Meanwhile, a new report by US Mobile Data Market, Update Q3 2012, suggests that there has been a drop in the number of texts sent each month by users via cell phone, from an average of 699 texts sent during the second quarter of 2012, to just 678 in the third quarter. While some safe driving advocates lauded the drop as a potential indicator that texting-while-driving laws were influencing behavior, the information in the US Mobile report does not drill down enough to indicate which texts were sent via a potentially distracted driver and which were sent in other situations.

According to NHTSA data, there were more than 416,000 car crash injuries and more than 3,000 car crash fatalities in 2010 due to distracted drivers. The NHTSA report also notes an increase from 2009 to 211 by 50 percent in the number of sent text messages.

Texting only seems to be picking up. A survey by the International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry states that text messaging is only growing: 2.206 trillion texts were sent in 2011 and 2.273 trillion (and counting) texts have been sent by late 2012.

The issue with texting during driving is one of distraction. Texting takes enough attention away from the road – researchers believe texting while driving reduces brain activity by some 37 percent and reduces attention by as much as 50 percent, according to the NHTSA. Studies by the federal government show that human error such as distracted driving, is now the leading cause of car accidents nationwide. In 2010, more than 3,000 people in the U.S. were killed in distracted driver car accidents.

The U.S. Department of Transportation has been pushing for more public education on the dangers of texting behind the wheel, from pushing for a ban, now enforced, which forbids commercial drivers to text or use their cell phone while driving, to advocating for tougher laws and penalties for distracted drivers, to launching http://www.distraction.gov, a website devoted to getting the public to “commit to distraction-free driving.”

Nathan Williams is a Brunswick personal injury lawyer, Brunswick divorce attorney, criminal defense and Brunswick DUI lawyer in Southeast Georgia. Visit http://www.thewilliamslitigationgroup.com or call 1.912.264.0848.

In excess of 1,000 pounds of toxic coal ash from the coal-powered plant Plant Scherer is generated daily and placed in the pond; according to the federal Toxic Release Inventory, the pond contains high levels of heavy metals and ash. While uranium can occur naturally in the ground throughout parts of the Piedmont region, it is suspected that the plant’s coal ash is to blame for the high levels found there. Numerous residents in Juliette have high levels of radon inside their homes and uranium in their water, according to tests. Some residents have tested positive for uranium poisoning.

A large coal ash pond spill in 2008 in Tennessee promoted the Environmental Protection Agency to reexamine rules considering coal ash disposal and safety; the EPA is in talks to reclassifying coal ash as a hazardous waste.

Allegedly, employees of Georgia Power have been disposing the plant’s coal ash waste into an unlined pit for 30 years and failing to monitor any effects that disposal may have on the area groundwater. Critics are calling for the plant to increase safety measures and update monitoring systems to ensure the health and well-being of workers and neighbors.

The Georgia Department of Public Health responded to public concerns that Plant Scherer was potentially the cause of uranium and radon contamination by conducting preliminary tests earlier this year. The GDPH concluded that the groundwater contamination which included uranium and other heavy metals likely occurred naturally, but also called for further residential well water testing.

Meanwhile, the spokesman for Georgia Power has stated that while they will not comment on any potential lawsuits, those overseeing Plant Scherer believe it complies with air and water quality standards. He also stated that drinking water well tests on and near the plant showed no violation issues and that the EPA rated the ash pond high during the most recent inspection.

Coal ash is not currently subject to federal protections; according to the EPA, toxins found in coal ash can be linked to cancer, organ disease, respiratory illnesses, and neurological damage. Infants and children, with their developing neurological systems, are far more vulnerable when it comes to the health impacts of coal ash exposure; according to the EPA, more than 1.5 million children currently live near coal ash storage sites.

Community meetings which invite area residents to discuss possible lawsuit action are scheduled for early November.

Nathan Williams is a Brunswick personal injury lawyer, Brunswick divorce attorney, criminal defense and Brunswick DUI lawyer in Southeast Georgia. Visit http://www.thewilliamslitigationgroup.com or call 1.912.264.0848.

The dram shop law states that victims of alcohol-related car crashes or other injury incidents can sue the bar, the restaurant and/or the staff if it is found that they have served alcohol to a noticeably intoxicated patron who they could have reasonably assumed would soon be behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. In Georgia, the statute has led to several lawsuits against restaurants and bars in Atlanta. A dram shop claim typically is in the name of a third-party who has been killed or injured in a drunken driving accident, when there is likelihood that the driver was overserved. The civil lawsuit claim is filed against the business or person that served alcohol to someone, with a resulting injury or death.

Georgia statutes substantially limit dram shop liability in drunk driving injuries; servers may be held financially responsible only if they served alcohol to someone noticeably intoxicated (which can be subjective), or to someone they knew would be driving a motor vehicle relatively soon after, or to a minor.

The dram shop law has successfully been applied outside of the bar and restaurants service; party hosts have also been known to face dram shop claims, as has, in one case, an employer who served his employees after hours, one of whom later was killed in a drunken driving accident. In 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling and stated that a convenience store was accountable for selling beers to a noticeably intoxicated man who then caused a fatal highway accident in 2004. Though the argument was made that the beer was not consumed on premises, the Court found that it was possible for the shop clerk who sold the alcohol to note the man’s level of intoxication and means of transportation.

There currently are thirteen states that do not have some form of the dram shop law on the books: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

Nathan Williams is a Brunswick personal injury lawyer, Brunswick divorce attorney, criminal defense and Brunswick DUI lawyer in Southeast Georgia. Visit Thewilliamslitigationgroup.com or call 1.912.264.0848.

While dropping insurance may seem necessary in the short term in order to meet other financial obligations, it could easily come back to bite them, should a large medical malpractice judgment force a hospital to declare bankruptcy. Many states do not require hospitals to carry malpractice insurance. In some area hospitals in Chicago, New York, Philadelphia and Florida, the cost of malpractice can seem prohibitive to hospital executives, so they gamble and hope there won’t be dire consequences if they forego malpractice insurance.

New York State Department of Health surveyed “self-insured” hospitals in 2009 and found that one dozen New York-based hospitals acknowledge that they did not carry malpractice insurance and instead were partially self-insured or had some mix of primary coverage and excessive coverage. In addition, several hospital administrators stated that the house physicians had their own, subsidized insurance.

When they do not have malpractice insurance, some hospitals have a separate reserve of funds with which they plan to cover claims, but according to The New York Times, several hospitals investigated did not have sufficient funds in case of a large malpractice judgment, while two had no funds set aside at all.

Hospitals are cutting costs in other ways too, which sometimes means an actual denial of services. In Ohio, for example, some smaller hospitals no longer offer obstetric deliveries due to rising costs; malpractice insurance for obstetrics is particularly high. According to the Ohio Department of Health, there are 23 counties in Ohio that do not offer maternity units in their hospitals, with 19 separate hospitals no longer offering maternity services since 2004.

When an uninsured hospital becomes bankrupt, the creditors—which can include malpractice plaintiffs—often find they are unable to do anything but accept less of a payment than they were awarded via litigation.

Nathan Williams is a Brunswick personal injury lawyer, Brunswick divorce attorney, criminal defense and Brunswick DUI lawyer in Southeast Georgia. Visit http://www.thewilliamslitigationgroup.com or call 1.912.264.0848.