condition after the wreck.  As a result, it’s often difficult for a doctor to make the diagnoses of a brain injury.

That’s why I tell clients that it’s so important to have friends and family members look for changes in your condition or behavior.  For our clients, we have forms that we give you to fill out that can help figure out what problems you’re having.  That way, you’ll be in a better position to articulate to your doctor the problems you’re having and the doctor can more easily and quickly make a referral to a neurologist or other treating physician.

Don’t Let GEICO Or Other Insurance Companies Take Advantage Of You After A Car Wreck

Insurance claim forme

Here are today’s two lessons from a court decision yesterday:  (1) Take your time before settling your case.  (2) Talk to a lawyer before settling a case.

I often warn victims of car wrecks or other accidents to be aware of insurance companies’ “swoop and settle” tactics.  In these situations, the insurance company (GEICO seems to be the worst) contacts you immediately after a wreck and makes an immediate settlement offer to try to get you to give up your rights before you know how bad you are hurt or before you know your rights.

Yesterday, the Dallas Court of Appeals handed down a new case that shows just how this terrible practice works.

In the case, Windell Gilbert was injured in a car wreck.  GEICO was the insurance company that covered the driver who caused the wreck.

Eight days after the wreck, GEICO called and suggested to Mr. Gilbert that they settle the case for GEICO’s payment of the medical expenses incurred on the date of the accident (which totaled $4,806.75) and $500.00 to Mr. Gilbert.  Mr. Gilbert agreed, and the GEICO representative had them do a recorded call confirming that settlement.

Not surprisingly, but Mr. Gilbert ended up being hurt much worse than he thought.  He went to a doctor and had over $15,000.00 more in medical expenses.

Mr. Gilbert later sued the other driving, arguing that the first settlement was unfair.  But yesterday’s opinion held that Mr. Gilbert and GEICO had a binding agreement and that Mr. Gilbert was bound to the $500.00 agreement.  Moreover, the court awarded GEICO (through the other driver) $10,000.00 in attorneys’ fees against Mr. Gilbert.

This case is a perfect example of why car wreck victims should wait to talk to an attorney and to take a little time before settling a case.  Initially, even if Mr. Gilbert wasn’t hurt more than just needing medical care on the first day, the offer from GEICO was a terrible offer.  But more importantly, people are often hurt more than they realize.  Problems linger or don’t show up until later.  I typically advise my clients that in most cases, you shouldn’t settle until you know you’re better or until a doctor tells you you’re not better, but you’re as good as you’re going to get.

So remember the lessons for car wreck (and really all injury) claims. Don’t settle too early, and don’t settle without talking to a personal injury lawyer.

 

 

Brain Injuries: New Study Finds Even One Concussion Can Have Lasting Effects

The human brainMany of us that deal with these injuries routinely have suspected it, but a new study confirms that even one concussion can have lasting effects.

The study was based on extensive data on the health of people in Sweden.  The researchers found 104,000 people who experienced head injuries between 1973 and 1985.  The researches then looked at the these brain injured persons’ records after their injuries and compared those results with the results and history of the siblings of the brain injured persons.

The researchers found that persons who had even one concussion were more likely to receive future disability payments, more likely to need mental health care, less likely to graduate high school, and much more likely to die prematurely.

The researchers also found that the problems increased significantly if the person had more than one concussion, and if the persons had their head injuries after the age of 15.

The good news is that most of the people who had just one concussion were fine.  But people who have suffered concussions will still have to worry about what their future must hold.

The article also noted that the leading causes of brain injuries are what we see often in our practice.  For the very young, the leading cause of concussions is falls.  For teens, the leading cause becomes sports.  And for adults, the leading cause of brain injuries is car wrecks.

If you or a loved one has experienced a concussion or other brain injury because of another person or business’s carelessness, call us at (512)476-4944.  We will try to help you navigate the difficult process of pursuing your claim.

 

 

 

Brain Injuries: Risk Of Suicide May Increase Three Fold After A Concussion

brainI’m part of a nation-wide group of lawyers who regularly exchange articles and other information with one another about brain injury cases.

This week, we were having an online discussion about suicide, and we shared a study from earlier this year finding that persons who have suffered even a single concussion may be at a much higher risk for suicide.

What really struck me is how these risks apply to my clients.

In a Scientific American article about the study, Dr. Donald Redelmeier, one of the study’s lead authors stated:

The typical patient I see is a middle-aged adult, not elite athlete.  And the usual circumstances for acquiring a concussion are not while playing football; it is when driving in traffic and getting into a crash, when missing a step and falling down a staircase, when getting overly ambitious about home repairs — the everyday activities of life.

These are the things we routinely see in our practice. Over the last year, I’ve represented clients who have had brain injuries in car wrecks, bicycle wrecks, slip-and-fall accidents, and more.

Too often the diagnoses of these injuries is slow, and in many cases, not recognized until very late in the process.   This delays the treatment, including the psychological treatment, that clients need to help them start the road to recovery from these devastating injuries.

 

Is Football Affecting Your Case?

American football on white background.

Summer is over and football is back.  My University of Texas Longhorns are off to a great start with a big season-opening win over Notre Dame.  Even my daughter’s high school is 2-0.  Everything about football season is great, right?

Maybe not.

You see, football season may be affecting your case.

Earlier this week, the Atlantic published a concerning story about a study from LSU economists Naci Mocan and Ozkan Eren, who found that the results of college football games affect how judges rule.  The story states:

In looking at decisions handed down by judges in Louisiana’s juvenile courts between 1996 and 2012, the pair found that when LSU lost football games it was expected to win, judges — specifically those who had earned their bachelor’s degrees from the school — issued harsher sentences following the loss.  When the team was ranked in the top 10 before the losing game, kids wound up behind bars for about two months longer, on average.  When the team was not as highly ranked, it was a little more than a month.

This was a pretty broad study, looking at over 8,200 cases involving 207 judges.  The economists screened for the kids’ behavior in court, economic background, and even tested placebos through non-LSU games, and none of those factors had the same impact as football.

Some have criticized the findings, but the economists hope that their research will strengthen a growing body of evidence that suggests emotions influence unrelated decisions and that the study will perhaps help judges become aware of the decision-making and make the judges more careful.

That emotion is an issue.  Those of us who are trial lawyers know that jurors and judges often make emotional decisions and then try to subconsciously rationalize those decisions through their view of the logic of the case.  We’ve factored in for that.  But I guess now, we need to start asking jurors in voir dire about their football teams too.

Having said all that, enjoy Friday Night Lights, college football and the NFL this weekend.

 

Posted on: September 9, 2016 | Tagged

No Pokemon (ing) While Driving

Fairly typical questions we ask and investigate in car wreck cases are whether the driver was distracted by talking on the phone or texting while driving.  Now, I might have to start another series of questions after the introduction of Pokemon Go.

Pokemon Go is an app game that was released a few days ago, and it’s already taking over the virtual worlds of kids and young adults.

But this morning, I was alerted by a reporter acquaintance that the new game is also quickly becoming a driving hazard.  A quick twitter search confirmed his fears.

I’m inserting a few of the concerning screen shots in the post.  Needless to say, don’t play PokemonGo or engage in other distracting conduct while driving.  Keep yourself focused while driving so your ultimate time for Pokemon isn’t cut short.

IMG_6907 IMG_6908 IMG_6909 IMG_6910 IMG_6911 IMG_6912 IMG_6913 IMG_6914 IMG_6915

Mediation/Settlement Lessons From An NBA Trade

basketballI’m not a huge NBA fan, but over the last few days, I have been listening to a variety of talk show hosts discuss the trade of former NBA MVP Derrick Rose from the Chicago Bulls to the New York Knicks in exchange for a few of the Knicks’ players.

Normally, that wouldn’t be all that news-worthy, especially in the lawsuit context.  But one of the commentators made a point that was familiar to me.

When this commentator was asked who got the better part of the trade, the Bulls or the Knicks, the commentator laughed and said, “You know, both of the fan bases are pretty unhappy with the trade, which tells me that it was probably a pretty fair trade.”

I laughed to myself when I heard that because that’s advice I find myself giving a lot of clients.  In most settlements, the plaintiff settled for less than they really wanted, and the defendant paid more than they really wanted.  And I usually tell clients that when that happens, it’s a pretty good indication that the settlement is a fair settlement.

Now, that’s not to say that we never have a negotiation or settlement where we feel like we’ve been overly-compensated, but it’s rare — insurance companies aren’t in the business of just handing out money.  And in NBA or NFL or MLB trades, there are some trades where you can look at the deal and know that one side was really coming out much better than the other.

But more often than not, in most trades and in most settlement negotiations, both sides usually end up walking away a little disappointed, and that’s usually a signal that it was probably a pretty fair result.

 

Posted on: June 24, 2016 | Tagged

Texas Farm Bureau & Texas Department Of Insurance Trying To Take Away Important Rights

Insurance claim forme

I’ve seen a lot of questionable conduct by insurance companies, but the latest proposal may take the cake.

Texas Farm Bureau is now petitioning the Texas Department of Insurance to allow it to offer a “discount” to its home insurance customers in exchange for customers giving up their rights to a fair trial of any dispute.

But the good folks at Texas Watch have been trying to find out the details on this backroom deal and have come up with some details about the proposal.

First, the proposal tries to take away customers’ rights by requiring mandatory arbitration clauses.  Under the provision,

all disputes would go to mandatory, binding arbitration;

  • the insurance company has already selected the arbitration company (in essence, the private judge hearing your case);
  • the insurance company pays for the judge; and
  • the results are secret.

Gee, if your dispute is decided by a judge hand-picked by the insurance company and paid by the insurance company, I wonder how the results will come out?  You already know the likely answer to that.  That’s why several states forbid these types of arbitration clauses in insurance policies.

But what do you get for giving up those rights?  According to the proposal, homeowners are supposed to get a discount on their premiums.

But lo and behold, what did Texas Watch undercover when they filed open records requests with the Texas Department of Insurance?  That the “discounts” appear to be conveniently equal to the amounts that Texas Farm Bureau has already raised rates.  These types of bogus discounts — raising the price and then saying you’re offering a discount — would likely be illegal in most other contexts.  But here, there’s a real risk that the Texas Department of Insurance will approve them.

And don’t think this is just about Texas Farm Bureau.  If this type of conduct is approved by the Department of Insurance, other insurance companies will likely follow suit. Yours could be next.

Posted on: June 20, 2016 | Tagged

Perlmutter & Schuelke, PLLC maintains offices in Austin, Texas. However, our attorneys and lawyers represent clients throughout the state of Texas, including Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Forth Worth, El Paso, New Braunfels, San Marcos, Kyle, Buda, Round Rock, Georgetown, Lockhart, Bastrop, Elgin, Manor, Brenham, Cedar Park, Burnet, Marble Falls, Temple and Killeen. By Brooks Schuelke


Law Firm Website by CLM Grow