Michigan Personal Injury Blog - death

Study Finds 51% of Patients in ICUs Suffer From Infections

David Mittleman — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 10:00:00 GMT

According to a new study, more than half of intensive care unit patients suffer from infections, increasing their risk of dying. The lungs were the most common site for infection, followed by the abdomen and bloodstream.

The study researchers analyzed data collected from 13, 796 patients, aged 18 or older, from 1, 265 ICUs from 75 different countries during one day (May 8, 2007). From their research, they found that 51% of patients were classified as infected with 71% on antibiotics for the treatment or prevention of infections.

Overall, the study found that the longer a patient stayed in an ICU, the more likely they were to acquire an infection. In fact, the infection rate for patients that had spent a day or less in the ICU was 32%, compared with those who had spent more than seven days in the ICU, who had an infection rate of 70%. Moreover, infections contributed greatly to the death rates of patients in the ICU. For example, the ICU death rate for infected patients was twice that of patients who acquired no infections. Most importantly, the study sheds light on the fact that infections are still a problem in most hospitals, and that it is important to provide infection prevention and management.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Pair of Holiday-Weekend Accidents Result in Death, Injury

David Mittleman — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 20:16:28 GMT

Two young Lansing, Michigan residents fell victim to car crashes over the Thanksgiving holiday - a sobering reminder of the hazards of one of the busiest travel seasons of the year.

Christy Luckett, 30, died Thursday morning, one day after a two-vehicle crash at the intersection of Waverly Road and Phoenix Drive in Lansing. The driver and one passenger in the other vehicle were also treated for injuries. The collision is still under investigation.

Some 50 miles away in Oceola Township, Zachery Warren was injured when he swerved to avoid a pickup truck driven by Clem Plowman on M-59 in Livingston County. Warren, a 23-year-old Lansing man, is still receiving treatment at University of Michigan Medical Center in Ann Arbor.

Remember to use extreme caution when driving. Careful driving behaviors should be a year-long habit, but they become especially important during periods of heavy travel.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Survive Black Friday?

Timothy Smith — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:19:54 GMT

A number of years ago, I represented a young woman who was injured by a crowd that had gathered outside a Wal-Mart in Cadillac Michigan after reading about a new home video gaming system that was being released. My client was 7 months pregnant and had hoped to surprise her husband with a new video gaming system for his birthday.

By 5am, the crowd was nearly 100 and the Walmart had advertised that quantities were limited to 25 gaming units. As the store approached the opening hour, the crowd was getting restless. Bullies in the back of the line began pushing forward and tempers began to flare. You'd think that Wal-Mart would have recognized this and set up a system to ensure that the sale of the systems occurred in a safe manner to the 25 first individuals in line. Simple measures such as handing out wristbands to the first 25 or any number of approaches would have spared the crowd from what came next.

At the time of the opening, a Wal-Mart employee came forward and simply unlocked the front door. The crowd surged forward as it became every man and woman for themselves. My client, who was 8th person in line, was pushed to the ground and trampled by the folks behind her.

By the time the dust settled on the stampede, my client lay on the floor of the entry to Wal-Mart - bruised, battered and going into labor from the trauma. Emergency medical technicians from Cadillac were called to the scene and transported her to Cadillac Mercy Hospital where the doctors were able to stop the labor. She wasn't able to have any x-rays of her injured pelvis, hips and back because of the risk to the fetus. She spent the next 2 months on her back wondering if her unborn child was going to be okay.

When I sent my first notice of claim letter to Walmart, they responded by denying that their store or it's employees had done anything wrong. Suit was filed against Walmart in Wexford County Circuit Court. I was able to secure a copy of the security tapes from the front door. The tapes showed the Walmart employees laughing at the crowd gathered outside and then laughing at the stampede that ensued once the front doors were unlocked. The video was very similar to this YouTube clip from a Black Friday Stampede in Grand Rapids Michigan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeSgBL7gpAk

It's shocking to me that this happens every year at the Big Box stores like Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, Best Buy and others. Even more shocking are the security regulations that each store has drafted and implemented which are rarely followed when the store is releasing a new limited quantity gaming system or on the morning of Black Friday. Through extensive discovery [which Walmart fought every step of the way], my office obtained internal safety rules and regulations that, if followed, could have prevented my client's injury.

What's even more shocking is that Wal-Mart and other big box stores not only endanger the lives of their customers, but evn their employees aren't safe during these Black Friday Riots. In fact, one Wal-Mart employee was killed during one of the Black Friday riots like you just watched above.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S6UKRaM5fA

Wal-Mart called this death of it's employee "an unfortunate event". That's an understatement. Every big box store knows that Black Friday brings big crowds and that big crowds can cause big problems. So why is it that every year we have people getting injured and even killed while trying to shop? Why aren't stores following the rules and regulations they themselves have implemented to provide a safe shopping experience for it's customers? I suppose we can answer that question in a single word - Profits. Proper security measures are expensive to implement....

My client was one of the lucky ones. The money that Wal-Mart paid to her at the conclusion of the litigation more than covered her medical bills and her pain and suffering. More importantly, after laying in bed under doctors orders for 2 months, her child was born healthy. She still has days where she has aches and pains in her pelvis and low back from where she was trampled, but she knows that it could have been worse. Much worse.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Dog Bite Basics in Michigan

Timothy Smith — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:13:50 GMT

DOG BITE

In Michigan, when a dog bites a person, the person must sue the owner of the dog within three years from the date of the dog bite under MCL 600.5805(10). Proper plaintiffs would include:

· Person the dog bit and injured, as well as their spouse, child, or parent;

· Personal representative of the person killed in a dog attack, who would be a stand-in for the deceased and could recover on behalf of the dead person’s estate.

The proper defendant in a dog bite case includes:

1) the “registered owner” of the dog, or person who has represented him or herself to be the “owner”;

2) the “keeper,” or the “temporary caretaker” of the dog.

The jury will determine the fact question of whether the defendant having possession of the dog rises to “keeper” status and is usually defined as exercising the type of control over the dog that the owner would exert.

Three common potential causes of action for dog bite cases include:

1) The dog bite statutory action, applying to an owner of a dog

The good news in these cases is that generally if a dog bites a plaintiff, the plaintiff must only prove these facts:

· The dog bit the plaintiff and the plaintiff was injured as a result;

· The plaintiff did not provoke the bite, typically a fact question for your jury;

· The defendant owned the dog; and

· The plaintiff was lawfully at the location where the dog bite occurred.

2) Common law strict liability action against the dog owner and “keeper”

When the dog bite occurs while the dog is under the control of an owner or a “keeper,” who knew or should have known of the dog’s dangerous propensities, the plaintiff must prove in addition to the facts listed above.

3) Common law negligence

The same facts as listed under number 1 above plus that the owner or “possessor,” or temporary caretaker of the dog had the dog long enough to know of the dog’s dangerous propensities, breached a duty to the plaintiff of controlling the dog, and therefore was negligent.

More good news for Michigan victims related to defense of dog bite cases:

· Provoking the dog, an issue the jury will decide, is the only defense under a statutory claim

· Reacting to a dog’s viciousness does not constitute provocation under the statute.

If you or someone you know has been attcked by a dog, click here for a prior article I authored on how to treat bite injuries.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Disbursing Funds under Michigan's Wrongful Death Statute

Timothy Smith — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:01:22 GMT

Recently, we've resolved a number of wrongful death cases here in Northern Michigan. In Michigan, these types of cases are governed by a statute that controls every aspect of the case, including how the recovered funds are distributed to the family members that survive the deceased. One of the families that I represent asked me to explain to them how the distribution of the monies we recovered would take place.

In order to fully answer their question, I turned to Andrew Shotwell, a probate specialist with my office here in Traverse City, Michigan. I asked Andrew to draft an informative letter to the family to answer the question and thought I'd share the substance of it with my readers in case they were facing a similar issue.

The procedure and applicable law depends on various facts. First, if a complaint has been filed in circuit court, the distribution is governed by MCL 600.2922. Essentially under that statute, if no conscience pain and suffering was present or to the extent an award is for other than conscience pain and suffering, the circuit can distribute under 600.2922. The Court approves distributions “to those…who suffered damages and to the estate of the deceased for compensation for conscious pain and suffering, if any, in the amount as the court or jury considers fair and equitable considering the relative damages sustained by each of the persons and the estate of the deceased.”

If there is conscience pain and suffering awarded, the award passes to the estate and is distributed in accordance either with the decedent’s last will and testament, or by intestate succession [this is the law that governs how an individual's estate passes when they have no will]. There is no precise formula for determining the damages for the loss of a loved one’s society and companionship. In re Claim of Carr, 189 Mich App 234, 471 NW2d 637 (1991). The measure of damages is gauged by the relationship the decedent had with the claimant, including the amount of time the decedent and the claimant spent together. McTaggart v Lindsey, 202 Mich App 612, 509 NW2d 881 (1993).

If a complaint has not been filed and settlement has been reached, the distributions occur pursuant to MCL 700.3924, which is similar to 600.2922, requiring the distributions to be fair and equitable. The persons entitled to notice and an opportunity be heard in a wrongful death case under both 700.3924 and 600.2922 are as follows:

1) The deceased's spouse, children, descendants, parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters, and, if none of these persons survive the deceased, then those persons to whom the estate of the deceased would pass under the laws of intestate succession determined as of the date of death of the deceased.

2) The children of the deceased's spouse; and

3) Those persons who are devisees under the will of the deceased, including beneficiaries of a trust under the will, those persons who are designated in the will as persons who may be entitled to damages under this section, and the beneficiaries of a living trust of the deceased if there is a devise to that trust in the will of the deceased.

In any case, an estate would need to be opened with the probate court in the county of residence for the decedent. If a will exists, it is submitted to probate and a Personal Representative appointed, as nominated in the will. If no will exists, or the will fails to nominate a Personal Representative, the Court will appoint one according to the priority schedule, starting with the surviving spouse. Notice is required to be sent to all the people indentified above as having an interest in the distribution.

Once a settlement or an award has been granted, if all of the potential distributees are competent, nondisappeared adults, they may stipulate to a specific distribution scheme. If all of the interested persons stipulate to a proposed allocation, the court must order that distribution. However, if a disagreement exists, a hearing would be required.

If a minor is involved a guardian ad litem may be required to advocate on the minor’s behalf.

If after reading this summary of the approaches to distribution under the wrongful death statute, you still have questions, feel free to shoot me an email or call with further questions.

In my next article, I'll address and give some examples of what happens when the family can't agree on the distribution and an evidentiary hearing is required.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Recent Michigan Taser Incidents Cause Concern for Safety, Use of Force

David Mittleman — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:11:31 GMT

Two recent incidents involving the use of Tasers have grabbed headlines throughout Michigan and around the country, again raising doubts about the safety of the product and its use by law enforcement officials. Generally considered a "less-lethal" way of subduing unruly suspects, the use of Tasers has engendered serious controversy in recent months.

Earlier today, a young man in East Grand Rapids, Michigan, died in police custody after being Tasered. Early reports suggest that Matthew Bolick, 30, was Tasered twice during a struggle with local police officers.

Late last week, a Lansing, Michigan, police officer was reprimanded for Tasering a suspect who had already been handcuffed. Rocky Allred, 43, fell to the ground after the weapon was used on him, fracturing his jaw, chipping a tooth, and requiring eight stitches. The incident occurred back in August, and charges against Allred have been dismissed. The officer has been suspended for two weeks without pay for the appalling violation of police policy.

In late October, police in Traverse City, Michigan Tasered a 17-year-old girl following a traffic stop.

The recent spate of Taser-related injuries and deaths is by no means limited to Michigan. Injuries stemming from the use of the device have been reported across the country.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Theft and Joyriding Lead to Pursuit and Death in Oak Park, MI

Devon Glass — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:30:27 GMT

15-year-old Desean Murrell Fant died after crashing a stolen car into a tree in the early morning hours of November 10, 2009 in Oak Park, MI. Desean and another 15-year-old child had allegedly stolen a 1999 Saturn that belonged to a 24-year-old Oak Park resident.

After locating the vehicle, Oak Park police ensued on a car chase. The boys were not wearing seat belts when they lost control of the vehicle. The police had been pursuing the boys for several blocks and Michigan State Police are reconstructing the crash to learn more about the boys' speed at the time of collision.

Local residents noted that the speeding car was zooming. It is unfortunate and tragic that the need to go on a joyride or steal property would lead to taking such dangerous risks. The risks were not only to their own lives, but to the lives of any other pedestrian or driver.

It is also unfortunate that death is the price that was paid by these kids for stealing a car. If these kids had been caught and arrested, I don't think anyone would find death a reasonable punishment for the crime they committed, but that's the sentence they received when the situation escalated. Did the police really need to engage in a high speed pursuit to catch these kids for stealing a car?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Devon Glass

Michigan's Wrongful Death Act Provides Compensation, Closure for Families

David Mittleman — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:31:00 GMT

It is always difficult when a family member dies. When a loved one passes away, it is quite common to feel grief and loss. Those feelings can be even worse when someone is taken out of our lives due to the carelessness or negligence of another.

Nothing can ever truly replace a relative lost forever. However, Michigan law does allow family members to receive fair and reasonable compensation when an individual dies as a result of injuries caused by someone else. Michigan's Wrongful Death Act permits the following people to recover certain damages:

The decedent's spouse
The decedent's children (and their descendants)
The decedent's parents and grandparents
The decedent's brothers and/or sisters
People entitled to recover a portion of the decedent's estate under law
People entitled to recover a portion of the estate under a will

Instead of compensating the decedent, the Wrongful Death Act is designed to compensate the surviving relatives and the estate for damages they have suffered. Therefore, damages are typically limited to:

Reasonable medical, hospital, funeral, and burial expenses
Conscious pain and suffering suffered by the decedent
Loss of financial support
Loss of society and companionship

The law also permits a jury or judge to award any other damages considered "fair and equitable under the circumstances."

Michigan's Wrongful Death Act is very complicated and detailed. It includes numerous procedural requirements that must be strictly observed. Our firm regularly handles this type of claim, and we may be able to help you if you have lost a family member due to the negligence of someone else.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Family of Drowned 3-year-old Sues Ohio Water Park

David Mittleman — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:18:56 GMT

The family of a 3-year-old Dearborn boy is suing the Kalahari water park in Sandusky, Ohio after the boy drowned in a 3-foot deep wading pool on August 2^nd. The lawsuit alleges that the boy did not have a life vest, as required by Kalahari policy, and that the park did not have and adequate number of lifeguards on duty.

The boy’s mother lost sight of him as he entered the wading pool, which contained over 50 people. When employees finally located the boy, he was face down in the water. He was then transported to a local hospital, where he subsequently died.

The lawsuit specifically alleges that Kalahari should have known that additional lifeguards were needed on such a busy day, particularly during the height of the summer season. Furthermore, the lawsuit also argues that Kalahari always has a large number of visitors, which should’ve prompted the park to prepare with more lifeguards on duty. In fact, according to the lawsuit, the park brings in more than 1 million guests each year to its 250,000 square-foot park.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Campaign Sheds Light on Importance of Worker Safety

David Mittleman — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:26:28 GMT

As a worker, you should be able to go to work without fearing for your health or safety. Nevertheless, worker safety is an issue that is often ignored. However, the 16 Deaths Per Day campaign is dedicated to shedding light on the fact that employers who provide unsafe working environments for their employees are rarely ever prosecuted for a subsequent death of an employee.

Furthermore, the punishment for employer negligence is tantamount to a slap on the wrist. In fact, contribution to an employee’s death is only a misdemeanor, which carries a maximum prison sentence of six months and a maximum fine of $70,000. Unfortunately, under the Bush Administration, funding to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was cut. Thus, OSHA was unable to inspect worksites suspected of providing unsafe working conditions. Furthermore, OSHA rarely ever referred cases of employer negligence to the Justice Department for prosecution, and employer fines for noncompliance were lowered even more.

A few current and past members of congress are hoping to change these current conditions: Lynn Woolsey and the late Ted Kennedy introduced a bill in April called the Protecting America’s Workers Act. The bill would help to strengthen worker safety laws and give OSHA the ability to inspect dangerous worksites and impose legitimate fines for non-compliance.

Please view the video below for further information and personal stories of how several employees were affected by employer negligence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pssw5bnjnr4

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman