Orlando injury attorney

Published on: April 29, 2018

Driverless Vehicles Legal in Florida, Liability Questions Arise

It may seem as if the question of driverless, autonomous vehicles is one we aren’t likely to confront for several years, if not decades. In reality, though, legislation passed by Florida lawmakers in 2012 make it perfectly legal for self-driving vehicles to operate on our roads. In theory, a totally driverless car could pull up next to you with no human occupant and there would be no law against it.

Sen. Jeff Brandes (R-St. Petersburg) is the one who consistently championed that measure and continues to advocate for advancing vehicle technologies. He explained recently to The Tampa Tribune that Florida is one of the most forward-thinking states in regards to mobility and transportation, and the goal is to lure developers and other companies to grow expand this technology here. However, that hasn’t come without concern of the potential risks.

As many personal injury attorneys are noting, this technology may not be fully ready. There are practical and legal concerns about how such vehicles are going to respond in real-life scenarios. One recent example of how things might go terribly wrong occurred recently in Tempe, Arizona. As reported by The New York Times, Uber and other rideshare companies started testing driverless cars a few years ago in Arizona, after officials in that state promised not to impose stringent restrictions on developers. Then earlier this month, an autonomous passenger car operated by Uber (with an emergency backup driver behind the wheel) struck and killed a pedestrian. It’s believed to be the first pedestrian fatality associated with self-driving technology. Continue reading →

Published on: December 13, 2017

Florida Amusement Park Injury Raises Liability Questions

By Dean Freeman

A 14-year-old was recently injured in a Florida amusement park accident when she was reportedly thrown from a ride while it was in motion, eventually landing on the metal walkway that surrounded the ride. The Tallahassee Democrat reported the ride moves in a circular loop, but does not leave the ground, operating something like a fast carousel. The high school freshman later said she felt her feet start to slip and she was unable to hold on.

The girl’s mother said her daughter had not been engaging in horseplay or flouting the rules in a manner that would have resulted in her being thrown from the ride. She said she shouted at the ride operator to halt the machine, but the music was too loud to grab his attention. The girl was initially unconscious and was later transported to the hospital with a broken nose and a large gash on her forehead requiring stitches.

The ride was shut down for the rest of the evening and into the following morning, but was later cleared for re-opening, following an inspection by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ ride inspection unit. The unit reportedly ascertained there was no malfunction of the machine. Specifically, it appeared the lap restraints were working properly and the speed was within the limits of the manufacturer’s recommendations. Continue reading →

Published on: November 30, 2017

Landowner May be Liable for Crash Injuries – But Only in Some Circumstances

By Dean Freeman

Car accident and pedestrian accident lawsuits usually involve claims that one or more motor vehicle drivers was negligent. However, an experienced injury lawyer can tell you it may be worth exploring whether other individuals or entities might also be responsible. A good example of this is landowner liability for crash-related injuries.

For instance, if you’re on a public road, we may explore whether the government poorly maintained, designed or constructed the road in a way that increased the odds of an accident or enhanced the severity of it. If you’re on commercial private property, we may explore whether the property owner failed in its duty of care to provide a safe means of ingress and egress for customers. And then there are also some cases where a private property owner could be liable for injury that occurs on a public road – but usually the circumstances to successfully make such a claim are limited.

Recently, the California Supreme Court took on this issue, deciding that landowners do not have a duty to insist invitees in crossing a public street when the landowner doesn’t do more than maintain a parking lot that requires invitees to cross the street to access landowner’s premises – so long as the dangers of the public street aren’t magnified or obscured in some way by a condition of landowner’s property or some action taken by the landowner. Continue reading →

Published on: December 28, 2016

Report: Sleep-Deprived Drivers No Better Than Drunk Drivers

By Dean Freeman

One of the greatest risks on the road is drunk drivers. We all know that. But another hazard that is equally dangerous – and gets far less ink – is drowsy driving.

A recent study released by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety opines that acute sleep deprivation exponentially increases the risk of an auto accident. In fact, even mild sleep deprivation ups the risk. Drivers who slept for less than seven hours in the previous 24 hours and also drivers who slept for one hour less than normal had a “significantly elevated crash risk.” As compared to drivers who slept 7 hours or more in the preceding 24 hours:

Drivers who slept 6-7 hours had 1.3 times the crash rate;
Drivers who slept 5-6 hours had 1.9 times the crash rate;
Drivers who slept 4-5 hours at 4.3 times the crash rate;
Drivers who slept less than 4 hours had 11.5 times the crash rate.

Meanwhile, drivers who slept 1 to 2 hours less than their usual rate had 1.3 times the crash rate. Meanwhile, those who slept 4 or more hours less than their usual had 10.2 times the crash rate. Continue reading →

Published on: May 30, 2016

Grimes v. Family Dollar Stores of Florida – Trip-and-Fall Accident Lawsuit to Proceed

By Dean Freeman

Property owners have a legal duty to make sure their property is reasonably safe for those who lawfully enter. Those with the highest duty of care – which includes the responsibility to routinely inspect the property for possible hazards – are those owners whose properties are open to the public for the financial benefit of the owner. Those would include:

Restaurants
Hotels
Shopping Centers
Night clubs
Amusement parks

This duty can be breached when a property owner fails to keep the property in a reasonably safe condition, fails to correct a dangerous condition about which they knew or should have known and/ or failed to warn of that dangerous condition – and the result is an invitee is injured.

In the recent case of Grimes v. Family Dollar Stores of Florida, Inc., et al., plaintiff filed a lawsuit against a commercial tenant, a landowner and a hired landscaper after suffering a fall outside the store. Continue reading →

Published on: March 23, 2016

Pedestrian Accident Deaths a Growing Problem Nationally

By Dean Freeman

Pedestrian accident deaths have been a significant issue in Florida for decades. This is largely a result of our streets being designed primarily for motor vehicle traffic – wide roads, high speed limits and few safe spaces to walk or opportunities to cross.

But it’s increasingly becoming a major problem on a national scale.

The new Spotlight on Highway Safety Report, released by the Governors’ Highway Safety Association (GHSA), reveals the pedestrian fatality count for 2015 (when it’s released) is expected to have increased 10 percent over 2014. That would be the largest year-over-year increase since national records have been kept.

As researchers put it, “We are quite alarmed.” Continue reading →

Published on: February 22, 2016

Carlson v. Town of South Kingstown – Ball Field Injury Lawsuit Weighed

By Dean Freeman

It’s true that property owners in Florida owe a duty to ensure their grounds are safe for lawful guests.

However, those who are injured on property that is open to the public for free recreational purposes may have a tough time collecting. That’s because Florida’s Recreational Use Statute limits the liability of land owners who allow the public free use of land for recreation. The idea is to encourage those who own property to open it up for public access.

These protections also extend to government entities, like cities and counties, that parks and preserves for use by the public. There may be some situations in which the owner or third-parties may be liable, but it will depend on the circumstances.

Recently, in the case of Carlson v. Town of South Kingstown, a Rhode Island woman was denied compensation after review by the state supreme court. Continue reading →

Published on: January 22, 2016

Ketler v. PFPA – Enforcing a Liability Waiver

By Dean Freeman

Waivers of liability are contracts signed that release one person or business from responsibility for certain negligence that may cause harm to another.

These are often thrust in front of people who participate in recreational activities like parasailing, skydiving or rock wall climbing. However, they are increasingly being used by companies that aren’t necessarily offering a potentially dangerous service or activity. For example, many gyms require patrons to sign such waivers before they will allow them to become members.

That’s what plaintiff in Kelter v. PFPA did, three years before he was seriously injured when a piece of heavy equipment broke while he was using it. Continue reading →

Published on: July 6, 2015

Sarkisian v. Concept Restaurants, Inc. – Slip-and-Fall on Wet Dance Floor

By Dean Freeman

When someone takes to the dance floor, they may want to “get down,” but they usually don’t actually mean “on the ground.”

Unfortunately, when bars, nightclubs and other entertainment establishments allow drinks – alcoholic or otherwise – on the dance floor, patrons are at-risk for a slip-and-fall injury.

What started as a night of fun and revelry quickly becomes a trip to the emergency room, and in some cases, an extensive recovery with time off work or worse.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 4, 2015

$63M Defective Product Verdict Affirmed in Child Injury Case

By Dean Freeman

The case of Reckis v. Johnson & Johnson is a victory not just for a young girl and her family, who endured unimaginable suffering and whose lives have been forever altered, but also for consumers nationwide.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Justices recently affirmed a $63 million judgment in favor of the family – $50 million for the girl and $6.5 million for each parent – following a case that began with a slight fever and a few doses of ibuprofen.

The girl was just 7 when she complained to her dad of a stuffy nose. He noticed she was warm too. Like countless other parents in the same situation, he purchased a bottle of Children’s Motrin, produced by a subsidiary of defendant manufacturer Johnson & Johnson. He read the label on the bottle and noted nothing alarming.

Continue reading →