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.
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.
The Houston Chronicle has an interesting article about British Petroleum and its safety record in today's edition.
Even after killing 15 people and injuring hundreds in 2005 at its Texas City refinery, and pleading guilty to a felony as a result of its conduct leading up to that explosion, BP apparently has not learned its lesson.
According to the Houston Chronicle, since the 2005 explosion, BP's Texas City refinery is still the nation's most dangerous.
You can read the full article by clicking here.
For some reason, the federal government apparently believes that a $50 million dollar fine for BP's felonious conduct would be sufficient punishment.
(Tell that to the parents, siblings, and children of the 15 people killed in 2005 and the 4 people killed since then.)
Many safety focused attorneys have objected to the proposed fine as too lenient. Why?
Simply put, it is too lenient. A $50 million dollar fine for BP (which is worth billions) is like a fine of less than one penny for someone with ten dollars. It's just not high enough to have any deterrent effect. It doesn't register.
Rather than have a meaningless, arbitrary fine, that will have a minimal effect on BP's bottom line, some people have suggested that the fine should be tied in some way connected to BP's net worth or profits. That is the only way for the fine to have any "bite" to it. Otherwise, the fine is basically meaningless.
What do you think? Feel free to comment below.
According to a story posted on BenGlassLaw.com, some major disability carriers are basically defrauding claimants.
At least one insurance company is sending 1099s to people with whom it settled in the previous year. One major company is even telling the IRS that the settlements are taxable benefits.
This is false. If you receive disability benefits and paid the policy premiums, any benefits are not taxable.
Even though the major insurance company admits that it knows the settlements are not taxable, it is sending the 1099s to the IRS anyway.
This is pure fraud by this company. It also means that the disabled person will spend time and money fixing the mistake.
These insurance company tactics should be stopped in their tracks immediately so people who are already disabled aren't forced to spend any more time and money messing with the insurance company or its mistakes.
Texans for Lawsuit Reform, a shady group run by rich business and insurance interests, has apparently been dissolved by the Texas Secretary of State.
This group spent literally millions of dollars in an effort to shut the courthouse doors to widows, young children, the elderly, single mothers, and those who are seriously injured by corporate or insurance company wrongdoing.
Although certain wrongdoers will be sorry that the Texas Secretary of State dissolved the group, Texans interested in access to justice will no doubt rejoice at this news.
For decades, certain manufacturers of stoves have known of a dangerous feature of their product which has killed or maimed hundreds of people, including young children.
According to Joan Claybrook, a consumer advocated with Public Citizen, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the government agency allegedly responsible for protecting consumers from these types of dangerous products, knew about the problem for 25 years and did nothing.
As part of the settlement, Sears has agreed to notify 4 million customers who may have bought stoves between July 2000 and September 2007. Sears will agree to install (for free) anti-tip safety brackets or receive a gift certificate or reimbursement of up to $100.
The dangerous feature on the stove is its tendency to tip over on top of people when the oven door is opened. When the stove tips over, anything on top that is hot, or anything in the oven that's hot, can tip over and cause severe, even fatal, burn injuries.
How to protect yourself from stove-related injuries?
CNN has five good suggestions on stove safety.
1. Install anti-tip safety brackets on any new or existing stove;
2. Do not sit on or place heavy objects on open over door;
3. Turn pot handles away from the front of stove to prevent hot food spilling;
4. Use back burners instead of front when feasible to protect children and pets;
5. Never leave a hot stove top unattended.
To learn more about the Sears stove recall, visit www.searsrangesettlement.com.
Click here to visit the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
To learn more about Public Citizen and their efforts to protect consumers from dangerous, click here.
A Jones Act seaman's wife has filed a lawsuit against Blessey Marine, his employer, for the wrongful death of the seaman.
The seaman was killed by lighting on August 2007. According to the lawsuit, Blessey Marine ordered the man to work outside in inclement weather. The lawsuit claims that Blessey Marine violated industry standards. The wife is seeking compensation for the loss of her husband.
What is the Jones Act?
The Jones Act allows injured seaman, or their heirs if they are killed, to bring a lawsuit against their employer.
To find out more about the Jones Act, please contact our law firm at www.vbattorneys.com by going to the contact section of the main website.
You can request a free copy of our book, "The Truth About Offshore Injury Cases."
The book explains offshore injury cases, including Jones Act cases, and explains the entire process of a legal case for an offshore injury or death, including what to do in the early stages of the case, how to handle the insurance companies, whether and when and how to go about hiring a lawyer, and what to expect during the case.
On February, 12th, 2008, all 25-microgram-per-hour patches that expire on or before December, 2009 sold in the U.S. were recalled by Johnson & Johnson.
The recall includes Duragesic and Sandoz brands, both of which are manufactured by the Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Alza Corporation.
The recall occurred as a result of the potential for a cut along one side of the drug reservoir where fentanyl is stored in gel form, causing a leak of the gel. As fentanyl is a dangerous opioid drug, patients and caregivers who come in contact with a leaking patch may have difficulty breathing, or potentially be victims of a fatal overdose.
This recall follows a 2004 recall of five lots of 75-microgram-per-hour patches for leaking defects. Many other lots, of all sizes, that were not recalled suffered from leak defects as well.
In addition to reports of leaking patches, the FDA has investigated deaths and life-threatening side effects in patients who never should have been prescribed the patch.
Fentanyl pain patches are approved for moderate to severe chronic pain. They should be prescribed only to patients who are accustomed to powerful narcotic drugs. The reports of improper prescribing of the patch prompted. the FDA in December of 2007 to issue its second Public Health Advisory regarding fentanyl pain patches.
The Public Health Advisory stated that "reports indicate that doctors have inappropriately prescribed the fentanyl patch to patients for acute pain following surgery, for headaches, occasional or mild pain, and other indications for which a fentanyl patch should not be prescribed."
Public Citizen, a non-profit public interest organization, has released a troubling report on dangerous and defective products.
The United States has law requiring manufacturers to provide the Consumer Product Safety Commission with immediate notice of any dangerous or defective products.
However, the agency typicall delays nearly seven months before telling the public about dangerous products!
You can read the full report and press release by clicking here.
The message for Houston and Texas residents is pretty straightforward. You cannot rely on the federal or state governments (at least with the current leaders) to prevent or protect dangerous or defective products from reaching store shelves. You must protect yourself. Arm yourself with as much information as possible by obtaining information outside of the government agencies.
One of the most productive and helpful function of private product liability lawsuit is that the manufacturers are often required to disclose what they knew and when they knew it. And why they continued to sell defective or dangerous products.
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.
The insurance companies and big business have flooded many states with millions of dollars in an effort to shut the courthouse doors to average citizens. For example, Ohio has recently limited the discretion of jurors to render damage awards in civil lawsuits, creating a completely arbitrary "damage" cap.
The limits resulted from a flood of millions of dollars from big business and insurance companies.
The net result is that the courthouse doors are being slammed shut for average citizens.
You can read about the problems with the Ohio Supreme Court decision by clicking on the link below:
www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article
In Texas, groups like "Texans for Lawsuit Reform" and their ilk, run by mega-wealthy businessmen and backed by millions of dollars of special interest and insurance company money, have tried to shut the courthouse doors to Texans. A lot of their money comes from out of state business interests.
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.
John Grisham's latest book is called "The Appeal." The book starts with a jury verdict against a large chemical company. The jury finds that a powerful chemical company has intentionally and illegally polluted the drinking water in a small Mississippi town, causing "cancer clusters."
The chemical company is concerned that the verdict will encourage other cancer victims in the area to sue.
So the company appeals the verdict and then seeks to elect a no-name lawyer to the Mississippi Supreme Court by essentially buying a judicial election using a shady political consulting company and lots and lots of corporate money.
Anyone interested in the civil justice system should read this book. Although fictional, in many ways it rings true. The book casts a bright and critical light on what is often a seedy underworld of people and companies intent on undermining civil justice in whatever way they can.
And it makes quite a statement about the problems of electing judges.
Here is a description of the book from Amazon.com.
Book Description
In a crowded courtroom in Mississippi, a jury returns a shocking verdict against a chemical company accused of dumping toxic waste into a small town’s water supply, causing the worst “cancer cluster” in history. The company appeals to the Mississippi Supreme Court, whose nine justices will one day either approve the verdict or reverse it.
Who are the nine? How will they vote? Can one be replaced before the case is ultimately decided?
The chemical company is owned by a Wall Street predator named Carl Trudeau, and Mr. Trudeau is convinced the Court is not friendly enough. With judicial elections looming, he decides to try to purchase himself a seat on the Court. The cost is a few million dollars, a drop in the bucket for a billionaire like Mr. Trudeau. Through an intricate web of conspiracy and deceit, his political operatives recruit a young, unsuspecting candidate. They finance him, manipulate him, market him, and mold him into a potential Supreme Court justice. Their Supreme Court justice.
The Appeal is a powerful, timely, and shocking story of political and legal intrigue, a story that will leave listeners unable to think about our electoral process or judicial system in quite the same way ever again.
Enter keywords:
Enter your information below to send us a quick message and we'll reply in one business day or less.
