|

When a client walks into our White Plains, New York office, having suffered a serious injury in a car crash, slip and fall accident, or from using a defective or dangerous product, we envision that this new case will reach trial, and want to preserve evidence as soon as possible. One of the most important types of evidence to prove your personal injury case in Court is photographs–of the smashed in back of your car, uneven and broken sidewalk or stair, or icy driveway. Each of these conditions frequently disappears and is lost forever shortly after the accident. The car is taken to a repair shop and declared a total loss; the owner of the stairway sends out a contractor to fix the broken stair, or the icy driveway is cleared up through a quick application of salt or a warming trend in the weather.

Thus, it is our advice that immediately after the accident, you have a friend, relative, or witness take photographs of the scene of the accident, and of the cars involved if it was an auto accident. Obviously, if you are able to, you can do this yourself, but often, the injuries you have suffered prevent this. If you wait until the next day or a couple of days later, particularly with regard to weather related accidents, the evidence is likely to be lost forever.

The reason that photographs are so critical is that insurance companies utilize them to determine the severity of an accident, and to decide in many cases whether your injuries were caused by the accident. The second reason is that if the case does not settle before trial, jurors often expect to have visual proof of the damage to your vehicle, or the stairway you fell on, before deciding whether the defendant is at fault for your injuries.

Continue reading ›

|

According to the final New York State Police report, issued last month, Diane Schuler was speeding at a whopping 85 miles per hour in last July’s fatal car crash on the Taconic Parkway in which 8 people died. The fiery crash occurred on July 26, 2009, when Ms. Schuler, traveling with her three nieces and two children, was driving southbound in the northbound lanes of the Taconic Parkway with a blood alcohol content of .19 (more than twice the legal limit) and high on marijuana. Everyone was killed in the Schuler vehicle with the exception of her then 5 year old son Bryan, and all three occupants of the vehicle driven by Guy Bastardi, which was traveling northbound in the left lane, were also killed.

Daniel Schuler, the husband of Diane Schuler, claimed last year that his wife must have had an illness or medical problem which caused her to drive so recklessly on the wrong side of the parkway. There was talk of exhuming Ms. Schuler’s body to conduct a separate autopsy to potentially rebut the findings of the Westchester County Medical Examiner’s Office, but to date there has been no evidence to refute the Westchester Coroner’s findings that Schuler was high and intoxicated at the time of the accident.

Understandably, the Bastardi family has commenced litigation against the Estate of Diane Schuler for the deaths of 81 year old Michael Bastardi, Sr. and his 49 year old son, Guy Bastardi, who was behind the wheel when the tragic accident occurred. The lawsuit is pending.

When you combine the speed of the Schuler vehicle at 85 m.p.h with the alleged speed of the Bastardi vehicle at 74 miles per hour, the vehicles were approaching each other at 233 feet per second–(Total of 159 miles per hour X 1.466 feet per second= 233 feet per second). Thus, there is no question that Guy Bastardi had no time to react or take evasive action from the Schuler vehicle. The only real question in this lawsuit is how much automobile insurance or umbrella insurance coverage the Schuler family had in effect on the date of the accident to compensate the Bastardi family. To date, we are not aware whether the family of the late Daniel Longo, also in the Bastardi vehicle, intends to commence legal action against Schuler’s estate.

Continue reading ›

|

In the summer of 2008, then 22 year old Jacy Good was on her way home to Lititz, Pennsylvania with her 57 year old parents after graduating from Muhlenberg College. Suddenly, her entire life was turned upside down when a tractor-trailer slammed head on into her car, killing Jacy’s parents Jay and Joan Good, and leaving Jacy with permanent injuries including a collapsed lung, shattered pelvis, a lacerated liver, and worst of all, a traumatic brain injury that has caused faltering speech and difficulty concentrating. The truck driver had been forced to swerve to avoid a vehicle driven by an 18 year old who blew through a traffic light while speaking on his cell phone. The 18 year old driver was issued a ticket for disregarding a traffic control device but investigators were not able to determine if he went through the light because he was on his cell phone.

As a result of the accident, Jacy has now become a nationwide advocate to ban all cell phone usage by drivers. She noted: What is that important that you have to put everyone else on the road in jeopardy?” Since 2001 in New York, pursuant to Section 1225-c (2) (a) of the Vehicle & Traffic Law, it has been unlawful to use a mobile phone while a vehicle is in motion, unless the motorist has a hand-held device. Then last year, the New York State Legislature passed a law banning texting while driving. However, the offense was made secondary, meaning that in order to be charged with texting while driving, the officer would first have to charge the driver with a primary offense such as speeding or passing a red light. This month, the Legislature passed an amendment to the texting ban, making it a primary offense, and the amended law awaits approval by the New York State Senate before Governor Paterson can sign the bill, which he is in favor of.

Nationwide, 5,870 people were killed in car crashes in 2008, based upon data from the National Safety Council. The Council has urged legislatures to outlaw all cell phone use while driving, as it is clearly a major contributor to the overall epidemic of distracted driving, which also includes motorists who are too tired to drive, eat, drink or smoke while driving, attend to children, or focus on their radios or GPS devices instead of the road.

In June, Ms. Good and her boyfriend Steven Johnson, (who gave up his intention of a career in banking and has become inspired by Jacy’s accident to become an occupational therapist), spoke at nearby Ardsley High School about the huge risks and dangers from using cell phones while driving. Mr. Johnson told the students that he will never forget, and hopes that they never will either.

Continue reading ›

|

In follow up to our post on February 22, 2010 entitled Diabetes Drug Blamed For Heart Problems, there is new information which reveals that SmithKline Beecham actively attempted to cover up studies which showed that the diabetes drug Avandia was dangerous to the heart. In a July 12, 2010 article by Gardiner Harris in the New York Times, it was revealed that since Avandia’s success was so vital to SmithKline, company executives decided not to publicize results of studies on its website or, more importantly, to submit these negative results to drug regulators at the Food & Drug Administration.

One particular company executive, when he found out that data revealed that Avandia was riskier to the heart than a competing drug Actos, wrote in an e-mail: “Per Sr. Mgmt request, these data should not see the light of day to anyone outside of the [company].” Apparently, according to the article, SmithKline knew as early as 1999 of extensive heart problems from the use of Avandia, but had determined that they would lose between “$600 million from 2002 to 2004 alone” if the risks became public. Even worse, an F.D.A. reviewer who reviewed an Avandia clinical trial named “Record” found that 12 patients who suffered severe heart problems from Avandia were not included in the trial’s listing of “adverse events.”

Surprisingly, the issue of whether to withdraw Avandia as a dangerous drug from the market has split the F.D.A., with some regulators arguing in favor of keeping the drug on the market despite the risks. Other diabetes drugs available include Actos and an older diabetes drug named glyburide, which is also less expensive.

In 2004, when GlaxoSmithKline was found to have hidden data regarding the suicidal thoughts teenagers and children were having from its antidepressant Paxil, the company settled a lawsuit by publicizing all data from its clinical trials. The posting of clinical trial data became federally mandated in 2007. It would appear that the Paxil experience has not changed Smith Kline’s procedures when it comes to disclosing the risks of its products.

Continue reading ›

|

We have been receiving more calls from clients who suffered dog bites by pit bulls, Doberman pinschers, German shepherds, and numerous other breeds. If this happens to you, what do you do to protect your legal rights?

First, make sure that you obtain the owner’s information, especially the address, and find out as much information as you can about the dog–its name, whether it has been licensed, had all of its shots, and most importantly, had the dog bitten anyone previously–this is critical information as will be discussed further below.

Second, if a cell phone or camera is available, take photographs of the dog, and of the property where you suffered the injury.

Third, you must report the incident to the police so that there is an official report. Make sure that the police officer investigating the incident questions the dog owner about rabies shots and prior bites by the dog. The issue of previous attacks or bites by the dog is vital to a successful claim against the dog owner, based on the legal concept of notice. Notice means that the dog owner knew (or should have known) that his or her dog was dangerous based upon a previous attack, yet did not properly restrain or fence in the dog to prevent future attacks.

Fourth, obtain prompt medical attention for your injuries at an emergency room or your private doctor. It is very important to confirm with the triage nurse or staff at the doctor’s office that they described the incident accurately, including where the dog bite happened, how it happened, and when it took place. We have seen numerous situations in which hospitals do not accurately describe the circumstances of an incident, which causes many complications when we are attempting to resolve the case for the client.

Fifth, obtain a copy of the police report of the incident if some time has passed before you seek legal counsel. If there are any inaccuracies in the police report, you should notify the department immediately that you wish to file an amended report so that all information in the report is correct.

Continue reading ›

|

If you suffer an injury by, for example, falling on a crack in the sidewalk, slipping on a spilled substance at the supermarket, or on ice on a stairway at the mall, there are several things you must do to pursue a New York slip and fall case:

1. Obtain the names, addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses of any potential witnesses. This includes people who observed you fall, as well as those who came on the scene afterward but can attest to pain, suffering and the extent of your injuries;
2. If possible, take photographs of the condition that caused you to fall, or have a friend or relative do the same. This is vital, as conditions such as a spilled substance or ice on the ground are frequently gone by the time you return with a camera if immediate photographs are not taken;

3. Report the accident to the property owner, request that a written report be prepared and obtain a copy of any statement that is prepared. If there is incorrect information on the report, make sure that this is rectified before you leave the premises.

4. Take photographs of any injuries you suffered. Remember that swelling, bruising and severe cuts will begin to heal and you want to document how the injury appeared immediately after the accident;
5. Obtain medical treatment at a local emergency room or private doctor and make sure that you report the history so that it is documented that your injuries were caused due to the slip and fall accident;
6. Do not under any circumstances provide a recorded statement to insurance company representatives who are trained in asking questions that attempt to shift the blame to you;

7. DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING FROM THE INSURANCE COMPANY without consulting an attorney. They often will contact you with an offer to pay your medical bills in exchange for your signature on a binding “general release” which will prevent you from initiating a claim or lawsuit for your injuries.

Continue reading ›

|

In part 1 of this post, e discussed the initial stages of a no- fault claim when you are injured in a New York car crash. Now we will discuss what is required to be successful in your claim or lawsuit against the other car that caused the accident. Under Insurance Law Section 5102 (d), also known as the No-Fault Statute, which was established in 1973, in order to obtain compensation for your injuries, you must suffer what is known as a “serious injury” in the automobile accident. A serious injury includes:
1. Death;
2. Dismemberment;
3. Significant Disfigurement;
4. A fracture;
5. Loss of a fetus;
6. Permanent loss of use of a body organ or member;
7. Permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member;
8. Significant limitation of use of a body function or system; or

9. A medically determined injury or non-permanent impairment that prevents the person from being able to perform their usual and customary activities for 90 of the 180 days immediately following the accident.

The first five sections of the “serious injury” definition are much easier to define and prove. For example, if you suffer a broken arm in the accident, you automatically meet the no fault threshold of serious injury. Similarly, if the accident causes the loss of a body part or severe scarring, these injuries will automatically satisfy the “serious injury” requirements. However, we do constant battle with insurance companies in determining whether an injury has caused a “significant limitation of a body function or system”, and whether an injury has resulted in a “permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member.” So what is a “significant limitation” of a body function or system, or a “permanent consequential limitation of a body organ or member?” According to the law, in order for you to have suffered a “significant limitation”, the limitation on the body part must be more than simply “minor, mild or slight.” Further, the limitation must be objectively determined by a medical provider, and not simply substantiated by your “subjective” complaints of pain. As to “permanent consequential limitation” of a body organ or member, in addition to being more than “minor, mild or slight”, the doctor must determine that the injury to your back, neck, or other body part is to some extent permanent, as established by the doctor’s records and reports.

In order to beat the other driver’s insurance company and be successful in your New York car crash case, we must prove first that the other driver was at fault for the accident, either in whole or partially. If we prove the other driver’s responsibility for the accident, we must then establish through your treating doctor’s reports how your injuries have affected you in your ability to perform activities of daily living, such as your job, or being unable to perform household chores. Further, the doctor must quantity disability such as loss of range of motion of your neck, back, arm, or whatever part of your body was injured in the accident. If we have this medical proof, we have the basis for a successful No-fault case in New York.

Continue reading ›

|

In New York State, if you are injured in a motor vehicle accident, regardless of which car is at fault for the accident, your medical expenses and lost earnings will be paid by your own insurance company under the No-Fault Law of New York State. In order to qualify for no-fault benefits, you must immediately report the accident to your insurance company, and then you must submit what is known as an NF-2 (No-Fault Report Of Accident) within 30 days of the New York car crash. This 30 day rule is a problem, in that clients frequently are unfamiliar with the rule and don’t initially intend to pursue a claim for their injuries. When they do contact a lawyer and learn that their medical bills, lost earnings and expenses are supposed to be submitted to their own insurance company (Clients will often ask-“Why is my insurance company responsible–that guy rear ended me!”) it is often past the 30 day window, and the client’s insurance company can attempt to disclaim coverage for no-fault benefits.

Once the claim has been properly filed with the no-fault insurance company, it is vital to obtain as much treatment with the orthopedist, neurologist, physical therapist, chiropractor or other provider as soon as possible. The reason for this is that all insurance companies will send you for an “Independent Medical Examination” (IME) within several weeks of the commencement of treatment, and in some cases, within days, to determine whether you need medical treatment. Of course, the “Independent” medical examiner, is anything but, often conducting 30 or more of these exams in one day. Certainly, it doesn’t take a big stretch to say that they “know where their bread is buttered”, and they are not likely to remain on the approved list of the insurance company if they continuously find that the examinee is in need of further treatment. It is my estimate that in 90% of our client’s cases, the first examination with the “IME” doctor is used to establish that the client does not meet the No-Fault threshold” of “serious injury”, and thus, the client is cut off from further treatment with that specialist. Insurance companies will often schedule numerous examinations for a client at the same time–i.e- they are sent to a neurologist, orthopedist and a chiropractor on the same day, so that the insurance company can utilize these “normal” examinations to cut the client off from all benefits.

Thus, it is our recommendation to our clients that they seek all necessary medical treatment expeditiously, not miss any appointments if at all possible, and when undergoing an “IME”, explain to the doctor in detail the benefit they are receiving from their treatment (obviously, if you inform the no-fault doctor that treatment is not providing any benefit, you will be cut off). We find that if the client is upfront and respectful of the no-fault examiner, but also makes definitively clear that they do need more treatment and that the treatment is having some positive effect, the client may at least obtain one additional course of treatment of 6 to 8 weeks. This extension is vital to the personal injury aspect of the New York car crash case, as we will discuss in Part 2 of this post.

Continue reading ›

|

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has reported that fatal car crashes have decreased for a fourth straight year since the statistical high in 2005. There were 33,963 motor vehicle fatalities in 2009, a decline of 8.9% from 2008 when there were 37,261 fatalities. The difference between 2008 and 2007 was even more dramatic, with 41,259 wrongful death accidents in 2007 reduced by 10.5 % in 2008. From 2005 to 2009, traffic fatalities dropped significantly, by approximately 22%. This is certainly attributable in part to the inclusion of driver and passenger side air bags in most vehicles as well as increased seat belt usage.

According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), vehicle miles increased by approximately 6.6 billion miles form 2008 to 2009, representing a 0.2 % increase. The fatality rate in 2009 was the lowest ever recorded, from 1.25 fatalities per million vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in 2008 to 1.16 fatalities VMT in 2009.

Continue reading ›

|

In an interesting article by Matt Richtel in the March 2, 2010 Business Section of the New York Times, electronic billboards are examined as another possible cause of distracted driving. We are all aware of distracted driving due to speaking on a cell phone and texting while driving, and who hasn’t seen someone driving while eating, drinking, applying makeup or looking at a map? However, what about driving while digital images are flashing at you every six to eight seconds, with headlines, food deals or what song is playing on the radio? In my opinion, the increased prevalence of these electronic billboards will undoubtedly lead to more car crashes and more fatalities on the roadways.

In Michigan, safety groups are attempting to block construction of the billboards, and the executive director of Scenic Michigan called the digital billboards “weapons of mass distraction.” Michigan legislators are considering a two year moratorium on the construction of electronic billboards. According to the article, the Federal Highway Administration is performing a study in which eye-trackers are utilized to determine whether motorists look at these billboards, and if so, for how long. Studies have been performed which indicated that electronic billboards do not change driver behavior, but their accuracy is questionable as they have been sponsored by the billboard industry.

The Federal Highway Administration has prohibited states from having “flashing, intermittent or moving light or lights” for some time, but possibly due to some intense lobbying by the billboard industry, the agency ruled in 2007 that free standing digital billboards did not violate their rules. Instead, the the agency simply recommended that advertisements on the billboards remain in place for at least 4 seconds and not be “unreasonably bright”, which is certainly a vague standard, to say the least.

Continue reading ›