Missouri Injury Lawyer Blog

As a Missouri auto accident lawyer, I know railroad crossings can be a serious hazard for Midwestern drivers. A crash between a car and a train is no contest at all, and some crossings, particularly rural ones, can be dangerously poorly marked. So I was interested to see an adverse ruling from the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for a man who lost his wife in a train accident. In Cornwell v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., Dennis Cornwell lost in trial court after the court dismissed three of his four expert witnesses testifying as to the crossing’s safety. He challenged those dismissals on appeal and also the summary judgment granted to Union Pacific on other safety claims. The Tenth upheld the district court, finding its decisions well supported by precedent.

Renia Cornwell hit a Union Pacific locomotive at 11:45 a.m. at an at-grade crossing, killing her at the scene. Some, but not all, witnesses heard the train’s horn sound before the collision, and the train’s onboard recorders provided contradictory information on the horn. The crossing also had warning signs, but no lights or gates; the installation of those safety features was completed about a month after the accident. Dennis Cornwell eventually sued Union Pacific for negligent, reckless and intentional wrongdoing in the operation of the crossing and the horn. At trial, the Oklahoma district court excluded three of Cornwell’s four witnesses, finding their testimony unreliable under Daubert. Cornwell went to trial with the fourth expert witness, but the jury found for Union Pacific.

On appeal, Cornwell argued that the district court incorrectly assessed the evidence the witnesses were offering. One, general railroad expert Alan Haley, Jr., was deemed unqualified, unreliable and relying on insufficient data. Two others, accident reconstructionist Robert Painter and his videographer, Bryan Schubert, were excluded because their accident reconstruction was dissimilar to the conditions of the actual crash, and also because they had trespassed on Union Pacific property during their research. The Tenth Circuit upheld these. Haley “lacked the proper background,” the Tenth found, and frequently changed his opinions on specific factual issues like the reliability of the train’s onboard video. Thus, he would not be able to give meaningful help to the jury. Similarly, the Tenth found Painter and Schubert’s reconstruction was speculative and conclusory because they tried to reconstruct Renia Cornwell’s view using a minivan rather than an SUV and the wrong type of locomotive, and made assumptions about how her eyes would have tracked as she reached the intersection. However, it declined to reach the trespassing issue, noting that the Daubert reasons were enough to uphold their exclusion and well supported by Tenth Circuit precedent and other caselaw.

As a southern Illinois car crash attorney, I am disappointed in this ruling. Excluding witnesses is not just a procedural matter; excluding expert witnesses is essentially excluding evidence. Because there’s no clear other way to demonstrate certain issues to a jury, having experts excluded can sound a death knell for the case. For this reason, defendants like very much to exclude the plaintiff’s expert witnesses, then try to have the case dismissed for lack of evidence. It’s also disappointing that the court declined to reach the trespassing issue, which is unusual — most accident reconstruction takes place on public roads not requiring permission, and permission from the adverse party might be difficult to get. As a St. Louis motor vehicle accident lawyer, I’d be pleased to see it revisited in other cases.

Continue reading "Tenth Circuit Upholds Exclusion of Plaintiffs Experts in Car Accident Lawsuit Involving Train – Cornwell v. Union Pacific Railroad" »

A federal judge denied Bedford County, Tennessee's request for a summary judgment in a wrongful death case filed against the county, suggesting that the credibility of one of the county's witnesses may be compromised. The county had requested a dismissal of claims remaining in regard to the death of inmate Larry Dale Byford in 2009. Byford died of an apparent heart attack.

Byford's sister, Doris Rollins, filed the wrongful death suit against the county as well as against Donna Delrio, a nurse at the jail, over her brother's death. Rollins claims in her suit that Byford was denied necessary medical care, and that this lead directly to his later death at Vanderbilt Medical Center.

Federal Judge Harry S. Mattice denied the county's motion to dismiss the remainder of the case, and further denied the county's request to strike the testimony of numerous witnesses. Mattice cited repeated errors and inconsistencies in the testimony and documentation provided by the county and the jail regarding their roles in the case. The judge was quoted as saying he would overlook the first errors he saw as one-time mistakes "if not for the fact that the Court subsequently discovered that both parties' Statements of Undisputed and Material Facts are riddled with errors — typographical, factual, and otherwise."

The judge had attempted to construct a timeline of events regarding the case so he could rule on the summary judgment, but due to the quantity of errors and the sheer volume of material to examine, he decided that a summary judgment was not an appropriate decision.

Further, according to the judge, the county was relying heavily on nurse Delrio's testimony and written records as rebuttals to Rollins' arguments, but "discrepancies appear repeatedly throughout the disputes over nurse Delrio's accounts of her understanding of Byford's condition and her responses to the same."

The case is set to go forward, and the first trial date has been scheduled for November 1st.

As a Missouri motor vehicle accident lawyer, I believe pedestrian accidents are among the most destructive crashes. Unlike crashes between two vehicles, pedestrian crashes involve at least one person who is totally unprotected by a steel cage or any safety device — and almost always involve a driver who had a legal obligation to yield to pedestrians. In Lifson v. City of Syracuse and Derek Klink, the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, rejected a defense raised by a driver who hit a pedestrian as she crossed a pedestrian-heavy street. Driver Derek Klink hit Irene Lifson as she crossed the street, killing her. Lifson’s family sued, and Klink benefited at trial from jury instructions to consider the emergency doctrine — whether Klink behaved prudently in an emergency not of his own making. He was found not liable, but the New York high court found that the emergency doctrine instruction was in error.

Lifson and Klink both worked in the same Syracuse office tower, which lies across the street from a parking garage. Klink said he was unfamiliar with the area, however, when he pulled out of the garage on the day of the crash. He testified that he waited until he thought pedestrians had cleared the road before turning left, and when he glanced to the left again, he was blinded by the sun. When his vision cleared, he said, he saw Lifson too late to stop his car. Lifson’s family sued. At Klink’s request and over the objections of the Lifsons, the court instructed the jury to consider the emergency doctrine, which asked the jury to decide whether Klink faced an emergency not of his making and, if so, whether he responded in a reasonably prudent way. If it found both to be true, it would find no liability for Klink. This is ultimately what happened; the jury found Lifson 85% at fault and the city of Syracuse 15% at fault. The appellate division of New York’s courts affirmed the ruling, finding that the sun blinding could reasonably be found a sudden and unforeseen occurrence. A dissenter to that case argued that the sun glare was not an emergency because it could reasonably have been anticipated. The Lifsons appealed.

The New York Court of Appeals reversed, agreeing that Klink’s situation did not rise to the level of an emergency. It likened the case to Caristo v. Sanzone, a 2001 case in which a car slid downhill during icy weather and hit another vehicle. In that case, the high court reversed an emergency doctrine finding, saying the bad weather conditions had existed for at least two hours, and thus could not be considered “sudden and unexpected.” Similarly, the court found that it cannot be considered sudden and unexpected to be blinded by the sun while driving west at sunset. Klink was moderately familiar with the area, the court noted. Furthermore, the court found the error not harmless, because it permitted the jury to consider the evidence under a standard very favorable to Klink. Thus, it remanded the case to trial court. Judge Smith dissented, arguing that while the sun reliably sets in the west, drivers should not be required to always keep sunset, weather and obstructions in mind.

As a St. Louis auto accident attorney, I do not agree. In fact, I believe most people would agree that it’s completely reasonable to require drivers to keep road conditions in mind, including bad weather, road construction, obstructions on the side of the road and other factors as well as sun glare. All of these factors are easy to anticipate — though the sun is perhaps the easiest, being the main source of natural light for our planet — and common concerns for drivers. Indeed, failing to consider these factors is a failure in the common-law duty to take reasonable care behind the wheel that we all owe to one another. And that common-law duty is the source of lawsuits such as that of the Lifson’s family. A jury might still reduce blame for a driver if a pedestrian runs into traffic unexpectedly, but as a southern Illinois car accident lawyer, I encourage drivers who genuinely cannot see during sunset to find alternative routes.

Continue reading "New York Court Rejects Use of Emergency Doctrine in Fatal Pedestrian Accident Case – Lifson v. City of Syracuse" »

Members of James Craig Anderson's family have asked both the State of Mississippi and federal prosecutors to remove the death penalty from consideration as regards the seven white teenagers charged with the brutal beating and hit-and-run death of Mr. Anderson on June 26. The Anderson family is pursuing a wrongful death claim in connection with the case.

CNN.com reported that Anderson's sister wrote the following letter to officials:

“We ask that you not seek the death penalty for anyone involved in James’ murder. Our opposition to the death penalty is deeply rooted in our religious faith, a faith that was central in James’ life as well. We also oppose the death penalty because it historically has been used in Mississippi and the South primarily against people of color for killing whites. Executing James’ killers will not help to balance the scales. But sparing them may help to spark a dialogue that one day will lead to the elimination of capital punishment.”

The letter was signed by Barbara Anderson Young, who speaks for Anderson's estate in legal matters.

The death penalty is currently only in discussion for Deryl Dedmon, a 19-year-old resident of Brandon. The only other teen facing criminal charges at this moment is John Aaron Rice. Dedmon is charged with capital murder, which Rice was originally charged with as well. A judge later lowered Rice's charge to assault because it was apparent that Rice was not driving the car that struck and killed Anderson.

According to reporting and surveillance cameras, the seven teens ambushed Anderson in the early hours of the morning, beating and kicking him severely before leaving the scene. As Anderson attempted to walk away from the scene while injured, Dedmon and Rice followed him, drove partly up onto the curb of the motel and struck Anderson, running him over.

Dedmon remains in jail, his bond request having been denied twice now. Rice and the others remain free, and none of the other five face criminal charges, though the wrongful death suit names all seven teens.

As a Missouri products liability lawyer, I was pleased to see a recent case from the Montana Supreme Court upholding a jury verdict in favor of a family that lost their 18-year-old son in an American Legion Baseball game. In Patch v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co., Debbie and Duane Patch sued the maker of the aluminum bat that was used in the game that killed Brandon Patch in 2003. They alleged that it improved the speed of baseballs so much that it enhanced the risks of playing baseball, and Hillerich & Bradsby should have warned users of those risks. In pretrial motions, the court declined to grant summary judgment to H&B on that issue, and also granted a motion to exclude a defense by H&B that users of the bats assume risks. At trial, the jury awarded the Patches $850,000 on the failure to warn claim. H&B appealed, but the Montana high court upheld that verdict.

The Patches originally brought claims for defective design, defective manufacturing and failure to warn, but the trial court granted summary judgment on the manufacturing defect claim. It also granted an in limine motion to exclude H&B’s assumption of risk defense. On appeal, H&B argued that it should have been granted summary judgment on the failure to warn claim because Brandon Patch was a bystander not entitled to make a failure to warn claim about someone else’s bat. The Montana Supreme Court replied that this is contrary to both Montana caselaw and the Second Restatement of Torts. Furthermore, it noted that the risks created by using a bat go beyond the user and the purchaser; any player is a consumer placed at risk. And warnings need not only be physically printed on the bat; manufacturers can also distribute flyers, posters, press releases, ads and even oral warnings.

The Supreme Court also took up the issue of whether H&B should have been permitted to make an assumption of risk defense. An assumption of risk defense argues that the injured person had discovered the risk, or the risk is open and obvious, and the injured person thus voluntarily assumed the risk by using the product. The high court agreed with the trial court that the defense does not apply here, however, because no evidence showed that Brandon Patch knew these bats posed an enhanced risk. Without such a showing, the assumption of risk defense would be inappropriate. Finally, the Supreme Court discarded H&B’s challenge to the jury instructions, finding there was nothing wrong with the instructions actually submitted to the jury. Thus, it upheld the verdict and declined to call for a new trial.

Because I am an experienced St. Louis failure to warn attorney, I appreciate that this decision preserve the family’s victory in court. Manufacturers of all kinds of products, from toys to automobiles to prescription drugs, are required to warn their products’ users about risks from using those products. As this case shows, it’s not enough merely to show that any use of a baseball bat carries a risk; the Patches had to (and did) argue that the particular baseball bat carried an unreasonable risk above and beyond the risks of other bats. This allows victims and their families to recover financial damages from companies that unreasonably fail to warn about risks. Perhaps even more importantly, it gives companies an incentive to make sure their products are free of defects and as thoroughly explained as possible. As a southern Illinois wrongful death lawyer, I know injured people would far rather have avoided the injury in the first place than collect money afterward.

Continue reading "Montana Supreme Court Upholds Jury Award in Failure to Warn Case Involving Death of Teen – Patch v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co." »

A recent decision from the Missouri Supreme Court caught my eye as a St. Louis personal injury attorney. In Schmitz and Ewing v. Great American Assurance Company, the parents of Christine Ewing sued for wrongful death after their daughter died from falling off a portable rock-climbing wall set up at a minor league baseball game. Kathleen Schmitz and Craig Ewing sued Columbia Professional Baseball (CPB) for wrongful death, and CPB’s primary and excess insurers both denied any duty to defend. The parents made a contract with CPB limiting its financial liability to the amounts of its insurance policies, $1 million and $4 million respectively. After the parents won a suit against CPB, the primary insurer paid out less than the full $1 million limit, and the secondary insurer refused to pay because the primary insurance was not exhausted. In this case, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the excess insurance policy did not require exhaustion before it would pay out, allowing the parents to collect the full amount of their judgment.

The parents won their original $4.5 million judgment against CPB in a bench trial. They then filed an equitable garnishment lawsuit against the primary insurer, Virginia Surety, and the secondary insurer, Great American. Prior to the court’s judgment, the parents settled with Virginia Surety for $700,000 and agreed not to seek the full limits of the policy. They then continued the suit against Great American, seeking the balance of the $4.5 million, calculated at about $2.8 million. The court hearing the equitable garnishment case found that they were not entitled to a judgment against Great American because the Virginia Surety policy had not been exhausted. The parents appealed. On review, the Missouri Supreme Court found that the language of Great American’s contract did not require exhaustion — merely an obligation for the first insurer to pay. It also rejected arguments from Great American that the judgment against it was unreasonable. Thus, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case for more proceedings.

This ruling is good news for Missouri wrongful death lawyers like me. In essence, it denies insurance companies the opportunity to dodge their legal obligation to provide insurance payments when their customers cause a serious injury. This matters because ultimately, the beneficiary is the injured person or people. After an injury, finances often become a serious problem for injured people, for two interconnected reasons. First, medical care is very expensive, even if you do have health insurance. For a serious injury requiring intensive care or long-term therapy, it can easily reach seven figures. In addition, when the victim was a family breadwinner or provided other services, the family often sees an immediate drop in income — in wrongful death cases, permanently. That’s why, as a southern Illinois injury attorney, I work hard to ensure that clients get the financial compensation they need after a bad accident.

Continue reading "Parents of Wrongfully Killed Girl May Collect Full Judgment – Schmitz v. Great American Assurance Co." »

As a St. Louis wrongful death lawyer, I was saddened to see a series of articles about the death of a young woman at the home of a former Anheuser-Busch executive. August Busch IV had offered a $1.5 million settlement to Blake Martin, the 8-year-old son of Adrienne Nicole Martin. Busch, 47, is a son of the Anheuser-Busch brewing empire and served as CEO of the company until its sale to InBev in 2008. Adrienne Martin was found dead of a cocaine and oxycodone overdose at Busch’s home in December of 2010. Martin’s ex-husband later sued Busch for wrongful death on behalf of their son, and a settlement was in the works until Martin’s parents sought to join the lawsuit. Now, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported June 7 that the settlement will be postponed until a court has time to consider the parents’ appeal.

Adrienne Martin had been dating Busch for nearly a year before her death. After a police investigation, authorities decided that her death was an accidental drug overdose with no foul play. However, her ex-husband, Kevin Martin of Cape Girardeau, filed a wrongful death lawsuit alleging that Busch had been negligent in his treatment of her. Their attorneys negotiated a $1.5 million settlement intended to benefit Blake Martin, her son. But before that settlement was completed, Adrienne Martin’s divorced parents stepped in. Christine Trampler and George Eby joined the wrongful death suit, claiming part of the settlement. The judge in the case denied their request to join, but they plan to appeal and the settlement is on hold until a higher court can consider that appeal.

As a wrongful death attorney in Missouri, I’d like to discuss a specific issue raised by this case: Who can file a wrongful death lawsuit? According to state law, the people with the strongest claim are the spouse, children, grandchildren and parents of the deceased. If there’s no relative in that category, sisters and brothers may make claims; and if there is no sibling, a court-appointed representative of the estate can sometimes step in. Thus, Kevin Martin has no claim, but Blake Martin and both parents do. It’s unclear whether the parents would get less priority than the little boy, but as a rule, lack of custody or support doesn’t bar parents from filing suit. This is all separate from the practical considerations about financial support for the child. I hope the appeals court takes those into account as well as caselaw when it decides the parents’ appeal.

Continue reading "Wrongful Death Settlement Postponed in Woman’s Death at Busch Heir’s Mansion" »

The parents of Danroy Henry, known also as DJ, have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the officer who shot and killed him last year. In a statement prepared by the family, the attorney for the plaintiffs said, "From the investigation the family has conducted, it is apparent that others acted in grossly irresponsible manners. These parties should be held accountable for their failures." The statement was released shortly after the officer, one Aaron Hess, was honored by the Pleasantville Police Benefit Association.

According to police reports, officer Hess was responding to a brawl that had broken out in front of a bar. A number of patrons were involved in the altercation, and Hess called for backup. Approximately fifty officers ended up responding to the call in order to break up the various fights going on.

During this process, a car that was parked nearby accelerated and attempted to leave the scene. Allegedly the car struck an officer that tried to flag the vehicle down, and the officer opened fire. DJ Henry was driving the vehicle in question.

An attorney for officer Hess released his client's response to the suit, saying, "the tragedy of D.J. Henry's death cannot and should not be distorted to pursue an agenda which ignores the sad and painful truth that a 20-year-old man who by all accounts was a good and decent human being made very, very poor decisions that night and morning that brought about his own death."

Prior to the filing of the suit, a grand jury refused to indict Hess in the death of Mr. Henry. In their filing of the wrongful death suit, the family has argued that the grand jury was presented distorted and faulty information, a charge officer Hess denies.

There is no date currently scheduled for hearings, although according to sources, the Henry family are in the case for the long haul.

A news story about a traffic accident lawsuit caught my eye as a St. Louis pedestrian accident lawyer. As the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported April 7, the surviving husband of a woman killed as she walked through a gas station has sued the driver who hit her. Matthew McBride of St. Louis was left a widower with two toddler daughters last September when his wife, 38-year-old Molly McBride, was hit by Anthony Rancilio of southern St. Louis County. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages from Rancilio, 27, for the effects of the death on the McBride family. Criminal charges have not been filed against Rancilio; police say they are still looking into whether he had a medical condition that caused or contributed to the crash.

According to the Post-Dispatch, Molly McBride was walking toward the gas cap at the rear of her vehicle when Rancilio sped into the gas station and hit a small barrier pole. His Mazda Tribute SUV then struck McBride. She was taken to a hospital, where she died. Witnesses told the newspaper at the time that Rancilio had been using his cell phone moments before the crash, and Matthew McBride’s lawsuit says Rancilio had been speeding. Police officers said at the time that they were looking into whether an unspecified medical condition could have caused the crash; no charges have yet been filed. This is not Rancilio’s first car wreck lawsuit; he previously settled two suits out of court, both stemming from a December 2000 rear-end crash involving ice.

As a Missouri car crash attorney, I think this is a great example of how individuals can seek justice through the civil courts even when the criminal justice system moves slowly. It is not certain that Rancilio won’t be charged, but it seems unusual to wait seven months to determine whether he has a medical problem. Meanwhile, distracted driving, especially phoning and driving, has become a major focus of federal and state driving safety campaigns. The McBride family’s lawsuit can go forward regardless of whether authorities end up filing criminal charges against Rancilio, and may give them some measure of justice even if they do not. It may also provide fair compensation for the emotional and practical challenges faced by the loss of a mother while both daughters are still very young.

Continue reading "Family Sues Driver Over Woman’s Death in Gas Station Accident With Charges Pending" »

As a Missouri defective automobile attorney, I was pleased to see reports that the federal Department of Transportation is looking into allegations about unsafe rental cars. As the Detroit News reported Nov. 23, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating how quickly car rental companies make repairs to vehicles in their fleets that are subject to recalls. The agency said it was acting in response to allegations that people have suffered injuries or deaths because rental car companies failed to pull recalled vehicles off the road. There has already been one high-profile case fitting that description, in which two young women died after their vehicle caught fire on a California highway. Their mother co-founded an auto safety group that has asked the FTC to require repairs before rental cars go back on the road.

The California case involved sisters Jacqueline and Raechel Houck, ages 20 and 24. They died in 2004 after the Chrysler PT Cruiser they had rented caught fire on the road, causing them to hit a tractor-trailer. Later, it was discovered that the PT Cruiser had been recalled for exactly this problem -- a risk of catching fire under the hood. Their parents sued Enterprise Rent-A-Car for renting the young women a car that was recalled because of the possibility of catching fire while in use. In fact, the family claims Enterprise rented the car at least four times after receiving the recall notice. After fighting the lawsuit for five years, Enterprise settled this summer for $15 million. A spokesperson for the car rental industry said no law requires companies to repair recalled vehicles before they go back on the road, but that most companies pull recalled cars from their fleets.

I hope the NHTSA investigation confirms that statement. But as a St. Louis auto defect lawyer, I believe the financial incentives at play here work against safety, not for it. Car rental companies only have so many vehicles, and when they place vehicles out of service, they can serve fewer customers. That leads to less money, of course. As a result, the companies have an incentive to keep as many cars on the road as possible. Even when the risk of a lawsuit is taken into account, some managers may judge that the risk of an accident is less desirable than the near-certainty of not making money while the vehicle is grounded. This policy makes sense if your only goal is to make money -- but it’s an unacceptable safety risk for rental car customers and the people they happen to pass on the road.

Continue reading "Federal Government Launches Investigation Into Safety Recall Repairs on Rental Cars " »

As a Missouri wrongful death lawyer, I was saddened to read about the death of a seven-month-old baby at a Merriam daycare. According to the Kansas City Star, Johnson County prosecutors announced Oct. 28 that they would not file any criminal charges in the girl’s death. For many families who suddenly lose loved ones to preventable accidents, a prosecutor's decision not to file criminal charges can leave the family feeling that those responsible for the accident have not been held accountable. While families whose loved ones are taken from them always feel their loss, families find closure when a civil case requires the responsible party to admit guilt.

Aniyah Boone, age seven months, was in a playpen at Debbie's Daycare center on May 31, 2009. An eight-year-old boy tried to take her out of the playpen, but dropped her on her head. She was rushed to a hospital but died. An autopsy blamed the death on blunt force injuries to her head, complicated by liver damage that probably came from resuscitation attempts. State authorities suspended operation at the daycare on June 1, 2009. In fact, the article suggests that the incident, and the evidence of neglect it produced, have closed the business for good. In April 2010, the daycare’s owner agreed not to operate a daycare as long as her name is on the state abuse and neglect registry. The announcement that prosecutors would not file any criminal charges followed.

While prosecutors apparently decided the baby's death was an accident, this was not the kind of accident that no one could have predicted. From the brief description given by the newspaper, it looks like it could have been prevented if the adults responsible for supervising children had actually been supervising. Parents send their children to daycares under the belief that they are leaving their children in the care of adults who are trained and licensed in this line of work. Parents do not send their children, especially infants, to daycares to be cared for by other children, who may not have the strength to lift a growing baby or the experience to know that dropping a baby is dangerous. The adults operating and employed by the daycare are responsible for directly caring for all of the children, not delegating that care to older children, and for managing their work so that no child is left unsupervised. Failing to live up to those duties constitutes negligence.

In my work as a St. Louis wrongful death attorney, I help families of those killed by others' negligence and carelessness hold the people who hurt them accountable. Whether or not the criminal justice system holds the negligent party responsible, the civil justice system allows victims and their families to recover compensation for the personal and financial harm they have suffered. Victims and their families can sue negligent people or organizations for medical and funeral costs, pain and suffering, harm to their relationships, and lost quality of life and past and future wages. I recognize that no amount of money can ever replace a lost loved one, but holding the negligent person responsible can help families gain closure and replace income that was lost unexpectedly and permanently.

Continue reading "No Charges Will Be Filed in Connection With Baby’s Death at Kansas City Daycare" »

As a St. Louis personal injury attorney, I noted a recent article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch about involuntary manslaughter charges that were brought because of a tragic but preventable accident. Yet another young man, 22-year-old Michael Brown of Florissant, has died in a drunk driving accident. The driver, 23-year-old Ronnie Langford of St. Paul, now faces serious criminal charges as a result of the crash.

According to the Post-Dispatch, Brown died from injuries he sustained after he was thrown from Langford’s 2004 Nissan Titan on June 11. Langford was allegedly driving drunk and speeding when he struck a utility pole and then a house in the 1700 block of Koch Road in St. Charles County. The truck flipped after it hit the home’s front deck. Two men were in the home at the time, but neither was injured. Police said that Langford's blood-alcohol content was more than three times the 0.08 percent limit, registering at 0.248 percent when tested. Langford also told police that he knew he should not have been drinking. Langford, who lives on the 700 block of Grandpa's Lane in St. Paul, was jailed in St. Charles County in lieu of $50,000 in bail. He was forbidden to drive or drink alcohol if released.

It's shocking how often people drive when they're drunk, even though it's widely understood that this is dangerous and could hurt or kill others. Many people realize that they could be arrested and charged for driving under the influence of alcohol or, as in Langford's case, involuntary manslaughter. But they may not realize that they may also have to answer in civil court as well -- if they are sued by the loved ones of the victims. Driving when you know perfectly well that you're impaired, and when the dangers of drunk driving are well known, is negligence -- that is, extreme carelessness that could hurt others. Under the law, victims and their families can recover compensation for harm they have suffered from those who hurt them. Victims and their families can sue those who harmed them to recover medical costs, the cost of replacing destroyed property, and lost past and future wages, as well as more intangible harms like pain, suffering, and damage to their relationships and quality of life.

Continue reading "St. Charles Man Faces Manslaughter Charges in Friend’s Drunk Driving Death" »

The parents of a 15-year-old girl tragically killed in a 2006 car accident have recently settled a wrongful-death lawsuit for $50,000. The parents of Hannah Smallwood, who died in a crash in 2006, settled their claim against the driver’s insurance company for $25,000 each. As a Missouri car crash attorney, I know how much pain this couple must feel after losing their daughter to a senseless, preventable accident, and I wish them well. Wrongful-death lawsuits are an important way for victims and their families to fight back against those who harmed them.

Smallwood, of Carthage, Mo., died on December 8, 2006, just outside Carthage. She was a passenger in a Mazda Millenia along with two other teenagers, driven by Jarub R. Baird, now 20. Baird was speeding on County Road 120 when the car left the road, hit a utility pole and sheared it off at its base, crashed through a barbed-wire fence, and rolled about the length of a football field. Only one person in the car was wearing a seatbelt, which she put on just seconds before the crash. She and Baird suffered only minor injuries. Unfortunately, the others weren't so lucky. Smallwood was thrown from the back seat through the windshield. She died at the scene. Her 16-year-old boyfriend, Colby Johnson, was also thrown from the car and suffered a brain injury, a broken femur, and three broken bones in his hand.

A jury convicted Baird of second-degree involuntary manslaughter and second-degree assault. Baird is now incarcerated in the Missouri Department of Corrections, serving consecutive sentences of four years and three years. Notably, when Baird was on trial in 2008 for manslaughter and vehicular assault, a witness testified that as Baird walked away from his car after the accident, he said to a friend on his cell phone, “Dude, we flew, man. Seriously, dude.” It must be especially painful for parents who have lost a child to hear that the person whose recklessness caused their child's death thought of the accident as a source of amusement. Hannah's parents, Andy and Debbie Smallwood, sued Baird for wrongful death and settled recently with his insurer, which ended their lawsuit.

Of course, the settlement that the Smallwoods will receive can never make up for their daughter's death. As a St. Louis auto accident attorney, I know that every parent who has lost a child to a car crash would much rather have their child back than the money that comes from a wrongful-death settlement. But at the same time, most parents who have lost a child to someone else's negligent behavior want that person to be held responsible for the harm that he or she caused. A criminal trial and conviction hold the negligent person responsible for breaking the law, but this is accountability to the state, not to the individuals who were devastated by the person’s actions. In a civil suit, family members can make the wrongdoer face what he or she has done to hurt them and their loved ones. A lawsuit can also help those left behind deal with the high bills caused by an unexpected hospitalization, funeral and loss of income.

Continue reading "Parents Settle Lawsuit Over Death of Teenage Girl in Reckless Driving Crash" »

As a Missouri wrongful death attorney, I have worked with many grieving families whose loved ones have been taken from them, and I know how devastating the loss of a family member is. That’s why I was sorry to read that a Branson man has been charged with manslaughter in the deaths of two young women. Michael Green, 25, was allegedly drunk when he crashed his car just west of Branson, killing Nicole Porter, 25, and Jessica Jenkins, 24. Green has been charged with a Class B felony for killing both women while driving under the influence of alcohol, with a BAC of .18% or more.

On the night of Monday, Sept. 27, prosecutors say that Green was driving his Pontiac sports car too fast and down the wrong side of the road on Highway 248. He ran a stop sign at Branson Hills Parkway and his car hit a rock embankment and caught fire. Porter and Jenkins were passengers in his car. Both women were taken to hospitals -- Jenkins to one in Branson, and Porter to one in Springfield. Sadly, both women died. The Western Taney County Fire District photographed the wrecked car. Police took a blood sample from Green at the scene of the accident.

Jenkins' sister, Brittany Halstead, 20, said that Jenkins had offered to drive so that Green would not have to. Medical personnel at the Branson hospital where Jenkins died that night told the family that Jenkins had no alcohol or drugs in her system. Jenkins was an organ donor, and her family hopes that people will learn from their tragedy. Jenkins's mother told her daughters' friends how much pain she was in, and Halstead told them, "Let this be a lesson. Do not drink and drive and do not get in the vehicle if the driver is drunk because it's the innocent that suffer."

It's especially sad to me as a St. Louis auto accident attorney to know that this accident could have been prevented if Green had allowed Jenkins to drive. Driving drunk and refusing to allow an unimpaired driver to take the wheel are well beyond the boundaries of responsible behavior -- in fact, they're good examples of the kind of negligence that is an issue in my cases. If Green is convicted of the criminal charges he faces, he will be sentenced for breaking the law. But he may also face lawsuits from the Porter and Jenkins families for taking their daughters away from them. When someone behaves negligently and hurts someone else, the negligent person can be required to pay for the harm that they caused. Even with court cases, families of car crash victims will never get their loved ones back, and their lives will never be the same. But through wrongful death and personal injury lawsuits, they can hold drivers responsible for the emotional -- and sometimes financial -- consequences of their actions.

Continue reading "Alleged Drunk Driver Charged With DUI Manslaughter in Passengers’ Deaths" »

It's every parent's nightmare: sending your children off with their friends on a school-related trip, only to hear later that the school buses have crashed. As a St. Louis bus accident attorney, I was disturbed to learn of a horrible accident like this right here in Missouri, in which a student was killed and several others suffered serious injuries in a crash with a large truck and a pickup. Also killed was the 19-year-old driver of the pickup. Initial reports put at least some blame on the bus drivers. My sympathies go to the families of those killed, and I wish those who were injured a speedy recovery.

Band members from John F. Hodge High School in St. James, Mo., were on two school buses making their way to Six Flags St. Louis when the buses crashed into slowed traffic and each other. Danie Klein, 14, was sitting at the back of the first bus. She suffered two broken vertebrae and a fractured skull. Luckily, her doctors say she escaped neurological or brain damage. Her best friend, Jessica Brinker, 15, was sitting next to her, and tragically, Jessica was killed. Emily Perona, 16, sat in the second-to-last row of the bus, right in front of Danie and Jessica. When the second school bus smashed into the one she was riding, Emily was thrown into the air and pinned against the seat in front of her, breaking her pelvis, cutting her skin, and possibly injuring her neck. Another 54 students were treated for minor injuries. Daniel Schatz, 19, of Sullivan, was driving another vehicle involved in the crash, and sadly, he was killed as well.

The accident occurred as traffic slowed for a work zone on Interstate 44 in Gray Summit, Mo., about 40 miles from St. Louis. Michael D. Crabtree, of Kearneysville, W.Va., was driving a semi cab without a trailer. Crabtree slowed for the road construction and was rear-ended by a pickup truck driven by Schatz. Then Schatz's truck was rear-ended by a school bus driven by 75-year-old Katherine P. Shackelford, of St. James. A second school bus driven by Kelly M. McEnnis-Mullenix, 38, hit the first one. Schatz's truck was pushed on top of Crabtree's cab, and Shackelford's bus was pushed on top of both of those vehicles. The Missouri Highway Patrol told the newspaper that nothing was off the table this soon after the crash, but an initial report did not blame the truck driver, Crabtree. Rather, it said bus driver Shackelford was "inattentive" and her colleague, McEnnis-Mullenix, was following too closely.

We'd all like to think that those who drive our children will use particular caution, so it's particularly disturbing to read that the drivers of the school buses were allegedly failing to exercise the most basic level of care that we expect of all drivers. Large vehicles like school buses are heavy and require plenty of stopping distance. Failing to pay sufficient attention to traffic conditions and following too closely can and does cause serious, but completely preventable, accidents. Drivers of school buses should be especially careful about maintaining enough stopping distance between their vehicle and the ones in front of them because many school buses do not have seat belts. Stopping suddenly, or crashing, can be especially dangerous when young passengers do not have safety belts to help protect them.

In my experience as a Missouri bus crash lawyer, accidents like this can impose high financial and emotional costs on victims and their families. Treatment for the children who were injured will be lengthy and very expensive. Victims may need special tutoring to help them keep up with schoolwork during recovery, and they will lose out on participating in sports and other activities that they had looked forward to as the school year's start approaches. Their parents may lose income while making sure they get the medical treatment they need. The families who lost loved ones will have to deal with funeral expenses and emotional devastation. The law recognizes that victims should not have to pay for all these costs themselves if they were not at fault for their injuries.

In cases where government entities like school districts may be at fault, a lawsuit to recover compensation can be complicated. Government entities have "sovereign immunity," meaning that they are exempt from lawsuits. In Missouri, sovereign immunity does not extend to government employees' negligence in operating motor vehicles, but there are caps and restrictions on the amount and kind of compensation victims can receive from public entities. This is why victims of crashes like this one need an experienced southern Illinois bus wreck attorney who knows how to handle these complex areas of law.

Continue reading "School Bus Crash With Semi Truck Blamed on Negligence of Several Drivers" »

As a St. Louis personal injury lawyer, I noted a recent news report that a 16-year-old girl's death in the adolescent psychiatric ward of SSM DePaul Health Center in Bridgeton was ruled a homicide. State and federal regulators had already warned the hospital to correct its alarming series of lapses in patient safety. The hospital apparently failed to live up to its moral and legal obligations to provide enough well-trained staff to care for all of its patients. The tragic result may have been the death of Alexis Evette Richie, who had reportedly been verbally and physically abused by staff members.

Alexis had been in foster care for nine years and was often in emotional turmoil that led to acting out. She was admitted to DePaul after stabbing a teacher at Evangelical Children's Home with a pencil on October 16, 2009. She died in the hospital ten days later. The day of her death, she reportedly verbally abused and physically attacked DePaul staff members after she was told that it was time to go to bed, and was threatened with a tranquilizer when she did not comply. To restrain her, staff members held her facedown in a beanbag chair while a nurse administered shots of Geodon (ziprasidone), an antipsychotic, and Ativan (lorazepam), an anti-anxiety drug. Then the nurse left. Alexis reportedly went limp, so the aides left her facedown in the beanbag chair. Finally, the charge nurse checked on Alexis and found her unresponsive and soaked in her own urine, with a weak pulse, no reflexes and fixed pupils.

The charge nurse did not begin CPR, and nurses even told an aide not to begin CPR because there was no breathing mask. The aide started CPR anyway, 12 minutes after the charge nurse discovered Alexis's condition. Nine minutes later, a doctor put a breathing tube down Alexis's throat, and an emergency team tried to restart her heart, but soon after, she was pronounced dead. An autopsy showed that she died from being sedated and suffocated by the beanbag chair. Leaving Alexis for 12 minutes after she stopped moving was cited as a serious problem in investigations by both the state health inspector and the Children's Division of the Missouri Department of Social Services. The Children's Division also charged the aides and the nurse who administered the shots with child neglect, since Alexis had been a ward of the state. Alexis's biological parents have hired an attorney to investigate the case as well.

In my view as a Missouri wrongful death attorney, cases like Alexis's demonstrate what can go wrong when hospital staff are poorly trained, ill-supervised, and spread too thin. State and federal regulators had warned DePaul two years earlier to pay more attention to patient safety after learning about other patients' deaths after being restrained and secluded -- deaths that DePaul failed to report to the authorities, as is legally required. A nurse said that the hospital was short-staffed because of budget cuts, so patients in seclusion and restraint weren't being monitored constantly, also as legally required. And in Alexis's case, nurses told police that they didn't even know why they didn't start CPR on Alexis as soon as they discovered her condition.

Patients who enter a hospital do so expecting to get better, not to be neglected and abused. All patients, including foster children with no one to stand up for them, should be able to expect that hospitals will adhere to basic standards of care. Federal and state regulators do their best to ensure that hospitals meet their responsibilities, but as DePaul's case demonstrates, when hospitals keep regulators in the dark about their problems, regulators can't always address the problems. Unfortunately, patients and their families are the ones who experience the consequences of these failings. A southern Illinois personal injury attorney can help these victims fight back, holding negligent hospitals responsible for their careless conduct. It's important for families of victims killed by a hospital staff's carelessness to contact a lawyer immediately, since wrongful death lawsuits must be filed within as little as 30 days after families learn about the incident.

Continue reading "St. Louis-Area Hospital Allegedly Negligent in 16-Year-Old Girl's Suffocation Death" »