Wilmington Personal Injury Lawyer - accident

New Roof Crush Standards Are A Start But Do Not Go Far Enough To Protect Consumers

Jean Martin — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 12:32:24 GMT

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, beat expectations recently by doubling the minimum roof crush resistance standard for most vehicles.
For the last three years, NHTSA toyed with a lower increase that would have had a negligible effect.

But beating low expectations doesn’t mean NHTSA has raised the bar enough for auto makers. Rollover accidents will still be deadly and preventable.

When the rules are fully in effect in 2017, vehicles weighing up to 6,000 pounds will have to withstand a force equal to 3 times their weight. Vehicles weighing 6,000 to 10,000 pounds will have to withstand a force of 1.5 times their weight, a measure known as a roof’s strength-to-weight ratio.

Of the 10,000 fatalities each year from rollover accidents, NHTSA attributes roof crush as the cause in 667. NHTSA expects the new rule to save 135 of those lives and prevent 1,065 nonfatal injuries each year.

Laudable as those goals may be—especially given a previous proposal to increase the minimum standard to just 2.5 times the vehicle’s weight for automobiles of 6,000 pounds and less—don’t be fooled into thinking this is the best the U.S. government could do to protect consumers. These rules will increase the cost of a vehicle by just $54. Yet compliance with the new standards would not even earn a vehicle the score of “acceptable” under roof-crush ratings published by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

To be rated acceptable, a car must withstand a force of 3.25 times its unloaded weight. The threshold is ratio of 4 for a “good” rating.

NHTSA calls its new standard “tough.” Even the Institute called it “bold.”

Really? The standard puts most cars somewhere between “marginal” and “adequate” while requiring half that protection for drivers and passengers in many SUVs and light trucks. But the rule does beat expectations. The previous standard stood for 36 years, and NHTSA’s proposed upgrade in 2005 would only have increased roof resistance for lighter vehicles to 2.5 times their weight.

But research shows a strength-to-weight ratio of 2.5 would have minimal effect on auto fleets that mostly exceed that number anyway. The same research shows that a ratio higher than 3 is achievable and would dramatically improve safety.

A report by the Institute studied 12 small four-door passenger cars and crash data for those cars in 14 states. While NHTSA estimates its strength-to-weight ratio of 3 would save 135 lives, or just over 20 percent of the deaths attributed to roof crush nationwide, the Institute concluded that a ratio of 3.9 would save 32 percent of the lives lost in the 14 states it studied.

Not only does that result suggest that the NHTSA underestimates the impact of its new rule, it also demonstrates that the agency could have done much better by consumers--and so could auto manufacturers.

*Thank you to law clerk Cory Reiss, 3rd year student at Wake Forest University School of Law, who contributed this blog.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin

On The Road For Memorial Day Weekend - Watch Your Medications

Jean Martin — Fri, 22 May 2009 16:11:54 GMT

Many Americans will be on the road traveling this Memorial Day weekend. Unfotrunately, as we all know, holiday weekends with holiday travel present more risk for traffic accidents. We have all heard the warnings to slow down, be patient, leave plenty of room between you and the car in front of you, check your tire pressure, etc. But perhaps we should also warn people to check their medications.

First, as you head out for the holiday weekend, you want to make sure that you remember your medicines. If you are diabetic or have high blood pressure or another chronic disease, you do not want to miss your medications. So in those circumstances, your medicines should be the first thing you pack.

But if you have been taking Chantix in order to quit smoking, I would encourage you to leave that one at home, particularly if you are doing the driving this weekend. Over 170 serious events described as accidental injury, including more than 30 traffic accidents and 77 falls, have been reported with use of Chantix. The resulting injuries from the falls have included fractures of ribs, hands, arms, facial bones, spine and lower limbs. According to the manufacturer's own study, there is a doubling of the risk of accidental injury at at .5 mg does. In the 4th quarter of 2007, Chantix accounted for 988 serious injuries in the United States - more than any other individual drug.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) does not allow pilots flying commerical planes or air traffic controllers to use Chantix. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has warned medical examiners not to prescribe Chantix for commerical drivers. The reason? Chantix is being blammed for blackouts and seizures. I don't have to tell you that the consequences of experiencing a blackout or seizure while driving can be deadly.

You have valuable cargo in your car this weekend, keep them and yourself safe - leave the Chantix at home!

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin

Lawsuits Against North Carolina State Employees

Jean Martin — Fri, 22 May 2009 12:14:03 GMT

The government and governmental agencies have protection from lawsuits under the theory of sovereign immunity, which precludes lawsuits against the government without its consent. Governments can waive sovereign immunity to allow for lawsuits.

In 1951, North Carolina adoped the State Tort Claims Act which allows injured persons and grieving families to file suit against state agencies and state employees for acts of negligence. Under the State Tort Claims Act, a state agency, state employees or agents of the state may be sued for injury to another for the negligence and carelessness caused of a state employee or agent acting within the course and scope of their employment.

An action under the State Tort Claims Act must be filed with the North Carolina Industrial Commission within three years of the date the cause of action accrued or within two years of the date of death in the case of a wrongful death. Under the State Tort Claims Act, the liability of the State is determined under the same principles applicable a private person under the laws of North Carolina. This simply means that the State has no greater protection or available defenses than would private citizen who was sued for negligence. As the injured party, although you have to bring your claim in a particular court of law, you have the same rights and claims against the State for the negligence causing the injury as you would if a private citizen would have been at fault.

Types of claims that may be brought under the State Tort Claims Act include:

* medical malpractice at a state hospital

* wrongful death in automobile accident caused by state employee driving a state vehicle

* gross negligence during a police chase

* premises liabilty at a state owned property or facility

Citizens need to be aware that they do have rights to bring lawsuits against the state for negligent acts of state employees or agents.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin

Accident in Columbus County, NC Claims Three Lives Including Groom on His Wedding Day

Jean Martin — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:31:42 GMT

A tragic accident in Columbus County, North Carolina claimed the lives of three members of a wedding party, including the groom just an hour before his expected wedding ceremony. Brandon Tedder, Brandon Lee Mintz and Daniel Sykes were all pronounced dead on the scene. Tedder was scheduled to get married less than an hour after the accident happened and Mintx and Sykes were members of the wedding party.

Most disturbing, police officers found empty beer bottles in the car that hit and killed these three young men. Officers are now investigating whether alcohol contributed to the accident.

What a tragedy to lose these three young lives, particularly as Tedder was just about to embark on a wonderful, new chapter in his life. Accidents like these are never good news to report and this one is even more heart-breaking given the timing.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin

What Would Cause Someone to Blackout While Driving? Maybe It's the Chantix.

Jean Martin — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 08:14:00 GMT

My InjuryBoad Colleague Randy Appleton recently reported about an accident that occurred when a woman blacked out while driving. Too often accidents happen and the driver doesn't remember a thing. The police officer investigating the accident determines that the driver suffered a blackout and that led to the accident.

Not only is is tragic circumstances when the accident results in someone being injured, now the driver is left with the scary questions as to what caused the blackout. Doctors will look for a medical condition - seizure, epilepsy, heart problems, diabetes, etc - that caused the blackout. But now there may be another answer - Chantix.

Chantix is a medication that is used to help people quit smoking. While many people say that is has helped them in this regard, the side effects experienced were worse than the smoking habit. Chantix has been linked to seizures, suicides, heart problems, and diabetes. There have also been numerous reports of traffic accidents due to blackouts while the affected driver was taking Chantix. I think that it is telling that the Federal Aviation Administration will not allow pilots to be taking Chantix and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has banned operators of tractor trailer trucks from using this prescription drug.

If an accident happens due to a driver blackout, Chantix needs to be added to the list of consideration for potential causes.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin

DOT Worker Dies After Being Crushed By Backhoe

Jean Martin — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:09:09 GMT

When my fellow IB partner Steve Lombardi asked me to join in a series of blogs about workers being accidentally backed over by fellow workers, I had no idea that the timing would be so ripe. Unfortunately, last week here in Wilmington, New Hanover county, North Carolina, we experienced such a tragic accident. Jimmy Lee Phillips, a long-time DOT worker, was killed after being struck by a backhoe operated by a fellow DOT worker. Mr. Phillips was standing behind the backhoe when it backed up and crushed him. The accident is still under investigation, but there is no doubt that Mr. Phillips' family is left with many questions.

One has to wonder if spotters were being used. Operators of heavy machinery often have their vision blocked, particularly in backing up. Were there workers who were supposed to be standing guard to prevent such accidents? Did the backhoe have an alarm that sounded when it was operating in reverse? Did the backhoe have such a mechanism, but it didn't work this time or had been dismantled? We often make jokes about such alarms, but they can save lives. Were workers given proper instructions and guidance as to the work that was going to take place and how the machinery would be moving about? Was there a proper work plan to ensure that workers would not be working in an area that was dangerously close to the backhoe? Workers on these types of job sites work in very confined spaces. Safety precautions are absolutely necessary to prevent such accidents.

Our hearts go out to the family of Jimmy Lee Phillips and to the operator of the backhoe as he undoutedly feels much anguish due to the tragic consequences of this accident. Hopefully this accident will serve as a wake-up call for workers and supervisors that proper safety precautions are necessary and equipment needs to be checked prior to each use to ensure that safety mechanisms are working properly.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin

Accidentally Backing over a Fellow Construction Worker

Tate Hodges — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:10:19 GMT

Your first impression about this type of accident probably will be one of curious interest and inquisitive horror. After all, how often could this actually happen? Surely, there must be precautionary measures in place to ensure that one of the most traumatic construction accidents will never occur on any jobsite. However, a sobering realization is that this type of accident happens far more than we would believe.

The amount of catastrophic injuries and deaths has reached epidemic proportions. Highway and roadway workers are the most frequent victims of this hazard. To help reduce the amount of vehicular construction accidents, Congress has passed numerous regulations through the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). For example, adequate barricades, conspicuous clothing, and flag persons are required when a large vehicle is being operated on a construction site. Furthermore, OSHA requires an operable backup alarm if a vehicle is backing up. The lack of a flag person raises issues of supervision and adequate manpower. If a worker is injured as a direct result of failure to adhere to these standards, the injured person likely will have a strong legal claim.

In addition, if the injury is a direct result of a vehicle not operating properly, for example, a break malfunction, the injured may also have a product liability claim against the manufacturer or distributor of the vehicle. Product liability claims are especially helpful in obtaining recovery for the injured because unlike negligence claims, most product liability actions follow the legal concept of strict liability. In strict liability product liability actions, all the injured would need to prove is that the defective product was the proximate cause of the injury. Conversely, if the injury was a result of inadequate supervision, an OSHA violation, or the lack of reasonable care by a fellow construction worker, a negligence claim may arise against one or more responsible parties. Finally, workers compensation statutes can help the injured party obtain adequate compensation for costly medical bills, pain and suffering, past lost wages, and future diminished earning capacity. Products liability, negligence, and workers compensation claims are common issues that may arise in a lawsuit when a construction worker is backed over at a jobsite.

If you or a loved one has been injured from being struck by an operating vehicle on a jobsite, first, it is most important to report the accident immediately. Having a record of the accident immediately after it occurs is often required by law to have a legal claim. Second, it is strongly suggested to acquire an attorney who may help you in collecting important evidentiary documents, gathering witness information, serving the responsible parties with a lawsuit, and filing the lawsuit with the appropriate court. Although these types of injuries may seem rare, they do occur with some frequency, and it is important that you know your rights.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Tate Hodges

Spinal Cord Injuries - Things to Know

Tate Hodges — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 08:00:00 GMT

Spinal cord injuries (SCI) are some of the most tragic, prevalent, and costly injuries that occur in the U.S. Thousands of cases are reported each year, and over a quarter of a million Americans are currently living with spinal cord injuries. Automobile accidents are the leading cause of SCI – therefore, an extremely large percentage of the American population is at risk. Falls and violence also contribute to a large number of injuries. SCI are extremely complex and can have drastic, life-altering effects on a person for the rest of their life.

The two most common effects of SCI’s are whiplash and paralysis. Whiplash, most commonly found in rear-end automobile collisions, is caused by a sudden and violent movement of the neck. This movement will likely cause soft tissue damage around the neck. If you think that you have whiplash, the most common symptoms you should look for are pain and stiffness in the neck, headache, nausea, numbness, and loss of balance. These symptoms may not appear immediately after the accident and may take time to manifest. Unlike other SCI’s, whiplash is difficult to diagnose through modern X-ray procedures, so if you think that you have whiplash, it is very important to consult a doctor who specializes in soft tissue damage. The second most common effect of SCI’s, paralysis, is the inability to control the muscles that move the body. SCI’s may render the injured a paraplegic or a tetraplegic. The paraplegic has lost the partial or complete ability to move the legs while the tetraplegic has lost the partial or complete ability to move both the arms and legs. There is a wide range in the severity of paralytic injuries. The extent of the injury largely depends upon the location of the SCI. Generally, the higher the SCI occurs within the spinal column, the more damaging the results, and consequently, the higher the cost associated with the patient’s care.

After the initial SCI trauma, further unnecessary injury may result if the proper steps are not taken by medical professionals who have undertaken the duty to care for the SCI patient. Early measures that should be considered to avoid further injury include methlyprednisone therapy and/or surgery or traction to decompress – or relieve the pressure of – the spinal cord. Methylprednisone is a steroid that, if given up to 8 hours after the injury, can improve neurological recovery by 20%. Directly after a spinal cord injury, it is important to determine whether: (1) methylprednisone was administered or considered; (2) the spinal cord has been decompressed; (3) blood thinners have been administered to prevent dangerous clotting; and (4) the other organs are being cared for to prevent complications. If further injury results because of the failure to consider any of the above, you may have sufficient grounds for a lawsuit against the patient’s health care providers.

SCI injuries are extremely costly to treat. The average lifetime health care and living expenses of a person injured at 25 is $3 million, not including loss of earnings or companionship. If the circumstances of the injury are such that other people may have contributed to the initial injury or unnecessarily made the initial injury more severe, you may wish to hire an attorney and file a lawsuit. A successful lawsuit following an SCI will provide much needed financial support for the patient’s care, and may potentially deter others from acting negligently or recklessly in the future. Hiring a lawyer shortly after an SCI provides several helpful advantages. First, the attorney will help you gather all relevant information and evidence that likely will increase the chances of your lawsuit being successful. Second, legal actions have a statute of limitations, which requires that a lawsuit be filed within a certain amount of time. While hiring an attorney following a SCI is not mandatory, it is strongly recommended if it is likely that someone other than the patient may have contributed to the injury.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Tate Hodges

Child Car Seats - Safety Is A Key

Jean Martin — Tue, 06 May 2008 12:44:24 GMT

So, you’re in the market for a child car seat and you walk into your local retailer only to find dozens of seats on the shelf and no way to make an easy decision. First and foremost, you need to view this purchase as being for a “safety seat” not just a car seat.

But I probably didn’t need to tell you that safety was the number one key, but that also didn’t make your decision any easier. You see a tag that says ‘meets or exceeds FMVSS 213” safety standard so you rush to pick up that particular model. Then you notice that all of the other choices have the same tag. Then you ask yourself how the car seat that sells for $20 can carry the same safety tag as the child seat that sells for $200. You might think that it doesn’t matter, but it does.

In a world of “it will never happen to me,” thousands of children are killed each year due to injuries sustained in a car crash. According to NHTSA statistics, more then 9500 children, from birth through age 8, were killed and almost 1.5 million were injured in motor vehicle crashes from 1991 to 20002. Those are alarming statistics, especially given the laws requiring that children use child restraint car seats. However, the statistics show that properly used child seats can reduce the chance of death in an accident by as much as 71%.

I encourage you to go back home and do some much needed research before you make that most important decision. Read some guides on how to choose a car safety seat. Review the websites of various manufacturers. Research the federal safety guidelines. Have a good understanding of your child’s physical structure, particularly height and weight, and have a general understanding of the anatomical structure of children, particularly the head, neck and abdomen.

To get you started, here is a brief overview of the types of child restraint seats that are available in the United States:

Infant seats – these should only be used in “rear facing” mode. They are designed for use with children who weigh no more than 22 pounds and have reached the age of one. Many of these come with a removable base.

Convertible seats – these can be used in “rear facing” mode with children who weigh no more than 35 pounds and are at least one year old. These seats can be “converted” to forward facing seats for children who weigh up to 65 pounds. These seats are usually available with a tray shield or “T”shield harness.

Low shield booster seats – these seats are no longer being sold, but are still available in the resale markets. These are forward facing seats for children weighing between 30 – 60 pounds. These seats often contain conflicting warnings and instructions with regard to the correct weight range.

Combination seats – these seats are forward facing and are used, with a harness, in children weighing up to 40 pounds. Once the child reaches 40 pounds, then the harness can be removed and the seat relies on the car’s belt system for restraint. These seats should never be used with only a lap belt.

High Back Booster Seats – these are forward facing seats and are generally recommended for children weighing between 20 – 100 pounds. These seats have no built-in harness system, so the car’s belting system must be used. Basically these seats simply raise the child to a level that allows the proper use of the car’s lap/shoulder belt system.

Backless Booster Seats - these seats are very similar to the High Back Booster Seat but they have no back and, thus, no back support. They are not suitable for cars with low seat backs or with no headrests.

Integrated Safety Seats – new model cars comes with “built in” child seats that typically fold down out of the automobile seat. These seats are forward facing only.

As you can see, there are many choices and one size definitely does not fit all. So do your homework before you buy.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin

Yamaha Rhino ATVs Unsafe

Jean Martin — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:48:36 GMT

Since its introduction in 2003, the safety of the Yamaha Rhino has been called into question. With several fatalities, accidents, and serious injuries, the Rhino is considered among the most dangerous all-terrain vehicles (ATV) available to consumers. As an acknowledgement of the accidents that have occurred thus far, Yamaha offered to install doors on all Rhinos as an increased safety measure, free of charge. The doors are meant to prevent riders from sticking out arms or legs during rollover accidents.

The height of the Rhino combined with its narrow wheel base creates a high center of gravity, making the ATV prone to rollover accidents. Even when used at minimum speeds, the Rhino's disproportionate design makes it a hazardous vehicle to operate or ride in. Unlike other ATVs, the Rhino rolls over during turns even at low speeds on flat surfaces because it is top heavy, narrow, and the tires are too small.

Though Yamaha has made alternative safety measures available to customers, still no acknowledgement of responsibility has been made for a faulty design. Yamaha has merely made amendments to the Rhino owner's manual and has offered advice for safer operation. The Rhino is still currently available for purchase, despite its unsafe reputation. Those involved in the unfortunate accidents believed to be attributed to the poor design of the Rhino have suffered from a wide variety of injuries. From severed limbs and head injuries to broken bones and numerous deaths, the list of those who have experienced a traumatic event as a result of the Yamaha Rhino continues to grow.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jean Martin