Boston Accident Lawyer Blog

Massachusetts Pool Slide Death Appealed To SJC By Toys R Us

Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:45:37 -0500

Here’s a real interesting story about defective products, and the legal liability that can attach to them. (This type of liability is known as Product Liability.) The story is also timely, since it’s summer now. Read on, and you’ll find out why.

Ever visit a friend who has a pool in their back yard, on a hot summer day? Fun comes to most people’s minds with such a scene. As a Massachusetts swimming pool injury lawyer, caution comes to mine. Swimming pools, especially the backyard/privately-owned ones, are especially dangerous places. They often have a “do-whatever-you-want, it’s our house” type of atmosphere to them, and this can invariably invite serious injuries. And worse, those injuries tend to be of the catastrophic variety, often involving either broken necks, broken backs, brain injuries and death. I've blogged previously about Massachusetts swimming pool injuries, and of what measure pool owners need to take to minimize the risk of a swimming pool injury on their property.

This case is more about unsafe and dangerous products. Exhibit “A” on this point: One hot summer day back in July 2006, a young woman by the name of Robin Aleo, from Colorado, was, along with her husband Michael, visiting her husband’s aunt and uncle in Andover, Massachusetts. Mr. Aleo’s aunt and uncle had a backyard in-ground swimming pool. She thought she was looking at the perfect day of fun at the family pool. She slid head-first down a 6-foot inflatable pool slide that had been purchase by her husband’s aunt and uncle through Toys R Us. The slide’s instruction manual and a small warning label near the ladder footholds stated that the slide’s weight limit was 200 pounds. Aleo, reportedly weighing 148 pounds, figured that was no problem. Down she went, head first. As she did so, the slide partially collapsed near the bottom, and Aleo slammed her head onto the concrete pool deck. She suffered massive injuries to her neck and head, causing her death the next day. She was 29 years old. Her husband and 15-month-old daughter witnessed the entire shocking event.

Mrs. Aleo’s husband, through his late wife’s estate, sued Toys R Us, alleging that the slide they sold failed to comply with federal safety standards governing swimming pool slides. In 2011, an Essex Superior Court jury in Salem, Massachusetts awarded Aleo’s family more than $20 million, agreeing that the slide did not comply with required federal safety requirements for swimming pool slides. But, unlike in movies such as The Verdict, that’s frequently not the end of the matter. Very rarely does a defendant’s insurance company just turn around, issue a check for the verdict award, call it a day and walk away. They have the right to appeal, and they have done just that.

I’ll have more on that in a couple of days, in Part Two of this post.

Massachusetts Taxicab Accidents: Not Something You Want To Be Injured In.

Fri, 31 May 2013 23:17:19 -0500

A common question I get in my injury law practice is, “Who can I sue if I’m injured either as a pedestrian by a Massachusetts taxicab, or as a passenger in a taxicab?” That’s a good question. Answering it, sometimes, isn’t so easy.

That’s because of the arcane, byzantine way that taxicabs are licensed and “regulated” (I put that in quotes for good reason,) in Massachusetts. You see, to own and operate a taxicab business in almost any city or town in Massachusetts, requires a license. That license is called a “medallion,” and medallions are issued by cities and towns, who determine how many are issued. In large cities such as Boston, a relative handful of extremely wealthy individuals own the lion’s share of taxi medallions. These people essentially control the market for taxicabs in most large urban locations, such as Boston, Worcester and Springfield. Most of these individuals are millionaires. Nothing wrong with that - but there is plenty wrong with the way they do business.

And the cab drivers you see behind the wheel of any given cab in any given city? Who are they? They’re not employees of the taxi medallion owner. They’re just “solo operators” – what are legally called independent contractors. They pay a given amount of money to the cab owner (at least $100, and then even more under the table) to get the keys to drive one of the taxi owner’s taxis for a 12-hour shift. They aren’t in any way trained, they don’t work for the cab company owner - and most importantly – they don’t carry any liability insurance. Which means that if you’re injured by one of those taxicabs as a pedestrian on the street, or you’re in a taxicab as a passenger, that driver has no liability insurance to pay for your injuries.

“Oh,” you say. “But the cab owner/taxi company has liability insurance, correct?” Yes, and no. First, a little background on Massachusetts auto insurance claims: To register a private passenger car in Massachusetts and legally put it on the road, everyone must first produce proof to the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles, that they have purchased an auto insurance policy. There are several sections of the standard Massachusetts auto insurance policy, offering coverage for a variety of claims, from bodily injury, to collision, to car rentals. A lot of these coverages are optional (meaning the law doesn’t require you to buy them to register a car). However, Massachusetts law requires that everyone operating a motor vehicle in this state carry Bodily Injury liability insurance, to pay for the damages of anyone you may injure with your vehicle. The absolute minimum of Bodily Injury Liability insurance that everyone MUST carry in order to get a registration in Massachusetts, is called “20/40.” This provides coverage of $20,000 per person, up to a maximum of $40,000 per accident if you injure someone while driving your vehicle. When you consider that a single night in a hospital can run up to $10,000, requiring drivers to carry only “20/40”really is woefully inadequate. Now, that’s the law for you and me – ordinary people who aren’t running a taxi business. For a cab company, you’d think that the state would require them to carry much higher injury liability coverage than a maximum of $20,000 per person and $40,000 per accident, wouldn’t you?

Wrong. You see, the people who control the majority of the taxicab business in Massachusetts – very wealthy individuals who own the bulk of taxi “medallions,” or taxi licenses, in the state – have successfully lobbied the Massachusetts Legislature to only require them to carry pathetically low liability coverages of $20,000 per person/$40,000 per accident. That’s despite the fact that, as taxis, those vehicles are seven times more likely to be involved in an accident causing bodily injury, than a private vehicle owner. Seven times. Now I’ll provide some contrast, that will really show how strong the Massachusetts taxicab industry is, and how they’ve corrupted the Massachusetts Legislature when it comes to how little liability insurance they’re required to carry in their businesses:

• Bicycle courier businesses in Massachusetts –yes, bicycle couriers – are required to carry no less than $50,000 per accident in bodily injury liability insurance. If you’re injured in a Massachusetts bicycle courier accident, there’ll almost certainly be $50,000 in liability insurance to pay for your injuries and damages.

• Limousine companies – otherwise known as “livery companies” – re required by Massachusetts law to carry a MINIMUM of $1 million in bodily injury liability insurance. That means that if you are hit in a Massachusetts limousine-pedestrian accident, or are injured in a Massachusetts limousine accident, there should be at least $1 million available as insurance to pay for your damages.

And taxicabs? A maximum of $20,000 per person.

You see, in Massachusetts (as in most states and in Washington,) money talks. And the taxicab owners in this state have contributed heavily to grease the right palms on Beacon Hill, to prevent their having to pay more money in insurance premiums for higher injury liability limits. What’s the translation to all this? Massachusetts legislators – for the right amount of campaign contributions – are willing to put your financial well-being at enormous risk in the event you’re injured in a Massachusetts taxicab accident. And there’s little – very little – liability insurance to pay for what could be hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages that you might incur from your injuries.

As a Boston, Massachusetts car accident lawyer, I find this repugnant and offensive. But aside from raising millions of dollars in lobbying money to counter the taxicab owners, the only way these laws will ever change, is to call and email your state legislator and demand that cab companies carry higher bodily injury liability insurance.

In the meantime, the best I can say as a Boston, Massachusetts taxi accident lawyer, is: Cross your fingers if you’re in or near a Massachusetts taxi.

Massachusetts Product Liability Claims May Result From Defective Beanbag Chairs

Wed, 22 May 2013 20:35:43 -0500

Here’s a typical scenario in life, which can suddenly go off into a direction you never anticipated.

You go the furniture store, planning to buy some pieces for your new home or apartment. Wow – you see beanbag chairs, which are “just the ticket” for the informal recreation room for your children. You make your purchase, have the chairs delivered, and assume that you can sit back and enjoy things.

Only there’s a real threat tucked inside those beanbag chairs -- one that never crossed your mind.

The particular brand of beanbag chairs that you just bought, does not have permanent zipper closures. Which means that unsupervised children could unzip, then ingest or inhale the small beads contained inside the beanbag chairs. The danger here? Obviously, the all-too-real possibility of strangulation or suffocation. This is a very real threat, evidenced by the fact that as of May 16, 2013, about 6,300 “Anywhere Lounger Beanbag Chairs” have been recalled, according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. The manufacturer is the Powell Company. You can contact them at (800) 622-4456 from 8-5 PM. Pacific Time or at www.powellcompany.com. The recalled beanbag chairs are made of 100% polyester or 100% cotton; each is approximately 51 inches high.

As a Boston defective products law firm, we bear witness all too often, to terrible and horrific consequences that sometimes seem to arise out of nowhere. Though gratefully no incidents or deaths were reported with the Powell beanbag chairs, I could just imagine disaster happening to a vulnerable young child, much to the horror of the child’s distraught parents. Should you or your child suffer from a personal injury, you would definitely need the legal services of a Boston injury law firm, or a Boston defective products law firm. They would file a lawsuit on your behalf, claiming product liability or negligence.

Think it can’t happen to you or your family? You would be unwise to assume that. Property damage, injuries and deaths from defective consumer products cost our country in excess of $900 billion every year, according to the CPSC.

Massachusetts Defective Product Injuries Might Result From Popcorn Maker

Mon, 20 May 2013 17:44:18 -0500

Made popcorn lately with the Avon Popcorn Maker? Chances are it was anything but a Jolly Time.

Recently, the U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled Avon Microwave Popcorn Makers, due to burn and fire hazards and the possibility of injuries from using them. The CPSC has instructed consumers who use this product to cease doing so at once. And remember, it is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. As of May 16, 2013, it was found that when cooked too long, the popcorn can overheat in the Avon popcorn maker and ignite, causing a fire and posing a possible burn injury to consumers.

Apparently Avon Products has received approximately 20 reports of the popcorn makers overheating. Two episodes resulted in fires, damaging the microwave ovens.

And, in case you were wondering, yes: The manufacturer of this product, Avon, is the same cosmetics company for women that is famous for its tagline, “Avon calling,” and its sales agents who used to sell door-to-door. They have apparently branched out, selling all kinds of products through its independent sales representatives. My own mother used to buy Avon products. As a young kid, I never would have thought that the same company would one day be selling popcorn makers. File under: Go figure.

If you own the Avon popcorn maker, contact the company at www.avon.com, and also contact the CPSC’s toll-free hotline at 800-638-2772.

And what if you’ve been injured due to the Avon popcorn maker -- or any other consumer product? In that event you should discuss your injuries with a Boston product liability lawyer. In Massachusetts, product manufacturers have a legal obligation to ensure that their products will be safe for consumers to use, when used in the correct manner. But here’s the sad truth – in my experience as a Boston injury lawyer, I’ve found that far too often, manufacturers expend too little money on product safety, and far more on advertising and marketing. And when that happens, a consumer may have a valid claim of injury due to product liability. In that case, you should seek legal counsel to discuss a possible Boston product liability lawsuit.

Massachusetts Distracted Driving Accidents Involve Too Many Parents

Mon, 13 May 2013 23:50:34 -0500

Every parent – and of course, every soccer Mom – knows all too well the chaos and confusion that comes with the territory, when you shuttle your children around in the car. What tunes should you play on the radio? How to handle the fights between siblings? Darn, my toddler is crying -- what do I do now? Not to mention just taking care of yourself, be it munching on a cracker or taking a sip of coffee. And, let's not forget that evil of all evils, talking on the cellphone. Every parent multitasks, even in the car – it just seems to go with the territory when you have kids.

And that’s exactly where it gets dangerous – in the car. As a Boston Massachusetts distracted driving accident lawyer, I’ve seen far too many cases where parents took their eyes off the road – to disastrous consequences. A recent study from the University of Michigan tells the horrifying story. Researchers there polled more than 600 parents about their distracted driving. Here are some of the shocking – and frightening statistics – that should make every parent stand up and take notice (except while in the car, of course.) These problems need to be addressed, faster than you can say, “Baby on Board.”

* Child care: 70% of parents polled said they also handled child care simultaneously when driving with children

* Phone calls: 75% said they talked on the phone when driving with their children

* Self-care: 70% admitted to taking care of themselves when driving with their kids

* Texting: 15% said they texted when driving with kids in their cars

* Entertainment: 50% changed a CD or the radio stations when in the car with children

Don’t parents realize how dangerous these practices and habits are? It’s one thing to change the tune on the radio, or to follow directions. But texting? Making phone calls while driving? Picking up your kids’ toys when you’re driving on the highway? How can anyone do these things in good conscience?

The plain, obvious truth is that doing anything but driving – when you are driving – can lead to disaster. Is an irreversible, horrible, perhaps even fatal accident worth not being a little late?

The researchers also discovered this fact: the parents who drove and simultaneously used the phone were more than TWICE AS LIKELY to have had a previous motor vehicle accident. In addition, the same holds true for parents who attended to child care, got directions, or performed self-care (such as putting on lipstick or combing their hair) while in the driver's seat.

I’m once again asking all responsible parents out there to PLEASE PULL OVER when you need to attend to something other than driving – be it administering discipline to your children, listening to the radio, or whatever. And put that smartphone away when you're in the car! Remember, every parent is a role model for their kids – and if you don’t want your kids to text and drive at the same time one day, or multitask while at the wheel, you should follow the same rules for yourself.

Otherwise, as a Route 128 Massachusetts car accident lawyer, I can assure you: Disaster can be just around the corner - and you won't even see it.

Massachusetts Car-Pedestrian Accidents Need To Be Prevented

Fri, 10 May 2013 22:12:48 -0500

This blog post is for all of the parents out there who might be reading this. If your child is at home with you right now, lean over and give him or her a big hug, and thank your lucky stars that he or she is safe.

And if you by chance are reading this because your child has been injured by a car or a bus – read on. You have my empathy and sympathy. I’ve been a Boston pedestrian-car accident lawyer for a long time, and I know firsthand how painful any car accident is for the injured parties – and their families.

Today I’m focusing on children, who need to be protected from Boston pedestrian-car accidents.

Children are impulsive. And they need to be educated in safety issues, and how to act in the adult world that surrounds them. Parents, you need to teach your kids how to protect themselves, and how to make sure they don’t ever get in harm’s way on Massachusetts roads and intersections. I say this, in light of a story I read in The Boston Globe today, about a young 12-year-old boy, who was struck by a commercial van and killed instantly, as he ran to catch an MBTA bus to get to school. It happened this past Thursday during rush hour in the morning, at 6:47AM, in Allston, near the Jackson Mann K-8 school. People who are familiar with the area said that even on the best of days, there is traffic congestion in the area, making it a nightmare for pedestrians and drivers alike.

Perhaps this Allston pedestrian-car crash might have been avoided, if a number of things had happened. Maybe the van driver wasn’t paying enough attention. Maybe people simply jaywalk in the area, as a matter of course. Maybe the young victim was running to catch the bus, when he needed to be walking instead. Maybe the roads at the scene of the accident, are simply too busy and unsafe. The Boston Globe mentioned that the area is rife with drivers who frequently zip through the area, to beat stopping for the lights. I don’t have all the facts. But I do know this: parents and adults need to always remind young people to pay attention at crosswalks; to walk, not run across the street; to obey traffic signals; and to be alert anytime they are near traffic. As parents, it’s all you can really do to safeguard your children. If anything, make sure to teach them to always look both ways before crossing the street – or catching a bus. And I say this because here in Westwood, where my office is located, I see scores of high school students every afternoon, all walking home, and to their trains and buses, while plugged into their Smartphones and iPods – and not paying enough attention to the traffic surrounding them.

My heart goes out to the parents of this young victim. I hope that law enforcement will get to the bottom of this tragedy. And if you or someone you love has been injured in a Boston pedestrian-car accident, make sure to speak to an experienced Boston personal injury lawyer, who can help you receive the financial damages you deserve.

Boston University Student’s Death In Fire Shows Safety Risks of Older Structures

Fri, 03 May 2013 23:57:33 -0500

Binland Lee was 22 years old and set to graduate from Boston Univeristy later this month. Tragically, she is dead today, killed last Sunday, April 28 2013, in a three-alarm fire that tore through her apartment in Allston. Beyond Ms. Lee’s fatality, nine additional residents and another six firefighters suffered injuries in the blaze. According to the Boston Fire Department, the fire was started by careless smoking. The Suffolk County District Attorney’s office is investigating to determine if criminal charges are warranted in the tragedy.

Aside from the possibility of careless smoking, there is an equal if not greater concern here: The dilapidated state of a great many of apartment buildings in Boston – especially in Allston and Brighton, which are “home” to thousands of BU students every year, who live in off-campus housing. Aside from being a Boston, Massachusetts burn injuries lawyer, I know this very well, because I grew up on the side of Brookline just down the street from these areas. I’ve seen them a million times, and been in them many times in my younger years. To be kind, many of them are one step above a slum: Virtual dumps and firetraps that haven’t been upgraded in decades. In many cases, they’re also overcrowded, housing a greater number of occupants than they legally should be. Liability for injuries sustained in such dilapidated buildings falls under an area of law known as Massachusetts premises liability.

Initially, that may well have been the case in this tragedy. News reports have stated that nineteen persons lived in this building, located at 87 Linden St, Allston. A city of Boston ordinance prohibits more than four unrelated college students from sharing or occupying the same dwelling. As of the date of this post, city officials have stated that no less than six of the 19 residents were students from BU. According to a city Inspectional Services spokesperson, the last time that the building was inspected was in 1992 – 21 years ago – and the building owner was allegedly cited by the city for operating an illegal rooming house. According to Ms. Lee’s uncle, Da Ren Kwong, when her mother visited her in Boston, she expressed concerns about the building’s safety. According to Mr. Kwong, Ms. Lee’s mother saw exposed wires on at least one wall, but Ms. Lee assured her mother all would be well. While the property owner’s lawyer has claimed that the building has passed inspection many times in the ten years his client has owned it, the city Inspectional Services Department disputes that claim, insisting that their records show that the last time the building was inspected was in 1992.

While the particular legal battle over whether this building was in compliance with building codes and safety requirements, the overall point is that too many apartment buildings are old, dilapidated, and fire hazards. People – especially college students who historically have never minded living in older, less-desirable housing - need to be very careful about making sure that the building that they live in has passed all local and state building codes and fire safety codes.

Kwong, young Ms. Lee’s uncle, told reporters that Lee wanted to go to graduate school for marine biology. Tragically, that will not happen now.

Energy Drink Injury Claims In Massachusetts Are On The Rise

Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:11:21 -0500

My wife and I were watching an episode of the hit show Shark Tank on TV a few weeks ago, when we were shocked to see an entrepreneur’s latest offering: pancakes ladled with caffeine, so you could have your sugar and caffeine in one easy fix, no coffee required.

As a Boston product liability lawyer, I just have to ask: When will marketers stop pushing crazy "energy" food products to the American public? The proof is already in: "Energy products", and "energy drinks" specifically, are very dangerous, and have even led to Massachusetts wrongful death lawsuits. Massachusetts Representative Edward Markey said recently, “It’s time for energy drink makers to stop masking their ingredients, stop marketing to kids, and start being more transparent with their products.”

I wholeheartedly agree. Consider these facts:

Between 2007 and 2011, the amount of emergency-room visits caused by energy drinks doubled, from 10,000 to 20,000. Experts say the ER visits were typically caused by heart problems caused by an overdose of caffeine.

As a Boston wrongful death lawyer, I realize that that is an astounding statistic, and one that everyone should bear in mind. The American public now spends an estimated $12.5 BILLION annually on energy shots, drinks and drink mixes, according to a recent story in The Boston Globe. That figure represents an approximately 60% increase than was spent on the same products just five years ago, in 2008. Particularly dangerous are supplements and energy drinks that contain DMAA – that’s the stimulant dimethylamylamine. Apparently, this stimulant has resulted in about 60 cases of complications, including seizures, psychiatric problems, heart attacks and even death. The fine print about energy drinks is all incredibly complicated and confusing, but the bottom line is that the U. S. Food and Drug Administration has attempted, in the past four years, to get DMAA off the market. The FDA considers DMAA an unproven dietary supplement that that still needs to be tested for safety. The agency has repeatedly warned manufacturing companies that make products containing DMAA in their dietary supplements that their products containing DMAA are illegal. They also warned that when combined with caffeine, DMAA is especially dangerous. One product that reporetedly falls in this category is Jack3d, which was the subject of a recent major report on NBC.

Medical experts are making comparisons between DMAA and another highly publicized supplement that was banned years ago -- Ephedra. They report that people who use products with DMAA tend to experience the same horrible reactions that were seen by people using Ephedra, including strokes, heart attacks, and deaths.

I’ve written blog posts before, about the dangers of using energy drinks. In one celebrated case, a family has filed a lawsuit against Monster Energy Products, because their 14-year-old daughter died soon after injesting Monster Energy caffeinated drinks. The parents claim that Monster Energy‘s caffeinated drinks killed their daughter, after she drank two 24-oz. Monster Energy drinks within 24 hours. Her untimely death was said to be caused by cardiac arrhythmia due to caffeine toxicity, according to autopsy reports. As a Massachusetts unsafe products lawyer, I’m shocked to find that so many people still consume energy drinks, despite all the warnings about them.

Over at Harvard Medical School, an assistant professor named Dr. Pieter Cohen likened DMAA to amphetamines, and, in a letter last year in the Archives of Internal Medicine, he asked for a ban on DMAA. Dr. Cohen reported that his patients told him that they like using products with DMAA, because it allows them to have better workouts, pumped up their energy, and in some cases, even helped them to lose some weight. But, he noted, “They get addicted to the caffeine and other stimulants,” and wind up getting headaches if they stop taking those products, even for one day.

As a Boston, Massachusetts personal injury lawyer, I caution people not to take any products containing DMAA.

Massachusetts Distracted Driving Accidents Still A Problem

Tue, 09 Apr 2013 22:07:18 -0500

How many times has the following happened to you? You’re driving, and talking on your cell phone, (which you shouldn't be, in the first place.) You drive over a bump and the phone slips out of your hand, into the Netherworld – the black space between the middle console and your driver’s seat. Most people, at this point, take their eyes off the road, and start fishing in the black hole below. In probably 60% of these instances, they cause a car accident because they’re not paying attention and their eyes are off the road.

The same thing could happen to your coins, pens, paper, keys and God know’s what else you might be holding in your hand when you drive. This kind of distracted driving of course, doesn’t even begin to take into account the numerous people who text-message while they are driving. It bewilders me – and should frighten everyone – at the number of people who take their eyes off the roadway, thinking that sending a message is more important than driving safely.

People had better start to think twice about this foolish practice. Because It just might be the very last message you ever send.

Distracted driving is, and continues to be, a huge problem. In a recent article in The Washington Post, a survey from AT&T pointed out that adults, sadly, are nowadays more likely to drive when they are distracted. A whopping 49% of adults polled said that they actually do drive and text at the same time, even while realizing that this practice is incredibly unsafe. And even more, the survey showed that 60% of drivers indeed do text – though they said that they never did so three years ago.

Why do people do this? According to the survey, people said that simultaneously texting and driving makes them feel that they are more productive. They called the practice “second nature.” They likened it to feeling “connected.” Worse, an equally disturbing number of teen drivers – 43% -- said in the survey that they were also simultaneously driving and texting.

I’ve got news for all these people: That deadly practice may end up making you feel connected, all right – to a wheelchair, or a coffin. And if you’re the unfortunate person in the OTHER car, who is hit by a distracted driver, you are likely going to need a Boston Massachusetts distracted driving lawyer in order to recover financial damages for your injuries.

The problem has become so severe that the U.S. government has its own website for distracted driving. Distraction.gov. One way that the U.S. government is trying to stop these alarming accidents, is by getting drivers to “take the pledge.”

You can do your part and pledge to:

• Protect lives. I pledge to never text or talk on the phone while I am driving.
• Be a good passenger. I will speak up if and when the driver in my car is distracted.
• Encourage my friends and family to drive their cars phone-free.

In Massachusetts, generally speaking the law on texting while driving and distracted driving breaks down:

There is a ban on cellphone use for bus drivers. Fine: $500.
There is a ban on cellphone use for novice drivers. Fines: $100 (first offense), then $250, then $500, plus graduated license suspensions.
There is a ban on texting for all drivers. Fines: $100 (first offense), then $250, then $500.

For more specifics, visit our Boston Massachusetts Distracted Driving Accidents/Cellphone Accidents page on our web site.

Who else is doing something all about this distracted driving? The Massachusetts Association of Trial Attorneys (MATA). The bar organization (for which I used to be Public Affairs Counsel and of which of which I am now a member) is leading a statewide effort to put a stop to distracted driving. The City of Medford’s mayor recently announced that Medford has been selected as a lead community in this Massachusetts statewide program to, once and for all, end distracted driving.

MATA is bringing our “End Distracted Driving” program to local high schools throughout Massachusetts. I’m proud to say that I intend to work with MATA, to speak at public high schools throughout Massachusetts, to educate young drivers about the horrible dangers of texting and driving, and driving distracted in any way. Stay tuned to this website and my blog for my upcoming information about the program as it develops.

STUDENTS SUFFER SEVERE BURN INJURIES AT UNH DORM

Sun, 07 Apr 2013 23:26:43 -0500

Most burn injury victims suffer these injuries due to a fire of some kind. However, as our burn injuries page makes clear, many times burn injuries occur due to scalding, and these types of burns are usually severe.

This was the case yesterday (April 6 2013,) when three students at the University of New Hampshire were badly burned Saturday afternoon due to a hot water pipe that burst in a dormitory, according to a university spokeswoman. Injuries from pipes that burst coming from a hot water heater, can be especially devastating: The normal water temperature inside a water heater is commonly set at around 160 degrees, and when water this hot hits the skin, it will without doubt cause third-degree burns. According to news reports, that’s exactly what these three female students suffered, as they were in or leaving Hunter Hall, a three-story dorm that houses nearly 115 students. Their burn injuries were so bad that while the burn victims were first taken to local hospitals, they were later transferred to Boston hospitals, due to the severity of their burn injuries.

Following such an accident, most families ask: Is anyone liable for the injuries that the burn injury victim suffered? If so, why, and what type of compensation is possible? As a Boston, Massachusetts burn injury lawyer, I can tell you that the answers to those questions depend on the facts and the circumstances surrounding the event, centrally whether and how much evidence of negligence is present. In this case, possible defendants could include:

• The University of New Hampshire, which presumably owns the buildings and is responsible for maintenance.
• The manufacturer(s) of the water heating system, including piping, that malfunctioned.
• The manufacturer(s) of any electrical thermostat and/or electronic water temperature control system(s) that were designed to regulate the water heater.
• The manufacturer(s) of any pipes, pipe fittings, and plumbing connected with eh water heating system.
• Any outside plumbing contractors that the University may have engaged to either install or service the water heater and/or associated plumbing systems.

Each of these potential defendants would almost certainly carry a policy of liability insurance that provides for payment of negligence claims. First, however, negligence must be established. Whether liability would attach to any particular named defendant, would depend on the facts discovered in the accident. However, the types of damages that can be compensated following such an injury include payment for the following:

• Lost wages and income due to inability to work following the injury
• Medical and hospital expenses, including physical therapy and rehabilitation
• Lost future earning potential, if any
• Damages due to scarring and disfigurement
• Pain and suffering
• For married persons, a spouse can add a claim for something known as loss of consortium, which provides compensation for the loss of enjoyment in life that a married couple suffers when one incurs a serious injury.

Burn injuries due to scalding from hot water are usually pretty severe, because in most cases the hot water is spilled from a stove top, or out of a burst hot water pipe or burst hot water heater. They can result in lifelong scarring, and these legal claims require he expertise of an experienced Boston burn injury law firm. Victims of this type of injury in Massachusetts would be well advised to seek out a Boston burn injury law that specializes in these types of lawsuits, as they can become very complicated.

Massachusetts Head Injury Guidelines For School Sports Need Updating

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:53:21 -0500

Today’s school lesson is: When in doubt, sit it out.

This is exactly what the American Academy of Neurology would like to see happen, if and when high school athletes receive a head injury while playing sports for their school teams. Head injuries happen to athletes in high school and college all the time, and, with that motto, the American Academy of Neurology has concurred and offered guidelines to improve safety in school sports.

If players who are displaying head injury symptoms such as dizziness and headaches are allowed back in a game after a suffering head injury, it could lead to serious, possibly irreparable neurological damage. In that event, injured athletes would be wise to consult with a Boston head injury lawyer, to ascertain any negligence on the part of the schools, game officials or other parties involved in the incident. And in case you might be asking yourself whether players in a sports game relinquish all legal rights once they agree to play in the game, the answer is "No, they don't." If a player suffers preventable injuries due to someone else's negligence, that party may be held legally responsible.

What exactly is a concussion? Acording to the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, it is a brain injury caused by a blow to the head, which involves a temporary loss of normal brain function. Bruises or cuts may be present on the head but in the majority of cases, the injured person shows no outward sign of trauma. The statistics on concussions are revealing. According to the most recent data, the University of Pittsburgh Brain Trauma Research Center found that more than 300,000 sports-related concussions occur in the USA each year. They also discovered that the likelihood of a school athlete sustaining a concussion is as high as 19 percent per year of play.

And concussions don't just happen to school athletes. At this writing, more than 3,000 former football players for the National Football League have filed concussion-related lawsuits against the NFL, specifically for the head injuries those athletes have suffered in the course of their playing professional sports. Those lawsuits may very well result in billions of dollars in legal damages. Here in the Commonwealth, Boston concussion injuries happen on the field all the time, and are just as serious as any of those that happened to NFL football players.

Head injuries are not to be taken lightly. Traditionally, high school coaches have determined the subtle signs of concussions, out in the field, on the sidelines, by talking to athletes and assessing their symptoms, after they have received a blow to the head. Their symptoms might include nausea, vertigo, ringing ears, sensitivity to light and headaches. But the American Academy of Neurology would like school coaches and trainers to go one step further, by using something called a five-minute memory test. It is a technique by which a rapid diagnosis of concussion is made. It is known as the “Maddocks questions” and is an effective tool that can be used on the sidelines. It involves posing some of these questions to the injured athlete:

What field are we in right now?
What team are we playing today?
Did we win last week?
What period is it?
Who is your opponent presently?

These questions are important, because concussions frequently involve the athlete's inability to maintain coherent thoughts; awareness disturbance that manifests itself in rising distractibility; and the victim's inability to implement specific goal-directed movements.

In its creation of new guidelines, the Academy would also prefer that state health departments institute specific “sports concussion registries”; these would include student-athlete records, of student athletes who have experienced concussions, in the hope that their information would assist researchers and doctors to discover more about the effect of concussions and brain injury on long-term brain functioning. The Academy also would use these registries to ascertain how head injuries impact the academic performances of student athletes.

School sports are great. They teach kids of all ages how to develop a team spirit, and they build character. But these goals should not be sacrificed when a student athlete gets bashed in the head by another player, whether intentionally or not. Head injuries and concussions can have serious consequences. And remember – there is no such thing as a “minor concussion.”

Boston Food Poisoning Injuries Can Result From Canned Tuna Fish

Mon, 18 Mar 2013 23:04:36 -0500

Injuries and accidents occur every day, everywhere, and usually when and where you least expect them.

And now, there’s reason to be concerned about eating lunch – specifically if it’s a tuna fish sandwich. If you live in or near Boston, consuming tuna fish that is contaminated can lead to a Boston food poisoning injury, and that can lead to all kinds of terrible complications. If you’ve ever contracted food poisoning previously, you know that it is a horrible sickness. If that happens to you in the future, you should consult with a Boston food poisoning lawyer. Symptoms of food poisoning can range from vomiting, to fever and dizziness. The most common food poisoning in the USA results from botulism, campylobacter, E. coli O157:H7, salmonella, shigella, and listeria. And if you’ve ever taken a cruise, you know all too well that you have to be on the lookout for other causes of food poisoning such as Norwalk virus. In extreme cases of food poisoning – such as if you contact botulism or E. coli -- food poisoning can be fatal.

Think it can’t happen to you? Think again. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that annually, about 1 in 6 Americans (roughly 48 million people) get sick from foodborne diseases, 128,000 become sick enough to need hospitalization, and 3,000 die.
.
Here are two tuna fish recalls to take note of, so you can avoid food poisoning in Boston.

Recently, Bumble Bee Foods issued a voluntary recall on its five-ounce Chunk White Albacore and Chunk Light Tuna products that carry specific codes. Why the recall? Because these cans of tuna do not meet Bumble Bee’s standards for “seal tightness.” That description means that certain cans of Bumble Bee tuna cans have loose seals or seams. The upshot? Consuming tuna fish from a can with a defective seam or seal can result in product contamination and eventual illness. The Bumble Bee products were distributed for sale nationally between January 17, 2013 and March 6, 2013.

If you wish to read about the company’s listing of all products affected by this voluntary recall including code dates, click here: Bumble Bee Foods Voluntary Recall List of Products.

What should you do if you have purchased the contaminated tuna fish? Throw it in the trash. Then call to get reimbursed by contacting the 24-hour dedicated recall line at (888) 820-1947.

In a related contaminated tuna fish story, Tri-Union Seafoods LLC, which had formerly announced a voluntary recall of some tuna fish, is now also expanding its recall to include Chicken of the Sea five-ounce chunk light tuna that is packed in oil. This is in addition to the Chicken of the Sea five-ounce chunk white albacore tuna in water recall that was announced on March 6, 2013. Just as happened with Bumble Bee, the seams on the lids of the Chicken of the Sea cans do not meet the standard for seam quality.

The specific Chicken of the Sea products being recalled are as follows:

Chicken of the Sea 5-Ounce Chunk Light Tuna in Oil with a UPC code of 0 48000 00195 5 and the Best By date of 01/15/17.

Chicken of the Sea 5-Ounce Chunk White Albacore Tuna with a UPC code of 0 48000 03355 0 and a Best By date of 01/18/17.

If you need more information, contact the Chicken of the Sea 24-hour Recall Information line at 800-597-5898.

Boston Personal Injuries May Result From Hyundai Assembly-Line Errors

Thu, 14 Mar 2013 23:52:16 -0500

Sometimes the worst things happen, when you least expect it. Imagine that you’re out driving safely, minding all the road signs and traffic lights. You’re behind the wheel, observing all safety regulations, your seat belt is on, and you are neither texting while in the driver’s seat nor are you drunk. Everything seems just fine.

Suddenly, without any warning, your car’s sunroof shatters, raining glass onto you and your passengers, in the middle of a busy intersection. What happens next? As a Boston car accident lawyer, I have a good idea -- and it does not have a happy ending. Chances are, you will lose control of the vehicle and become involved in a car crash. That means that you could possibly wind up with catastrophic personal injuries, a stay in the hospital, endless doctor appointments, and months and months of physical therapy – if you are lucky enough to live. You may well need the services of a Boston car crash attorney in the process.

Think it couldn't happen? That this kind of accident is just too strange - too “Twilight Zone?” Think again.

It's enough of a real possibility with the Hyundai Veloster hatchback model, that the Korean car company has recalled an additional 6,100 cars that have sunroofs that can break and shatter glass. It’s not the first recall. Last December, Hyundai recalled almost 14,000 cars from its 2012 model year, for exactly the same issue. The Korean car maker claims that its sunroofs were probably weakened when they were installed at the factory. Apparently the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has begun an investigation, due to it receiving many complaints from worried customers. Minor injuries have been reported in several Hyundai Velosters, although there have not been any major injuries reported. Nonetheless, this type of defective product would definitely require the services of a Boston defective products attorney.

The Hyundai Veloster is a compact three-door car, which differs from its competition, because of its asymmetrical door configuration, which includes one large door on the driver’s side and two on the passenger side. It is the first brand that is part of Hyundai's new Premium Youth Lab category, which is targeted for a younger generation of drivers. (As if teen drivers don’t have issues enough, regarding teenager driver accidents in Massachusetts.)

Hyundai’s sister company, Kia, has also received complaints from customers who have experienced the same sunroof problems. The safety recall is scheduled to start this March 2013. Owners should contact Hyundai by calling (800) 633-5151.

Massachusetts Nursing Homes Targets of Patient Safety Campaigns

Sun, 03 Mar 2013 23:54:04 -0500

I have published posts previously on the subject of Massachusetts nursing homes prescribing anti-psychotic drugs to patients who are not psychotic, but rather suffering from Alzheimer's Disease and dementia-related medical conditions. In Massachusetts in recent years, this practice was exposed in federal court for what it really was: A kickback scheme between anti-psychotic drug manufacturers (notably Johnson & Johnson,) and nursing home operators, who received increased financial payments if they "pushed" these drugs onto patients, many times in the absence of medical need.

Thankfully, public awareness of this problem is growing. Care One and HealthBridge Management corporations, which own nursing homes in Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey, have become the focus of a newspaper and internet advertising campaign by a nursing home patient advocacy organization called HealthbridgeWatch.org, and careonewatch.org. The nursing home patient advocacy campaigns are warning people that nursing homes run by these companies have been reported by the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS,) as prescribing anti-psychotic medications to patients and residents "At rates that are higher than Massachusetts and National averages"; sometimes "Over triple the national average." The twin advocacy organizations have reported that as many as 76% of long-term residents of these facilities, who are not psychotic, are administered these powerful and dangerous drugs, despite the FDA's warning against this practice. HealthBridge Management owns or operates several nursing homes here in Massachusetts, but at least three that HealthBridgeWatch.org has reported as prescribing these drugs to a high degree include the Newton Health Care Center, the Lowell Health Care Center, and the Holyoke Rehabilitation Center.

In my experience as a Boston, Massachusetts nursing home neglect and abuse lawyer, anyone who either has a loved one in a nursing home owned or operated by these corporations, or by other owners, would be wise to seek immediate clarification of whether their family member or loved one has ever been given anti-psychotic drugs, or any similar drugs belonging to the class of anti-psychotic drugs.

Sub-Par Massachusetts Nursing Homes Rake in $5.1 Billion in Taxpayer Money

Sat, 02 Mar 2013 01:31:46 -0500

File this under "Your Taxpayer Dollars At Work." ... Or, as I've been thinking recently about doing with this blog, creating a new category of post called "Outrage Of The Day."

According to a recent article in The Boston Globe, in 2009 Medicare paid approximately $5.1 Billion in taxpayer dollars to nursing homes across the United States -- including Massachuetts. That’s a staggering number. If it went to truly help the elderly and infirmed patients at these nursing homes, that would be money well spent. But there’s more to this story, and it isn't good.

Those taxpayer dollars apparently went to sub-par nursing homes that reportedly were not meeting the most basic requirements necessary to look after their residents, according to government investigators. As a Boston nursing home neglect and abuse lawyer, I believe that these nursing homes could very well be perpetrators of the nursing home neglect, negligence and abuse that we as a Boston, Massachusetts nursing home neglect law firm see all too frequently.

This report was released this past week by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. It states openly that one-third of all patients in nursing homes were in facilities that failed to follow the most basic health care standards that are required by Medicare.

It’s head-shakingly horrible to realize that elderly residents are not only going without the care that they need, but that the U. S. government is apparently spending our hard-earned taxpayer money on nursing home facilities that could actually endanger and harm those elderly residents, instead of actually caring for them. As it stands now, the elderly and other patients who require help from a therapist or nurse on a daily basis are usually sent to a skilled nursing facility. In return, that nursing home usually gets reimbursed by the government for much of the care they provide to the elderly. According to law, each nursing home then needs to tailor-make care plans for each resident, so all caregivers including doctors, nurses, and therapists are all in agreement about giving the elderly resident the best, most optimum care.

Yet, we find out that the U. S. government is spending our money on facilities that provide poor care. That is totally unacceptable, and in my mind, more proof yet (along with $2,000 toilet seats paid for by the government,) that government bureaucrats just can't get it right.