The lawyers over at Altman & Altman, which is a Massachusetts personal injury and Massachusetts criminal defense firm, have a great blog dealing with Massachusetts workers compensation law. Here is a link: http://www.massachusettsworkerscompensationlawyerblog.com/
My office handles workers compensation claims, and Altman's blog does a wonderful job of explaining this area of law to both lawyers and non-lawyers.
Attorney David White of Breakstone, White & Gluck, P.C. has a new, informative post on his blog regarding recently implemented bicycle laws in Massachusetts. The enacted new laws protect Massachusetts bicylists, and said protection was very, very necessary.
Here is a link to the newly enacted laws: new bicycle laws.
Colleague and fellow personal injury lawyer Ronald Miller has an informative post over at his Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog concerning truck accident verdicts. Be sure to check out this very interesting blog. Here is part of the post:
A recent Jury Verdict Research study revealed some interesting settlement and verdict data regarding truck accident cases. The most frequently cited injury in a truck accident cases, which is probably true for auto accident cases in general, is the back strain. Back strains, according to the study, drew a median verdict of $15,000.00. Brain injury cases, which accounted for only six percent of truck accident verdicts, had a median verdict of 1.3 million. Knee injuries accounted for four percent of the cases and had a median verdict of approximately $85,000.00.
The study also broke the verdict down into the type of truck accident collision which occurred and the median verdicts by type. Not surprisingly, the head-on collision had the highest median verdict of $275,000 and the "backing" collision (where a truck backs up into another vehicle) had the lowest of $33,000. The overall verdicts studied had a median verdict of $100,000.
The point of criminal law is to punish for wrongdoing. The point of civil law is to hold wrongdoers financially accountable to deter similar behavior in the future. With certain criminal offenses in Massachusetts, there is often a criminal prosecution as well as a civil trial. Examples of such criminal offenses are assault, battery, rape and murder. Many times, after the conclusion of a criminal matter, a civil law suit will commence which is intended to "make whole" the victim of the crime by way of money damages.
Therefore, liability for a wrong does not always end at the conclusion of a criminal proceeding, for there could very well be a civil suit as well to recover damages for the victim.
If you are involved in slip and fall litigation in Massachusetts, you should be aware of the right of the defense to conduct an IME (Independent Medical Exam). This right comes from Rule 35 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure which states: "When the mental or physical condition (including the blood group) of a party, or of a person in the custody or under the legal control of a party, is in controversy, the court in which the action is pending may order the party to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician or to produce for examination the person in his custody or legal control."
The IME will be arranged by the defense attorneys defending the case and will be paid for by the insurance company that insures the party that you are suing for injuries. The doctor's report of his/her findings following the IME must be released to your attorney following a written request for same.
Remember that the IME doctor wants to have continued business from the insurance companies so therefore, do not be surprised if that doctor says in his/her report that you are not injured or, not injured to the extent that you claim.
Here are some various notice requirements in Massachusetts that you must be aware of if you have been injured:
Defects in public way causing personal injury or property damage - 30 days;
Snow or ice on a public way or private property causing personal injury or property damage - 30 days;
Ski area operators' negligence causing personal injury to skiers - 90 days;
Federal Tort Claims Act - two years for written presentment;
Massachusetts Tort Claims Act - two years for written presentment;
Hit and run accidents - must notify police and insurer within 24 hours of the accident.
Kudos to the Boston Injury Lawyer Blog for this post on recent developments on the tragic dog mauling death that occurred last week on actor Ving Rhames' property. Here is part of the post:
Police have identified the man who was mauled by dogs on the Brentwood property owned by movie star Ving Rhames as Jacob Adams. Adams lived on the property and had been employed to take care of the actor’s dogs.
Medical examiners are still trying to determine whether Adams died as a result of the numerous dog bites he sustained during the attack or from heart failure during the attack.
Animal services have confiscated an English bulldog and three bull mastiffs that were living on Rhames’ property.
If you have tripped or fallen on a Boston sidewalk or street, and sustained injury, you face a grim reality. G L c. 84, Sec. 15 places a $5000.00 cap on these claims. That is right! No matter how serious your injury, how much your medical bills amount to, and how much in lost wages you have incurred, you are still stuck with the $5000.00 cap if a defect on a street or sidewalk caused your injuries. This law must change as it is simply absurd and unjust. Here is the actual language of the law:
Section 15. If a person sustains bodily injury or damage in his property by reason of a defect or a want of repair or a want of a sufficient railing in or upon a way, and such injury or damage might have been prevented, or such defect or want of repair or want of railing might have been remedied by reasonable care and diligence on the part of the county, city, town or person by law obliged to repair the same, he may, if such county, city, town or person had or, by the exercise of proper care and diligence, might have had reasonable notice of the defect or want of repair or want of a sufficient railing, recover damages therefor from such county, city, town or person; but he shall not recover from a county, city, town or local water and sewer commission more than one fifth of one per cent of its state valuation last preceding the commencement of the action nor more than five thousand dollars; nor shall a county, city or town be liable for an injury or damage sustained upon a way laid out and established in the manner prescribed by statute until after an entry has been made for the purpose of constructing the way, or during the construction and repairing thereof, provided that the way shall have been closed, or other sufficient means taken to caution the public against entering thereon. No action shall be maintained under this section by a person the combined weight of whose carriage or vehicle and load exceeds six tons.
Minors in Massachusetts cannot initiate a lawsuit. When a minor, for example, has a personal injury claim that requires litigation, the lawsuit is brought by the minor's parents. The parents, in the context of litigation, are referred to and named in the lawsuit as "next friend." At times, a guardian must be appointed and approved by a court if the parents are not alive or do not have the capacity to act as "next friend" on behalf of the minor.
I found this post over at San Francisco Mediation: A Better Solution authored by San Francisco Attorney Paula M. Lawhon that caught my attention because of its informative analysis of mediation in the context of a personal injury case. It deftly chronicles the mediation process from start to finish. If you will soon be involved in a mediation, irrespective of the type of case you have, I recommend checking out this post:
Here's an example of a recent personal injury mediation from a serious car accident (with some details changed to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the parties and the mediation):
The parties at the mediation were the injured woman (the plaintiff) and her attorney as well as the insurance carrier and the attorney appointed by the insurance carrier to defend the driver against the plaintiff's claims of serious personal injury from the car accident. The driver was not present because the insurance carrier and its attorney were there to represent his interests and they had the authority needed to make the decisions. (This is why we pay for car insurance.) The plaintiff was seeking almost $1 million in damages.
