A significant factor to consider when evaluating a case, in particular for purposes of settlement, is whether the opposing party intends to utilize expert witnesses. The inclusion or exclusion of opposing party's expert witness in some instances may make or break a case. The lack of an expert witness such as an economist may prohibit a plaintiff from proving future lost income which would significantly diminish the value of the case. Or failing to disclose a orthopedist as a testifying expert may preclude an injured plaintiff from establishing causation. Alternatively, the use of such expert witnesses by the plaintiff may significantly strengthen their case and convince you or your client that settlement is more advantageous than proceeding to trial. The use of an expert witness becomes even more important when the other side intends to use one. There are countless instances where juries put undue weight on the testimony of an expert merely because the other side failed to present similar testimony to rebut the expert's opinion. This makes the disclosure of an expert witness critical for evaluating a case for settlement. ... Continue Reading
Change of Condition vs. Fictional New Injury: A review of AZ Atlanta et al. v. Surge Staffing, LLC, et. al.
The Workers' Compensation Act is most successful in its application when an injured worker receives all necessary and related medical treatment needed to return the employee back to his pre-injury state that allows him to pursue gainful employment. Ideally, the employee's condition is restored so far as he is capable of performing the same pre-injury work duties for the same employer. ... Continue Reading
On December 20, 2019, President Trump signed into law the SECURE Act. Short for "Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement," the new law has sweeping, long-term implications for beneficiaries of and contributors to retirement accounts. ... Continue Reading
Contractual provisions controlling the venue and avenue through which a plaintiff can bring a claim against a defendant are powerful tools to control litigation should it arise. ... Continue Reading
Since 2017, several courts have held that the exclusion for damages caused by "seepage or leakage" of water which occurs "over a period of weeks, months, or years" does not bar coverage for damages occurring during the first 13 days. ... Continue Reading
The Journal is a publication for the clients of Drew Eckl & Farnham, LLP. It is written in a general format and is not intended to be legal advice to any specific circumstance. Legal Opinions may vary when based upon subtle factual differences. All rights reserved.
H. Michael Bagley