Author Archive for Jen Petersen – Page 8

Uber Facing Lawsuit in Death of Passenger in Miami

Popular transportation-on-demand company Uber is facing harsh criticism and a wrongful death lawsuit after a fiery crash claimed the life of a 20-year-old man in Florida’s Miami-Dade county in the early morning hours of December 27.

Shafena Mohamed and Pablo Sanchez Sr., mother and father of the man killed in the accident, filed suit in Miami-Dade Circuit Court on January 8 against the company and the two drivers involved in the crash, Uber drivers Jean Ralph Adam and Adam Shamma Chery.

 

According to the court filing, Pablo Sanchez Jr. called for a ride on the night of the 27th to take him and some friends from downtown Miami to his parents’ home in Country Walk approximately 30 miles away.

uberlawsuit

The GMC Yukon he was riding in turned sharply into oncoming traffic, flipped on its side and caught fire. Sanchez was trapped inside the wreckage and died. The drivers and other passengers escaped.

The lawsuit claims that Uber is negligent in its driver screening process and takes no precautions to ensure that drivers aren’t driving while fatigued or otherwise impaired. According to the plaintiff’s attorney, Andrew Yaffa, “Many of these drivers are using Uber to supplement their lifestyle. You may have folks that have two and three other jobs and are coming on duty late in the day. Somehow, someway there needs to be safeguards that Uber is not putting people that are on the verge of falling asleep behind the wheel and responsible for our children.”

Although thousands of Uber drivers currently operate in Miami-Dade county, the service is technically illegal because it doesn’t comply with the county’s car-for-hire regulations. Miami Mayor Carlos Gimenez and the county commission are trying to reach a compromise on differing proposals on driver screening procedures that would lead to legalizing Uber operations in the county. The final proposal is scheduled for an initial vote on January 20.

Bill Gibbons, a spokesman for Uber, had no comment on the lawsuit or company policies but said, “We are deeply saddened by this tragic accident, and our thoughts are with all those involved and their families during this very difficult time.”

Uber does carry commercial insurance on its drivers, with a policy that offers $1 million in coverage once a ride has started.

Medical Negligence Lawsuit Filed Over Non-Sterile Spinal Injections

Belleville, IL – An injection to the back of the neck that was meant to be therapeutic turned out to be anything but. Shortly after receiving the treatment, Bill Blechinger experienced pain and paralysis which spread and developed into a serious and disabling injury for which he is seeking damages.

Plantiff-injuriesHe came under the care of St. Joseph’s Hospital on the 18th of December last year. The reason for Blechinger seeking treatment is undisclosed. Court documents associated with the legal action state that Blechinger was under the care of one Dr. Alejandro J. Alvarado in March of 2015, and that on the very next day he was admitted to the emergency room at St. Joseph’s Hospital. It was at this time that a Dr. Corprew administered the injections to Blechinger’s neck. The plaintiff’s claim states that the injection was performed under non-sterile conditions and that an infection which damaged the nervous tissues of his spinal cord developed.

According to Blechinger’s claims, the infection that resulted has had a major debilitating effect on his health and wellbeing, including substantial pain from the injury to his spine, mental anguish, and physical disfigurement. Blechinger further claims that he has been permanently disabled by the infection which resulted from a poor standard of care and which amounts to medical negligence. He seeks damages for these injuries, for lost wages and income as well as the considerable medical expenses he has incurred.

The plaintiff further asserts that his injuries and the resulting disability caused by them prevent him from engaging in normal day to day activities, self-care, and work. He and his wife, Kimberly seek a minimum award of $75,000 for damages to not only the physical health detriment visited upon Mr. Blechinger and the hardships mentioned but also for their court fees and other legal expenditures which would not have been necessary had they not needed to seek damages for their losses. Among the plaintiff’s claims is included a loss of the ability to engage in physical intimacy with his spouse, bringing further mental anguish to the couple.

The defendants in this suit include the Midwest Emergency Department Services and HSMS Medical Group Inc. The lawsuit was filed on November 18 in St. Clair County Circuit Court, Case No. 15-L-661.

$150,000 of Lawsuits Filed Against Volkswagen in Multnomah County

Consumer protection attorney Tim Quenelle has filed six lawsuits from ten plaintiffs seeking a total of $150,000 in damages against Volkswagen Group of America in Multnomah County, Oregon. The lawsuits allege that Volkswagen programmed its “clean diesel” engines with sophisticated defeat software to fool emissions testing devices. Vehicles with those “clean diesel” engines carry a premium of $1,000 to nearly $7,000 more than other vehicles.

vw-emissions-softwareAlong with other data, the defeat software detects steering and throttle input and changes fuel pressure, timing of ignition and circulation of exhaust fumes. The software permits the trick engines to emit drastically lower emissions when it senses the engine being emissions tested. Once they’ve completed testing and are back out on the road, the vehicles emit up to 40 times more contamination than permitted by law. The CEO of Volkswagen Group of America admitted to the installation of the software and being “dishonest.” About 500,000 Volkswagens made between 2009 and 2015 driven in the United States with 2.0-liter turbo-diesel engines have the software. Volkswagen says all of the affected vehicles are technically safe.

As damages, the plaintiffs in the Multnomah County lawsuits are claiming overpayment for the vehicles and diminished resale value. Other damages questions will arise on performance of the affected vehicles after the emissions compliance issues are remedied. At the moment, some of the vehicles might even be illegal to drive in certain states. Some people say that they never would have bought their vehicles if they’d have known of the defeat devices.

When the engines at issue will be fixed remains unclear. There are actually three types of the 2.0-liter turbo-diesel engines, and none of them appear to have the same fix. Some will involve software, and others involve hardware. Since some engines will never be in compliance with the emissions standards of some states, Volkswagen might be required to buy back about 100,000 vehicles

Volkswagen has set aside $7 billion and earmarked it for recalls, but it acknowledges that it might need more. To start 2016, the manufacturer was sued by the U.S. Department of Justice, and it could be fined as much as $37,500 per vehicle. Owners of the engines at issue continue to drive their vehicles. It’s too early to see how their damages issues will be resolved.

Coach’s discrimination lawsuit against Kean & NCAA rejected in court

It’s a new year for new beginnings, with a former Kean University coach ending her 2015 with a dismissal in the courtroom. The former women’s basketball coach Michele Sharp filed a lawsuit against the NCAA and Kean University claiming that both parties conspired to frame her for various NCAA violations. Sharp also claimed that she was being discriminated (by both parties) due to her gender.

Michele-Sharp-lawsuit-NCAAUnfortunately, Sharp’s lawsuit held no facts regarding gender-based discrimination from the NCAA, which was in addition to being nowhere near a plausible lawsuit against Kean University (according to Judge William Martini’s opinion).

Judge Martini then dismissed Sharp’s claims filed against Kean, the NCAA, and university employees (past and present). Sharp’s allegations went on to claim that the NCAA violated federal and state RICO laws, which led to Kean University’s retaliation from Sharp due to her criticism regarding the NCAA’s violations placed against her.

Judge Martini also dismissed Sharp’s claim of malpractice that was placed against the Jackson Lewis firm, which was the law firm that represented her throughout the NCAA’s initial investigation of Kean University.

Kean University’s spokeswoman Susan Kayne stated that the university hasn’t had a moment to read Judge Martini’s ruling regarding the lawsuit. As far as the attorneys for the NCAA and Sharp, they couldn’t be reached the following day after the trial. Martin Aron, known as the local counsel for the Jackson Lewis law firm, stated the firm chooses to not comment regarding the litigation in which it is involved in.

Michelle Sharp is known as the person who took over as Kean’s women’s basketball coach in 1998. Under her guidance, Sharp re-established the team as an unstoppable Division III force. However, it was in 2012 when she was demoted to overseeing the campus weight room as allegations spread that Sharpe had violated NCAA rules. Kean University stated that Sharpe is an assistant athletic director who pulls in $92,000 a year for her expertise.

 

OxyContin Lawsuit Costs Manufacturer $24 Million in Settlement Agreement

OxyContin has been linked with drug abuse for years, and the prescription painkiller’s manufacturer is finally being held financially responsible for it. Purdue Pharma now has to pay a total of $24 million to the state of Kentucky as part of a legal settlement.

Purdue-Pharma-settlementKentucky officials sued Purdue Pharma back in 2007 after claiming that the manufacturer falsely marketed OxyContin as nonaddictive. While the drug was designed to be released gradually over a 12-hour period, it didn’t take long for some people who took it to find a way to get high from it. These users crushed OxyContin pills before taking them instead of swallowing them whole as the directions stated, making them instantly high. Kentucky officials stated that this discovery caused a large number of addictions in the state, especially among coal miners with injuries, which resulted in skyrocketing medical costs.

Although Purdue Pharma tried to settle the Kentucky lawsuit quickly with a proposed payment of $500,000, the state would not accept the offer. Instead, the state moved forward with the lawsuit, which officials believed to be worth millions of dollars or even close to one billion at the time. While the lawsuit continued, Purdue Pharma took steps to make OxyContin safer for consumers to take for pain relief. In 2010, the company released a newer version that is designed to prevent abuse.

Despite the recent settlement agreement, which was reached in late 2015, the drug manufacturer still has not admitted to doing anything wrong while marketing OxyContin. Instead, the company has been working on developing additional painkillers that deter abuse and offer safe forms of pain relief. Under the settlement agreement, Purdue Pharma must make two payments of $12 million to Kentucky. The company has a total of eight years to make these payments, which the state will then use to set up addiction treatment programs to help those who have been affected by this drug.

Bicyclist Hit By Garbage Truck And Family May Finally See Justice

In Brentwood, New Hampshire in the summer of 2014, a woman was killed by a garbage truck that was traveling through a construction zone. Now, over a year later, her brother, James Rugg, is filing a lawsuit through the Rockingham County Superior Court on behalf of his deceased sister Margaret Rugg’s estate.

family-closureThe suit states that Margaret was forced into an area that was narrow and unsafe. This led to Ms. Rugg being hit by the back tires of the garbage truck. The commercial trash truck injured Margaret severely and eventually lead to her death. The state police reported that on July 22, 2014, Rugg rode her bike through a breakdown lane located on Epping Road in Exeter. She tried to maneuver her bike through a construction lane closure. During this time, Rugg lost her balance and fell. When she fell, she was in the path of a garbage truck driven by Pinard Waste System’s Mark Lancey.

Pinard Waste Systems Co. Inc. of Hooksett, Bourassa Construction of Stratham and Martini Northern LLC are the three defendants named in the suit. Martini and Bourassa are being accused of negligence. However, they claim to have retained traffic control personnel and flaggers. This wasn’t the only accusation. One of the other ones were that Martini Northern failed to comply with regulations on local, state and federal grounds regarding trenching. They’re being accused of failing to put up signs and roadside markings. Additionally, they didn’t leave enough space for cars, pedestrians large trucks or bicycles to pass safely. The suit makes similar allegations toward Bourassa. Margaret’s suit claims that Pinard didn’t train employees adequately in regards to operating a vehicle in a construction zone.
Rugg died at age 64. She retired the year prior to her death. She was in the education field throughout the entire course of her life. She retired as the preschool coordinator for the Windham School District. In addition to her passion for teaching, she was also very interested in biking.

Although nothing can bring her back, if the settlement is won, it may just give her family a bit of closure over the ordeal.

Tobacco Companies Ordered to Pay $35 Million in Damages

A jury awarded $35 million to a man who argued his wife was unaware of the dangers of smoking. The woman died of cancer prior to FDA requirements forcing tobacco companies to be more transparent regarding the risks of tobacco use.

Florida-cancer-verdictA Florida jury is holding two tobacco companies 94% responsible for the death of a woman who smoked for 41 years before succumbing to cancer. On December 22, 2015, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Phillip Morris USA Inc., were ordered to pay a total of $35 million to the deceased woman’s husband – $12.5 million apiece in punitive damages, as well as $10 million in compensatory damages.

Legal counsel argued that the companies had deceived the man’s wife by failing to disclose the risks associated with tobacco use. She passed away in 1996, well prior to the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which gave the FDA control over aspects of tobacco sales within the United States. Among other requirements, the FDA now has the authority to require companies to disclose ingredients and nicotine content in their products, to modify product ingredients, and to display warning notices on at least 50% of the front and back of product packaging.

The lawsuit argues that the woman was never made aware of the risks of tobacco use because the companies withheld this information from her until the 2009 FDA requirements forced them to be more transparent. By that time, the woman was dead. Legal counsel noted, “there is no evidence whatsoever that the tobacco companies have done anything to mitigate what they’ve done in the past. You will see that they are the same companies.” Conversely, R.J. Reynolds’ attorney advised the jury that the company has made many changes over the years, and that they no longer attempt to conceal the dangers of tobacco use.

The woman at the center of the lawsuit had reportedly smoked two packs per day since the age of 14 and continued to use tobacco after her cancer diagnosis. “The attorney estimated that over the 41 years she smoked, the woman took about 6 million cigarette puffs.” The jury found the woman to be 6% responsible for her own death.

 

Father sues Atlanta Braves and MLB over injuries

On August 30, 2010 a six year old girl was sitting with her father behind the visiting team’s dugout at a baseball game at Turner Field.  At the bottom of the fourth inning, the Braves outfielder Melky Cabrera hit a foul ball.  That ball struck the child in the head, fracturing her skull in 30 places and causing a traumatic brain injury.

MLB-Commissioner-quoteThe girl’s father, Fred Fletcher, filed a lawsuit against the Atlanta Braves.  In the filing, Fletcher cited the fact that Cabrera (who now plays for the Chicago White Sox) was suspended for 50 games due to testing positive for testosterone.  The filing requested that MLB turn over documents relating to that investigation.  Lawyers for Fletcher contend that the use of steroids makes players hit the balls harder, giving fans in the stands less time to get out of the way of foul balls.

Previously, the Braves have stated that they would increase the size of the netting around the foul line from 10 feet to 35 feet.  This would raise the netting to the same height as the netting behind home plate.  It should be noted that these improvements will only be installed at Turner Field. It has not been disclosed whether SunTrust Park, the new stadium currently under construction, will have the extended netting.

Fletcher’s lawsuit seeks damages for his daughter’s pain and suffering, the cost of her medical treatment, and compensation for her diminished ability to work and her future earnings.  Recently, Fletcher and his lawyers added MLB as a defendant, citing that the League has a lot of input over decisions to install netting, the lawsuit contends that MLB was negligent by not taking steps to ensure that fans were safe during their games.

In response, Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred stated last week that MLB clubs repeatedly warn fans about the dangers associated with foul balls and broken bats.  Still, he contended that the League could do a better job of making fans aware of the dangers associated with individual stadium seating sections.

The Montana Supreme Court to Decide on Out-of-State Business Being Sued There

There is an old adage about not being able to escape the “long arm of the law.” Well, Montana judges have to decide just how long this arm is in reality.

The Supreme Court of Montana heard a case on Wednesday, December 9, 2015, that could cause reverberations in the world of business. In general, corporations must have a viable presence in a state where someone files a lawsuit against them. The rules of civil procedure have always protected against outside litigation, ensuring that the accused have the ability to defend themselves. If able to file wherever they so choose, plaintiffs would “forum shop,” locating courts believed friendly to their cause, putting defendants in awkward positions.

Supreme-court-business-rulingThe Two SIdes

In this case, two employees of BNSF Railway have filed a legal claim against the company, despite serious questions about any connections to Montana. The two men, Brent Tyrrell and Robert Nelson, work for the Texas-based business. Neither railroad worker lives in Montana, nor did the alleged injuries occur within state lines. On its face, this case does not present the traditional fact pattern for a Montana court to accept jurisdiction.

The Legal Arguments For and Against

During the state Supreme Court testimony, attorneys for the workers put forth an argument that the Federal Employers’ Liability Act does allow courts to accept such cases, if a company operates within the state. Meanwhile, on the other side, legal representatives for BNSF countered that the highest tribunal in the land, the U.S. Supreme Court, just last year found that Daimler(Mercedes-Benz) did not have to face allegations of wrongdoing in California, despite having operations there, for actions committed in Argentina.

What Next?

Two prior rulings on this case have been inconclusive. On lower levels, Montana courts offered opposing opinions, one for the corporation, the other for the plaintiffs. It is now up to the state Supreme Court to put forth its decision.

New Witness Testimony Prompts Hearing in $21.5 Million Holland America Line Lawsuit

Holland America Line is asking for a dismissal of a $21.5 million dollar settlement awarded to a passenger in October of 2015. The passenger sued the cruise line in retribution for a purported injury sustained in a sliding-glass door accident. The cruise line is accusing the passenger of a laundry list of offenses: witness tampering, destroying evidence, and perjury.

Holland-america-lawsuitDuring a 2011 eight-month worldwide sailing trip on the cruise line’s M/S Amsterdam, James Hausman of Illinois was walking out to the pool deck when the ship’s automatic doors struck him on the side of the head. Following the incident, a physician diagnosed the successful businessman with a minor brain injury and post-concussive syndrome. Reportedly, Hausman continues to suffer from seizures, fatigue, and bouts of dizziness because of the injury. An eight-person jury came to a unanimous decision after hearing witnesses on both sides during the course of a nine-day trial. Holland America Line was ordered to pay Hausman millions for pain and suffering as well as emotional distress. Over the course of the trial, attorneys for Hausman accused the cruise line of suppressing documents for over 30 cases of automatic glass door incidents occurring on other sailings in the past three years.

New witness testimony from Hausman’s personal assistant has prompted a federal judge to review the case to determine if there are grounds for dismissal. Holland America Line filed hundreds of pages of evidence that they claim demonstrates misconduct on the part of Hausman. The cruise line states Hausman deleted evidentiary emails, lied about his drinking habits, and fabricated details about his sustained injury. In a sworn affidavit, Hausman’s former personal assistant, Amy Mizeur, claimed Hausman asked her to delete emails from his account, told her to lie about the state of his marriage, and admitted to exaggerating his injuries. Mizeur testified Hausman would watch online videos about seizures in order to mimic the symptoms.

In turn, Hausman has called his former personal assistant’s credibility into question. Hausman maintains her accusations are in retribution for firing Mizeur after catching her forging checks. When she was released from her position, Mizeur allegedly tried to extort money from Hausman.

U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein is presiding over the upcoming hearing and will decide if the verdict should be reversed or if a new trial should be granted.