Fisher and Talwar: Southern California Injury Blog

California's Proposed High-Speed Train & Its Effect on Property Owners

2012-01-27T10:22:00.000-08:00

The proposed California high-speed rail system is a huge endeavor, with plans to initially run track from San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim through the Central Valley, and later to Sacramento and San Diego. At speeds of up to 220 miles per hour, trains will be able to travel from LA to San Francisco in under 2 hours and 40 minutes. The California High-Speed Rail Authority is confident the train will bring significant economic, environmental, and community benefits to the State.

For people who own property in the path of the train, however, the project demands personal sacrifice for the benefit of all. Many California homeowners, business owners, and land owners will receive a notice from the government that their property may be subject to acquisition by the Rail Authority for construction of the rail system.

The government is able to initiate these acquisitions because the state and federal constitutions, as well as the California Eminent Domain Law and the state and federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, authorize the purchase of private property for public use. But in addition to allowing this action, the laws protect the rights of citizens whose property is being acquired.

If your property lies within the proposed train route, the Rail Authority will send a "Right of Way Agent" to perform an appraisal of your property. It is the duty of the Rail Authority to ensure that you receive fair market value for your property, which is the amount you would receive if you sold your property privately in the open market. California law provides that you must receive a copy of the appraisal or a summary of the valuation upon which the Rail Authority's purchase offer is based.

The acquisition of private property for public use is rarely a simple matter. There may be issues of partial purchases and loss of value to remaining property; costs of relocation; the ability to retain and move a home, business building, machinery, or equipment; payment of loans or liens; tax deferments; favorable tax status; and the list could go on and on. An experienced eminent domain attorney can help you navigate this complex terrain, ensuring that your rights are protected every step of the way.

Southern California Eminent Domain Attorneys

If your property may be subject to taking for public use, make sure you know your rights. In Southern California, contact the Los Angeles eminent domain attorneys at Fisher & Talwar at (213) 891-0777 for advice and representation in eminent domain and condemnation matters.

Potentially Contaminated Baby Formula Could Lead to Products Liability Lawsuits

2011-12-29T15:31:00.000-08:00

Yesterday and today, several news sources reported that a third baby has tested positive for Chronobacter, a bacterial infection that caused a Missouri baby's death in mid-December and prompted national retailers, including Wal-Mart, Walgreens, Kroger, and Safeway, to pull Enfamil baby formula from their shelves.

Chronobacter bacteria cause rare illnesses and infections in newborns that are considered extremely dangerous for babies less than one month old, with approximately 40 % of illnesses from the bacteria ending in death. Even when children survive the infection, they may have neurological problems, such developmental delays and seizures. The bacteria are found naturally in plants such as wheat and rice, and have been found in dried milk and powdered formulas in the past. According to an expert interviewed by Bloomberg News, the potential for the bacteria to infect infants from powdered formula has been known since the 1980s.

As reported by Huff Post Health News, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) is testing opened formula containers, both liquid and powdered, as well as distilled water used to feed the baby in Missouri. They are also testing closed bottles and cans from the lot collected from the family, the hospital, and the Wal-Mart store where the family bought its formula. Health authorities will look for links between the Missouri case, the most recent case, which involves a baby from Oklahoma, and a case reported in Illinois. Luckily, the Oklahoma and Illinois babies were treated successfully and are now recovering.

If experts conclude that the babies did contract the Chronobacter bacteria from baby formula, lawsuits against the parties responsible for distributing the formula are likely. Manufacturers, suppliers, and retailers have a duty to make sure their products are safe for use by the consuming public. Failure to ensure safety may give rise to products liability claims, which are a type of personal injury lawsuit that is meant to compensate victims of defective products in the marketplace.

While no connection between the affected babies and Enfamil formula has been found yet, as a preventative measure - against legal liability as well as harm to other infants - Wal-Mart is waiting for the government test results before returning the product to its shelves.

Contact the Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorneys at Fisher & Talwar

If you are concerned that your child has been harmed by a dangerous or defective product in the marketplace, immediately seek medical care, and contact personal injury lawyers Fisher & Talwar at (213) 891-0777 for legal assistance.

The Lasting Effects of Traumatic Brain Injury in Children

2011-10-31T09:42:00.000-07:00

In our August personal injury blog, we discussed the potentially long term consequences of serious spinal cord injuries, and the need to plan for future living costs, including housing, healthcare, and transportation. This month, we will talk about the lasting effects of traumatic brain injury. Specifically, a new study reported in US News found that children who suffered head injuries may face numerous problems throughout their lifetimes.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI), also known as intracranial injury, occurs when an external force injures the brain. It is a major cause of death and disability worldwide, especially in children and young adults. The new study, available in the November issue of Pediatrics magazine, focuses on lasting learning and behavioral deficits in children who had suffered head injuries. After testing a group of 729 children treated for TBI three months, one year, and two years after the injuries occurred, the researchers found significant residual effects of TBI, as compared to children who had suffered no injuries and children who had suffered arm injuries.

The majority of lasting deficits were found in children who sustained a mild injury with a brain hemorrhage and children who suffered moderate or severe brain injury. At the end of the two-year period, these children still had troubles in daily life activities, school activities, and sports. Alarmingly, the researchers also concluded that the most seriously injured children had a lower quality of life than children undergoing active treatment for cancer.
Thus, when a child suffers a head injury, it is extremely important to carefully observe and document unusual behaviors, such as:

Changes in mood or sleep patterns, including anxiety, depression, or irritability

Difficulty performing tasks where there was none before

Differences in sensory functions

Nausea and/or headaches

Orientation problems

Emotional control problems

Concentration or attention problems where there were none before

Contact the Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorneys at Fisher & Talwar

At the onset of any of the above signs and symptoms, immediate seek medical care, and contact Los Angeles Lawyers Fisher & Talwar at (213) 891-0777 for legal assistance.

The Importance of Life Care Plans in a Spinal Cord Injury Lawsuit

2011-08-31T13:01:00.000-07:00

The severity of a spinal cord injury depends upon where the trauma occurs; the higher up on the spine, the more severe disability will result. Injury to the nerve in the lower back (lumbar region) will likely cause some form of permanent paralysis in the legs (paraplegia) and loss of control of bowel and bladder and sexual activity. An injury to the vertebrae in the neck (cervical region) can cause paralysis of all four limbs (quadriplegia) as well as loss the ability to independently breathe without mechanical assistance.

Clearly, any spinal cord injury is serious, and a victim who is left paralyzed by the negligence or wrongful conduct of another is entitled to compensation for the present and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other damages this injury will create. But the spinal cord victim suffers more damages than most other personal injury victims, and often a life care plan is the best tool to communicate that fact to an insurance company or jury.

A life care planner looks at a person's diagnosis, prognosis, medical history, and known facts about the type of disability, and develops a comprehensive outline of the individual's needs for the future, including a cost estimate for each item. A life care plan is a comprehensive document that considers all facets of daily living, including:

Housing - will the individual live at home, in assisted living or a nursing facility? If at home, will there be home health care visits or a full-time caregiver? If a family member is the caregiver, respite care should be provided when the family member needs a break or has other duties. What modifications need to be made to make the home accessible?

Healthcare - planning for future routine doctor visits, labs and tests, as well as future procedures to fix pumps or implanted medical devices, or treat common complications, such as bedsores, urinary tract infections, fractures, or respiratory ailments.

Transportation and Mobility - will the individual utilize a manual or motorized wheelchair? A modified vehicle or accessible van?

Occupational - what assistive technology is necessary to allow the individual to work and/or achieve the maximum level of self-care and independence?

Not Just For Litigation

Of course, a life care plan may be useful for more reasons than just maximizing a financial recovery. In fact, settlement negotiations and litigation may not even be the most important reasons for a life care plan. A life care plan is like a roadmap created to help you navigate your life. You will be able to see the road ahead and know when to expect some bumps and how to avoid them or handle them appropriately.

A life care plan may not be necessary in every case. Talk to the physician in charge of your recovery, and visit with your lawyer about how best to maximize your recovery. In Los Angeles and Southern California, contact the personal injury lawyers at Fisher & Talwar.

Truck Versus Train Crash on Nevada Highway

2011-06-30T15:20:00.000-07:00

On June 24th, the Amtrak California Zephyr was traveling from Chicago, Illinois to Emeryville, California north of Oakland when it collided with a semi-truck on Interstate 95 in Nevada, about 70 miles east of Reno. The driver of the truck was killed, as were six passengers on the train. Dozens more were injured, and as of the time of this posting, many are still unaccounted for.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has begun its investigation into the cause of the crash. Meanwhile, a personal injury lawsuit has already been filed in the case. An Amtrak attendant is suing the driver and the trucking company for negligence. The plaintiff in the case has already obtained a court order in an effort to preserve evidence from the crash. Why is such an order necessary?

Trucking Company Logs and Records

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) issues rules and regulations that cover truck drivers, the trucks themselves, and the trucking companies. These regulations dictate the hours behind the wheel for truckers and mandate periodic inspections of tires, brakes, and other critical components.

The regulations require truck drivers and trucking companies to maintain log books showing compliance. By obtaining these log books, the NTSB, or a plaintiff's attorney, can determine whether the driver was logging in too many hours, and whether the truck was properly inspected and maintained. An important piece of evidence, log books may sometimes be lost or destroyed in the accident, either accidentally or intentionally. A forensic analysis may even be necessary to determine if they have been doctored after the fact. The plaintiff's protective order should help preserve such evidence.

Other lawsuits may follow from those injured and the family members of those who were killed. As you can see, taking swift legal action is important to protecting your rights and preserving crucial evidence after a crash. If you or a loved one has been involved in a train accident, contact Los Angeles Lawyers Fisher & Talwar at (213) 891-0777 for immediate assistance.

Fatal Crash Raises Questions as to Cause or Causes

2011-04-29T11:20:00.000-07:00

A recent tragedy in Los Angeles raises many points that show how complicated a personal injury or wrongful death case can be.

On April 26^th, a woman died as the Volkswagen Tiguan she was driving went off the fourth story of a West Los Angeles parking garage. The vehicle landed upside down, causing the roof to cave in. The woman was pronounced dead at the scene.

At this point, it is not clear what happened to cause this accident. Indeed, many factors may be involved, and we may never know all the details of what happened.

Vehicle Defect?

It is possible that some component of the vehicle failed. It may have slipped into gear, the accelerator may have stuck, the brakes may have failed. Even if none of these things occurred, there is the question of the roof crush. SUVs and other vehicles with a high center of gravity should especially have reinforced roofs in the event they rollover in an accident. Was the roof properly designed in this case? It is possible that it was, and that vehicle roofs are simply not designed to withstand the forces of a four-story fall. Accident experts and engineers may be required to answer that question.

Construction Defect?

Another question surrounds the construction of the parking garage itself. The garage had concrete barriers in place to prevent a car from going over the edge. The barrier in this case failed; it was simply pushed out by the force of the car. The barrier appears to have been connected only to the floor of the garage, so that it swung out and down as if on a hinge, allowing the car to sail over the edge.

Did the barrier's failure reveal a construction defect? One would expect the barrier to be built to withstand most impacts that could foreseeably occur in a parking garage environment. The failure of the barrier could be due to a design defect or it could have been installed improperly or with substandard materials. It is also possible that the barrier was built to acceptable standards and that the acceleration of the vehicle in this particular accident was simply too powerful.

Driver Error?

Some may point to driver error as the likely cause, and that may certainly be the case. The woman's foot may have slipped or she may have had a health emergency that caused her to lose control of the vehicle. But questions about the vehicle's safety and the garage construction remain. Was the Tiguan's roof properly designed and constructed, and what about the barrier? Perhaps this deadly tragedy could only have been a minor accident had other measures been in place.

In California, an injured driver (or the family in a wrongful death action) can recover damages against negligent defendants, even where the injured driver contributed to the accident. A jury decides how much each party is responsible, and defendants who are found negligent are liable for that portion of the damages their negligence caused.

At times of tragedy nobody wants to consider issues like fault and blame and lawsuits. Yet sadly this is also the time when a thorough investigation is most likely to collect and preserve the evidence needed to hold those accountable who contributed to the catastrophe. If a design or manufacturing defect is to blame, legal action is often the fastest and most effective way to change corporate policy and make sure the same tragedy does not befall another individual or family.

Our hearts go out to the families of people who have lost their lives in automobile accidents or due to dangerous, unsafe products and construction. If you find yourself in such a situation and require legal assistance, please contact Fisher & Talwar for a consultation.

Federal Safety Standards No Safe Haven for Automakers

2011-02-28T15:48:00.000-08:00

Just because an automaker meets federal safety standards may not absolve it from liability in a crash, when implementing safer features may have prevented a serious personal injury or wrongful death. Such is the message seemingly delivered by the United States Supreme Court in a February 23^rd ruling in the case of Williamson et al. v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc., et al.

This case involved a lawsuit brought in California state court by the family and estate of a woman who died in an auto accident. The woman was riding in the rear aisle seat of a Mazda minivan equipped only with a lap belt instead of a lap-and-shoulder belt. The woman suffered fatal internal injuries, which ostensibly would not have occurred had the seat been equipped with a lap-and-shoulder belt.

The relevant Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (the “Standard”) at the time the minivan was manufactured required auto manufacturers to install seatbelts on the rear seats of passenger vehicles, but left it up to the automaker to decide whether to use simple lap belts or the more-expensive lap-and-shoulder belts on rear inner seats such as the one involved in the present case.

The state trial court dismissed the case on the pleadings, and the state court of appeal affirmed that dismissal, relying on an earlier Supreme Court ruling which held that a safety standard requiring installation of passive restraint devices preempted a state tort suit against a carmaker who installed seat belts instead of airbags. In this case, however, the Supreme Court held that the current Standard does not preempt state tort suits claiming that manufacturers should have installed lap-and-shoulder belts instead of lap belts only.

The difference in the two Supreme Court rulings is that in the first instance, the Standard gave carmakers a choice between seat belts and airbags for many reasons, including allowing time for airbag technology to improve and overcome public concerns about airbag safety. The current Standard allowed a choice based solely on cost-effectiveness. Although that choice existed, the High Court would not let an automaker's decision to cut costs stand in the way of lawsuit when its choice resulted in a passenger's death.

This decision will allow the case against Mazda to proceed in state court. Moreover, it should cause all automakers to think twice when choosing cost over safety and human life in its business decisions. Thanks for reading our blog. If you have been injured in an accident and suspect the vehicle did not adequately protect you, or if you think a dangerous or defective part of the vehicle caused or contributed to your injuries, contact Fisher & Talwar.

Letter to Santa, Copy to Consumer Product Safety Commission

2010-12-30T12:21:00.000-08:00

Whether shopping for your kids or watching them open presents from friends and relatives, it is a good idea to keep one eye on your child and the other eye on a list of recalled toys. The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) maintains just such a list here (be forewarned: the list is distressingly long). At least 44 toys were recalled in 2010, adding to the ever-growing list of dangerous products.

A recent report by the CPSC reveals that while the numbers of fatalities and overall recalls have been declining, the total number of injuries has been on the rise. In 2009 alone, toy-related incidents involving children under the age of 15 led to 186,000 visits to the emergency room. Frequent toy-related injuries include lacerations to the face and head, suffocation, and dangers from chewing on or swallowing toys, ranging from intestinal problems to serious illnesses from ingesting harmful chemicals. Tragically, 2009 also saw a dozen deaths related to toy safety.

Many helpful toy safety tips can be found at the website of the CPSC, which is a federal agency charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious personal injury or death from consumer products. But the resources of the CPSC are limited, and they cannot possibly monitor every product on the market. Often, items come to their attention only after several injuries have been reported.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to produce toys that are safe for their intended purpose as well as any reasonably foreseeable uses. In addition to making sure products are free from both design defects and manufacturing defects, product makers have a duty to include adequate instructions and safety warnings on their products and packaging. This duty is especially important in the toy industry where the product is likely to end up in the hands of children. Manufacturers who ignore these duties may be liable to the consumer for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other damages caused.

If your child has been injured by a dangerous toy or other consumer product, it is important to consult with an attorney who concentrates in the areas of personal injury and products liability. In Los Angeles and Southern California, contact Fisher & Talwar to seek compensation for your child's injuries and to hold the responsible party accountable for its negligence.

Recent Los Angeles Accident Sparks Demands For Safer School Buses

2010-10-29T14:53:00.000-07:00

On Monday, October 25, a Los Angeles Unified School District bus was transporting 46 students through Boyle Heights en route to Roosevelt High School when a car ran a red light, struck and killed a pedestrian, and broadsided the bus. The bus flipped on its side and skidded into a nearby Metro station plaza. While many of the students were injured after being thrown from their seats, no passengers sustained serious injuries. According to a L.A. Times report, some students were hospitalized Monday night, but were back on the bus to school the following morning.

Less fortunate was the pedestrian, a 70 year old man who was in the crosswalk when hit by the speeding vehicle. A grandfather of three walking home from a local store, Eduardo Gayton was critically injured and pronounced dead at the scene. The 17 year-old driver of the BMW was arrested at the scene after attempting to flee, and is likely to face felony hit-and-run and even manslaughter charges.

Police are investigating whether the driver and the two other passengers, also teenagers, were under the influence when the accident took place. The driver and one passenger, also arrested at the scene, are currently in custody at the Los Angeles County Juvenile Hall. One of the minors has been identified as a Roosevelt High School student, but authorities are withholding their names due to their ages.

Upon discovering that the bus carrying the students was not equipped with seat restraints, many of the accident victims' parents are outraged at the poor condition of the city's bus fleet. California law requires all school buses built to carry more than 16 passengers to be equipped with three-point seat belts, but this regulation applies only to buses built on or after July 1, 2005. The bus involved in the accident was built just months prior and is not subject to the requirement. A recent study indicates that California has among the oldest fleets in the nation, with the average school bus being 17 years old.

While school officials pointed to the lack of serious injury in this incident to attest the general safety of even seatbelt-free buses, many parents remain displeased with the current bus conditions and have demanded new buses. Consequently, the L.A. school district will be purchasing over 250 new buses that meet the 2005 seat belt requirement, retiring older models as each new bus is acquired.

If you are the victim of a bus accident caused by unsafe conditions or poor maintenance, contact the experienced personal injury attorneys at Fisher & Talwar to determine your legal rights and the optimal course of action.

Costs for Motor Vehicle Crash Injuries Reach $99 Billion Each Year

2010-08-31T15:21:00.000-07:00

A recent study in the Traffic Injury Prevention journal found that the costs of motor vehicle-related fatal and nonfatal injuries in 2005 were $99 billion. This is a total annual cost of nearly $500 for each licensed driver in the U.S. and does not include the costs of vehicle or property damage involved. Motor vehicle occupant injuries (both fatal and nonfatal) accounted for nearly $70 billion of these costs, motorcyclist injuries accounted for about $12 billion, pedestrian injuries $10 billion, and pedalcyclist injuries accounted for about $5 billion.

Although motorcyclists account for 12 percent of the total costs of all U.S. motor vehicle accidents, they only account for six percent of total injuries and fatalities. This is likely due to the fact that motorcycles are unprotected in nature and thus accidents involving motorcyclists generally result in more severe (and costly) injuries. Similarly, accidents involving pedestrians, who have no protection when hit by a motor vehicle, accounted for merely 5 percent of all injuries, but double the percentage of overall costs.

U.S. Crash Statistics
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) analyzed the costs of motor vehicle accident injuries and fatalities by breaking down crash statistics into costs associated by age group and gender. By doing so, they hoped to discover which groups needed to be targeted for increased safety measures. They found that men are more likely to be killed or injured in motor vehicle accidents: men account for 70 percent of motor vehicle accident-related deaths and 52 percent of injuries. At 28 percent, teens and young adults also made up a large percentage of the overall number of motor vehicle accidents, despite the fact that they only make up 14 percent of the U.S. population. The CDC's study showed the following annual accident costs by age group:

Children (ages 0 to 14): $7 billion

Teens (ages 15 – 19): $14 billion

Young Adults (ages 20 to 24): $17 billion

Adults (ages 25 to 65): $58 billion

Older Adults (ages 65+): $3 billion

The Insurance Journal discussed these alarming statistics with Dr. Grant Baldwin, director of the CDC's Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. According to the Dr. Baldwin, a person in the U.S. seeks emergency treatment for injuries resulting from motor vehicle accidents every 10 seconds, and nearly 40,000 people die from these injuries each year. Currently the ninth leading cause of death worldwide, road traffic injuries are expected to surpass diabetes, HIV/AIDS, and heart disease by becoming the fifth leading cause of death by 2030. "This study highlights the magnitude of the problem of crash-related injuries from a cost perspective, and the numbers are staggering," says Dr. Baldwin.

How U.S. Crash Statistics Compare to Other Countries
In 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a report examining incidents of road traffic injuries and improvements in road safety since 1980 in 178 countries. Although there have been significant decreases in the number of accidents and traffic deaths, the U.S. appears to be lagging far behind other countries. In some European countries, the death rate in motor vehicle accidents has decreased by about 60 percent. However, the U.S. has only been able to reduce traffic-related death by about 35 percent. The WHO study suggests that this may be due in part to Europe's stricter laws, including seatbelt laws that cover all seating positions, DUI laws involving a 0.05 blood alcohol content (BAC) instead of 0.08, and motorcycle helmet laws covering all riders.

Measures for Reducing Traffic Injuries
At the conclusion of the study, the CDC found that the economic and societal costs associated with motor vehicle injuries and deaths reinforced the need for cost-effective strategies to be implemented in the U.S. The CDC's Injury Prevention and Control center, which focuses on injury prevention and motor vehicle safety, recommends increasing seat belt use, increasing child safety-seat use, increasing motorcyclist and pedalcyclist helmet use, and decreasing alcohol-impaired driving to help at-risk groups, including child passengers, teen drivers, and older adult drivers.

Despite the CDC's investigation into traffic accident causes and subsequent recommendations to increase traffic safety, accidents involving cars, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, and pedestrians still occur at alarming rates. If you have been injured in a motor vehicle accident that may have been caused by another party's negligence or recklessness, you may be able to recover compensation for the harm you have suffered. To discuss your case with an experienced personal injury lawyer, contact at Fisher & Talwar today or call us at (213) 891-0777.

Drunk Driver Strikes USC Students in Crosswalk

2010-06-09T09:40:00.001-07:00

A couple accused of a 2009 hit-and-run collision that caused great bodily injury to one University of Southern California student and killed another was sentenced to prison recently. Claudia Cabrera and her husband Jose Luna, were sentenced to eight and seven years respectively in state prison for felony hit-and-run and misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter.

According to prosecutors, Ms. Cabrera was driving with a suspended license when she ran a red light and struck the two students, Marcus Garfinkle and Adrianna Bachan. The victims were in a crosswalk at the time. After striking the students, Ms. Cabrera continued to drive another 400 feet with Mr. Garfinkle trapped inside the broken windshield. According to a witness, the couple pulled over so Mr. Luna could yank the victim from the car window and leave him on the sidewalk. The couple then fled the scene, partly, according to prosecutors, because Ms. Cabrera had been drinking at a party prior to the accident. Prosecutors also claimed that the couple tried to cover up the accident by repairing the windshield and towing the car to Tijuana, Mexico. Superior Court Judge Robert J. Perry called their actions "outrageous and shocking."

Mr. Garfinkle suffered serious injuries from the accident, including broken leg bones and extensive bleeding from his stomach. Ms. Bachan suffered massive head injuries and severe traumatic brain injury which resulted in her death.

As of yet, there is no word as to whether Mr. Garfinkle will sue for personal injury or if Ms. Bachan’s family will file a wrongful death claim. Under California law, every person is responsible for his or her willful acts and for injuries or deaths caused by the result of his or her lack of ordinary care. If a person breaches his or her duty to act as a reasonable person would, such as by drinking and driving or running a red light, and that causes injury or death, the person can be held liable for the harm caused.

Generally, there are two types of damages that may be recovered in both wrongful death and personal injury cases: economic and noneconomic damages. In a personal injury case, the injured party, which in this case would be Mr. Garfinkle, may be able to recover economic damages for medical bills, lost wages, loss of future earning capacity, and other costs that are the result of the accident. He may be able to recover non-economic damages for his pain and suffering or mental anguish. In this case, Mr. Garfinkle told the court while weeping that he would, "never forget waking up on the side of the street, covered in blood…" From this testimony it seems clear that Mr. Garfinkle's mental anguish caused by the accident was quite significant.

Ms. Bachan's family may also have a cause of action for the wrongful death of their daughter. Under California law, there are certain parties that can bring a wrongful death action, including the victim's surviving spouse, domestic partner, children, or issue of deceased children, or if none, the victim's heir by intestate succession. In this case, it is likely that Ms. Bachan's parents would be the ones to sue for wrongful death. If so, they may be able to recover economic damages, including funeral and burial expenses, and non-economic damages, including the loss of their daughter's love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, and moral support.

If you have been injured or lost a loved one in a pedestrian or motor vehicle accident, it is important to seek immediate medical attention from a well-qualified physician and preserve any evidence to help protect your rights. Even if the negligent parties have been criminally prosecuted, you may you may be able to recover monetary compensation for your harm through a personal injury or wrongful death action. Contact the experienced personal injury lawyers at Fisher & Talwar today to learn more about how we may be able to help you.

In Los Angeles, Combating Hit-and-Run Accidents That Leave Injured Cyclists

2010-02-23T14:52:00.000-08:00

Los Angeles cyclists are calling for stricter hit-and-run laws for cars that collide with bicycles, according to KPCC. In 2008, there were 10 fatal bike-related injuries and 97 serious injuries requiring hospitalization in Los Angeles.

Although law enforcement budget cuts have made investigation of hit-and-run accidents difficult, the LAPD is considering setting up a website to allow cyclists to report traditionally non-reportable incidents. These reports would have the potential to prompt an LAPD investigation.

Police are also working with bike advocates to put together a list of the top 10 locations in the city where the most hit-and-run accidents occur. Supposedly, LAPD officers will receive special training on how to handle hit-and-runs between cars and bikes. The LAPD also says it will help spread awareness among the cycling community about cyclists’ rights.

Collisions between cars and bikes happen easily in Southern California, especially since drivers do not always anticipate cyclists, and often do not see them. Injuries from these accidents have to potential to be severe, due to the difference in size, weight, and speed between a car and bicycle. Despite the availability of helmets and protective padding, a cyclist may fare even worse than a pedestrian in a collision with an automobile, because the speed of the bicycle is added to the speed of the car in measuring the force of the impact.

Drivers and cyclists alike owe a duty of care to everyone with whom they share the road. If a driver or cyclist breaches the duty of care and causes injury to someone else on the road, he or she can be held liable for damages, including compensation for medical bills, pain and suffering, and lost wages.

Cyclists are subject to the same traffic laws and rules of the road as drivers of cars and motorcycles. Given their vulnerability, cyclists should be especially careful when riding near cars. They should ride predictably, such as by clearly signaling an intention to turn well ahead of time. Nevertheless, a cyclist who is negligent in causing an accident, or who incurs more serious injuries by not wearing a helmet or other safety gear, can still recover a portion of damages from a driver whose negligence caused or contributed to the accident.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a car or bicycle accident, seek advice from experienced personal injury lawyers. In Southern California, contact the law firm of Fisher & Talwar for immediate assistance.

Safety of Toyota Vehicles Comes Into Question

2010-02-05T10:48:00.000-08:00

The United States government will begin an inquiry into allegations of braking problems in the 2010 model of Toyota’s popular Prius hybrid vehicle, according to the New York Times. This news comes just days after a large recall of other Toyota models was announced. The recall, which affects a number of models including the very popular Camry, is aimed at correcting an acceleration problem that has been described alternately as both a “sticking accelerator pedal” and a “surging acceleration problem.” Several recent tragic deaths have been blamed on Toyota vehicles (including Lexus models) that spontaneously accelerate and are difficult or impossible to slow down before causing a collision.

There has been some concern that Toyota did not act quickly enough to warn drivers and make arrangements for correcting the accelerator problem. Now, with the possibility of another significant safety problem, the braking system in the Prius – loyal Toyota customers and the public at large seem to be wondering what has gone wrong with a company previously world-renowned for safety, reliability, and quality.

Manufacturers of products have a duty to make sure that their products are safe for use. When someone is harmed by a defective product, he or she can bring a products liability lawsuit against the manufacturer. Monetary damages may be recoverable for physical injuries, emotional distress, and associated economic losses, such as medical bills and lost wages. In some cases, a victim may be able to recover punitive damages, if the manufacturer acted with complete disregard for the safety of consumers.

Products liability claims can be made in several ways, including on the basis of design defects, manufacturing defects, or failure to warn. A design defect means that there is some inherent flaw in the design of a product that makes it dangerously defective. With a design defect, every product manufactured according to that design is similarly flawed and, therefore, similarly defectively dangerous. Generally, if the foreseeable risk of harm exceeds the benefits of the design, the product is defectively designed. Manufacturing defects occur when there is some error or mistake made during the manufacturing process that causes one of the products or one batch of the products to be dangerously defective.

Manufacturers have a duty to warn consumers of foreseeable, non-obvious risks associated with the use (or foreseeable misuse) of a product. Not only must products contain a warning about these risks, but the warning must be adequate and in some cases must include instructions for safe use. Where a manufacturer or supplier fails to provide adequate warnings or instructions, an injured consumer can bring a products liability claim to recover money damages for his or her injuries and pain and suffering, as well as resulting economic losses.

Products liability claims can help restore the rights of victims of defective products. These lawsuits can also force manufacturers to improve the safety of their products over time. If you or a loved one has been injured in a motor vehicle accident, contact Fisher & Talwar for immediate assistance.

California Highway Patrol Has a Zero-Tolerance Stance on Drivers Who Do Not Use Hands Free Devices

2009-09-08T11:51:00.000-07:00

California passed recent laws regarding using wireless communication devices while driving. Effective July 1, 2008, California prohibited all drivers from using a handheld wireless phone while driving a motor vehicle, but permitted drivers ages 18 and over to use a hands-free device (California Vehicle Code Section 23123). A second law that became effective around the same time prohibited drivers under the age of 18 from using a wireless phone or hands-free device while driving (Vehicle Code Section 23124).

Effective January 1, 2009, a new California law makes it an infraction for drivers to write, send, or read text messages on an electronic wireless communications device, such as a cell phone, during the operation of the vehicle. However, in the event of an emergency, drivers are permitted to use a cell phone or wireless telephone to make emergency calls to law enforcement, fire department, or other emergency services department.

Penalties
The first violation of the wireless device or no-texting laws will result in a twenty dollar fine. Subsequent offenses will result in a fine of fifty dollars, plus fees.

California Highway Patrol's Zero-Tolerance Campaign
According to the California Highway Patrol (CHP), five people died and 115 were injured as a result of driving while using handheld phones from July to October 2008. The CHP also states that 261 accidents were connected to drivers holding a cell phone during that same period. As a result, the CHP has announced that it will begin a zero-tolerance enforcement campaign of drivers who continue to text or use their cell phones without a hands-free device.

The CHP is hoping that by enacting such a campaign, people will be more willing to comply with these recent regulations. The CHP also hopes that with greater compliance, the risk and number of motor vehicle accidents and injuries will be reduced.

Causes of Automobile Accidents
One of the main causes of car or motor vehicle accidents is the carelessness or negligence of the driver. The types of negligent conduct that can potentially cause serious automobile injuries and fatalities include:

Inattentiveness of the driver
Using cell phones without hands-free devices or texting
Driving too fast or slowly
Failure to follow traffic rules, signs, and signals

Another significant cause of auto accident injuries is intoxicated drivers. When drivers are under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, their ability to drive with the judgment and motor skills of a sober driver are impaired considerably and serious accidents can result.

If you or someone you love has been involved in an automobile accident resulting in serious injuries or death, contact the experienced personal injury attorneys of Fisher & Talwar for assistance.

Will Bankruptcies Wipe Out Personal Injury Lawsuits Against GM and Chrysler?

2009-08-14T09:19:00.000-07:00

Two of America's "Big Three" automakers have entered into and emerged from bankruptcy this summer. The Federal government played a strong hand in the proceedings, and both companies emerge indebted to, or in part owned by, the United States. The impact of these reorganizations on pending and future personal injury lawsuits is profound and perhaps not yet fully understood.

Companies emerge from Chapter 11 reorganizations as essentially new companies. Claims pending against the "old" companies at the time of the bankruptcy filing, such as personal injury lawsuits, are dealt with by the bankruptcy court, usually by being discharged, in which case the lawsuit simply goes away.

In our dual state/federal system, Congress has the power to "occupy the field" and preempt state court lawsuits when enacting legislation in certain areas. Bankruptcy is one such area, since the U.S. Constitution gives Congress authority over bankruptcy legislation. The general rule favors bankruptcy preemption of lawsuits, with an exception for suits begun in state court that are not based on federal law or of a core bankruptcy character.

Some types of lawsuits and damages are specifically allowed by statute. For instance, punitive damages are dischargeable in bankruptcy, unless they are based on willful and malicious injury. Similarly, a judgment against a doctor based on misrepresentation about the need for a medical procedure is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Hundreds of personal injury claims against the two car giants were pending at the time of the bankruptcy filings. While the dismissal of these claims might be expected as typical of a bankruptcy proceeding, the effect of the bankruptcy on future injuries that have not yet occurred is also in question.

General Motors will remain liable for future accidents involving cars built before the company filed for bankruptcy. Such an arrangement was not made in the case of Chrysler, however. Those cars were built by the "old" company for which the "new Chrysler" will not be responsible. A bill recently introduced into Congress (H.R. 3088) would hold both automakers subject to suit in such situations by requiring the companies to buy products liability insurance up to $200,000 per claim. This bill was introduced on June 26th and has been referred to the committee on financial services.

Clouding the issue further is the fact that both companies agreed in their reorganization plans to honor "Lemon Law" claims made before the companies restructured. These laws generally allow consumers to trade in vehicles that require an unreasonable number of repairs due to faulty construction, but they do not provide any protection for injuries sustained by a motor vehicle.

As you can see, the laws surrounding motor vehicle accidents can get quite complex. Having an experienced attorney qualified to see your case through the myriad of legal complications that arise is essential to protecting your rights. If you or a loved one has been injured in a motor vehicle accident, contact Fisher & Talwar for immediate assistance.

Fatal La Cañada Truck Crash

2009-05-08T08:55:00.001-07:00

On April 1, 2009, a double-decker, car-hauling truck crashed into a passenger vehicle, killing its two occupants, 58-year-old Angel Jorge Posca and his 12-year-old daughter, Angelina, who both died at the scene.

The truck was driven by Marcos Costa, who ignored signs along the twisting lanes of California's Angeles Forest Highway, which prohibited trucks from being driven along that route. Costa proceeded to drive his truck onto Angeles Crest Highway, and when he reached La Cañada Flintridge, his brakes started to fail. The truck, as it sped downward, struck Posca's car, slammed into five additional vehicles, and finally crashed into the Flintridge Bookstore at the intersection of Angeles Crest Highway and Foothill Boulevard. In addition to the two fatalities, 12 people were injured as a result of the tragic accident.

Unfortunately, just seven months before this tragedy, on September 5, 2008, a semi-truck, traveling through the same intersection, and carrying 78,000 pounds of onions, crashed into seven cars when its brakes failed. One person suffered a minor injury.

Signs of Possible Danger

About ten years ago, Caltrans, California's highway agency, closed a runaway-truck escape route that was installed along the final downward descent into La Cañada. The purpose of the escape route was to prevent accidents in the event of an emergency.

After the September 5th accident, city officials asked Caltrans to post signs warning truck drivers about the steep descent into La Cañada along Angeles Crest Highway. City officials also wanted the escape route to be reinstalled, but Caltrans did not fulfill either request before the April 1st accident. Before these incidents, city officials had also asked the California Department of Transportation to prohibit trucks on Angeles Crest Highway, but their requests were ignored.

After the April 1st Tragedy

Caltrans imposed a 90-day ban on five-axle trucks along Angeles Crest Highway, between the Angeles Forest Highway and 210 Freeway after the April 1st incident. Additionally, overcoming the first legislative obstacle, the Assembly Transportation Committee voted 14 to zero on April 27th in favor of Assembly Bill 1361, which would ban trucks along Angles Crest Highway, located between Big Pines Highway and the 210 Freeway in La Cañada Flintridge. Those in violation would be fined a minimum of $1,000.

Truck Accident Statistics

Since trucks generally weigh on average about 80,000 pounds, compared to a regular car weighing 3,000 pounds, truck accidents can cause serious, catastrophic injuries. According to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), in 2007 in California, there were approximately 325 fatal crashes involving large trucks. The FMCSA also reports that of the 41,059 people who died in motor vehicle crashes in 2007 in the United States, about 4,808 people died in crashes involving a large truck, and 101,000 people were injured in crashes involving large trucks.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (Title 49, Parts 350-399 & 658) governs commercial vehicles that are engaged in interstate travel, such as requiring drivers and their companies to keep logbooks, and limiting the length of time truck drivers can be on the road. These regulations also have weight limitation rules on the maximum gross weight of commercial vehicles and their axles.

Truck accident cases can be complex, involving a wide variety of state and federal rules. Thus, finding qualified, experienced legal representation for truck accident cases is essential. If you or someone you love has been involved in a truck accident, seek experienced legal representation. Contact Fisher & Talwar for immediate help and assistance.

Bus Accidents Increasingly Common in California

2009-04-27T09:49:00.001-07:00

Millions of people ride buses each day. Bus passengers include children on school buses, commuters going to work, or people on vacation. Unfortunately, there were more than 13,000 buses involved in crashes nationwide in 2007, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. Among those buses, 6,953 were involved crashes that resulted in injuries. There were also 1,332 buses involved in accidents in California in 2007. The state has seen a considerable increase in the number of bus accidents in recent years, since there were less than 400 buses involved in accidents as recently as 2003.

Charter Bus Involved in Major Accident

Recently, several bus crashes involving buses traveling to casinos have occurred in California. On October 5, 2008, a charter bus on its way to Colusa Casino Resort, an Indian casino, flipped over and rolled to the side of the road into a ditch. Eight people were killed and 35 others were injured in the accident. The crash occurred on a two lane road north of Sacramento. The driver of the bus was arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. It was also reported that the driver had a history of substance abuse. Prior to the crash, witnesses said the driver was driving erratically. Furthermore, witnesses report that the driver overcorrected three times as the bus drifted into opposing traffic, right before the crash. Another potential contributing factor to the accident is the maintenance and safety of the bus; the bus had invalid Texas plates and other registration serial numbers were also invalid.

In May of 2008, a charter bus headed to Laughlin, Nevada overturned, killing one person and injuring 22. Overall, eight serious crashes involving buses taking people to casinos have occurred in California in the last three years.

Typical Causes of Bus Accidents

Bus accidents are often avoidable since they are often caused by:

Defective emergency exits
Driver error or fatigue
Improperly trained or inexperienced driver
Driver under the influence of drugs or alcohol
Driver with a history of dangerous or reckless driving
Inadequate security
Negligence
Dangerous roadways
Defective products
Improper maintenance

Injuries and Recovery for a Victim of a Bus Accident

Survivors of bus accidents may suffer from a variety of injuries, some of which may be long lasting or even life threatening. Possible injuries include:

Whiplash
Back injury
Concussions and other head injuries
Brain trauma
Fractures, sprains, and abrasions
Knee damage
Burn injuries
Internal and soft tissue injuries
Spinal cord injuries

Bus passengers are owed a higher standard of care since bus companies are considered common carriers. Passengers are owed a duty by the bus company and driver, both of whom both may be negligent if they do not use the necessary care and cause an injury to a passenger.

Thanks for reading our blog. If you have a comment or question, please do not hesitate to reply to this posting, but keep in mind that your response will not be confidential. You can also send us an e-mail. If you or a loved one have been involved in a bus accident, it is important that you act quickly to seek medical attention from a well qualified physician, and to preserve evidence and protect your rights. Please feel free to contact us to schedule a confidential consultation and for immediate assistance.

Recent Wave of Metrolink Train Accidents in Southern California

2008-12-12T11:06:00.000-08:00

More than 9,000 train accidents or incidents occurred nationwide in 2007, according to the Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis. California accounted for more than 500 fatal and non-fatal casualties in 2007. Also, in terms of use of the rail system in the Southern California area, Metrolink’s ridership has increased by about 60% over the past five years. With more trains in operation to accommodate the increase in riders, the possibility train accidents (such as derailments or collisions) involving passenger trains rises.

Recent Southern California Train Accidents
There have been several recent train accidents in Southern California. On November 20, 2008, a Metrolink train struck an oncoming freight train in Rialto when it failed to stop for a red light. Five passengers were injured in the crash. An investigation continues as to the cause of the crash, which maybe attributed to faulty signal lights or train brakes.

On September 19, 2008, in downtown Los Angeles, a Metrolink Blue line train crashed into a bus. Approximately 14 people, including the bus driver, were injured in the accident. The cause of this incident is also being investigated, and it has yet to be determined whether the train or the bus had the right of way.

In Chatsworth, California, a Metrolink train collided head on with a freight train on September 12, 2008. Among the casualties, there were 25 killed and approximately 135 injured. This accident is considered the worst Southern California train crash in the past 50 years. The cause of this crash also is under investigation, although a preliminary investigation determined that the Metrolink train failed to stop for a red light signal. Cell phone records of the Metrolink engineer indicate that he was text-messaging within minutes of the crash and may have been distracted.

Common Injuries Resulting from Train Accidents
Train accidents are oftentimes traumatic events for the victims. Individuals will often endure such debilitating or life threatening injuries as:

Severe crush injuries
Concussions and other head injuries
Fractures, sprains, and abrasions
Brain trauma
Spinal cord injuries
Burn injuries
Internal and soft tissue injuries.

Recovery for Persons Injured in Train Accidents
Damages are usually determined based on a victim’s lost future wages, medical costs, dependent care costs, state of health at the time of the accident, physical pain, and mental anguish. Recovery under these categories could be limited by a 1997 U.S. law that caps damage claims in railroad accidents at $200 million. This law limits the recovery for the total allowable award to all rail passengers, from a single passenger rail accident, to no more than $200 million. The law covers all rail carriers and the total amount includes punitive damages. To date, this law has not affected any recovery for victims. However, this law could affect recovery for future accidents, such as those having a large number of victims.

Thanks for reading our blog. If you have a comment or question, please do not hesitate to reply to this posting, but keep in mind that your response will not be confidential. You can also send us an e-mail. If you or a loved one have been involved in a train accident, it is important that you act quickly to seek medical attention from a well qualified physician, and to preserve evidence and protect your rights. Please feel free to contact us for immediate assistance and to schedule a confidential consultation.