Posts Tagged ‘“wrongful death”’
New Technology Prevents Pedestrian Accidents and Saves Lives In Massachusetts
Pedestrian accidents at crosswalks cause some of the most serious personal injuries, including spinal cord injury, and wrongful death. In 2006, pedestrian accidents accounted for 14% of roadway fatalities in Massachusetts. Public education campaigns and strict traffic laws have not prevented the death toll from climbing. However, new technology may be the solution for preventing many pedestrian accidents.
Communities across the country, including some in Massachusetts, have started installing “in roadway warning light systems” or IRWLs, at dangerous crosswalks. Flashing beacons are installed on the side of the road, in the crosswalk pavement, or in an overhead mast. When a pedestrian activates the system, either by automatic detection or manually, lights flash outwards toward the approaching vehicle. As an intentional design factor intended to prevent a feeling of false security, pedestrians cannot see the flashing lights. Studies have shown these IRWL enhanced crosswalk systems are effective in reducing pedestrian accidents.
Pedestrians can protect themselves further by being aware of whether they or motorists have the right-of-way. Massachusetts laws and regulations set forth the rights-of-way of pedestrians and motorists where traffic control signals are not present. Where a pedestrian is crossing at a crosswalk where no traffic control signals are in operation, Massachusetts law requires that motorists must yield to the pedestrian. Pedestrians crossing at a point in a road that does not have a crosswalk must yield to the right-of-way of motorists. Further, once they being to cross, pedestrians should continue to look in the direction of on-coming or turning traffic. Pedestrians should always face the on-coming traffic when walking or running in the road.
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center has additional information on pedestrian and bicycle safety.
Breakstone, White & Gluck Earn Recognition as New England and Massachusetts Super Lawyers for Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice
For the fifth year in a row, all of the lawyers in our Boston law firm have earned top rankings as Super Lawyers in New England. The rankings of the best attorneys in the region were posted in the New England edition of Super Lawyers 2009, published by Boston Magazine.
Marc L. Breakstone earned recognition as one of New England’s top 100 lawyers, and again as a Super Lawyer in representing plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases.
Ronald E. Gluck was again recognized as a Super Lawyer for his achievement as one of New England’s top plaintiff’s personal injury lawyers.
David W. White again achieved recognition as one of New England’s top 100 lawyers, and again as a top plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer.
The top lawyers in New England earn these recognitions as a result of an extensive polling process among their peers, as well as a check on ethical standing, and other factors.
To learn more about the types of cases we handle, including medical malpractice, wrongful death, and other personal injury cases, please visit our website.
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 Reaches Final Settlement in Big Dig Tunnell Ceiling Collapse
Massachusetts has reached a final settlement in the Big Dig tunnel ceiling collapse case that caused the wrongful death of Boston resident Milena Del Valle and the injury of her husband.
Gannett Fleming, the company which designed the ceiling, will pay $50,000 to the city of Boston and $1.5 million for maintaining the Big Dig tunnels. Additionally, they will forfeit $150,000 in payments from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.
Sika Corp., which made the epoxy glue that held the ceiling in place, has agreed to pay $200,000. This money will go directly into a trust fund that has been designed to fund the upkeep of the Boston tunnel complex.
Two claims were dismissed: those against Sigma Engineering International Inc., a structural engineering company, and Conam Inc., a materials inspection company.
Both were determined to have no liability for the ceiling collapse.
After the tragic accident, resulting from the negligent design and construction of the tunnel, Massachusetts undertook a thorough examination of the tunnel system. The resulting settlements have provided funds that will assist in proper upkeep and maintenance in years ahead.
More Information
AG settles with final two firms in fatal collapse of Big Dig tunnel, Boston Globe, March 27, 2009
Massachusetts Court Affirms $3.4M Verdict in Negligence Case Against Liquor Store–Drunk Driver Caused Wrongful Death
On January 7, 2003, 16-year-old Trista Zinck was struck and killed by an underage drunk driver, William White, as she walked with her boyfriend, Neil Bornstein, along Ferry Road in Newburyport. Bornstein survived, but was seriously injured. Before the accident, White had been drinking at his friend Brendan Kneram’s house, whose parents were away. Earlier that day, White, Kneram and their two friends pooled some money, and Kneram used his fake New Jersey driver’s license to purchase a 30-pack of beer at The Gateway Country Store in Seabrook, NH.
Since the accident occurred in Massachusetts, Zinck and Bornstein’s families brought actions for negligence in the Massachusetts Superior Court against both the driver and Gateway Country Store, alleging that the store negligently sold beer to an underage buyer, a transaction that was the proximate cause of the accident that killed Zinck and injured Bornstein. In 2004, an Essex County jury decided that the liquor store was partially responsible for the wrongful death and injuries, and awarded the families nearly $9 million in damages, which the defendants promptly appealed.
On appeal, Gateway admitted that it sold the beer to the underage Brendan Kneram, but argued that because it was William White who became intoxicated and caused the accident, the store should not be held liable. In Massachusetts, to be liable for negligent conduct, the plaintiffs had to prove two primary elements:
- First, they had to prove that the defendants owed a duty of care, and that they breached that duty. Businesses that sell alcohol owe a duty of care to the public, by law. In this case, the jury found that Gateway breached this duty by selling alcohol to someone whom the store clerk reasonably should have known was under 21.
- Second, the plaintiffs had to prove that there was a causal link between the breach (the sale of the alcohol) and the harm (the car accident). Gateway argued that its liability ended once Kneram served the beer to his friends, but the jury did not agree.
In its opinion, the Massachusetts Appeals Court reiterated the test of causation, which the trial judge had instructed the jury to apply: If an intervening act (Kneram giving the beer to his friends) was foreseeable by the defendant, then the original negligent act (the sale of the beer) remains a proximate cause of the harm (the car accident).
Another important part of this test is that the plaintiff does not need to prove that the defendant could have foreseen the exact harm that occurred, but only the injuries that could have occurred in “substantially the manner” in which they did. In this case, plaintiffs had to show the jury that the liquor store clerk could have reasonably foreseen that selling 30 cans of beer to an underage man with an out-of-state license, on a snowy, January evening, with a car full of other underage teenagers waiting in the parking lot, is an action that could potentially cause a fatal drunk driving accident.
Here are two more general, important points to keep in mind about causation and the role of the jury in these types of cases:
This is a civil case, not a criminal case, so the burden of proof is much lower than “beyond a reasonable doubt.” A jury only needs to find “more likely than not” that the defendant was negligent. The two elements of negligence (breach and causation) are questions of fact for the jury to sort out after evaluating the defendants’ and plaintiffs’ versions of the events.
It should be noted that under Massachusetts law, the driver and the liquor store were found jointly liable, meaning both are responsible for the full amount of the damages. The plaintiffs will be able to recover the balance of the damages from the liquor store since the insurance on the driver will be inadequate to cover the damages.
The name of the case above is Zinck vs. Gateway Country Store, Inc., 72 Mass. App. Ct. 571 (2009).
Read More
Massachusetts Changes Laws to Increase Bicycle Safety, Reduce Bicycle Accidents
Good news for Massachusetts bicycle riders! Legislative changes have finally come which help protect bicyclists, and which place greater requirements on drivers of cars and trucks to prevent injuries to bicycle riders.
Bicycle riders are at risk when riding on the road for a number of reasons. First, motorists are often not looking for bicycles when driving; they are looking for larger vehicles, such as other cars or trucks, and they often simply fail to see bicycles (and the same is true, or course, for motorcycles). The risk is magnfied because cyclists are largely unprotected from serious injury if there is a crash.
The new law targets the most common types of accidents, and places new, explicit requirements on drivers to prevent these accidents. These are some of the most common accidents:
- Drivers try to pass a bicycle when there is not enough room
- Drivers cut back into the lane where the bicycle is operating, cutting off the cyclist
- Drivers overtake cyclists, then turn right, right in front of them, cutting them off
- Drivers fail to recognize that bicycles are traveling to the right of traffic–which is perfectly legal–and turn left in front of them, failing to yield the right of way
- Drivers fail to recognize the cyclists passing them on the right, and move to the right or turn to the right without checking blind spots or mirrors
- Drivers and passengers fail to recognize approaching bicycle riders, and open their doors directly in the path of the bicyclist
The new laws, which are part of Chapter 525 of the Acts of 2008 (click for full text of enacted statute), prohibit all of these acts, and create fines for drivers who fail to follow the law.
Hopefully the new legislation will help reduce the incidence of serious injury and wrongful death caused by collisions between bicycles and motor vehicles.
For more information on the legislative changes, please see our article, Good News for Bicyclists in Massachusetts: Important Changes in Massachusetts Statutes Favor Cyclists–Drivers Must Use Greater Care.
Information
What the New Bicycle Law Means for You: A Practicle Guide. MassBike
Contractors Cited in Fatal Quincy, Massachusetts Shipyard Crane Accident
A crane collapse in August 2008, which occurred in Quincy, Massachusetts, caused one wrongful death and three other people injured. After an extensive investigation, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), issued citations to three of the companies involved in the crane
dismantling process. With today’s pressure to underbid competition, many people are wondering if those cost savings mean a compromise of safety on the job site.
At the Fore River Shipyard in Quincy, MA, a giant crane needed dismantling. As is customary, specialty contactors were brought in for the task. Norsar LLC was hired to oversee the process and they subcontracted Sarens to operate the jacking system necessary for the dismantling process. OSHA issued citations for serious violations to both of these companies.
The problem, OSHA representatives say, is that the companies deviated from their original plan and then did not adequately work out the new plan, placing many employees in danger. Originally, the companies planned to dismantle the crane’s 160-foot leg units in two 80-foot parts. Instead, they opted to work with the full 160-foot units, exposing employees to crushing-by and struck-by hazards. Additionally, they failed to minimize employee presence in the danger zone.
Massachusetts Court Says Limo Service May Be Liable For Drunk Driving Accident Caused by Passenger
The Massachusetts courts have continued to expand the liability of individuals and companies which contribute to drunk driving accidents. On November 26, 2008, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial court ruled that limousine driver have a responsibility to prevent their passengers from drinking and driving, and to prevent drunk driving accidents.
In the accident leading to the case, one man was killed and several others were injured in a car accident caused by the drunk driver. The driver, along with several other men, had been drinking at a bachelor party on the night of the crash. The men, expecting to become intoxicated during the party, had hired a limousine service to provide safe transportation. The limo driver picked the men up at a bar in South Boston, where they had been drinking, and drove them to a strip club in Rhode Island, stopping along the way to purchase even more alcohol. The limo driver allowed the men to drink in the limo on the return trip. The limo driver knew the passengers were drunk.
At 2:10 A.M., the limo driver dropped at least one man off at his car near the South Boston bar. The bar was closed. The MBTA was closed. It was plainly foreseeable that the drunk limo passenger would attempt to drive home.
The victims of the drunk driving crash sued the limo service for wrongful death and personal injuries, arguing that its driver knew, or should have known, that his passenger was drunk, was going to drive home, and would likely injure or kill someone. The trial court threw the case out, saying the limo driver had no responsibility. But the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found that the limo driver had the duty or responsibility to use reasonable care to avoid discharging its passenger “who they knew, or should have know, was intoxicated” and likely to drink and drive.
The SJC stated, “[a] private carrier, engaged in the business of transporting persons consuming alcohol, is in a primary position to use care to avoid leaving an intoxicated passenger at a location where it is likely the passenger will drive.” The case will now go to trial.
This case is important because it defines responsibility on private carriers, such as limo drivers, to make sure passengers who have been drinking do not drive home drunk after they are dropped off. Private carriers are required to exercise “reasonable care” to ensure that its passengers are not going to drive home drunk at the end of the night.
In addition to limo drivers and private carries, bars and restaurants also have a legal duty to prevent people from drinking and driving. Bars are prohibited from serving customers who are visibly intoxicated. If a bar serves someone who is visibly intoxicated, and that person drives home and causes a car crash, the bar is legally responsible for injuries caused by the drunk driver. This is known as “dram shop” liability.
Bicycle Accidents on Rise Around Nation
Rising gas prices have led to an increased in bicycle use around the country. Unfortunately, that trend has led
to an increase in bicycle accidents as well.
Statistics are not available for the current year, but bicycle traffic is up dramatically in Massachusetts
metropolitan areas. In other areas, there is an increase as well. For example, in one California city, bicycle traffic was up 14% but accidents increased by 40%. Fatal accidents in Chicago and New Jersey were also noted to be
significantly increased this year.
The most recent crash statistics from the National Highway Transportation Safety Authority (NHSTA), through 2005, indicate that the highest rates of injury are in the 10-19 year old range, but the highest rate of fatalities is in males 35-54. Death rates were approaching historical highs in 2005. The most common causes of bicycle accidents are left-turning vehicles which fail to yield the right of way, and vehicles which overtake a cyclist, and then turn in front of the cyclist.
In a city like Boston, where bicycle transportation has historically received little attention from transportation officials, Mayor Menino has promised to make Boston more bicycle-friendly. This means the city will be adding more bike lanes to major streets. But Boston has a long ways to go, if the ratings from Bicycling Magazine are any indication. Boston has been rated the worst city for bicycling for three years. Mayor Menino’s promise is to move Boston to the “Best” column for cyclists.