Total Injury

Oceanside, California Officer Tony Zeppetella was shot and killed three years ago during a routine traffic stop, when a shooter's bullet penetrated his supposedly bullet resistant vest.  Second Chance Body Armour Inc., maker of the vest,  agreed to pay $2.3 million to Jamie and Jakob Zeppetella, the wife and son of the officer.

A jury verdict last month awarded the family $2.5 million but they chose to take the slightly lower settlement  to avoid years of appeals in California personal injury courts.

National Union Fire Insurance Company lost its last appeal and a New York Supreme court will now determine an amount the insurance company must reimburse rapper Heavy D for suits the rapper paid out to victims of a stampede in 1991.

Heavy D, whose real name is Dwight Myers, purchased an insurance policy from the insurance company in 1989 to cover him while working as an entertainer. Nine people died in a stampede at a basketball game where he promoted himself and other rappers.

The state Supreme Court in Manhattan has not yet determined the amount National Union will have to pay the rapper. Myers is requesting nearly $1.5 million for the personal injury and wrongful death claims he paid out plus interest and legal fees.

A Michigan personal injury attorney helped Jason and Julie Lowe received a favorable settlement in the malpractice suit for the negligent medical care Julie received while she was in labor with her son, Jason. The Michigan personal injury attorney argued that the doctors failed to continuously monitor the baby with a fetal monitor when there were confirmed signs of problems with the umbilical cord during labor. The judge in this case ruled that the doctors' negligence forced the baby to lose oxygen which in turn caused brain damage resulting in cerebral palsy.

The $15.8 million personal injury award is for pain and suffering, current and future medical expenses, loss of future wages and the necessary care for the rest of Jason's life.

A girl and her mother hired Kentucky personal injury attorney David Thomas to file suit against James T. Evans the man who sexually abused the girl three years ago. Evans did not hire a defense attorney and instead represented himself in court. The judge ruled in favor of the abused girl for $16 million with $8.5 as punitive damages. This personal injury case only took one day to try and the jury deliberated for a little more than one hour.

Even though Evans has minimal assets and is retired, Thomas agreed to pursue the personal suit because he hopes the family can collect as much as possible as a way to deter at least one sexual abuser in the future.

The trust is one of the largest ever established for asbestos related claims. By establishing the trust and limiting the amount the company must pay out to claimants, Owens Corning is actually able to emerge from the bankruptcy it filed in 2000.

The trust establishes set amounts to pay victims based on the severity of their asbestos related disease. The compensation amounts range from $240 to $420,000. Many victims may receive less of a settlement than if they sued Owens directly, but the claims can be handled more quickly and equitably without overtaxing the court system.

Three trustees will manage the trust in order to process an estimated 850,000 claims stemming from asbestos product exposure during the 1940's through the 1970's.

On March 5, 18 year-old Michael Cummings was killed in an automobile crash by an uninsured drunk driver. The settlement is against Allstate insurance who provided Michael's mother Vicki with uninsured motorist coverage on her policy at the time of the accident.

The parents plan to use this $100,000 personal injury settlement and to sue other parties in order to recoup damages for expenses related to Michael's death.

Polaris Sales, Inc. failed to issue a recall notice soon enough for Willard Long to avoid suffering a massive head injury from a defective boat. The boat that broke apart and injured Willard Long was a Polaris 2000 personal watercraft and was known to be defective well before the recall notice was issued. Long actually received the recall notice while he was in the hospital recovering from his extensive face and skull injuries.

A jury awarded Willard Long $3.4 million for damages which is most likely the largest personal injury award in the history of Kalkaska County, Michigan.

Stephen Roberts now needs to use the same civil justice system he has fought against for so long. Roberts is currently the president of the West Virgina Chamber of Commerce and actively advocates for state tort reforms. Roberts has lobbied to enact tort reform laws in West Virginia that would be similar to nearby states by setting limits on punitive damages.

Ironically, Roberts was forced to file a West Virginia personal injury suit of his own after his unsuccessful attempts to settle a claim with an insurance company. His neighbor's son allegedly shot Robert's daughter in the eye with a paintball gun which resulted in her partial vision loss and expensive medical bills. Now Roberts gets to learn firsthand how difficult it is to settle claims with an insurance company, which is exactly the reason many personal injury claims ultimately end up in court.

A Hawaii personal injury attorney sought to prove that Doctor Danielle Bird at Tripler Army Medical Center administered carbon dioxide instead of oxygen to a newborn for more than forty minutes on January 14, 2005. The newborn, whose name is Izzy, suffered severe brain damage and will require constant care for the rest of his life. His parents, Army Staff Sergeant Dwight and Shalay Peterson filed the suit against Tripler Army Medical Center with the help of a Hawaii personal injury attorney and the government immediately admitted guilt.

The trial began on August 15, 2006 and the Hawaii personal injury attorney argued that the family should receive enough compensation necessary to cover all the expenses related to the baby's current and future care. The Chief U.S. District Judge David Ezra made his final ruling on the malpractice case this week. The judge awarded the family $16.5 million for future care and loss of future income for Izzy.

An Illinois personal injury case against Starbucks that was dismissed earlier this year has been revived by the Appellate Court. The Circuit Court Judge had ruled that the suit could not go forward because the facility was operating on Southern Illinois University property and the university was liable under a contract with Starbucks. Thus, the Judge determined that sovereign immunity barred the suit.

The Appellate Court determined that the agreement between Starbucks and the school was simply an indemnity agreement, and that to bar suit against Starbucks because of it would allow governmental entities to transfer their sovereign immunity to private corporations.

A Pennsylvania jury awarded $1.5 million in compensatory damages and was scheduled to consider punitive damages when a mistrial was declared, overturning the jury verdict against Wyeth. The lawsuit was only the second of approximately 5,000 pending suits against Wyeth to reach trial. The lawsuits alege that the hormone replacement drugs Prempro and Premarin raised the risk of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, stroke or heart attack.

In a New York personal injury case, the city of New York will pay out a $3 million settlement to the estate of a woman who was injured and later died as a result of a 2003 Staten Island ferry accident. Debra Castro died several months after she suffered massive internal injuries and loss of limbs when the ferry collided with a concrete pier.

This settlement concluded one New York personal injury case of several. Ten other people died as a result of the ferry crash, with dozens more injured. A man who lost both legs in the accident earlier received a $9 million settlement from the city, and other cases are yet to be resolved. The ferry pilot received an 18-month jail sentence after he passed out at the helm of the ferry, thus causing the accident. At the time, the pilot had disregarded a rule that requires two pilots to work together during docking procedures.

In an Illinois personal injury case, a jury determined that Walgreens was responsible for $31 million in damages after filling one man's prescription incorrectly. Leonard Kulisek went to Walgreens to fill a prescription for his gout medication, but was instead given diabetes medicine. The mistaken medication caused Kulisek's health to quickly decline, and he later died after extensive kidney failure.

Through the course of the Illinois personal injury trial, it was determined that the pharmacist responsible for the mistake suffered from an addiction to pain killers, which he stole from his own pharmacy. The jury's damages will go to a friend of Kulisek's and his family, and it was Kulisek himself who filed the Illinois personal injury suit before he passed away.

While Walgreens admitted that a mistake occurred, the company claimed that Kulisek had a preexisting kidney condition. The jury disagreed. An appeal of the injury verdict by Walgreens is possible, and may include new information about a potentially ineligible jury member.

Joseph Henson Norris, a veteran of the U.S. Navy, was exposed to dangerous asbestos while he served as a gunner's mate onboard the U.S.S. Bremerton in the mid-1950s. Norris died as a result of this exposure, which can cause mesothelioma, an incurable cancer linked to asbestos. Norris' family challenged the causes of his injury in a civil suit, and they recently received a $3.9 million personal injury verdict from a California personal injury jury.

A manufacturer of asbestos components, Crane Co., will have to pay the amount. Norris' family argued that Crane Co. did not do enough to prevent Joseph Henson's malady, despite the fact that asbestos and its dangers have been known since the early 1901. The symptoms of asbestos exposure might not show up for many years. Norris discovered his mesothelioma only 15 months before he died.

In Pennsylvania, a concern about personal injury lawsuits may lead to some hunting grounds closing their doors to sportsmen. The development follows a recent jury verdict that held a landowner partially responsible for a stray bullet that struck and injured a woman. The landowner has since restricted his land for hunting use.

Concerned that they too could be held responsible in such an accident, other Pennsylvania landowners could follow suit. The Pennsylvania personal injury verdict may be the first of its kind in the state. Some feel that this is an overreaction, and are worried about the vitality of Pennsylvania's hunting industry. The jury decision could be reversed in the future, however, and even today there is legislation that many thought protected a landowner in just such a situation.

A recent Connecticut personal injury case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which ultimately affirmed an initial reward verdict. A jury originally awarded $2.2 million to two carpenters who were hurt on the job when a roof bracket failed and caused a support system to collapse.

This particular Connecticut personal injury case was important because the court's decision went against an older law in which the negligence of a second wrong-doer could supersede the negligence of a first wrong-doer. The new judgment, which applied to issues of negligence and defective products, set the stage for a new trial and a change in Connecticut personal injury law.

The case took eight years, and two jury trials, to reach its ultimate conclusion in the Supreme Court. Neil Barry and Bernard Cohade were hurt in a construction accident back in early 1998.

New York personal injury suits filed on behalf of plaintiffs in Nw York, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, New Jersey and South Carolina join the long list of pending litigation against Pfizer in relation to the cholesterol drug Lipitor.

The New York personal injury claims, like a host of other Lipitor cases, allege that the company used deceptive markting practices and failed to adequately warn physicians and patients of known side effects.

The owners of the Rhode Island nightclub that burned in 2003, killing 100 people, have filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection. Attorneys for victims of the nightclub fire filed no objections to the bankruptcy case, which will free the brothers of civil liability for the deaths and injuries caused by the blaze.

The ultimate outcome of those personal injury and wrongful death claims will likely not be affected, since the club owners were among several defendants, many of whom have much greater resources from which to pay personal injury claims.

The club's $1 million general liability policy is making payment for some of the victims' medical bills.

Remember the McDonald's coffee case? Of course you do. It was the personal injury case in which that woman got millions of dollars, and...well, wait. Actually, the verdict was reduced to $480,000.

But still, you might say--half a million dollars for spilling hot coffee on yourself? Hasn't that happened to all of us? Fortunately, though, most of us haven't sustained 3rd degree burns to very personal areas as a result of those spills (probably because we don't keep our coffee at 185 degrees!).

Nearly 15 years after the media hype about a woman who got millions of dollars for spilling coffee in her lap (who was, in fact, a woman who got $480,000 dollars after spending eight days in the hospital receiving skin grafts for third degree burns), a New York jury has returned a verdict of $300,000 in favor of a Manhattan woman after a Starbucks barista dumped a cup of hot coffee on her foot.

The court has already scheduled a hearing on the company's argument that the award is "excessive", and it seems likely that it will be reduced. That probably won't make headlines. However, if the court determines that the award wasn't excessive--that $300,000 isn't an outrageous award to a woman who sustained permanant nerve damage in her foot, experiences constant numbness and tingling, can't wear certain kinds of shoes and boots, and has had to give up lifelong leisure activities like ballet--then we'll undoubtedly be hearing more about the case.

Tuesday's ruling that Nationwide isn't responsible for $130,000 in water damage to Julie and Paul Leonard's Mississippi home doesn't come as a surprise: it's standard for homeowners insurance policies to explicitly exclude flood damage. Still, the ruling--which applies only to the Leonards' case but will likely set precedent for the hundreds of other similar cases pending in Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi--is a blow for already devastated hurricane victims. The Leonards will be compensated for less than $3,000 of the $130,000+ damages to their home and property stemming from the 2005 hurricanes, and similar results seem likely for scores of other hurricane victims whose homes were partially or entirely destroyed by the storms.

Plaintiffs from 7 states have filed personal injury suits against Pfizer for alleged undisclosed risks of the popular cholesterol-blocking drug Lipitor. Read the full story here: Lipitor Litigation

In yet another case of an insurance company having to be compelled to do right by its own insured, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that insurance companies could not base underinsured motorist coverage on the liable party's coverage limits without regard to the actual recovery.

Alison Welin was covered under an American Family policy that included $300,000 in underinsured motorist coverage. She was injured in an accident, and the other driver was determined to be at fault. The responsible driver had $300,000 in liability coverage.

Welin received $250,000 from the responsible party's insurance carrier. The other $50,000 went to another victim.

It is undisputed that Welin's injuries exceeded the $250,000 she received from the other driver's insurance company. However, American Family determines "underinsured" based on the liability limits of the responsible driver's policy, not on actual payments received. Since the responsible driver's policy value was equal to Welin's underinsured motorist coverage, American Family determined that the driver was not "underinsured" by the company's definition, and that Welin was not entitled to additional compensation from her underinsured motorist coverage.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that insurance companies cannot base the determination as to whether or not a motorist is "underinsured" on policy limits alone, without regard to the number of personal injury victims and actual recovery.

In 2000, a pedestrian bridge collapsed at Lowe's Motor Speedway in North Carolina, injuring more than 100 people. The cause of the accident is clear: the company that built the bridge used an improper additive in the cement--an additive that corroded the bridge's steel cables and weakened the bridge to the point of collapse.

With liability so clear, the personal injury victims hurt in the fall might have expected that they'd have little difficulty recovering for their injuries, but a three-judge appellate panel ruled this week that the claims are barred by a state law that protects manufacturers from negligence claims after six years. The theory behind the statute is that all products are subject to detioration over time. However, its application in a construction case, where the "product" in question was clearly intended and expected to last for more than six years, creates a frightening precedent that could allow negligent workmanship to go unpunished--and injury victims to go uncompensated--so long as the "product" endures for more than six years.

Not long ago, we posted an explanation of the value of punitive damages, and mentioned in that post that Merck had reportedly calculated that it could save $229 million dollars by delaying a change in the warnings associated with Vioxx. A jury sought to cost Merck exactly that much through a punitive damage award, hoping to ensure that the pharmaceutical giant didn't profit from it's bad decision. Punitive damage caps undermined that effort, but it looks like Merck ended up paying the price anyway--unfortunately, without benefit to the plaintiffs. Op Ed News is reporting that during 2005, Merck paid $285 million in legal defense costs related to Vioxx. It's nice that Merck's casual decision to risk the lives of its customers is costing them, but unfortunate that it's the defense attorneys rather than the injured parties who profit.

The South Carolina Appellate Law Blog is reporting that an Oregon lawyer is seeking to establish a common law tort claim that would allow pet owners to recover for loss of companionship when their pets were killed. The current case involves an animal that had to be put to sleep after a neighbor allegedly intentionally ran it over, but the attorney has made it clear that the issue is larger than this case, and that if he doesn't prevail in establishing the claim here, he will raise it again.

The Massachusettes Supreme Judicial Court precluded an important defense for cigarette makers facing personal injury claims from smokers.

While "improper use" is a defense in many product liability cases, the court ruled that because cigarettes could not be used safely for their intended purpose. As such, "there can be no non-unreasonable use of cigarettes." This prevents cigarette manufacturers from arguing that plaintiffs are responsible for their own injuries because they used cigarettes in a harmful way.

Although the ruling has legal effect only in the state of Massachusetts, the precedent may impact tobacco litigation across the country.

A Chicago couple has filed a $20 million law suit against a Catskills resort where the woman sustained nearly 500 bed bug bites. Although bed bug bites are usually fairly harmless, the woman apparently suffered an allergic reaction that required medical treatment.

In at least one previous case, a hotel has been ordered to pay large punitive damages to a guest bitten by bed bugs. In a 2003 case, the plaintiff was awarded $5000 in compensatory damages for bed bug bites that were annoying but not harmful, and an additional $186,000 in punitive damages.

The court in that case considered the fact that, in the absence of a large punitive damage award, it might be profitable for the hotel to deceive customers rather than addressing the bed bug problem.