For years, a 29-year-old Georgia woman has alleged that members of her former Texas church abused her during a forced exorcism when she was just a teen.

The woman’s personal injury lawyers have now asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review her intentional injury lawsuit.

Laura Schubert alleges that members of the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God held her down, cut and bruised her and forced carpet burns on her back.

She further said she suffered hallucinations after being held down for hours while others tried to dispel a demon. Schubert reportedly attempted suicide after the ordeal.

The Texas Supreme Court threw out her $188,000 jury award this summer, saying that it drew the court into deciding on religious issues, which is unconstitutional.

But Schubert’s personal injury lawyers argue that the court improperly tried to expand the First Amendment’s religious protections, saying that someone’s religious beliefs don’t protect them from state laws prohibiting assault and false imprisonment.

The church’s attorneys argue that the case shouldn’t go before the U.S. Supreme Court because it’s a personal injury lawsuit for pain and suffering and mental anguish and because it concerns protected religious conduct.

Schubert’s lawyers expect to hear by late January as to whether the high court will hear the case.

While dying of cancer, a former district attorney confessed to suppressing a lab report that would have exonerated John Thompson, a man who was convicted of murder and on death row for the 1984 killing of a New Orleans hotel executive.

Thompson spent 14 long years awaiting his execution before he was exonerated and finally released from prison.

Last year a jury awarded him $14 million—a million for each year he sat on death row as an innocent man. His award was appealed but this week the 5^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that he will rightfully retain the $14 million compensation for pain and suffering.

If you’ve been wrongly convicted or have experienced pain and suffering because of another person’s wrongdoings, you may be able to receive compensation for your injuries. Talk to a personal injury lawyer today about your legal options and demand justice.

In October, a Los Angeles County Superior Court jury verdict resulted in the largest award to a plaintiff under the federal law that covers railroad workers injured on the job.

This is an important case because railroads and their employees are not covered by state workers’ compensation laws that generally govern most other on the job injuries.

The Los Angeles Times reported that Eric Doi worked for Union Pacific Railroad last year when a work-related car accident caused by a co-worker’s negligence left him a quadriplegic.

He now lives with his parents and requires round-the-clock care and physical rehabilitation.

At the end of November, a judge approved the $48 million jury award.

A Connecticut woman was awarded almost $300,000 last week for injuries she sustained when a taxi slammed into her car more than five years ago.

It took the jury about seven hours before ordering the taxi company to pay the 47-year-old single mother $292,000 for her spine injury.

The woman’s spine injury was so severe that it required surgery. Even though she went ahead with two surgeries, she still experiences extreme pain.

The woman’s personal injury lawyer said she “suffered a tremendous injury with significant pain as a result of the incident and appreciates the jury’s verdict.”

R & B Star Brandy is facing yet another lawsuit in connection with her 2006 automobile accident.   That accident resulted in the death of 38-year-old Awatef Aboudihaj, whose family is seeking $50 million in damages from the singer.  That case is scheduled for trial in April, 2009.

Now, Donald Lite, another party to the accident, has filed suit against both Brandy and Aboudihaj, claiming that each had failed to follow road regulations and thus contributed to the accident which left him with "serious and permanant" injuries. 

The singer was not charged criminally in connection with the 2006 accident.

The legal and societal controversy over taser abuse may have reached a new level, with the revelation by a British Columbia television station that employees of Taser International had disclosed numerous safety violations, including failure to properly inspect and cull out faulty products and a practice of placing circuit boards returned as defective in new casings with new serial numbers and shipping them back out unrepaired. 

The battle about whether or not tasers are inherently dangerous and whether itheir benefits outweigh the "occasional" death rages on, but this information adds a whole new element.  If the employee statements are accurate, it means that any given taser may or may not work as anticipated, and that some may be more dangerous than others–a difference that would not be apparent to the officer using the taser until the damage was done.

In response to these safety concerns, the B.C. solicitor general announced that B.C. police would no longer use tasers acquired before 2006.  We can only hope that U.S. officials will act as responsibly.

The city of Los Angeles this week filed a first-of-a-kind lawsuit against leaders of one of the city’s most troublesome gangs.  The suit, which names 9 imprisoned gang leaders (including two members of the Mexican Mafia), seeks cash damages on behalf of residents of two neighborhoods where the gangs have imposed "street taxes". 

The suit, if successful, will create an important precedent because the neighborhood residents targeted by such gangs are usually unable or unwilling to pursue their own relief out of fear of retaliation.  City officials seek compensation on behalf of residents for property damage, property devaluation, emotional distress, personal injury, medical expenses and time in which residents could not use public parks because of gang activity.

If judgment is entered against the gang leaders, property will be seized and distributed among residents who have been victimized by gang activity. 

Employers have been warned to take their employee’s stress seriously or risk the potential of costly personal injury claims.

Ginny Hallam, the head of employment at a large law firm, has warned that stress in the workplace is projected to increase as businesses brace for the hit of the spiraling economy. Hallam suggests employers offer counseling services for its staff if they are facing with too much stress.

But in a recent case, a judge ruled that providing counseling services for stressed-out employees without additional support was an inadequate defense to a personal injury claim.

If you feel like conditions at work are unbearable, unfair or illegal, you have the right to file a personal injury claim. Talk to a personal injury lawyer today.

It was a normal day for Leon Bostick. Like usual, he warmed up on an elliptical machine at Gold’s Gym in Venice, California and stretched for a while before he moved over to a Flex Equipment Co. Smith machine to do squats.

He started with about 90 pounds of weight and gradually increased it after each set. After a few sets, the bar of weights fell because it lacked a safety device and Bostick went to floor with a couple hundred of pounds crashing down on his neck.

Bostick, a former Marine and lifelong athlete, is now confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life.

He sued Flex and the gym. He offered to settle with Flex and its insurer, Atlantic Mutual, for its policy limit of $1 million, but the company never responded so the case went to trial.

Gold’s gym settled for $7.3 million.

A Superior Court jury found Flex liable and awarded Bostick $14.6 million. Frustrated that its insurer didn’t settle, Flex gave Bostick the right to sue Atlantic Mutual for bad faith for refusing to settle earlier in the case.

After 7 years of litigation, a U.S. District Court jury ruled against the insurance company and awarded Bostick an additional $11.3 million.

For more information on filing a personal injury lawsuit, check out our feature section, Personal Injury Case Steps.

A lawsuit was recently filed against Victoria Secret on behalf of a Florida woman who suffered itching and blistering of her skin after wearing one of the company’s undergarments.

The lawsuit alleges that Victoria Secret misrepresented the safety of its intimate apparel. It further charges that Victoria Secret knew—or should have known—that its products were defective and failed to warn consumers.

The victim who filed the defective products lawsuit is seeking compensation for physical and economic injuries related to the defective undergarments, as well as compensation for all medical expenses.

This isn’t the first time Victoria Secret has been under fire, numerous complaints have been filed alleging some undergarments have caused painful and serious rashes, hives, scarring, allergic reactions, contact dermatitis, blistering and other health problems.

Media reports have said that some Victoria Secret items have tested positive for the chemical formaldehyde, which is sometimes used in the textile industry to make fabrics crease-resistant.

If you’ve suffered any injury from defective products, talk to a personal injury lawyer today.