Few students can afford to pay for college completely on their own. The majority of students take out at least some form of financial aid to pay for their college education.
According to the 2007-08 National Post-Secondary Student Aid Study (the last year for which data is available), 66 percent of undergraduate students finished their degree with some debt, and the average debt was $27,803.
Student loan debt for graduate and professional students such as those attending law school or medical school can exceed $100,000.
Students graduating with poor job prospects in a still floundering economy may find themselves unable to pay back these debts. While many government loans offer income-based repayment plans and other options for those experiencing financial hardship, many private loans do not.
The high cost of student debt and the limited options for those with private loans has spurred some legislators to advocate for allowing private student loan debt to be included in a bankruptcy filing.
Proposed Changes
Changes to the bankruptcy laws in 2005 broadened the definition of the type of student loans that were excepted from a discharge in bankruptcy. In essence, the changes made private student loans ineligible for discharge in a bankruptcy – except in extreme cases of hardship, for which a petition to the Bankruptcy Court could be made. Federal student loans have been ineligible for discharge unless a showing of “undue hardship” could be made by the bankruptcy debtor for two decades.
Sen. Rick Durbin (D-IL) has proposed allowing private loans to be included in a bankruptcy. A bill was proposed in 2011 to make these changes, and legislators are currently debating it.
The United States Senate has built into its version of the federal transportation bill $24 million in extra funding for research on alcohol-sensing technology that could be installed in vehicles. Along with seat belt alarms, perpetual running lights on the floors and the serene guidance of GPS units, this new concept would detect boozy breath in drivers and prevent them from being able to start the car.
As opposed to the interlock device, which functions much like a breathalyzer test and is installed in the cars of some drivers with DUI convictions, these new technologies would be far less intrusive, if not subliminal, and could eventually end up in every car. Not surprisingly, there are many conflicting opinions on the topic, from car manufacturers to restaurant owners to those who have suffered traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury and broken bones in drunk driver car accidents.
Dallas Texas personal injury lawyer David Glenn, of Glenn Law Firm, sees the anguish drunk driving accidents in Texas cause and applauds any technology that can help save lives, while still appreciating the complexity of the issue. “Of all the types of accidents that cause catastrophic injury,” he attests, “drunk driving accidents may be the most devastating and disturbing for families. There’s no excuse for a drunk driver whose negligent actions cause serious injuries or lead to the loss of life.”
When generic drugs first became available in the 1980s, patients everywhere celebrated due to the drastically lower prices. What consumers didn’t know was that, in choosing generic drugs over brand name versions, they were giving up their right to receive damages should they suffer from injuries due to ingesting generic drugs.
According to a recent article in the New York Times, while patients who became ill after taking brand name dangerous drugs can win a malpractice lawsuit, those who take generic drugs cannot. The reason goes back to a Supreme Court decision which stated that, since generic drugs do not have control over what is listed on their labels, they cannot be sued for medical malpractice. Even cases involving drugs that necessitated amputations due to gangrene and major surgeries to address debilitating gastrointestinal problems, the prescription injury victims who were given generic forms of the drug had their cases dismissed.
San Antonio attorney at The Herrera Law Firm, Inc. know that some Texas medical malpractice cases involve generic drugs and are working hard to fight for the rights of their dangerous drug lawsuit clients.
In the article, the significant inequity of patients filing medical malpractice lawsuits is evident. “Your pharmacists aren’t telling you, hey, when we fill this with your generic, you are giving up all of your legal remedies,” said Michael Johnson, a lawyer who represented Gladys Mensing, one of the patients who sued generic drug companies in last year’s Supreme Court case, Pliva v. Mensing. “You have a disparate impact between one class of people and another.”
Car Accident Lawyers | Lawyer | Comments Off on News Dangerous Drug Injuries In Texas May Not Apply to Malpractice Lawsuit If Generic Drugs San Antonio
Car Accident Lawyers | Lawyer | 
Comments Off on Legal News Congress Debates Whether to Allow Student Loan Debts in Bankruptcy 223 
