What should you do if you are injured in a car accident? This little guide, written by a nationally recognized personal injury lawyer, will show you what to do, and perhaps more important, what not to do.

This book may be for you, if you: 1. Were injured in an accident involving a car, semi truck, motor cycle, bus or any other moving vehicle. 2. Do not think you were more than more than 50% at fault for the accident. 3. Have, or will probably have, medical bills of more than $2,000 from the accident. 4. Are not bothered about having your damages paid by a multi-billion dollar insurance company.

This book may be for you, if you: 1. Were injured in an accident involving a car, truck, motor cycle, bus or any other moving vehicle. 2. Do not think you were more than more than 50% at fault for the accident. 3. Have, or will probably have, medical bills of more than $2,000 from the accident. 4. Are not bothered about having your damages paid by a multi-billion dollar insurance company. Show more Show less

Landmark Cases in the Law of Tort contains thirteen original essays on leading tort cases, ranging from the early nineteenth century to the present day. It is the third volume in a series of collected essays on landmark cases (the previous two volumes having dealt with restitution and contract). The cases examined raise a broad range of important issues across the law of tort, including such diverse areas as acts of state and public nuisance, as well as central questions relating to the tort of negligence. Several of the essays place cases in their historical context in ways that change our understanding of the case's significance. Sometimes the focus is on drawing out previously neglected aspects of cases which have been - undeservedly - assigned minor importance. Other essays explore the judicial methodologies and techniques that worked to shape leading principles of tort law. So much of tort law turns on cases, and there are so many cases, that all but the most recent decisions have a tendency to become reduced to terse propositions of law, so as to keep the subject manageable. This collection shows how important it is, despite the constant temptation to compression, not to lose sight of the contexts and nuances which qualify and illuminate so many leading authorities.

This book is a study of doctrinal and methodological divergence in the common law of obligations. It explores particular departures from the common law mainstream and the causes and effects of those departures. Some divergences can be justified on the basis of a need to adapt the common law of contract, torts, equity and restitution to local circumstances, or to bring them into conformity with local values. More commonly, however, doctrinal or methodological divergence simply reflects different approaches to common problems, or different views as to what justice or policy requires in particular circumstances. In some instances divergent methodologies lead to substantially the same results, while in others particular causes of action, defences, immunities or remedies recognised in one jurisdiction but not another undoubtedly produce different outcomes. Such cases raise interesting questions as to whether ultimate appellate courts should be slow to abandon principles that remain well accepted throughout the common law world, or cautious about taking a uniquely divergent path. The chapters in this book were originally presented at the Seventh Biennial Conference on the Law of Obligations held in Hong Kong in July 2014. A separate collection, entitled The Common Law of Obligations: Divergence and Unity (ISBN: 9781782256564), is also being published.

Read about intentional murder of unsuspecting senior citizens by Medtronic, Incorporated and bribed physicians for hard cash. Was your spouse or other family member killed by Medtronic and his/her cardiologist? Do you have a time bomb wired to your heart? Consider the inside story on criminal bribery, criminal conspiracies, consumer fraud and felony murder inside America's medical communities. Review complete guide on how to sue Medtronic Incorporated and bribed health care providers in state court (no class action) for being implanted with a killer defibrillator.