Car Accident Lawyer

How many times have you been cut off in traffic, or watched another driver run a stop sign, only to notice that the driver was talking on a cell phone?

How many times have you yourself started to veer toward other cars when you stumbled to reach your cell phone or tried to respond to a friend’s text?

Most drivers recognize that cell phones are a distraction that can be dangerous on the road. Yet few drivers want to give up the convenience of ‘talking or texting while theyre driving.

An article in USA Today reports that the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety found that 94 percent of drivers think that texting while driving is a “serious threat” to safety and that 87 percent of drivers are in favor of texting bans. However, more than a third of drivers also admitted to reading texts or e-mail while driving, and nearly 70 percent said that they talk on their cell phones while driving.

Cell Phones and Safe Driving

Data about the dangers of texting or talking on a cell phone while driving is unclear. While the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says that cell phones were a factor in about 13 percent of fatal crashes See: Personal Injury Lawyers Charlotte North Carolina last year, officials note that reporting is unreliable. Drivers are not likely to report that they were engaging in risky behavior while driving, such as talking on a cell phone or texting, especially if those behaviors have been banned in that region.

USA Today reports that the National Transportation Safety Board called on states in December to ban handheld and hands-free cell phone use while driving.

Read The Full Report

A new study, however, indicates that teenage girls are engaging in risky driving habits. Young women, in fact, were around twice as likely as young men to use electronic devices while driving, according to the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. The study also determined that females were 10 percent more likely to be observed engaging in other distracted driver behaviors, such as reaching for an object in the vehicle or eating or drinking.

LA auto accident attorney Mickey Fine, of the Law Offices of Mickey Fine, (Directions : Law Offices of Mickey Fine has represented seriously injured accident victims. An experienced car accident attorney, Fine has seen first-hand how devastating injuries can be to victims and their families.

Distracted driving has become an epidemic as more people use cell phones and other electronic devices. More than 3,000 highway deaths in 2010 were linked to distracted driving, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. It’s important for parents to talk with their teenagers about the dangers of using cell phones while driving or texting while driving.

Another study looking at gender and car accidents revealed that the number of young female drunk drivers is on the rise. In 2007, the risk of being involved in a drunk driving car accident was about the same for young female drinkers as it was for young male drinkers, according to the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. In 1996, a male under 21 was four times as likely as an underage female to get into a fatal drunk driving car accident with a blood alcohol concentration of .1 percent, according to the study.

It’s not entirely clear why more young women are getting into drunk driving accidents, but they may be taking more chances on the road than they had in the past, according to researchers.

While teenagers may cause accidents due to their inexperience as drivers or because they have engaged in risky behavior behind the wheel, some young people can become injury victims through no fault of their own. If you were injured, or a loved one was injured or killed due to someone’s negligence, it’s important to speak with an experienced attorney who can protect your rights.

Women often spend a lot of time driving their children to and from school, extracurricular activities like sports, and family activities.

Because they spend so much time on the road with such precious cargo, women often choose vehicles based on their safety rating and other perceived safety features. Yet new vehicle ratings reveal that safety information had been skewed for men, and that women and children may actually be at greater risk of serious injury from car accidents than previously thought.

Starting with 2011 models, the federal government began using a smaller “female” crash-test dummy for some safety tests, instead of the standard, average-sized “male” dummy. The result has been a lower safety rating for many vehicles – as much as two stars – to reflect the increased risk of serious injury for smaller passengers, such as women and children.

Read The Full Account

The American Insurance Association and the Coalition for Medicare Secondary Payer reform both announced their support for the Medicare Secondary Payer and Workers’ Compensation Settlement Agreements Act of 2012, introduced last week by Representatives Dave Reichart (R-Wa.) and Mike Thompson (D-Ca.).

The legislation is aimed at resolving the delays in the review of workers’ compensation set-asides for Medicare.

A Medicare Set-Aside Arrangement (MSA) is an account that is created when a workers’ compensation case is settled to protect Medicare from paying for expenses that are related to the worker’s injuries. Therefore, if a worker has to receive surgery, the MSA would be used to pay for it, rather than Medicare benefits.

“(The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) takes too long to review proposed set-asides, fails to provide appropriate and consistent standards for determining amounts to be set aside, and provides no avenue to appeal CMS determinations,” Douglas Holmes, the coordinator of the Coalition for Medicare Secondary Payer Reform, said in a press release. “The process results in injured workers not receiving funds, additional costs for states and workers’ compensation payers, and additional liability for employers, insurance carriers, and attorneys. A legislative solution to this problem is needed.”

The coalition, which includes representatives for injured workers and insurance carriers, has been pushing for reform of this system for some time, and the Government Accountability Office released a report in March that included recommendations for improving these processes.

“In case after case, we hear of delays in approval, uncertainty of the amount to be reimbursed by injured workers, and changes in amounts to be set-aside after settlements have already been approved,” J.R. Boyd, the president of the Workers Injury Law and Advocacy Group, said in a press release.

Get The Full Account

A new study examining the safety of young workers in the United States has yielded startling findings, says Massachusetts personal injury attorney Mark E. Salomone . According to statistics that appeared in HealthDay News, researchers from the Colorado School of Public Health found that approximately 20,000 teen job-related injuries occurred in 2010, including 88 teen deaths due to workplace injuries at privately owned companies. Most businesses with three or more employees carry Worker’s Compensation coverage, which applies to young employees as well as adults.
Teen worker injuries and fatalities can be the due to a number of factors, including dangerous work environments, defective work equipment or poor training. Teenager job injuries have many causes, from construction site accidents and company car accidents to repetitive stress carpal tunnel pain and restaurant worker kitchen burns .
The study found that, out of all the types of work young people are hired to do, farming is the most hazardous. “From a fatality standpoint, farm work is the most dangerous occupation for kids,” said study author Carol Runyan in an University of Colorado news release. “In farm work, youths are working around heavy equipment, digging and cutting with sharp implements. There are deaths almost every year from young people suffocating in grain bins.”
Massachusetts personal injury attorney Mark E. Salomone understands that young workers are typically more vulnerable than adults, across all industries, and that it is vital for teen employees and their families to explore not only Workers’ Compensation rights but other damages they may be able to recover. “Even if your family receives the maximum amount of teen Workers’ compensation benefits,” says Salomone, “it may not be enough to cover all the expenses incurred as a result of your child’s injury. A third party-such as a manufacturer, contractor or someone else whose actions may have been careless-could also be liable for a young worker’s injuries.”
Child labor laws exist across the nation, though in some companies they are not fully implemented or may go unheeded altogether. “We don’t tend to think of child labor as a major issue in the U.S., but we should,” says Runyan. “Laws governing the employment of youth ages 14 to 17 in this country are often very lenient and, in the case of family farms, virtually non-existent.”

Read The Full Story

SPRINGFIELD Mass Live – A 41-year-old city man, who apparently named the sledgehammer that he uses for work after a prominent personal injury lawyer, allegedly used it to break down the door of an ex-girlfriend’s Windsor Street home early Wednesday and threaten her, police said.

The woman and another occupant of the home escaped injury after they barricaded a hallway door with a refrigerator, Sgt. John M. Delaney said.

The incident began about 1:40 a.m. when the suspect, Eric Turhan Northrop, approached the woman’s home and threatened to use the sledgehammer which he referred to as ” Mark E. Salomone” to break down the door if she didn’t let him in, Delaney, aide to Commissioner William J. Fitchet, said. Salomone is a well-known Massachusetts lawyer who airs commercials on television.

Delaney, quoting from the arresting officer’s report, said that Northrop “broke through the front door wildly swinging Mark E. Salomone’” and yelled “I am going to get medieval on you like Thor.” A

Responding police officers found the sledgehammer on a table inside the home and arrested Northrop, of 40 Windsor St.

He was charged with home invasion, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, threat to commit a crime and assault with a dangerous weapon, police documents state.

Law Wire News

By: Catherine C. Nguyen, Esq.

College alumni in their mid to late twenties remember the good old days when Facebook used to be exclusive for only those with a valid college e-mail address. Back then, Facebook consisted of a single page with just the basics: a profile picture, gender, birth date, a friend list, a wall, a status log, maybe a photo album or two. Each college was its own network and Facebook advertised itself as a networking site. As college kids got to know their classmates and dorm mates, they added these new people to their friends list. Facebook then kept everyone up-to-date with a news feed that provided constant status, picture, and profile updates.

Facebook proved to be a successful venture into the relatively new world of social media. It continued to grow, opening its doors to community colleges, then to corporations, and eventually to anyone with an e-mail address. It became so popular that “Facebook” became a verb. For example: “Why don’t you Facebook her to find out what she’s doing tonight?” or “Is he single? Facebook him and find out.” When Facebook became an application on smart phones, users became even more “connected.” The Facebook application allows users to “check-in” to any place, allowing the phone’s GPS to locate these users and broadcast where they are to the world. The application can also utilize a smart phone’s camera to snap a picture and instantly upload it. Facebook has continuously upgraded its layout to accommodate so much information. The latest upgrade is called the “Timeline,” where a friend may search an user’s status updates, check-ins, and uploaded photographs throughout the years. Facebook is basically an open diary for anyone with the right privacy authorization to see.

Speaking of privacy, Facebook has had its share of privacy problems. Because more and more people are willing to upload intimate and potentially embarrassing material onto the internet, Facebook responded by creating increasingly complicated and customized privacy settings. An user can become Facebook friends with his parents and carefully finagle the privacy settings so that Mom only sees pictures of him frantically chugging a cappuccino before an exam or posting statuses that say “got an An on my history paper!” rather than those pictures of him chugging beer through a funnel and statuses that say “woke up in jail today.”

Facebook’s popularity has turned it into a powerful discovery tool. Take, for example, the case of Mary. Mary was roughly rear-ended by Rob and now claims that she is so injured that she can no longer partake in life’s pleasures. Traditionally, Rob would send a private investigator to take pictures of Mary out and about to see if her claims could be disproved. Now, all Rob would have to do is access Mary’s Facebook page to find pictures of her playing beach volleyball, looking tanned and healthy, and there goes both her claim and her credibility.

The conflict arises when Rob tries to access Mary’s Facebook page and is blocked by her privacy settings. Only Mary’s Facebook friends are permitted to view her posted material. All Rob can see is her name and profile picture which really doesn’t tell him anything. Rob files a motion in a Pennsylvania court to compel discovery of Mary’s Facebook page. What would be the outcome? See: Pennsylvania personal injury attorney

Since the dawn of the internet era, consumers have been repeatedly reminded to never give out their passwords. Understandably, people bristle when an opposing attorney demands their user name and password in order to have unfettered access to something they thought was private. Yet, it seems as though Pennsylvania discovery rules side with disclosure. Pa.R.C.P. 4003.1 allows a party to obtain discovery regarding any unprivileged matter as long as it is somehow relevant to litigation. In McMillen v. Hummingbird Speedway, Inc., 2010 WL 4403285, an argument was made in the Jefferson County court that private Facebook material should be subject to a “social network site privilege” based upon the belief that the plaintiff’s postings were private communications between him and his friends.

The court shot this argument down by pointing out that the law disapproves of privileged information so there could be no such thing as a social network site privilege. In addition, Facebook’s own terms and privacy policies say that it cannot prevent friends from reposting information or Facebook operators from accessing that information, so it is unrealistic to expect Facebook postings to be privileged. The McMillen court ultimately ordered the plaintiff to give the defendant his Facebook username and password.

One way to approach Facebook disclosure is to ask the court to conduct an in camera review of the private Facebook page in question. In Offenback v. L.M. Bowman, Inc., 2011 WL 2491371 (M.D. Pa. June 22, 2011), the court ordered the plaintiff to disclose his Facebook username and password then proceeded to review the plaintiff’s Facebook page in chambers. This review revealed that all of the relevant information the defendant needed had already been displayed on the public portion of plaintiff’s page. The court concluded that the plaintiff knew his Facebook page best and could have produced the posts the defendant wanted without the court’s help. On the other hand, the court in Zimmerman v. Weis, No. CV-09-1535 (Northumberland Cnty) determined that it would be an unfair burden on the court if it had to go through the plaintiff’s Facebook page to determine what is relevant and what is not. It ordered the plaintiff to provide his Facebook username and password to the defendant.

In Luzerne County, a court refused to compel a plaintiff to give defense counsel his username and password. The facts in Kalinowski v. Kirschenheiter and National Indemn. Co, No. 6779 of 2010, (Luzerne Cnty.) involved a plaintiff who was a bar owner with a Facebook page. When the defendant demanded access to the page, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant was only trying to embarrass him with pictures of the plaintiff in his best party attire. The court denied the defendant’s Motion to Compel without prejudice because the plaintiff’s public page did not reveal anything that impeached the plaintiff. The court did also order that the plaintiff refrain from deleting anything from his Facebook page to open the door for future social media discovery.

It seems as though the trend in Pennsylvania is to allow a party access to the opposing party’s Facebook page as long as something in the public profile suggests that relevant information may be contained in the private profile. Facebook postings may not only affect your relationship with your friends and family, it may also affect the outcome of your case. The world as a whole is still trying to sort out the role social media plays in professional settings – classes are even beginning to be taught on the topic. Although the rules on Facebook discovery are not set in stone, what your parents and teachers tell you still remain true: be careful what you post on Facebook!

Whitney Buchanan, P.C

A generic drug and a similar name-brand drug might not seem that different. But if you’re a victim of a dangerous drug, which one you took could make all the difference. That’s because in many cases, victims of a generic drug often have no right to sue the drug company. In contrast, people who sustain serious health problems caused by a brand-name drug have a much easier time taking legal action against the company.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that “companies did not have control over what their labels said and therefore could not be sued for failing to alert patients about the risks of taking their drugs,” according to a recent article in The New York Times.

News of this legal loophole may come as a shock to many people injured by dangerous drugs. But you do have rights, including in New Mexico. Make sure you find someone who will stand up for them and stand up for you. If you’re dealing with serious drug side effects, contact a New Mexico dangerous drug lawyer who puts people first. Contact Whitney Buchanan, P.C.

Serving clients in Albuquerque and throughout New Mexico, we take a hands-on approach to helping clients, including working with them to decide if they should file a New Mexico dangerous drug lawsuit. Each case is unique – just like your medical malpractice case. Contact an Albuquerque dangerous drug attorney who demands justice. Contact Whitney Buchanan, P.C.

Two women each had an arm amputated because a similar anti-nausea drug given to them caused gangrene. One woman took the generic version of the drug. Her case was thrown out of court due to last year’s Supreme Court ruling. The other woman took the brand-name drug. She successfully sued the drug manufacturer and received $6.8 million.

A dangerous drug can dramatically change your life forever in an instant. Don’t leave your future to chance. Contact a New Mexico lawyer focused on results. Contact Whitney Buchanan, P.C. 5201 Constitution Ave. NE Albuquerque, NM 87110.

Teenage boys traditionally have been viewed as more dangerous drivers than young female drivers. They have a higher risk of being injured a car accident. The insurance companies are aware of this, which is why young men pay higher premiums than their female peers.

A new study, however, indicates that teenage girls are engaging in risky driving habits. Young women, in fact, were around twice as likely as young men to use electronic devices while driving, according to the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. The study also determined that females were 10 percent more likely to be observed engaging in other distracted driver behaviors, such as reaching for an object in the vehicle or eating or drinking.

LA personal injury lawyers Mickey Fine, of the Law Offices of Mickey Fine, has represented seriously injured accident victims. An experienced car accident attorney, Fine has seen first-hand how devastating injuries can be to victims and their families.

Distracted driving has become an epidemic as more people use cell phones and other electronic devices. More than 3,000 highway deaths in 2010 were linked to distracted driving, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. It’s important for parents to talk with their teenagers about the dangers of using cell phones while driving or texting while driving.

Another study looking at gender and car accidents revealed that the number of young female drunk drivers is on the rise. In 2007, the risk of being involved in a drunk driving car accident was about the same for young female drinkers as it was for young male drinkers, according to the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. In 1996, a male under 21 was four times as likely as an underage female to get into a fatal drunk driving car accident with a blood alcohol concentration of .1 percent, according to the study.

Get The Full Report

When generic drugs first became available in the 1980s, patients everywhere celebrated due to the drastically lower prices. What consumers didn’t know was that, in choosing generic drugs over brand name versions, they were giving up their right to receive damages should they suffer from injuries due to ingesting generic drugs.

According to a recent article in the New York Times, while patients who became ill after taking brand name dangerous drugs can win a malpractice lawsuit, those who take generic drugs cannot. The reason goes back to a Supreme Court decision which stated that, since generic drugs do not have control over what is listed on their labels, they cannot be sued for medical malpractice. Even cases involving drugs that necessitated amputations due to gangrene and major surgeries to address debilitating gastrointestinal problems, the prescription injury victims who were given generic forms of the drug had their cases dismissed.

San Antonio attorney at The Herrera Law Firm, Inc. know that some Texas medical malpractice cases involve generic drugs and are working hard to fight for the rights of their dangerous drug lawsuit clients.

In the article, the significant inequity of patients filing medical malpractice lawsuits is evident. “Your pharmacists aren’t telling you, hey, when we fill this with your generic, you are giving up all of your legal remedies,” said Michael Johnson, a lawyer who represented Gladys Mensing, one of the patients who sued generic drug companies in last year’s Supreme Court case, Pliva v. Mensing. “You have a disparate impact between one class of people and another.”

Get The Full Story