Published on:

Living in an age of medical and scientific advancements, we have a tendency to think of our health care providers – and specialist doctors in particular – as being infallible. The truth of the mater is they are simply human who can cause harm even when they are trying to help. That’s the case with most birth injuries that give rise to medical malpractice claims.birth injury attorney

Recently, a jury in Ohio awarded $11.35 million to a boy, now 16, who reportedly suffers from intellectual and social disabilities after suffering a brain injury at birth. His parents say the OB/GYN and her practice were negligent in the delivery of the boy in April 2001. According to court records obtained by The Akron Beacon Journal, the child was born via vaginal delivery, wherein the doctor used a vacuum and forceps. This was despite the fact there were several indications the boy needed to be delivered via C-section. These factors included the fact that patient was a first-time mother, the baby was large and also his head was facing the wrong direction. Plaintiffs alleged the baby was traumatized as a result of the delivery, with evidence of contusions and bruising.

He was thereafter hospitalized in the facility’s neonatal intensive care unit, where doctors explained the child may suffer lasting injuries. Although he initially appeared to function normally, social and developmental delays became apparent as he got older. The couple was hopeful the child would “grow out of” these issues, but by the time he was between 9- and 10-years-old, they concluded that the reality was he would not. It was at that point the parents contacted a birth injury lawyer to help investigate their claim. Continue reading →

Published on:

Head injuries can be among the most serious types of personal injuries seen in the West Palm Beach area.  Not only can these accidents result in death, in cases where they do not prove fatal, they can leave a victim with a traumatic brain injury (TBI).  A traumatic brain injury can result in the need for a plaintiff to undergo multiple surgical and non-surgical medical procedures, and will leave plaintiffs unable to do many of the things we take for granted like walking, eating, using fine or even gross motor skills, talking, and they may have trouble concentrating on simple tasks, memory issues, trouble returning to work, and in many cases, these victims will not make anything close to a full recovery.

slip and fall attorneyThis means the plaintiff will often have extensive medical bills, rehabilitation costs, and the need for full-time care.  In some cases, the plaintiff will no longer be able to live alone and may require moving to a full-time care facility. In other cases, plaintiffs will be fortunate enough to have family members who are retired or can afford to stop working, but even this will cause a tremendous financial burden to the members of plaintiff’s family and this is why we say that not only the plaintiff, but the plaintiff’s family members can also be devastated by a serious accident resulting in a traumatic brain injury. Continue reading →

Published on:

The family of a 24-year-old father is suing for his death saving his 3-year-old daughter’s life by jumping into a pond – despite the fact he could not swim – after the car unexpectedly rolled away with the child inside. The vehicle had reportedly been recalled by the manufacturer for a malfunction that could cause it to unexpectedly shift gears and roll away. Additionally, the parking lot of the apartment complex where the vehicle had been parked before it unexpectedly began rolling away had no barriers between it and the pond, despite a sharp downward slope.wrongful death lawyer

His family is pursuing damages against the manufacturer of the car for product liability and against the owner of the apartment complex for premises liability.

A review at several CarMax Inc. locations published late last year found that of the 1,700 vehicles reviewed, 1 in 4 had unrepaired safety recalls, ranging from air bag deflaters linked to deadly malfunctions to fire risks and other hazards that have been linked to serious injuries and deaths. Some vehicles had numerous safety recalls. Selling used cars with unrepaired safety recalls is not technically banned under federal law, though it is condemned by consumer and auto safety advocates who argue it puts unsuspecting motorists and passengers at risk. It is unlawful to sell new cars with unremedied safety recalls. CarMax, which sells used vehicles at 175 locations in 39 states, responded to the report indicating customers sign a release form indicating they have received NHTSA recall information prior to the sale.  Continue reading →

Published on:

A business liability insurer will not need to provide coverage to a convenience store faced with claims of negligent supervision arising from a physical altercation between the store’s security guard and a customer.personal injury attorney

According to records from the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the incident happened in 2009 at a convenience store when the customer visited the store to buy beer and that while he was inside the store, the security guard punched him in the face twice. Customer/ plaintiff left the store, called police to report an assault and was transported to the hospital where he received treatment for a broken jaw.

As our personal injury attorneys in Orlando can explain, actions for intentional tort can be difficult because many insurers will allege they do not cover intentional acts. However, there may be negligence claims that are applicable for which insurers are liable.

Plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit against the store owner, the security guard and the store’s insurer. He alleged the store had a duty to properly train and supervise employees, owing the highest degree of care for the safety of customers. The store’s liability insurer hired an attorney to represent him, but did so under “reservation of rights,” meaning that decision alone did not mean it would provide coverage for the end verdict. The insurer sought to bifurcate issues of coverage and liability and put the proceedings on the latter issue on hold until the issue of coverage could be decided, a motion the court granted. The store owner hired his own attorney to represent him on the issue of coverage. Continue reading →

Published on:

A motorcyclist who was thrown backward onto the hood of a car driven by a motorist who failed to stop in time for a red light was not entitled to underinsured motorist coverage from the vehicle driver’s insurer.motorcycle accident lawyer

It was an interesting argument made by the plaintiff in the case, as uninsured/ underinsured motorist coverage is typically paid by an insurer to its own insured and/ or occupants of that vehicle. It can also be paid to bicyclists or pedestrians by the insurer of the car that struck them because they are not required to have insurance to use the road. In this case before the Alaska Supreme Court, plaintiff alleged he should be entitled to the driver’s UIM coverage as an “insured occupant” because he landed on the car after impact. The liability limits of the vehicle driver’s insurance did not cover the full extent of his damages, essentially rendering the car driver uninsured.

The vehicle driver’s insurer then sued the injured motorcyclist for a declaratory judgment, arguing UIM coverage was not available to him.

The motorcyclist responded, arguing the issue wasn’t ripe for the insurer’s declaratory judgment and thus the court didn’t have any subject matter jurisdiction. He filed a counterclaim seeking his own declaratory judgment in his favor that would assert the coverage was available to him. The trial court found that it did have subject matter jurisdiction, granted both summary judgment and declaratory judgment in favor of the insurer and dismissed the motorcyclist’s third-party claim.  Continue reading →

Published on:

Unsafe sidewalk conditions such as uneven slabs and cracks can result in serious injuries from trip-and-fall, bicycle accidents and, it turns out, Segway accidents.sidewalk accident

Recently in California, the San Diego Tribune reported the city council had agreed to approve a $1.5 million settlement with a woman who suffered a Segway accident injury while riding on a sidewalk. Her husband was also awarded $200,000 for loss of consortium. Segways, which can be rented across the Orlando area as well, are those two-wheeled motorized vehicles that can carry a single person standing upright. Plaintiff was reportedly injured when she drove a Segway over a large area of damaged and broken sidewalk in the summer of 2015. She suffered a shattered pelvis requiring emergency surgery and permanent metal plates. She still requires intense physical therapy and currently relies predominantly on a wheelchair for mobility now. She sought damages for pain and suffering and lost wages, while her husband sought compensation for loss of companionship.

The city initially defended itself, arguing in responses that plaintiffs were negligent, careless and the damage to the pavement was open and obvious and could have been avoided had they been using reasonable care. The city also filed a cross-complaint against the Segway tour guide business from which plaintiff rented the vehicle. Ultimately, that company didn’t contribute to the payout because the company lacked liability insurance at the time of the accident and the company had limited assets. The city is now working on an ordinance that would require Segway tour operators to carry liability insurance, as well as adhere to other safety regulations.  Continue reading →

Published on:

Following a work-related injury aboard Royal Caribbean’s Voyager of the Seas, a former employee successfully sued the company for negligence, unseaworthiness, failure to provide maintenance and cure, failure to treat, retaliatory discharge and breach of contract. She won $20.3 million in a jury verdict in the 11th Judicial Circuit court in Miami-Dade County. It’s likely Royal Caribbean will appeal the damage award, but the case is noteworthy not just for the amount of compensation but for the fact that this was an employee who successfully sued a former employer for work-related injuries.Orlando injury attorney

The injury in question occurred while the vessel was in international waters (Spain’s, specifically). Plaintiff is a citizen of New Zealand. Royal Caribbean, though, is a U.S. corporation with headquarters based in Florida, so the 11th Circuit had jurisdiction. Normally in Florida worker injury cases, any employee would be required to pursue the exclusive remedy of workers’ compensation, as outlined by F.S. 440.01-440.60. This exclusive remedy is part of the “grand bargain” between employers and workers. Employees injured in the course and scope of employment don’t need to prove the employer was negligent to obtain no-fault benefits for medical expenses, a portion of lost wages (and some others), but in turn they cannot sue their employer for negligence. They also aren’t entitled to pursue damages like pain and suffering, mental anguish or loss of consortium.

So what makes this case different? It happened on a boat. More specifically, the incident falls under The Jones Act. Among other things, The Jones Act allows sailors and other crew members the right to seek damages from the crew, captain or ship owner in the event of injury. Employees of cruise lines injured while the ship is at sea may not be subject to the same workers’ compensation laws as those who are injured on land.  Continue reading →

Published on:

Urinary catheters are used in many medical settings to help patients with bladder dysfunction (or temporary inability, sometimes due to surgery or other conditions) to continuously drain urine. They can be inserted in men and women, and research has established they are used by between 15 percent and 25 percent of all patients at some point during a hospital stay (with greater prevalence among patients whose stays are longer). Most catheters are only intended for short-term use, under 30 days typically.medical malpractice

Although catheters can be medically necessary, they are invasive devices and serious problems can arise when they are used unnecessarily or aren’t removed when they are no longer needed. There are far too many instances wherein older patients with incontinence have catheters inserted when they medically don’t need it – simply for staff convenience. These devices are associated with a greater death risk – four times higher during hospitalization and twice as high three months after discharge.

Recently in Missouri, the family of a 52-year-old veteran soldier filed a medical malpractice lawsuit over what they say was a misplaced catheter. According to the Kansas City Star, the patient was living in a nursing home due to multiple sclerosis and a traumatic brain injury. He was being seen at a Veteran’s Affairs urology clinic for a condition called neurogenic bladder, which is a common complication of multiple sclerosis that can cause one’s bladder to be either underactive or overactive. Continue reading →

Published on:

A recent Florida slip-and-fall lawsuit ended in disappointment for the plaintiff after the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for defendant Costco on grounds the element of actual or constructive knowledge had not been established. slip and fall injury

Florida is somewhat unique in this requirement, since the legislature in 2010 introduced F.S. 768.0755. Generally, dangerous conditions on a property subject the owner/ controller of that property to premises liability claims if someone is hurt on site. Plaintiffs in all cases need to show negligence, which involves proof that defendant owed a duty of care to plaintiff, defendant breached that duty, the breach caused plaintiff’s injury and plaintiff’s injury resulted in monetary damages. Slip-and-fall lawsuits are a unique subcategory of premises liability claims in that they require evidence the property owner either knew about the dangerous condition or should have known about it and failed to act on it.

To prove actual knowledge, plaintiff must show defendant either created the condition or was expressly made aware of it. Most slip-and-fall lawsuits in Florida, however, are proven with evidence of constructive knowledge. This can be shown in one of two ways, per the statute: The condition existed for a long enough period of time that property owner should have discovered in the exercise of ordinary care or secondly that the condition occurred with regularity and was thus foreseeable. This provision applies only to cases that involve a business establishment wherein an invitee slipped and fell on a “transitory foreign substance,” meaning something that isn’t supposed to be present on the floor and the invitee wouldn’t expect to encounter it.  Continue reading →

Published on:

Florida is renowned for its water parks and theme parks – from the obvious draws like Disney and Universal Studios in Orlando to Tampa’s Adventure Island, Destin’s Big Kahuna’s Waterpark and Winterhaven’s Legoland. Amusement parks are big business in the Sunshine State, drawing in many millions of visitors (Disney World’s Magic Kingdom alone has more than 20 million visitors annually) who collectively pay billions for the experience. amusement park injury

But with this benefit comes a huge responsibility: To keep visitors reasonably safe from foreseeable harms.

When businesses fail to do this and it results in a personal injury, it can be grounds for a premises liability lawsuit. Examples might include the failure to clean up a spill resulting in a slip-and-fall or the failure to properly manage a busy parking lot, resulting in a vehicle-versus-pedestrian accident.  Continue reading →

Contact Information