The Joel Bieber Firm

Call 1-800-451-6393

Archive for Virginia

Woes of an Ex-Doctor

Wednesday, May 1st, 2013

     This is a tale of woe from Staunton, Virginia. (NewsLeader.com)  Charles K. Weisman had his medical license suspended  after  the Board of Medicine determined  that he had smoked marijuana at his practice, kept alcohol in his office, prescribed testosterone to himself, swore at patients and kept faulty records. I know, you almost have to read that sentence a second time to take it all in.

     Like a bad ad, imagine hearing the voice that says, “But wait, there’s more”.  Weisman was also accused of misdemeanor sexual assault against two female employees. Those charges were later amended to simple assault and then ultimately dropped. Then, in his continuing events of life;  in 2009, a Staunton store owner accused Weisman of trespassing after the two men argued over storage space. (2009)

     I know you’d rather hear that exciting voice screaming, “set it…and forget it”. Instead, let’s stay with the same theme…”But wait, there’s more”.  In 2011, a judge found Weisman not guilty after Weisman was initially charged on a misdemeanor charge of obtaining money by false pretenses, after he was accused of giving a man a foot rub but trying to charge him for an X-ray at his Day Star Medical Center.

     A month later, his girlfriend brought an assault and battery charge against him,; Ultimately, that was taken under advisement and dismissed. 

     Now, what is going on in his life?… Yes, there is more.

     This past Tuesday, he was found to be operating a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning business without a license, and was convicted  on a misdemeanor charge of violating Virginia’s Profession and Occupation act.

      So, I guess we are all caught up. Maybe we should check in on him in a couple of weeks!

     And for pic o’ day, I thought I would stay in a bit of the theme:

Line up

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Protecting Wrongdoers and Punitive Damages

Sunday, November 4th, 2012

     After a good weekend plus a Colts win, I usually stay away from negative. This time, I am getting something off my chest! 

     At the end of October, a group of distinguished lawyers, judges and law professors got together at the Homestead to discuss issues in the law. The group meeting is called the Boyd-Graves Conference.

     The background for the formation of this group is best said on it’s website:   ”The Boyd-Graves Conference was created by the late Thomas V. Monahan, a former VBA president, who believed that civil practice in Virginia would be improved if lawyers with different types of practices, from all regions of the state, would meet and attempt to reach consensus about ways to improve the law.” It was formed in 1978 and has been very helpful in addressing question and needs of law and practice.

     This October meeting did make several significant recommendations. Then, the issue of Virginia’s laws regarding punitive damages immediately ran into a group obstacle.  

     Right now, Virginia has a state cap of punitive damages in the amount of $350,000. That means that if an entity, company or individual is found by a jury to have done or committed an act that is “willful and wanton”, which is worse than negligence. There are several legal terms for it, but basically it is willful and egregious conduct. It basically almost has to be intentional or just a disregard of doing what is right. I probably am not even describing the standard strict enough.

     Punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant; deter such future conduct by that defendant as well as others in the future;  and in doing so, protect the citizens of the state where the punitive damages are part of a verdict.

         I know I am getting too much legal stuff… but here comes the meat of my blog.

     The cap of $350,000 was enacted in 1988. If adjusted for inflation, the cap would now be approximately $677,000 without any real increase. Still, Boyd-Graves rejected any proposal to eliminate the cap or even raise it to a mere increase of $500,000.

     When you hear the term a ”business-friendly” state, you assume that it is helpful to attract businesses to Virginia. In fact, it probably does. However, I really wonder if anyone really finds out what the state caps on punitive damages are, before relocating to that state. If they do, I don’t think that is really the kind of business that we should want to open up here. Instead, I would think that they are mainly looking for tax incentives. 

     I could get stirred up more about this. A business that generates billions in revenue can create a product that they know will kill Virginia citizens. Then, they know that they are only going to be punished in an amount of 350K maximum. It can be something added to their projected balance sheet.

     In past lawsuits, there have been many memos uncovered that showed businesses considering the expense of injury versus profit. Profitability… that doesn’t mean protection for Virginia citizens. To me, I don’t think that a business should be able to weigh its conduct against what the margin of expense per violation or lawsuit in punitive might be. Punishment should really be punishment. For most big businesses, 350K has no meaningful message.  I just thought that this is topical, with an election on Tuesday.

     For pic o’ day, I am posting one of my Dad on a recent vacation. It makes me smile. (Sorry Dad!!!!!)

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Rules of Court and Field

Tuesday, September 25th, 2012

In every jury trial, the Judge will read the law of the case. The jury is “instructed” on how to view the evidence, based on law.

In Virginia, it is very difficult to get a verdict for punitive damages. Lawyers have to meet certain burdens of proof to even get that issue to the jury. Then, Virginia has a cap of $350,000 for punishment damages. That means that a company can do business in Virginia and know that no matter how vicious or mean their conduct might be, they still will only have to pay a maximum of $350,000.

While a cap on punishment damges  is bad for the protection of Virginia residents, it’s good for companies who know that they can color outside the lines with little penalty.

In law and in sports, we are all supposed to play by the rules. In the NFL, it seems that the replacement referees are not enforcing rules very consistently. Anarchy seems now to reign.

When companies are reckless, it irritates me that there are not real rules to make them pay. Amy sent me the following picture that sums up the application of rules in football right now. We all need fair rules applied!

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments Comments Off

The Stands of Ken Cuccinelli

Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli  probably has made both sides of the aisle a bit unhappy. He expressed his personal opinions regarding Federal  tort reform, and applied his same reasoning to restricting the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA).

Now, I know that politics can be some pretty boring stuff. I’ll bet that a few have already scrolled to pic o’ day. So, I’ll try to be quick.

Big Business and The Chamber of Commerce decided a long time ago that it’s cheaper to influence Congress and the US Senate,  rather than spending money in every state, trying to influence each legislator. So, if you can get favorable laws enacted Federally that override states’ rights, then you’ve done it in one vote; controlling 50 states.

Ken Cuccinelli has taken the position that the Federal Government should not be involved in the business of what individual states do; particularly Virginia.  He wrote an editorial piece in the Washington Post on Sunday, expressing this very point that would keep the federal government from restricting lawsuits, or enacting lawsuit caps, or requiring states to ignore their own laws, in favor of the Federal Government.

Here’s a short version of what he said about such Federal action. Specifically, he was also addressing Senate Bill 197 that attempts to cap damages in medical malpractice cases. “This legislation expands federal power, tramples states’ rights and violates the Constitution. If it were ever signed into law, by a Republican or Democratic president, I would file suit against it just as fast as I filed suit when the federal health-care bill was signed into law.”

Such expressed opinion goes against many in the Republican Party. In keeping with that thought, he disagrees with Democrats because he blasted the EPA, in testimony before a US  House Committee. He believes that upcoming air quality regulations would have a devastating impact on Virginia.

The EPA has regulations in effect to take place soon, that would require coal-fired plants to make equipment changes and retrofitting of their facilities,  to decrease  pollution. He believes that such restrictions will put such burdens on the coal companies that it will cause business closings and cost jobs.

OK, I know I’m getting carried away with politics. The quick point is that, even though there may be evidence that the EPA is trying to restrict mercury, arsenic, dioxin and other pollutants, Cuccinelli is again saying, “Federal Government… Stay out, let’s States take care of this”.  Just something to think about.

Now, if you’ve made it to the bottom, here is pic o’ day… Feeling left out:

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments Comments Off

Congressman Scott Rigell’s Dilemma

Tuesday, April 12th, 2011

     I intended to move to Part 2, for yesterday’s blog, and got sidetracked on another blog story. I promise to get to the   “Why”, for the Governor McDonnell veto. In the meantime, I do what I seem to always enjoy doing….. I digress.

     I saw an article in Pilot Online  that  discusses the NO vote of Congressman Scott Rigell (R-VA), from the 2nd District. Bills becoming law have always held some fascination for me. It’s why I was a Political Science major in college, in the first place.

      Political Science majors were always known as people that didn’t know what they wanted to major in, so it seemed easy and not too much of a commitment toward any specific career. I once heard a minister joke that the way that some knew that they wanted to be ministers in churches, was that “they woke up in the morning, craving chicken and not wanting to go to work”. Kinda like Poly Sci.

     All that leads me to Congressman Rigell voting against the Federal budgetary deal, that funds the government through  the remaining months of 2011. I have seen both sides of the aisle agree on voting against it and for it. In this instance,  even liberal Independent Senator  Bernie Sanders  (I-VT) also voted against the budget bill.

     This shows different philosophies arriving at the same ending.   Sanders says he voted against it because it did not provide funding for programs that helped the poor and elderly. He thought the budget does not do enough in funding.

     Congressman Rigell thought it didn’t do enough in reductions . He was the lone Virginia legislator to vote against it because it does not adequately deal with the budget deficit. He feels that, as a fiscal conservative, he could not vote for this spending bill.

     Now, drawing on my old Political Science days, here is the interesting caveat. Rigell’s vote basically was voting to shut down the government. That would have the effect of shutting down government services; eliminating or delaying government worker pay; and halting or delaying military pay. The Second District (Rigell’s) has many government and military personnel that he represents…. His constituents that elected him. 

     Rigell said that passage of this bill increases the federal deficit. Such an increase “threatens the foundation of this country”

     To me, some of this blog gets a bit boring until you consider the following  question. As an elected Congressman, does he owe a duty to vote for his constituents or vote for what he thinks is best for the country. I suspect that the next election for Congress will have an ad that may ask prospective voters, that exact question. “Who does Congressman  Rigell represent?”  Kinda like trying to figure out the correct blog title spelling for  ”dilemma” or “dilemna”.

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments Comments Off

Mall Texting Reminder

Sunday, January 16th, 2011

     I’m not one who enjoys watching videos of people getting hurt. However, (you knew that there would be that “However” inserted) the youtube video below is going viral. It is a reminder of what happens when texting takes over your life.

     It’s also a reminder why Virginia has taken a stand against texting and driving. This video clip is being narrated by someone who had access to mall camera security. Fortunately, this girl was not hurt. Hopefully, her mall splash will remind her to not text and drive or even text and walk.

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Categories : Uncategorized
Comments (2)

The Rig of Oil

Monday, May 17th, 2010

     I always enjoy the marketing employed in real estate ads. When you see “quaint” or “cozy”, I think that it really means, “That’s amazing that they were able to fit 2 bedrooms in here. When I see the description of ” unique”, I immediately assume, “The builder didn’t want to clog the master bedroom with a closet”  or, “even Frank Lloyd Wright thought this looked strange”. 

     To me, “all offers considered” means, “For the love of Pete, they are going to foreclose, if you don’t buy”. “Backyard Paradise?” Well, I’m not sure if that means you’ll need a mosquito net or that it has plants and flowers with strange names, that will put immense pressure on you to keep them alive.

     I am starting to think that oil companies use the same kind of marketing for platform oil drilling. I previously blogged on offshore drilling, but now want to call your attention to a story that I saw on 60 Minutes on Sunday night. The story is titled “Blowout, The Deepwater Horizon Disaster“. Survivor Mike Williams describes in detail his personal experience on the platform that recently blew up in the Gulf, as he describes the platform that was on fire and the explosions, which caused him to jump 90 feet into water that was covered in oil and  ready to go up in flames.

     The story would be the kind of fiction book that you can’t put down. Instead, this Chief Electronics Technician, in charge of the oil rig’s computers and electrical system, tells the true story of what he saw in the days leading up to the explosion. Now that I have heard that side of the story of how he escaped this fiery inferno that killed 11 other crewman, and also hearing the warning signs that were ignored by BP which have caused the continual oil leaking  in the Gulf, for a period of 3 weeks; If you watch the video, it will just disturb you. Can corporate oil drilling America be this dirty?

     For a legal blog, I really can’t do  the story true description justice.  BP is under scrutiny for this one. However, how quickly we  forget. In 2005, a Texas refinery of BP also exploded, killing 15 workers and leading to a 108 million dollar fine, the highest workplace fine in history. For the current explosion, BP reminds us that they are spending money around the clock, in an effort to fix the current leak. They tell us that it has already cost them 500 million. What they don’t say is that, in just the first 3 months of this year, they have already realized a profit of 6 billion.

     When I hear politicians talk about how Virginia needs offshore drilling to create jobs and to make us self sufficient, I wonder who has their ear. How are they equipped to even make that decision when such money and profits are at stake? Then, the marketing begins to tell us that technology is so advanced that problems of the past have been solved and that any spills can now be quickly corrected. I could attach those basic words from some of our State politicians. Instead, I just hope that voters will not put up with this “oil marketing”. This oil leak has probably delayed these false promises for a little bit.

      BP in the news right now. Companies such as Conoco and Exxon are out there drilling and turning profits. Unfortunately, based on the assertions of one former BP employee, there is another platform that shows all the signs of a massive leak, according to the attached story, and BP is refusing to address those early warning signs. The employee claims that the profit is just too large and getting larger for them. Why not profit over safety?

     Sitting in our chairs, it really is hard to know truth from fiction.  According to the facts of this Gulf explosion, BP knew about the problems and ignored them, choosing to push forward and faster because of the expense involved and the profits that were being lost. In one planning session, a BP representative pressured everyone at the platform meeting to keep pushing ahead, that they were falling behind schedule, and to just ignore signs such as floating rubber that indicated a problem below the drilling surface. 

     Dr Bob Bea, a Professor of Engineering, has been asked by the White House to analyze and give recommendations about this Gulf explosion. He also consulted on the Columbia Space Shuttle disaster for NASA, and was part of the review team for the National Science Foundation which assessed the Katrina Disaster. When the reporter for 60 Minutes, Steve Pelfrey, asked him what he thought would be the right thing to do at that point, Bea said, “I express it to my students this way, ‘Stop, think, don’t do something stupid.’” 

     Doesn’t this story remind you a little bit of the real estate marketing, as I described. I half expect someone to print something like “it makes for a great fixer-upper”.  When I see the BP Oil television ads that tout how eco-friendly they are to the environment, I wonder if we will start to see politicians advertise that, “I was the one who stopped BP from drilling near the Virginia coast”.

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Categories : Current Affairs
Comments (26)

Drill Baby, Uh oh

Monday, May 3rd, 2010

     I have gone back and forth, in my mind, on what I think of offshore drilling. When I say that, I am guessing that you probably have an opinion that is firm and, either way, you can’t understand why I would be “on the fence, on oil drilling”.  Hearing someone scream “Drill Baby Drill” really has little effect on me.  I am sure someone is also screaming “Spill Baby Spill”.

     Recently Congress was faced with whether  individuals should be allowed to have access to prescription drugs outside of the United States. The bill was defeated, which served to deny senior citizens access to life-saving drugs that are half the cost in Canada, than the same drugs cost in the United States. Of course, Drug Company lobbyists outnumber Congress by a 2-1 margin, and currently spend over 100 million a year to get their message out and get what they want, much of the time.

     It really comes down to who is controlling the message. That’s why it’s hard to know what is real in offshore drilling. What is message and what is massage.  A take on the Mark Twain saying applies, “liars figure and figures lie”.

     Are jobs created by off-shore drilling or does it just mean that more people need to be hired to scoop up the dead fish and shrimp?  Will it help us stop depending on foreign oil and foreign countries or is it really a mere “drop in the bucket”? Are oil spills a fault of a company that can be prevented or just a natural consequence of drilling and weighed as to whether such spills versus the oil are just an acceptable risk?

     Last Wednesday, the US Coast Guard said that the Gulf of Mexico oil tragedy was much worse than initially reported. Supposedly, 42,000 gallons of oil a day are spilling into the water and a new leak has now been found in the piping. Over 400 species of wildlife are at risk.  All this from a drilling rig some 50 miles off the coast of Louisianna. 

     In 2008, Glenn Beck said   ”It appears to me that the oil companies are doing a better job protecting the ocean and the fishes and the Gulf of Mexico than the local, state, and federal government are having at protecting people in our cities.” As the E Trade baby says of his buddy Mike, dancing in Vegas, “Haunting”.    

     One former Presidential candiadate remarked that when Katrina hit Louisiana, “Not one drop of oil was spilled“.  Another commentator  pointed to Katrina as proof that we have the technology to be safe with offshore drilling. Unfortunately, it was later determined by the US Minerals Management Service that from Katrina,  ”124 [oil] spills were reported with a total volume of roughly 17,700 barrels of total petroleum products,”  including more than 10,000 barrels from platforms and rigs alone. The report further noted that “about 13,200 barrels were crude oil and condensate from platforms, rigs and pipelines, and 4,500 barrels were refined products from platforms and rigs.”

     Right now, it  sounds like crickets in the world of those advocating offshore drilling.  However, the Virginia Governor has taken the position on his WRVA radio show that, ” This is certainly a setback, but I continue to be dedicated to making us first to drill, 2012 at the latest, and over the next couple years these safety and environmental issues will be addressed.” 

     I read and I watch.  Should it be a risk/reward evaluation. Or, will there come a day when I will see fish and fowl come floating up on the shore of Virginia Beach and the Virginia Governor, whoever that might be at that time, explaining that ”we have it all contained and that (insert oil company name) is investing millions of dollars to actually make the water more pure, than it was before the oil spill”.

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Categories : Current Affairs
Comments (51)

One For The Road?

Monday, April 19th, 2010

The businessman finishes his last drink and signs his credit card, in a scrawl, at the bar. He barely notices the bill that shows he’s had 9 drinks. In his mind, it’s been a hard day. The bartender casually says, “You be careful out there”. The man gets up and looks toward the door. He thinks how fortunate he is to be so close to home.  Plus, he’s made it home like this on Thursdays for about 3 years. This time, though, is different. He crosses a center line and crashes into an oncoming car and kills a coach, headed home from practice.

The college student slurs through his side window, “officer, it’s not my fault, I was just over served”. Then, he giggles as he drops his license on the car mat. He looks out at his bumper and just shakes his head.  Fortunately, the student collided with a telephone poll and not another car.

These two instances are clearly the fault of both drivers. Should bars, restaurants and taverns also have any responsibility as to  how much they serve. In the state of Virginia, the answer right now is no.  A bar can lose its ABC license to serve alcohol, if it does not comply with only serving someone who is 21. A fake i.d. is no excuse as to wrongdoing.  In all 50 states, serving alcohol to minors is illegal. Over serving alcohol is not a separate offense in all 50 states, though including Virginia.

Now here is how states differ on responsibility.  Thirty-five states have some form of law that puts responsibility on bars for serving too much alcohol to their patrons. Virginia is not one of those states. Virginia prides itself on being a place for business and that apparently includes the business of serving alcohol.

Laws that hold bars accountable are called Dram Shop laws. Dram Shop is a legal term for establishments where alcohol is served. Dram is a measurement that was used by the apothecaries of old, when mixing liquids in their “concoctions”.  I have a blog about Henry VIII bouncing around in my head. He worked on concoctions for his own medical conditions and probably measured in drams, but I digress. I hope you’ll click when you see Henry VIII in the title.

The purpose of this blog is to point out Virginia’s position on alcohol. The hospitality lobby has been stronger than other lobbying voices in keeping bars from being responsible. The argument against making bars liable for over serving patrons is that the individual should be responsible for what they drink. I don’t understand the either/or. Why can’t both be responsible. I’m not saying that a bar should be responsible, everytime someone drunk is responsible for an accident. In my thinking, they should be responsible when they served a patron and knew or should have known that they were contributing to the drunkenness.

In my opening to this blog, I fictionalized a story that probably happens a lot. Hopefully, the “businessman-drinker” gets home despite his actions.  However, a bar should not be able to just profit by continually serving and then hiding behind the laws of no responsibility. When Virginia changed its drinking under the influence from .10 to .08 BAC, there was a big legislative fight, but organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) prevailed.

There are those that would try to make this a bad for business fight. Instead, anything that stops drunk driving, including making bars also responsible for their actions, should also be part of the fight.  I have yet to see a politician really stand up for “alcohol rights”. Dram shop laws have to be couched in those terms instead of protecting the servers who are helping to put drunk drivers behind the wheel.

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Categories : Food and Drink
Comments (8)

Governor McDonnell Loves Speed

Thursday, January 28th, 2010

One of my all time favorite television commercials showed dogs hanging out of the windows, of various trucks, and the announcer saying, "Dogs Love Trucks". It motivated me on several levels. I wanted a truck; I wanted a dog; and I had a strange desire to put my head out of the window of a moving truck and try barking.

In advertising, cagey veterans of television persuasion claim that you should figure out how to weave animals, kids or "free" into your advertising. I guess that's why we still have the ETrade Baby to teach us about smart finances.

Prior advertising for the State of Virginia has been the campaign of "Virginia is for Lovers". Now, we may have a possible new campaign, courtesy of a bill that the new Virginia Governor wants to be enacted as law. The new campaign might be something like "We'll get you where you're going, hopefully". See if you agree?

I titled this "Governor McDonnell Loves Speed". The Governor is pushing new legislation on speed limits. Pilot Online reports that on Wednesday, a bill to raise the speed limit on interstate highways, from 65 mph to 70 mph, has passed in the house subcommittee and is now advancing to the full House Transportation Committee. The basis for the passage was described by a representative of the National Motorists Association, who spoke in favor of the bill, by saying that, "speed limits should be posted at the prevailing speed of traffic".

The opposition to this bill primarily came from the insurance industry and the Sierra Club. Statistics were cited that showed that a 5 mph increase had statistically coincided with an increase in accidents; as much as 15%. Plus, common sense says that injuries could be more severe, as a result of crashes occurring at a higher rate of speed.

Stacey Johnson, the Governor's press secretary, has called the governor's position a "common-sense step to get traffic moving faster in the Commonwealth". Plus, Johnson added the logic that, "If speed limits reflect real travel speeds, then traffic will flow more uniformly, thus making the roads safer." The legislator that sponsored the bill in the house, Delegate Charles Carrico, also added that, "You can get killed in a 30 mile-an-hour crash. People are going 70 anyway, let's be brutally honest".

One final note on this. Some of my blogs really don't require my personal analysis because the statements speak for themselves. I think this is one of those blogs. However, maybe there can be some unique support for this in the form of tax and revenue. Maybe the next bill will be about an increase in gas taxes, because more speed creates more gas consumption, creating more revenue for the Commonwealth. Another idea: Now we need more toll booths to help slow down traffic, which will create more revenue. To sell those ideas, we just need some dogs, babies and some free balloons for travel.   

  

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Categories : Auto Accidents
Comments (1)