Massachusetts Personal Injury Blog

Information Regarding the Ving Rhames Dog Attack Case

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.

Charlie Weis Loses Medical Malpractice Trial

This disappointing news comes courtesy of the Boston Globe:

Former New England Patriots offensive coordinator Charlie Weis lost his lawsuit today against two surgeons who he said were negligent in treating him when he underwent gastric bypass surgery five years ago.

Michael Mone, the attorney for Weis, who is now head coach at Notre Dame, said he doubted that his client would try to appeal the decision.

“Obviously, Mr. Weis and I are disappointed. We recognize these cases are very difficult. They involve very complicated medical facts, and the jury listens to very different views on complicated medical facts. Medical malpractice cases are very difficult.

“We will consider an appeal, but we have no intention to do so. There are no issues that came up at the trial that would appear to be the basis for an appeal.”

Mone said Weis was flying back to South Bend, Ind. this afternoon and couldn't be reached for comment.

Weis contended in his lawsuit that Massachusetts General Hospital surgeons Charles Ferguson and Richard Hodin had acted negligently by allowing him to bleed internally for 30 hours after the procedure June 14, 2002.

$13M Verdict Handed Down Today in Suffolk County

Today a Suffolk County jury awarded a man $13M for serious personal injuries he sustained after being struck by a motor vehicle.  The case name is William T. Dodge v. Arda Tezel.  With interest, the verdict comes to approximately $16M.  The plaintiff was however assessed 1% comparative negligence by the jury.  I will provide more information on this case as it becomes available. 

New "Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly" Publication for Non-Lawyers

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, a weekly publication for lawyers on news and developments in Massachusetts law, has recently launched Exhibit A.  Exhibit A is a monthly newsletter written by lawyers and intended for non-lawyers.  It is written in a way which makes the law a little less confusing and easier to understand.  It is a FREE monthly publication you can pick up at most MBTA stations.  The newsletter covers many different legal topics which you may find useful if you have specific legal questions, or, if you are just interested in the law generally.

Important New Massachusetts Snow and Ice Decision

The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently decided the case of O'Brien v. Leahy Landscaping.  In that case, the plaintiff, O'Brien, sustained a fractured wrist after slipping and falling due to snow and ice that had remained on the Defendant's premises for five days following a snow storm.  As you may know from reading this blog, the only way to create liability in Massachusetts snow and ice cases is to show the accident was caused by an 'unnatural' accumulation of ice and snow.  Many times, this is difficult, if not impossible to show.

O'Brien's lawyer successfully argued that the snow and ice had been converted to an 'unnatural' accumulation by the landowner's failure to clear it within a reasonable period of time.  This case is significant because it expands the definition of what constitutes an 'unnatural' accumulation of ice and snow in Massachusetts.  That means those injured in snow and ice accidents now have an added way in which to create liability on the part of a landowner.

Big Medical Malpractice Jury Award in Brockton Today

A Brockton, Massachusetts jury awarded a medical malpractice victim a 3.15M verdict today in the Brockton Superior Court.  2.5M of the jury verdict was allocated to damages and roughly $634,000.00 was allocated to interest.  Congratulations to attorney Jay Lynch of Lynch & Lynch who was the Plaintiff's attorney.  I will be sure to provide more details of this case as they become available. 

Fore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I found this to be an interesting, albeit probably painful post provided by the injuryboard.com:

According to a report by KVUE News, an Austin man has filed a lawsuit against a student golfer, her coach and her university, after he was hit in the head with a golf ball. The lawsuit states that, without warning, the student athlete from St. Edward's University hit the ball while Cortez was still on the green.

The strike knocked Cortez unconscious and caused other injuries. It claims the student golfer was negligent by not waiting until other golfers left the hole and not warning Cortez the ball was headed in his direction. The suit names the golf coach for not properly training and supervising the student and St. Edward's University for failing to properly supervise the coach.

The attorney representing St. Edward's University said witness statements show Cortez was not on the putting green when he was hit and that the student did yell fore to warn the golfers about the ball. He also said Texas law states a golfer cannot be held liable for such an incident, which was unintentional.

Interesting Slip and Fall Decision by U.S. Supreme Court

The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that the U.S. Postal Service is not immune from suit by a woman who opened her door and tripped and fell over her mail that had been placed in her doorway by a postal carrier.  The U.S.P.S. argued that it was immune from lawsuits according to a federal law that bars suits against the U.S.P.S. for the "loss, misacarriage or negligent transmission of letters."  The Court disagreed in a 7-1 decision holding that since the U.S.P.S. can be sued for automobile accidents its drivers cause, they should not be insulated from liability in slip and fall cases of this kind.

I personally disagree with this decision.  The U.S.P.S. delivers millions of letters and packages each and every day in this country.   To subject the U.S.P.S. to liability stemming from accidents like the one that gave rise to this case is unreasonable.

A Difficult Defamation Case - Disclaimers

The First Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Stanton v. Metro Corp. recently held that a disclaimer at the beginning of an article about teenage sexual mores does not insulate the Defendant-publisher from potential defamation liability. 

In that case, the Defendant Metro Corp. published a story in the Boston magazine entitled "The Mating Habits of the Suburban High School Teenager."  A picture of the Plaintiff, taken of her from a high school dance she attended, and in which there were four other people in the picture, was placed just above the text of the article. 

There was a disclaimer that was placed below the picture of the plaintiff and the four others in the picture, and rested between the title of the article and the text of the article that stated "The photos on these pages are from an award-winning five year project on teen sexuality taken by photo-journalist Dan Habib.  The individuals pictured are unrelated to the people or events described in this story.  The names of the teenagers interviewed for this story have been changed."  The Plaintiff contended she was defamed because she was never involved in any such "project on teen sexuality."  However, on appeal, her arguments focussed exclusively on the fact that she was defamed because of the presence of her picture just above the text of the article, and how readers would incorrectly conclude that she was in any way related to the article, notwithstanding the presence of the disclaimer.

The Court ultimately found that alhough the disclaimer preceded the text of the article and was likely read by the readers of the article, the Plaintiff was still potentially defamed because in the opinion of the Court, it was reasonable to conclude that there were readers who perhaps did not see the disclaimer, or choose not to read the disclaimer, or choose to only read a part of the disclaimer.  The court overturned the decision of the lower court and concluded that the Plaintiff's claim should survive the Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.

In my opinon the Court ruled correctly.  When dealing with such a sensitive topic as teenage sexuality, publishers should be required to protect, as much as possible, individuals like the Plaintiff from being potentially defamed, and should be required to publish similar disclaimers in such a font style and size that readers' eyes would invariably see the relevant disclaimer, so as to prevent the possible confusion that the Court saw possibly arising on these facts.

The area of defamation is an interesting prong of personal injury law because it deals with the oftentimes elusive and intangible concept of injury to reputation.  Please send me any comments you may have with respect to this post and the case it discussed.

Click here for a link to the full opinion of Stanton v. Metro Corp.