(360) 733-3773 Bellingham, WA

SHEPARD_ALLEN2

Rising Tort Filings in 2025

Posted by David Brown 
· October 14, 2025 

Rising Tort Filings in 2025 – What It Means for Personal Injury Victims

Across the United States, civil courts are seeing a surge in tort filings in 2025. For injured people, this trend has both risks and opportunities. On one hand, more cases mean courts are addressing harm caused by negligence. On the other, it raises questions about delays, backlogs, and how juries are responding to higher volumes of personal injury claims.

Why are tort filings increasing now? Several factors are driving the rise. Pandemic-related backlogs have cleared, allowing more cases to move forward. Plaintiffs’ attorneys are filing large numbers of suits in mass torts, such as defective drugs, medical devices, and toxic exposure. Courts are also seeing more injury claims linked to vehicle crashes, workplace accidents, and nursing home neglect. Together, these shifts mean more people are turning to the civil justice system for accountability.

How does this affect the average personal injury victim? A busier court system may mean longer wait times for trials and hearings. But it also shows that juries are willing to listen to claims and award significant compensation. In recent verdicts, damages for pain, suffering, and loss of quality of life have climbed higher. This trend can give victims confidence that their voices will be heard, even in crowded dockets.

Another question: do more filings make it harder for victims to stand out? The short answer is yes, but strategy matters. Strong evidence, medical records, expert testimony, and clear legal arguments become even more important when courts and juries are faced with case after case. Victims need representation that can cut through the noise and present their story with clarity.

Insurance companies are watching these trends closely. With higher volumes of tort cases and larger jury awards, insurers are likely to fight harder to limit payouts. That means more aggressive settlement tactics, more disputes over coverage, and more pressure on victims to accept less than full value. For injured parties, it underscores the importance of skilled advocacy.

Does this wave of filings mean courts will change the rules? Not immediately, but history shows that when tort filings rise, legislatures and appellate courts often debate new limits on damages or stricter filing requirements. Victims should pay attention to these discussions, because laws can shift quickly and affect both pending and future claims.

For Washington residents, the national trend carries a local lesson: if you are hurt due to negligence, don’t wait to act. Courts are moving cases forward, juries are listening, and victims who prepare early are better positioned to succeed. Rising tort filings may sound like just a statistic, but behind every case is a person seeking justice. The system is crowded, but the right claim, backed by evidence, can still stand out.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , ,

Supreme Court Case on Government Liability

Posted by David Brown 
· October 9, 2025 

Supreme Court Case on Government Liability – New Limits for Victims?

The U.S. Supreme Court is taking up a case that could reshape how Americans seek justice when harmed by government actions. At issue is the balance between protecting public agencies from endless lawsuits and ensuring victims still have a path to compensation.

When government employees make mistakes, who should bear the cost? Families injured by poor infrastructure, delayed emergency response, or negligent supervision often look to the courts for answers. Yet, the doctrine of sovereign immunity has long shielded federal and state agencies from many claims. This case asks whether those protections should stretch even further.

If the Court narrows liability, victims may lose the chance to recover damages for injuries caused by government negligence. Imagine a school ignoring repeated safety warnings, or a city failing to maintain dangerous roads. Should citizens pay the price when public agencies fail? Or should taxpayers be spared from large payouts?

At the center of the dispute is the “discretionary function exception.” This rule protects government workers when they exercise judgment in carrying out official duties. The new case may expand that shield, making it harder for victims to prove negligence even when mistakes are clear.

How would this affect ordinary people? Plaintiffs could face higher hurdles, needing to prove not just harm but also that the government’s action was outside its protected discretion. That shift could discourage lawsuits and reduce accountability. For those already harmed, it could mean no meaningful path to justice.

On the other side, government agencies argue that without strong protection, they risk being overwhelmed. They claim that every policy decision, budget cut, or on-the-spot judgment could spark costly litigation. Is this a fair concern, or an excuse to avoid responsibility?

The outcome may also influence state courts. If the Supreme Court sets a stricter national standard, local judges in Washington and across the country may feel pressure to limit similar claims. Victims in cases involving school safety, road maintenance, and emergency services could see their options shrink.

What does this mean for the public? If the ruling favors broader immunity, citizens may need to rely more on legislative reform or administrative remedies rather than civil lawsuits. If the Court rules for victims, government entities will face stronger incentives to prioritize safety and oversight.

The stakes are high. This decision will not just decide one case. It will shape the line between public duty and private accountability for years to come.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , ,

$45M Verdict in Connecticut Motorcyclist Injury Case

Posted by David Brown 
· October 7, 2025 

$45 Million Connecticut Verdict Highlights Power of Jury in Motorcycle and Trucking Collisions

A Connecticut jury recently awarded $45 million to a motorcyclist severely injured in a collision with a commercial vehicle. The verdict is one of the largest of its kind and raises important questions about liability, damages, and how juries view responsibility when businesses are involved.

Why did the jury decide on such a high number? The case showed how multiple parties contributed to the crash. The truck company was found largely responsible because of how its vehicle was positioned, creating dangerous visibility issues. The driver of the SUV also shared some fault, and even the motorcyclist was assigned a small percentage. This division of fault didn’t stop the jury from awarding a life-changing amount in damages.

What does this mean for victims of severe collisions? It shows that juries are willing to award not just for medical expenses and lost wages, but also for pain, suffering, and the permanent impact on quality of life. In this case, the injured motorcyclist faced ongoing medical needs and limitations that will last a lifetime. Those non-economic damages made up the majority of the award.

Could the verdict be reduced? Defense lawyers often argue that such numbers are excessive or influenced by emotion. They may ask the court to lower the award or order a new trial. But unless the verdict is far outside the range of reason, courts usually respect the jury’s decision. That means the $45 million judgment could stand as a new benchmark in serious injury cases.

Why should trucking companies pay attention? Because liability doesn’t stop with the driver. Poor parking, unsafe positioning, and company policies can all create risk. When a business ignores safety, the consequences can be enormous. A single mistake can translate into tens of millions in damages if a jury believes negligence played a role.

For injured victims, this case is a reminder of the importance of pursuing all avenues of recovery. Multiple defendants may share responsibility, and that increases the potential to cover the true cost of lifelong injuries. It also shows the power of a strong legal team to uncover evidence, build the narrative, and make jurors see the full human impact of the accident.

The size of this verdict will ripple beyond Connecticut. Plaintiffs in other states may point to it as proof that juries are ready to hold companies accountable. Insurance carriers, defense firms, and corporate risk managers will be paying close attention. The message is clear: when negligence leads to catastrophic harm, the cost can be staggering.

For families dealing with the aftermath of a trucking or motorcycle collision, the question isn’t whether justice is possible — it’s whether they are prepared to fight for it.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , ,

Pfizer Sued Over Contraceptive Drug & Brain Tumor Risk

Posted by David Brown 
· October 2, 2025 

Pfizer Sued Over Contraceptive Drug & Brain Tumor Risk

A new lawsuit has been filed against Pfizer over claims that one of its contraceptive drugs caused brain tumors in women who used it for long periods of time. The plaintiffs argue the company failed to provide adequate warnings about the risks, leaving patients exposed to a medication that could alter their health permanently.

What happens when a drug meant to prevent pregnancy ends up causing something far worse? This case highlights a growing concern in pharmaceutical liability: whether drug companies are putting profits before patient safety.

The lawsuit centers on women who say they developed benign brain tumors after years of using Pfizer’s contraceptive injection. While benign may sound less threatening than malignant, these tumors can still be life-changing. They may cause headaches, vision loss, seizures, and, in some cases, require invasive surgery to remove.

Did Pfizer know about the risks? Plaintiffs claim that studies and reports flagged potential connections between long-term contraceptive use and tumor development. The lawsuit argues that Pfizer either ignored these warnings or failed to communicate them clearly to doctors and patients. If true, this could support claims of failure to warn, one of the core theories in product liability cases.

Pharmaceutical lawsuits often turn on complex evidence. The company will likely argue that the tumors were rare, that risks were already disclosed in fine print, and that patients were warned to undergo regular checkups. But the plaintiffs will push back, saying those warnings were not prominent, accessible, or strong enough to truly protect patients.

What does this mean for women currently using contraceptives? While no single lawsuit proves causation for all, cases like this raise awareness. Women may begin questioning whether their doctors fully explained the risks and whether safer alternatives were available. It also raises the question: how much risk is acceptable when a medication is widely prescribed?

Pfizer’s case is not unique. Drug manufacturers have faced mass tort litigation over products like talcum powder, antidepressants, and opioids. Each case sends ripples through the industry, forcing companies to revisit their safety testing, labeling, and disclosure practices.

Who benefits if the plaintiffs succeed? Beyond the women involved, the broader public gains transparency. A favorable verdict or settlement could push Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies to issue clearer warnings and monitor adverse events more closely. It could also open the door to class actions or multidistrict litigation if more victims come forward.

For now, the case is in its early stages. But it shows how consumer protection and corporate accountability often meet in the courtroom. Patients trust drug companies with their health. If that trust is broken, the law provides a path to justice — one that can reshape an entire industry.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , ,

How Burn Injuries from Defective Products Lead to Lawsuits in Washington

Posted by David Brown 
· September 30, 2025 

How Burn Injuries from Defective Products Lead to Lawsuits in Washington

Burn injuries caused by defective products can change a person’s life in seconds. From scalding hot appliances to exploding batteries, these accidents can leave permanent physical and emotional scars. In Washington, victims of product-related burns may be able to file a product liability lawsuit to recover damages.

Common Products That Cause Burn Injuries

Some of the most common sources of defective product burns include:

  • Kitchen appliances that overheat or short-circuit
  • Batteries in phones, e-bikes, or vapes that catch fire or explode
  • Children’s toys that melt or overheat
  • Heating pads or electric blankets that malfunction
  • Chemical cleaners or aerosols with flammable ingredients

Many of these products are mass-produced and sold without proper warnings, or they pass through supply chains without adequate safety checks.

What Is a Defective Product?

Washington law recognizes three types of defects:

  1. Design defects: The product is inherently dangerous due to its design, even if used correctly.
  2. Manufacturing defects: A flaw occurred during production, making a specific unit or batch unsafe.
  3. Failure to warn: The manufacturer did not provide adequate safety instructions or warnings about potential hazards.

Any one of these may be grounds for a lawsuit if the defect leads to a burn injury.

Proving Liability in Washington

To file a successful product liability claim, the injured party must typically show:

  • The product was defective.
  • The defect caused the burn injury.
  • The product was being used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable way.
  • The victim suffered actual harm (medical bills, lost wages, pain, etc.).

Washington follows a strict liability standard, meaning a manufacturer may be held responsible even if they were not negligent—as long as the product was defective and caused injury.

What Damages Can Be Recovered?

Victims of burn injuries may be entitled to compensation for:

  • Emergency medical treatment and long-term care
  • Lost income and diminished earning capacity
  • Permanent scarring or disfigurement
  • Emotional trauma and psychological counseling
  • Pain and suffering

In some extreme cases, punitive damages may also apply if the manufacturer knowingly ignored safety risks.

Time Limits and Legal Action

In Washington, the statute of limitations for product liability claims is usually three years from the date of injury. It’s important to act quickly, as evidence can disappear, and deadlines can pass without warning.

Hiring an experienced personal injury attorney can help gather expert testimony, preserve product evidence, and deal with insurance companies.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

Motorcycle Accidents Caused by Road Hazards: Who’s Responsible in Washington?

Posted by David Brown 
· September 25, 2025 

Motorcycle Accidents Caused by Road Hazards: Who’s Responsible in Washington?

Motorcycles are vulnerable to more than just traffic. In Washington State, road hazards like potholes, loose gravel, standing water, and uneven pavement cause serious motorcycle crashes every year. Unlike cars, motorcycles offer little protection, so what might be a minor nuisance for a vehicle can turn deadly for a rider.

So who is responsible when a poorly maintained road causes a motorcycle accident?

Common Road Hazards That Cause Crashes

Motorcycles rely on traction, visibility, and balance. Hazards like these frequently lead to loss of control:

  • Potholes — Sudden dips in the road can throw a rider or damage the bike’s suspension or wheels.
  • Gravel or Loose Debris — Slippery surfaces on corners or turns often lead to high-side or low-side crashes.
  • Uneven Pavement or Edge Drops — These catch tires and destabilize the bike.
  • Poor Drainage or Standing Water — Hydroplaning is especially dangerous for motorcycles.
  • Unmarked Road Work Zones — Construction areas without clear signage or warnings create confusion and dangerous surprises.

When any of these are present, the road itself becomes a threat.

Who’s Liable?

Responsibility depends on who controls the road. In Washington:

  • City or County Governments are often responsible for maintaining local streets.
  • Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) handles state highways and interstates.
  • Construction Contractors may be liable if poor signage or unsafe practices contributed to the crash.

If you were hurt because a public entity failed to fix or warn about a known hazard, they may be held accountable. But claims against government bodies come with strict deadlines and notice requirements.

Proving Negligence in Hazard-Related Accidents

To hold someone liable, you must show:

  1. A dangerous condition existed.
  2. The agency or contractor knew or should have known about it.
  3. They failed to fix it or provide adequate warning.
  4. That failure directly caused your injury.

This often requires investigation, photos or videos of the hazard, eyewitness accounts, and expert analysis. In some cases, your attorney may request public records to prove how long the hazard had existed.

Why These Cases Are Different

Motorcycle accident claims involving road hazards are not like regular fender-benders. You are not negotiating with an insurance company for another driver—you’re taking on a city, state agency, or large contractor.

There may be:

  • Government immunity defenses
  • Short notice-of-claim windows (sometimes 180 days or less)
  • Difficulty preserving evidence before the hazard is fixed

You must act quickly to protect your rights.

What Riders Can Do

If you’re in a crash caused by a road hazard:

  • Take photos of the scene and hazard immediately
  • Get medical attention and document all injuries
  • File a police report
  • Identify any nearby surveillance cameras or witnesses
  • Do not delay contacting an attorney familiar with motorcycle and government liability claims

Washington motorcyclists face real risks from neglected roads and hidden dangers. If a hazard caused your crash, you may have the right to pursue compensation. These cases are complex, but riders shouldn’t bear the cost of someone else’s failure to maintain a safe roadway.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

Understanding Washington Wrongful Death Claims

Posted by David Brown 
· September 23, 2025 

Understanding Washington Wrongful Death Claims

Losing a loved one is always painful. When that loss is caused by someone else’s negligence or misconduct, Washington law gives surviving family members the right to seek justice through a wrongful death claim.

Whether the death occurred due to a car crash, a workplace accident, medical malpractice, or other forms of negligence, holding the responsible party accountable can help cover financial losses and bring some measure of closure.

What Is a Wrongful Death Claim?

A wrongful death claim is a civil lawsuit filed when someone’s death is caused by another person or entity’s wrongful act, neglect, or default. It’s not a criminal case, but the outcome can include financial compensation for those left behind.

Common causes include:

  • Fatal car or motorcycle accidents
  • Medical errors or neglect
  • Construction or workplace incidents
  • Defective products
  • Nursing home abuse or neglect
  • Criminal actions like assault or drunk driving

Who Can File a Wrongful Death Lawsuit in Washington?

In Washington, the personal representative of the deceased person’s estate must file the claim. This representative is often a surviving spouse, child, or parent, but it can also be another party appointed by the court.

Beneficiaries who can recover damages include:

  • The surviving spouse or domestic partner
  • Children or stepchildren
  • Parents or siblings (if there are no closer surviving family members)

Washington law recognizes that multiple family members may suffer both financial and emotional harm, so the claim can cover a wide range of damages.

What Damages Can Be Recovered?

Wrongful death lawsuits in Washington may include compensation for:

  • Medical bills related to the final injury or illness
  • Funeral and burial costs
  • Loss of the deceased’s expected income
  • Loss of companionship, care, and guidance
  • Pain and suffering experienced by the survivors

These damages aren’t just symbolic—they’re designed to ease the financial burden families often face after an unexpected death.

Time Limits: Don’t Miss the Deadline

Washington has a three-year statute of limitations for wrongful death claims. This means the lawsuit must be filed within three years from the date of death. Missing this window could mean losing your legal right to pursue compensation.

There are rare exceptions, such as when the death was not immediately discovered, but these are limited. It’s essential to act quickly and speak with a qualified attorney as soon as possible.

Get the Help You Need

Wrongful death cases are complex. They often involve insurance companies, expert witnesses, and significant emotional stress. A skilled attorney can help build a strong case, gather the right evidence, and fight for the compensation your family deserves.

If you’ve lost a loved one due to someone else’s actions, don’t wait. Learn your rights under Washington law and take steps to protect your future.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , ,

Rideshare Accidents in Washington: Who’s Liable—Driver, Company, or You?

Posted by David Brown 
· September 18, 2025 

Rideshare Accidents in Washington: Who’s Liable—Driver, Company, or You?

Rideshare services like Uber and Lyft are convenient, but when an accident happens, things can get complicated fast. You may find yourself asking, “Who’s responsible—my driver, the rideshare company, or me?”

In Washington State, liability depends on who was driving, what they were doing at the time, and whether the rideshare app was active. That’s where many people get stuck. Knowing your rights and what steps to take can make all the difference after a rideshare accident.

When the Rideshare Driver Is at Fault

If your rideshare driver caused the crash, their personal auto insurance may not be enough to cover the damages. Luckily, Washington law requires rideshare companies to carry commercial insurance. When the app is on and a ride is accepted, Uber and Lyft provide up to $1 million in liability coverage.

That coverage kicks in as soon as the ride is in progress—even if the passenger hasn’t been picked up yet. If you’re injured during that window, you’re covered by the company’s insurance, not just the driver’s.

What If Another Driver Hits You?

If a third party—like another car on the road—is at fault, that driver’s insurance is typically responsible. But again, Uber and Lyft have uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage for their riders and drivers. This means you may still be able to recover damages if the at-fault driver lacks proper coverage.

The issue often lies in proving fault. That’s where evidence from dash cams, police reports, and eyewitness accounts can make or break your claim.

What Happens If the App Was Off?

If the rideshare driver wasn’t logged into the app, they’re not considered “on the job.” In that case, their personal insurance is the only coverage available. You’d handle the accident the same way you would with any private driver.

That’s why it’s important to confirm whether the app was active. Rideshare companies aren’t liable unless their system shows the driver was online.

Multiple Parties, Multiple Insurers

Sometimes more than one person shares the blame. Maybe the rideshare driver was distracted, and another vehicle ran a red light. In these cases, multiple insurance companies might be involved.

Washington follows a comparative fault system. That means each party pays based on their percentage of fault. If you’re found 10% responsible, your total recovery is reduced by that amount.

What You Should Do Immediately After an Accident

  • Call 911. Make sure injuries are treated and a report is filed.
  • Take photos of the vehicles, road conditions, and any visible injuries.
  • Get contact information from all parties, including witnesses.
  • Request a copy of the police report.
  • Document your rideshare app activity, including ride details and driver info.

Don’t assume the rideshare company will handle it all. Their priority is limiting their own liability.

Common Injuries in Rideshare Crashes

  • Whiplash and soft tissue injuries
  • Broken bones
  • Head trauma or concussions
  • Spinal cord injuries
  • Emotional distress

Even a low-speed collision can lead to long-term pain and expenses. Keep all medical records and track how your life has been affected.

Why These Cases Are Legally Complex

Rideshare liability isn’t simple. You’re dealing with a mix of corporate insurance, personal insurance, app usage logs, and state law. And if you’re a pedestrian or cyclist injured by a rideshare driver, the situation adds another layer of complexity.

You need to understand your rights clearly—before signing anything or accepting a payout.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

What to Do Legally After a Dog Bite Injury in Washington State

Posted by David Brown 
· September 11, 2025 

What to Do Legally After a Dog Bite Injury in Washington State

Dog bites can cause more than just physical pain. They often result in infection, scarring, emotional trauma, and medical bills that quickly add up. In Washington State, the law holds dog owners strictly liable when their pet attacks someone without provocation—even if the dog has never shown aggression before.

Washington’s dog bite statute, RCW 16.08.040, makes this clear: if a dog bites a person who is lawfully in a public or private place, the owner is liable for the damages. This applies whether the incident occurs in a public park, on a sidewalk, or at someone’s home.

Victims do not have to prove that the dog owner was negligent. Unlike other types of injury claims, Washington law imposes strict liability. That means the owner is responsible simply because the bite happened. This is true even if the dog had never bitten before or wasn’t known to be dangerous.

Victims should take immediate steps after a bite:

  • Seek medical attention — even minor-looking bites can get infected.
  • Report the incident to local animal control or the police.
  • Document everything — take photos of the injuries, the location, and the dog if possible.
  • Get witness statements and identify the dog’s owner.

Insurance may cover some or all of the damages. Homeowners or renters insurance often includes liability coverage for dog bites. But victims may need to file a claim or even a lawsuit to receive full compensation for medical costs, lost wages, and pain and suffering.

Dog bite claims must be filed within three years of the date of the incident under Washington’s personal injury statute of limitations. Failing to act in time can result in losing the right to recover any damages.

Some cases involve additional factors, like children who were bitten or attacks by dogs labeled as “dangerous breeds.” Washington courts generally apply the same legal rules regardless of breed, but owners of dogs with known aggression may face more scrutiny.

Being bitten can have long-term consequences. Beyond physical injuries, many people experience anxiety, PTSD, or fear of animals after an attack. Mental health care and therapy can be part of the compensation sought in a legal claim.

Dog owners, too, should understand their obligations. Keeping dogs properly leashed, fenced, and under control at all times isn’t just a recommendation—it’s a legal responsibility. Violating leash laws or failing to control a dog can strengthen a victim’s case in court.

Each dog bite case is unique. But Washington law is clear: victims have rights, and owners are accountable.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

Filing a Premises Liability Claim After a Slip-and-Fall at a Grocery Store

Posted by David Brown 
· September 9, 2025 

Filing a Premises Liability Claim After a Slip-and-Fall at a Grocery Store

Slip-and-fall accidents in grocery stores happen more often than you think. A spilled drink, wet floor, or broken tile can turn a simple shopping trip into a serious injury. When this happens, you may have grounds to file a premises liability claim in Washington.

Common Causes of Slip-and-Fall Accidents in Grocery Stores

Grocery stores have a legal duty to keep their premises reasonably safe. But hazards still show up. Here are some of the most common:

  • Spilled liquids in aisles
  • Freshly mopped floors with no warning signs
  • Loose floor mats or torn carpeting
  • Leaking freezer units
  • Cracked or uneven pavement near store entrances

If staff fail to clean up or warn you about these dangers in time, the store could be held responsible for your injuries.

Proving the Store Was at Fault

To win a premises liability case, you need to show:

  1. The store had a duty to keep the premises safe.
  2. They knew (or should have known) about the dangerous condition.
  3. They failed to act in a timely or reasonable way.
  4. You were injured as a result.

This usually comes down to proving the store had “constructive notice” — meaning the hazard was present long enough that staff should have spotted and fixed it.

What Evidence Helps Your Case?

Gathering solid evidence after the fall can make or break your claim. Here’s what helps:

  • Photos or video of the hazard
  • Incident report from the store
  • Witness statements
  • Medical records linking the fall to your injury
  • Security footage (request it immediately — stores often delete it within days)

What If You Were Partially at Fault?

Washington follows comparative negligence laws. That means if you were partly responsible (like ignoring a warning sign), your compensation may be reduced. But you can still recover damages as long as the store was more at fault than you.

Time Limits for Filing

In Washington, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims — including slip-and-falls — is three years from the date of the injury. Waiting too long could cost you the chance to recover anything.

Injuries That May Qualify for a Claim

Some injuries from a grocery store fall may seem minor at first but get worse over time. Common ones include:

  • Broken wrists or hips
  • Head trauma or concussion
  • Back or neck injuries
  • Knee damage
  • Internal bruising

Always seek medical attention, even if you feel okay. A doctor’s evaluation creates a record that supports your claim.

Categories : News
Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , ,
← Previous Page
Next Page →

Bellingham Office:

2011 Young Street
Suite 202
Bellingham, WA  98225
(360) 733-3773 or 647-4567
(360) 647-9060 (facsimile)
info@saalawoffice.com

shepard_allen