Jury says U-Haul must pay $84 million to injured man -- chicagotribune.com
Do you think a verdict like this will cause U-Haul to be a safer company? Or do you think U-Haul will just ignore the jury's message and continue conducting business as usual?
Please give us your thoughts.
If you or a loved one are injured in an accident in Houston or the surrounding area, you will probably want to hire the best, most competent lawyer for the case.
So how do you find the best lawyer for your particular case? And how do you even get an appointment to talk to the best lawyers in Houston?
The best and most experienced attorneys in Houston will have people lining up at their door to hire them. These lawyers will be very selective about the cases they accept and the people they represent. It's often hard to get an appointment to talk with them directly.
If it's easy to get an immediate appointment with the lawyer you are thinking about hiring, ask yourself why? Maybe that lawyer doesn't have much else to do?
Once you get an appointment with a lawyer you are thinking about hiring for an injury, accident, wrongful death, or business dispute case you should ask questions. Lots of them.
Good lawyers will not be insulted by questions. They will most likely encourage you to ask as many questions as you want. Most of the best lawyers in Houston will want you to educate yourself during the hiring process.
Any lawyer who seems to discourage your questions or doesn't answer them in a straightforward no-nonsense way should raise red flags.
After all, the best lawyers consider it their job to keep you informed and educated and comfortable during the entire process.
Questions to ask a lawyer you are thinking about hiring
1. How long have you been in practice?
2. Do you have any experience handling a case like mine?
3. Can you give me a list of your past results or past cases?
4. Have you ever published any articles about cases like mine?
5. Have you ever had a case against the same company that was negligent in my case?
6. Will you actually work on my case?
7. How much experience does your support staff have in these types of cases?
8. Have you ever won a large verdict or settlement?
9. Are you board-certified in any field?
10. Do you carry malpractice insurance?
11. Have you ever been disciplined or reprimanded by a bar association?
12. What is my case worth?
13. Have you ever represented large companies or insurance companies?
14. Can I have a copy of my attorney-client contract to take home and study?
15. Why do you believe you should handle my case and not some other lawyer?
This list does not include every possible good question. It may depend on your case. But this list will certainly cover a lot of important areas and get you started down the right road.
Any good Houston personal injury lawyer will be glad to answer all these questions and any other questions you have. And they will be glad to answer them in a straightforward, honest, no-nonsense way!
If the lawyer is evasive or says he won't answer your questions until you hire him as your lawyer by signing papers, then you should probably just leave the appointment. That lawyer is either not experienced enough for your case, is desperate for business, or has something to hide.
Have a good question you'd like to suggest?
If you have other questions you'd like to suggest that are not on the list above, please submit your question to the comments section below. We will print the most popular and most helpful question in a future post.
For more questions, visit the rest of the entires on this website or go to www.vbattorneys.com.
Houston, Texas -- Vujasinovic & Beckcom has been prosecuting a truck accident lawsuit against a Victoria-based trucking company, in which one of the company's drivers allowed the over-sized load on the flatbed trailer of his tractor trailer to strike a pick up truck legally parked on the shoulder of US 59 in Montgomery County, Texas, killing a two year old child in the pick up truck. This truck crash happened on October 26, 2006.
Through discovery efforts, the firm recently discovered that the trucking company driver tested positive for cocaine on the day of the crash. Testing documents reveal the driver admitted using cocaine the night before the crash.
The firm further determined that the trucking company's top managers were told by their field manager that the load on the truck was illegal because it was 40,000 pounds over weight and over five and a half feet over wide.
According to sworn testimony by the trucking company's field manager, after he told the managers of this extreme safety risk, the managers told him to ignore the safety hazard and to send the truck on its 250 mile route from Berclair to Woodville, Texas.
The firm further determined that at the time the trucking company hired the driver, it knew that he had a criminal record including three felonies (all of which were drug or alcohol related), a driving record including a DWI, and that his commercial drivers license was revoked.
The law firm further determined that the trucking company ignored a comment on its website in which a motorist told the company that its drivers -- including the driver who killed the young boy -- were driving so unsafely that it was likely they were going to "kill someone," yet the company took no action in response to this warning.
Finally, the law firm discovered that the trucking company falsified the trucker's logs before producing them to the law firm in this litigation, based on a comparison to the drivers logs that were provided to the investigating Troopers at the time of the official DPS investigation. The case is pending in State District Court in Jim Wells County, Texas, and is set for trial in June of 2008.
If you have any information on this truck crash or on the driving and safety habits of trucking companies, please contact us.
Most people involved in truck accidents in Texas believe they can negotiate with the insurance companies on their own. This is one of the major mistakes we see when handling Texas truck accident cases.
The insurance companies have declared war on injured people. They write letters to injured people trying to convince them not to hire an attorney. They claim that the injured person will not get as much money if they hire an attorney. But the insurance company for the trucking company always hires a team of lawyers. Isn't it suspicious that they hire a bunch of lawyers but don't want the injured person to hire his or her own lawyer?
Why do the trucking companies, and their insurance companies, need a team of adjusters and lawyers but don't think an injured person needs their own lawyer?
Simple. Because they know that if an injured person is not represented, they are almost certainly going to be able to settle the case for an unfairly low amount.
Trucking companies and their insurance companies also have spent millions and millions of dollars trying to lower the amount of verdicts in truck accident cases. This propaganda has had an enormous effect on jury verdicts in Texas truck accident cases.
As a result of these developments, people injured in Texas truck accident should strongly consider hiring an experienced and aggressive lawyer so they can level the playing field and have a better chance of getting a full and fair settlement.
Simply put, you are almost certain to get an inadequate settlement without an experienced Texas truck accident attorney because the trucking company and insurance company know they can take advantage of an injured person much more easily if they do not have to deal with an experienced, aggressive attorney.
Why? Because an experienced Texas truck accident attorney will know what cases like your have settled for in the past, or what juries have given in the past when truck accident cases have gone to Court.
And the experienced truck accident attorney will be ready, willing, and able to take the negligent truck company to Court if the trucking company or its insurance company doesn't make a fair and adequate settlement offer.
Finally, an experienced accident attorney will be know the tricks that the trucking companies commonly use and will be prepared to deal with those tricks.
Level the playing field. Strongly consider hiring an experienced and independent truck accident lawyer before trying to settle a serious truck accident injury or wrongful death case.
After a car or truck crash, especially one involving significant injuries, the insurance companies for the negligent driver or negligent trucking company may try to trick you into making decisions that will hurt your chances of obtaining a fair recovery for any injuries you have sustained.
Here are five things the insurance companies or the negligent driver may try to do that you should avoid:
1. The negligent driver may encourage you not to call the police, claiming that there is no need because they admit liability.
You should always call the police after any car or truck accident involving injury. All too often, what you are told at the scene will change once the insurance companies get involved. You need the police to come and investigate the crash so an independent party makes a written record of what happened.
2. The negligent driver may encourage you not to get the names and contact information for witnesses.
This is a mistake as well. The more witnesses you have, the easier it will be to prove your case. Again, stories often change once the insurance company or defense lawyers get involved.
3. Not getting timely medical care.
Insurance companies love this. When you don't get immediately, or timely, medical care, they claim you couldn't possibly have been injured. If you think you or anyone in your car is hurt, seek medical care in a timely fashion.
4. Giving a "recorded statement" to the insurance company.
Many times, the insurance company will try to get you to give a recorded statement, where they ask you questions and record your answers to those questions. They want to do this before you get a lawyer.
Why? Because without your own lawyer, the professional insurance adjusters may be able to trick you into saying things that will hurt your case. They will be nice and friendly most of the time, but in reality, they are often trying to trick you into hurting your own case without you even knowing it.
5. Accepting a quick settlement in a serious injury or death case.
When liability is clear, the insurance company may try to offer you money quickly, before you've recovered or had a chance to talk to your own lawyer. These offer are almost always way too low and unreasonable, and are unfair. However, with the stress and uncertainty of a serious injury, you may be tempted to take their first offer.
Not a good idea. Most lawyers will be glad to discuss your case and the offer with you for free, to determine whether the offer is in fact a fair one. Since an initial consulation is free, it doesn't make much sense not to go ahead and get independent, professional advice on the offer.
A Houston man was left with permanent brain damage when he was involved in an accident with a car on the 610 West Loop, and his driver’s side airbag failed to deploy. His brain damage was caused when his head slammed against his car’s steering wheel, which would not have happened had his airbag functioned as expected.
There have been dozens of other cases in the Houston area where airbags have failed to deploy in a crash. This has prompted lawsuits and investigations into why airbags fail to deploy in some accidents.
A review of recall statistics at Safecar.gov reveals that since airbags were first implemented in passenger vehicles, there have been over 700 recalls due to airbag or airbag component failures. What is causing all these recalls?
Manufactures claim that airbags are governed by complicated, highly scientific sensors that are programmed to determine exactly when an airbag should and should not deploy. According to vehicle manufacturers, it may seem as though an airbag should have deployed, but if the accident was a side-impact crash instead of a full head-on crash, the airbag would have been prevented from deploying in order to protect the driver from being injured by the bag.
Of course this is little consolation to the gentleman who was left with permanent brain damage after his head-on collision, and countless others like him. If you suspect that your airbag should have deployed but did not, the NHTSA wants to hear from you. You can contact them at 1-888-327-4236 or go to www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq to file a complaint.
After an accident involving serious injury, or even wrongful death, especially in truck or car accidents, you can expect the insurance companies to be pounding on your door (not literally, of course!) and calling you all the time for a "statement."
Be very careful about what you tell the insurance adjuster. Especially if you don't have your own lawyer yet.
In fact, it is a good idea many times not to give a recorded statement at all. Why? Because the insurance adjuster may be asking you "trick" questions that will hurt your case later on.
Even though the insurance adjuster may tell you he or she is just trying to "gather up some information" or "get enough information to settle your case," the reality is that most insurance adjusters in serious accident claims are there to try to "trick" you into saying things that will hurt your case.
One purpose of written, recorded, and sworn statements is to keep someone from "changing the story" later on. The other purpose, of course, is to allow the insurance adjuster to twist your words into something you did not mean to be used against you at a later time.
When an insurance company comes to you looking for a statement, a big reason is to try to trick you into saying things that will hurt your case. The insurance adjuster are professionals at this sort of thing and have extensive training in taking statements from injured people.
Do you want to know if the insurance company is trying to trick you?
If you want to know if the insurance company is trying to trick you, ask them these questions and see what they say:
1. Before you take my statements, will you admit liability and put it in writing, and have the insurance company sign the letter?
2. Before you take my statement, will you promise to pay for all my medical care until I am 100% recovered, and will you put that promise in writing too?
3. Before you take my statement, may I see a copy of your investigation file for this case?
4. Before you take my statement, can I take a recorded or written statement from the person who hit my car?
5. Before you take my statement, will you promise to settle my claim and send the settlement check within 30 days?
Most insurance adjuster will not answer these questions or follow-thru with the commitments in the questions. That's because they are not really trying to help you or settle your case quickly or determine what's wrong with you so they can pay your claim. They are trying to minimize what they owe you.
Don't fall victim to the insurance company traps.
A barge worker's widow recently filed a lawsuit against a barge company and a contracting company after her husband was killed.
In the lawsuit, the widow claims that her deceased husband died when he slipped and fell on an icy barge. The barge was empty. The lawsuit claims that the barge company failed to provide the worker with a safe place to work.
About this case and maritime wrongful death claims
Under maritime law, the direct descendents of deceased workers may be able to bring claims for wrongful death. Under most claims, the survivors must prove that the company did something "negligent" to cause the death or that the vessel was "unseaworthy" and that caused the subject accident or death. The damages available differ depending on a lot of factors, but if the survivors were financially dependent on the deceased worker, they generally can collect damages for the loss of financial support.
The negligence standards differ depending on whether the case is a Jones Act case, a Longshore and Harbor Worker's Compensation Act case, a General Maritime Law case, or some other case.
Most of the time, only an experienced maritime and Jones Act lawyer will be able to tell you what law you can file under and what claims you can bring.
Most important, don't trust the insurance company to tell you your rights. Hire your own independent lawyer to advise you.
Safety seats and modern vehicles are supposed to protect our children in foreseeable, survivable car or truck crashes.
Safety experts and auto manufacterers have long known that a lack of crash protection exists for children between the ages of 4 and 8. Most kids in this age group are too big for their child safety seat and too small for the seat belt restraints in the vehicle, which were likely designed for adults.
Automakers say that children who are 12 and under should ride in a vehicle’s rear seats. The outside rear seats of domestic vehicles made in the last decade are equipped with combination lap/shoulder belts. Passengers seated in the middle of a rear bench seat are usually secured by a two-point lap belt. Unfortunately, few of these restraints are designed to accommodate an occupant shorter than 57 inches and weighing less than 80 pounds.3 The average six-year-old child—who is right in the middle of the “forgotten child” age range—stands only 47 inches high and weighs merely 52 pounds.
Manufacturers concede that injuries and deaths attributable to the safety gap have reached unacceptable proportions. According to industry estimates, 500 children are killed every year, and thousands more are seriously injured, due to a lack of proper belt usage. Many of these children were killed while wearing safety belts. At a recent trade show, a former chief executive officer of Ford Motor Co. told colleagues that “these are preventable tragedies and urgent action is needed” to close the safety gap.
Studies demonstrate that every 90 seconds a child is killed or injured in a motor vehicle crash. During the 1990s, children between the ages of four and eight were dying in crashes at a rate of about 16 per week.
This is unacceptable in our country. At our law firm, we see far too many grieving parents who have either lost a young child in a car wreck or had a child badly injured in the wreck because the seat belt system or car seat or booster seat did not protect them properly.
And the sad thing is, the automakers and child seat manufacturers could easily and cheaply prevent many of these injuries and death to children but are not doing so!
Our firm has written an article on this issue. To read more about the dangers for the "forgotten child," please please visit our main website at www.vbattorneys.com or click here to read the article.
Between 1982 and 1998, there was a 23 percent increase in automotive fatalities among children aged five to nine.9 In 2000, 2,343 children under 15 were killed, and more than 291,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes.10
Manufacturers would have the public believe that the best way to prevent these tragedies is through the use of aftermarket child safety seats. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), placing a child in an age-appropriate safety seat will reduce a child’s risk of dying in a crash by as much as two-thirds.11
Parents are restraining children four and under in child safety seats. The usage rate of safety seats for children under one year old is 95 percent; the rate for children between ages one and four is 91 percent.12 But according to recent studies, the usage rate for children in the safety gap is substantially lower—10 percent.13
The National Transportation Safety Board and NHTSA recommend that children who outgrow child safety seats be placed in “booster seats” until they are large enough for adult-size lap and shoulder belts.14 A well-designed booster seat positions a child so that the three-point shoulder and lap belts fit better.
However, less than 10 percent of children between the ages of four and eight use booster seats.15 This is probably due, in part, to the lack of consensus among experts concerning which types of seats are appropriate for children of different ages and sizes.
For example, NHTSA recommends that children who have outgrown child safety seats be restrained in booster seats until they are at least eight years old, unless they are 49 inches tall.16 On the other hand, a study conducted by the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, State Farm Insurance Co., and the University of Pennsylvania suggests that parents should keep children in booster seats until they are at least eight years old, weigh 80 pounds, and are 58 inches tall.17 In light of this conflicting information, how are parents supposed to determine whether their child should be using a booster seat?
This confusion is exacerbated by manufacturers’ failure to develop their own booster seats. Not every seat works well in every vehicle. Obviously, auto manufacturers are in the best position to determine which types of booster seats are best suited for the wide range of vehicles they build. But they neither build booster seats nor adequately test aftermarket seats to determine which ones can be used safely with their vehicles’ rear seat-belt restraint systems. As a result, parents are denied important information regarding the proper fit of booster seat, child, and vehicle.
Understanding the injuries
In a collision, the seat belt is supposed to slow down the occupant with the vehicle and spread the forces of the collision to the strong bones of the body.18 Proper belt fit and good belt geometry are important in maximizing protection.19
The auto industry has long been aware of the dangers associated with placing children in restraints designed for adults. These dangers result in three types of injuries: submarining injuries to the spine and abdomen; fulcrum injuries to the cervical spine; and injuries associated with partial or full ejection.
Submarining injuries. The lap portion of a properly fitting seat belt should fit snugly below the hips.20 In a crash, the lap belt should couple the occupant to the vehicle and provide restraint by transferring force to the pelvic bones.21 Submarining occurs when a passenger’s pelvis and buttocks slide down and forward during a collision, allowing the lap belt to slip up to the abdomen.22 Submarining can cause severe intra-abdominal injuries and spinal cord trauma.23
Children between four and eight are particularly vulnerable to this type of injury. The lap and shoulder belt geometry is not well suited to their stature. They tend to slouch down in their seats because their legs do not hang comfortably over the edge of the seat cushion.24 Consequently, the lap belt lies above the child’s pelvis and can easily slide up to the abdomen during a crash.25
Fulcrum injuries. The shoulder harness of a rear seat lap/shoulder belt typically passes diagonally across an adult’s outside shoulder, over the sternum, and down to the inside hip where it connects with the lap belt and fastens into the seat belt buckle.26 In the case of a child, the typical shoulder harness crosses in front of the child’s face or throat.27
A belt in this position creates an artificial fulcrum that, during an accident, can stretch the upper spine past the breaking point, resulting in paralysis or death.28 If the torso belt is not used (either because the vehicle is not equipped with it or because it is placed behind the child’s back for a more comfortable fit), the fulcrum point is at the waist. This can cause severe head injuries when the force of an impact throws the child’s head forward onto his or her knees or the back of the front seat.29
Full or partial ejection injuries. Some seat belts are so poorly designed that even belted children can be thrown completely out of a vehicle. Such was the case in Johnston v. Ford Motor Co.30 In that case, five-year-old Cody Johnston was riding as a front-seat passenger while his mother was driving the family’s Ford Ranger on an interstate. Both Cody and his mother were wearing three-point lap/shoulder belts.31
Another vehicle collided with the Ranger, causing it to roll over. Cody was thrown from the car and killed. The investigating officer noted in the police report that Cody was not big enough for the seat belt and that the belt was still buckled after the car came to rest.
Poor seat-belt design can also cause partial ejection.32 Torso rollout—when the torso of a child completely escapes or rolls out of the shoulder harness—is a type of partial ejection that can occur in oblique crashes and rollovers.33 Children who roll out of a shoulder belt often sustain severe intra-abdominal injuries and lumbar or cervical spinal cord injuries, often resulting in paralysis.34
Establishing liability
As with any crashworthiness case, one brought on behalf of a child injured by improperly fitting, or absent, safety belts is based on the claim that the vehicle was defectively designed because it failed to provide adequate occupant protection during a crash.
In addition to proving that a product is unreasonably dangerous as designed, plaintiffs in many jurisdictions are required to assert a design defect claim to prove the existence of a safer alternative design. A safer alternative design in safety gap cases is the integrated child seat. These are seats with harnesses built into the cushion of a vehicle’s rear seats. They have been available in some European vehicles since the late1980s. Child safety advocates, manufacturers, and safety experts agree that an integrated child seat with a five-point harness is the safest form of child restraint available.35
Most jurisdictions also require plaintiffs to prove that a proposed safer alternative design is economically and technologically feasible. In the United States, Chrysler first introduced five-point integrated child seats in the U.S. market by placing them in its minivans in the 1992 model year. Other manufacturers have also offered the seats, as optional equipment on select model vehicles.
Accordingly, the auto manufacturers’ own conduct proves the technological and economic feasibility of this safer alternative design. Moreover, there is no real functional or cosmetic problem associated with integrated child seats; the seat is virtually indistinguishable from a normal bench seat when the safety seat is not in use.
Plaintiff attorneys also should consider advancing a marketing-defect claim. This concerns the seller’s failure to adequately warn or instruct consumers on the safe use of the product. Manufacturers recognize that nearly 80 percent of parents do not use the proper safety device for their four- to eight-year-old children; automakers clearly have knowledge of the danger. Yet manuals and notices that accompany many vehicles do not warn parents of the danger associated with having children wear seat belts designed for adults.
Many owner’s manuals may suggest that booster seats be used for children who weigh 40 to 80 pounds, but they are unlikely to contain any meaningful instruction on which ones work best with the vehicle’s seat belts. These vehicles therefore lack adequate instructions for safe use by children in the safety gap.
Making the case
As soon as a potential client contacts you, take immediate steps to preserve the evidence. The vehicle should be secured in its postcrash condition. Nothing should be disassembled or removed from it without notice to the defendants.
You should inspect the seat belt, review the child’s medical records, and interview witnesses to determine if and how the child was wearing the belt. A qualified accident-reconstruction expert should inspect, measure, and photograph the crash scene and any other vehicles involved.
Retain a biomechanical engineer or qualified medical expert to review the medical records, X-rays, and other imaging studies to determine whether the child’s injuries were caused by a belt’s poor fit and geometry. After an initial review, consult an expert with knowledge of automobile design to analyze the design defect claims.
Obtain documentation from the manufacturer relating to the design and marketing issues raised in the case. Many of these materials have been disseminated publicly or uncovered in earlier litigation, so you may already have many of the relevant documents even before filing the case.
Anticipate certain defenses. First, the automaker may deny that a safety gap exists. This defense is easily refuted by statistical information compiled by independent third parties like the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen and by the auto industry’s own statements acknowledging the safety gap.
Second, the manufacturer may blame the child’s parents for not using a booster seat. To counter this, produce evidence showing there is no consensus on the appropriate use of booster seats. Properly qualified design and biomechanical experts can explain why the use of a booster seat may not have prevented the injuries sustained in a particular crash.
Finally, the manufacturer almost certainly will argue that because its rear-seat restraint system meets Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, it is not defective. However, compliance with government standards does not establish as a matter of law that the design is not defective. Explain to the jury that these are minimum standards and that nothing prevents manufacturers from exceeding these minimum standards in the interests of children.
Auto manufacturers have a duty to design and market cars that provide consumers of all ages with a reasonable level of protection in the event of a crash. While seat belts may provide protection for many adults, a gap in crash protection exists for children between four and eight years old. Successfully pursuing cases for the forgotten children in this age group should allow the injured to obtain justice and cause auto manufacturers to improve the safety of their cars.
Notes
1. Martha W. Bidez & Stephen R. Syson, Kinematics, Injury Mechanisms, and Design Considerations for Older Children in Adult Torso Belts, SAE 2001-01-0173, in BIOMECHANICS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT (Soc’y Auto. Eng’rs 2001); Richard Stalnaker, Inconsistencies in State Laws and Federal Regulations Regarding Child Restraint Use in Automobiles, SAE 933087, in CHILD OCCUPANT PROTECTION 51 (Soc’y Auto. Eng’rs 1993).
2. Jacques Nasser, Former Chief Executive Officer, Ford Motor Co., Address at the New York International Auto Show (Apr. 2000).
3.Id.
4. See FORD MOTOR CO., BOOST AMERICA! RAISING KIDS WITH SAFETY IN MIND, available at www.actsinc.org/childpassengersafety.html (last visited Sept. 27, 2002).
5. See generally AUTO. COALITION FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY, INC., CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY, at www.actsinc.org/childpassengersafety.html (last visited Sept. 27, 2002).
6.See Nasser, supra note 2.
7.See S. REP. NO. 107-137 (2002).
8.Id.
9.Id.
10.Id.
11. NAT’L HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMIN., BUYING A SAFER CAR FOR CHILD PASSENGERS (2001), available at www.nhtsa.dot.gov/People/ Injury/ChildPS/SaferCar2001/contents.html (last visited Sept. 27, 2002).
12. NAT’L HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMIN., TRAFFIC SAFETY FACTS 2000—CHILDREN 5 (2000), available at www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/ NCSA/TSF2000/2000chdfacts.pdf (last visited Sept. 27, 2002).
13. Press Release, Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety, Blue Ribbon Panel II Announces Recommendations to Improve Child Passenger Safety (Mar. 15, 1999), available at www.actsinc.org/ whatsnew_5.html (last visited Sept. 27, 2002).
14.See S. REP. NO. 107-137, supra note 7.
15.Id.
16.See S. REP. NO. 107-137, supra note 7.
17. PARTNERS FOR CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY PROJECT, PARTNERS INTERIM REPORT (1997), available at www.chop.edu/download/ Interim_report.pdf.
18.Bidez & Syson, supra note 1.
19.Id.
20.Bidez & Syson, supra note 1.
21. David L. Perry, A Primer on Crashworthiness for the Non-Crashworthiness Lawyer (Nov. 3, 2001), available at www.crashworthinesscases.com/ crashworthinessIntro.html.
22.See S. REP. NO. 107-137, supra note 7.
23.Id.
24.Id.
25.Id.
26.Bidez & Syson, supra note 1.
27.Id.
28.Id.
29.Id.
30.No. 010902023 PI (Utah, Salt Lake County Dist. Ct. June 26, 2002).
31.See Utah Highway Patrol Accident Report (Nov. 8, 1999).
32.Bidez & Syson, supra note 1.
33.Id.
34.Id.
35.FORD MOTOR CO., INTEGRATED CHILD RESTRAINT STRATEGY STATUS REPORT (1995).
60 minutes had a chilling expose a few weeks ago on the Bayer drug Trasylol.
The broadcast told the story of Joseph Radone. Mr. Radone had heart surgery. The risk asociated with the surgery was around five percent. Mr. Radone would be home in a week.
After the surgery, the doctors told the family about "complications" that had occurred. The doctors told the Joe's wife and daugther that Traysol was responsible for the complications.
Only ten days after the surgery, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study on Trasylol. According to to the study, there was an "association" between Trasylol and kidney failure and Traysol increased the risk of death in patients given the drug.
As far back as the 1980s, German researchers were concerned with the drug. In 1992, in one small study, almost 75% of patients given Trasylol had kidney problems afterwards.
After the New England Journal of Medicine study came out, the FDA held and advisory meeting to determine the accuracy of the study.
At the hearing, Bayer representatives hid previous studies from the FDA.
In 2007, a Canadian study was stopped because too many patients in the study were dying.
After the Canadian study, German authorities banned Trasylol and Bayer temporarily stopped selling the drug.
After 19 operations including having his eyes sewn shut, removing his gall bladder, and having his legs amputated, Joe Randone died.
What do you think about the 60 minutes story? Bayer's conduct? Whether the Randone family should be allowed to file a lawsuit against Bayer?
Do you think the 1000s of other patients and families who were harmed by Trasylol should obtain some sort of justice from Bayer for the effects of its drug?
We welcome your comments.
Have you been paying attention to all the recalls in the news lately? Did you know that auto recalls were up 30% in 2007 compared with 2006?
Ford led the pack with over 5.5 million recalls last year, 3.8 million of which were due to a faulty cruise control switch. Next in line was DaimlerChrysler with 1.47 million recalls, and Volkswagen clocked in with 1.4 million.
If you’re concerned about the safety of the vehicle that you’re driving, then do yourself a favor and check out these websites. Safecar.gov is maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and allows you to search for recall information, view current complaints against manufacturers, or file a complaint yourself.
You can also check the Recalls.gov website, an online portal that provides access to six federal agencies that maintain recall information. From this site you can access the NHTSA recall data
Were you affected by the record recalls last year? What do you think that manufacturers can do about it? Leave us a comment, and then check out our articles about the 2007 auto recalls and about product recalls in general.
According to reports, a worker for New Port Building and Construction obtained a $1.47 million dollar settlement after he was paralyzed while working at the company president's personal residence.
The insurance company discovered after the accident that the injured worker had not filled out the proper insurance forms before the accident.
One of the most important things consumers must remember when purchasing insurance is to be honest and forthright on the application and to fill it out completely. Do not fail to list information you think may increase your premium slightly or leave out requested information. If you do, you run the risk of losing coverage for a later accident or covered claim.
Unfortunately, Houston and the surrounding counties have one of the highest rates of truck accidents and car accidents in America.
Let's say you were involved in a serious truck or car accident in Houston or the surrounding area. Chances are, the other driver will have insurance. (In fact, insurance is required by law!).
If the accident is serious, the insurance company will likely have their entire team of investigators on the scene within minutes or hours. We have seen cases where the insurance investigation team literally beats the police officers and ambulance drivers to the scene.
Why does the insurance company send a team to the scene so quickly? Simply put, to try in any way possible to minimize what they will pay the innocent injury victims. The insurance company representatives are looking for evidence that will help them build up a case to not pay a fair settlement.
Often, the insurance company will make contact with the injured person or their family shortly thereafter. The insurance representative will act like your best friend and do everything possible to convince you to settle out quickly.
This is an insurance company trick. It's a game. And they hold most of the cards.
So how do you get the upper hand? How do you turn the tables on them? Or at least figure out whether the insurance company is being straightforward and honest is what they say to you?
Try this. Ask the insurance company representative the following 5 questions and see how they respond:
1. What are the limits of insurance for the driver that caused the accident?
2. Will you send me a letter in writing confirming that you have accepted full responsibility for the accident on behalf of your insured?
3. Will you confirm in writing that you will pay all medical bills, lost wages, and at least that much in pain and suffering?
4. Can I have a written admission from the driver that he or she is at fault?
5. Will you send me a copy of the claims file so I can see what you really think about the accident?
The answers to this questions (if the insurance company agrees to answer them, which is highly unlikely) should give you an excellent idea about what the insurance company is really up to.
There are way too many truck accidents in Houston. There is probably more than one reason. First, there are just a whole lot of trucks in Houston. The more trucks traffic, the more likelihood of truck accidents.
Second, some of the trucking companies hire incompetent or reckless drivers. Those drivers, not surprisingly, cause truck accidents.
After a car or truck accident, the insurance company will probably want to take a "recorded statement" from you. The insurance company will tell you they are trying to "investigate your claim" and "determine liability" and they need your recorded statement "for their file."
The insurance company will try to convince you it is in your best interest to give a quick recorded statement. They will say something like "just tell us what happened" so they can "make an offer" on your case.
It is a bad idea to give a recorded statement to the insurance company unless you have your own independent attorney involved.
Why?
Because the real purpose of a "recorded statement" is so the insurance company can trick you into saying something that will hurt your case or allow them to avoid responsibility for paying your claim. The insurance company and their adjusters are skilled at "investigating" the case in such a way that it either allows them to avoid responsibility entirely or significantly reduce the amount of your claim.
The bottom line is that if you were involved in a car or truck accident in Houston or the surrounding counties and the insurance company starts trying to talk you into giving a recorded statement, carefully consider not giving a recorded statement without your own independent legal advice. Otherwise, you may be falling into an insurance company trap.
A few days ago, Haydee Valdez Mendez, age 30, died when a large vessel being transported by an Ace Transportation flatbed truck came off the flatbed and fell on top of Ms. Mendez's SUV.
The Houston Chronicle reports that Mrs. Mendez was married with two young kids. She was studying at the University of Houston-Clear Lake to be a teacher.
According the reports in the Houston Chronicle, the driver failed to heed posted warning signs regarding bridge clearance and failed to follow the designated route allowed by his permit.
The driver told police investigators that he thought his load was 14 feet 6 inches.
The vessel was being transported from Capco Fabrications to Henderson.
You can read the entire story by clicking here.
Now that the investigation has begun, one would hope that the company, Ace Transportation, would do a full-blown investigation into its own hiring, training, loading, and driving policies, as well as inform all of its truckers of the importance of following all safety policies and procedures. We hope the company will not simply rely on the police investigation. And we hope the company will preserve all the evidence.
Some questions the company should be forced to answer:
1. Why was the driver under the impression the load was shorter than it actually was?;
2. Why was the driver traveling this particular route?:
3. Who trained the driver?;
4. What do Ace Transportation's safety policies and procedures say about this particular operation?;
5. Who loaded the trailer?;
6. Why wasn't the load better secured?'
These are just a few of the questions that Ace Transportation should have to answer.
The lawnmower manufacturing industry and the companies that sell riding lawnmowers have a secret they are not sharing with the public. A secret that the lawnmower industry and the companies that sell riding lawnmowers like Home Depot, KMart, Sears, and Wal-Mart don't want the public to know even though they have known about the secret for years.
The secret is many riding lawnmowers do not have adequate safety features to protect young children from severe injury and death. Some riding lawnmowers are extremely dangerous and have been the caused thousands of severe injuries to children. In fact, some riding lawnmowers have even been responsible for the death of children in lawnmower-related accidents.
In February 2006, for example, the Journal of Pediatrics, a well-respected national publication published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, published a landmark study entitled "Technical Report: Lawn Mower-Related Injuries to Children."
The article can be found online by clicking here.
The study surveys lawnmower-related injuries to children, compiles some pretty horrifying statistics, and offers recommendations to the lawnmower industry.
Among other things noted in the article:
1. Approximately 9400 children younger than 18 years of age receive emergency treatment every year for lawnmower-related injuries;
2. 7% of these children require hospitalization
3. Power mowers account for a large proportion of the amputations during childhood;
4. Prevention of these injuries can be achieved by design changes of lawn mowers and more education of parents;
From 1990 - 1999, 68,000 injuries related to lawnmowers were recorded. 14% were to children 18 and under.
The article has a section entitled "Prevention of Injury" in which specific recommendations are made to prevent lawnmower-related injuries to children.
The article recommends the following:
1. Design changes in lawnmowers;
2. appropriate age and maturity guidelines for mower operation; and
3. education of parents, other child caregivers, and children regarding the hazards associated with lawn mowers.
Note that the number one recommendation is design change in lawnmowers. It is also clearly the safest, quickest, and most cost-effective method to prevent lawnmower-related accidents and injuries.
According to the article, the "science of injury prevention" recognizes that the most effective way to protect against injury is by using methods that do not require a lot of human intervention and vigilence.
Many of the lawnmower manufacturers have known about basic, simple, cost-effective safety mechanisms that they could have and should have installed on their lawnmowers for decades and yet have refused to do so. In fact, some manufacturers have actively fought government efforts to improve the safety features on these mowers.
The article concludes by recommending that the ANSI standards for riding lawnmower safety mechanisms be strengthened and, if the industry does not agree, to mandate the safety features.
Some insurance companies will send letters to people involved in car or truck accidents telling the injured person that they do not need an attorney.
Since 1995, for example, Allstate has been sending a letter entitled "Do I need an Attorney?" which makes the following claims, among others:
1. Claims are settled faster when a lawyer is not involved;
2. Lawyers charge a percentage of recovery and if you settle directly with Allstate you get to keep the entire amount;
3. Injury victims can hire a lawyer later if they don't like the settlement offer;
The letter includes many other statements that are misleading, half-true, or not true at all. Other insurance companies also try to convince injured people not to hire their own lawyer.
Here is the plain truth--Allstate, and the other insurance companies who send these types of letters, do not care anything at all about you or whether you receive a fair settlement.
In fact, the insurance company's own statistics prove that its costs the insurance industry an average of $9000 more per claim when the injured person has a lawyer.
The reason the insurance companies try to convince people not to hire an experienced lawyer is because they know they can settle the case more cheaply if the injured person doesn't have a lawyer.
The truth is that you should always at least consult with an attorney before settling a personal injury or wrongful death claim. Our firm never charges anything for meeting with a client and answering any questions they may have about their case. Other good personal injury firms in Houston offer the same benefit.
For example, we will talk to you about:
1. The reasonable value of your case;
2. Why delay may be a good thing (or a bad thing);
3. How to get your medical bills and treatment taken care of;
4. How to recoup any lost wages;
5. How long the case will take.
And many other topics. Or any other questions you may have about your case.
The insurance companies won't answer these questions. Or at least they won't give you straight and truthful answers.
If you have been involved in a serious car or truck accident in Houston, and the insurance company is trying to convince you not to hire a lawyer, you should know right away that they are trying to trick you into settling your case for pennies on the dollar.
And once you know the insurance company is trying to do this, you know you can't trust a thing they tell you after that.
For more information on insurance company tricks, visit our firm's main website, www.vbattorneys.com.
1. First and foremost, get appropriate medical attention. Your health is the first priority, as well as the health of anyone else involved in the truck accident.
2. Second, if possible, call the police. Truck drivers will sometimes accept responsibility at the scene and discourage you from calling the police. Then, after everyone is gone, they start denying responsibility.
It is perfectly appropriate, and a good idea, to make sure the police come and take statements, investigate the truck wreck, etc.
3. If you are able, get the contact information for the truck driver and any witnesses. Get insurance information. Make sure that later on, you will have witnesses to back up your version of what happened.
4. Take photographs if possible. Photos are almost always helpful. Like they say, "a picture says a thousand words." This is true with truck accident cases particularly. It is difficult for a truck driver to claim that he or she wasn't at fault when the pictures show otherwise.
5. Consider getting legal advice if you believe you have serious injuries. The trucking companies and their insurance companies almost never offer fair settlements unless a lawsuit is filed and a trial date is scheduled. And most personal injury lawyers, including our firm, offer free initial consultations to let you know what your options are.
You are certainly free to talk to the adjuster and/or the trucking company before hiring your own lawyer. However, be aware of some "tricks" they may try to use against you to hurt your case:
"Trick #1" They will try to get a recorded or written statement from you. It is a bad idea to give insurance adjusters or trucking companies written or recorded statements unless you have your own independent legal advice. Often, they will ask you questions designed to lower the value of your case or make it seem like you were at fault. You are not required to give a written or recorded statement.
"Trick #2" Trucking companies and their insurance adjusters will try to convince you not to hire a lawyer. They will claim that you will get less money if you hire a lawyer than if you negotiate the case yourself. This is false, and studies have been done to prove it. The trucking companies and insurance companies have lawyers--you should have one too, and if they tell you that you don't need a lawyer, be very cautious about anything else they tell you.
"Trick #3" Some trucking companies or their adjusters will offer to provide medical care. The trick here is that they hand pick company or insurance doctors. You are NOT required to see company or insurance doctors. You should choose a doctor on your own, a doctor who you feel comfortable with. That is often the only way to ensure that you get appropriate medical treatment.
"Trick #4" All too often, the insurance adjuster or trucking company will tell you that they need a bunch of information and once they get that information, they will settle your case for a fair amount. Then, they keep asking for more information in an effort to delay your case.
Time is on their side. If you wait to long, you may be prevented from ever filing a claim or lawsuit because of the statute of limitations or because the evidence is gone by the time you file your case.
In our experience, trucking companies and their insurance adjusters almost never offer a reasonable and fair amount unless you've acted quickly to preserve your legal rights. Don't let them string you along for months and months while they promise a reasonable settlement. Conclusion:
You are certainly within your rights to try to negotiate a trucking case on your own. However, trucking companies and their insurance adjusters have teams of lawyers giving them advice. You should be very careful when dealing with insurance adjusters or trucking companies without your own independent legal advice.