VanDerGinst Blawg

In Chicago, personal injury law is about holding responsible any negligent parties, to prevent innocent parties from unnecessarily bearing the weight of consequences. Many aspects of personal injury law, common in today’s courtrooms, including wrongful death, motor vehicle accidents, and medical malpractice, are examples of civil justice laws addressing unlawful and illegal negligence - inaction - rather than intentional acts.

Also addressing negligence and inaction, though on a much larger scale, is the government-funded bailout currently being considered by Congress. Many have criticized these companies as extremely negligent of their responsibilities: to those they employ, to investors and stockholders, and, in effect, to any with a vested interest. Through poor planning and decision-making in overall business strategy, these companies, say some, have shirked their duty. Also alleged, is that, for these companies, the very knowledge or potential of a bailout plan in dire circumstances (as these are) has for some time undercut automobile officials’ drive (no pun intended) to innovate and move intelligently with the market. If there is truth to these arguments, even partial truth, what else can we call this but negligent behavior?

To further the Chicago personal injury law comparison, should these companies be guilty of such negligence, can we then ive them finances to - maybe or maybe not - head off disaster? Consider a defendant in a personal injury case admitting frivolously wasting the money of the plaintiff. Can we conceive of a court ruling in such a case for the plaintiff to “bail out” the negligent defendant? No, we cannot. Personal injury law is built the social duties between individuals, and on the idea that upon the violation of such a duty, it is the violator, not the violated, bearing responsibility to compensate the victim and rectify the situation. These standards are necessary to shifts consequences of bad behavior from the innocent to the guilty.

Let us return to the present, national bailout situation. In considering guilt and innocence and the placement of consequence, is not the innocent automobile manufacturer employee already suffering the consequences and standing to lose everything if the bailout is not approved? Is it possible to hold responsible the small portion (executives) of decision-makers within these companies while helping the rest? In civil, personal injury law, there do exist some devices for doing comparable things - contributory negligence, for example - but perhaps we must admit that this is the end of our metaphor. As it breaks down, we are left with no choice except to leave these decisions to those who were elected to make them.

When you or someone you love is the victim of negligence, don’t hesitate to contact us. We look forward to hearing from you.

Share this article with others:

That there is a current crisis in Chicago medical malpractice law is rarely disputed. Attorneys, medical professionals, and even the average person on the street know of the rampant overuse and abuse of the medical malpractice laws currently underway in our courts. Equally well-known are the results: clogged court dockets, wasted tax dollars, and a steady decline in the confidence of the average citizen in the legal system of this country.

It is all well-known except for one fact: it’s not true.

However, what is true is statistically verified: the mistakes and malpractice of medical professionals account for a shocking number of deaths each year - more, even, than auto accidents. It has been demonstrated by recent research that nearly all medical malpractice lawsuits filed in this country have merit, being based on the injury or death of an innocent person as the result of a serious and significant error in medical care. This contrasts sharply with the popular idea that most medical malpractice lawsuits are the product of trial lawyers’ imaginations (and, some would say, avarice). How then can we account for this pervasive belief?

This idea has been effectively disseminated by Read full entry and feel free to comment »

Share this article with others:

The big day, election day, approaches. The polls, pundits, predictions and the regular circus and celebration of this election cycle have been a part of our national landscape for longer than perhaps any other cycle, at least in recent memory. What will we ever talk about around the water cooler after it’s all over? Which name will remain on our lips for at least the next four years, and which will fade into presidential trivia: Obama or McCain?

As the highest officer in the executive branch, the president is, in some ways, the law of the land or at least one of the three critical points defining it (along with the legislative and judicial branches). It follows, then, that it is not so uncommon for politicians to have legal backgrounds. Several of this year’s candidates, as well as pivotal political figures of recent memory have been trained, licensed attorneys.

This is by no means a recent phenomenon. Abraham Lincoln is a prime example. He practiced law for nearly 25 years in Illinois courts before rising to the highest office in the land. That so many of those in public office are trained, licensed attorneys only makes sense. Law is Read full entry and feel free to comment »

Share this article with others:

Pfizer’s recent $894 million settlement of pending Bextra and Celebrex lawsuits addresses thousands of affected consumers and their families. Some have declared that this amount is not nearly enough to do either of the things such an award is potential intended for: compensate victims and punish wrongdoers. Others, however, including attorneys representing Pfizer as well as attorneys for the defendants, have called the deal a success for all involved.

When dealing with people’s lives, including injuries and deaths resulting from correct use of a faulty drug, it is extremely difficult to answer questions of wrongs righted. It is unlikely that any of us could pick a dollar amount, however high, and say that we honestly felt that the death of our loved one had been rectified. So it likely is for many of the plaintiffs in this case.

And yet, within the civil legal system, this can be considered a victory. If not for the vehicle of personal injury law and class-action litigation how could any of these individuals have won justice? It is possible for a David to defeat a Goliath, but in the real world a more useful adage is “strength in numbers.”

When a product, especially a pharamecutical, which will be consumed or ingested and trusted to heal, turns out to be harmful, a common first reaction is disbelief. This shows how strongly we believe in the medical system, drawing from experiences in seeing miracles granted daily and ever-advancing technology. A common second reaction is wonder over how to respond, how to react, how to proceed from the small bottle of pills and the pain they have caused toward justice. Personal injury law is that course of action.

If you or a loved one has suffered an injury, illness or death after exposure to a dangerous pharmaceutical, call VanDerGinst Law at 1-866-843-7367 or click here for a FREE online case evaluation. The initial consultation is free of charge. If we agree to handle your injury case, we will work on a contingency fee basis, which means we get paid for our services only if, and when, there is a money recovery for you. In many cases a lawsuit must be filed before an applicable expiration date, known as a statute of limitations. So please call right away to ensure that you do not waive your right to possible compensation.

Share this article with others:

If you think that personal injury law is frivolous litigation, personal grudges, The People’s Court, and get-rich-quick lawsuits, you’re correct. But if you think that’s all that personal injury law is, think again.

Personal injury law is also legal recourse for anyone unjustly injured or otherwise wronged, a way to seek justice, a protection against the erosion of societal duty, a check-and-balance for the behavior of private citizens toward one another, a legal device to facilitate the evolution of social and moral norms of conduct.

Since the inception of the civil legal system, people have recognized these two aspects. Certainly, the intention of the system is justice and protection, while frivolous and careless use for personal gain is perversion of its purpose. Legislation has been passed at various points in our history in an effort to minimize the latter while preserving the former. Most recently, the stir over “predatory trial lawyers” lead to the passage of legislation to limit damages awarded and otherwise attempt to block efforts at system abuse.

The truth is that to some extent such abuses will always occur, and are part and parcel of a system such as ours. By putting the power of legal action into the hands of its citizens, the country gives immense power to those citizens, not all of whom will have pure motives. And yet, it seems clear that the benefits greatly outweigh the costs.

We find a similar situation with the First Amendment. Free speech is just that: free. This may include offensive, hateful, and divisive speech as well as calls for unity, celebration, contentious objection, and healthy protest. Similar to personal injury law, periodically some form of speech is called into question - flag burning, hate speech, etc - and dealt with in particular, but overall free speech remains free and we accept the consequences. It is ridiculous for most citizens to consider doing away with free speech in an attempt to eliminate the “abuses” to it - a better example of throwing out the baby with the bathwater would be difficult to find. In the same way, personal injury law, in its protection of personal rights and duties, opens the door for potential abuse of its own system. Shall we then do away with personal injury law?

For any citizen who has been treated unfairly or taken advantage of, or knows someone who has, the answer is obvious. For those of us who have been lucky enough to avoid such a situation, it takes only a moment to consider how we might feel in such a situation, and how we would use the legal options of personal injury law to seek justice.

If you or a loved one has suffered an injury, illness or death, that seems to have been someone else’s fault, call VanDerGinst Law at 1-866-843-7367 or click here for a FREE online case evaluation. The initial consultation is free of charge. If we agree to handle your injury case, we will work on a contingency fee basis, which means we get paid for our services only if, and when, there is a money recovery for you. In many cases a lawsuit must be filed before an applicable expiration date, known as a statute of limitations. So please call right away to ensure that you do not waive your right to possible compensation.

Share this article with others:

Q: Will my monthly Social Security Disability benefits be reduced if I am receiving Workers Compensation payments?

A: If you receive Workers’ Compensation benefits for a work-related injury or illness and are found eligible to receive Social Security Disability, you may receive notice that your Social Security benefits have been reduced. You will need to provide Social Security with information related to your Workers’ Compensation benefits so that they may make the necessary calculations.

The total amount of benefits from both programs (Workers’ Compensation plus Social Security Disability) may not exceed Read full entry and feel free to comment »

Share this article with others:

As Chicago winter weather fast approaches, it is relevant to review some of the issues surrounding the seemingly-straightforward but often-confusing personal injury laws regarding property owners’ responsibility for removal of snow/ice from property. This area of law is often called premises liability. Note that it is always important to check on city, local, and regional laws, ordinances, and regulations; the following is only general information and does not constitute legal advice.

Persons can be sued for negligence, under certain circumstances, with respect to the “unnatural accumulation” of water and/or ice on their premises. Note “unnatural” accumulation. Generally speaking, Illinois law Read full entry and feel free to comment »

Share this article with others:

If you are ever injured as a result of the actions or negligence of others, you will probably ask yourself: “Do I need to hire an attorney to represent me?” The answer to that question is yes. An attorney specializing in personal injury law has the experience and knowledge to protect your interests and obtain a fair and equitable settlement for you. Most insurance companies will agree that those people who are represented by an attorney will receive a larger settlement and better care than those trying to handle their claim on their own. It is a fact that insurance companies want to settle each claim as cheaply as possible and those people who do not hire an attorney will most likely receive a lower offer of settlement.

In a personal injury claim, you have to present Read full entry and feel free to comment »

Share this article with others:

Some interesting facts about divorce in Illinois:

Filing: A dissolution action, or a divorce petition, may be filed by anyone who has resided in the state for at least 90 days. You can file for divorce prior to fulfilling the 90-day residency requirement, but the divorce may not be finalized by the court until you have resided in Illinois for at least 90 days.

Grounds: The state of Illinois (unlike Iowa), is a “fault state”. This means that Read full entry and feel free to comment »

Share this article with others:

We have all seen the signs at worksites: “__ days since last work-related injury”.  Maintaining such records publicly shows a commitment to safety as well as a willingness to be judged in the court of public opinion.  Certainly, business owners understand that consumers and potential employees will be affected by the injury statistics displayed, for better or worse.
Some worksites and careers are more hazardous than others. It is difficult to imagine a “Days Since Last Injury” sign at a coffee shop or florist. Still, nearly every work environment has the potential for injury. The overt risks are obvious: heavy machinery, hazardous materials, heights, extreme heat or cold, etc. These types of workplaces usually have very strict safety procedures and extensive training to minimize risk. But what of a relatively harmless worksite?

Returning to our example of the coffee shop, upon closer inspection, we see that this seemingly innocuous location does include grinders, steam wands, scalding-hot liquids, kitchen knives, potentially slippery floors, and hot ovens. Nearly any worksite, when subjected to a thorough inspection, will yield significant hazard(s). In addition to these types of hazards are less obvious risks such as those injuries caused over time by repetitive motion and the sedentary nature of so much of modern work.

This is not a call for panic or paranoia about a constant threat of injury at work. In fact, it is clear that our society minimizes these risks pretty well, relatively speaking. What is important is Read full entry and feel free to comment »

Share this article with others: