Archive for the ‘Airplane & Train Crashes’ Category

« Older Entries

Distracted Driving Laws May Get Even More Stringent After DOJ Releases Info on Successful Law Enforcement Pilot Program “Phone in One Hand, Ticket in the Other”

July 14th, 2011 by admin

The Department of Justice reports that pilot programs held in New York and Connecticut have resulted in a significant decrease in distracted driving accidents, with U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood calling the results “dramatic.”

Pilot Programs in Syracuse and Hartford Fight Against Texting and Cell Phone Use While Driving

Two cities were chosen as the locations where the government would experiment with increased law enforcement targeting texting and cell phone use by drivers along with a big public education media campaign to educate the two communities on the dangers of texting or talking on the phone while driving a car, truck, SUV, minivan, etc. 

And by “law enforcement targeting,” we mean giving lots of traffic tickets.

“These findings show that strong laws, combined with highly-visible police enforcement, can significantly reduce dangerous texting and cell phone use behind the wheel,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “Based on these results, it is crystal clear that those who try to minimize this dangerous behavior are making a serious error in judgment, especially when half a million people are injured and thousands more are killed in distracted driving accidents.”

Federal Government and State Governments Shared Costs of the Pilot Programs

For each of the test runs, in New York and Connecticut, the Department of Justice put in $200,000 in federal funds with the state adding another $100,000 to cover the costs of increased police efforts as well as media costs (ads in the local newspapers, on the local television stations, etc.) They didn’t start from square one, however: costs were cut by mimicking the “Click It of Ticket” campaign as these two cities held their “Phone in One Hand, Ticket in the Other” distracted driving campaign.


National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Studies Success of the “Phone in One Hand, Ticket in the Other” Pilots

The NHTSA surveyed public awareness at the Syracuse and Hartford driver licensing offices and their findings include:

  • In Syracuse, New York, because of high-visibility enforcement -– both handheld cell phone use and texting behind the wheel have declined by 33%.
  • In Hartford, Connecticut, where researchers initially identified drivers talking on their cell phones at twice the frequency (which left more room for improvement), there was a 57 percent drop in handheld use and texting behind the wheel dropped by nearly three-quarters.

Based on these numbers, the NHTSA is already promoting the implementation of these campaigns across the country, pushing for “Phone in One Hand, Ticket in the Other” campaigns with state legislatures, law enforcement agencies, and consumer safety advocates as well as manning its own Distracted Driving website at www.distraction.gov.

Which means that if states are willing to spend the money, there will lots more police pulling people over for using their cellphone while driving to give them tickets that will vary in cost depending upon which authority is issuing the traffic violation.   Be careful out there.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Motorcycle Accidents, Pedestrian Accidents, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Spinal Injuries, Sports & Boating Accidents, Transportation, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Ability of Plaintiffs to File Class Actions is Vital: Congress Investigating Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Harming Plaintiffs’ Class Action Rights

July 7th, 2011 by admin

Class action lawsuits allow individual plaintiffs to group together in one lawsuit and in one courtroom as they seek justice against a defendant that is all too often a huge, international corporation. Class action lawsuits level the David vs Goliath playing field in countless ways, and class action lawsuits have proven to be vital to justice when defendants are powerful, rich, and ruthless.

Consider these famous class action lawsuits in American history: (1) the breast implant litigation of the 1990s, settled for $3.4 billioin, where a class action lawsuit sought damages for women injured by silicone breast implants against the major implant makers (Corning, Baxter, Bristol-Meyers Squibb/MEC, 3M), (2) the Exxon-Mobil class action litigation after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, where those injured by the oil spill along 1300 miles of coastline took the oil and gas giants to judgment (not settlement) for $5 billion in damages, or (3) the nationwide tobacco product class action litigation, where the top six tobacco companies were sued by each state’s attorney general for injury and death caused by cigarette smoking, etc..

Movies are made about class actions: A Civil Action and Erin Brockovich are just two examples.

Senate Is Investigating Supreme Court’s Recent Impact on Class Action Lawsuits

The Senate Judiciary Committee is investigating recent opinions released by the United States Supreme Court and for details, the Opening Statement by SJC Chairman Patrick Leahy to the June 29, 2011 Hearing provides a good overview of what Congress is doing to help injured plaintiffs and their families:

This morning, we will highlight several recent Supreme Court decisions to examine the impact on the lives of hardworking Americans. Each of these decisions give corporations additional power to act in their own self-interest, and each limits the ability of Americans to have their day in court. This hearing is a continuation of previous hearings about how Supreme Court rulings affect Americans’ access to their courts. Especially in these tough economic times, American consumers and employees rely on the law to protect them from fraud and discrimination. They rely on the courts to enforce those laws intended to protect them. Unfortunately, these protections are being eroded by what appears to be the most business-friendly Supreme Court in the last 75 years.

Last week, in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, five men on the Supreme Court disqualified the claims of 1.5 million women who had spent nearly a decade seeking justice for sex discrimination by their employer, Wal-Mart. They ruled that the women did not share enough in common to support bringing a class action. Perhaps more troubling, they told those women that Wal-Mart could not have had a discriminatory policy against all of them, because it left its payment decisions to the local branches of its stores.

The case gives Wal-Mart, and the rest of corporate America, a clear path to avoid company-wide sex discrimination suits: Have your lawyers write a non-discrimination policy, then allow your local branches to implement compensation decisions, and you can hide behind your policy regardless of what really happened to your employees across America. Through this decision, a narrow majority of five justices have, again, made it harder to hold corporations accountable under our historic civil rights laws.

Earlier this month, in Janus Capital v. First Derivative Traders, the same five justices gave corporations another victory by shielding them from accountability even when they knowingly lie to their investors. In that case, the Court held that investors have no remedy when a corporation knowingly issues false statements from a shell entity it created to “make” the false statement. Some have said that the Janus decision provides Wall Street companies with a “license to lie.” Others have called the opinion “a roadmap for fraud.” Whichever phrase you use, the decision allows Wall Street companies to design new ways to evade accountability from the harm inflicted on hardworking Americans who have seen their life savings ravaged over the past few years by fraudulent investment schemes and corporate misconduct.

This term, the Supreme Court also issued a devastating decision that will harm the ability of consumers to band together when their phone company or other corporations falsely charge them small, unjustified, and unfair fees. Two months ago, in AT&T v. Concepcion, the Supreme Court, in another 5-4 opinion, held that companies can take advantage of the fine print on telephone bills and other contracts to bar customers from bringing class action lawsuits. What’s more, the Court held that states cannot prohibit such “mandatory arbitration clauses” — even if the state legislatures vote to do so — because such a law would be preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act. Justice Scalia and the four fellow conservatives on the Court, once again, misinterpreted Congress’ intent; they favored corporations and further weakened protections for consumers. Binding mandatory arbitration makes a farce of the American people’s constitutional right to a jury trial and the due process our Constitution guarantees to all Americans.. In arbitration, there is no transparency. There are no juries. There is no appellate review.

Like the Wal-Mart case, the AT&T case also denies consumers the right to bring their lawsuit as part of a class action. Class actions serve an important function in our justice system. If I have a claim for $50 or $100 against a company, the potential recovery is too small for me to hire a lawyer and seek redress. If I combine my claim with those of other people who also have a small claim, that would allow us to attain adequate representation and seek accountability. When consumers can band together, then corporations can be forced to account for their misconduct, even if the harm to each individual consumer is relatively small. Class actions are an essential way for everyday Americans to gain access to our courts.

The cases we are discussing today are just a few examples of how the Supreme Court’s recent decisions will hurt individual Americans and benefit large corporations who engage in misconduct. A study by Lee Epstein, William Landes and Richard Posner, entitled “Is the Roberts Court Pro-Business?” illustrates this phenomenon. It found that the Supreme Court ruled in a pro-business fashion in 29 percent of cases under Chief Justice Earl Warren. Under Warren Burger the figure was 47 percent. Under Chief Justice Rehnquist, it was 51 percent. Now, under Chief Justice Roberts it has risen to 61 percent. The point of today’s hearing is to put these statistics in context by examining some of the most troubling pro-business rulings from the Supreme Court’s term and to consider the lasting effect of these divisive rulings.

Over the past few years, the American people have grown frustrated with the notion that regardless of their conduct some corporations are too big to fail. The Supreme Court’s recent decisions may make some wonder whether the Supreme Court has now decided that some corporations are too big to be held accountable. You get the unfortunate feeling that many of the Justices view plaintiffs as a mere nuisance to corporations. We cannot ignore that sex discrimination in the workplace continues, that corporations continue to deceive consumers and that fraud continues on Wall Street. I believe that the ability of Americans to band together to hold corporations accountable when these things occur has been seriously undermined by the Supreme Court. These decisions have been praised on Wall Street, but will no doubt hurt hardworking Americans on Main Street.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Construction Injuries, Defective Products, Electrocution, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Falls, Illinois Wrongful Death, Indiana Wrongful Death, Insurance Claims, Job Site Injury, Longshoremen & Maritime, Medical Malpractice, Mill Accidents, Motorcycle Accidents, Other Jurisdictions, Product Liability, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Good Samaritan Laws in Illinois and Indiana: Do You Risk a Lawsuit If You Stop to Help Someone at the Scene of an Accident?

April 28th, 2011 by admin

You’re driving home from work, or maybe it’s the end of a long weekend and you’re part of a parade of cars filled with families returning home. Or maybe you’re at work. In a mine, in a mill, on a train, or in a factory.  You could even be at school, or at the stadium for a game.

Suddenly, without warning: there’s an accident. A serious, scary accident where someone is seriously hurt. They’re in need – and if someone doesn’t help them, they may die.

This scenario becomes reality every day, in every state, in this country. Tragedies happen. Shockingly, however, not every state protects its citizens in the same way when they step up to render aid in an emergency. In fact, without Good Samaritan Laws in place, these do-gooders were sometimes later sued (yes, sued) for trying to help in a crisis.

For example, this winter in Fort Wayne, Indiana, there was a horrific car crash and an off-duty state trooper stopped to help the woman trapped inside her car.  It was only when a stranger, an ordinary citizen and good guy, stopped to help the trooper that they were able to set the woman free.

Illinois Good Samaritan Law

In 2011, the Illinois Good Samaritan Act was amended to clarify that the Illinois General Assembly’s purpose in passing the law was to ” …establish numerous protections for the generous and compassionate acts of its citizens who volunteer their time and talents to help others. These protections …shall be liberally construed to encourage persons to volunteer their time and talents.”

The overall Good Samaritan Law for Illinois is found in 210 ILCS 50, where it provides:

Sec. 3.150. Immunity from civil liability.

(a) Any person, agency or governmental body certified, licensed or authorized pursuant to this Act or rules thereunder, who in good faith provides emergency or non‑emergency medical services during a Department approved training course, in the normal course of conducting their duties, or in an emergency, shall not be civilly liable as a result of their acts or omissions in providing such services unless such acts or omissions, including the bypassing of nearby hospitals or medical facilities in accordance with the protocols developed pursuant to this Act, constitute willful and wanton misconduct.
(b) No person, including any private or governmental organization or institution that administers, sponsors, authorizes, supports, finances, educates or supervises the functions of emergency medical services personnel certified, licensed or authorized pursuant to this Act, including persons participating in a Department approved training program, shall be liable for any civil damages for any act or omission in connection with administration, sponsorship, authorization, support, finance, education or supervision of such emergency medical services personnel, where the act or omission occurs in connection with activities within the scope of this Act, unless the act or omission was the result of willful and wanton misconduct.
(c) Exemption from civil liability for emergency care is as provided in the Good Samaritan Act.
(d) No local agency, entity of State or local government, or other public or private organization, nor any officer, director, trustee, employee, consultant or agent of any such entity, which sponsors, authorizes, supports, finances, or supervises the training of persons in the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, automated external defibrillators, or first aid in a course which complies with generally recognized standards shall be liable for damages in any civil action based on the training of such persons unless an act or omission during the course of instruction constitutes willful and wanton misconduct.
(e) No person who is certified to teach the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, automated external defibrillators, or first aid and who teaches a course of instruction which complies with generally recognized standards for the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, automated external defibrillators, or first aid shall be liable for damages in any civil action based on the acts or omissions of a person who received such instruction, unless an act or omission during the course of such instruction constitutes willful and wanton misconduct.
(f) No member or alternate of the State Emergency Medical Services Disciplinary Review Board or a local System review board who in good faith exercises his responsibilities under this Act shall be liable for damages in any civil action based on such activities unless an act or omission during the course of such activities constitutes willful and wanton misconduct.
(g) No EMS Medical Director who in good faith exercises his responsibilities under this Act shall be liable for damages in any civil action based on such activities unless an act or omission during the course of such activities constitutes willful and wanton misconduct.
(h) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create a cause of action or any civil liabilities.

Indiana Good Samaritan Law

Indiana’s Good Samaritan Law is not the same as that of Illinois.  Indiana focuses upon protecting emergency medical professionals, whether they are licensed in Indiana or elsewhere, as they do their work at the scene of an emergency.

Indiana’s Good Samaritan Law is found at IC 16-31-6-1, where it provides:

IC 16-31-6
Chapter 6. Immunity From Liability

IC 16-31-6-1
Emergency medical technician services
Sec. 1. (a) A certified emergency medical technician or a certified emergency medical technician-basic advanced who provides emergency medical services to an emergency patient is not liable for an act or omission in providing those services unless the act or omission constitutes negligence or willful misconduct. If the emergency medical technician or emergency medical technician-basic advanced is not liable for an act or omission, no other person incurs liability by reason of an agency relationship with the emergency medical technician or emergency medical technician-basic advanced.
(b) This section does not affect the liability of a driver of an ambulance for negligent operation of the ambulance.
As added by P.L.2-1993, SEC.14. Amended by P.L.205-2003, SEC.33.

IC 16-31-6-2
Use of defibrillators
Sec. 2. (a) Except for an act of negligence or willful misconduct, a certified first responder who uses an automatic or semiautomatic defibrillator on an emergency patient according to the training procedures established by the commission under IC 16-31-2-9 is immune from civil liability for acts or omissions when rendering those services.
(b) If the first responder is immune from civil liability for the first responder’s act or omission, a person who has only an agency relationship with the first responder is also immune from civil liability for the act or omission.
As added by P.L.2-1993, SEC.14.

IC 16-31-6-3
Advanced life support
Sec. 3. An act or omission of a paramedic or an emergency medical technician-intermediate done or omitted in good faith while providing advanced life support to a patient or trauma victim does not impose liability upon the paramedic or emergency medical technician-intermediate, the authorizing physician, the hospital, or the officers, members of the staff, nurses, or other employees of the hospital or the local governmental unit if the advanced life support is provided:
(1) in connection with an emergency;
(2) in good faith; and
(3) under the written or oral direction of a licensed physician;
unless the act or omission was a result of negligence or willful misconduct.
As added by P.L.2-1993, SEC.14. Amended by P.L.205-2003,

SEC.34.

IC 16-31-6-4
Life support provided in connection with disaster emergency
Sec. 4. (a) This section does not apply to an act or omission that was a result of gross negligence or willful or intentional misconduct.
(b) An act or omission of a paramedic, an emergency medical technician-intermediate, an emergency medical technician-basic advanced, an emergency medical technician, or a person with equivalent certification from another state that is performed or made while providing advanced life support or basic life support to a patient or trauma victim does not impose liability upon the paramedic, the emergency medical technician-intermediate, the emergency medical technician-basic advanced, an emergency medical technician, the person with equivalent certification from another state, a hospital, a provider organization, a governmental entity, or an employee or other staff of a hospital, provider organization, or governmental entity if the advanced life support or basic life support is provided in good faith:
(1) in connection with a disaster emergency declared by the governor under IC 10-14-3-12 in response to an act that the governor in good faith believes to be an act of terrorism (as defined in IC 35-41-1-26.5); and
(2) in accordance with the rules adopted by the Indiana emergency medical services commission or the disaster emergency declaration of the governor.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Construction Injuries, Electrocution, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Falls, Insurance Claims, Job Site Injury, Longshoremen & Maritime, Medical Malpractice, Mill Accidents, Motorcycle Accidents, Pedestrian Accidents, Railroad Workers (FELA), School & Playground Injuries, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Slip & Falls, Spinal Injuries, Sports & Boating Accidents, Transportation, Work Related, Workers’ Compensation | No Comments »

Illinois Bill Would Ban On the Scene Photos: Rubbernecking vs Collecting Valuable Evidence

March 15th, 2011 by admin

The Illinois House of Representatives is considering legislation that would make illegal in the State of Illinois for drivers to take photographs or videos from cell phones at the scene of accidents.  State Rep. Tom Holbrook of Belleville is sponsoring this bill, arguing that drivers shouldn’t rubberneck — it’s dangerous for drivers to take their eyes off the road. 

Specifically, the bill (HB1984, read full text and follow it here) inserts “digital photograph” and “video” into legislation that is being proposed that would fight against distracted driving involving texting, instant messaging (IMs), or emailing.  There’s another proposed statute that’s just been amended within the same bill to ban the use of cell phones within 500 feet of an Illinois accident scene. 

Evidence at Trial Begins at the Accident Scene

There’s a reason why those scenes in CSI and Law and Order have all the cops and detectives and crime scene investigators wrapping the incident areas with yellow tape and banning everyone from going near the site.  Evidence must be protected — and most of the physical evidence is there at that scene of the crime.

Similarly, in accidents, the physical evidence is there at the scene.  On the roadway, the truth about what happened to cause the injuries or wrongful death reveals itself.  Photographs and videos taken as close in time as possible to the event itself is critical to discovering what really happened.

Insurance companies know this — that’s why they are notorious for having investigators on the scenes of accidents so fast that on occasion they beat law enforcement to the site.  Trucking companies instruct their truck drivers to let the company know immediately if they’re in an accident — so they can start their defense to any claim through the gathering of evidence as soon as possible. 

What Happens to Critical On the Scene Evidence if This Bill Becomes Law?  Plaintiffs Are Hurt.

Rubbernecking can cause wrecks, that’s true.  However, the proposed legislation goes farther than that.  If it is passed, then critical evidence of all kinds of motor vehicle accidents will be outlawed.  This will serve only to hurt injury victims and their loved ones as they later try to prove their claims and obtain justice.  It’s harmful.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Illinois Wrongful Death, Indiana Wrongful Death, Insurance Claims, Job Site Injury, Motorcycle Accidents, Pedestrian Accidents, Railroad Workers (FELA), Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Workers’ Compensation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Tips for Keeping You and Your Neighbors Safe During the Big Storm of February 2011

February 1st, 2011 by admin

The weather reports are predicting an unprecedented winter storm will hit our area beginning today, and it’s tragic but true that some folk aren’t going to survive this onslaught.  It’s the duty of us all to try and keep that loss as small as possible.  Here are some tips for keeping safe during this massive onslaught of freezing temperatures, snow, and ice:

1.  don’t drive if you don’t have to do so, drive during the day and on main roads if you must, and all motorists should use extreme caution.   A toll-free phone number has been set up, so you can call and learn what the Illinois road conditions are like in advance: call 1 (800) 452-4368. 

 2.  along the roadways, look for National Guard troops positioned at certain rest areas (for example, along I-70) if you need help; both the National Guard and local law enforcement will be driving the roadways, looking for stranded motorists 24/7 during this storm.   They will have basic things like snacks, water, and first aid for those in need.   

3.  watch out for your neighbors, particularly the elderly.  Seniors can be very vulnerable, very quickly in winter storms if they haven’t prepared in advance with filled prescriptions, adequate food, etc. 

4.  prepare in advance for power outages – have water and food stored for emergency use, as well as blankets, flashlights, and charged phones.  Have kerosene and kerosene heaters at the ready (always refilling them outside).

5.  close off rooms that don’t need to be heated, it saves on fuel. 

For more tips, check out FEMA.GOV. 

The National Guard for both Illinois and Indiana have both been called into action.  This is a serious situation for our area.  For the latest information on the weather and storm conditions and other information on staying safe, see ready.illinois.gov.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Job Site Injury, Motorcycle Accidents, Pedestrian Accidents, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Slip & Falls, Spinal Injuries, Transportation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Car – Train Crashes Up 20% in 2010: Operation Lifesaver Responds

January 6th, 2011 by admin

In the past, it appeared that things were finally changing for the better, with a steady decrease in the number of tragic, horrific deaths happening due to a collision between a person – walking or in a car, truck, or minivan – and huge, heavy, moving locomotive.  Things have changed. 

In 2010, there was a twenty percent (20%) increase in the number of Illinois fatalities due to train accidents.  This is a huge, significant jump.  What’s going on?

Railroad accidents usually result in death. The responsibility of the train tracks themselves, as well as the warning systems, is not with the government but with the owner of the railroad. The state governments are each responsible for their roadways leading up to the crossing. Needless to say, money plays a big factor in how safe railroad crossings are in America today. Railroad companies are watching their bottom line, and we all know the dire straits of 2011′s Illinois budget (see our previous post on cutting public services).

Operation Lifesaver is getting involved.

Operation Lifesaver is a national nonprofit organization dedicated to the eradication of railroad accidents and train fatalities.  From its website:

Operation Lifesaver’s mission is to end collisions, deaths and injuries at highway-rail grade crossings and on rail property through a nationwide network of volunteers who work to educate people about rail safety. Our national office in Alexandria, VA, supports state programs, developing videos, educational brochures, instructional information and other materials for audiences of all ages. Our state coordinators are located in all 50 states.

Already, the Illinois office of Operation Lifesaver has begun a media blitz aimed to educate everyone in Illinois about the dangers of any crash with a train – especially when you’re in a hurry, and thinking you are going to be able to scoot over the tracks and beat the train.  We applaud them for their efforts, and hope this post in some small way assists them in getting the word out about this growing danger to us all. 
Here’s a video from their latest awareness campaign:

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Railroad Workers (FELA), Serious Personal Injury | No Comments »

Illinois Budget Crisis: What Will Happen to Government Services and Public Safety?

January 4th, 2011 by admin

Illinois is in big financial trouble according to the financial bigwigs over on Wall Street: Moody’s Investors Service reportedly ranks Illinois as having the lowest credit rating in the country (tied with California, which we all know isn’t good news) and Moody’s also predicts things are not getting better in the near future for the state.

Meanwhile, the Illinois Legislature is hitting the ground running as it makes critical budget decisions: there is a $13 billion dollar deficit – and millions in unpaid bills and missed pension fund payments. No one can avoid the reality that there will be severe cuts in public services, but who is going to be hit? 

How will your family be impacted by the Illinois Budget Crisis?

Maybe not at all if the Illinois Governor gets his way, and the state borrows $15 billion to cover the shortfall.  If not, then California is providing an example, although severe public service cuts are being made in a number of states across the country: thousands of kids lose child care; young adults see an increase in tuition; state workers are laid off; and health care costs are slashed. 

Which means the state safeguards in place to protect Illinois citizenry may be disappearing — and with them, an increase in the risk of individuals being harmed.  For many, the harms will simply have to be handled within the family. 

Injury Lawsuits and Justice When Budgets are Slashed

However, if there is a serious personal injury or wrongful death because of scenarios like:

  • a child is on the streets instead of day care; 
  • a lack of state inspection regarding compliance with boating regulations or hazardous road conditions, or 
  • a stressed-out unemployed worker fatally crashes his vehicle into an innocent family’s minivan

this budget crisis will not close the courthouse doors on justice.

Plaintiffs’ personal injury law firms have traditionally provided legal services on a contingent basis to their clientele.  This is not going to change with the current recessionary times. 

It’s sad to predict that the loss of government services may have as an unintended consequence the serious personal injury or wrongful death of someone in the future, but it is very likely to be the reality.  At least, in these instances of personal injury lawsuits, Illinois budget cuts cannot cut justice out of our future.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Defective Products, Illinois Wrongful Death, Insurance Claims, Medical Malpractice, Motorcycle Accidents, Pedestrian Accidents, Product Liability, School & Playground Injuries, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Slip & Falls, Spinal Injuries, Sports & Boating Accidents, Transportation, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

We’re Providing Free Copy of Car, Truck, and SUV Crashworthiness and Damage Risk Report

July 23rd, 2010 by admin

Federal law (49 CFR 582) provides that car dealers must give their customers specific information regarding how safe their products are on the road. As described by NHTSA (National Highway Traffic & Safety Administration), dealers must provide data regarding both damage susceptibility and crashworthiness for all their makes and models of passenger cars, sport utility vehicles, light trucks, and vans.

NHTSA Bulletin Must Be “Made Available” by Car Dealers to Customers

To assist the car dealers with compliance, NHTSA creates a pamphlet containing the current information for motor vehicles being sold in the United States, and provides it as a free download to the dealerships on the agency website. The dealers are then required to “make [them] available” to potential buyers.

How prominent these booklets are placed within a dealership, or how often a car salesman actually provides the customer with notice of the NHTSA bulletin, is up for debate. It’s great information if the vehicle ranks well in the statistics; it’s not a great sales tool for those cars that rank badly. Last time you visited a dealership, did you see the NHTSA bulletin?

Booklet Title: Comparison of Differences in Insurance Costs for Passenger Cars, Station Wagons/Passenger Vans, Pickups, and Sport Utility Vehicles On the Basis of Damage Susceptibility

What NHTSA booklet gives the car owner, or car purchaser, is a comparison of insurance costs for different makes and models – but the agency warns that the data should not be read as the agency’s perception of the relative safety of any particular motor vehicle for its occupants. Right.

Without independently verifying the data, NHTSA uses statistics from the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI)’s annual Insurance Collision Report, and then reports the collision loss experience of motor vehicles in terms of the average loss payment / insured vehicle year.

How to Read the Data

When reading the data, the key is how the vehicle varies from the average number of 100. A rating of 140 is given to a vehicle with accident loss history that is 40% higher than average for all the vehicles of similar type (SUVs compared to SUVs, etc.). Contrarily, a rank of 90 is given to a vehicle that has an accident loss history that is 10% lower than the average.

Obviously, the lower the number, the safer the car appears to be. (For more details on car safety, check out safecar.gov.)

Copy of the NHTSA Bulletin Provided Here

Dealership compliance isn’t the issue here. Making sure that our readers have the information they need regarding the cars they drive – and are thinking about driving – is very important to us.

Accordingly, Kenneth J. Allen & Associates Law Firm provides a copy of the NHTSA Crashworthiness and Damage Risk of Motor Vehicles being sold in this country today, for free, here as a .pdf download.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Defective Products, Motorcycle Accidents, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Recalls Of Cars, Trucks, SUVs Happening So Fast: How You Can Keep Up

April 19th, 2010 by admin

Last month, there was more on the growing (huge) Toyota scare.

Now, we’re hearing about Lexus problems.

In February, there were Honda recalls.

In January, there were GM recalls of Pontiacs as well as the Chevy Cobalt.

How to keep up with all these recalls — are there any safe vehicles on the road these days?

Well, no one can predict the future here but one good source of information is the database maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).  Updated frequently, and available for free online, this resource gives you information regarding:

Motor Vehicle Recalls

Child Safety Seat Recalls

Motor Vehicle Equipment Recalls

Tire Recalls

School Bus Recalls

It also gives you Monthly Recall Reports and lets you subscribe to monthly updates by email.

Remember, a Recall Does NOT remove the danger; it only warns of it.

A recall database is not giving you and your family protection in advance, but at least this NHTSA compilation is giving some warning of dangers that are out there — because a recall doesn’t mean that a faulty, unsafe product isn’t still being used in the marketplace.

As you and your loved ones drive the roadways of Illinois and Indiana today, odds are very, very high that you will share the road with many vehicles that have recalls attached to them or their components (tires, etc.). 

Be careful out there.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Defective Products, Illinois Wrongful Death, Indiana Wrongful Death, Motorcycle Accidents, Product Liability, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Wrongful Death | 1 Comment »

New Study Shows Fewer Drunk Drivers on the Road – But It’s Missing the Point

April 5th, 2010 by admin

The February issue of Status Report brought good news: a NHTSA study shows a big drop in the number of people driving drunk on the weekends, but drunk drivers are still a major cause of fatal motor vehicle accidents in the U.S. (“Drinking Continues to Decline Among Weekend Drivers,” Status Report, Vol. 45, No. 1, Feb. 6, 2010).

There’s a caveat or two about the study: today, people may be less likely to participate in a roadside study than they were when the research began back in the early 1970s. So, part of the drop in numbers may mean that lots of people that are driving with a buzz after a Friday happy hour aren’t talking about it now. And, the focus of the research results is totally about alcoholic beverages.

Impaired Drivers Are Doing More Than Drinking Alcohol

This is a key issue. Many drivers who are driving impaired may not be drinking alcohol. They may be taking pills or drinking liquid enhancers (or both) to stay on the road longer. Driving impairment that causes fatal crashes isn’t just about beer, wine, or mixed drinks.

A 1991 study by Monash University found that 25% of truck drivers took pills to stay awake on the job. There are other studies.

What are these Stay Awake Pills?

Heck, these pill manufacturers actually market to truck drivers: check out the online advertisement for “Stay Awake Pills” from T&M Distributing: they’re offering their “… legendary “Buy Two Get One Free” special, which means “stay awake pills” can be purchased at approximately a 75% savings over the major brands of alertness aids.” Clicking on their site today, you can buy 100 of their “357 Magnum Tablet” for $9.95.

They’re basically selling caffeine in tablet form.

Of course, other pills are out there to keep people from falling asleep: students across the country are taking Adderall and Ritalin to pull “all-nighters” — Adderal being one of newer versions of amphetamine.  Other forms of amphetamine (“speed”) on the market today include Dexadrine and Vyvance. Crystal Meth is an illegal form of speed, cheap and readily available (street names include “go fast,” and “crank”).

Was the School Bus Driver Impaired by Wake-Up Pills?

But the real story lies in the lives of people out there on the roads. Like last week’s testimony in Canada, where a school bus driver took the stand in a case resulting from an October 2007 school bus crash, killing a 9-year-old girl. On the stand, she admitted to taking pills to stay awake, but denied taking a pep pill that morning. Evidence, however, already shows a package of “wake-up” pills was on the bus, discovered by Crime Scene Investigators after the fatal accident occurred.

What Does the NHTSA Study Really Tell Us?

So, getting back to the NHTSA study: its number sure sound good at first glance. However, reading closely you find that they sent out people to ask drivers on the roads about what they had been drinking, and they did it on Friday and Saturday nights, and on Friday during the day, as it led into the weekend. Times when they thought most people are out there, imbibing alcohol.

The report admits people may not have told them the truth (for privacy reasons, fear of liability or litigation, what have you), but the truth is that the real issue is driver IMPAIRMENT not just drivers who drink alcohol.

Impairment – that is the real issue.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Motorcycle Accidents, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

« Older Entries