Brain Injury Law Blog : Head Injury : Coma : Personal Injury : Las Vegas Nevada Lawyer & Attorney Tim Titolo

The American Association of Justice is a group of plaintiff attorneys who represent consumers.  The proverbial David v Goliath challenges that present when a large corporation with vast resources is taken on by a lone consumer with limited resources is the reality of what consumer plaintiff attorneys do. 

To help educate us with the accomplishments of consumer plaintiff attorneys the AAJ has published three interesting pieces.  I include them here for your review and consideration.  Please feel free to post a comment on anything that comes to mind - agree or disagree.

Auto Safety   http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xbcr/justice/Driven_to_Safety.pdf

Environmental Hazard         http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xchg/justice/hs.xsl/12721.htm

Standing up for Seniors      http://images.magnetmail.net/images/clients/ATLA/attach/Nursing_Home_Report.pdf

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration was created in 1980 to regulate big rig, tractor and trailer trucks. These regulations spell out the responsibilities of drivers and expectations of the public who drive on the roads with these trucks. An attorney must be not only familiar with these regulations but fluent in them.

The trend of trucking deregulation that started over 20 years ago has not materially changed original regulatory schemes governing required insurance and financial responsibility. Motor carriers operating under federal permits and intrastate carriers operating under state authority must still secure liability coverage in order to maintain an operating permit or otherwise provide proof of ability to self insure. Typically statutory coverage of this nature is implemented through a two-part process which involves a public filing and an endorsement. Motor carriers or their insurers will make a filing with the appropriate agency as proof that insurance coverage has been issued conforming to the applicable regulation or statute. The endorsement conforms the motor carrier's coverage to the relevant requirements of the law governing the truckers' operations. In this manner, the insurance is extended to protect the public from accidents or negligent operations.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 Click on this link for the entire report and illustrations The impact of litigation on car safety.

 The impact of litigation on car safety.

Beginning in the 1960s and ranging from gas tanks, side-impact design, air bags, seat belts, and power windows, the civil justice system has worked hand-in-hand with regulation to protect Americans while spurring generations of safety innovations.

This report marks the beginning of renewed efforts to not just defend, but promote the importance of the civil justice system and the important work trial attorneys do every day.

The American Association of Justice, the national group of plaintiff trial lawyers, compiled the following data and produced a report outlining the safety impact trial and litigation has had on corporate promotion of profit over safety to consumers.  The last century has seen safer cars and corrected consumer safety issues.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Truck driving safety is provided in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations published by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.  There are specific limitations on the number of hours a driver can be on duty.  Violation to these limits is unsafe and can create liability for a trucking company and its driver.  Fatigued drivers make highways and roads dangerous places for all of us.

A college student in Florida alleged that the tractor-trailer driver violated federal motor carrier safety rules by failing to take the required off-duty time after working a 24-hour shift as a county firefighter. Lymon v. Bohn No. 53-2007-CA-7728 (Fla., Polk Co. Cir. Mar. 20, 2009).

Kendra Lymon, 19, was driving through an intersection on a green light when Robert Bohn, driving a tractor-trailer truck, made a left turn into the intersection even though his view was obscured by another truck in the opposite turn lane. Bohn’s tractor-trailer T-boned Lymon’s car on the driver’s side, crushing the vehicle and sending it spinning off the highway.

Her injuries included brain damage that resulted in a motor speech disorder, difficulty swallowing, mild left hemiparesis, bowel and bladder incontinence, cognitive defects, and seizures. She also sustained a fractured left scapula.

Lymon’s mother, Vanessa, on her behalf, sued Bohn and his employer, Bynum Transport, Inc. Vanessa Lymon alleged that the trucking company had provided no ongoing safety training or defensive driver program for its drivers and that it failed to enforce federal motor carrier safety rules about driving hours and rest periods.

The plaintiff alleged that Bohn began his shift without taking the mandatory 10 hours of off-duty time after working a 24-hour shift as a battalion chief for the county fire services, a violation of federal rules. Furthermore, the plaintiff claimed, he violated basic traffic safety rules by turning without waiting for a clear view.

The jury awarded the plaintiff $65 million. The defendants have appealed.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 I am representing a man who was hit by a bus making a left turn in Las Vegas. The man was in the crosswalk and the driver simply did not see him. The man was hospitalized with brain injury. The Bus Company with Las Vegas offices alleged the man was walking against the pedestrian traffic signal. Somehow, the Bus Co. feels, this gave the bus driver the right to run him over. And the police officer cited the man who got hit!

The police report listed two witnesses who provided statements in Spanish. Today, I took their depositions. The witnesses were fine Mexican-American individuals, legally in this country, who told us that the bus driver was at fault and that the man had the right of way according to the traffic signal. The police never spoke to the unconscious man, and obviously did not understand or ignored the independent witnesses’ accounts. Instead police took the bus driver’s version of traffic control violation of the pedestrian had and cited the pedestrian.

This is a blatant example of how the wrong picture is frequently painted based on pre-existing prejudice. The two Mexican-American witnesses were simply discounted out of hand. The sad part was that the pedestrian had his citation dismissed partially because the cop never showed up in court, yet the stigma remains. And the bus company may have gotten away with it.

The witnesses not only stated the traffic signal allowed the man to walk into the cross walk, but that the bus was attempting, in their opinion, to flee the scene. Can you imagine: A bus company that hires drivers who would flee the scene after hitting a pedestrian and knocking him to the ground unconscious? The amazing thing is that the bus company’s own camera installed on the bus actually showed the man walk into the crosswalk; The bus make its left turn while the radio is blasting; and then the sound of “thud” when the bus hit the pedestrian.

These are situations when all the tort reform rhetoric falls short. These things really happen and consumers need protection from faceless corporations driven solely by profit and self-preservation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A number of years ago I was involved in representing plaintiffs against Las Vegas Paving in a lawsuit alleging the truck driver's loads were routinely in excess of limits.  During one such run, the trucker crashed into my client near a highschool.

Similarly, in Bryant v. APAC-Tennessee, No. CV2006-0261CD  (Miss., DeSoto Co. Cir. Nov. 18, 2009) a teen and his parents sued the paving company that hired the truck’s driver, alleging the company failed to monitor his loads and supervise his conduct. The plaintiffs offered evidence that the driver had made multiple trips on the company’s behalf, each with hauls that exceeded the state’s maximum weight limit.

Ethan Bryant, 16, was driving his pickup truck on a highway. When he entered a controlled intersection on a green light, a loaded gravel truck driven by Chad McCarty struck the driver’s side of the pickup at about 50 mph.

Bryant suffered severe brain injuries, and a 16-year-old passenger in his vehicle was killed. Bryant was comatose for eight months and developed a disorder that limits oxygen to his brain. He now suffers from quadriplegia and periodic seizures and will require 24-hour care for life.
 

 Local trucking companies all too frequently break the rules of the road.  They ignore safety protocol and all too often injure users of public roads.

Factors may effect which rules must be met.  For instance, Interstate Trucking, driving between states, and intrastate Trucking, driving within one state, are subject to different regualtions.  Although many rules bring about some responsibility for truck companies and their drivers, it is important to know the difference.  Likewise, the weight of trucks and loads may apply to different regulations and it is important to know the difference.

I have been working more closely with organizations advocating safety for public roads. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link