Blog

You have signed your oil and gas lease, and maybe you are happy with the terms of your lease, but maybe you are not. Maybe you decided you could put up with a little noise or the extra traffic in your community while the drilling is going on. What you have been waiting for is for production to start and for the royalties to start pouring in. Just let the royalty payments start and it will all be worth it. Unfortunately, there are a myriad of ways the oil and gas company has misled you as to the amount of money you might ultimately receive from the production. Drawing inaccurate and improper unit production boundaries is one of them. An oil and gas producer's application of the "pooling" or "unitization" language in your lease might severely limit the royalties you expected to receive. Horizontal wells reaching the Marcellus and/or Utica Shales are large and expensive operations. It is not cost effective to drill one such well for individual tracts of land. Instead, the oil and gas companies need to combine many tracts of land into "production units." These units are often as large as 640 acres or more in total size. These units will typically have one drilling pad with multiple wells drilled thereon. The individual wells are drilled vertically downward then out horizontally to stretch across and through the unit. The horizontal legs permit the driller to drain the oil and gas from large areas of land. The "pooling" or "unitization" language in an oil and gas lease permits the oil and gas producer to combine your land with your neighbor's land to make production possible. "Pooling" really is necessary for the majority of landowners to get production from their oil and gas rights. However, landowners need to understand the other consequences of "pooling." "Pooling" and/or "unitization" clauses typically provide that once a production unit is created, oil and gas production from any part of that unit will hold by production all the lands which are a part of that unit. Land is held by production once certain production operations begin under a lease. If at the end of the primary term of a lease such production operations are ongoing, a lease will remain in effect typically until production ceases. Just because part of your land is in a unit does not mean that you will get paid royalties for all of your property. Imagine you have 100 acres of property and you signed a lease. The gas company has decided on a well site nearby and will begin drilling and ultimately producing oil and gas. The gas company creates its production unit of 600 acres. When the unit is created, the gas company mails a notice to the land owners in that unit. It also records a "Declaration of Pooling" or similarly named document in the land records office at the local Courthouse. The declaration shows the boundaries of the pooling unit and identifies all the landowners and amount of property each landowner actually has in the unit. As you review the pooling notice you see that although you have 100 total acres, only 2 of your acres are actually in the production unit. What does that mean? Unfortunately, it means that when production starts you will only get paid royalties for 2 of your acres. You will not get royalties for the remaining 98 acres! You might think, big deal, they are only paying me for 2 acres, I will just go get a new lease on the 98 acres not in production. WRONG! Even though you are not getting production from those 98 acres, the "pooling" language in your lease provides that the gas company still controls all of your property. This could have been prevented by asserting the need for a Pugh Clause in your lease. Very generally, a Pugh Clause is a contractual statement that an oil and gas company cannot hold by production those lands which are not part of the production. If you don't have such a clause what other options do you have? You might very well have a suit against the oil and gas company for something called "bad faith pooling." As you would likely expect, an oil and gas company will often draw its production units not to maximize profit for itself AND for its royalty owners (which is a duty that it owes under the law and under your lease), but to hold as much land as they can by production to avoid competition and give them additional time to delay further operations. The gas company does not want to pay you at the end of your 5 year term to extend your lease and it doesn't want to have to sign you to a new lease now that you know what everyone else is actually getting paid. So what does it do? It "includes" a small portion of your property in its production unit so that it retains control over all your land. By drawing a line across your property the gas company may have prevented you from obtaining hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential rental or bonus fees. Frankly, it may also be a fraud against the other land owners in the unit as well. The gas company may be paying you royalties on 2 acres when, in reality, they are not even pulling gas from your property. That reduces every other land owner's share of the total production pie. If this has happened to you, what are your options? Bordas & Bordas, PLLC is actively investigating and preparing to file bad faith pooling lawsuits. These suits ask courts to declare that property that is not within the production unit is free and clear so that you may seek new lease options for that property. Bordas & Bordas, PLLC has a long history of taking on large companies and defending the rights of individuals who might not be able to fight for themselves. The oil and gas industry has brought an immense amount of money into our area, but much more money is going right back out with these out of state companies. Don't let the oil and gas companies find new ways to deceive you and to avoid paying you. If you are concerned that you are not being treated fairly and/or not being paid properly contact us immediately for a free consultation. This article is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact an attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this website or any of the email links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Bordas & Bordas and the user or browser.

The West Virginia Wage Payment and Collection Act ensures that West Virginia workers receive all wages and fringe benefits due them for the hours they work. The Act aims to protect the rights and wages of workers, while providing a level playing field among the state businesses which must follow these rules. In brief, the Act provides: · Employees must be paid at least once every two weeks unless a special waiver is obtained by the Commissioner of Labor to pay less frequently; · Wages are paid in cash, check, money order or direct deposit; · Employees must be notified in writing at the time of hiring of the rate of pay and of the day, hour and place of payment and thereafter of any changes. · Employers are not required to provide paid fringe benefits such as holiday pay, vacation pay, sick leave or any other type of paid leave to their employees. However, if employers do provide such benefits, they must establish a written policy outlining how those benefits are earned and pay them accordingly. · Employees are entitled to an itemized statement of deductions made from wages of each pay period. · Employers are prevented from selling goods or supplies to employees at prices higher than their current value; · Employers are prohibited from deducting more than 25% of an employee's net earnings under a wage assignment and may not take a wage assignment unless it contains the written notarized authorization of the employee, specifies the amount due, states that ¾ of the employee's net wages are exempt, and is for a period of no longer than one year. · Employees that are discharged must be paid all wages, including fringe benefits due, within four business days of the last hour of employment. · Employees that resign should be paid all wages, including fringe benefits due, by the next regular payday or their last day of work when a full pay period's notice has been provided by the employee. Common Employer Abuses to Look for: 1. Payment upon termination of employment. Fired employees are often not timely provided with their final paycheck. Final paychecks must be provided with four business days of termination, no exceptions. Business days are defined as any day other than Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays. 2. Fringe benefits payable upon separation. Vacation pay and other fringe benefits that are earned according to company policy are considered wages and, generally, must be paid upon separation of employment. However, employees should consult their company's written policy relating to the payment of these benefits, if not received. Employers are permitted to place conditions on these fringe benefits and to exclude payment upon separation in their written policies. For example, policies not to pay fringe benefits to employees who were discharged for cause are permissible. 3. Assignment of wages. Without a valid wage assignment agreement, an employer is not permitted to make a deduction from an employee's pay for repayment of an obligation owed to the employer. Such obligations include: damages caused by the employee, services provided to the employee, salary advances, loans, etc. In order to have a valid assignment it must: be in writing; be accepted through signature of the employee with the employee's signature being notarized; specify the total amount due; state that three-fourths of the employee's net earnings shall be exempt from assignment and; be limited to no more than one year. 4. Coercion of employees to purchase merchandise in payment of wages; Businesses may not coerce or compel, or attempt to coerce or compel, an employee to purchase goods or supplies in lieu of paying wages due him. For example, an employer requiring an employee to purchase work uniforms by taking deductions from his or her pay could violate the Act. Even when appropriate, employers may not sell goods or services to an employee in payment of wages due or to become due him at prices higher than the reasonable or current market value. Remedies: The Act employs strong enforcement mechanisms and allows aggrieved employees to file claims for unpaid wages and benefits. In addition, aggrieved employees are often entitled to penalties, such as three times the wages owed at the time the employer violates the Act. The employee may also recover his or her attorney fees and costs in a lawsuit against their employer or former employer. This article is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact an attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this website or any of the email links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Bordas & Bordas and the user or browser.

Wheeling - The Ohio Seventh District Court of Appeals has upheld a $10 Million verdict awarded in January 2012 that was awarded to two families as a result of Personal Service Insurance Company's wrongful denial of insurance coverage benefits stemming from an April 2003 crash that claimed the life of one man and seriously injured two others. The court upheld the jury's verdict that PSIC's denial of coverage and refusal to provide an attorney to Donald and Kathy Cox was done in bad faith and awarded $8 million in compensatory damages and that PSIC, a Pennsylvania Corporation, consciously disregarded the rights of the Coxes and awarded punitive damages of $2 million. The Coxes' attorney, Jamie Bordas, of Bordas & Bordas, said that this decision sends a message that insurance companies cannot treat their client's customers in this manner. "The court reviewed and upheld the jury's decision regarding this large insurance company's total disregard for the rights of these Belmont County residents," Bordas said. "It sends a message to insurance companies everywhere that when they promise to provide coverage and protect people who use their hard-­-earned paychecks to buy insurance, the insurance company had better make good on that promise when it is their turn to protect those people." The Appellate Court also approved the attorney fee award of Belmont County Common Pleas Judge Jennifer Sargus that was in excess of $1 Million. The court stated that Judge Sargus had praised the quality of the legal wok performed stating that it had not been surpassed at any time in her career as a judge. The 2012 trial spanned two weeks and included testimony from numerous experts, including Charles Miller of Berkeley, California and Paul Dolbow of Safety Harbor, Florida, on insurance industry standards. The case stems from an April 2003 crash that resulted in the death of Brian Bigler and serious injuries to his father, Howard Bigler. Donald Cox had hit the Biglers after going left of center while trying to adjust his sun visor on his car. Cox and his wife had automobile insurance coverage with PSIC. However, after being notified of the crash by its agent, PSIC refunded the Coxes' premiums four days after the wreck, claiming that the company had effectively cancelled the policy over a month earlier. Judge Sargus presided over the trial and had previously held that under Ohio law, PSIC had not effectively cancelled the policy before the collision and that the policy was in full force and effect on the day of the accident. Because PSIC had refused to provide coverage and had refused to meet the Bigler family's settlement demand of only $50,000.00, the liability limits under the policy PSIC had sold to the Coxes, which would have completely released the Coxes from further liability, the Biglers sued Cox and obtained a judgment of $3,000,000.00 against him. Cox later assigned his claims against PSIC to the Bigler family so that the judgment that the family had obtained against Cox could be satisfied through any recovery against his insurance company. Attorney Harry White of the law firm Banker & White in St. Clairsville represented the interests of the Bigler family at the trial and on appeal. Tom Mulvey and Lisa Haase of the Columbus, Ohio law firm of Curry, Roby, and Mulvey Co., LLC, represented PSIC that had previously been headquartered in Columbus. Bordas & Bordas is a plaintiff's litigation law firm of 16 attorneys based in Wheeling, West Virginia that also has offices in St. Clairsville, Ohio and Moundsville, WV. It practices throughout the region in diverse areas of law. For more information, please contact Jamie Bordas or Carrie Scanlon, Director of Communications and Philanthropy at 304.242.8410 304.242.8410.

It has happened to me again! I missed the red hot episode of Criminal Minds that has caused a Social Media frenzy. My Facebook newsfeed was inundated with statuses setting forth opinions on Wednesday night's episode of Criminal Minds that was supposedly set in Wheeling, WV. Several friends who had obviously not watched the episode, but had only heard about it, commented on how awesome it was that little Wheeling, WV was on this hit CBS show and how amazing it was that the Wheeling Police Department was mentioned. Other friends, who stuck out the duration of the grueling episode, were irritated and embarrassed by the inaccurate depiction of our city. So... again, I had to watch it. I logged on to CBS.com and watched the episode several hours after it aired to see what all this Facebook fuss was about. For those of you, like myself, that missed the airing of the show, here is a summary of what you missed. The Criminal Minds episode titled "Blood Relations" began with the words OUTSIDE WHEELING, WV plastered across the TV screen, letting the viewers know that this episode was supposedly taking place in our city. The episode was wrought with horrific and gruesome murders that turned household, farm, and hunting accessories into murder weapons(barbed wire, bear traps, chains). The actors and actresses portraying the Wheeling natives spoke with heavy accents, wore flannel clothing and boots, lived on farms, and had a family history of incest. CBS wanted its viewers to think that the Wheeling natives made their money selling moonshine or making meth. The episode seemed to allude to the historical West Virginia feud between the Hatfields and the McCoys as it depicted the family dissention between the "Howards" and the "Lees." You may have even caught the subtle poke at the Wheeling natives' intelligence in the reference to the complaints and motions filed with nonsensical expletives. The killer in the episode was portrayed as a shirtless, overall wearing, psychopath who we learn is deformed as a result of his being conceived from incest relations when his mother was impregnated by her brother at the age of 16. He also keeps his "adoptive" dead mother on ice and possibly has sexual relations with her as well (necrophilia). Throughout the entire episode there seems to be a demeaning depiction of our city and its citizens. What I wonder is whether the writers of the show did any research at all before depicting Wheeling and its citizens this way? Given the fact that I was born and raised in Wheeling, and saw absolutely no similarities between the depictions and the city itself, I have to assume that the huge TV network, CBS, and its show's writers, in fact, conducted no research and instead decided to depict this city based on the many stereotypes that West Virginia cities hold - uneducated, incestual, strong-accented farm hicks with no "real jobs." Sadly, not only is this depiction wrong, but it gives national viewers a very wrong and unrealistic view of our city. What is the harm in that? Consider this scenario... Have you ever been curious when you watch TV shows and wondered whether the depictions of people or a profession are accurate? For those of you who were fans of the legal drama "Boston Legal" did you ever wonder whether we attorneys really sit on a balcony and drink expensive scotch and smoke cigars after a big case victory? How about those of you that watch the medical drama "Grey's Anatomy", do you find yourself curious to ask your doctor how realistic the cases and scenarios are that are depicted in the weekly episodes? If you are anything like me, you do. These depictions pique our curiosity regarding issues with which we are not familiar, or make us contemplate the culture of places where we have never been. Now, Criminal Minds has potentially piqued the curiosity of its viewers regarding the small town of Wheeling, WV. And even if it didn't make someone curious about the city, or confirm the state's stereotype, it certainly implanted in the minds of its viewers this depiction of the city and its citizens. What does this mean? It means that when I travel and I meet new people and I say I am from Wheeling, WV these are the thoughts of me that cross people's minds. When you move away and apply for jobs in other states, this is the "picture" of you that your potential employers see. Or when my child applies to an out-of-state college and fills in his address as Wheeling, WV, this is the stereotype the Admissions Officer envisions and now my child has to overcome. Is it fair? Could it be that this purely fictitious show was just running a compelling storyline designed to draw in viewers and impress them to watch the show more? Are we overly sensitive and overanalyzing this one show because of those bold letters -OUTSIDE WHEELING, WV that we saw within the first two minutes of the episode? Does CBS actually make such inaccurate depictions often and we never notice because it doesn't concern us, our profession, our city, or our lives? Stereotypes are oversimplified ways of characterizing groups of people based on the differences between them and other people. Some stereotypes are rooted in fact and others are rooted in prejudice. Stereotypes exist and will continue to exist as long as there are differences between individuals and a tendency of the human brain to compartmentalize knowledge as a way to reduce the effort used when thinking. Stereotypes play a huge part in writing fiction. Storytellers rely on stereotypes and play on them to make their writing a success. When writers use characters that fulfill a stereotype, it requires much less explanation and planning on their part, therefore leaving more time for the "story line." However, even among peers, writers are divided as to the use of stereotypes in their writing. Writer Junot Díaz has said about stereotypes that "they're sensual, cultural weapons. That's the way we attack people. At an artistic level, stereotypes are terrible writing." Unfortunately, it is human nature to make stereotypes. The first time we meet a person, there are inevitably stereotypes about him or her from his appearance and mannerisms. In short, we stereotype him. But when we get to know him better, his individuality reveals itself and we realize he is a unique person who breaks the expectations of his stereotype in many ways. Those of us that live in Wheeling and agree that it is a laid-back, family-oriented community, with wonderful people, friendly children, intelligent businessmen and women, involved parents and a low crime rate, struggle with the inaccurate depiction of ourselves and our peers that CBS set forth in Wednesday night's Criminal Minds episode. Others may simply see the episode as a fictitious and entertaining story line of a hit CBS show. Either way, it is true that the writers played on a typical WV stereotype for the purpose of their show. We, as Wheeling, WV residents have two choices --- to live up to the stereotype or break it down. Myself, I am choosing the latter. I am not a regular viewer of the show. Quite frankly, I only watched this episode because of all of the backlash it was receiving. As a lifelong resident, I can't help but think of the many wonderful things Wheeling has to offer: its gorgeous scenery and two local parks, its great schools and universities, the many lucrative, thriving businesses, and the historical significance of National Road. Wheeling is not a city plagued with murder and crime, but rather a fantastic place to raise children and start a family. CBS did not give us such a view of "The Friendly City", but rather, played on inaccurate and grossly negative stereotypes. Was this irresponsible of CBS? Was it distasteful and unnecessary to the storyline or show? Or are we overly sensitive to this episode because we are, in fact, Wheeling residents? I would love to hear the thoughts and comments of others on this.

It's been a long, cold, hard winter. Sub-zero temperatures for weeks at a time have kept just about everyone I know (including me and my pups) indoors and anti-social. While Mother Nature has given us a couple glimpses of the spring weather we are usually enjoying in earnest by this time of year, Old Man Winter has been reluctant to release his grasp on the Valley. As the calendar turns to April, it appears that Spring is finally arriving and outdoor activities will be increasing exponentially. Spring brings out the best in both people and animals. It's a time of awakening and activity. It's a time to shake off the winter blues and get out and move! I knew Spring was finally arriving even though there was still snow in the forecast last week when I saw the change in Cassie, my thirteen and a half year old pup. She was helping me take out the trash one evening when she starting running laps around my house going between the back and front yards and playing hide and seek with me. There was a spring in her step that I hadn't seen since the weather had turned cold last fall. She wanted to play and sniff and simply enjoy being outdoors. I am fortunate that Cassie knows her boundaries. She will stay between my yard and her "Aunt Heather's" yard (my neighbor's yard) unless I tell her she can go further and even then she doesn't go far from me. All I have to do when she is off leash is make a noise and she comes right back to my side. Not all dogs are like that and she certainly wasn't always so well behaved. When she was little, she learned to open the storm door on her own. If the front door was open and I didn't have the storm door locked, she would let herself out and would be touring the neighborhood before I knew it. She was fortunate that she never got lost and was never hit by a car. Her best buddy Tripp wasn't as fortunate. He snuck by me one night when I opened the front door to let Cassie in and went full speed into the street and directly into the path of a car driven one of my neighbors, a man who is always on alert for children and animals when driving. Thankfully, he heard me scream and was able to stop. So instead of Tripp getting hit by a car, Tripp hit the car and escaped with relatively minor injuries. As Spring takes hold and the weather continues to warm, more and more of our animal friends are going to want to be outside running and playing with their human brothers and sisters. Children who received puppies as Christmas gifts are going to be outside playing with those puppies and learning how to take their puppies for walks on leashes. It will be a learning experience for both that will likely result, at least once, in the puppy getting loose and the child chasing after it. Hopefully, there will be an adult present to intervene and prevent both the child and the puppy from running into the street, but that is not guaranteed. There is also no guarantee that a child learning to ride his or her bike will not fall into the street or that the child will be able to stop at an intersection. There is no guarantee that the pre-teen practicing her pitching won't overthrow a ball into the street and the "catcher" (either human or canine) will run into the street without looking to retrieve the errant ball. There is no guarantee that the jogger running along the side of the road won't step wrong and fall. What is guaranteed is that the unexpected will happen at some point when we are driving and we must be prepared to deal with the unexpected in an instant. So here is my springtime plea to those driving through our neighborhoods: Please be alert. Watch for children and animals playing in the yards lining the street or walking down the sidewalk. Be prepared to stop if you believe there is even a chance that a child or animal may end up in the path of your car. Don't have your music up so loud that you would not be able to hear a child or adult scream for you to stop. You are not going to receive a prize for seeing how fast you can get from one stop sign to the next. That extra five seconds it may take you to travel the length of the block if you slow down may save the life of a child or a beloved family pet. We can teach children the dangers of running into the street without looking. We can tell children to let the puppy go and get an adult if the puppy breaks free instead of chasing it. Children are children, however. They do not always think rationally and often just react. Children fall. Leashes break. Fence gates come open. Children and pets often escape the safe confines of their yards. Drivers need to be alert, traveling at a reasonable speed in residential neighborhoods and prepared to stop in an instant. So please, as you are avoiding the pot holes left behind by the harsh winter we experienced this year, keep your eyes open for our children and pets as they are enjoying the freedom of spring and being outdoors. And pet parents: please make sure your furry children have identification tags so they may find their way home if they escape the safety of their yards. We, at Bordas & Bordas, strive to make the world a safer place for children and pets. Please help and do your part by slowing down in our neighborhoods and watching out for children out playing both with and without their pets.

"Distracted driving is a dangerous and deadly habit on America's roadways." With these words, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood introduced the first-everederal guidelines for reducing distracted driving. Nearly 50,000, or 5%, specifically involved the use of an electronic devise.  The new guidelines, issued in February, 2012, are the first attempt to address this growing threat. February's guidelines are directed at manufacturers of "light" vehicles--cars, pick-up trucks, SUV's and minivans. For the most part, the guidelines encourage manufacturers to reduce the amount of time drivers are required to spend operating devices within the vehicle.  In addition, they encourage manufacturers to disable certain devices except while the vehicle is in park. Another set of guidelines, known as phase II, will address cell phones, tablets, and other technologies that are not actually a part of the vehicle. It's not clear when the phase II guidelines will be issued. Some states, however, are taking action now. According to the Governor's Highway Safety Association, 19 states already have enacted some form of legislation banning cell phone use while driving. Texting while driving is banned in 37 states. Just last week, West Virginia joined their ranks.  SB 211, which passed by overwhelming majorities, tackles both texting and cell phone use.  Governor Tomblin supported the legislation and has promised to sign it.  When the new law takes effect on July 1, 2012, it will be illegal to text while driving.  This will be a primary offense--meaning that a driver can be pulled over specifically for that offense.  Cell phone use will also be illegal.  However, this will be a secondary offense until July 1, 2013.  Thus, for the first year, police officers will not be able to pull drivers over or issue tickets solely for cell phone use. These are all steps in the right direction.  West Virginia should be applauded for addressing the issue of distracted driving so aggressively.  After all, one of the primary purposes of our legal system is to provide for public safety.  The law must keep pace with technology.  Where, as here, the misuse of a new technology poses a clear threat to our safety on the highways, the Legislature must act.  To its credit, that's exactly what our Legislature did. But that's not the end of the story.  The new legislation will only be effective if there's proper enforcement.   Police officers must be willing to issue tickets to violators regardless of the outcry that may come from a small, vocal minority.  Prosecutors must treat these cases with the seriousness they deserve.  And, where appropriate, judges must impose the authorized fines.   Without enforcement, SB 211 will be reduced to nothing more than ink on a page.  But if all of our law enforcement officials do their part, we'll begin to see a change in driving behavior that will make West Virginia's highways a little bit safer for all of us.

Bordas & Bordas partner Chris Regan was recently published in the West Virginia Record's "Their View" column refuting an editorial published by The Record. Read on for his views about why all citizens-weak and strong alike-should enjoy the same protection of the law. Using a clearly legitimate claim as a pretext to bash basic liability rules is not the best tribute February 16th, 2014 By Christopher Regan The West Virginia Record's recent "Our View" column entitled " Using a spouse's death as a pretext for a lawsuit is not the best tribute " gives us another  opportunity to have a frank exchange of ideas. By way of background, a Target employee pushing a string of shopping carts knocked over an elderly man walking in the lobby of the store, causing him to fall, break his hip and die as a result. The Record says " believe that Target should not be blamed for a death that probably would not have occurred if Zink had been young and healthy." I appreciate the forthrightness and directness of the Record's View and the opportunity to say that I believe something different. I believe that the weak and the old enjoy the same rights as the young and the healthy. I believe that no matter why a person is weak -- whether they be a small child, a disabled person or a senior citizen -- they still enjoy the same rights I have as a healthy person in his prime. I believe that when you carelessly hurt or even kill someone, it's a poor excuse to say that the person you hurt was sickly, or some kind of weakling. As has been observed in the past -- "this is an old story, as old as our history." Some of us, like the Record, apparently believe in a kind of social Darwinism. In other words, "the wagon train will not make it to the frontier unless some of the old, some of the weak and some of the sick get left behind by the side of the trail." Well some of us believe in something different. I believe that Mr. Zink and every other American who gets a little sick or a little old deserves to ride along with the rest of us Americans as far as their life will take them, and not to be run down while taking a simple shopping trip as though their life isn't worth living because they aren't quite as tough as the Record's ideal man. The basic principle in law that when you hurt someone, you take them as you find them dates to the 1800s. The oldest West Virginia case one could find in five minutes is Perkins v. Monongahela Valley Traction Co., 81 W. Va. 781, 95 S.E. 797 (1918), and our high Court explained it this way: One suffering an injury from the unlawful act or negligence of another is entitled to recover all of the damages resulting from such negligence, even though, because of his enfeebled condition, the injury to him is much more severe than would have been sustained by one in good health. The damages in such case are not special in the sense that the injured party in his pleading must aver his weakened physical condition, and the more serious effect of the accident upon him because thereof. 1918. Not exactly a creature of modern trial lawyers, the Perkins case. This wise rule protects not only the old, but pregnant women, children, the blind, or anyone else who might be more susceptible to injury. Simply enough, the weakness of the victim is no excuse for the wrongdoer who hurts him. The Record has a lot of ambitious views about the law, but since it's been published, this is the oldest and most basic rule I've ever seen it hold up to ridicule. What's next? Mr. Zink is dead, and he shouldn't be. The people driving vehicles, trucks, and pushing heavy chains of carts inside the store should look out for people so they don't run them over. Maybe the Record thinks that's too much to ask. The law doesn't. Full Disclosure: The Zink family is represented by colleagues of Mr. Regan at Bordas & Bordas, PLLC.

Mandatory arbitration clauses are buried in the fine print of consumer finance, employment, cell phone, credit card, retirement account, and nursing home contracts. Just by taking a loan, a job or buying a product or service, consumers without warning are forced to give up their right to go to court if they are injured by a company. Because the private system of forced arbitration benefits companies - and disadvantages consumers and employees - more and more industries are flocking to forced arbitration to evade accountability. In arbitration, there is no publicly accountable judge, jury, or right to an appeal. The arbitrators are not made to follow the facts or the law, and there is no public review of decisions to ensure the arbitrator got it right. Moreover, contracts typically name the arbitration firm that must be employed. That arbitration firm is typically one preferred by the company. These arbitrators have an incentive to favor the company, as they want to continue to be given repeat business by them. Most importantly for corporate America, arbitration is now being used to legitimized broad class action arbitration waivers in all types of consumer agreements, including consumer finance contracts. The practical effect is that companies now use forced arbitration clauses to eliminate the ability of consumers to band together, which is often the only means for consumers to vindicate their rights. "The federal law that governs arbitration has been interpreted to the point where it has warped all sense of fairness or justice, and has given corporations a get-out-of-jail-free card," said Christine Hines, consumer and civil justice counsel at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. "The mere existence of a forced arbitration clause and class-action ban in a contract can squash thousands of valid consumer claims and shield companies from being held liable for their misconduct." As part of the Dodd-Frank Act, Congress required that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB") conduct a study to analyze the impact of mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer contracts for financial products and services, such as automobile loans, credit cards and checking accounts. The Act explicitly empowers the CFPB to adopt regulations that "prohibit or impose conditions or limitations" on the use of arbitration agreements if it finds doing so to be "in the public interest and for the protection of consumers." Late last year, the CFPB issued its preliminary findings, which were welcomed by consumer advocates. The study revealed the following facts: while tens of millions of consumers are subject to arbitration clauses in the markets the CFPB studied, on average, consumers filed 300 disputes in these markets each year between 2010 and 2012 with the leading arbitration association; 9 out of 10 arbitration clauses prevent consumers from participating in class actions; larger institutions are more likely than community banks or credit unions to include an arbitration clause in consumer contracts for credit cards or checking accounts; consumers do not choose arbitration over class action settlements; and consumers do not file arbitrations for small-dollar disputes CFPB Director Richard Cordray explained that "reliminary results help us better understand how these clauses are affecting consumers' financial lives so that we can ultimately determine whether action should be taken for their greater protection." These findings foreshadow, but do not guarantee, much-needed regulation prohibiting or limiting mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer finance contracts. Thankfully, the CFPB has already utilized its authority to ban arbitration provisions in the context of mortgage loans. Unfortunately, the CFPB has no power over arbitration clauses in other consumer industries. For the second phase of the CFPB's study, it intends to look at a number of areas, including whether consumers are aware of or have read the terms of arbitration clauses and whether arbitration clauses influence consumers' decisions about which consumer products to purchase. Bordas and Bordas welcomes action by the CFPB, but is by no means waiting on it. Bordas & Bordas has successfully beaten back numerous arbitration clauses forced on its clients by banks, creditors, cell phone companies, nursing homes and employers, allowing its clients to proceed in a public court. Those of you who have been harmed by corporate America should not assume that these shocking arbitration clauses are valid and are welcome to contact us to discuss your rights. The results in a legal case depend on a variety of factors, many of which are unique to each case. Prior results by this firm or any other do not guarantee future results. Case results presented here are illustrations of the type of work done by Bordas & Bordas and not a guarantee that any prospective case will yield any particular amount.

At Bordas & Bordas, where I've been a lawyer for going on fifteen years now, we hear about a lot of legal cases. Because of the reputation Jim and Linda Bordas have built up for decades, we get the privilege of hearing about hundreds and even thousands of different potential legal cases from people who feel they've been wronged. And I mean it when I say "privilege." It isn't easy for anyone to talk about what may be one of the worst things that has happened to them in their lives. But that is how most every case begins. Still, of the many folks who get in touch, only a small percentage of those cases get "taken." And while we do our best to explain our thinking to each person we talk to, we don't get to talk to everyone. I often meet people who once they find out I'm a lawyer, immediately want to tell me about the case they had that no lawyer would take. If you've ever been in that spot: this one's for you. Reason #1: There's no such thing as your case. This is by far the most common situation. Every week, for example, we get calls from people who feel they are treated unfairly by a boss. Not because of race or religion or in some sexual way, but just "my boss is not fair," "she plays favorites" or even "he fired me because he doesn't like me, or for something I didn't do." All of these things are hurtful, upsetting, and can truly mess up your life, but they are not against the law in most places. The "employment-at-will" doctrine means that employees without benefit of a union or a contract can be fired at any time for good reason or no reason. Only when a person is fired for a specific bad reason, like a discriminatory racial, religious or sexual reason, or in violation of some public policy, is that a case. Reason #2: There is such a thing as your case, but the case can't pay its way. This happens a lot too. Most ordinary people cannot afford to pay lawyers by the hour. They use the "contingency fee system" that allows them to pay with a portion of the money that is recovered if their case is won. We get calls about shoving matches and fistfights and people who feel they were slandered by a person they know who talked about them behind their back. In those situations, there may well be a case, but because there's rarely insurance backing up bar brawlers or town gossips, the case will end up costing more in time, effort, and money than can ever be squeezed out of the wrongdoer to pay for it. Other situations exist where a wrong is done, but there is not enough provable (see # 3, below) harm to make the process worth going through. This can also happen sometimes because damages are "capped," preventing people with just claims from getting compensation by a specific law targeting them. Reason #3: Not enough proof. No matter what you hear, every legal case requires PROOF. In fact, many types of lawsuits cannot even be filed anymore unless you submit proof in advance that the case has merit. Even the ones that get past that point rarely get to trial without the judge being required to specifically decide that there is enough proof to show the plaintiff has a just claim (juries are not told that the judge has made this finding though). So we talk to folks in great detail about how each part of their case will be proved. In some situations, after careful investigation, we find out that no matter how strongly we believe something has happened, we don't have the proof the law requires. Sometimes even we don't know, and we hire experts in engineering, or nursing, or mining, only to find out a seemingly good case can't be proven. And that is tough to take, but so is losing, so we have to level with people about that from time to time. Bonus Reason: I once got a call from a man who wanted to sue the police for malicious prosecution. He said he had been accused of, um, pleasuring himself, in a public place. Since one of the elements of malicious prosecution is "termination of the case in your favor," I asked him this: "When were you acquitted of the public indecency charge, sir?" "Oh, I wasn't acquitted, I was convicted," he tells me. Not a good start. I thought maybe there was a false witness, who could potentially be a defendant, so I asked him who the witness was. He said this: "No witness, there was just a videotape they showed the jury of the whole thing." I have to admit the case felt like a loser at this point, but I wanted to be thorough, so I asked: "Where was the video shot from?" I asked, and he said, "The security camera outside the ladies' dressing room at JC Penney." So, sometimes, you can't get a lawyer because . . . your case stinks. I tried to find a polite way to tell the gentleman that he had gotten about all he would from the law under the circumstances, that he should quit while he was behind, and sent him on his way.* One thing Jim and Linda Bordas stressed to me from day one of my training is that every person should be treated with dignity and respect. Most of the cases aren't like that last one, of course, but arise because someone truly feels they've been made a victim without good cause. It's very difficult to turn down anyone who asks us for help. We are all very grateful to get the chance to talk to each person who contacts us, and we'll continue to tell each person what we think of their case for free, even if we can't take every case that comes our way. *The attorneys at Bordas & Bordas value your privacy. Some details of this potential case have been changed to protect the, er, guilty. This article is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact an attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this website or any of the email links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Bordas & Bordas and the user or browser.

A gas explosion has kept families out of their own neighborhood for a week. While the line in the neighborhood did not run to homes, it did run down the street and when a leak caused an explosion, a severely burned man was fortunate enough to be aided by his neighbor. These explosions are happening with greater and greater frequency here in the Ohio Valley. From the drilling site fire last week in Greene County, Pa., to the Tyler County gas explosion last year to the Sissonville blast that shut down an interstate, the incidents are occurring more and more often. Property damage is the least of the worries when burns, sometimes over a person's whole body, can result from these event. Companies need to be held accountable for their conduct in failing to properly inspect, repair and maintain gas lines so that leaks, particularly in residential areas, but really anywhere are eliminated.

Tens of millions of Americans, including over 60% of lower-income Earned Income Tax Credit recipients, use paid tax preparers. Yet nearly all states have more regulatory requirements for hairdressers than for tax preparers. Certified public accountants, tax lawyers, enrolled agents credentialed by the IRS, and certain unpaid volunteers are the only tax preparers subject to testing and regulatory oversight. The lack of oversight has led to widespread and endemic problem across the industry. Mystery shopper testing done by the government agencies and consumer advocacy groups over the last several years has revealed a large number of errors, fraud, and other abuses. In addition, high and inflated tax preparation fees of up to $500 for simple returns were documented by mystery shoppers. Accordingly, Bordas & Bordas recommends consumers consider a local certified public accountant as opposed to large tax preparation chains. Often, a more qualified CPA can prepare your return for a similar or even lower price. Furthermore, Bordas & Bordas recommends filing your taxes early in the tax season as opposed to waiting in order to lower your chances of becoming a victim of identity theft. Stolen identity refund fraud (SIRF) is a growing subset of identity theft, which accounts for up to 43% of identity theft complaints. Similar to any identity theft, a criminal committing tax identity fraud gathers key information about the victim. In the tax context, the key is obtaining the individual's name matched with his or her social security number. The thief then submits a false tax return in the name of the victim claiming a tax refund. Unfortunately, in many instances the refunds are issued. Cleaning up the mess left behind by the identity thief and getting your refund can take more than a year and countless hours of your time. One way to prevent this from happening is to file early. Why? The IRS may be able to process your return before the identity thieves can. "It really can be a race to the IRS," said Steve Toporoff, coordinator of the Identity Protection Program at the FTC. "They usually don't have access to W-2 forms, so they just make up income numbers and hope their phony return gets through the process," Toporoff explained. The IRS has published a Taxpayer Guide to Identity Theft which contains additional tips that you may wish to review. Don't let tax season be more of a hassle for you than it already is. Find a qualified tax professional and file early. This article is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact an attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this website or any of the email links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Bordas & Bordas and the user or browser.