- Jury Awards $11.35 Million Dollars to Plane Crash Victims
A Philadelphia jury awarded an Akron doctor and his fiancé, a pilot, $11.35 million as compensation for injuries suffered in a 2007 plane crash, one of the largest air crash disaster verdicts awarded to Ohio residents. The verdict was against the company that maintained the plane, as the jury found that the plane had not been properly maintained prior to the crash.
The plane, owned by the doctor and flown by his fiancé, developed engine problems shortly after taking off from DeKalb-Peachtree Airport in Atlanta, and crashed in a non-populated area near a water treatment facility. The doctor was rendered unconscious, but was revived by his fiancé whose legs were crushed. Incredibly, making matters much worse, while the doctor was helping his fiancé out of the plane, a wing exploded – engulfing both in fire. He suffered lung and respiratory system injuries from breathing in flames and fuel and third-degree burns, while she suffered third-degree burns to 40 percent of her body. Sadly, she can no longer fly because she has been unable to pass the FAA’s medical examination.
What do you call 1,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea – A good start. I’ve heard them all. Lawyers often get bad raps due to frivolous law suits that have been filed. Sadly, many of these suits have merit, but the facts get so distorted by groups attacking personal injury lawyers, that the public doesn’t have the opportunity to learn the actual facts of the case, and in turn, they don’t realize that the Plaintiff has a legitimate claim.
On the other hand, there are ridiculous suits that are filed pro se, in which the public automatically assumes that suit was filed by an attorney. The latest story making headlines, which has people calling for the disbarment of a lawyer, one that doesn’t exist, takes place in Kansas. The suit is being brought pro se, by a convicted criminal serving an 11-year sentence.
Legalwriting.net has a post on the 10 legal words or phrase we could do without. I’ve been guilty of using the “instant case” although I now promise to stop. The word I hate more than all of these is the word “same” as in, “I will write a memorandum on the issue and the discuss same with Mr. Smith.” I just find it incredibly annoying. The foolishness of using these kind of words is underscored in a new book on advocacy from Justice Scalia He says that words and phrases used almost exclusively by lawyers in place of plain-English are ill advised.
I agree. Let’s all agree to stop it.