Chuck Douglas and Jason Major of Douglas, Leonard & Garvey just finished a two-week long jury trial in Merrimack County with a $150,000.00 victory against the New Hampshire Department of Corrections in a free-speech case brought by correctional officer Mark Jordan. Here is a copy of the jury verdict form completed by the jury.

Mr. Jordan was suspended without pay or benefits for a year following a parking lot altercation started by another Corrections Department employee on March 10, 2010. Corrections Commissioner William Wrenn also referred the case to the State Police for criminal charges against Mr. Jordan. Evidence that demonstrated that the other employee was the aggressor was available to but ignored by Commissioner Wrenn. The aggressive employee, who had a history of angrily confronting his co-workers, was not placed on suspension or charged with any crime.

Why was Mr. Jordan singled out and placed on a year-long suspension without pay if he was not the aggressor in the parking lot incident? Mr. Jordan happens to be the president of the New England Police Benevolent Association chapter that represents New Hampshire correctional officers. He had been a vocal advocate for the safety of his fellow officers in late 2009 and early 2010, going on the record to challenge what his union saw as dangerous choices to layoff 56 correctional workers (leading to unsafe levels of understaffing), and Commissioner Wrenn’s support for SB500, a bill which proposed the early release of violent offenders and provided weaker sentences for parole violators. Mr. Jordan also began an investigation of allegations of corruption at the Men’s Prison in Concord related to excessive force charges against a fellow correctional officer, which he also made public.

Following the voicing of his opinions in early 2010, Mr. Jordan’s previously strong personal relationship with Commissioner Wrenn broke down, and when the parking lot altercation occurred on March 10, 2010, Wrenn seized the opportunity to attempt to silence and discredit Mr. Jordan by placing him on suspension and under a criminal investigation (which led to a simple assault charge) for a full year. Mr. Jordan was acquitted of the criminal charges against him on February 28, 2011, and finally returned to his job in June of 2011. The State did provide him with back-pay for the year of work he missed, and retroactively reinstated his health insurance.

However, the State refused to acknowledge the damage done to Mr. Jordan while he was out of work without pay. Mr. Jordan fell behind on his bills and his family had to make sparing use of medical care despite a serious health condition that Mr. Jordan suffers from (which came to light after he was assaulted by an inmate in 2009). Mr. Jordan’s wife Pam described the year without pay and benefits, with bogus criminal charges hanging over Mr. Jordan’s head, as being a “year of hell,” with fear and desperation predominating over their family during that time.

The case was tried before Superior Court Judge Richard McNamara from October 18 through October 28, 2010, resulting a verdict for Mr. Jordan in the amount of $150,000.00. The case was tried under RSA 98-E, a statute which guarantees the free speech and criticism rights of State employees like Mr. Jordan. It is believed to be the first jury verdict under RSA 98-E. The statute provides for an award of attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party as well as damages. The case received press coverage in both the Union Leader and Concord Monitor.

We have commented before about Facebook and the concern that certain employees may be posting comments about co-workers or their boss in violation of employer policies. Of course, if the employee is unaware of a policy against cell phone usage during work, or Facebook postings, then they cannot be disciplined for violating an unknown and undistributed policy.

On the other hand, if you have been warned and specifically shown a policy at work, then termination or discipline is possible depending on whether the policy calls for termination or merely discipline. Some employers use a Facebook comment as a pretext for firing workers who otherwise had complained about bad management practices. Each case will turn on its facts, so just be aware that the comments you make on your cell phone or computer are potentially going to be used against you by your employer. Employers should also be aware that undistributed policies or seat of the pants decisions do not count as a proper basis for termination or discipline. Employees cannot be expected to be mind readers.

A waitress waited on tables during the week but when she asked to pick up extra shifts on the weekend she agreed to work only for tips until business picked up. After she worked for several hours over weekends she filed a wage claim for unpaid compensation. The New Hampshire Department of Labor hearing officer held that despite the oral agreement that she was only working for tips, the employer was not relieved of its obligation to pay an hourly wage. The waitress was awarded almost $4,000 for the weekends she worked over the year.

Because the employer had not kept accurate employee records it was not able to reduce the amount she claimed she was owed. Employees should get whatever their compensation understandings are in writing. Otherwise, you can end up hoping that you win a Department of Labor hearing. Of course, the employer has the duty to reduce the deal to writing and keep accurate records, though many small employers don’t do that.

As a technician for a heating company providing on-site maintenance and service, the employee was required to travel. Because he was an hourly employee he used a time card and at the end of each work day had to return to the home base of the operation to punch out. The employer and an employee had an oral side agreement that the employee would not be paid for travel time from his last service stop to the employer’s residence which was where the company was located. After the employee filed an unpaid overtime claim he obtained almost $15,000 from the Department of Labor. The employee’s records indicated he was owed approximately a half hour’s pay for each day involved but because the employer could not produce better records, the estimate by the employee was adopted as the proper measure of unpaid wages. Once again, oral side deals can get an employer into trouble.

Several states have recently enacted “medical malpractice reform” which places arbitrary caps on damages awards. Those in favor of such caps argue that doctors will no longer have to worry about “frivolous lawsuits” and “higher malpractice insurance premiums.” This is wrong because arbitrary damages caps will not accomplish either of those goals. Instead, these proposals harm victims who are left with life-changing injuries and shield negligent medical providers for the injuries they cause.

Arbitrary damages caps are easy to believe in when you or a family member have never been a victim, or worked with victims, of medical negligence. The reality is that damage recovery in medical malpractice cases hardly compensates victims for their injuries or even death. Placing limits on these victim’s ability to obtain a “full” recovery (as impossible as that is) lets off the hook the negligent medical providers.
The idea of “reform” begs the question: why focus on limiting the recovery of a victim. The real problem is the huge number of medical negligence victims in the United States each year. True “reform” should address ways to reduce or eliminate medical malpractice victims. These medical mistakes injure and kill thousands of Americans every year. Some shocking statistics reveal the following:

In 1998, the Harvard Medical Practice Study published in the New England Journal of Medicine estimated that 98,000 people die as a result of malpractice committed in hospitals each year.

In 2000, the Institute of Medicine published an article entitled, “To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System,” which stated that in any given year, more people die as a result of medical errors than from motor vehicle accidents (43,458) or breast cancer (42,297) or AIDS (16,516).

In 2003, the Congressional Budget Office found that there were 181,000 severe injuries attributable to medical negligence.
In 2004, HealthGrades, the nation’s leading health care rating organization, found that “The United States loses more American lives to patient safety incidents every six months than it did in the entire Vietnam War. This also equates to three fully loaded jumbo jets crashing every other day for the last five years.”

In November 2010, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported, “An estimated 1.5 percent of Medicare beneficiaries experienced an event that contributed to their death, which projects to 15,000 patients in a single month.”

In January of 2011, the obstetrics department of the Cornell Weill/Columbia Presbyterian Obstetrics and Gynecology Department in New York City published a study that showed that they had reduced their malpractice premiums, and more importantly, their malpractice claims by an astounding 99 percent by simply re-examining and redoing their policies and procedures. There was no cap placed on their creativity.
(taken from http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2011/06/medical_profession_at_fault_fo.html)
As the Cornell Weill study demonstrates, reducing malpractice claims and insurance premiums is done most effectively by the medical industry itself. As with attorneys, it only takes a few bad doctors/hospitals/medical boards who allow repeat incidents to drive up insurance costs for everyone else. If lower malpractice claims and insurance premiums are the goal, then stricter self-policing and better medical practices by medical professionals and medical boards is the best way of making sure that costly accidents are reduced or eliminated.

Doctors who cause life-altering injuries or death must be held accountable not off the hook and shielded from their wrongdoing.
“Medical malpractice reform” such as damage caps are not the answer. Medical and insurance costs are more likely to be effectively controlled through reforms and reducing medical mistakes rather than through placing artificial caps on the recovery of the people who did nothing wrong. New Hampshire victims of medical mistakes are at risk now because the issue to impose caps on damages may be brought up in the New Hampshire legislature. The insurance companies and doctors have powerful lobbies at the State House and may try to place caps on a victim’s ability to recover in New Hampshire.

If you or a family member has been harmed by a medical mistake or negligence, please give us a call at 800-240-1988 or fill out on online contact form. We have experienced attorneys who may be able to help you and your family.

When you treat with your doctor for a work-related injury, make sure your doctor completes the New Hampshire Workers’ Compensation Medical Form! The Workers’ Compensation Medical Form is a New Hampshire Department of Labor form that asks the doctor to describe the employee’s injury, state whether the injury is work-related, and state what restrictions the injury imposes on the employee’s physical functioning. The form further requires the doctor to state whether the employee can work or whether the injury has disabled the employee from working.

Your doctor must complete the Workers’ Compensation Medical Form in order for you to receive the benefits that you should. You will not receive any workers’ compensation benefits without a form from your doctor certifying that the doctor believes you have suffered a work injury. You will not receive disability benefits without forms from your doctor stating the time periods during which your injury disabled you from work.

Even in cases where it is clear that an employee has suffered a disabling work-related injury, the doctor sometimes forgets to complete the New Hampshire Workers’ Compensation Medical Form. This omission can disqualify injured employees from receiving the benefits they should. If you are an injured employee, make sure your doctor completes the form so your entitlement to benefits is not jeopardized. If you have a work-related injury, give us a call at 1-800-240-1988 or fill out on online contact form to see if we can be of assistance.

Facebook, Twitter, etc. are fast becoming a popular tool for employers looking for information about future employees. The social networking sites, according to one source, are used by 45% of employers to screen potential job candidates. At least a third of those employers have rejected an applicant because of information they discovered from social networking sites where the future employee talked about drug and alcohol use, nudity, bad mouthed a former employer, bragged about misconduct or made discriminatory remarks.

This is another reminder that postings on the internet are available for many people to see – even those you don’t intend to read it or use the information. All of those folks who are having fun on the internet should realize that it may cost them a future job because for employers it’s fast, free and easy and there is a treasure trove of ridiculous information posted by people. Young people especially enjoy putting their wild and crazy times on the internet for the rest of eternity. Social networking sites, including profiles, will tell an employer most information they might want to do know but are afraid to ask such as, gender, marital status, religion, age, and even a photograph to help show ethnicity, race, etc.

For future employees, beware of what you decide to post on the internet because it may come back in many ways.

Filing a personal injury or workers’ compensation claim can be complicated and there are many different steps involved before the case is resolved. One of these steps may involve an examiner by a medical examiner, which is a doctor hired by the defendant’s insurance company. This is sometimes referred to as an “independent” medical examination but that is not accurate. Instead, this examination should be called a Defense Medical Examination.

It’s important to keep in mind that the medical examiner is NOT your doctor and they were hired to assist the defense in disproving your claim or minimizing the extent of your injuries. Given this fact, you should be prepared by your lawyer ahead of time and know what to expect before your appointment so that you don’t do anything that might hurt your case.

Here are a few suggestions:

Be concise when answering questions. When asked about your pain or symptoms, state them clearly and concisely. Rambling on may result in your saying the wrong thing, or mentioning something that may hurt your case in the long run. Keep it to the point and you will be fine.

Be polite and cooperative. There is no need to be hostile with the medical examiner, even though you know they are not on your side. Be as pleasant as you can and do as he or she asks. For example, if the doctor requests that you bend or twist, do so to the best of your ability but within your limits.

Avoid exaggeration. The medical examiner is looking for people who get carried away when describing their pain. Going overboard may make you appear to be dishonest or exaggerating will only hurt your case.

Know your condition and don’t minimize it. Although it’s good to be concise in your answers, you should also be sure not to leave out anything important when it involves your pain and symptoms. Be specific and accurate in your list of limitations and complaints so that everything important is properly documented.

Understand the details of your claim. The medical examiner may ask you specific questions about your case, like the date of the incident, the details of what happened, or the names of doctors you have consulted with. Know this information ahead of time so that you’re prepared and confident.

Try not to be emotional. Certainly the experience of being injured can be emotional, and dealing with the pain and suffering is upsetting. But try to stay as focused as possible when meeting with the medical examiner. Leaving the emotion out of it can make the visit go much more quickly and smoothly.

Be honest. If a medical attorney has agreed that you are, in fact, a victim, there should be no reason to lie or stretch the truth when visiting with an independent medical examiner. Doing so will only serve to hurt your case so remember to keep it honest.

These are just a few suggestions to help prepare you for this part of your case. An experienced personal injury or workers’ compensation attorney from Douglas, Leonard & Garvey, will sit down with you to discuss your concerns and answer any questions you may have before you go to the appointment. Being prepared and knowing what to expect can make a difference between a winning case or a loss. Call our office at 1-800-240-1988 or fill out our contact form online.

With the arrival of May and warm and sunny weather (well, miserable rainy weather) its bicycle season. In addition to kids riding their bikes around town, New Hampshire is home to many bicycle enthusiasts and with record high gas prices, bicycle commuters. Although, some towns have actual bicycle travel lanes in some roads, most do not. As bicycle riders are required to ride in the roadway, and not sidewalks, accidents with car and trucks unfortunately happen.

If you or a loved one is involved in a bicycle accident, you may be wondering if you need an attorney. Collisions on a bicycle can be very serious, resulting in severe injuries. If your bicycle accident involved a motor vehicle, your injuries could be life-altering or permanent. Determining the need for a personal injury attorney following a bicycle accident depends on the specific circumstances of the accident. If you have been injured and your bike has been damaged, you may be eligible to receive compensation for medical bills, property damage and pain and suffering.

Some questions that you might consider include:

• Was there negligence or inattention on behalf of another person?

• Was I following the rules of the road?

• Did I take chances that I should not have?

• Was the road or sidewalk in poor condition?

• Did the weather contribute to the accident?

• Does the driver of the car/truck have enough insurance coverage?

• What do I do to protect my rights and get the compensation I deserve?

Assigning blame can be difficult, but if the driver of the car or truck is at fault, you have legal rights and will be entitled to full and fair compensation for your injuries.

The personal injury team at Douglas, Leonard & Garvey have experience in all types of accident cases, including bicycle accidents, and can help you in the event that you need to file a New Hampshire personal injury claim, and they can inform you of all your other legal options. You can contact us by calling our toll free number 800-240-1988 or filling out the information form on our contact form.

The New Hampshire Department of Labor (“DOL”) has regulations which protect hourly workers and require that employers pay you in a timely way. The regulations require your employer to pay all wages due within 8 days, including Sundays, after the expiration of the workweek on regular paydays designated in advance. Employers may pay workers less frequently, but have to meet specific DOL requirements. In this day and age, many people have been discharged by work. If that happens, under New Hampshire law, your employer must pay all wages owed within 72 hours either by physically giving payment to the employee or by mailing the payment to the employee, at the employee’s choice.

If you quit work, the employer must pay you in full no later than the next regular payday, or within 72 hours if you are not allowed to work after you tell your employer that you quit. Every employer shall pay without condition and within the required time frames all wages or parts thereof that are due. The employer must pay wages based upon recorded hours and in accordance with written or verbal agreements between you and your employer.

Wage and hour laws and regulations can be complicated but exist to protect employees. If your employer makes a mistake or willfully withholds wages based upon commissions or hourly work, you may have the right to bring a wage claim before the Department of Labor. The process is relatively quick, but an experienced employer lawyer can maximize your chances of recovering wages or commissions that are owed to you. If the DOL finds that wages have willfully been withheld, and the employer had the ability to pay those wages/commissions, you may be able to recover double damages. The lawyers at Douglas, Leonard & Garvey regularly practice before the New Hampshire Department of Labor and are available to help you recover the wages/commissions that you deserve. Call our office at 1-800-240-1988 or fill out our contact form online.