Boston Personal Injury Attorney Blog

December 26, 2017

Service of Process in Boston Medical Malpractice Lawsuits

Service of process is a legal procedure whereby a party to a lawsuit provides proper notice of a legal action involving another party (usually the defendant). One gives notice of a Boston personal injury lawsuit by delivering a set of court documents to the person who is being served.

If a settlement can’t be reached with defendants, the case will be filed in the Suffolk Superior Court in in Boston’s Government Center area. The court will then issue a service packet, complete with a signed and stamped summons. Multiple copies will be provided if there are numerous defendants. Each defendant must then be served with the packet, including copies of the summons and complaint. If a defendant is not properly served within 90 days, per state rules, the defendant can move to dismiss for lack of service.

Take for example the 2012 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, wherein the appeals court affirmed the dismissal of a Massachusetts medical malpractice/ wrongful death claim, which came a full year after the complaint was originally filed against defendant physicians. Although plaintiff had sought two 90-day extensions one top of the original, (complications arose, as one defendant was out of the country), the court found the delay was inexcusable. The case was pending in Essex County Superior Court, while service was governed by Massachusetts Rule of Civil Procedure 4(j), requiring that such process be completed in 90 days. Justices ruled that while federal rules offer no specific time limit on service of process outside the U.S., case law has established reportedly that the amount of time for foreign service is not unlimited.

December 20, 2017

Compensation for Personal Injuries Caused by Assault and Battery

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

The term “accident” gets thrown around a lot when describing injuries no one intentionally set out to cause. However, the reality is most personal injury cases are the direct result of a failure by someone else to use reasonable care when they had a duty to do so. This is referred to as “negligence,” and it’s grounds to obtain compensation if you’re injured.

Negligence however, is not the only tort. A “tort” is the legal term for anything a defendant does to a plaintiff that results in some loss or damages for which plaintiff can seek “remedy” from defendant “tortfeasor,” or person who committed the tort. In addition to negligence and negligence-based torts, there is also an entirely different type of tortious conduct known as intentional torts.

Because we know that negligence essentially involves acting in an unreasonably careless manner so as to harm a plaintiff, intentional torts do not involve carelessness, but rather conduct characterized as intentional harm to plaintiff. So if you’re injured in a robbery or some other type of assault, you can sue your attacker for that too. (You can also, in some cases, sue the property owner where the crime occurred for negligent security, though that will be a negligence-based tort.)

December 14, 2017

Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Diagnosis Advances May Affect Lawsuits

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

New advances in traumatic brain injury diagnostics can help in obtaining damages for those affected, according to a recently-released study.

Traumatic brain injury or “TBI” as it often called, is a term that encompass several very serious medical conditions involving trauma to the brain. While it is hard to think of any brain injury that permanently changes one’s cognitive abilities, motor control, speech patterns, and ability to function on a basic level as anything but catastrophic, there is a medical condition known as mild traumatic brain injury or “mTBI.”

Mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) in Boston Personal Injury Cases

According to the Brain Injury Association of America, mild traumatic brain injury is a somewhat misleading term. It does not mean that the damage to the plaintiff’s brain was mild, but rather the injury that caused the brain injury were less severe than typical. In other words, a serious brain injury can result from a seemingly minor injury, and that injury can result in very severe traumatic brain injuries, but there was a low chance of suspecting brain injury from the less severe looking injury. This in terms leads to denials by insurance companies and claims that the plaintiff is malingering or even faking the brain injury in order to get compensation. Continue reading

December 2, 2017

Litigating Premises Liability Cases

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

When a plaintiff is on someone else’s property and is injured as a result of some dangerous condition on the property, the type of legal action likely to be filed is known as a premises liability case. A Boston premises liability cases is plead under a theory of negligence and alleges that the defendant did not maintain the property in such as condition so as to make it reasonably safe for lawful entrants onto the land.

Standard of Care in Boston Premises Liability Cases

In Massachusetts, the law regarding the duty of due care owed to lawful occupants on the property was drastically altered as compared to what it was and still is in many other states in a 1973 cases captioned Wilbur M. Mounsey v. P. Ellard & Another (363 Mass. 693). Prior to this case, the law required a distinction between invitees and licensees when determining if the landowner owed a duty of due care to maintain the property in a safe condition and warn lawful occupants of known, yet hidden, dangers. Continue reading

November 28, 2017

Boston Slip and Fall Cases and Defenses

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

The term “slip-and-fall” is used to cover a variety of situations where a plaintiff slips and falls to the ground in a manner that results in personal injury. There are various causes of slip and fall injuries in Boston such as falling on a wet floor in a store or other business, tripping due to an uneven floor surface, or tripping on an object left on the floor just to name a few. These cases are filed under a type of negligence claim in a premises liability lawsuit.

Assumption of Risk Abolished in Massachusetts as a Defense to Negligence

One common defense in many jurisdictions is known as the assumption of risk. This is essentially an argument that plaintiff knew of the risks of whatever activity he or she was engaging in and took the risk of the type of harm that occurred. Continue reading

October 31, 2017

Litigating Slip-and-Fall Ice and Snow Cases in Boston

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

As we head into the winter months, the weather will turn colder and snow and ice will begin to accumulate on streets, sidewalks, and parking lots across the Greater Boston area. While this often creates a picturesque scene, we also see a major increase in the number of slip-and-fall accidents due to that ice and snow. The main question is whether the adjacent property owner or leaseholder, or both, are liable for the plaintiff’s injuries in connection with these Boston snow and ice injury cases.

Popadopoulos v. Target Corporation

Prior to the court’s decision in Popadopoulos v. Target Corporation, a landlord or lease holder was only potentially liable for injuries caused by accumulated snow and ice if the accumulation did not occur due to natural conditions. For example, if a snowstorm brought several inches of snow to the area, many parking lots would be covered with snow. This snow might melt partially during the day and then freeze over resulting in very icy conditions. Continue reading

October 22, 2017

Seeking Damages for Daycare Injuries in Massachusetts

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

The U.S. Census Bureau reports that as American families increasingly rely on dual incomes, childcare outside the home is the norm. In a typical week, 61 percent of children under 5 were in some type of regular child care arrangement, whether with a relative or in a daycare center.

We trust these individuals and facilities to provide the very best care for our children. At the very least, we expect them to keep our children safe. In fact, by taking on a supervisory role, they have a legal duty to use reasonable care in shielding children from foreseeable harm.

Unfortunately, this is not always, and Boston day care injuries are far too common.

This is not to say that all accidents are the result of someone’s negligence, as children are after all children, and some accidents cannot be prevented. However, children cannot, by virtue of their age and inexperience, be expected to foresee all possible dangers. It is negligence if a foreseeable danger existed and the daycare worker or caregiver failed to take action to mitigate that risk. And of course, child abuse at a daycare center is not only criminal, it is a legal breach of duty of care, and may be actionable in civil court. Continue reading

October 22, 2017

Failure to Respond Appropriately to Boston Daycare Injuries

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

There are many ways a child can get injured at even the most well staffed daycare facility in Boston. Even with proper supervision and the best safety protection, children tend to run and trip and that can result in a serious personal injury. While your child can fall and become injured without any negligence whatsoever, the daycare employees are sometimes very careless in what they do after the accident and it is often this response, or lack thereof, that can lead to aggravation of the injury, and that is where negligence comes into play.

Daycare Workers Responsibilities in Boston Child Injury Cases

Under the law in Massachusetts, the daycare workers have a duty of due care to prevent foreseeable harm to foreseeable plaintiffs, and in the case of daycare injuries, we are talking about the children enrolled in the program. This includes acting as reasonable and prudent daycare provider in preventing injury to the children, but in responding properly if a child is injured. Continue reading

October 6, 2017

Jury Selection in Personal Injury Cases in Boston

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Jury selection can be very crucial element in Boston slip-and-fall accident litigation. The best injury attorneys know the extensive research that goes into this process, and how to be most effective to maximize the potential for success in trial.

In 2016, a jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant in a slip-and-fall case in Boston. This case involved a 59-year-old marketing consultant who was walking on a side walk on Somerset Street in Boston. She was walking next to a shopping center when she slipped on ice and fell. She alleged that the fall resulted in serious injuries to her lower back as well as her left ankle. She sued the defendant store owner, landowner and related entities.

In many jurisdictions, there is a distinction between the reason plaintiff was on the property in terms of the duty of care owed to plaintiff, if any, and this can greatly effect whether the plaintiff has a valid personal injury claim. These distinctions don’t exist in Boston.

September 24, 2017

Boston Personal Injury Risk During Recreational Activities

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

There are many fun and exciting things to do in Boston throughout the year, but in some cases, engaging in these activities could result in serious personal injury. As we head into the fall, there will be people doing all kinds of outdoor activities, such as going to apple orchards, taking hayrides at local pumpkin patch and attending sporting events. However, even these seemingly safe activities could result in serious personal injury if there is any negligence on behalf of the event organizers or property owners.

According to a recent news article from ESPN News, a young girl was seriously injured at Yankee Stadium when she was hit in face with a foul ball off the bat of Todd Frazier. The young girl was sitting in the lower level seating area when the ball hit her in the face. Using this season’s new technology that measures the hit speed of every batted ball, they were able to determine that the baseball was traveling at 105 miles-per-hour when it came off the bat. Continue reading