Over the course of the years, I have represented many victims and their families who were seriously injured or died from adverse reactions to vaccines. Over those years, a common question is:

Under what circumstances may the doctor or person giving me the vaccine or the vaccine maker itself be sued?

Answer: If the Petition has been judged non-compensable or dismissed under then National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) or if the award granted by the VICP is otherwise rejected by the petitioner or if the vaccine is not covered under the VICP, in those circumstances suit can be filed.

Divorced or separated parents often  confuse the concepts of legal custody and physical placement.   This is probably partly due to the understandable belief that “custody” implies “possession,” and partly because practically each state uses different terms for the same ideas.   In Wisconsin, however, these two terms have very different meanings and possible outcomes.  “Legal custody” is defined as the right to make major decisions for a child, including consent to marry and get a driver’s license, to authorize heath care, and choice of school and religion.   The definition of custodial decisions can be expanded to decisions on enrollment in activities, participation in sports, accelerating or holding back school advancement, and so on.   There are three  types of custodial authority that can be granted by a judge:  joint, sole, and impasse-breaking authority.   In sole custody, only one parent has the authority to make these decisions.  In joint custody, both parents have that authority.  With impasse-breaking authority, both parents can make the decisions, but if they disagree, the designated parent’s wishes govern.  Joint custody is presumed in Wisconsin, and is granted in most cases.  Sole custody or impasse authority is generally reserved for situations in which a parent cannot be trusted to make good decisions for a child, whether because of mental illness, immaturity, or irresponsibility.   As can be imagined, these situations are rare, but extremely serious, and often involve serious questions regarding the child’s safety and development.

Physical placement is simply the  amount of time that a child spends with each parent.   Unlike with joint custody, equal placement time is not presumed. For example, joint custody can be granted to a parent who has placement only a few times per year.  Because joint custody is typically granted, the majority of parental disputes occur over placement.   Placement also more clearly impacts parents’ and children’s daily lives, and for a parent who sees the children less than he/she would like, is often a source of extreme frustration.   Childcare responsibilities that made sense while parents lived together often become impossible after a split.  A stay-at-home parent may need to take a job to pay expenses, requiring either daycare or the other parent to take a bigger role.   Or a parent who typically worked late may have to change work hours now that the other parent is no longer in the home to provide childcare on evenings and weekends.   If a parent cannot make changes in lifestyle or work responsibilities, he/she may be granted only limited placement, even if he/she is an otherwise good and loving parent.   Parents worry, with some justification, that their bond with the children will be weakened if their time with the children is limited.  As a result, parents often fight very strongly to retain as much time with the children as possible.

Parents understandably are worried and unsure about how their relationship with the children will be affected after the separation.   In most cases, a reasonable agreement can be worked out.  However, since the issues are so important, it is vital to work with an experienced family lawyer to understand and enforce your rights and, in some cases, ensure the children’s safety and well-being.  It is far  better to establish fair and reasonable arrangements at the beginning than suffer unnecessarily from an inappropriate custody/placement situation.   I am happy to consult with all parents facing such difficult decision

VICP (The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) was established in 1986 to help compensate vaccine recipients and their families who have been severely injured as a result of adverse effects from certain vaccines. Over the course of the years, I have represented many victims and their families who were seriously injured or died from adverse reactions to vaccines. Over those years, a common question is:

What is the last date in which I can file a claim?

Answer: We would hope that would be an easy answer but it is not.  In most cases, you must file a claim within 36 months after your first symptoms.

If you have any questions about the vaccine injury program, please contact me for a free, no obligation consultation or comment below.

Is the best personal injury attorney for you the attorney that advertises on television, radio or has a first page placement on Google?  Maybe or maybe the television advertising law firm had one big hit on a case and is spending their money advertising to get more “big hits”.  Maybe, the law firm takes on huge annual debt to pay for the advertising.  The law firm with the first page placement on Google could very easily have gotten there, not because they are the best attorneys for you, but because they paid a company to put the right words on their website to get a higher placement.  The same can be said for the radio advertising law firm.  Simply because a law firm either can afford to pay for the expensive telephone or radio advertising or website placement service does not mean they are the best attorney for you. 

If you or a friend or family member have been in an accident in which there was an accident report filed you or your friends or family most likely received letters from a variety of law firms.  Those law firms hire people to check sheriff’s department and police departments for accident reports on a daily or weekly basis.  They then send out the letter and get around solicitation rules by putting on the top of the letter that it is an “advertisement”.  These law firms may be the best law firm for you or they may be similar to a commercial fisherman that puts the net down in the water to get as many fish as possible and once the fish are on board the big ones are kept and the little ones are discarded.  If your case is the “big fish” you will get top service;  if not, you may get discarded.

The internet has a wealth of information for you to use in determining what law firm to contact to discuss representation.  Look for things like areas of law, expertise and a feeling of teamwork and compassion that does come through some firm’s website.  Is the law firm made up of “real people”.  Does the law firm represent big businesses and companies and if so will they really care about your injuries in a car accident with limited medical expenses and lost wages or are they looking for the multi-million dollar verdicts to pad their pocketbooks and to pay for even more expensive advertising.

Talk to your friends and family members to see if they know of a law firm and if so what is their opinion and why do they have that opinion.  Look for a law firm that will give your case the attention you deserve as opposed to what is best for the law firm.  Will the law firm put your case at the top of their priority list and will they treat you like a person with real needs and concerns.  Talk to the law firm about making decisions about your case based upon what is best for you as opposed to what is best for the law firm.  Ask the lawyer about his or her experience handling the type of case that you have whether it be injuries from a car accident, a slip and fall in a store or parking lot, injury at a water or amusement park or as the result of the negligence of a professional such as a doctor, chiropractor or another lawyer.

We have been helping people, not corporations or big businesses, who were injured as a result of the negligence of others for more than 25 years.  We have recovered millions of dollars for our clients.  We represent people with a variety of injuries whether minor or catastrophic keeping in mind that our top concern is treating the client with dignity and respect, providing them with information so that they can make the right decision on how to handle their case and getting them the compensation they are entitled.  Should you, a loved one or a family member have any questions about an injury as a result of the negligence of another, please contact Attorney Mark L. Krueger for a free, no obligation consultation.  Most of these cases are handled on a contingency fee so there is never a payment to the law firm unless and until there is a recovery.  At Krueger & Hernandez SC we mean it when we say “we listen, we care, we get results”.

The Highway Investment, Job Creation, and Economic Growth Act of 2012 is the latest transportation funding bill. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to finance transit, highway and bridge improvements. The bill would make critical infrastructure investments across the country and create good-paying jobs by fully funding the Highway Trust Fund and the projects it supports. So what, might you ask, does this have to do with estate planning?

In order to help raise revenue to fund the projects contained within the bill, Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus has recommended a provision that would limit the use of stretch IRAs. Funds that are placed into a traditional IRA are exempt from income taxes. When funds are distributed from the IRA to the original account owner, or to a beneficiary, the distributed amount must then be claimed as income and taxed in the year of distribution. Under current tax law, beneficiaries who inherit a traditional IRA usually have the option of stretching out distributions over their own expected lifetimes, thereby allowing income tax-deferred growth. There are some exceptions to this rule, but overall the option of stretching out an IRA provides an opportunity for many years of tax-deferred growth. Under the proposed changes, with certain limited exceptions, a beneficiary of an IRA would be required to withdraw the entire amount, and therefore pay the deferred income taxes from these distributions, from the inherited IRA within five years.

Opponents to this proposal claim that too many investors have placed funds in IRAs, relying heavily on the tax-saving provisions currently in place. In addition, opponents argue that tax policies should encourage saving and transferring investments between generations.

Those who support the proposal claim that the changes would raise $4.6 billion for the Treasury over the next decade by requiring younger beneficiaries to pay taxes over five years instead of spreading them over their lifetimes. Further, the original intended purpose of IRAs is as a retirement planning tool, rather than a way for wealthy individuals to pass even more wealth to their beneficiaries (who did not earn the inherited money) essentially tax free.

Many anticipate that the proposed legislation will not ultimately clear the full Senate and the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. However, it’s certainly something for investors and advisors to keep an eye on.

VICP (The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) was established in 1986 to help compensate vaccine recipients and their families who have been severely injured as a result of adverse effects from certain vaccines. Over the course of the years, I have represented many victims and their families who were seriously injured or died from adverse reactions to vaccines. Over those years, a common question is:

What kind of damages can I recover?

Answer: Lost wages, pain and suffering and emotional distress up to $250,000. Unreimbursed out of pocket expenses relating to the vaccine injury, future medical needs that are not covered and paid by other benefits or paid by insurance, social security, Medicare/Medicaid, etc. In cases where death occurs, the Estate is limited to $250,000 and attorney’s fees and costs.

If you have any questions about the vaccine injury program, please contact me for a free, no obligation consultation or comment below.

Auto insurance and health insurance are very expensive.  Premiums for both add up and in these times when money is tight it is not uncommon to look for ways to save some money.  However, your options are limited with saving money with health insurance and medical payments coverage. 

Most automobile insurance policies offer a type of coverage called Medical Payments often referred to as Med Pay.  Depending on the company and how much you want to spend, you can usually purchase it in amounts such as $1,000, $5,000, $10,000, $25,000 or $50,000 per person, per accident.  If you are injured in an accident, med pay coverage pays for medical expenses (and funeral costs, if necessary) resulting from the accident for you and for all of your passengers.  If you are a passenger riding in someone else’s car or injured while a pedestrian your med pay coverage also pays for you and your family members. 

However, if you have health insurance you must submit your medical expenses incurred in an accident, even if you were not at fault, to your health insurance company.  Whatever your health insurance company does not pay will be covered by your med pay coverage.  Med pay can be a very beneficial coverage if you or a family member are injured in a car accident especially if you have a high deductible or high co-pay health insurance.  Of course, if you do not have health insurance then your med pay coverage would be your only source of insurance for paying your medical bills.  However, med pay only covers you or a family member if you are injured in a car accident or by a car as a pedestrian. 

In Wisconsin, med pay is mandatory.  Please check with your insurance agent on how much it costs you to increase your med pay coverage.  On the other hand, if you have great insurance coverage with little or no deductible or co-pays then it makes little sense to pay a high premium for increased med pay coverage.  Again, assess your own situation and talk to your insurance agent.

If you or a family member are injured in a car accident or an accident of any kind caused by the negligence of another, paying for medical expenses and dealing with insurance companies can be confusing, complicated and time consuming.  We have been helping injured victims and their families deal through the complicated maze of insurance claims for 27 years and offer everyone a no cost, no obligation initial consultation.  Should you decide to retain our services we represent people on a contingency fee basis which means you do not pay for our fees unless and until there is a recovery.  Should you or a family member have questions about med pay because of being in an accident or have been injured as a result of the negligence of another please do not hesitate to contact us and schedule your free, no cost, no obligation consultation.

Telephone and radio ads are filled with lawyer advertisements claiming you have nothing to worry about and representation will cost you nothing because the lawyer offers you a contingency fee.  The ads do not explain a contingency fee but seem to imply that if you are injured it is the one and only way for you to be able to afford to take legal action to protect your interest.

A contingency fee is an agreement whereby a lawyer or law firm agrees to represent you and you agree to the lawyer or law firm being your lawyer in exchange for payment of their services based upon a percentage of the recovery.  This includes the gross recovery which could be payment for pain and suffering, medical expenses, lost wages, loss of consortium, society and companionship, etc.  Each case is different and each case brings with it different damages; however, the lawyer is paid for his or her time from the percentage of the gross recovery.

The percentage depends upon the area of law and the locality in the country where the lawyer is practicing.  Generally, in Wisconsin, personal injury cases are handled on a 33 1/3% contingency fee while a worker’s compensation lawyer cannot charge you more than 20% of the amount in disupte.  In worker’s compensation cases the gross amount generally has to do with disability payments and normally does not include reimbursement of past medical expenses or payment of future medical expenses.

In medical malpractice cases, the percentage a lawyer can charge depends upon the amount of settlement or verdict.  The percentage varies between 25 – 33 1/3%.

In Wisconsin, lawyers have to advise clients that they have a choice of hiring the lawyer on an hourly basis or a contingency fee basis.  On an hourly basis, you pay by the hour for the work performed regardless of the outcome.  In a contingency fee case, you pay a percentage of the recovery and if there is no recovery you generally owe nothing for fees.

What generally is not discussed are costs and disbursements.  The expenses associated with the litigation such as court fees, travel expenses, expert witness fees, deposition expenses, etc.  Most law firms advance those fees on behalf of the client throughout the course of litigation and receive reimbursement for those expenses at the time of settlement or verdict.  Costs and disbursements are in addition to the percentage that you agree to pay your lawyer.  Costs and disbursements are generally the client’s responsibility whether you hire the lawyer by the hour or on a contingency fee.

Contingency fees allow individuals to have link representation to protect their interest when they are injured as a result of the negligence of others.  Generally, these cases are against big insurance companies or corporations who have much more money then individuals.  The lawyer is sharing the risk with the client by not getting paid unless there is a recovery and while both the attorney and the client are benefited the more the amount of the settlement or verdict. 

In some cases, the law does not allow a lawyer to charge a contingency fee.  In most family law cases including divorce, contingency fees are not allowed.  In some cases, lawyers offer a combination of a minimum hourly rate and a contingency fee based upon a recovery.  These types of mixed fee agreements work well in commercial cases involving businesses.

We have been representing people who have been harmed by other’s negligence for 27 years.  We offer contingency fee cases in a variety of legal areas and also are willing to discuss mixed fee arrangements depending upon the type of case. 

A contingency fee allows you to pursue your legal rights when you are injured because of the negligence of another without incurring huge legal expenses or risking your family’s financial security.  If you or a loved one have been injured because of the negligence of another or have any questions about your legal rights please contact Attorney Mark L. Krueger or comment below.

 Situations in which a parent, particularly a citizen of another country, wishes to remove a child from the United States should be monitored extremely carefully.  The fact is that, if a parent leaves the US with a child and refuses to bring her back, it is extremely difficult and expensive to secure the child’s return.  The case of Sean Goldman, a child whose mother took him to Brazil, then obtained a divorce from the American father and refused to return the child, dragged on for five years.  Although this case made headlines, it is more common than might be expected.  The US Department of State reported over 1,000 abduction cases in 2010.    Although there is an international law governing child abduction (Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction), only 68 countries are signatories to this law, and few are in full compliance.  Failure to comply is not limited to rogue countries; the 2011 report indicated instances in which countries such as France, Australia, and Switzerland also failed to comply with valid child custody orders. 

The report can be found at http://travel.state.gov/pdf/2011HagueComplianceReport.pdf. It is extraordinarily difficult to obtain the return of a child from Hague Convention countries; if a child is abducted to a non-Hague country, return becomes infinitely harder.  The best option is to anticipate and try to prevent an abduction by obtaining clear, specific, and enforceable orders from the US court that comply with Hague Convention requirements. 

If abduction to another country is a possibility, the parent should obtain an order stating the US as the child’s habitual residence, limiting the other parent’s access to the child’s passport, or preventing the passport application altogether, prohibiting certain travel, requiring that the other parent post bond, clearly stating custodial responsibility, and other vital provisions.    This should be done in the original divorce or paternity order, since the order provides means of preventing the abduction as well as responding to it.   Although there are generally no restrictions on leaving the country, even with children, there are ways to notify federal and local governments in advance of abduction concerns.   Parents should keep in mind that even if there is a concern regarding possible abduction, the judge may still permit the other parent to leave the country with the child.    For example, in Long v. Ardestani, 241 Wis. 2d 498 (2001), the Wisconsin Court of Appeals permitted a parent to travel to Iran (a non-Hague country) despite the other parent’s fears that the child would not be returned.  

Not every parent who is a citizen of another country would intend to abduct a child.  However, the importance of addressing this issue cannot be overstated.  Even with proper language in a US court order, there is no guarantee that a child will not be removed from the US.  Indeed, parents generally have a right to do so for shorter periods.  However, the presence well-written and compliant orders can be of tremendous assistance if preventing an abduction.   Likewise, if an abduction actually occurs, the US orders are vital to support international efforts to return the child to the US.   I strongly encourage parents with issues of this nature to contact me for a review of their court order, or to establish such an order.

VICP (The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) was established in 1986 to help compensate vaccine recipients and their families who have been severely injured as a result of adverse effects from certain vaccines. Over the course of the years, I have represented many victims and their families who were seriously injured or died from adverse reactions to vaccines. Over those years, a common question is:

Am I entitled to a jury trial?

Answer: No. The trial will be held by a special master of the United States Court of Federal Claims. There are two phases of a case. First, the special master will determine if you are entitled to compensation which means that the vaccine caused or contributed to your injuries. The next phase is damages. If you cannot reach an agreement with the government at that point then the special master will determine damages. Generally, both entitlement and damages are determined by the special master upon fact testimony from witnesses, medical records, expert testimony and medical literature.

If you have any questions about the vaccine injury program, please contact me for a free, no obligation consultation or comment below.