Articles Posted in Car Accident

Published on:

By

An auto parts company recently agreed to settle a wrongful death car accident lawsuit involving a 29-year-old mother, her 12-year-old daughter and 14-year-old killed on a New York highway two years ago when their vehicle was struck by one of the company’s truck drivers. Multiple sources have reported the truck accident occurred when the mother called 911 for help after running out of gas. The woman was in the driver’s seat, her niece in the front passenger seat and her daughter in the rear. (The crash also killed two dogs that were in the vehicle.)

Traffic homicide investigators concluded the woman was stopped in the right driving lane with her flashers on when the smaller vehicle was rear-ended by the tractor-trailer, driven by AutoZone’s 52-year-old employee. Defendant company, based in Tennessee, did not comment on the settlement agreement which resolves the estates’ wrongful death claims. There is no indication based on media reports that the defendant conceded any wrongdoing, which is typical of most injury and wrongful death settlements prior to trial.

Why File Wrongful Death Lawsuit in Florida Trucking Accident?

While money is never going to come close to compensating survivors for such a profound loss, it’s nonetheless important to pursue wrongful death litigation in crash cases for two reasons.

The first is that in many cases, those who died were active, contributing family members whose loss has a huge financial impact to survivors. But even in a case like this, wherein those killed were teenagers/ not contributing family members, many survivors find legal action one of the key means through which to hold individual drivers and companies accountable for their negligence. Specifically as it relates to businesses and professional drivers, such sizable settlements serve as an incentive for implementation of and strict adherence to critical safety measures.  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

A South Florida car accident reportedly left one woman disfigured and disabled. The Florida Record reports that in a subsequent lawsuit she filed against the alleged at-fault driver, she is seeking “loss of life enjoyment” in addition to damages for serious injury, medical expenses, pain, disability (lost wages) and disfigurement.

This particular type of damages is worth exploring because while medical bills and lost wages are quantifiable losses, the impact of one’s “loss of life enjoyment” is far more subjective. Nonetheless, it can mean a sizable increase in the sum of one’s total calculated damages. It can be a significant portion of one’s damage award, too, if the individual didn’t suffer any significant loss of income, such as a young person, someone who is retired or a stay-at-home parent.

Loss of life enjoyment is a component of pain and suffering damages in a personal injury lawsuit. Not all states recognize this as a distinct and calculable compensable loss, but Florida does. Here, pain and suffering refers to the direct pain resulting from injuries sustained as a result of a Florida car accident. Loss of life enjoyment, meanwhile, pertains to the emotional, physical and psychological losses one endures long-term as the result of that crash.  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

A car dealership has agreed to settle a wrongful death lawsuit for $5.5 million – while still denying liability – after it reportedly sold a vehicle to an unlicensed driver who was later behind the wheel in a hit-and-run crash that resulted in catastrophic brain injuries for the pedestrian he struck. 

Technically, car dealerships can sell a vehicle to an unlicensed driver, but it’s a rare scenario. It’s not one that is likely to happen unless the individual:

  • Is paying cash for the vehicle in question (most banks offering a vehicle loan will require the vehicle be registered, which typically requires a valid license).
  • Does not drive the vehicle off the lot – either for a test drive or after purchase.

In the recent settlement, the Washington car dealership (part of a national chain) insisted it had done nothing wrong, as kit did not hand the unlicensed buyer the keys and it was his mother her drive the vehicle off the lot. It was the expectation or assumption of the dealership, according to The News Tribune, that the buyer would obtain a license if he was going to drive the vehicle. However, he reportedly did not do that. This hit-and-run pedestrian accident occurred approximately one year after the vehicle was purchased in June 2015.  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Personal injury protection (PIP) benefits, as outlined in F.S. 627.736, legislation that was designed to reduce lawsuits in Florida, instead resulted in a record number of 60,000 lawsuits filed in Florida in 2017, according to a report by the Florida Justice Reform Institute. This amounts to a 50 percent increase in PIP litigation in a single year. 

However, insurers weren’t rushing to the halls of the state legislators to urge them back a repeal of the state’s no-fault PIP statute (which faltered in the state Senate this past session). But that’s probably because Florida’s top 25 automobile insurers raised their PIP rates 54 percent just since the beginning of 2017. On average, premiums increased 35 percent faster than other types of insurance premiums. Motorists in Florida are within the top six when it comes to the highest auto insurance bills for those within a no-fault system.

Statewide, drivers are compelled to pay $10,000 in PIP coverage to foot the bill for their own injuries in the event of a Florida car accident, regardless of who is at-fault, regardless of how much health insurance a person already has. The PIP system was established in the 1970s as a means of reducing litigation following minor car accidents and fender-benders. Nearly 50 years later, the relatively small benefit insureds receive hasn’t changed (failing miserably to keep pace with medical inflation), which pushing consumer rate increases and – as we now know – resulting in even more injury lawsuits. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

A new audit takes vehicle safety regulators to task for delayed reaction in its oversight of automobile recalls that likely left consumers in the dark about dangerous defects for months.

The vehicle recall oversight audit, issued by the U.S. Transportation Department’s Office of Inspector General (requested by Congress in 2015), concluded the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) isn’t doing enough to make sure vehicle manufacturers are following through on their safety recalls and the public is deprived of critical information about the safety of their vehicles. The analysis delved into several years’ worth of data, with particular interest in the several years during which vehicle recalls spiked. It includes the time frame during the Takata airbag recall, now recognized as the largest and most complex vehicle safety recall ever. A total of 15 deaths and more than 220 injuries in the U.S. have been linked to the airbag defect, which involves spraying shrapnel at drivers when deployed. (A total of 23 Takata airbag-related deaths have been reported globally.) Vehicles involved include 21 vehicles manufactured by Honda and two by Ford Motor Co.

The inspector general noted the number of light passenger vehicle recalls issued annually rose from 180 in 2012 to 346 in 2016 – a stunning increase of 92 percent. The number of actual vehicles involved in those recalls also rose during that time, from 15.6 million to 46.6 million – a rise of 200 percent. Overseeing those recalls at the NHTSA was an office of just eight people, including five recall specialists, one program management, an assistant and a single engineer. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

When customers order takeout pizza, they are expecting it to arrive hot, fresh and fast. But pizza shops that promise prompt delivery (i.e., under 30 minutes) may find themselves moving from the dinner table to the defense table. 

Firstly, that’s because vicarious liability – specifically, respondeat superior (Latin for, “let the master answer”) – allow employers to be held responsible for the reckless or negligent conduct of employees who are acting in the course and scope of employment. Pizza delivery drivers are typically employees (as opposed to independent contractors) and the delivery of food is a core function of the job. In a vicarious liability case, a plaintiff doesn’t need to prove the employer necessarily did anything wrong. However, one might also alleged negligence by the company if indication exists the company’s practices were causal in the crash.

That’s what happened recently in Kansas, where a Congressman filed a lawsuit against a pizza company, alleging the recklessness of a pizza delivery driver – abiding the company’s delivery practices – was to blame for a crash that killed his mother and seriously injured his grandmother, WIBW.com reports. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In many car crashes, we see one at-fault driver, and one or more drivers who were not at-fault in causing a serious or fatal South Florida car wreck.  However, in some cases, there are two drivers who are acting in a negligent manner and responsible for injuries to themselves and possibly for injuries of passengers in one or both of the vehicles. There are a variety of different ways in which two or more drivers involved in a single traffic crash could be engaged in negligent behavior.

One situation, that while not an everyday occurrence, but one which happens far more often than it should, is when two or more cars are engaged in an illegal street race. This could be a pre-planned (though still illegal) semi-organized street race like we see in the movies an in many shows on reality TV, or it can simply be two drivers who see each other and decide to start racing each other.  This is not only very dangerous, but is also illegal, and could be the basis for an arrest for reckless driving.  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The conservator of a woman catastrophically injured as a passenger in a motorcycle crash was unsuccessful in a bid to hold accountable a city government for alleged negligent failure to maintain a road, which she claimed was a causal factor in the crash. 

The City of Denver, CO, defendant in this action, argued entitlement to government immunity. Plaintiff countered the facts of this case allowed for exception to governmental immunity because the road was in unreasonably dangerous condition, which posed an unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public. The trial court disagreed, granting summary judgment to the defense. The appellate court reversed, but then the Supreme Court reinstated the trial court’s summary judgment.

Plaintiff hasn’t walked away completely empty-handed, though. She settled her claim against the other driver without litigation and with the operator of the motorcycle prior to trial. This premises liability claim against the city was the only one still pending.  Continue reading →

Published on:

By

A $19 million damage award to the widow of a man killed when a train struck him as he attempted to cross the tracks has been affirmed.

Defendant railroad company had sought a new trial based primarily on a typo and alleged “intentional non-disclosures” by a single juror. The Missouri Supreme Court found these arguments unpersuasive.

Court records reveal decedent was a 53-year-old businessman who died when his pickup truck was struck by a northbound freight train at an unguarded crossing on a county road. The crossing is marked by “passive railroad crossbuck signs,” but no flashing lights, bells or crossing gates to warn people of oncoming trains. Furthermore, the road crosses the tracks at what is described as “an extreme angle,” which plaintiff alleged created a hazardous intersection that was made even more dangerous by visual obstacles, such as overgrown vegetation.

Plaintiff presented evidence of numerous “near-misses” at this intersection before this fatal crash in 2012. The crossing, decedent’s widow argued, did not meet basic industry safety standards (specifically because they did not trim the vegetation that had become overgrown around the crossing), the railroad company defendant knew that and yet failed to seize on numerous opportunities to correct this danger. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The families of three people (including two children) killed in a horrific North Florida crash are suing the manufacturer of a product consumed by the at-fault driver prior to the collision. 

It’s an interesting case that many car accident attorneys are watching carefully. It’s noteworthy because makers of products like alcohol or opiates generally are not held liable for the actions of those under the influence of those products. In this case, WCTV.com reports the families are suing the product manufacturer for making and selling a product called “spice” knowing and intending for it to be consumed – knowing it was unsafe to do so.

The product in question was named “Purple Chronic,” and plaintiffs allege the company manufacturer specifically named it this as a play on words, knowing “chronic” is slang for marijuana. The company manufacturer insisted in recent testimony the product was never intended for human consumption – a fact that is expressly stated on the label – and for this reason, did not feel compelled to print warnings on the product indicating the dangers of consumption or even list the ingredients. Continue reading →

Contact Information
WEST PALM BEACH
5 Harvard Cir #110,
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
Phone: 561-999-9999
Fax: 561-689-4310
PLANTATION
8751 W Broward Blvd #106
Plantation, FL 33324
Phone: 954-999-9999
Toll Free: 800-561-7777
Fax: 954-979-1225
MIAMI
7685 SW 104th St #200
Miami, FL 33156
Phone: 786-517-9774
Toll Free: 800-561-7777
Fax: 954-979-1225
ORLANDO
258 Southhall Ln #140
Maitland, FL 32751
Phone: 407-999-9999
Fax: 407-956-3820

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Freeman Injury Law
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design