Boston Personal Injury Attorney Blog

November 18, 2014

Video Cameras Could Prevent Boston Nursing Home Abuse

Family members who must place relatives in nursing homes have plenty of legitimate reasons to be concerned about whether their parents or loved ones are getting appropriate care.

Recently, the New York Times wrote about one woman who wanted to use a video camera in her mother’s room when she suspected abuse. The bylaws of the nursing home prohibited this, claiming they violated the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA). However, this may not be entirely true.

Preventing nursing home abuse is an important issue, and it’s important patients and family members understand their legal rights. A Boston nursing home abuse lawyer should be consulted for assistance when nursing home abuse is suspected. Families visiting relatives and loved ones over the winter holidays should also watch for signs of potential abuse so they can take appropriate action.
Continue reading

November 15, 2014

RGR, LLC v. Settle: On Wrongful Death Actions

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

RGR, LLC v. Settle, a case from the Supreme Court of Virginia, involved a plaintiff who was killed while driving a dump truck. Plaintiff drove his dump truck across train tracks at a private railroad crossing, which contained no bells, warning signals, or flashing lights. While on the tracks, he was hit by a freight train and killed.

Near the railroad tracks, defendant operated a business that offloaded lumber from train cars and then loaded the wood onto tractor-trailers. Defendant had stacked lumber approximately seven feet inside railroad operator’s 30-foot right-of-way alongside the tracks. After passing the large stacks of lumber, plaintiff entered the tracks, and the train hit the front of his truck. At the time of the accident, plaintiff was delivering a load of gravel for a public construction project.

Plaintiff’s surviving spouse filed a wrongful death action in her late husband’s name, alleging defendant was negligent in stacking lumber near railroad tracks, thus breaching the duty of care owed to plaintiff and causing his death.
Continue reading

November 11, 2014

Colombo v. BRP US, Inc.: Serious Personal Injury and Personal Watercraft

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Colombo v. BRP US, Inc., an appeal from the California Court of Appeal, involved plaintiffs who went jet skiing. The group consisted of two sisters who went to help a third sister move into a new apartment. The sister who was moving had a boyfriend whose roommate operated personal watercraft for a local company.

Boyfriend wanted to reward the two sisters for helping his girlfriend move and arranged to meet them at a store and then take them to ride the personal watercraft (PWCs). He loaded two PWCs onto a trailer, met them at the store, and took them to the bay to ride. Both sisters wore two-piece bathing suits. Nobody in the group was wearing a wetsuit.

After putting on a life vest, plaintiffs waded into the water and met defendant. Both plaintiffs got on the back of PWC with defendant sitting in the operator’s seat. He did not give them any instructions. Plaintiff testified that she had no intention of driving the PWC herself and did not have any idea how PWCs worked and how fast water exited the jet-thrust nozzle underneath. She also did not see any labels under the handlebars or on the console that warned of severe injury that could occur as a result of falling into the water near the nozzles.
Continue reading

November 7, 2014

Braese, Jr. v. Stinker Stores, Inc: Animal Bite Injury Liability

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Braese, Jr. v. Stinker Stores, Inc., an appeal from the Supreme Court of Idaho, involved a rather unique set of facts. A customer entered the convenience store at a gas station. Store manager permitted customers to bring their dogs into the store because she knew that other area businesses allowed this, and she did not want to be disliked by area dog owners.

One particular day, a customer had his dog on a leash while standing at the counter. However, customer was not holding the leash while at the counter. The dog raised up her paws and put them on the counter. Manager gave the dog a treat. The entire transaction took around two minutes and during that time the dog put her paws on the counter six more times and, on the last time, cashier gave her another treat.

While customer was putting his change in his pocket, plaintiff walked into the store. Customer was facing cashier. Plaintiff put his hand in his pocket to get cash to pay for a lottery ticket. The dog apparently though another treat was involved and jumped up, hitting plaintiff in the chest with her front paws.
Continue reading

November 4, 2014

Mattox v. Life Care Centers of America: Nursing Home Wrongful Death

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Sometimes a loved one or family member reaches a point where they can no longer receive sufficient care at home. While it is often a difficult decision, arranging for a loved one to enter into a managed care facility or nursing home is often most loving choice we can make. We trust the facility and staffers will better care of our family member than we could at home.

In Mattox v. Life Care Centers of America, an elderly woman was receiving care from a nursing home owned by defendant. She was 86-years-old. During her stay, she suffered a fall and fractured her femur. She was taken to the emergency room, where doctors gave her pain medication. She then suffered nausea, vomiting and aspiration. She was not stable enough to have surgery to repair her broken leg, was placed in “comfort care,” and died just after midnight.

Plaintiff’s son filed a wrongful death lawsuit against defendant, alleging they were aware she had a history of falling and did not take proper care to prevent her from falling and breaking her leg. Defendant filed for summary judgment on grounds plaintiff failed to name an expert who would testify that defendant didn’t adhere to the required standard of care with respect to plaintiff’s death, and further had not introduced any evidence to prove the fall was the proximate cause of plaintiff’s death.
Continue reading

November 1, 2014

Lyons v. Richmond Cmty. Sch. Corp: Wrongful Death Cases Involving Children

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

When we send our children to school, we assume that school officials will take proper precautions to make sure our kids are safe. In Lyons v. Richmond Cmty. Sch. Corp, a case from the Indiana Supreme Court, plaintiff was the parent of a 17-year-old high school student with Down syndrome who was considered severely disabled. She had trouble eating and failed to chew her food or frequently took too many bites before attempting to swallow.

A contractor hired by the state worked with her school to develop a safety plan for the girl, which included a requirement that staff monitor her closely at every meal or snack. She was never to be left alone while eating. Specifically, the plan said the girl tended to shove food into her mouth and will choke if not carefully supervised. She required constant monitoring and verbal prompts to slow down. Additionally, the school had an established procedure that required staff to cut up all the girl’s food.
Continue reading

October 30, 2014

Zuppardi v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc: On Slip-and-Fall Accidents

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Slip-and-accidents can result in serious personal injury to plaintiffs. Zuppardi v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., an appeal heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, involved a plaintiff who went to a big box retail store (“defendant”) along with her brother and son.

Plaintiff took a shopping cart from the front of store and pushed it down a highly-trafficked walkway known in the industry as an “action alley.” Plaintiff was walking at normal speed and did not see any other customers around her when she slipped and fell in a puddle of what she believes to be water. She landed on a concrete floor. She believed the puddle of liquid was water, because it was colorless odorless.

Plaintiff testified it was about two feet across and blended in with the floor very well. According to court records, there were no warning cones or danger signs or footprints or shopping cart tracks around the puddle, and she did not know how it got there.
Continue reading

October 27, 2014

Entergy Mississippi, Inc. v. Acey: On Emotional Distress Claims in Personal Injury Cases

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Entergy Mississippi, Inc. v. Acey, a case from the Supreme Court of Mississippi, involved a child who was electrocuted while playing on a farm.

Employee was operating a cotton picker and parked it under an allegedly sagging power line. The child climbed onto the parked cotton picker, touched the power line and was electrocuted.

During his deposition, employee testified that he and his sons were unaware that farm owners’ daughter and her friend, the electrocuted child, were playing nearby. One of employee’s sons saw a flash, and they immediately ran to the area where the flash originated and found plaintiff on top of the cotton picker. Employee held the child until paramedics arrived.
Continue reading

October 22, 2014

Kovnat v. Xanterra Parks and Resorts: On Personal Injury and Motions for Summary Judgment

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Kovnat v. Xanterra Parks and Resorts, a case from United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, involved plaintiff who was injured while horseback ridding in Yellowstone National Park.

Plaintiff and her husband, both from California, traveled to the park in Wyoming for a vacation. While on vacation, they went on an evening horseback ride. Defendant is the provider of the horseback riding attraction.

Plaintiff, her husband, and other tourists were asked to sit on a bench while they were instructed on how to ride a horse. Defendant alleges that all riders are told that if they feel the saddle slip, even slightly, they should stand up in the saddle and attempt to straighten the saddle. They are also told to tell a wrangler that there is a problem with the saddle.
Continue reading

October 18, 2014

Powers v. 31 E 31 LLC: On Premises Liability Issues

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Powers v. 31 E 31 LLC, a case from the New York Court of Appeals, involved plaintiff who was injured at a friend’s apartment building. After a night of drinking, plaintiff and some friends went to apartment where the accident occurred.

While at the apartment, the group stepped through a window to access the roof deck. The window opening was nearly a foot and a half wide and a little more than two feet high. The roof area flat enough to walk on was five feet wide and extended the entire length of the building. The portion of the roof abutted the exterior wall of the next building.

At one portion of this flat roof, an airshaft separated the two buildings. The airshaft consisted of a 25-foot vertical drop with no railing or other protection to keep people from falling into the shaft. The opening of the shaft was approximately four feet by eight feet.
Continue reading