By backing the bill, Governor Snyder made Michigan the 31st state to provide that option. Motorcyclists who want to ride without a helmet must be 21 and have passed a motorcycle safety course within the past two years. The new requirement also is a boon for the insurance industry: motorcyclists must carry at least an additional $20,000 in medical insurance.

Snyder framed his decision as one of individual liberty: “While many motorcyclists will continue to wear helmets, those who choose not to deserve the latitude to make their own informed judgment,” he said in a statement released Friday.

Safety advocates bemoaned the decision, saying that safety studies show helmet laws lower health-care medical costs and increase public safety.

A March 2012 study by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute in Ann Arborfound that, had the Michigan law been repealed in 2009, the average cost per crash involving a motorcyclist would have increased 48 percent, from $213,770 to $317,031.

Data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2008 showed that motorcyclists who do not use helmets are three times more likely to suffer a traumatic brain injury in a crash than those who are wearing helmets.

Tom Constand, a spokesperson for the Brain Injury Association of Michigan in Brighton, said the repeal is “unconscionable.”

However, motorcycle advocates in the state say the change is necessary to boost tourism and that personal safety should be a matter of choice for each rider.

Jim Rhoades, the legislative director of the Michigan chapter of American Bikers Aiming Toward Education, said in a statement released Friday that road safety “lies in rider education, car driver awareness, and license endorsement.”

Mr. Rhoades said Michigan lost “millions of dollars” each year due to the helmet requirement. Also supporting the repeal was the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association, a trade association representing bars, restaurants, and other liquor vendors in the state.

“Every year we watch our customers ride into neighboring states and very few motorcycles ride” because of the previous law, executive director Scott Ellis said in a statement.

The federal Highway Safety Act of 1966 required all states to have a motorcycle-helmet law on their books so they could qualify for highway construction funds and other federal safety programs.

Today, 19 states and the District of Columbia have laws mandating helmet use for all riders, but most states’ laws vary regarding the age of riders and if helmets are required for all low-power cycles such as scooters and mopeds. Illinois, Iowa, and New Hampshire are the only three states that have no motorcycle helmet laws, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety inArlington, Va.

Read Full Story

Often when I am discussing a client’s personal injury case I ask my client if they have seen the movie Casablanca. Regardless of whether they have seen the movie I tell them their case is like the closing scene.

In the closing scene of Casablanca Humphrey Bogart tells Ingrid Bergman she must leave Casablanca with her husband. The success of the French Resistance in World War 11 depends on her leaving with her husband. When Ingrid Bergman asks about “us”  in relation to her husband Bogart says “the problems of three little people don’t amount to a hills of beans in this crazy world.”

I then tell my client a wise client years ago told me “nothing matters unless it matters when you’re 75 years old.” I then explain this statement  and the closing scene in Casablanca represent the importance of her personal injury case. Meaning the only thing that really matters is how she feels at 75. If she misses the opportunity to do everything she can to recover to the highest possible level from her injury she will regret  missing the opportunity she has now when she is 75.

As far as the simile on her case being like Casablanca, I explain her legal case  ultimately does not mean a hill of beans in the long run of her life- meaning when she is 75 years old what matters is how she feels. Plus dedicating herself to recovery now by doing everything in her power to get better makes her personal injury case better. This is because juries best appreciate a person who never gives up and does everything possible to overcome her injury.

Read full story at Seattle Zen Lawyer

Some of the common medical errors are:

The failure to diagnose a disease or medical condition.

The failure to provide appropriate treatment for a medical condition;

The unreasonable delay in treating a diagnosed medical condition.

Medical malpractice cases are complex and require vast resources to pursue those responsible for the damages caused by medical errors.  These cases present many obstacles and insurance companies are likely to defend these matters to the fullest extent.

When you contact the attorneys at Kupets & DeCaro, P.C. you can rest assured that we will aggressively and efficiently pursue your rights.

Call the Chicago Medical Malpractice Attorneys at 312-372-4444.

We understand that sustaining traumatic and life-changing injuries has a devastating emotional effect. We will assist you in handling every aspect of your claim. The Renton Personal Injury Lawyers Law Offices of Paul Houser, Jr., we offer a free initial consultation.

We accept personal injury cases on a contingency basis, that means we only receive attorney fees after we recover for you. This arrangement means you can obtain the best possible legal serves at the time of your injury. Our fees are collected at the time your claim is resolved.

Law Offices of Paul Houser Jr. – Renton Accident Attorneys
1620 Duvall Avenue N.E., Suite 201
Renton, Washington 98059
Phone: 425-272-0039
Fax: 425-272-0040

Robert Kornfeld,  of Kornfeld, Trudell, Bowen and Lingenbrink, PLLC,  was the attorney representing both women plaintiffs in the underlying action filed in King County Superior Court.

Mr. Kornfeld was able to show convincingly to the District and its insurer they had certain liability exposure to a  plaintiff’s verdict, in favor of two women bus drivers, who claimed they had been discriminated against because of their gender.  There was ample evidence to show a  school district mechanic in the transportation department had harassed, bullied and picked on only women, or predominantly women, bus drivers over the course of 10 + years.

Unfortunately, the school district did not take timely and effective remedial action to correct the problem in the workplace of the Transportation Department for these women bus drivers. Plaintiffs contended that no prompt and effective corrective action was taken because they were women. No one took their complaints seriously.

The evidence showed that the District failed to eliminate the harassment and bullying by this  mechanic. The conditions were so intolerable to work under that one of the women bus drivers could not return to work. She contended that she was constructively discharged, meaning, that she was effectively fired, because no reasonable person could have worked under the conditions she was forced to work. She contended that the District’s school board and the administration turned a blind eye to what was going on in the Transportation Department because it was a male dominated, managed and run organization.

Further the plaintiffs contended that, although there were two women in the administration, their positions as women in the administration were merely symbolic as figured heads only, with no real power, & they had no disciplinary authority over this mechanic. Plaintiffs were able to convince the District that the evidence painted it as an administration which was like an “old boy’s club”  favoring men over women.

In addition, the plaintiffs were able to show the District that its employee mechanic, the alleged harasser,  bullied and treated women unfairly, not men. For some reason the District protected and favored this man, over that of many helpless and hard working women bus drivers, including both plaintiffs. Here is how that was done.

You see, there were about 42 bus drivers in the Transportation Department,  24  of them were women and 18 were men. There were complaints from 10 women about this same mechanic harasser. The complaints were in writing and spanned a 10 year period. There were no written complaints from any man bus driver  regarding this same male mechanic. Clearly this harasser targeted women, not men, and he was protected by the male dominated administration of the school district and the male director of the Transportation Department under which the male mechanic worked. The administrations ignored the complaints and did not take them seriously.

After nearly four years of trying to bring this case to justice for the two women, who were regularly belittled, bullied and harassed, the case settled weeks prior to the scheduled jury trial date.

For more information, fee free to e-mail Rob Rob@Kornfeldlaw.com or call our toll free number for a FREE CONSULTATION about your case or to learn more about this case. (800) 282-4878.  Visit the Seattle Personal Injury Lawyers at Kornfeld Law online.

The bill (S2316) would require personal injury lawyers and others who offer their services to wait one month before writing to accident victims. Those who violate the law would face criminal charges, including possible prison time.

The bill, which was approved 6-0, is scheduled for a vote in the full Senate Monday.

Three of measure’s sponsors – State Sen. Nicholas Scutari (D-Union), Assemblyman Jon Bramnick (R-Union) and Assemblyman Peter Barnes (D-Middlesex) – practice personal injury law.

“Over my 30 years of practice, I have seen some things that shock the conscience,” said Bramnick.

Scutari said writing to victims immediately after a disaster or accident “gives the profession a bad name.”

“I think most good personal injury attorneys do not include this kind of practice because it’s unsavory,” he said.

Violating the measure would be a third degree crime, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $15,000 fine.

Although nobody voted against the measure or testified against it, some did raise concerns. Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll (R-Morris) and Todd Sidor, Director of Government Affairs at the New Jersey State Bar Association, both said it may run into constitutional roadblocks.

The state Supreme Court has jurisdiction over how attorneys practice law, including advertising, Sidor said.

Carroll, who voted yes on the legislation, suggested amending it so remove the criminal penalties for the offense, and to instead make it an ethics violation.

“I’m increasingly convinced that although I’ll this bill today it probably could use some amendments to take it out of the criminal statutes,” he said.

Source

The claims in question were filed from January 2001 to early February 2009. The case recently settled according to court documents (PDF). Under the settlement, claimants are entitled to 60 percent of the difference between the amount of the medical bills submitted to Farmers and the amount paid by Farmers. If you think you’re covered by the settlement and haven’t received the paperwork in the mail, you can get a claim form online.

Farmers says it settled the suit ”to avoid the burden and expense of continued litigation.” There’s speculation that Farmers settled to avoid a blockbuster jury award. Given the nationwide reach and eight-year claims period involved in the suit, who knows how much a jury could have awarded the class?

This is especially relevant when you consider Farmers’ previous experience with class action lawsuits over its PIP coverage. Earlier this year, a jury ordered Farmers to pay about $9 million on claims that it underpaid PIP claims, again, because of the process it used to determine how much to pay.

Source

A lawsuit filed in White Plains today by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York says Newburgh-based Larkin Axelrod Ingrassia & Tetenbaum and one of its partners violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by twice refusing to let a client enter its law offices with her German Shepherd service dog, Reuters reports.

The suit says Lauren Klejmont uses the animal to help her get up when she falls and assist her with tasks such as picking up dropped items, according to the Associated Press.

It alleges she was told she had a choice of leaving the dog at home or meeting with her lawyer in her car.

“The notion that a law firm and a partner in the firm would so flagrantly violate such a clear and well-established law, as was alleged in this case, is disturbing,” said U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in a written statement. “Of all people, lawyers should know better.”

The firm declined to comment when contacted by the AP because it had not yet received the complaint in the case.

Source

Some of the Tacoma personal injury matters the firm handles include:

-   Medical Malpractice Cases

-   Construction Site & Workplace Injuries

-   Wrongful Death Matters

-   Motor Vehicle Collisions

-   Maritime Accidents

-   Nursing Home or Elder Abuse Cases

We also help those who have  suffered catastrophic injuries such as paralysis, quadriplegia, traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, burns and chemical exposures, and electrical injuries.

Contingency Fee Representation: Since the cost of legal services are always a major concern, Rob offers legal services on a contingent fee basis.

A contingent fee is simply a fee based on a percentage of the recovery, which is paid at the conclusion of the case.  If there is no recovery there is no fee. Typically, there is no money up front.

Call 1 (800) 282-4878 for a free consultation. Visit the Tacoma Personal Injury Lawyers

The personal injury lawyers at the Auburn, Washington law firm of Kornfeld Law focus on representing clients who have suffered a personal injury caused in a motor vehicle collision.

The Auburn WA law firm represents clients who have suffered serious injuries involving motor vehicle accidents including:

• Auto Accidents
• Car Accidents
• Truck Accidents
• Motorcycle Accidents
• Bus Accidents
• Pedestrian Injuries
• Wrongful Death
• Uninsured/Under-Insured Motorist Claims
• Bike Accidents