Nashville Personal Injury Lawyer

Recent Nashville Accident Deaths Reminds Us to Drive Safely

George Fusner — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:15:30 GMT

Two recent accidents in Nashville remind us of the importance of driver safety. In the first accident, William McGuire, 23, was killed when riding as a passenger in a vehicle driven by a friend. The driver, Samantha Johnson, was driving eastbound on Harding Place in heavy rain when her vehicle hydroplaned. She lost control of the vehicle and struck a pole. McGuire was pronounced dead. The police noted that the tires on the vehicle were extremely worn. No word on whether the road was flooded, or whether the sole reason for the vehicle hydroplaning was the condition of the tires.

In another accident, a mid-teen passenger was killed when her vehicle struck a tractor. The 18-year-old driver reported that she was cut off by another vehicle, causing her to swerve off the road and strike the mower. Amazingly, the operator of the mower was not injured. There’s no report as to whether the deceased passenger was wearing her seatbelt.

Let this be a reminder to all those on the road:

1) Always, always, always wear your seatbelt.

2) Make sure your tires are in good condition! Tires are one of the single most vital parts of your vehicle. Don’t forget the “penny” test to determine if your tires need to be replaced. And not all tires are created equal, some are more safe than others. Check out Tire Rack for tire reviews, or talk to a trusted technician to find out what tire is best for your environment.

3) Be aware of your surroundings! Based solely off the second accident’s report, if the teenage driver was aware of a mower on the side of the road, maybe she would have braked rather than swerved.

Also, a common problem in accident litigation is the difficulty of reconstructing an accident when the vehicles are destroyed. It’s important that if your vehicle is involved in an accident, and is “totaled,” that you seek representation immediately. If necessary, the attorney should have the vehicle preserved for as long as necessary to create an accurate recount of the events leading up to the accident. Sometimes, vehicles are destroyed before such due diligence is performed.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Brentwood Tennessee SUV Fire

George Fusner — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:25:18 GMT

Chanel Five News reports an SUV fire in Brentwood last night. Fortunately no one was injuried. Its hard to tell from the picture what is the make of the vehicle. However, if it is a GM product there are some ironic twists to the story.

If the owners have comprehensive insurance coverage on the vehicle the insurance company will then have to pay the actual cash value. Couch on Insurance defines actual cash value as:

In the great majority of cases, the limitation to “actual cash value” is expressed in the following terms: The insurer will not be liable beyond the actual cash value of the property at the time any loss or damage occurs, and the loss or damage must be ascertained or estimated according to such actual cash value, with proper deduction for depreciation, however caused, and will in no event exceed what it would then cost the insured to repair or replace the same with material of like kind and quality.

Then the insurance company would pursue a subrogation claim against the responsible party to recover its loss. If it was caused by a defect in the vehicle and the SUV was still under warranty, GM would pick up the tab with our governments backing.

Now the ironic part. If the fire had seriously injuried somebody or burned them to death guess what? NO recovery under the current government sponsored bankruptcy plan. Read this great post for a good explanation of what is happening.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Tennessee Auto Insurance 103 (Med Pay Coverage)

George Fusner — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:50:54 GMT

In this part of the ongoing Tennessee automotive insurance series, I’ll go over medical payments coverage, and some of the less than fair tactics insurance companies will use to limit an accident victim’s recovery.

Medical payments coverage, often called “MedPay” (as I refer to it) or “personal insurance protection,” will pay for health services required as a result of an accident without regard to fault. The coverage “follows the vehicle,” meaning anyone in the insured vehicle is covered under the insured vehicle’s policy. Coverage usually extends to:

§ Policyholder
§ Policyholder’s relatives in the same household

Passengers
Other authorized drivers
Policyholder and family members if they are injured while riding in someone else’s car or as a pedestrian when struck by another vehicle. (in some states)

There are limits, though. MedPay will only cover what is deemed “reasonable” for the situation, and coverage is limited to things directly resulting from an accident. Additionally, something many people don’t know (because insurance companies don’t make this clear to them) is that if you are injured in another person’s vehicle that also has MedPay coverage, any amount you receive from their MedPay coverage limits your ability to recover from your own MedPay coverage. In other words, if you are injured in someone else’s vehicle, any money your own MedPay coverage pays you will have to be paid back if you are fully compensated under the vehicle owner’s coverage.

There is no legal requirement in Tennessee to have MedPay coverage, but is a worthwhile investment. The premiums are extremely low in relation to the coverage. Thousands of dollars of coverage can be had for only a few dollars a month. Even for those with health insurance, MedPay coverage covers injuries not covered under most health insurance plans. For example, many health insurance policies don’t cover a visit to a chiropractor, and are in the least reluctant to cover soft tissue issues, whereas MedPay covers these types of health care. The health insurance companies limit early treatment when often early diagnoistic treatment can be very healpful.

Even with MedPay coverage, getting your insurance company to pay the medical bills resulting from an accident will not always be easy. Something I see often in my practice is accident victims being delayed by their insurance company in receiving an MRI. My clients often complain of soft tissue damage resulting from an accident. While some soft tissue damage is readily observable, such as open wounds and bruising, some extremely painful and debilitating soft tissue damage (such as whiplash) is only detectable by an MRI. My clients often find their insurance company is unwilling to order an MRI, or delay the MRI for an arbitrary reason. The real reason behind this delay, though, is to decrease the accuracy of the MRI and decrease the chance the MRI will detect the damage appropriately. This could potentially limit the victim’s ability to claim whiplash or other soft tissue damage related pain and suffering.

It is important to talk to an attorney in any accident resulting in pain and suffering or injury. Accidents are often unfamiliar territory for victims, who aren’t aware of the tactics utilized by insurance companies.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Gunfights In Nashville Bars

George Fusner — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:19:00 GMT

The front page of todays Tennessean headlines a story that Nashville bar owners plan to ban holders of a Tennessee Handgun Carry Permit from entering their establishment with their weapons. Much talk about a fictional problem. Before continuing, and to be transparent as our President likes to say, I am a long time holder of a Tennessee Handgun Carry Permit, a life time member of the NRA, a lifetime member of Safari Club International, an avid hunter, member of the Tennessee Association for Justice (formerly the Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association) and a member of the American Association for Justice. I consider myself a personal injury lawyer who only represents plaintiffs.

As such I would be approached by an individual wishing to sue someone or some bar if they were shot in a bar by a person carrying a gun with a Tennessee Handgun Carry Permit. Would I take the case. Probably not. Are these cases winnable? Probably not in Tennessee. The bar owners are quoted as being fearful of the liability. A little hypocritical would you say from someone who sells alcohol and then watches their patrons drive away under the influence.

Some background on the issue is necessary. Tennessee is known as a "shall issue" state. That is if the applicant meets the requirements of the Handgun Carry Permit statute, the Department of Safety MUST issue the permit. That statute is TCA 39-17-1351. It requires among other things that the applicant must have taken a course that includes both classroom study and range time to establish that the applicant can safely use a handgun. Tennessee's requirements are some of the strictess in the nation. Its permit is widely accepted in many states as a result of the training requirements. As a matter of fact only 15 states do not honor Tennessee's permit. Look at this list compiled by the Tennessee Department of Safety. Another good source is this website.

That training is what will cause the courts to throw out these cases. The basic defense is that the carrying of the pistol or allowing the carry in the bar is NOT the proximate cause of the injury. Several years ago a tragic event occurred in Memphis. An underage youth was an avid hunter. He had a number of guns and had received training in shooting and safe gun handling. He had taken a Hunter safety course when he was in the sixth grade. Although under age he purchased ammo illegally for his 44 magnum hunting revolver. One night he heard a noise outside the patio door. He shot through the door an killed one of his friends. A lawsuit was brought against the owners of the gun store that had sold the minor the ammo. The Tennessee Court of Appeals held that as a matter of law the store was not responsible. It stated:

Under the uncontroverted facts in the instant case, defendant's sale of the ammunition to Cannon, at most, created a condition by which the unfortunate incident was made possible. The direct and proximate cause of the incident was the action of Cannon in firing a gun at a supposed intruder.

I believe this is exactly what would happen in the bar case. It is not the action or inaction of the bar owner letting a patron carry. The injury by shooting would be the firing of the handgun by the permit holder.

Now for a little practical advice. As a permit holder what am I doing in the bar? If I am carrying I am not drinking. Why? Its illegal and a Class A Misdemeanor. Check out TCA 39-17-1321. It says:

Notwithstanding whether a person has a permit issued pursuant to § 39-17-1315 or § 39-17-1351, it is an offense for a person to possess a handgun while under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance.

(b) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

If I am drinking I am not carrying. No not even one drink.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Tennessee Auto Insurance 102 (Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Coverage)

George Fusner — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:17:54 GMT

In the previous article, I talked about liability insurance in Tennessee in detail, but only briefly mentioned uninsured motorist (“UM”) and underinsured motorist (“UIM”) coverage. This blog post will be about UM and UIM coverage more specifically.

Unlike liability insurance, which pays for damages by accidents where you are at fault, UM/UIM coverage protects you (“the insured”) by paying (up to the UM/UIM coverage policy limit) for damages such as medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, property damage, and other losses when you are injuried by a person who cannot afford to pay and does not have liability insurance. There is a relatively small distinction between UM and UIM coverage. UM coverage protects the insured party when a driver at fault whom causes an accident does not have insurance, and cannot pay for the injury or property damage. UIM coverage protects the insured party when a driver at fault has insurance, but their policy is not enough to pay for all of the damages.

In a perfect world, everyone would have adequate coverage. However, the reality is, many motorists opt for the cheapest insurance premium available. This means the only minimal coverage for these motorists on the road. In Tennessee, the legislature recently revised section 55-12-102, Tennessee Code, to increase the minimum liability insurance:

(D) (i) If proof is required after December 31, 2008, proof means:

(a) A written proof of liability insurance coverage provided by a single limit policy with a limit of not less than sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) applicable to one (1) accident;

(b) A split-limit policy with a limit of not less than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) for bodily injury to or death of one (1) person, not less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for bodily injury to or death of two (2) or more persons in any one (1) accident, and not less than fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) for damage to property in any one (1) accident;

Even though Tennessee has upped the total liability coverage minimum to $60,000 this past year, this amount of coverage is almost always inadequate for anything but the most minor of accidents. As a practical matter the most liability policies are split limit with ONLY $25,000 in liability limits. This amount would certainly not be enough to cover moderate to severe injuries let alone death. This is where UIM coverage kicks in. For example, let’s say a driver hits your vehicle, and is 100% at fault. The damage costs you $100,000 in combined property and personal injury damages, but the other driver only has the Tennessee required minimum of $25,000 in coverage. UIM coverage would pay you $75,000 or the UM/UIM policy limit, whichever is less.

An even worse scenario than an underinsured motorist is an uninsured motorist. In 2007, 1 in 5 motorists in Tennessee did not have insurance. And unfortunately, that statistic is getting worse every day. Numerous reports, such as the recent Insurance Research Council news report, predict an increase in the number of uninsured motorists with the economic downturn. And naturally those who can’t afford insurance would more than likely not be able to pay for an accident which they are at fault for.

To reiterate an important point from the previous lesson – the UM coverage limit cannot exceed liability coverage. So if you have a $100,000 in liability coverage, you’re only allowed to buy up to $100,000 in UM coverage. You can trust yourself to be a safe, defensive driver, but can you trust others on the road? UM coverage is a very worthy investment, because quite simply it helps protect you.

In summary: without UM/UIM coverage, the insured party may be left with a stack of bills and a judgment against a party who cannot pay. This should be more than enough reason to talk with your insurance agent about increasing your UM/UIM coverage. If you have any questions, please contact me via phone or e-mail and I’ll be happy to help.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Flammable Bath Robes Recalled

George Fusner — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:25:57 GMT

The CPSC posted a recall of bath robes that catch fire. It stated "

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and Blair LLC, of Warren, Pa., are re-announcing the voluntary recall by Blair of 162,000 women’s full length Chenille Robes. Since the recall was originally announced in April 2009, Blair has received reports of six deaths due to the robes catching on fire. Five of the six victims were female, and all five were cooking at the time of the incidents. Three of the victims were in their 80s.

It also recommended that "

CPSC and Blair once again urge consumers to stop wearing the garments immediately and contact Blair LLC for information on returning the robe and to receive a refund or a $50 gift card for Blair merchandise. Contact Blair toll-free at (877) 392-7095 between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. ET Monday through Saturday, visit the firm’s Web site at www.blair.com/recall, or contact the firm by e-mail at blairproductrecall@blair.com

However, DO NOT follow that advice if you or a loved on has been burned by this defective product. You will need the original robe to pursue any claims for injuries.

This type of case is called a products liability case. In Tennessee you have only one year from the date of the injury to file suit. Tennessee's product liability statute states:

"A manufacturer or seller of a product shall not be liable for any injury to a person or property caused by the product unless the product is determined to be in a defective condition or unreasonably dangerous at the time it left the control of the manufacturer or seller.

Were these robes in a defective or unreasonably dangerous condition when they left the manufacturer? Absolutely.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Personal Injury Myths

George Fusner — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 06:00:00 GMT

MYTH: If you write the insurance company a letter and are reasonable, you will get a reasonable settlement proposal.

THE FACTS: The insurance company will "low ball" you. Guaranteed!!!

MYTH: When you are in an accident and the insurance company for the responsible party calls you to ask for a recorded statement, you have to give them a recorded statement or they won’t settle with you.

THE FACTS: You have no obligation to give a recorded statement. Just say no. Get an attorney first. NEVER EVER give any information to the insurance company about either the accident or your injuries without first consulting a qualified attorney. Just last week I was negotiating a settlement for a client. I spoke with the adjuster. He said well your client told me right after the accident (before he hired me) he had no injuries. I asked "what exactly did he say?" The adjuster paused pulled up his notes and said "I asked him how he was doing and he said "fine." A good Southern polite response. Fortunately the client had just been to the Doctor and the medical records and x-rays confirmed injuries from the accident.

MYTH: All lawyers who advertise that they handle accident cases have the same ability, tools and experience to handle your case.

THE FACTS: All lawyers are different. They went to different law schools, handled different cases, numbers of cases, studied the law differently, tried different numbers of cases, or maybe never tried a case. Ask the Big TV advertising lawyers (I bet you can't see them personally) the last time they saw the inside of a courtroom.

MYTH: The insurance company for the person who hit you is obligated to pay your medical bills as they are incurred.

THE FACTS: The medical bills are only one item of your damages. They won't pay them so you won't seek medical treatment. Then they tell the jury you could not have possibly been injured since you didn't even go to the Doctor.

MYTH: All lawyers charge the same fees in injury cases.

THE FACTS: In most personal injury cases all lawyers will charge a fee on a contingency basis. That is if they do not make a recovery there is no fee. Different cases demand different fees. For instance products liablity cases are very expensive an often a forty percent fee is charged. What is really important is the expenses. Some lawyers will charge you for the case expenses even if they make no recovery. Some even make you pay as you go. I advance all expenses on a contingency basis. If I don't make a recovery for you you pay no expenses.

MYTH:The tort liability system is some sort of lottery that will help you get rich.

THE FACTS: No lawsuit will get you rich. Its hard work for both the client and lawyer. Hundreds of hours are worked and thousands of dollars are spent. Some juries will only give you your medical bills.

MYTH: Just because there has been a wreck and it wasn’t your fault, there must be some insurance company that will pay for your bills, lost wages and injuries.

THE FACTS: Often there is no insurance. Did you protect yourself and have uninsured motorist coverage on your car? See my blog at http://nashville.injuryboard.com/automobile-accidents/tennessee-auto-insurance-basics-.aspx?googleid=260732. for more info. The insurance industry is predicting more cars will have no insurance as the recession progresses. It stated: "

MYTH: If a lawyer refers you to a doctor, that is a good idea.

THE FACTS: Often the kiss of death for your case. Recently, I had a potential client contact me after one of the big TV advertisers refused to go forward with his case when the insurance company refused to settle a clear liability case. When I looked at the file the lawyers had hooked him up with a Doctor. The Doctors bills and EOB (Explanation of Benefits) showed the lawyer as being the responsible party. The Doctor ran up charges of over $50,000. The insurance company refused to pay anything since the charges were so outrageous. Was the client hurt? Yes. However, the lawyer by referring the client to a Doctor killed the case. Now the real bad part. The Doctor then sued the client for the bills.

MYTH: Juries in Tennessee are generous.

THE FACTS: Tennessee juries will be fair but not generous in most cases. It all depends on the case, injuries and client. If they like you they will treat you fairly. If you lie or they don't like you look out!

I hope this helps.

Approximately one in six drivers across the United States may be driving uninsured by 2010, according to a recent study from Insurance Research Council (IRC). Although the estimated percentage of uninsured motorists decreased nationally, from 14.9 percent in 2003 to 13.8 percent in 2007, the recent economic downturn is expected to trigger a sharp rise in the uninsured motorist rate.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Tips For Hiring A Personal Injury Lawyer

George Fusner — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:16:53 GMT

Here are some factors and good points to look for and question your attorney about. Note that not every attorney will meet all of these criteria, but the significant absence of the following should be a big question mark.

• Experience – obviously, the longer you have been practicing a particular area of the law, the more you will know. Experience is a big factor in most cases.

• Experience actually trying or mediating cases — ask the attorney how many cases he has actually tried or mediated. When was the last time he was in court for any matter? Has he or she achieved any significant verdicts or settlements? Does he have a list of verdicts and settlements available that you can look at? Don’t accept the “All my cases are confidential” line! Has he ever appeared before the Court of Appeals or the Tennessee Supreme Court? The greater your number of cases actually tried or mediated and substantial verdicts and settlements achieved, the more likely the insurance companies will respect you. If he has appeared before the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court that is an indication that he will “really” fight for you. Past results are not a guarantee of the future but past results do demonstrate some level of experience and success.

• Respect in the legal community—does the attorney teach other lawyers in Continuing Legal Education courses?

• Continuing Legal Education—The Tennessee Supreme Court requires every lawyer in Tennessee to take a minimum of 15 hours of CLE each year. Ask how many hours the lawyer took last year. What subject matters were covered? Even the most experienced lawyers need CLE to keep current. I have found that the best and highly respected lawyers nationwide attend more CLE than they are required just to learn, get better, and network with other lawyers specializing in the same areas of the law.

• Membership in Trial Lawyer Associations. In our area, you can certainly find a lawyer who is a member of the Tennessee Association for Justice(TAJ), or American Association for Justice (AAJ). These organizations provide extensive education and networking for trial lawyers representing injured individuals.

• Publications—has your attorney written anything that has been accepted for publication in legal journals? This is another sign of respect that the legal community has for his or her skills and experience.

Ask the attorney if he or she is licensed in the state where your case will be filed. We believe that an attorney who is not licensed in the state where the case will be filed is at a disadvantage when it comes to negotiating with the insurance company. The insurance companies know who is not licensed and thus cannot actually try the case. We also recently ran across a horror story involving an out—of—state attorney who evaluated a Tennessee tractor trailer case. This attorney kept the file for over one year and gave it back to the client after the the statute of limitations expired in Tennessee. The problem was that the attorney told the client that he had one more year to file his case, but this was based on the statute of limitations in his own state. The client was then unable to file his case in Tennessee.

Lastly, will the attorney you are meeting with personally handle your case?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Taser Officers Found Not Liable

George Fusner — Tue, 19 May 2009 15:25:08 GMT

The Tennessean this morning reported the verdict in the tragic death of a 21 year old who was tasered 19 times by Metro Officers. I will not be lengthy in this post since I know the defense lawyer John M.L. Brown very well. He an I went to law school together at Vanderbilt University, have tried cases together, shared an office, and he has given me a bunch of fire arms training.

The jury found for the officers involved and absolved them of all responsibility. I Only represent Plaintiffs who are injured and have done so for over 30 years. This kind of case is know as a excess force case whose liability is founded on 42 USC 1983. It states

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.

The case is premised on depriving the injured person of their due process rights by the police officers taking the law into their own hands and causing the injury or death. What is extremely difficult in proving these cases for the Plaintiff is the issue of causation. Did the use of the taser cause the death? Further was the force excessive under the circumstances? I don't know the answers, however, the jury did find for the officers.

Once again the jury system worked. The survivors of the deceased had their day in court. The officers had their say. The jurors made a determination. There is no reason to change the system. What if it had been your son? Would you want your day in court? Of course. Sometimes you win and other times you loose. The so called tort reformers would want you to believe this is a frivolous case and should not have been brought. Bunk. Leave the system alone. It an't broke so don't try to fix it.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

I-40 McCrory Lane Death Due to DUI

George Fusner — Thu, 07 May 2009 11:59:18 GMT

News Channel 2 and the Tennessean reported the death of a young woman on Interstate 40 at McCrory Lane early Wednesday Morning May 6, 2009. According to the reports a man from Centerville named Ian McClellan was driving the wrong way on the interstate and hit the car driven by Katie Kerr of White Bluff head on. She died at the scene.

Guess what? Alcohol was involved. The reports are that Mr. McClellan started drinking at 3PM on Tuesday in Spring Hill. What day was Tuesday? Cinco de Mayo day which literally means May 5. Any excuse for a drinking holiday.

Who is responsible for Katie's death? First and foremost its Mr. McClellan. How much insurance does Mr. McClellan have to compensate Ms. Kerr"s heirs? I don't know, but I doubt very much. Now the lawyer part.

Ms Kerr's heirs are entitled to recover an array of damages for her death. If I am right and Mr. McClellan has little or no insurance were do they turn. First, to the parties that served or sold the alcohol. In Tennessee we have a Dram Shop Act. It is codified at Section 57-10-101 and 102. It says:

Notwithstanding the provisions of § 57-10-101, no judge or jury may pronounce a judgment awarding damages to or on behalf of any party who has suffered personal injury or death against any person who has sold any alcoholic beverage or beer, unless such jury of twelve (12) persons has first ascertained beyond a reasonable doubt that the sale by such person of the alcoholic beverage or beer was the proximate cause of the personal injury or death sustained and that such person:

(1) Sold the alcoholic beverage or beer to a person known to be under the age of twenty-one (21) years and such person caused the personal injury or death as the direct result of the consumption of the alcoholic beverage or beer so sold; or

(2) Sold the alcoholic beverage or beer to an obviously intoxicated person and such person caused the personal injury or death as the direct result of the consumption of the alcoholic beverage or beer so sold.

Thus to have a recovery against a person over 21 you must prove that the alcohol was sold or served to an "obviously" intoxicated person. That may seem easy, but is not. First the investigation must start sooner rather than later before memories fail. Were was he drinking, who was there, what did the bartender see? Then the tough part, the heirs must prove their case "beyond a reasonable doubt." Wait thats a criminal standard for convicting someone of a crime. Yeap, but that is the standard in this civil matter. If it was a regular car wreck the Plaintiff has to prove its case by a "preponderance" of the evidence which means that the fact is probably true. That is a much lower burden that "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Who was the legislature protecting when they passed the law? NOT the ordinary people for sure.

What else can the family do? Investigate signage. The Channel 2 report mentions 3 other head on crashes for wrong way driving on the Interstates around Nashville in the recent months. Often the entrances are poorly marked. Look at the one at I-40 at 96 close to this tragedy? How about the ramps at Exit 172 in Dickson? The State may bear some responsibility as well.

The best advice is to hire an experienced attorney now.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by George Fusner

Notwithstanding whether a person has a permit issued pursuant to § 39-17-1315 or § 39-17-1351, it is an offense for a person to possess a handgun while under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance.



		(b) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

Notwithstanding the provisions of § 57-10-101, no judge or jury may pronounce a judgment awarding damages to or on behalf of any party who has suffered personal injury or death against any person who has sold any alcoholic beverage or beer, unless such jury of twelve (12) persons has first ascertained beyond a reasonable doubt that the sale by such person of the alcoholic beverage or beer was the proximate cause of the personal injury or death sustained and that such person:



		(1) Sold the alcoholic beverage or beer to a person known to be under the age of twenty-one (21) years and such person caused the personal injury or death as the direct result of the consumption of the alcoholic beverage or beer so sold; or



		(2) Sold the alcoholic beverage or beer to an obviously intoxicated person and such person caused the personal injury or death as the direct result of the consumption of the alcoholic beverage or beer so sold.