In January of 1995, an Orlando couple’s home was struck by a tornado causing extensive damage. Their insurance company made initial repairs to the home at a cost of approximately $30,000.00. Unfortunately, the couple continued to have problems with the home. It continued to allow water and moisture to seep through the walls. The summer months were particularly uncomfortable, because the home was impossible to keep cool. The couple took care of their elderly parents in the home and continued to report the problems to their insurance company over the next several years.

Finally, in 1998, when the interior walls of the home began to bubble, the insurance company denied coverage, and alleged their problems had nothing to do with the 1995 tornado.

Plaintiffs filed suit in Orange County alleging that the continued problems with the home were related to the tornado, a covered loss under the policy. More specifically, Plaintiffs’ experts testified that the home had been “wracked” by the twisting winds of the tornado, resulting in the studs that supported the walls being twisted to such an extent that the structural integrity of the home was compromised. This caused the stucco to crack and allow moisture inside.

The insurance company alleged that the problems with the home were caused by flaws in the original construction, namely that the stucco was cracking due to the wood framed walls being improperly constructed. Their experts opined that the plywood in the walls was installed too close together, which made it expand outwardly when exposed to moisture, causing the stucco to crack and allow moisture in the home.

After five days of trial, a jury composed of one man and six women returned a verdict of $290,000.00, approximately $170,000.00 more than the policy limit. After interest and attorney’s fees, the total recovery for the Plaintiffs was roughly $900,000.00.

In February, 2006, a warehouse worker was injured when he was struck by a forklift while performing his duties on a loading dock in Orlando, Florida. The rear wheel of the forklift struck his right foot, causing a “degloving” injury, in which the skin, muscles and tendons were torn from the skeletal structure of the foot. The accident also crushed some of the bones of the foot and ankle joint. The foot was reconstructed over a period of two years, requiring more than eleven surgeries and procedures.

The operator of the forklift and his employer denied responsibility for the accident, claiming that the warehouse worker was at fault for failing to pay attention. They also alleged that the owner of the forklift and warehouse was responsible for failing to properly outfit the forklift with backup alarms, rearview mirrors or other safety equipment. They contended that the warehouse should have had separate lanes for pedestrians and forklifts as well. The defendants initially offered $500,000.00 to settle the case, but withdrew the offer during the litigation.

After a ten day trial, a jury composed of one man and five women returned a verdict of $5.9 million; $1.9 million in past and future economic damages, and $2 million for past pain and suffering and $2 million for future pain and suffering. The jury found that the plaintiff was 1% at fault and the warehouse owner was 10% at fault, leaving a net recovery for the plaintiff of $5.3 million. The defendants’ appeal is pending.

David Paul was recently a keynote speaker at the Central Florida Trial Lawyers Association’s (CFTLA) annual seminar. Mr. Paul spoke on the issue of “Shifting from Facts to Story: A New Approach to Damages”. The speech focused on a paradigm shift from the basic discovery and presentation of facts to a more meaningful explanation of the story behind the facts. Paul & Perkins remains committed to partnering with local lawyers in discovering the most creative and effective ways to ensure the truth prevails at trial. This talk is part of a series of presentations Mr. Paul has given (and continues to give) exploring the importance of passionately pursuing the truth in every case.

Paul & Perkins is proud to announce David Paul’s recent election to the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). Mr. Paul is honored by his selection, as ABOTA is a highly selective “invitation only” trial lawyer’s society that reserves membership for trial lawyers who are of “high personal character and honorable reputation”, and who have met the extensive trial requirements of national ABOTA membership. Mr. Paul is the youngest lawyer in Central Florida to be elected and inducted into ABOTA membership.

Insurance Bad Faith occurs when an insurance carrier chooses its own interests over those of its insured. In Florida, “bad faith” law helps regulate large insurance companies, affording an avenue for relief when insurers hold profits in higher esteem than people.

In 2007, one of our clients lost her husband when he was killed in an accident on Interstate 4 that was caused by some children playing pranks. We quickly resolved claims against most of the at-fault parties, but one insurance carrier refused to appropriately respond to our client’s request for the insurer’s $300,000 policy limits.

When the trial date loomed, the insurance carrier requested mediation and the claim against its insured ultimately settled for $1,500,000 – five times the underlying policy limits. This case reminds us that an insurance company owes a fiduciary obligation to its insureds and is legally responsible for its actions when that duty is violated.

We have prosecuted insurance bad faith claims for over ten (10) years and have experience handling the underlying litigation, subsequent bad faith claims, and matters involving Coblentz and Cunningham agreements. Do not hesitate to call upon us if we can help you and your clients secure fair compensation and justice from an insurance company.

More and more Florida nursing homes are choosing not to secure liability insurance, hoping to deter valid claims by asserting the absence of assets if the facility is found liable for neglect. Many firms have abandoned litigation calculated to enhance protection of the elderly in response to this maneuver. We, however, have chosen to even more aggressively prosecute those who mistreat these vulnerable citizens.

We recently represented a former Florida nursing home inspector, who lost her mother due to poor care, in an arbitration proceeding. The facility claimed it had no assets and had made only nominal settlement offers. After a multi-day arbitration, a three lawyer panel found the nursing home responsible and ordered the payment of over $300,000. Despite representations of no assets, the funds were paid within 20 days of the arbitration award.

Another nursing home claim we recently pursued involved the untimely death of a resident after nursing staff failed to recognize signs and symptoms of a serious infection. This case was sent to us by a local lawyer after the facility ignored reasonable efforts at early resolution.After a year of intense litigation, the nursing home settled the case by paying nearly $500,000.

We feel privileged to prosecute civil nursing home abuse claims. Nursing homes held financially accountable for mistreatment have an added incentive to increase and more closely monitor staff. These cases matter. Please let us know if we can help families select the best nursing home for their loved one, or investigate mistreatment.

In 2007, our client was placed into a mental health crisis facility for short term stabilization. In spite of clear internal rules governing the appropriate medications for a patient with a history of dependence issues, and knowledge it would significantly decrease the possibility of a withdrawal seizure, the psychiatrist and facility failed to give a critical dose of Librium. The health care providers chose to “wait and see” if there was a problem, rather than follow their own rules. As a result of that decision, our client sustained a withdrawal seizure, suffered a catastrophic fall, and became a paraplegic for life.

With the help of doctors from Harvard, Dartmouth, University of Florida and Wake Forest, we proved the facility and its staff were responsible for the life changing injuries. After years of litigation, our team secured a confidential settlement of this complex medical malpractice case. We are thankful for the trust placed in us by our Alachua County referral lawyers and this loving family.
We continue to actively review significant medical negligence cases throughout Florida. Our experience includes resolution (by trial or settlement) of cases involving wrongful death, spinal cord injuries, RSD, failure or delay in diagnosing cancer, nursing home negligence, hospital malpractice, surgical errors, and many other health care issues. Our medical malpractice model rests on three principles:
Carefully screening potential new cases before moving forward with litigation;
Prosecuting worthy cases only, which we are willing to take through trial; and,
Hiring the most qualified experts in the world to ensure we provide the best possible representation.

If you would like to refer a client, colleague, family member or friend, we will be honored to help. Please remember medical negligence cases have a very short statute of limitations, so prompt action is pivotal.

Source: St. Petersburg Times

TAMPA – After going out of town, an 82-year-old man returned home to find his house emptied out. Even the trash was gone.

He found a padlocked door and a sign for a company that cleans out properties in foreclosure.

But Benito Santiago Sr.’s home wasn’t in foreclosure, public records show.

In a lawsuit filed this month in Hillsborough Circuit Court, Santiago claims that Field Asset Services Inc., took his property and changed his locks in the fall of 2009. He sued the company, along with Countrywide Home Loans, for damages.

A Hillsborough County sheriff’s deputy estimated in an Oct. 5, 2009, report that the Santiago’s possessions were worth $29,100.

In an interview, Santiago, a retired antiques dealer, guessed they were worth $100,000.

“At least,” he said.

Pictures of his deceased wife were among the items taken. He lost everything, including his furniture and an antique wagon wheel. The incident upset him enough that he moved in with a friend.

“Everything was taken out of the property,” he said. “I feel nervous. I’m not going back.”

Neither Field Asset Services nor Bank of America, which now owns Countrywide, commented on the incident when contacted by the St. Petersburg Times. Field Asset Services said it doesn’t discuss client cases. Bank of America requested a copy of the suit.

In February, an attorney representing Field Asset Services sent Santiago’s attorney a letter denying any wrongdoing.

“FAS has found no record of servicing the property belonging to your client,” company attorney Chris Helling wrote.

But Santiago’s attorney, J. Scott Murphy, said in the complaint that agents from Field Asset Services were hired by Countrywide Home Loans to carry out janitorial and cleanup services to a condominium next door – at 4255 W Humphrey St.

Santiago lives in a single-family home at 4205 W Humphrey St.

In the fall of 2009, when Santiago and his son, Benjamin Santiago Jr., returned to the northwest Tampa home after spending time in New Mexico, they discovered a big sign posted on the house that read Field Asset Services.

The locks were changed and a padlock was left on the front door. Everything was gone.

Santiago Jr. called a phone number on the lock.

He reached the clean-out company and talked to a worker there, the Sheriff’s Office said in a report.

Santiago Jr. said the company initially acknowledged that a mistake may have been made.

“The lower-level people were saying, ‘It had to be us. We had a work order to go out to 4255,’ ” Santiago Jr. said.

His father’s mailbox could have caused confusion.

On one side, it displayed the number “4205.” But on the other side, the “0″ was missing.

The land formerly known as “4255 W Humphrey St.” does not exist in Hillsborough County Property

Appraiser records. Santiago’s property is surrounded on three sides by Grand Reserve, a condominium complex that once used that address. Others have arrived in error to 4205.

After the initial incident, Santiago’s house had its lawn mowed by an unknown company, a visit from a tow truck company, and a visit by someone who left a notice for the occupant of 4255.

The Santiagos have repeatedly called the Hillsborough Sheriff’s Office about unwanted visitors, according to sheriff’s spokesman Larry McKinnon.

They called upon discovering the house had been emptied.

Deputy David Feenaughty investigated the incident.

“At this time, it appears that a cleaning company for foreclosures (Field Asset Services) may have mistakenly arrived at the residence in error on 9/17/09 and removed its contents,” he wrote in a report.

As foreclosures sweep the nation, more people have come home to surprises.

For contractors hired by banks to clear out houses, business is booming. But they don’t always get the right place.

Carlin Phillips is a Massachusetts attorney who specializes in cases of wrongful “lock-outs” and “trash-outs.” In the past year, he’s had hundreds.

Sometimes, the homeowner is delinquent, but the lockout is premature. Sometimes, cleaners go to a “road” instead of a “court.” And in some cases, people who just purchased a bank-owned home will return to find it cleaned out, because no one took it off the foreclosure list.

Phillips says banks have failed to adopt policies to make sure they have the right house.

His experience doesn’t bode well for Santiago’s possessions.

“We have never gotten one piece of property back,” he said.

Millions of people die each year from medical errors and infections linked to health care and going into hospital is far riskier than flying, the World Health Organisation. “If you were admitted to hospital tomorrow in any country… your chances of being subjected to an error in your care would be something like 1 in 10. Your chances of dying due to an error in health care would be 1 in 300,” Liam Donaldson, the WHO’s newly appointed envoy for patient safety, told a news briefing. This compared with a risk of dying in an air crash of about 1 in 10 million passengers, according to Donaldson, formerly England’s chief medical officer. Stephanie Nebehay, Reuters, Hartford Courant 07/26/2011

Did you know that in Florida, there is no such thing as an “accident report.” They are called Crash Reports, and the State of Florida officially re-named them crash reports in 1998. The reason they are called Crash Reports, is because accidents can all be avoided if people take precautions and are careful. Therefore, there really are no accidents, only people who are driving unsafe, thus causing a crash.

Why does the law prevent the Jury from seeing the Crash Report? Florida Statute §316.066 basically says that in order to encourage people to tell the truth to the police officer at a crash, that if they admit any wrongdoing, then it should not be used against them later in a trial. So to help the State of Florida to more effectively investigate crashes, we won’t let the jury see the crash report. “No such report or statement shall be used as evidence in any trial, civil or criminal.” §316.066(7).

Who got the ticket? Why is this kept from the jury? This is another law Florida Statute §316.650(9) which says: Such citations shall not be admissible evidence in any trial, except when used as evidence of falsification, forgery, uttering, fraud, or perjury…”

Insurance is hidden from the jury. Florida Statute §627.4136 entitled the Nonjoinder of Insurers. Statutes says: that juries are not to know about the availability of insurance that will protect the negligent defendant. The intent of the nonjoinder statute is to ensure that the availability of insurance has no influence on the jury’s determination of damages.

Before this statute the law in Florida allowed people who were injured in an crash to bring a suit against the insurance company who insured the bad driver, rather than the person directly. They changed the law and now prohibit any mention of insurance in the trial. It is believed that if the jury knew that there was insurance and that a person did not have to pay the damages personally, the damages given by the jury might be higher if they thought there was no insurance to pay the loss.

However, if the jury does not know about insurance, the jury may be sympathetic to the person who caused the crash, for fear that the financial loss might cause them harm even though the insurance will pay the full judgment.

Ever wonder who pays the lawyer for the defendant? The insurance companies pay the lawyer. And very rarely does the defendant have any say in who defends him or her. Many lawyers in court these days who defend bad drivers are actually employees of the insurance company. Many insurance companies such as GEICO, State Farm, Allstate, Progressive, have created “in house” lawyers. These lawyers are employees and paid a salary for their work. Some insurance companies hire lawyers who do primarily “Insurance Defense” work, and are experienced lawyers who focus on defending claims. No matter what the cost of the lawyers is, the person does not pay the cost of the defense. The insurance company does.

Ever wonder what the Insurance Limits are? Well, the jury never knows what the limits are, but it is important to know that usually before the trial started, there were probably some settlement negotiations. If an insurance company has an opportunity to settle a claim within their insured’s policy limits, and they don’t settle the case and it goes to trial, well, the policy limits won’t really matter. In most cases, the insurance company understands that if they gamble, and lose, that their insured should not have to pay the loss, and they pay the judgment even when it exceeds the policy limits. So if a person who caused a crash only has a policy limit of $10,000.00, and their insurance company did not settle the case, and now their insured is in a trial, the chances are very high that if the jury were to award anything over the policy limits, the insurance company will pay. If the insurance company did not pay and left their poor insured to suffer with a judgment against them, it would probably be a result of “Bad Faith” by the insurance company, and the insured may hire a lawyer to go after their own insurance company for putting them in this position.

Have you ever wondered if the parties tried to settle the case before a trial? The answer is almost always yes. Before a suit is filed, the attorney for the injured person will normally collect all the medical records and bills, any lost wage information, and any important information about the fault and damages, and send a letter to the insurance company for the negligent driver, or negligent doctor, and suggest that the matter be resolved. If they can’t agree and a suit is brought, the judge usually orders the parties to “Mediation” which is a confidential settlement conference. This allows the parties to talk about the strengths and weaknesses of their case, and try and resolve the matter. Mediation is a great tool when both sides try to settle the case in good faith. And to encourage settlement, everyone agrees that any discussions about settlement are confidential, and cannot be brought into court. Sometimes certain insurance companies have taken a position that they will not negotiate, they will never offer money, and they would rather force their doctor to trial, and the injured person as well. These unfortunate situations are quite common. Many insurance companies know that if they play hardball, they will scare many people away, and they win the benefit of the people who are afraid to go to trial.

The jury may think that since your health insurance company paid your medical bills, that you should not recover that money as part of the compensation for your losses. But the jury probably does not know that your health insurance company has a “Right of Subrogation” This means that since you were hurt by the fault of another, and since your health insurance company paid your medical bills, they are entitled to be paid back from your recovery.