Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog

Pike Township School Bus Hit By Truck Driver Reading a Text Message

Mon, 23 Apr 2012 07:43:36 -0600

Indystar.com is reporting nine (9) children were injured when a truck driver rear-ended a Pike Township school bus carrying the children last week. An investigating officer to the collision said the truck driver was admittedly looking at a text message he had just received at the time of the collision.

Indiana Code section 9-21-8-59, in part, says a person, while operating a motor vehicle, may not use a telecommunication device to: 1) to type a text message or an electronic mail message; 2) transmit a text message or an electronic mail message; or 3) read a text message or an electronic mail message; while operating a moving motor vehicle unless the device is used in conjunction with hands free or voice operated technology, or unless the device is used to call 911 to report a bona fide emergency.

The injury attorneys at Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Patterson have represented injury victims involved in motor vehicle accidents where the responsible driver was texting or typing a text message at the time of the crash.

Lawyer Tony Patterson Speaks to Fox 59 About Upcoming Pedalpalooza Event

Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:45:08 -0600

Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Patterson lawyer Tony Patterson spoke with Fox 59 today regarding an upcoming event his law firm is sponsoring called Pedalpalooza which promotes bicycle safety and the use of bicycle helmets. Mr. Patterson's law firm will be giving away free bicycle helmets at the April 28, 2012 event at Witham Hospital in Lebanon. It is set to begin at 10:00 am.

For more details about Pedalpalooza please click on the link below to watch Tony Patterson's full interview with Fox 59 news.

http://www.fox59.com/videogallery/69455698/News/VIDEO-Pedalpalooza-Event

Indiana Court of Appeals concludes that Auto-Owners Insurance Company's underinsured motorist provision vague and ambiguous

Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:00:10 -0600

In Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Cathy Benko, et al., the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded that the plain language of an insured's underinsured motorist provision in the policy "would lead an ordinary policyholder to believe that they were required to bring a bodily injury claim against the alleged tortfeasor within the applicable statute of limitations."

A Starke County woman was involved in a motor vehicle collision on August 17, 2007, which resulted in her suffering personal injuries. She filed her lawsuit against the at fault driver on August 11, 2009, just several days before the 2-year statute of limitations ran. In September 2009, she received a policy limits settlement offer of $100,000 from the at fault driver's insurance company. She then notified her insurance company (Auto-Owners) of the settlement offer and in October 2009 notified Auto-Owners that she would be making an underinsured motorist claim on her auto insurance.

Auto-Owners' policy language stated:

a. TIME LIMITATION FOR ACTIONS AGAINST US
Any person seeking Uninsured or Underinsured Motorist Coverage must:

(1) present a claim for compensatory damages according to the terms and conditions of the policy; and
(2) conform with any applicable statute of limitations applying to bodily injury claims in the state in which the accident occurred.

Indiana Court of Appeals Awards Prejudgment Interest to Plaintiff in Lake County Auto Accident Case

Sun, 11 Mar 2012 15:13:40 -0600

In Kosarko v. The Estate of Herndobler (Cause No. 45A03-1012-CT-668), the Lake County trial court denied a motor vehicle collision plaintiff prejudgment interest. Margaret Kosarko (plaintiff) was injured in an automobile accident involving Daniel Herndobler. Kosarko sued Herndobler for her injuries arising from the crash.

Herndobler died while his case was pending and the administrator of his estate was substituted as the defendant. On March 18, 2008, Kosarko served the administrator with a settlement offer of $100,000 payable within sixty (60) days, but it was not accepted. Following a jury trial, a verdict was returned in favor of Kosarko in the amount of $210,000. Kosarko filed a motion with the trial court for prejudgment interest and the trial court denied the motion.

Indiana Court of Appeals Determined Pendleton, Indiana Motorist Owed a Duty of Care to Motorcyclist After Waiving Motorcyclist Through Intersection Indicating it was Clear

Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:52:13 -0600

In the case of Hamilton v. Key (Cause No. 48D01-0905-CT-749), Dewayne Hamilton (the plaintiff) was riding his motorcycle and was seriously injured after a collision with another motorist at the intersection of two roads located northeast of Pendleton, Indiana. Hamilton was driving in the left southbound lane and Jacob Key (the defendant) was driving in the right southbound lane. Key was stopped in his employers’ truck at the intersection due to traffic that had stopped in front of him; traffic was also stopped behind him, however traffic was not stopped in the left southbound lane. Another vehicle, driven by John Owens, was travelling eastbound toward the intersection and had stopped at the intersection to make a left turn to go northbound.

Key thoroughly looked around for traffic approaching the intersection from the north in the lane to his left (Key actually got out of his truck, stood on the doorsill, and examined the traffic) and motioned to Owens that it was safe to enter the intersection to make the left turn. Owens’s view north was obstructed by the line of stopped traffic in the right southbound lane. As Owens entered the intersection, Hamilton also entered the intersection in the left southbound lane on his motorcycle and collided with the car being driven by Owens. Hamilton sustained serious injuries and filed a lawsuit against Jacob Key. Hamilton also sued Ted and Sally Brown, alleging they were responsible as Key’s employers.

Tony Patterson Testifies Before Indiana State Senate Committee in Support of Additional Money to Indiana State Fair Sugarland Concert Stage Collapse Victims

Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:04:32 -0600

This past Thursday, attorney Tony Patterson testified before an Indiana state Senate committee in support of additional money going to the Indiana State Fair Sugarland concert stage collapse victims. The State of Indiana has paid $5 million to the victims which is the maximize allowed under current Indiana law. Proposed legislation looks to pay an additional $5 million to the victims, but Mr. Patterson urged the committee that will not be enough.

"With 7 folks dead, with long term medical costs, serious injuries, we're looking at a damage figure of up to a $100 million" said Patterson. He explained that all of the defendants that answered the victims' complaint thus far in the civil lawsuit have blamed the State of Indiana for the incident meaning the defendants will attempt to have the jury allocate fault to the State of Indiana at trial.

Tony Patterson, Paul Kruse and Pete Obremskey Selected as 2012 Super Lawyers for Excellence in Representing Personal Injury Victims in Indiana

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:31:45 -0600

Super Lawyers magazine recently released its 2012 list of attorneys to be recognized in Indiana. Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Patterson is proud to have six attorneys from its office recognized on this prestigious list. Attorneys Pete Obremskey, Paul Kruse and Tony Patterson were selected as 2012 Indiana Super Lawyers based on their excellence in representing personal injury victims. Parr Richey attorney Kent Frandsen was also selected as a 2012 Indiana Super Lawyer for the outstanding representation he has provided as a civil litigator, while Larry J. Wallace and Jeremy Fetty were recognized as a 2012 Indiana Super Lawyer and Rising Star in the utilities practice area, respectively.

Super Lawyer candidates are evaluated based on a number of things, including verdicts, settlements and experience. The Super Lawyers list is limited to only 5% of the attorneys within their jurisdiction. Parr Richey has been represented on the Indiana Super Lawyers list by at least one of its attorneys every year since its inception.

Tony Patterson and Pete Obremskey Ranked Top 50 Laywers in Indiana

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:50:35 -0600

Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Patterson attorneys Tony Patterson and Pete Obremskey were ranked in the top 50 in the Indiana Super Lawyers 2012 publication. Tony and Pete represent personal injury victims throughout Indiana, but received this ranking amid all attorneys in all practice areas around the State of Indiana.

Indiana Supreme Court Says Okay to Engineering Expert Providing Testimony as to Cause of Lower-Back Injury in Motor Vehicle Collision

Sat, 11 Feb 2012 14:30:48 -0600

In Person v. Shipley (No. 20S03-1110-CT-609), the Indiana Supreme Court agreed with the trial court that an engineering expert was qualified to provide expert testimony on the cause of a lower-back injury the plaintiff suffered when his tractor trailer truck was rear-ended by the defendant’s Buick sedan.

The engineer's qualifications included an undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering, a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering, time spent as an assistant professor at a school of medicine, and time spent teaching courses in biomechanics that cover the musculoskeletal system and the principles underlying the calculations he used for his testimony. The Court explained that the expert was qualified to provide expert testimony because his “engineering background, his knowledge of velocity and changes in speed upon impact, and his experience in reviewing these types of cases made him qualified to offer his opinion as to the change in speed or velocity of [the Plaintiff’s] tractor-trailer.” The Court also agreed that the expert was qualified to give his opinion that the accident did not cause the plaintiff’s lower-back injury because, although the expert was not a medical doctor, the expert’s opinion focused on “the science of engineering and physics as opposed to the science of medicine.” Therefore, his education, background, training, and knowledge of the effect of forces on the musculoskeletal system made him qualified to render his causation opinion under Rule 702.

Parr Richey Attorneys Closely Reviewing Indiana Department of Labor's IOSHA Investigation Results in Connection with the Indiana State Fair Sugarland Stage Collapse

Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:01:34 -0600

Attorneys representing victims of the Indiana State Fair Sugarland stage collapse are closely reviewing the recently released results from the Indiana Department of Labor’s IOSHA investigation. The investigation resulted in fines and Safety Orders being assessed against the Indiana State Fair Commission, Local 30 of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees and Mid-America Sound Corporation, for their safety failures in connection with the stage collapse.

Attorney Tony Patterson (Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Patterson LLP), is representing several injury victims including the Polet family, who previously filed a lawsuit in Marion County captioned Polet, et. al. v. Live Nation et. al. That lawsuit was brought by more than fifteen law firms on behalf of approximately 40 injury victims and the families of four persons killed in the stage collapse.

“On behalf of the victims of the tragedy, our hope is that this investigation and the fines that were assessed will improve safety so that others in the future won’t have to go through what these people and their families have had to endure,” said Patterson. “We know that this report is just the beginning and we look forward to receiving the reports and investigation results from Thorton Tomasetti and Witt Associates, which will hopefully continue to give us, and the public, a better understanding as to the events that evening.”

Indiana Supreme Court Holds Psychologist Allowed to Testify as to Cause of Brain Injury in Elkhart County, Indiana Truck Accident Case

Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:09:55 -0600

In Bennett v. Richmond (No. 20S03-1105-CV-293), the Indiana Supreme Court held the trial court was correct in allowing a psychologist to testify that the plaintiff in a Elkhart County, Indiana truck accident case had a brain injury that was caused by the crash. The Court explains, in Bennett, the plaintiff underwent a neuropsychological evaluation with Dr. Sheridan McCabe, a psychologist. Plaintiff had been suffering from headaches and memory loss sinice the crash, but had not been diagnosed with a brain injury.

Dr. McCabe reviewed plaintiff's medical records and deposition, interviewed plaintiff and his wife, and administered a "battery" of neuropsychological tests to plaintiff. After which, Dr. McCabe testified that plaintiff had "experienced a traumatic brain injury in the accident."

In reaching its holding that it was appropriate for Dr. McCabe to testify plaintiff had suffered a traumatic brain injury caused by the crash, the Indiana Supreme Court reasoned that psychologists and neuropsychologists may provide such testimony if they are qualified under Indiana Evidence Rule 702 (qualified based on certain knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education).

Did You Know?

Thu, 19 Jan 2012 08:57:00 -0600

Indiana Trial Rule 75 provides that the county where a motor vehicle collision or train accident occurs is a county of preferred venue. However, Indiana Trial Rule 75 does not provide for the location of an injury for other personal injury or malpractice claims to serve as an independent basis for preferred venue.

Attorney Paul Kruse Admitted to Million Dollar Advocates Forum

Tue, 03 Jan 2012 07:53:55 -0600

Parr Richey attorney Paul Kruse was recently admitted as a member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum. Membership to this group is limited to attorneys who have won million and multi-million dollar verdicts, awards or settlement. Congratulations Paul!

Tony Patterson Inducted as a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers

Sun, 25 Dec 2011 07:27:31 -0600

Parr Richey attorney Tony Patterson was recently inducted as a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers. Fellowship in the College is by invitation only to experienced trial lawyers in practice more than 15 years and is selected by College Members. Membership is limited to no more than one percent of the bar in any state.

New Indiana Case on Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

Fri, 16 Dec 2011 07:53:16 -0600

In a recent opinion (Spangler v. Bechtel, cause number 49S05-1012-CV-703), the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that the parents’ claim for damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress from experiencing the stillbirth of their child was not barred by the Indiana Child Wrongful Death Act or the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act ("MMA"). After witnessing the death of their full-term child in utero during labor, the parents filed suit against the hospital (where child was delivered), nurse-midwife (provided pre-natal care and managed the delivery of the child at the hospital), and alleged employer of the nurse-midwife.