Orlando accident lawyer

Published on: October 19, 2015

GHSA: Drugged Driving A Growing Problem on Nation’s Roads

A new report released by the Governors’ Highway Safety Association reveals that drug use by drivers is a significant and growing concern among traffic safety advocates.

This is particularly true as a growing number of states (23) have approved marijuana for medicinal use and four for recreational use, while others have significantly relaxed criminal sanctions against possession. Plus, the rates of prescription drug abuse has increased substantially, considering the number of painkillers dispensed nationally has quadrupled in just the last 16 years. Just from 2007 to 2014, the number of drivers who tested positive for marijuana or illegal drugs rose from 12.4 percent to 15.1 percent.

So while the incidence rate of drunk driving has declined significantly, the rate of drugged driving is climbing. In fact, the percentage of drivers killed in car accidents who tested positive for drugs is 40 percent. That’s about as many as tested positive for alcohol. And a recent annual roadside survey conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found 22 percent of drivers tested positive for at least one medication or drug. Continue reading →

Published on: October 11, 2015

Clifton v. McCammack – Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

By Dean Freeman

In Florida, it is possible to collect for negligent infliction of emotional distress following a car accident, but it is not as simple as suffering emotional harm. In order to collect compensation for such damages, plaintiff must suffer a discernible physical injury.

One of the exceptions noted is what other jurisdictions refer to as the “relative bystander test.” This requires the plaintiff to suffer a physical injury caused by the psychological trauma of witnessing, seeing or otherwise being involved in some way to the event causing negligent injury to another to whom plaintiff has a close personal relationship.

The case of Clifton v. McCammack recently dealt with the issue of negligent infliction of emotional distress under Indiana law. That state is one of those that refers to the exception as the “bystander rule.” There are three circumstantial factors that must be met in order for plaintiff to succeed in a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. One of those three factors is “direct involvement” in the incident. Continue reading →

Published on: September 8, 2015

Vanderbloom v. Vermont – Negligent Construction of a Highway

By Dean Freeman

Mistakes in road construction can result in serious injuries to drivers and others. These errors could include things like improper signage, requiring motorists to negotiate a turn that is too sharp or leaving a dangerous condition on the pavement.

The question of who may be held responsible for this depends on a host of factors, though it is possible in some cases to hold liable the construction company that did the work and/or the government agency that contracted the work.

However, the liability of the government is often heavily dependent on local law and the extent to which the doctrine of sovereign immunity is enforced in a particular state. Sovereign immunity shields government from liability unit agrees to be sued. Florida has a broader-than-most waiver of sovereign immunity, but that doesn’t mean cases will be easy. Continue reading →