Washington DC Injury Lawyer Blog

Returning Veterans are at High Risk for Auto Accidents

October 19, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Automobile crashes are the leading cause of death for veterans returning from deployment during their first year back home, according to the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA). Veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan face a 75% greater probability of a fatal car accident than the general population. This continues a historical trend, but at a greater rate than prior to the deployments of the past decade. The VA’s investigation suggests that military training, psychological effects of deployment, and possible injuries all play a role in unsafe driving among veterans.

Studies by the VA and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration have shown that risky behavior accounts for many of the deaths. This includes not using seat belts or helmets, speeding, and driving under the influence of alcohol. Training in “aggressive driving” is one possible cause. People on deployment receive training for driving in combat situations, and must constantly contend with the possibility of ambush or improvised explosive devices. VA officials have described a sense of “invincibility” among many returning veterans, having survived combat, which can unwittingly lead to dangerous driving.

Psychological factors also play a significant role because of the highly stressful situations in deployment, particularly to Iraq and Afghanistan. Post-traumatic stress disorder, an all-too-common condition of returning veterans, can lead to dangerous driving back home. An Army study revealed that 50% of returning soldiers reported feeling anxiety on the road when other vehicles quickly approached them, and 20% reported feeling general anxiety whenever driving. The VA has further noted that auto accidents can lead to further PTSD, particularly in individuals already affected by PTSD or other mental health issues, which can create an ongoing problem for veterans involved in accidents.

Traumatic brain injuries can affect driving, causing a person to think they are driving normally and not noticing mistakes. Such injuries may go undetected in returning veterans, leading to unforeseen driving problems. Individuals suffering from brain injuries may not be able to recognize changes in their driving patterns, making safe driving difficult.

Food and Drug Administration to Take Action on Food Safety in Restaurants and Stores

October 13, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a series of initiatives in late September that it hopes will further ensure the safety of the food supply. The proposed measures, known as the Retail Food Safety Action Plan, would apply to food service establishments such as stores, restaurants, and schools. The Plan will focus on food safety rules at the state and local levels. It establishes a set of “model rules” to help managers in food service establishments handle food safety procedures, and standards for training personnel on food safety issues. The Plan follows a series of recent stories in the news about food contamination such as the recent cantaloupe recall.

The FDA is cooperating with the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) to promote best safety practices at the local level. It hopes to get local governments to implement its Voluntary National Retail Food Regulatory Program, a series of standards developed by the FDA to encourage uniform food safety protocols nationwide.

The Plan also includes amendments to the 2009 Food Code, the most recent set of standards put out by the FDA. The Food Code is typically revised every few years. The proposed amendments include:
– Food establishments should have a plan for responding and cleaning up if an employee is phyiscally ill near where food is served, prepared, or stored.
– Food establishments should have clear standards about bare-handed contact with prepared food by employees.

– They should have consistent standards for how to display meat and poultry.

The FDA is an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is responsible for promoting public health by supervising and regulating food products, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, cosmetics, and other products commonly used by the public. It also enforces various laws related to public health. It regulates safety for most food products, although many meat products fall under the Department of Agriculture’s jurisdiction. FDA review and approval is a critical step towards getting a product to market in the pharmaceutical and food industries.

Food safety and quality control are vital tasks in promoting public health and preventing certain diseases. Food-borne illnesses such as salmonella and E. coli can result from poor food quality or lack of standards. Injuries can be severe, ranging from sickness and lost time at work to serious hospitalization or death.

Children’s Jewelry Manufacturers Agree to Limit Cadmium Levels

October 7, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The Consumer Product Safety Commission has approved new voluntary limits on cadmium levels in children’s jewelry. A move to regulate cadmium began in 2010 after a recall of bracelets and pendants at Wal-Mart stores. The new standards represent a national consensus among manufacturers and importers of children’s jewelry as to the need to address the toxic metal. A series of mandatory limits has already developed through state regulation and litigation, but this new standard represents the first national standard.

Cadmium is a metal element that occurs as a byproduct of various industrial processes. For years cadmium was used in steel and plastic production and as a pigment, but use has declined considerably. It is still used in some batteries and solar panels. Cadmium exposure has been linked to a number of health problems, including flu-like symptoms, acute kidney problems, pulmonary emphysema, bone disease, and possibly cancer. Dangerous exposure can occur even with trace amounts of cadmium.

Wal-Mart stores recalled children’s bracelets and pendants from their stores in January 2010 due to concerns that they might contain cadmium. Children could receive dangerous doses of cadmium if the jewelry were placed in a child’s mouth, even without actually swallowing the product. Some Chinese companies use cadmium in jewelry production because of prohibitions on using lead. An American company, Tween Brands, reached a settlement in California in March 2011 in which it has agreed to eliminate cadmium from all of its products by January 2012. The settlement agreement only applies to the state of California. Different standards among U.S. states may have led to repeated and inconsistent testing of products, which has led to the current push for national standards.

Possible New FMCSA Hours-of-Service Regulations on Commercial Truck Drivers Create Controversy

September 29, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has spent two years considering modifications to hours-of-service regulations for commercial truck drivers, but any proposed increase in regulation could inspire opposition in Congress. The agency has delayed the release of new rules until October, requesting further comment during the summer of 2011. While the agency cites its own research to argue that revisions to the existing regulations are needed to improve safety, members of Congress have vowed to fight any changes.

Four Republican Representatives led by House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica (R-Fla.) wrote to President Obama regarding the proposed changes, stating that “we are very concerned the proposed changes will result in additional trucks and drivers on the road to deliver the same amount of freight, adding to the final product costs and increasing congestion on our already overburdened roads.” Industry groups have expressed similar concerns about new regulations. Since the FMCSA has not released new rules, the situation is still simmering. It pits concerns over driver safety against concerns over the impact of new rules on the trucking industry.

Under current rules, commercial truck drivers who do not carry passengers can drive for a maximum of 11 consecutive hours after at least 10 consecutive hours off duty, and they can be on duty for a maximum of 14 consecutive hours. Drivers are also limited to 60 to 70 hours total driving in a 7- to 8-day time period. Proposed new regulations would limit the total number of 14-hour shifts to two per week, with driving time limited to 10 or 11 hours. The FMCSA issued the current rules in 2003, in the first major revision of hours-of-service rules since 1939.

As an agency of the United States Department of Transportation, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration regulates the U.S. trucking industry, enacting and enforcing safety regulations covering commercial motor vehicles and drivers. It is tasked with monitoring highway safety data, researching existing safety concerns, promulgating rules and regulations enforcing safety policies, and developing technological solutions supporting safety. The agency was established January 1, 2000.

The FMCSA issued a report in May 2011 analyzing driving performance of commercial truck drivers and considering all activities expected of drivers in addition to driving. Aside from driving, drivers may spend time during shifts performing “heavy work” like loading and unloading their trailers and “light work” like paperwork and other administrative tasks. Drivers also take breaks during shifts to eat, sleep, and relax. The report identified driver drowsiness as a major concern, but also the variety and range of tasks performed by drivers during a shift. All of these factors can negatively affect driver safety.

NTSB Urges Ban on Cell Phones for Truck Drivers

September 23, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The National Transportation Safety Board has formally recommended a ban on the use of cell phones and other mobile electronic devices by commercial truck drivers while driving. While this does not have the force of law, the recommendation follows on a prior recommendation to ban text messaging by truck drivers. The Washington DC Injury Lawyer Blog previously reported on how this led to a formal ban by the federal government on texting by commercial truckers. Nineteen U.S. states and the District of Columbia already ban all drivers from texting while driving. The federal texting rule for truckers, set by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, carries fines of up to $2,750 per incident. The NTSB recommendation on cell phone use is likely to lead to similar rules regarding cell phone use.

The NTSB recommendation resulted from its investigation into a tragic crash on Interstate 65 in Kentucky last year in which a commercial truck driver veered across the median of the highway into oncoming traffic and struck a van carrying a total of 12 people. The crash killed the truck driver, the van driver, and nine of the van’s occupants. Two children in the van were reported to have been saved by their child-restraint systems. The investigation concluded that the truck driver’s distraction from use of a cell phone, combined with fatigue, caused the crash. Investigators found that the truck driver had used his phone for calls and text messages while driving 69 times during the previous 24-hour period. Road conditions, weather, and driver health issues did not play any role in the accident, according to investigators.

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent agency of the United States government, formed in 1967 and tasked with investigating accidents in the civil transportation system. It investigates certain types of car and truck accidents. Since the accident in Kentucky occurred on an interstate highway, which is partly administered by the federal government, it came under the NTSB’s jurisdiction. The NTSB also investigates aviation, marine, shipping, pipeline, and railroad accidents. The agency lacks the legal authority by itself to create laws or rules, but its system of recommendations frequently leads to the adoption of new safety regulations. In it 44-year history, it has issued over 13,000 recommendations.

Social Media Technology Can Help Establish Liability in Accident Cases

September 15, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

A bike ride on the San Francisco peninsula during the 4th of July weekend turned disastrous for New York Times writer John Markoff when he crashed on a downhill at over 30 miles per hour. Paramedics took him to the hospital, where he found that he had a 20-minute gap in his memory surrounding the crash. He could not remember the circumstances of the crash at all, despite physical evidence such as road rash on his hands and a deep skid mark on his helmet.

Markoff relates the story of Ryan Sabga, a bike racer, who was hit by a car in Denver in 2010. The driver of the car claimed she did not think she had hit him, and police concluded that there was not enough evidence to issue a citation to the driver. Sabga was able to use data from the GPS device to establish where he was at the time of the accident, and to demonstrate exactly how the car hit him (including a spike in his heart rate at the moment of impact). Although police still did not want to pursue the case, this evidence was enough to get the driver’s insurance company to accept responsibility.

Markoff similarly used his GPS device to reconstruct his bike ride and figure out what had happened to him. Both Sabga and Markoff used a Garmin GPS device that recorded location, speed, and other information, and allowed the option of uploading data to a web service where it could be shared with other users.

Forbes columnist Kashmir Hill notes that an increasing number of people use devices like a Garmin GPS to record data about their daily lives and often share that information through social media. Widespread use of such technology is often known as “the Quantified Self” or “self-tracking.” While such recording and sharing can serve any number of useful purposes such as allowing support for fitness plans or tracking health conditions, it can also be useful for accident victims. This applies to accident victims who may use their own data, much like Markoff and Sabga, to determine what happened, or to those who may obtain data from another party to establish liability or challenge a conflicting description of an accident.

Social media information is the subject of a growing number of discovery requests in litigation. Courts, while often slow to adapt to new and quickly-changing technologies, are beginning to understand the importance and ubiquity of social media, and are allowing discovery of personal social media information that is relevant to the case at hand. Data collected by “self-tracking” technologies, particularly those shared on popular social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, are undoubtedly relevant in establishing the circumstances of an accident. This information can cut both ways. Information that could prove liability in a personal injury matter could also disprove a claimant’s account and clear a defendant of liability. Either way, this segment of social media technology, when used by people involved in accidents, is an invaluable fact-finding tool.

Safety Recalls of RV’s in Washington DC

September 6, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Recalls have been issued in the Washington, DC area for recreational vehicles from four different manufacturers: Spartan Chassis, Navistar, Dutchmen Manufacturing, and Winnebago Industries. The reasons for the recalls include problems with the exhaust system, defective headlight fuses, faulty ventilation, and possible fuel or propane leaks. Any of these conditions could severely impact the operation of the RV and threaten the safety, or even the lives, of drivers, passengers, and others on the road. Dangers include electrical failures, fires, and even carbon monoxide poisoning. RV owners should review the recall information carefully to see if their vehicles are affected.

An RV can be a great source of adventure and recreation, but RV’s also carry their own unique risks. RV’s are different from other automobiles: obviously they are larger and heavier, and they handle differently than other vehicles on the road. Automatic transmission and power steering may be standard features of today’s RV’s, but they require care and attention. An inexperienced driver should take care when operating an RV and take the time to learn how to operate the vehicle safely.

AllState recently ranked America’s 200 largest cities based on frequency of car collisions, ranking Washington, DC 193rd out of 200. Auto accidents are a serious problem. Numerous accidents in the Washington, DC area and elsewhere have involved RV’s. The past month has been an unusually dangerous one on DC-area roads, with multiple serious accidents and fatalities, so the news of the RV recalls is critical for driving safety.

If an RV is involved in an accident due to a defect in the vehicle’s design, construction, or marketing, the manufacturer may be liable for damages caused by the defect under the theory of products liability. A design defect is one where the product may work, but is dangerous to use because of an error or omission that occurred before the product was ever built. A construction or manufacturing defect most likely happened when the product was assembled or produced, and may cause the product not to function correctly. A marketing defect involves incorrect or insufficient instructions or guidance on how to use the product safely, or a failure to warn consumers about some dangerous characteristic of the product. The defects noted in the RV recall appear to be design or manufacturing defects.

An injured person making a claim of products liability may recover damages due to product defects for property damage, medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Products liability is often a matter of strict liability, meaning that a manufacturer may be liable for damages even if it did not know of the defect. In claiming products liability, an injured person should look at the manufacturer of the product as well as any distributors and retailers responsible for marketing the product.

Washington DC Defective Medical Device Cases: Surgical Mesh Can Cause Serious Side Effects

August 31, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

The US Food and Drug Administration is proposing that surgical mesh products be subject to tougher regulations. The mesh products, which are placed in the vagina to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, can cause serious injuries. In an update to its 2008 advisory warning that transvaginal mesh products can serious complication, last month the federal agency announced that these complications are not rare.

If you or someone you love has experienced bleeding, organ perforation, infection, urinary issues, and severe pain after undergoing a transvaginal mesh procedure, you may have reason for filing a Washington DC products liability case against the manufacture of the surgical mesh products. These medical devices are currently manufactured by about nine companies, including Boston Scientific Corp. and Johnson & Johnson.

Now that the FDA believes that the severity and rate of injuries related to surgical mesh to treat POP repair are serious enough to raise questions about the safety of these medical devices, the federal agency is proposing that new mesh products go through a premarket review process. This would require companies to conduct studies examining a product’s effectiveness and safety before it is approved. Right now, mesh products are subject to the 510(k) process, which is less rigorous.

According to consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, of the almost 300,000 women who underwent surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in 2010, nearly 67,500 women underwent procedures involving a mesh product that was implanted in their vaginas. From these transvaginal procedures, federal regulators received 1,503 reports of complications, such as mesh implant erosion and pelvic organ injuries. Also, surgical mesh-related complications may require a woman to undergo more surgeries, which can place her at risk of additional complications and decrease her quality of life.

Our Washington DC personal injury lawyers represent clients that have sustained injury, illness, infection, or died because the medical device they used proved unsafe, dangerous, defective, and/or worsened their condition or health.

Public Citizen calls for a ban of surgical mesh devices, NJ.com, August 25, 2011
FDA Planning Tougher Regulations For Surgical Mesh, The Wall Street Journal, August 31, 2011

Related Web Resources:

FDA

Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Web MD
Stress urinary incontinence, NIH

More Blog Posts:
Are Some Children Undergoing Unnecessary CT Scans?, Washington DC Injury Lawyer Blog, May 11, 2011
Dangerous Medical Device?: Woman Files Cold Therapy Lawsuit Against DeRoyal Industries Alleging Tissue Damage, Maryland Accident Law Blog, June 18, 2011
US Lawmakers Seek to Reinstate Right to Sue Medical Device Makers for Personal Injury and Wrongful Death, Maryland Accident Law Blog, February 19, 2009

NHTSA Rejects Petition Calling for Safety Belts on School Buses

August 25, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Our Washington DC personal injury law firm represents children and adults injured in motor vehicle crashes. Unfortunately, DC school bus accidents can be a cause of serious injury to kids—especially because there is no law requiring that these large vehicles be outfitted with seat belts. This means that during a school bus collision, kids on a bus don’t have anything to keep them securely tethered to their seats. As a result, head injuries, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injuries, and other debilitating injuries are more likely to occur during a crash.

The NHTSA has just turned down a petition calling for a federal law requiring that all school buses come with seat belts. The National Coalition for School Bus Safety and the Center for Auto Safety were the leaders of the petition.

According to the Washington Post, In the Federal Register NHTSA said it considered big school buses among some of the safest vehicles in the country. Their fatality rate is six times less than that of passenger cars. NHTSA also said that of the approximately 19 school kids who die annually in bus crashes, 14 are killed in school bus loading zones—compared to the five that die while on the bus. The federal agency argued that since fatalities in a school bus usually will have occurred because of impact with an object or another auto, seat belts would likely not prevent this. Cost, decrease in the number of passengers, and smaller fleets were also cited as a factor for why mandating seat belts on large school buses did not make sense.

School bus safety coalition member Arthur Yeager, however, noted that it was “hypocrisy” for NHTSA to push for seat belts in almost all other vehicles under their control but not for school buses. (Smaller school buses weighing less than 10K are required to have shoulder-lap belts for their seats.)

Regardless of whether or not a school bus is equipped with seat belts, depending on who caused the crash and the severity of your child’s injuries, you may have reason to seek damages from the school bus operator, the school, the bus manufacturer, the district, the motorist of another car that was involved, and/or the entity in charge of maintaining the road or traffic signals where the accident happened.

Feds reject request to require seat belts on school buses, Washington Post, August 25, 2011
NHTSA Turns Down Petition for Lap/Shoulder Belt Requirement on Large School Buses, School Transportation News, August 25, 2011
Related Web Resources:

Read the petition for rulemaking (PDF)

The Federal Register

Center for Auto Safety

National Coalition for School Bus Safety

More Blog Posts:
Preventing the Non-Crash Auto Deaths of Kids, Washington DC Injury Lawyer Blog, July 26, 201
Tour Bus From Washington DC Involved in Deadly Crash May Have Been Derailed by Tire Blowout, Washington DC Injury Lawyer Blog, July 18, 2011
Frederick County, School Bus Crash Involving Injuries Went Unreported, Say Maryland State Police, Maryland Accident Law Blog, October 28, 2010

Washington DC Medical Malpractice: Most Doctors Will Be Sued by Age 65, Says New England Journal of Medicine

August 19, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

According to an article published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine, most doctors will face at least one medical malpractice lawsuit as a defendant by the time they turn 65. Their findings come from looking at the files of a national malpractice insurance carrier.

The five most-sued specialties, with its doctors having a 99% chance of being sued by the time they celebrate their 65th birthday, are:

• Thoracic cardiovascular surgery