12/30/2009
Dallas, TX-Road construction often causes delays, winding stretches, and traffic, but most of all they are creating deadly hazards for motorists across the United States. Leading personal injury accident lawyer, Amy K. Witherite, reports that over the last five years highway construction zones have injured at least 200,00 people and led to 4,700 fatalities, which accounts for over two a day, , as reported by the Dallas Morning News.
An easily corrected construction hazard, pavement-edge drop-offs, have contributed to the deaths of 160 people, and injured 11,000 others every year. On September 15, 2005, Bryan Lee, 26, was on his way to work, while traveling on FM51 west of Forth Worth, when he came around a curve in the road and the wheels of his motorcycle slid off the asphalt edge. Contractors, who didn’t finish the roadway, just two days before Lee had his accident, left the drop-off in the asphalt there. The pavement contractors reportedly did not have the equipment to finish the road, which left a steep drop-off in the asphalt that continued for miles, and didn’t plan to finish the road for a few days. Lee fell from his motorcycle and was struck by a pickup truck.
Construction zones produce dozens of hazards like concrete barriers in the wrong position, old lane markings, lack of warning signs, and unfortunately there is a lack of regulations that mandate safety measures to be implemented. Contractors often face fines when guidelines are violated, or they are fined because of ignorance, carelessness, or to save money. The problem is that contractors continuously are being hired, and the dangerous and often fatal practices stand uncorrected.
Top personal injury attorney, Amy K. Witherite, maintains when motorists are injured or even die because of the negligence of road construction contractors who leave road construction incomplete and in a dangerous and hazardous condition, you may have a personal injury claim in the state of Texas. If you or someone you love has been injured or killed because of a contractor’s carelessness you may be entitled to compensation for your injuries and damages. Contacting a Dallas personal injury lawyer who is experienced with personal injury accident claims may help you recover any damages you maybe entitled to.
Texas personal injury claims new for Dallas automobile accident victims by Amy K. Witherite, a Dallas personal injury lawyer.
3100 Monticello, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75205.
Toll Free: (888) 407-6669
http://www.dallastexaspersonalinjurylawyers.com
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Maryland Accident with 2 Victims
Legal news for Maryland Personal Injury attorneys—Two pedestrians were critically injured after a car struck them.
Rockville, MD (NewYorkInjuryNews.com) – Witnesses watched in horror as two women were crossing the street near the Twinbrook Metro station when a car struck and fatally injured them, Monday, December 28, 2009, according to WJLA.
Police and emergency medical services (EMS) rushed to the scene at 8:50 a.m. to discover a car had struck two pedestrians. A 63-year-old female pedestrian had been launched into the air and then crashed through the top of the vehicle from the impact. A 20-year-old victim crashed through the vehicles windshield and landed in the passenger seat. Police reported that both women had been walking in the crosswalk heading toward Rockville Pike when the distracted driver in a Chrysler struck both women.
EMS transported both the 20-year-old victim and the 63-year-old victims to Suburban Hospital where they were cared for by doctors and nurses for their potentially life-threatening injuries. Paramedic reported that the 63-year-old woman was conscious at the scene but may have suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI).
Police identified the driver of the vehicle as 33-year-old Hyppolite Bouopda, who was cited from failure to avoid pedestrian collision. It was reported how fast the car was traveling at the time of the incident. The two pedestrian’s names were not released. A crisis counselor was reportedly on the scene to console Bouopda for the shock of the tragic incident.
Rockville, MD (NewYorkInjuryNews.com) – Witnesses watched in horror as two women were crossing the street near the Twinbrook Metro station when a car struck and fatally injured them, Monday, December 28, 2009, according to WJLA.
Police and emergency medical services (EMS) rushed to the scene at 8:50 a.m. to discover a car had struck two pedestrians. A 63-year-old female pedestrian had been launched into the air and then crashed through the top of the vehicle from the impact. A 20-year-old victim crashed through the vehicles windshield and landed in the passenger seat. Police reported that both women had been walking in the crosswalk heading toward Rockville Pike when the distracted driver in a Chrysler struck both women.
EMS transported both the 20-year-old victim and the 63-year-old victims to Suburban Hospital where they were cared for by doctors and nurses for their potentially life-threatening injuries. Paramedic reported that the 63-year-old woman was conscious at the scene but may have suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI).
Police identified the driver of the vehicle as 33-year-old Hyppolite Bouopda, who was cited from failure to avoid pedestrian collision. It was reported how fast the car was traveling at the time of the incident. The two pedestrian’s names were not released. A crisis counselor was reportedly on the scene to console Bouopda for the shock of the tragic incident.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Settle or Litigate - That is the Question
Posted by Mark BelloDecember 28, 2009 3:51 PM
Personal Injury litigation is usually vigorously contested by an insurance company or a corporate defendant. However, even with this consideration, damage recovery does not always require you to go to trial and receive a jury verdict. A large majority of cases are settled out of court. Yes, you need and you should, absolutely, have an attorney. You will usually have to file a lawsuit as opposed to settling the case at the claims level with an insurance adjuster. Your lawyer will know how to do that and will advise you whether it is best to file suit. Even after suit is filed, most cases are still settled without a trial. Why? There is no one answer, but the biggest one is that a settlement eliminates the uncertainty of a trial and reduces your costs. No one, not even the most experienced attorneys, can accurately predict what a judge or jury will do with your case.
Also, since the judge's docket must be clear to permit your case to go to trial, it is often difficult to get a trial date in most states, counties and/or cities. Thus, settlement of your case will, almost always, result in "faster" money than waiting for or pursuing a case to trial. Settlement allows you to control an otherwise unpredictable outcome. While you should choose to settle only if you feel that settlement is in your best interest, you will not be at the mercy of strangers (judges or jurors) in determining your fate.
Before settling any personal injury lawsuit, you should retain, or, at least, consult, with an attorney who has experience handling the type of case you are pursuing. Ask him/her to gather evidence and analyze it before agreeing to resolve any personal injury case. "Quick money" is usually inadequate settlement dollars. A case filed timely, in court, with appropriate time to gather evidence through a process known as "discovery", will assist your attorney in providing you with an appropriate range for you to consider the fair and adequate settlement of your case. If you are seriously injured and need treatment or long term care or assistance, these medical and assisted care expenses may take awhile to develop; early resolution will cheat you out of damages and expenses that you incur after settlement. Yes, you can consider and add future damages to your settlement negotiations, but it is often difficult to predict what those damages might be. You may wish to wait until you have completed treatment or have fallen into a routine, with routine, predictable, expense, before considering settlement.
Let's assume that all considerations have been taken and you are ready to talk settlement with the other side. Sometimes, this process has been ongoing since the claim or lawsuit was filed; formal or informal talks about settlement are often conducted throughout litigation. A formal letter might be necessary, enclosing all liability and damage documents; an informal telephone conversation might begin the process. Information must be exchanged and lines of communication must remain open. Above all, for settlement to be achieved, compromise must come from bother sides; both must "give a little". It is often said that a good settlement is one that disappoints both parties.
Sometimes, formal or informal mediation or facilitation is helpful. Sometimes this is ordered by the court; sometimes the parties agree to voluntary mediation or facilitation. This is a process where a neutral third party (or parties) hears evidence from both sides and conducts formal or informal negotiations with both sides in an attempt to move the parties closer together. The final decision on whether to settle or not, whether you have a lawyer or not, whether you mediate or facilitate or not, belongs to you and the defendant. No one can force you to settle your case. There are, certainly, external factors effecting whether a case settles: Does the defendant demand confidentiality? Do you want the settlement publicized to prevent future conduct? Do you seek compensation or punishment? Are you (and/or the defendant) being reasonable? Are you (and the defendant) considering your attorney(s) opinion(s)? Is the compensation adequate?
Considering whether to settle your personal injury case or not is...well...personal. You are the one who suffered the injuries, no one else; you are the one who pained and suffered, no one else. You know what you went through; you know how it felt. However, remember why you hired an attorney. His job is to evaluate the law and apply it to your situation. He might not like how the law applies to your injuries. There may be a question of liability or fault. These things are not always black and white; there are often many shades of gray. Seek your attorney's advice and counsel. I am not suggesting that you do everything he/she tells you; it is your case and your injury. But he knows the law and how it applies to your situation; if he makes a compelling case for settlement, there is usually a very good reason to settle.
One other thing Lawsuit Financial knows a little bit about is financial pressure. Insurance companies and deep pocket defendants have all the time and all the money in the world. Insurance adjusters and attorneys are not injured, they are not missing work. Settlement or not, they can feed their families and take care of life's necessities. Injury victims are often forced, by financial circumstances, to consider settlements too early and for too little. Lawsuit funding is a service that was developed to help a personal injury plaintiff take care of life's necessities (mortgage, rent, food, utilities, gas, car payments, medical expenses, transportation, etc). The service exists to reduce your financial pressure to settle too early and for too little. An experienced and compassionate lawsuit funding company will attempt to purchase you the precious time you need to develop your case, your damages, and to allow your attorney the time he/she needs to get the job done. If the case must go to trial to get you what you deserve, you need to have the financial staying power to pursue the case to trial. Lawsuit funding can help you with that.
If you have been injured, are pursuing a lawsuit, and need money to buy time to get the settlement or verdict you deserve, Lawsuit Financial hopes you will consider talking to a professional about lawsuit funding. Happy and healthy New Year to all Injury Board members and readers. Thanks for a great year!
Personal Injury litigation is usually vigorously contested by an insurance company or a corporate defendant. However, even with this consideration, damage recovery does not always require you to go to trial and receive a jury verdict. A large majority of cases are settled out of court. Yes, you need and you should, absolutely, have an attorney. You will usually have to file a lawsuit as opposed to settling the case at the claims level with an insurance adjuster. Your lawyer will know how to do that and will advise you whether it is best to file suit. Even after suit is filed, most cases are still settled without a trial. Why? There is no one answer, but the biggest one is that a settlement eliminates the uncertainty of a trial and reduces your costs. No one, not even the most experienced attorneys, can accurately predict what a judge or jury will do with your case.
Also, since the judge's docket must be clear to permit your case to go to trial, it is often difficult to get a trial date in most states, counties and/or cities. Thus, settlement of your case will, almost always, result in "faster" money than waiting for or pursuing a case to trial. Settlement allows you to control an otherwise unpredictable outcome. While you should choose to settle only if you feel that settlement is in your best interest, you will not be at the mercy of strangers (judges or jurors) in determining your fate.
Before settling any personal injury lawsuit, you should retain, or, at least, consult, with an attorney who has experience handling the type of case you are pursuing. Ask him/her to gather evidence and analyze it before agreeing to resolve any personal injury case. "Quick money" is usually inadequate settlement dollars. A case filed timely, in court, with appropriate time to gather evidence through a process known as "discovery", will assist your attorney in providing you with an appropriate range for you to consider the fair and adequate settlement of your case. If you are seriously injured and need treatment or long term care or assistance, these medical and assisted care expenses may take awhile to develop; early resolution will cheat you out of damages and expenses that you incur after settlement. Yes, you can consider and add future damages to your settlement negotiations, but it is often difficult to predict what those damages might be. You may wish to wait until you have completed treatment or have fallen into a routine, with routine, predictable, expense, before considering settlement.
Let's assume that all considerations have been taken and you are ready to talk settlement with the other side. Sometimes, this process has been ongoing since the claim or lawsuit was filed; formal or informal talks about settlement are often conducted throughout litigation. A formal letter might be necessary, enclosing all liability and damage documents; an informal telephone conversation might begin the process. Information must be exchanged and lines of communication must remain open. Above all, for settlement to be achieved, compromise must come from bother sides; both must "give a little". It is often said that a good settlement is one that disappoints both parties.
Sometimes, formal or informal mediation or facilitation is helpful. Sometimes this is ordered by the court; sometimes the parties agree to voluntary mediation or facilitation. This is a process where a neutral third party (or parties) hears evidence from both sides and conducts formal or informal negotiations with both sides in an attempt to move the parties closer together. The final decision on whether to settle or not, whether you have a lawyer or not, whether you mediate or facilitate or not, belongs to you and the defendant. No one can force you to settle your case. There are, certainly, external factors effecting whether a case settles: Does the defendant demand confidentiality? Do you want the settlement publicized to prevent future conduct? Do you seek compensation or punishment? Are you (and/or the defendant) being reasonable? Are you (and the defendant) considering your attorney(s) opinion(s)? Is the compensation adequate?
Considering whether to settle your personal injury case or not is...well...personal. You are the one who suffered the injuries, no one else; you are the one who pained and suffered, no one else. You know what you went through; you know how it felt. However, remember why you hired an attorney. His job is to evaluate the law and apply it to your situation. He might not like how the law applies to your injuries. There may be a question of liability or fault. These things are not always black and white; there are often many shades of gray. Seek your attorney's advice and counsel. I am not suggesting that you do everything he/she tells you; it is your case and your injury. But he knows the law and how it applies to your situation; if he makes a compelling case for settlement, there is usually a very good reason to settle.
One other thing Lawsuit Financial knows a little bit about is financial pressure. Insurance companies and deep pocket defendants have all the time and all the money in the world. Insurance adjusters and attorneys are not injured, they are not missing work. Settlement or not, they can feed their families and take care of life's necessities. Injury victims are often forced, by financial circumstances, to consider settlements too early and for too little. Lawsuit funding is a service that was developed to help a personal injury plaintiff take care of life's necessities (mortgage, rent, food, utilities, gas, car payments, medical expenses, transportation, etc). The service exists to reduce your financial pressure to settle too early and for too little. An experienced and compassionate lawsuit funding company will attempt to purchase you the precious time you need to develop your case, your damages, and to allow your attorney the time he/she needs to get the job done. If the case must go to trial to get you what you deserve, you need to have the financial staying power to pursue the case to trial. Lawsuit funding can help you with that.
If you have been injured, are pursuing a lawsuit, and need money to buy time to get the settlement or verdict you deserve, Lawsuit Financial hopes you will consider talking to a professional about lawsuit funding. Happy and healthy New Year to all Injury Board members and readers. Thanks for a great year!
Monday, December 28, 2009
Driving While Intoxicated in Houston
Houston, Texas – United States – Houston personal injury attorney Joel A. Gordon, in a post published this morning on his blog, cited Houston DWI statistics as one of his primary motivating factors in helping clients with wrongful death lawsuits. The numbers released suggest a serious problem not only in Houston but throughout the state and across the nation. A spokesperson for the firm was asked to elaborate.
“There are 3.9 million people living here in Harris County and last year there were over 10,000 cases of DWI brought into the Houston court system,” our spokesperson said. “A whole lot of people were injured and some were killed by these irresponsible motorists and Joel A. Gordon wants to see family members compensated for that. You can’t replace a loved one lost but you can ease the financial burden that was created by that loss when you make those who caused it pay a price.”
Later in the post Attorney Gordon goes on to quote the statistic published by SADD, Students Against Drunk Driving, that 11,773 people died in drunk driving crashes in 2008. Scarier still is the fact that 1.3 million teenagers died of drug overdoses, many of whom were of legal driving age. He suggests that the high level of teen drug abuse across the country proves that intoxicated and impaired driving is a problem everywhere.
“Most people tend to associate DWI with drinking only,” said our spokesperson. “The truth is that there is also a pretty severe drug problem with our young people and many of them are driving also. By fighting for victim’s rights and compensation we’re toughening the penalties that have to be paid for that kind of behavior. Maybe if a few parents get brought to court they’ll start watching their children a little closer. A minor can’t be held financially responsible but sometimes the parents can.”
Statistics for 2009 will not be released until the year is over but Joel A. Gordon and Associates would like to remind everyone of how dangerous the roads can be over the holiday season. “If you’re going to drink this holiday season, please don’t drive,” said our spokesperson. “The fatality rate is already high enough.”
“There are 3.9 million people living here in Harris County and last year there were over 10,000 cases of DWI brought into the Houston court system,” our spokesperson said. “A whole lot of people were injured and some were killed by these irresponsible motorists and Joel A. Gordon wants to see family members compensated for that. You can’t replace a loved one lost but you can ease the financial burden that was created by that loss when you make those who caused it pay a price.”
Later in the post Attorney Gordon goes on to quote the statistic published by SADD, Students Against Drunk Driving, that 11,773 people died in drunk driving crashes in 2008. Scarier still is the fact that 1.3 million teenagers died of drug overdoses, many of whom were of legal driving age. He suggests that the high level of teen drug abuse across the country proves that intoxicated and impaired driving is a problem everywhere.
“Most people tend to associate DWI with drinking only,” said our spokesperson. “The truth is that there is also a pretty severe drug problem with our young people and many of them are driving also. By fighting for victim’s rights and compensation we’re toughening the penalties that have to be paid for that kind of behavior. Maybe if a few parents get brought to court they’ll start watching their children a little closer. A minor can’t be held financially responsible but sometimes the parents can.”
Statistics for 2009 will not be released until the year is over but Joel A. Gordon and Associates would like to remind everyone of how dangerous the roads can be over the holiday season. “If you’re going to drink this holiday season, please don’t drive,” said our spokesperson. “The fatality rate is already high enough.”
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Winter Selectivity for Slip and Fall Cases
Attorneys choosy with winter 'slip and fall' cases
by Jack Zemlicka
December 26, 2009
It’s winter in Wisconsin, which means that for upwards of five months, pedestrians have to navigate icy patches of pavement, some with more success than others.
Personal injury attorneys say that this time each year they field calls from people with premises liability or ‘slip and fall’ claims, but few of those claims are worthy of a lawsuit.
Milwaukee attorney Anthony J. Skemp only pursues “a handful” of ice-related slip and fall cases each year, and those claims have to meet certain criteria to warrant taking them to court.
“We bat away more of these than we sign up,” he noted.
For example, said Skemp, photographic evidence, documentation or eye-witnesses are key elements in building a credible case.
Sole practitioner Randall L. Rozek said a key component of a credible slip and fall case is whether there is a history of poor snow and ice removal at the property in question.
He said jurors tend to allow an isolated mistake during winter, but are less lenient if there is a proven cycle of substandard maintenance.
“If I can establish a pattern of neglect and the owner is liable under state statute, [that’s] great,” he said.
Severity of the injury is also a determining factor, noted Skemp. A soft tissue injury isn’t likely to persuade a judge or jury.
Someone who slips outside a Walgreen’s and calls 48 hours later without any substantive evidence or significant injuries won’t get very far, he said.
“When we’re in a dogfight with the insurance company on liability, we need more than that,” Skemp said.
Manitowoc attorney Steven R. Alpert agreed. “Anything surgical is good.”
That can include herniations, bulging discs or rotator cuff injuries.
“If we estimate that it’s going to result in a small amount of damages, we’re not going to take it,” he said. “But, if damages are good and the client is believable, we’ll take a chance more often than not.”
He generally avoids taking cases worth less than $25,000, and won’t take a case if there is no insurance.
Can be worthwhile
Despite the many caveats, in the right circumstances winter premises liability cases can be lucrative.
Rozek is working on a slip and fall in which the property owner’s downspout drained onto a driveway which had a ditch that poured onto the sidewalk. He is relying on law providing that a property owner can be held liable if there is an unnatural accumulation of ice or snow.
And Alpert has won some six-figure awards for clients.
In one case, he successfully argued that owners of a mini-mart hadn’t taken the necessary steps to remove ice and snow from outside the store in a reasonable amount of time.
Multiple defendants can also lead to profitable cases, such as if a business outsources its snow and ice removal to a company that didn’t do the job.
“So if a mini-mart hired a plowing company and they didn’t show up, we can also bring them in,” he said.
To defend these cases, Alpert said opposing counsel will frequently use this argument: “It’s winter in Wisconsin, we can’t keep things perfect.”
Wisconsin’s Safe Place Law, which applies to public buildings and places of employment, provides that every business owner has a duty to maintain the premises in a manner that is as safe as reasonably possible.
“You need to find something to hang your hat on liability wise,” Alpert said. “If it hasn’t snowed in a few days and maintenance isn’t being done, we can recover on those cases.”
He shies away from public sidewalk slip and falls, because to bring suit against a municipality like Milwaukee, a plaintiff has to prove it has not snowed in 21 days and there is a damages cap of $50,000.
Rozek says he only takes about a quarter of the slip and fall cases he is presented with each winter.
“A lot of times people don’t understand and they think they are entitled to compensation,” Skemp said. “Sometimes we have to say, ‘Unfortunately, we’re not in position to help you.’”
by Jack Zemlicka
December 26, 2009
It’s winter in Wisconsin, which means that for upwards of five months, pedestrians have to navigate icy patches of pavement, some with more success than others.
Personal injury attorneys say that this time each year they field calls from people with premises liability or ‘slip and fall’ claims, but few of those claims are worthy of a lawsuit.
Milwaukee attorney Anthony J. Skemp only pursues “a handful” of ice-related slip and fall cases each year, and those claims have to meet certain criteria to warrant taking them to court.
“We bat away more of these than we sign up,” he noted.
For example, said Skemp, photographic evidence, documentation or eye-witnesses are key elements in building a credible case.
Sole practitioner Randall L. Rozek said a key component of a credible slip and fall case is whether there is a history of poor snow and ice removal at the property in question.
He said jurors tend to allow an isolated mistake during winter, but are less lenient if there is a proven cycle of substandard maintenance.
“If I can establish a pattern of neglect and the owner is liable under state statute, [that’s] great,” he said.
Severity of the injury is also a determining factor, noted Skemp. A soft tissue injury isn’t likely to persuade a judge or jury.
Someone who slips outside a Walgreen’s and calls 48 hours later without any substantive evidence or significant injuries won’t get very far, he said.
“When we’re in a dogfight with the insurance company on liability, we need more than that,” Skemp said.
Manitowoc attorney Steven R. Alpert agreed. “Anything surgical is good.”
That can include herniations, bulging discs or rotator cuff injuries.
“If we estimate that it’s going to result in a small amount of damages, we’re not going to take it,” he said. “But, if damages are good and the client is believable, we’ll take a chance more often than not.”
He generally avoids taking cases worth less than $25,000, and won’t take a case if there is no insurance.
Can be worthwhile
Despite the many caveats, in the right circumstances winter premises liability cases can be lucrative.
Rozek is working on a slip and fall in which the property owner’s downspout drained onto a driveway which had a ditch that poured onto the sidewalk. He is relying on law providing that a property owner can be held liable if there is an unnatural accumulation of ice or snow.
And Alpert has won some six-figure awards for clients.
In one case, he successfully argued that owners of a mini-mart hadn’t taken the necessary steps to remove ice and snow from outside the store in a reasonable amount of time.
Multiple defendants can also lead to profitable cases, such as if a business outsources its snow and ice removal to a company that didn’t do the job.
“So if a mini-mart hired a plowing company and they didn’t show up, we can also bring them in,” he said.
To defend these cases, Alpert said opposing counsel will frequently use this argument: “It’s winter in Wisconsin, we can’t keep things perfect.”
Wisconsin’s Safe Place Law, which applies to public buildings and places of employment, provides that every business owner has a duty to maintain the premises in a manner that is as safe as reasonably possible.
“You need to find something to hang your hat on liability wise,” Alpert said. “If it hasn’t snowed in a few days and maintenance isn’t being done, we can recover on those cases.”
He shies away from public sidewalk slip and falls, because to bring suit against a municipality like Milwaukee, a plaintiff has to prove it has not snowed in 21 days and there is a damages cap of $50,000.
Rozek says he only takes about a quarter of the slip and fall cases he is presented with each winter.
“A lot of times people don’t understand and they think they are entitled to compensation,” Skemp said. “Sometimes we have to say, ‘Unfortunately, we’re not in position to help you.’”
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Kentucky Fire Harms a FireFighter
December 23, 2009 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal news for Kentucky personal injury attorneys. Three people were injured in a house fire.
Kentucky personal injury lawyers alerts-A firefighter was injured while fighting a fire in Louisville, Kentucky.
Louisville, KY—A firefighter was injured after he fell down a fight of stairs while battling a fire inside a two-story home. The firefighter was fighting the blaze around 3:30 a.m., on Monday morning, December 21, 2009 in a home located in the 1800 block of Bolling Avenue, as reported by the Courier-Journal.
The fire reportedly broke out in a second-floor bedroom for unknown reasons; officials reported a portable heater was being used in the room, but the fire appeared to be accidental. A firefighter was injured after he fell down the stairwell as he was battling the inferno. He was transported to University Hospital for treatment, and was later released. Two children who were inside the house, an 11-year-old and an 18-month old, who were driven by their mother to Kosair Children’s Hospital for treatment of their injuries sustained in the fire. When fire officials arrived at the scene no one was home, because the mother called 911 as she was driving her injured children to the hospital. The 11-year-old reportedly sustained burns to her hands and face, while the baby suffered from smoke inhalation. The fire was contained to the second-story floor of the home. The fire is reportedly being investigated by fire investigators to determine what exactly ignited the blaze.
Legal News Reporter: Nicole Howley-Legal news for Kentucky personal injury lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal news for Kentucky personal injury attorneys. Three people were injured in a house fire.
Kentucky personal injury lawyers alerts-A firefighter was injured while fighting a fire in Louisville, Kentucky.
Louisville, KY—A firefighter was injured after he fell down a fight of stairs while battling a fire inside a two-story home. The firefighter was fighting the blaze around 3:30 a.m., on Monday morning, December 21, 2009 in a home located in the 1800 block of Bolling Avenue, as reported by the Courier-Journal.
The fire reportedly broke out in a second-floor bedroom for unknown reasons; officials reported a portable heater was being used in the room, but the fire appeared to be accidental. A firefighter was injured after he fell down the stairwell as he was battling the inferno. He was transported to University Hospital for treatment, and was later released. Two children who were inside the house, an 11-year-old and an 18-month old, who were driven by their mother to Kosair Children’s Hospital for treatment of their injuries sustained in the fire. When fire officials arrived at the scene no one was home, because the mother called 911 as she was driving her injured children to the hospital. The 11-year-old reportedly sustained burns to her hands and face, while the baby suffered from smoke inhalation. The fire was contained to the second-story floor of the home. The fire is reportedly being investigated by fire investigators to determine what exactly ignited the blaze.
Legal News Reporter: Nicole Howley-Legal news for Kentucky personal injury lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Friday, December 25, 2009
NY Child Seat Law Tightened
A new law went to effect in November 2009 requiring all children under eight years of age to sit in a safety seat when riding in an automobile. The previous law had required the use of age- and size-appropriate seats until a child reached his or her seventh birthday.
New York, NY (PRWEB) December 24, 2009 -- A new law went to effect in November 2009 requiring all children under eight years of age to sit in a safety seat when riding in an automobile. The previous law had required the use of age- and size-appropriate seats until a child reached his or her seventh birthday.
“While parents with children in elementary school may feel uncomfortable enforcing a safety seat rule, especially if their children put up a fuss, putting their children in booster seats can make a big difference in protecting them as passengers,” said Paul Dansker, Esq., a New York City-based personal injury attorney.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) consistently has found that about half the children between the ages of four and seven who are killed in car accidents are unrestrained. Among younger children who account for accident fatalities, about one-third are not restrained,” he added.
The NHTSA estimates that proper seats can reduce fatal injury by 71 percent for infants and by 54 percent for toddlers and preschoolers.
The New York State law specifies the type of restraint system required for children of different ages. All children under the age of four must sit in a federally-approved car seat when riding in a motor vehicle, including a school bus.
Infants should be placed in a rear-facing infant seat in the back seat until they reach about 27 inches and up to 20 pounds. Convertible seats can be used as either rear-facing infant seats or front-facing toddler seats. Seats that only face forward are designed for children who weigh at least 20 pounds. Some models can be converted into a booster seat for children who meet the weight guidelines.
All children between the ages of four and six, and younger children who weigh over 40 pounds, should use a booster seat, harness or safety seat in combination with the car’s lap and shoulder belt, as long as they meet the height and weight recommendations of the manufacturer. These laws apply to all children being transported in a private motor vehicle, not just one’s own children. Booster seats are not required on school buses.
“Even with this new and more stringent law, we may not be going far enough to protect our child passengers,” said Dansker. “A parent or adult driver is not required to put a child in a booster seat once he or she reaches 4 feet 9 inches, 100 pounds, or eight years of age. Yet many eight-year-olds are not yet tall or heavy enough to sit in a standard seat with a safety belt that fits properly and offers enough protection in the event of an accident.”
“Simple safety measures such as car and booster seats go a long way to help prevent injury and fatal injury to children in the event of an accident,” noted Dansker. “Adults who drive with children in the car should take just a small amount of time to shop for and properly install the right equipment for their passengers.”
To find a child safety event or a list of permanent fitting stations, visit http://www.safeny.com.
Dansker & Aspromonte Associates is located at 30 Vesey Street, 16th Floor, New York, NY 10007. For more information, call (212) 732-2929 or visit www.dandalaw.com.
About Dansker & Aspromonte Associates: Dansker & Aspromonte Associates is a New York City personal injury law firm specializing in serious brain injuries; medical malpractice, motor vehicle accidents, falls, construction accidents, municipal liability, injuries to children and more. The firm has represented thousands of clients and obtained hundreds of millions of dollars for them over the last 30 years.
New York, NY (PRWEB) December 24, 2009 -- A new law went to effect in November 2009 requiring all children under eight years of age to sit in a safety seat when riding in an automobile. The previous law had required the use of age- and size-appropriate seats until a child reached his or her seventh birthday.
“While parents with children in elementary school may feel uncomfortable enforcing a safety seat rule, especially if their children put up a fuss, putting their children in booster seats can make a big difference in protecting them as passengers,” said Paul Dansker, Esq., a New York City-based personal injury attorney.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) consistently has found that about half the children between the ages of four and seven who are killed in car accidents are unrestrained. Among younger children who account for accident fatalities, about one-third are not restrained,” he added.
The NHTSA estimates that proper seats can reduce fatal injury by 71 percent for infants and by 54 percent for toddlers and preschoolers.
The New York State law specifies the type of restraint system required for children of different ages. All children under the age of four must sit in a federally-approved car seat when riding in a motor vehicle, including a school bus.
Infants should be placed in a rear-facing infant seat in the back seat until they reach about 27 inches and up to 20 pounds. Convertible seats can be used as either rear-facing infant seats or front-facing toddler seats. Seats that only face forward are designed for children who weigh at least 20 pounds. Some models can be converted into a booster seat for children who meet the weight guidelines.
All children between the ages of four and six, and younger children who weigh over 40 pounds, should use a booster seat, harness or safety seat in combination with the car’s lap and shoulder belt, as long as they meet the height and weight recommendations of the manufacturer. These laws apply to all children being transported in a private motor vehicle, not just one’s own children. Booster seats are not required on school buses.
“Even with this new and more stringent law, we may not be going far enough to protect our child passengers,” said Dansker. “A parent or adult driver is not required to put a child in a booster seat once he or she reaches 4 feet 9 inches, 100 pounds, or eight years of age. Yet many eight-year-olds are not yet tall or heavy enough to sit in a standard seat with a safety belt that fits properly and offers enough protection in the event of an accident.”
“Simple safety measures such as car and booster seats go a long way to help prevent injury and fatal injury to children in the event of an accident,” noted Dansker. “Adults who drive with children in the car should take just a small amount of time to shop for and properly install the right equipment for their passengers.”
To find a child safety event or a list of permanent fitting stations, visit http://www.safeny.com.
Dansker & Aspromonte Associates is located at 30 Vesey Street, 16th Floor, New York, NY 10007. For more information, call (212) 732-2929 or visit www.dandalaw.com.
About Dansker & Aspromonte Associates: Dansker & Aspromonte Associates is a New York City personal injury law firm specializing in serious brain injuries; medical malpractice, motor vehicle accidents, falls, construction accidents, municipal liability, injuries to children and more. The firm has represented thousands of clients and obtained hundreds of millions of dollars for them over the last 30 years.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Pick Up Truck Driver Dead for 20 Hours before Police Arrive
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. Police arrive on the scene of pickup truck crash 20 hours late, driver died from untreated injuries.
Pickup truck driver dead before NPPD deputies arrive at the crash site 20 hours late.
North Port, FL—It took two calls to the North Port Police Department (NPPD) and twenty hours for the department to dispatch an officer to the site of a pickup truck crash. The driver was severely injured and died from the injuries he sustained in the wreck before deputies arrived on the scene, as reported by USA Today. The driver of the pickup truck, Brian Wood, 55, allegedly sat down near the site in which he crashed into a pole on Friday.
A motorist, Mark Minisci, that saw Wood sitting there badly injured called the police but reportedly could not remember the correct name of the street on which they were located but provided the department with directions instead. The call-taker, allegedly told the motorist that she had to have the exact location and subsequently never dispatched an officer to the scene. By the time police officers arrived at the scene after receiving a second 911 call, Wood had tragically already passed away.
Allegedly, the 911 operator from the Sarasota Sheriff’s Office did not specify the details of the emergency from the initial phone call before transferring the emergency phone call to the NPPD. Though Chief Terry Lewis took responsibility for the error, Lewis allegedly stated that the NPPD call-taker should have inquired into more specific details of the incident. The investigation continues.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. Police arrive on the scene of pickup truck crash 20 hours late, driver died from untreated injuries.
Pickup truck driver dead before NPPD deputies arrive at the crash site 20 hours late.
North Port, FL—It took two calls to the North Port Police Department (NPPD) and twenty hours for the department to dispatch an officer to the site of a pickup truck crash. The driver was severely injured and died from the injuries he sustained in the wreck before deputies arrived on the scene, as reported by USA Today. The driver of the pickup truck, Brian Wood, 55, allegedly sat down near the site in which he crashed into a pole on Friday.
A motorist, Mark Minisci, that saw Wood sitting there badly injured called the police but reportedly could not remember the correct name of the street on which they were located but provided the department with directions instead. The call-taker, allegedly told the motorist that she had to have the exact location and subsequently never dispatched an officer to the scene. By the time police officers arrived at the scene after receiving a second 911 call, Wood had tragically already passed away.
Allegedly, the 911 operator from the Sarasota Sheriff’s Office did not specify the details of the emergency from the initial phone call before transferring the emergency phone call to the NPPD. Though Chief Terry Lewis took responsibility for the error, Lewis allegedly stated that the NPPD call-taker should have inquired into more specific details of the incident. The investigation continues.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
California Coast Guard Mishap
Legal news for California personal injury attorneys. Five people seriously injured, one killed after boat collision.
California personal injury attorneys alerts- A Coast Guard vessel and a pleasure boat crashed during the San Diego Bay Parade of Lights.
San Diego, CA—A Christmas watercraft parade turned tragic when a 33-foot Cost Guard vessel and a 24-foot pleasure boat collided for unknown reasons. A young boy was killed and five others were seriously injured during the San Diego Bay Parade of Lights around 6:00 p.m., on Sunday, December 20, 2009, as reported by the Los Angeles Times.
Authorities reported five of the 13 people riding on the pleasure boat sustained serious injuries. An 8-year-old boy, who was also on the pleasure boat, was killed in the collision. None of the five people aboard the Coast Guard vessel was injured in the crash. The victims were rushed by responding emergency services to the University of California, San Diego Hospital for treatment of their injuries. The young boy was pronounced dead after arriving at the hospital for treatment. Neither boats involved in the wreck were reportedly a part of the boat parade. Officials do not know how the crash occurred, or if the pleasure boat was a part of the spectators who came to the bay to watch the parade and fireworks. The sun had reportedly just gone down, and the weather was clear with a light wind when the fatal collision occurred. Police officials and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) http://www.ntsb.gov/ are investigating the tragic incident. The San Diego Harbor Police and the San Diego Fire Department responded to the boat crash.
Legal News Reporter: Nicole Howley-Legal news for California personal injury lawyers.
Tags: california personal injury attorneys, coast guard vessel, crash, pleasure boat, san diego bay parade of lights
Written by Nicole · Filed Under Justice News Flash, california personal injury attorney
Online Justice News Flash Legal News Distribution - JusticeNewsFlash.com
California personal injury attorneys alerts- A Coast Guard vessel and a pleasure boat crashed during the San Diego Bay Parade of Lights.
San Diego, CA—A Christmas watercraft parade turned tragic when a 33-foot Cost Guard vessel and a 24-foot pleasure boat collided for unknown reasons. A young boy was killed and five others were seriously injured during the San Diego Bay Parade of Lights around 6:00 p.m., on Sunday, December 20, 2009, as reported by the Los Angeles Times.
Authorities reported five of the 13 people riding on the pleasure boat sustained serious injuries. An 8-year-old boy, who was also on the pleasure boat, was killed in the collision. None of the five people aboard the Coast Guard vessel was injured in the crash. The victims were rushed by responding emergency services to the University of California, San Diego Hospital for treatment of their injuries. The young boy was pronounced dead after arriving at the hospital for treatment. Neither boats involved in the wreck were reportedly a part of the boat parade. Officials do not know how the crash occurred, or if the pleasure boat was a part of the spectators who came to the bay to watch the parade and fireworks. The sun had reportedly just gone down, and the weather was clear with a light wind when the fatal collision occurred. Police officials and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) http://www.ntsb.gov/ are investigating the tragic incident. The San Diego Harbor Police and the San Diego Fire Department responded to the boat crash.
Legal News Reporter: Nicole Howley-Legal news for California personal injury lawyers.
Tags: california personal injury attorneys, coast guard vessel, crash, pleasure boat, san diego bay parade of lights
Written by Nicole · Filed Under Justice News Flash, california personal injury attorney
Online Justice News Flash Legal News Distribution - JusticeNewsFlash.com
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Judge Decision This Week to Throw or Continue Law Suit
A Goodhue County judge will decide whether a personal injury case against a Minnesota college should be thrown out.
John McDonald Jr., an attorney for St. Olaf College, on Friday filed a motion to dismiss the case, which alleges the institution and Welch Village Ski Area are liable for injuries to a ski racer involved in a 2005 crash.
"He consented to the inherent risks of the run," McDonald said in court.
First District Court Judge Thomas Bibus took the case under advisement and will likely issue a ruling after several weeks.
Kristoffer Larsen was taking a practice run March 2, 2005, on Welch Village's black-diamond run Bakkelyka when he lost control on a slalom course and smashed into a chairlift tower.
Mark Streed, an attorney for Larsen - a Norwegian citizen who was attending Northfield's St. Olaf College in 2005 - refuted McDonald's claims. He said St. Olaf's ski coach set the course in a negligent manner that "failed to protect skiers."
Streed said Larsen received two broken legs, a skull fracture and traumatic brain injury in the crash. He said Larsen was left with ongoing headaches and moderate cognitive deficits.
Larsen, who raced for the St. Olaf ski team, assumed some risk on the day of the crash, Streed said.
"But he did not assume risk of an unpadded steel plate," he told Bibus, referring to a contested point about the lift tower's padding.
McDonald contended that Larsen should have identified the lift tower during an inspection of the course, a common pre-race practice used by racers to identify course structure.
"Based on the testimony of Mr. Larsen and others, he was aware of the risks and assumed (them) by racing and becoming injured," McDonald said outside the courtroom.
The case is set for an April 2010 trial.
Tags: local news, goodhue county mn, welch village, red wing, news
John McDonald Jr., an attorney for St. Olaf College, on Friday filed a motion to dismiss the case, which alleges the institution and Welch Village Ski Area are liable for injuries to a ski racer involved in a 2005 crash.
"He consented to the inherent risks of the run," McDonald said in court.
First District Court Judge Thomas Bibus took the case under advisement and will likely issue a ruling after several weeks.
Kristoffer Larsen was taking a practice run March 2, 2005, on Welch Village's black-diamond run Bakkelyka when he lost control on a slalom course and smashed into a chairlift tower.
Mark Streed, an attorney for Larsen - a Norwegian citizen who was attending Northfield's St. Olaf College in 2005 - refuted McDonald's claims. He said St. Olaf's ski coach set the course in a negligent manner that "failed to protect skiers."
Streed said Larsen received two broken legs, a skull fracture and traumatic brain injury in the crash. He said Larsen was left with ongoing headaches and moderate cognitive deficits.
Larsen, who raced for the St. Olaf ski team, assumed some risk on the day of the crash, Streed said.
"But he did not assume risk of an unpadded steel plate," he told Bibus, referring to a contested point about the lift tower's padding.
McDonald contended that Larsen should have identified the lift tower during an inspection of the course, a common pre-race practice used by racers to identify course structure.
"Based on the testimony of Mr. Larsen and others, he was aware of the risks and assumed (them) by racing and becoming injured," McDonald said outside the courtroom.
The case is set for an April 2010 trial.
Tags: local news, goodhue county mn, welch village, red wing, news
$100 Million Verdict Mostly Punitive
By Susan Beck
December 21, 2009
We're sorry to rain on the parade of the ten contract workers who won a $100 million verdict against energy company BP in a Galveston federal district court on Friday, but the chances of that verdict surviving intact are pretty slim. That's because all but $300,000 of that amount represents punitive damages. If you compute the ratio of punitive to actual damages, you get 333 to 1, which is not a ratio that many courts will look favorably on. In addition, Texas caps punitive damages in most cases at $200,000 per plaintiff.
Still, that verdict should get the attention of BP, which faces similar claims by an additional 133 workers. All claim to have been injured by a toxic chemical release at BP's troubled Texas City oil refinery in 2007. Click here for an account of the verdict by the Houston Chronicle.
We talked on Monday to plaintiffs lawyer Anthony Buzbee of Galveston's Buzbee Law Firm, who represents the 10 workers who won the verdict, as well as the other 133. "The whole purpose of the case was to punish BP," said Buzbee. "I was very upfront [with the jury] that this was a punitive damages case." He admits that his clients' injuries were minor: All were released from the hospital the same day they were admitted. But, he contended, BP has a history of safety violations at this plant that it refuses to remedy. The Texas City refinery is the same facility where 15 workers were killed in a 2005 explosion, leading the company to pay $2 billion in private damages and a $50 million criminal fine (see third item). Federal and state regulators, he contended, are unwilling or unable to force the company to improve the safety of its working conditions. (The company is fighting an $87 million fine imposed this year by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.)
"Honestly, I didn't want to try this case. I have other cases I wanted to try," said Buzbee. He maintained that he offered to settle for $10,000 per worker, but BP refused. Buzbee said he has a "long history" of representing plaintiffs against BP, including representing roughly 180 people injured in the 2005 explosion. He urged this jury to act with a sense of mission: "I told the jury from the beginning to do something historic."
Buzbee acknowledged that he will have to clear steep hurdles in post trial motions--which will be heard by Galveston federal district court judge Kenneth Hoyt--and in an appeal. Buzbee claimed he should be able to "bust" the state punitive damages cap because BP engaged in a felony by lying to authorities about the safety of its plant.
BP issued the following statement: "We are shocked and outraged by today's verdict, and we will appeal. We believe the evidence showed that BP did not cause harm to anyone on April 19, 2007. The verdict, and punitive damages award in particular, is utterly unjustified, improper and unsupportable." (The company declined to comment on Buzbee's statement regarding his settlement offers.)
We reached out to BP's lead trial lawyer, James Galbraith of the Galveston office of McLeod, Alexander, Powel & Apffel, but have not heard back.
December 21, 2009
We're sorry to rain on the parade of the ten contract workers who won a $100 million verdict against energy company BP in a Galveston federal district court on Friday, but the chances of that verdict surviving intact are pretty slim. That's because all but $300,000 of that amount represents punitive damages. If you compute the ratio of punitive to actual damages, you get 333 to 1, which is not a ratio that many courts will look favorably on. In addition, Texas caps punitive damages in most cases at $200,000 per plaintiff.
Still, that verdict should get the attention of BP, which faces similar claims by an additional 133 workers. All claim to have been injured by a toxic chemical release at BP's troubled Texas City oil refinery in 2007. Click here for an account of the verdict by the Houston Chronicle.
We talked on Monday to plaintiffs lawyer Anthony Buzbee of Galveston's Buzbee Law Firm, who represents the 10 workers who won the verdict, as well as the other 133. "The whole purpose of the case was to punish BP," said Buzbee. "I was very upfront [with the jury] that this was a punitive damages case." He admits that his clients' injuries were minor: All were released from the hospital the same day they were admitted. But, he contended, BP has a history of safety violations at this plant that it refuses to remedy. The Texas City refinery is the same facility where 15 workers were killed in a 2005 explosion, leading the company to pay $2 billion in private damages and a $50 million criminal fine (see third item). Federal and state regulators, he contended, are unwilling or unable to force the company to improve the safety of its working conditions. (The company is fighting an $87 million fine imposed this year by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.)
"Honestly, I didn't want to try this case. I have other cases I wanted to try," said Buzbee. He maintained that he offered to settle for $10,000 per worker, but BP refused. Buzbee said he has a "long history" of representing plaintiffs against BP, including representing roughly 180 people injured in the 2005 explosion. He urged this jury to act with a sense of mission: "I told the jury from the beginning to do something historic."
Buzbee acknowledged that he will have to clear steep hurdles in post trial motions--which will be heard by Galveston federal district court judge Kenneth Hoyt--and in an appeal. Buzbee claimed he should be able to "bust" the state punitive damages cap because BP engaged in a felony by lying to authorities about the safety of its plant.
BP issued the following statement: "We are shocked and outraged by today's verdict, and we will appeal. We believe the evidence showed that BP did not cause harm to anyone on April 19, 2007. The verdict, and punitive damages award in particular, is utterly unjustified, improper and unsupportable." (The company declined to comment on Buzbee's statement regarding his settlement offers.)
We reached out to BP's lead trial lawyer, James Galbraith of the Galveston office of McLeod, Alexander, Powel & Apffel, but have not heard back.
Monday, December 21, 2009
DUI Defense Attorney Say Don't Spoke
LOS ANGELES, Sept. 28 /PRNewswire/ -- Los Angeles DUI attorney Lawrence Taylor, author of the legal textbook Drunk Driving Defense, claims that smokers arrested for DUI may have false high results from breathalyzer tests.
Breath machines don't actually measure alcohol, Taylor says. They are actually designed to detect any compound containing the methyl group in its molecular structure and to assume that it is alcohol. They cannot distinguish the difference between alcohol and, among many other compounds, acetaldehyde.
Acetaldehyde is produced in the liver in small amounts as a by-product in the metabolism of alcohol. Unfortunately, the DUI lawyer says, alcohol moving from the blood into the lungs has been found to metabolize there as well. And scientists have found that acetaldehyde concentrations in the lungs of smokers are greater than for non-smokers - far greater. Translated: smokers arrested for DUI are more likely to have falsely high readings on a breathalyzer. "Origin of Breath Acetaldehyde During Ethanol Oxidation: Effect of Long-Term Cigarette Smoking", 100 Journal of Laboratory Clinical Medicine 908.
The Los Angeles DUI lawyer points to another scientific study that found cigarette smoking can influence absorption by the body of alcohol -- and thus attempts to estimate earlier blood alcohol levels when driving based upon levels when tested. Johnson et al., "Cigarette Smoking and Rate of Gastric Emptying: Effect on Alcohol Absorption", 302 British Medical Journal 20.
The researchers reported testing blood samples of a group of smokers both after smoking and after prolonged abstinence. The result was that "areas under the venous blood alcohol concentration-time curves between zero and 30 minutes and 60 minutes and the peak blood alcohol concentrations were significantly less during the smoking period compared with the non-smoking period."
The scientists concluded that the effect of smoking on alcohol absorption has "considerable social and medicolegal relevance", and that the ingestion of nicotine should be taken into account when dealing with legal issues involving alcohol metabolism. In other words, Taylor says, attempts to estimate blood-alcohol levels of a DUI defendant when driving are highly unreliable.
For more information, visit the law firm's website at http://losangeles.duicentral.com/ . Inquiries may be directed to the firm's main Los Angeles office: 562.989.4774.
About THE LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE TAYLOR
With a national reputation and the highest professional ratings, The Law Offices of Lawrence Taylor has specialized in DUI defense exclusively for 29 years. The firm's California DUI defense attorneys serve clients statewide from offices in Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange County, Riverside and San Francisco.
SOURCE The Law Offices of Lawrence Taylor
Breath machines don't actually measure alcohol, Taylor says. They are actually designed to detect any compound containing the methyl group in its molecular structure and to assume that it is alcohol. They cannot distinguish the difference between alcohol and, among many other compounds, acetaldehyde.
Acetaldehyde is produced in the liver in small amounts as a by-product in the metabolism of alcohol. Unfortunately, the DUI lawyer says, alcohol moving from the blood into the lungs has been found to metabolize there as well. And scientists have found that acetaldehyde concentrations in the lungs of smokers are greater than for non-smokers - far greater. Translated: smokers arrested for DUI are more likely to have falsely high readings on a breathalyzer. "Origin of Breath Acetaldehyde During Ethanol Oxidation: Effect of Long-Term Cigarette Smoking", 100 Journal of Laboratory Clinical Medicine 908.
The Los Angeles DUI lawyer points to another scientific study that found cigarette smoking can influence absorption by the body of alcohol -- and thus attempts to estimate earlier blood alcohol levels when driving based upon levels when tested. Johnson et al., "Cigarette Smoking and Rate of Gastric Emptying: Effect on Alcohol Absorption", 302 British Medical Journal 20.
The researchers reported testing blood samples of a group of smokers both after smoking and after prolonged abstinence. The result was that "areas under the venous blood alcohol concentration-time curves between zero and 30 minutes and 60 minutes and the peak blood alcohol concentrations were significantly less during the smoking period compared with the non-smoking period."
The scientists concluded that the effect of smoking on alcohol absorption has "considerable social and medicolegal relevance", and that the ingestion of nicotine should be taken into account when dealing with legal issues involving alcohol metabolism. In other words, Taylor says, attempts to estimate blood-alcohol levels of a DUI defendant when driving are highly unreliable.
For more information, visit the law firm's website at http://losangeles.duicentral.com/ . Inquiries may be directed to the firm's main Los Angeles office: 562.989.4774.
About THE LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE TAYLOR
With a national reputation and the highest professional ratings, The Law Offices of Lawrence Taylor has specialized in DUI defense exclusively for 29 years. The firm's California DUI defense attorneys serve clients statewide from offices in Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange County, Riverside and San Francisco.
SOURCE The Law Offices of Lawrence Taylor
Florida Hit and Run Injures Police Officer
December 19, 2009 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. A hit and run traffic accident fatally injured an off-duty police officer.
Police officer killed after being struck by van in fatal traffic accident.
Tallahassee, FL— Off-duty Tallahassee Police Officer, Mike Saunders, was tragically killed after being hit by a van early Saturday morning,December 12, 2009 as reported by WCTV news source. The driver of the Bowden’s Carpet Cleaning van, Guy Jones, 22, was allegedly driving the vehicle without authorization from the company near Paul Dirac and Orange Avenue when he struck the police officer, fatally injuring him.
Jones’ neighbor reportedly noticed the Chevrolet service van parked outside his home in the Willow Bend Apartment Complex. The badly damaged van was allegedly somewhat hidden and had an apparently missing bumper. A “bow tie” emblem, the passenger side mirror, a front blinker, as well as other debris left behind after the incident were found at the scene, according to the arrest report.
A Tallahassee police officer allegedly overheard a phone conversation between Jones and another individual in which he reportedly admitted that he was drinking at the time of the accident. Bowden’s attorney allegedly called the police after Jones reportedly told his employers at Bowden’s Carpet Cleaning that the van was damaged due to an accident in which he struck a dear the night before, though apparently Bowden did not believe the story. Jones subsequently lost his job after the incident. Charges are pending. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
http://www.newyorkinjurynews.com/2009/12/19/Florida-Personal-Injury-Attorneys-News-Tallahassee-FL-Traffic-accident-kills-off-duty-police-officer_200912191829.html
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Florida Personal Injury Attorneys. A hit and run traffic accident fatally injured an off-duty police officer.
Police officer killed after being struck by van in fatal traffic accident.
Tallahassee, FL— Off-duty Tallahassee Police Officer, Mike Saunders, was tragically killed after being hit by a van early Saturday morning,December 12, 2009 as reported by WCTV news source. The driver of the Bowden’s Carpet Cleaning van, Guy Jones, 22, was allegedly driving the vehicle without authorization from the company near Paul Dirac and Orange Avenue when he struck the police officer, fatally injuring him.
Jones’ neighbor reportedly noticed the Chevrolet service van parked outside his home in the Willow Bend Apartment Complex. The badly damaged van was allegedly somewhat hidden and had an apparently missing bumper. A “bow tie” emblem, the passenger side mirror, a front blinker, as well as other debris left behind after the incident were found at the scene, according to the arrest report.
A Tallahassee police officer allegedly overheard a phone conversation between Jones and another individual in which he reportedly admitted that he was drinking at the time of the accident. Bowden’s attorney allegedly called the police after Jones reportedly told his employers at Bowden’s Carpet Cleaning that the van was damaged due to an accident in which he struck a dear the night before, though apparently Bowden did not believe the story. Jones subsequently lost his job after the incident. Charges are pending. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
http://www.newyorkinjurynews.com/2009/12/19/Florida-Personal-Injury-Attorneys-News-Tallahassee-FL-Traffic-accident-kills-off-duty-police-officer_200912191829.html
December 19, 2009 (NewYorkInjuryNews.com - Injury News)
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys. Elevated levels of toxic metal found outside elementary school, EPA investigates.
EPA finds excessive levels of the toxic metal, manganese, outside an Ohio school.
East Liverpool, OH—Abnormally high levels of the toxic metal, manganese, were found on the premises of LaCroft Elementary, according to information provided by USA Today. Officials from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allegedly reported that the air samples taken outside the elementary school, located in East Liverpool, Ohio, exhibited levels of manganese, which greatly exceeded the government safety limits in regards to long-term exposure to the dangerous metal.
It was reported that nine samples taken at LaCroft Elementary revealed levels of manganese that were two times higher than the standard set by the EPA for long-term exposure to the toxin. A sample taken from the air outside the school in September allegedly revealed that the presence of manganese was twelve times the government standard.
When USA Today reportedly conducted an investigation showing how hundreds of schools across the United States had air that was polluted with high levels of toxic industrial chemicals, the EPA started a $2.25 million program to collect and monitor air samples taken from 63 schools in a total of 22 states. Samples taken from a school in Marietta, Ohio, as well as Vienna, West Virginia, also allegedly demonstrated excessively high levels of the toxic metal.
Manganese has been known to allegedly cause mental and emotional problems with long-term exposure.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Ohio Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
http://www.newyorkinjurynews.com/2009/12/19/Ohio-Personal-Injury-Toxic-metal-with-brain-damaging-effects_200912191831.html
New Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com
Legal News for Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys. Elevated levels of toxic metal found outside elementary school, EPA investigates.
EPA finds excessive levels of the toxic metal, manganese, outside an Ohio school.
East Liverpool, OH—Abnormally high levels of the toxic metal, manganese, were found on the premises of LaCroft Elementary, according to information provided by USA Today. Officials from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allegedly reported that the air samples taken outside the elementary school, located in East Liverpool, Ohio, exhibited levels of manganese, which greatly exceeded the government safety limits in regards to long-term exposure to the dangerous metal.
It was reported that nine samples taken at LaCroft Elementary revealed levels of manganese that were two times higher than the standard set by the EPA for long-term exposure to the toxin. A sample taken from the air outside the school in September allegedly revealed that the presence of manganese was twelve times the government standard.
When USA Today reportedly conducted an investigation showing how hundreds of schools across the United States had air that was polluted with high levels of toxic industrial chemicals, the EPA started a $2.25 million program to collect and monitor air samples taken from 63 schools in a total of 22 states. Samples taken from a school in Marietta, Ohio, as well as Vienna, West Virginia, also allegedly demonstrated excessively high levels of the toxic metal.
Manganese has been known to allegedly cause mental and emotional problems with long-term exposure.
Legal News Reporter: Sandra Quinlan- Legal News for Ohio Personal Injury Lawyers. News Source: JusticeNewsFlash.com - Press Release Distribution
http://www.newyorkinjurynews.com/2009/12/19/Ohio-Personal-Injury-Toxic-metal-with-brain-damaging-effects_200912191831.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)