Oakland Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

It is well proven that texting or using a cell phone while driving dramatically increases the risk of an auto accident. Studies have shown that texting while driving can be more distracting and dangerous than driving under the influence of alcohol. So why are auto manufacturers adding more distracting technological features to their lastest models?

Ford, Chevy, and Chrysler are all working on new dashboards equipped to handle transactions we are used to doing on our laptops. Ford's new "in car connectivity" called "Ford Sync" lets the driver sync up to apps, read Twitter feeds, play iPods on demand and even read text messages to you. They are working on a system to read your e-mail, update your schedule and read articles from newspapers.

Ford claims that the new systems actually reduce driver distraction. When the secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, heard about the new technology laced dashboards, he immediately called the CEO of Ford concerned about the safety of this new dash. LaHood said he would compile his own statistics on the effects the internet dashboard has on driver's distractions and safety.

As an Alameda personal injury lawyer, I have seen first hand how texting while driving causes serious personal injury auto accidents. I can only imagine how these new dashboards will affect driver safety. Independent studies need to be done on the safety of these new gadgets. Auto manufacturers have always been slow to adopt safety features in their cars--think seat belts and air bags. Relying on Ford or any other manufacturer to do their own safety studies on these high tech dashboards would be a mistake. Independent studies by the National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration should be done.

Source:

Have You Driven a Smartphone Lately, Maureen Dowd, New York Times, February 26, 2011

A California Appellate Court has ruled that a jury may decide whether Johnson and Johnson should be liable for punitive damages for injuries and deaths associated with its drug Motrin (ibuprofen).

The case involves a fifteen year old boy who had a severe reaction to the over the counter drug, motrin. Motrin is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that may be purchased without a doctor's prescription. The drug may cause a serious and sometimes fatal skin disease knows as Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) and a variant of that disease, Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN). The symptoms may include shedding of skin, blisters, hives, facial and tongue swelling, and skin pain. The boy claimed in his case, that the manufacturer of the drug failed to warn him of the risks and dangers of developing these diseases.

The young man had presented evidence to the court that the manufacturer knew of these risks but failed to warn consumers. He showed that Johnson and Johnson warned of these risks in foreign countries, but not here in the United States. In Germany, the company warned "of the side effects associated with this OTC product of rare but serious skin reactions, such as reddening and blister formation ... which is bullous EM/SJS."

In California, a drug manufacturer is responsible for the content of its label at all times. It must ensure that its warnings adequately warn of dangers associated with its drug as long as the drug is on the market. When there is a failure to warn of these dangers, the manufacturer can and should be held liable for the person injuries caused by its neglect.

As an Oakland personal injury lawyer, I applaud the court's ruling. When manufacturers do not inform the consumer of the risks associated with its products, which it knows about and which can cause severe personal injuries, juries should be empowered to assess punitive damages to prevent such reprehensible conduct from recurring.

Resource:

Johnson and Johnson v Superior Court, Court of Appeal Second District, January 20, 2011

As an Alameda personal injury lawyer, I am constantly reviewing California case law as it pertains to consumer safety and the driving public. Sport utility vehicles have a spotty safety record and can be dangerous if they have a high center of gravity and if not adequately protected against rollovers. Recently, the California Court of Appeals upheld a judgment against Land Rover arising out of a 2003 rollover highway accident.

In 2003, Sukhsagar Pannu was driving his 1998 Discovery, manufactured by Land Rover when he was involved in a rear end collision. The collision caused Mr. Pannu's Discovery to roll over several times, finally coming to rest on its roof. The roof crush caused a spinal cord injury to his neck, resulting in his being paralyzed.

At trial, evidence was produced that the Discovery would tip under evasive steering maneuvers, but with slight alterations to the track width of the vehicle and center of gravity, the rollover resistance would be greatly improved. There was also expert testimony that by adding steel tubing and foam filling at a cost of $116.00 per vehicle, the crush resistance of the vehicle was dramatically strengthened. As a result the trial court found Land Rover responsible for Mr. Pannu's injuries and awarded compensation in the amount of $21 million dollars.

California products liability laws hold auto manufacturers liable if their vehicles fail to meet consumer expectations as to safety or if the manufacturer fails to warn consumers as to safety defects inherent in their products. Verdicts based on the product liability laws, such as that against Land Rover, send a message to the auto industry: Public safety should come first when it comes to designing and manufacturing vehicles.

Resource:

Pannu v Land Rover North America, Inc. et. al, California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, January 19, 2011

According to the National Ski Association, 41 people die and another 43 are seriously injured annually on our ski slopes. In an effort to reduce serious head and brain injuries, Senator Leland Yee introduced SB 105. This bill would require children under the age of 18 to wear helmets while they are on California ski runs. Parents would be fined $25 if their children fail to wear the helmets.

Senator Yee stated that California's ski slopes are the last area of recreation where there are no basic safety standards in place for children. He believes that SB 105 will significantly reduce the number of traumatic brain injuries and deaths associated with snow sports.

As an Oakland personal injury lawyer, I have represented numerous traumatic brain injury clients. I have seen first hand the enormous effects these injuries have on people's lives. I have also seen the positive effects bike helmets, and other protective head gear have had in reducing traumatic brain injuries. I strongly support Senator Yee's efforts to require our children to wear helmets when skiing or snowboarding.

Resources:

San Francisco Chronicle, Sen. Leland Yee takes another shot at ski helmet bill, January 13, 2011

Mountain Democrat, Snowboarder's death brings heightened safety awareness, January 3, 2011

Frequently, I see critical mistakes that people make when dealing with insurance adjusters regarding personal injury claimscaused by car accidents. These mistakes are generally made before they have contacted a lawyer regarding their claim. As an Oakland Alameda personal injury attorney, I have written a brochure entitled "8 Critical Mistakes that can Cost you $$$ If You've been Injured in an Accident," which you can obtain from my website. Today, I would like to discuss one of the biggest mistakes the uninformed make.

Soon after most accidents, an injured person will receive a telephone call from an insurance company adjuster. Often times, it may not be clear who the adjuster represents (this is especially true if the other person and you are insured with the same company). After some initial inquiry, the adjuster will innocuously ask if she can take a recorded statement from you. Most people, feeling that they have nothing to hide, will agree and give the recorded statement.

Unfortunately, this is one of the biggest mistakes that can be made. First of all, people are often still under the effects of medications if they have been seriously hurt. One cannot give a clear and accurate statement if they are on pain medications, even if they may be feeling up to it. Secondly, most individuals have never had a claim before. Therefore, they have no idea of the type of questions that will be asked. If not thought through ahead of time, they can give erroneous or incomplete answers to questions. While the injured person has never given a statement before, the seasoned insurance adjuster has taken thousands of statements and knows how to elicit information which will be helpful to the insurance company but harmful to the injured person. If you have been injured in an automobile accident, most personal injury lawyers will provide you with a free consultation to advise you of your rights. An early phone call to a lawyer before talking with the insurance adjuster will prevent you from making mistakes that the insurance company adjuster will later use against you.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, car crashes are the leading cause of death among children ages three to 14. In 2009, there was an average of 4 deaths and 490 injuries per day of kids in this age group that were caused by car accidents.

One of the best ways of preventing personal injuries to young children is to have an appropriate child safety seat. The seats should be installed correctly and should always be used. Safety seats for young children are required by law in all fifty states.

In addition to being properly installed, the seats should be periodically inspected. For a list of Child Safety Seat Inspection Stations you may go to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration website.

Age and weight restrictions vary from state to state and range from 4 to 8 years old and 40- 80 pounds. After the children outgrow the forward facing seats they should ride in a booster seat until the regular seat belts in the car fit properly.

As an Alameda personal injury lawyer, I am concerned about our children's safety and well being. NHTSA research shows that there was a significantly lower injury rate for children in safety seats than for those in booster seats. However, staying in a booster seat rather than an early use of adult seat belt for kids ages 4 to 8 also resulted in fewer personal injuries for the kids. Just like seat belts save lives for adults, proper use of safety seats for children is essential for reducing personal injuries and deaths.

Resources:

NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts 2009

NHTSA, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Unveils New Data and Urges Parents to Install Proper Safety Seats During Child Passenger Safety Week, September 23, 2010