New Jersey Injury Lawyers Blog

When An Accident Results from Distracted Driving Are Both Parties to the Text Responsible?

Mon, 07 May 2012 22:43:40 -0500

Texting on a qwerty keypad phone (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

By now most people are aware that distracted driving – particularly talking or, perhaps worse, texting on cell phones – is to blame for an increasing number of motor vehicle accidents. Studies show texting drivers have a slower reaction time than even those with the legal alcohol limit in their systems and that distracted drivers are more likely to be involved in accidents than non-distracted drivers.(1) But what role does the person on the other side of the phone play? That’s the question one New Jersey couple is asking the courts to address.(2) If, after reading the following, you need a Hunterdon County lawyer to assist you with a similar motor vehicle violation, contact the personal injury attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm in Lebanon, N.J.

On Sept. 21, 2009, David and Linda Kubert were riding their motorcycle when they were struck by a pick-up truck driven by then 18-year-old Kyle Best. Each of the Kuberts lost a leg as a result of the accident. Police later determined Best was looking at his cell phone at the time of the crash. He was cited for careless driving, failure to use a hands-free device, and making an unsafe lane change. He pled guilty and was ordered to pay fines of $775 and address 14 high schools on distracted driving dangers; he was allowed to keep his driver’s license without suspension however. (2)

Lawyers for the Kuberts now say the woman who sent the text message “aided and abetted” Best’s recklessness by texting when “she knew or should have known" he was driving. Attorneys for the woman countered that she had no control over when her message would be read and, therefore, has no liability. Unlike a passenger who may encourage a driver to violate or ignore traffic safety issues, the woman had no such control since she was not in the car at the time of the crash. (2)

State law now requires hands-free kits when talking on cell phones in cars; prohibits text messaging and video games while driving; bans school bus drivers from using cell phones while driving; and prohibits drivers younger than 21 holding permits or probationary licenses from all cell phone use, as well as the use of other wireless devices, including iPods, either hand-held or hands-free, while driving. (3)

New Jersey is currently seeking to toughen these laws. There are about six bills up for consideration this session. One of those bills is named after the Kuberts and Helen Kulesh, an 89-year-old woman who was killed after being hit by a driver talking on her cell phone.(4) The bill calls for increasing the fines from the current $100 to a graduated system starting at $200 and increasing to $600 for repeated offenses, plus a 90-day license suspension and three points after the third offense. In addition, the bill would make it possible for drivers to be charged with vehicular homicide or assault by vehicle if the accident resulted in any deaths.(3)

If you or someone you know needs assistance with a distracted driving violation, especially in Hunterdon County, contact the personal injury lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm located in Lebanon, N.J., which is in close proximity to Clinton and Flemington.

(1) http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2009/11/crash_victims_seek_crackdown_o.html
(2) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/nj_judge_to_decide_if_text_sen.html
(3) http://handsfreeinfo.com/new-jersey-cell-phone-laws-legislation
(4) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/03/nj_assembly_democrats_refused.html

Bullying Victim to Receive $4.2 Million in Settlement with School District

Sun, 22 Apr 2012 13:07:13 -0500

Schloss Rosenstein (Photo credit: Sapperlott)

Earlier this month, a $4.2 million settlement of a lawsuit against the Ramsey School District by the family of a former student who was left paralyzed as a result of a bullying incident was announced. This settlement is thought to be the largest yet in a personal injury lawsuit involving bullying. (1) If, after reading the following, you need the assistance of a Hunterdon County lawyer with a similar situation, contact the personal injury attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm in Lebanon, N.J.

Back in 2006, Sawyer Rosenstein, then 12, reportedly was punched in the stomach by classmate Kenneth Major. Later that day, Rosenstein complained of back pain and, two days later, he was brought to the hospital in excruciating pain. A blood clot had formed interrupting blood flow to the spine. Despite several surgeries, Rosenstein has been left permanently paralyzed from the waist down. (2)

According to the lawsuit, Rosenstein had reported previous incidents of physical and verbal harassment by Major to school administrators. Faculty members also reported some bullying behaviors. In addition, Major allegedly harassed others at the school. (1)

In the lawsuit, the Rosensteins claimed the school failed to take necessary measures that may have prevented the incident that left their son paralyzed. It was noted the school had not kept records of previous reports of bullying and did not impose escalating disciplinary actions for the repeated behaviors. The school, it was claimed, also failed to appoint anyone to coordinate its anti-bullying efforts as required by State law. (1)

Since 2002, New Jersey has had a law requiring all school districts to adopt anti-bullying policies designed to prevent acts of intimidation, harassment or bullying on school property, including school buses, as well as at school-sponsored events both on and off-campus. That law was amended in 2007 to include “electronic communications,” such as cell phone messaging and internet postings aimed at intimidating or harassing others. Just last year the State went one step further and adopted the Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act, which has been called the strictest law of its kind in the country. This Act requires schools to, among other things, develop prevention programs, provide training for their personnel and take timely investigative action on all reported bullying incidents. (1)

In announcing the settlement, the Ramsey School District did not admit fault or liability in the aforementioned incident, explaining it was the district’s insurance company that agreed to and will pay the settlement. The district contends that its policies exceed the State’s criteria for fighting bullying. (3)

A separate lawsuit against Major had been settled previously under confidential terms. (3)

If you or someone you know needs assistance with a bullying incident, contact The Rotolo Law Firm's personal injury lawyers located on Route 22 West in Lebanon, N.J.

(1) http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202549171206&Student_Paralyzed_in_Bullying_Attack_in_Middle_School_Settles_Suit_for_42M&slreturn=1
(2) http://www.northjersey.com/news/Bullying_suit_settled_for_42_million.html
(3) http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/nj-bullys-paralyzing-punch-nets-42m-settlement-16163474

Appeals Court Rules That Slip-and-Fall Lawsuit against Church Can Proceed

Sun, 01 Apr 2012 00:28:01 -0500

Fischerhude Chruch (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A New Jersey State appeals court recently ruled that a trial judge acted too quickly when granting summary judgment to a Hudson County church involved in a slip-and-fall lawsuit, proving that where responsibility lies in such accidents is not always clear-cut. (1)

In November 2008, Fatma Mohammed fell after stepping into a dip in the sidewalk adjacent to a Jersey City church suffering soft-tissue injuries. Ms. Mohammed sued the church for failure to maintain the sidewalk. (1)

New Jersey law states that commercial property owners are responsible for maintaining the sidewalks adjacent to their property. (2) That includes making reasonable inspections of the property to discover potential damage. If repairs cannot be made immediately to the damaged area, those owners are responsible for alerting the public to the potential hazards until the necessary repairs can be made.

Private homeowners, religious entities and other non-profit organizations are usually exempt from this liability, with certain exceptions:

* Homeowners can be held liable if it is proven the damage resulted from faulty construction or attempted repairs on the part of the homeowner. Exceptions also exist if the homeowner is receiving rent from the property in question.

* Religious organizations are exempt if it is proven their property is used solely for religious services. (1) Similar exemptions apply to other non-profits who use their property only for the express business of the organization.

In the aforementioned case, the church’s pastor disclosed that the church, at times, rented its basement for parties and also received donations for the use of its parking lot on weekdays. The pastor also stated that separate books were kept to record donations received from parishioners and non-parishioners. Before the court could review those books, however, attorneys for the church moved for summary judgment, which the trial judge granted. (1)

The appeals court pointed out that before granting summary judgment, the judge should have waited for the discovery period to end so it could be decided whether the church, because of its rental activities, could be considered a commercial entity and, as such, held responsible for Ms. Mohammed’s injuries. (1)

Slip-and-fall accidents are those in which a person slips or trips and falls on someone else’s property. (3) Determining responsibility for injuries incurred in such accidents involves more than just discovering who owns the property. First, it must be determined that the victim fell through no fault of his or her own. The next step is deciding who was responsible for maintaining the area of the fall, which is not always an easy question to answer. (4)

For legal advice pertaining to the recovery of damages for injuries suffered in a slip-and-fall accident, contact the Hunterdon County NJ personal injury lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm. The firm is located on Route 22 West, Lebanon, NJ.

(1) http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/PubArticleNJ.jsp?id=1202546537215&slreturn=1
(2) www.judiciary.state.nj.us/civil/charges/5.20B.doc
(3) http://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/slip-and-fall-accidents-overview.html
(4) http://www.lawcore.com/slip-and-fall-accident/

Motorist Fined after Failure to Clear Truck Results in Injuries to another Driver

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:04:13 -0500

The third generation Isuzu Elf (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Although New Jersey didn’t see much snow and ice this winter, residents should not forget their responsibility to clean off their vehicles when the harsh weather returns. Just last week, a municipal court judge ruled against a driver who forgot to do just that. If, after reading the following, you need a Hunterdon County lawyer to assist you with a motor vehicle violation, contact the personal injury lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm in Lebanon, N.J.

The case stems from a January 2011 incident in which Cheryl Desiderio-Huberdeau was injured when ice from the roof of a passing box truck flew off shattering her Jeep Wrangler windshield. (1) Desiderio-Huberdeau suffered cuts to her face and had glass removed from her eyes as a result of the incident. (2) On March 22, 2012, Sparta Municipal Court Judge John Mulhern found the truck’s driver, Kristopher Heine, guilty of not removing snow and ice from his vehicle, as required by state law, and imposed a fine of $750. (1)

An amended state law took effect on Oct. 20, 2010, requiring drivers of all vehicles, personal and commercial, to make a “reasonable” effort to remove all snow and ice from their vehicles before getting on the road. Fines for not complying with the new law range from $25 to $75, increasing to between $200 and $1,000 for private motorists and $500 to $1,500 for commercial drivers if injuries or property damage result. (3)

Prior to the amendment, motorists were ticketed only if snow or ice from their vehicle caused property damage or injury to another. The amended law now allows police to stop motorist simply for not clearing their cars or trucks. (2)

Since the amended law went into effect, 3,645 motorists in the state have received tickets for not removing snow and ice from their vehicles. (1)

Snow and ice are not the only hazards facing drivers on New Jersey roadways. Motorists carting materials in open truck beds or on the roofs of their cars are required to ensure that the materials are fastened securely and could face fines for not doing so. (4)

If you or someone you know needs the assistance of an attorney for a motor vehicle violation, particularly in Hunterdon County, contact the personal injury lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm located in Lebanon, N.J., which is in close proximity to Clinton and Flemington.

(1) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/judge_rules_in_favor_of_woman.html
(2) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/snow_on_your_car_you_may_get_a.html
(3) http://www.njmta.org/articles.dws?section=1&id=1227
(4) http://www.pulltarps.com/State_and_Federal_Truck_Tarping_Laws.htm

Who Is Responsible When Pony Kicks Onlooker?

Sun, 11 Mar 2012 23:30:41 -0500

Image via Wikipedia

For equestrians, New Jersey is the place to be. According to a State website, there are more horses here per square mile than anywhere else in the nation. (1) As with any sport, however, injuries can occur and when they do, who is at fault – the owner of the horse farm or the participant? That’s the question facing a Hunterdon County court this week. If, after reading the following, you need a Hunterdon County lawyer to assist you with a similar situation, contact the personal injury attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm, located in Lebanon, N.J.

On March 16, a Hunterdon County judge is scheduled to decide whether or not a lawsuit against Tir Na Nog, LLC and its owner, Margaret Donovan, should be dismissed. The suit stems from a 2002 incident in which Lindsey Ward was kicked in the face and head by a pony as it was being lead off a trailer at the farm. Ms. Ward and her parents filed suit in June 2011 against the farm, its owner and Jodi Cox, who brought the pony to the farm on the day of the incident. (2)

This case brings to light two issues: first is the protection afforded to owners of horse farms by the New Jersey Equine Activities Liability Act. This statute recognizes there are inherent risks involved with dealing with horses and that eliminating such risk is impractical if not impossible. As a result, the act states that spectators and participants assume the risks when engaging in equine activities and that the assumption of those risks precludes them from suing if injuries are incurred. However, there are exceptions where the farm owners are not automatically protected, such as situations where they failed to take necessary steps to assure the participant’s safety. (3)

Ms. Donovan has asked the court to dismiss the case against her and the farm citing their immunity under the State’s Equine Activities Liability Act. The Wards, however, contend that Lindsey was not actually participating in an equine activity at the time of the accident and, as such, could not have assumed the inherent risks involved. Additionally, they claim the defendants did not take sufficient measures to prevent the accident, which would negate their protection anyway. (2)

The second issue this case addresses is the statute of limitations. In New Jersey, the statute of limitations for filing a personal injury lawsuit is two years. However in cases involving minors, the clock doesn’t start running until the minor turns 18. Although the incident occurred in 2002, the suit was not filed until 2011 after Ms. Ward, who is now 19 years old, turned 18. (2)

The motion to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that the farm owner is protected under the Equine Activities Liability Act was first heard in Superior Court last month. Because the discovery period had not yet expired, the judge rejected the motion. (2)

If you or someone you know needs assistance with a similar personal injury case, contact the personal injury attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm located in Lebanon, N.J., which is in close proximity to Clinton and Flemington.

(1) http://www.nj.gov/nj/about/
(2) http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2012/03/is_horse_farm_liable_for_pony.html
(3) http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stusnjst5_15_1.htm

Judge: PIP Does Not Preclude Accident Victims from Recovering Excess Medical Expenses

Sun, 26 Feb 2012 13:53:10 -0500

Image via Wikipedia

Does Personal Injury Protection (PIP) limit a motorist’s right to sue for medical expenses to treat injuries suffered in a car crash? The answer lies in the interpretation of the no-fault insurance laws. If, after reading the following, you need a Hunterdon County lawyer to assist you with a similar situation, contact The Rotolo Law Firm located in Lebanon, N.J., which is in close proximity to Clinton and Flemington.

In a recently published decision, a Union County Superior Court judge ruled that people injured in an automobile accident may sue for medical expenses not covered by insurance regardless of the amount of PIP they carry. This decision contradicts an earlier ruling in which a Bergen County Superior Court judge concluded that those who choose to pay a lower premium for less protection give up their right to sue for excess expenses. (1)

Under New Jersey’s no-fault insurance law, motorists are required to carry PIP, which ensures even those who have no medical insurance would have coverage for injuries sustained in a car accident regardless of who was at fault in the accident. (2) In New Jersey, car insurance policies provide for a standard $250,000 in PIP coverage. Drivers, however, have the option of paying smaller premiums for less coverage, ranging from $15,000 to $150,000, or paying higher premiums for coverage in excess of $250,000. (1)

The recent ruling involved a 2007 accident in which two sisters, Cecilia and Nina Wise, suffered multiple injuries when their car was rear-ended by another car. Cecilia carried a PIP policy for $15,000, but the medical expenses incurred to treat their injuries exceeded that amount by more than $48,000. The two sisters filed a suit against the driver of the other car to recover those additional expenses. (1)

Previously, the Bergen County Superior Court judge concluded that drivers who choose to pay lower premiums for less coverage give up their right to sue for expenses that exceed their limit. The Union County judge, however, disagreed, noting that reasoning was not consistent with the purpose behind the no-fault law, which states accident victims should not be precluded from recovering unreimbursed losses, including medical expenses. He did note, however, that accident victims are prohibited from suing for expenses in amounts less than their PIP coverage. (1)

PIP insurance covers the policy holder and any relative living with them, as well as passengers in the car, anyone who drives the insured car with permission and any pedestrian hit by the insured car. (3) There are two parts to this coverage: 1). the cost of medical treatment; and 2). reimbursement of certain other expenses incurred due to the injuries. Such expenses could include the cost of hiring someone to care for your family or home or to cover lost wages while you are injured. You can choose to purchase both parts of the coverage or just the medical expense coverage. (2)

If you or someone you know is injured in an automobile accident, contact the personal injury lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm in Lebanon, N.J.

(1) http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/PubArticleNJ.jsp?id=1202542808973&slreturn=1
(2) http://www.njm.com/Auto/Faqs.asp
(3) http://insurance.lawyers.com/auto-insurance/No-Fault-Insurance-Whats-Covered-and-Whats-Not.html

Contract Releases High Bridge from Liability in Fall Lawsuit

Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:38:48 -0500

The Borough of High Bridge recently was released from liability in a pending lawsuit over a fall on the grounds of the Solitude House Museum thanks, at least in part, to terms of a leasing contract between the Borough and the Union Forge Heritage Association (UFHA). The Association, however, may still be liable for injuries suffered in that fall. (1) If, after reading the following, you need assistance seeking damages for injuries resulting from an accidental fall, particularly in Hunterdon County, contact the personal injury attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm located in Lebanon, NJ.

In September 2009, Steven and Pamela Jones were visiting the Solitude House Museum when Steven slipped on a step hidden by fallen leaves. The couple was on their way to the Annex, a separate building on the property, when the accident occurred. In the fall, Mr. Jones fractured both wrists and suffered cuts to his face. (1)

The couple, who claims Mr. Jones continues to have limited movement and pain in his wrists, filed a lawsuit in January 2010, against the Borough of High Bridge as owner of the property, UFHA and several individuals. (1)

Normally suits of this type are filed against the property owner. To determine fault, two major factors are considered: A). Did the owner take reasonable steps to prevent the accident; and B). Was the injured person exceptionally careless? (2)

When considering whether reasonable preventive measures were taken, the Court must look at whether the owner created the hazard or was neglectful in repairing it. To find this, the hazardous condition must have existed long enough for the property owner to discover and correct it. (2)

In this particular case, while High Bridge owns the property upon which both the Museum and the Annex sits, the terms of the lease agreement between the Borough and the UFHA state that the Museum is responsible for maintaining the property and the Annex is to be closed to the public. According to the lawsuit, however, on the day of the accident there was a sign inviting guests to the Annex. (1)

Both High Bridge and the UFHA filed motions for summary judgments. The motion was approved for High Bridge but not for UFHA. The judge hearing the motions noted that the above-mentioned contract protects the Borough from lawsuits, but the judge ruled he could not tell whether or not UFHA was responsible for the hazardous condition. As a result of this ruling the trial date, which had been set for February 27, will proceed unless the parties involved reach a settlement agreement beforehand. (1)

If you think you have grounds for a lawsuit resulting from an accidental fall, be aware that there is a statute of limitations for filing. The statute of limitations usually requires a lawsuit be filed one to two years from the date of the accident, but this varies from state to state. (3) If you or someone you know needs assistance with an accidental fall lawsuit, contact the attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm located on Route 22 in Lebanon, NJ.

(1) http://newjerseyhills.com/hunterdon_review/news/union-forge-sued-in-slip-and-fall-lawsuit/article_9ad61eac-4c21-11e1-b20c-001871e3ce6c.html

(2) http://www.injury-settlement-guide.com/slip-and-fall-accident.html

(3) http://www.ehow.com/how_2292567_file-slip-fall-lawsuit.html

Court: County Not Responsible for Pothole That Caused Death of Cyclist

Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:09:45 -0500

A few months back we posted an article addressing the question to what extent are local governments liable for damages or injuries resulting from damaged roadways. (1) The State Supreme Court recently settled that question when it issued its ruling on Polzo v. County of Essex. If after reading the following you need assistance recovering damages from pothole-related accidents, contact the personal injury lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm in Lebanon, N.J.

Back in August of 2001, Mathi Kahn-Polzo was biking along the shoulder of the roadway with friends when she hit a pothole and fell from her bike striking her head. Even though she was wearing a helmet at the time of the accident, she died a few weeks later from head injuries suffered in the fall. In 2002, Ms. Kahn-Polzo’s husband filed suit against Essex County seeking wrongful death damages and survivor benefits. (2)

In the suit, Mr. Polzo claimed Essex County was responsible for his wife’s death since it had failed to repair the pothole, which was on a county-owned road. The Torts Claims Act restricts liability of local governments but does require them to repair damages for which they have been given “constructive notice.” The question the Court grappled with was whether or not that responsibility extended to include the establishment of an inspection program to detect such damages. (1)

In the original trial, the court ruled that the plaintiff failed to prove the County was aware of the pothole. The recent Supreme Court decision agreed with this ruling. (3) Furthermore, the Supreme Court noted that the road damage was the result of natural conditions – storms, fluctuating temperatures, flooding, etc. – and not the byproduct of a faulty or non-existent inspection program. According to the Court, failure to discover a dangerous condition was not the same as creating that condition. The Court also noted that even if County crews had been filling potholes in the area just weeks before the accident, as documents disclosed, it could be considered reasonable for the County to fix damages in the roadway before addressing those on the shoulder of the roads since that area is reserved for emergency use only. (2) Based on these findings, the Court dismissed the suit. (3)

While local governments may be responsible for repairing potholes and other dangerous road conditions if they are notified, they are not liable for their failure to seek out such dangers.

If you or someone you know has suffered injuries or damages caused by poor road conditions particularly in Hunterdon County, contact the personal injury attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm to protect your legal rights. The Rotolo Law Firm is located in Lebanon, N.J.

(1) http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/PubArticleNJ.jsp?id=1202516933540&slreturn=1

(2) http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/PubArticleNJ.jsp?id=1202538796300&slreturn=1

(3) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/01/nj_supreme_court_rules_essex_c.html

Court: Alcotest Reliable But Not Necessary for Drunk Driving Conviction

Sun, 15 Jan 2012 14:03:24 -0500

The State Appellate Division recently confirmed that the high-tech Alcotest to determine a person’s blood alcohol level is not necessary to proving a drunk driving case. In fact, a person suspected of driving under the influence can be convicted solely on the results of field testing, according to the court. (1) If after reading the following, you need a Hunterdon County lawyer that can assist you with a similar situation regarding drunk driving laws in New Jersey, contact DWI attorneys The Rotolo Law Firm located in Lebanon, New Jersey, on Route 22 in the westbound lane.

The case dates back to October 2008 and involves a woman who was stopped in Manchester Township for driving erratically. The woman admitted to having two glasses of wine but said her swerving was caused by reaching down to retrieve something she had dropped. Roadside sobriety tests were administered and the woman failed. She was then brought to the police station where she agreed to take an Alcotest, which showed her blood alcohol level to be 0.15. (1) The legal limit in New Jersey is 0.08. (2)

The woman blamed her poor performance on the sobriety tests, which included walking a straight line heel-to-toe and maintaining balance with feet together and while standing on one foot as directed, on her Graves disease, an autoimmune disorder, and the fact she was wearing high heels at the time. Her lawyers questioned the validity of the Alcotest since the officer who administered it had not observed her for the required 20 minutes prior to testing. As a result, they said the test results should not be considered.(1) The 20-minute observation period is intended to ensure the suspect does nothing that could alter the results of the test. (3)

The Alcotest, which replaced the former Breathalyzer standard several years ago, is a fully-automated test that uses computer software to determine a person’s blood alcohol level. Initially there was much controversy surrounding the accuracy of the Alcotest. The State Supreme Court commissioned a study conducted by a retired Appellate Division judge who found the test to be much more accurate than the Breathalyzer standard. Based on those findings, the State Supreme Court has ruled that results from Alcotests are reliable. (4)

The above case initially was heard at the municipal level where the Alcotest results were deemed admissible, since it was determined that the officer administering the test did not have to be the same person who observed the suspect for the required time period. As the case progressed to the State Superior Court level, the prosecutor said that, due to the confusion over whether or not the observation period was monitored properly, he could not rely on the Alcotest. (1)

The Appellate Division concluded that the Alcotest is not necessary when there is sufficient evidence to convince the court that the defendant is guilty as charged. Such evidence includes the results of the field testing and the observations of the officer making the traffic stop. (1)

Driving under the influence (DUI) is a serious offense in New Jersey that carries fines ranging from $300 to $500 for a first offense, up to $1,000 for repeated offenses, plus additional fees and possible jail time. (2) Laws regarding DUI’s can be complicated and the penalties severe. If you or someone you know is involved in a DUI case in Hunterdon County, contact the lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm.

(1) http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202537242051&Woman_Convicted_of_DWI_Without_Alcotest_Loses_High_Heels_Defense&slreturn=1

(2) http://www.nj.gov/mvc/Violations/dui.htm

(3) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/12/state_court_rules_with_police.html

(4) http://www.totaldui.com/news/articles/breathalyzer/new-jersey-alcotest.aspx

Despite YouTube Campaign, Controversy Surrounding Red Light Cameras Grows

Thu, 29 Dec 2011 00:32:54 -0500

A recent post on YouTube highlights what can happen when drivers try to run red lights; the post shows footage of crashes and near misses in New Jersey intersections. But do the red light cameras being installed at various locations throughout the State help or add to the dangers? If, after reading the following, you have issues with traffic violations in Hunterdon County, consider contacting the municipal court attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm in Lebanon, NJ.

The YouTube video shows ten actual accidents that occurred on our roadways as drivers try to beat the light, including:

• A Hudson County driver being t-boned after running a red light;
• A Middlesex County driver slamming on brakes to narrowly miss a pedestrian in the roadway; and
• A Gloucester County driver getting hit at night after running a light. (1)

The accidents shown occurred in Deptford, Linden, Union Township, Monroe Township, Jersey City, East Brunswick and Pohatcong. All occurred during 2011. (1)

The video was put together by American Traffic Solutions, a major provider of red light camera systems in the nation. According to the video, over 100,000 people are injured every year, including hundreds fatally in accidents caused by running red lights.(1)

New Jersey began a five-year pilot program in 2008 to install red light cameras at various locations throughout the State. Since then, twenty-five municipalities have signed on to participate. (1)

Some drivers, however, suspect the program is more of a money-generator than a safety matter. They cite the possibility of even more accidents as drivers stop short at yellow lights to avoid getting caught on camera. (2)

There is no question that the cameras do generate ticket income for participating municipalities. In Pohatcong Township, for example, where cameras were installed in August, 2,500 tickets have been issued as of earlier this month at a fine of $85 each. (2)

One of the biggest areas of debate seems to be the right-on-red rule. Drivers who claim to have come to a full-stop before making a legal right-hand turn are still getting tickets as a result of the red light cameras. Drivers have become accustomed to stopping beyond the white stop line when preparing to turn right on red in order to get a better view of oncoming traffic. The cameras, however, are designed to snap photos of all cars that pass that white stop line when the light turns red. As a result, it is not definitely clear whether a driver did indeed come to a full-stop or rolled through the light. (3)

Public debate aside, New Jersey’s red light camera program is scheduled to expand next year. Nearby Phillipsburg is one of the areas on the list of possible candidates for cameras. (3)

If you or anyone you know has an issue with traffic violations in Hunterdon Count,y consider contacting the municipal court attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm, located in Lebanon, NJ.

(1) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/nj_intersection_crashes_are_po.html

(2) http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/phillipsburg/index.ssf/2011/12/lopatcong_township_councilman.html

(3) http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/phillipsburg/index.ssf/2011/11/route_22_red-light_cameras_cau.html

Proposed Changes to Driving Laws Would Affect Drivers of All Ages

Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:49:07 -0500

Legislators have been presented with several recommendations, which are intended to make our roadways safer and, if adopted, would affect drivers of all ages. If you have been involved in a situation involving injuries because of allegedly unsafe driving, contact the personal injury lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm, located in Hunterdon County, NJ.

The NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) recently recommended prohibiting all use of cell phones, as well as other electronic devices, while driving. The NTSB is encouraging all states in the nation to adopt this ban, claiming that even the use of hands-free devices poses potentially dangerous distractions to drivers. (1) The NTSB wants the ban to apply to all non-emergency use of electronic devices. (2)

The American Automobile Association has stated that one-third of U.S. drivers use their cell phones regularly or fairly often while driving. The Department of Transportation claims that the simple fact of a phone conversation causes drivers to miss both audio and visual cues that could have helped them avoid an accident. (1)

Many states including New Jersey already have strong cell phone use laws on their books that prohibit texting and use of hand-held phones. Some even prohibit the use of hands-free devices for certain drivers, such as new drivers and school bus operators. No state, however, has banned the devices for all drivers and the NTSB has no authority to impose such changes.

Other changes pending legislative approval in New Jersey include stiffer rules for teen drivers.

Earlier this month, the State Assembly Transportation Committee approved the proposed changes which would include extending the driver’s permit period to one year from six months for drivers younger than 21, and would require drivers under 18 to participate in a driver’s orientation program with a parent or other adult before applying for a driver’s license. In addition, young drivers would be required to have 100 practice hours before getting their license. Accounting for these hours would be done on an “honor system” basis and attested to by the driver’s parents. (3)

New Jersey already has some of the toughest laws in the country regarding young drivers. However, supporters of the proposed changes believe that teaching safe driving habits to young drivers will prevent more accidents among our State's youth.

If you have been involved in a New Jersey accident, because the driver was on a cell phone or other electronic device, contact the attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm with its offices at 502 Route 22 West in Lebanon, New Jersey.

(1) http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20111218-704971.html

(2) http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/12/cell-phone-ban-in-cars-what-do-you-think.html

(3) http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/11/nj_teens_may_face_longer_road.html

More Efforts Underway to Curtail Cell Phone Use While Driving

Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:19:41 -0500

New Jersey experienced an 18% increase in fatal car accidents during the first quarter of 2011. Officials attribute this rise, at least in part, to distracted driving.(1) High on the list of distractions for motorists is the use of cell phones and State officials are taking steps to change this behavior. If, after reading the following, you need a car accident lawyer in Hunterdon County or the surrounding areas to assist you in a similar situation regarding traffic violations, contact the The Rotolo Law Firm in Lebanon, N.J.

Since March of 2008, talking on a hand-held cell phone and/or texting has been a primary offense in New Jersey, meaning police may stop and ticket a driver solely for the reason of witnessing that driver using a hand-held device. Today such an offense carries a $100 fine and no points on the driver’s license.(2) But that may soon change. There are five bills before the Legislature which, if passed, would give New Jersey the distinction of having the toughest cell phone use laws on the books.(1)

Among the major consequences of the pending legislation would be a graduated increase in the amount of fines associated with distracted driving and the possible suspension of a driver’s license. According to reports, fines under the new law would start at $200 for the first offense and climb to $600 for the third and subsequent offenses. Drivers would also be subject to suspension of their driver’s license for 90 days for third and subsequent offenses.(1)

According to State law enforcement agencies, some 10,000 traffic tickets are written each month for violations of the State’s cell phone use laws.(1) The issuance of traffic tickets has long been a source of contention between police and the general public, with the latter sometimes looking at tickets as merely a fundraising gimmick. At least one neighboring community is taking steps to combat this notion.

During the month of December, law enforcement officials throughout Somerset County will not issue tickets for violating cell phone laws. Instead, drivers stopped for such offenses will be given warning citations and 15 days in which to view a video titled “The Last Text” and answer questions related to the video in lieu of a fine. This is part of the county’s “Put It Down” campaign designed to educate the public to the dangers of using a cell phone while behind the wheel.(3)

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says the risk of serious accidents is about four times higher for drivers engaged in hand-held cell phone use than for drivers who refrain. Efforts are underway to reduce this risk through education and changing laws.

When there has been a car accident, whether it is related to cell phone use or not, the individuals involved need legal representation; contact the car accident lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm. With a location on Route 22 in Lebanon, NJ, The Rotolo Law Firm is conveniently located minutes off of Route 78.

(1) http://handsfreeinfo.com/new-jersey-cell-phone-laws-legislation

(2) http://njsaferoads.com/phone_down_overview.html

(3) http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20111130/NJNEWS/311300022/Put-Down-campaign-Drivers-using-cellphones-will-watch-video-pay-fine?odyssey=nav%7Chead

Prior DUI Convictions in Jurisdictions with Similar Laws Can Be Considered by NJ Courts

Sun, 20 Nov 2011 14:37:40 -0500

Driving under the influence (DUI) is a serious offense in New Jersey. While first-timers may be treated a little more leniently, repeat offenders face harsh penalties. Anyone tempted to drive under the influence should know that not all DUI convictions need to occur in this State in order to be considered a repeated offense. If, after reading this, you have questions regarding the DUI laws in New Jersey, in Hunterdon County or another county within New Jersey, contact the lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm.

A New Jersey Appeals Court earlier this month ruled that a lower court in Bedminster was right when it treated Jeffrey Zeikel as a repeat offender after a December 2009 DUI arrest. Mr. Zeikel pleaded guilty to the charge – his fourth – in June 2010, but argued that he should be considered a first-time offender due to a provision in the State’s DUI law. That provision allows that if more than 10 years pass between a first and second offense, the second incident be treated as a first-time offense. Mr. Zeikel’s last offense before the Bedminster charge occurred in Chatham 16 years earlier. Before that, however, he was convicted twice in New York State, once in 1981 and again only 3 years later in 1984. (1)

At the original hearing in Bedminster Municipal Court, Mr. Zeikel was sentenced to 180 days in prison, received a fine of $1,006 and lost his license for 10 years. (1) Usually first-time offenders would receive jail time of up to 30 days, fines of between $300 and $500, and a license suspension of between 7 and 12 months under New Jersey law. (2)

Mr. Zeikel appealed, claiming that since 16 years passed between the two New Jersey offenses, he should be treated as a first-time offender. A Somerset County Superior Court judge upheld the earlier decision, citing Mr. Zeikel’s earlier convictions. Mr. Zeikel again appealed, stating that his New York State convictions were not “substantially similar” to his latest conviction. The State Appellate Division disagreed and, once again, Mr. Zeikel’s conviction was upheld. (1)

In 1997, New Jersey’s DUI statute was amended. Prior to that, a conviction in another jurisdiction had to be based on blood-alcohol content (BAC) of .10 percent or better in order to be considered in a New Jersey court. The amendment changed things so that prosecutors only had to show the defendant was convicted of violating a law “substantially similar in nature” to New Jersey law, taking the emphasis off of the BAC. The statute was further amended in 2003, lowering the BAC to .08 percent. (1)

The Appellate Division judges found that these amendments applied retroactively to Mr. Zeikel’s case and held that since New Jersey and New York have similar drunk driving laws, Mr. Zeikel’s prior New York convictions could be considered at sentencing in the Bedminster case. (1)

DUI laws vary from state to state and sometimes even within a state. In New Jersey the penalties can vary from offense to offense. (3) If you or someone you know is struggling with the complications of a DUI case, contact the DUI lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm. The Rotolo Law Firm is located in Lebanon, NJ, close to Clinton and within 10 miles of Flemington, NJ.

(1) http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/PubArticleNJ.jsp?id=1202531231816
(2) http://www.nj.gov/mvc/Violations/dui.htm
(3) http://www.drivinglaws.org/legal-advice/dui-dwi/misdemeanor-dui/can-i-jail-time-misdemeanor-dui-conviction

Deer Pose Additional Hazard for NJ Drivers

Sat, 05 Nov 2011 09:32:03 -0500

Traffic accidents are on the rise across the state – a fact that a quick glance at the local news confirms.

• Mount Arlington, NJ Police Officer Killed in Car Crash (October 18, 2011)
• Highland Park. NJ Man Is Struck by Two Vehicles (October 21, 2011)
• Woman Fatally Struck Trying to Cross Route 37 in Toms River, NJ (October 21, 2011)
• Linden, NJ Business Owner Dies After Accident; Driver Was Using Cell Phone (October 26, 2011) (1)

Earlier last month, the New Jersey State Police released statistics showing that traffic fatalities are up this year, indicating an end to a four-year drop in the State. There were 445 motor vehicle related deaths in New Jersey as of October 4, 2011, compared with 418 fatalities for the same period in 2010. (2)

The causes of these accidents vary – overcrowded roadways; dangerous driver behavior, including distracted driving and driving under the influence; and poor road and weather conditions can all contribute to a motor vehicle accident. And, as if New Jersey drivers don’t have enough road hazards to face, now is the time to add yet another – deer.

Fall is mating season for the whitetail deer that populate the area. Studies by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection indicate this season peaks in the State’s northern counties during the first three weeks of November and in the southern counties during the last three weeks of the month and may last well into December.

The problem is these amorous herbivores pay little heed to cars as they dart across roadways in search of a mate. This is especially a problem in Hunterdon County where the deer population is extremely high and dark, rural roadways dominate the area.

Car versus animal collisions are not the only concern, although a deer hit at a high enough speed can come through a windshield causing serious injury or even death. Darting deer can cause drivers to veer out of control and hit objects, such as trees, utility poles and road barriers. They can also cause drivers to swerve into the path of other motorists, resulting in multiple vehicle collisions. The worse hours for deer-related accidents are the twilight hours which, ironically, coincide with rush hour – the time of day more cars are on the roads. (3)

This isn’t a small problem. The New Jersey Department of Transportation (DOT) has already picked up more than 4,000 dead deer from roadways as of October 20. A total of 6,020 deer carcasses were picked up from our roadways last year. Deer-related motor vehicle accidents have risen steadily in the five-year period between 2005 and 2010. The DOT reported 6,847 deer-related accidents in 2005 versus 8,365 in 2010. (3)

With all the hazards on our roadways today, even the most careful drivers can experience an accident. If you, or someone you know, find yourself involved in a motor vehicle accident in Hunterdon County, you may want to seek the advice of accident attorney. Contact the accident attorneys at The Rotolo Law Firm located in Lebanon, NJ, which is located in close proximity to Clinton and Flemington, NJ.

(1) http://www.NJ.com
(2) http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/state/nj-traffic-deaths-on-pace-to-end-4-year-decline
(3) http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20111104/NJNEWS10/311040055/Deer-car-crashes-NJ-rising

The High Cost of Driving Under the Influence

Sun, 23 Oct 2011 12:46:36 -0500

It has been calculated that driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol can cost a driver up to $10,000 in fines, insurance surcharges and related expenses. (1) That cost can skyrocket depending on the severity of a resulting accident.

Last week, a New Jersey jury awarded $3,375,000 to Ernesto Sta Maria's estate; Mr. Sta Maria was killed in an automobile accident in Middletown, NJ, in 2007. Mr. Sta Maria died from injuries suffered after his car was struck by another car driven by Christopher M. Brozyna, an off-duty state trooper whose blood alcohol level registered more than two times the legal limit at the time. (2)

The lawsuit, heard by Superior Court Judge Joseph Rea in New Brunswick, was first filed in April, 2008, and included several bars that presumably served Mr. Brozyna. The jury found Mr. Brozyna responsible for 57% of the amount awarded and split the remaining judgment between two Red Bank businesses – the Dublin House, 33%, and Ashes Cigar Club, 10%. (2)

Fortunately not all accidents are as tragic as this one, but the cost to the driver charged with a DUI can still be significant. The aforementioned $10,000 price tag can apply even when no accident occurs.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration statistics for 2009 (the last year available), show alcohol was involved in about 32% of fatal automobile accidents – or 10,839 deaths. More than 1.4 million people were arrested on DUI charges that year. (1)

Expenses incurred from a DUI include bail, which ranges from $150 to $2,500 and towing fees, which range from $100 to $1,200. Additionally, drivers face increased insurance premiums for at least three to five years. Insurance can cost customers considered “high risk” an estimated $1,500 more a year than “preferred” customers. (2)

In New Jersey DUI cases, fines for first-time offenders can range between $250 and $500, depending on blood alcohol concentration. In addition, drivers are required to pay fees in excess of $500 to various alcohol-related funds and resource centers. Repeat offenders face fines between $500 and $1,000. All offenders are also hit with a three-year surcharge amounting to $1,000 per year. (3)

DUI charges are serious offenses that shouldn’t be taken lightly. If you or someone you know is involved in or the victim of a DUI-related accident, contact the accident lawyers at The Rotolo Law Firm. The firm is located on Route 22 in Lebanon, NJ, in close proximity to Clinton and Flemington, NJ.

(1) http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/dui-the-10000-dollar-ride-home.aspx
(2) http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20111021/NJNEWS/310210033/Crash-victim-s-estate-awarded-more-than-3M
(3) http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/Violations/dui.htm