Moore & Wolfe Attorney Explains Victim’s Rights to Educators

Moore & Wolfe attorney, Karlos Finley recently visited Blount High School to speak with teachers and administrators at the school regarding the protection of their rights following a motor vehicle accident. Mr. Finley spoke on the importance of first seeking medical treatment and then legal advice prior to signing any paperwork following an accident. The group of educators seemed surprised to hear that liability insurance adjusters will contact individuals who have been involved in auto accidents shortly after the accident and try to have them sign a release prior to getting any medical care or legal advice regarding their rights. The adjusters will often offer a few dollars to the victim as money for the victim’s “inconvenience.” To get the money they tell the victim he or she must just simply sign some paperwork so the funds can be delivered. Mr. Finley laid out the typical scenario as follows:
ADJUSTER: Hello, Mr. Doe. This the adjuster with XYZ Insurance Company. I understand that you were in an automobile accident earlier today where my client ran into the back of your car. How do you feel?
MR. DOE: Oh, I’m fine. Just a little soreness in my neck and my low back’s a little stiff. It’ll probably go away in the next few days.
ADJUSTER: Well good Mr. Doe, I’m glad to hear that. Well I know you had to miss some time from work today because of this accident and it looks like our insured is at fault. I’d like to send you $75.00 today for your inconvenience. I just need you to sign some paperwork for my company so they can issue you the check……..Oh by the way, I’m going to be out of town working some other claims for the next several weeks, so we need to take care of this today so I can get the check issued before I leave town. Are you near a fax machine?
MR. DOE: Yes sir! As a matter of fact, you can send it here to my work.
ADJUSTER: Good! I will fax this waiver over to you. You can sign it, and fax it back and I will put the check in the mail today.
MR. DOE: Well thank you very much sir. I appreciate that greatly.
Well of course Mr. Doe signs the waiver and release and Mr. Adjuster sends the check. By time the check gets to Mr. Doe, he is so sore that he can’t walk. It feels like his back is stiff and there are sharp shooting pains going down his back and legs. He calls Mr. Adjuster, only to receive a voice mail alerting him that all calls will be returned within 24 hours. Mr. Doe doesn’t know what to do next. So he waits 24 hours and calls back. The conversation goes something like this.

MR. DOE: Yes, Mr. Adjuster, my back and neck have really taken a turn for the worse. I’m experiencing a lot of pain now. I think I need some medical attention.

ADJUSTER: Well, Mr. Doe I’m really sorry to hear that, but our file has been closed on this claim.

MR. DOE: But what about the doctors bills I’m going to have to incur? I need go to the doctor. The pain has spread from my neck down my entire back and into my thighs.
ADJUSTER: Well I don’t know sir, if you have health insurance, they may cover it.
MR. DOE: But what about you? Your insured caused this accident. Aren’t you responsible for this.
ADJUSTER: No sir, remember the paperwork you signed a few days ago. That paperwork releases our company from any further liability as it relates to this accident. That was all explained in the paperwork you signed. We have nothing further to do with this situation.
MR. DOE: Well I think that I’m going to see a lawyer. I don’t think that’s right.
ADJUSTER: Well sir you go right ahead and talk to a lawyer. Just make sure you tell them you signed a Release of All Claims and cashed the check we sent you. They’ll tell you under Alabama law there’s nothing that you can do. As I said before, this claim has been closed and this company has no further obligation to you. Good day.

Mr. Finley explained that, unfortunately, this scenario happens all too often in our State. In Alabama our Appellate Courts have strictly construed releases and documents signed by victims and consumers. Simply put when you sign a document in our State you are deemed to have read and understood the terms and conditions in that document, no matter what someone else tells you the document says or means. See, Foremost Insurance Company v. Parham, 693 So.2d 409 (Ala. 1997). This means adjusters are free to work loosely with facts and implications in order to secure a victim’s signature on a Release. Mr. Finley concluded his presentation by explaining to the group that the above scenario had recently occured to one of their members. That memeber had invited Mr. Finley to address the group so others would not be victimized in the future.

Are You a Good Driver?

You’re Probably Not as Good of a Driver as You think You Are. 

We certainly don’t want to offend anybody, but four separate studies by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, AAA’s Foundation for Traffic Safety and the University of California at Berkley’s Traffic Safety Center all confirm that most driver’s believe they are “above average” drivers and based upon that belief they rationalize or justify engaging in unsafe driving. The four studies confirm that almost 75% of drivers believe they are safer drivers than other drivers. Yet according to Rae Tyson of NHTSA, 95% of crashes are caused by human error. Tyson states that this over confidence in driving skills is dangerous because a driver’s false since of ability often is used to justify multitasking while driving or to engage in unsafe driving behavior. This observation is confirmed by AAA research. 82% of drivers say distracted driving is a “very serious” problem, but over half of those same drivers admit to using their cell phone regularly while they drive. 14% of those drivers even admitted to reading and sending text messages while driving! According to 75% percent of drivers, speeding is a “very serious” problem yet almost all of these same drivers admit to speeding “a little” most of the time they are driving. 20% admitted to driving at least 15 miles per hour over the speed limit on the highway and 14% admitted to doing the same on neighborhood streets! The next time you get behind the wheel of your car, just remember you may not be quite as good of a driver as you think you are….and the driver’s around you aren’t as good of drivers as they think they are either! Please be a safe and courteous driver.


By Knox Boteler, Attorney at Law
As the great oil spill looms off our shoreline, we continue to monitor BP’s handling of the crisis. While BP American CEO Lamar McKay stated his company will pay “all legitimate claims” for economic damages, regardless of the expense, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) passed by Congress after the Exxon Valdez spill caps BP’s exposure to economic damages at $75 million dollars. BP has already admitted this limit will be exceeded by claimants. Within the last several days, bills were introduced in Congress that would increase the $75 million cap. Senator Jeff Sessions (AL) has introduced one of those bills. To date, such attempts appear futile as the bills are facing opposition from big oil supporters.
Boteler & Wolfe is working toward the best solutions for our clients to overcome the caps to recover direct and indirect economic damages. In one case, a class action has been jointly filed with a law firm in Missouri on behalf of landowners in Baldwin County. If the landowners show that BP and other responsible parties have engaged in willful neglect, gross misconduct, or violations of safety rules, the $75 million dollar cap will be defeated. Another alternative for victims to consider is a claims process established by the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC). The NPFC is responsible for the administration of claims funded by the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF). This fund allows for the payment of up to $1 billion toward economic damages. Potential claimants that can utilize this process include individuals, corporations, local governments, and many others. Potential claims that can be sought against the fund are real and personal property damage, removal costs, loss of profits and earning capacity, and loss of subsistence. While this alternative to litigation requires a claimant to first seek restitution from BP and other responsible parties through a claims procedure established by the companies, the administrative process may prove beneficial for certain classes of victims.
Irregardless of the alternative a victim utilizes for restitution, BE PATIENT with the process. The responsible parties for the disaster will attempt to resolve claims quickly. Do not fall victim to the companies’ strategies and ploys. Frankly, the environmental impact to our area will not be fully understood for some time. As always, we are available to answer any questions you or your family have regarding the spill. Please feel free to email me your questions at or contact the office.


JUST A REMINDER: May is National Youth Traffic Safety Month.

The National Organization for Youth Safety (NOYS) is reminding parents and teens that May is National Youth Traffic Safety Month. NOYS encourages and promotes youth led safe driving initiatives in high schools through out the United States. This year over $100,000 in funds are available from NOYS to support safe driving programs and projects for youth. If you have teenage drivers in your household, we hope you will take a moment in the next few days to remind them about the importance of safe driving.


Debunking the CIVIL LITIGATION Myths
from the American Association for Justice
Drug, oil, and insurance companies have spent millions of dollars to generate myths about how lawsuits are out of control and responsible for all of America’s ills. The facts tell a much different story.
Myth: The number of lawsuits filed is skyrocketing.
Not true. According to the Justice Department under President George W. Bush, the number of federal tort (personal injury) cases resolved in U.S. District Courts fell by 79 percent between 1985 and 2003. In 1985, 3,600 tort trials were decided by a judge or jury in U.S. District Courts. By 2003, that number had dropped to less than 800.(1)
Additionally, the most recent statistics from the Administration’s Bureau of Justice Statistics show the number of tort trials at the state level has decreased. These statistics were compiled as part of the Bureau’s survey of state civil justice systems in the nation’s largest 75 counties. Among these counties, the number of tort trials decreased 31.8 percent between 1992 and 2001. (2)
Myth: Health care costs are rising and doctors are unable to practice due to litigation.
Health care costs are rising; however, medical malpractice litigation has nothing to do with it. According to the Congressional Budget Office, medical malpractice amounted to less than 2 percent of overall health care spending.(3) The Government Accountability Office also found that malpractice cases have not widely affected access to health care. (4)
According to the American Medical Association, the overall number of physicians is up more than 40 percent since 19905, while over the same time, the U.S. population increased by only 18 percent.(6) The number of emergency physicians, neurosurgeons, and OB/GYNs has also increased significantly over the same time period.
Myth: Legal reform is needed because lawsuits hurt small businesses.
Wrong. Multiple surveys have shown that lawsuits are not a concern for small business owners. A survey from the National Association of Manufacturers suggests that “lawsuit abuse” ranks at the bottom of concerns for manufacturers.(7) A 2008 survey from National Federation of Independent Business had similar results, with “costs and frequency of lawsuits / threatened suits” ranking 65th on a list of small business owners’ worries. (8)
In reality, only big corporations and their front groups want to destroy the legal system so they can’t be held accountable for negligence and misconduct. Drug, oil, and insurance companies have tried to hide behind small business owners to accomplish this; however, these surveys reveal their true intentions.
Myth: Trial attorneys are trying to drive corporations out of business.
Absolutely not. Corporations, large and small, are all entitled to have profitable businesses. Most do so without being negligent or engaging in misconduct.
A strong civil justice system allows deserving individuals to get justice and hold wrongdoers accountable. Civil justice attorneys work to make sure all people have a fair chance through the legal system – even when it means taking on the most powerful corporations.
Myth: Lawsuits are out of control. Someone even sued because they spilled hot coffee on their lap!
Those looking to destroy the civil justice have continually mocked Stella Liebeck and the McDonald’s coffee case. Unfortunately, the actual facts of this case make it no laughing matter.
Ms. Liebeck’s injuries include third degree burns—the most severe—to her groin, inner thighs, and buttocks. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting and debridement treatments (the surgical removal of tissue).
Ms. Liebeck sought to settle her claim with McDonald’s for $20,000, but they refused. McDonald’s eventually produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1993, some involving third degree burns similar to Ms. Liebeck. This history documented McDonald’s knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard. McDonald’s own quality assurance manager testified that a burn hazard exists with any food served above 140 degrees; their coffee was kept warm at 185 degrees.
A jury awarded Ms. Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages, but reduced it to $160,000 because they found her 20 percent at fault for the spill. The jury also awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages, equal to two days of McDonald’s coffee sales. This was eventually reduced to $480,000, even though the judge called McDonald’s conduct reckless, callous, and willful. Jurors expressed similar sentiments in interviews after the trial. Ms. Liebeck and McDonald’s eventually entered a post-verdict settlement.
Myth: Trial attorneys are charging outrageous hourly fees and leave victims with nothing if they win.
Civil justice attorneys do not charge by the hour like most other attorneys. Instead, their clients pay on what is called a “contingency fee basis.”
For over 200 years the contingency fee system has provided Americans who must go to court with a degree of access to justice that is unheard of in most other countries. Our system allows people who cannot afford to pay legal fees to obtain representation on a contingency fee basis. In personal injury and death cases, and in certain other types of litigation, the fee is based on a percentage of any money damages that are recovered.
Myth: My insurance rates are skyrocketing because of lawsuits.
Your insurance premiums may be going up, but it has nothing to do with lawsuits. Look no further than the insurance industry’s annual profit reporting. In 2007, insurance companies reported a near-record profit of $61.9 billion. In comparison, the insurance industry’s 2004 profit was $38.7 billion, which broke all previous records. Their profits continue to rise, and unfortunately, your premiums are following suit.
The insurance industry has also made the argument that awards and damages should be limited; however, have later admitted that caps will not lower premiums. For example, American Insurance Association spokesman Dennis Kelly told the Chicago Tribune in 2005 that, “We have not promised price reductions with tort reform.”
Myth: Lawsuits cost taxpayers X hundreds of dollars each year.
Several so-called “independent” think tanks or organizations have devised the notion that American families pay a yearly “tort tax,” or that the cost of litigation is passed on to taxpayers. These organizations, funded by oil, drug, tobacco, and insurance companies, produce studies that are a prime example of junk science. There is no methodology or academic basis for their results. Trying to pass off these organizations and their studies as legitimate is yet another scheme by corporations to avoid accountability in the courtroom and stack the deck against every day Americans.
Myth: Schools are canceling recess because they are afraid of litigation.
Wrong. School districts across the country are almost universal in blaming the elimination of recess on the need to meet requirements for teaching and testing hours.(9)
Myth: People aren’t volunteering to help with Little League, Boy / Girl Scouts, etc., because they are afraid of lawsuits.
Wrong again. Similar to the previous myth, these lies are peddled by groups interested in destroying the civil justice system.
The Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 was passed to provide immunity for volunteers of nonprofits in the course of their charity work.
1. “Federal Tort Trials and Verdicts, 2002-03”, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 8/17/05
2. “Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts in Large Counties, 2001”, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 4/04
3. “Congressional Budget Office, “Limiting Tort Liability for Medical Malpractice,” 1/08/04
4. “Medical Malpractice: Implications of Rising Premiums on Access to Health Care,” GAO, 9/29/03,
5. “Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the U.S.,” American Medical Association, 2006 edition, p.312
6. U.S. Census Bureau data:
7. “National Manufacturing Week 2006 Annual Survey Results,” National Association of Manufacturers,
8. “Small Business Problems and Priorities,” National Federation of Independent Business,

size=2 width=”100%” align=left>