Archive for October, 2006

A Federal Jury Awards $24 Million To Men Burned After Climbing Rail Car

Saturday, October 28th, 2006

A federal jury awarded $24.2 million to two men who were severely burned by electrical wires when they trespassed onto railroad property and climbed atop a rail car.

Jeffrey Klein and Brett Birdwell, who were 17 at the time of the accident, sued Amtrak and Norfolk Southern Corp. after being burned by a 12,500-volt electrical wire in Lancaster in August 2002. In their lawsuit, they argued that the companies should have placed warning signs alerting people to the wires, which power locomotives.

Klein, who was burnt over 75 percent of his body, was awarded more than $11 million in compensatory damages; Birdwell, who was burned over 18 percent of his body, was awarded more than $588,000. The jury also awarded a total of $12.5 million in punitive damages.

Attorneys for the companies said the two teen were old enough to recognize the dangers. But a lawyer for the teens said while they were trespassing, the law did not provide landowners with “blanket immunity.”

The accident occurred after the men, who are now 22, decided they wanted to see the view from the top of the boxcar, according to the lawsuit. Klein was shocked by the wire, without touching it, and Birdwell was burned while he tried to help his friend.

Klein suffered second- and third-degree burns across much of his body and now has limited use of his left hand. Birdwell, who is now serving with the Army in Afghanistan, spent a year recovering from his burns.

The companies can appeal the verdict.

$1.5M For Chicago Nightclub Stampede Families

Saturday, October 28th, 2006

A judge has approved a partial settlement in which families of 21 people killed in a 2003 Chicago nightclub stampede will receive $1.5 million, attorneys announced Thursday.

Under the settlement approved Wednesday by Cook County Circuit Judge Kathy M. Flanagan, E2 club owners Calvin Hollins and Dwain Kyles and building owner Lesly Benodin will pay into a fund established for the plaintiffs.

They were then dismissed as defendants in a lawsuit filed by the victims’ families.

But Kyles; Hollins; Hollins’ son, Calvin Hollins III; and a fourth man, party promoter Marco Flores, still face criminal charges of involuntary manslaughter in the Feb. 17, 2003, stampede, said Melvin Brooks, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys. All four have pleaded not guilty.

Dozens of people were crushed in a narrow stairwell at the E2 nightclub when someone used pepper spray to break up a dance floor fight and sent the crowd into a panic. Bodies jammed the door as people still inside tried to push their way out.

A grand jury indictment said the owners willfully packed the club with about 1,200 people the night of the stampede, roughly five times its capacity of 240.

A number of individuals and corporations still remain as defendants in lawsuits, Brooks said. The city is also a defendant, accused of failing to ensure the building was safe. The city has contended the club owner and operator were responsible.

Ed Grasse, one of the attorneys for the settling defendants, said he was pleased Flanagan approved the settlement.

“We’re very happy to get this piece of the litigation over with and give some closure to the families,” Grasse said.

Poorly Designed Automobile Seats Lead To Needless Injuries

Friday, October 27th, 2006
  

Poorly designed or defective automobile seats can cause unnecessary injuries in rear impact collisions. These injuries could have been prevented had the seatback designs and manufacturing defects been replaced with proven safety measures that have been readily available for a long time. Problems with automobile seats can be attributed to non-sturdy and defective parts, including seatbacks, seat tracks, and recliner mechanisms.

A seatback should be able to keep the vehicle’s occupants safe by keeping the individual from moving forward and impacting the interior of the vehicle in a collision, or even worse being completely ejected. Automobile seats are not required to be tested in crash tests, and there have been recent tests showing the insufficiency of seatback standards. Safety standards today do not suffice in preventing fatalities and serious injuries are resulting from the lack of proper seat strength standards.

Common Automobile Seat Failures
There are estimates that in 1990 there were 1,100 fatalities and 1,600 serious injuries due to seat collapses in rear-ended collisions. When the seatback collapses rearward in a rear impact a driver can lose control of the vehicle, causing further injuries. A seatback failure can also interfere with the restraint system, allowing vehicle occupants to impact rear seat objects in a rear-impact collision because they are not properly restrained. In some circumstances the vehicle occupants can be completely ejected from the vehicle when they have slid out from under the safety restraints. A front seat collapse can injure the rear seat passengers in a rear-impact collision, and the rear seat occupants can become trapped underneath the collapsed seatback.

Current Safety Standards
The safety standards for automobile seats are viewed as being too lenient and not updated to protect vehicle occupants from injuries otherwise avoidable. It is not required for automobile seats to go through crash tests and is so weak it leaves safety experts wondering why new standards are not made. Tests that have been conducted on vehicles show that most seatbacks are unable to safely withstand impacts, especially bucket seatbacks and split bench seatbacks.

Seatbacks are most affected by rear-impact collisions because a number of seatback defects can occur. A particular study found that in rear-impact collisions that had a front seat collapse occupants ended up being ejected from the seat even at low speeds. Some experts feel that if seatback strength were increased it would limit the number of seatback defects that result from collisions. Although the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has indicated their desire to strengthen the requirements on federal requirements they have yet to change them.

 

Defective Door Latches And How They May Lead To Serious Injuries

Friday, October 27th, 2006

Door latch defects have caused doors to be opened and vehicle occupants to be thrown out of the vehicle. The ejections from the vehicle due to the door latch defect have lead to numerous deaths and serious injuries. Ejections cause injury to the vehicle occupant when they impact the road and/or object hit and when another vehicle does not have time to swerve out of the individual’s way. Though modifications have been suggested to prevent door latch defects from occurring, changes were not made immediately, if at all. Unfortunately when vehicle defects like door latch problems exist, the consequences are deadly.

The Facts About Car Accidents And Paralysis

Friday, October 27th, 2006

Paralysis is the loss of functioning or feeling because of injury or disease to a person’s nervous system. In 1995, Christopher Reeve severely damaged his spinal cord and suffered paralysis from the neck down after a horse fall. Despite the devastation of the accident, Reeve became a spokesman for spinal cord injury and paralysis, using his celebrity to raise national interest. There is no cure for a spinal cord injury and paralysis, but Reeve’s advocacy increased researching funding, giving hope to trauma victims, families and friends.

Approximately 40 percent of all spinal cord injuries are caused by motor vehicle accidents, the leading cause of all new spinal cord injuries every year. Depending on where the location of the injury is will determine what type of paralysis is suffered. Usually, injuries higher in the spinal cord will cause more paralysis. An injury at the neck level, for instance, is more likely to cause paralysis in both arms, legs and make it impossible to breathe without the aid of a respirator, but a lower injury may affect just the lower parts of the body.

For people under 65, motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of spinal cord injury and paralysis. Should a spinal cord injury be suffered, recovery typically will start between a week and six months after injury if it occurs, but doctors will usually view any impairments lasting after a one to two year period as permanent. Adjusting to paralysis, in addition to causing high financial costs, can be very difficult emotionally and psychologically to adapt to.

Paralysis will likely affect just about every aspect of life. More than half the people living with a spinal cord injury and some degree of paralysis were injured between the ages of 16 and 31, so patients are usually affected during their youth. Not only can a spinal cord injury cause paralysis, but a number of other complication, such as urinary tract problems, pressure sores, lung and breathing problems, bowel management difficulties, spasticity, autonomic dysreflexia, sexual dysfunction and many other conditions.

Though there is still no way to reverse damage to the spinal cord and paralysis, advances in recent years have been considerable. Focusing on preventing further injury and new paralysis injuries from occurring, in the meantime, needs more attention. Because of the significant impact auto accidents have on paralysis sufferers, auto manufacturers and federal regulators have been criticized in recent years for failing to implement stricter standards and include basic safety measures in vehicles.

A new report on auto industry data released March 30, 2005 showed automakers have misled government regulators and the public for years by claiming roof strength and injuries in rollover crashes are unrelated. For years, automakers have been trying to fight off liability in lawsuits by arguing head and neck injuries, like paralysis, occurred in rollover crashes when the vehicle occupants dive into the roofs, but the new report analyzed Ford’s own tests to show roof crush does occur prior to injurious neck loads during rollovers.

The report was released at a particularly important time since regulators were on the verge of proposing new roof strength standards that would update standards dating from 1971 after years of making unfilled promises for changes to be made. Safety experts have criticized the agency’s failure to implement changes despite the 6,000 to 7,000 of the 10,000 rollover deaths that occur every year attributed to roof collapse and roof crush. Public Citizen consumer advocacy group president, Joan Claybrook, said one of the “basic tenets” of auto safety is to prevent injuries, yet the auto industry has continued to mislead the NHTSA and the public strictly for financial reasons, allowing a higher number of deaths and devastating injuries, like paralysis to be suffered.

Although possible to retain sensation after a spinal cord injury, most traumas will cause permanent disability or loss of movement, or paralysis, or other sensation loss

Quadriplegia And Car Accidents

Friday, October 27th, 2006
  

Paralysis of both the arms and legs is called quadriplegia. Quadriplegia is the result of an injury to the spinal cord, and although it is possible to retain sensation and movement after a spinal cord injury, in most instances permanent disability or loss of movement and sensation below the site of the injury will be suffered. The devastating injury is most often caused by accidents, including motor vehicle accidents, falls, sports injuries and acts of violence.

A quadriplegic is unable to move both their arms and legs because the spinal cord injury interferes with the brain’s ability to communicate through the nervous system with other parts of the body. Every year, about 11,000 Americans will suffer a spinal cord injury, adding to the 200,000 people living with some type of spinal cord disability in the U.S. Because over half the people living with a spinal cord injury were suffered between the ages of 16 and 30, the majority of quadriplegics must suddenly adjust to disability within the most traditionally active years of their lives.

For quadriplegics under the age of 65, motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of spinal cord injury. The devastating injury does not just interfere with a person physically, but the presence of quadriplegia will force the patient, as well as family members and friends, to realize everyday activities will be affected, which can be emotionally difficult to adapt to as well.

In the past, a spinal cord injury resulting in quadriplegia was usually fatal. Currently, there is no way of reversing the damage suffered to the spinal cord, but major advances have been made and are expected in the next decade. These quadriplegia advances have improved recovery, as well as drastically reduced the amount of time required in the hospital. Quadriplegia treatment is mainly focused on allowing patients to return to the most active and productive lives that they can, given limits of their disability.

head or neck injury suffered in a car accident should be immediately addressed by taking all necessary precautions to limit further injuring the person. If the spinal cord has been injured, it is essential that the neck be immobilized so that more damage is not done. Addressing the injury that caused the loss of function, using medication, traction surgery or a combination, will treat quadriplegia in the earliest stages. Treatment can be difficult, and quadriplegics can expect ongoing care and treatments to improve remaining muscle strength and to help the patient gain the best mobility and independence.

Unfortunately, accidents resulting in quadriplegia cannot all be prevented, but there are some safety precautions that can be taken. Ever year, forty percent of new spinal cord injuries are caused by auto and motorcycle accidents, the leading cause of all spinal cord injuries, so improving auto safety can help reduce the number of quadriplegics. One of the biggest auto safety concerns in recent years has been the high fatality rate of rollover accidents, as well as the devastating head and neck injuries suffered.

Rollover crashes account for just three percent of vehicle crashes, but they are responsible for a third of all crash fatalities, or 10,000 deaths a year in the U.S. Due to the forces applied to vehicle occupants in a rollover crash, head and neck injuries that can lead to catastrophic head and spinal cord injuries are suffered far too often. For years, government regulators have promised to update current standards dating back from 1971, but the auto agency has failed to live up to their repeated promises.

Auto safety experts believe simply improving a vehicle’s resistance to roof crush would prevent injuries like quadriplegia, but automakers have claimed roof strength and injuries in rollover crashes are unrelated, according to a new report that disputes these claims. According to Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook, “strengthening roofs and installing other basic safety devices, such as side head air bags, safety glass and pretensioned belts, is the only way to save lives in rollover crashes,” adding arguments made by auto manufacturers claiming head injuries are because of people “diving” into the roofs of their cars is “ludicrous.”

The report’s author, Martha Bidez, added the industry’s own rollover test data presents “unequivocal evidence that roof crush can and does cause catastrophic injury and death.” Strengthening roofs are just one way of preventing serious injuries like quadriplegia in just one area of auto accidents, but it could have a significant impact, according to safety experts.

 

The Facts Concerning Roof Crush Injuries

Friday, October 27th, 2006
 

Roof crush causes over 10,000 fatal injuries each year in rollover crashes. A roof crush is most often caused by a vehicle rollover. Vehicles are designed to have a structural support system by creating a survival space in order to protect the occupants that are in a crash from being injured due to a roof crush. Roof crushes can cause serious and fatal injuries, including disabling head or neck injuries. The roof strength of the vehicle does not have the proper roof pillar strength and that will cause the roof to cave into the passenger compartment.

Safe roof structure designs have been documented from as early as the 1950’s that could reduce the number of roof crush accidents. Despite safer designs and structures that have been created, manufacturers claim it is the force of the impact that leads to injuries and death, despite the fact that the relationship between rollover crashes and injuries from roof crush has been observed and noted since as early as 1932. The safer roofs are equipped with strong roof pillars and full-length closed-sections, windshield headers and side sections, internal baffle plates, strong tubular cross-members, and reinforcing gussets at the connections, and some use rigid foam within the tubular cross-members to help strengthen the structure. These different safety precautions can significantly minimize the fatal results of roof crush.

Roof pillars appear strong to the average consumer but most of them consist of just sheet metal that is hollow on the inside at the cross sections. When an accident occurs involving roof structures with a filled inner space, the outcome has been shown to be safer due to a lesser amount of roof crush. Pillars filled with high-density foam can reduce the severity of a roof crush significantly, saving lives and reducing serious injuries.

Injuries from roof crush accidents are very serious. A common roof crush injury is neck fracture and other injuries involving the neck. Sometimes a brain injury may result from the roof crushing in on the vehicle occupant. These head and neck injuries can cause paraplegia, quadriplegia, or other life altering conditions.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Roof Crush Resistance
This notice is a request for comments to assist NHTSA in upgrading the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 216, “Roof Crush Resistance,” to reduce injuries and fatalities in passenger cars, pickup trucks, vans and multipurpose passenger vehicles resulting from roof intrusion during rollover crashes. It asks the public for its views and comments on what changes, if any, are needed to the roof crush resistance standard. NHTSA will consider all such comments in deciding what regulatory changes, if any, may be appropriate for upgrading the standard. Concerns presented in a petition for rulemaking from the law firm R. Ben Hogan, Smith and Alspaugh requesting that dynamic testing be used to validate the strength of vehicle roof structures, instead of the current quasi-static procedure, are also addressed in this notice.

 

The Crash Worthiness Of Our Cars Is In Question

Friday, October 27th, 2006
  

The U.S. Department of Transportation reported that there were 42,815 Americans killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2002. This figure is an increase from previous years and the highest level since 1990. While these statistics are concerning, the actual number of people killed per 100 million vehicle miles traveled has decreased. Over the years as car manufacturers found ways of improving cars, the focus on crashworthiness including crash behavior of structures and materials in the vehicle and impact biomechanics has become an important focus.

A vehicle’s ability to protect the occupants when an accident occurs will determine the model’s crashworthiness level. Things such as airbags, side impact, seatbelts, as well as other features are intended to better protect passengers in an accident. Crash tests are performed because automakers want to see how the vehicle stands up to different types of crashes, including different hit locations and speeds.

Considering a person dies about every 12 minutes from a motor vehicle accident and every 11 seconds a person will suffer an injury, many critics believe an even great emphasis on crashworthiness should be present. In the U.S., the economic impact of motor vehicle crashes is $230.6 billion. Crashworthiness can initially cost automakers a lot of money, however in the long run deaths, injuries, damages, and pain and suffering can be drastically reduced.

 

CPSC Reminds Parents To Keep Treat Or Treaters Halloween Safe From Injury

Friday, October 27th, 2006

Frail skeletons and fluorescent Jack O’ Lanterns decorate homes, while children disguised as witches, ghosts and goblins begin flocking out onto neighborhood streets in search of treats. As Halloween approaches, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) wants you to know that like children, Halloween’s hidden dangers also come in disguise.CPSC is aware of serious Halloween-related injuries involving burns from flammable costumes and decorations, including ignition from open flames, such as candles and Jack O’ Lanterns. Additional incidents have involved abrasions from sharp objects attached to masks or costumes.

“One of the greatest problems is kids dressed up in homemade costumes that are not flame-resistant,” said Acting CPSC Chairman Nancy Nord. “If parents make a costume, choose inherently flame-resistant fabrics, such as nylon or polyester, and avoid long draped items that could cause an entanglement hazard.”

To help keep children safe, CPSC enforces the Flammable Fabrics Act and recalls products at Halloween and throughout the year that can cause injury.

Make this year’s holiday a safe one by following these safety tips on costumes, treats and decorations:

Costume:

  • When purchasing costumes, masks, beards and wigs, look for flame-resistant fabrics such as nylon or polyester, or look for the label “Flame Resistant.” Flame-resistant fabrics will resist burning and should extinguish quickly. To minimize the risk of contact with candles and other fire sources, avoid costumes made with flimsy materials and outfits with big, baggy sleeves or billowing skirts.
  • Purchase or make costumes that are light, bright and clearly visible to motorists.
  • For greater visibility during dusk and darkness, decorate or trim costumes with reflective tape that will glow in the beam of a car’s headlights. Bags or sacks also should be light colored or decorated with reflective tape. Reflective tape is usually available in hardware, bicycle and sporting goods stores.
  • Children should carry flashlights to see and be seen.

Treats:

  • Warn children not to eat any treats until an adult has examined them carefully for evidence of tampering.
  • Carefully examine any toys or novelty items received by trick-or-treaters under three years of age. Do not allow young children to have any items that are small enough to present a choking hazard or that have small parts or components that could separate during use and present a choking hazard.

Decorations:

  • Keep candles and Jack O’ Lanterns away from landings and doorsteps where costumes could brush against the flame.
  • Remove obstacles from lawns, steps and porches when expecting trick-or-treaters.
  • Indoors, keep candles and Jack O’ Lanterns away from curtains, decorations and other combustibles that could catch fire. Do not leave burning candles unattended.
  • Indoors or outside, use only lights that have been tested for safety by a recognized testing laboratory. Check each set of lights, new or old, for broken or cracked sockets, frayed or bare wires, or loose connections. Discard damaged sets.

Woman Awarded $1.8 Million In Lawn Mower Case Against Wal-Mart

Friday, October 27th, 2006

A woman who suffered severe injuries after being run down by a defective lawn mower has settled a personal injury lawsuit against Wal-Mart for $1.8 million in compensation.

Joyce Burnside, 58, purchased a lawn mower from a South Carolina Wal-Mart store. According to the claim, she was riding the mower around her lawn when it began to turn over.

The suit claims that Burnside jumped off the machine, but the defective mower continued to chase her 30 feet across her lawn until she was blocked in by a tree. The lawn mower’s sharp blades were still running and sliced into Burnside causing her to sustain serious, permanent injuries to her arm.

The machine cut off most of Burnside’s left hand, leaving only her thumb and forefinger. Her left elbow was also severely crushed and she endured 18 unsuccessful surgeries in an effort to correct the disfigurement.

The personal injury lawsuit filed against Wal-Mart, the retailer of the lawn mower, sought monetary damages for Burnside’s economic and non-economic losses including pain and suffering, medical bills, disfigurement, and more. Murry, the Manufacturer of the product filed for bankruptcy.