Category: Uncategorized

Jury Duty…What the Lawyers are Looking For in a Juror

August 20th, 2012 · · current events, good faith, Jury Duty, litigation, Uncategorized No comments - Tags: , , , ,
Dan Smith

Daniel E. Smith, Workers Compensation Attorney

As a citizen of the United States, it is our civic duty and responsibility to serve on jury duty. Every US citizen above the age of 18, who is proficient in English, and has been a resident of their judicial district for at least a year, is eligible to be summoned for jury duty. Those ineligible for jury duty are limited to people currently subject to felony charges, and those formally convicted of a felony charge, unless their civil rights have been legally restored. Though, jury duty may seem like an inconvenience to some, and an honor to others, it is an essential part of the judicial system our country is based on.

Several groups of people are exempt from their eligibility, including the armed forces on active duty, professional fire and police department, and “Public Officers” of the federal, state, or local government, who are actively engaged full time in the performance of public duties. These people cannot serve jury duty, even if they would like to.

Other groups can be excused from service. These groups include people over the age of 70, persons who have served within the past two years, and those who serve as volunteer fire fighters or are members of a rescue squad or ambulance crew. Other temporary excusals may be granted at the discretion of the court.

Once you’ve received a summons to jury duty, ignoring it is generally bad. However, the letter does not guarantee you will serve. While employers can chose to continue paying an employee during jury duty, the law does not require it. Financial need, alone, is a reason you can be excused.

Jury selection is a long process that takes time. You’re going to have to wait, so bring a good book, or something to keep you busy. The process itself is called “Voir dire,” and it describes a procedure in which attorneys from both sides go back and forth asking questions of potential jury members. Generally, an attorney is looking for a jury member who has few opinions, is average when it comes to intelligence, works a menial job, and seems easy to sway. Obviously, a lawyer is looking for a jury member who seems like they will side with their argument. If you want to get chosen, you will want to avoid possible contact with police, doctors and lawyers involved, as to thwart any possibility of bias, appear earnest, and surprisingly, go to church. Being involved in religion makes you seem like you know the difference between right and wrong.

Many people intentionally try to get out of jury duty by sounding opinionated and obnoxious when asked questions. This actually works to a lawyers benefit. It gives them time to judge the nonverbal cues of potential jurors surrounding their ‘outspoken’ person. They watch for signs of agreement or disagreement, by paying attention to slight headshakes, crossing of arms, or nodding. The psychology behind jury selection can make or break an attorney’s case.

Potential Jurors are also judged based on age, gender, race, wealth, appearance, marital status, and all the stereotypes that go along with each of these categories. Depending on these traits, a lawyer can judge relatively accurately, whether a person will be sympathetic to the plaintiff or defense.

If chosen, you’ll be pleased to know there is compensation for jury duty. A Petit Jury is paid $40 per day, and can receive up to $50 a day after serving for 10 days. A Grand Jury is paid the same $40 per day, and can receive up to $50 a day after serving for 40 days. Government employees are paid their regular salary in lieu of this compensation. Jurors are also reimbursed for transportation and parking fees, in addition to receiving a subsistence allowance to cover meals and any required overnight stay.

Though many find Jury Duty to be a burden, more often than not, those chosen find it a fascinating experience, in which they can learn about our judicial system first-hand. Try to learn from it, instead of finding ways to get out of it.

Do you or a loved one have a legal issue and need the assistance of an attorney? If so, Contact the experienced lawyers at Coye Law Firm for a free consultation.

 

Medicare Cuts Could Be Costly

April 14th, 2011 · · Uncategorized No comments - Tags: , , , ,

Dan Smith - Disability Attorney

Crisis was averted last week when President Obama and Congress agreed to cut $39 billion in the federal budget for the remainder of the fiscal year. President Obama also laid out an outline of how to decrease the deficit by $4 trillion over the next 12 years, which included ending the Bush tax cuts to incomes above $250,000 and reforming social security.

According to the Social Security Administration website, 54 million Americans will receive $730 billion in Social Security benefits and of those 54 million Americans, 8 million are disabled and in 2010, received $8.8 billion with an average of $1,068 in month benefits. Considering that there is expected to be almost twice as many elderly Americans in 2041 as there are now, talk of reforming Medicare and Medicaid might be worrisome to the public, but it is only logical.

In the last five years there has been a steady increase of applications for social security disability. President Obama has stated that he does not want to make any immediate changes to social security since the program is not a major contributor to the deficit, however, if he were to make changes to Medicare then the value in Social Security Disability for obtaining Medicare has to be looked into.

Republicans are against increasing taxes for the rich, and some such as Rand Paul of Kentucky, are putting forward an alternative. His Social Security Solvency Sustainability Act would gradually increase the retirement age to 70 by 2032. Right now, Medicare is for people aged 65 years and older, but people younger than 65 with disabilities or permanent kidney failure can also qualify for Medicare. If you are under the age of 65 then you are eligible for free Medicare hospital insurance if you have been entitled to Social Security disability benefits for 24 months. If the retirement age is increased then the resulting affect on Medicare could be a change in policy where elderly citizens don’t receive their full Medicare benefits until the age of 70 and those under 70 could possibly have to wait longer to receive their Medicare benefits as well.

Political, social, and financial reforms are all apart of life, as nothing remains constant forever. If any changes are to be made towards Medicare then it requires serious consideration of the effects that it could have on those that rely on Medicare to survive. Ample portions of my clients are those that are either on or fighting for Social Security disability benefits in order to receive Medicare. If Medicare, for whatever reason, were to be altered in a way that it made difficult to receive treatment then it would not only hurt the patient, but also the doctors that treat the patient and the government.

Hypothetically, say I had a 42 year-old construction worker who got hurt on the job and needed to be put on Social Security disability in order to sustain a living. He receives his monthly disability check, but because of recent changes to Medicare, he is unable to get the treatment he needs to recover completely and return to work. Without Medicare he will not be able to work at the level he did before, which means he will make less money to treat his persisting pain. Doctor’s visits and treatments could go unpaid all the while, diminishing his role as an active member of the human society.

There is light at the end of the tunnel, though, as some practices to save money are being put into form. The Social Security Administration is now sending all files electronically to the attorneys at the Coye Law Firm, which helps save money on stamps, paper, and envelopes. Attorneys at the Coye Law Firm have also been selected as a test site for holding hearings with the Social Security Administration through teleconferencing, which will help save money on gas and future wear and tear on a car that comes with driving back and forth to hearings.

The discussions of revamping Medicare is likely a topic that will be reproached for years to come on Capitol Hill, but the impact that a change could have on its existing and future members must be at the forefront of the negotiations.

Universal Healthcare Could Be Demise of Workers’ Compensation

March 31st, 2011 · · Uncategorized No comments - Tags: , , , , , ,
Dan Smith

Daniel E. Smith, Workers Compensation Attorney

Barack Obama ran his presidential election on the promise of healthcare reform. It is estimated that upwards of 50 millions Americans are uninsured in the United States. That is a staggering number when you think of the population of the United States, which currently sits just above 300 million people. Add that figure to the number of jobs that have been lost (and the insurance that comes with a job) then the amount of Americans uninsured is frightening.

People from both sides of legislation fought and are still fighting to amend Obama’s recent healthcare plan, but that is not the only healthcare issue that has been circulating on Capitol Hill. People might remember that Hilary Clinton promised, if elected, that she would set up a universal healthcare system for all Americans. Just because she didn’t get elected doesn’t mean that the issue was dropped.

Even though a universal healthcare plan is not in the very near future, it’s still not too early to talk about the effects that a universal healthcare plan could have on workers’ compensation. Most people are insured through their employer and are covered under workers’ compensation should they get injured at their place of work. The employer, through the insurance carrier, should provide benefits that include, but are not limited to, hospitalization, physical therapy, medical tests, doctor’s visits, and medication. If a universal healthcare plan were implemented then how would the new system go about figuring out what coverages are provided?

Currently, workers compensation is a state run program. Considering that workers’ compensation only accounts for about 2-3% of the health care system makes overhauling it on a national level a daunting task. Adopting national laws for workers’ compensation could also interfere with state laws that are already in place. If not kept at a state level then workers compensation benefits could decrease. At worst, we could see the end of workers’ compensation as it would seem redundant to offer workers’ compensation if all Americans are provided insurance regardless if they have a job or not.

Employees are also offered indemnity benefits under workers’ compensation, which helps provide an income for injured employees while they are recovering and unable to work. Under a universal healthcare plan, an employee’s medical costs would be covered, but an employee might not be able to collect indemnity payments to support him or herself.

The bottom line is that workers compensation is too fragile and small of an area of the healthcare system to be amended and overhauled by a universal healthcare plan.