South Carolina Lawyer Blog

Anyone who has had to sit through rush-hour traffic knows that it can be one of the most exhausting, dangerous, and expensive times to drive. The evening commute, between 5:00 and 7:00 p.m., is one of the most hazardous times of the day to drive—as this article in Forbes points out. However, South Carolina commuters are better off during this time than many of their counterparts across the nation, with an average drive time of just 23 minutes.

S.C. drivers may also have another reason to feel better about their commutes—in addition to a better trip time, the price of gasoline is lower today than one year ago, according to a recent article in The State. Some experts predict that prices at the pump may not rise for a while, which could be music to the ears (and wallets) of the nearly 2 million drivers who hit the road to commute in South Carolina.

However, there could be even better news for approximately 81,000 of those commuters, with the announcement of a $1.5 million Lexington plan to ease traffic along U.S. 1, U.S. 378 and S.C. 6. According to the article, traffic jams of over a mile are common along those road corridors during commute times. Such heavy traffic can lead some drivers to aggressive behavior, such as running red lights or tailgating—which can then mean more accidents. The latest plan is an effort by Lexington officials to improve traffic, and it focuses on installing a computerized signal system to control traffic flow—in contrast to an earlier, $80 million plan which focused on road construction.

The federal government favors computerized signal systems as a way to improve commutes and reduce accidents. According to an article in Public Roads, the magazine of the Federal Highway Administration (FHA), the computerized systems may help reduce the danger during the commute by helping to reduce the number of accidents. The FHA says that automatic signal systems can lead to improvements for drivers and cities, including:

• Fewer serious or deadly accidents.


• Less aggressive driver behavior, like red-light running or tailgating.


• Better air quality and less gas use.


• Less heavy traffic and better flow for commercial and emergency vehicles, buses, and the public.


• Delayed or no need for road expansion or construction.

There are a few different ways to modify signal systems, each with different levels of computer control. A city can pick the kinds of controls that fit its traffic and commute needs, according to FHA information. The systems aren’t a complete fix for traffic problems and accidents, however. Many deadly accidents still occur in rural areas, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, where such traffic control systems aren’t operating. Additionally, the FHA recommends updating and adjusting systems every 2-3 years, and the cost can swing from as little as $300 per year to almost $3,000 per signal.

The Lexington system is expected to be up and running by the fall of 2013, and will cover about two dozen intersections in the downtown area—where the busiest routes intersect. Whether the systems will help make commute times safer and reduce the number of deadly or serious traffic accidents remains to be seen. It will be interesting to see if the numberof rear-ending or red-light running accidents is affected by the new signals. Until then, area drivers will have to find other ways to stay aware of and avoid aggressive drivers (and the accidents they cause) during commute times.

About The Louthian Law Firm

The Louthian Law Firm, P.A., of Columbia, S.C., has been obtaining fair compensation for personal injury victims since 1959. The firm was founded by Herbert Louthian, who has more than 50 years of trial experience and is licensed to practice in all courts in South Carolina. The Louthian Law Firm focuses on personal injury cases involving medical malpractice; car, truck and motorcycle accidents; and other serious and catastrophic injuries throughout South Carolina. For a free, confidential case evaluation, contact the firm by phone at (866) 410-5656 or through its online form.

The answer to ending repeat drunk driving offenses and creating more safe drivers may be a device that’s been around for more than 20 years, according to a recent study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). The study, which focused on drivers in Washington State, found that installation of a so-called “interlock” device on the vehicles of those convicted of drunk driving might be able to lower the rate of repeat DUI offenses by about half.

An interlock, also called an alcohol interlock, is a machine that acts like a breathalyzer. The device requires a vehicle’s driver to blow into it in order to start the vehicle. If the driver has a blood alcohol content higher than a pre-set level, the vehicle won’t start. The authors of the IIHS study say that their findings aren’t unusual, and that other studies have found that interlock devices lead to fewer repeat drunk drivers.

Nationwide, the number of impaired driving accidents and deaths fell in the 1980s and 1990s, but has remained fairly steady since those earlier drops. In 2010, nearly 450 South Carolina drivers died in drunk driving accidents. This number becomes even more disturbing when you consider that number along with the total number of people killed in accidents in S.C. that year. According to IIHS figures, 810 people died in accidents during 2010—which means that drunk drivers accounted for well over half of the deaths on South Carolina roads.

South Carolina has required some drivers to install interlock devices—which the state calls an Ignition Interlock Device (or IID)—since 2008. According to the SC Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services (which oversees the program), IID devices may be installed in the cars of drivers who have been convicted of at least a second DUI offense, who have completed the license suspension period and who have also finished an alcohol education program.

According to the IIHS, Congress is debating legislation that would tie each state’s highway funds to an interlock requirement for all DUI convictions. Not everyone is in favor of using the devices in all drunk driving cases. Some opponents want the devices limited to those with convictions that show an alcohol content of .15 percent or more. The study authors disagree with this proposal, however, since that threshold would leave out about one-third of people convicted of drunk driving.

About The Louthian Law Firm

The Louthian Law Firm, P.A., of Columbia, S.C., has been obtaining fair compensation for personal injury victims since 1959. The firm was founded by Herbert Louthian, who has more than 50 years of trial experience and is licensed to practice in all courts in South Carolina. The Louthian Law Firm focuses on personal injury cases involving medical malpractice; car, truck and motorcycle accidents; and other serious and catastrophic injuries throughout South Carolina. For a free, confidential case evaluation, contact the firm by phone at (866) 410-5656 or through its online form.

Baja Inc., more commonly known as Baja Motorsports, has re-issued a recall of approximately 4,300 of its DR50 and DR70 dirt bikes. The recall was prompted by a defect in the fuel tank systems of the affected models, which can cause the bikes to leak fuel and is a potential fire hazard. The defect has already led to burn injuries among riders, according to recall information posted on the Baja Motorsports website. According to the company, consumers should stop using the affected dirt bikes immediately and contact Baja for free repairs.

The recall officially began in March, but Baja Motorsports, based in Anderson, S.C., received reports of a significant amount of malfunctions and more consumer injuries after the recall notice had been announced—more than twice as many, according to a statement issued by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

The original CPSC recall notice says that the recalled dirt bikes were sold exclusively at Pep Boys, between December 2010 and January 2011. The current CPSC notice, however, changes those dates to between December 2010 and January 2012 and no longer says the bikes were sold exclusively at Pep Boys.

Those who think they may have one of the affected models should check the bike’s VIN (vehicle identification number), which is located on the side of the bike, in the “gooseneck,” where the handlebars meet the body. The dirt bikes affected by the Baja recall have a VIN beginning with L98. For more information, people should contact Baja or read the current CPSC product recall statement.

This isn’t the first time Baja has voluntarily recalled a product. In 2010, the company recalled approximately 308,000 units because of a fuel system defect and a problem with vehicle throttles.

About The Louthian Law Firm

The Louthian Law Firm, P.A., of Columbia, S.C., has been obtaining fair compensation for personal injury victims since 1959. The firm was founded by Herbert Louthian, who has more than 50 years of trial experience and is licensed to practice in all courts in South Carolina. The Louthian Law Firm focuses on personal injury cases involving medical malpractice; car, truck and motorcycle accidents; and other serious and catastrophic injuries throughout South Carolina. For a free, confidential case evaluation, contact the firm by phone at (866) 410-5656 or through its online form.

A recent study conducted in Spain showed that almost eight percent of fatally ill patients didn’t receive necessary treatment because they were misdiagnosed. Unfortunately, these mistakes were discovered only after the patients had died, during an examination of the deceased, commonly known as an autopsy. The Spanish study looked at how often autopsy findings matched doctor diagnoses in seriously ill patients who died in intensive care units, and it found a difference in 18.5 percent of the cases -- or nearly one in five.

The Spanish study should alarm American patients and doctors, since fatal misdiagnosis is not a problem unique to Spain.

A 2004 article by Dr. Kaveh G. Shojania, who works in the Department of Medicine at UC-San Francisco, discusses the dangers of misdiagnoses in seriously ill patients, and points to several factors that can lead doctors to the wrong conclusions. Dr. Shojania also points out how the reduced incidence of autopsy in the United States makes it difficult to track the rate of misdiagnosis. An example of this could be a 2003 report published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which found that nine percent of acutely ill U.S. patients received a misdiagnosis that seriously impacted their treatment. The authors reached this figure by surveying autopsies recorded between 1966 and 2002.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the percentage of U.S. deaths investigated with an autopsy dropped more than 50 percent from 1972 through 2007, going from about 19 percent to around 8 percent (or fewer than one in ten deaths). What autopsies look into has also changed, according to CDC data. In 1972, about 80 percent of autopsies examined deaths which involved disease or illness, and the remaining number were because of external causes, such as injury, accident or homicide. By 2007, those proportions had changed dramatically. Disease-related exams represented less than half of all autopsies carried out—and the total numbers, as we just mentioned, shrank drastically by that time.

The shrinking numbers of investigations into the deaths of critically ill patients may be letting serious mistakes in the medical system go undetected. According to patient safety researchers and experts, the number and frequency of errors in doctor diagnoses have gone largely uninvestigated. The experts agree that there are many factors that impact a doctor’s opinion and medical findings—and an autopsy is often an important tool in determining the effectiveness of various treatment options.

Of course, the declining number of autopsies may also have many causes. Many families may not be aware that they can request an autopsy, even for a non-violent or seemingly normal death. Additionally, the cost of autopsies has caused some hospitals to stop the practice almost entirely and may bar some families from being able to request a thorough investigation into the exact cause of a loved one’s death.

About The Louthian Law Firm

The Louthian Law Firm, P.A., of Columbia, S.C., has been obtaining fair compensation for personal injury victims since 1959. The firm was founded by Herbert Louthian, who has more than 50 years of trial experience and is licensed to practice in all courts in South Carolina. The Louthian Law Firm focuses on personal injury cases involving medical malpractice; car, truck and motorcycle accidents; and other serious and catastrophic injuries throughout South Carolina. For a free, confidential case evaluation, contact the firm by phone at (866) 410-5656 or through its online form.

A recent report about robotic drug dispensers, a kind of technology used more and more often in hospitals, found that the dispensers may be more likely to contain harmful bacteria, and be able to spread those bacteria to medications and patients.

According to the report, hospital staff in North Carolina found harmful Bacillus cereus germs during a routine test of drugs dispensed by a pharmacy robot system. The germ is not only potentially harmful to humans, it is resistant to many common disinfectants, including alcohol. Bacillus cereus is commonly associated with certain kinds of food poisoning, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

While the most common effects of Bacillus cereus infection are digestive problems or vomiting, the germ has been known to cause lung infections, gangrene, brain swelling and even death.

The study says that the germ outbreak was traced back to parts of the robot cleaning system which, surprisingly, isn’t considered a ‘sterile’ part of the machine and has no formal cleaning or maintenance procedures from the manufacturer—other than suggestions of occasional “fogging” with alcohol.

In the North Carolina case, there were no reported cases of the germ spreading to patients, but experts say the risk of such a spread is possible, especially for drugs given by injection. This makes the presence of harmful germs in the pharmacy robots especially disturbing, since they are used specifically to prepare sterile drugs for injection.

The authors of the study and other experts say that the makers of the pharmacy robots should come up with more specific guidelines about keeping the robots clean and free of unwanted and potentially dangerous germs. They also suggest using the robot in the clean rooms of hospital pharmacies, which may help limit exposure to contaminants. Regular testing of drugs dispensed by the pharmacy robots is also necessary, the report says.

If you or someone you care about has been injured by the negligence of a medical professional or hospital, you should speak with a South Carolina medical malpractice attorney like the ones at the Louthian Law Firm as soon as possible. Our attorneys can help you evaluate your case; protect your legal right to the courts; and stand by your side throughout the legal process.

For a free consultation, call the Columbia SC Medical Malpractice Lawyers at Louthian Law Firm today at (866) 454-1200 or locally at (803) 454-1200. You can also fill out our confidential online case evaluation form.

Controversy has accompanied recent overhauls and changes to the medical system in the United States. The switch to electronic health records (or EHRs) and other digital systems seem to be at the heart of much of the controversy.

Recent articles about the safety and security of EHRs have questioned how ready hospitals and doctors are for the switch from traditional, paper-based record keeping. Another recent study, focusing on emergency room records, showed that the more designers improved the ability of EHR software to recognize unapproved abbreviations used by doctors (for things like medications or symptoms), the more doctors used them. That increased the risk of the notes being misread by another doctor or pharmacist.

However, patient safety and security wasn’t the main concern behind a recent letter from the American Medical Association (AMA) to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), urging government regulators to ease impending deadlines—and, more specifically, the financial penalties tied to them. The AMA letter, addressed to DHHS Acting Administrator Marilyn B. Tavenner, says that doctors are facing a “storm” of overlapping regulations and deadlines from government mandates.

The letter focused mostly on the fines and penalties facing physicians who do not meet deadlines for new electronic drug prescribing systems, EHRs, and a program known as the Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS), which pays doctors for reporting information about the impact of some kinds of treatment paid for by Medicare.

The letter states that the quality of medical care could be hurt by overlapping systems, and uses the example of a situation where a doctor receives a payment and a penalty at the same time, because of the same program. According to the letter, this sort of confusion and financial strain could keep some doctors from wanting to update to EHRs or other systems on time—even at the cost of patient safety.

About The Louthian Law Firm

The Louthian Law Firm, P.A., of Columbia, S.C., has been obtaining fair compensation for personal injury victims since 1959. The firm was founded by Herbert Louthian, who has more than 50 years of trial experience and is licensed to practice in all courts in South Carolina. The Louthian Law Firm focuses on personal injury cases involving medical malpractice; car, truck and motorcycle accidents; and other serious and catastrophic injuries throughout South Carolina. For a free, confidential case evaluation, contact the firm by phone at (866) 410-5656 or through its online form.

Columbia, S.C., March 29, 2012 -- Columbia car accident attorney Bert Louthian said today that stricter law enforcement and educational campaigns suggested by the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) should be pursued to fight an increasing number of deaths attributed to speeding over the last 10 years.

“As a society, we should address speeding and the destruction it causes the same way we have worked against drunk driving and for the use of seat belts to save lives,” said Louthian, a partner in the Columbia personal injury firm, Louthian Law Firm, P.A.

The GHSA said this month that there has been progress in “nearly every other area of highway safety,” over the last 30 years, but speeding has continued to be a factor in about a third of traffic deaths each year.

Car accidents blamed on speeding in the U.S. accounted for 31 percent of all traffic deaths in 2010, marking a 7 percent increase since 2000, the GHSA said. At the same time, car crash fatalities blamed on not using a seatbelt dropped by 23 percent and deaths due to drunk driving were down by 3 percent.

The GHSA said that seven states have increased maximum speed limits “despite research showing that an increase in traffic deaths was attributable to raised speed limits on all road types after the 1995 repeal of federal speed limits,” of 55 mph.

South Carolina allows 70 mph speed limits on interstates.

The GHSA says states should consider increasing law enforcement efforts against “aggressive driving” because “the public considers aggressive driving a more serious threat to safety.” The study also suggests stricter enforcement of speeding in school and work zones, which it says has strong public support.

South Carolina has no specific “aggressive driving” law, although 11 states do. South Carolina law specifies enhanced fines of $75 to $200 or up to 30 days jail, or both, for speeding in a work zone.

The GHSA report also said the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) should sponsor a high-visibility enforcement campaign and support public awareness efforts to address speeding and aggressive driving.

Louthian said if a South Carolina resident is severely injured in a car accident caused by speeding, they should seek legal help to hold the driver at fault accountable and to obtain compensation for their losses through a lawsuit if necessary.

“Those who suffer personal injury or the wrongful death of a loved one in a motor vehicle accident face medical bills, repair bills, lost income and other financial costs that often were caused by someone else’s recklessness, such as speeding,” Louthian said. “These are the people we stand up for and fight for.”

About The Louthian Law Firm

The Louthian Law Firm, P.A., of Columbia, S.C., has been obtaining fair compensation for personal injury victims since 1959. The firm was founded by Herbert Louthian, who has more than 50 years of trial experience and is licensed to practice in all courts in South Carolina. The Louthian Law Firm focuses on personal injury cases involving medical malpractice; car, truck and motorcycle accidents; and other serious and catastrophic injuries throughout South Carolina. For a free, confidential case evaluation, contact the firm by phone at (866) 410-5656 or through its online form.