San Francisco Injury Lawyer Blog

The published accounts of problems with Toyota uncontrolled acceleration defects are beginning to surface. Today's article in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat indicates that Toyota has suppressed years of known problems and reports of injuries, deaths and accidents due to acceleration defects. In these cases, according to the Press Democrat, Toyota chose not to recall 2003 Sienna vans with known acceleration stick defects, rather changing the design for future vans and ignoring the thousands of vehicles on the market with the defects. The report indicates that Toyota's history is to settle the cases and request confidentiality clauses. The Sienna is apparently not the only Toyota with unintended acceleration problems.

There are pending at least 10 lawsuits alleging acceleration related defects that have caused fatalities and severe injuries. In one such case, a 2007 Camry accelerated out of control for 20 miles before killing the driver of another car in San Jose, California.

These cases are serious, and if they result in significant injury, may warrant litigation against Toyota. There are strict time limitations in California and other states in filing complaints. They require management by experienced product lawyers who have the knowledge and talent to take on Toyota or other vehicle manufacturers.

Last week's Monday accident at the new S-curve on the Bay Bridge, where a speeding truck driver lost control and plunged 200 feet to his death in his big rig onto Yerba Buena Island, was a sad and unnecessary tragedy. The S curve was a poor design choice for Bay Bridge repair and drivers don't expect it on a bridge crossing. This accident is just one of many in that curve and Caltrans' answer is typically the same. Driver error. Speeding. Inattention. Driving across the Bay Bridge and experiencing that S curve is all one needs to do to understand the design flaw present. All the signage in the world will not resolve that problem.

There is a short 6 month claims requirement against Caltrans that must be satisfied before pursuing your rights to recover for your injuries or the loss of your loved one. Take care to act quickly if Caltrans was responsible for a design problem such as the S curve on the Bay Bridge.

Yesterdays news has become today's health headache for American women. The new guidelines indicate that women under the age of 50 need not receive yearly mammograms, self examinations are useless and women age 50-74 need mammograms only every two years.
Now that the US Preventive Service Task Force announced that women ages 40-50 essentially need not concern themselves with the risks of breast cancer, the implications may be significant for long term health, cost management and malpractice. It is of course too early to tell whether the Task Force's recommendations will result in mortality increases for our women. My bet is that they will. I also predict that insurance companies will no longer pay for mammograms that are outside the parameters recommended. Women under age 50 can expect to pay for their own studies if they can find physicians who will order them.
Finally, those women whose physicians abide by these guides and miss breast cancers in their patients leading to more significant treatments, surgeries and morbidity or mortality can point to these guides in support of their argument that there was nothing that could or should have been done to diagnose the problems.
The insurance industry will benefit in dollars and cents- the guidelines will reduce costs for insurers in amounts that are almost incomprehensible and protect physicians from being sued for malpractice. Be sure to check to see whether your insurance premium rates decrease commensurate with this insurance savings.
Women--remain ever vigilant and fight for your lives.

Why would school administrators and teachers allow their students to take part in a lunch time tackle football game, with no supervision and without any protective equipment?
The result was predictable, as one child suffered a significant knee injury that tore multiple ligaments and damaged cartilage and bone. The young man injured, who had his knee surgically repaired, now contemplates pain and a swollen knee with every activity for the rest of his life.

In this case, the school ignored a regularly played tackle football game that took place on the school athletic field during lunch hour. Boys and girls participated with no equipment, supervision or instruction. There was no effort to stop this game until after the injury occurred. A simple expression to the students that unsupervised, pick-up tackle football would not be tolerated on campus was all that was necessary in this case to have eliminated the injury, but that never occurred.

Particularly in a private school setting, social or peer pressures may play a role in deciding whether to take legal action. Of course the choice may depend upon the severity of the injury. Also be aware that time limitations can be a factor as well, depending upon whether the school is private or public. California public schools are typically entities that require a legal claim be filed with them or their District within 6 months of the injury.

Whether or not a serious injury experienced at school is worthy of litigation may depend upon whether the injury occurred on campus, during the school day or in the open. Prior knowledge of a dangerous condition among teachers and administrators will also be a factor. Teachers or administrators may not be guarantors of safety but they are expected to enforce reasonable safety rules and regulations and put a stop to dangerous events that they know or suspect are ongoing. Turning a blind eye to these situations is not acceptable.

Certain sports, including football should be played only with proper supervision, coaching and equipment. By the year 2009, this should be obvious to every school teacher and administrator.

Automobile collisions can and do cause serious injuries. Insurance companies judge the value of a case by the extent of damage to the vehicles involved. Minor damage, they say, equates with minor injury.

To the insurer, anyone claiming serious injury from a collision that does not appear dramatic to one reviewing photographs, means that the party claiming injury is a liar. Insurance companies categorize these cases as 'fraudulent' and they are dealt with in their 'fraud' department. The carriers instruct their attorneys to hire expensive expert witnesses, including biomechanics witnesses, physicians and other experts to defend the cases at trial. They know that they can outspend most Plaintiff's attorneys and drum up evidence sufficient for their attorneys to argue that the injured person is a malingerer or simply out for secondary gain. This means that they argue the injuries are made up and not real.

I tried a case in October 2007 where the insurer pulled out all of these stops--and more. Still the jury saw through the tactics and fairly compensated this middle aged woman who suffered disc injury in the rear end collision. In the blogs to come, I will take you through the anatomy of this case through to verdict.

The recent crash into the Bay Bridge by the Cosco Busan container ship is an atrocity.They will unravel the facts of this crash for years to come but the birds, fish, marine life, oyster farmers, surfers and all of us have to deal with the fallout now. And it is an outrage. Every day there is another new fact elicited about what happened that morning. Today the Chronicle reports that the ship captain was unfamiliar with the electronic guidance system on the ship while operating it in the fog. Nice.

Everyone knows that there is no excuse for this to have happened. Senator Feinstein suggested someone should question why this was a single hulled ship. If the Chronicle reports are accurate, someone needs to question how a huge cargo ship like this one, was being captained by someone who could not operate the directional electronics. There was a complete breakdown in management of this vessel. Is it not foreseeable that someplace, somewhere there might be fog necessitating the use of the electronic directional system. Certainly no one might assume that there might be fog in the San Francisco Bay while this massive ship is attempting to dock or leave port. Bottom line is that Cosco (China Ocean Shipping) or whoever owns this ship, is not going to take the time to check out its ship captains. San Francisco and the entire Bay Area suffers the consequences.

The other day, Senator Feinstein indicated that from what she heard, this accident should never have happened. Ah, the insights of our elected officials.

But that apparently was only the half of it. Based upon reports in the media, it appears that the crash occurred at 8:30 am, but it was not until eight (8) hours later that the Coast Guard realized 58,000 gallons had poisoned the Bay. During the previous 8 hours, reports say that the Coast Guard thought only 140 gallons had been unleashed. What is that about?? The reports I am seeing indicate that all 58,000 gallons were in the Bay by 9:00 am. Why did the Coast Guard fail to learn about the size of the spill immediately?

The point is that these people have a lot of responsibility to do their jobs properly and the health and wellbeing of an ecosystem that is far reaching is in the balance. Lives and livelihoods are dramatically affected.

Now it is about the blame game and the focus will of course turn to the law suits. I suppose that is what we do as lawyers. Regrettably, I wonder if all that is left now is the finger pointing and a few good people trying to help clean it all up.

I hope that there is an investigation that results in a framework or forum for ideas that leads to more rigid limitations for ships navigating the San Francisco Bay.

As you can tell from my comments in prior blogs, the uninsured motorist situation in this State has gone from bad to worse. Just when I thought that I may never see another auto accident case where all of the drivers were adequately insured, the cavalry arrived. California has decided to flex its muscle and at least attempt to make sure all drivers have some coverage. Unfortunately, the only teeth in these enforcement plans is vehicle seizure. Since the targets here are uninsured motorists, civil penalties and fines against these people who presumably cannot afford insurance to begin with probably serve only to make matters worse. Again, the only thing you can do is obtain adequate uninsured motorist coverage for yourself and your family.

An article entitled, "California Going After Uninsured Motorists" discusses the State's effort to regulate uninsured drivers. The Legislature authorized the DMV to begin a systematic review of 22.4 million private vehicles registered in the state. The DMV reviews its data of registered car owners and compares their list to a list of insured vehicles (supplied by insurance companies). With this method, the DMV will be able to account for the car owners who are driving without insurance.

The State has already sent out suspension warnings to vehicle owners that do not have insurance. The vehicle owners are given 30 days to purchase insurance or show proof of insurance. If they do not respond to the suspension notice, the vehicle owner may be subjected to fines exceeding $1,000 and or seizure of the vehicle if the driver obtains a citation for driving with the registration suspended.

The article highlights the fact that, " Uninsured drivers who get in accidents can lose their licenses for one year and be subjected to civil damages to compensate injured parties or to repair property." The article also states that 14.3 percent of California drivers are uninsured and 15 percent of accidents involve uninsured motorists.

That means that if you are in an accident at present, you have a nearly 2 in 10 chance that the person involved has no insurance. Rather dramatic information, wouldn't you agree?

It is no secret that the time period between Thanksgiving and New Year's can be a stressful time for some people because of financial strains, family problems, unmet goals, recall of holiday seasons past and a host of other emotional issues. People are often not as focused as they may be during other seasons-- they may be partying or concentrating on partying or not concentrating at all. They may be in an altered state due to alcohol, drugs or otherwise.

It is not just that the Holiday Season seems to proliferate more accidents and mishaps, but that the fallout during the Holiday Season can add insult to injury. We all are anxious to have fun during this time and being injured, hurt and impaired due to an injury not of our own making is very frustrating and upsetting.

As "Coping With the Holiday Blues" on EverydayHealth.com explains, people struggling with the holiday blues may experience feelings of sadness, tension, and stress; changes in sleep patterns; a lack of energy; diminished interest in favorite activities; or excessive drinking or eating. These emotional issues impair our ability to function, both on the job and in other aspects of our lives.

Injury from a car accident, or losing a loved one in an accident can potentiate these emotional problems and make things even more difficult to cope with. On top of holiday blues, suffering from personal injuries will add tremendous pressure during the holidays. People injured in car accidents often miss work due to their injuries necessitating sick leave, disability, or valuable personal time off. At times, some people are forced to take reduced pay or no pay at all. Depending upon one's job, missing work may really not be an option and a host of dominoes can begin to fall. Injury leads to the added stress of attending medical appointments, the side effects of medications, and worrying about paying medical bills. It is so frustrating not to be able to complete normal household chores or accomplish the activities of daily living due to injuries.

Continue reading "Insult to Injury: Coping With Holiday Blues and Personal Injuries" »

Cbs5.com reported on a fatal hit and run that occurred early Thursday morning. A vehicle headed northbound on Laguna Street in San Francisco ran a red light while a cab was crossing the Fulton Street intersection. The cab then spun out, hit a pole and a car. As a result, one of the three passsengers has died. Another passenger was in critical condition after the crash while the other passenger and the taxi driver suffered minor injuries.

The San Francisco district attorney's office has arrested Eduardo Vicente and charged him with felony involuntary manslaughter and felony hit and run. According to the San Francisco police, after the collision Vicente jumped out and ran from the intersection. The police found empty alcohol containers in Vicente's car. Police are investigating whether Vicente was driving under the influence of alcohol or whether he ran a red light.

This accident raises a host of issues about San Francisco driving. The obvious here is that it is Holiday Season and drinking and driving are once again synonomous. They are a recipe for certain disaster as was evident in this crash. Be sure your uninsured motorist protection is adequate. As I have previously stated in earlier blogs, there are many uninsured drivers on the road and if one of them hits you, all you can rely on is your UM coverage. Call your broker or get on line and make sure you have adequate coverage. California minimum limits of $15,000.00 is not adequate coverage in most accidents. For the few additional dollars necessary to obtain coverage, UM insurance is the best bargain and among the most important coverages offered.

Second, if this news report is accurate, this may be one of the rare instances that, from what I have seen, that a cab driver was not at fault. Which leads us to suggest--at the risk of being redundant: wear your seatbelt especially in a cab! For whatever reason, many of us think that since we are in the hands of a common carrier, we are safe, or safer than when we drive. In this City, as in New York, nothing could be farther from the truth.

Holiday season can bring rainy weather along with already congested freeways and anxious drivers that are even moreso during the Holidays. The Bay Area was the site of 90 motor vehicle accidents over the long Thanksgiving weekend which brings to mind a few critical issues that many of us ignore. First, pay attention to the driving conditions and weather. Second, wear your seatbelt and shoulder harness. It is the law and airbags without belts may be ineffective. Third, be sure you have adequate insurance coverage--including uninsured motorist coverage. The UM coverage is relatively inexpensive so check with your broker or on line for quotes.

The California Vehicle Code incorporates bad road conditions in its mandates to drivers. California Vehicle Code Section 22350 tells us that a driver may only travel at a speed that is safe for the conditions at the time. Obviously, if the roads are wet or flooded, as they were during portions of this weekend in Marin County, a drivers' speed must be reduced accordingly to a speed that is safe for those road conditions. This is true even if the speed limit signs provide for a higher speed. Many drivers neglect to drive more carefully when the weather is foggy, rainy, or windy. This Thanksgiving weekend was no exception with the usual impatience, inappropriate speed for the conditions and tailgating leading to accidents. Regretably, any combination of this, particularly in bad weather, can and did lead to serious injuries.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported yesterday that the San Francisco Bay Area experienced over 90 car crashes on Sunday (11-26-06) alone (according to the California Highway Patrol). Officer Tom Stewart further explained that roughly 30 of the car crashes occurred in just one hour. According to Officer Stewart, "You can't expect to drive at 65 miles per hour and be able to stop in the same amount of time and distance as you would on dry pavement. People need to slow down."

Perhaps the most important safety device remains the seatbelt with shoulder harness. Airbags are intended as an adjunct to the seatbelt and the design of newer vehicles contemplates safety with the use of belts. In the litigation arena, defense attorneys and insurance companies will give serious consideration to the negligent contribution of an unbelted driver before paying--or not paying, otherwise valid claims.

Furthermore, CHECK YOUR AUTO COVERAGES! Many drivers on the road are either uninsured or underinsured. If they cause injury to you and have no coverage or inadequate coverage, your uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage becomes important to pay for your injuries. Be sure you have not opted out of uninsured motorist coverage and that there is a substantial limit on that coverage. I constantly speak with seriously injured people who either have no uninsured motorist coverage or minimum $15,000.00 limits. Any serious injury will exceed those limits so protect yourself by obtaining the best UM coverage you can afford.

Holiday time is toy time for children. Toy time is one of the pleasures of the season for kids everywhere, and for parents as well. We love to watch our children enjoying their new toys and we naturally enjoy assembling many of them into the wee hours of Christmas eve. I would urge people purchasing toys to take a careful look at the product, its moving parts, the size of small parts that may come loose or can be swallowed by small children. Please consider not only the child who is to be the recipient but also other children in the house for whom a toy with dangerous sharp or small parts is a potential disaster. It takes very little for a small child to ingest a sharp object or dangerous part when our heads are turned and quite a lot of medical care to reverse the consequences of that event--if they even are reversible.

In today's business environment, products are manufactured all over the world. The standards of many manufacturers are not what they once were, as the manufacturer and seller are primarily interested in selling the product and making their profit. This can be at the expense of our children.

We have learned that Mattel Inc. is recalling 4.4 million Polly Pocket magnet play sets because three children suffered serious injuries and were hospitalized after swallowing small magnets that fell off of the dolls. The Polly Pockets dolls and accessories contain magnets 1/8 inch in diameter. These magnets can fall out and children may swallow or inhale them. If children swallow more than one, the magnets will stick to each other, which can cause infection, blockage, or intestinal perforation.

The three children that sustained injuries from the Polly Pocket dolls each swallowed more than one magnet. The children suffered from intestinal perforation and had to undergo surgery.

As the holiday season approaches, consumers will be deciding what gifts to purchase children. To stay on the safe side, consumers can check the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s website and view a list of Toy Hazard Recalls.

Years after thousands of women participated in the Breast Implant class action, with injuries that ran the gamut from rupture leading to re-implant surgery to severe immune disease, the FDA has now essentially white washed the product for use by women as they choose. It has now approved the use of silicone for cosmetic breast enhancement surgeries.

Many women will now have the choice to use silicone or saline for their breast enhancements. Previously, the FDA banned the use of silicone for cosmetic breast enhancements because of the health risks associated with possible leaks. Today, the FDA takes the position that they are “reasonably assured” that silicone breast implants are safe. My experience concerning women injured by these implants both from my clients and as viewed in the seminars I have attended is very much at odds with a clean bill of health for this product.

Women now considering silicone implants will experience ruptures just as they did when these implants were previously marketed. My experience is that the silicone can become systemic, with lumps of the stuff appearing in places and times that it is not expected. Certainly women choosing this implant should educate themselves about the risks involved in choosing silicone implants. They should also consider the necessary and costly medical treatment that goes hand in hand with the product. For example, in the event that a silicone breast implant ruptures, the woman may not experience any immediate symptoms. It is possible that the rupture is initially detected only on MRI examination. These are now important studies in detecting ruptures and a decision to choose silicone breast implants will subject the woman to a lifetime of MRI examinations. The FDA states that the first MRI examination is to be conducted three years after the surgery. In addition, the FDA recommends an MRI be conducted every two years thereafter. Not only will the cost of MRI’s exceed the cost of the initial breast enhancement surgery, but women may have to pay these costs out of their own pockets. Obviously, as has been the case previously, ruptured implants portend additional surgeries with additional scarring and potential disfigurement.

Furthermore, women must be aware of the risks of physical injury involved with possible ruptures. Women may be subjected to multiple operations, hardening of the area around the implant, changes in nipple and breast sensation, and as discussed above, rupture with or without symptoms and possible migration of the silicone in the woman’s body.

Continue reading "FDA Approval of Silicone Breast Implants Reflects the Times" »