July 31

Accident Lawyer Lake Oswego


Beware the Reformer in the Expensive Suit: How Big Business is Trying to Limit Your Rights

Tort Reform is a phrase that most Portland personal injury attorneys cringe at hearing. Wikipedia defines tort reform as: “proposed changes in common law civil justice systems that would reduce tort litigation or damages.” Proponents of tort reform argue that jury damage awards in personal injury suits are either too high or inconsistent, i.e., award amounts vary widely in cases where the plaintiffs suffer similar injuries. Opponents of tort reform point to conflicting statistics that show that jury awards are relatively consistent and provide appropriate compensation for the types of injuries suffered by plaintiffs.  Opponents of tort reform also criticize the fact that tort reform’s loudest supporters are corporations and professional organizations that have a vested interest in limiting their financial liability in potential lawsuits.

Portland personal injury lawyers are, for the most part, against laws which limit Oregonian’s access to the court room, to jury trials, and to fair damage awards.  Portland injury lawyers, including myself, like to see our clients receive damages based on the severity of their injuries, not based on a predetermined statutory formula.  This Portland injury attorney sees great constitutional due process problems when legislatures start to limit the range of damages a jury can award or when legislatures bar some plaintiffs from even getting into a courtroom at all.

For anyone interested in learning more about the debate over the civil legal system and ‘tort reform’, I would suggest and highly recommend that you check out the excellent 2011 documentary entitled Hot Coffee.  The title of the documentary refers to the now infamous case of Stella Liebeck, an elderly woman who was scalded by McDonald’s coffee.  After the incident, and the subsequent lawsuit, politicians, newspapers, and tort reform lobbyists pointed to the case as an example of a ridiculous lawsuit.  Because, of course, how could someone blame McDonald’s for hot coffee? It’s obviously the woman’s fault she burned herself right? Wrong!

Turns out Ms. Liebeck had a great case, and this was a far-cry from a frivolous lawsuit.  Per McDonald’s standards and operations guidelines, and in the face of several prior complaints about the temperature of the coffee, the coffee was heated to an insanely high temperature.  Additionally, it was in a particularly flimsy cup, and McDonald’s had knowledge of other previous accidents related to their coffee and did nothing to change the temperature or the cup design.  As a Portland accident attorney it is frustrating to see people jump to conclusions about accident victims like Ms. Liebeck, assuming that they are ‘fakers’ or just looking to get a quick buck from a small injury.  I have worked for over 5 years as a Portland injury attorney and most of my clients have been hard-working people who only want to be fairly compensated for their injuries – if I don’t believe in my client’s claim, I don’t take their case.

Unfortunately, those interested in limiting plaintiff’s access to justice, the civil justice system, or compensation for injuries caused by corporate negligence, have done an excellent job disseminating propaganda turning the Ms. Liebeck’s hot coffee case from the quintessential example of the need for plaintiffs to have access to the civil justice system as a check on corporate greed into just the opposite – what most people think of as the epitome of greedy plaintiffs, their greedy lawyers, and frivolous lawsuits.  As is often the case, the real truth lies beneath that urban myth exterior and it is nothing like what most people think.  This Lake Oswego and Portland car accident attorney can speak from experience in knowing the success the tort reformers have had with their campaign of misinformation because it is the #1 issue and example raised at the first stage of every trial when we are interviewing potential jurors.  ALL jurors, without fail, bring up the McDonald’s coffee case.

This accident lawyer who practices in Lake Oswego and Portland strongly recommends that you do the work to learn the real truth about the hot coffee case before you go spouting off about it at your next work meeting or cocktail party.  You could actually be the person in the room showing off your intelligence instead of continuing to feed false and misleading urban myths!  Just watch the movie and find out.

July 23

DUII Attorney Portland Lake Oswego

douglas-green-criminal-defenseDriving Under the Influence Laws are Changing in Some States to Accommodate a Shift in State Marijuana Laws

Marijuana laws in the United States are changing. With full-blown legalization in Colorado and Washington and medical systems in place in many other states, it is clear that the American people’s views on marijuana are changing. Many Portland criminal defense attorneys who have defended clients in marijuana possession and distribution cases are now shifting their focus to business licensing and regulatory compliance with an eye towards assisting individuals set up and run legal marijuana businesses (if and when the drug is legalized for recreational use in Oregon).

As a Portland and Lake Oswego drug attorney, I have defended many people accused of marijuana-related crimes. Currently, Oregon uses an ‘actual impairment’ standard for cases where people are accused of driving under the influence of marijuana or other narcotics. The driver can be found guilty of a DUII if he or she was driving in an impaired manner, i.e., not as well as they would have been driving if they were sober. Portland and Lake Oswego DUII lawyers are used to this standard, but if marijuana is legalized in Oregon then the state may adopt a different standard. Under Washington State’s new legalized marijuana law, a driver can be found guilty of driving under the influence of marijuana if his or her blood tests positive for THC (the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana) in an amount equal to or higher than 5 nanograms per milileter . The effectiveness of having such a legal limit has been hotly debated because a regular or heavy user of marijuana may test positive even when he or she is not under the influence at the time of driving, or a light user who is impaired significantly by a small amount of marijuana might be below this threshold.  A recent NPR story discussed the new marijuana DUII law in Washington.  NORML (The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) discusses marijuana laws on a state-by-state basis here.

Another issue with Washington’s new law is that it requires blood draws to prove that drivers have an illegal amount of THC in their system. There has yet to be an effective, mass produced breathalyzer for marijuana like there is for alcohol. Drawing a driver’s blood implicates more privacy issues than giving a breathalyzer test, and, after a recent Supreme Court case, State v. McNeely, it will usually require a police officer to apply for a warrant before drawing the blood. This in turn means more work for Portland police and more opportunities for Portland and Lake Oswego criminal defense attorneys to make procedural objections to DUII cases if the warrant has not been acquired or has been acquired improperly. It will be interesting to see how driving under the influence of marijuana cases are processed moving forward, and, very important for Portland and Lake Oswego DUII attorneys to keep up on new developments in this area of law.

June 12

Portland Personal Injury Attorney

Autonomous Vehicles Self Driving Cars GaugeSelf-Driving Cars may become a Viable Option for Improving Safety on America’s Roads

Traffic accidents are unfortunately an all too common occurrence on our roads and highways. As a Portland car crash attorney, I have seen firsthand the terrible economic and social harm caused by motor vehicle accidents. As a Portland personal injury lawyer, it is my job to hold negligent or reckless drivers financially accountable for their actions and get my clients the recoveries that they deserve as compensation for their injures. But, unfortunately, my job as a Portland accident attorney is focused on reactive responses to car accidents rather than proactive systemic change.

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released a report recently that estimates the economic loss and social harm of car accidents can be valued at around $871 billion in the year 2010 alone. This figure accounts for roughly 1.9% of the total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the United States! Any Portland car accident attorney, or, for that matter, any American, can see that the toll from car crashes is at a catastrophic level. Here’s an article discussing that report.

Technology may be one answer towards lowering the frequency of car accidents and thus reducing the cost in economic harm and loss of human enjoyment and life caused by automobile accidents. Most car crashes are caused by driver error, not environmental factors. Drunk driving, distracted driving, and speeding drivers account for the majority of car accidents in the U.S. Recently, Google and several other companies have been developing self-driving cars. These cars use mapping software combined with GPS to figure out where they are going and they have motion sensors and detection equipment that will stop them from running into obstacles. Although the technology is still in a developmental phase, the implications for traffic safety are huge. Computers do not get tired, they do not answer to impulsive urges such as the urge to speed, and they do not get drunk (at least not yet). Imagine a future where you get off work, get into the back of your car, tell the computer to drive you home, and crack a beer. Of course this would not be advisable now considering current open container laws, but as the technology improves and self-driving cars become a reality, the law will have to evolve as well. The future of self-driving cars is exciting because these cars have the potential to greatly reduce the frequency of car crashes. Hopefully, they won’t put this Portland car crash lawyer out of a job!

June 4

Portland Criminal Defense Attorney

Crime RateJuvenile Crime Rates-A True Change or a Game of Statistics?

Many people look to crime rates as an indicator of general social health. When the economy is good, unemployment is low, and education rates are high, there is usually less crime. Crime statistics are often viewed as a barometer for social welfare. However, statistics are only as strong as the methods used to create them, and sometimes the easy explanation for a statistical change is not the correct explanation.

Working as a Portland criminal defense lawyer, I see trends in the criminal justice system at the micro level. As a Portland felony lawyer, I will see the frequency of my felony cases rise and fall. But just because one Portland felony attorney sees an uptick in the felony cases he or she has been defending does not mean that this is anything more than a localized trend. Furthermore, even if it is a general trend it is impossible for one criminal defense lawyer to determine the underlying reasons for this trend. This is why we should turn to statistics to understand changes in criminal behavior in our city, state, and country.

One interesting crime statistic is that across the country juvenile crime rates have been falling. This fact is interesting to me because juvenile cases often come across my desk in my capacity as a Portland drug lawyer, Portland misdemeanor attorney, or in any criminal defense case. Why are juvenile crime rates falling? An easy answer might be that the police are doing a better job of preventing crime, or that, with a slowly improving economy, the American family unit is getting stronger and providing youth with a more stable and prosperous upbringing. But I have found a few articles that hypothesize more interesting reasons for this drop in crime rates.

A recent article on the website Juvenile Justice Information Exchange links a rise and subsequent drop in juvenile crime rates with the rising and falling popularity of lead based paints. Read about it here. The theory expressed by the author is that young people who are exposed to lead at an early age are more likely to develop developmental disabilities and that these children are more likely to commit crimes. I’m not sure if I agree with the author’s premise, but it is an interesting use of statistical analysis to show a possible link between a single environmental factor and crime rates. As a Portland personal injury attorney, I wonder if anyone was able to successfully link lead exposure to behavior as part of a civil case for damages. Or, if any criminal defense attorney in Portland, Lake Oswego, or around Oregon or Washington, was able to use these environmental factors as a defense to a crime.

Another interesting recent article in the Willamette Week suggests that juvenile crime rates are not actually falling at all. This article quotes some experts who suggest that the apparent drop in juvenile crime is actually attributable to the change in the way juveniles are processed through the system. Juveniles charged with violent crimes are now more likely to be charged as adults than they were in the past, pushing some crimes out of the juvenile category and into the adult category. And, with a new focus in juvenile justice on rehabilitation and keeping youth out of the corrections system, less juveniles are arrested and less juveniles are charged with crimes than ever before. So, perhaps juvenile criminal behavior has not changed at all. Maybe the real change is in what behavior we label as juvenile crime to begin with. In my work as a juvenile criminal defense attorney in Portland, I saw many juveniles charged as adults even for relatively minor offenses.

What do you think?