Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Blind Spot Car Crash near Sacramento, CA

July 17, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

I was reading an article in the newspaper today while having breakfast that reminded me of the dangers of the “blind spot” while driving. Not that far from our Sacramento home, a woman in San Ramon was the victim of a “blind spot” car crash when she lost control of her car in a fatal way.

The article tells of a 20-year old man driving his Suzuki Sidekick along the freeway. He merged to get in the slow lane without seeing the San Ramon woman, Cynthia Muson-Lim, driving in the lane next to his car. To avoid the Sidekick, Cynthia swerved off the freeway, completely losing conrtol of her car and hitting a tree. She died at the scene due to the violent collision.

The thing that amazed me more about this story was the fact that the young man not only did not realize the woman was there initially but even after the accident he was not aware of what had happened. He turned without making sure it was safe, and because of his lack of attention, a woman lost her life because of it. A witness actually followed him, lights flashing, to inform him of the crash. It’s not only tragic, it’s very disturbing.

Spinal Cord Injury Yearly Costs: Info for You and Your Lawyer

July 15, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

At the Law Offices of Moseley Collins, we know that a spinal cord injury incurred from a serious accident has many detrimental implications. They can be emotional, financial, or purely and solely logistical. For one, the loss or partial loss of feeling and motion is a tremendous hardship for one to bear. I can’t begin to tell you how much I feel for those affected by something like it.

In addition to this loss, a person suffering from spinal cord injury will incur numerous costs throughout their lifetime. The financial costs associated with something as life-changing as this are surely worth of reflection. I would like to share some information I found relevant when I was researching for a case I am representing. I believe it is a helpful tool to use if you or someone you love has suffered from this type of injury.

The list below indicates the average yearly expenses as of May 2006 for injuries of varying severity. The first number is the average cost for the initial year and the following number is the average cost for each subsequent year. This gives us an extremely useful piece of information regarding the estimated costs for those facing such situations.

Slip and Fall Liability – Sacramento Injury Lawyer Discussion

July 14, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

When a client of my Sacramento Law Firm is injured in a slip and fall accident, one of the first questions they have is, “Who is a fault?”. There are three possible answers to this question, the first of which I generally addressed in my last blog, being the owner of the property. The other two options are both parties or the injured party itself.

Both parties responsible…

When both parties are responsible it is called “comparative negligence” and means that the carelessness of the injured person and the carelessness of the owner resulted in the accident. There are varying degrees of comparative negligence and liability is distributive by percentage of responsibility owed to the accident (i.e. 30% caused from plaintiff and 70% caused by defendant).

Car Accident Liability in Sacramento, CA

July 14, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

Who is at fault? If you have been in an accident and it’s all very confusing, this question will undoubtedly cross your mind. This is the question to which all our clients here in Sacramento want to know the answer when they call our firm’s law offices. At its most basic level, who is at fault can be determined by common law which looks at four different and specific aspects: negligence, recklessness, intentional misconduct, and strict liability. And information on which of these topics is key! It may help you get the compensation you deserve.

So what are all these terms, you ask? I know that many of us have heard terms such as negligence and recklessness before, but what does it mean for you and your accident? What are the legal implications and how do you actually determine how any of these situations happened in an accident?

If the driver of the vehicle is being negligent it means that they are not being careful and this carelessness causes an accident or injury. In other words, they are neglecting their responsibilities as a driver. Being a reckless driver is willfully disregarding the safety of others. “Reckless driving” for example has been used to describe someone driving 25 mph over the speed limit. Intentional misconduct is just as it sounds, willfully causing damage or injury. Finally, strict liability is when fault is attributed to the manufacturer or seller of a defective product whether negligence is found or not.

Brain Injury Causes Six Year Coma, Man Regains Abilities From Brain Stimulation

July 12, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

I’m sure you have seen the articles throughout the news lately about the man who has recently regained some abilities after being in a six-year coma-like state brought on by suffering from a severe brain injury. This is an incredible breakthrough in the area of brain injury. It was past thought that someone in a minimally conscious state for so many years was untreatable. Now, with these new findings, we know that the possibility looms of some recovery even after years of living in such a condition. It’s almost miraculous.

To stimulate activity, doctors implanted tiny electrodes into the man’s brain which attached to a pacemaker-like a device inside his chest. Within hours of the implantation, the man opened his eyes and tracked people moving throughout the room. Now, a year later, he has continued to progress. Reports state he can drink from a cup, comb his hair, and even speak in short sentences, all by himself.

Researchers do say that this type of treatment is not going to be for everyone, at least at the stage research is at the moment, because certain brain connections must have remained intact for the device to work. It’s necessary to assess a person’s brain to know if the treatment is viable. This, however, is none less a breakthrough of extraordinary proportion. It may mean a significant boost to the quality of life of many brain injury victims and their families.

The Dangers of Not Wearing Your Seatbelt in California

July 11, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

At our Personal Injury Law Firm in Sacramento, CA, I see many accidents in which the person killed was not wearing his or her seatbelt. Out of curiosity, I decided to see if I could find seatbelt statistics for California. On the website for the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) I found just what I was looking for. A couple of statistics, listed below, reassured me of the necessity to buckle up:

* Seat belts reduce a person’s chances of dying in a crash by 50 percent.

* In 2004, NHTSA estimates that in California 481 unrestrained vehicle occupants would have survived their crash had they simply buckled up.

Slip and Fall Defined – Sacramento Injury Lawyer Discussion

July 9, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

Slip, trip and… fall. As a lawyer in Sacramento, I have seen many slip and fall accidents that have resulted in serious injury. I am sure that you also have heard the term “slip and fall” before or know someone that has been injured in an accident such as this. But what does a slip and fall case entail? What does it mean, according to the law? And how can you prepare yourself if it ever happens to you or one of yours?

First of all, let’s start with defining a “slip and fall” case. A slip and fall case usually falls into a category called premise liability. This means that someone is injured on another person’s property and because that person owns or maintains such property, that person may be held liable or accountable for damages. So, there are circumstances that must be in place for it to classify as material for legal action.

Slip and fall cases come in many different forms. It can be a bit tricky. The cause could be an open pothole in the ground, a slippery floor, a broken sidewalk, and so on. In all these situations, there poses a dangerous situation that has the potential to cause injury or damages. When someone is actually injured on a slippery floor, for example, there remains the necessity of proving fault to the person/company responsible for the floor. In my next blog post, I will continue to discuss slip and fall injury cases and what is needed to prove fault.

Traumatic Brain Injury Survivor Writes of His Second Chance to Live

July 9, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

As I search through online information regarding brain injuries and traumas, I often find myself coming across a blog called “Second Chance to Live”. As a Sacramento Personal Injury Lawyer and being the person called immediately after someone is involved in an accident, it is more common for me to hear about the initial stages of someone dealing with a brain injury rather than the later stages. Many times, in the later stages, the injured person will find a new sense of hope and destiny to their life.

The blog is written by a man who, in the summer of 1967, was in a terrible car accident. As a result of the accident, he sustained an open skull fracture and was put in a coma for three weeks. His right frontal lobe, where we carry out executive decisions, was injured as well as having an impact to his brain stem. From here, he began a slow process of rehabilitating himself and was able to receive a graduate degree. His blog now talks about his life, his struggles, his joys, and what he sees as a second chance to live.

It’s quite inspiring. I find a renewed sense of hope as I read through his letters. I would like to invite anyone that has suffered from a traumatic brain injury or know someone that has to read this blog. I believe that it gives a good understanding to what a brain injury entails, emotionally and physically, for the person suffering from it.

Simi Valley Sued Over Car Crash

July 8, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

I read an article in the news today in which the family of a girl killed in a car accident south of Sacramento is suing the city of Simi Valley, CA. The victim of the crash, Cynthia Scott, was traveling in the passenger seat with her boyfriend in October of 2005. Driving at high speeds, Cynthia’s boyfriend eventually lost control of the car and wound up smashing into a 3,500 lb. concrete block that was placed six feet from the side of the road.

The article continues on to state that Cynthia’s family is suing the city over the close proximity of these concrete blocks to the edge of the road and the matter should proceed to court. It is unclear on whether the case is strong enough to get Cynthia’s family the compensation they claim, however by pushing the matter before a judge it seems they have obtained at least one goal. Starting a public debate on the subject.

One of the most interesting points that I found in this case, is the fact that California State roads require about 30 feet of clear space next to roadways. The road of Cynthia’s crash was a city street, however, and therefore governed by city rules. In my opinion, however, thirty feet to six feet is a big difference when a car veers off the road in a dangerous situation. It’s now up to the court to reach its own decision.

Doctor’s Negligence Results in Brain Injury to Baby

July 7, 2007 | by Moseley Collins

Today I would like to speak to you about a case that’s been on my mind for the past days. A doctor is being charged with “inadequate, irresponsible, inappropriate and sub-standard care” for his delivery of a baby. The result of his negligence caused the baby undue stress and subsequently was born with a severe brain injury. You can imagine how the parents must feel in such a situation.

The article reads that the mother was having a difficult delivery when the doctor took over. The doctor tried to deliver the baby via suction cap six times when the standard is only three. From here on, the doctor attempted to deliver the baby using forceps and then finally, gave the mother a cesarean which left her obliged to a long recovery period.

A representative of the General Medial Council of the UK stated that the doctor “should have carried out the operation after the third attempt at suction failed”. It is not understandable why he chose not to do so. This seems to indicate the there is an intention to take action against the doctor’s negligent actions.