Injured

Minnesota Bus Crash Kills 2 after Driver's Aneurysm

2009-11-21T00:38:32Z

The cause of a fatal Minnesota bus crash may be due to the fact that the bus driver suffered from an aneurysm bursting in his chest while he was driving.

The AP reports that the crash occurred on the Strain Bus Line which was operating a tour bus to an Iowa casino.

The bus driver, Ed Erickson was driving the bus on a clear Wednesday afternoon on Interstate 90 near Austin, Minn. when he lost consciousness due to the chest aneurysm before the crash occurred. The bus actually crossed over the median dividing the highway from the eastbound lane it was traveling in. The bus made it all the way into westbound lanes before it ended up in a ditch.

A video that details the crash can be viewed here:

According to CNN, the bus lost control and flipped over into a ditch killing two women in the process. The bus crash was so devastating and scary, that many are questioning whether the bus driver's condition was known prior to the accident.

While delving into Mr. Erickson's records, Minnesota Public Radio reported that he was arrested in Fillmore when a sheriff had caught him cross the center line while driving his SUV on County Road 14. The court documents indicate that his blood alcohol at the time was 0.15 percent.

Fortunately, Mr. Erickson did have a valid license at the time of the crash. Patrol officers refused to comment on whether Mr. Erickson had his medical records up to date. Truck and bus drivers are required to carry and keep their medical records up to date.

State Patrol spokesman capt. Matt Langer said that investigators would be looking at various factors involved with the Minnesota bus crash and that Mr. Erickson's medical history would only be a part of the investigation. He also indicated that gaining access to his medical history would be difficult. Authorities need to get the patient's permission before they can gain access unless a judge issues a search warrant.

For more information, please visit our Related Resources section.

Related Resources:

Running Background Checks on Job Applicants (Findlaw)
Dangerous Bus and Truck Companies Still on Road (Findlaw's Knowledge Base)
State Assembly Passes Tough Legislation Aimed at Bus Companies (Findlaw's Knowledge Base)
What to do after an auto accident (provided by Steele Law, P.C.)
Who Is Responsible in Catastrophic Injury Cases? (provided by Beale, Micheaels & Slack, P.C.)

DOT's 2009 Bus Safety Action Plan Urges Seat Belts

2009-11-20T20:50:43Z

The United States Dept. of Transportation has released its Motorcoach Safety Action Plan last Monday. This comes at the heels of an investigation into a fatal crash in Texas and another crash this week in Minnesota. The fatal bus crash in Texas occurred in the summer of 2008 because of a tire puncture. We covered both crashes on the Injured blog here and here.

Many would be surprised to know that currently, buses are not required to have seat belts installed.

The bus safety action plan proposes the installation of seat belts on all buses. This is important because DOT's 2009 action plan outlines how data shows that passengers being ejected from their seats due to a rollover crash causes the greatest number of deaths: "[D]ata indicates that ejection due to a rollover crash causes the highest percentage of motorcoach passenger fatalities. NHTSA determined that installing seat belts would be the most direct method of retaining passengers within the seating compartment and preventing ejection."

The action plan put forth by the DOT strives to prevent fatalities like this from happening. The DOT expects that this action plan will result in a reduction in the number of bus crashes as well as a reduction in the number of fatalities and injuries.

Some of the other priority actions set forth in the plan are:

Initiate rulemaking to require electronic on-board recording
devices on all motorcoaches to better monitor drivers' duty hours and manage fatigue.
Initiate rulemaking to propose prohibiting texting and limiting
the use of cellular telephones and other devices by motorcoach
drivers.
Initiate rulemaking to require the installation of seat belts on
motorcoaches to improve occupant protection.
Evaluate and develop roof crush performance requirements to
enhance structural integrity.
Develop performance requirements and assess the safety benefits for stability control systems on motorcoaches to reduce rollover
events.
Enhance oversight of carriers attempting to evade sanctions and
of other unsafe motorcoach companies.
Establish minimum knowledge requirements for people applying
for authority to transport passengers.

If you would like to learn more about this new 2009 Bus Safety Action Plan please visit our Related Resources links.

Related Resources:

Bus Safety: Next Stop, Seat Belts? (Findlaw's Injured)
U.S. Proposes Bus Seat Belts, Driver Cell-Phone Ban (Bloomberg)
Administration to seek seatbelts in motorcoaches (Associated Press)
Auto Accident Claims (provided by The O'Connell Law Firm, P.C.)
Bus and Truck Accident Resources (provided by Harris, Powers & Cunningham, P.L.L.C.)

Driver Texting about Drug Deal Injures Cyclist

2009-11-19T16:52:23Z

Bicyclist Lisa Granert was wearing a reflective vest and a helmet while she was riding her bike along Route 70 in New Jersey but it was of little help when she got struck by a car operated by a man distracted because he was texting.

Philly.com reports that Robert Sharrer told police that he was texting while he was driving. The worst part? It was a text about a drug deal. While he texting about the drug deal, his car drifted to the shoulder and struck Ms. Granert.

He was allegedly texting about the sale of prescription drugs that he was in possession of at the time of the crash. The unauthorized prescription drugs were found in the car. As a result, Mr. Sharrer has been charged with possession with an intent to distribute.

According to The South Jersey Courier-Post, the accident occurred on Monday night around 6:00pm. Police were searching the highway for Mr. Sharrer after receiving reports that his 1994 Oldsmobile Cutlass was driving erratically along the road.

Ms. Granert suffered from fractures to her face, a vertebrae in her spine, and her leg. She also slammed her head against the windshield on impact. Mr Sharrer was rushed to the hospital. He could not recall the accident. Bloood samples were taken from him.

What Happens When a Bicyclist is Hit By a Car?

In some states, there is a presumption of fault if drivers strike a pedestrian or bicyclist, for want of care and defensive driving on the driver's part.

However, the presumption can be overturned by evidence of fault or statutory violation on the part of the bicyclist or pedestrian, e.g., bicycling at night without a headlight, jaywalking, etc.

In no-fault states, injured pedestrians are often covered by their own automobile policies, even though they were pedestrians at the time, and even if the driver was at fault.

What About This Case?

In this case, the police pointed out that Ms. Granert took precautionary safety measures. She was not hit by any fault of her own. She wore a reflective vest at night, she wore a helmet, and she was familiar with the stretch of highway that she was riding on.

More charges against Mr. Sharrer are pending at the moment. For more information, please visit our Related Resources links.

Related Resources:

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Reminds Drivers and Bicyclists to Share the Road During Bicycle Safety Month (Findlaw)
Special Cases: Rentals, Pedestrians, and More (Findlaw)
Distracted Driving: More States Strengthen Cell Phone, Texting Laws (Findlaw's Injured)
Driving while Texting and Vehicular Manslaughter (Findlaw's Blotter)
Texting While Driving Laws on The Rise (Findlaw's Law and Daily Life)
Personal Injury Overview (provided by Markman & Cannan LLC)
Auto Accident Injuries and Compensation (provided by Lederer & Nojima LLP)

Molestation Suits vs the Mormon Church, Boy Scouts

2009-11-18T20:50:14Z

Portland Oregon attorney, Kelly Clark, filed suits in Washington, Oregon and California on Monday, charging the Mormon Church and the Boy Scouts of America with liability for the molestation of his clients when they were children. The cases, against both organizations in San Francisco and Seattle and against the Church alone in Portland, all concern allegations of molestation that took place in the 1970's and '80's. Clark has a long standing practice specializing in representing victims of abuse.

In the case filed in San Francisco Superior Court, the plaintiffs known as John Does 1-3, are brothers. They contend that the defendant molested them while serving as their bishop, scout master and later their step-father while they were living in the Sunnyvale area. They claim the Church ignored their complaints about the molestation. According to the judge, a jury will be left to determine the specific amount of damages.

In the Seattle case, the plaintiff also claims he and others were abused by an assistant scout master, chosen by the Mormon Church's Shelton Ward. The plaintiff, who was 13 at the time, says the "abuse haunts him still - as does his failure to protect others, some of whom were even younger."

The plaintiff, in the Portland case claims he was molested by a Mormon youth leader in mid-70's. This suit claims that the abuse was reported to a Church bishop, but not to law enforcement. The plaintiff here is seeking nearly $5 million in damages.

Various representatives and lawyers for the Mormon Church said the institution took such complaints very seriously. Chuck Gordon, a Seattle-based lawyer for the Church, said it would investigate the complaint and act accordingly. "While we do sympathize with all victims of abuse, the Church will defend itself against any accusation it deems to be false," Gordon said.

One of the San Francisco plaintiffs is still a devout member of the Mormon Church.

Related Resources:

Lawsuits to be filed against Boy Scouts, Mormon Church (OregonLive.com)
Mormons, Boy Scouts sued for sex abuse in Wash. (Seattle Post Intelligenser)
Men file abuse suits against Mormons, Boy Scouts (AP)
Sex Crimes Overview (provided by Flynn & Associates, P.C.)
Personal Injury Overview (provided by Miller & Ogorchock, S.C.)

School Hit With a Lawsuit over Dodgeball Game Injury

2009-11-18T20:02:47Z

A Bronx school was hit with a lawsuit because a 12 year old was injured during a school dodgeball game while he was sitting on the sidelines.

According to the New York Daily News, 12 year old Shane Reese of the Bronx was hit in the face with a soccer ball and suffered a mouth injury during a game of dodgeball at public school IS 219. The City of New York has offered Reese $20,000 in order to settle the lawsuit.

His lawyer Mark Weinberger is quoted by the New York Daily News as saying: "Soccer balls were flying all over the place. There was an issue of lack of supervision." According to the lawsuit, gym teachers gathered over a 100 students into a gymnasium and gave them soccer balls to play dodgeball with instead of the more gentle red dodgeballs that are typically used in the schoolyard activity. Soccer balls are typically harder and hurt more when an individual is hit with it.

Ironically, Reese was sidelined because he told teachers that he did not want to participate in the brutal game. He was concerned because he had some dental work done on his teeth because of a car crash. It was while Reese was on the sidelines that he got hit square in the face with the soccer ball, suffering a painful mouth injury. The dental work Reese tried so hard to protect was smashed on impact.

A judge in the Bronx Supreme Court will decide whether the city's offer for settlement will suffice. In the meantime, you have to feel sorry for the poor kid. He suffers a car accident and a visit to the dentist only to get his teeth knocked during a game of dodgeball that he didn't even play in. Talk about traumatic!

Related Resources:

Settling Your Personal Injury Claim FAQ (Findlaw)
Specific Legal Duties (Findlaw)
City Gets Smacked With Dodgeball Lawsuit (The Gothamist)
Personal Injury Overview (provided by Bernard & Stuczynski)
Personal Injury Resources (provided by Williams, Walsh, & O'Connor, LLC)

Officer Shooting of AZ Man Results in $20 Million Lawsuit

2009-11-18T17:05:24Z

The family of an Arizona man who was shot by police while he was holding his baby daughter has filed a lawsuit against the city of Scottsdale. The lawsuit is for $40 million dollars.

According to The Examiner, the scuffle between Scottsdale police and Mr. David Hulstedt occurred on November 7, 2008. The police department received a telephone call from a man who identified himself as David Hulstedt. He told the dispatcher who received his call that there was a crisis. When the dispatcher heard a baby crying in the background, she asked if Mr. Hulstedt was hurting the child.

Mr. Hulstedt responded to her query with: "I'm not going to tell you. I want you to send her to my house. I want to meet with her. I'm done talking here." Mr. Hulstedt was talking about his desire to meet with Arizona's governor Janet Napolitano. He wanted the governor to come to his house. No one knows why he was upset or wanted to the governor to come to his house. He hung up the phone on the dispatcher.

When the dispatcher called back, the man's mother told the dispatcher that her son was "mentally distressed".

In spite of this callback, the dispatcher sent the Scottsdale Police to check on the man and the child. The man was in the front yard carrying the crying baby and threatened to pile drive the baby into the ground if police did not listen to his demands.

Mr Hulstedt is alleged to have said: "If you don't let my brother come inside, I'll pile drive my daughter into the ground."

Scottsdale police became alarmed by the threat and shot Mr. Hulstedt. As a result of the shooting, Mr. Hulstedt may be permanently disabled. The family claims that the police intended to isolate David from his family support system when they refused to listen to his requests, he was not armed when the police shot him, and that Mr. Hulstedt did not threaten the police.

You can read the family's version of the story on their website here.

This may be a case of police misconduct.

What is Police Misconduct?

Police misconduct occurs when police officers deprive a citizen of his/her rights as granted by the Constitution or federal law.

Title 42, of the United States Code. Section 1983 makes it unlawful for anyone acting under the authority of state law to deprive another person of his or her rights under the Constitution or federal law. The most common claims brought against police officers are false arrest (or false imprisonment), malicious prosecution, and use of excessive or unreasonable force.

Which Claim Did The Hulstedt Family Make?

They may have claimed wrongful death through use of excessive force by the police. In this type of claim, the court must assess whether or not the use of force was reasonable under the circumstances. What the officer's intentions were do not really matter. It is an objective standard. Therefore, even if the Scottsdale police intended to save the baby, if the court finds that their use of force was unnecessary, then the claim of excessive force would be upheld.

For more information about police misconduct and excessive force, please visit our Related Resources.

Related Resources:

Police Misconduct and Civil Rights (Findlaw)
Fears of Excessive Force and Confidence in the Legal System Vary by Race: Survey (Findlaw's Blotter Blog)
Can A Parent Sue When his Adult Child is Killed by the Police?
(Findlaw's Writ)
Wrongful Death Overview (provided by Harris, Powers & Cunningham, P.L.L.C.)
Monetary Damages in Wrongful Death Cases (provided by Beale, Micheaels & Slack, P.C.)

Can You Sue for Getting an STD?

2009-11-17T21:44:50Z

Sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise. The AP reports that chlamydia has hit a new record in 2008 with 1.2 million new cases of the disease. The sexually spread disease is often symptomless, but one of its devastating effects is that it renders women infertile. It was the most STD cases ever reported to date for the disease.

Other STD cases have been on the rise too. Approximately 13,500 cases of syphilis have been reported in 2008. It was on the verge of being an extinct disease in the United States ten years ago. This means that there is a surge in new cases for this particular STD. Syphilis can be fatal.

The other two STDs that have seen a steady rise are HPV (Human Papillomavirus) and herpes. The STD cases for both of those reach in the millions. There is currently no cure for herpes.

If there are so many new cases of these STDs, it seems like there will soon be a rise in lawsuits about STD transmissions.

The tort for STD transmission is called wrongful infection of a sexually transmitted disease. This may be a lawsuit that you would want to consider if you are an unmarried individual who has unknowingly contracted an STD from a known sexual partner.

What do you need to know if you want to proceed with an STD Case?

Consider The Statute of Limitations

The statute of limitations is how much time you have as a plaintiff to file a lawsuit. Typically for a personal injury claim, the statute of limitations runs for five years, but this will vary by state. The tricky part is figuring out when it starts.

In general, it starts when the plaintiff discovers the injury. In this case, it is when the plaintiff discovers that he or she has an STD. It could be when the plaintiff started suffering from STD symptoms or even when the plaintiff has been officially diagnosed with the disease by a doctor.

Consider The Type of STD

The type of STD will actually help the court decide how much relief you can actually collect. The more severe the consequences of the STD, the more relief you will ultimately be granted if you prevail in your lawsuit.

Consider the Damages

Seeking damages for wrongful transmission of an STD is justifiable, but it is tricky. Courts can only allow a certain amount of monetary damages.

Unless a plaintiff can illustrate that there are problems that will burden the him or her for the rest of his or her life, it will be difficult to recover excess damages.

Some possible damages could include life long medical care and treatment as well as related treatment such as counseling. In some rare cases, even punitive damages can be given. However, please keep in mind that this is only in severe cases.

Consider the STD Case and the Evidence

The lawsuit must be able to prove with evidence that the defendant knew that he or she had an STD. The defendant must knowingly have transmitted the disease to the plaintiff. This can be proven with medical records, the defendant's own words, or even the defendant's previous sexual partners.

The plaintiff has to prove that he or she was unaware that the defendant had the STD. The plaintiff must also prove that infection was indeed caused by the defendant and no one else.

If you feel that you have been the victim of wrongful infection of an STD, you do have legal recourse. Please visit our Related Resources for more information.

Related Resources:

Ex-Girlfriend Ilya Dall Sues Roberto Alomar for $15M in AIDS Bombshell (Findlaw's Common Law)
Settlement reached in Michael Vick herpes case (NBC)
California Supreme Court Opinion on AIDS Liability (Findlaw)
STD Transmission FAQ (provided by Pingelton Law Firm)
Personal Injury Overview (provided by The Donahey Law Firm)

Fighting Kite Fights: Boy's Family Sues NYC

2009-11-17T20:15:42Z

Jared Kopeloff of Flushing, Queens was just minding his business while skateboarding when he was slashed in the throat by a stray kite wire that was encrusted with glass shards.

The kite wire is used in a sport made popular by the book The Kite Runner. It is a South Asian sport that is particularly popular in the Afghani community in Flushing and is commonly played in Flushing Meadow Park. It uses strings encrusted with shards of glass in order to cut opponents' kites in what is known as "kite fighting." The fighting kite that gets cut falls from the sky until there is only one fighting kite left. That kite flier is declared the winner of the kite fight.

The wire in question was hanging between two buildings in the cooperative where the 12 year old boy lived. According to the Gothamist, the boy was slashed in the neck from ear to ear and had to receive 400 to 500 stitches in order to close the wound. He also lost two of his lymph nodes from the accident. Jared Kopeloff was quoted by The Gothamist as saying that he "heard a noise like bees... I thought I went into a beehive."

His family has now brought forth a lawsuit against the City of New York as well as the coop where the boy and his family live. The NY Post reports that the city should have been aware that there has been a resurgence of the sport and that it was being played in Flushing Meadow Park. The family's lawyer said: "The city should have known these kite festivals are happening in Queens parks -- and should have known the danger that the glass-encrusted string poses."

The lawsuit has been filed in Queens Supreme Court for an unspecified amount in damages. The city's response to the accident has been somber, but there has been no further commentary about the lawsuit itself. A spokeswoman for the city's legal department told the NY Post, "This was a tragic accident. We have received the lawsuit and are unable to comment further because of the pending litigation."

Related Resources:

Premises Liability Claims Against the Government (Findlaw)
Special Rules: Injury Claims Against the Government (Findlaw)
Accident & Injury Law (Findlaw)
Personal Injury FAQ (provided by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman, LLC)
Personal Injury Resources (provided by Richard H. Raphael, Attorney at Law)

Travis Barker DJ AM Lawsuit Now Claims Wrongful Death

2009-11-17T16:51:16Z

The lawsuit that Travis Barker and DJ AM (also known as Adam Goldstein) filed against Learjet for the crash that they suffered injuries from September 2008 was amended to include a claim of wrongful death by the late DJ AM's mother Andrea Gross.

The lawsuit now claims that DJ AM's death from an accidental drug overdose was directly related to the Learjet crash he and Travis Barker were in. According to Rolling Stone, DJ AM's family claims that the medication that DJ AM took during his hospital stay as well as the mental toll the crash took on him were the reasons that DJ AM resumed his drug use after ten years of sobriety.

The Learjet crash was severe. It injured DJ AM, Travis Barker and it killed four people. As a result of the crash, DJ AM and Travis Barker sued Learjet, Clay Lacy Aviation, Global Exec Aviation, Inter Travel & Services, Goodyear, and the estates of the two pilots killed in the crash. The lawsuit alleged that the parties decided "to abort the takeoff in a negligent manner" after a tire on the Learjet blew out on the runway down in South Carolina.

DJ AM's estate is allegedly seeking $20 million dollars in the lawsuit which is slated to go on trial in March 2, 2010. According to People Magazine, Learjet has denied all responsibility for the crash.

Back in January, the company claimed in court papers: "Learjet alleges that any and all conditions [of the aircraft], if any there were, were solely a result of the failure to properly maintain and service the aircraft".

Furthermore, Learjet suggested that "the damages suffered by the plaintiffs were 'either excessive, exaggerated, unreasonable, speculative, inflated or otherwise unnecessary and/or unrelated to the alleged incident.'"

Let's see how Learjet will respond to this wrongful death claim now. I wonder if they will still claim that the allegation is "speculative"?

Related Resources:

Legal Dictionary: Wrongful Death -- Plaintiff (Findlaw)
Wrongful Death Claims: Time Limits and the "Discovery" Rule (Findlaw)
DJ AM Adam Goldstein, Victim of Plane Crash with Travis Barker, Asking for $20M in Damages from Learjet and Others (Findlaw's Common Law Blog)
Monetary Damages in Wrongful Death Cases (provided by Rosen Law Firm, LLC)
Wrongful Death FAQ (provided by Cogan & McNabola, P.C.)

Did Doc Inseminate Patient with Own Sperm? Suit Settles

2009-11-16T13:50:34Z

A racially mixed couple from Connecticut are shocked because they recently found out that a complete stranger is the biological father of their twin girls. Now before this turns into a Maury Povich show special questioning the wife's fidelity, it seems like the father could be the fertility doctor that the couple went to for artificial insemination.

In a lawsuit filed back in 2005, the couple argued that Dr. Ben Ramaley used his own sperm to artificially inseminate the woman. The lawsuit was settled this week.

CBS News reports that the case was settled for an undisclosed amount of money and a confidentiality agreement was signed. As a result, the family and the doctor refuse to comment on the case. The question of the twin girls' paternity still hangs in the air.

The doctor claims that it was merely a mistake. During the lawsuit, he said he used someone else's sperm to inseminate the patient but not his own. The odd thing is that the doctor was not ordered to complete a paternity test. And what would cause the family to claim it was the doctor's sperm? The family tested the twins' DNA with the husband's DNA and it did not match up. This caused the family to file the lawsuit in the first place.

While the lawsuit was settled, an independent investigation was done by the Connecticut Dept. of Heath. Their investigation concluded that it was a simple mistake made on the part of the doctor.

The Connecticut Dept. of Health simply fined the doctor and allowed him to continue practicing medicine. However some individuals are concerned by what they feel is a lax punishment. CBS' legal analyst Lisa Bloom said: "A $10,000 fine is really a slap on the wrist to a doctor like this, and especially allowing him to have an unrestricted license, where he has unfettered access to other women in his community - that's very surprising."

When Could They Have Ordered DNA Testing?

This news is interesting because it brings up the importance of DNA testing. Since the doctor had serious allegations levied against him, this would cover a civil lawsuit and also a criminal one.

The civil lawsuit would have been a good place to have requested a paternity test. However, since they settled the lawsuit and had a gag order in place, the opportunity for DNA testing is gone. And why wouldn't the family want to know who the biological father of their twins is?

The second missed opportunity is when the Connecticut Dept. of Heath stepped in. They led an investigation of the doctor. However, they came to the conclusion that the doctor simply messed up the labels on the bottles containing sperm. The strange thing is that the Dept. never requested DNA testing either. The Dept. claims that they did not have the authority to request him to undergo DNA testing.

Again, legal analyst Lisa Bloom claims that this is simply not true: "Under my reading of their rules, they did have the authority to order the DNA test and they simply failed to do so."

What are other families who used the doctor supposed to do? They may have questions about the paternity of their own children. The lawsuit and independent investigation could have possibly put their fears at rest by doing DNA tests, but now they have to keep wondering.

For more information, please visit our Related Resources links.

Related Resources:

Paternity Tests: Blood Tests and DNA (Findlaw)
Paternity Suit Deadlines: Rielle Hunter Wants Paternity Test for John Edwards, But is It Too Late? (Findlaw's Law and Daily Life Blog)
What is "Actionable" Medical Malpractice? (Findlaw)
Paternity (provided by Law Offices of John A. Guthrie)
Medical Malpractice Overview (provided by Chopin Wagar Richard & Kutcher LLP)

For Blind Gamer, Lawsuit Against Sony Is Clear

2009-11-13T17:50:15Z

The Examiner reports that Sony is facing a lawsuit from a blind gamer named Alexander Stern in California. Mr. Stern contends that even after repeated requests he made to Sony via email to revise their games to make them more accessible, the company did not revise their games. For blind gamers, this is a big deal.

The gamer sued under Title III of the ADA and under California civil rights law.

ADA Title III requires that all public accommodations and facilities from commercial and non-profit entities be accessible to disabled Americans.

While the law historically applies to physical accommodations, Stern alleges them broad enough to include the virtual world as well. While his complaint makes referrence to the brick and mortar Sony stores that sell Sony's games, his primary argument is that the gaves themselves are goods, services, privileges, advantages or accomodations of the stores, thus bringing them under Title III of the ADA.

Anticipating Sony's argument that the games do not fall under ADA Title III, Stern has asked the court for a declaratory statement that they do.

He also claims violations of California civil rights laws similarly guaranteeing access to public accomodations.

ADA Title III requires that businesses constituting public accomodations take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that that they do not discriminate against those with disability in terms of access to their facilities or in their communications with applicants, participants, and members of the public with disabilities.

It also requires that no individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods and services.

The fact that Mr. Stern can not enjoy full and equal enjoyment of Sony's games is outlined in his complaint: "Sony has constructed the products in a way that is inaccessible to plaintiff; maintains the products in this inaccessible form; and has failed to take any action whatsoever to correct these barriers even after being repeatedly notified of the discrimination that such barriers cause."

Mr. Stern is also claiming financial losses since Sony holds an auction site where gamers can sell the items that they win in these games for actual cash.

Sony has not publicly responded to this lawsuit.

Related Resources:

That's Hot! The Lawsuit Against Hot Food Survives

2009-11-13T13:50:58Z

Dunkin' Donuts cannot be pleased about a recent complaint with shades of the famous McDonald's lawsuit. Surely everyone remembers the 1994 case against McDonald's, Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants. Woman spills coffee. Coffee is hot. Woman suffers 3rd degree burns and is awarded $2.86 million in court.

The original case was much derided, but is now part of our popular culture; remember Kramer's suit on Seinfeld, and how about the reference in Toby Keith's new tune American Ride? Please also note the so-called Stella Awards, named for Stella Liebeck, which supposedly award the most outrageous and ridiculous lawsuits of the year. Appropriately, there seems to be hot debate over whether the cases applauded are true or fake. And yet, it looks like suing for a food-related injury that may well be avoided by the plaintiff herself is as American as apple pie. Very hot apple pie.

Witness one recent resurgence of the hot food law suit -- a hot hashbrown suit. The Patriot Ledger reported in September that a woman in Quincy, Mass, is suing Dunkin' Donuts for burns suffered by her toddler when a hot hashbrown fell out of his mouth and on to his neck where they stuck. Before you rush to judgment too quickly, the plaintiff claims she touched the hashbrowns and thought them to be lukewarm before giving it to her son.

Hot coffee and hot food cases are still popping up like gofers on a golf course every now and again. In 2006, a now well known case of hot coffee burns was levied against Starbucks. In Griffin v. Starbucks Corp, the circumstances were a bit different than the usual fact pattern. There, the plaintiff claimed it was the barista who spilled coffee on her, resulting in burns. Sounds even worse when it includes clumsy action by the purveyor of the dangerous drink, doesn't it?

The bottom line: think before you drink. Or eat.

Related References:

Dunkin' Donuts sued over hot hashbrowns (Patriot Ledger)
Griffin v. Starbucks Appellate Opinion
Personal Injury Overview (FindLaw)
PI from defective prosucts (provided by David P. Beeson & Associates)
Personal Injury: General Resources (provided by Law Offices of Joseph J. Cariglia, P.C.)

Is the Carrie Prejean Sex Tape Child Pornography?

2009-11-12T19:30:54Z

We all know that Carrie Prejean was involved in making a sex tape that proved the undoing of her legal battle with the Miss California USA Pageant. What we don't know is what implications that this may hold for the former Miss California USA, her ex boyfriend, the pageant and anyone else who distributed or showed the video. There may be something more than just a simple violation of privacy. The tape could actually be criminal.

Since Carrie Prejean was only 17 years old during the filming of this video, it could strictly be understood as child pornography. This likely explains why the Prejean sex tape itself has not been more widely disseminated on the internet, as websites could take on huge liability forp putting up child pornography.

Prejean shot the video by herself and then she sent it to her boyfriend at the time.

According to the Sentencing Law and Policy blog, the video that Carrie Prejean shot could be viewed as "use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct" which is against federal law. Anyone who produces material that uses the sexual exploitation of minors violates strict child pornography law. Specifically, this law falls under 18 USC 2251. Anyone guilty of this crime is subject to a 15 year mandatory minimum sentence.

The distribution of material of sexual exploitation of minors is also against of federal law. The mandatory minimum sentence for this law is 5 years.

What exactly are the implications? It could possibly mean that the pageant lawyers who have possession of this tape and showed this tape in a meeting could be prosecuted -- particularly if any money changed hands in the acquisition of the tape. It also could mean that whoever leaked the Prejean sex tape to the pageant could be prosecuted.

And worst of all? Though probably unlikely, it means that Ms. Carrie Prejean herself could be prosecuted.

On the flip side, if others were convicted of illegally distributed the video, emerging case law indicates that Prejean, as the victim, could be entitled to monetary restitution.

None of the above is intended to predict likely outcomes in the Prejean fiasco, but rather to give readers a sense of how broad and encompassing child pornography laws can be. So next time you hear about news like this, think twice before you double click your mouse.

Related Resources:

Carrie Prejean Sex Tape Leads to Settlement (Findlaw's Injured Blog)
The Carrie Prejean sex tape is child pornography (The Examiner)
Carrie Prejean: Conservative Sex Offender? (Momlogic)
Child Pornography Laws (provided by Law Offices of Anthony B. Cantrell)
Possessing or Transmitting Child Pornography (provided by The Law Offices of Gary E. Gerson)

Toyota Lawsuit Over Sudden Acceleration Picks Up Speed

2009-11-11T20:02:23Z

A class action lawsuit was filed by CA residents Seong Bae Choi and Chris Chan Park on Nov. 5, 2009 against the popular car maker Toyota.

The plaintiffs claim that sudden acceleration is a problem that is present in many makes and models. This particular problem has caused countless unintended accidents and crashes. They also contend that in spite of Toyota's knowledge of the problem, that Toyota has failed to address the safety issue.

According to Bloomberg, there have been over 2,000 complaints about sudden acceleration. The lawsuit also contends that the sudden acceleration has been the cause of 16 deaths and over 200 injuries.

The LA Times reports that federal regulators say that the crashes are far more than any other automakers have experienced.

The lawsuit also says that Toyota has failed to "incorporate important failsafe measures." However, according to the automaker, the planned Toyota recall of as many as 3.8 million vehicles including Lexus ES luxury cars, Camry sedans and Prius hybrids over a potential flaw in which floor mats shifting out of position could jam the accelerator pedal.

However, the plaintiffs say that this is not the actual cause of the problem.

The plaintiff's attorney said in a written statement: "Neither driver error nor floor mats can explain away many other frightening instances of runaway Toyotas. Until the company acknowledges the real problem and fixes it, we worry that other preventable injuries and deaths will occur."

The complaint set forth by the plaintiffs state that the problem is actually caused by a faulty electronic throttle system called ETCS-i. There was a fail safe mechanism in place in cars older than 2001 but that mechanism is not present in newer vehicles.

The plaintiffs allege that this non-inclusion of a fail safe mechanism is the cause of these accidents. This implies that the planned Toyota recall, if limited to dealing with floor mats, would not address the crux of the problem.

Even scarier news has been the reluctance on the part of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In spite of these complaints, the administration has failed to address the issue. They have dismissed a majority of the complaints by narrowing down the focus of their own investigations.

The LA Times also reported that the agency got rid of broad cetegories of sudden acceleration complaints. This means that all of the instances where drivers have complained of sudden acceleration have not necessarily been addressed or even documented.

What is Toyota's response to the lawsuit? Toyota has not responded to the press about the current lawsuit yet.

Related Resources:

Toyota Recall over Deadly Floor Mats to Affect up to 3.8 Million Vehicles (Findlaw's Common Law Blog)
Govt criticizes Toyota press release on floor mats (Findlaw)
Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Toyota to Correct Sudden Acceleration (Findlaw)
Auto Accident Injuries and Compensation (provided by Jacquart & Lowe, S.C.)
Injuries from Dangerous Products (provided by Albert L. Buzzetti & Associates, L.L.C.)

Christopher Bizilj Uzi Death Triggers Wrongful Death Suit

2009-11-11T13:50:31Z

The family of 8 year old Christopher Bizilj (who died because of a Micro Uzi machine gun accidentally discharging during a Westfield Connecticut gun fair last year) filed a civil wrongful death lawsuit. The lawsuit is for $4 million dollars.

A newsclip of the story can be seen here:

The boy was participating in an event called the "Great New England Pumpkin Shoot" when he lost control of the Uzi gun and accidentally shot himself in the head.

The Daily Hampshire Gazette reports that the event was advertised as "an opportunity to shoot machine guns and automatic weapons, without the requirement of permits or licenses to do so."

The lawsuit was filed by the boy's family against seven defendants. These defendants are COP Firearms & Training of Amherst; Fleury, of Amherst; Provost Precision Pistols LLC, of Weatogue, Conn.; Carl Giuffre of West Hartford, Conn.; D&T Arms LLC, of New Milford, Conn.; and Domenico J. Spano, of Milford, Conn.

The causes of action are negligence in maintenance and training, wrongful death and the infliction of emotional stress.

This lawsuit is in conjunction with a criminal trial that was supposed to take place this December, but has been postponed.

The criminal trial is based on charges of charges of involuntary manslaughter and furnishing a machine gun to a minor in connection with the shooting. Each of the defendants have pleaded innocent.

One of the defendants is a 15 year old boy who was in charge of giving Christopher Bizilj instructions on how to operate the gun.

According to the lawsuit, the Uzi gun jammed after the first round of ammunition. 15 year old Michael Spano then retrieved the gun, cleared what he thought was the jammed round of ammunition, and handed the gun back to Christopher.

The AP reports that the Bizilj family filed the civil suit on Friday. It alleges that a 15-year-old instructor cleared the gun and gave it back to Christopher and failed to give proper instruction.

After the gun was handed back to Christopher, it accidentally discharged into his head.

The sad story looks like it could have been preventable. It is now up to the courts to decide who could have prevented this tragic death.

It is currently illegal under Connecticut gun law to furnish a machine gun to anyone under the age of 18.

Will the court decide that it was all the boy's parents' fault? Or will it rule in favor of the boy's family?

Related Resources:

Connecticut Gun Law (about.com)
Legal Dictionary: Wrongful Death -- Plaintiff (Findlaw)
Wrongful Death Resources (Findlaw)
Family sues over boy's gun show death (AP)
Wrongful Death Claims (provided by Marcus & Mack)
Wrongful Death Compensation (provided by Small Law Firm)