Alabama Personal Injury Blog - accident

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

Durable Power of Attorney over Health Care Issues

Gaines Drago — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:44:56 GMT

No one likes to think about their own mortality, especially while feeling vibrant and alive. The "It could never happen to me attitude," dominates our thoughts, and while it is true that most of the time it won't happen to you sometimes it does, and the people left to suffer through painful decisions are friends and family. Imagine, for example, that you are 35 years old, in relatively good health, good job, engaged but not married, but that you are one day involved in an auto accident and leaves you incapacitated. Your are rushed to the hospital, where your mother, father and fiance agonize over what to do. Your mother wants keep fighting even though you have limited if any chance and you are feeling some high levels of pain, but your fiance, whom you have discussed this scenario with wants to let you go. These kinds of things, while horrible do happen.

However, there is an easy way to resolve this type of problem: awarding durable power of attorney over health care to a trusted individual. This works much like a typical durable power of attorney and gives a trusted person the ability to make decisions about life and death when the other party is unable to do so. In addition you can assign more than one person this power so as to relieve the alone on an island effect this could have over a person. The most appealing aspect is that it allows the victim to have a say in his own life and death decisions. Guidelines can and should be given to the individual who will be given power of attorney over healthcare. This will alleviate much of the pressure on that person, and allow you a peace of mind to know that whatever happens you are in control over what happens in your life.

While, no one certainly enjoys thinking about these things, there is nothing wrong with having a plan in place that ensures you remain the key decision maker in your own life.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gaines Drago

Four-Wheelers Are Not Toys

Pete Mackey — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:51:53 GMT

Like many folks in the Mobile area, I went to the beach on Labor Day. On my way home, I saw two young boys coming the other way on a four wheeler in the grass next to the road. This road is a four lane, divided highway with a 50 MPH speed limit. The driver appeared to be no older than 12 or 13 and his passenger was considerably younger. Neither wore a helmet.

As a lawyer who represents claimants in injury cases, my first thought was all of the bad things that this scenario conjured up. As a parent whose children are grown, I wanted to turn around and drive them home. I could not get the thought of them out of my mind. When I got home, I went straight to Google.

Stories like this one popped up repeatedly. An entry on all terrain vehicles in Wikipedia provided some greusome statistics on overall use:

Statistics released by CPSC show that in 2005, there were an estimated 136,700 injuries associated with ATVs treated in US hospital emergency rooms. In 2004, the latest year for which estimates are available, 767 people died in ATV-associated incidents. According to statistics released by CPSC, the risk of injury in 2005 was 171.5 injuries per 10,000 four-wheel ATVs in use. The risk of death in 2004 was 1.1 deaths per 10,000 four-wheelers in use. Focus has shifted to machine size balanced with the usage of ATVs categorized by age ranges and engine displacements—in line with the consent decrees. ATVs are mandated to bear a label from the manufacturer stating that the use of machines greater than 90 cc by riders under the age of 12 is prohibited. This is a 'manufacturer/CPSC recommendation' and not necessarily state law.

The numbers regarding accidents involving children were even grimmer but the industry is more concerned with profits:

According to The New York Times on September 2, 2007, the Consumer Product Safety Commission met in March 2005 to discuss the dangers of ATVs. Data from 2004 showed 44,000 children under 16 injured while riding ATVs, 150 of them fatally. Says the Times, "National associations of pediatricians, consumer advocates and emergency room doctors were urging the commission to ban sales of adult-size ATVs for use by children under 16 because the machines were too big and fast for young drivers to control. But when it came time to consider such a step, a staff member whose name did not appear on the meeting agenda unexpectedly weighed in." That staff member was John Gibson Mullan, "the agency’s director of compliance and a former lawyer for the A.T.V. industry" - the Times bases the claim on a recording of the meeting. Mullan reportedly said that the existing system of warnings and voluntary compliance was working. The agency's hazard statistician, Robin Ingle, was not allowed to present a rebuttal. She told the Times in an interview, "He had hijacked the presentation. He was distorting the numbers in order to benefit industry and defeat the petition. It was almost like he still worked for them, not us." CPSC reports of ATV deaths and injuries show an increase in the raw numbers of deaths and injuries that is statistically significant. The rate of deaths and injuries, which takes into account the fact that the number of ATVs in use has risen over the last ten years, has been shown to have experienced no statistically significant change.

This is not acceptable. We need to do something. If you have a four-wheeler at the house, understand that it may be like a loaded gun around a child. Apread the word - these machines can be killers.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Pete Mackey

Money for a Wreck? Fast? Think again!

Jon Lewis — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 08:08:40 GMT

I was working out at the YMCA the other day, and another one of those attorney ads came on the television. The promise? We'll get you money fast for your wreck. Well, I don't know what process they are using, but I do know that our experience shows that proper compensation for your injuries does not come fast.

In this commercial, the firm implies that the process is quick, easy, and simple. That might be true if the case is settled for less than a fair value. Usually, the adjusters for the insurance companies make you prove your case and injuries before they properly evaluate the claim, and even then, they don't always evaluate it properly.

What if the case has to go to court? What does that entail? Well, we have to file a complaint with the court. Once the defendant is served with a copy of the complaint, they will have thirty (30) days to answer in Circuit Court. Once that process is concluded, paper discovery ensues, depositions are taken, a scheduling order is entered, and the case is typically set for trial within 12-18 months (For more information on the process, visit the Lewis, Feldman, Lehane & McAtee, LLC website). Is that fast? Is that quick and easy?

What about issues of subrogation? What is that? If your medical bills are paid by a health insurance company such as BlueCross BlueShield of Alabama, you have to pay them back and potentially negotiate a settlement with them. If Medicare paid your bills, you have to send them a letter and wait for a response. Do you know how long it takes to get a response from Medicare? Think about typical government action and how long that takes.

When attorneys start making promises of quick and easy cash for your injuries, question the process. How familiar are the attorneys with the court system? How many cases have they tried to verdict? How do they define proper compensation? This article is not to denigrate any firms or their attorneys, but to dispel the idea that these cases can be settled for quick and easy cash and provide you with adequate compensation. They CAN be settled for quick and easy cash, but the case will usually be settled for less than fair value.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Its no "accident" when you run over bicyclists after drinking all night

Danny Feldman — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 12:08:38 GMT

Three cyclists recently were hit and injured in Baldwin County by a 28 year old driver who apparently had been out drinking all night and had yet to go to bed. See article at http://blog.al.com/live/2009/08/two_baldwin_county_cyclists_hi.html. Interestingly, this 28 year old "child" still lived at home with his parents. After the incident, the father of the 28 year old driver issued a statement advising that thoughts and prayers went out to the bicyclists and their families for this terrible "accident." According to the article, the 28 year old driver had been out drinking all night and refused a breath test. A blood test was taken and although results have not yet been released, I believe that there is a very good chance that these tests will show that this young man was drunk when the wreck occurred at 8:30 in the morning.

Staying out all night drinking, then driving around drunk, losing control of your vehicle and then running over cyclists is no "accident." Rather, had one of the cyclists died, which easily could have happened, the case is one of vehicular homicide. Calling something an "accident" when it really is a deliberate action taken without regard for the health and well-being of the general public, cyclists included, really is an attempt to minimize the seriousness of the wrongdoing involved. While it may be true that this motorist did not mean to run over these cyclists, the fact of the matter is he did mean to get drunk; he did chose to stay up all night; after drinking and staying up all night, he did decide to drive his car - consequences be damned.

This case hits close to home in Baldwin County where another young man on two separate occassions separated by only a couple of years, got drunk and killed cyclists. Tragic, but hardly an "accident," especially the second time.

Here in Birmingham, I handled a case 5 years ago where a man, only a few years younger than the one here at issue, and like the one here, still living at home with his parents, went out, got drunk and ran over 3 cyclists on Lakeshore Drive. He fled the scene, dragging one of the cyclist's bikes under his car for more than a mile. His mother made him turn himself in and when he took a blood test a couple of hours later, we were able to determine through expert testimony from a toxicologist, that his blood alcohol level at 7:30 am on a Sunday morning was about twice the legal limit. Discovery revealed that this young man had had a serious of incidents, including arrests and convictions for public drunk, disturbing the peace, DUI's etc. However, each time, his penalty was quite minor, maybe attendance at an alcohol abuse class. Even in the incident described above, he spent only one night in jail because, fortunately, the cyclists involved did not die and they decided not to press assault charges.

I wonder about Mr. Maple, the 28 year old in Mobile. I would be very surprised, indeed, stunned, if he did not have a number of arrests and/or convictions, for DUI and the like. The article states that he was able to leave by posting a $1,000 bail. Has he learned a lesson? Will he quit going out and getting drunk and threatening not only himself, but every other motorist, cyclist or pedestrian that gets in his way? I bet not - and that's too bad for all of us.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Danny Feldman

Noose that Hangs a Man Shows No Damage Either

Jon Lewis — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:30:07 GMT

The insurance industry has been promoting a fallacy since the early 1990's. That fallacy is that people in cars cannot be injured if the damage to the car is minor. This could not be further from the truth; however, jurors and society in general have bought into this concept. People think anyone who brings a claim for injury after minor damage to the vehicle is a crook.

As the title of this blog indicates, the rope used to hang a man will show little, if any, damage, but it will kill the man. With respect to vehicles, they are built better these days and built to withstand crashes of more significance than they could withstand years ago. Think about the materials which are now used in bumpers and other components of cars and SUV's. Simply because the car or SUV shows little damage does not mean the impact of the collision was insignificant or that the person inside the vehicle was not jolted one way or another to cause an injury.

Additionally, you have more towing packages and other components which resist damage but still receive the force of the impact. The seats in the vehicle have an effect on the collision and injury as well. See this report on It is not enough to say that the car or SUV suffered little damage. Shouldn't we focus on the individual who is injured and not the metal?

My grandfather used to always say, "Don't ever worry about what money can replace." Unfortunately, insurance companies want you to focus on the opposite. Since there is little damage to the vehicle, this person isn't hurt, and we shouldn't have to pay. This is horrible logic. We should focus on the person and the doctor and not assume the victim is lying. We should presume the person is telling the truth because if they are, they are the ones who lose in the end and are left with the injury.

If you want to read more about this issue, here is a very good article with supporting cites: Low Impact Injury Accidents: Are they Real?

Have you been in a low impact accident? Were you injured? Do you know someone who was? Can you dispel the myth? Let's talk about it. Let's get the public aware of this problem. Not everyone is injured in a collision. Some people are involved in significant collisions and rollover crashes, and they are not injured. Some people are in minor crashes, and they are injured. That is why we need to evaluate the person, not the car.

Let us know what you think.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Healing from an automobile accident - Part IV

Beth Scherer — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:33:24 GMT

The last three articles dealt with the nutritional, physical and emotional stress that one deals with after an automobile accident along with some tips on how to cope with them. Part IV deals with an area of stress that most people tend to ignore - their posture and nervous system. Most people are not aware that the master system (which includes the brain and the nervous system) are tied into posture, and that it is imperitive to keep both healthy in order you maximize your life's potential.

In order for ANYTHING in your body to function, the brain needs to send the message down the spinal cord. The messages then go through a network of nerves to send the message to the body. The body then functions. If this message is interrupted (as in the case of a spinal cord injury), the brain cannot send the proper message to the body and the body cannot perform its function. The body then breaks down.

When people are involved in a trauma or injury, the spine can make shifts which can disrupt the nervous system flow to the body. When the spine shifts, not only will this irritate the nervous system, but the muscles will contract around that area, which leads to muscle spasms and pain. The joint locks up. If that joint is not motioned properly, then over time degeneration may occur. This is why it is so important to see a specialist such as a chiropractor to analyze the spine and see if the joints are moving properly. If not, then a person can not only impede their healing process, but he/she can suffer joint damage 10 years, 20 years down the road.

It is also imperitive to work on the muscles as well. Physical therapy, Exercise therapy, Massage therapy are also crucial because if the muscles are weak, they cannot support the spine. Proper posture is also important, because improper posture places unequal stress throughout different areas of the body, causing tension and nervous system irritation.

The following are some tips to follow. Of course, check with your physician first before beginning any regimin.

1. When standing, try to keep your shoulder and hips even. Keep your toes facing forward .

2. When sitting, try to keep your ear and shoulder even. Dont lean your neck forward, as this will cause shoulder tension and headaches. If you are working on the computer, adjust your keyboard so that you can align your ear with your shoulder.

3. When bending and lifting, concentrate on keeping your hips and shoulders level. Don't bend and twist at the same time as that will lead to extra stress on your disc.

4. Try not to carry heavy things on one shoulder (eg ladies and their purses).

5. When driving, don't sit on a wallet (for men). Try to have lower back support. roll up a hand towel if you have to. Get out every hour or so and walk around.

6. When lying down, put some pillows under your knees while laying on your back to flatten your lower back into the floor. If you are laying on your side, put a pillow in between your knees. Invest in a good neck pillow that will support your neck while you sleep.

It is my goal in writing these four articles that those involved in an automobile accident can heal faster by taking this advise. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 205-862-6776.

Beth Scherer,DC

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Beth Scherer

Cyclists should not ride against traffic

Danny Feldman — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:28:00 GMT

This is the last of a 6-part series regarding annoying or dangerous cycling behaviors.

Many people, almost without exception, non-cyclists, wonder why cyclists do not ride against (or into) oncoming traffic - like most runners (correctly) run. Simply stated - it is unsafe.

First, cyclists are traffic. With very limited exceptions, cyclists have the same rights and responsibilities of motorists. Bicyclists riding against the traffic are not in the place where motorists expect them to be. Because riding against traffic places a cyclist in an area where motorists do not know to look, the obvious consequence is that the motorist will not expect the cyclist to be where it is, thus leading to wrecks. For example a car making a right hand turn may only look to the left, given that is the only direction that cars are expected to come. A bicycle headed into traffic thus would plow right into a car making a right hand turn.

Secondly, bicycles move fast relatively speaking - much. much faster than joggers, and in some parts of the roadway, may even push toward the speed limit. Accordingly, the distance between a car and an oncoming bicycle is reduced very quickly. For example a car travelling 40 mph approaching a bicyclist traveling 20 mph will be getting closer at the rate of 88 feet a second. In just a little over 3 second a distance off 100 yards (the length of a football field) will be gone.

Third, unlike runners, who are taught to run against traffic - cyclists cannot bail out off the road, as can runners.

Once someone gives the matter a little thought, it is absolutely clear why cyclists should not ride against traffic.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Danny Feldman

Overboard passenger in Gulf of Mexico...

Troy Schwant — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:37:05 GMT

Last night tragedy struck the carnival cruise lines that sails out of Mobile, Al, when an unidentified fifty (50) year old apparently fell overboard approximately 70 miles off the coast of Pensacola.

For most people, cruises are a way of escaping there every day problems, but unfortunately common sense can be left at home. Please be careful while on a cruise, because though Cruise lines push people to drink while on the cruise, it is important to realize that you are still on a vessel sometimes hundreds of miles from land.

blog.al.com/live/2009/06/carnival_coast_guard_search_fo.html

The next time you book a cruise, don't think of it as a seven day vacation from reality, think of it as a vacation from work, and make sure you are still safe while having a great time.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Troy Schwant

Are they Really Accidents?

Jon Lewis — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:52:36 GMT

I just finished a book called "Safety 24/7 - Building an Incident-free Culture". The authors, Gregor M. Anderson and Robert L. Lorber, Ph.D, make it clear that there are very few true "accidents". In the book, they call them "incidents". What's the difference? In the book, they define the difference as follows:

Incident vs. Accident: an accident implies the result is outside a person's control. In 97 percent of the cases, what happens - the incident - is easily within someone's control.

Somewhere along the line, we started calling "incidents" "accidents". Why? When someone runs a red light and causes a collision, is it an accident? When someone is texting on their cell phone and has a crash, is it an accident? When someone drinks and drives, is it an accident?

These aren't accidents. These are choices people make. We choose whether to pay attention to the roadway. We choose whether to look at the radio or look at the road. We choose whether to drive defensively. These are choices, and the term "accident" implies we have no choices.

When we are in a court of law, you will hear the defense attorneys constantly refer to the term "accident". Plaintiff attorneys will use the terms "collision," "wreck," or "crash". Which is more accurate?

In future posts, I will discuss more of the theme of this book. It does not only apply to car wrecks. it also applies to the workplace, public stores, and other commercial establishments. If you are interested in the book, you can purchase it from Amazon.com.

Or, you may call or e-mail our firm, Lewis, Feldman, Lehane & McAtee, LLC, for your free copy.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis