California Traumatic Brain Injury Lawyers - TBI Attorneys.
If you have suffered an accident involving impact to your head or rapid back and forward head motion resulting in traumatic brain injury or suspected TBI, please consult our California Traumatic Brain Injury Lawyers page for information with regard to our TBI lawyer credentials and practice, or contact our California TBI attorneys for a free consultation. Simply submit the e-mail form California TBI Lawyers Case Evaluation Request and California traumatic brain injury lawyer, Ray Henke, will personally call you to discuss the facts of your case and provide his initial impressions and recommendations. Mr. Henke's general trial lawyer credentials are discussed briefly in the right column of this page. In addition, you may wish to consult our "Serious and Catastrophic Injury Lawyers" page, linked on the top of our Practice Areas Menu in the left column of this page.
The following is an article quickly summarizing some of the information provided on our California Traumatic Brain Injury Lawyers page for publication in I-magazines.
Traumatic Brain Injury, TBI, from the Physicians' and Lawyers' Perspective
When physicians refer to traumatic brain injury, or TBI, they mean a closed head brain injury from an impact to the head or "diffuse axonal shearing" from a rotational acceleration and deceleration, the rotational movement of the head and brain resulting in a sliding of brain layers. Cavitaton can also commonly result in traumatic brain injury, the formation of microscopic bubbles from the rapid movement of the brain, which then can burst, causing brain damage as the brain moves back into place.
For TBI lawyers all traumatic brain injury is serious, and this is certainly true for those who suffer traumatic brain injury. However, medical doctors commonly characterize TBI as mild, moderate and severe, not to diminish the seriousness of "mild" TBI but to have a diagnostic framework with commonly understood terms.
In order to appreciate the distinctions made by the medical profession, the definitions of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) are instructive. According to NINDS: "A person with a mild TBI may remain conscious or may experience a loss of consciousness for a few seconds or minutes. Other symptoms of mild TBI include headache, confusion, lightheadedness, dizziness, blurred vision or tired eyes, ringing in the ears, bad taste in the mouth, fatigue or lethargy, a change in sleep patterns, behavioral or mood changes, and trouble with memory, concentration, attention, or thinking."
There are differing definitions of mild traumatic brain injury as the medical profession characterizes it. For example, the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee, Head Injury Interdisciplinary Special Interest Group of the American Congress of Rehabilitative Medicine, states: "A patient with mild traumatic brain injury is a person who has had a traumatically induced physiological disruption of brain function, as manifest by at least one of the following: (1) any period of loss of consciousness; (2) any loss of memory for events immediately before or after the accident; (3) focal neurological deficits that may or may not be transient, but where the severity the injury does not exceed the following: (a) post traumatic amnesia not greater than 24 hours; (b) after thirty minutes, an initial Glasgow Coma Scale of 13 to 15, or (c) loss of consciousness of approximately 30 minutes or less."
For the person who suffers TBI, and for the traumatic brain injury lawyers who represent them, it must be appreciated that "mild" TBI isn't "mild," but can be a life changing event resulting in both physical symptoms and personality changes. The physical symptoms commonly include nausea, headaches, dizziness, sleep disturbance, fatigue and blurred vision. Cognitive changes can include difficulties in memory and speech as well as with attention and concentration. Behavioral changes can range from irritability or disinhibition to the opposite, emotional lability. Those who suffer mild TBI will often seem "different" to family and friends, and his relationship with those close to him may also suffer.
From the TBI lawyer's perspective, as we see explain in the article "TBI Lawyers Identification Presentation of Damages in Traumatic Brain Injury Cases", the initial difficulty is in demonstrating the existence of the "mild" brain injury that his client has suffered, a proof problem which is complicated by the fact that most mild TB will not be diagnosed. Emergency room doctors may be so rushed that they won't make the diagnosis and general practitioners commonly lack the necessary training to recognize the symptoms.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke categorizes moderate and severe TBI as follows: "A person with a moderate or severe TBI may show these same symptoms, but may also have a headache that gets worse or does not go away, repeated vomiting or nausea, convulsions or seizures, an inability to awaken from sleep, dilation of one or both pupils of the eyes, slurred speech, weakness or numbness in the extremities, loss of coordination, and increased confusion, restlessness, or agitation."
Those who are categorized as suffering moderate and severe TBI may have sustained a hemorrhage or concussion and more enduring loss of consciousness. Those who sustain skull fractures are more likely to be diagnosed with moderate or severe TBI. Those who suffer coma would with certainty be categorized as having suffered severe traumatic brain injury, but coma isn't essential to the diagnosis of severe TBI.
Often CT, MRI scans and other diagnostic technology of the brain can be used to identifying brain swelling, edema, or contusion, substantiating more serious brain injury. Skull x-rays and EEG studies are also useful in making the diagnosis of moderate or severe TBI. In addition to the Glasgow Coma Scale referred to above, the Rancho Los Amigos Cognitive Scale is commonly used to evaluate function as well as the rehabilitation of the patient with traumatic brain injury.
Finally, neruopsychological evaluation can be highly useful in TBI diagnosis. It doesn't depend upon a standardized scale. Rather it recognizes the individuality of the particular patient, evaluating his physical, mental and personality changes from before the incident which resulted in his traumatic brain injury.
Both medical doctors and the traumatic brain injury lawyers have at hand all these tools available to them to recognize the qualities of the brain injury their clients and patients have suffered. It is in the application of these tools, recognizing that all TBI is serious, that the injured individual is best served.
Raymond L. Henke
Principle trial attorney with the California Accident Lawyers Paralysis and Brain Injury Group
*Landmark Jury Verdicts:
$3.8 million dollar gross jury verdict in brain injury case. The brain injury and consequent mild aphasia resulted from strokes caused by emboli from an atrial myxoma, a tumor in the upper left chamber of the heart. Atrial myxomas are the most rare human tumors known to medical science. The patient suffered a "fainting spell" which her physicians investigated using EEG's and CT scans and well as an EKG, but failed to perform an echocardiogram of the patient's heart, which would have disclosed the atrial myxoma. The internist defendant was asked politely by Mr. Henke at trial whether he "considered atrial myxoma in his differential diagnosis." The physician responded snidely, "Mr. Henke, you don't think of zebras when you hear hoof beats." Mr. Henke thought about the doctor's analogy for a moment and then then asked, "Mitral valve prolapse. It's a 'horse,' isn't that a fact, Doctor?" The physician responded, "What do you mean?" Mr. Henke clarified, "Well mytral valve prolapse occurs in about 6 percent of a randomly selected population of females Mrs. Z's age. It's a 'horse' isn't it?" The physician responded reluctantly, "Yes, It's a horse." Henke continued, "Mitral Stenosis, it's a 'horse,' isn't it Doc?" The internist responded "Okay, yes, it's a 'horse'". Again Henke then asked, "Idiopathic subaortic stenosis, it's a 'horse' isn't it?" The physician has to acknowledge "Yes." Henke concluded, "Well, doctor, upon hearing the 'hoof beats,' Mrs. Z's symptoms, if you had just thought 'horse,' atrial myxoma, mitral stenosis or idiopathic subaortic stenosis, and 'turned your head in the direction of the hoof beats,' done an echocardiogram, you would have seen the 'Zebra,' wouldn't you have doctor?" Again the physician had to acknowledge "Yes." The physician's snide remark followed by Mr. Henke's quick analysis of the fallacy of the analogy, and indeed its utility in demonstrating the physician's negligence, by his own analogy, was cited by the jurors in interviews following the trial as the pivotal point in the trial which resulted in their liability verdict for Mr. Henke's client. This case and this particular interchange between Mr. Henke and the defendant physician, formed the subject for a chapter in the book "Medical Malpractice, Solving the Crisis" by Frank Edwards, M.D., Holt & Co. The case and interrogation was also the subject of a legal journal article published in "Forum" the journal of the California Trial Lawyers Association. You may consider our qualifications, and indeed our national acclaim as seasoned, superior trial lawyers in complex litigation, discussed in the center and right hand column of this page.
$2.7 million dollar jury verdict in medical malpractice case in which attorney Henke represented 5 plaintiffs in a single consolidated 4 month trial against their physicians and hospital for conspiracy to defraud them with phony AIDS cures. Mr. Henke's experts in the case included Luc Montagnier, the discoverer of HIV and head of France's National AIDS Laboratories; Michael Gotlieb, the discoverer of AIDS and co-founder of the American Foundation for AIDS Research, Don Francis, the head of the first CDC AIDS Task force and discoverer that AIDS was a sexually transmitted disease, John Curnutte, head of the largest AIDS vaccine project in the world, Roger Detels, Chairman of the Epidemiology Department at UCLA and chief investigator on the largest AIDS epidemiology study in the United States, and a dozen others of the most highly respected AIDS scientists and physicians in the world. This case was chronicled in legitimate newspaper articles from the front page of the New York Times to the front page of the Los Angeles Times, from the Washington Post to the San Francisco Chronicle and Examiner, in California and national legal journals from "California Lawyer" to the "National Law Journal," in national and international television news segments, from Tom Brokaw's NBC Nightly News to CNN. Mr. Henke also testified before Congress with regard to these cases, at the invitation of the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives.
*State Bar of California Disclaimer: The results obtained in the cases listed were dependent upon the facts of the cases, and the results will differ in other cases based on different facts
$3.8 million dollar gross jury verdict in brain injury case. The brain injury and consequent mild aphasia resulted from strokes caused by emboli from an atrial myxoma, a tumor in the upper left chamber of the heart. Atrial myxomas are the most rare human tumors known to medical science. The patient suffered a "fainting spell" which her physicians investigated using EEG's and CT scans and well as an EKG, but failed to perform an echocardiogram of the patient's heart, which would have disclosed the atrial myxoma. The internist defendant was asked politely by Mr. Henke at trial whether he "considered atrial myxoma in his differential diagnosis." The physician responded snidely, "Mr. Henke, you don't think of zebras when you hear hoof beats." Mr. Henke thought about the doctor's analogy for a moment and then then asked, "Mitral valve prolapse. It's a 'horse,' isn't that a fact, Doctor?" The physician responded, "What do you mean?" Mr. Henke clarified, "Well mytral valve prolapse occurs in about 6 percent of a randomly selected population of females Mrs. Z's age. It's a 'horse' isn't it?" The physician responded reluctantly, "Yes, It's a horse." Henke continued, "Mitral Stenosis, it's a 'horse,' isn't it Doc?" The internist responded "Okay, yes, it's a 'horse'". Again Henke then asked, "Idiopathic subaortic stenosis, it's a 'horse' isn't it?" The physician has to acknowledge "Yes." Henke concluded, "Well, doctor, upon hearing the 'hoof beats,' Mrs. Z's symptoms, if you had just thought 'horse,' atrial myxoma, mitral stenosis or idiopathic subaortic stenosis, and 'turned your head in the direction of the hoof beats,' done an echocardiogram, you would have seen the 'Zebra,' wouldn't you have doctor?" Again the physician had to acknowledge "Yes." The physician's snide remark followed by Mr. Henke's quick analysis of the fallacy of the analogy, and indeed its utility in demonstrating the physician's negligence, by his own analogy, was cited by the jurors in interviews following the trial as the pivotal point in the trial which resulted in their liability verdict for Mr. Henke's client. This case and this particular interchange between Mr. Henke and the defendant physician, formed the subject for a chapter in the book "Medical Malpractice, Solving the Crisis" by Frank Edwards, M.D., Holt & Co. The case and interrogation was also the subject of a legal journal article published in "Forum" the journal of the California Trial Lawyers Association. You may consider our qualifications, and indeed our national acclaim as seasoned, superior trial lawyers in complex litigation, discussed in the center and right hand column of this page.
$2.7 million dollar jury verdict in medical malpractice case in which attorney Henke represented 5 plaintiffs in a single consolidated 4 month trial against their physicians and hospital for conspiracy to defraud them with phony AIDS cures. Mr. Henke's experts in the case included Luc Montagnier, the discoverer of HIV and head of France's National AIDS Laboratories; Michael Gotlieb, the discoverer of AIDS and co-founder of the American Foundation for AIDS Research, Don Francis, the head of the first CDC AIDS Task force and discoverer that AIDS was a sexually transmitted disease, John Curnutte, head of the largest AIDS vaccine project in the world, Roger Detels, Chairman of the Epidemiology Department at UCLA and chief investigator on the largest AIDS epidemiology study in the United States, and a dozen others of the most highly respected AIDS scientists and physicians in the world. This case was chronicled in legitimate newspaper articles from the front page of the New York Times to the front page of the Los Angeles Times, from the Washington Post to the San Francisco Chronicle and Examiner, in California and national legal journals from "California Lawyer" to the "National Law Journal," in national and international television news segments, from Tom Brokaw's NBC Nightly News to CNN. Mr. Henke also testified before Congress with regard to these cases, at the invitation of the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives.
*State Bar of California Disclaimer: The results obtained in the cases listed were dependent upon the facts of the cases, and the results will differ in other cases based on different facts
Driving Under the Influence of Cell Conversation Results in DUI Level Driving Impairment And a 4 fold Increased Likelihood that the Driver will Cause an Accident.
Read Henke Law Group Scientific Review Article. As Knowledgeable Cell Phone Accident Lawyers We Can Investigate to Establish That The Other Driver Was On His Cell Phone. The Evidence Can Make the Difference in a Contested Liability Case.
Where we Can Establish That the Other Driver Was Engaged in a Business Call We Can Bring his Employer in as a Defendant and Recover Against the Employer's Assets and Insurance Coverage.
California auto accident attorney Henke has reviewed all the scientific literature on the effect of cell phone use to impair driver attention. Driving under the influence of cell conversation renders the driver DUI level driving impaired and results in a four fold increased likelihood that the driver will cause an accident. Contrary to popular belief, it is not "holding" the cell phone which resulting the impairment. It is the diversion of conscious attention to the internal-cognitive tasks associated with the give and take of the cell conversation away from the external-visual tasks essential for safe driving. Indeed, it matters not whether the motorist is driving under the influence of handheld or hands-free cell conversation, the impairment and the 4 fold increased likelihood that the driver will cause an accident are precisely the same. Yes, California and a number of other states have enacted handheld laws; unfortunately that is just a function of politics. The scientists are not in dispute. All agree that driving under the influence of any cell phone results in the identical DUI level driving impairment.
It is important that the auto accident lawyer obtain the cell phone records of the other driver in every contested liability case, and especially in any serious injury case in which it appears that the other driver lacks sufficient insurance coverage to fully compensate the plaintiff for his injuries and full measure of his damages. In the contested liability case,the evidence of the other party's cell phone use in the moments prior to the accident may snatch victory from the mouth of defeat. In the most common serious injury auto accident case in which the other driver lacks sufficient insurance to fully compensate the plaintiff for his injuries and damages, it is essential that the cell phone records be obtained and appropriate depositions taken of the defendant and the other party to the call to determine whether the other driver was engaged in a business call in the moments leading up to the accident. If he was, then the knowledgeable cell phone auto accident lawyer can bring the employer into the litigation as a defendant "vicariously liable" for the injuries caused by its employee in the "course and scope of his employment." In this way the auto accident lawyer may assure that the plaintiff will be fully compensated up to the limits of the employers insurance policy, and indeed, the employer's assets would be available to execute against.
Read Henke Law Group Scientific Review Article. As Knowledgeable Cell Phone Accident Lawyers We Can Investigate to Establish That The Other Driver Was On His Cell Phone. The Evidence Can Make the Difference in a Contested Liability Case.
Where we Can Establish That the Other Driver Was Engaged in a Business Call We Can Bring his Employer in as a Defendant and Recover Against the Employer's Assets and Insurance Coverage.
California auto accident attorney Henke has reviewed all the scientific literature on the effect of cell phone use to impair driver attention. Driving under the influence of cell conversation renders the driver DUI level driving impaired and results in a four fold increased likelihood that the driver will cause an accident. Contrary to popular belief, it is not "holding" the cell phone which resulting the impairment. It is the diversion of conscious attention to the internal-cognitive tasks associated with the give and take of the cell conversation away from the external-visual tasks essential for safe driving. Indeed, it matters not whether the motorist is driving under the influence of handheld or hands-free cell conversation, the impairment and the 4 fold increased likelihood that the driver will cause an accident are precisely the same. Yes, California and a number of other states have enacted handheld laws; unfortunately that is just a function of politics. The scientists are not in dispute. All agree that driving under the influence of any cell phone results in the identical DUI level driving impairment.
It is important that the auto accident lawyer obtain the cell phone records of the other driver in every contested liability case, and especially in any serious injury case in which it appears that the other driver lacks sufficient insurance coverage to fully compensate the plaintiff for his injuries and full measure of his damages. In the contested liability case,the evidence of the other party's cell phone use in the moments prior to the accident may snatch victory from the mouth of defeat. In the most common serious injury auto accident case in which the other driver lacks sufficient insurance to fully compensate the plaintiff for his injuries and damages, it is essential that the cell phone records be obtained and appropriate depositions taken of the defendant and the other party to the call to determine whether the other driver was engaged in a business call in the moments leading up to the accident. If he was, then the knowledgeable cell phone auto accident lawyer can bring the employer into the litigation as a defendant "vicariously liable" for the injuries caused by its employee in the "course and scope of his employment." In this way the auto accident lawyer may assure that the plaintiff will be fully compensated up to the limits of the employers insurance policy, and indeed, the employer's assets would be available to execute against.
©2008 The Ray Henke Law Group