October 20, 2008

Nissan Issues Massive Recall Over Airbag Problems

Nissan recently decided to recall 204,361 vehicles from its 2007 and 2008 model years in the United States due to the possibility that a passenger side airbag could fail to deploy properly in an accident. The recall covers 2007 and 2008 Nissan Altima, Altima Coupe, 350Z, Murano and Rogue; and Infiniti G35 Sedan, G37 Coupe and EX35 built from March 12, 2007 to May 27, 2008. Please click here for the full article.

The defect was in the passenger side "Occupant Classification System," which figures out whether the front passenger is present, and if so, whether it's a child or small adult. Apparently, the problem is with Nissan’s “Occupant Classification System,” which didn’t work properly since it was out of spec. As a consequence, the passenger airbag may not deploy in a serious crash.

For more information regarding Nissan’s recall, or to speak with a trial attorney with experience litigating similar product liability claims against automobile manufacturers, please contact us for a free consultation.

September 16, 2008

Pursuing a Recovery for Personal Injuries Caused by a Drunk Driver

Each year, more than forty percent of the total number of traffic fatalities are alcohol related. In this country, nearly 17,000 thousand people are killed on an annual basis in accidents caused by drunk drivers.

Sadly, notwithstanding these horrific statistics, Maryland law does not permit a cause of action against a bar owner, restaurant, homeowner or other individual or entity responsible for negligently serving alcohol to individuals who later get behind the wheel of a car and cause serious, and oftentimes catastrophic, injury to others. See Veytsman v. New York Palace, Inc., 170 Md.App. 104, 122 n.11 (2006). Such a claim is known as tavern liability or “dram shop” liability. In fact, Maryland is one of only three states that do not permit such lawsuits. Maryland law also does not allow an injured victim to recover punitive damages in automobile accident cases, even in instances where the driver that caused the injury has consumed excessive quantities of alcohol or other mind-altering drugs. See Komornik v. Sparks, 331 Md. 720 (1993).

Continue reading "Pursuing a Recovery for Personal Injuries Caused by a Drunk Driver" »

September 9, 2008

Pursuing a Product Liability Theory in the Catastrophic Automobile Accident Case

Many individual automobile insurance policies do not provide adequate coverage for catastrophically injured victims. As a result, a product liability case against the manufacturer of the automobile may need to be explored. Such cases can be extremely complicated and expensive to prosecute effectively. As such, it is imperative to consult a trial attorney with significant experience handling such cases.

In addition to a simple “negligence” theory, Maryland law recognizes the “crashworthiness doctrine” and doctrine of “strict liability.” A claim may also be pursued under Maryland’s Consumer Protection Act in appropriate circumstances. Pursuing such avenues may be the only way to obtain full compensation for the catastrophically injured client. Therefore, at the beginning of a case, counsel should take affirmative steps to determine whether a product liability theory of recovery should be considered. At a minimum, counsel should take steps to secure the vehicles involved in an accident and send a “spoliation” letter to any parties involved in the accident to preserve evidence for later inspection.

My law firm and I recently obtained a substantial settlement from an automobile manufacturer in a product liability case on behalf of a woman who was blinded in an automobile accident case by the vehicle’s airbag. For more information regarding your catastrophic automobile injury case, please contact us for a complimentary consultation.

September 9, 2008

Preserving Evidence in Trucking Accident Cases Occurring on Maryland's Highways

Maryland is a major transportation corridor for trucking and other interstate travel with Interstate 95 running from North/South and Interstate 70 running East/West. As such, accidents involving tractor trailers and other large motor carriers oftentimes occur on Maryland’s frequently traveled roadways. In many of these cases, the tractor trailer is equipped with a “black box” containing critical information, such as average speeds of travel, top speeds, braking information for "hard stops" or other valuable information just prior to the point of impact. It may also contain information regarding the number of hours the truck was in operation; information that can be compared with the log books the driver and trucking company are required to keep. The black box can be a gold mine of information. The information contained in the black box can be critical to proving liability not just for the negligent truck driver, but for the company that employs him or her. This information can be used to show that a trucking company should have known there were problems with a particular driver.

If you’ve been involved in an automobile accident involving a tractor trailer or other trucking company, it is important to retain counsel early and act quickly. Counsel should send a “spoliation” letter requesting that the trucking company take affirmative steps to preserve evidence, including the data contained in the black box. A substantial amount of the data can be lost if the tractor trailer is put back into service after an accident. Counsel should notice the inspection of the tractor trailer unit. Counsel should also retain expert assistance to download the black box information. You don’t want the defendant-trucking company to beat you to the punch because they can easily erase critical information in the process. In addition to a black box, some trucking companies also use satellite tracking on their vehicles. This too can be a critical resource to explore when prosecuting a trucking accident case.

If you’ve been injured by the negligence of a truck driver, contact an experienced Maryland plaintiff's personal injury lawyer for a free consultation about how best to pursue your claim.

August 8, 2008

Maryland Law of Autopsies

Many Marylanders and even experienced personal injury lawyers are unclear of the law and policies regarding autopsies in Maryland. Below, in question and answer format, is a clear and concise discussion to the most common questions:

Q: What is an autopsy?

A: An autopsy is a series of tests and examinations performed on the body and its internal organs to determine the presence of an injury and/or to identify any disease that may have caused or contributed to the death of a person where the cause is not apparent. Additionally, special tests are performed to check for the presence of infectious diseases, alcohol and/or drugs.

Q: Why are they performed?

A: In Maryland, a death certificate must be completed by a doctor for all deaths before the body can be sent to the funeral home. When the person has a family doctor and dies from natural causes, the doctor can complete the death certificate and an autopsy may be unnecessary. However, if the person is not under the care of a physician or the death appears to be unusual or suspicious in nature or State law requires it, the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner must be notified to begin an investigation and determine the cause of death so that the death certificate can be completed. Similarly, in some situations, a hospital or State-licensed physician may, with the permission of the decedent’s family, perform an autopsy.

Q: In Maryland, who decides if there will be one?

A: This answer depends on who the decedent was and the circumstances surrounding their death. In Maryland, an individual dying as a result of a homicide, poisoning, suicide, criminal abortion, rape, therapeutic misadventure, drowning, or dying in a suspicious or unusual manner, or a death of an apparently healthy individual or a case which is dead on arrival at the hospital shall be examined by the medical examiner in the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in Baltimore. In addition, in the case of a firefighter who dies in the line of duty, or a person who suffers a fire-related death, Maryland law dictates that the medical examiner must conduct an autopsy. Lastly, if the decedent died in a State-funded or State-operated facility, and the death appears unusual or suspicious in nature, the death shall be investigated by the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. By contrast, a State licensed physician or hospital pathologist may perform an autopsy, with permission from the decedent’s family, on “non-medical examiner cases”, such as a stillbirth or neonatal death, a hospital death in which the cause of death has been established by a hospital physician and is due to disease, or when a decedent is dead on arrival to the hospital but the physician who pronounces death has previously treated the patient. Finally, when the decedent has a family doctor and dies from a natural cause such as from a disease, the family or hospital doctor can complete the death certificate and an autopsy may not be necessary, unless requested by the family.

Q: Can the family or anyone else request or prevent them?

A: Before an autopsy can be performed in the instance of a non-medical examiner death (death during hospital stay), the next of kin must grant permission. However, when state law requires a medical examiner to perform an autopsy, family permission is not required. A family may object to an autopsy because of religious beliefs. In this event, the Chief Medical Examiner must review the matter and determine, usually after speaking with the next of kin, whether it is absolutely necessary to perform an autopsy over a family’s objections. If the Chief Medical Examiner determines an autopsy is required, the family may ask the court to intervene and grant an injunction to prevent the procedure until a hearing can be scheduled. This will, however, delay the release of the body to the funeral home.

Continue reading "Maryland Law of Autopsies" »