San Luis Obispo Personal Injury Lawyer - Automobile Accidents - Most Popular

Distracted Driving - Pets, Phones and Pretzels

Nigel Whitehead — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:49:43 GMT

Driving while "distracted" is a major source of automobile accidents. The National Highway Traffic Administration has released several articles dealing with the effect of driving while distracted. After all the statistics are analyzed, the bottom line is clear - driving while talking on the phone, eating, or petting your pet, is dangerous. One would hope that it wouldn't be necessary to point out that driving with your cat sitting in your lap is dangerous, but, once again, an accident was reportedly caused when a woman drove into a pole after the cat sitting in her lap scratched her while driving. This raises a related question on the wisdom of having a cat at all, but that's another topic! Why you would own a cat in the first place is bewildering. But why you would drive with a cat sitting in your lap is beyond comprehension.

(Skip Morrow, The Art of Humor. The I hate Cats Collection)

In fact, in California, a new law will go into effect as of July 1, 2008 mandating that if you use a phone while driving you must use a hands-free device. Whenever we litigate an automobile accident case we always examine whether or not the other driver was using his or her cell phone at the time of the accident. Simply put, when you are holding a phone to your ear you are driving with one hand. When your attention is even partly devoted to your conversation, you are not paying full attention to the road. We all shake our heads in disbelief when we see a teenager on the phone, or a driver with fluffy the pooch in their lap, but its no laughing matter. People are being seriously hurt, or even killed by inattentive drivers.

Please, don't drive while holding a phone, or even eating. And PLEASE, don't drive with your pet riding in your lap. It's dangerous and it makes you look like one of those too rich to care pretend celebrities who takes their mini-dogs everywhere. And who wants that?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

High Death Rate for Young Drivers Who Don't Wear Seatbelts

Susan Devine — Tue, 20 May 2008 15:25:30 GMT

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that sixty-eight percent of drivers and passengers between the ages of 16 and 20 who were killed in car crashes at night in 2006 were not wearing their seatbelts. The statistics for daytime drivers are not much better: 57 percent of the young motorists who were killed were reported as not wearing seat belts.

Of course, the threat of serious injury or death by not wearing a seatbelt is not limited to teenagers. For adults up through the age of 44, 60 percent of drivers and passengers were reported as not wearing seatbelts, for adults 55-64, that number declines to 52 percent, and adults older than 64 the number declines to 41 percent.

Police agencies around the country have embarked on the popular "click it or ticket" campaign to raise awareness. Anyone caught not wearing a seatbelt will be ticketed and fined.

The news is not all bad, however, as the NHSTA reports that seatbelt use is rising slowly. Nationwide, 82% of drivers and passengers were wearing their seatbelts in 2007 compared with 81% in 2006.

If you are the driver of a car, insist that your passengers wear their seatbelts. If there is a passenger under the age of 16 who is not wearing a seatbelt, the driver can be fined up to $340 for the first offense and $870 for the second offense.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Susan Devine

Car Accident on Cuesta Grade

Nigel Whitehead — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:47:35 GMT

Another accident was reported this morning on Cuesta Grade. According to the San Luis Obispo Telegram Tribune, a man driving recklessly crashed his car causing traffic delays for south bound traffic.

Cuesta Grade has been the scene of many accidents over the years, including several resulting in fatalities. Often, excessive speed plays a role because of the steep incline over the grade.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

Sudden Onset Illness Causes Auto Accident

Nigel Whitehead — Tue, 20 May 2008 11:03:35 GMT

What happens when a driver of a car suffers a sudden and unexpected medical condition, such as a heart attack, which causes him to lose control of his car resulting in an accident? In California if the accident was caused by a sudden onset illness which the driver had no reason to suspect he may be able to escape liability when he injures another in the ensuing accident. KSBY is reporting that a driver with very low blood sugar crashed near Highway 1 in Lompoc. The driver apparently tried to slow, but crossed the road into the wrong lane before crashing.

If this accident caused injury to another would the driver be civilly liable? It depends. If the driver had no reason to expect that he could suffer from low blood sugar, then he may very well not have been negligent. However, this driver was reported to be diabetic. If the driver was aware of his medical condition he would have been obligated to take reasonable steps to ensure that he wasn't driving with low blood sugar.

Similarly, if you have a history of seizures, whether or not you should be driving will be a question of fact. It is a more difficult question when a driver suffers a heart attack when driving thus causing an accident. What if the driver knew he had coronary heart disease, high cholesterol, high blood pressure and a family history of cardiac arrests? Should that driver stay off of the road? It will depend on what the medical experts say. If the cardiologist testifies that while the driver was at risk, there was no way to reasonably suspect a heart attack, then the driver may escape liability. On the other hand, if the testimony is that the driver was a "heart attack waiting to happen", then it may very well have been unreasonable for that driver to be behind the wheel of a car.

In these case understanding the medical evidence will be critical in determining civil liability.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

Hospital Balance Billing in California

Nigel Whitehead — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:14:29 GMT

In California if you end up in the emergency room at least you don't have to worry about the bill since you have health insurance, right? Not so fast. This week a new rule was put in to place prohibiting hospitals from the so called practice of "balance billing". This means that if you end up in the hospital, particularly one outside of your provider network, you could be billed by the hospital for anything your insurance company didn't pay. This could be thousands and thousands of dollars. This week the California Department of Managed Health Care implemented a new rule banning this practice. You can read the Department's press release on this issue here.

But, before you head to the emergecny room without concern for the bill, be aware that a group of doctors and hospitals have filed a lawsuit challenging the new rule. They argue that many times the reimbursment rates from the insurance company is far below the amount needed to make a profit. And, since by law an emergency room is obligated to treat every patient regardless of insurance issues, they will lose billions of dollars.

The DMHC argues that the reimbursement issue will be addressed by regulations desgined to address unfair contracts giant health insurance companies are forcing on local medical providers that provide for very low payment rates for medical services.

As if the issue was not confusing enough, the California Supreme Court is set to hear oral aurguments in another case addressing this very issue - Prospect Medical Group v Northridge Emergency Medical Group -on November 5, 2008. You can see the California Supreme Court calendar here.

In a personal injury case this issue can have a huge impact on the settlemement of a case. If the lawyer can't tell with certainty how much - if anything - the client will owe to the hospital over and above the paid amount, it is impossible to tell the client how much the net settlement will be. This is an area that cries out for judicial and legislative clarity. Hopefully, the result will be fairness to the consumer, and not protection of the profits of giant corporations.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

Do I Need a Lawyer?

Nigel Whitehead — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:23:40 GMT

I just spoke to a potential client on the phone about her daughters non-injury accident. She was shocked when I explained to her that she probably didn't need a lawyer and suggested that a Small Claims Court claim was the best way to resolve the small property damage dispute. She joked (perhaps) that I was the first lawyer she knew who ever talked himself out of getting hired!

Hiring an experienced personal injury lawyer in a serious injury case is essential if you are to receive full value for your case. However, there are many situations where you simply don't need to hire a lawyer. Did you know that you can make a claim for up to $7,500 in Small Claims Court? The process is inexpensive and quick.

The California Superior Court web site is an excellent self-help guide. The site contains links to forms and "How To" guides.

If you claim is minor you should be fine in Small Claims Court. If, however, you are getting treated unfairly by the insurance company and you have been injured you should consider hiring an experienced personal injury attorney.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

Santa Maria Man Killed in DUI Collision

Nigel Whitehead — Mon, 12 May 2008 11:35:31 GMT

KSBY is reporting that on Friday night an 83 year-old man, Walt Williams, was killed when an SUV driven by a suspected drunk driver crossed over into William's lane, hitting him head-on. The 27 year-old driver of the SUV was critically injured in the wreck. According to a friend, Mark Payne , Williams was vibrant man, with many interests and even more friends.

Anytime a loved one is killed it is a tragedy for family and friends. It seems, however, that there is an even a deeper hurt when the accident was avoidable. An accident caused by a drunk driver is the result of a choice made to drink and drive. Call a cab, a friend, walk, use a designated driver - anything to avoid driving drunk.

There are numerous private and public entities devoted to stopping drunk driving. Perhaps best known is MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) The National Highway Safety Administration recently presented its annual safety awards to those devoted to promoting highway safety. One of the recipients was Robert Crane, M.D., chair of MADD. In fact, the NHTSA has an entire division devoted to stopping impaired driving.

Drunk driving is a crime in every state. In California the legal limit for drunk driving is a Blood Alcohol Concentration of .08%. Despite the laws drunk driving statistics remain frightening. The NHTSA reports that today 34% of all fatal highway accidents involved at least one driver with a BAC greater that .08%. This number is down from over 50% in the 1980's but it is still far too high.

Please do your part. Make wise choices. Stop a friend from driving drunk. Report suspected drunk drivers to law enforcement.

Forget .08%. Think of another percentage - 34% of all highway deaths involve a drunk driver. That's a number that should sober up any drunk driver.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

Fatal Collision on Hwy 166 in San Luis Obispo County

Nigel Whitehead — Wed, 07 May 2008 10:59:24 GMT

On Tuesday afternoon a white 2007 Corvette collided head-on with a semi truck on Highway 166 in San Luis Obispo County. The driver of the Corvette was air-lifted to a local hospital where he died from his injuries. There were no witnesses to the collision so officials are examining the physical evidence to determine what happened. Early reports were that the skid marks from the Corvette went from the East-bound lane, into the West-bound lane where the collision occurred.

Tragically, the driver of the Corvette was not wearing a seat-belt and was ejected from the car after the impact with the truck. Highway 166 is widely used road between Bakersfield and Santa Maria on the Central Coast. Much of the road is two lanes and has many sharp curves. While the posted speed limit is 55 MPH, many of the curves require a much slower speed.

We do not yet know whether sped was a factor, but a 2007 Corvette for some reason moved into the opposing lane while the driver is not wearing a seat-belt. Experience tells me speed was likely a factor. The CHP will no doubt examine all possible factors that might have contributed to the accident. It is always possible that the Corvette swerved to miss another car, or a pedestrian. The CHP will look at the condition of the road, signage, and even mechanical issues with the Corvette to determine the cause of the accident

Regardless of the cause, the one fact that cannot be ignored is the failure to wear a seat-belt. According to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, a driver is 17% more likely to die in an automobile accident if he is not wearing a seat-belt. California has a mandatory seat-belt law for a reason. If you in an automobile on a public road, please wear a seat-belt.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

Should I Take My Personal Injury Case To Trial?

Nigel Whitehead — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:53:31 GMT

Deciding whether to settle your Personal Injury case or go to trial is sometimes a difficult decision. Many factors unique to you and your case must be carefully considered before you decide whether or not you should settle without going to trial.

You and your lawyer should objectively examine the offer being made by the Defendant and the chances that you will obtain a more favorable result at trial. Examine the strenghts and weaknesses of your case. Research comparable verdicts in your jurisdiction. Your personal circumstances, including the financial and emotional costs of trial must also be considered.

An interesting new study looked at over 2000 cases and determined that in only 15% of the cases that went to trial did the Plaintiff recover more than the Defendant's offer AND the Defendant paid less than the Plaintiff's demand. That means in 85% of the examined case someone made an error in judgment!

Having tried many case over my career I can offer this advice: The more ready and able you are to take your case to the jury - the more likely it is that the Defendant will make a reasonable offer. The best way to make the right decision is to hire a lawyer with the skill, resources and nerve to take your case to a jury.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead

Serious Motorcycle Accident in Nipomo

Nigel Whitehead — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:09:55 GMT

The San Luis Obispo Tribune reported a serious Ford Explorer v. motorcycle accident on April 26, 2008 on Highway 1 near Nipomo. The driver of the Ford Explorer turned left in front of the motorcycle rider causing the collision. Even though the rider was wearing a helmet he suffered significant injuries. Hopefully the helmet saved this man's life.

This area of Highway 1 is between Willow Road and the new Woodlands development on the Nipomo Mesa. This development is already bringing thousands of residents and visitors to the area. The major access road to the Woodlands is Highway 101. To date, no stop signs or traffic signals have been installed, despite the significant increase in traffic. What was once a little traveled section of road is becoming increasingly busy while the infrastructure remains the same. Hopefully, as the project continues officials will reassess the need for modifications to the road.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nigel Whitehead