Orange County Personal Injury Lawyer - Automobile Accidents - Most Commented

Street-racing crash in Yorba Linda kills 68-year-old woman

IB Contributor — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:17:41 GMT

A 68-year-old Orange County woman was fatally injured in an auto accident Sunday when she attempted to make a left turn from a residential neighborhood, The Orange County Register reported Monday. Police officials suspect that street racing may have caused the crash.

Witnesses told Brea Police officials that two cars were seen speeding side-by-side, southbound down the hillside street of Fairmont Boulevard when one of the cars, a black Chevrolet pickup, collided into the victim's white Buick sedan, the article stated.

The accident occurred at 12:47 p.m., at the corner of Fairmont and Oak Meadow Drive.

Joetta May Martinez of Yorba Linda was transported to a hospital, where she was pronounced dead.

The driver of the pickup, Charles William Marquardt III, also from Yorba Linda, was taken to the hospital for minor injuries. The 17-year-old male driver of the car reported to have been driving next to the pickup was questioned by police. No charges have been filed yet and their names were not released.

Residents who live nearby said they came running out of their homes when they heard a loud collision. One neighbor rushed to the woman's aid and tried to check her pulse, but didn't get one on her neck or hand. Another rushed to check on the driver of the pickup, who was reportedly shaken up and kept inquiring about the lady and whether she was alright. Neighbor Paul Noonan said the driver of the pickup "seemed brokenhearted and just devastated."

Several residents cited a growing problem with cars speeding around their neighborhood and the danger of turning from a residential street onto a downhill street with a blind curve. The speed limit on Fairmont is 40 mph; Oak Meadow is 25 mph.

Residents have asked for a traffic light at that intersection, but it hasn't happened so far

If this were indeed a street-racing incident, Marquardt is looking at prison time. He is also looking at a civil lawsuit for wrongful death. In the right circumstances, if Marquardt was driving someone ele's car, whoever allowed him to drive their car could be liable to the family of the deceased accident victim under a theory of "negligent entrustment".

I curious to see how the Orange County District Attorney's office handles this case. The DA has an opportunity here to send a message that street racing will not be tolerated in Orange County and that violators who cause accidents and injury people will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Here is an interesting link to a nonprofit group called Street S.M.A.R.T.S. (Sports Machines Against Racing on the Street), which aims to educate people about the dangers of street-racing. Their Web site is http://www.streetsmartsusa.org/. The Web site has memorials to victims of street-racing as well, which serves as a tragic reminder. I like their motto, which is, "If you must race, remember, TAKE IT TO THE TRACK!"

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Roof Crush Intrusion - "Deadly By Design" Expose

IB Contributor — Mon, 25 Dec 2006 15:00:20 GMT

In response to my Dec. 23, 2006 "The Most Deadly Vehicle" article, I received an email from Paula Lawlor, a roof crush consultant, who has co-authored, along with Todd Tracy, "Deadly By Design". According to its authors, "Deadly By Design" is "An expose of the weak government standard that has lead to more than three decades of unnecessary fatalities and catastrophic injuries in rollover accidents". "Deadly By Design" goes through the history and statistics of "roof crush intrusion" or what is sometimes called "roof crush failure" or simply "roof crush".

The conclusion that Lawlor and Tracy come to is:

Year after year, for the past 36 years, thousands of people have unnecessarily died and been maimed due to pathetically weak roof structures that crush excessively during a rollover. Rather than engineer roof designs that promote the idea of preserving

the passenger compartment space, the vehicle industry has made a concerted effort to defend itself in litigation with a defense known as the "diving theory" which has proven to be a hoax.

Having been involved in litigating dozens of rollover vehicle accident cases wherein "roof crush" was responsible for multiple deaths and catastrophic injuries, I am in agreement with the conclusion of the Lawlor/Tracy expose. With ten thousand deaths and 16,000 catastrophic injuries each year due to rollover accidents, why hasn't the auto industry built their vehicles more stable, in order to prevent rollovers and built the roofs to hold up in a rollover accident The auto industries' own data indicates that stronger roofs save lives, yet they fight every attempt to legislate stronger roofs.

Is it any wonder that the American auto industry is continuing to lose market share and billions of dollars annually. Their philosophy of fighting higher standards for automobile safety standards is appalling. They will spend more on cosmetic extras, leather seats, navigation and entertainment systems than they will on safer more reliable vehicles. Maybe their philosophy of building questionably safe vehicles, according to today's technology, and then defending lawsuits with junk science and smoke screens is catching up to them. Maybe if they start "doing what is right" rather than worry about the next quarterly report, it would turn them toward long run profitability and respectability.

Everyone of our rollover/roof crush cases has encountered the auto industry's "diving theory" as well as multiple other defenses. So far we have been successful in ninety percent of our rollover/roof crush cases. We continue to accept and aggressively pursue rollover and roof crush cases that have resulted in a death or catastrophic injury. Litigating these cases is our way of coaxing the auto industry to build safer vehicles for us all and holding them accountable for the harm their negligence has caused.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Backover Deaths Can Be Prevented

IB Contributor — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:49:29 GMT

One hundred children die in "backover" accidents each year.

Every week, at least two children are killed and 50 more are injured in automobile "backover" accidents. Unfortunately, rear cameras and audible warning sensors that could help prevent such tragedies are not standard or considered "must have", safety equipment by auto manufacturers. And, while such safety equipment is offered as an option on many vehicles, it is doubtful that they will ever be mandated in cars, trucks or SUVs.

Consider the case of 2-year-old Adrianna. Adrianna had just shared a bath with her mom, Rachel and while mom was drying her hair Adrianna slipped out of the house and into the garage where her dad, David, was moving the family's SUV so that he could get into a storage area to remove some Halloween decorations. In a second Adrianna was dead and nothing could bring her back. Neither her 7-year-old brother, or her mom or her dad will ever be the same.

It has been 2 Â½ years since Adrianna died and her parents still can't understand what went wrong. They took every safety precaution to protect their children that they could think of- installing a very tall fence around the family pool, making certain that the latch was so high no child could reach it. But, when they bought their Q-45 SUV the salesperson did not encourage rear cameras or audible devices to prevent a "backover" accident. Instead, the salesperson encouraged them to get a sunroof.

Five years ago pediatrician Greg Gulbransen went out into the night to re-park his truck so that he wouldn't have to fight traffic in the morning when he left for work. Greg was doing his best to back up slowly between parked cars when he felt a bump, and as he continued to back up he saw the most horrifying sight - his small son in his headlights. Greg's son, Cameron, died in his arms, and he and his wife Leslie have never been the same. It isn't like the technology wasn't there! Warning sensors add approximately $100 to the cost of a car, and cameras run around $300. What a shame!

The group Kids and Cars offer education and seek to raise awareness of "backover" fatalities.

According to "Good Morning America" consumer correspondent Greg Hunter, part of the "backover fatality" problem is, as cars get bigger, drivers have a bigger blind spot and a harder time seeing what's behind them.

Child safety devices should be standard on all cars and SUVs, and for $300 or less how can we afford to not have them? What is a child's life worth anyway?

Last week we ordered a new BMW X5 to replace our Yukon, which I now consider to unstable and weak roofed to have my family in. We chose to equip our new BMW X5 with a rear-view camera and park distance control even though our children are in their twenties. The park distance control beeps if something is close to the front or rear bumper when starting, stopping or parking. Combined, they were an additional $700.

It is tough to always know where your children and the neighbor children are every time you move your car but what may the consequences be for not knowing? Seven hundred dollars is a lot of money to spend for safety equipment. However, I'd bet that Greg Gulbransen would pay any price to have had it on his truck, as would Adrianna's parents.

Be safe, check around your vehicle. Know where your children are when moving your vehicles. Pay the extra for safety equipment. The cost of not having it is way too high.

For more information on this subject, please refer to our section on Car and Motorcycle Accidents.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Las Vegas police to pay record $1.48 million to settle lawsuit

IB Contributor — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:56:04 GMT

Police covering for their own.

Las Vegas Police have agreed to pay a record $1.48 million to settle a federal lawsuit that accused officers of giving special treatment to an officer's wife after she was involved in a fatal bicycle accident 13 years ago, according to an Associated Press news report published in the Las Vegas Review Journal.

The driver, Janet Wagner, wife of Police Officer David Wagner, had been drinking alcohol before the crash but was never charged, according to court documents. Erin DeLew, 29, was killed while riding her bike home from a Summerlin supermarket.

The settlement, the largest in Las Vegas police history, will go to DeLew's husband, Michael DeLew, and her parents, Roy and Vickie Mayberry. The family in 1999 also accepted $100,000 to settle a wrongful death lawsuit against Janet Wagner, according to the article.

Police department lawyers said they agreed to settle because losing at trial might have cost millions more dollars, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie said. He said police administrators worried about the public's perception of the police department giving preferential treatment to its own, should a jury find the officers guilty of such partiality.

The $1.48 million settlement will be paid from the department self-insurance trust fund, which is supported by the department budget. Las Vegas police are funded by Las Vegas and Clark County taxpayers.

DeLew died Sept. 27, 1994. The federal civil rights lawsuit contended that David Wagner, a traffic officer who lived nearby, and other officers knew Janet Wagner, 26, had been drinking before the collision, but delayed calling the Nevada Highway Patrol, which eventually took over the investigation. The lawsuit alleged that Las Vegas officers failed to administer field-sobriety tests and let David Wagner take his wife home. It was almost two hours before the Highway Patrol was contacted.

A blood sample taken three hours after the crash put Janet Wagner's blood-alcohol level at 0.05 percent, half of the legal limit at the time. Here's the sad part -- the NHP found DeLew responsible for the crash - saying she was riding her bike without lights and changed lanes into the path of the Wagner's vehicle.

An internal Las Vegas police investigation cleared department officers of any policy violations. Nine of the officers named in the lawsuit have retired. Five, including David Wagner, remain on the force.

I have a lot of problems with this story. In my opinion the cops should have been charged criminally for their dereliction of duty and possible false reporting.

Although we put a lot of weight in "traffic collision reports" prepared by a police agency when we are assessing a case, the report is never the final word. Officers pressed for time do not always get the facts straight. Sometimes witness are just wrong about what they think they saw. Sometimes involved parties give self serving statements. And sometimes the investigators have their own agenda or a party to the accident that they want to protect, and the report is biased, slanted or fabricated. We consider all possibilities.

Unless there is a comprehensive video corroborat traffic collision reports, there is a chance that they are not accurate. This case is particularly disturbing because the department that should have called in an outside agency to investigate the fatality bicycle vs car accident when one of their own was involved, choose to protect an officer's wife rather than get to the truth and disclose it. The Chief himself says they settled because they did not want to create the appearance of wrongdoing. Come on Chief, there was wrongdoing, we just don't know how much.

Pedestrians and bicyclists have rights, no matter where they are in the street.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Speeding and alcohol takes another young life in Orange County

IB Contributor — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:49:44 GMT

Speeding and alcohol may have left an 18-year-old Buena Park man dead and a teenage passenger hurt this morning in a single-vehicle auto accident near Merten Avenue and Moody Street, the Orange County Register reported on today.

According to the article, Philip Na was driving a Toyota Camry about 1:40 a.m. Wednesday when it careened off the road and hit a light pole, police officials said.

Na died at the scene. His 17-year-old passenger was taken to La Palma Intercommunity Hospital with minor injuries. The boy, who was not identified because he is a minor, was treated and released to his parents, officials said.

Officers are investigating the accident, but preliminary reports show that a combination of speed and alcohol contributed to the crash, police said.

Unfortunately, this is not a rare occurrence in our country. Alcohol abuse and speeding are among the most common cause of auto accidents involving teenagers in our country. In this particular case, the 18-year-old driver died, but had he survived he would have been liable for the injuries and emotional trauma he caused his 17-year-old passenger by drinking and driving.

The U.S. Center for Disease Control posts a few interesting details on its tip sheet on the subject written by the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, an arm of the CDC.

Studies show that two out of five deaths among U.S. teens is a result of an auto accident. The risk of a motor vehicle accident is higher among 16- to 19-year-olds than among any other age group. In fact, per mile driven, teen drivers ages 16 to 19 are four times more likely than older drivers to crash, according to the agency's statistics. Here are some proven risk factors that the agency cites, which go against teen drivers:

* Teens are more likely than older drivers to speed, run red lights, make illegal turns, ride with an intoxicated driver, and drive after using alcohol or drugs

* Among male drivers between 15-20 years of age who were involved in fatal crashes in 2003, 39% were speeding at the time of the crash

* At all levels of blood alcohol concentration (BAC), the risk of involvement in a motor vehicle crash is greater for teens than for older drivers

* In 2003, 25% of drivers ages 15 to 20 who died in motor vehicle crashes had a BAC of 0.08 g/dl or higher

* In a national survey conducted in 2003, 30% of teens reported that within the previous month, they had ridden with a driver who had been drinking alcohol. One in eight reported having driven after drinking alcohol within the same one-month period

* In 2003, among teen drivers who were killed in motor vehicle crashes after drinking and driving, 74% were unrestrained

These are scary details for any parent to read. But we must consider these facts before handing off the car keys to our teens. Better yet, we must do everything we can to educate our children about the dangers of speeding and drunk driving.

From my position as a personal injury lawyer, I can tell you that a parent that provides those car keys to their child, be they an adult or teenager, it is possible for the parent to be held fully personally responsible for any harm their child causes under a theory of "negligent entrustment". Such financial responsibility can reach far beyound what a parent's auto insurance would cover.

With the right circumstances, a skilled personal injury attorney could recover a very substantial amount from a parent, or for that matter, anyone, who negligently entrusts an automobile to an impaired or otherwise dangerous driver. When you hand off car keys, you can be just as liable as if you were handing off a gun. In the wrong hands, cars have proven to be much more deadly than firearms.

As I write this, I am thinking about my mom and her driving. My mom will be eighty this year. She tells me she only drives on surface streets, during the day and only when the weather is good. Knowing what I know about my mom's driving, if I was to give her my car keys on a rainy day and she caused an accident, I can see how a sharp personal injury attorney could be coming after me personally. We'll see what my mom has to say after she reads this.

Here is a link to another useful educational Web site about preventing injuries as a result of auto accidents: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/mvoi/default.htm.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Ford Excursion Rollover Fatality

IB Contributor — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:48:24 GMT

Was this a roof crush fatality?

A California man driving a Ford Excursion on U.S. 6 just east of Ely, Nevada died Sunday in a single-vehicle rollover accident according to a story by NBC News 4.

Jay Wooten of Fairfield, California was driving his Ford Excursion with five other people in the vehicle, when he swerved to avoiding hitting an elk. According to Nevada Highway Patrol Trooper George Edwards, the Ford Excursion crossed both travel lanes and rolled over, killing Wooten. The five passengers in the Excursion were injured and taken to an area hospital. Four of them were children.

The news article did not mention if Mr. Wooten was wearing a seat belt, if he was ejected or if his fatal injury was due to the roof of the Ford Excursion caving in.

No one who is familiar with the Ford Excursion would be surprised at it rollover in a sudden defensive maneuver like Mr. Wooten apparently performed. We have been after Ford Motor Co., in a number of lawsuits, for the instability of their SUVs for some time. I doubt that Mr. Wooten's Excursion was equipped with any type of stability control to prevent rollover, which I am relatively certain would have prevented this accident from being a rollover and saved Mr. Wooten's life.

We are in the process of crash testing Ford Excursions to test their roof strength in rollover accidents. What we have discovered so far is frightening. Our testing shows that in a moderate rollover accident, the roof on the Excursion is so weak that it flattens like a pancake, leaving no survival space. It is very possible this is what happened to Mr. Wooten, the roof crushed in and killed him. Only an inspection of the vehicle by experts would tell us for sure, but I'd bet on it.

If you have been the victim of a rollover or roof crush (roof crushing in) accident and you need legal assistance contact me. If you are an attorney who needs restraint system test, crash test, stability test or roof crush test results, especially for Ford Motor products, contact me.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Ford Recall to Fix Fire Hazard

Christina Cole — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 10:19:28 GMT

Ford recalling 155,000 pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles.

Ford Motor Company is recalling 155,000 sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks which includes the following models: 2003 F-150, F-250, F-350, F-450 and F-550 Super Duty truck, the Ford Excursion SUV and the Lincoln Blackwood pickup.

The recall involves a defective cruise control switch that is potentially causing fires in older model Ford trucks.

In 2006, Ford recalled 5.8 million vehicles after detailed investigations by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) due to engine fires linked to the cruise control systems in their SUVs, vans and trucks.

The investigation concluded that brake fluid could leak through the cruise control's deactivation switch into electrical components and cause to corrosion which might lead to overheating and fire.
Ford officials now say an internal check discovered the same switch systems in some early 2003 trucks and SUVs.

To date, the NHTSA has received about 1,472 complaints regarding the problem, including 65 reports of fires. There have been no reports of death or injuries.

Ford will be mailing consumers notices by mail. The problem can be fixed at dealerships. Customers can contact Ford with further questions at 1-866-426-7332.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Christina Cole

GM recalls Saturn Outlook and GMC Acadia SUVs

IB Contributor — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:46:50 GMT

General Motors Corp., the world's largest auto maker, announced Friday that it is recalling most of its new 2007 Saturn Outlook and GMC Acadia sport utility vehicles because the vehicles' front air bags may fail to deploy in a crash, according to a Bloomberg News report.

The recall includes 13,032 of the SUVs built from August to this month, the automaker told the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. It doesn't include those built after Feb. 2, GM spokesman Alan Adler said today in an interview with the Bloomberg reporter.

GM officials have also said that computer controls for the air bags will be reprogrammed in a procedure that takes about 25 minutes and will be done at no cost to owners. The Detroit-based company began sending out letters to owners about the recall on Thursday, according to the article.

The problem mainly affects two of the so-called crossover SUVs that the automaker is relying on to help regain sales in the United States. Both models began U.S. sales in December, and the company sold 2,162 Acadias and 1,088 Outlooks through last month, according to Autodata Corp.

Most of those affected by the recall are still on dealer lots and will be fixed before they're sold, the article said. Crossovers combine a car-like ride with features of light trucks such as more interior space. GM is bringing out several such models as it seek to rebound from an 8.7 percent decline in U.S. sales of cars and light trucks last year.

"Good catch and good move GM!" Better to catch this defect before someone gets hurt and/or it costs millions more to reprogram tens of thousands of vehicles. It appears that GM did this own their own without a NHTSA forcing a volutary recall.

All though airbags save many lives and even more serious injuries, they also cause injuries when software does not perform properly. We recently reached a settlement for a women's children and husband, after she died due to a GM vehicle airbag failing to deploy after she hit a telephone pole at a modest speed.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Teen Age Driver Accidents

IB Contributor — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:45:36 GMT

How can we prevent the carnage?

Car accidents are the number one killer of teenagers in the United States. Promising and precious lives can be lost, or forever changed, when our teenagers take the wheel. Speeding while distracted seems to be more common among teenage drivers, and this behavior often results in permanent disfigurement, or even worse, a fatal car crash.

Consider the case of Rianna Woolsey. Rianna had everything to live for. She was 16 and on the varsity song squad at Tesoro High School. Today, she might have been in college if it hadn't been for the accident. Rianna was speeding along a major street in her Coto de Caza neighborhood when she lost control of her Volkswagen Jetta, crashed into a tree, and then died at the hospital a few hours later.

Ironically, Rianna was on her way to a song squad Christmas party when she lost control of her car. Could she have been distracted while talking on her cell phone? Or even worse, could she have been text messaging on her phone when she lost control? No one knows the answer, but a very promising life was extinguished that day in December of 2005. Now Rianna's MySpace site sits frozen in time, but her friends and family have continued to monitor the site where Rianna has received over 700 messages since her death from all over the country as memorial to this smiling and vibrant young lady.

Then there is Nikki Kunkle, a 16-year-old Campbell High School student from Atlanta, Georgia. "I remember it just being silent", Nikki said, about her near fatal traffic accident. Then Nikki remembered, "When we rolled, my window was shattered, and I realized that my arm had been severed". Nikki was a passenger in a car driver by a fellow student, who was speeding down the back road to the high school trying to avoid being late to class. Nikki just got her new prosthetic arm .

So what can we do?

I propose that we change our laws granting driving privileges to: 1) The minimum age of drivers to 17 for driving alone or with an adult over 25; 2) Minimum one year of being licensed or 21 before driving with anyone unless accompanied by an adult over 25; and 3) The adult over 25 be equally legally responsible as the driver for any "driving with a measurable amount of alcohol", excessive speeding or reckless driving violations and damages.

What are you suggestions as to what we can do to improve the driving safety record of our teenage drivers?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor

Law Suit Filed Over Teen's ATV Accident Death

IB Contributor — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 18:36:54 GMT

The parents of a 15-year-old girl, who was killed while riding an all-terrain vehicle on a Florida ranch, are suing the ranching family with a claim of wrongful death, according to a news report in the Orlando Sentinel.

Taylor Rae Bronson, also 15, was driving the ATV on the ranch on Nov. 29 when she lost control of the vehicle and her passenger, Analisa DelSonno, was thrown off the vehicle. Analisa died as a result of her injuries, the newspaper reported.

The suit, filed last week in circuit court in Kissimmee, Florida, asks for damages in excess of $15,000 as a result of the "negligence and carelessness of the defendants which resulted in the death of Analisa DelSonno."

Also, neither girl was wearing a helmet. The lawsuit claims that Robert Bronson was negligent because he failed to properly supervise his daughter as she was driving the ATV.

Incidents of serious injuries and fatalities are becoming all too common especially when it comes to children. It is my opinion that children and even teenagers should not be allowed to operate an all-terrain vehicle. If a teenager is not a licensed driver, he or she should not be able to drive a powerful vehicle that can travel at a high rate of speeds - sometimes over 70 mph.

Parents must remember that ATVs are not toys. They are powerful machines that must not be taken lightly. If your child is below 16 years of age and he or she must ride an ATV, they should not be able to do that without appropriate adult supervision. We have seen that accidents happen even when there is supervision.

We have represented numerous victims of ten driver accidents and we've found that drivers less than sixteen, who pilot motorized vehicles have a significantly higher risk of injury compared to experienced drivers, which is why a training course is an effective tool in preventing ATV-related injuries. Death, serious bodily injury, and property damage can all result from an ATV related accident.

If you or a loved one has been involved in a vehicle accident of any type, ATV, motorcycle, watercraft, automobile, bicycle, truck or aircraft, call me. We can help.

Although I do not condone young children piloting motor vehicles, here are some useful tips that I found on the Web site of Irvine-based ATV Safety Institute (www.atvsafety.org):

* Always wear a helmet and other protective gear.
* Never ride on public roads - another vehicle could hit you.
* Never ride under the influence of alcohol or other drugs
* Never carry a passenger on a single-rider vehicle
* Ride an ATV that's right for your age. The guidelines are:
a. Age 6 and older - Under 70cc
b. Age 12 and older - 70cc to 90cc
c. Age 16 and older - Over 90cc
* Supervise riders younger than 16; ATVs in untrained, inexperienced or competent hands is a recipe for disaster.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by IB Contributor