Diabetic William Ulmer didn’t take his insulin as prescribed when he got behind the wheel of his employer’s truck, and the resulting hypoglycemic attack caused him to collide with six other vehicles in an eight-mile drive before he hit Corrie Johnson head on. Attorney Tom Edwards argued to the jury that “Rent-Way knew of Ulmer’s medical history” and the jury thus found them liable to the tune of $4 million. (Press accounts are not clear why the doctrine of respondeat superior did not apply, but perhaps Ulmer was held not to be negligent for his medical condition.) Edwards’s comment is intriguing: “They knew that this man had problems, but yet they did nothing about it.” What was Rent-Way supposed to do that didn’t violate the ADA and leave themselves liable to Ulmer? (“$4 Million Awarded To Victim In Diabetic Driver Accident”, News4Jax, Nov. 18).
Tom Edwards was recently in the news with the fascinating suggestion that attorneys could get around the recently passed Amendment 3 limiting attorneys’ fees in medical malpractice cases by asking clients to “waive their rights.” Hey, I’m all for that—if only attorneys would let clients waive their rights in other contractual arrangements, such as with doctors, we’d need a lot less tort reform. (Stewart Verney, “Lawyers may ask clients to waive new amendment rights”, Jacksonville Business Journal, Nov. 26, 2004).
Comments are closed.