Why Texas’s New “Loser Pays” Legislation Is Bad Law

21 Dec

At a time when our state legislature should be working to address our state budget crisis, it instead took time to pass a new law that gives millions ( potentially billions ) of dollars to insurance companies by stripping away the rights of individuals and small businesses to bring almost any kind of lawsuit. Proponents of the bill have deceptively named it “Loser Pays”, but that name is a sham.

The law is worded to guarantee that the insurance company wins no matter what. The new law will apply to almost every type of case including breach of contract, insurance claims, property rights, personal injury, and oil and gas leases.

Under this law, HB274, the victim of a drunk driver could have to pay the attorney’s fees of the drunk even if the victim WINS at trial! MADD ( Mothers Against Drunk Driving ) testified against HB274 in front of a Texas Senate subcommittee.

Here is how the victim wins, but LOSES, in a drunk driving case.

Assume a drunk driver crashes into your car as you are taking your child to school. Your damages, including medical bills for you and your child, total $150,000 but the defendant?s insurance company only offers $100,000. The defendant also demands a confidentiality agreement to prevent you from ever discussing the accident if you accept the settlement. You decide to go to trial. Unfortunately, the insurance company’s attorney is really good, and he convinces the jury the accident was partially your fault ( for not watching out for the drunk as much as you should have. ) He also convinces the jury to reduce your lost wages because “you could have gone back to work sooner” instead of taking care of your injured child at home. Regardless, you win and the jury awards you $79,000.00.

You just lost under HB274!

Even though the jury awarded you $79,000, you get nothing. In fact, you may owe the drunk driver $21,000 or more. Because you won less than 80% of the defendant’s settlement offer, the law defines you as the “Loser”. You now have to pay the defendant’s litigation expenses. Since the insurance company hired the best, high priced lawyers, experts, and court costs, that bill could easily be in excess of $100,000.

Incredibly, it gets even worse.

The law is written to protect the Defendant/Insurance Company, even when it loses. Under HB274, if the plaintiff wins big ( i.e. more than the insurance company’s settlement offer ) the defendant still gets a free pass and will never have to pay the plaintiff’s attorney’s fees. This is because section 38.015(d) of the law says the court cannot consider contingency fee contracts as evidence of attorney’s fees.

The only way most individuals or small businesses can afford to hire an attorney is through a contingency fee contract (where the attorney gets paid only if his or her client wins at trial). Since almost all claimants are forced to hire an attorney under a contingency fee contract, the law gives defendants and insurance companies a loophole even when they lose.

In summary:

If the injured person (or small business) “loses”, he/it will have to pay the insurance company’s attorneys fees, expert witnesses, court costs, etc.

If the injured person (or small business) wins, but wins less than 80% of the settlement offer, he/it still pays the defendant’s attorney’s fees, and litigation expenses. (I.e. the winner still loses)

If the injured person (or small business) wins more than 80% of the insurance company’s settlement offer, he/it is the ?prevailing party.? However, because HB274 will not let a contingency fee contract be considered as evidence of attorney’s fees, the insurance company gets a free pass and never has to pay the victim’s attorney’s fees even when the defendant loses.

It is shameful for the Republican Party to promote a law as “Loser Pays” when the law they drafted is rigged to prevent anyone other than the insurance company from ever winning. HB274 goes beyond political gamesmanship. It goes beyond favoritism and acceptable political payback to special interests. If this law is passed, every victim of a drunk driver, every homeowner whose storm damage claim is denied, and every business owner with a contract dispute, will be forced to risk financial ruin if they dare to assert their constitutional right to trial by jury.

Our elected officials would do well to remember the words of Thomas Jefferson who wrote:

“I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”

Each of our elected officials have published phone numbers, fax numbers and email. Lets remind them of Mr. Jefferson’s wise words. Lets remind them that our faith is better placed in each other, and in the collective wisdom of our fellow citizens who serve on our civil juries, than in the schemes of lobbyists, and powerful insurance companies.

Tags: , , ,

Settlement Announcement-Oil Field Tank Explosion

21 Nov

The Firm announces the settlement of a case involving the explosion of a oil tank battery near Bowie, Texas. The firm represented an independent contractor, a welder, who was instructed to work on the tanks to repair some leaks when the owner of the tanks had failed to ensure that the tanks were free of hydrocarbons and it was safe to weld. The company was cited and fined by OSHA for not having a hot work permit. The welder was fortunate to have survived the explosion, however, he suffered burn injuries to his face, ears, stomach, back and arms. The company has adopted corrective measures to ensure the safety of future hot work to be performed on either its transport and storage tanks. The case settled for a confidential amount.

Tags: , , ,

Firm Files Suit on Behalf of Dallas Police Officer Injured by Taser

19 Oct

The firm has recently filed suit on behalf of a Dallas Police Officer who was seriously injured during Taser training. The officer suffered serious injuries to his neck, including ruptures to discs in his cervical spine, caused by the application of the Taser. The injuries left the officer with permanent disabilities and physical limitations and required disc replacement surgery. The suit alleges that Taser misled the police officers and their departments about the risks of being shot with the Taser. Rick Smith, the CEO of Taser, has testified that since at least 2004 Taser was aware that every officer that received a Taser hit during training was at risk of serious injury or death, and that dozens of police officers have been hurt in such training. In spite of these known risks and injuries Taser has never notified the officers or the police departments that they should stop Tasering the officers during training on the Taser weapon. Taser, rather than accept responsibility for the injuries caused by their product and negligence, is threatening to sue the officer for their costs of defense. The suit is pending in Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. It is hoped that the suit will alter Taser’s behavior, ensuring that other police officers are not injured by Taser’s negligent training and warnings.

Tags: , , ,

DePuy Hip Implant Recall

7 Oct

DePuy Hip Replacement Problems

If you have a DePuy ASR XL Acetabular or DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System you should receive a letter informing you of the recall. You should then consult your doctor. Below we have a compiled a list of frequently asked questions about the DePuy hip recall.

Which DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. hip replacement systems were recalled?

The DePuy ASR XL Acetabular and DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing Systems have been recalled. The DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System was not approved for use in the United States.

When would the surgeries involving the recalled DePuy hip replacements have occurred?

The DePuy ASR Hip Replacement System was approved for use in 2005 and the company began phasing the line out at the end of 2009. Some may have been implanted in 2010.

What are some of the symptoms of a failing DePuy hip replacement system?

The DePuy hip replacement problems will differ from person to person and it’s important you consult with your doctor. Same severe problems with the DePuy hip replacement, those requiring a second hip replacement, are listed below:

• serious pain
• inflammation
• loosening of the implant, with possible detachment
• dislocation of the hip implant
• fracture of the bone around the hip implant

Will I have to have another hip replacement surgery?

Consult with your doctor.

DePuy is offering to pay my medical bills, do I need a lawyer?

Yes. You may be entitled to compensation for additional damages.

Who can file a DePuy hip recall claim?

Persons with a DePuy ASR hip replacement system implanted between 2005 and 2010.

Tags: , , ,

Firm Partners Recognized as Top Attorneys in Fort Worth 2011

23 Sep

Firm partners Jeff Kobs and Mark Haney were recently recognized by Fort Worth Magazine as top attorneys in Fort Worth in appellate and personal injury trial law. In a testament to their consistent performance this marks the 7th year they have been recognized for their work. The award is primarily peer driven, and reflects their work on cases and their relationships with other attorneys in the Fort Worth legal community.

Tags: , , ,

Suit Filed For Truck Accident Head Injury

9 Sep

The firm announces the filing of a suit against Alan Ritchey Trucking Company for damages arising from an accident. The suit alleges that the truck driver failed to maintain a proper look out, resulting in him crashing into the rear of the client’s vehicle which was stopped in traffic. The client and her son were both injured. Her son sustained a serious closed head injury requiring extensive rehabilitation.

Tags: , ,

Settlement Announcement

31 Aug

The firm announces the settlement of a suit arising from the negligent operations of a tree trimming truck. The driver of the truck failed to maintain a proper look out and entered an intersection immediately in front of the client’s vehicle resulting in an accident and serious injuries. The case was settled pre-suit for a confidential amount.

Tags: , ,

Kobs, Haney & Hundley Announce Suit Over Explosion of Oil Tank

29 Aug

The firm has recently filed suit regarding injuries arising from an explosion of an oil tank. The suit alleges that a waste water disposal company located in Bowie, Texas failed to take reasonable precautions to ensure the safety of the tank prior to allowing a contract welder to attempt to make a repair to a leak on the tank. The company, Gilbow Oil Field Services, Inc., did not have a hot work permit process in place, did not have a hazard communication system in place, and failed to clean and vent the tank prior to telling the welder it was safe for the welding to occur. The tank exploded seriously injuring the welder and an employee of the company. The suit seeks to effect changes to the policies of the company in addition to compensation for the welder. The company was cited and fined by OSHA for several safety related violations that contributed to cause the explosion.

Tags: , , , ,

Accidents While Texting and Driving

24 Aug

The City of Arlington is joining a number of cities looking to pass ordinances associated with curtailing texting and driving. Distractions, such as texting on cell phones or other mobile devices, poses a serious risk of causing accidents and injuries. Kobs, Haney & Hundley supports efforts to curtail such practices, especially in school zones. If you suspect that you or someone you love was injured as a result of such practices please contact us. Records of texting and cell phone use is potentially critical evidence in today’s environment and has to be preserved. We have experience securing such evidence in cases handled by this firm and can assist you in protecting your interests.

Tags: , , ,

Ground Water Contamination

17 Aug

The firm is tracking litigation involving ground water contamination arising from oil and gas development. The firm is currently studying oil and gas development best practices designed to prevent ground water contamination. Many land owners are being affected by ground water contamination arising from oil and gas development. The contamination of their ground water is destroying a significant portion of the value of their property, often endangering livestock and preventing their property from being used for agricultural purposes. The firm welcomes the opportunity to assist those who have been adversely affected by ground water contamination arising from oil and gas development.

Tags: , , ,

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.