While the law cannot change what happened, the law does provide that upon proof of liability a victim of another’s negligence or intentional act is entitled to an award of money that represents fair compensation for the individual’s damages and loss. The damages that an individual is entitled to receive includes compensation for out of pocket expenses, loss of income or future loss of earnings capacity, all past and future medical expenses, plus compensation for noneconomic losses such as loss of life’s pleasures, pain and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, disfigurement, etc. It is the focus of the Bill Jorden Litigation Team lawyers to obtain for you the money damages that the law entitles you to. Most often, this involves a contest with a major insurance company or corporation with deep pockets, and many attorneys at their disposal.

For over 40 years, we have successfully represented our clients in such contests and have secured, either by settlement or verdict, money to compensate them for their losses and to greatly improve their quality of life. When the lawyers of Bill Jorden Litigation Team agree to undertake a personal injury case, they also agree not to receive a fee or obtain reimbursement of advanced costs until and unless money damages are recovered. This is referred to as a contingency fee. For more information, click here to go to the “Fees / Contingency” section.

The lawyers of Bill Jorden Litigation Team Law Firm have long offered prospective clients a free case review. This evaluation is without obligation to retain the firm of Bill Jorden Litigation Team, even if we should determine that your case does have merit. Part of the free case review includes an evaluation of the extent of your damages and how much you might expect to receive by way of verdict or settlement. If you would like to have a free consult, please click here to fill out an online form.

We can help you with cases involving:

• Medical expenses
• Income loss
• Loss of earning capacity
• Pain and suffering
• Loss of life’s pleasures
• Emotional distress
• Disfigurement/scarring

A Look at The Pennsylvania Oil & Gas Industry

The Marcellus Shale gas formation is thought to be one of the largest reserves of natural gas in the United States, if not in the world.  It spans from northwest Virginia across much of Pennsylvania and into New York State.  From southwest Pennsylvania to Northeast Pennsylvania, its depth is as much as 9,000 feet below the surface and near Lake Erie can be found as shallow as 20 feet below the surface.  The formation itself ranges from up to 250 feet, top to bottom, in locations in northeast Pennsylvania and as little as 10 feet, top to bottom, near the western Pennsylvania/Ohio boarder.

There are other gas producing formations in Pennsylvania besides the Marcellus Shale, which are either in production or being explored for production.  Gas and some amount of oil has been produced in western Pennsylvania from the Oriskany Sandstone Formation in significant quantities for over seventy years.  Towards the center of Pennsylvania test wells have been drilled into the Rhinestreet Formation, which is part of the upper Devonian Shale that sits in that location at about 1,000 feet above the Marcellus Strata.

There is also quite a bit of excitement in Western Pennsylvania, including Northwest Pennsylvania, concerning the gas potential offered by the Utica Formation, which is a shale oil formation lying deeper than the Marcellus Shale.

Pennsylvania has been a center for oil and gas production longer than Texas, the Middle East, or anywhere else in the world.  Oil and gas drilling and production activities started in Pennsylvania when Colonel Drake drilled the world’s first commercial oil well in Titusville, Pennsylvania.  With the advent of directional drilling, gas production from the Marcellus Shale and the potential for gas production from other formations, Pennsylvania is guaranteed to be a mega-center for oil and gas production long into the future.

As with the pursuit of black gold in Pennsylvania in the late 19^th Century and as it was with the California Gold Rush, and as it is today with the Marcellus Shale gas boom, the sudden rush of people and explosion of activities brings about dramatic events with both fortunes to be made and lives to be destroyed.  Injuries and accidents occur, landowner and contractor disputes arise, the environment is assaulted, large sums of money are to be made and lost, and the innocent and trusting become victims of the devious and predatory.

Those who have become victims in the rush to capture Pennsylvania’s natural gas and the money it represents will find themselves trying to find an attorney to protect their interests and bring them justice.  If you are one of these individuals, then the information that follows will be of help to you.

Choosing an Attorney to Represent You
When choosing an attorney, you should be asking yourself the following questions: Just what is the background of the attorney whose advertising or contact information I am responding to; what experience does he have in terms of how people work and think in the Pennsylvania oil and gas regions; What does the attorney bring to the table in terms of knowledge, experience, resources, skill, and determination.  Choosing the right attorney to represent you is not easy.  The attorney you choose can make a tremendous difference in the outcome of your case and even your life.  It is a decision that usually must be approached as though it was one of the most important decisions to be made in your life, which it could well be.

We at Jorden & White Law Firm, of course, would like you to consider and contact one of our attorneys to recover money damages for you and/or be your champion.  Attorney Bill Jorden, Attorney Harry F. White, II, and Attorney Matt Jorden are experienced trial lawyers with a strong background in all aspects of oil and gas drilling and production, and both personal injury and commercial litigation.  We would welcome the opportunity to consult with you and consider how we can help or serve you.

In the coming weeks, it is my intention to publish a series of blogs having to do with law and justice and your rights under Pennsylvania law in Pennsylvania’s oil and gas regions and the role of the attorney in your fight for justice.  Regardless of the attorney you choose to contact or the attorney you ultimately engage to represent you, it is my hope that the blogs posted to this website will be helpful for you in choosing the right attorney.

We hope the information contained in this, and blogs to follow, will give you an understanding of issues and factors that have to do with, or are a result of, activities surrounding gas production from the Marcellus Shale and other formations in Pennsylvania.  Should you need an attorney or have additional questions concerning on a topic not yet published, you can call Bill Jorden for an initial no fee phone consultation.

by William T. Jorden, Esquire

A verdict in Court award in the amount of $252,063.24, and full reinstatement of job status was obtained in a Federal Lawsuit filed by Attorney Bill Jorden on behalf of Clifford VanTassel. Clifford VanTassel worked as a maintenance manager for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. The Complaint set forth that VanTassel was fired in retaliation for blowing the whistle on a Department of Corrections Superintendent, for exuberant spending, without proper approval on the Superintendent’s state-owned residence. The award included back wages, interest, reimbursement of attorneys’ fees and costs. A jury verdict was returned on St. Patrick’s Day, 2005.

A One Million Dollar ($1,000,000.00) Settlement was reached in the case of a secret service officer who suffered lacerating injuries to his right hand. Angus Beck, originally of Meadville, suffered a severe laceration to his right hand from a falling hotel chandelier. As a result of the nerve damage, Beck was limited in his ability to fire a weapon or use a sidearm. Beck was represented by Attorney William T. Jorden and Joanna Hamill-Flum of the Philadelphia Law Firm of McDade, Flum and Bloom.

A policy limit settlement was obtained from the owners of property where a drinking party took place. After the party, a boy who consumed alcohol at the party lost control of his vehicle, striking a tree. A rear seat passenger in that vehicle suffered traumatic brain injury as a result of the accident. The passenger was represented by Attorney William T. Jorden. A child of the property owner had invited friends to the property, knowing that alcohol would be consumed. The complaint set forth facts that the property owner failed to act to protect the minor plaintiff, and were responsible for the tragic consequences of the drinking party that took place on their property.

by William T. Jorden, Esquire

The Commonwealth opened a snowmobile trail on State Gamelands No. 214 in Crawford County, but neglected to remove or guard a steel post holding the gate, or to open the gate. A snowmobiler operating at night time in a snowstorm, collided with the post and gate, sustaining serious injuries.

Represented by Attorney Bill Jorden, suit was filed against the Commonwealth for maintaining a defective and dangerous condition on their property.

The Commonwealth has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, claiming immunity from tort action, based on the Recreational Use of Land and Water Act, 68 PS §477-1.

“Pennsylvania has averaged about 64 cases for the past few years.” – Washington Post

Surgical errors such as wrong-site surgery are seemingly easy to prevent from the perspective of a patient and potential victim. According to the latest statistics reported by the Joint Commission, wrong-site surgery remains a problem across the nation although only half of the 50 states are required to report mistakes made in surgery. In a recent article published in the Washington Post, we learn more about the ongoing issue.

The Washington Post (6/20,Boodman) reports: “Based on state data, joint commission officials estimate that wrong site surgery occurs 40 times a week in US hospitals and clinics.”  In 2010 alone, “93 cases were reported to the accrediting organization, compared with 49 in 2004.”  The Post points out, “Attention to the problem comes at a time of increased focus on the broader issue of medical errors, which a recent health affair study found affected one-third of hospital patients.”  Recently “The federal government recently rolled out its Partnership for Patients Program aimed at reducing medical mistakes.”  While “Medicare requires reporting and does not pay for wrong-site surgery, and many insurers have followed suit.”  Next year, Medicaid will begin a similar policy.

Click here to read the full article.

A big part of our practice is helping people that have been affected by defective products. Product liability can be a very serious issue, as illustrated in the case outlined below.

While researching house fire cases, I came across the case of Michael Joseph v. Lakewood Engineering and Manufacturing Company as reported by L.S. Sherman of Complex Litigation Consultants. The case involved a Philadelphia house fire that killed 2 and severely injured a third, resulting in a settlement of more than 18 million dollars with the building’s landlord and the manufacturer of a portable heater believed to have caused the blaze.  After discovering the fire, 23 year old Shereece Joseph took her 7 month old brother, Malachi Monroe, and placed him on the porch before running back into the house to try to save her 3 year old brother, Mikael Monroe, and 9 month old daughter, Rhayanna, the plaintiff said.

Joseph and Mikael died in the fire, while Rhayanna suffered disfiguring burns to most of her body and a brain injury caused by lack of oxygen.  The plaintiffs alleged that the fire had been caused by a defective rotary switch on a Sun 1 Model Radiant Portable Electric Heater manufactured by the defendant, Lakewood.  The subject model heater had been recalled by the Consumer Product Safety Commission for a separate defect in 2004, but during recall Lakewood sent a letter to CPSC saying it had discovered that rotary “switches on the returned heaters showed signs of overheating…within the normal expected operating range.”  Robert Miller, Lakewood’s corporate designee, testified that the company did find an overheating defect in the Sun 1 heater’s switch during the products recall.  The plaintiffs said the switch on the subject heater was never recovered but the wires that lead to the switch showed signs of divots caused by extreme heat.  Additionally the switch on one of the Sun 1 heaters, provided by Lakewood for testing during the litigation, showed signs of electrical malfunctioning.  In addition, the remains of the heater recovered in the fire, as well as the heater provided by Lakewood, showed evidence of high temperature limit control, a safety device designed to cut off power if the heaters temperature rose dangerously – had been designed with a heat threshold that was too low, causing it to be activated repeatedly.  This action caused a brittle fracture to be sustained on the switch, one that occurs without any deformation of the surrounding material.  Lakewood denied that the switch was defective and offered the report of fire science expert Scott Barnhill, who determined that repeated use of a high pressure limit switch would not cause it to fail; nor would a brittle fracture.  Lakewood also said that Larry Sacco, their electrical engineering expert, represented that there was no material in the switch that could have started the fire.  Instead, according to Lakewood, Philadelphia Fire Marshall, Bordes Ramseur, concluded in his report that the fire had been caused by combustibles placed too close to the heater, but the plaintiffs said Ramseur testified during a deposition that he had never considered the possibility of a defect in the heater.  Lakewood alleged that the fire had started because the heater had been placed by clothes that had been hung over furniture.  The plaintiffs however said there was no evidence to support that claim.  Lakewood was represented by James W. Ozog of Wiedner and McAuliffe in Chicago.  Ozog said that the case was “vigorously contested and Lakewood was prepared to disprove all of the plaintiff’s allegations.”  “This settlement was paid because of the horrendous injuries and losses suffered by the Joseph family,” he added.

“It would have been extremely difficult to convince a jury to set aside their emotions and compassion given the injuries presented by the plaintiff.  According to the plaintiffs, Rhayanna is currently 5, but her mental abilities are that of a 12 to 20 month old.  She has undergone 20 surgeries, mostly related to her burns and will require constant care for the rest of her life.  The plaintiff’s life care planning expert, Terri Paterson, estimated the cost of Rhayanna’s future medical care at between $13.7 and $17.2 million dollars.  The plaintiffs also retained Dr. Wayne Ross, a Forensic Pathologist, who concluded that both Joseph and Mikael would have experienced severe conscious pain and suffering for several minutes before they died.  Malachi has suffered emotional distress due to the loss of his brother and sister and the guilt of being the only one who escaped without sustaining a physical injury.  The plaintiffs also brought a claim against Jacqueline Gordon, the landlord of the building, based on the fire marshal’s report that the building contained no smoke detectors.  Gordon settled out of the case “very early on in this litigation” for $25,000.00, the limits of her homeowners’ insurance coverage.  Lakewood went bankrupt during the litigation and the plaintiffs had to have the US Bankruptcy Court lift the stay to allow the case to proceed.  Following a day long mediation with Judge Diane M. Welsh of JAMS, Lakewood agreed to settle for $18.25 million.  Lakewood’s policy limits were 21 million, so the plaintiffs would be able to collect the total amount of the settlement.

Although the 18.25 million dollar settlement in this case is significant, and will help pay for future medical expenses and piece back together shattered lives, no amount of money can compensate the plaintiffs in this case for their horrific loss and suffering. Still, this settlement would not have been possible had not the remains of the portable heater been recovered from the fire scene. The recovery was likely the result of a  lawyer’s fast action. In many instances when a lawyer for the victims is not involved early-on and is not part of the fire cause and origin investigation, crucial evidence is often overlooked or is lost in the removal of fire debris. Without the heater, no proof of cause and origin of the fire would have been possible and no settlement would have happened.

When the Bill Jorden Litigation Team is engaged for a fire case, we immediately take action to get to the fire scene with our cause and origin fire expert. We act to preserve all the important evidence we can. It is important that an attorney experienced in fire cases, such as we are, is contacted and engaged, at the earliest time after a fire.    In a fire case, the victims are often not in a position to think about hiring an attorney,  but those acting on behalf of a victim can. As this case exemplifies it is extremely important and valuable that the attorney is involved in the fire case as soon after the fire as possible.

by William T. Jorden, Esquire

In the case of Clifford Van Tassel v. Marilyn S. Brooks, Civ Act No. 02-166, United States District Court, Clifford Van Tassel worked as the maintenance manager for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections at its SCI Cambridge Springs prison. After a new superintendent was assigned to the prison, Van Tassel complained to his superiors that the new superintendent was misappropriating public funds, without proper approval, and was spending exorbitant sums of money on her personal state-owned residence. Shortly afterwards, Van Tassel was accused of undermining the superintendent’s authority, and for making racially derogatory comments. On April 13, 2002, the DOC terminated Van Tassel’s employment. Van Tassel denied the accusations made against him and hired the Law Firm of Jorden and White to get his job back. With Attorney Bill Jorden as lead counsel, a law suit was filed in Federal Court based on protected speech and whistleblower protection.

by Harry Faber White, II, Esquire

It is the beginning of another school year and school busses are everywhere. The Pennsylvania Vehicle Code has numerous sections relating to the maintenance, operation and licensings of school busses. Other statutes regulate the conduct of vehicles approaching, meeting or overtaking a school bus.

Any driver approaching a school bus when the red signal lights are flashing and the side stop signal arm is activated, must stop at least 10 feet away from the bus. The driver may not proceed until the flashing red signal lights are off and all children who have alighted from the school bus have reached a safe place.

Any driver of a vehicle meeting or overtaking a school bus when the amber signals are flashing, may proceed past the bus, but only with caution and must be prepared to stop immediately.

The amber visual signals are required to be activated by the driver of every school bus, not more than 300 feet nor less than 150 feet prior to making a stop for the purposes of loading or unloading school children. The amber signals shall remain on until the red visual signals are activated. The red visual signals must be activated whenever the vehicle is stopped on a highway for the purpose of receiving or discharging children, and shall not be terminated until the children have either reached a place of safety off the bus, or have boarded the bus.

The red signals are not required at intersections or other places where traffic is controlled by a uniformed police officer or appropriately attired person authorized to direct, control or regulate traffic.

When a school bus is being operated on a highway for purposes other than the actual transportation of school children for a school activity, all markings including school bus shall be covered or concealed. During such a trip, the flashing visual signal shall not be activated.

If in fact, a driver fails to stop when required under the above regulations, the operator of the school bus should prepare a signed written report indicating information relating to the identity of the alleged violator, the license number, the color of the vehicle, time and approximate location of the violation, and shall deliver that report within 48 hours after the violation occurs to a police officer having jurisdiction in the area where the violation occurred.

Any driver convicted of failing to stop for a school bus with flashing red lights receives a mandatory 60 day license suspension and 5 points.

A driver must stop for a bus with flashing red lights in the opposite traveling lanes of a four-lane highway, unless the opposing lanes are separated by a physical barrier or median. In Crawford County, that means you must stop for a school bus with flashing red lights in the opposing lanes of Route 322 between Meadville and Conneaut Lake.

Finally, Pennsylvania’s new DUI Statute convicts any individual who drives a school bus, if his or her blood alcohol is .02 or greater within 2 hours after driving a school bus.

by William T. Jorden, Esquire

Last month, August 12, 2005, a small town Texas jury returned a sensational verdict for Plaintiff, Carol Ernst, against pharmaceutical giant Merck and Company. Evidence established that Mrs. Ernst’s husband, Robert, age 59, died of Vioxx induced fatal arrhythmia and heart attack. Ernst, a produce manager at a WalMart Store, ran marathons and taught aerobic classes on the side.

The jury awarded 450 million dollars in economic damages for Robert Ernst’s lost pay, 24 million dollars for mental anguish and loss of companionship, and 229 million dollars in punitive damages.

Is there any lesson to be learned from this about the law and lawyers? A $253,450,000.00 verdict within our legal system of justice, is far more meaningful than the announcement of last week’s lottery jackpot winner.

The verdict in the Vioxx Case is a clear example of how our civil justice system works to protect our rights, allowing ordinary Americans to hold even the largest and wealthiest corporations accountable when they put their bottom line before the health and safety of the public.

David Graham, Scientist of the Food and Drug Administration, in testimony before the United States Congress, said that Vioxx contributed to the death of as many as 55,000 people in the United States. Merck knowingly put a dangerous and deadly drug on the market and should be held accountable. Internal Merck documents indicated that the company was aware of the problems with Vioxx as early as 1997. In fact, the company’s top scientist stated in March, 2000 that a clinical trial of Vioxx confirmed that the drug had heart risks. Despite their knowledge of these problems, Merck aggressively marketed the drug, making billions of dollars off the new blockbuster.

Merck trained drug reps to dodge questions from doctors about the safety of the drug, another example of their negligence and lack of concern for the public’s well-being. In a misleading 2001 letter to doctors, the company clearly understated the risks of taking Vioxx. Merck even produced a game called “Dodgeball” to teach pharmaceutical representatives how to avoid answering tough questions about their new blockbuster drug. If Doctors were deterred by this tactic, internal documents show that Merck worked to discredit these doctors.

It’s obvious that the CEO of Merck was paying a great deal of attention to promoting the sales of Vioxx because it was critical to their bottom line. The jury in the trial sent back a clear message to Merck that they should have been paying equal or more attention to insuring that Vioxx was safe for patients. As the jurors themselves have noted, the 229 million dollars in punitive damages that they awarded, was not a random figure pulled out thin air. It was the amount that Merck officials estimated the company would save by delaying changes to the drugs warning label.

It is expected that the damage award is likely to be drastically cut to no more than 26.1 million, because Texas law caps the punitive damages that made up the bulk of the total.

This case gives us a glimpse at the manner in which our courts and juries create a coliseum affect, where the struggles between the interests of large corporations are met with society’s challenges and demands for justice and accountability.

The lawyer is the modern-day gladiator who fights within this coliseum of justice. As in most product liability cases, the lawyer representing the victim and his family, is only paid a fee if the jury finds him right, and often the attorney must use his own personal financial resources in combating the staggering wealth of the large corporation. Corporate or insurance company attorneys are paid by the hour, win or lose, and their clients front all expenses.

What we learn about lawyers is as John M. Cleland, President Judge of McKean County, Pennsylvania, wrote, “We are a society of law. (Lawyers and Judges). As a profession schooled in the law, it is our unique responsibility to assure that the law is used to protect the social welfare and promote the legitimate ends of government.”

Clearly implicit in the outcome of this Vioxx Case, the pharmaceutical companies are not policing themselves. Likewise, our government is not holding the pharmaceutical companies accountable. Consequently, the last resort for victims or the family members of those who have died or are injured, is with the personal injury lawyer and in our courts.

On Memorial Day weekend, at the Erie Yacht Club in Erie, Pennsylvania, a boat explosion killed a 25 year old woman who was a guest on the boat and injured nine other people.  What was to have been a happy, fun-filled day on the water turned into a horrible tragedy.  As a lifelong boater myself, an accident like this is particularly unsettling.

Years ago, in my law school days, I witnessed a dear friend be blown out of a water-ski boat and severely burned after re-fueling.  A surfer friend of mine lost his father when his fishing boat exploded in the Florida Keys.  While serving as a Boy Scout Master I took my two sons and twenty other scouts on a sailing adventure.  The boys manned a tall ship, the Spirit of Miami, sailing from Islamorada, Florida to the Dry Tortugas.  While in port at Key West, we were alerted to a propane leak by a gas detector alarm on our boat.  The Scouts were safely evacuated immediately.  The problem was solved and we were able to safely continue on our adventure.

Based on this current tragedy in Erie and my experiences, I would like to share with you several thoughts;

The ignition of gas fumes causing explosion is a known hazard on power boats.  Every single time after I take my ski-boat off the boat lift and before starting it, I do three things.  First, I turn on the bilge blower.  Second, I lift the engine hatch.  Third, I smell for gas fumes.

Safety requires all in-board engine boat operators to take similar precautions.

Exhortations to be careful, alone, will not prevent the killing, burning, or maiming of innocent pleasure boaters.  Boat manufacturers must also be held accountable and be forced to make the boats the manufacture and sell safe.  It is technologically feasible to equip pleasure boats will alarm systems that will detect and warn of dangerous gas leaks or gas fumes.

The social purposes of tort and personal injury law are to hold manufacturers accountable, make products safer, and prevent accidents.

It is well established law in Pennsylvania that the manufacturer of a defective product is liable for injuries caused by the defect.  A product is considered to be defective if it is not provided with every element necessary to make it safe.  A reliable gas fume detector is one element necessary to make boats safe.  A warming alarm would likely have saved a life and prevented injury to the victims in last weekends boating accident in Erie.