Personal Injury News Site

Infant Dies in Hospital

Fritzie and Cameron Burke filed a lawsuit against Advocate Lutheran General Hospital in Park Ridge, Illinois after their month-old baby, Genesis, died in its care in 2010.  A pharmacy technician administered an incorrect concentration of sodium into Genesis’ IV tube, leading to his death.

Not only was Genesis’ death the hospital’s fault, but it also tried to subsequently cover its mistake up.  The hospital tried to hide the cause of death by covering up the label on the IV bag. Additionally, doctors said the original blood test indicating the high levels of sodium was wrong and "ordered" another round of tests that was never performed.  The dose administered was 60 times higher than prescribed.  The parties settled for $8 million.

UPS Named as a Defendant

On April 2, 2012 a Sacramento jury awarded $2.9 million to the survivors of an Oregon woman who was killed by a UPS truck nearly two years before.  Rosa Arenas, 52, was driving to visit her children and grandchildren in Los Angeles for Easter when a UPS truck changed lanes and killed her. 

The $2.9 million includes monetary compensation for past and future loss of love, affection and comfort and other non-economic damages.  This verdict helps make the family feel vindicated as UPS tried to blame the accident on their mother. 

Fatal Crash on Railroad

On March 28, the families of four young people won a verdict against BNSF Railway Company.  The Supreme Court upheld that the lower court’s instructions to the jury to apply common-law or “reasonable person” standard of care was fair.  Interestingly though, only after the verdict was delivered did the defense attorneys request a new trial on several grounds, including that the plaintiffs had to prove the railroad company failed to comply with a different standard of care.  However, the Supreme Court denied the new trial motion filed by the railway company.

The four young people were killed when their car collided with one of the company’s trains.  The families claim BNSF negligently maintained the warning signals at the crossing and had failed to comply with several maintenance and signal regulations. 

NJ Woman Hit by NJ Transit

In 2008, Mercedes Perez, a New Jersey resident, was hit by a New Jersey transit bus while crossing the street.  Immediately, her legs were pinned underneath the bus and she suffered extensive injuries as a result.  Because her legs were pinned underneath the bus, she was forced to have her left leg and right foot amputated.  Furthermore, she suffered brain damage, losing her ability to speak or feed herself.  She was placed in a rehabilitative center and faced enormous medical mounting medical costs.

Ms. Perez’s case was not settled until almost 3 ½ years later in 2012.  However, as a result of her patience, her attorney was able to get $7.85 million to cover her damages.  Additionally, she will now be able to receive care in a private facility, something that was only a dream before. 

This case calls into question how safe everyone is in New Jersey.  The bus driver that struck Ms. Perez was newly hired and Ms. Perez was halfway across the street when the driver struck her.  This clearly proves negligence on the part of the drivers.  Furthermore, transit vehicles are massive and cause enormous damage.  Consequently, they should have a higher duty to respect the safety of other drivers or pedestrians on the road. 

Toxic Coal Ash Sparks Lawsuit

Environmental and public health groups filed a lawsuit against the EPA.  The groups want to force the EPA to finish a rulemaking process and finalize safeguards against toxic coal ash, the byproduct of coal-fired power plants.  Coal ash includes many dangerous pollutants that is harmful to residents and visitors alike.  In thirty years, the EPA has not updated its waste disposal and control standards for coal ash.  And, recent EPA data showed that 29 power plants have contaminated the groundwater near coal ash dump sites. 

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act requires the EPA to regularly update safeguards, but the EPA has never done this regarding coal ash.  The lawsuit would force the EPA to set deadlines for review and revision of coal ash waste safeguards.  Furthermore, the lawsuit claims that the EPA has a responsibility to protect us from these threats to our health, and they are not performing their duties.  The lawsuit aims to rectify this problem.

Judge Finally Allows Scientific Link with Disease and Mold

Recently, tenant Brenda Cornell sued her ex-landlord for respiratory illnesses caused by exposure to mold for 6 years.  Originally, the trial court dismissed her suit, referring to a case where the court declined to accept scientific evidence connecting illness to mold.  However, in this previous case, the plaintiff failed to prove a scientific theory connecting mold to illness was generally accepted by other scientists. 

However, a recent ruling, made by a New York appeals court, suggests that prevailing opinions about mold science may have changed.  The appeals court claimed that Cornell was able to prove the former apartment was over a mold-infested basement that caused mold to grow under her floorboards.  With the help of medical experts and a number of studies, the plaintiff won.  The court ruled that the mold exposure caused the ill-health effects and, consequently, Cornell was able to receive monetary damages related to her illness.

Outdated Tort Reform Laws

In 1971, the government was granted immunity to lawsuits.  The immunity statue capped the government’s liability at $150,000 per individual and $600,000 per incident.  However, these same rules do not apply to citizens if they were to crash into a neighbor’s car or accidently kill someone.  The citizen would have to pay monetary damages or face criminal charges.  However, the government does not. 

This recently became an issue when the Colorado State Forest Service was responsible for the destruction of 27 structures and three deaths in a recent controlled burn that went awry.  However, the government’s liability will be restricted to the above numbers.

On March 22, 2012, this fire started as a controlled burn.  However, it reignited in 80 mph winds on March 26.  Consequently, the fire spread across more than 4,000 acres and caused $11.3 million in property damage.  To further the damage, firefighting efforts were hampered by a series of communication mishaps and a delay in ordering an evacuation.  Additionally, many residents in the area did not receive emergency phone calls, including one of the people who died. 

However, the Sheriff department found no criminal violations related to the wildfire.  Homeowners are justifiably furious that the Forest Service chose to set the fire during one of the driest Marches on record.  This fire resulted in 900 homes being evacuated and more than 700 firefighters. 

The legislature is now being asked to raise the liability cap for plaintiffs to be able to recoup from the government.  For example, one of the nine claimants lost 2.5 miles of power distribution lines in the fire and has already spent $700,000 to repair them, even before paying mounting overtime compensation for restoring electric service to customers in the area. 

While this immunity law is intended to protect governments from frivolous lawsuits, the law needs to be reviewed and updated to keep pace with inflation.  After all, the state and local governments are collecting more in taxes as individuals earn more and home values increase than they did in 1971.  Furthermore, this would ensure that the government is liable and held accountable for its own mistakes.

Florida Smokers Prevail

On March 26, 2012 the U.S. Supreme Court turned down the tobacco industry’s appeals that sought to challenge the manner in which Florida courts are handling thousands of personal injury lawsuits against them.  The companies that appealed were R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co, Philip Morris USA and Liggett Group LLC.  The tobacco companies claimed that Florida courts are not requiring the plaintiffs to prove key arguments.  The industry claimed they were being robbed of their constitutional protections. 

Thousands of personal injury, individual cases began after 2006 when the Florida Supreme Court ruled that smokers couldn’t continue to proceed with one class-action lawsuit.  These cases include claims that the industry sold defective products and concealed the real dangers of smoking.

Lawyers have provided caution to clients and others stating that large monetary amounts are not awarded by merely walking into the court room.  The client still must prove essential elements of each of their cases.  And, the tobacco industry is fighting back hard.  So far, 50 cases have been tried to verdict and the judgments against the industry have totaled more than $375 million.

Target Sued for Slip and Fall Accident

Marj and Samuel Scarberry, Ohio residents, recently filed a lawsuit against Target in Ohio.  However, Target is asking for the case to be moved to federal court because it believes that the damages sought exceed the jurisdictional limit of $75,000.  Additionally, Target claims the case should be moved because there is a “diversity of citizenship” between it and the plaintiffs. 

The accident occurred in 2010 when Marj was shopping.  She violently fell on an “unsafe, dangerous and unmaintained walkway floor aisle way” in Target.  She claims that Target failed to exercise reasonable care to ensure that customers were not in danger of this aisle way.  As a result of its negligence, she sustained injuries, losses and damages.  She suffered injuries to her back, head, extremities, “body chemistry,” psyche,” fascia and muscle tissue, along with other internal injuries.  Furthermore, she claims that she lost wages and has sustained a diminution in her future earning ability, capacity to care for herself and enjoy a normal life.  Her husband, Samuel, is also claiming loss of consortium as a result of his wife’s permanent and lasting injuries.   

Children Hurt in School Bus Accident

In 2009, a Skokie school bus driver lost consciousness while driving.  As a result, the bus crashed and one child was injured.  The driver claims he blacked out because of low blood sugar, due to his diabetes.  Regardless, he is now being sued by the parents of the children.  The bus driver was sentenced to probation and community service after being found guilty of child endangerment. 

The lawsuit also names First Student Bus Co as a defendant, claiming they should have checked the driver’s driving and medical history better before hiring him.  The lawsuit claims that one child suffered permanent injuries in the crash; however, in 2009, the police stated that minor injuries were only sustained by one child.