Oregon Injury Lawyer Blog

A fatal accident earlier this month at an Eastern Oregon railroad crossing where collisions involving trains and vehicles have occurred in the past raises serious questions about corporate responsibility and road/rail safety.

According to Oregon Public Broadcasting (citing an article that originally appeared in the East Oregonian), a 63-year-old county worker died earlier this month “when a train struck a road grader on Canal Road south of Hermiston” in the Eastern part of the state. The worker was using the grader to spread gravel along one side of the tracks at the time of the accident. According to OPB “the train dragged the grader about 100 feet before it stopped.” The grader operator died at the scene of the Oregon train and car accident.

What makes this tragedy especially noteworthy are facts indicating it was ultimately preventable. As the article explains, at the crossing in question “motorists cannot see trains coming from the west until they emerge around a nearby curve. The crossing is uncontrolled, meaning it does not have traffic control arms.”

When one adds in the fact that there have been accidents involving vehicles at this particular crossing in the past it is difficult to avoid asking why the railroad company has not seen fit to install crossing arms in such an obviously dangerous location.

Private companies have a special responsibility to ensure that their products and services pose no threat to the public in situations where the public has no choice but to interact with the company – such as when a road crosses railroad tracks. From the perspective of an Oregon vehicle accident attorney it is especially important that ordinary citizens know that they have rights, and that they should not be intimidated by the rich or the powerful when it comes to claiming them. We all deserve to know we are safe when taking appropriate care as we cross train tracks. Doing so requires that the railways, too, take appropriate precautions concerning motorists’ safety.

OPB News: County Equipment Operator Killed in Canal Road Train Collision

Earlier this month HBO launched a new documentary, Hot Coffee, that is designed to challenge entrenched stereotypes concerning our legal system and to remind all Americans of an important, but often overlooked, constitutional right: the trial by jury.

The film takes its title from the famous 1990s personal injury lawsuit involving an elderly woman who suffered a serious burn injury after spilling a cup of McDonalds coffee. As the filmmakers point out, this case became the “poster child” for frivolous lawsuits. The point of the movie is not, however, to demonstrate that the facts of this and several other high profile cases were different than was widely reported in the media (though they are, and the film does make that point strongly).

Instead, it focuses on a broader and even more important issue: the lengths to which large and powerful corporations will go to keep cases involving their negligence out of our courts and away from juries. Our Seventh Amendment guarantee of a trial by jury is one of the most fundamental rights we enjoy as Americans. Yet, as Hot Coffee demonstrates, that right has been under attack for a generation or more. Companies make getting to court difficult and winning even harder.

When they do settle they often require victims to sign non-disclosure agreements that leave the company free to tell its side of the story but prevent victims from airing their own.

This, in turn, makes it easier for companies to dominate public discussion and to paint legitimate actions by ordinary Americans seeking justice as frivolous grabs for money and attention. Any Oregon personal injury lawyer can attest to the importance of the issues raised by Hot Coffee. The film is currently available for sale at Amazon.com and is also available for rent via Netflix.

Hot Coffee Website

Amazon.com Hot Coffee Page

The federal government’s Food and Drug Administration announced recently that Beaverton-based King International has agreed to recall its ShoulderFlex Massager. The Oregon product recall was ordered after evidence emerged that ShoulderFlex use can lead to serious injuries or even a product liability-related Oregon wrongful death.

“One death and one near-strangulation have been reported after a necklace and piece of clothing became caught in a rotating component of the device. In other cases the FDA says people’s hair became caught in the ShoulderFlex,” Portland television station KATU reports.

The station notes that all 12,000 of the massagers the company has sold nationwide since 2003 are being recalled. It adds that efforts to obtain a comment from the Beaverton-based company were unsuccessful.

From the perspective of an Oregon product liability attorney, it is good to see an unsafe product pulled from shelves (and, hopefully, also from cyberspace, where many of the ShoulderFlex devices have reportedly been sold), but worrisome that it took so long. The number of serious injuries that could be caused over the eight-year period during which the product was on sale is difficult to imagine. Situations like this are classic examples of why our civil courts are so important, allowing, as they do, a chance for those injured by dangerous products to obtain justice in ways the product recall system itself is often unable to offer.

A Portland or Beaverton product liability and wrongful death lawyer can help clients sort through the conflicting medical and legal claims that often emerge in cases like this. Ordinary Oregonians should never feel that they are at a disadvantage when squaring off against a well-funded company in court. Experienced legal help can level the playing field and ensure that justice is done when products that ought to be safe end up causing harm instead.

AP via KATU: ‘Shoulder Flex Massager’ can give a truly killer backrub

All Headline News: Neck massagers recalled after woman’s death

Resource:
FDA news release regarding the King International recall

A recent column in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call highlights a potentially serious attack on patients rights here in Oregon and elsewhere, one that has received relatively little notice in the months since the new Congress convened.

The focus of the piece is HR 5. Formally titled the Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-Cost, Timely Healthcare Act (i.e. the “HEALTH Act”), it is billed as a centerpiece of Republican efforts to repeal and replace the health care reform act passed by President Barack Obama and the Democrats last year. According to the federal government’s legislative bill-tracking service, Thomas.gov, the bill is co-sponsored by about half of all the Republicans in the House. Among Oregon’s congressional delegation only Rep. Greg Walden, whose district covers much of rural eastern and central Oregon, is a co-sponsor.

The official summary says that the bill “sets conditions for lawsuits arising from health care liability claims.” In particular, it establishes a three-year statute of limitations for most health-care related injuries. In addition, the bill “limits noneconomic damages to $250,000 (and) makes each party liable only for the amount of damages directly proportional to such party’s percentage of responsibility.” It also forbids the awarding of punitive damages “in the case of products approved, cleared or licensed” by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

In practical terms what does all of that mean for personal injury and medical malpractice victims here in Oregon? The most important effect of the bill would be to sweep away state law where medical malpractice and patients rights are concerned. As the Roll Call column notes, these matters have traditionally been left to the states (making it somewhat ironic that among HR 5’s sponsors are many of Congress’ most vocal defenders of states’ rights). It would, in effect, replace decades of carefully considered state law on Oregon product liability, medical malpractice and patients’ rights with a national, one-size-fits-all, approach.

From a Portland personal injury lawyer’s perspective, this legislation deserves closer public scrutiny. The effect on victims seeking justice for a medical malpractice claim or severe brain injury here in Oregon could be devastating – shifting the scales of justice decisively in favor of large companies or irresponsible players within the health care system. It is particularly worrisome that the legislation would, in effect, provide blanket immunity from lawsuits to any product or drug approved by the FDA regardless of the circumstances of the product’s failure or the nature of the damage it caused. Clients should know, however, that Oregon’s medical malpractice, traumatic brain injury and personal injury attorneys will be here to defend them, regardless of what happens in Washington DC.

Roll Call: Vance: Medical Malpractice Is Issue for the States

Thomas.gov: Official summary of HR 5

A recent announcement that insurance giant Allstate is buying the Esurance and Answer Financial brands from the smaller, less well-known, White Mountains Insurance Group raises several troubling questions.

According to an Associated Press article, Allstate expects to pay about $1 billion for the two brands. The acquisition will allow Allstate to broaden the offerings available under its corporate umbrella. AP cites an Allstate press release claiming “the deal will help it tap consumers who prefer certain brands along with consumers who want choices among insurance carriers.”

Leaving aside the dubious claim that one company’s marketing of its products under different names actually constitutes “choice” from a consumer’s perspective, customers might also want to consider what a company really has in mind when it makes acquisitions like this at below-market-value. Notably, White Mountain told the AP that the sale “will increase its book value by $80 per share.” Yet in trading after the deal was announced White Mountain’s stock rose by only $51 (about 15%) – indicating that the market thinks White Mountain should have gotten more money from Allstate for the deal to raise the company’s valuation as much as the White Mountain claims.

So Allstate seems to have obtained Esurance and Answer Financial at a cut-rate price. Combine this with Allstate’s PR statement announcing, according to AP, “its first-quarter profit more than quadrupled as it paid out less money for damage claims” and one has to wonder who, exactly, Allstate is keeping in “good hands” – its investors or the customers who count on it for insurance coverage.

From an Oregon personal injury attorney’s perspective, this is a near textbook example of the mindset consumers often find themselves struggling against when seeking a just settlement following a Portland auto accident, a severe injury to the brain or spinal cord or an industrial accident. Fighting for your rights against a company more concerned with its bottom-line than with fair play or justice is never easy. Severe injuries here in Oregon should not lead to a series of battles with an insurance company over the benefits you deserve, but when they do it is important to have an experienced Portland personal injury lawyer in your corner.

Associated Press: Allstate buys Esurance, Answer Financial for $1B

After a year marked by bad news – fatal crashes; official reports indicating that safety needs to be improved – it is refreshing to encounter a story about Tri-Met that makes you feel good.

According to The Oregonian, a Tri-Met train driver’s quick thinking saved the life of a woman who had fallen onto the tracks last week. What could have turned into a disastrous Portland transportation accident was averted, the paper reports, mainly because train driver Arthur Beardsley “knew the Willow Creek stop in Hillsboro can be ‘a scary area.’” As a result, he was already approaching with caution when a woman fainted in front of his oncoming train.

Trains, as the article notes, can take a long time to stop. Large freight trains can easily travel over a mile after the brakes are applied before they begin to lose momentum. Even light rail cars, like the trains commuters use here in the Portland area, normally take about 600 feet to stop, according to The Oregonian. In this case it was only Beardsley’s unusually slow approach to Willow Creek that averted an otherwise certain tragedy.

I have written on a number of precious occasions that Portland personal injury lawyers are here to help everyone in our community hold those who are reckless and negligent accountable for their actions. Oregon wrongful deaths, medical malpractice, drunk and distracted driving and industrial accidents need not happen. The courts exist to help citizens get the justice they deserve – but even better outcomes come from people and companies exercising due caution in their day-to-day activities, in the hope that all of us do not need to resort to the justice system in the first place.

The Oregonian: Tri-Met operator, knowing he was approaching a ‘scary area,’ hit the brakes just in time to save woman

A recent profile in The Oregonian details the struggles, and mutual support, of Portland burn victims, offering a reminder of how devastating this kind of injury can be. The article focuses on Portland Burn Survivors, Inc. and a related group, Burn Concern. The latter is organized by Legacy Emanuel Medical Center, Oregon’s only hospital with a full-scale burn unit.

The paper notes that the prospects for Oregon burn victims have changed substantially over the last generation. “Until about 30 years ago, survival of a bad burn meant constant pain and medical complications that usually led to swift death,” the article states. Advances in medical technology have increased survival rates, and made life after a burn more tolerable for many in physical terms, but have done little to alter the stigma society often attaches to those dealing with a disfiguring injury.

Burns, of course, can happen for any number of reasons. The survivors profiled by The Oregonian received their injuries in vastly different ways – ranging from a camping accident to a car crash. One was severely injured as a 13 year old by an outdoor garbage fire.

The very variety of their experience, however, attests to the need to consider the long-term consequences of life after a severe burn. A fact box accompanying the article notes that of the 138 people who died in fires here in Oregon between 2004 and 2008 half “were in single-family homes or duplexes, 31 percent in mobile homes or trailers and 17 percent in multifamily housing.” In roughly half of those cases “there was no smoke alarm” in the dwelling, or the alarm did not go off. Such statistics, by their very nature, raise questions of responsibility and accountability.

When embarking on the long and difficult road to recovery from an Oregon burn accident survivors and their loved ones need to give serious thought to both the cause of the fire and its long-term consequences. A Portland personal injury attorney can advise burn survivors of their options and on the remedies the legal system may offer those seeking justice in the wake of a personal and family tragedy – particular one whose consequences are likely to be felt every day for years to come.

The Oregonian: In Portland, burn survivors find a new way to step out into the world again; sometimes, it’s as simple as lunch

An article just published by the online magazine Slate raises an intriguing question: is it safer to drive head-first into a parking spot, the way most Americans do? Or to back into it? The question is relevant because if there is strong data suggesting that backing into parking spaces is, by and large, safer that, in turn, would mean that we ought to begin looking at Oregon car accidents in different ways.

We all know, of course, that Portland car accidents can lead to any number of traumas: Oregon brain injuries, injuries to children, even wrongful death. Who among us has not had a near miss either when backing out of a parking space or when passing by (whether in a car or on foot) someone who is doing so without paying sufficient attention.

Though Slate notes that “parking lot crash statistics are a bit hazy,” it goes on to note: “a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in 2001 and 2002 found that 14 percent of all damage claims involved crashes in parking lots (some number of which must have involved vehicles moving in and out of spaces).” Further, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in a report to Congress last year estimated that “backover crashes,” as they are officially known, “cause at least 183 fatalities annually” as well as approximately 7000 injuries. The NHTSA is studying new rules that it hopes may lower these numbers by cutting the size of vehicle blind spots.

Pedestrians of all ages are at risk where Oregon backover crashes are concerned, as are Portland cyclists. As the government report notes however, it is children who are particularly vulnerable where backover injuries are concerned.

An Oregon child injury lawyer can help victims and their families as they as they consider their next moves in the aftermath of a backover crash or other Portland car accident. For the moment, it might also be good for the rest of us to at least think about Slate’s advice and consider backing into parking spaces more often. As the magazine notes, when you back in you have the opportunity in driving past the space to glance over and ensure that it is clear before starting to park. Similarly, when pulling out one has a clearer view of the traffic or the rest of the parking lot.

Slate: You’re Parking Wrong

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Vehicle Backover Avoidance Technology Study – Report to Congress

A case headed for California’s courts offers a pointed reminder that there is more to ‘distracted driving’ than cellphones. According to the Orange County Register, a man in southern California has been charged with vehicular manslaughter for causing a baby’s death because he “was distracted by a laptop sliding off his passenger seat.” In California the charge of “vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence” caries a potential sentence of a year in jail.

According to the paper, the fatal car accident took place last September. It began when the driver, as he crossed some railroad tracks, turned his attention to a laptop sitting in the passenger seat that he feared would slide out of its bag. As a result, he “did not notice that the traffic in front of him had stopped” and rear-ended the vehicle in front of him. That vehicle, in turn, lurched forward, striking an Australian tourist who was making her way across a crosswalk with her baby in a stroller as well as her 11-year-old niece and 7-year-old nephew.

The woman and the 11 year old were struck and injured by the car at the head of the chain-reaction accident. The baby was launched from her stroller, landing “approximately 70 feet away,” the newspaper reports.

Legally-speaking, this tragedy, were it to happen here in Oregon, probably would not qualify as Oregon distracted driving, a term we generally reserve for violations of Oregon’s ban on texting and the use of cellphones without a hands-free device (California has similar laws). That would not mean the victim’s family wouldn’t have legal remedies, such as an Oregon wrongful death or Oregon negligent driving lawsuit.

From this distance, and at this time, the important lesson this case offers us here in Oregon is the reminder that cellphones are far from the only distractions drivers need to be aware of when they are behind the wheel. If you or a family member have been the victim of a motorist distracted by something besides a cellphone when they should have been paying closer attention to traffic and the road, consulting a Portland car accident attorney at the earliest possible opportunity is a key first step in protecting your rights.

Orange County Register: Distracted Driver Charged in Baby’s Death

Two serious Portland pedestrian accidents only hours apart – one of them fatal – highlight the danger pedestrians continue to face here in northern Oregon, despite a renewed public focus on the issue in recent months.

The first accident took place last Monday on Southeast 82nd Avenue where a 27-year old pedestrian was hit by a car and run over by not one but two vehicles, according to a report in The Oregonian. The victim is hospitalized in serious condition. According to an OSP spokesperson, the Oregon pedestrian car accident began when she was struck while crossing 82nd Avenue in a marked crosswalk Monday afternoon. A pick-up truck traveling behind the car that hit the pedestrian ran over her as it attempted to drive around the first car. The driver of the first car, apparently startled, then moved her vehicle – in the process running over the victim a second time. Neither driver was cited in the incident, according to The Oregonian, but an investigation is still under way.

The second Portland car accident took place Tuesday evening. Unlike the first accident, where both drivers are cooperating with police, this was a hit-and-run, and a reward is being offered for information leading to the arrest of the driver, according to The Oregonian. The accident, on Southeast Division St, led to the death of a pedestrian who was struck “as he crossed the wide road”, the newspaper reports. The victim was pronounced dead at the scene.

The accidents come in the wake of months of renewed concern regarding the safety of pedestrians and cyclists on roads throughout the Portland area. As I have noted several times in recent months, public attention has repeatedly focused on the unusually high number of Oregon pedestrian accidents and Oregon bicycle accidents the city has witnessed over the last year or so.

The dramatically different behavior of these three drivers notwithstanding, both of these accidents are important reminders of the role a Portland personal injury attorney can play in the struggle for justice by Oregon accident victims and their families. Even when police decline to cite one or more drivers at the scene of an accident, that decision does not mean the end of legal responsibility for drivers. A Portland Oregon pedestrian accident lawyer can offer essential advice and guidance when victims and their families are faced with difficult choices.

The Oregonian: Authorities offer reward in fatal SE Portland hit and run

The Oregonian: Investigators confirm two vehicles hit pedestrian on SE 82nd

Yamaha’s Rhino off-road vehicle is emerging as a target of significant personal injury lawsuits here in Oregon and elsewhere around the country, according to a recent article in The Oregonian. The paper notes that the Rhino, first introduced in 2003, is the subject of “about 700 injury and wrongful death claims” nationwide, including several in Oregon.

Only five such cases have gone to trial so far, and the company has won four of those (the exception was in Georgia), but, the paper notes, “Yamaha has quietly paid settlements in at least 40 Rhino cases, some on the eve of trial.” The paper’s reporting, which was compiled by the consumer watchdog organization FairWarning.org, also says the federal government’s Consumer Product Safety Commission “has received reports of 70 deaths in Rhino crashes.” An August 2009 CPSC news release notes that several models of the Rhino were recalled for repairs “in order to enhance stability and reduce the potential for rollover.” At the time of the recall the company also gave Rhino owners free helmets.

The company says the vehicles are safe, and that its winning record at trial proves it. Consumer advocates, according to The Oregonian, counter that the company has, until now, successfully cherry-picked cases it was likely to win: instances in which reckless driving appeared to have played a role in the injuries or deaths resulting from accidents involving Rhinos. A March 2009 CPSC report noted, however, that many of the more recent accident reports “appear to involve turns at relatively low speeds on level terrain,” according to The Oregonian.

Sorting through contradictory claims like these is exactly the sort of situation in which most consumers will benefit from the experience a Portland personal injury attorney can bring to the table. The first step on the long road to justice involves determining how the law is likely to view the injuries you or your loved ones have suffered, and then thinking through the best ways to present your case in a court.

Huge multi-national companies can sometimes appear to hold all of the cards, but with an Oregon personal injury and wrongful death lawyer in your corner your fight for justice after an accident stands a much better chance of succeeding.

The Oregonian: Yamaha faces hundreds of lawsuits over off-road rhino injuries, deaths

CPSC News Release Concerning the Yamaha Rhino

Have you ever been to a carnival, or even a child’s birthday party and wondered just how safe those moonwalks, bouncy castles and other portable ‘rides’ are? According to a recent article in the Wichita Eagle, a Kansas court case looks set to bring those issues into focus.

According to the newspaper, the civil lawsuit was filed last month by the parents of a five-year-old boy who died after being thrown from an inflatable ride called King of the Hill. The newspaper describes this as being “designed like a large mattress – flat except for a bulge in the middle – and… surrounded by a 2-foot-high inflatable barrier.” Parents were allegedly told to place a child in the center of the ‘mattress’ and then to jump up and down themselves on the inflatable’s sides, causing the child to fly into the air. Having done this a few days earlier for the boy’s birthday party the five-year-old’s family returned to the same amusement park a few days later, using free passes they had received during the birthday celebration. On this second visit, however, the child was launched over the inflatable barrier. He landed head-first on the facility’s concrete floor, resulting in his death.

The parents also charge that the ride was “underinflated and unsupervised” and that the operator ignored the manufacturer’s recommendation that the ride was for children ages 8 and up.

Any child’s death is, of course, an enormous tragedy. Incidents such as this, however, highlight the importance of tough enforcement mechanisms and the need, here in Oregon, to contact a Portland personal injury lawyer immediately should your child suffer an injury on a carnival ride. Accidents like the one in Kansas are particularly serious because even if they do not result in death they carry significant risk of traumatic brain injury or a spinal cord injury.

It is important that the operators of amusement parks and similar attractions be held accountable when their attractions are operated negligently or in an unsafe manner. Injuries to children are especially difficult for any parent or loved one to think about. If your child has been injured while visiting a carnival or amusement park, prompt consultation with an Oregon child injury lawyer is an essential first step toward protecting your family’s rights and ensuring that justice is done.

Wichita Eagle: Mother sues inflatable company over death of child

Media reports over the last ten days have noted the strange case of nearly 20 Oregon high school football players taken ill after practice with a rare muscle disorder. According to the Associated Press three of the teens needed surgery “and 16 others were treated after suffering muscle damage following a fall camp.” The high schoolers are suffering from a rare condition known as “compartment syndrome” in which high levels of enzymes released after heavy exercise can, in some cases, lead to kidney failure. The constant repetition of the fact that the victims are football players, however, can obscure the fact that they are high schoolers – children, in the eyes of the law – and raises the question of what level of responsibility ought to be assigned to McMinnville High School and its football coach.

According to an article in The Oregonian, doctors familiar with the case say an intense combination of “high heat, dehydration and heavy exercise” may have led to the mass case of compartment syndrome. The doctors are also, however, “waiting for blood tests looking for the presence of creatine, a legal, loosely regulated and widely available bodybuilding supplement present in a number of weight-gain products that has been linked to an increased risk of sports-related injury.”

These Oregon child injuries, taking place at a high school sports practice, raise serious questions about the school’s responsibility – where it should start and where it should end. In particular, if creatine is found in the players’ blood that, in turn, would raise questions about whether the team’s coaches were aware of supplement use among their players and what, if anything, they may have done to warn against it.

Families struggling with questions like these in the wake of a student sports injury are strongly urged to contact an Oregon child injury lawyer with specialized knowledge of Oregon sports injuries at the earliest possible opportunity.

The Oregonian reports that even the McMinnville high school football team’s doctor has questioned the wisdom of team workouts that reportedly took place in temperatures well over 100 degrees. This is the sort of expert analysis that can be a key element of any Oregon child injury or Oregon sports injury case. An Oregon sports injury attorney can be an important guide and advisor as you consider the best path to pursue in the wake of an Oregon child injury suffered as part of school activities.

The Oregonian: Combination of intense drill, heat, dehydration may have sent McMinnville players to hospital

AP: 19 Ore. Football players treated for muscle injury

A new study from Tufts University, published last week in The New England Journal of Medicine, has found what appears to be a link between the chronic pain disorder fibromyalgia and Tai Chi, a Chinese martial art that is most often practiced here in the United States for its health benefits rather than self-defense.

The focus on fibromyalgia makes the study especially interesting for Oregon accident victims seeking to recover from a car crash, bicycle crash or industrial accident. According to an analysis by the New York Times, the study “found that after 12 weeks of Tai Chi, patients with fibromyalgia… did significantly better in measurements of pain, fatigue, physical functioning, sleeplessness and depression than a comparable group given stretching exercises and wellness education.”

The paper notes that other medical studies have previously suggested that Tai Chi might hold benefits for other pain suffers, such as people with arthritis. These, however, are relatively well-understood maladies. Fibromyalgia is different. As the Times notes, fibromyalgia is “common”, but remains little-understood and is often difficult to treat. One doctor involved in the study is quoted by the Times attributing Tai Chi’s success with fibromyalgia victims to the discipline’s multiple components: “physical, psychological, social and spiritual.”

The study’s findings are especially good news for accident victims struggling with physical pain, in some cases years after an accident. They are also a reminder that while an Oregon personal injury lawyer can be an essential aide and ally in the legal side of your quest for justice after an Oregon car, bus, truck or bicycle accident, his services can only take you so far. The legal system can help with the medical bills and other personal difficulties that flow from an Oregon injury accident, but at a certain level recovery is also about discipline and dedication. That, it seems, is where an ancient Chinese art focused on training the body as it steadies the mind, may be able to help.

New York Times: Tai Chi reported to ease fibromyalgia

The New England Journal of Medicine: A Randomized Trial of Tai Chi for Fibromyalgia (abstract)

A new measure signed into law in Massachusetts this week raises questions about whether Oregon has sufficiently strong laws regarding young riders and ATVs. As outlined by Boston TV station WCVB, the measure, known as “Sean’s Law," raises the minimum age for ATV operation in Massachusetts from 10 to 14. The law is named after a 8 year old boy who died in an ATV accident in 2006.

New laws such as this are necessary because of the disturbing ways in which some ATV manufacturers market their products. Advertising materials show families using ATVs - in some cases portraying children who in many states would be breaking the law by being on one. Manufacturers downplay the tendency of ATVs to flip over and the serious consequences that can come from being pinned under one. ATVs are neither small nor light.

Here in Oregon there is no minimum age for operating an ATV, though operators below the age of 30 are required to complete a safety education course (by 2014 that requirement will apply to all Oregon ATV riders regardless of age). The course can be taken either in person or online, though beginning in 2012 the “hands-on” version will be required for Oregonians 15 and younger.

The data that drove passage of the Massachusetts law, however, should lead Oregon parents to ask whether these vehicles are actually safe for younger teens and pre-teens to operate under any circumstances, and whether the resulting Oregon ATV accidents - some leading to death or Oregon traumatic brain injuries - are worth the risk. With ATV use growing the number of deaths associated with the vehicles has grown as well. Federal data shows Oregon with 124 ATV-related deaths between 1982 and 2005 – an average of 5.4 deaths per year. From 2006-2008, however, the figure jumps to 40 for only that three- year period: more than 13 deaths per year – a 247% increase.

According to WCVB, the Boston doctor who treated the fatally injured boy for whom the Massachusetts law is named, and who later became one of the new law’s strongest advocates, says he was swayed by data from Nova Scotia. There, a similar law led to a 50% drop in ATV deaths among children in the first year after it was enacted.

ATVs can be fun, but they are also inherently dangerous vehicles. If you or a loved one have been the victim of an Oregon ATV accident, immediately contacting an Oregon personal injury attorney with a specialization in Oregon ATV injuries to children is a crucial first step in protecting your rights.

WCVB.com: Young victim’s family gets ATV laws changed

Oregon Parks & Recreation Department: ATV page

Consumer Product Safety Commission: ATV Statistics Page

Contracts between the Pentagon and defense contractor Kellogg, Brown & Root grant the company complete immunity in Iraq for harm its employees may cause to either Iraqi civilians or American and other coalition soldiers.

That immunity – cited by KBR in defending itself against an Oregon workplace injury lawsuit – has prompted Rep. Earl Blumenauer, a Democrat who represents much of the Portland area, to demand an explanation from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, according to The Oregonian. In his letter to Gates, Blumenauer called the blanket liability exemption “mind-numbing”.

The newspaper reports that the exemption came to light as part of a lawsuit filed by 26 Oregon National Guardsmen who served in Iraq in 2003. The troops were assigned to guard KBR employees undertaking reconstruction work. The guardsmen claim that “the contractor knowingly or negligently exposed them to a cancer-causing chemical” the newspaper reports. A similar suit is also being considered by courts in Indiana.

The company has argued that the exemption – which was originally kept secret – immunizes it from any liability concerning injuries the soldiers may have suffered while guarding its activities.

This case is a reminder of the important role an Oregon personal injury lawyer can play in resolving claims related to Oregon workplace accidents – especially those which may have resulted in a wrongful death. Consulting with a Portland industrial accident attorney can be an important first step in determining what recourse you may have following an industrial accident – particularly one whose origins can be traced to negligence on the part of the company. Holding powerful private-sector companies responsible for the damage they cause is one of the most important functions with which a Portland industrial liability lawyer can assist you.

The Oregonian: Blumenauer demands that Pentagon explain KBR immunity deal

A 69 year old Salem man died Thursday in an Oregon car accident just as the holiday weekend was getting underway. According to The Oregonian, Rodney Kamppi was headed for a Fourth of July camping trip with his daughter, son-in-law and the younger couple’s two daughters when the driver, Kamppi’s son-in-law, lost control of vehicle near La Grande.

The family was traveling in an SUV, and was towing a large camper. According to the newspaper, quoting an Oregon state trooper, “the SUV flipped over, separated from the trailer and slid about 100 feet down an embankment before hitting a tree.” Kamppi died at the scene of the accident, the newspaper reports, despite the best efforts of two nurses who were passing by and stopped to offer assistance, including CPR. The remaining members of the family were taken to a local hospital. The OSP told The Oregonian that all occupants of the SUV were wearing safety belts.

In the wake of accidents like this one it is an unfortunate fact that grieving and injured families often require the assistance of an Oregon personal injury lawyer in what becomes a fight to receive all of the insurance benefits to which they may be entitled.

Insurance companies will often look for small technicalities in a bid to avoid paying claims, even when several members of the same family – including children – are injured through no fault of their own. A Portland car crash lawyer who is experienced in dealing with insurance companies can help you fight for everything to which you are entitled after a Portland, Salem, Medford or La Grange car accident.

The Oregonian: OSP troopers respond to fatal crash in I-84 near La Grande

The Oregon Supreme Court sided with cigarette giant Philip Morris last week in refusing to reinstate a $100 million punitive damage ruling issued by a lower court in 2002. That earlier ruling was overturned by a state appellate court in 2006.

It is important to note that one part of the Oregon product liability and wrongful death case still stands: the original Oregon jury award of more than $164,500 in “economic losses, pain and suffering” is not affected by the ruling regarding punitive damages, according to The Oregonian. Moreover, the Supreme Court ruling does not mean that the case is finished or that punitive damages have been disallowed: merely that the issue of Oregon punitive damages must be reargued before a lower court.

The case concerns a Salem woman who died in 1999 after decades of regular smoking. According to The Oregonian, she switched to low-tar cigarettes in 1976, after a dozen years of smoking, believing that low tar cigarettes would be less problematic for her health. Oregon personal injury attorneys representing the woman’s family argued that Philip Morris possessed study data showing that smokers of low-tar cigarettes tended to inhale longer and more deeply, thus negating the alleged benefits of the product. The company, however, did not disclose this information to consumers.

The state appellate court threw out the $100 million Oregon punitive damage award on the grounds that the trial judge had incorrectly instructed jurors as they began their consideration of the verdict. From an Oregon personal injury attorney’s perspective this seeming legal technicality could prove to be of great use to clients over the course of time. Smokers seeking to gain justice after suffering decades of harm can take comfort from the fact that the Supreme Court’s ruling turned on the manner of the judge’s instructions to the jury, rather than on the substance of the claim that cigarettes can cause extensive damage to smokers and people around them.

Though smoking lawsuits can be particularly long and complex, that does not mean that people injured by tobacco companies should not consider pursuing them. Justice can be a long and trying road. With the assistance of an Oregon personal injury lawyer it is, however, a goal you can attain.

The Oregonian: Oregon Supreme Court says Philip Morris doesn’t have to pay $100 million for smoker’s death

Businessweek: Philip Morris $100 million punitive verdict reversed

One of the stranger stories of the week comes from Minnesota where a fatal crash involving two cars and two semi-trucks Monday not only killed two people, but also released a swarm of millions of bees.

According to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, rescuers responding to the fatal car-truck crash had to fight their way through dark clouds of bees released from one of the trucks, both of which were hauling bees that had spent the winter in Mississippi to North Dakota for the summer. The cars were reportedly crushed between the two trucks. Police are still investigating the cause of the fatal car-truck crash, according to the Star-Tribune.

The bee-laden semi-trailers collided with two cars on Interstate 35 closing what the Star-Tribune described as a five-mile stretch of the interstate for several hours. The paper quoted a fireman who was one of the first rescuers on the scene saying; “I saw this big black cloud… I opened up my door and got stung in the face by a couple of bees.”

Car and truck crashes like this one serve as a reminder for Oregon drivers that the consequences of an accident can extend beyond the damage to the vehicles themselves. I wrote a few days ago about a man in Maine killed while tending his own yard sale when a pick-up and a camper crashed into his front yard. When accidents kill bystanders – or release a cloud of potentially dangerous insects – the people responsible for the damage need to be held to account. An experienced Portland personal injury lawyer can advise clients on the best way to obtain justice if they have been damaged by another person’s Oregon reckless driving or negligence.

USA Today: Firefighters battle thousands of bees released in highway crash

Minneapolis Star-Tribune: Rescuers battle bees in deadly I-35 pileup

The videos on The Oregonian’s website are arresting: a table saw stopping abruptly as it comes into contact with a hot dog (standing in for a human finger as part of a demonstration), leaving the hot dog barely nicked. The technology, called “Saw Stop”, was developed by a Portland lawyer (with a PhD in Physics) whose Tualatin-based company now manufactures its own table saws after failing to sell industry leaders on the technology. It represents a dramatic leap forward in safety: something that could decrease the number of Oregon amputations significantly were it to come into wider use.

The lawyer/inventor/physicist, Stephen Glass, designed a technology that allows the saw to distinguish flesh from things it ought to be cutting (such as wood or metal). When the blade senses it is in contact with flesh it stops and retracts, Glass claims, 10 times faster than an airbag deploys in an Oregon auto crash. Glass and his partners set up their own company to sell saws using their technology after the country’s leading tool manufacturers refused to license it, deciding, Glass said, that “safety doesn’t sell.” This, he says, despite an estimated 60,000 table saw injuries each year in the United States, about 3000 of which lead to amputations.

What may change this equation is a recent Massachusetts jury decision against Roybi, a large table saw manufacturer, awarding $1.5 million to a man who mangled his hand while working with one of the company’s table saws. The Oregonian reports that 60 similar cases have already been filed nationwide. Since Glass believes the tool companies were uninterested in his technology because they had not previously been held liable for the injuries their products can cause, the evolving legal landscape may lead to a change in the business environment.

Until then, however, victims of Oregon power tool accidents should consult immediately with a Portland personal injury attorney after suffering an injury while using a table saw or other power tool. In his interview with the Oregonian Glass recounts arguments against the adoption of his technology that are eerily similar to ones the auto industry made in the 1960s against making seat belts standard in cars (arguments it repeated in the 1980s in reference to air bags). Whether this technology will someday be as universal as seat belts are today, remains to be seen.

The Oregonian: Saw-safety invention pits Oregon firms against giant manufacturers

A man from Prospect, in southern Oregon between Medford and Crater Lake National Park, has filed an Oregon personal injury lawsuit against the US Forest Service and a local lumber company for injuries sustained because the government allegedly failed to remove a dangerous tree. According to The Oregonian, as well as wire service reports, Bert Fernandez claims he was permanently injured, and that his vehicle was severely damaged, when a 32-foot tree fell on his car as he drove through the Rouge River National Forest. The accident took place in February, 2008.

Fernandez charges that the tree had been marked by the Forest Service for removal and that the logging company failed to cut it down within the timeframe agreed in the company’s contract with the government. He is alleging negligence on the part of the logger for failing to cut down the tree, and on the part of the Forest Service for failing to hold the loggers to their contract.

While unusual in some respects (people more commonly get sued for cutting down a tree improperly rather than for failing to cut it down in the first place), at its core this is a familiar sort of Oregon personal injury case: one that seeks to recover damages caused by alleged negligence on the part of the government and a private company.

Anyone involved in a Medford injury accident is well-advised to consult an Oregon personal injury attorney as soon as possible. An experienced Portland accident lawyer can advise you on the best course of action after considering your particular circumstances, including whether you may be entitled to damages to compensate for medical bills, pain and suffering, damage to your property or lost wages or salary.

The Oregonian: Here’s a twist: southern Oregon man sues Forest Service for not cutting a tree

AP from the Sacramento Bee: Oregon Man Sues Over Tree that Fell and Hurt Him

Cars and cellphones have been the media’s main focus when discussing Oregon’s new laws, but the distracted driving bill was not the only significant piece of legislation which came into force on January 1, 2010. Several new measures change state insurance regulations in ways that stand to benefit consumers in significant ways.

Among the most important is a new law raising the ceiling on income replacement benefits from $1250 to $3000 per month. These are benefits paid by your insurer if you are unable to return to work because of an injury. It goes without saying that for many people the old monthly rate of $1250 – essentially a minimum wage salary – fell far short of actually replacing lost income.

The same bill also increased the required level of motor vehicle liability insurance for damage to others from $10,000 to $20,000 (that increase, in turn, bumps up the minimum level of optional uninsured motorist coverage for property damage that companies must offer their customers. This level also goes from $10,000 to $20,000).

The income replacement benefit is especially important not only because it ought to help injured consumers in these tough economic times, but also because it may put pressure on insurers to offer more generous benefit levels. If you are locked in a dispute with an insurance company over income replacement benefits and their appropriate level this would be a very good time to consult with an Oregon personal injury attorney to get a better sense of the new law and how it may benefit you. Experienced Portland severe and catastrophic injury attorneys take the time to examine all legal and regulatory changes like these and give careful consideration to how they may effect your situation. Even at $3000 per month, income replacement will fall short for many people. A careful and compassionate Oregon injury lawyer can help you explore your options should this situation arise.

State of Oregon Insurance Division: 2009 Legislative Summary

Police in Gresham, just east of Portland, have arrested a suspect in a hit-and-run Portland auto accident that injured four people, three of them from the same family. According to a report in The Oregonian, a 26-year-old Gresham man has been charged with two counts of felony hit-and-run, one count of reckless driving, four counts of reckless endangering, three counts of criminal mischief and with driving without a license. The paper quotes Gresham police saying the man has confessed to the crime.

The Portland injury crash took place at the corner of SE Stark and 181st St last Friday. According to the Salem News, the suspect rear-ended a vehicle carrying a family of three that was stopped at a traffic light, forcing that car into the one in front of it. All three people in the first car as well as the driver of car it was shoved into had to be transported to area hospitals for treatment. The driver of the pick-up fled, but police arrested him later that evening.

After an accident like this prompt consultation with a Portland traffic accident lawyer should be a top priority. The criminal charges filed against the alleged driver of the pick-up truck are separate from, and do not address, civil liability. Put another way: in a situation like this the criminal charges may take a reckless driver off the road, but they will not pay the victims’ hospital bills or compensate them for lost wages or pain and suffering.

All of these are elements of Oregon hit-and-run cases that an experienced Oregon hit-and-run accident attorney can help you sort through and address. Prompt action following an accident can be a key step in protecting your rights and obtaining the compensation to which you may be entitled.

The Oregonian: Suspect arrested in Gresham hit-and-run crash

Salem News: Hit-and-run crash sends family of three and another motorist to hospital

This may not come as a huge surprise, but a new survey indicates that teens are still texting while driving, despite a rising number of state bans across the country, including a newly enacted one here in Oregon.

The new survey data, compiled by Pew Research, was released this week, according to the tech news website CNET. In July Oregon became the 16th state to ban texting while driving, a practice that is pretty much universally acknowledged to be extremely dangerous. Oregon car accidents leading to serious injuries or death are far more likely to occur when a driver is talking on a cellphone or texting. This includes single and multi-car Oregon auto accidents as well as Oregon pedestrian accidents.

The Pew survey indicated that one-third of 16 and 17 year old drivers admitted to texting while driving (one was quoted as saying he wears sunglasses while texting “so the cops don’t see” him looking down). A full 48 percent of passengers age 12 to 17 said they had been a car while the driver was texting. Portland car accidents involving a texting driver can be especially serious, and may expose the driver to liability even from passengers in his or her own vehicle. A Portland personal injury lawyer specializing in Oregon cellphone-related car accidents can advise on the best way to approach a car accident lawsuit.

CNET: Survey: Third of teens text while driving

Resource:
Governors Highway Safety Association

A Portland hit-and-run accident involving a single car and a pedicab driven by a six-foot tall orange rabbit (yes, you read that correctly) ended in a mixed Portland car accident verdict last week, according to a report in The Oregonian.

Kate Altermatt was pedaling the cab through Portland last Easter Sunday, dressed for the holiday, when a driver trying to recover a dropped cellphone hit her. Altermatt testified that the driver offered her money when she confronted him following the Portland injury traffic accident but when she smelled alcohol on his breath and refused the cash he drove away. A Multnomah County Circuit Court found Edward Cespedes-Rodriguez guilty of hit-and-run driving. He faces up to one year in jail and is scheduled to be sentenced later this month. He was cleared of a reckless endangerment charge stemming from the pedicab driver’s allegation that when Cespedes-Rodriguez hit her a second time he did so on purpose.

While a trial involving a six foot tall, pedicab driving, orange rabbit sounds like something from a TV program, the larger issues at stake are deadly serious. Hit-and-run driving is dangerous as well as illegal. Victims of a Portland hit-and-run accident should consult a Portland personal injury attorney as soon as possible. Criminal charges, such as the ones the driver faced in this case, do not address injury claims. As the victim of an Oregon hit-and-run you may be entitled to monetary damages.

Compensation for Oregon accident victims may include restitution for lost wages, damage to property, medical bills and pain and suffering. Every situation is unique, but an experienced Portland car accident lawyer can guide you through the process.

The Oregonian: Hit-and-run driver claimed he didn’t see 6-foot-tall orange rabbit on the pedicab

After a ten-day trial, a Lane County Oregon jury cleared John Deere company and a local distributor of liability in a 2006 Oregon riding mower accident that caused a toddler to lose her leg. The Eugene child injury took place when Kurt Norton accidentally backed over his daughter Isabelle, then age 3.

Isabelle and her family sought $11 million in damages, arguing that poor design made the John Deere riding mower unreasonably dangerous. By a series of 9-3 votes the jury did not agree.

Government and academic studies show lawn mower injuries to be surprisingly common, with riding mowers alone accounting for 37,000 injuries each year, according to a government study. The Consumer Product Safety Commission report examined data from the years 2003-2005. A broader study, conducted by Ohio State University, looked at 15 years of data noting that an average of 9400 children were injured each year over the survey period. The researchers concluded that “injuries related to lawn mowers are an important cause of pediatric morbidity” for which “current prevention strategies are inadequate.”

Consulting a Portland child injury lawyer is an important and crucial step to take following any Oregon lawn mower accident involving a child. An experienced Oregon personal injury attorney can help you secure your rights and appropriate compensation in the event of an injury or accident that is not your fault.

Eugene Register-Guard: Jury clears companies in lawn mower lawsuit

Resources:
Consumer Product Safety Commission: Riding Lawnmowers

National Center for Biotechnology Information: Summary of Ohio State University study

The US Transportation Department is reporting an increase in the number of women arrested for drunk driving. Although there are still more males arrested for drunk driving than women—626,371 men were arrested for DUI in 2007 and only 162,493 women—from 1998 to 2007, there was a 28.8% jump in the number of female drunk driver arrests and a 7.5% drop in the number of men arrested for DUI.

US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says he is surprised at the rise in DUIs involving women. Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) President Laura Dean Moody says that although the reason is unclear why more women are being arrested for drunk driving now than 10 years ago, she believes that it may be because females are facing greater pressures these days, such as having to be the breadwinner while their husbands are unemployed. Moody also noted that there are television programs that portray stay-at-home moms who drink as cool.

The NHTSA also is providing a breakdown of how many women and men were arrested for DUI over the last two years while they were involved in deadly Oregon traffic accidents.

• In 2007, 25 of the 144 women arrested for their involvement in a fatal Oregon motor vehicle crash had d BAC’s over .08.
• 22 of the 141 women arrested in 2008 had BAC’s that were above the legal drinking and driving limit.

• Of of the 434 men arrested for their alleged in involvement in a 2007 Oregon auto accident, 108 of them had BAC’s over .08.
• 94 of the 372 men arrested in 2008 had BAC’s above the legal drinking and driving limit.

Across the nation, the number of impaired female drivers who were involved in fatal auto accidents went up in 10 US states. About 2,000 traffic deaths each year involve women who were driving drunk.

In an effort to stop people from driving while impaired, police throughout the US will increase their efforts to arrest anyone caught driving drunk beginning Friday until the end of Labor Day . Last year, 40% of deadly US traffic accidents that occurred over this long weekend involved drunk drivers. Nationally in 2008, almost 12,000 people were killed in DUI crashes last year.

According to statistics, some two million drivers who already have multiple DUI convictions are expected to drive over the Labor Day weekend. These numbers don’t even take into account other motorists who may not have prior DUI convictions but may drink too much at a party or while spending time with family and friends and decide to get behind the wheel of a car while drunk. Portland, Oregon, Injury Attorney Matt Kaplan would like to discuss your car accident case with you.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Kicks Off Nationwide Enforcement Crackdown on Impaired Driving, NHTSA, August 19, 2009

2009 Impaired Driving National Enforcement Crackdown August 21 - September 7, 2009, NHTSA

Related Web Resources:
Alcohol-Impaired Drivers Involved in Fatal Crashes by, by Gender and State, 2007 - 2008 (PDF)

MADD

The US Transportation Department is reporting an increase in the number of women arrested for drunk driving. Although there are still more males arrested for drunk driving than women—626,371 men were arrested for DUI in 2007 and only 162,493 women—from 1998 to 2007, there was a 28.8% jump in the number of female drunk driver arrests and a 7.5% drop in the number of men arrested for DUI.

US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says he is surprised at the rise in DUIs involving women. Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) President Laura Dean Moody says that although the reason is unclear why more women are being arrested for drunk driving now than 10 years ago, she believes that it may be because females are facing greater pressures these days, such as having to be the breadwinner while their husbands are unemployed. Moody also noted that there are television programs that portray stay-at-home moms who drink as cool.

The NHTSA also is providing a breakdown of how many women and men were arrested for DUI over the last two years while they were involved in deadly Oregon traffic accidents.

• In 2007, 25 of the 144 women arrested for their involvement in a fatal Oregon motor vehicle crash had d BAC’s over .08.
• 22 of the 141 women arrested in 2008 had BAC’s that were above the legal drinking and driving limit.

• Of of the 434 men arrested for their alleged in involvement in a 2007 Oregon auto accident, 108 of them had BAC’s over .08.
• 94 of the 372 men arrested in 2008 had BAC’s above the legal drinking and driving limit.

Across the nation, the number of impaired female drivers who were involved in fatal auto accidents went up in 10 US states. About 2,000 traffic deaths each year involve women who were driving drunk.

In an effort to stop people from driving while impaired, police throughout the US will increase their efforts to arrest anyone caught driving drunk beginning Friday until the end of Labor Day . Last year, 40% of deadly US traffic accidents that occurred over this long weekend involved drunk drivers. Nationally in 2008, almost 12,000 people were killed in DUI crashes last year.

According to statistics, some two million drivers who already have multiple DUI convictions are expected to drive over the Labor Day weekend. These numbers don’t even take into account other motorists who may not have prior DUI convictions but may drink too much at a party or while spending time with family and friends and decide to get behind the wheel of a car while drunk. Portland, Oregon, Injury Attorney Matt Kaplan would like to discuss your car accident case with you.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Kicks Off Nationwide Enforcement Crackdown on Impaired Driving, NHTSA, August 19, 2009

2009 Impaired Driving National Enforcement Crackdown August 21 - September 7, 2009, NHTSA

Related Web Resources:
Alcohol-Impaired Drivers Involved in Fatal Crashes by, by Gender and State, 2007 - 2008 (PDF)

MADD

The Oregon Senate passed Senate Bill 311 this week to increase the liability lawsuit limits that a government agency can be made to pay plaintiffs. Whereas the old limits, set in 1987, placed a cap of $100,000 on noneconomic and economic damages, $50,000 for property damage, and $500,000 for all claims from one incident, the new bill proposes raising the state government’s liability lawsuit limit maximums to $1.5 million for one claim and $3 million for all claims stemming from a single incident. The distinctions between the damages would be eliminated, and the Oregon Supreme Court would deal with any challenges to the new limits.

Caps would increase $100,000 a over a five-year period. After 2015, amounts would be indexed according to inflation. All other governments in Oregon would have caps that are one-third of the state’s caps. Individual workers would also be covered against civil claims for accidents that occur while he or she is on the job. The bill now goes to the House.

In 2007, the family of young Jordan Michael Clarke sued Oregon Health & Science University and seven of its employees for medical malpractice after he suffered permanent brain damage following surgery to repair a congenital heart defect. Using the state’s liability shield, however, OHSU replaced the individual defendants named in the complaint with itself to limit liability at $200,000.

While the Oregon State Supreme Court ruled that OHSU was legally entitled to do this, it also found that the existing government caps were too low that they prevented the boy's family from receiving an appropriate legal remedy for his injuries. A $9.3 million personal injury settlement was eventually reached between OHSU and Clarke’s family.

Senate approves increase in liability lawsuit limits, Statesman Journal, February 24, 2009

Oregon may welcome higher lawsuit caps, SeattlePI.com, February 12, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Oregon Health and Science University

General information about the Oregon Tort Claims Act, OHSU.edu

Continue reading "Oregon Senate Approves Bill to Increase State and Local Government Agencies' Liability Lawsuit Limits" »

The family of Jakobi Mulgrave, the 10-year-old boy who survived a Eugene drunk driving accident that killed his mother and three other people last month, is suing several plaintiffs on his behalf for personal injury. According to the Oregon car accident lawsuit, which is seeking approximately $13 million, Jakobi sustained a brain injury, a fractured skull, a fractured pelvis, as well as damage to his kidney, spleen, and liver. Mulgrave is being treated at a Portland hospital.

The catastrophic motor vehicle accident took place on the night of January 21 when an Isuzu Rodeo, driven by Matthew Ellmers and the Toyota Highlander carrying Jakobi, his mother Yvonne, Connie Marie Vermilyea, 34, Jaziah Vermilyea, 10, and Nima Gibba, 11, collided, causing the Highlander to turn in the air and hit a utility pole. Ellmers, who is the only other person to survive the crash, also sustained serious injuries. Police say the 24-year-old Eugene driver was driving drunk.

The Mulgrave family’s Oregon personal injury lawsuit involving injuries to minors contends that Jakobi should receive $10 million for noneconomic damages, $2.8 million for lost wages throughout his lifetime, medical expenses, and other costs.

The defendants in the case are Matthew Ellmers who is accused of negligence for causing the auto accident, Kimberly Snyder, who lent her Isuzu Rodeo to him (the lawsuit contends that she either knew or should have known that Ellmers had a history of drinking heavily and that this could result in a fatal Oregon drunk driving accident), and businesses Strike City and The Nile for serving alcohol to Ellmers, who the complaint claims was already noticeably intoxicated.

On February 3, an Oregon grand jury indicted Ellmers with four counts of assault, manslaughter, DUI, and other criminal charges. Ellmers has pleaded not guilty.

Lawsuit seeks $13 million for boy injured in crash, KVAL, February 3, 2009

$12.8 million suit filed in Eugene crash, Oregon Live, February 4, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Children, 2007 Traffic Safety Fact Sheet, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Deadly Oregon Motor Vehicle Accident Leaves Four People Dead and a Young Boy in Critical Condition, Matthew D Kaplan, Attorney at Law, January 23, 2009