On Friday, July 23, 2010, around 10 a.m., a Cessna airplane crashed off the coast of Ludington, Michigan. The crash was reported by Ludington Air Control and was apparently witnessed by a fishing boat miles off the coast. Indications are that the flight developed problems maybe a third of the way into the flight when the plane doubled back over Lake Michigan and then had a steep decline in altitude and eventually crashed. The private flight left Alma, Michigan and was headed for Rochester, Minnesota, ostensibly with passengers onboard traveling for medical reasons.  

Carol Freed, apparently owned the plane and her husband may have been rescued.

(Photograph of a Cessna 206)

The 1971 Cessna 206 is a fixed wing single engine with seating capacity for 6 people.  Its weight can be up to 12,4999 pounds and it can reach speeds of 132 mph.  Reciprocating N-Number is 82531; Serial Number of U-206-01734.  It was registered to Freed Construction, P.O. Box 92, Alma, MI 48801.

Medical flights have been the source of investigation and concern lately, with many medical flights crashing in recent years. 

An investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board and local authorities will begin.   http://www.ntsb.gov.

It appears initially that the weather was not a factor and that the focus will inevitably be on pilot error, mechanical failure, or a combination of such airworthiness factors.

In Michigan, there are statutory laws that apply, among other laws, regarding legal responsibility for plane crashes:

259.180a Liability for injury occasioned by negligent operation of aircraft.

Sec. 180a.

(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), the owner or operator or the person or organization responsible for the maintenance or use of an aircraft shall be liable for any injury occasioned by the negligent operation of the aircraft, whether the negligence consists of a violation of statute, or in the failure to observe ordinary care in the operation of the aircraft, as the rules of the common law require.

(2) The owner of an aircraft shall not be liable for an injury occasioned by the negligent operation of the aircraft, as described in subsection (1), unless the aircraft was being operated with the owner’s express or implied consent or knowledge at the time the injury occurred.

(3) “Person or organization responsible for the maintenance or use of an aircraft” does not include a mechanic who is an independent contractor and who has performed work on or furnished materials, supplies, or equipment for an aircraft, or any employee of the mechanic.

Attorneys and lawyers familiar with complex litigation can be of significant assistance in helping individuals and families who are injured or killed in airplane crash cases. Of particular significance is the preservation of evidence and investigation of witnesses so as to preserve critical evidence and have expert analysis of potential causes.  http://www.leadersinlaw.com/2009/09/why-you-not-just-should-but-need-to-contact-an-attorney-after-an-accident/

 These types of cases can involve many types of legal issues that require lawyers to evaluate anything and everything potentially involved with the airplane, the pilots, and the crash. This would include maintenance work done or not done on the plane to potential product liability claims against the manufacturer of the plane or a component part.

For example, one major issue that may arise with a claim against the plane manufacturer is called “GARA.” The General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994 (GARA) immunized General Aviation aircraft manufacturers against lawsuits for defects in products older than 18 years. It is a very protective law for manufacturers and thus forces more scrutiny on  owners of the aircraft, maintenance businesses and pilots after bad crashes where there is a mechanical malfunction. Moreover, manufacturers may not have the immunity they expected because some courts have interpreted GARA as not completely providing protection from suit.

For example, in Caldwell v. Edstrom Helicopter Corporation, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that an aircraft’s flight manual is a part of the aircraft. Any post-sale revisions or deletions to an aircraft manual may restart the 18-year liability exposure clock each time they are made. In June 2003, a California State Court of Appeals held that a manufacturer could be responsible for willfully misrepresenting the safety of its helicopter by failing to notify the FAA of five military accidents involving the same part as the civilian version of that helicopter.

GARA is thus not an automatic bar against a lawsuit of a plane manufacturer. Furthermore, a lawyer investigating and pursuing these types of claims have to explain to the family the complex interplay among various laws, ranging from state and federal law issues, choice of law issues, wrongful death laws and who can bring claims and for what damages, to beginning the stressful probate law process.

Typically, there are so many needs of the family and complicated legal issues that multiple meetings are necessary and recommended so that the inherent stress and emotion of the situation can be managed. The best legal teams investigating these types of cases do not charge any fee for meetings to explain what needs to be done and why. And the best legal teams recommend that the family meet with as many lawyers as they see fit to make sure that they know they are getting the best , that they are getting lawyers and people in whom they have trust and confidence. If that level of trust is absent, if the family does not know that they will get the questions answered and phone calls returned, then they should seek other counsel. There are many good attorneys who handle major cases successfully and skillfully; and there are many good attorneys who may not be the best fit for a particular client to meet the particular needs of that client.

Having seen the emotional trauma that results from these types of accidents and other similar tragedies, our thoughts will be with these families.

Halpert Weston Wuori & Sawusch, P.C. has been involved in major airplane crash cases, including involvement with the Northwest Flight 255 multidistrict litigation  (working with the presiding Chief Judge on the case), the runway incursion crash of a Northwest jet in Detroit, and the medical survival flight that crashed into Lake Michigan on a donor flight between Milwaukee and the University of Michigan. All six people on board that Cessna 550 Citation were killed. Similarly, the law firm of Halpert Weston Wuori & Sawusch, P.C. has handled major litigation, from injury to wrongful death lawsuits, for families throughout Michigan and other states.

Families whose loved ones are the victims of a tragic crash can obtain information not only from the National Transportation Safety Board but also from experienced attorneys who can help them investigate and pursue legal claims as a result of these types of crashes. See http://www.ntsb.gov/.  It is important for families and loved ones to be fully informed about preserving any such claims and meeting with and evaluating attorneys before any decision is made about which law firm to hire.

The focus of any lawyer and law firm who is asked to consult with a client involved in these types of tragedies is helping the family navigate what needs to be done and why so that the family members can focus on their immediate needs.

See “The Nicest Tough Firm Around.”  http://hwwspc.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/ABA-Journal.PDF

Too many cases of mild traumatic brain injury are not initially diagnosed.  The reasons are many and diverse, including but not limited to: 

• The patient presents in the emergency room with trauma that requires immediate orthopedic, medical-surgical or burn treatment to stabilize or save the life of the patient. 
• Pharmacological intervention with narcotics which mask the neuro-cognitive impairments during acute care, and sometimes for weeks or even months after injury.
• Periods of hospital and home convalescence following injury, during which cognitive and functional demands are limited.
• Incomplete testing of persons who display no obvious injury to the head. 
• Failure to seek treatment immediately after injury or during the weeks that follow, during which symptoms of cognitive impairments manifest and become problematic.
• Inability of diagnostic equipment typically utilized in emergency departments (CT, MRI, EEG) to detect the presence of mild brain damage. 
• Misunderstandings among even some medical providers that brain damage can exist even where there has been no impact or direct trauma to the head. 
• Timing of arrival of paramedics to the scene of an accident or timing following an accident in seeking initial medical care.  If the joint medical assessment (paramedic or emergency room physician) is delayed, initial assessments and Glasgow Coma Score determination may be different than immediately after the injury. 
• There are many, many factors that affect whether a Traumatic Brain Injury is initially diagnosed.

Any or some combination of these factors can result in an undiagnosed and therefore, untreated, mild traumatic brain injury.  This is the silent epidemic-the large numbers of people who are left to suffer impaired abilities to succeed at work, or to work at all, and engage in social and family relationships at the levels they did before they were injured.  Widely accepted symptoms of mild traumatic brain injury, even if only noticed weeks after initial injury include:

• Impaired attention/concentration
• Impaired memory
• Slowed information processing                 
• Difficulty in word finding
• Impaired executive function-planning, thinking   
• Headache
• Easily fatigued                           
• Slurred Speech
• Problems with vision                         
• Easily frustrated
• Emotional swings (anger/sadness/euphoric)      
• Sleep Disturbance
• Fine motor impairments                   
• Tinnitus
• Anxiety                                 
• Depressed mood

All brain injuries are serious.  Traumatic brain injury survivors suffer emotional and psychological issues and loss of self-esteem and self worth.  Often, it is a downward spiral in which dysfunctional coping responses lead to more dysfunction, alienation from co-workers, friends and family, and depression.  They and their family are lost and bewildered.  The lack of diagnosis and treatment for the mild traumatic brain injury leave them rudderless and without hope.  This downward spiral can result in serious depression, loss of relationships and loss of self.  The longer it is unaddressed and untreated, the more difficult it becomes to treat.  Layers of psycho-emotional dysfunction are laid on, and can result in a destroyed life.

There is help.  There is hope.  The first step is to recognize that help is needed.

If the injury was caused by the fault of another person-whether an auto accident, boating accident, explosion, burn injury with anoxia or inhalation injury, or injury at work, it is important to locate and retain legal help with an attorney who understands the dynamics of mild traumatic brain damage and is experienced and well studied in how to successfully prove the existence and impact of this “silent” but devastating injury.  In choosing an attorney, it is important to consider whether the attorney will support, and be a part of, the treatment team.  The attorney then must understand not only the goals of the treatment modalities (psychological, neuropsychological, psychiatry, occupational therapy, neurological, social work, etc) but must support and facilitate the client’s compliance with and consistent participation in, the treatment regimes and plan. 

An invaluable resource is the family physician.  Our experience has seen these dedicated and caring physicians serve as the gateway to verification of diagnosis and treatment weeks and months after injury onset.  The family physician can initiate referrals to neuropsychological testing, psychiatry, and/or neurological care.  Where necessary, the attorney can assist in facilitating referrals for help if the traumatic brain injury survivor is without a family physician or primary health care provider.

Even where weeks or months have elapsed since the initial injury, it is not too late to seek help.  The good news is that there is hope and help available.  The recovery process can be long and the extent of recovery will vary case by case.  But, it is a road that must be traveled.  There are many caring and dedicated people who understand the struggles endured by the traumatic brain injury survivor and his/her family.  The enemy of the traumatic brain injury survivor is inaction.  Frequently, it is the family, friend or co-worker who must provide the initial energy to intervene and take the first step to seek help.  Most often, it is a step that can save quality of a life.

The prohibition is the latest in a series of actions taken by the U.S. government to combat distracted driving.  In September 2009, the Secretary of Transportation convened a national summit on this serious driving issue and has set up a website dedicated to resolving the problem.   www.distraction.gov  

In his opening remarks at the Distracted Driving Summit, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said, “Every single time you take your eyes off the road or talk on the phone while you’re driving – even for just a few seconds – you put your life in danger. And you put others in danger too. This kind of behavior is irresponsible – and the consequences are devastating.”

In announcing the ban, the Secretary said “We want the drivers of big rigs and buses and those who share the roads with them to be safe. This is an important safety step and we will be taking more to eliminate the threat of distracted driving.” 

According to the National Safety Council, drivers who are texting cause an estimated 200,000 crashes on U.S. roads.  Drivers of commercial trucks and buses who text while driving may now be subject to civil or criminal penalties of up to $2,750.

Research from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration shows that drivers who take their eyes off the road while sending and reading text messages are significantly more at risk for being involved in an accident than those drivers who do not text while driving.  Research demonstrated that texting drivers take their eyes off the road for an average of 4.6 seconds out of every 6 seconds.  At 55 miles per hour, this means that a texting driver travels the length of a football field, including the end zones, without looking at the road.  Those drivers are more than 20 times more likely to get in an accident than non-distracted drivers.  

Because of the significant safety risks associated with the use of electronic devices while driving, the FMCSA is also working on additional regulatory measures that will be announced in the coming months.

On October 28, 2009, a van was pulling a utility trailer in Cannon Township.  The trailer came loose and hit an oncoming car’s windshield, killing the driver and severely injuring her passenger. 

 Police said it appeared the steel pin holding the ball mount to the van’s hitch came loose, allowing the trailer that was hauling salvage metal to break free from the van. No safety chains were being used by the driver of the van.  After the trailer was inspected by the Sheriff Department, it was found to not be road worthy.  The law firm of Halpert, Weston, Wuori and Sawusch P.C. has handled numerous civil cases involving vehicles hauling trailers.  The law firm investigates all levels of the mechanical, safety and legal issues for each and every case.  

It is important that drivers hauling trailers not only have the knowledge of how to properly hookup and use the trailer, but also know the dangers of what could happen without the proper hookup and lack of safety precautions.

 There are several types of trailer hookups to vehicles.  In the matter mentioned above, the driver was using a ball mount hitch hookup.  The driver not only failed to take safety precautions by using chains to secure the trailer to the vehicle in the event the hitch came loose, the driver also failed to make sure the pin that holds the ball mount to the van’s hitch was safely secured. 

Michigan law requires that a trailer towed or drawn by a vehicle must be attached to the vehicle with forms of coupling devices so that the movement of the towed or drawn trailer does not deviate more than 3 inches to either side of the path of the towing vehicle. The trailer must also be connected to the towing vehicle by suitable safety chains or devices, 1 on each side of the coupling and at the extreme outer edge of the vehicle. Each safety chain or device and connection must be of sufficient strength to haul the trailer when fully loaded.

 Safety chains should be crossed-over on each side of the trailer to the hookup on the vehicle.  The left side chain on the trailer should be hooked to the right side of the vehicle and the right side chain on the trailer should be hooked to the left side of the vehicle.

The law firm of Halpert, Weston, Wuori & Sawusch P.C. has successfully litigated cases involving vehicle-trailer collisions.  In 2009, the law firm obtained a 1.05 million dollar settlement in a case involving a pickup truck that was hauling a trailer full of salvaged steel.  The poorly secured and overloaded trailer unhitched from the truck, and the trailer crushed the passenger side of a vehicle, trapping the victims inside and causing very serious injuries. 

CO can be caused by a faulty heat exchanger in a furnace, by incomplete combustion, and/or by faulty venting.  Improper maintenance can be a major factor in CO productions. For example, below is a photograph of a heating system where a previously rusted-out vent created toxic levels of CO at a hotel, causing it to be shut down but not before injuries were suffered.

As in many circumstances, just because  the injuries may not appear to be “life-threatening” does not mean that there can be no residual, long-term or permanent damage. What is critical is for an accurate and reliable blood draw to be done to evaluate the carboxyhemoglobin levels, taking into account exposure times, levels of CO recorded (and when and where and how), when the victim was removed from the toxic area, and whether and when the victim was given oxygen (non rebreather mask with oxygen for example). The half-life of carbon monoxide in the body differs depending on these factors. And the levels of CO recorded in the area in comparison to the  injured person’s carboxyhemoglobin levels can be important, but are not dispositive or controlling in evaluating what happened, why, and any long-term complications from the exposure. 

Symptoms of CO poisoning can range from nausea and headaches to mental confusion and dizziness.  “Flu-like” symptoms may be indicative of  CO poisoning.  Victims of CO poisoning have been thought to be “drunk” when in fact they were exposed to high levels of CO (707 ppm). Typically, a safe level of CO in a building is between 0 and 9 ppm.

Brain damage can result from CO poisoning, and the damage is not dependent on the person’s carboxyhemoglobin levels or the severity of the poisoning.  There are circumstances in which a substantial CO exposure or persons with high COHb levels can make substantial recoveries.  However, many do not.  Those with ostensibly “minimal poisoning” (or low or nearly normal COHb levels) can suffer substantial damages.  Loss of consciousness is not a requirement for neurological damage to have been suffered.

Exposure to CO, whether chronic or acute and depending on many factors, can lead to neurological changes and damage along with other physiological damage. Immediate treatment in a hyperbaric oxygen chamber has been utilized in some cases. Simply because a person may be discharged with appropriate levels of carboxyhemoglobin after treatment does not mean that there is no damage. Sometimes, brain damage and other neurological deficits do not appear until later.  Often times, the victim of CO poisoning does not equate the CO exposure with their symptoms of tiredness or difficulties in processing and organization. There are specialists who are knowledgeable and experienced in this highly specialized area. Specialized neuropsychology battery of tests have been developed and are geared towards those who have been exposed to CO and may be experiencing problems.   

The law firm of Halpert Weston Wuori & Sawusch, P.C. has handled CO poisoning cases in the past and is currently involved in a major CO poisoning case in which two people were exposed to significant levels of CO. In such cases there are many issues that should be addressed, ranging from preservation and documentation of the scene, the cause (before repairs are made and equipment thrown away), and other testing. Experts familiar with CO poisoning can be helpful early on in assisting in treatment and diagnosis, all of which requires skill in the coordination of how best to handle the many issues that may confront a victim of CO poisoning.  Issues ranging from medical bills and expenses, preservation of the evidence and cause, and legal recourse. Halpert Weston Wuori & Sawusch, P.C. investigates and handles CO poisoning cases and stays abreast of the mechanical, medical, and legal issues surrounding these types of cases.

Our law firm is a strong proponent of CO and gas detectors–in homes and environments where this deadly gas may escape purely by accident or due to someone’s negligence.

Public education is critical not only to understand the dangers presented by CO exposure, but also about prevention and treatment.  Public perceptions about the dangers and causes of CO show that there is not a sufficient understanding of the risks and from where the risks come (i.e. not just a furnace, but also from automobiles, recreational boats, radiant heaters, and so on).  The risks are underestimated; the use of CO detectors is small (not unlike the utilization of smoke detectors years ago).

CO poisoning is a substantial risk and may lead to unanticipated and unexpected damages. Carbon monoxide lawyers with an established record of state-wide experience and knowledge in protecting your rights and obtaining maximum justice should be contacted immediately before critical evidence is lost.

If you have any questions regarding CO poisoning, go to www.leadersinlaw.com or call 800.400.9115.

Too many cases of mild traumatic brain injury are not initially diagnosed.  The reasons are many and diverse, including but not limited to: 

• The patient presents in the emergency room with trauma that requires immediate orthopedic, medical-surgical or burn treatment to stabilize or save the life of the patient. 
• Pharmacological intervention with narcotics which mask the neuro-cognitive impairments during acute care, and sometimes for weeks or even months after injury.
• Periods of hospital and home convalescence following injury, during which cognitive and functional demands are limited.
• Incomplete testing of persons who display no obvious injury to the head. 
• Failure to seek treatment immediately after injury or during the weeks that follow, during which symptoms of cognitive impairments manifest and become problematic.
• Inability of diagnostic equipment typically utilized in emergency departments (CT, MRI, EEG) to detect the presence of mild brain damage. 
• Misunderstandings among even some medical providers that brain damage can exist even where there has been no impact or direct trauma to the head. 
• Timing of arrival of paramedics to the scene of an accident or timing following an accident in seeking initial medical care.  If the joint medical assessment (paramedic or emergency room physician) is delayed, initial assessments and Glasgow Coma Score determination may be different than immediately after the injury. 
• There are many, many factors that affect whether a Traumatic Brain Injury is initially diagnosed.

Any or some combination of these factors can result in an undiagnosed and therefore, untreated, mild traumatic brain injury.  This is the silent epidemic-the large numbers of people who are left to suffer impaired abilities to succeed at work, or to work at all, and engage in social and family relationships at the levels they did before they were injured.  Widely accepted symptoms of mild traumatic brain injury, even if only noticed weeks after initial injury include:

• Impaired attention/concentration
• Impaired memory
• Slowed information processing                 
• Difficulty in word finding
• Impaired executive function-planning, thinking   
• Headache
• Easily fatigued                           
• Slurred Speech
• Problems with vision                         
• Easily frustrated
• Emotional swings (anger/sadness/euphoric)      
• Sleep Disturbance
• Fine motor impairments                   
• Tinnitus
• Anxiety                                 
• Depressed mood

All brain injuries are serious.  Traumatic brain injury survivors suffer emotional and psychological issues and loss of self-esteem and self worth.  Often, it is a downward spiral in which dysfunctional coping responses lead to more dysfunction, alienation from co-workers, friends and family, and depression.  They and their family are lost and bewildered.  The lack of diagnosis and treatment for the mild traumatic brain injury leave them rudderless and without hope.  This downward spiral can result in serious depression, loss of relationships and loss of self.  The longer it is unaddressed and untreated, the more difficult it becomes to treat.  Layers of psycho-emotional dysfunction are laid on, and can result in a destroyed life.

There is help.  There is hope.  The first step is to recognize that help is needed.

If the injury was caused by the fault of another person-whether an auto accident, boating accident, explosion, burn injury with anoxia or inhalation injury, or injury at work, it is important to locate and retain legal help with an attorney who understands the dynamics of mild traumatic brain damage and is experienced and well studied in how to successfully prove the existence and impact of this “silent” but devastating injury.  In choosing an attorney, it is important to consider whether the attorney will support, and be a part of, the treatment team.  The attorney then must understand not only the goals of the treatment modalities (psychological, neuropsychological, physiatry, occupational therapy, neurologic, social work, etc) but must support and facilitate the client’s compliance with and consistent participation in, the treatment regimes and plan. 

An invaluable resource is the family physician.  Our experience has seen these dedicated and caring physicians serve as the gateway to verification of diagnosis and treatment weeks and months after injury onset.  The family physician can initiate referrals to neuropsychological testing, physiatry, and/or neurologic care.  Where necessary, the attorney can assist in facilitating referrals for help if the traumatic brain injury survivor is without a family physician or primary health care provider.

Even where weeks or months have elapsed since the initial injury, it is not too late to seek help.  The good news is that there is hope and help available.  The recovery process can be long and the extent of recovery will vary case by case.  But, it is a road that must be traveled.  There are many caring and dedicated people who understand the struggles endured by the traumatic brain injury survivor and his/her family.  The enemy of the traumatic brain injury survivor is inaction.  Frequently, it is the family, friend or co-worker who must provide the initial energy to intervene and take the first step to seek help.  Most often, it is a step that can save quality of a life.

For thousands of years, dogs have been referred to as “Man’s Best Friend.”  Why?  It’s simple—because dogs are well known for their ability to be loyal, loving, playful, and a great source of companionship for both the young and the old.  Dogs even serve some of the most important roles for humans such as being the eyes for the blind and drug and human trackers for police. There is no denying the fact that dogs bring a lot of joy to many and because of the deep bond that is established with humans, they are often considered and treated like part of the family.   

Unfortunately, the staggering number of dog attacks every year tells us that it is not always safe or wise to trust Man’s Best Friend.  The statistics reported by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention tell us that the number of dog attacks each year are in the millions, that medical attention is necessary for one out of every six attacks, and that dog attacks are in the top five reasons that children are sent to the hospital each year.  These are facts that should not and cannot be ignored.  Although cute, cuddly and furry, dogs of all types can be very dangerous causing severe injuries up to and including death.  Granted, not every dog is prone to or has a reputation for biting or attacking, but the statistical data speaks for itself—Man’s Best Friend has been the root cause of many horrendous and life altering injuries for a lot of innocent people. 

This law firm has represented many victims of dog attacks that have resulted in significant injuries requiring prolonged hospitalization and surgery for skin grafting and/or reconstructive surgery.  Below is a sample of some of the types of injuries that can result from being bitten or attacked by a dog:

The lawyers at Halpert, Weston, Wuori & Sawusch, P.C., know excellent plastic surgeons and other specialists and work with them to understand the injuries and help obtain compensation to pay for future surgeries and other needs.  In some cases, the injuries are such that the scarring can be reduced and improved, but not eliminated.  A dog bite can be very traumatic and result in not only long-term or permanent physical injuries, but also emotional and psychological issues that must also be addressed medically.  This law firm has successfully handled dog bite cases in which a neighborhood dog has attacked a child that caused puncture wounds requiring stitches to more catastrophic cases in which a woman was savagely attacked by three escaped dogs causing hundreds of puncture wounds that required multiple skin grafting surgeries due to the depth and severity of the wounds. 

Thankfully, Michigan law is harsh on dog owners forcing them to be responsible pet owners and responsible to the victim of a dog attack.  The dog bite statute in Michigan imposes strict liability (absolute or complete responsibility) against the dog owner(s) where it is shown that (1) there was a dog bite or attack of a person, (2) there was no provocation (i.e., taunting, hitting, or other action that might cause an ordinary dog to react by biting), and (3) the dog bite victim was lawfully at the location where the bite occurred.  MCL 287.351.   The key to establishing strict liability is developing the factual evidence to show an absence of provocation on the part of the victim.  Even if provocation is involved, however, there are other theories of liability for which a claim can be brought against the owner or keeper of a dog responsible for the attack that results in injury.    

The owner of a dog may also face criminal charges if the dog is determined to be a “dangerous animal” that has caused serious injury or death to a person.  Depending on the factual circumstances of the dog bite or attack, the owner can be fined, ordered to perform community service, and/or sentenced to jail time.  Generally, after a dog bite or attack is reported, the dog is required to be quarantined either at the owner’s home or the local Animal Control Department.  Under Michigan law, however, many dogs have to be put down to avoid future harm to others.   MCL 287.321. 

 The lawyers at Halpert, Weston, Wuori & Sawusch, P.C., have been successfully representing dog bite victims for many years.  This law firm has obtained hundreds of thousands of dollars in compensation on a single case and millions in total over the years.  We believe strongly that just like all the other types of personal injury claims we handle, a skilled and experienced trial lawyer is crucial to obtaining the best possible recovery to take care of medical bills incurred, future medical bills and treatments, therapy as well as compensation for pain and suffering, disfigurement, and any other long-term or permanent implications a person is forced to live with as a result of being bitten or attacked by a dog.  

1. Provide warnings of road construction and the dangers associated with it;
2. Adequately repair the road;
3. Fill in areas of the road that had been dug out for repairs; and,
4. Warn the public of the hole in the road.

The suit also faults Christ Brothers for their failure to inspect the work of their subcontractor, Roadsafe.  As a result of hitting the hole and of Christ Brothers and Roadsafe’s alleged negligence, the man suffered numerous injuries including a brain injury, impaired vision, loss of visual acuity, pain, loss of wages, disability, a diminished earning capacity and subsequent medical treatment expenses.

Recently, our firm successfully negotiated settlement in a matter involving similar circumstances as those described above.  In Jones’ v. Unnamed Co. settlement was reached for burn injuries as well as a traumatic brain injury allegedly resulting when Mr. Jones crashed into a vehicle on a freeway.  There was a difficult liability claim with issues concerning non-party fault.  However, a settlement of 1 million ninety thousand dollars was reached with some of the settlement proceeds being structured for the economic security of the clients. 

Some factors surrounding the crash included Unnamed Co.’s negligence and failure to adhere to the following:

1. Properly and completely supervise the activities, work and work preparations, including the planning, organization, and setup of traffic control of employees, agents and/or servants, in order to positively ascertain that the activities work, and work preparations were done properly, safely, adequately, and in conformity with all applicable standards, guidelines, rules and statues;
2. Failing to know, observe, and implement all applicable standards, procedures, and devices, for the safe and effective warning to and control of traffic approaching and within the area in which roadwork was being performed;
3. Creating hazardous conditions on and in the vicinity of the traveled portions of the public highway;
4. Failing to properly and completely train employees, agents, and/or servants allowed to operate vehicles and perform work on and around the public highways before allowing such persons to operate motor vehicles and conduct work on the public highways; and,
5. Failing to properly and completely supervise the activities, work, work preparations, planning organization and setup, of traffic control to positively ascertain that such activities, work, and work preparations, and organization, were done properly, safely, adequately, and in conformity with all applicable standards, guidelines, rules and statutes.

According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), there were 1,010 work zone fatalities in 2006, an increase of nearly 50% from the previous decade. The majority of these accidents occur during the weekday commute, with trucks involved in 30 percent of crashes. In mid-summer more than 3,000 work zones can be found on U.S. highways.  Due diligence should be observed when encountering constructions zones because, as indicated above, the fault doesn’t always lie with the motorist.

If you are interested in a free consultation regarding any accident, we would be honored to do so.

Second, what is critical in virtually all of the accident situations, but especially so in serious injury or death cases, is the vital need for an investigation into the cause of the accident and the preservation and protection of evidence (from the scene, a reconstruction, appliances or mechanical devices, testing, photographing, videotaping, etc). The experienced and knowledgeable lawyer and law firm will or should immediately be able to provide legal notices to the involved parties requesting the preservation of any and all evidence (including documents and electronically-stored evidence) and access to the evidence with investigators and expert witnesses knowledgeable about the particular type of accident.

Third, every second that is lost without someone investigating and protecting the accident scene and evidence, and talking to and obtaining truthful information from available witnesses, on your behalf, is a second the other side is using to its advantage. From our experience, it is the rule, not the exception, that whenever there is an accident, there are insurance adjusters, investigators, and lawyers and experts already involved from the first notice of an accident working the scene or talking to witnesses. Their interest is not to find all of the information and evidence, to find the “truth,” and then present it to you or a lawyer you later may hire.

Fourth, we have had many, many cases in which critical evidence or an accident scene has been lost, altered, or destroyed, or in which the scene and evidence has been significantly changed from its accident condition, making a case that much harder to investigate and eventually prove. We have had success despite these problems but it is not unusual for there to have been “spoliation” of evidence by people or companies in an effort to avoid liability. “Spoliation” is a legal term that may provide some relief in a legal case for someone who has not protected evidence or had or allowed it to be changed or altered. However, some states are more aggressive in how they view spoliation of evidence. In Michigan, for example, there is no legal claim against someone for the spoliation of evidence. You may be able to get some relief from a court, but many of the cases have been hardest on the Plaintiffs themselves—dismissing claims for the Plaintiff’s failure to preserve the evidence whereas a Defendant who has allowed the spoliation of evidence may get a favorable jury instruction, if that. This presents another reason why a person injured in an accident should contact an attorney—if evidence under his or her control is altered or destroyed (intentionally or by mistake), you may have your legitimate case dismissed because of this alteration in certain circumstances.

Fifth, it does not matter what type of case it may be (product liability, auto negligence, premises liability, general negligence, gas explosion, scald burn, nursing home neglect, carbon monoxide poisoning, and so on); it does not matter who may have caused the accident, where the accident is or the evidence located—an investigation and preservation of the evidence needs to be done to protect your legal rights should there be a legal case worth pursuing. Having an experienced lawyer and law firm investigate a case typically will not cost you any money unless a case is going to be pursued after the investigation, in which case a typical contingency contract is agreed to and executed. Not having an investigation done, while the other side is doing so, may harm or limit the success of a legitimate legal claim for serious injuries. We have had cases involving propane and gas explosions and fires in which the other side had access to critical evidence, the scene and witnesses weeks and months before we were even contacted to conduct an investigation. We have had cases involving carbon monoxide poisoning in which the accident scene was altered by the time we got involved. We have had car and trucking accidents in which an accident reconstruction was not done by the police at the time and that is more difficult to do months after the accident. On the other hand, there are cases in which we have been contacted quickly by a family member. As a result, we have been able to have an investigation and experts on the scene sometimes the same or next day. There are many cases involving catastrophic burn injuries in which we have been able to not only protect and preserve the scene but essentially gather the critical and necessary evidence (photographs, witness statements) that have led to major settlements for our clients without a lawsuit even being filed. The failure to contact an attorney is not inherently wrong or a mistake—we have found that most people simply have no idea of how the legal process works and why it is critical for an experienced attorney and law firm to conduct an investigation and protect any legal claim that may exist. Many clients believe that the police or fire investigators are going to do a complete and thorough job, but that is not necessarily true. Many clients have no idea that the other side already has its own team assigned and is working the case. And many clients willingly acknowledge that they “don’t sue,” “are not litigious,” or “are not like those people that do bring legal claims.” However, when someone is seriously injured or killed due to the provable negligence of someone else, our clients then acknowledge that they wish they would have contacted us sooner so that a complete and thorough investigation could have been conducted as soon as possible. And they recognize that our system of justice is built upon accountability—of people being held accountable for their actions and inactions that cause serious injuries or death. And they recognize, sheepishly, that the media and advertisements have created a negative image of anyone whom might bring a lawsuit, such that they distance themselves from “the McDonald’s coffee case.”

Finally, not every accident creates a legal claim. Not every accident creates a legal claim worth pursuing. Not every accident creates a legal claim that a lawyer is willing to pursue. Many accidents that cause injuries provide some legal rights (workers’ compensation benefits, for example), while there are some accidents that cause serious injuries or death that create legal claims worth pursuing (even cases in which you might get legal benefits such as workers’ compensation benefits as well). Investigating and protecting the accident scene and evidence and obtaining first-rate experts in the vast majority of cases is critical—the sooner the better. The other side already has investigators and adjusters and lawyers and experts involved in serious accident cases. So should you.