Las Vegas Injury & Accident Attorney Blog

Walking your dog without a leash, even in a park, is negligent. While dog bites often occur due to the owner not properly maintaining their dogs (i.e. Not closing a gate or restraining the animal upon opening a door) more than half of reported animal attacks can be avoided if animal owners would simply place their dog on a leash. The common statement by dog owners, “my dog doesn’t bite” is disturbing. Dogs are animals and have instincts that most owners are not aware. They may become protective or aggressive without notice. Every dog has teeth and every dog is capable of attacking without provocation. Children are often victims of dog bites while out playing in the neighborhood. Aggressive dogs are attracted to bicycles, skateboards and loud children playing.

Personal injuries suffered from dog bite cases often result in stitches, scarring, muscle damage, neurological damage and extreme distress for fear of animals.  If you or a loved one has been attacked and bitten by a dog, contact Benson & Bingham at 702-382-9797.

In certain circumstances*, Passengers in automobile accidents will have more insurance coverage available to them.   Those passengers who are in a vehicle that is “also” at fault in an accident (what we call joint tort feasers) or multiple at-fault drivers can now maintain a 3^rd party claim and a 1^st party claim against the same insurance policy in a single accident.  This is new law and good news for passengers who, before, could only go after liability OR underinsurance coverage on the same policy.   For example, in a two car accident involving a passenger who broke her arm requiring surgery she would not be limited to just the liability coverage of the driver of her car and the other at fault car, she could also make a claim for “underinsurance” against the Driver of her car; thus, she would have a potential breach of contract claim if they didn’t offer her a reasonable sum over and above the two other liability policies (in an addition to negligence actions).  This example, of course, assumes BOTH drivers were at fault for the accident.

This changes the old policy that would only enable an accident victim to recover against the liability policy of the 2^nd car and the liability of the 1^st car.   No UIM/UM claim could be made.   The Nevada Supreme Court made this distinction in Delgado v American Family Insurance Group, 217 P.3d 563, (2009) where a passenger was allowed to make a claim against the $50,000 policy of the 1^st at fault driver, $15,000 against the 2^nd car’s liability policy, and also $25,000 against he 1^st car (the car she was a passenger in) for the underinsurance benefits.  Thus, the $25,000 claim is now allowed under Nevada Law.  If you were a passenger and need an experience Las Vegas personal injury lawyer call the experts at Benson & Bingham.

Recall for Toyota one of Auto Industry's Largest Recalls Ever

Have you been affected by the Toyota Motor Recall?  Toyota’s apologies come a little late given the enormous consequences that will forever plague this troubled company.   Everyday more information is leaked about the issues of Toyota recalls and Toyota accidents, and the real problem inside the computer systems causing rapid, unexpected acceleration is still a mystery.  Often the brakes do not help overcome the forward movement.  From floor mats, to steel pedal friction issues, to accelerator module problems Toyota has a myriad of unreasonably dangerous issues.  Benson & Bingham is spearheading its own litigation for the victims of this horrible tragedy.  If you need a Toyota Attorney to fight for your rights call Benson & Bingham.

Vehicles

2005-2010 Toyota Avalon

2007-2010 Toyota Camry

2009-2010 Toyota Corolla

2008-2010 Toyota Highlander

2009-2010 Toyota Matrix

2004-2009 Toyota Prius

2005-2010 Toyota Tacoma

2007-2010 Toyota Tundra

2009-2010 Toyota VENZA

Alleged Accelerator Problems

2009-2010 Toyota RAV4

2009-2010 Toyota Corolla

2009-2010 Toyota Matrix

2005-2010 Toyota Avalon

2007-2010 Toyota Camry

2010 Toyota Highlander

2007-2010 Toyota Tundra

2008-2010 Toyota Sequoia

What to Do if your Toyota or Lexus Rapidly accelerates?

Toyota Vehicles can rapidly accelerate without depressing the gas pedal.  If your vehicle does rapidly accelerate, attempt to use the brake to overcome the forward movement, and quickly shift the vehicle into neutral.  It appears this is the only way to stop the car.  Most cars will stop with brake use, however, these cars will not as they are electronically controlled.  Don’t worry about the engine revving as the engines are electronically controlled to not over revolutionize.  Do not turn of the car or pull the keys out or you might lose the steering wheel function.  Once the vehicle drifts to a safe stop, you may take the keys out.  Remember to stay calm as smart drivers will remain calm is a stressful moment—it just may save your life!

What did Toyota Know and When Did they know?

Toyota Motors is now under the gun for what they didn’t do.   The television is blasting with new ads creating this “we are on our problem and its fixed” theme in the wake of a serious image problem created by horrific car accidents with Toyota vehicles suddenly accelerating for no apparent reason.   As if a phantom is controlling the vehicle, the cars act by themselves, and what’s worse is that the driver has no control in stopping.  This issue is by no means new to Toyota and their upper management.  Toyota USA is now defending their response to the fatal crashes indicating their recalls and fixes were appropriate.  The problem appears to have been much greater than Toyota is acknowledging.  The internal reports of accidents from dealerships and the NTSB have likely showed a trend of accidents going back many years, and they have kept this a giant secret.  To avoid the catastrophe that has emerged anyway, Toyota tried to save money by not publicly addressing the lethal problems plaguing the now recalled models.  Investigations will reveal the internal notes, tests, and history of accidents that they sat on without notifying the public of the true danger.  This nightmare is just beginning for Toyota, as it appears it did not do the right thing.  Instead, they did the wrong thing by internalizing and ignoring the public safety issue.  Corporate Criminal Charges are likely as this reckless behavior has serious legal consequences.  If you or a loved one has been affected by an out of control Toyota call the Toyota victims rights attorneys at Benson & Bingham.

Toyota Motor Testifies before Congress regarding the serious malfunctions of its products and the major recall.

Of importance is the brake pedal assembly, the computer system controlling acceleration, and the response of the company in the wake of the mounting evidence of problems including Toyota Crashes, Fatal Toyota accidents, and Toyota recall.   As of February 23, 2010, The President of Toyota will be testifying before members of Congress to address the serious issues of their products.

Search Terms:

Clark County Toyota Attorney, Nevada Personal Injury attorney, Las Vegas Toyota Attorney, Toyota Lawyer-Toyota Crash Lawyer, Toyota Crash Attorney, Nevada Toyota Lawyer, Personal injury lawyer Nevada Toyota, Lexus Personal injury lawyer, Toyota Personal injury lawyer, Las Vegas Toyota Attorney, Wrongful death Toyota lawyer

In 2009, 243 people died on Nevada roads according to the state traffic safety director–81 fewer deaths than in 2008.  Nevada State authorities attribute the lower accident related deaths to better law enforcement and more laws to enforce.   While certainly this may be the only thing that can be actually analyzed in a quantifiable measure, the drop and continued drop of deaths likely has many other factors besides new laws.   Nevada deaths peaked with 431 total deaths in 2006—up from 381 deaths in 2002—a sea saw of statistics.  The State’s rationale can’t be correct.  In all likelihood, we had more traffic laws legislated from 2002 to 2006 yet we had an increase of deaths; so how does one truly explain the numbers?  You can’t.   Here is why.

The other factors that must be considered are:  population increases/decreases, population of drivers increasing, types of cars driven from 2002 to 2009 (SUV’s, airbag equipped vehicles, etc.), the economy (causing less total drivers on the road), the number of new freeways e.g. I-215 (adding to less traffic collisions as a percentage of total cars-less risks as no center dividers and cross traffic issues), etc.  Nevada still has not implemented laws prohibiting people from texting while driving, nor have they implemented laws to stop cell phone use while driving —yet we have an increase of both of those activities, yet a drop in deaths; in addition, our speeding has increased.  Most speed limits are now 65 mph with highway speeds allowing for 75 mph in certain rural areas.  In California, the death rate dropped when they increased the speed limits in 1998 when compared to 2002 when they calculated an increase from 55 to 65 mph with more drivers on the road—confused?  You should be.  What is really saving lives?  More laws?  Not likely.  Who really knows except to think car safety has improved dramatically—and a little luck.  Perhaps we are just luckier this year.   If next year traffic deaths increase what will we say caused it?

When purchasing insurance coverage for your motorcycle ALL riders are encouraged to purchase Medical Payments. Further, each rider should purchase the maximum limits for which their insurance company offers. Most insurance companies limit Med Pay coverage to twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) for motorcycles. Many riders are not familiar with medical payments coverage and how such coverage benefits them in the event of and accident. However, the concept of Med Pay Coverage is simple. If you are involved in a motorcycle accident and have Med Pay Coverage of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) then your insurance carrier will pay up to ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) of your medical bills related to the accident. Even if you have health insurance, most health insurance policies require the insured to make co-payments.

To pay these co-payments you can have your Med Pay provider (Auto Policy) directly send you the ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) to pay your co-payment. Further if you do not have health insurance, again your Med Pay policy will pay up to your limits. More importantly, Medical Payments coverage is a “no-fault” policy. Thus when coverage is triggered, your insurance carrier cannot raise you rates or drop you from coverage. In the event of a single vehicle motorcycle accident the insured is still covered. So next time you talk to your motorcycle insurance agent ask about Medical Payments Coverage.

Two principle fundamentals in a winning a civil case are: 1. Having good facts, and 2. Having someone who can deliver those facts with an eloquent presentation in a logical and simple manner.  When someone claims they “have a great case”, that usually equates to ” I have great facts.”   And great facts are the key to a winning case.  If you have bad facts, then a good lawyer will argue the good law with hopes that the law is stronger than the less than favorable facts.

The perfect lawyer is hard to find, and likely, there is not one out there;  there are lawyers who attempt to be perfect however.  The undefeated lawyer is one who either does not take chances in life, has an ego problem, or is simply just too scared to lose;  quite frankly, I would notwant that undefeated lawyer anyway because he only takes cases with excellent facts which makes his job much easier.  Most often in law, I have found that persons in the greatest need of a good lawyer are those persons with decent or poor facts.  Facts are those things that occur in an incident, or items that can be inferred by logical deduction or human conclusion.

For example, if two cars collide in an intersection and both drivers claim they had a green light; there are no eye-witnesses, and both think the other ran a red light.  If both suffer injury, how does one prove either part was at fault for the vehicle accident?  It’s tough.  Under Nevada law, this scenario would likely end in a 50/50 jury verdict, as neither party could prove who did what.  Of course this analogy draws the inference that everything was equal in the facts:  that both drivers were equally credible, that neither driver had a criminal record involving deceit, the traffic light patterns did not indicate who may have been at fault, that skid marks did not play a role, that neither party was under the influence or intoxicated, that perception reaction time could not be calculated, that the visual perception of each driver was unobstructed, that neither driver was on his cell phone, that each driver was not in a hurry, etc, etc.

The point should be clear that one who is given simple, yet unconvincing facts, must do a proper investigation, be creative in his assumptions, and deliver those points effectively.  Good Facts and Good Lawyering are keys to success in a personal injury matter.

Nevada Personal Injury Attorneys should be aware of laws that will affect all automobiles, motorcycles, and bikes next year.

You can Pass on the Right!

Vehicles may now pass on the right—what?  That is correct, vehicles traveling may pass another vehicle on the right side of the road!  The caveat here is that obviously no parked cars must be in the way, and the pavement must be unobstructed.  Other terms of this law include no passing if there is a private driveway or intersection, and the passer must do so within 200 feet.

Accident Law

Tow trucks must use their amber lights when at an accident scene, and drivers must use caution around such lights.

Environmental Boost

First, in Assembly bill 163 Electric cars get a boost from the wave of green thinking.  This bill allows jurisdictions to enact laws allowing use of green vehicles to use a designated multi-passenger lane the HOV lane or car pool lane. This includes L.E.V.’s (Low Emission Vehicles) and golf carts.

Bikes need to Signal!

Also, AB 247 mandates bicycles must signal to turn unless they are in a turn lane.

Slow Down In Red Rock!

Finally, Red Rock National Conservatory and state route 159 traffic speeds will be reduced to accommodate the visitors to the area (e.g. make it safer for all those bicyclists who do the Red Rock Loop.)

If you have been cited for a traffic violation and need a ticket attorney, contact 24 Hour Ticket Power, Las Vegas’ Only 100% online ticket fighter!

Tort Law is very specific on the types of damages a victim can recover for.   Most, if not all, humans have some type of pre-existing medical condition that may have the appearance of being related to a recent trauma.   In the context of the personal injury, the typical accident case involves disruption of the spinal cord or related body parts.  The obvious problem is that most adults have some type of “degeneration” in the spine via the vertebra or discs that show up on MRI or other film.  Disc protrusions can happen for a myriad of reasons.   Knee injuries can also occur to “old football” injuries or other falls not relating to the current traumatic car accident.

This “aggravation of a preexisting condition” is to be considered by the jury as a question of fact.  Nevada civil jury instructions lay out the law as it relates to old and new injuries.  Anything old is not compensable, however, anything new is.   So, a jury must consider all the facts of the new injuries or aggravation and put a value on it.   Benson and Bingham understands your new complaints, and can help prove that damage does relate to the immediate trauma.

Over the course of the past ten years bicycle riders in Las Vegas have seemed to multiply exponentially. To accommodate the growing recreation many surface streets have bicycle lanes (i.e. Charleston Boulevard). However most motorists are unaware that bicyclists have the same rights to the road as a motor vehicle. To that extent it is important cyclists keep aware of their environment to ensure safe interaction between them and the motorists.

Here are a few simple reminders to keep everyone safe: Cyclist should only ride on the right side of the road and stay to the furthest point right as possible, obey all traffic signals and use proper hand signals. While motorists must yield to cyclist as they would for motorized vehicles, and motorists may not park or drive in a designated bicycle lane. All parties must pay particular attention to children as they may not follow traffic rules and require additional consideration. Following these guidelines will help avoid many cycle or auto accidents, and improve the enjoyment and safety for all riders.

The concerted acts of multiple defendants create liability amongst each defendant.  The issue becomes the amount of damages each must pay as a result of the negligence they each caused.  Under Nevada Law, joint tortfeasers are liable 100% if they are liable for 1% of the damages.

What this means in layman’s terms is simply that if a victim is injured as a result of multiple causes (e.g. more than one at fault party:  two rifle shots, two cars crashing, etc.) the law will not distinguish who must pay the victim as the victim may recover all damages from either party.  Thus, a deep insurance pocket or business entity may be on the hook for the whole amount of the damages depending on a jury’s determination of any fault.  So, if a jury determines the concerted efforts of multiple parties contributed to an accident, the Plaintiff need only prove either party did something wrong.  This equates to getting 100% of the damages.

NRS 41.141 When comparative negligence not bar to recovery; jury instructions; liability of multiple defendants.

1.  In any action to recover damages for death or injury to persons or for injury to property in which comparative negligence is asserted as a defense, the comparative negligence of the plaintiff or his decedent does not bar a recovery if that negligence was not greater than the negligence or gross negligence of the parties to the action against whom recovery is sought.

2.  In those cases, the judge shall instruct the jury that:

(a) The plaintiff may not recover if his comparative negligence or that of his decedent is greater than the negligence of the defendant or the combined negligence of multiple defendants.

(b) If the jury determines the plaintiff is entitled to recover, it shall return:

(1) By general verdict the total amount of damages the plaintiff would be entitled to recover without regard to his comparative negligence; and

(2) A special verdict indicating the percentage of negligence attributable to each party remaining in the action.

3.  If a defendant in such an action settles with the plaintiff before the entry of judgment, the comparative negligence of that defendant and the amount of the settlement must not thereafter be admitted into evidence nor considered by the jury. The judge shall deduct the amount of the settlement from the net sum otherwise recoverable by the plaintiff pursuant to the general and special verdicts.

4.  Where recovery is allowed against more than one defendant in such an action, except as otherwise provided in subsection 5, each defendant is severally liable to the plaintiff only for that portion of the judgment which represents the percentage of negligence attributable to him.

5.  This section does not affect the joint and several liability, if any, of the defendants in an action based upon:

(a) Strict liability;

(b) An intentional tort;

(c) The emission, disposal or spillage of a toxic or hazardous substance;

(d) The concerted acts of the defendants; or

(e) An injury to any person or property resulting from a product which is manufactured, distributed, sold or used in this State.

6.  As used in this section:

(a) “Concerted acts of the defendants” does not include negligent acts committed by providers of health care while working together to provide treatment to a patient.

(b) “Provider of health care” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 629.031.

(Added to NRS by 1973, 1722; A 1979, 1356; 1987, 1697; 1989, 72)