Alabama Personal Injury Blog - Automobile Accidents - Most Popular

Tragic early morning Thanksgiving car accident

Staff Writer — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:34:00 GMT

An early morning single-car accident on Thanksgiving left one teen dead and one in critical condition, a report from the associated press said.

The 17-year-old boy driving the car died at the scene, while the other three passengers lived. The 17-year-old male passenger was in critical condition at hte University of South Alabama Medical Center, and the other two passengers, a 15-year-old girl and a 16-year-old girl, were treated for minor injuries.

The fatal accident occured on Old Pascagoula Road. Alabama State Troopers report that alcohol may have been a factor in the 1997 Nissan Maxima running off the road and overturning.

"Alcohol was involved," Piggott said. "There was evidence at the scene that led the trooper to the conclusion that alcohol was involved, and that's what my report shows."

It is not yet known whether the driver or passengers were wearing seat belts.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Staff Writer

Homicides Predict Traffic Deaths

Jon Lewis — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:42:37 GMT

Do State Homicide rates predict traffic fatalities? According to a University of Michigan study, they do. The study found that there was a parallel with the number of homicides and the number of traffic deaths. What seems to be the reason for this? Aggression.

The study looked at ten factors and "found that seven of them accounted for 71 percent of the variance in traffic fatality rates." Those seven are "homicide rates, proportion of male drivers, proportion of older drivers, number of alcohol-related liver failures (as a proxy for intoxicated driving), density of physicians, seat-belt use rate, and income." Apparently, the strongest predictor of these seven are homicides because homicides relate to aggression which relates to aggressive driving.

What does this teach us? We need to respect others on the roadways. We can't be in a hurry all of the time. We cannot drive while we are doing several other things: texting, playing with the radio, putting on makeup, using the telephone, changing CD's, and having too much noise and distractions in the car. We need to realize that we share the road with others, and we need to understand that different people have different driving styles just as different people have different psychological makeups.

During this holiday season, think before you act. Take a few miles per hour off your speedometer. Leave a little early for that appointment or meeting so you aren't in a rush. Be more passive on the roadways, and maybe you will save a life.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Alabama Guest Statute Opinion

Michael Roberts — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:56:12 GMT

A decision released recently by the Alabama Supreme Court, Phillips v. United Services Automobile Assoc., held there was no evidence of wantonness in a single-vehicle accident. In this case, the driver took her eyes off the road in order to wave to friends in another vehicle, and then lost control, injuring a passenger

Because of the harsh effect of Alabama’s guest statute, the injured passenger was required to prove, not merely that the driver was negligent, but that the driver was guilty of wantonness, which is more difficult to prove, because that requires a showing that the driver acted consciously or recklessly in disregard of the rights or safety of others.

This illustrates the unfairness of Alabama’s guest statute. Many states around the country adopted guest statutes in the 1930s, but almost all states, other than Alabama, have repealed or substantially abrogated their own guest statutes. Additionally, this case illustrates the importance of prompt and thorough investigation, as quickly as possible after a serious accident, in order to document and preserve information and evidence about the actions of the party at fault.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Roberts

A Dangerous RV Tire - The Goodyear 159 - Has Caused Problems

Tom Methvin — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:50:55 GMT

Beasley Allen Law Firm has handled numerous cases against tire manufacturers when their tires failed causing accidents and injuries. As you may know, one of the most serious types of failure of a steel belted radial tire is a de-tread and/or belt separation. Because of the stress concentrations and subsequent high internal temperatures at the edge of the belt, this area is particularly sensitive to manufacturing, design and material problems. One tire we have learned has experienced problems with de-tread due to manufacturing and design defects is the Goodyear G159 steel belted radial tire. The G159 is actually a heavy truck tire made specifically by Goodyear for recreational vehicles. Several manufacturers, including Fleetwood and Monaco, have equipped their larger or class A recreational vehicles with the Goodyear 159 tire. These RV manufacturers selected the Goodyear 159 tire for use on their RVs based on Goodyear's rating of the G159 and its recommendation that this tire was appropriate for these larger recreational vehicles.

Recreational vehicles are very popular in the U.S. for use during vacations. They are also a fan favorite in this part of the country during the football season. Tragically, several families' vacations have turned into virtual nightmares when a Goodyear 159 failed, experiencing a tread separation, which caused an RV to lose control and crash. Our firm currently represents two families who have owned RVs equipped with these Goodyear tires whose vacations where cut short and lives forever changed because of these defective and dangerous tires.

The problem with the G159 is that it's design and manufacturing process are inadequate for the expected loads on these big RVs. The G159s that we have examined have exhibited some of the worst failures we have seen. The design and manufacturing problems have led to tire tread and outer belt separations of G159 tires in all parts of the country. Our cases against Goodyear are still in the discovery phase. Goodyear, despite repeated request and motions filed with the different Courts, refuses to produce any documents or witnesses without having the Courts enter a "Secrecy Order" so that the problems with their tire can be kept confidential. Because Goodyear has not provided any discovery to date, in our cases, we still don't know the full extent of the design and manufacturing problems which are causing the G159 failures. However, we have learned that at least one RV manufacturer, Fleetwood, has recalled some of their RVs which were equipped with the G159 tires after learning of the problems with the tire. As a part the Fleetwood recall, it is replacing the G159 on its affected RVs with Michelin tires.

We have also learned that another RV manufacturer, Monaco, has initiated, along with Goodyear, a tire "Customer Satisfaction Change Over" program were it, along with Goodyear, has offered to replace the Goodyear 159 tires on some of their RVs with larger and stronger Goodyear tires. While Goodyear maintains that the tire change over was due to customer abuse of the G159, the change over program, or silent recall, at least acknowledges that the G159 tires are not safe for these big RVs. In addition, we have learned that there have been numerous customer complaints to NHTSA relating to these tires. Several owners of RVs have had their G159 tires fail and have been more fortunate than others to escape injury.

What we don't know is how many other claims have been filed against Goodyear. We also don't know how many RVs are currently being operated with G159 tires. What we do know is that several of the larger RVs are no longer being built as equipped with the G159. However, until Goodyear or the RV manufacturers institute a program to replace the G159 with safer tires, RV users will remain at risk.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Tom Methvin

Police Investigating Car Accident that Killed 3 Alabama Cheerleaders

Jenny Albano — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:31:09 GMT

Police are investigating the cause of a car accident that killed three Alabama high school cheerleaders and injured four in Friday night, November 30.

Sarah Casey, 16, Courtney Niceley, 17, and Whitney Bradford, 16, of Warrior, Ala., all died when the car they were in hit a tree and went over an embankment. The driver, Sarah Elizabeth Agee, 17, Brittany Lovejoy, 17, Ariel Nibblet, 17, and Alexandria Thomas, 16, were all injured, but thankfully survived the crash.

The Blount County coroner says that the girls were just goofing around, singing and laughing when the driver lost control of the vehicle. He doesn't think that the accident was caused by anything other than the driver was distracted. The teens attended Hayden High School and were returning home from a cheerleading clinic at the time of the crash.

The accident occurred on Alabama Highway 160 about 10 miles east of Hayden. The 2006 Chevrolet Malibu was traveling westbound at around 9:10 p.m. Thursday when it struck the tree and went over the embankment.

For more information on this subject, please refer to our section on Car and Motorcycle Accidents.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jenny Albano

Males Die More Than Females

Jon Lewis — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 18:13:59 GMT

According to a study done by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, more males have died in automobile crashes from 1975 through 2007. Why? Men typically drive more and take more chances such as speeding and driving drunk. The study can be viewed here.

The article has some very interesting facts regarding the statistics relating to males and females in car crashes. For example, "Almost one-third of all motor vehicle crash deaths in 2007 were females. Females accounted for 29 percent of passenger vehicle driver deaths, 47 percent of passenger vehicle passenger deaths, 30 percent of pedestrian deaths, 12 percent of bicyclist deaths, and 9 percent of motorcyclist deaths."

Check ou the study for more interesting statistics.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Another Death From Texting?

Billy Cunningham — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 13:35:30 GMT

This past week a legal secretary I knew died in an automobile wreck when she crossed over the center line and struck an oncoming car. Apparently, she was texting when she veered over and could not have been paying attention to the job of safe driving. She left behind a 5 year old.

The National Safety Council reports that 80% of all wrecks are caused by inattention. http://www.nsc.org/resources/issues/distracted_driving.aspxCar Wrecks are the number cause of accidental death in the US. Outlawing texting has become the subject of laws in several states. On April 10, 2009, Gov. Barbour of Mississippi signed a bill effective July 1 banning young drivers from texting. The fine under this act can be as high as $500 and if an accident is involved the fine can be $1,000. Mississippi joins 9 other states banning novice drives from texting (Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and West Virginia) Why ban just young drivers? 10 states ban texting for all drivers (Alaska, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, Utah, Virginia, and Washington and the District of Columbia)

In researching this, I read articles and blogs opposing a ban on texting. The reasons seem inane to me. Like- “Why not ban drinking water-it is distracting, too” “Laws are made to be broken” If you follow that logic then we should do away with laws prohibiting running stops signs.

I have started a little nonscientific research project- counting the number of drivers I see talking on the cell phone. Right now, in city type driving the average is about 4 in 10. To combat cell phone distraction, some states and local governments have passed various laws to control cell phone usage. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 6 states (Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Ohio, and Pennsylvania) specifically authorize a locality to ban cellphone use. Localities that have enacted restrictions on cellphone use include: Chicago, IL; Brookline, MA; Detroit, MI; Santa Fe, NM; Brooklyn, North Olmstead and Walton Hills, OH; Conshohocken, Lebanon and West Conshohocken, PA; and Waupaca County, WI. Interestingly, localities are prohibited from banning cellphone use in 8 states (Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Utah). The use of all cellular phones while driving a school bus is prohibited in 17 states and the District of Columbia. ( I cannot imagine any reason other than an emergency for a school bus driver to be talking on the pohone while driving!) The use of all cellular phones by novice drivers is restricted in 20 states and the District of Columbia.

The National Safety Council offers a Distracted Driver CD to help businesses inform and educate employees about the risks of using hand-held and hands-free communication devices while driving. It also assists organizations in creating and implementing a distracted driving policy as well as in gaining employee buy-in. It also includes tools to help reinforce the policy company-wide. On the CD is the NSC Motor Vehicle Safety Policy. This document, with its comprehensive section on distracted driving, is designed to serve as a model for any company. It includes a Statement of Acknowledgement, which employees must sign and return to their supervisors. A similar acknowledgement statement is part of the sample Generic Cell Phone Policy. Your business and family may find this CD and its tools helpful in protecting your co-workers and loved ones.

The bottom line to all this is that we all need to be more attentive when driving to protect ourselves and others.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Billy Cunningham

Don’t Give Your Car Keys to a Drunk or Careless Driver

Tara Helms — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:26:31 GMT

If you do, you could be subject to liability for compensatory and punitive damages if that driver causes a wreck which results in personal injuries. All of us have a legal duty to the public, not to provide a vehicle, or allow a person to drive a vehicle who is incompetent to do so. Incompetency can take many forms such as: inexperience, intoxication, or a bad driving record.

The elements of a cause of action for negligent and/or wanton entrustment of a vehicle are: (1) an entrustment; (2) to an incompetent; (3) with knowledge that he or she is incompetent; (4) proximate cause; and (5) damages.

The test in Alabama, is whether the entrustor of the motor vehicle knew, or from the circumstances could or should have known of the driver’s incompetence. This may be proven by showing specific acts of incompetency that the person giving the keys knew or should have known about. Examples include where the driver has had multiple driving offenses for speeding or DUI that the person entrusting the vehicle knew about, or should have known about. An obvious situation might involve two friends who are out drinking together, and that friend asks to borrow your car. If you know or have reason to know that this person is intoxicated, and you provide him or her the keys to your vehicle, you will likely be subject to liability if that person causes a wreck. Just because you do not personally get behind the wheel of the vehicle does not protect you from liability.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Tara Helms

Are you a Guest Passenger?

Jon Lewis — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:56:00 GMT

What is a guest passenger? The courts of Alabama have defined it as follows:

“Because the statute does not define the term ‘guest,’ we turn to caselaw for a definition:

“ “ “The general rule is that if the transportation of a rider confers a benefit only on the person to whom the ride is given, and no benefits other than such as are incidental to hospitality, goodwill or the like, on the person furnishing the transportation, the rider is a guest; but if his carriage tends to promote the mutual interest of both himself and [the] driver for their common benefit, thus creating a joint business relationship between the motorist and his rider, or where the rider accompanies the driver at the instance of the latter for the purpose of having the rider render a benefit or service to the driver on a trip which is primarily for the attainment of some objective of the driver, the rider is a passenger and not a guest.” ” “ Cash v. Caldwell, 603 So.2d 1001, 1003 (Ala.1992) (quoting Wagnon v. Patterson, 260 Ala. 297, 303, 70 So.2d 244, 249 (1954), quoting in turn Hasbrook v. Wingate, 152 Ohio St. 50, 56-57, 87 N.E.2d 87, 91 (1949)).”

Alabama law provides that the owner of the car is not responsible for injuries to his passengers as a result of his negligence.

Section 32-1-2

Liability for injury or death of guest.

The owner, operator or person responsible for the operation of a motor vehicle shall not be liable for loss or damage arising from injuries to or death of a guest while being transported without payment therefor in or upon said motor vehicle, resulting from the operation thereof, unless such injuries or death are caused by the willful or wanton misconduct of such operator, owner or person responsible for the operation of said motor vehicle.

(Acts 1935, No. 442, p. 918; Code 1940, T. 36, §95.)

This law does not hold true of the driver of the car is "wanton". What is wantonness, you ask? Wantonness is defined as conduct which is carried on with a reckless or conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others. What does that mean? If the driver of a car is driving twice the speed limit in a driving rain storm while on the cell phone, that would be considered wantonness.

Should this be the law? Probably not. If a driver is negligent and causes injuries to his passenger(s), he should be liable, and his insurance company should compensate the victim. Why should such drivers receive this quasi-immunity for injuries to their passengers? Many States agree. Unfortunately, Alabama tends to remain status quo.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Get Off the Phone

Gaines Drago — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:55:28 GMT

Every year, well really every month for that matter, our cell phones appear to be able to perform more and more functions. They truly have become computers in the palm of our hand connecting us to anyone at anytime. Unfortunately, their distracting nature is causing tragic accidents on our road ways.

I was in Orlando, Florida, last weekend visiting a friend, and venturing out to the wonderful world of Disney. I had not been a passenger in a vehicle in a long time so I decided to watch the number of drivers who were texting not talking, and to my amazement I counted nearly one hundred. This is completely crazy to me. In order to text unless you are thirteen and just have a supernatural ability to type on your phone without looking texting requires you to lower your eyes and view the screen, thereby taking your eyes off the road. This was extremely alarming considering we were blazing down the Interstate 4 at speeds of at least 70 mph.

I know that since the radio was placed in the car people have been shouting about the dangers of distracting the driver and very little headway has been made. But texting is simply too much. Unfortunately, we usually wait until something happens that affects our own lives to initiate change, but in this case I urge you to impress upon your State legislators to pass legislation that outlaws the use of cell phones while driving. There is simply no need for such a distracting practice to be allowed. So please put the phone away when you are on the road ways.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gaines Drago