P.I.S.S.D. -- Personal Injury, Social Security Disability. Dallas Texas Lawyers

"Credibility Problem" Of The Texas Supreme Court

The Dallas Morning News published an editorial today regarding the credibility problem of our current Texas Supreme Court. The newspaper is definitely right in saying the Court has a credibility problem, but the paper is misinformed in one of its statements, and in my opinion is wrong in its suggested solution.

The misinformation is in the statement that "Texas trial lawyers who argue directly before the justices also have been huge contributors." The implication is that plaintiff lawyers are contributing to the justices. This may have been true in the past, but I don't think there are many plaintiff lawyers now who would even consider making a contribution to any of the nine sitting Republican justices.

The newspaper's conclusion that the best solution to the current problem would be appointed justices is, again in my opinion, simply wrong. This would be dangerously close to the federal judicial system of appointments for life. And while there are many fine federal judges, there are some who never should have been appointed, and who will never leave the bench.

The correct solution is fair and open elections, with full disclosure of campaign contributions, combined with an educated electorate who understand the influence that campaign contributions can have on judges' legal opinions. Full public financing of judicial elections would be even better.

Here is the text of the editorial:

The reputation of our state's judiciary has been tarnished for years. As then-state Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Phillips told the Legislature all the way back in 2001, when judges owe their jobs to an electoral system dominated by political parties and big campaign donors, their judicial objectivity comes into question. 

Nothing underscores this point better than the May 2 Texas Supreme Court decision favoring Perry Homes over homeowners Jane and Robert Cull. The court's decision, overturning two lower courts' rulings to compensate the Culls for a defective home, probably will be debated for years.

But what isn't debatable is that the founder of Perry Homes, Bob Perry, is a major donor to the campaigns of the Supreme Court's justices. He, his family and their political action committees have donated more than $250,000 to the nine justices – all Republicans – including those who dissented in the Cull case.

The justices may have used flawless legal analysis in ruling against the Culls. That's not the point. In the public's eye, their decision is tainted by the fact that they owe their elected positions, at least in part, to Mr. Perry.

He isn't the only big donor with business before the court. Texas trial lawyers who argue directly before the justices also have been huge contributors.

And to add to the credibility problem, three Supreme Court justices are fending off allegations that they abused their campaign funds. And a report yesterday by the judicial watchdog group Texas Watch criticized the court for relying too heavily on anonymous opinions, which effectively reduces the panel's public accountability.

The method of electing Texas judges – from the Supreme Court all the way down – is badly in need of modernization. Campaign donations from special interests should have no place in an independent judiciary.

The state needs a system in which the governor appoints judicial nominees by merit, with Senate confirmation, and voters regularly decide whether or not to retain them. That would help remove partisan politics and make court decisions less suspect.

That's one of several options put forth by Mr. Phillips in 2001. His argument made sense then, and it's no less valid today.

Friday Fun

Is anyone else out there old enough to remember using carbon paper, dialing a rotary phone, using a manual choke control to start your car in the winter, or using a CP/M language office computer? You can relive those and other old memories at the ObsoleteSkills Web site. The list is a little heavy on the geek side of the scale, but there are some interesting "skills" such as using a church key to open a beer can, that younger folk won't remember at all.

On the other hand, even I am not old enough to remember telling time with a sundial.

Texas May Actually Punish Uninsured Motorists (Finally)

As reported in today's Dallas Morning News, Texas may actually start getting serious about punishing uninsured motorists. Of course, I'll believe that when I see it happen.

For many years, it has been against the law to operate a motor vehicle in Texas without complying with the financial responsibility act — basically either showing proof of liability insurance or putting up a bond to be self-insured. But that law has never been vigorously prosecuted, and there has been no state-wide effort to identify uninsured motorists and get them off the road. Why? Because the auto insurance companies have always been opposed to mandatory insurance, and in Texas the insurance companies control the Legislature and the courts.

Auto insurance companies make high profits for the same reasons health insurance companies do — they insure only the cream of the crop, unless forced to do otherwise by law. So auto insurance companies are perfectly happy to insure only the people who are rich enough to easily afford insurance and who are responsible enough to buy it. As for the poor and/or irresponsible drivers, the carriers would much rather not be burdened by insuring them. Here are excerpts from the newspaper article:

Three years after the Legislature passed a law to crack down on uninsured motorists, the number of drivers caught without insurance coverage under the 2005 statute is exactly – zero.

Start-up of the new insurance verification program has been snagged by initial delays in hiring a private contractor to create a database, differences among state agencies responsible for implementing the law, worries that some data may be inaccurate and doubts about the program by the insurance industry.

The program, funded with an annual $1 fee paid by all Texas drivers when renewing their vehicle registration, aims to create a database for police officers, state troopers and vehicle inspection stations to instantly verify whether a motorist has the minimum coverage required under state law. The database would be set up with information provided by insurers.

An estimated one in five Texans drives without insurance, costing insured motorists an extra $1 billion a year for protection against uninsured drivers. State officials say they are aiming to launch a pilot program in June.

One group that lobbied for the law was MADD [Mothers Against Drunk Driving] of Texas, which argued that the average drunken driver is less likely to have insurance than other drivers.

"The need for this law has not changed in the past three years. In fact, it has probably gotten worse," said Bill Lewis of MADD-Texas. "There are probably more uninsured people today than when the law was passed."

Between 3 million and 4 million of the state's 16 million drivers are uninsured, according to state officials and the insurance industry.

"We have never supported any sort of compulsory auto insurance, particularly one open to inaccuracies when using a database," said Jerry Johns, president of Southwestern Insurance Information Service, an industry group.

"We will abide by the law and will certainly cooperate with the Texas Department of Insurance and other agencies involved. But we are concerned that if mistakes are made in the new system, it is the industry that will be blamed, and that's not the way it should be."

Although Texas has had a financial responsibility law requiring drivers to buy insurance for several years, enforcement has been difficult even though proof of insurance must be furnished to get a license renewal or safety inspection.

Millions of motorists skirt the law by using counterfeit proof-of-insurance cards or by obtaining a month's coverage of insurance to get an ID card, only to cancel the policy once they get their licenses renewed or their vehicles inspected.

Under the state program, a driver pulled over for a traffic violation or involved in an accident will still be asked to produce proof of insurance. But the officer also will run the license plate of the vehicle through the insurance database to determine whether the driver has insurance.

The state also will contact drivers without insurance by mail, warning them of the consequences for not having an insurance policy.

Featured Link - American Association Of People With Disabilities

The American Association of People With Disabilities (AAPD) is just what it sounds like — an organization of and for people with disabilities. There are some good resources and tips here. Here is their description:

AAPD is the largest national nonprofit cross-disability member organization in the United States, dedicated to ensuring economic self-sufficiency and political empowerment for the more than 50 million Americans with disabilities. AAPD works in coalition with other disability organizations for the full implementation and enforcement of disability nondiscrimination laws, particularly the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

Friday Fun

Here's yet another silly game from Tom Mighell. This one is all about popping balloons with darts, and like Tom says, it IS addicting. I'm stuck on level 37 right now. Can anyone help me?

Workers' Health Insurance Costs Soar

Yesterday's Los Angeles Times had a good article on the outrageous cost of health insurance, especially relative to inflation. As a small-business owner, I struggle with this issue every year. Each time we come up for renewal, I am forced to increase our deductibles or reduce our benefits in order to keep the costs of premiums at a manageable level. I blame both the health insurance carriers for these increases and the health providers for increasing their fees at a much greater rate than inflation in general. Here are excerpts:

          

If gas and milk price hikes seem steep, check out health insurance premiums. They have increased 10 times faster than incomes in recent years, a study shows.

Workers with job-based coverage for their families saw earnings rise 3% from 2001 to 2005, while their health insurance premium contribution increased 30%, according to the study by researchers at the State Health Access Data Assistance Center at the University of Minnesota.

The average cost nationally of family coverage during the period increased nearly $2,500, to $10,728 from $8,281. The average cost for job-based family coverage in California increased more than $2,650, to $10,551 from $7,898.

Between 2001 and 2005, more than 30,000 of the 3.6 million private-sector employers offering health insurance as a benefit to workers dropped it.

As a result, the number of people in private-sector jobs that offered health insurance benefits declined by more than 4 million, and the number of people with private insurance fell by 2.4 million, or 6%, the study found.

   

One More Post About Minimum Auto Insurance Limits

This is the official news release from the Texas Department of Insurance about the recent increase in auto liability limits:

Minimum Auto Liability Insurance Limits to Increase on April 1

AUSTIN – The minimum amount of automobile liability insurance Texas drivers are required to carry for bodily injury/property damage will increase on April 1 from the current $20,000/$40,000/$15,000 (“20/40/15”) coverage to “25/50/25” coverage.

Texas law requires people who drive in Texas to be financially responsible for the accidents they cause. Most drivers do this by buying auto liability insurance. Liability insurance pays to repair or replace the other driver’s vehicle and pays the medical expenses of the other party; it does not pay to repair or replace the policyholder’s vehicle.

The current minimum amount of liability insurance required by law is $20,000 for each person injured in an accident, up to a total of $40,000 for everyone injured in an accident, and $15,000 for property damage per accident. The limits will increase on April 1 to $25,000 of coverage for each injured person, up to a total of $50,000 per accident, and $25,000 for property damage.

The 80^th Legislature amended the current financial responsibility law in 2007 to increase the auto liability limits amid concerns that the current limits aren’t enough to cover the costs of an accident resulting in severe injury or major vehicle damage.

The limits will increase again on January 1, 2011, to $30,000 of coverage for each injured person, up to a total of $60,000 per accident, and $25,000 for property damage per accident (30/60/25).

Drivers who carry minimum limits will begin to notice the new limits as they renew their auto policies or buy a new policy, but they won’t need to take any action unless contacted by their insurance company.

There are severe penalties for violating the state’s financial responsibility law. A first conviction will result in a fine between $175 and $350. Subsequent convictions could result in fines of $350 to $1,000, suspension of your driver’s license, and impoundment of your vehicle. The state of Texas will implement the new Texas Financial Responsibility Verification Program this spring that will allow law enforcement officers to immediately verify whether a driver has car insurance.

For more information about the new limits or automobile insurance coverage, visit the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) resource page at http://www.tdi.state.tx.us/consumer/financialrespon.html, read TDI’s Automobile Insurance Made Easy publication at http://www.tdi.state.tx.us/pubs/consumer/cb020.html or call the Consumer Help Line at 1-800-252-3439.

Studies On Chemical In Plastics Questioned - FDA

The Washington Post has an article today that illustrates the fallacy in the current trend of the Bush administration and the U.S. Supreme Court to push the doctrine of "preemption." This is the legal theory that basically states if a federal agency approves a product, then consumers are forbidden to file any claims for damages caused by that product. The argument against premption is that the government is starving the federal agencies by reducing their budgets, thereby reducing their abilities to adequately test products. The story is about safety concerns with the chemical compound bisphenol A (BPA). Here are excerpts.

Despite more than 100 published studies by government scientists and university laboratories that have raised health concerns about a chemical compound that is central to the multibillion-dollar plastics industry, the Food and Drug Administration has deemed it safe largely because of two studies, both funded by an industry trade group.

The agency says it has relied on research backed by the American Plastics Council because it had input on its design, monitored its progress and reviewed the raw data.

The compound, bisphenol A (BPA), has been linked to breast and prostate cancer, behavioral disorders and reproductive health problems in laboratory animals.

As evidence mounts about the risks of using BPA in baby bottles and other products, some experts and industry critics contend that chemical manufacturers have exerted influence over federal regulators to keep a possibly unsafe product on the market.

Congressional Democrats have begun investigating any industry influence in regulating BPA.

"Tobacco figured this out, and essentially it's the same model," said David Michaels, who was a federal regulator in the Clinton administration. "If you fight the science, you're able to postpone regulation and victim compensation, as well. As in this case, eventually the science becomes overwhelming. But if you can get five or 10 years of avoiding pollution control or production of chemicals, you've greatly increased your product.

Scientists first flagged possible health risks of BPA more than a decade ago. From 1997 to 2005, 116 studies of the compound were published, many of them focused on its effects in low doses. Of those funded by government, 90 percent showed a health effect linked to BPA. None of the industry-funded studies found an effect; all of them said BPA is safe.

Featured Link - FoodSafety.gov

There have been so many food recalls lately that some of us are losing weight just worrying about the safety of what we eat. The federal government has a site filled with information about food safety. There's lots of good stuff here. Here's the description from the site:

FoodSafety.gov is a gateway website that provides links to selected government food safety-related information. Not every government web site is listed. When more than one government web site provides similar information, links will be provided to only one or two of those sites. Individuals with different backgrounds review all potential sites for inclusion on the FoodSafety.gov web site. This web site is part of the National Food Safety Information Network. It is maintained by FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

Friday Fun

Are you having a really bad day at the office? Do you feel like freaking out and trashing your cubicle? The good news is that you don't have to do that in reality — you can do it virtually, at CubicleFreakout.

Featured Link - Web 2.0 Directory

Are you one of those baffled by all the talk of Web 2.0? Here's the Wikipedia definition:

Web 2.0 is a trend in the use of World Wide Web technology and web design that aims to facilitate creativity, information sharing, and, most notably, collaboration among users. These concepts have led to the development and evolution of web-based communities and hosted services, such as social-networking sites, wikis, blogs, and folksonomies. The term became notable after the first O'Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference in 2004.^[2][3] Although the term suggests a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an update to any technical specifications, but to changes in the ways software developers and end-users use webs.

But the Featured Link is a cool directory of Web 2.0 sites, each represented by the company logo and searchable by category. As of now, there are more than 2300 sites represented at Go2Web20. Check it out.

"Fatal" Mistakes Social Security Disability Clients Make

This is a short list of mistakes we have seen our clients make over the years. Whether you are our client, another lawyer's client, or simply trying to represent yourself in a claim for Social Security Disability benefits, you should read this list carefully and maybe you can avoid making one of these "fatal" mistakes.

Please call or write us if you have questions about this or any other legal matter.

    * Not being completely honest with the lawyer regarding medical conditions, work status, and drug or alcohol use.

    * Not going to the doctor regularly or not taking all the medications prescribed by the doctor.

    * Not attending all meetings scheduled with the lawyer.

    * Not keeping Social Security and the lawyer informed of the client's current address and telephone number.

    * Committing a crime that would cause Social Security to question the client's credibility.

    * Saying anything untruthful during the hearing with the Administrative Law Judge.

    * Continuing to smoke while claiming disability for heart or respiratory disease.

    * Not reading all letters from Social Security or from the lawyer, and missing a deadline contained in a letter.

    * Using illegal drugs or abusing legal drugs and alcohol.

    * Not attending medical examinations scheduled by Social Security.

    * Failing to tell the lawyer about every doctor the client has seen.

Reminder - Texas Auto Liability Minimum Limits Raised

I've written before about the woefully low minimum automobile liability insurance limits in Texas, and how they were going to changed in April 2008. Well, the time has finally come, and as of April 1, the minimum insurance requirements were increased under the Texas Motor Vehicle Safety Responsibility Act. This applies to policies purchased or renewed on or after that date.

Now, the minimum limits are no longer 20,000/40,000/15.000. The new state-mandated limits are 25,000/50,000/25,000. That means $25,000 for bodily injury to or death of one person in one accident; $50,000 for bodily injury to or death of two or more persons in one accident; and $25,000 for damage to or destruction of the property of others in one accident. These limits are still far too low, both for injury and property damage, but at least it's a small step in the right direction.

We advise all our clients to purchase more than the minimum limits if possible, and please pay the few extra dollars to add Personal Injury Protection and Uninsured Motorist coverage to your policy. Statistics show that 25% or more of all Texas motorists have no auto insurance coverage. If you get hit by one of those drivers and you don't have Uninsured Motorist coverage, you'll probably be out of luck. Talk to your insurance agent now about adding this coverage.

Featured Link - Internet Crime Complaint Center

The federal government has a Web site where you can report all those Internet scam e-mails you get every day. Not that it will do any good, but maybe you'll feel better after complaining. Here's the explanation from the Internet Crime Complaint Center:

The Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C), and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA).

IC3's mission is to serve as a vehicle to receive, develop, and refer criminal complaints regarding the rapidly expanding arena of cyber crime. The IC3 gives the victims of cyber crime a convenient and easy-to-use reporting mechanism that alerts authorities of suspected criminal or civil violations. For law enforcement and regulatory agencies at the federal, state, local and international level, IC3 provides a central referral mechanism for complaints involving Internet related crimes.

The site does have a good section on Internet crime prevention that is well worth reading.

Average Processing Times For Social Security Disability Claims

The list of the most recently available average processing times for Social Security disability claims throughout the nation has been published by NOSSCR. The Dallas and Forth Worth offices rank closer to the top than to the bottom, but processing times across the country are abysmal and unfair to claimants.

The times as of the first of March 2008 range from 258 days in Harrisburg, to 816 days in Indianapolis. Fort Worth ranks 43rd out of 143 offices, with an average processing time of 405 days. The North Dallas office ranks 57th, with an average processing time of 437 days, and the Downtown Dallas office ranks 66th, with an average processing time of 460 days.

Friday Fun

Do you like computer games where you have no chance of winning? How about quizzes that make you feel stupid? You like both those things? Then you'll just love The Impossible Quiz 2!

Featured Link - Case Management Resource Guide

The Case Management Resource Guide is an online listing of  over 100,000 individual medical facilities,  programs, companies, and organizations. The site is sponsored by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals.

Allstate Insurance Releases Documents As Ordered By Florida Court

I've written several times now about Allstate Insurance being banned from writing new policies in Florida until they released certain court-ordered documents. Allstate has now released those documents online.

This is going to be deathly dull to almost everyone except a few interested parties, but I'm sure there will be some juicy little nuggets that will come to light eventually. As for me, I'll let someone else be the first to read the 150,000 pages of documents...

Co-Payments For Expensive Drugs Soar

Today's New York Times carries a story about the rising costs of prescription drugs — even for people who have health insurance. The gist of it is that insurance carriers are raising the co-pay amount for the most expensive and popular drugs. Here are excerpts:

Health insurance companies are rapidly adopting a new pricing system for very expensive drugs, asking patients to pay hundreds and even thousands of dollars for prescriptions for medications that may save their lives or slow the progress of serious diseases.

With the new pricing system, insurers abandoned the traditional arrangement that has patients pay a fixed amount, like $10, $20 or $30 for a prescription, no matter what the drug’s actual cost. Instead, they are charging patients a percentage of the cost of certain high-priced drugs, usually 20 to 33 percent, which can amount to thousands of dollars a month.

The system means that the burden of expensive health care can now affect insured people, too.

No one knows how many patients are affected, but hundreds of drugs are priced this new way. They are used to treat diseases that may be fairly common, including multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, hemophilia, hepatitis C and some cancers. There are no cheaper equivalents for these drugs, so patients are forced to pay the price or do without.

But the new system sticks seriously ill people with huge bills, said James Robinson, a health economist at the University of California, Berkeley. “It is very unfortunate social policy,” Dr. Robinson said. “The more the sick person pays, the less the healthy person pays.”

Traditionally, the idea of insurance was to spread the costs of paying for the sick.

Beware Of A "Rootkit" Virus

These new rootkit viruses are driving people nuts. Here's a quick tip from Tom Mighell's Internet Legal Research Weekly:

Viruses are tricky, but rootkits are especially diabolical.  A rootkit is a program that digs deep to the root of your computer, and hides itself there.  If something is wrong with your computer and your regular troubleshooting can't figure it out, maybe it's a rootkit. There are several rootkit detectors, such as the free Rootkit Revealer  (http://tinyurl.com/2gukvq), that will tell you if you're infected.