We continue to live in unprecedented times, and as we approach 2021, there remains important questions about how to continue to move forward against our client’s adversaries.  Technological advancements have allowed us as trial lawyers to continue conducting court business and seek maximum compensation for our personal injury and policyholder clients for all accident and property damage claims.

The reality is, many civil jury trials will continue to go virtual for the foreseeable future.  The Florida Supreme Court is trying it out in several places, including Miami and Orlando.  The judge, clerks, attorneys, and jurors all gather in a virtual courtroom, listening to testimony remotely.  Florida courts are exploring various options to keep their dockets running smoothly but big questions remain.

Some courts are moving towards the restoration of in-person proceedings, but those will have a very different look and feel.  For example, only emergency matters, some criminal cases, and critical proceedings have been permitted to be conducted in-person.  Additionally, judges will have to identify metrics to monitor case backlogs and make recommendations on priorities while figuring out which proceedings should continue to be held remotely.

The Tampa Bay area’s circuit and county courts aim to resume having jury trials and grand jury proceedings.  All local courthouses require visitors to undergo basic wellness screenings and temperature checks.  Plans call for jury trials to resume in Hillsborough County starting October 19 and in Pinellas and Pasco counties on October 26. 

In our office’s insurance dispute arena, we are currently set for trials in mid-December, mid-January, and March of 2021.  In federal court, we have just received our first jury trial date for January 11, 2021, in the U.S District Court in the Middle District of Florida.  Whether there are enough jurors available for these trials remain to be seen. 

There will probably be a much higher percentage of no-show jurors after they receive their notices to appear for jury duty.  This is understandable, given that appearing for jury duty when you are already stressed at work raises the burden on each juror.

Suppose you receive a notice to appear for jury duty. In that case, if you have a material reason why you cannot serve, it is imperative you contact the court administrator and plead your case.  Do not be surprised if they listen but then tell you to show up anyway.  Then, at the initial conference in the courthouse, you can explain to the judge why you should be excused. 

Courts may consider whether you are responsible for another person (child care, elder care, etc.) but the excuse, “my boss won’t like me missing work” probably won’t persuade the judge, as the judge may then offer to call your boss and tell them the importance of this civic duty.  When judges make the offer to “call your boss,” most people decline and accept their fate for the week they will miss work.  If you must serve, it is against the law for your boss to fire you for that reason, but we all know, in a smaller work environment, it does not mean you won’t get pressured by your boss to attempt to avoid it. 

There are specific segments of the population who have been disproportionately impacted by coronavirus.  Reports show a higher percentage of people of color get COVID-19.  Much of this is believed to be because more African Americans than Caucasians have no choice whether to work from home or return to the workplace, where they have more regular exposure to the public. 

The new normal of civil jury trials raise questions about fairness, safety, and due process in a court system that, like everything else, is affected by the coronavirus.  There is substantial data to suggest that the juries selected during the pandemic would be less diverse and not truly representative of a jury of one’s peers. Our law firm intends to be extra vigilant on this point and protect our clients’ interests, even if it means delaying any trial. 

Corless Barfield Trial Group is here to answer your questions about personal injury and property damage cases, and how the COVID pandemic may impact the court system or your access to justice.  Call us anytime at 813-258-4998.

The Problem: Johnson & Johnson recently recalled one lot, about 33,000 bottles, of its Johnson’s Baby Powder because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration found asbestos in a bottle. People who own a bottle of Johnson’s Baby Powder from Lot #22318RB should stop using it, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. said in a release announcing the recall and refunds.

According to the New Jersey-based company, the recall is limited to just one lot of Johnson’s Baby Powder produced and shipped in the U.S. last year. This announcement comes on the heels of the company facing previous allegations of asbestos contamination in its talcum powder.

Over the past century, asbestos was used as an ingredient in many different construction, insulation, and manufacturing materials. Asbestos-containing materials have likewise been used to insulate steam pipes, boilers, turbines, pumps, and other industrial equipment.

A Reuters report published last year said that Johnson & Johnson was aware for decades of asbestos in its baby powder but did not disclose that information to the public. The Justice Department and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the company over allegations that Johnson’s Baby Powder is contaminated with asbestos. The Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation into whether the pharma giant misled the public about cancer risks of its talcum powder.

The Litigation: Lawsuits have been filed against Johnson & Johnson in the U.S. alleging that asbestos in its talcum powder cause cancer. In one historic decision last year, a jury awarded $4.69 billion to 22 women and their families. The women had claimed that their ovarian cancer was linked to asbestos contamination in the company’s powder and talc products.

Exposure to asbestos can seriously compromise your health and livelihood. Having an attorney who understands and recognizes the various types of exposure that can occur is essential in asbestos lawsuits. For a free consultation, contact Corless Barfield Trial Group at 813-258-4998.

If you or a family member is suffering from an asbestos–related disease or illness, contact our team of lawyers at 813-258-4998 to learn more about how we can help you. The lawyers at Corless Barfield Trial Group have represented numerous injury victims and are available to help you as well.

At Corless Barfield Trial Group, we don’t recommend settlement unless it’s in our client’s best interests. We offer our clients this unique, tactical benefit: Corless Barfield Trial Group thoroughly and painstakingly prepares cases with the view that they are going to trial. It’s all in the name – we are a personal injury law firm prepared and focused on trial. Corless Barfield Trial Group is committed to creating winning strategies for trial.

If you’ve been seriously injured or lost a loved one due to another’s negligent or reckless behavior, we will assess your case and provide you with an honest opinion on your case at no cost to you. For a free consultation, call us today at 813-258-4998.

Corless Barfield Trial Group is a law firm serving the Carrollwood and Westchase communities. If you are wondering if you have a personal injury case, the best thing to do is get a professional opinion from Corless Barfield as soon as possible. There are time limits on filing a case and delaying could jeopardize your right to compensation.

Our attorneys have extensive experience representing seriously injured people and their families in motor vehicle accidents, slip and falls, motorcycle accidents, premises liability accidents, and other catastrophic event cases. We provide the highest quality of service to our clients. Our lawyers handle accident and personal injury claims including:

• Car Accidents
• Pedestrian Accidents
• Truck Accidents
• Commercial Vehicle Accidents
• Motorcycle Accidents
• Bicycle Accidents
• Slip, Trip, and Falls
• Premises Liability
• Wrongful Death

Our group of top-rated, experienced, and knowledgeable personal injury attorneys have substantial resources to develop and present comprehensive and convincing evidence in court.

Corless Barfield Trial Group maintains strong relationships with internationally known experts in the fields of medicine, engineering, accident reconstruction, law enforcement, technology specialists, and economists to provide evidentiary support for our client’s claims.

We spare no resource in the investigation and preparation of each case for trial. We incorporate cutting-edge courtroom technology into our litigation strategy to help support expert testimony and assist jurors in fully understanding the various and complex aspects of a case.

All personal injury cases are carefully developed so that our courtroom presentations are powerful and successful. We aim to out-prepare and out-perform opposing counsels, insurance companies, and other third party entities so that our client’s message resonates with judges and jurors. We have the resources necessary to go up against the largest adversaries.

Our personal injury lawyers know the lengths insurance companies will go to limit the amount of money they have to pay to injury victims and we’re ready to fight for your rights. Our talented litigators understand how insurance companies operate and are prepared to stand up to them at trial. Contact us today at 813-258-4998 to schedule your free case evaluation with a personal injury trial attorney. We are your community law firm.

HB 107 makes driving while texting a primary offense, meaning law enforcement can stop motorists for just that offense.  (There will be a six-month grace period where only citations will be issued.) Prior to the new law, texting while driving was a secondary offense that officers could only cite drivers for after pulling them over for a different violation. In the past, law enforcement needed to see a driver weave, speed, or engage in any other traffic violation.  

Also, the law bans the use of handheld wireless devices in school and construction zones. The ban doesn’t apply to drivers using a navigation device or texting while not moving.

A first offense is punishable by a $30 fine, with a second costing $60 and 3 points added to your license. Court costs and fees also would apply.

Were you injured in an accident caused by a distracted driver?  If you or a loved one has sustained a serious or catastrophic injury caused by a driver who was texting or otherwise distracted, you should contact a personal injury attorney that specializes in texting and driving car accidents as soon as possible. 

At Corless Barfield Trial Group, our personal injury lawyers have helped countless clients who were injured in texting while driving accidents. We can provide the legal counsel and effective advocacy you need to successfully pursue a claim against a negligent driver. Contact us at 813-258-4998 for a free consultation. 

The seriousness of texting while driving cannot be understated:  Studies have shown that texting while driving poses a comparable or greater car accident risk than drunk driving. Watch Corless Barfield Trial Group’s John Mulvihill discuss these important studies.

If you believe distracted driving was a factor in your injury-causing motor vehicle accident, it is crucial to contact an attorney who will seek maximum compensation for you. Corless Barfield Trial Group helps victims of car accidents caused by distracted drivers. We aid accident victims throughout the Tampa Bay area. For an experienced texting while driving attorney, call us now at 813-258-4998. 

The proposal would eliminate the $10,000 no-fault coverage in 2018 while mandating motorists get at least $25,000 in coverage for bodily injury or death and $50,000 for bodily injury or death of two or more people.

Florida drivers are only required to carry personal injury protection of at least $10,000 to pay for medical benefits after an accident.  But the people pushing for House Bill 1063, i.e., the insurance industry, suggest $10,000 isn’t enough when health care costs are rising.

Abandoning no-fault for bodily injury, which provides coverage if motorists cause accidents that hurt someone else, would put more questions of medical coverage into the courts, as injured parties would seek to recoup expenses from at-fault drivers.

More than 90 percent of motorists have PIP and some form of bodily-injury coverage, which is why most motorists would be projected to see a savings from eliminating no-fault with HB 1063. However, the change could negatively impact health care premiums.

Since 2015, rates have gone up 25.7 percent. Meanwhile, all liability coverage has gone up 23.4 percent the past two years. The increases are due to rises in medical care, costs of vehicle body work, people driving more, and an increase in distracted drivers. How much you save depends on whom you are, how much you drive, and how many cars you insure.

Lawmakers supporting the bill predict the average driver will save about $81 a year for each vehicle they insure, but critics forecast costs will ultimately increase later. The costs would rise higher in Tampa Bay. In Hillsborough County, getting car insurance would cost $308 more on average for those who have the bare minimum now, according to a statewide report commissioned by the state’s Office of Insurance Regulation. In Pinellas, that would become a $385 annual increase. Rates vary depending on a county’s traffic density, percentage of uninsured drivers, and accident rates.

Currently, drivers and passengers get car damages and PIP paid for up to $10,000, no matter who is at fault in an accident. Drivers have to pay an additional cost to insurance companies to pay for bodily injuries, which cover them if they are at fault. The insurance industry is pushing to scrap PIP and instead require all motorists to carry coverage that includes bodily injury if they are at fault.

HB 1063 is now moving through the state legislature, which calls for eliminating Florida’s no-fault insurance plan. Consult a Corless Barfield Trial Group attorney to understand changes to automobile insurance policies and learn about your rights by calling 813-258-4998 if you are involved in a motor vehicle accident.

Police say the apprentice opened the cover of the cage and the snake jumped at him and then slid away. When the owner and the apprentice couldn’t find the snake in the concealed room, they called Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC).

The yellow cobra is dangerous, leading authorities to warn neighbors. “Residents in the area are urged to use caution until this snake has been captured,” the FWC said in a news release. “Although reclusive by nature, cobras are highly venomous and will strike out if they feel threatened.” If someone were to be bitten by the escaped cobra, they would need to get to the hospital as soon as possible as they should be treated with the appropriate anti-venom medication.

The snake’s owner has been licensed to have the cobra since May 2016. Under Florida law, there are a number of wild animals that anyone can own as long as he or she acquires the proper permit for said animal. The FWC requires the rooms where venomous reptiles are kept to be escape-proof. Investigators will be looking into whether Purdy violated any regulations.

Strictly speaking, Florida courts have extended strict liability to the owner, keeper, or possessor of wild animals if the animal injures others. This means that Purdy cannot escape liability for an injury even if he was being reasonably careful.

The owner of a wild animal can be strictly liable to an individual injured as a result of the animal escaping from its cage, even if the animal escaped without any fault on the owner’s part. This is different from negligence, which typically requires the injured party to demonstrate some degree of fault, e.g., that the owner knew or should have known that the animal could escape. Florida law is an extension of the common law that held owners of dangerous animals should bear the cost of any injury they cause.

Under Florida law the owner of a dangerous animal is responsible for ensuring that the animal does not escape and that it does not cause harm to another person. If someone knowingly keeps a wild animal on their property, then they are likely going to be strictly liable for the harm that it causes.

Please contact a lawyer from Corless Barfield Trial Group. We are experienced in handling personal injury claims, and can serve as an important resource for information if you or someone you know has been injured in an animal attack.

If you’re thinking of suing an insurance company for bad faith, it’s important that you understand what that means. You need to understand what services an insurance company is responsible for providing and how to know if they’re failing the expectations set. It’s understandable – we pay these companies hundreds of dollars a month and trust that when the going gets rough, they’ll be there for us. So what is a bad faith lawsuit, and how do you know if you should pursue one?

What does bad faith mean?

A bad faith lawsuit occurs after another attempted lawsuit. For example, say you’re involved in a major car accident, and file a claim with your insurance company. Once you’ve filed the claim, provided them with all the information they ask for, and essentially wait your turn in the queue, your insurance company is responsible for two things:

1. Offering and providing a reasonable settlement
2. Doing so in a timely manner

Essentially, the theory is that insurance companies have a duty to negotiate in good faith, and should settle claims in a timely manner for appropriate amounts.  If the insurance company does not settle when it should have settled, and the injured person goes to trial and the jury awards an amount greater than the insurance policy limits, the law might look to the insurance company and question why the insurance company made the person go to trial and failed to settle the case earlier.

What is a bad faith lawsuit?

A bad faith lawsuit is a separate lawsuit against an insurance company for not settling cases when they should settle them, and these bad faith lawsuits can often result in verdicts that are much higher than the underlying personal injury lawsuits.  This area of the law is intended to encourage insurance companies to “do the right thing” during settlement negotiations.  Specifically, once the insurance company has sufficient information to know it should pay the policy limits, the insurance company is required to pay the insurance limits to the injured person.  If the insurance company does not pay the insurance limits when it should have paid the limits, then the insurance company is said to have acted in bad faith, and is subject to a separate “bad faith” lawsuit for failing to pay a claim in a timely fashion.

Of course, the question then becomes, when and under what circumstances does an insurance company have enough information to pay the insurance limits on a claim?  And moreover, what constitutes a timely payment?  This is what an insured brings to the court to decide when suing an insurance company for bad faith, and hopefully force the insurance company’s hand in making a timely, reasonable decision.

If you find yourself in a position where you’re questioning the dependability of your insurance company, contact Corless Barfield for a free consultation.