Omaha Personal Injury Lawyer - Railroad Injuries (FELA)

FELA Verdict in Nebraska

John Inserra — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:31:42 GMT

A Nebraska railroad worker won a nearly $2.8 million verdict against the Union Pacific Railroad for a workplace injury that went to trial last week at U.S. District Court in Omaha. Kendall Walsh lost the use of his right arm after it was crushed by a concrete railroad tie that fell off a pile at an Iowa railroad crossing two years ago. A jury sided with Walsh on Friday but found him partially responsible and subtracted 2 percent, or $56,000, from the $2.8 million verdict.

For more information on this subject matter, please refer to the section on Airline, Cruise, Bus, and Other Mass Transit.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

FELA Verdict

John Inserra — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:30:42 GMT

A Douglas County Nebraska jury this week ordered Union Pacific Railroad Company to pay $942,000 to a conductor for the knee injuries he suffered after falling on ice in a parking lot of a hotel where Union Pacific had paid for him to stay.

For more information on this subject, please refer to our section on Workplace Injuries and Discrimination.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

Healthcare - A Start

John Inserra — Tue, 29 May 2007 15:26:02 GMT

Finally a start to the curbing of health care costs. First, the consumer must know the cost of the service, so he or she can make a judgment about that service. Will this curtail costs? Who knows! I believe it is a least a step in the right direction.

California's largest private physician practice has become one of the first doctor groups in the nation, and almost certainly the largest, to make prices for its medical procedures widely available to consumers.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

Healthcare

John Inserra — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:38:44 GMT

One doctor's opinion!

America's health insurance system is sick. The symptoms: high costs, lack of access, declining choice, increasing medical homelessness.[1] The etiology: our dependence on private health insurance. In no other industrialized nation does the majority of people rely on private health insurance to get healthcare.
Private health insurance is like a sponge: It sucks up dollars but is full of holes when it comes to coverage, limiting patients' choice of doctor, hospital, and treatment. High deductibles make patients pay for preventive and primary care; so many wait until they have advanced disease. The insured as well as the uninsured are shortchanged by our system.[2]
Private insurance companies also create major problems for doctors. We are ethically obligated to our patients while insurance companies are fundamentally obligated to their shareholders: They cover the healthy and shun the sick. Each company has its own rules and drug formulary, forcing doctors to hire staff just to process bills, challenge claims denials, and obtain prior approvals.[3]
Doctors are seeking new solutions, as shown by the recent Medical Society of the State of New York membership survey: Fifty-six percent of the more than 1700 respondents favored single-payer, Medicare-for-all, national health insurance.[4]
Watch TV or read the newspaper. Everyone -- President Bush, John Edwards, Arnold Schwarzenegger -- claims a "solution," yet their solutions are bound to fail. Why? Because neither individuals, businesses, nor government can afford the hundreds of billions of additional dollars that would be paid to insurance companies. They and the billing systems they require already take $350 billion from patient care and shift it into marketing, collections, paperwork, underwriting, and inflated CEO salaries.[5]
We would take that $350 billion and put it into covering all the uninsured and eliminate deductibles and coinsurances for the underinsured. Overall, there would be no increased costs to the healthcare system.
As Chair of The Metro New York Physicians for a National Health Program, our prescription for this sick US health insurance system is some major surgery. Cut out the private insurance companies and bring in expanded, improved Medicare-for-all, automatically enrolling all US residents. Patients and doctors alike will be the winners.
That's my opinion. I'm Dr. Oliver Fein, Professor of Clinical Medicine and Public Health at the Weill Medical College of Cornell University in New York City.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

Intervertebral Disk Replacement

John Inserra — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:39:16 GMT

A small study shows promise for intervertebral disk replacement rather than spinal fusion or artificial disk replacements.

Preliminary experience in 5 patients with degenerative spine disease suggests that transplantation of fresh-frozen intervertebral disks preserved motion and stability of the spinal unit, despite some signs of mild degeneration in the disks over follow-up. Neurologic symptoms in all patients were also improved compared with before-surgery levels.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

Kentucky FELA Verdict(2)

John Inserra — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:06:42 GMT

An Indiana man was awarded $8.4 million in damages after he was run over by three train cars and lost his left leg as a railroad worker in October 2004. The verdict was $9.3 million Tuesday against his former employer, Louisville & Indiana Railroad Co., for which the jury found the railroad 90 percent responsible.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

FELA Cumulative Trauma Verdict

John Inserra — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 15:47:55 GMT

A verdict in Beaumont Texas was reported for a cumulative trauma spine injury against the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

US Supreme Court Follow Up

John Inserra — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:23:02 GMT

The United States Supreme Court has ruled in NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. V. SORRELL that the causation standard: "in whole or in part, no matter how small" is the same for the negligence claim brought by the plaintiff and the contributory negligence defense brought by the defendant.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

LawyersUSA Top Ten Verdicts fall for 2006

John Inserra — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 14:37:48 GMT

It is always interesting to read about the top ten plaintiff's verdicts in any given year. An article in LawyersUSA indicates a significant drop in the dollar amount of these verdicts.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra

Microdiscectomy Study

John Inserra — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:53:27 GMT

A study reported at Medscape: Not a large study but it seems to fall in line with recent trends for treatment of herniated discs.

Study Design: Prospective randomized controlled trial.
Objective: To assess effectiveness of microdiscectomy in lumbar disc herniation patients with 6 to 12 weeks of symptoms but no absolute indication for surgery.
Summary of Background Data: There is limited evidence in favor of discectomy for prolonged symptoms of lumbar disc herniation. However, only one randomized trial has directly compared discectomy with conservative treatment.
Methods: Fifty-six patients (age range, 20-50 years) with a lumbar disc herniation, clinical findings of nerve root compression, and radicular pain lasting 6 to 12 weeks were randomized to microdiscectomy or conservative management. Fifty patients (89%) were available at the 2-year follow-up. Leg pain intensity was the primary outcome measure.

Results: There were no clinically significant differences between the groups in leg or back pain intensity, subjective disability, or health-related quality of life over the 2-year follow-up, although discectomy seemed to be associated with a more rapid initial recovery. In a subgroup analysis, discectomy was superior to conservative treatment when the herniation was at L4-L5.
Conclusions: Lumbar microdiscectomy offered only modest short-term benefits in patients with sciatica due to disc extrusion or sequester. Spinal level of the herniation may be an important factor modifying effectiveness of surgery, but this hypothesis needs verification.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Inserra