Category Archives: blog

all blog posts

Retrial in Kroger slip-fall case ends in another $2M verdict

Screen Shot 2013-04-06 at 7.55.20 AM

New testimony ordered by appeals court makes little difference in outcome

By Katheryn Hayes Tucker Daily Report
Photo of Lloyd Bell
Lloyd Bell – Bell Law Firm
Photo of Bruce Berger
Bruce Berger
For the second time in just over a year, a jury has awarded $2 million to a man who slipped on a banana in a Kroger store, hurt his back and claims permanent pain despite surgery. The first trial before Gwinnett County State Court Judge Joseph Iannazzone resulted in a $2.3 million verdict in January 2012. The second verdict, reached March 22, was an even $2 million. The retrial, again before Iannazzone, resulted from December’s decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals directing a do-over. At issue: the judge’s not allowing the defense to include the testimony of the manager of the meat department in the Douglasville Kroger store where the fall took place. The second trial lasted a week—two days longer than the first. The meat manager’s testimony took up about 35 minutes: 15 minutes of direct and 20 minutes of cross examination, according to Bruce Berger, second chair for the plaintiff. The testimony didn’t make a difference to the jury, Berger said. “I was bent on keeping him out” of the first trial, said lead plaintiff’s counsel Lloyd Bell of the meat manager, whose testimony Bell thought was irrelevant. “I wish I’d allowed him to testify the first time.” The dispute is still not over, said Kroger defense counsel Earl “Billy” W. Gunn of Weinberg Wheeler Hudgins Gunn & Dial. Gunn said he is recommending that his client appeal the jury’s award of $500,000, included in the total verdict, for legal fees to Bell and Berger. Gunn said the judge should not have allowed the jury to decide the question behind the attorney fee award—whether Kroger was stubbornly litigious or acted in bad faith by destroying video evidence of the fall. Gunn said he blamed the plaintiff’s lawyers for the extensive fight, adding that he told the jury, “The reason I’m trying this case is Lloyd Bell is stubbornly litigious.” Bell responded by noting that the Court of Appeals had already reviewed the bad faith issue from the first trial, in which the jury awarded $675,782 in attorneys’ fees, and upheld the trial court’s decision to sanction Kroger for spoliation. “It’s time to pay the judgment,” Bell said. Bell agreed that the battle has gone on too long, but he held Kroger accountable, saying the grocer has put his client through nearly five years of “brutal and exhausting” litigation. The story began on May 25, 2008. According to the plaintiff’s portion of the pre-trial order, Charles Walters Jr., then a 49-year-old landscape business owner, was shopping in a Kroger with his teenage daughter. He was near the meat department looking for hot dogs when he slipped and fell on something gooey. An unidentified customer cleaned it off the floor and determined it was a banana. The store manager suggested in the first trial that a baby had dropped the banana, saying that a half-hour after the accident he saw a baby eating the fruit in a shopping cart in the checkout area. During discovery before the first trial, Walters’ attorneys sought video evidence that they believed would show when the banana was dropped, how long it remained on the floor without being cleaned and images of their client’s fall. But Kroger had not maintained the video recordings. Kroger, represented then by solo Douglas Wilde of Tyrone, argued that the video evidence wouldn’t have mattered because the camera was pointed away from the spot where Walters fell. The store even produced a video sample to show that the accident area wouldn’t have been shown. While Walters’ lawyers were in the store for a deposition, they asked a manager to show them the live video feed from the same camera on his computer. To their surprise, although another manager had just sworn the camera had never been moved, the live feed showed exactly where Walters fell. “We couldn’t believe it,” Bell said after the first trial. “The camera had obviously caught everything.” The judge sanctioned Kroger for spoliation by ordering that the company couldn’t defend itself against Walters’ negligence claim. The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court on the spoliation sanction, except for the exclusion of testimony from the meat department manager, David Wiggly. When it finally came his turn to testify in the second trial, the meat manager offered an explanation of why the camera had been moved after Walters’ fall. Wiggly said he moved the camera temporarily to point toward his department to catch shoplifters who were stealing steaks. Bell and Berger said they felt their cross examination of Wiggly established that his explanation made no difference. And they noted he offered no evidence of ever catching any “steak burglars” with the video camera. Bell and Berger said the second trial was challenging because Kroger had been able to review the transcript of the first trial and had filed a long list of motions in limine to restrict what the plaintiff’s counsel could say. For example, Bell had told the first jury to make a statement that could be heard all the way in Cincinnati, where Kroger’s headquarters is located. That encouragement wasn’t allowed at the second trial. Bell said Gunn defended Kroger much more aggressively than Wilde had done in the first trial, preventing the plaintiff’s lawyers from making any statements “that sounded like advocacy.” The second trial also featured another new witness—a medical expert to challenge whether Walters’ fall was the cause of his back injury. The expert, Dr. John Heller, an orthopedic surgeon from Emory Medical Center, suggested Walters would have needed surgery regardless of the accident for pre-existing spinal degeneration. Bell said Heller is one of the best known orthopedic surgeons in the country, and that Kroger spent a total of $24,000 for his testimony—breaking down the cost to $800 an hour. He used that defense expense in his closing arguments regarding the value of time, asking the jury to value Walters’ time for lost wages and pain. Walters also claimed $135,000 in medical bills for back surgery. His treating physicians testified that his back was fine before the fall, Bell said. The case is Walters v. Kroger, No. 09-C-14740-S4.
 
Posted in blog, News | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Quest Diagnostics Injures Patient In Blood Draw – Lloyd Bell Obtains Jury Verdict of $5.4 Million.

Quest Diagnostics Responsible for Catastrophic Injury to Patient During Routine Blood Draw- Jury Awards  total of $5.4 Million

April 20, 2012 – A Fulton County jury returned a verdict Friday against Quest Diagnostics and its Alpharetta-based subsidiary, Quick-Med, Inc., for $5,459,255, after a medical technician caused permanent nerve damage to Mr. Michael Bowbliss of Buford, Georgia during a routine blood draw as part of a life insurance examination. After seven hours of deliberation, the jury reached a verdict totaling $3,459,255 for Mr. Bowbliss’ claims, and $2,000,000 for Dee Anna Blowliss and her children’s loss of consortium claim, one of the largest loss of consortium awards in Georgia history. “As a result of the blood draw, Mike suffered permanent damage to the median nerve of his right arm, a major nerve about as wide as a Number 2 pencil that runs down the middle of the forearm into the hand,” said Lloyd N. Bell, the attorney for Bowbliss.  “The nerve injury led to the onset of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, Type II, a debilitating chronic pain condition which has no known cure,” said Bell. “The injury’s effect on Mike’s wife and children is also profound, and the verdict and award speak to that loss,” added Nelson Tyrone, attorney for Mrs. Bowbliss. “In May of 2009, Quest Diagnostics sent a medical technician to the home of 34-year-old Michael Bowbliss to conduct a routine life insurance exam,” said Bell.  “The technician, Patricia Robinson, inserted a needle into Bowbliss’s right arm to obtain a blood sample.  When she inserted the needle, Bowbliss screamed in pain and felt immediate burning and tingling down his arm and into his hand.  Ms. Robinson continued to probe, repositioned the needle, and eventually drew blood, despite Mr. Bowbliss’ obvious pain.” “After she removed the needle, the pain remained and did not go away,” continued Bell.  “A few days later, Bowbliss contacted Quest and reported that his arm felt like it was on fire since the needle stick.  He asked what he should do.  Quest advised Bowbliss to get immediate medical attention, which he did.” “Since the injury, Mike’s life has been spent in doctor’s offices and examination rooms trying to treat his pain and disability.  He was finally referred to The Shepherd Center, one of the finest catastrophic care hospitals in Atlanta, and has been getting excellent treatment from Dr. Erik Shaw, a specialist in treating complex regional pain syndrome,” Bell said.  “Dr. Shaw is using some the most advanced, cutting-edge treatment options available to help control the pain including Ketamine infusions and various nerve blocks. Mike is grateful to Dr. Shaw and the entire team at Shepherd Center, and he is hopeful about the future, but Mike knows this will be a condition he will have to work to manage for the rest of his life,” said Bell. “Despite overwhelming evidence of fault and catastrophic injury to Mike and his family, Quest and Quick-Med never acknowledged any responsibility,” said Bell.  “From the beginning, Quest and Quick-Med made it clear they did not care about Mike and his family.  In fact, the only offer to settle the defendants ever made before the verdict was entered occurred during trial – an offer of $5,000,” said Bell. “A young, healthy man who has given blood dozens of times in his life without incident, should not get his median nerve sliced during a routine life insurance exam,” said Bell.  “Mike filed suit to find out why this happened and hopefully prevent this from happening to someone else,” continued Bell. “In discovery we found that Quest and Quick-Med had hired a medical technician to perform blood draws without ever observing her technique and without confirming that she understood the standard of care,” said Bell.  “At her deposition, Ms. Robinson testified it was her practice to insert the needle into the arm at a 45 degree angle, which everyone in the case agreed violated the standard of care,” said Bell.  “She also admitted she kept the needle in Mike’s arm after he expressed pain, another clear violation of the standard of care,” said Bell.  “A properly trained medical technician knows that the only acceptable angle of entry is 30 degrees or less, and that if a patient ever expresses pain, the needle should be removed immediately, and certainly not repositioned.” Mr. Bowbliss’s wife, Dee Anna, also brought an independent claim against Quest Diagnostics and Quick-Med for the loss of marital services, what is known under Georgia law as a “loss of consortium” claim. “Georgia law recognizes and values marriage,” said Dee Anna Bowbliss’s attorney, Nelson O. Tyrone.  “When one partner in a marriage suffers terrible injury, the impact on the marriage is profound,” said Tyrone.  “By representing Ms. Bowbliss on this issue, I was able to help the jury understand the life-altering impact Mike’s injury has had on the marriage and their three young children.  In a very real sense, Quest and Quick-Med have pulled this family apart and changed their lives forever.  The verdict speaks to that loss.” The verdict for Mike and Dee Anna Bowbliss of $5,459,255, included damages for Mike Bowbliss’s claims totaling $3,459,255 and $2,000,000 for Dee Anna Bowbliss’s loss of consortium claim, one of the largest such awards for loss of consortium in Georgia history. After the verdict was entered, Judge Patsy Porter reduced Mr. Bowbliss’s verdict by approximately $1,600,000, which represented the cost of two medical procedures, a spinal cord stimulator and intrathecal pump, both treatment options to help control the pain.  “The court determined the cost of the future treatments was too speculative,” said Bell.  “While I respect the Court’s decision, I strongly disagree with it, and am confident Mike will ultimately receive all the money the jury found he was entitled to,” said Bell.  
Posted in blog, News | Tagged , , | Comments Off

Gwinnett jury returns $2.3 million verdict in slip-and-fall lawsuit against Kroger.

Gwinnett jury returns $2.3 million verdict in slip-and-fall lawsuit against Kroger

 By Andria Simmons

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution A Gwinnett County jury has returned a verdict of $2.3 million in damages in a slip-and-fall lawsuit against Kroger Co. after a judge determined Kroger destroyed and manipulated important video evidence involving an injured customer. The lawsuit arose out of a May 2008 incident in which Craig Walters, 49, was shopping at a Kroger grocery store on Ridge Road near Douglasville. The lawsuit was filed inGwinnett County because that’s where the company’s registered agent is located. Walters slipped on crushed fruit on the floor near the deli and fell onto his back. According to Walters’ attorney, Lloyd N. Bell, Walters suffered a serious spinal cord injury from the fall, requiring surgery and the placement of multiple rods and screws to stabilize his spinal cord. His medical bills amounted to about $135,000, and he was unable to work, the lawsuit said. Walters previously had been a commercial landscaper. Initially, lawyers for Kroger claimed the in-store video footage from the time of the accident had been taped over, and that videos are only kept for 17 days unless there is a reason to hold them longer. The store’s lawyers also said the cameras did not point in the area where the accident occurred anyway, and provided sample images taken from the camera to prove it. However, while the manager was giving a deposition at the Douglasville store, lawyers for Walters asked for a demonstration of the store’s video surveillance system. The demonstration revealed the camera was centered directly on the spot where Walters fell. “We couldn’t believe it,” Bell said in a written statement. “The camera had obviously caught everything that had happened — when the fruit fell to the floor, how long it was there, Walters slipping and falling on it — and they deliberately erased it, lied to us, and gave us a phony sample of video footage to throw us off their trail.” Gwinnett State Court Judge Joseph C. Iannazzone sanctioned the company and issued an order finding Kroger had “spoliated” [destroyed] video evidence. The judge also determined the company was negligent and scheduled a trial on the limited issue of what damages Walters was entitled to receive. A jury returned the $2.3 million verdict Jan. 20 at the conclusion of a three-day trial. A representative for Kroger said the company was evaluating whether to file an appeal. “The safety of our customers is important to Kroger,” company spokesman Glynn Jenkins said.  “We are sorry that Mr. Walters had an unfortunate experience in one of our stores. However, we disagree with some of the decisions made in the recent trial and are currently evaluating our future course of action.”
Posted in blog | Leave a comment

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2011, Harper v. Barge Air Conditioning

The Georgia Court of Appeals Re-Affirms the Right to a Fair and Impartial Jury

[W]e remain steadfast in our commitment as a Court to safeguarding the sacrosanct and cherished right to a fair and impartial jury trial…- Judge Stephen Dillard, Georgia Court of Appeals

On December 16, 2011, in the case of Harper v. Barge Air Conditioning, Inc., the Georgia Court of Appeals re-affirmed its commitment to safeguarding the right to a fair and impartial jury. The Court determined that my client, Jocelyn Harper, who suffered severe brain injury after exposure to carbon monoxide at her place of employment, was denied a fair trial when the trial court allowed two prospective jurors to remain on the panel after they expressed clear bias in favor of the defense.  For example, one of the jurors was the personal accountant of the defense lawyer and a client of the defense lawyer.  During jury selection (“voir dire”) I asked the accountant whether he would “be inclined to try to find in [defendant's] favor.” The prospective juror responded, “What do you think?  Of course.”  Despite a motion to strike the juror for cause, the trial court allowed him to stay on the panel along with another juror who expressed similar bias. In a strongly worded opinion, The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, and made it abundantly clear that it will safeguard the right of Georgia citizens to a fair and impartial jury trial.  As Justice Dillard wrote:

Accordingly, we reverse the judgment in favor of Barge and remand the case for a new trial. In doing so, we “deplore the significant burden a [second] retrial will impose, not only on the parties, but on the community as well,” and “[w]e are particularly troubled by the trial court’s willingness to infect a trial with this kind of error when a solution (excusing the juror[s] for partiality) was so readily available.”  Nevertheless, we remain steadfast in our commitment as a Court to safeguarding the sacrosanct and cherished right to a fair and impartial jury trial, and we will continue to remand this case back to the trial court until Harper is provided with same.
Posted in blog | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Georgia Lawyers Disbarred for Unethical Conduct

           

The Georgia Supreme Court recently disbarred two personal injury lawyers who were caught using “runners” to seek out and solicit clients.  In the Matters of Thomas C. Sinowski and Steven F. Freedmanthe Court concluded Attorneys Sinwoski and Freedman violated multiple Bar Standards and are now forbidden from further practicing law – a professional “death penalty.” 

The use of “runners” is an unethical practice where a lawyer will pay non-lawyers to approach potential clients and refer them to the lawyer. Oftentimes, the runners will stake out hospitals or trauma care centers hunting for people involved in serious car wrecks.  The runners will “innocently” approach a grieving family member, maybe at a vending machine or in the lobby, and “suggest” they contact a certain lawyer. The practice undermines public confidence in the legal profession further contributing to the false perception that all personal injury attorneys are unethical “ambulance chasers.”  Even worse for the clients, the attorneys who use runners quickly develop a reputation for poor legal work and selling out their clients for a quick settlement.

The use of runners continues throughout Georgia, and the public should be alert to the practice.  For example, just a few days ago, I was contacted by a young woman who had been in the hospital for 6 weeks.  She was involved in a terrible car accident which resulted in multiple fractures of her vertebrae.  When I met her in the hospital, she told me a lawyer from one of the large “billboard advertising firms” had come by her hospital room about 3 days after the wreck pushing her to sign a attorney contract.  Fortunately, the client had the good sense to keep all the paperwork, the name of the attorney and the pertinent details to support a Complaint to the State Bar – which is forthcoming.

It is unfortunate that every profession has its share of “bottom dwellers” who will engage in unethical and illegal conduct to try and gain advantage.  The legal profession is no different.  With its recent decision disbarring Sinowski and Freedman, the Georgia Supreme Court has demonstrated that such conduct will not be tolerated in Georgia.  

Posted in blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

New Documentary Debunks Urban Legend of McDonald’s Coffee Case

          This past weekend, I had the pleasure of listening to Susan Saladoff discuss her new documentary, “Hot Coffee”, which recently aired on HBO. Of course, the provocative title – “Hot Coffee” – refers to the much-maligned civil lawsuit involving an elderly lady, Stella Liebeck, who suffered burns after she spilled McDonald’s coffee in her lap. The case became corporate America’s rallying cry for so called “tort reform” – an organized effort to restrict civil lawsuits and limit the compensation injured people could receive from a jury. After watching the documentary, however, a much different picture emerges. First of all the idea this was a minor burn case is totally false. The documentary shows the actual photographs used at trial depicting Ms. Liebeck’s injuries. Imagine blackened, charred skin throughout her groin and inner thighs – unforgettable and deeply troubling images. She required multiple skin grafts and lengthy physical therapy. She never fully recovered from her injuries. Also, the popular media image of the diminutive grand-mother from New Mexico is that of a greedy, money-hungry woman looking for “jackpot justice” from a wealthy corporation. The truth is that Ms. Liebeck asked McDonald’s to pay only her out-of-pocket medical bills that were not covered by Medicare. McDonald’s offered her $800 to go away. Only then did Ms. Liebeck retain an attorney to pursue a claim. Below is a link to the official trailer of “Hot Coffee”. I urge you to watch it and share your comments. The movie is also available on Netflix. Hot Coffee Trailer
Posted in blog | Comments Off

Is “Stolen Valor Act” Constitutional?

          The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in the case of U.S. v. Alvarez, which presents the question of the constitutionality of the “Stolen Valor Act.” The Stolen Valor Act prohibits people from falsely claiming they have been awarded military decorations and medals, and states that:

“Whoever falsely represents himself or herself, verbally or in writing, to have been awarded any decoration or medal authorized by Congress for the Armed Forces of the United States, any of the service medals or badges awarded to the members of such forces, the ribbon, button, or rosette of any such badge, decoration, or medal, or any colorable imitation of such item shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than six months, or both.”

The lower courts that have considered challenges to the act have reached different conclusions. In July 2010 a federal district court in Denver ruled that the act violates free speech, and rejected the argument that lying about having military medals dilutes their meaning and significance. A month later, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also considered the issue in a separate case (the Alvarez case), and held that the “speech” involved in the case — lying about being awarded military medals — was within the scope of the First Amendment. The 9th Circuit therefore applied “strict scrutiny review to the Act, and [held] it unconstitutional because it is not narrowly tailored to achieving a compelling governmental interest.” The court observed that if the Stolen Valor Act was constitutional, as argued by a dissenting judge, then there would be no constitutional bar to criminalizing lying about one’s height, weight, age, or financial status on Match.com or Facebook, or falsely representing to one’s mother that one does not smoke, drink alcoholic beverages, is a virgin, or has not exceeded the speed limit while driving on the freeway. The sad fact is, most people lie about some aspects of their lives from time to time. Perhaps, in context, many of these lies are within the government’s legitimate reach. But the government cannot decide that some lies may not be told without a reviewing court’s undertaking a thoughtful analysis of the constitutional concerns raised by such government interference with speech. I suspect the Supreme Court will strike down the act as unconstitutional, while rightly condemning those who would peddle lies about imagined battlefield glory. It is hard to imagine that a court which regards a stripper’s activities as protected “free speech” would uphold an act criminalizing true speech, however malignant.

Posted in blog | Comments Off