Recent settlements
  • $1,560,000.00 Motor Vehicle Accident
  • $2,200,000.00 Wrongful Death
  • $1,250,000.00 Motorcycle Accident
Free Consultation No fee unless succesful we will travel to you
  • Top 100 Trail Lawyers
  • AVVO Car Accident 2015
  • AVVO Top Attorney Car Accident
  • American Academy of Trial Attorneys
  • 10 Best 2015
  • Super Lawyers
  • Massachusetts Academy of Trial Attorneys
  • ASLA

Articles Posted in Personal Injury

powerlinesElectricity is one of those things to which most of us give little thought – until something goes wrong. Unfortunately, things can sometimes go very wrong when a power company acts negligently, sometimes triggering a Massachusetts personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit.

Governmental tort liability, including the possibility of immunity from suit, can be an important factor in such cases, depending upon the particular defendant that is being sued. Such cases must be handled with the utmost care, since a procedural mistake can result in a finding that the governmental entity is not liable for the plaintiff’s harm, even when obvious negligence occurred.

Facts of the Case

legal advice
When someone is injured in a Cape Cod car accident, the responsible party’s insurance company has certain responsibilities toward the injured individual. When the insurance company fails in this regard, the plaintiff may have a separate legal action against the insurer.

As with a traditional tort case, the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the insurance company acted wrongfully. Due to the punitive nature of the statute, a successful case can result in substantial damages, including up to three times the amount in controversy.

Facts of the Case

doctor
There are many procedural hoops that must be jumped through in order for a person injured by an act of medical negligence to be successful in a Cape Cod medical malpractice lawsuit. While potential pitfalls are common in the area of negligence law, this is particularly so in claims against doctors, hospitals, nurses, and so on. Unfortunately, this sometimes means that an otherwise valid (and potentially very valuable) claim falls through the cracks due to a technicality.

Facts of the Case

In a recent (unreported) Massachusetts Appeals Court case, the plaintiff was a woman who sought compensation for the alleged medical malpractice of several defendants related to complications from gallbladder removal surgery she underwent in 2013. In an earlier case, the plaintiff (on her own behalf and on the behalf of her two minor children) asserted claims against a hospital, a surgeon, and two “John Doe” (unknown) defendants, claiming that she had suffered a bile duct injury during her surgery that required her to undergo several other (otherwise unnecessary) medical procedures later. That case was dismissed by the medical malpractice tribunal on the ground that the plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence to raise a legitimate question of liability, and the plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed with prejudice.

fraud
In personal injury and wrongful death cases, there are sometimes multiple theories of liability. In a Cape Cod product liability case, for instance, the plaintiff may allege that the defendant manufacturer was negligent in the design of an unreasonably dangerous product and that the defendant should be held accountable for its failure to warn the consumer of the dangerous propensity of the product in question. These theories are not necessarily inconsistent.

Sometimes, however, a plaintiff may have to decide between legal theories that could be considered inconsistent. A recent case explored the complications that can arise in such situations.

Facts of the Case

prescription medicationApproximately seven out of every 10 Americans take a prescription medication. While the majority of these drugs are reasonably safe (virtually every medicine has some side effect), there has been a trend in recent years for drugs to be put on the market before the full effects are adequately studied.

A number of Massachusetts product liability lawsuits have arisen as a result of personal injuries or wrongful deaths allegedly caused by prescription medications. One common claim in such lawsuits is an allegation that the patient was not adequately warned of the medication’s side effects. A complication arises, however, when the patient takes a generic version of a drug. This is because federal law requires that a generic drug provide an identical label to its name-brand counterpart, even though the drugs may be made by different manufacturers.

Facts of the Case

stop bullying
Bullying is a terrible problem in schools these days. Sometimes, a Massachusetts personal injury or wrongful death claim can arise from injuries caused by bullies. While each case stands on its own facts, a common issue in such cases is, “is the school liable?” In a case that made its way all the way to the state’s highest court, it was held that neither the school district nor teachers to whom reports of bullying had previously been made were liable for an incident that put a young student in a wheelchair for life.

Facts of the Case

In a recent case, the plaintiffs were the parents of a fourth grader who was pushed down the stairs by a classmate at his public elementary school in 2008. Although the extent of the boy’s injuries was not immediately apparent, he complained of tingling and numbness in his extremities a few hours after the fall; by the end of the school day, he reported that his legs were like “dead weight” and required assistance to walk out of the school. Two days later, the student was diagnosed with an injury to his spinal column and spinal cord, which resulted in permanent quadriplegia.

vehicle fireThe National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is an arm of the federal government whose mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce costs due to traffic crashes. The entity’s website lists many statistics illustrating its success, including a “safety success” of decreasing Massachusetts fatal car accidents in rural towns by 48% in 2015.

As part of its task of keeping people safe on America’s roadways, the NHTSA issues recalls of vehicles, car seats, tires, and equipment that may pose a risk to the public. Sometimes, a recall affects only a few products, but other times millions of consumers may potentially be affected. Either way, it pays to stay up to date on the latest information issued by the NHTSA.

Toyota Recalls 65,000 Tundras/Sequoias

meatballs
A Cape Cod product liability case can arise from many different types of products and can involve several different theories of liability. Claims of strict liability, negligence, defective design, manufacturing defect, breach of warranty, or failure to warn may be alleged, depending on the circumstances. Since product liability lawsuits are subject to both a statute of limitations and a statute of repose, it is important to get legal advice concerning your case as soon as possible. Claims not filed in a timely fashion are usually dismissed, regardless of the severity of the plaintiff’s injuries.

Facts of the Case

In a case recently under consideration by the appellate court, the plaintiff was a public school first grader who allegedly suffered traumatic brain damage after choking on meatballs served in the school cafeteria. Together with his parents, the student filed suit against the city that owned the school and the company that produced and sold the meatballs, alleging, among other things, that the meatballs contained “Profam 974,” which gave them an unreasonably dangerous texture and presented a choking hazard. The plaintiffs’ legal theories included negligence and breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.

speeding car
When someone leaves the scene of a Massachusetts car accident that results in property damage or personal injuries, he or she can be subject to both a fine and possible imprisonment. A civil negligence case is also a possibility, if the person who was hurt or whose vehicle was damaged in the crash is able to ascertain the wrongdoer’s identity.

Such cases can be difficult, however, sometimes leading an injured person to seek compensation from his or her own insurance company. Unfortunately, even that is not a guaranteed form of recovery.

Facts of the Case

muscle carThe fact is, most Massachusetts car accident cases settle out of court, even though the litigants in such cases have a right to have a jury decide the merits of their claims (and defenses). There are many reasons for this, including the costliness and time involved in a jury trial. Additionally, when a case settles, both parties have a say in the outcome, while jury trials involve considerable risk and a lack of predictability.

Facts of the Case

In a recent (unreported) case, the plaintiff was a man who was injured when a vintage “muscle car” slid off a flatbed trailer that was traveling in front of him on the Massachusetts Turnpike in 2011. The plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit against the owner of the car, and the case proceeded to a jury trial. The jury found that the defendant was not negligent. The plaintiff appealed, asking the court of appeals to find that he should have been granted a mistrial due to the opening statement of the defendant’s attorney, that the trial court should have instructed the jury on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, and that he should have been given a new trial after the jury’s verdict in favor of his opponent.