Talk about teen driver safety this holiday season

Teens are much more likely to be involved in car crashses than older drivers. As reported here, there are seven things parents can do to keep their teens safe this holiday season. The suggestions include:

1. Sit with your son or daughter before and after he or she earns a driver’s permit or license. Discuss the dangers involved, and have a frank conversation about the consequences-those you will impose and those a judge will impose.

2. Get in the car and observe your child’s driving. The CDC recommends providing 30 to 50 hours of supervised driving practice forat least six months after a teen gets his or her license. Teach your young driver how to handle a vehicle in different weather conditions and under changing traffic circumstances.

3. Sign a written agreement that details all the rights and privileges, as well as consequences, your teen will be subject to in exchange for the car keys. The CDC has a useful template on its website.

4. Consider prohibiting nighttime driving, or at least set a driving curfew of 10 p.m. at the latest.

5. Restrict the number of passengers to one or none.

6. Take away the keys if you even suspect your child has been drinking and driving.

7. Take away the cell phone if your child has been calling or texting while driving.

Happy and safe holiday greetings from the Chaney Law Firm!

IP litigation humor

Probably my favorite thing about being an intellectual property lawyer is that I’ve actually heard of most of the things I read about in cases. Off the top of my head, there are important, recent patent cases about Microsoft’s Word product and eBay’s Buy-It-Now feature. Famous trademark cases involve the Burger King franchise vs. a Burger King mom-and-pop shop on the East Coast, McDonald’s famous name, John Deere’s green tractors, and Pink Panther insulation. The Supreme Court once heard a copyright case involving a profane 2 Live Crew parody of a Roy Orbison’s “Oh, Pretty Woman.”

So, I had to laugh this morning when I saw that a patent and trademark lawsuit was filed earlier this week over the Shake Weight®, which has been mercilessly parodied on Saturday Night Live, South Park, The Daily Show, and others. But, while the subject matter may be funny, these IP cases are big business. The Shake Weight® owner is trying to protect a $6M investment in its advertising, which is being poached upon by competitors.

Our IP laws permit innovators to insulate themselves from certain types of competition. Patents protect implementations of new ideas; design patents protect product configurations; trademarks protect brands and other indicators of source; and copyrights protect artistic expressions. These laws are important because they represent the only way for individuals and businesses to protect the investment into research and development, production, advertising, and other business-related costs. The primary purpose of the IP laws is to allow innovators to recoup their investment into bringing new products to market. Yes, even the Shake Weight®.

Chaney Law Firm fights for the right of independent counsel for insurance policyholders

The Chaney Law Firm recently filed a brief with the Arkansas Court of Appeals advocating for the right of insurance policyholders to be represented by independent lawyers. The brief follows the Chaney Law Firm’s successful opposition to an insurance company’s attempt to employ its own lawyer to represent a policyholder, as reported here earlier this year.

The Chaney Law Firm is asking the Arkansas Court of Appeals to uphold the trial court’s ruling that the inurance company’s practice constitutes the unauthorized practice of law, and creates an impermissible conflict of interest for the insurance company’s lawyer. Aside from the legal argument that corporations cannot practice law for others in our state, the brief argues that the insurance company lawyer cannot give his client undivided fidelity when, at the same time, he must answer to his superiors at his insurance company.

This case is just one example of the way the Chaney Law Firm fights for the rights of individual Arkansans every day. In this situation, we are trying to make sure that policyholders get an unbiased attorney so those policyholders get the full benefit of the bargain out of their insurance policies. Without an independent lawyer, the policyholder faces greater odds of being dragged through the court system for years as an innocent pawn, or winding up with a judgment against their personal assets. Insurance is for both economic and emotional security, yet too often policyholders have to fight desparately to get the benefits to which they are entitled.

The Chaney Law Firm’s argument also seeks to uphold the professional independence of lawyers, even for lawyers who are afraid to represent themselves. Since many law firms represent insurance companies, they are afraid to take a stand on this important issue for fear of being blackballed by those insurance companies and losing future business. Even lawyers need other lawyers to stand up for their rights, and the Chaney Law Firm is proud to be doing just that.

Presentation by ABC Director Michael Langley

Michael Langley, the Director of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division for the State of Arkansas, came to Arkadelphia Town Hall today for a short presentation and a long question-and-answer session with a packed house of local residents. The high points included:

• the number of liquor stores in Clark County (5 or 6, depending on the 2010 census that will be released in late December)
• the application process for liquor stores (at least 4–5 months, and the selection process for the 5–6 stores is a public, random drawing)
• the number of beer and wine only outlets in the county (unlimited)
• the different types of applications available for wet counties (35)
• the amount of taxes the city can pass on alcohol sales (5%, all of which comes back to the city)
• limitations on hours of operation (controlled by state law, but can be further limited by local ordinance)
• signage limitations (locally regulated)

Director Langley informed the group that the ABC’s primary job  is to raise revenue for the State of Arkansas through regulation, and  his division wants businesses to be successful. He gave tons of  practical advice on how businesses could satisfy the ABC’s concerns. He also encouraged outlets selling alcohol to be good neighbors by policing their own operations, working with local law enforcement, and giving back to the community.

One of the most interesting things Director Langley had to say was that the ABC and other economic development groups are trying to change the law with respect to “liquor by the drink” local option elections. These groups believe the current law is prohibitive to economic development. As the law currently stands, a separate election would have to be held in Clark County as early as next summer in order for restaurants to sell mixed drinks (like margaritas) in restaurants. The new legislation, which could be considered by the Legislature in January, would repeal this requirement and would make it less expensive for restaurants to obtain liquor.

Thanks to Director Langley for making the trip down to Clark County, and to Arkadelphia Town Hall for hosting the meeting!

Little progress made in ensuring patient safety

A decade after the National Institute of Medicine's landmark study on patient injury resulting from medical treatment, little progess has been made, according to a recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine. The article reports that "[d]espite enhanced attention on patient safety following the 1999  Institute of Medicine report on medical errors, 'the penetration of  evidence-based safety practices has been quite modest.'" One evidence-based safety practice is the use of electronic medical records, but just 1.5% of hospitals have adopted new electronic recordkeeping technology.

The most frightening aspect of this report is, perhaps, the conclusion that 63% of the patient injuries were preventable. We would be interested to know how hospitals treated those preventable patient injuries — that is, did the hospitals do right by their patients and fix what they could, help what couldn't be fixed, and make up for what couldn't be helped?