|

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 ›

|

This week New York State changed its rules regarding teenage drivers to improve safety on the roadways. Effective immediately, teenage drivers with a learner’s permit obtained at age 16 will be required to wait six months to take their road test to obtain a license. Second, the new law increases from 20 to 50 the amount of hours that the teenage driver must complete, as verified by a parent (15 of those hours during night time) before he or she can get a license. Third, drivers with learner’s permits or a junior license are now limited to one non-family passenger under the age of 21 in the car unless there is an adult in the vehicle as well.

The new rules have been established due to significant statistics reflecting the percentages of teen and young adult drivers in New York car crashes. According to the National Safety Council, motorists aged 16 to 24 comprised 16% of all drivers in New York, but accounted for approximately 26 % of all injuries and New York wrongful death fatalities in 2008. In 2001, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reported that the amount of car crashes almost doubled for each additional teenage passenger in a vehicle. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported in 2008 that 16 year old drivers are 3 times more likely to be in a car accident than 17 year olds, and a whopping 5 times more likely to be in crashes than 18 year old drivers!

For those of us with teenage children and impending young drivers in the near future, the new law is a very sensible and proactive approach to improving young driver safety, and I applaud the legislators behind this new legislation.

Continue reading ›

|

Toyota is in the midst of an absolute legal and public relations disaster as the result of its delay in responding to deadly defects in its cars and trucks which have apparently led to at least 34 deaths in the last decade. The problem is sudden acceleration, which has been blamed on floor mat interference and sticky gas pedals, but which many safety experts are attributing to the electronic systems in these vehicles. Toyota has recalled approximately 8.5 million cars, and supposedly repaired about 800,000 to date, but the company has run into two huge public relations and credibility nightmares. First, despite initially claiming that it first learned of the sudden acceleration problem last October, it is now known that a year earlier, in October of 2008, there was an issue with sticky pedals in Europe, particularly in Britain and Ireland. Toyota’s CEO for North America, Yoshimi Inaba, claimed that the company “Did not hide [the problem]…but it was not properly shared…with the United States to see if there was any danger to American consumers.” Sure seems like hiding the problem to this writer.

Second, the Congressional oversight committee found that Toyota had given a presentation that stated “Toyota safety wins”, noting that they had been able to save $100 million by convincing the government initially to allow them to recall floor mats on 55,000 Toyota Camry and Lexus ES 350 sedans rather than recalling the vehicles themselves. This past Tuesday, in testimony to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, James E. Lentz, the president of Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., informed the committee that the ongoing repairs might “not totally” solve the sudden acceleration problem–certainly not exactly comforting words for Toyota owners nationwide.

To attempt to quell the growing swirl of controversy and anger at the delayed and insufficient response to their defective vehicles, Toyota has announced that they will commence at home pickups of vehicles, reimbursement of consumer’s transportation expenses and free rental cars while cars are being repaired. New York State’s Attorney General has started a website- www.NYToyota-Help.com to provide information about this program. Toyota has also announced that new models will allow brakes to override gas pedals in an added effort to solve the sudden acceleration issue.

Continue reading ›

|

In a front page story in the February 20, 2010 edition of the New York Times, Gardiner Harris reported on confidential FDA reports which have recommended that the diabetes drug Avandia be removed from the market. Apparently, FDA studies have determined that if diabetes sufferers had taken another drug, Actos, approximately 500 heart attacks and 300 cases of heart failure could have been avoided. Avandia, also known by its clinical name Rosiglitazone, is prescribed to patients with Type 2 diabetes. This apparently dangerous drug was linked to a shocking 304 deaths worldwide in the third quarter of 2009, according to a study by the Institute for Safe Medication Practice, a drug safety group

Two FDA researchers, Dr. David Graham and Dr. Kate Gelperin, concluded that “Rosiglitazone should be removed from the market.” There is a significant conflict over what should be done with Avandia. Naturally, the manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline, is claiming that the reports of cardiac problems as a result of Avandia use are not scientifically definitive and require further study. Senators Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, and Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, who have overseen the FDA study, are sharply critical of GlaxoSmithKline, stating that the company should have alerted patients many years ago of the potential cardiovascular risks of Avandia, thus offering patients the opportunity to take a less dangerous drug for their diabetes. But as early as 2003, according to the Senate investigation, GlaxoSmithKline and the FDA were aware of a GlaxoSmithKline study in which diabetics who used Avandia had substantially more heart problems than those given placebos!

Several years back, Avandia was one of the top selling drugs in the world, but after a 2007 study by a Cleveland Clinic cardiologist suggested cardiac risks from Avandia, the FDA got involved, and sales of the drug took a dive. Mr. Harris also reports that GlaxoSmithKline executives attempted intimidation tactics to prevent independent physicians from notifying patients or other doctors that Avandia posed serious heart risks to diabetics, who die from heart problems 66% of the time. In one egregious example, in 1999, University of North Carolina professor John Buse gave presentations at scientific meetings suggesting that Avandia caused heart problems. As a result, GlaxoSmithKline executives complained to his supervisor and warned of potential legal action against Dr. Buse in an effort to keep him quiet. Dr. Buse ended up signing a document prepared by GlaxoSmithKline agreeing not to publicly discuss his concerns about Avandia. The report mentions another similar incident of intimidation of University of Pennsylvania investigators.

Continue reading ›

|

If you are injured in a New York slip and fall accident or accident involving dangerous premises, it is vital that you get as much evidence as possible while in the store to win in Court or obtain a good settlement. Some examples:

1. Insist on providing a written report to the manager or supervisor of the store or establishment, which you review before signing, and get a copy of that report;

2. When reporting an accident, do not allow the store representative to put words in your mouth (which they love to do) such as that you were looking at the shelves, not the floor, or you were distracted by a child or a cellphone;
3. If you slipped on a substance and there is an open bottle, write down the name of the product. If you slipped or tripped on an item sold in the store, secure this item as it will be of critical importance if your case reaches trial;
4. Take photographs of the accident scene on a cellphone or better yet, a digital camera if you are fortunate enough to have one with you;
5. Obtain the names, addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses of any witnesses to the accident;
6. Don’t refuse medical attention if you are injured–take them up on their offer to call an ambulance for you. We have many cases in our office in which the client refused medical attention initially, which is a frequent defense of the insurance carriers for these owners of dangerous premises;
7. Take photographs of any visible injuries such as bruising, swelling, and bleeding;
8. Preserve intact any clothing which has been damaged, torn or has blood stains or stains from a spilled substance;

9. Maintain a diary of how the accident has affected your life, documenting pain, loss of range of motion, inability to perform activities of daily living, doctor’s appointments, and the loss of enjoyment of hobbies and sports that you would normally engage in.

Continue reading ›