Posts Tagged ‘Massachusetts’
Massachusetts Commuter Rail Accident at Boston South Station, September 15, 2009
There has been another train accident on the commuter rail, this time at South Station in Boston. The Boston Herald reports that approximately 9AM, train 512, which originated in Worcester, failed to stop in time and collided with the end-of-track bumper at South Station, the last stop on the route. Of the approximately 100 passengers on the train, at least 18 people suffered personal injuries, many of whom were treated at local hospitals.
Although the train was allegedly traveling at a speed of 5 miles per hour at the time of the collision, many passengers were standing in preparation for getting off the train and were thrown to the floor and suffered personal injuries. Many patients were taken off the train on backboards by emergency personnel. Boston Medical Center activated its emergency plan in case a large number of injured passengers.
Transportation officials have already suggested that operator error contributed to the collision. Investigations by the MBTA and the National Transportation Safety Board are underway. Preliminary reports have ruled out signal, dispatching, or equipment problems as a cause. The Boston Herald has reported that the train’s engineer told supervisors that he misjudged the stopping distance at the South Station platform. The engineer will be tested for drugs and alcohol.
Ordinarily, trains stop dozens of yards back from the bumpers, which are the emergency devices designed to stop the train at the end of the track and to protect people in the train station. There are no recent reports of other crashes into the bumpers.
If you would like more information about what to do if you were injured in this train accident, please call us at 1-800-379-1244 or visit us at www.bwglaw.com.
For More Information
Train hits South Station bumper, 16 passengers hurt, Boston Herald, September 15, 2009
18 injured in commuter rail mishap at South Station, boston.com, September 15, 2009
Massachusetts Court Upholds Verdict in Premises Liability Case; Discusses Innovative Jury Techniques and Question of “Control”
On August 29, 2003, several people suffered personal injuries and one person was killed when an improperly secured gate arm at the Gillette Stadium in Foxboro swung into a bus traveling on an access road. The stadium, which is the home of the New England Patriots, is on property managed by Foxboro Realty Associates, LLC, with security provided by Apollo Security, Inc,. parking operations managed by Standard Parking Systems.
According to the evidence, the accident occurred when the gate arm was not properly secured by its three pound pin, and a gust of wind blew it from the open position. The evidence demonstrated that Foxboro Realty Associates had promulgated a policy on securing the gate, but had failed to put the policy in writing. It was the job of Apollo to unlock the gate and the job of Standard to open and secure the gates at the appropriate times.
After a trial lasting several weeks, the plaintiff (who was the wife of the deceased passenger from the van) was awarded $4,400,000 for her husband’s conscious pain and suffering and wrongful death arising from the negligence of the defendants.
There were two issues on appeal: The instructions the trial judge gave the jury about discussing the evidence; and the issue of control, and whether Foxboro had sufficient control over the parking operations to be found negligent for the actions of its indpendent contractor.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the judge’s instructions to the jury that they could discuss the evidence in the case during the trial (which is most unusual in Massachusetts) were improper, because such discussions can only be allowed in civil cases when all parties agree. One party had objected. However, the court found that the error was harmless, because the evidence of the defendant’s negligence was very strong.
The Court also ruled that the trial judge had given proper instructions to the jury on control. Under Massachusetts law, an employer is not liable for the acts of an independent contractor unless the employer “retained some level of control over the manner inwhich the work was performed.” The judge had instructed the jury that the employer could be found liable if it failed to exercise its control with reasonable care. The judge’s instructions were found to be consistent with Massachusetts law, and the judge was not required to give the instructions requested by one of the defendants.
The case is Kelly v. Roxboro Realty Associates, LLC, 454 Mass. 306 (2009).
Massachusetts Elderly Drivers Involved in Motor Vehicle Accidents Ignite Debate Regarding New Licensing Requirements
A large number of motor vehicle accidents involving elderly drivers has prompted the Transportation Committee of the Massachusetts Legislature to enact a bill that would impose driving tests on people over 85 years of age. Currently, Massachusetts only mandates a vision test every ten years. However, a group of lawmakers is trying to enact tougher regulations on the elderly.
Several recent tragedies have drawn attention to safety issues related to elderly drivers. Concerns about reaction time and vision of the elderly have arisen from the wrongful death of 4-year old Diya Patel who was allegedly killed by an 86-year-old woman in Canton earlier this month. Similar stories this year alone accuse elderly drivers of crashing into a Wal-Mart, a group of cyclists at UMASS, and even a Vietnam Memorial in Plymouth. Furthermore, an 84-year-old woman remains in critical condition after an 86-year-old man allegedly hit her while she was crossing the street near downtown Melrose yesterday.
According to an article in the Lawrence Eagle Tribune, Rep. Joseph Wagner (D-Chicopee) and Sen. Brian Joyce (D-Milton) want to enact a law similar to those in nearly 30 other states which mandate road tests alongside the vision test every five years for drivers over 85. This would override the current system, where drivers take a simple vision test every ten years after their initial licensure.
Not surprisingly, the issue is a sensitive one for many who say that regulating senior driving and treating them more like adolescents is demeaning and insulting. Even some suspects, such as 85-year-old Dominick Perry who stands accused of pinning a young boy against another car in a parking lot complain that “age discrimination” is the sole reason for the revocation of his license. A story in The Boston Globe tells of a former race-car driver who took a long and difficult mock test similar to the road test which would be required of someone his age under the new law. However, the anecdotal evidence from the elderly about the tedious nature of the test doesn’t outweigh the substantial evidence which links many elderly people to acts of negligent driving.
More Information
Lawmakers Hear Call for More Legislation Regarding Elderly Drivers – Boston Globe July 1, 2009.
Legislators Discuss Proposed Elderly Driving Bill Tomorrow – Lawrence Eagle Tribune – June 29, 2009.
Tested for the Road – Hospital Test Gauges Older Drivers’ Capability. – Boston Globe July 1, 2009.
Registry Revokes License of Driver, 86, in Melrose Accident. – Boston Globe June 29, 2009.
Passenger Dies in Elderly Driving Case – Boston Herald July 1, 2009.
Driver Charges Elderly Bias – Boston Herald July 2, 2009.
Malden Man Involved in Fatal Wreck Has Recent Road Woes – Boston Herald July 2, 2009.
If you’ve been injured in a motor vehicle accident<
The attorneys at Breakstone, White and Gluck have a proven record in dealing with elderly drivers envolved in cases of wrongful death and car accidents. Recently, Ronald E. Gluck obtained a significant recovery for a 33 year old school teacher and avid sports enthusiast who was struck by an elderly woman in a parking lot. If you or anyone you know has suffered injury as the result of an elderly driver or any motor vehicle accident, please visit www.bwglaw.com or call 617-723-7676. Experience Matters.
Massachusetts Consumers Urged to Act to Protect Rights
We are posting an urgent Action Alert We Received from People Over Profits — Please act today!
“You can help make a difference in the health care reform debate – and we need your help. Now is the time to weigh in! Your rights are at stake.
“As Congress and the President prepare to make a significant overhaul of our health care system, there are those who believe that in order to achieve universal coverage, victims of medical negligence must surrender their legal rights and remedies. In the hope of achieving “bi-partisanship,” the Obama Administration has made several comments, indicating their willingness to enact medical malpractice reform in exchange for “bi-partisan” support of Obama’s top domestic priority, health care reform. In fact, this coming Monday, President Obama will deliver a speech to the American Medical Association (“AMA”), a group that supports as one of their top priorities limiting the legal rights of injured patients.
“Despite the rigid stance of many congressional Republicans, President Obama continues to “negotiate” in good faith, hoping that Republicans in Congress, the insurance industry, and the AMA will support his efforts. The fact of the matter is that allowing the discussion on health care reform to focus on medical malpractice is a distraction from the real issue of quality care, preventable medical errors which are the 6th leading cause of death in the United States, and the fraud, waste, and abuse of programs like Medicare.
“Please call the White House today, and express your view that under NO circumstance, does medical malpractice tort reform belong in a health care reform bill. The tort system has always been a remedy that shines the light on past negligence, thereby reducing medical errors and improving patient safety. We cannot allow special interest groups to put patient safety and protection at risk. We cannot compromise access to justice.
White House Comment Line: 202-456-1111
(Because the President’s speech to the AMA is fast approaching, we are asking people to call in rather than email at this time.)
“We must not sit by and allow the opponents of health reform to mislead the American people. We cannot allow the protections afforded to every American under the 7th amendment to be sacrificed based on misperceptions propagated by those with a vested interest. We need you, and your alliance of patient advocates to let the White House know that we will not allow special interest groups to hold hostage, the legal rights and remedies of medical malpractice victims. During the 2008 presidential campaign, President Obama affirmed that access to healthcare was a right! The notion that one must relinquish a right embodied in the Bill of Rights in exchange for another right represents bad public policy.
“Thank you for your efforts on behalf of civil justice!”
Support for Drug Policy Reform Offered at Massachusetts State House
Breakstone, White & Gluck partner David White testified at the Massachusetts State House on June 10, 2009 in support of changing Massachusetts laws to provide more treatment to non-violent drug offenders. White spoke in support of House Bill 1962, sponsored by Martin Walsh of Dorchester. Walsh’s bill would offer diversion to drug addicted individuals who had been arrested for non-violent crimes. The programs which would be expanded would allow more individuals to obtain treatment instead of incarceration.
White was the president of the Massachusetts Bar Association from 2007 to 2008, and formed the MBA Drug Policy Task Force. The Task Force is making recommendations for reforming drug treatment and sentencing policies. Policy changes would save the taxpayers money, reduce the rate of crime, and help rebuild families and communities.
Can Stricter Licensing Requirements for Elderly Drivers in Massachusetts Help Make Our Roads Safer?
Two recent Massachusetts car accidents have once again raised the issue of the safety of some elderly drivers. Last week a 73-year old woman lost control of her car and drove it into a crowd of people viewing “The Moving Wall,” a traveling replica of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Plymouth, MA, injuring eight people. The same week, a 93-year old man plowed into a Wal-Mart in Danvers, MA, causing personal injury to six people including an infant.
For years, the debate over elderly driving has been waged in Massachusetts, yet nothing concrete has been done. Generally, once a person has passed the initial road test, only a vision test is required for renewal. Yet as the body ages, this simply is not safe.
Some elderly advocates say that the media has been blowing elderly driving accidents out of proportion, while similar accidents by younger drivers go unnoticed. Research indicates that risk begins to increase around age 70, and increases significantly after age 80.
For the last two sessions one state senator, Brian Joyce of Milton, MA, has proposed a bill that would require drivers 85 or older to pass another road test before their licenses could be renewed. However, this bill is always stalled by advocates for the elderly who cry age discrimination. This year Governor Patrick has indicated his support for the bill. Representatives from the RMV say that the agency would be willing to support a study on the issue as is proposed in a bill sponsored by Sen. Stephen Buoniconti.
In some states, doctors are required by law to report to the registry when a person is unfit to drive, but not in Massachusetts. Right now there are no state laws or tests in place to protect residents from unfit elderly drivers. Sometimes a police officer or a family member will report a medically impaired driver, but so far only 8,000 cases have come under review.
We support enhanced testing of elderly drivers, just as we supported the stricter regulation of younger drivers which are now the law in Massachusetts. We have handled many cases where we have seen that the age of a driver has been a factor in the accident.
Of course if an elderly driver causes an accident, their license may be revoked or suspended. But sometimes it is too late. If you have been injured by a medically unfit driver in Massachusetts, contact the Massachusetts personal injury law firm of Breakstone, White & Gluck, P.C. for a free legal consultation.
More Information
Pressure mounts to test elder drivers, Boston Globe, June 8, 2009.
Family and Friends Concerned about an Older Driver, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Tips from Dog Bite Prevention Week to Help Keep Massachusetts Residents Safe
While dogs have long been considered “man’s best friend,” the sad fact is that approximately 4.5 million people suffer from dog bites each year. About one in five of those bitten require medical attention for personal injury. Even seemingly friendly, mild-tempered canines can suddenly become agitated in certain situations or with certain individuals. However, there are actions you can take to decrease the odds of a serious dog bite.
Tips for Dog Owners:
- Don’t allow your dog to roam outside without a leash.
- Spay or neuter your pet.
- Never leave your dog unattended with a young child or baby.
- Don’t play rough/aggressive games with your pup. This can inadvertently teach aggressive behaviors.
- Plan social activities into your pet’s schedule–like walks in the park or dog play groups.
- If your pet does develop aggressive behavior, seek professional advice immediately from a veterinarian or trainer.
Tips for Interacting with Dogs:
- Don’t attempt to pet a dog through its fence; seemingly friendly dogs are often territorial.
- Always ask the owner before reaching to pet any canine.
- If you meet an unattended dog, do not shout or run.
- If the dog approaches you, avoid eye contact and remain motionless until the dog passes by.
- Do not approach a dog that is eating, chewing a bone, or sleeping.
- Teach your children appropriate dog interaction skills.
Massachusetts has laws that make dog owners strictly liable for injuries caused by their dogs, as long as the person who was bitten was not teasing, tormenting or abusing the dog, or not trespassing at the time of the bite. Ordinarily, these injuries are covered by insurance, although some insurance companies have begun to limit coverage for certain breeds of dog. If you are a dog owner, you should make sure injuries by your pet are covered.
MBTA Green Line Crash Caused by Texting Operator–Scores Injured in Boston Tunnel Accident
Two MBTA Green Line trolleys collided in the tunnel near Park Street Station in Boston, and the accident is being blamed on the operator of the train who was texting his girlfriend while driving. His recklessness forced the train he hit 100 feet down the tunnel, derailed both trains, and injured dozens of passengers on both trains.
The train crash occurred at about 7:18 PM, and the westbound trolley cars were full of commuters headed home and families headed to the Red Sox game. Dozens of people were taken to area hospitals, some with orthopedic injuries.
According to investigators, the first trolley, which consisted of two cars, was stopped at a red signal short of the station. The second trolley, which also had two cars, rear-ended the stopped train. The 24-year-old driver was looking at his cell phone, texting his girlfriend, and when he looked up it was too late to stop. Investigators have not yet determined the speed of the train.
MBTA drivers are forbidden to use cell phones or to text while driving. According to T General Manager Daniel Grabauskas, the driver will probably be fired (we hope so!), and he may also face criminal charges.
The MBTA will be held liable for the injuries sustained by the passenges on the trains. The T is vicariously liable for the negligence of its operators, and operator negligence seems extremely clear in this case. As a common carrier, the MBTA has a high duty of care to its passengers to prevent accidents.
Massachusetts Workers Continue to Suffer High Rate of Workplace Death, Injury and Disease
In its annual report on workplace safety, The Massachusetts Coalition for Occupational Safety and Health (MassCOSH) has detailed the high rate of death, injury, and disease which Massachusetts workers continue to suffer. Enforcement and prevention by OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, is still seen as lacking, and an audit of OSHA nationwide demonstrated a failure to enforce job safety laws against employers which repeatedly risk injury and death to workers. OSHA is underfunded and understaffed and incapable of completing comprehensive worksite inspections.
According to the MassCOSH report, sixty-six workers lost their lives on the job in 2008. These deaths were caused by transportation accident, falls, commercial fishing, workplace violence, crushing injuries, electrocution, and toxic substances. Falls continued to be a common cause of workplace deaths, and most of these were construction accidents.
In addition to the high rate of death in the workplace, almost 90,000 workers in the private jobs sector (which excludes self-employed and public sector workers) suffered some form of work injury. While Massachusetts did not have the highest rate of workplace injury, the rate of serious injuries and illnesses, resulting in lost time from work, was higher than the national average.
Occupational disease also remains a very serious concern, and the scope of this problem is not completely known. Certain diseases, such as mesothelioa, occupational cancers, work-related asthma, and lead poisoning are tracked, but the diagnoses of these diseases is not always related to the job, even if it was caused by a workplace exposure.
The complete report released by MassCOSH, entitled Dying for Work in Massachusetts, Loss of Life and Limb in Massachusetts Workplaces, is available at the MassCOSH website. MassCOSH sponsored Worker Memorial Day at the Massachusetts State House on April 28th.
Breakstone, White & Gluck, a Massachusetts construction accident law firm, is a proud sponsor of the work of MassCOSH, which is making Massachusetts workplaces safer for all, and which is working to increase the rate and quality of workplace safety inspection and enforcement.
Massachusetts Car and Truck Drivers: Slow Down and Move Over to Prevent Accidents–It’s the Law!
Massachusetts drivers now have another law to obey: Drivers need to slow down and move over when approaching stationary police, emergency response, and construction vehicles that have their lights flashing. The penalty: $100, and your insurance rates will probably also go up.
This well intentioned bill was enacted to prevent injuries caused by car accidents. First responders to accident scenes and work crews have suffered serious injuries as the result of negligent drivers who fail to slow and move over, and the legislation is designed to make their work safer.
But can you legislate this kind of safety? The bill itself is quite vague. A driver is required to change lanes “if practicable.” A driver is required to reduce his or her speed to a “reasonable and safe speed for road conditions.” How will that be judged? And will emergency vehicles leave the scene to chase down violators of this new law?
Saving lives and preventing injuries are, of course, important goals. But real safety comes from a broader awareness of our duty to ensure the safety of emergency and construction personnel, and that awareness begins with proper driving training. It also begins with simple common sense and courtesy.