Oakland Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

On September 24, 2010, a sixty-three year old pedestrian was struck by a car in a mid-block crosswalk accident in the City of Alameda. The driver of the car who hit the pedestrian states that she did not see her before the collision occurred. According to a local business owner, there have been many "near misses" at this location.

As a personal injury lawyer in Alameda, several questions come to my mind regarding this collision. First, why didn't the driver of the car see the pedestrian? Second, was there something in the design of the crosswalk and roadway which contributed to the driver not seeing the pedestrian? Were there steps that could have been taken by the City of Alameda to prevent this type of accident from occurring?

Cities are required by law to maintain their property in a safe condition (Government code section 830 (a). This applies to roadways as well as all other types of public property. Accordingly, cities are liable for a pedestrian's injuries and damages caused in a crosswalk accident if the crosswalk was in a dangerous condition. A dangerous condition of public property is defined as a condition of public property which creates a substantial risk of injury to members of the general public who are using the property with reasonable care and in a foreseeable manner.

According to Cal-Trans, mid-block pedestrian crossings such as the Alameda crosswalk in question are generally unexpected by the motorist and should be discouraged unless, in the opinion of the traffic engineer, there is strong justification in favor of such installation. Particular attention should be given to roadways with two or more traffic lanes in one direction as a pedestrian may be hidden from view by a vehicle yielding the right-of-way to a pedestrian.

Pedestrian accidents can result in serious injuries. Whenever a pedestrian is injured in a crosswalk accident, it is prudent to investigate all of the circumstances surrounding the accident. This includes whether there were other factors beyond driver error which contributed to the accident. At times the very condition or design of the roadway where the accident occurred may have been the primary cause of the pedestrian injury.

Resources:

Oakland Tribune, 63-year-old woman severely injured in Alameda traffic accident, September 24, 2010

California Department of Transportation, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in California, July, 2005

A sixty-three year old woman suffered life threatening injuries when she was struck by a car in a crosswalk in Alameda. The unidentified woman was walking across Park Street at 7:30 a.m. in the morning when she was hit by a blue Saturn. The driver of the Saturn told police she did not see the pedestrian before the collision. According to the president of the Park Street business association in Alameda, there have been several near-misses at that cross walk and that is why flashing foot lights were installed on the roadway.

California Vehicle Code section 21950 states that drivers must yield the right of way to any pedestrian lawfully in a crosswalk. That section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty to use proper care in crossing the street. Therefore, the pedestrian cannot suddenly dart out from the curb or unnecessarily stop or impede traffic.

As an Alameda personal injury lawyer, I know many questions will be investigated in this pedestrian accident. The investigation will center on several matters including the visibility of the pedestrian and the reasonableness of the conduct of both the driver and the pedestrian. Whenever pedestrians are seriously injured in crosswalk accidents, insurance companies immediately hire experts to determine the speed of the vehicle at time of impact and to conduct time and distance studies. The investigation is done quickly before evidence disappears. Accordingly, victims of these type pedestrian accidents are wise to quickly find a attorney specializing in personal injury to do a thorough and prompt investigation of the accident to protect their legal rights and to preserve all necessary evidence. If this is not done, the victim of the crosswalk accident can be victimized again by the driver's insurance company.

Resources:

Oakland Tribune, 63-year-old woman severely injured in Alameda traffic accident, September 24, 2010

A young motorcyclist died in a tragic accident on September 24, 2010 in Oakland. The motorcyclist, twenty-seven year old Robert Adams was driving his motorcycle on Hegenberger Road in Oakland when a truck driven by a Sky Chef's employee made a left turn directly in front of him. As a result, Mr. Adam's motorcycle ended up running into the side of the truck. Mr. Adams suffered serious injuries and later died at Highland Hospital.

While this Oakland motorcycle accident is still under investigation, there are a few things that can be said about this deadly collision. The California Vehicle code section 21801 states that the driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left must yield the right of way to oncoming traffic. It also says that once he has yielded to oncoming traffic and after having put on his turn signal, all oncoming traffic must then yield to him. A full investigation will follow to determine the right of way question.

In this motorcycle accident, questions will be raised about the speed of both vehicles and which vehicle had the right of way. You can bet that the insurance companies for the Sky Chef will be hiring experts to investigate the scene and preserve all necessary evidence to protect its rights. It would be prudent for anyone who has suffered a serious injury or loss in an accident such as this to promptly hire their own experts through the use of an experienced personal injury attorney who can investigate the matter and protect their rights. As an Oakland personal injury lawyer I have often seen how the quick investigation of accidents can mean the difference between winning or losing the case.

Assuming that the driver of the left turning truck was at fault in this Oakland motorcyle accident, Mr. Adams family would have the legal right to bring a wrongful death claim in Alameda County against the driver of the truck. Sky Chef which would be liable for its employee's negligence under the doctrine of vicarious liability. His heirs would be entitled to compensation for the loss of his love, companionship, comfort and care and for any economic losses, including loss of support (California Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60).

Resources:

Oakland Tribune, Motorcyclist killed in morning crash identified, September 24, 2010

Recently the City of Oakland joined 157 other cities across the nation and became a formally recognized "Bicycle Friendly Community." This is a designation given by the League of American Bicyclists to those cities which provide safe accommodations for cycling and encouraging people to bike for transportation and recreation.

As an Oakland bicycle injury lawyer and a bicyclist myself, I have seen numerous instances where people have been seriously hurt in bicycle accidents. I am glad to see that the city of Oakland has taken steps to not only help reduce these injuries but has encouraged the use of bicycles for transportation.

In order to promote safety, I strongly recommend the following:

Wear a properly fitted bicycle helmet
Adjust your Bicycle to Fit
Seen and Be Seen-- Wear appropriate clothing and use of reflective materials
Watch for Road Hazards
Avoid riding at night where possible.

For more tips on bike safety, go to the National Highway Safety and Transportation website. If you have been injured in a bicycle accident, you should know your legal rights.

Resources:

Oakland Tribune, Oakland Recognized as bicycle-friendly Community, September 16, 2010

NHTSA, Kids and Bicycle Safety, April 2006

A young woman was sexually assaulted at a Walnut Creek apartment complex on September 16, 2010. According to the Contra Costa Sheriff's office, three similar assaults have occurred in the same apartment complex in the past four months.

As a lawyer who practices personal injury litigation in the Oakland Alameda area, this report caught my attention due to the number of attacks on the premises. In this unfortunate case four women have been assaulted in the same Walnut Creek apartment complex within four months. Legal questions will arise whether the owner of the apartment complex and/or the professional management company which is responsible for managing the property bears any legal responsibility for these attacks.

In California, a property owner has a legal duty to keep his premises safe. This includes the legal duty to protect people on the property from foreseeable criminal acts of those entering the premises.

California law holds that an owner of a business which would include an apartment complex must use reasonable care to protect those on the property from another person's criminal conduct if the owner can reasonably anticipate such conduct. Prior similar acts or other indications of violent criminal assaults may put the property owner on notice that special precautions need to be taken for the safety of those on the premises. This may include the use of security guards, or less costly measures such as improved lighting or security gates.

Not all crime can be prevented, but apartment owners can and should also keep their tenants' safety in mind. Where there have been sexual attacks, appropriate steps should be taken to reduce the risk of future attacks. As an Oakland personal injury attorney, my hope is that all business owners and property owners take the safety of their patrons and tenants seriously and do all that is necessary to keep their properties safe.

Resource:

Oakland Tribune, Fourth sexual assault at Walnut Creek apartment complex, September 16, 2010

On September 8, 2010, a dump truck driver lost control of his truck and caused a multi-car accident. The truck driver said he lost his brakes as he was exiting highway 580 causing this Oakland car accident. 13 vehicles were involved and four people were injured and sent to the hospital. The extent of the injuries are unknown at this time.

So if you suffered injuries in an accident such as this Oakland car crash, what would you do? There were 13 vehicles involved; 4 were injured; the driver says it's not his fault. Would you hire an Oakland personal injury lawyer? Would an injury attorney be helpful?

Truck accidents like this raise lots of complicated legal questions. For example, there is a limited amount of insurance. How much is it and how should it be distributed among all of the injured persons? Is the truck driver off the hook because his brakes failed and he couldn't have prevented that (hint, he's not)? Is there an independent mechanic involved who negligently performed brake maintenance? Who is the employer of the truck driver if there is one? What training and experience did the truck driver had? If the brakes were faulty, were there signs that the brakes were failing which the driver and/or owner of the truck should have known about?

These are all questions that need to be investigated before settling any personal injury claim. Most people simply don't have the background, time, or inclination to deal with all of these issues so they often turn to a personal injury lawyer for help. But mistakes can be made before you contact an attorney which can hurt your claim. Before discussing an injury claim with an insurance company, you should know the "Do's and Don'ts" following an automobile accident. Before hiring a personal injury attorney in Oakland or anywhere else, know the right questions to ask the injury attorney.

Resource:

San Francisco Chronicle, Four injured in 13-vehicle wreck in Oakland, September 9.2010

A recent court case, Saller v Crown Cork & Seal Company, reaffirms a product liability law that protects California asbestos victims and other victims of defective products. California has long been the leader in establishing products liability law. For many years, the courts have held that a product is defective if the design fails to meet consumers expectations as to safety or the benefits of the design are outweighed by safety risks inherent in the design.

In the Saller case, Mr. Saller had worked in an oil refinery for many years where he was exposed to asbestos on pipe insulation. Many years later he developed mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer, that is caused by asbestos exposure. Mesothelioma is a particularly virulent form of cancer, and Mr. Saller died within a year of his diagnosis.

The family of Mr. Saller brought a wrongful death action because of his death due to asbestos exposure. The asbestos company tried to prevent his family from applying the consumer expectation test at the time of trial. It argued that the test should not apply because there was no testimony regarding what an ordinary consumer might expect of asbestos at the time of the exposure. The appellate court rejected this analysis and followed other asbestos cases which held that the use of insulation products are within the understanding of the ordinary consumer and therefore the consumer expectation test was appropriate.

When I first started practicing as a personal injury lawyer in Oakland in 1983, the asbestos litigation was first starting up. I remember representing shipyard workers and pipe insulators who were suffering from asbestosis and lung cancers such as mesothelioma. I'll never forget the suffering of these clients who were unsuspecting victims of this deadly product. I am glad to see our California courts are continuing to protect these asbestos victims by upholding the consumer expectation test in asbestos cases.

Resource:

Saller v Crown Cork & Seal Co. (2010)

Famed plastic surgeon, Frank Ryan, M.D. was killed when his car crashed over the side of the Pacific Highway in Southern California. Dr. Ryan was known for performing ten procedures on Heidi Montag in a single day. It was reported recently by his ex-girlfriend that the doctor was sending a Twitter message just before his fatal car accident. The California Highway patrol has confirmed that the doctor had been texting before the fatal auto accident.

Since January 1, 2009, it has been illegal to write, send or read text messages while driving. Since January 1, 2008, it has been illegal to use a cell phone while driving unless using a hands free device. However, drivers under the age of 18 are prohibited from speaking on any type cell phone, whether hands free or not.

As a personal injury lawyer in the Oakland Alameda area, I have seen numerous personal injury car accidents caused by texting or cell phone useage. In January, 2010 the National Safety Council stated that at least 28 percent of all automobile accidents are related to use of cell phones or texting. Over 1.6 million car crashes every year are caused by people being distracted while using these devices.

The fatal car crash of Dr. Ryan reminds us of the importance of avoiding cell phones and sending text messages while driving. Driving in the Oakland Alameda bay area, I continue to see people who are driving under the influence of cell phones. Perhaps Dr. Ryan's fatal accident will deter us from this dangerous habit of driving and texting.

Sources:

Examiner.com, Texting, cell phone use while driving...causing enormous number of accidents, August 20, 2010

California Department of Motor Vehicles, Text Messaging Law

The Huffington Post, Dr. Frank Ryan, Heidi Montag's Plastic Surgeon Was TExting Before Fatal Car Crash, September 7, 2010

Two elderly pedestrians were struck in crosswalks in San Francisco in unrelated accidents on Thursday, September 2, 2010. The first collision involved a hit and run auto accident. The driver ran over a pedestrian, Joyce Lau, as she was walking in a crosswalk. She later died as a result of her injuries. The hit run driver was caught and arrested for felony hit and run driving.

The second accident also occurred in an intersection where the pedestrian was walking in a marked crosswalk. A 79 year old unidentified woman was crossing the Bayshore Blvd. with the right of way when the driver took a right turn onto Bayshore from Bacon and hit her.

As a San Francisco personal injury lawyer, I have unfortunately seen many such serious pedestrian accidents. The law is clear that a pedestrian in a marked crosswalk has the right of way. As drivers, even if we have a green light, we have an obligation to make sure the crosswalk is clear before making a right turn onto an adjacent street such as in the Bayshore Blvd. accident described above. As pedestrians, we are obligated to obey all traffic signals. If the intersection is controlled only by lights, we are free to enter the crosswalk upon the green light. However, if the traffic control also has a red hand, that control supersedes the green light. If the red hand is up, the pedestrian may not enter the intersection even if the light in her direction is green.

By keeping our eyes open, and obeying the traffic laws, tragic accidents like these San Francisco pedestrian accidents can be avoided. If you have been injured as a pedestrian by a hit and run driver such as Ms. Lau, your automobile insurance uninsured motorist coverage will provide help. By filing an uninsured motorist claim you may recover for your medical bills, lost earnings, and compensation for your pain and suffering. If you have been injured by a hit and run driver you should be aware of your legal rights and your rights under your uninsured motorist insurance coverage.

Resource:

San Francisco Chronicle, Cars hit 2 S.F. pedestrians - 1 dies, 1 hurt, September 3, 2010

A federal court jury in Missouri recently found that a Sunbeam electric blanket was defective. The case involved a elderly woman, Barbara Kay, who had been partially paralyzed due to an earlier stroke. She was sleeping under an electric blanket when it caught on fire causing her to suffer serious burns. Ms. Kay was spent five months in the hospital recovering from her burns, and had to have part of her left arm amputated.

A jury awarded her two million dollars compensatory damages for her injuries and her medical expenses. Evidence was presented that a faulty safety circuit in the electric blanket was responsible for the fire. The company has been the subject of many such lawsuits and has been investigated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

California product liability law protects consumers from defective products, such as electric blankets. Under California law, a product may be defectively manufactured or defectively designed. A product is defectively manufactured when the finished product deviates from the normal design. A product is defectively designed if the product as designed does not perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would have expected.

The case of the electric blanket is an example of a product which is defectively designed and does not meet consumer expectations as to safety. As an Oakland personal injury attorney, I have seen many cases over the years where corporations have put profits over the safety of the public. Our product liability laws were designed to curb such abuses. Hopefully, the recent Missouri verdict will deter Sunbeam from continuing to sell this particular product and design blankets which are not so susceptible to starting fires.

Resource:

San Francisco Examiner, Sunbeam reaches settlement for punitive damages with Mo. woman in blanket lawsuit, July 1, 2010