Articles Posted in Wrongful Death

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.)

It was suspected that, during this time, members of the party were trying to destroy the evidence of drinking and other illicit activity, waiting for Amos’s alcohol level to subside, and were developing their “story” to tell the police. While they waited to call police, Mark remained trapped in the back seat of the car submerged in the icy water at the bottom of the river.

Ultimately, hours later, Amos’ blood alcohol level was tested and estimated to have been above the legal limit at the time of the accident. He also tested positive for marijuana. The investigation determined that Amos drove into the river after missing a turn on a dirt road. Amos had a previous citation of reckless driving with alcohol on his record.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Plaintiff: Death.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Plaintiff: Not reported.

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS

According to Plaintiff: Not reported.

COMMENTS

According to Plaintiff: This case is unique in that the insurance company quickly settled the case against the adult who was trusted with the care of the teenager for policy limits.

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

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Facts:

The plaintiff, a 36 year-old program Manager in the computer industry, was the father of a 7-year-old boy who died in a car accident on Aug. 11, 2006. The child’s mother, who was driving, was also killed, as was his older sister, age 9.

The plaintiff sued the mother’s estate and her widower. Against the mother’s estate, the plaintiff claimed wrongful death, and against the husband, he claimed negligent entrustment.

The plaintiff had primary custody of the child at the time of his death.

The accident occurred when the mother lost control of the Mercury Mountaineer she was driving east on IHS Highway 80 near Sacramento, CA. She and her husband, who was asleep in the passenger seat, were both wearing seatbelts. The children were in the back seat watching a DVD and were apparently not belted. The vehicle rolled over a number of times, and the children were ejected.

The plaintiff claimed that the mother was negligent in her failure to require the children to wear seatbelts.

The husband testified that when he went to sleep, the children were wearing their seatbelts and watching a DVD. According to both the surviving husband’s testimony and the plaintiff’s testimony, the mother had no history of driving irresponsibly.

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.)

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Defendant: On February 12, 2007, at approximately 11:00 p.m., decedent Sam Watson, 89 years old, was admitted by paramedics to the ER of defendant ABC Hospital (“ABC”) after he called 911. The paramedics reported to the ER physician that they had found decedent in his apartment amidst conditions that suggested elder abuse by his caretaker.

Although the patient’s only recorded complaint was being hungry, upon examination he was found to be dehydrated, malnourished, over-anticoagulated on Coumadin, and to have an apparent old fracture of his right hip. He also had pneumonia, hypoxia, and was “possibly demented.” Because his primary care physician, Dr. Park, was not on staff at ABC and could not be reached, he was admitted to the service of internist Sal Reason, M.D., who was on call to the ER. Dr. Reason had no prior relationship with the patient.
A plan for stabilization of the various conditions was established by Dr. Reason, who called in various consultants for assistance. Among the consultants was defendant Pat Haim, M.D., an orthopedist, to consult on the obviously fractured leg. In his history and physical note, Dr. Reason also indicated, among other conditions, “possible dementia.”

Dr. Haim saw the patient on February 13, 2007, and by then both a plane x-ray and a CT of the right hip demonstrated an old, complete intertrochanteric fracture of the right hip, with about 3 inches of displacement of the femoral shaft. Dr. Haim recommended a right hemiarthroplasty (partial artificial hip replacement) to be done after the patient’s condition was sufficiently stabilized for surgery.

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.)

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

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.)

Defendants contested the wrongful death claim as to the parents, and the jury ultimately determined that they were not financially dependent and rejected their wrongful death claim. On the wrongful death claim for the family members, there was a claim for loss of support and loss of household services based upon the industrious nature of decedent. Additionally, there was a claim for loss of financial support in terms of loss of medical insurance benefits. The claim for economic damages was approximately $3 million. Defendants contested the nature and extent of the economic losses, and, through their expert, claimed that the economic losses, once the present cash value analysis by their expert was applied, would result in economic losses of about $1.2 million.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Plaintiff: $3 million economic damages.

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS

According to Plaintiff: The matter went through multiple mediations and settlement conferences. Defendant ABC Group, which was insured by XYZ, refused to acknowledge that it had a higher percentage of responsibility than defendant ABC Produce. This insurer insisted on a 50/50 split on any type of allocation, and, therefore, offers being made to plaintiffs. All defendants contested the wrongful death claim of the parents. Plaintiffs filed a statutory demand on the wrongful death case in the amount of $9.9 million as to ABC Group in response to the settlement position taken by defendants. The last settlement offer made by ABC Produce was $750,000. The initial offer made by ABC Group was $1 million and ultimately was increased to $2 million, but that was the last offer ever made by ABC Group. As a result, the statutory demand was made. As to plaintiff Barron Yemming, defendants made a combined offer of $125,000. In response to that, da statutory demand was made as to ABC Group in the amount of $250,000 and as to ABC Produce for $125,000. Both statutory demands were exceeded.

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.)

Defendant Merryweather then moved over as far as he could in the right lane toward the center line in an effort to give decedent and the bus as much room as possible.

Defendant Carreon said he never observed this movement or any other type of warning from Merryweather. The two vehicles contacted each other, with the tractor of the ABC Group truck coming into contact with the rear trailer of the ABC Produce vehicle. This caused the two vehicles to become entangled, with the rear trailer swinging out to the right and striking the bus and decedent, killing him instantly.

Plaintiff Barrom Yemming was on the bus at the time of the impact, knew that his uncle was down on the driver’s side and believed he saw him flying through the air. Defendant Carreon made a statement at the scene that for some reason he moved his vehicle to the right and that precipitated the contact. He denied making that statement to the CHP officer at his deposition and during trial.

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

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs alleged the tiger had frightened the Surelys’ horse, causing it to run out into the road and collide with decedent’s car. Plaintiffs further alleged that the Camerons were negligent in renting their mobile home to a couple with over 20 wild cats, without having obtained a required conditional use permit from the County, without having run a thorough background check on the renters, and without having insisted that the renters install adequate facilities for housing the animals. It was learned that, prior to the accident, a lynx had also escaped from the property. An inspection by the Fish & Game Department found numerous code violations with regard to how the animals were being housed.

The Surelys argued that it was the tiger that frightened the horse which resulted in the accident.

The Camerons argued that there was no evidence connecting the tiger to the escape of the horse. No witnesses observed the tiger in the vicinity of the Surelys’ property around the time of the accident. The Camerons’ animal tracking expert inspected the paw print on the Surelys’ fence post and concluded that it was from a large dog. A Fish & Game warden inspected the post and concluded that it was from a large cat, but that it appeared to be smaller than the paw of the tiger that had escaped.

There was an issue as to the Camerons’ insurance coverage. Their carrier defended the case under a reservation of rights, and the Camerons filed a cross-complaint against their insurance broker, cross-defendant Brian Deven of cross-defendant Deven Group. The Camerons claimed the broker negligently failed to obtain umbrella coverage and a policy covering the mobile home.

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: On April 17, 2009, decedent Jason Hamm was the operator of a Church bus that ran out of gas and was disabled on the side of southbound Highway 99 between Merced and Fresno, California. The bus was returning from a trip to San Francisco. On the bus were approximately 40 individuals who had made the trip from the church, including plaintiff Barron Yemming, the 17-year-old nephew of decedent. The bus did not have an operating gas gauge, and once it ran out of gas, decedent pulled the bus over to the shoulder area. Diesel fuel was obtained and was put into the vehicle, and decedent was on the driver’s side of the bus priming the diesel engine to get it started. The bus had been on the side of the road for approximately 30 minutes at this point. Decedent was next to the driver’s side of the vehicle for between 5 and 10 minutes.

Defendant Mark Merryweather, employee and operator of a tractor-trailer vehicle owned and operated by defendant ABC Produce, was southbound on Highway 99 traveling 55 mph. He observed the disabled bus and decedent working on the side of the bus and intended to move from the right lane to the passing lane. He looked in his rear-view mirror and observed defendant Reggie Carreon, the driver of a tractor-trailer rig operated by defendant ABC Group, in the passing lane starting a passing maneuver of his last trailer.

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

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: Decedent Sam Leonard, a 48-year-old real estate agent, was driving along Folsom Road in Sacramento in the early morning hours of February 12, 2005, when a horse ran on to the road and collided with Leonard’s vehicle. Leonard and the horse were killed instantly. Plaintiffs, decedent’s 46-year-old wife, 22-year-old son, and 19-year-old son alleged the corral, owned by defendants Max and Karen Surely, in which the horse was kept, was built of inadequate materials and was dilapidated. The dilapidated fence allowed for the horse to easily break through the fence and escape.

Defendants argued that their fence was adequate, given that their horses had never attempted to escape from the property before.

During the course of discovery and investigation, it was learned that a large Siberian tiger had escaped from a wild animal sanctuary and was roaming through Sacramento County at the time of the accident. The tiger and its tracks were observed at various locations in Folsom and El Dorado Hills, both east and west of the Surelys’ property, and both before and after the accident. An animal print was also found on a fence post on the Surelys’ corral. Due to heavy rains at the time, no other animal prints were found.

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

Continue Reading ›

The following blog is provided as an example of a Kaiser medical malpractice lawsuit to aid potential clients in how a lawsuit is examined and conduced. It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(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.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: Decedent Van Ferry, age 59, a facilities manager and husband to Danielle Ferry, a 58-year-old homemaker, father to Kathy Ferry, age 30, Alex Ferry, age 29, Vanessa Ferry, age 27, and Marry Ferry, age 26, and grandfather to Natalia Ferry, age 9, was diagnosed with Graves disease in 1991. He underwent radiation iodine treatment, killing much of his thyroid gland. As a consequence, decedent became hypothyroid (insufficient production of thyroid hormone) and was started on synthetic thyroid replacement therapy. After several years of taking oral thyroid tablets and having lost health insurance, decedent stopped filling the prescriptions for the Synthroid.

In April 2009, after becoming a new member of defendant Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, decedent was seen by a new primary care physician who referred him to endocrinologist Dr. Valerie Names with Kaiser. Dr. Names examined decedent, obtained a medical history, and prescribed 200 mcg of Levothroid to be taken on a daily basis, with a return office visit scheduled for 33 days later on May 18, 2009. Decedent returned to Dr. Names on May 18, 2009, at which time he informed her that during the previous week he had been suffering “worsening chest pain and pressure.” He had lost 11 lbs, his heart rate was elevated from 72 to 97, his cholesterol was measured at 302, and he smoked a pack of cigarettes per day. Dr. Names ordered blood tests, which were returned the following day, May 19, 2009, after which she contacted decedent and reduced his prescription from 200 mcg per day to 137 mcg per day. During the very early hours of the following morning, decedent died of a massive heart attack.

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

Continue Reading ›