Articles Posted in Personal Injury

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this motorcycle accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to court records: On September 15, 2008, at the intersection just north of Interstate 5 and Highway 99 in Sacramento, California, plaintiff Barry Remmy and defendant Matt Oliver were involved in a car versus motorcycle accident.

Defendant was traveling the wrong way on the one-way roadway when he met plaintiff in a curve. Plaintiff made a quick turn on his motorcycle to avoid defendant’s vehicle, and the motorcycle slid out from under him.

Plaintiff was a plastic surgeon.

Defendant admitted liability but disputed the claim for lost earnings. Defendant also contended plaintiff was involved in a second motorcycle accident approximately six weeks after the first in which he fell 20 to 30 feet off a cliff and was found unconscious. Defendant claimed many of plaintiff’s injuries could be attributed to that accident.

CLAIMED INJURIES
According to court records:

Clavicle fracture; fractured ribs; pain; sleep deprivation.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this big rig accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

At the time of the accident, ABC was performing a construction contract for the City of Sacramento. Plaintiff alleged that the City knew, or should have known, that the ABC dump truck/trailer was a hazard at certain City intersections, as it could not make an intersectional turn without substantially encroaching into the opposite lane of traffic. Plaintiff further alleged that the City’s contract specifications with ABC Construction required “re-routing” of the contractor’s heavy equipment away from after-school pedestrian routes used by grammar school children.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff sustained life-threatening, near-amputation of his left leg; large right leg laceration; blunt abdominal trauma; repeated orthopedic, neurological, and plastic surgeries.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff’s past medical bills exceeded $500,000. Plaintiff’s Life Care Plan prepared by Sams & Associates, Rehabilitation and Life Care Planners stated plaintiff’s future medical expenses for “one time” future surgeries were approximately $305,000 at present cost.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this big rig accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff, age 14 at the time of the accident, was walking from his school to tutor a classmate in math. As plaintiff was walking to his friend’s house, Defendant was driving an ABC Construction Services Inc. dump truck weighing 80,000 lbs, hauling a trailer weighing 19,600 lbs, with a “street paver” of unknown weight loaded on the trailer. The combination dump truck/trailer was in excess of 55 feet in length. Defendant was traveling west on Cyprus Street, intending to turn north onto N. Fort Street in the City of Sacramento, California. Both Defendant and his employer, defendant John Sann of ABC, knew from actual experience driving at this particular intersection that the ABC dump truck/trailer combination could not make a northbound turn from westbound Cyprus Street onto northbound Fort Street without encroaching 6 feet into the oncoming southbound traffic lane of Fort Street.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

In addition to the above mentioned, it was believed and further alleged that decedent was exposed to asbestos fibers, particles, and dust as a result of construction remodel work performed on his own personal residences and during the time employed as a maintenance worker at the JV School District, which occurred from the mid-1960s until the late 1970s. As a result of such work, decedent mixed, sanded, and applied joint compound products manufactured/supplied/sold by the following defendants: BI Inc./PM International Inc., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to PM Inc. (BD joint compound); GP Corporation (GP joint compound); and KG Company Inc. (KG joint compound). Upon information and belief, such joint compound did not have a warning on the containers regarding the dangers associated with asbestos, and decedent, as such, did not protect himself with a mask when working with the joint compound products.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Defendant: Death; loss of consortium.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiff’s physicians took him back to surgery on September. 2, for thecal decompression and exploratory surgery. After the decompression of the fluid collection, he was discharged home approximately two weeks later, with minimal improvement in his condition. In mid-October, Plaintiff was seen by a neurosurgeon and diagnosed with bilateral lower extremity saddle paresthesia, penile/scrotum anesthesia, urinary and fecal incontinence, paresthesia lateral and posterior aspects of both legs and pedal and lower extremity edema. He was told that the symptoms have been present for so long that the damage was permanent.

A further evaluation was performed on January 13, 2008, in Sacramento. Plaintiff was diagnosed with cauda equina syndrome and chronic pain syndrome due to cauda equina compression by post-operative fluid following the August 19, 2006 spine surgery. The physician noted that Plaintiff manifested the symptoms of cauda equina syndrome nearly immediately after surgery. The doctor stated when cauda equina symptoms are present, the standard of care requires it to be addressed expeditiously as an emergency.

Plaintiff and his wife sued the United States (which runs the VA hospitals). They claimed that post-operative changes were symptoms of cauda equina syndrome, which is an emergency requiring prompt surgical intervention to reduce pressure on the cauda equina nerves. Further, they argued that the U.S. government health care providers were negligent in failing to timely respond to his post-operative cauda equina syndrome by decompressing the nerves in a timely manner.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

During the time decedent performed the various jobs described, and while working on his own personal automobiles, decedent worked on and/or worked around others working on disc brakes, drum brakes, and manual transmissions. Plaintiffs alleged that decedent and his co-workers routinely replaced, maintained, and performed brake repairs and clutch repairs. Specifically, decedent testified to working on the brake assemblies on automobiles, big rig trucks, delivery trucks, and school buses, which included preparing the wheel wells to replace worn and used brakes and sanding, grinding, and arcing brake shoes for a proper fit to the brake drums. Plaintiffs also alleged that decedent blew dust out of the brake drum, as well as cleaning the brakes using his hands and brushes and/or blowing out the dust in the brakes. Decedent additionally testified to preparing clutches for installation and cleaning out the clutch assemblies with either his hands or an air hose in preparation for replacement. Moreover, after such work was performed, decedent and his co-workers would sweep up. Upon information and belief, this work with asbestos-containing friction products caused decedent to be exposed to airborne asbestos fibers.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

INJURIES: Plaintiff claimed he sustained cauda equina syndrome, chronic pain syndrome, loss of a leg due to amputation, bowel/bladder incontinence, and loss of sexual function. He said he suffers from intense pain on a daily basis and continues to have decreased sensation of lower extremities described as a “dead” leg below the knee. He uses a walker to ambulate short distances, cannot walk on his own and cannot drive.

Facts:

In August 2006, Plaintiff, 64, a retiree, presented to the ABC Hospital complaining of lower back pain and left leg pain, which he said was worse with activity. A decision was made to perform an L4-5 and L5-S1 laminectomy with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-5. A preoperative examination of Plaintiff revealed no weakness with, and he did not have problems with, bowel function, urination or sexual function or any difficulty walking.

On August 19, Plaintiff underwent the recommended back surgery. The next day, a nurse noted that Plaintiff complained of numbness in the scrotum, inability to feel sensation and a dull sensation in his right leg. The symptoms persisted and worsened. By that evening,

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Defendants also contended that plaintiffs had previously blamed the U.S. Navy and several other entities. They contended that decedent was exposed to various asbestos-containing equipment, products, or auxiliary equipment while serving on board ships in the U.S. Navy, including, but not limited to: C Company (C valves); GS Technologies LLC, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to G Inc. (G gaskets and packing); OMI Industries Inc., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to DLS Turbine Company (DL pumps and turbines); and Y Corporation (Y steam traps and valves).

Plaintiffs had also previously alleged that decedent was also exposed to asbestos fibers, particles, and/or dust from the work with (including installation, maintenance, overhaul, replacement, repair, and/or removal), or supply of, asbestos-containing products or materials from the following defendant contractors: MS and Associates Inc., TD Engineering Company Inc., and TAM Shop Inc. Moreover, upon information and belief, none of the above-mentioned contractor/supplier defendants provided decedent with any warning about the dangers of asbestos or provided him with a mask to protect him from such exposures. As a result, decedent was unaware of his need for any type of safety devices to specifically reduce his possible exposure to, or inhalation of, asbestos fibers, particles and/or dust, and did not use any such devices.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiff made a claim for subluxation of his C7-8 vertebrae leaving him an incomplete quadriplegia from nipples down, acute respiratory distress syndrome, leukocytosis, thrombocytosis, dysphagia, polydipsia, anxiety, nyponatremia, hypokalemia, acute renal failure, post-trauma pulmonary insufficiency, hyposmolality, pneumonia, post hemorrhagic anemia, constipation, neuogenic bladder and bowel, abnormal glucose, cardiac dysrhythmias and autonomic dysreflexia, hyperglycemia, C3-C4 and C4-C5 disc protrusion, UTIs, insomnia, depression, blisters and ulcers, $947,000 in past medical expenses, $2 million to 5 million in future medical expenses, $120,000 in past lost income, $1.7 million in future lost wages, reduced life expectancy and lost enjoyment of life.

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Defendant: Decedent, a 75-year-old retired maintenance man, shade tree mechanic, home remodeler, and former boiler tender/fireman in the Navy, died of pleural mesothelioma on October 11, 2007. Plaintiffs, surviving spouse, and adult children alleged that several defendants manufactured, distributed, or sold asbestos-containing products to which decedent was exposed.

Plaintiffs alleged that decedent’s exposure to work as a shade tree mechanic and work while a part-time mechanic for four years exposed him to brake-wear debris and wear debris from clutches that contained asbestos. Decedent would use an air hose to blow out brake wear debris from brake drums. Plaintiffs also alleged that decedent’s work with ABC joint compound exposed him to asbestos in the joint compound.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information