What general questions should I ask my lawyer in the initial consultation?

With lawyers asking many of the questions during the initial consultation, clients sometimes forget to ask questions that would like to know about the lawyer or upcoming case. Here's a list of questions you should ask your lawyer:

1-Will you always be honest with me about my case and not just tell me what I want to hear? Honesty between the lawyer and client is imperative.  A lawyer needs to be able to trust his client and the client needs to know he can trust the lawyer.

2-How long will it take my case to settle or reach trial? Depending on the type of case you have, the case could take weeks to years to be resolved. Litigation can take a long time, due to no fault of the lawyer, and clients need to understand from the outset that the process is sometimes slow so that the client has reasonable expectations about when they can expect a resolution.

3-Should I post information about my case on social media? The absolute answer to this is NO.

4-How long have you been practicing law?  Our firm currently has 6 lawyers with a combined 50+ years of experience.

5-What type of cases do you and your firm handle? Our firm does not generally take cases we don't have experience in.  We have handled thousands of cases in the areas of workers' compensation, personal injury, social security, discrimination, bad faith and other claims involving injuries.

6-Will I be interacting directly with you, the attorney, or with someone else in your office?  Some offices are small with no support staff and some offices are large with many helpful staff members.  There are advantages and disadvantages to both.  Discuss the differences honestly with your attorney so you know what to expect.

7-How many cases similar to mine have you handled before? 

8-What is the best way to contact your firm (i.e. Phone, email, fax, etc)?  Our firm will communicate with a client in any manner they prefer, but we live in an email driven world, and often that is a quick and efficient way to pass along information.

9-How will you let me know what's happening with my case?  It is unrealistic and not productive for a lawyer or staff member to call you regularly to tell you "nothing new," but a lawyer should communicate with you about milestones in the case.  Sometimes much of this communication about the expected milestones should be discussed in the first meeting, but a lawyer or his staff should keep you apprised of changes in the plan, rulings from a court or administrative body affecting your rights, and information that is pertinent for you to act on.

10-What will be the action plan for my case?  Lawyers cannot always predict every twist and turn, but an experienced lawyer should be able to give you an idea of the steps that will be taken to protect your interests.

Teresa E. Harvey

Should you have questions regarding a legal matter and would like to set up a free consultation, please contact me by going to our website http://www.cglawms.com or by calling 601-948-8005 today.

How to prepare for your initial meeting with your lawyer

It is always best to be prepared to meet with your lawyer.

You should bring with you all documents you have that may be relevant to the potential case or issue you will be discussing with your lawyer.  You will want to let your lawyer review them to determine whether they are relevant to the case.

If you have a timeline intensive case, it will be extremely helpful to write down or type out a chronological timeline of events in your case.

If you have seen any doctors related to your case, you should bring a list of those doctors and, if possible, the medical records.

If your case involves an employment issue, make sure you have the full names of your supervisors or bosses involved and other co-workers who may be witnesses.

Make sure you know the relevant dates related to your case (for example, date of car accident or injury in a personal injury case, date of termination in an employment case, date of surgery or medical procedure in a medical malpractice case, date of injury in a worker's compensation case)

Teresa E. Harvey

Should you have questions regarding a legal matter and would like to set up a free consultation, please contact me by going to our website http://www.cglawms.com or by calling 601-948-8005 today.

I was in a car wreck on the job that is someone else's fault. I have a lawyer to pursue the person that hit me, but he won't take my workers compensation case. What can I do?

You can have separate lawyers for both cases.  But generally, our firm recommends that you get one firm to represent you on both aspects of the cases.  The interplay between the two can be very complicated, but not all firms have experience in both areas.  However, it is ok to get a separate lawyer to make sure your rights are protected on your workers compensation case as well.  If you are happy with your lawyer on the car wreck but want to get some free and confidential advice on the workers compensation case, call our office at 601-948-8005 or go to our website at http://www.cglawms.com today.  If possible, we will work to cooperate with the other lawyer to make sure both remedies are maximized.

Rogen K. Chhabra

I'm not happy with my workers compensation lawyer. Can I fire my attorney?

Yes, but be careful.  Lawyers are not magicians.  Sometimes people expect results that are impossible to deliver.  What you should expect from your lawyer is timely responses to your inquiries from the lawyer or properly trained staff and honest advice on the best way for your case to proceed. 

A few rules that you need to understand:

1.  Lawyers cannot speak to someone already represented by counsel.

2.  You can terminate your lawyer anytime, but you should make sure it is for a legitimate reason as opposed to unreasonable expectations on your part.

3.  Terminating a lawyer requires no special form.  It is as simple as writing to the lawyer and stating that you no longer need their services.

4.  You are entitled to your file.  The lawyer is entitled to reasonable time to provide your file back to you and retain a copy.

5.  The lawyer will be entitled to a lien for services against a future settlement or award, but you should not be expected to pay the lawyer on termination of you signed a contingency fee agreement.

6. The lawyer also has a right to terminate the representation.

7.  You are free to hire a subsequent lawyer after the previous lawyer has been terminated.

8.  If the lawyer filed your case, the court will often give you a limited amount of time to get a new lawyer or proceed with your case on your own.  Do not miss that deadline or your case could be dismissed.

If you find yourself without a lawyer in an injury case and don't know what to do next, please call our office for a free consultation at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com/.  The consultation is free and confidential and you have no obligation to hire us.

Rogen K. Chhabra

Is my ex-spouse to be entitled to my workers compensation benefits in my divorce?

Maybe.  It depends on the benefits at issue.  I recently had the opportunity to testify in chancery court about whether workers compensation benefits were marital assets to be equally split in the divorce.  Every case is different, but in this case, the husband had received weekly payments for a period of 4 years, some argued to be before the parties separated and some after.  Then well after the separation, the husband received a settlement package worth more than $300,000.  The wife wanted her share.  My testimony was that the settlement was intended for future lost wages and for future medical treatment covered by a Medicare Set Aside (MSA), therefore they were not a marital asset.  The benefits paid during the marriage aside from the settlement were marital assets in my opinion, but the husband should get credit for the monies he used to benefit the marriage during that time.

Nobody wants to be in a divorce, but we have found that many people who get injured start to have marital problems.  You are already going through enough with the pain, treatment, reduced compensation for wages, stress, and to top it all off, it is hard on a marriage.  If you find yourself in this unfortunate position, you should get some free legal advice from a law firm as experienced as ours to help navigate the difficulties in dealing with the insurance company and the divorce court.  The consultation is free and confidential. 

You can call our office at 601-948-8005, or go to our website at http://www.cglawms.com/ and we will be glad to give you pressure free, honest, independent, and free advice about your best options in proceeding.  And as always, there is no obligation to hire our firm.

Rogen K. Chhabra

Can I choose my own physician in a workers compensation case?

YES, BUT be careful.  In Mississippi, after you have had a surgery or treated with the same physician for six months, you are stuck and you lose your choice.  This is critical because often insurance companies and employers will initially steer you to the doctors they know will be more on their side.  They just hope they can keep you there for six months before you find out you could have chosen your own doctor and never had to accept who they recommended for treatment to begin with.

You do not have to sign a choice of physician form to get treatment.  Most people don't think to ask this question and just assume the insurance company is steering them to the best doctor.  If you have been injured recently, you should seek attorney advice to make sure you are on a treatment path with doctors known to be fair rather than those who tend to side with the insurance company. So many of our firm's clients waited too late to get a free consultation, and we have to spend the rest of their case scratching and clawing to undo the damage that has already been done.

If you have been recently injured, or even if your injury was a long time ago, call our office today for a free and confidential consultation.  You will get to discuss the facts of your case, all the things the employer and insurance adjuster have told you, and most importantly, you will get advice on what you were told correctly and incorrectly.  It is a perfect opportunity to dispel the myths that you may have heard from a friend of a friend and make a decision on how you can best proceed in your best interests based on honest and real information rather than what others may have incorrectly told you. Contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com.  As always it is free and you will have no obligation to hire us.  

Is the nurse case manager allowed to come into the doctor's visit with me in a workers compensation case?

In many workers compensation cases, the insurance company (who is not on your side) will hire a nurse case manager to be involved in management of your medical treatment.  Most nurse case managers are nice, compassionate, caring and will make an injured person feel good.  But one has to ask: are they on the side of the patient or on the side of the insurance company that is paying them?  A nurse case manager may be handy in scheduling appointments and keeping information flowing, but what happens when they meet with the doctor in private?  Are they trying to maximize the value and remedy in your case, or are they trying to minimize the amount of money that the insurance company has to pay.  The fact that the insurance company pays them to be there ought to make the answer to this question obvious.

Here's the answer:  NO.  You have a right to privacy when you are hurt at work, even when the insurance company is paying your benefits, and even when the insurance company pays for your doctor bills.  But it's not as simple as telling the nurse case manager to buzz off.  The Mississippi Workers Compensation commission has ruled that a nurse case manager can be involved, and the insurance company and its lawyers, nurses, and representatives can to talk to doctors with or without you around unless you exercise your right by filing what is known as a petition to controvert with the Commission.  So if you play your cards right and find the right lawyer with the he right strategy, you can prevent a nurse case manager from meddling with your case and let the doctor make decisions independent of influence from the insurance company.

People are often scared, skeptical and downright opposed to hiring a lawyer.  It makes them feel like they are in a fight they don't want to be in.  After all, if the insurance company is paying your benefits as required, why would you want to take a chance of messing that up?  The answer is simple: insurance companies cannot withhold benefits just because you hired a lawyer.  But a good lawyer can certainly hold their feet to the fire and make sure you get what you are really supposed to get without getting steered in the wrong direction by outside pressure.  If you are one of those skeptics, I would recommend you take advantage of the free consultation our firm offers.  The most important thing about the consultation is that it is confidential.  Your boss and your insurance company will never know you got armed with some free advice.  You do not have to hire a firm just because you consulted with one.  Instead, you can find out real information and real long term solutions without any obligation or risk of retaliation. 

Rogen K. Chhabra

For a free consultation to weigh your options and see if you really are being treated properly as they tell you that you are, contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com.

THE ECONOMIC PAIN CONTINUES DUE TO VW’S DECEPTION

As discussed last week, lost in the chaos about Volkswagen’s deception in fooling regulators about the emissions of its “clean” diesel engines is the very real economic damages of used car dealers who purchased VWs for resale.  Those small businesses are now left holding the bag because of VW’s deception. The same is true for branded VW dealers who have hundreds of thousands of dollars — if not millions — in inventory that now can’t be sold.

Having to hold that inventory causes serious economic harm to dealers.  That is because there is a daily cost for holding pre-owned inventory on a used car lot and used cars lose their value while sitting on a used car lot for an extended period of time. Profit margins for used cars begin to dramatically decline after the vehicles are on a lot for more than 30 days. Further, there are costs incurred in holding vehicles in inventory.  The same is true for new vehicles, sitting on branded VW dealers’ lots.

Those small business owners might need to buckle in for a long ride.  This morning, Volkswagen announced that it will launch a massive recall in January of the VW cars that have been affected by this scandal.  Evidently, a software update might be sufficient for most cars, but other vehicles might require new fuel injection equipment and catalytic converters.

VW said that the recall won’t begin until at least the new year and only after German authorities have approved the company’s plans to fix the cars.  And even when it starts, VW does not believe that it will be completed until the end of 2016.

So small business owners — used car dealers and VW branded dealers — are looking at several more months — if not a year — until a real fix is instituted and the economic pain caused by VW’s deception can begin to subside.

If you or a loved one have purchased any of these vehicles, please contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com . You deserve to be compensated. It doesn’t cost you anything to call and talk to an attorney to see what options you have.

Small Business Owners Affected By VW’s Deception

Lost in the chaos about Volkswagen’s deception in fooling regulators about the emissions of its “clean” diesel engines are the very real economic damages of a certain group of small businesses.

Among the effected are used car dealers who are left holding the bag because of Volkswagen’s deception. That is because those small business owners made economic decisions for their businesses, unaware of VW’s deception.

The economic impacts are clear.  There is a daily cost for holding pre-owned inventory on a used car lot and used cars lose their value while sitting on a used car lot for an extended period of time. Profit margins for used cars begin to dramatically decline after the vehicles are on a lot for more than 30 days. Further, there are costs incurred in holding vehicles in inventory. Formulas can be used by dealers to determine the “Days in Stock Break – Even Point” which identifies the number of days a vehicle can remain in the used vehicle inventory before profitability on that vehicle hits a “break-even point.” Cars that cannot be sold in a certain time period or at a profit are wholesaled at auction or sold to another dealer.

Automotive dealers either pay cash or use debt to finance used vehicle inventory. Regardless of which avenue a dealer uses, each day a car sits unsold on a dealer’s lot, there is a daily cost associated with holding that car.

Most dealerships have a low threshold for adversity; liquidity and cash positions are affected very quickly. For example, having $200,000.00 in cash tied up in ten to twelve recalled vehicles that can’t be sold can cripple a dealership. Dealers that rely on debt  to finance their dealership have even a higher risk and less ability to withstand hardship because payments to reduce the principal amount must be made on the balance of the unsold inventory. A dealership should not have any more money tied-up in inventory than is absolutely necessary. This is why dealers will sell vehicles to other dealers, even if they have to do so at a loss. Doing so eases cash considerations even though the vehicle did not make a profit. Excess inventory levels have negative consequences on cash flow and, consequently, on the ability to meet the cash demands of an ongoing business.

Because of Volkswagen’s Stop Sales Orders, used car dealers were forced to pull popular models from their lots and have not even had the opportunity to sell the vehicles subject to the recall to the public, other dealers or auto auction houses. Thus, dealers’ money has been tied up in inventory with no chance of a foreseeable return. If in debt on the vehicle,  the dealers have carried interest and other costs associated with holding the cars during the pendency of the recall. If the inventory was financed with cash, dealers are unable to realize a financial return on the cash tied up in the unsold Volkswagen inventory. Automotive auction houses have, likewise, been forced to carry expenses on vehicles subject to the Stop Sale Order. Finally, there is now a stigma associated with Volkswagen vehicles and the values of the vehicles have dropped. All of these damages have been caused by Volkswagen’s deceptive actions.

These small business owners, like consumers, are affected by Volkswagen’s deceptive acts and deserve compensation for their economic losses.

If you or a loved one have purchased any of these vehicles, please contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com . You deserve to be compensated. It doesn’t cost you anything to call and talk to an attorney to see what options you have.

The Volkswagen Emission Deception

Recently, Volkswagen owners learned they were the victims of a deception. While many of these owners took pride in investing in vehicles believed to be equipped with some of the most environmentally-friendly technology, known as “clean diesel,” for which they paid thousands of dollars, these drivers instead learned that VW had done nothing more than engineer its vehicles to cheat on environmental tests.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, an investigation into VW vehicles was launched in 2014 to assess compliance with the Clean Air Act by VW diesel light duty vehicles model years 2009 to 2015. Questions had been raised after a study revealed that in the lab, VW vehicles complied with federal emission standards, yet road tests indicated the cars actually emitted nitrogen oxide over 40 times the federal limits.

VW has now admitted to installing software known as a “defeat device” in over 400,000 of its vehicles. This software can detect when emission testing is being performed and then activates countermeasures to reduce emissions. When the vehicles are not being tested, this emission-reducing technology is disabled, leading to the drastic rise in pollution levels.

For more than a year, VW deceived the EPA, telling regulators that the discrepancy between lab and road tests could be explained by “various technical issues and unexpected in-use conditions.” It was not until the EPA threatened not to approve VW’s 2016 line of diesel cars that the automaker decided to come clean and admit to its massive deceit.

Aside from its admission of guilt, VW has now halted sales of its diesel vehicles in the U.S. However, this is only the start of what will surely be a long road to recovery for the auto giant. According to EPA regulations, the company could be fined $37,500 for each car sold with a defeat device — a potential fine of $18 billion.

And aside from the regulatory penalties, consumers should be compensated for this deception.

The VW vehicles affected include:

2009 VW Jetta, VW Jetta Sportwagen

2010 VW Golf, VW Jetta, VW Jetta Sportwagen, Audi A3

2011 VW Golf, VW Jetta, VW Jetta Sportwagen, Audi A3

2012 VW Beetle, VW Beetle Convertible, VW Golf, VW Jetta, VW Jetta Sportwagen, VW Passat, Audi A3

2013 VW Beetle, VW Beetle Convertible, VW Golf, VW Jetta, VW Jetta Sportwagen, VW Passat, Audi A3

2014 VW Beetle, VW Beetle Convertible, VW Golf, VW Jetta, VW Jetta Sportwagen, VW Passat, Audi A3

VW Beetle, VW Beetle Convertible, VW Golf, VW Golf Sportwagen, VW Jetta, VW Passat, Audi A3

If you or a loved one have purchased any of these vehicles, please contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com . You deserve to be compensated. It doesn’t cost you anything to call and talk to an attorney to see what options you have.

Xarelto

Xarelto is linked to serious side effects, including the potential risk of bleeding. In the first quarter of 2013, the number of reported adverse events associated with Xarelto surpassed Pradaxa, another new oral anticoagulant, which had previously ranked as the No. 1 reported drug for adverse events in 2012. As a result, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration changed its boxed warning on Xarelto in March 2014.

Legal cases involving this powerful anticoagulant drug marketed as a blood thinner can be very complicated. That’s why it’s critical you have an experienced Xarelto injury lawyer on your side. Don’t let pharmaceutical companies dictate what happens to you. Contact us. Our attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A. can help you get the legal assistance you need.

What are serious side effects due to Xarelto?

Bayer AG created and marketed Xarelto primarily as a blood thinner. Unfortunately, this powerful drug has many dangerous side effects, including:
·         Major/Serious Bleeding
·         Brain Hemorrhaging
·         Gastrointestinal Bleeding
·         Urinary Tract Bleeding
·         Adrenal Bleeding
·         Pulmonary Embolisms
·         Stroke
·         Spinal/Epidural Hematomas
·         Fatal/Uncontrolled Bleeding
·         Thrombosis

How do you know if you or a loved one is suffering from serious side effects from Xarelto?  Some of the most common symptoms due to Xarelto exposure include nose bleeds, vomiting blood, headaches, dizziness, fainting, fatigue, red or brown urine, hypotension, unexplained swelling and muscle weakness.

What should I do if I am suffering from side effects due to Xarelto?

Don’t underestimate the seriousness of your symptoms. If you believe you or a loved one is a victim of Xarelto, we strongly urge you to take the following steps:

Seek immediate medical attention – Don’t take chances with your health. Visit an emergency room or your own doctor now. Serious health problems due to Xarelto can be life threatening.

Gather evidence – The more information you have about your health issues caused by Xarelto, the better off you will be if you need to file a Xarelto lawsuit. That way, if an insurance company or pharmaceutical manufacturer raises doubts, you’ll have proof of your medical issue. Evidence can include such things as photographs of health issues, copies of medical records and prescriptions, and a timeline or journal of when and what you notice about your health.

You might think you don’t need a lawyer. If you or a loved one is suffering from serious side effects due to Xarelto, you might think you can deal directly with insurance companies or Bayer HealthCare AG and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, which markets Xarelto in the United States.

Don’t be so sure. In most cases, most insurance companies and multi-national drug manufacturers only care about one thing – paying injury victims as little as possible. Make sure you have an attorney you can trust looking out for your best interests in your product liability case.

Don’t let large corporations dictate what happens to you. Take back control. Contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com . We might be able to help you receive compensation allowed by law for damages or injuries. It doesn’t cost you anything to call and talk to an attorney to see what options you have.

$635,325 Judgment in Lincoln County Wrongful Death Bench Trial

Recently, Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A. gained another major victory on behalf of one of our clients. Philip W. Thomas, from the MS Litigation Review blog site, made a recent blog article explaining the outcome of the case:

$635,325 Judgment in Lincoln County Wrongful Death Bench Trial

On July 23, 2015 Circuit Court Judge David Strong entered a $635,325 judgment in McCrory v. Lincoln County School District. The judgment resulted from a tort claims act bench trial in a case involving a car-school bus wreck.

The accident happened in 2011. The decedent, Tammy Jo Brown was traveling on a road in Wesson when she collided with a Lincoln County school bus traveling in the opposite direction. The school bus was two feet over the center line at the time of the collision. Brown died at the scene.

Brown was speeding: 68 mph in a 20 mph zone before the collision and 52 mph at the time of the collision. The school bus was also speeding: 35 mph. The bus driver saw the car approaching from two hills away, yet didn’t get into her own lane. The bus driver also didn’t show up for the trial.

The Court apportioned 90% fault to the bus driver and 10% fault to Brown. The Court assessed damages as $205,917 in economic damages and $500,000 in loss of society and companionship.

Due to Brown’s 10% fault, the damages were reduced and judgment entered in the amount of $635,325.

Defendant’s top offer to settle before trial was $230,000. 

      

Darryl Gibbs of Chhabra & Gibbs in Jackson represented the plaintiff. Bobby Thompson with Copeland Cook in Ridgeland represented the County.

If you or a loved one have experienced any type of injury or death due to someone else’s negligence, please contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com . We might be able to help you receive compensation allowed by law for damages or injuries. It doesn’t cost you anything to call and talk to an attorney to see what options you have.

Job Applicant’s Knee Injury Was Compensable

Recently, Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A.  gained a major victory on behalf of our Workers Compensation client.  Sherri Okamoto, from the WorkCompCentral website made a recent news article explaining the outcome of the case:

Job applicants who are required to undergo pre-employment testing can get workers' compensation benefits if they get hurt during the process, according to the Mississippi Court of Appeals.

The court ruled in a decision handed down July 21 that Kevin Collins had an “implied contract of hire” with Averitt Express when he injured his knee during his "road test." Thus, the court said Collins was an Averitt "employee," even though he flunked the test and he didn't get the truck driver position he had sought.

The case was Averitt Express v. Collins, No. 2014-WC-00936-COA.

Averitt, an international transportation and freight logistics company, offered Collins a job three years ago, contingent on his successful completion of a physical, a drug screen and a road test.

Collins came to Averitt's facility in Cookeville, Tennessee, for his road test and his new-hire orientation. As part of the test, Collins had to physically enter and exit the rear of a trailer in a specific manner. He tore a meniscus while trying.

Averitt then rescinded the job offer, based on his failure to pass the requirements of the road test. It still paid him a per diem of $75 for coming to the orientation, and $238.68 for his mileage.

Although Averitt referred him to a doctor, Collins paid for his own treatment.

Collins later filed a workers' compensation petition, which Averitt contested on the basis that Collins never became its employee.

However, Administrative Judge Tammy Harthcock determined that Collins was an "employee" pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated Section 71-3- 3(d), even though he never got the truck driver position with Averitt.

The Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission agreed, as did the Court of Appeals.

Last Tuesday, the court explained that Section 71-3- 3(d) defines an “employee” as “any person . . . in the service of an employer under any contract of hire or apprenticeship, written or oral, express or implied."

For a "contract of hire" to exist, the court said, there generally must be "mutual consent, consideration, and right of control." Although these elements are not rigidly applied in workers' compensation cases, the court found these elements were all present for Collins and Averitt.

Mutual consent is defined as a "meeting of the minds of both parties to a contract," the court said.

Since Collins applied for the job and came to the test and orientation, the court said he clearly intended to accept the offer of employment.

And since Averitt extended the offer and welcomed him to the company, the court said, it appeared "Averitt had every intention of hiring him" once he passed the road-test requirements.

The court further reasoned that Averitt had provided consideration to Collins, even though he was never on the company payroll, since he was compensated for attending the orientation and for his mileage.

Averitt also benefited from Collins' coming to participate in the road test, because it helped Averitt carry out its business of hiring truck drivers, the court said.

The court went on to note that Averitt "clearly controlled the road-test environment" – directing not only Collins' activities, but also dictating his grooming and manner of dress.

As such, the court said substantial evidence supported the Commission's decision to uphold the award of benefits to Collins.

Rogen K. Chhabra of Chhabra & Gibbs represented Collins, along with Darryl Gibbs, Candace Mayberry, Ashley Hendricks and Seth Thompson.

Chhabra said he thought last week's decision was simply a restatement of the existing law in Mississippi for determining when a worker qualifies as an "employee."

He said the important distinction to make was that Averitt never formally hired Collins as a truck driver, but it "hired him for the initial job of participating in the application process" to get that truck driver position.

As Averitt was having people come to try out for the truck driver job, directing them in what to do and compensating them for their time, Chhabra said Averitt was basically "employing them as (job) applicants." He acknowledged that most industries "don't have such an intense application process that they have to pay people to come participate in it," but "for those industries that need it, they need to know that they are going to have to consider these people employees."

The law in Mississippi is clear, Chhabra said, "if you are controlled and compensated by an employer, you are an employee, period."

He said he wouldn't be at all surprised if Averitt appealed Tuesday's decision, although he said the statistical odds of the Supreme Court granting review are slim. In any event, he said he believed "Averitt's argument that (Collins) wasn't an employee is just not tenable under Mississippi law," and he doubted it would fly in any other state either.

Thompson, who is now part of Maggio & Thompson, handled much of the case up until it reached the Court of Appeals.

Thompson said Monday he expected Averitt to seek review by the Supreme Court, and if it does, he predicted his colleagues from the Chhabra firm "will probably win there too."

While there is no "bright-line rule" for determining the compensability of injuries during the hiring process, and cases are "entirely fact-driven," the Collins case boils down to the fact that "in Mississippi there are three qualifications to be an employee, and he satisfied them," Thompson said.

"This may not have been your typical employment situation," Thompson allowed, "for purposes of Mississippi workers' compensation, this was employment."

Martin W. Zummach and Gregory Morton of Sparkman-Zummach represented Averitt. They could not be reached Monday for comment.

Inventure Foods and Listeria

Inventure Foods is recalling dozens of frozen-vegetable products as well as Jamba brand smoothie kits from large supermarkets and retail centers in several states, including Mississippi according to a U.S. Food and Drug Administration email alert distributed this morning.

The voluntary recall by Inventure Foods, Inc. affects dozens of varieties of the company’s “Fresh Frozen” line of frozen vegetables as well as select varieties of its Jamba “At Home” line of smoothie kits because of the detection of Listeria monocytogenes bacteria during routine testing in the company’s production facility in Jefferson, Georgia.

To view a list of the specific products recalled, go to www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls.

No known illnesses linked to consumption of Fresh Frozen frozen vegetables or Jamba “At Home” smoothies have been reported to date, and no listeria has been detected in the products themselves, but the company issued the recall notice because of the detected presence of the bacteria in the production facility.

Listeria can cause infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and others with weakened immune systems, the FDA said. Healthy people may suffer only short-term symptoms such as high fever, severe headache, stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea, but a listeria infection can cause miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant women.

Inventure Foods urged those who purchased recalled product to destroy the contents and its package and notify the company to obtain a refund.

If you’ve been injured or hurt due to consuming “Fresh Frozen” line of vegetables or Jamba “At Home” smoothies that have been recalled, please contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com . We might be able to help you receive compensation allowed by law for damages or injuries. It doesn’t cost you anything to call and talk to an attorney to see what options you have.

Blue Bell Ice Cream and Listeria

There have been three different recalls in the last month pertaining to Listeria contamination. Blue Bell has now begun to recall more ice cream due to pints of banana pudding ice cream testing positive for listeriosis. The contaminated ice cream came from the Broken Arrow, Oklahoma plant which serves a variety of supermarkets throughout several states, including Mississippi, according to Blue Bell.

More and more products are being recalled from Blue Bell Creameries, as 3 of the 8 people hospitalized for Listeria have already. For a complete list of the recalls, take a look here.

Blue Bell Creameries are not the only Listeria contamination recall this week; Sabra Hummus has also had some of their product test positive for the food-borne illness as well.

If you have consumed Blue Bell Ice Cream on the recall list and then become ill, contact your physician, and then contact Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A.  Also, keep the ice cream in your possession but store them in a location where they will not be consumed by anyone.

If you’ve been injured or hurt due to consuming Blue Bell Ice Cream that has been recalled, please contact the attorneys at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A., at 601-948-8005 or by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com . We might be able to help you receive compensation allowed by law for damages or injuries. It doesn’t cost you anything to call and talk to an attorney to see what options you have.

I Want to Speak to the Attorney

Every day, we get calls where a client insists on speaking to an attorney.  Sometimes they are new potential clients and sometimes, they have been a client for a long time.  We strive to return every call every day and make our attorneys as accessible as possible.  But where you find good lawyers, you find very busy lawyers.  And where lawyers are busy, efficiency matters.  So when is it ever appropriate to call and demand that an attorney get on the phone?

Perhaps an analogy is appropriate here.  Do you ever call up the doctor’s office and demand to speak to the doctor right now?  Do you ever walk in and demand to see him immediately?  Have you ever seen a doctor without some person that works for him take your vital signs and triage you?  Lawyers, the good ones that are busy, don’t work any different than doctors.  The job of the lawyer is to diagnose and treat the legal problem.  To diagnose each problem, he or she needs some basic information.  And every second spent getting basic information that the lawyer’s staff is paid to obtain, is a second less that the lawyer can concentrate on hearings, trials, depositions, and other important “treatment” for the solution.

So next time you call a lawyer’s office, instead of saying “I want to talk to a lawyer now,” perhaps you would actually get quicker diagnosis and treatment, if you would allow the lawyer’s office to work as efficiently as it is designed to do, and allow the assistant, receptionist, or paralegal to get the basic needed information so that an efficient solution can be provided.  

California woman wins $28 million against Kaiser Permanente

A young California woman who lost her leg and won a $28.2 million lawsuit against Kaiser Permanente said Thursday she hopes the verdict will bring reform against the managed care giant and empower patients to question their treatment.

“I truly hope that this is going to make a change in health care reform,” said Anna Rahm, a 23-year-old Cal State Northridge student.

“However, I know that it takes so much advocacy and so much passion,” she said. “We went into this with an initiative hoping that no matter the outcome, we wanted to get our story out there for everyone to be able to relate to and to learn from.”

A jury on Wednesday found that Kaiser Permanente was liable for mishandling Rahm’s medical treatment, resulting in the loss of her right leg, half of her pelvis and parts of her spine. The jury awarded Rahm the $28.2 million for future medical expenses, future loss of earnings, and pain and suffering after a four-week trial in Los Angeles Superior Court, according to her attorneys.

In response to the verdict, Kaiser issued a statement Thursday saying it was evaluating the outcome of the case.

“Although we understand the jury’s findings and wish only the best for Ms. Rahm, highly respected medical experts testified that the medical care provided was appropriate,” according to the statement. “We will be evaluating in the days ahead how best to respond to this verdict.”

Rahm was 16 years old when she began experiencing lower back pain. A chiropractor urged her to see her physician for an MRI. But according to court documents, her physician, Dr. Charlene Huang, who specializes in adolescent health at Kaiser Permanente Woodland Hills, told Rahm and her mother, Lynnette, she could not authorize the test. Rahm was referred to another physician, Dr. Ngan Vuong, who according to court documents noted that the young woman was experiencing pain down her leg and was unable to sleep. Instead of a diagnostic test, Vuong prescribed an epidermal injection and antidepressant, according to court documents.

Between March and June of 2009, Rahm’s family repeatedly requested an MRI from their treating physicians but both doctors refused to order any diagnostic exams. The complaint also said physicians failed to document the MRI request in the medical records.

Neither physician has had administrative penalties issued against them, according to licensing information by the California Medical Board.

When Kaiser Permanente agreed and the MRI was done on July 2, 2009, it revealed that Rahm had an aggressive tumor mass in her pelvis known as osteosarcoma. Rahm underwent chemotherapy, then surgeries lasting a total of 22 hours which resulted in the loss of her right leg.

Rahm’s attorneys said Kaiser Permanente’s refusal to give her an MRI not only resulted in the loss of her leg, but also was an example of medical negligence. Her attorneys said the physicians’ refusal to authorize the MRI was an example of Kaiser trying to keep costs low.

One of Rahm’s attorneys, Michael Bidart, said he hopes the verdict will change the way Kaiser provides health care to its members.

“The hope is that they will allow their doctors to do prompt imaging and diagnosis without having an institutional bias against getting MRI,” Bidart said. “There are a lot of good doctors at Kaiser, including the surgeon who did a magnificent job on her.”

But the same surgeon could have done more to help her, had the MRI been done earlier, Bidart said.

Bidart also noted this is one of the few cases of its kind involving Kaiser to be presented in front of a jury.

“We were able to avoid arbitration,” Bidart said. “When juries are able to see this, they are offended.”

For Rahm and her family, the verdict helped to cast light on an injustice.

“In our minds and in our hearts, it was important for justice to be done.” Lynnette Rahm said. “We felt she had been wronged. Monetarily, it could never be corrected. For years and years, Kaiser had been telling us, ‘We’ve done everything right.’ This was the greatest verdict of all.”

She agreed that after the MRI detected cancer, her daughter received great care at Kaiser.

“The doctors who came afterward were wonderful,” Lynnette Rahm said. “They saved her life. We love them. It goes to show we’re not against Kaiser or against all doctors. We’re against doctors who don’t do their jobs.”

Now that the trial is behind her, Anna Rahm said she plans to continue pursuing her degree at CSUN in child and adolescent development. She said she already visits children and teens who are hospitalized and frightened.

“When I ended up surviving cancer, I felt I needed to help children in the hospital, because I was helped after my diagnosis,” said Rahm, who has been cancer-free since 2010. “I felt as though it was important for me to give back. I just feel I know they benefit from what I’m giving to them and I can benefit from what they are giving me.”

If you or a loved one have become victim to medical negligence, contact Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A. today by going to http://www.cglawms.com or by calling 601-948-8005 for a free consultation.

How To Prep For Workers Compensation

The reality tv show “Doomsday Preppers” is about families who are preparing for the end of the world.  Everyday ordinary people who believe that life as we know it will end due to earthquakes, nuclear war or cyber-warfare, or some other disaster.  What’s remarkable is that the preppers are prepared for catastrophes that may or may not ever happen. 

We can learn from the preppers.  Maybe we don’t need to prepare for global earthquakes, but the way preppers know exactly what to do in moments of crisis is something positive we can all apply in our own lives.

At Chhabra and Gibbs, we regularly meet people during their times of crisis and it is our privilege to represent them.  But, like the preppers, it is important to know what to do before a crisis ever occurs.

If you are involved in an accident at your workplace or feel any pain while you are working, the first thing you should do is report it to your boss.  Tell your supervisor or your boss that you’ve been hurt—even if it was your own fault, even if it seems minor.

Accident = Tell your boss.  Even if you don’t think you’ve been injured in the accident = Tell your boss.

Sometimes a worker will be performing everyday ordinary tasks at their job and they will feel pain somewhere in their body. 

Pain = Tell your boss.

After you’ve reported your injury, seek medical treatment.  You have a legal right to medical treatment. We will work with you throughout your treatment process to get you the care and compensation that you deserve.

Do not quit or resign from your job.  If your doctor has taken you off work or given you light or medium duty, abide by your doctor’s instructions.  If your employer refuses to accommodate your restrictions, you should still continue to abide by the restrictions your doctor has given you.

If your doctor has cleared you to work and you do not have a job, search for a job.  This is good for your life and good for your claim.

If you feel that you have a workers' compensation claim, contact Chhabra and Gibbs, P.A. today for a free consultation by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com or by calling 601.948.8005.

The Workers’ Compensation System Is Broken And It’s Driving People Into Poverty

There’s a good news & bad news situation for occupational injuries in the United States: Fewer people are getting hurt on the job. But those who do are getting less help.

That’s according to a couple of important new reports on how the system for cleaning up workplace accidents is broken -- both because of the changing circumstances of the people who are getting injured, and the disintegration of programs that are supposed to pay for them.

The first comes from the Department of Labor, which aims to tie the 3 million workplace injuries reported per year -- the number is actually much higher, because many workers fear raising the issue with their employers -- into the ongoing national conversation about inequality. In an overview of research on the topic, the agency finds that low-wage workers have disproportionately high injury rates, and that injuries can slice 15 percent off a person’s earnings over 10 years after the accident.

There are two main components to the financial implications of a workplace injury. The first is the legal status of the people getting injured. A staggering number of workers in the construction industry are misclassified as independent contractors, which means they’re not entitled to workers' compensation payments. Also, more of them are employees of temporary staffing agencies, who tend to be less well-trained and less likely to report their injuries. Businesses will often contract out their most dangerous work, which allows them to keep their own workers' compensation premiums to a minimum.

The second component is the degradation of workers' compensation programs themselves. That issue is addressed by the second report out Wednesday, from ProPublica and NPR, which looks at how employers have lobbied states to get out of paying as much as they used to in workers' compensation, leaving injured workers with inadequate treatment.

Since 2003, the investigation found, 33 states have weakened their workers' compensation regulations, scaling back the procedures that will be covered and the duration for which benefits are offered. In addition, while businesses often push for reforms on the grounds that workers' compensation costs are out of control, data shows that premiums are lower than they’ve been at any point since the early 1990s.

Somebody ends up paying for those injuries, though: taxpayers. When a worker ends up unable to work because of an injury, he or she can be covered by Social Security Disability Insurance, a program that has steadily increased in cost over the past two decades. The rise has many demographic factors behind it, but it looks like the abdication of responsibility by employers may have played a role as well.

The Department of Labor has tried to tackle the misclassification problem -- which contributes to unsafe workplaces, and prevents those who are injured from getting help -- by aggressively pursuing employers abusing the system. But there’s not much they can do about the decline in workers' compensation coverage. That’s something states are going to address themselves -- over employers’ strong objections.

Has your employer been ignoring your workers’ compensation case? Are you having problems getting your paychecks or receiving medical treatment after you’ve been injured in a work-related accident? It might be time to hire a good Mississippi workers’ compensation lawyer to fight for you. If you feel that you have a workers’ compensation claim, contact Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A. today by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com or calling 601-948-8005. 

Ashley Furniture faces $1.76M in fines after OSHA finds more than 1,000 worker injuries

In a three-and-a-half year period, 4,500 employees at Ashley Furniture Industries Inc., in Arcadia, Wisconsin experienced more than 1,000 work-related injuries. One worker became another terrible statistic when he lost three fingers in July 2014 while operating a dangerous woodworking machine without required safety mechanisms in place. Of the injuries recorded, more than 100 were caused by similar machinery.

After the incident, the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration conducted an inspection of the facility. Investigators identified 12 willful, 12 repeated and 14 serious safety violations at Ashley Furniture's Arcadia location, carrying a total of $1,766,000 in penalties. The company has also been placed in the Severe Violator Enforcement Program for failure to address these safety hazards. OSHA previously cited the Arcadia facility in 2014 after an employee suffered a partial finger amputation.

"Ashley Furniture has created a culture that values production and profit over worker safety, and employees are paying the price," said U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez. "Safety and profits are not an ‘either, or' proposition. Successful companies across this nation have both."

Dr. David Michaels, the assistant secretary of labor of occupational safety and health, said, "Ashley Furniture intentionally and willfully disregarded OSHA standards and its own corporate safety manuals to encourage workers to increase productivity and meet deadlines. The company apparently blamed the victims for their own injuries, but there is clear evidence that injuries were caused by the unsafe conditions created by the company. OSHA is committed to making sure that the total disregard Ashley Furniture has shown to safety stops here and now."

Forbes lists Ashley Furniture Industries, a furniture manufacturer with worldwide distribution, as the 117th largest private company in America. With annual revenue of $3.85 billion as of October 2014, the company employs about 20,000 workers at 30 locations nationally. The Arcadia plant is also the largest employer in Wisconsin's rural Trempealeau County, with a population of about 30,000.

The 12 willful and 12 repeated violations were cited after OSHA found that the company did not take the necessary steps to protect its workers from being injured by moving machine parts. It did not prevent machines from unintentionally starting when workers were performing tooling and blade changes on woodworking machinery, and also failed to provide adequate safety mechanisms to prevent contact with those moving parts. These types of violations are among the most frequently cited by OSHA and often result in death or permanent disability.

A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law's requirement, or with plain indifference to employee safety and health. OSHA issues repeated violations if an employer previously was cited for the same or a similar violation of any standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years.

OSHA also cited Ashley Furniture Industries for 14 serious violations, including not training workers on safety procedures and hazards present when servicing machinery. The company also lacked adequate drenching facilities for workers exposed to corrosive materials; it committed three electrical safety violations, and it did not equip some of its machines with readily-accessible emergency stop buttons.

An OSHA violation is serious if death or serious physical harm can result from a hazard an employer knew or should have known exists.

Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc., has had 33 federal OSHA inspections and 23 state plan inspections since 1982. In its 33 previous inspections, OSHA issued citations for 96 serious, four repeat and 38 other-than-serious violations. Four inspections were initiated as a result of finger amputations, with Arcadia's 2014 incident being the most recent.

If you or a loved one have experienced any type of injury or death while working for Ashley Furniture or any other employer that has violated OSHA guidelines, contact Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A. by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com  or calling 601-948-8005.

Xarelto Leads to Bleeding Injury or Death

As a result of the drug makers’ failure to adequately warn about the risks associated with the anticoagulant, financial compensation may be available through a Xarelto lawsuit for individuals who have experienced:

• Internal Bleeding or Gastrointestinal Bleeding
• Brain Hemorrhage
• Hemorrhagic Stroke
• Wrongful Death from Bleeding Problems

To review whether you, a friend or family member may have a Xarelto case against the drug makers, request a free consultation today.

Xarelto Bleeding Problems

Xarelto was introduced in 2011, as a joint product developed by Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen Pharmaceuticals subsidiary and Bayer Health Care.

The anticoagulant has been used by millions of Americans to reduce the risk of stroke, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism and other blood clot injuries. It has been prescribed to individuals with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, following knee and hip replacement surgery and to prevent recurrence of clots.

While all blood thinners carry a risk of internal bleeding, Xarelto appears to be associated with a much greater risk than the manufacturers indicated in warnings provided for consumers and the medical community.

In many cases, Xarelto bleeding problems cannot be controlled by physicians, due to the lack of an approved reversal agent.

Johnson & Johnson and Bayer promoted Xarelto as a superior alternative to warfarin, which has been the go-to anticoagulation therapy for decades.

Although the manufacturers have indicated that the newer drug requires less frequent monitoring than warfarin, increasing evidence suggests that blood monitoring on Xarelto may reduce the bleeding risk. In addition, it appears that information was withheld about the lack of an effective Xarelto reversal agent to stop bleeding problems that may develop.

While doctors are able to reverse the effects of warfarin quickly if bleeding occurs, Xarelto bleeding is often uncontrollable, increasing the risk of serious injury or death.

Xarelto warnings fail to properly address the increased risk for these serious and fatal bleeding problems, despite a substantial number of adverse event reports and other findings suggesting that individuals taking Xarelto have more gastrointestinal bleeds and need more transfusions.

In addition to the inadequate warnings, Xarelto does not appear to provide sufficient benefits to justify the additional risks. Therefore, many lawsuits allege that a Xarelto recall should be issued, claiming that the medication is unreasonably dangerous and defective without an effective reversal agent.

Allegations in Lawsuits over Xarelto

Claims raised in the Xarelto litigation are similar to many of the allegations brought against Boehringer Ingelheim over their related anticoagulant, Pradaxa.

Following the filing of thousands of lawsuits over failure to warn about the risk of bleeding problems with Pradaxa, Boehringer Ingelheim agreed to pay more than $650 million in mid-2014 to resolve the litigation. Similar compensation may be available through Xarelto settlements, as it appears that Bayer and Johnson & Johnson also withheld important safety information about their drug.

Among the allegations raised in Xarelto injury lawsuits being pursued by individuals nationwide, plaintiffs claim Johnson & Johnson and Bayer:

• Failed to provide accurate warnings about the risk of Xarelto bleeds;
• Withheld information about the lack of an effective Xarelto reversal agent;
• Engaged in aggressive marketing that encouraged doctors to use the more expensive and more dangerous drug;
• Sold an unreasonably dangerous and defective drug as it was initially formulated;
• Failed to update warnings, issue a “Dear Doctor” letter or issue a Xarelto recall after it became clear that a large number of users were suffering severe and life-threatening injuries from uncontrollable bleeding.

Rather than withdrawing Xarelto from the market or taking steps to ensure accurate information was provided for consumers and the medical community, Johnson & Johnson and Bayer continued to promote the medication as safe and effective, causing millions of additional Americans to be exposed to a risk of serious injury.

The lawyers at Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A. are reviewing individual bleeding injury claims and potential Xarelto class action lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson and Bayer.

The makers of Xarelto appear to have placed their desire for profits before consumer’s safety, by failing to properly research the risk of bleeds on Xarelto or provide adequate information about the serious and potentially life-threatening health problems that may be caused by use of Xarelto.

For families of individuals who died as a result of these bleeding problems, damages may be available through a Xarelto wrongful death lawsuit.

The drug makers stand to generate substantial profits due to their decision to provide inaccurate and incomplete warnings. Xarelto has been estimated to be the 19th best-selling drug in the world by 2018, with sales expected to reach $3.7 billion per year.

Rather than allowing the drug makers to benefit from this behavior, lawsuits over Xarelto bleeding problems seek to hold the pharmaceutical companies responsible for injuries suffered by former users. In addition, pursuing Xarelto litigation may also prevent similar behavior in the drug industry.

If you or a loved one have been affected by the drug Xarelto, contact Chhabra & Gibbs, P.A. today for a free consultation by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com  or calling 601-948-8005.

Takata Airbag Class Action Lawsuit

A class action lawsuit has been filed in federal court alleging that Japanese auto supplier Takata Corporation supplied Honda, GM, Toyota, BMW, Chrysler, Ford, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru, and Mazda car manufacturers with potentially defective airbags that may rupture on activation, spraying shrapnel at drivers and passengers. The lawsuit has been brought against Takata, as well as a host of auto manufacturers whose vehicles may contain the potentially defective airbags.

Nearly 8 million vehicles equipped with the airbags have been recalled in parts of the United States. The number of recalled vehicles may continue to rise as reports of injuries and deaths resulting from exploding airbags continue to surface, some as recently as October. To date, the alleged defect has been linked to four deaths and over 140 injuries in the U.S.

According to the New York Times, the recalled airbags allegedly rupture, causing them to explode when activated. The rupturing has been linked to the propellant inside the airbag’s metal inflator, which is intended to burn slowly, causing the airbag to inflate on impact. In extreme circumstances, the allegedly faulty propellant burns aggressively, causing the inflator to explode and shoot metal fragments through the airbag’s fabric at drivers and passengers.

The class action lawsuit follows an investigation into Takata airbags launched by the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration in June. The NHTSA issued a Consumer Advisory on October 22, 2014, urging owners of potentially affected vehicles to “act immediately on recall notices to replace defective Takata airbags.” According to the Advisory, reports of injuries and death allegedly resulting from Takata airbags date back to early 2013.

According to a New York Times September investigative report, Honda learned of the alleged defect in 2004, when an airbag exploded in a Honda Accord in Alabama. The report states that what Honda deemed an “anomaly” soon mushroomed into a series of recalls, the first of which took place in 2008, when Honda recalled approximately 4,200 vehicles potentially containing defective airbags. The NY Times report also states that incident reports continued to be filed with Honda, and alludes to the fact that questions remain as to how these incidents were in turn reported to the NHTSA and other federal auto regulators. To date, Honda has issued nine recalls concerning the Takata airbags in Honda and Acura vehicles. Of the approximately 8 million vehicles recalled, about 5 million are Honda vehicles.

In connection with its ongoing investigation, the NHTSA has requested that Honda, Ford, Chrysler, BMW, Mitsubishi, Mazda, Nissan, and Toyota participate in voluntary field service actions, or regional recalls. According to correspondence sent to the NHTSA from these automakers, though each has agreed to conduct the field service actions, none have stated that a defect exists in any of the recalled vehicles. The regional recalls require automakers to recall certain model year vehicles registered in Florida, areas near the Gulf of Mexico and Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Louisiana, and Hawaii, as well as Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and Saipan.

According to the NHTSA, these regions are of particular concern to Takata and the automakers, as high humidity and resulting moisture may damage the ammonium nitrate compounds inside the airbags’ inflators, which may cause them to rupture.  The NY Times reports that Takata has been unable to pinpoint the precise cause of the defect, and that the company has put forth several explanations for the explosions, including poor oversight of manufacturing plants in Mexico and Washington state.

According to the NY Times, with the number of recalled vehicles already at 7.8 million and rising, supply of replacement airbags cannot meet consumers’ demand. The October NY Times article goes on to state that carmakers, unwilling to provide loner cars except in extreme circumstances, are finding solutions that U.S. Senators have deemed “troubling, dangerous,” and potentially illegal. Toyota has taken to disabling airbags in the absence of replacements, and they are advising against using the passenger seat in recalled vehicles altogether, the NY Times reports.

Are you concerned your vehicle may be included among the recalled vehicles? If so, the NHTSA suggests visiting the car manufacturer’s website, using your VIN number to check the NHTSA or the other electronic databases, and responding to any communications directly from the manufacturer.

According to the NHTSA, the following vehicles may be a part of the Takata airbag recalls:

BMW: 627,615 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2000 – 2005 3 Series Sedan

2000 – 2006 3 Series Coupe

2000 – 2005 3 Series Sports Wagon

2000 – 2006 3 Series Convertible

2001 – 2006 M3 Coupe

2001 – 2006 M3 Convertible

Chrysler: 371,309 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2003 – 2008 Dodge Ram 1500

2005 – 2008 Dodge Ram 2500

2006 – 2008 Dodge Ram 3500

2006 – 2008 Dodge Ram 4500

2008 – Dodge Ram 5500

2005 – 2008 Dodge Durango

2005 – 2008 Dodge Dakota

2005 – 2008 Chrysler 300

2007 – 2008 Chrysler Aspen

Ford: 58,669 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2004 – Ranger

2005 – 2006 GT

2005 – 2007 Mustang

General Motors: undetermined total number of potentially affected vehicles

2003 – 2005 Pontiac Vibe

2005 – Saab 9-2X

Honda: 5,051,364 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2001 – 2007 Honda Accord)

2001 – 2002 Honda Accord

2001 – 2005 Honda Civic

2002 – 2006 Honda CR-V

2003 – 2011 Honda Element

2002 – 2004 Honda Odyssey

2003 – 2007 Honda Pilot

2006 – Honda Ridgeline

2003 – 2006 Acura MDX

2002 – 2003 Acura TL/CL

2005 – Acura RL

Mazda: 64,872 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2003 – 2007 Mazda6

2006 – 2007 MazdaSpeed6

2004 – 2008 Mazda RX-8

2004 – 2005 MPV

2004 – B-Series Truck

Mitsubishi: 11,985 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2004 – 2005 Lancer

2006 – 2007 Raider

Nissan: 694,626 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2001 – 2003 Nissan Maxima

2001 – 2004 Nissan Pathfinder

2002 – 2004 Nissan Sentra

2001 – 2004 Infiniti I30/I35

2002 – 2003 Infiniti QX4

2003 – 2005 Infiniti FX35/FX45

Subaru: 17,516 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2003 – 2005 Baja

2003 – 2005 Legacy

2003 – 2005 Outback

2004 – 2005 Impreza

Toyota: 877,000 total number of potentially affected vehicles

2002 – 2005 Lexus SC

2002 – 2005 Toyota Corolla

2003 – 2005 Toyota Corolla Matrix

2002 – 2005 Toyota Sequoia

2003 – 2005 Toyota Tundra

For more information concerning the Takata airbag recalls, contact Chhabra & Gibbs today for a free consultation by going to our website at http://www.cglawms.com  or calling 601-948-8005.