It looks like the New Hampshire Department of Safety is once again going to try to prevent DWI suspects from double-checking its work.  This morning the Concord Monitor reported that the Department will, once again, try to convince legislators to remove one more protection against false evidence.  If they succeed, people charged with DWI will lose an opportunity not only to cast doubt on the evidence against them, but also to establish their innocence.

New Hampshire uses a machine called the Intoxilyzer 5000 to test breath samples of people arrested for DWI.  The machine is far from perfect, but one of its better features is that it provides a suspect with a tube containing a sample of his or her breath.  This sample can then be taken to an independent laboratory for testing by an independent device, one not controlled and operated by the same government that will be responsible for any criminal prosecution that follows.  In other words, the Intoxilyzer 5000 permits a DWI suspect to double-check the state’s work.  Unfortunately, the Intoxilyzer 5000 is the only breath testing machine on the market that provides a suspect with a sample.

In what I consider to be a jaw-dropping statement, the director of the State Police lab that maintains all of the Intoxilyzer 5000 machines in New Hampshire, is reported to have said that the motive for changing the law is “bad science.”  Bad science?  Bad science!  For twenty years the State Police have been telling suspects, lawyers, judges and the public that the Intoxilyzer 5000 was accurate and that its results were practically beyond reproach.  I have long argued that this was not the case.  Now the government agrees.  We have long known that approximately 15% of people have their breath tested independently, and approximately 5% show an inconsistency that casts doubt on the government’s result.  A 5% error rate is simply too high.  If Tiger Woods missed 5% of his shots, he would be picking up stray golf balls at some driving range in Omaha.

The government’s position seems to be this:  Trust us, and this time we will try really, really hard to get it right.  Sorry, but no thank you.  The government has been telling us for years that it is already getting it right.  Now they tell us that the old way is no longer good enough.  Which is it? And what about all those cases in which you testified that the Intoxilyzer 5000 results were beyond reproach?

Drunk driving is a serious problem and a very real danger.  But so is the risk of wrongful prosecution and conviction.  Our streets will not be made the slightest bit safer by removing one of the few opportunities a DWI suspect has to challenge the questionable science behind breath testing.  The New Hampshire legislature should not short-change its citizens by removing this protection against wrongful DWI prosecution.

Many of us have heard the term “at-will employment.”  Employment at-will refers to employees that do not have an employment contract for a stated period of time.  Some employees have a contract with their employers that state they will be employed for a specific period of time.  For example, many teachers have written contracts providing that they will be employed for the school year.  Most “contract” employees can only be fired “for cause.”  However, most New Hampshire employees are at-will employees and do not have such an employment contract for a term.  This means that they can be fired for any reason or no reason provided it is not for an illegal or discriminatory reason.

Your employment status may be important during employment litigation.

We have important laws that are designed to protect employees from discrimination in the workplace.  On June 29, 2009, the United States Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision finding that the City of New Haven, Connecticut violated the civil rights act when it threw out the results of civil service examinations.  Those examinations had cost the city $100,000 and attempted to be a neutral and fair testing system for candidates for Lieutenant and Captain.  Because only the white and Hispanic candidates scored high on the test New Haven chose to throw the test out rather than to base promotions on it because minorities did not score high on the test.  The Supreme Court decision makes employment decision more race neutral by overturning what New Haven did.  While employment discrimination remains a serious problem in our society we should avoid penalizing persons who do well on tests just because they are white.

The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that documents related to clergy sexual abuse cases in that state must be released.  The release of the documents may answer questions about how church officials handled the allegations of sexual abuse against priests.

The conduct of many church officials has been attached as not having done enough to protect children from clergy abuse.  The release of the documents may shed some light on those allegations.  Hopefully, the release will in some way protect others from being victimized in the future.

There are different theories of law to hold different parties responsible for abuse.  Under New Hampshire law, the term in loco parentis refers to holding schools − primary and secondary schools – responsible for abuse of a student.

New Hampshire law imposes a duty of care upon primary and secondary schools to protect students.  This duty is based on the role of schools as parental proxies over minor students because minors are required to attend school and, therefore, are entrusted to their case.

Frequently, we receive calls from accident victims after they have failed to settle their claim with the insurance company on their own.  Unfortunately, while they were not being represented by an experienced personal injury lawyer, we discover many people fall for the insurance companies’ tactic of requesting a taped or recorded statement from the accident victim.  Sometimes, the recorded statement is asked for under the guise that the insurance company is just trying to “move the claim along.”  Most accident victims do not know any better and fall for it.

Giving a recorded statement before you have consulted with a personal injury lawyer may harm your case.  A personal injury claim is an unfamiliar situation for most people and they are not aware of what is important to their case.  But insurance companies are experienced in processing these claims and know what information to ask.  Be clear – any misstatement by you about the facts of how the accident occurred or the extent of your injuries will later be used against you to reduce your recovery of damages.

The Intoxylizer 5000 breath machine that the police use may be prone to user error.  For a variety of complicated medical reasons, the machine assumes that you have the “average” physiology.  You don’t.  We are all different and we all digest and burn off alcohol differently.  By the time the police ask you to take a breath test, you are no longer in the same condition that you were while driving.  Depending on when and how much you had to drink, your BAC may be higher or lower than it was when you were actually driving.  At best, the Intoxilyzer 5000 provides a rough estimate of your BAC.

It is important to know what equipment was used during a breath test.  Your DUI/DWI lawyer will obtain this information during the course of the case.

If you are the victim of a slip and fall accident, you may wonder what steps you need to take.  The following guide sets forth some important steps for you to protect your claim.  You or your attorney will be dealing with an experienced insurance adjuster so it is necessary to take the following steps.

I. File An Incident Report

First, you should file an incident report because it creates a record of your accident and will help make your claim stronger.  In completing your incident report, you should include information such as:

• Date and time of the accident
• The conditions or hazard that caused the accident.  For example, such as ice on the parking lot, a liquid spill or hazard on the floor without any warning sign, a torn rug on the floor or pothole on the sidewalk
• Identification of any witnesses
Try to get a copy of your incident report as well as the name of the person to whom you reported your accident.

II. Determine The Hazard That Caused Your Accident
It is necessary that you determine the condition or hazard that caused your slip and fall.  Once you have done this, try to take photos of the scene.  Many cell phones have cameras or someone at the scene may be able to take photos.  Time is of the essence because some conditions or hazards such as liquid spills or ice may be cleaned up or removed.

III. Prepare a Diagram
If you are not able to take photos of the scene, draw the area with as much detail as possible, including the hazard causing your accident, the locations of any signs and positions of your fall.

IV. Identify Witnesses To Your Slip and Fall
In order to strengthen your claim, it is important to identify and locate any witnesses to your slip and fall.  These witnesses may be able to describe the condition or hazard that caused your fall and whether or not there were any warning signs at the time of the fall.

V. Seek Medical Care
It is important to seek immediate medical care for your injuries.  This will document your injuries and hopefully the medical treatment you will spend on your recovery.

VI. Photos Of Your Injuries
Some injuries such as bruising, swelling and scratches may heal quickly.  Photos of your injuries is important evidence.  Depending on the severity of your injuries, you may be prescribed crutches, or a brace or even have a cast or splint.  While your use of these devices may be temporary, taking photos of these medical devices will support the seriousness of your injuries.

VII. Wait to Give Information to the Insurance Company
You may be contacted by an insurance adjuster to discuss your claim.  Many times the adjuster requests to take a recorded statement from you about the accident and any injuries you may have suffered.  You may be asked to sign an authorization allowing the insurance company to get your medical records.

In determining parental rights and responsibilities, the Court is guided by the best interests of the child.  In determining the best interest of the children, the Court will consider a variety of factors including:

• The relationship of the child with each parent;
• The ability of each parent to assure that the child receives adequate care;
• The child’s developmental needs;
• The support of each parent for the child’s relationship with the other parent;
• The ability of the parents to communicate and cooperate with each other concerning the children; and
• Any other factor(s) which the Court considers relevant.

While the Court is charged with the responsibility of supporting frequent and continuing contact between each parent and the children, where such is possible and appropriate, the Court is not required, in the first instance, to award the parties joint or equal parenting rights and responsibilities.

In 2005, doctors lobbied hard to change the law so that any medical malpractice lawsuit now needs to be heard before a screening panel before having a trial in court.  These panels are made up of a doctor, lawyer and retired judge.

Some argued that the goal of the law was to have a “quick and easy” method for resolving medical injury cases.  However, the result of the new law has been to increase the cost of cases for victims of malpractice.  Because the insurance companies for the doctors or other medical professionals spend so much time and money fighting the cases before the screening panels, it forces the victim’s side to spend more time and money as well.  Now, the victim’s lawyer has to prepare the case twice – once to the panel and the second time to a jury.

The result of the law means that some malpractice cases may not be brought because it becomes too expensive to prepare a case for both the screening panel and a trial.  This situation only hurts victims of medical injury – not the insurance companies.