Archive

Posts Tagged ‘personal injury’

Broadside Accidents; T-Bone Accidents; and Side Impact Accidents

April 2nd, 2010 No comments

Broadside accident, T-Bone accident, and Side impact collision all refer to the scenario upon which the front of one vehicle impacts or collides with the driver side or passenger side of another vehicle.  Occupants experiencing a T-Bone collision are at higher risks of injury as the force impacting the broadsided vehicle are close in proximity to where the occupants are positioned.  As a result, occupants are subjected to tremendous force.  While many newer vehicles do employ side and side curtain airbags, older vehicles are not equipped with such technology.  Most T-Bone accidents occur at intersections and parking lots from the failure of drivers to obey traffic signals or yield to the right of way.  Occupants typically strike the inside frame of their vehicle and often strike other passengers traveling within the same vehicle.

Side impact accidents occurring at high rates of speed may cause a vehicle to overturn.  In roll-over accidents,  occupants who are seat-belted or restrained properly are subjected to a heightened risk of ejection.  Common injuries from Side impact collisions are: fatalities, wrongful death, pelvis fractures, hip dislocation, shoulder injuries, brain trauma, rib fractures, arm fractures, bleeding of the brain, leg fractures, spinal cord injuries, amputation, head trauma, lacerations from glass, close head injuries, broken ankles, fractured feet, and burns from the deployment of side airbags.

If you are a victim suffering injuries from the negligence of another driver in a T-Bone or side impact accident call Benson & Bingham at (702)-382-9797. We have helped thousands of injured T-Bone victims, ensuring each client receives proper medical attention and just compensation.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Head-on Collisions in Nevada

April 1st, 2010 No comments

A head-on collision occurs when two vehicles traveling towards each other in opposite directions collide; typically, when the front of two vehicles collide.  However, when a vehicle strikes that of a second vehicle in the frontal area of the second vehicle, and continues its impact along the side of that vehicle, this may also be considered a head-on collision.  Head on collisions are responsible for more traffic fatalities than any other type of motor vehicle accident.  Head on collisions are often the most violent motor vehicle accidents (MVA’s) occurring on our roadways in Nevada. Two vehicles approaching each other in excess of 45MPH creates such significant forces that the impact often leaves occupants with life changing catastrophic injuries if not death.

Many head on collisions occur on interstate and rural roads, especially  Interstates 15 and 215 in Southern Nevada, and State Route 80 in Northern Nevada.  However, head on collisions may also occur on surface streets from an unsafe lane change, falling asleep at the wheel, traveling the wrong way on interstate entry/exit ramps, blind bends in the road, disobeying traffic signals, and failure to maintain ones travel lane.

Ben Bingham of Benson & Bingham has the experience needed to litigate injuries commonly associated with head on collisions, including: wrongful death, fatalities, brain injuries and brain trauma, frontal lobe damage, bleeding in the brain, close head injuries, memory loss, pelvis fractures, hip fractures, spinal fractures, spinal cord injury, paralysis, loss of limbs, amputation, disabilities and emotional trauma. If you or a family member has been involved in a head on collision contact Benson & Bingham at (702)-382-9797.  Let an experienced team fight for you.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Dangers of Fireworks / Pyrotechnics and the Legal Ramifications of User Error

April 1st, 2010 No comments

Each year around Independence Day, injuries among children and adults rise significantly from fireworks.  While many stage events have fireworks / pyrotechnics throughout the year, “Fourth of July” celebrations typically kick off with a BBQ and fireworks.  Many of the injuries suffered from the explosives are often the result of user error. However, fireworks themselves can malfunction often resulting in severe burns.  Not only is the operator in danger of a malfunction, but also the spectators of the event.  Studies have shown that spectators account for up to 40% of reported firework injuries.  A scorching rocket darting into a crowd of onlookers can cause severe burns.  Last summer, close to ten-thousand people were treated for injuries associated with fireworks.  Those injuries are typically burns and lacerations, but also may include hearing loss or loss of sight.  The most common variety of firework causing injury are bottle-rockets, firecrackers, roman candles and sparklers.  Yes, sparklers!  Sparklers burn at 1,800 degrees and can throw sparks striking the eye and head.  It is also not understood by many that the average fuse time on a firework is only three-five seconds.

If you or a loved one has suffered a personal injury as a result of the negligence from an individual or company using fireworks or pyrotechnics, contact Benson & Bingham for a negligence consultation.  However, if you believe the firework itself malfunctioned, you may have a potential product liability case.  Contact Benson & Bingham at (702)-382-9797.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Elevator / Escalator Malfunction Possibly Caused Man’s Death at the Plaza Hotel Casino in Las Vegas

April 1st, 2010 No comments

Personal injury firm, Benson & Bingham has been contacted by the family of a man found in a pool of blood inside an elevator on the casino floor at the Plaza Hotel. While investigations of said matter are in their infant stages, there have been comments suggesting that the elevator may have experienced a power outage. The deceased is seen on video footage entering the elevator on the nineteenth floor. The next segment of footage displays the door opening at the casino floor with the same gentleman lying on the elevator floor suffering a broken neck, broken nose, and missing teeth. Upon being retained, Benson & Bingham shall immediately file a lawsuit and begin discovery in this wrongful death action. Of most concern is the video footage inside the elevator which has not been released.

The family contacted Benson & Bingham after having previously retained counsel who essentially did not preform any work over the past year (i.e. obtain video footage).  In elevator/escalator negligence or elevator/escalator malfunction cases, it is of utmost importance to obtain and preserve all of the evidence immediately to preserve the elevator or escalators condition, as well as being able to retain engineers to inspect the elevator or escalator to determine the malfunction. Further, many witnesses to an event in a casino are likely from out of town. Their statements may play a crucial role in determining what precipitated the events surrounding the event. While most elevator/escalator cases result in broken bones, spinal injuries, hip and/or leg fractures, this family suffered a loss of a husband and father.  As discovery unfolds in this matter and maintenance records are obtained with video footage, the truth will surface.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Passengers have More Insurance Coverage under 2009 Nevada Case Law*

April 1st, 2010 No comments

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 3rd party claim and a 1st 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 2nd car and the liability of the 1st 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 1st at fault driver, $15,000 against the 2nd car’s liability policy, and also $25,000 against he 1st 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.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Personal Injury Law Set to Change in Medical Mal-practice Cases.

March 27th, 2010 1 comment

Many states, such as Nevada, have imposed egregiously unfair limits on pain and suffering damages in Medical malpractice cases.  These cases often have horrible damages leaving the victims unfairly compensated for bad medicine.  Nevada currently has a cap of $350,000 for pain and suffering.   Two states in 2010 have now repealed their respective States’ laws on caps.  The first this year was Illinois and now Georgia (who has a cap similar to Nevada $350,000.)

These States’ Supreme Courts banned such limitation based on the Separation of Powers Doctrine Embodied in the US Constitution.  The crux of the argument is that the legislature can’t impose rules on those duties fundamentally outlined for the judiciary—here reducing verdicts.   The principle behind the Courts’ rulings is likely to be challenged.   Can a legislature make laws that affect the judiciary?  It really depends on your legal philosophy.  In some respects, it seems like a conflict of interest to have a Court decide whether they have the power over the legislature to interpret a law—in other respects, it does make sense that our Separation of Powers doctrine was implemented to serve the very issue of fairness over the legislature.  With the new health insurance reform, time will tell how this may impact our Medical mal-practice laws.  What do you think?

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Driving While Using a Cell Phone: Serious Negligence. Should We Also Punish the Employer?

February 15th, 2010 1 comment



Car Accidents can be avoided if everyone uses proper care.  The problem is that we are human and we err.  Often we go beyond just making careless mistakes, but do things that personal injury attorneys love:  reckless behavior.    So what is the difference between reckless behavior and negligent?  Under definition, negligence equates to just breaching a duty owed—in essence being stupid:  day dreaming through a red light, grabbing that spilling coffee as you hit the yellow light that turned red, simply missing the big red stop sign, or playing with the radio as you crash into the rear end of the family wagon on the highway.  These are the mistakes we make as drivers.  The problem is when we do the next level of culpability: encountering a dangerous situation that you know to be dangerous, and do it anyway—that is recklessness.  This is a very fine line to adjudicate.  Is it reckless to drive a car after you have been drinking—many think so.  In fact, public policy finds that we want to discourage this behavior so much we will assign punishing damages to those persons.  Elements of punitive damages are designed to punish drivers or their employers for conduct that is “reprehensible.”

We find it reprehensible to get intoxicated and drive a deadly weapon.  We find it reprehensible to shoot a gun into a crowd thinking we will miss.  We find it reprehensible for a truck driver to do crystal methamphetamine and drive for 48 hours straight, or for airline pilot to cockpit the airplane after a few beers.  So, the question begs:  is it reprehensible to drive a vehicle using a cell phone?  We know it is dangerous.  We know it is distracting, but yet most of us do it.  Cell phones while driving cause deaths.   In California last year, the engineer on a train was “texting” on his cell phone when the train collided with another.  Reprehensible?  Yes.   What do you think?

Employers also must be careful not to condone or encourage cell phone use for its employees on the road.   The consequences are dire.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Aggravation of a Pre-existing Medical Condition in the Context of Personal Injury

September 8th, 2009 No comments

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.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Commercial and Public Vehicle Safety in NV: Slow Down

September 7th, 2009 No comments

Traveling on any of the freeways in Las Vegas (I15, 215, 95, summerlin parkway) one finds themselves surrounded by semi trucks or commercial vehicles.  This scenario is dangerous enough without the element of speed.  Commercial and Public Transportation vehicles are to be held to a higher standard than that of private party drivers and need to drive responsibly.  A basic speed law exists so no person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonably or prudent, having due regard for weather, traffic, visibility, and the surface condition.

In no event should an individual travel at a speed which endangers the safety of others.  Semi trucks are extremely heavy and do not stop in tight situations.  When a thirty thousand pound tractor trailer impacts a private party vehicle fatalities or life changing injuries often occur.  Benson & Bingham has represented individuals and families who have requested aggressive counsel to pursue negligent commercial drivers for speeding. If you have questions concerning speeding commercial drivers contact the accident attorneys of Benson & Bingham now at 702-382-9797.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Bicycle Enthusiasts Have Rights to the Road in Nevada

September 6th, 2009 No comments

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.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS