While many wonder why the bed of the dump truck became raised causing this terrible accident, as a plaintiff's injury lawyer, it doesn't matter because the trucker and trucking company are legally responsible anyway.
Another weekend in the Rochester are and another death caused by drinking and driving. It seems that these accidents just continue to pile up, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on DWI education and "awareness". We are, as a society, aware of the potential tragedy caused by drinking and driving; we just don't seem to care.
Case in point: On September 19th, Dennis S. Rising and David T. Roehrig was seriously injured in Victor when Rising lost control of his car on a curve and struck a tree at about 4:30a.m. Police say speed, alcohol and lack of seatbelt use were factors in the crash. No doubt that Mr. Rising knew that drinking and driving accidents kill and injure tens of thousands in this country each year, but I suspect that Mr. Rising, like all of the others, just didn't think it would happen to him.
As for David Roehrig, let's hope he heals up and is able to move on with his life. He will almost certainly hire a lawyer and make a claim against Rising's insurance company to compensate him for his injuries. But hopefully he will use this incident to spread the word that yes, it can happen to you, too. Maybe then we will have fewer death and injury cases caused by DWI.
The recent article in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle proposing to allow police officers at traffic stops to use a syringe to draw blood from a suspected drunk driver should be placed in the category of "worst ideas EVER". While drunk drivers are a menace and a hazard, there is no reason, at least in New York state, to authorize police officers to perform what is essentially a medical procedure. I don't care how much training officers might get, the prospect of cops taking blood samples at the side of the road is a horrible idea under any measure of common sense. Aside from the hazard of injury to the motorist by an ill-performed procedure, which could include transmission of AIDS or HIV, the risks alone to the officer drawing the blood outweigh any perceived advantage to the prosecutors or the public. If you were the police, would you want to take blood from a potentially intoxicated and/or potentially violent individual in the confines of the back seat of a police car?
In New York, police authorities may take a person suspected of drunk driving to appropriate medical professionals who can draw the blood under proper conditions. The law also provides for the blood to be drawn under authority of the court in certain situations. The law also allows police to arrest individuals for drunk driving without proof of the individuals blood alcohol content. Why put the health of police officers and motorists at risk when there is no reason to do so? As a lawyer having represented many, many people injured in accidents caused by drunk drivers and the families of those killed by drunk drivers, I can tell you that I can't think of a single instance when I have been prosecuting a personal injury case against a drunk driver where a difference would have been made in the case of the cop on the scene drew blood. Such a procedure isn't needed in New York and is not worth the risks to all invovled.
My heart breaks for the family of Katie Stanley of West Sparta, Livingston County. Katie was killed by a drunk driver in a two-car accident on August 14th in Genesee County. Ronald Wendt of Alexander has been charged with second degree vehicular manslaughter and driving while intoxicated. It is alleged that he caused the accident by making a left turn in front of the vehicle in which Ms. Stanley was a passenger, causing the accident.
I have no idea what the evidence is against Mr. Wendt presently, but based on experience, I would bet that a sample of his blood was drawn by police investigators, and that the forensic test done on that blood will be the chief piece of evidence in the case. If it turns out that Mr. Wendt was intoxicated, he must be sent to state prison. I don't care if he doesn't have a prior record, or if he is universally regarded as a nice young man. In order to discourage other young people from drinking and driving, he must be punished harshly.
Unfortunately, we hear every summer of some local young person(s) needlessly killed by an equally young intoxicated driver. As the father of three young boys, two of whom are teenagers, I want to be able to talk with them about poor Katie and about the time Mr. Wendt will spend in prison if convicted of vehicular manslaughter. I want to scare the daylights out of them in the hope that they will not drink and drive or ride in a car with someone who has been drinking. Am I selfish? I don't think so, and I doubt Katie's family would think so, either.
No amount of money will bring Katie back to life or assuage her family's grief. While I am certain that her family will justifiably will make a wrongful death claim against Mr. Wendt and his insurer, the amount of money they will receive will be a slap in the face to her heartbroken parents. I say this from the experience of a lawyer having represented many grieving families in injury cases similar to this one, and I have no doubt that Katie's family will not receive justice in the civil court system. Let's hope that the criminal court dealing with this case will give the family the justice they deserve, while sending a strong message to young people that might save another family the anguish of burying their own Katie.
David Connors, age 64, of Hemlock, Livingston County, died after being hit by a van which was participating in a demolition derby in Batavia on July 25th. Mr. Connors was part of a safety crew known as the "Derby Dogs" at the time of the accident, standing outside the perimeter of the derby. Connors had apparently been involved with demolition derby and the Derby Dogs for many years. His experience with demolition derby is important as several people have criticized his participation, suggesting that his getting injured was a highly likely event. Others have suggested that perhaps his estate will sue the event organizers for his injuries and death. The problem with the foregoing is that if Mr. Connors did indeed put himself in an unreasonably dangerous position at the event, it would likely bar him from a successful claim against anyone, as he arguably would have assumed the risk of injury and eath by his voluntary participation in the event and proximity to the danger. This is a factual question, however, and we don't have the facts to make this call or criticize the man. As for the money aspect of any suit against the responsible partyies (if there are any), in New York, those persons legally responsible for causing his death would be obligated to pay his estate what boils down to the present value of the wages he would have lost by virtue of his death. This means, if he was working and not retired, all his estate would be able to recover for his wrongful death would be the total of all he would have earned over the remainder of his expected working life, which, probably wouldn't be much due to his age (64 year old men have a very short work life before they retire.) It is unfortunate that the loss of a loved one is often reduced to a mathematical calculation, but lawyers don't necessarily make the laws, but we do have to follow them.
Leroy Morgan, age 68 of Rochester, was injured when struck by a car while setting traffic cones in a work zone. Mr. Morgan was sitting in the back of a County pickup truck when the truck was rearended. Mr. Morgan received massive injuries to his legs.
Because Mr. Morgan was on the job when the accident occured, he is entitled to Worker's Compensation benefits to cover his medical expenses and to compensate him for his lost wages. He is also entitled to seek payment from the insurance company that insured the vehicle that ran into him, but only for the difference between the 2/3 wage reimbursement paid by Worker's Comp and the 80% paid by the insurance company for the driver who caused the accident. Further, any medical expenses not paid by WC could be submitted to the auto insurer.
The critical issue for Mr. Morgan, if he pursues a case against the guy who ran into him, is that he not settle that case with the auto insurer without first getting the consent of Worker's Comp., as his failure to do so could give Worker's Comp a lien on the money he gets from the autoinsurer!
The injury case arising from the January, 2005 bus accident that occured on Route 390 in Geneseo, Livingston County, is moving forward. In that case, a bus travellling in the southbound lane veered right onto the shoulder, striking a tractor trailer that had pulled over so that the driver of the tractor could walk his dog. Three people on the bus were killed, as was the driver of the tractor. Nineteen others were injured. There are numerous plaintiffs, both from Canada and the U.S.
In Livingston County Supreme Court this week, the Canadien plaintiffs and the defendant bus company, defendant tractor company, and defendant trailer company agreed to allocate fault 90% to the bus company and 10% to the tractor and trailer companies. I suspect that the other (non-Canadien) plaintiffs will similalrly agree to the allocation of fault/liability, thereby setting the table for the trial to proceed on the damages to be awarded to each plaintiff.
Interestingly, on the issue of damages, the Canadien plaintiffs are limited under Canadien law to a specific dollar amount of money, while those plaintiffs proceeding under New York law will, on the wrongful death aspect of the case, be awarded an unlimited amount based upon the evidence of the financial loss occassioned the decedant's death.
The good news is that the number of workers injured in farm related accidents in New York and around the country has steadily fallen in the last ten years, and particularly in the last two in New York. The bad news is that farming continues to be one of the most hazardous occupations, with numerous incidents resulting in death and serious personal injury. The most likely culprits are tractor rollover and employees getting caught up in a power take off, or PTO. What can farmers do to protect themselves and their workers? First, make sure all of your employees are paid on the books and covered by Worker's Compensation insurance. If an off-the-books employee gets injured, in addition to a huge penalty imposed by Worker's Compensation (usually three times the amount you should have been paying Worker's Comp for all employees paid under the table during their term of employment), you will also be sued by the employee and his lawyer for his/her injuries, losing the protection from suit you would normally have enjoyed by paying the employee on the books and providing Worker's Compensation insurance. Next, make sure that all farm equipment has the necessary safety devices attached and in operable condition.
To avoid an accident, farm employees should always remember when working around equipment to keep their clothing and hair tucked in and avoid loose fitting clothes that could get caught up in a PTO. If a tractor is missing a rollover bar or other piece of safety gear, don't use the equipment.
I believe folks need to take personal responsibility for their actions, particularly when they screw up. The family of Cori Mitchell, a 28 year old father of four children, and their lawyer, believe that four waterfront bars along Lake Ontario, near Rochester, New York, screwed up in serving alcohol to Howard Eddy, the night he crashed his speed boat into a pier on Lake Ontario near the mouth of the Genesee River. Eddy was highly intoxicated at the time of the accident, killing three passengers, including Mr. Mitchell. Mitchells' family has sued the bar owners, claiming they are responsible for his wrongful death. The law in New York provides that any establishment that serves alcohol to a visibly drunk individual may be liable for the personal injuries, including death, that may be caused subsequently by the drunk. This is known as the Dram Shop Act, set forth in the General Obligations Law. If newspaper accounts of Mr. Eddy's actions are correct, at least four different bars served him alcohol sometime between 11:00p.m. on June 27, 2008 and 2:00a.m on June 28th, just prior to the crash. Mr. Eddy plead guilty to manslaughter in Monroe County Court concerning that incident (he had a blood alcohol level of .20), and was sentenced to state prison. Will Mr. Mitchell’s family win? Probably not against all four of the bars, but he might have a good argument against those bars who served him just prior to the boat trip. While no amount of money will bring Mr. Mitchell back or assuage the grief of his family, perhaps it will cause bar owners and employees to think twice before serving the next Howard Eddy. What do you need to learn from this? Well, if you are a bar or restaurant owner or employee, make certain you do not serve anyone whom you believe may be intoxicated. Err on the side of caution and cut the customer off, with a smile. For the rest of you, if a family member or loved one is injured by a drunk, either on the water or on the road, and you believe the drunk may have become intoxicated at a bar or restaurant, it is critical that a detailed, immediate investigation must be conducted of all customers and employees at the bar/restaurant upon learning of the accident. Competent experts must also be retained. By the way, under the Dram Shop Act, you can’t sue the bar or restaurant owners for your own injuries caused by your intoxication. If you get drunk and hurt yourself, its your fault. Deal with it.
There was another guilty plea in Livingston County Court this week in the drinking death of SUNY Geneseo student Armen Partamian. Daniel Welch of Erie County plead guilty to Unlawful Dealing With A Child, a misdemeanor, for which he will pay a fine and perform three weekends of community service in the County jail program. The original charges against Welch and two other Geneseo students, Criminally Negligent Homicide and Hazing, would have been extremely difficult for the District Attorney to prove. While some argue that Welch and the others should not have been charged at all because of this accident, as Partamian voluntarily chose to becomehighly intoxicated, I disagree. Providing alcohol to your friends when you know they are A.) already highly intoxicated, and B.) intent on drinking until they pass out, is reckless and dangerous and no different than providing them a loaded gun with which to play Russian roullette. Was justice served? Yes, assuming the message is getting through that the type of irresponsible behavoir that Partamian, Welch and the others engaged in will not be tolerated. The next step? Civil actions against the college and the greek organizations on campus for the wrongful death of Partamian, with a claim by the injury lawyer invovled for punitive damages for knowlingly tolerating this type of behavoir in the past. Maybe then serious action will be undertaken to stop this recklessness.