Jump To Navigation
Verdicts and Settlements

Recent Personal Injury Settlments

Facial scarring and ankle fracture - 250,000

Herniated cervical disc - 187,500

Lumbar bulging disc - 125, 000

Herniated lumbar disc - 100,000

Wrongful death case - 900,000

Recent Worker's Compensation Settlements

Closed head injuries and multiple knee surgeries 177,500

Bilateral knee surgeries - 95,000

Pulmonary disease from explosion 360,000

Herniated lumbar disc - 130,000

Call today for a free consultation. Toll-free: 1-800-377-8194, Macon: 478-746-0063

May 9, 2008

  • Save This Page
  • Print This Page
  • Email This Page

Legal News

Nelson & Smith, LLC — Macon, Georgia

News

Autos

[05/09] MADD Encourages Ohio Legislature to Make Interlocks Part of Lifesaving DUI Bill
[05/09] Get Ready to Walk Like MADD to Eliminate Drunk Driving
[05/09] Three Metaldyne Plants Recognized by Ford for Outstanding Supplier Delivery Performance
[05/09] KUKA Robotics Corporation Introduces the KR 1000 Titan
[05/09] Japanese shares drop on Toyota outlook
[05/09] GM to pay up to $200M to help end American Axle strike

More...

Product Liability

[05/09] Retailers can use DNA tracing to track meat
[05/09] Government asks court to block wider testing for mad cow
[05/08] Group asks government to end use of birth-control patch
[05/06] China accuses US of shoddy probe into tainted heparin
[05/05] FDA study: Insulin pumps linked to injuries, deaths in teens
[05/05] Anti-psychotic drug use soars in UK children, too

More...

Top Headlines

[05/09] Convicted NYC lawyer sentenced to 25-to-life for murder
[05/09] Microsoft appeals $1.4B EU antitrust fine
[05/09] Jury selection begins in R. Kelly child pornography case
[05/09] Conn. man says police broke into home, ripped out catheter
[05/09] Pastors encouraged to violate IRS ban on partisan politics

More...

Tort

[05/09] Drugs, teens, pot are dangerous mix
[05/09] 77 more hepatitis cases may trace to clinic, officials say
[05/09] Tornado knocks vehicles around in N. Carolina, kills 1
[05/09] Retailers can use DNA tracing to track meat
[05/09] Plame seeks to resurrect lawsuit in CIA leak case
[05/09] Government asks court to block wider testing for mad cow

More...

Case Summaries

Workers' Comp

[05/06] Steed v. Astrue
Denial of social security disability and supplemental security income benefits is affirmed where: 1) substantial evidence supported a finding that claimant retained the capacity to perform light work and suffered only mild degenerative changes to her back; and 2) the ALJ did not err in its evaluation of medical evidence or in discounting claimant's credibility.

[04/30] Antelope Valley Press v. Poizner
In a case considering whether, for purposes of worker's compensation insurance, persons who made deliveries of newspapers for a newspaper publisher were independent contractors or employees, the court of appeals finds that the specific facts of this case and relevant case law supported a conclusion that the carriers were employees, and not independent contractors.

[04/29] Ramirez v. Murdick
In an action wherein plaintiff filed a Huffman claim seeking liquidated damages, attorney's fees and costs for the late payment of worker's compensation benefits, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the Superior Court did not err in its interpretation and application of Workers' Compensation Act, 19 Del. C. sections 2357 and 2362(c); and 2) although the Superior Court erred in converting employer's motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment without notice, the error was harmless.

[04/22] Sewell Coal Co. v. Dir., Office of Workers' Compensation Programs
In proceedings arising from a claim for benefits under the Black Lung Benefits Act (the BLBA), an order of the Benefits Review Board affirming an award of benefits is vacated and remanded where: 1) the three year statute of limitations under 20 C.F.R. section 725.308(a) applies to subsequent claims for benefits; and 2) a remand was proper for further proceedings on whether the claim was timely under the three year statute of limitations, as it applies to subsequent claims.

[12/05] Levan v. Independence Mall Inc.
In an action arising from an injury in a work-related accident wherein a petition for additional compensation was filed with the Industrial Accident Board more than 5 years after the employer's insurance carrier mailed the last medical expense payment, judgment that the petition was time-barred under 19 Del. C. section 2361(b) is affirmed over claims that: 1) the limitations period began to run when the claimant or his medical provider actually receives the last payment; and 2) the Board's decision was not supported by substantial evidence; and 3) the Superior Court applied its own construction of section 2361(b) incorrectly and erred when it upheld the Board's ultimate ruling of the petition as barred.

[11/21] Asbestos Workers Local Union No. 42 Welfare Fund v. Brewster
In a subrogation action brought by an ERISA Fund wherein one of its members sought to have her medical expenses from an automobile accident paid by the Fund, summary judgment for plan administrators is affirmed whereby: 1) the Fund's state law subrogation claim was preempted by ERISA section 514, as the claim "relates to" the ERISA plan; and 2) the Fund's subrogation claim duplicated or supplemented a civil enforcement remedy available to the Fund under section 502(a)(3) of ERISA.

More...

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.

Disclaimer pursuant to Georgia Rule of Professional Conduct 7.1(a)(6): The statement "no attorneys' fees unless we are able to secure a verdict or settlement on your behalf" refers only to those fees charged by the attorney. Court costs and other additional expenses of legal actions usually must be paid by the client. Contingent fees are not permitted in all types of cases.