California Personal Injury Attorneys

The California personal injury lawyers at BISNAR | CHASE are extremely concerned about this news report that 10 stroke patients were overexposed to radiation when they got CT scans at Glendale Adventist Medical Center. According to an article in the Glendale News Press, the patients received three to four times the normal dose of radiation during a triple imaging brain exam using a General Electric manufactured CT scan machine.
Read the rest of this entry »

The California personal injury attorneys of BISNAR | CHASE recently prevailed in a jury trial against Lynch Ambulance, convincing a Los Angeles jury that a negligent ambulance driver and the company that employed him were liable for serious personal injuries sustained by two passengers –Tracy Mucklevane and Shawna Alonzo. Mucklevane's case had already been settled. Jurors awarded Shawna Alonzo, who was then a respiratory therapist at Children's Hospital of Orange County, $164,000 for her serious injuries.
Read the rest of this entry »

The nursing home abuse and negligence attorneys at BISNAR | CHASE have been constantly concerned about the poor oversight of California nursing homes. Earlier this year we noted that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger cut funding significantly for nursing home ombudsman programs across California. These programs consist of volunteers who may go into nursing homes and conduct sudden inspections or follow up on complaints from families of nursing home residents relating to abuse, negligence or fraud.
Read the rest of this entry »

The Consumer Attorneys of California (CAOC) has launched a fresh attack on California's 34-year-old cap on noneconomic damages in California medical malpractice cases urging that a state court of appeal strike down those unjust limits. CAOC is basically challenging the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975 (MICRA), which was enacted in California to provide affordable medical malpractice insurance for physicians. MICRA limits jury awards in medical malpractice cases to $250,000 for pain and suffering and allows awards of $50,000 or more for future medical expenses and wage loss to be paid at regular intervals over the life of an injured plaintiff.

Jurors in medical malpractice cases can award damages to plaintiffs for past and future pain and suffering, physical impairment or disfigurement. These are known as noneconomic damages. The MICRA codified Civil Code section 3333.2 limits noneconomic damages to $250,000.

The most recent MICRA challenge came when attorney Robert S. Peck asked the California District Court of Appeal for the 5th District in Fresno to strike down the $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages. Like Peck and the CAOC, I believe that this cap violates the "inviolate right" to a jury trial and equal protection. It is, without doubt, an unconstitutional infringement by the Legislature on the judiciary. Peck appeared before the three-justice panel on behalf of CAOC and the American Association for Justice (AAJ).

The sad fact of medical malpractice lawsuits is that the people, who bring them, have often suffered catastrophic injuries. These are personal injuries that you cannot put a price on -- let alone a cap. For example, this particular case began when a local telephone company employee underwent surgery for a perianal abscess. The surgeon ended up severing a muscle during surgery causing the patient to suffer from permanent incontinence. A jury awarded him $2.5 million, but a judge reduced it to $250,000, the maximum authorized by MICRA.

There is no question that MICRA denies the common man access to the courts and justice. In almost all medical malpractice cases, the courts are the victims' last resort and only means to get justice. CAOC has formed a new committee to review, coordinate and assist the individual CAOC Member State challenges to MICRA caps. The committee is also actively looking for additional cases that would present good opportunities to challenge the cap. Bisnar | Chase medical malpractice attorneys wholeheartedly supports the CAOC and the AAJ in their efforts to get rid of the medical malpractice caps on noneconomic damages in California. This is not about money, but justice for consumers who have been neglected and wronged.