Philadelphia Top Injury Lawyer Blog

As a Philadelphia accident lawyer, I routinely handle cases that straddle the Pennsylvania state border with New Jersey. Because New Jersey is part of the Philadelphia metro area, it's not uncommon for a New Jersey resident to be involved in an auto accident in Pennsylvania, or vice versa. Occasionally, this can cause problems for drivers making insurance claims outside their home state. In Amica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Fogel, the situation was similar: the Fogel family had moved from New Jersey to Pennsylvania, and taken their Amica insurance policy with them. Amica knew about the move. However, when the family was involved in a bad accident in Pennsylvania, the company had not yet converted the policy to a Pennsylvania policy, which would give the Fogels more compensation. In this ruling, the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that New Jersey choice-of-law rules apply to the dispute, but point to Pennsylvania law.

The Fogels moved to Pennsylvania in August 2008, and father Edward Fogel called Amica in September 2008 to notify it that they had moved permanently. The company began billing in Pennsylvania immediately, but told him it could not convert his policy to a Pennsylvania policy until he and his wife had Pennsylvania driver's licenses and vehicle registration. That did not happen until early 2009. However, in October of 2008. Edward Fogel and his three daughters were hit head-on by an allegedly intoxicated driver. The crash killed daughter Melissa Fogel and seriously injured the others. The at-fault driver had liability insurance of $100,000, which was paid but did not meet the family's financial needs. The family had PIP insurance for $250,000 per family member. However, under Pennsylvania law, they would be entitled to "stack" their policies for more than one vehicle, collecting more money; New Jersey did not allow this. The Fogels sought to collect under Pennsylvania law, and Amica filed in New Jersey for a declaratory judgment that New Jersey law applies. This was transferred to Pennsylvania district court, which eventually granted summary judgment in favor of Amica. The Fogels appealed to the Third Circuit.

They had better luck at the appeals court. The Third started by noting that under existing caselaw, New Jersey law should be chosen because New Jersey was the forum in which the case began. It then applied New Jersey law to determine which state's law controls the actual insurance dispute. A 1998 New Jersey Appellate Division case, NJ Manufacturers Insurance Co. v. MacVicar, had strikingly similar facts' to the Fogels' case, the Third said; that family also sought to apply Pennsylvania law to a New Jersey policy after moving but before converting the policy. That case stayed in New Jersey state court, however, and the Appellate Division ultimately decided that Pennsylvania law applied to the crash because New Jersey follows the Third Restatement of Conflicts of Laws, which says to choose the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the parties and the transaction at issue. When the Fogels moved to Pennsylvania, the insured risk clearly also moved to Pennsylvania. Thus, it didn't matter that the Fogels hadn't yet reregistered their vehicles and gotten the rewritten policy; both parties were on notice that they were driving in Pennsylvania. Following MacVicar, the Third also ruled that Pennsylvania law should apply because Pennsylvania has a greater governmental interest in the case. Thus, it reversed and remanded the case for summary judgment on the choice of law issue.

As a Philadelphia personal injury lawyer, I'm glad to see the court apply Pennsylvania law to people who were clearly Pennsylvania citizens at the time of their accident. As the Third Circuit noted, Pennsylvania has a strong public policy interest in its stacking law, predicated on the belief that its citizens should be able to use all of the insurance they have purchased. For people like the Fogels, who are now dealing with serious injuries to three of the four remaining family members, this is significant because their financial needs could be very significant. A severe head injury, for example, could leave its victim permanently disabled, requiring retraining in basic life skills. If any of the victims is too badly injured to work, he or she will need some kind of financial help for life. That's one reason why accident victims come to our personal injury law firm -- to pass these steep financial costs on to the irresponsible people who caused them and the insurance companies that have promised to pay them.

Continue reading "Pennsylvania Law Governs Auto Insurance Coverage Dispute in Fatal Accident Case - Amica Mutual Insurance v. Fogel" »

As a Philadelphia accident lawyer, one thing I want all injured people to know is that insurance companies are not their friends. After a bad accident, insurers or other representatives from an at-fault company may approach the victims with money, offering a relatively small payment in exchange for a signature. You should never, ever sign anything or take money from anyone representing the party that caused your accident! This is sometimes a legal document in disguise, and your signature may legally bar you from pursuing any more compensation in the future. That was the case in Gonzalez v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, a Nebraska Supreme Court case involving a waiver of liability unwittingly signed by a grieving mother. The court ultimately sent her case back to trial court, ruling that she should have a chance to prove that the waiver was void because it fraudulently failed to explain that it was a binding mutual understanding.

Efrain Ramos-Domingo, age thirteen, died after being struck by a train at a railroad crossing. His mother, Manuela Domingo Gaspar Gonzalez, was approached two days later by Union Pacific, which offered $15,000 in exchange for her signature on a document releasing the company from liability. Gonzalez spoke no English and had no money. In later court proceedings, she claimed she did not understand the release and the Union Pacific representative did not explain its legal consequences. She later filed a wrongful death and breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit, alleging that the intersection was defectively designed; Union Pacific's operation was negligent; and the release should be void because it was fraudulently obtained. The trial court dismissed the wrongful death claim, citing the release, and also dismissed the fiduciary duty claim after discovery. Gonzalez appealed both decisions.

The Nebraska Supreme Court upheld the trial court on the fiduciary duty claim, but reversed on the issue of the waiver. Union Pacific argued that contracts are generally upheld when the signer had the chance to read them and failed to do so. But in this case, the high court found, Gonzalez had no chance to read it because she expressly pleaded that she cannot read English. Because the Union Pacific representative also didn't explain the meaning of the release, the high court found that this raised enough triable facts to survive a motion to dismiss. It dismissed Union Pacific's argument that Gonzalez had to return the $15,000 in order to rescind the contract. This is true in the case of a legal rescission of a contract, the court said, but in this case, Gonzalez is arguing for an equitable rescission based on the circumstances of the signing. This is essentially a declaration that no contract ever existed. Furthermore, the court said, rescinding a contract for fraud carries no obligation to return money at all. In addition, it said, it would be inequitable to ask Gonzalez to return the money in order to pursue her claim when she has likely spent it on Efrain's funeral. However, the Supreme Court agreed with the lower court that Union Pacific created no fiduciary duty to Gonzalez by "offering to help." It sent the case back to trial court for further proceedings on the wrongful death claim.

This case contains a lesson that all personal injury victims and their families should understand: It pays to be careful when approached by an at-fault company. Any company with enough money, or its insurance company, will try to limit the amount it pays out. While most Philadelphians are fortunate enough to be able to read and speak English, unscrupulous people can still take advantage of them in the time of emotional distress right after an accident. I advise all victims to politely decline offers from insurance company representatives until they have at least had a chance to discuss the offer with me. In fact, if I am your Philadelphia personal injury lawyer, they should never contact you directly; they should always go through my office. While it's tempting to be polite, it is much more important in cases of severe injury or wrongful death to protect your legal rights, including your right to pursue fair compensation.

Continue reading "Nebraska Supreme Court Finds Release of Liability in Child's Death May Be Void as Fraud - Gonzalez v. Union Pacific" »

As a Philadelphia personal injury lawyer, I was interested to see a recent ruling on a wrongful death claim stemming from a slip and fall accident in south Jersey. In Risko v. Thompson Mueller Automotive Group, Inc., the court ordered a new trial in the case because of what were described as "outlandish statements" to the jury by the plaintiff's attorney. The trial judge originally interrupted the disputed statements to chastise the attorney and warn that he was considering declaring a mistrial, but ended up allowing the case to continue. After the jury awarded $1.75 million to Peter Risko, the dealership successfully moved for a new trial. The appeals court reversed that order, but the state Supreme Court reversed it again, saying the comments warranted a new trial.

The underlying case involved the alleged wrongful death of Camille Risko, who fell down in an car showroom in Hammonton, N.J., breaking her hip and leading to colitis and eventually septic shock that took her life. At the summation of the wrongful death trial, Risko's wrongful death attorney compared Camille Risko's experience to torture, noted that the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution outlaws torture, and told the jurors to report to the judge any juror who found for less than $1 million because they would be "ignoring the law." They found for $1.75 million. The judge granted a new trial on the dealership's request, saying he should have declared a mistrial or cautioned the jury about the excessive statements. A divided Appellate Division reversed, and the dealership appealed. The New Jersey Supreme Court found that the inflammatory remarks warranted a new trial on damages only, because the trial judge failed to act immediately. Justice Rivera-Soto concurred and dissented in part, arguing that deference required a new trial on liability as well as damages.

As a Philadelphia accident lawyer, I sympathize with the plaintiff in this case. Because of this series of appeals, Peter Risko now has to wait even longer to put this episode behind him and find out whether he will ultimately be fairly compensated for the unnecessary, avoidable death of his wife. Slips and falls sound like no big deal, but for older people and people who land in an unlucky place, they can be crippling or even deadly. A broken hip would have been a hardship in itself for Camille Risko; the complications she later suffered could have destroyed her quality of life even further. That's why it's vital for business owners to avoid maintenance problems or sloppy construction site practices that create tripping hazards, take away handrails and create other problems for visitors to the site.

Continue reading "High Court Orders New Trial in South Jersey Wrongful Death Case - Risko v. Thompson Mueller Automotive Group" »

As a Philadelphia accident lawyer, I was disappointed to read about the death of a 25-year-old man in an unusual accident. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the man died on the night of June 3 after he mistakenly stepped into an empty elevator shaft and fell five stories. The man was not named pending notification of his family, but he was reportedly a resident of the building on Chestnut Street in the Washington Square West neighborhood. The elevator is the older kind with a gated lift. Representative from the state Department of Labor and Industry said it would send an elevator inspector to the building June 6 to determine whether the elevator is safe for other users.

The article said the building itself is older, with external fire escapes as well as the old-fashioned elevator. Police said the light was out as well, and that the man didn't realize the elevator was not at the fifth floor, which is the building's top floor. The accident was reported just before midnight June 3 and the man was pronounced dead at Thomas Jefferson University Medical Center around 1:15 on June 4. The Department of Labor and Industry said it was working with law enforcement to keep the elevator out of service and "secure" until it could send an inspector. A city spokesperson added that the City Licenses and Inspections Commission has no authority over elevators.

One thing that struck me about this story, as a Philadelphia injury lawyer, is the apparent lack of safeguards against just this kind of accident. Elevators have safety rules, which is why the state has elevator inspectors, but it's not clear whether any safety rules were broken in his case. Nonetheless, if a 25-year-old man can walk into an elevator shaft without noticing that the elevator isn't there, as this story suggests, it's easy to imagine unattended children or an impaired person doing the same. If the management of this building failed to install required safety equipment, or failed to maintain the light in violation of regulations, it could be considered legally liable for the accident. And that would entitle the victim's family to file a wrongful death lawsuit, which could help them defray the costs of the death as well as compensate them for a loved one lost too soon.

Continue reading "Man Dies After Falling Down Elevator Shaft in Center City Apartment Building" »

The Philadelphia Ride the Ducks Boat is back in business on the Delaware River for the first time since the tragic duck boat accident that occurred last year, killing two teens. The Ride the Ducks operation, whose corporate offices, are headed up in Norcross, Georgia, took a nine month hiatus to consider and address safety concerns to prevent any further accidents.

The Ride the Ducks gave a preview tour to Philadelphia area residents and media before officially opening back up for business. According to reports, the tour showcased a new, shorter and closer to shore water route. The tour also explained the use of a new spotter boat that will be present to help respond to any potential emergencies.
The changes have been made in consultation with the U.S. Coast Guard in order to make them even safer than before and to prevent accidents like the one that occurred last year.

Families of the injured as well as families of the two Hungarian teens that were killed filed lawsuits against the Ride the Ducks company and the city of Philadelphia after the Ride the Ducks boat was struck by a disabled boat which was hit by a 2,100 ton city barge.

Philadelphia residents seem to be expressing satisfaction that the tours have taken greater safety measures. If you are a Philadelphia resident who has been injured in a boat or other motor vehicle accident, contact a Philadelphia accident lawyer or Philadelphia injury lawyer.

The family of a Philadelphia, Pennsylvania man being only identified by the name "Ben" for reports, is suing the Philadelphia Archdiocese for wrongful death. The suit was filed last Wednesday in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas by Ben's family after a very heated allegation that the Philadelphia archdiocese covered up sex abuse cases, including that of their loved one.

Ben killed himself, according to family members, after he was told that his allegations of abuse by Philadelphia Archdiocese priest Rev. Joseph Gallagher were "not credible." Ben had previously filed a lawsuit against Rev. Gallagher alleging that he sexually abused him in the 1980s.

Although Rev. Gallagher was suspended in February, the archdiocese has declined to comment on either of the law suits. Ben's family is now hoping to receive compensation for damages due to wrongful death.

If you have suffered the loss of a loved one or family member that you suspect may have been the victim of wrongful death in the Pennsylvania area, contact a Philadelphia accident lawyer as soon as possible. A Philadelphia accident lawyer will ensure that any case you have will be heard as soon as possible in order to avoid any statutes of limitations and to ensure your family gets what they deserve in a timely manner.

The Supreme Court of Missouri has just reinstated a wrongful death claim against a spine surgeon. This case of medical malpractice involved a patient that committed suicide allegedly because of the pain caused by his spinal surgery.

The patient first underwent surgery in January 2005 to correct the curvature of his spine. The patient filed a medical malpractice action in July of 2005 due to being unhappy with the results. In March of 2006, the patient committed suicide. His wife and daughter then worked by themselves to amend the medical malpractice action into a wrongful death action.

According to reports, The Supreme Court of Missouri reasoned that because the patient is now deceased, it is impossible to "provide direct evidence as to why he acted as he did, an expert witness may be used to interpret the facts and data relating to his injury and to supply the causal link from the injury to his death." However, the wrongful death action has now been reinstated and the case now awaits trial.

Wrongful death and medical malpractice cases can take years to litigate whether in Missouri, Philadelphia, or elsewhere in the US. If you suspect your loved one has been the victim of wrongful death, it is important to contact a Pennsylvania medical malpractice lawyer of a Philadelphia Injury lawyer you can trust.

A recent Philadelphia 6ABC report revisits the deadly Philadelphia Duckboat crash from the point of view of the victims and the tugboat driver. The July 7 crash in busy Philadelphia harbor killed two Hungarian teens and injured and terrified several other Duckboat riders.

According to the ABC 6 report, Ride the Ducks captain Gary Fox told investigators "Each time on that water is a new experience," after the Duckboat he was driving in July had been struck by another large vessel in the Philadelphia harbor.

The vessel, a 250 foot long (and 2,100 ton) city barge was picking up sludge and depositing it at a treatment plant further down the Delaware river, was eventually found to be partially to blame for the accident in conjunction with the tug boat that was responsible for towing the barge in the right direction.

The new ABC 6 report reveals that tug boat pilot Matt Devlin, had just learned that his young son had just suffered a life threatening reaction to anesthesia during eye surgery and had used his cell phone to make and receive 21 calls while at the wheel that day.

Several passengers and victim's families have filed lawsuits, including wrongful death lawsuits against the tug and duck boat owners. Since cases like these can be extremely complicated in the way of finding just who is at fault, it is important to contact and expert Philadelphia injury lawyer or a Philadelphia accident lawyer right away.

Today the California Supreme Court has announced that they will reinstate claims against the cholesterol drug marketed under the name Baycol on behalf of California consumers who purchased the drug. Baycol was marketed and sold by Bayer Corporation from 1997 until 2001, when the drug was taken off the market. Data shows that the drug may be linked to serious muscle debilitating illnesses like Rhabdomyolysis, possibly leading to death. If you have taken Baycol and are concerned that you may have suffered injury, it is important that you contact a Philadelphia injury lawyer as soon as possible. According to reports "the claims addressed by the California Supreme Court were asserted on behalf of California consumers who purchased or paid for the drug Baycol between February 1998 and August 2001. In earlier proceedings, the trial court dismissed all of the claims asserted against Bayer."

Today, the California Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal decision and held that the Notice of Appeal of the claims of the class was indeed timely and should go forward. If you feel that you or a loved one has suffered wrongful injury due to use of Baycol or another prescription drug, contact a Philadelphia injury lawyer today.

Medical malpractice and criminal activity is being investigated in the case of Claudia Seye Aderotimi, 20, of London England who traveled to Pennsylvania recently to undergo what was supposed to be a simple non-invasive cosmetic procedure.

Aderotimi set up an appointment online to receive an injection of silicone to the buttocks and traveled from London to Philadelphia to do so. Silicone is used as a permanent filler in the body and is intended to create a rounded shape. Liquid silicone is currently not approved in the US for cosmetic injections. After receiving the injection, Aderotimi wound up in a Pennsylvania hospital and was pronounced dead early Tuesday morning.

Police have executed search warrants to the home of the woman believed to have set up the appointment for Aderotimi and are further investing the case. In a similar case in 2009, one New York city woman suffered pulmonary embolism after receiving a silicone injection, after fluid injection into her hips and thighs entered her lungs.

Tragically, cases of medical malpractice and wrongful death involving elective cosmetic surgery procedures have become common in recent years both in Pennsylvania and throughout the world. Contact a Philadelphia injury lawyer or a Pennsylvania medical malpractice lawyer if you suspect you or a loved one has been a victim of medical malpractice or injury after having a procedure performed by an unlicensed cosmetic professional.

In a horrendous case of medical malpractice in Philadelphia, one doctor and some members of his staff have been arrested and called in for interrogation while they await trial. Investigators are calling the office of Dr. David Gosnell in Philadelphia a "house of horrors." His practice, which has been in business for decades, has been said to illegally perform late term abortions as well as to have delivered live babied and then killed them by way of spinal injury. In addition, filthy office conditions and poor sanitation put women at risks of infection and disease.

Last week in the Philadelphia medical malpractice case that made national and even international headlines, Dr. Gosnell was charged with killing seven babies born alive and with the 2009 death of a 41-year-old refugee after a botched abortion at the clinic. Prosecutors have called the clinic an illegal drug mill by day and an illegal abortion clinic by night.

Regardless of suspicion of medical malpractice, Dr. Gosnell operated for years, becoming wealthy off of his horrendous alleged crimes. It is yet to be seen just what Dr. Gosnell and his staff members will be charged with. In the meantime sadly, several women are left with a lifetime of illness and heartache likely due to Dr. Gosnell's medical malpractice. If you or a loved one has been the victim of medical malpractice, contact a Philadelphia injury lawyer today. A Philadelphia injury lawyer will be essential in starting your fight for what you need to cover damages and medical bills.

A child welfare caseworker for the city of Philadelphia pronounced 2 month old Quasir Alexander and his twin brother "healthy and well" on December 21, even though, according to reports, Quasir weighed only a frail four pounds.

Quasir lived in a West Philadelphia homeless shelter with his mother and five siblings. Just two days after the visit, baby Quasir was pronounced dead from starvation and dehydration. The boy's mother, Tanya Williams, 32, of West Philadelphia, was charged Friday night with murder. Investigation into the Philadelphia caseworker assigned to Quasir is ongoing.

According to reports, District Attorney Seth Williams said Monday that the investigation will continue to look at whether the social worker assigned has failed to "perform their duties adequately or possibly even criminally." Later investigation revealed that Quasir has not eaten adequately for at least one month leading up until his death. Infants of Quasir's birth weight, 5 pounds, are expected to weight at least ten pounds at two months according to World Health Organization standards. Lutheran case workers and the staff at the homeless shelter are also being investigated in the infant's death.

This is an alarming case to mothers everywhere as well as the many Philadelphia residents who rely on Philadelphia case workers to properly oversee the welfare of family members. If you or a loved one has had to go through a tragedy involving personal injury or birth injury at the hands of state workers or medical professionals, contact a Philadelphia birth injury lawyer, or a Philadelphia injury lawyer today.

A recent study released Tuesday by a Massachusetts-based nonprofit that supports renewable energy development has found that Philadelphia residents are more concerned than US residents in general on average. Fracking is a term used for hydraulic fracturing as a process for the extraction of natural gas. Studies have shown that his process is harmful to the environment and can contaminate public drinking water.

The state survey was conducted among 403 adults from November 26-30 amidst a national survey conducted among 1,012 adults. Philadelphia residents were most likely to say they are "very concerned" about the health threats, personal injury, and damage that fracking can cause. Pam Solo, founder and president of the Civil Society Institute said concern about fracking "illustrates the point that Americans don't think of an energy source as cheap or clean if there is a hidden price in terms of safe drinking water and human health." Several Philadelphia residents seem to be on this page when it comes to fracking.

It is unfortunate that in the Philadelphia area as well as across the world, several processes used by big business put public health at risk. Philadelphia Injury lawyers remind us that this year's environmental disaster with BP, for example, demonstrates how a corporation damaged the environment, caused personal injury, and put the lives and lively hoods of humans at risk. For this, BP had to pay out richly in settlements. If you believe you or a loved one has been the victim of injury due to fracking or another environmental hazard caused by big business, find out what you're entitled to by contacting a Philadelphia injury lawyer.

Last month, Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled in a high profile Philadelphia medical malpractice lawsuit. The court's decision: a $20 million verdict in favor of the family of a woman killed in a liposuction accident will stand.

The wrongful death suit against plastic surgeon Richard Glunk and his nurse, Edward DeStefano, stemmed from an incident in 2001, when an 18-year-old college student, Amy Fledderman, suffered grievous complications from liposuction. Allegedly, Glunk stood by for two hours - refusing to take Fledderman to the hospital - while Fledderman's mother begged him to. As a result of this act, the jury awarded the mother $2 million for emotional distress. Glunk's clinic had not been licensed at the time of the disaster.

The defendants had argued to the appeals court that the $15 million in punitive damages was excessive, but the court rejected this argument. Glunk's legal team had challenged the wrongful death verdict on a number of other grounds - and all of these arguments also got struck down.

As any experienced Philadelphia medical malpractice lawyer will tell you, building a seven-figure wrongful death case can be challenging work, even if all the evidence is in your favor and even if the defendant's negligence and carelessness are easy to prove. The law provides numerous, diverse, and extensive resources for defendants. If a plaintiff does not build his or her case carefully and meticulously, small process errors and other imprecise actions can allow defendants to escape serious punishment and can significantly chew into any jury award.

Part of what's so challenging is that plaintiffs must meet an intense burden of proof. You need to show essentially that the defendant's negligence, carelessness, or failure to act created, either directly or indirectly, conditions that caused harm or exacerbated a medical condition. If your cause and effect argument breaks down at any point - and the defense will obviously be looking to break down your argument at every possible "weak link" - your case can fall apart. That's why it's so important to work with an attorney who has experience in getting results and who understands Pennsylvania medical malpractice law both in theory and in practice.

The same goes true for motor vehicle or product liability accidents. You want a Philadelphia accident lawyer or Philadelphia injury lawyer who not only understands the law from a theoretical and intellectual level but who also knows how to make the system function effectively for plaintiffs.

Continue reading "Massive Philadelphia Malpractice Verdict Upheld - $20 million Will Go to Family of Liposuction Victim" »

Attorneys of a local Pennsylvanian were recently able to convince a jury that he is innocent in the death of a Philadelphia police officer. The man, William J. Barnes, 74 of Pennsylvania was convicted of shooting Philadelphia police officer Walter Barclay during a burglary in 1966. Barnes served 16 years in jail following the shooting and was released on parole before a more recent 2007 arrest.

The recent arrest was made based on charges that officer Barclay (decades later) had died as a direct result of an infection sustained as a result of the 1966 shooting. After officer Barlay died, Barnes, who was working at a local Roxborough supermarket at the time of the recent arrest, was then charged and arrested by city prosecutors for murder.

Although Mr. Barnes attorneys were able to convince a jury that he is innocent in the murder of Philadelphia police officer Walter Barclay, nearly three years after his arrest, Mr. Barnes still remains in jail based on technical parole violations, including holding a cellphone and keys in his pocket. Now, attornies are trying to persuade Pennsylvania's parole board that he should be released from prison now that the murder charges have been dropped.

Personal injury cases can be extremely complicated, as demonstrated by the case of William J. Barnes vs. the city of Philadelphia. Philadelphia injury lawyers note that it is not unusual for it to take long for a verdict to be reached in such cases. It is often not uncommon that injuries sustained by a victim can come back to haunt a defendant years later. No matter what party you are, it is important to consult a Philadelphia personal injury lawyer every step of the way, to understand what charges can may be pressed in the present as well as in the future, and to defend your rights accordingly.