Diagnosing Errors

When a safety disaster occurs and worker are hurt or killed, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) can issue fines and citations against the company. Unfortunately, these fines have statutory caps and are often too low to really make a substantial impact on deterring companies from engaging in dangerous behaviors.

Employers also can’t generally be sued by workers, as workers are relegated by law to making a workers’ compensation claim only instead of filing a civil lawsuit against a negligent company employing them. With limited fines and virtually no risk of lawsuit, there is little to deter companies from taking a gamble they can get away with unsafe behavior. 

One powerful way to force companies to be better with safety would be to hold CEOs and other corporate executives personally responsible in certain situations where there is an egregious lack of effort to prevent disaster. Safety News Alert, however, reports executives are very rarely held accountable because OSHA and other government authorities are lacking in legal tools they need.

OSHA Lacking in Legal Tools To Hold Executives Accountable

The problem with insufficient legal tools to hold executives accountable was pointed out in a report from Senator Elizabeth Warren’s office. The report was called Rigged Justice: How Weak Enforcement Lets Corporate Offenders Off Easy. It listed 20 different criminal and civil cases which occurred over the course of recent years in which both government regulators and prosecutors failed to hold executives accountable for egregious safety issues.

Read more…

O’Malley & Langan
9 North Main Street
Pittston, PA 18640
p. 570-883-1321

A DWI charge is serious, but not as serious as being accused of causing an accident while driving under the influence. If you are accused of causing a collision while driving drunk, you can expect to face much more serious criminal charges with much harsher penalties.  Raising a vigorous DWI defense is absolutely essential when accused of an accident. In such cases, you can argue there is insufficient evidence of intoxication and/or insufficient evidence to prove your actions were actually the cause of the collision and any resulting injuries or deaths.

Unfortunately, it can sometimes be a challenge to successfully prove your actions were not the cause of an accident.  In one recent instance, for example, a driver who was allegedly drunk ended up being convicted of 10 different charges in connection with a DWI accident which left a police officer dead.  The problem is, the driver in this case was not actually the motorist who struck the police officer. As Pix11 reports, the prosecution of this driver marked the first time an allegedly impaired motorist was charged with manslaughter offenses in an incident where he wasn’t operating his vehicle at the time the death happened.

DWI Charges for An Accidental Death When Not Driving

The driver in this particular case reportedly had a blood alcohol concentration of .13 to 14 and got into his car upon leaving a night club.  He reportedly hit a BMW and disabled the steering on the BMW, then continued on the expressway before stopping short prior to an exit and causing an off-duty police officer to hit the brakes and suffer bone fractures. The allegedly impaired driver subsequently came to a stop with his vehicle on the HOV lane of the expressway.

A police officer responded to the scene and was securing the collision scene when an SUV approached. The SUV driver reportedly slow down his own vehicle, but not enough and did not see the police officer who was securing the crash scene. The driver of the SUV struck the police officer and killed the officer. The driver who actually hit and killed the officer, however, didn’t end up getting charged with any crime. In fact, he was given immunity in exchange for agreeing to testify against the person who was reportedly drunk but whose vehicle was at rest in the HOV lane at the time the officer was killed.

Read more…

Joseph LaBella & Associates
333 Simonton, Suite 200
Conroe, TX 77301

1-800-395-5951

Chapter 13 bankruptcy is one of the best options for many people who have found themselves struggling with debts. If the money you are paying to your bills is not actually bringing down balances because all of the money is going to interest, Chapter 13 may be the way to get out of the financial mess you are in.  Filing for bankruptcy protection is also even more important if you find yourself in a situation where your wages are being garnished or where you are being subject to abusive debt collection practices.

There are laws in place which are supposed to protect debtors from abusive debt collection efforts and from wage garnishments which take so much of their income they cannot afford to pay their basic bills. Unfortunately, Human Rights Watch warns courts are not really doing their jobs to protect people who have gotten badly into debt.

How Courts are Failing to Protect Debtors- And Why Bankruptcy May be the Answer

According to a recent report released by Human Rights Watch, courts are failing to protect families who have been caught up in debt buyer lawsuits. HRW has reported some families are bringing home almost none of their paychecks after debt garnishment orders are issued, which leaves them unable to provide basic necessities for their kids and unable to pay the electricity and light bills.

The problem for many families stars when debt buyers pay pennies on the dollar to purchase old debts. The debt buyers then file “hundreds of thousands of lawsuits each year.” The debt buyers sue and debtors may not be aware they are being sued or may not be able to get legal representation to help them.

Read more…

Matthew & Megna LLC
3406 West Avenue
Columbia, SC 29203
Phone 803-799-1700
Fax 803-352-3678

A grocery store shooting has resulted in a lawsuit initiated by the estate one of the victims killed in the shooting incident. The incident took place two years ago, and the family of the deceased and the grocery store have been involved in negotiations to try to resolve the case outside of court. No resolution was reached, and the estate of the victim is now the plaintiff in a wrongful death suit, with the goal of recovering compensation for the sons of the man who was killed.

Negligent Security Case Claims Grocery Store Failed in Its Responsibilities

According to the South Bend Tribune, the lawsuit brought against the grocery chain claims the grocery store had failed to take appropriate steps to prepare for a potential shooting and to respond appropriately in the event of an attack.

The shooting involved a 22-year-old who opened fire in the store. The attack went on for six minutes. The attacked had a .40 caliber handgun. He reportedly wandered the aisles of the grocery store for approximately 30 minutes before actually pulling the gun and beginning to shoot. He attracted the attention of an unarmed security guard as he was wandering the aisles, but the guard was not able to do anything. Evidence indicates the shooter had created a plan to kill himself but wanted to hurt others in the process.

Read more…

Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
3098 Breckinridge Blvd.
Duluth, Georgia 30096
Phone: 770-934-8000
Fax: 770-934-1631

Big organizations frequently make safety mistakes, sometimes making the same errors multiple times. This is true even when the outcomes are disastrous, such as an employee being killed or injured and a workers’ compensation claim being made for disability or death benefits. Recently, Safety News Alert published information on research providing new insight as to why safety errors repeatedly occur, even when companies should know better.

A Focus on Both Safety & Profitability Isn’t Possible

The study into why safety errors keep happening was conducted by the McCombs School of Business, which is the business school of the University of Texas at Austin. Researchers found companies make repeated mistakes because they go through cycles called “organizational oscillation.”

This research contradicted earlier data, which suggests companies either learn from their mistakes or fail to learn from their mistakes. If companies go through periods of organizational oscillation, they neither learn nor fail to learn from past problems. Instead, they go through cycles or learning and then of forgetting.

In the immediate aftermath of a serious mistake or a disaster, the company ends up being pushed forwards a focus on safety. Media, lobbyists groups, and government regulation can also cause companies to become more safety-focused, even if an accident does not occur.  However, a major catalyst like an employee getting badly hurt is usually a driving force leading companies to be dedicated to improving safety.

Read more…

The Law Offices of Deborah G. Kohl
191 Bedford St
Fall River, MA 02720
Phone: 508-677-4900

Truck accidents are often more serious than collisions which involve only passenger vehicles. Victims are more likely to sustain grave injuries or be killed in truck accidents. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety indicates around 70 percent of the victims who die in fatal truck accidents aren’t in the truck but are instead pedestrians, motorcyclists, bikers, or occupants of other cars on the road.  Victims who get hurt in truck accidents need to understand what their rights are and how truck accident cases differ from many other types of car accident injury claims.

Federal Rules Make Truck Accident Cases Different

One of the most fundamental things truck accident victims need to understand is how federal regulations, called Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) affect their truck accident claim.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations affect their claims, first and foremost, by guaranteeing there is much more insurance coverage available to pay for losses and damages than there would be in a typical car accident case involving two cars only. In Texas, drivers of passenger vehicles have to buy $30,000 per person and $60,000 per accident in liability coverage. This means if a driver causes a collision and three people get hurt, each person could get up to $30,000 but the total amount which would be paid out to all three victims by the insurance would not exceed $60,000.

In truck accident cases, however, there is much more coverage available. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulation no. 387.9 requires at least $750,000 in liability insurance coverage be carried for most typical commercial trucks. If there is a truck which transports hazardous materials, the minimum liability coverage limits could be $5 million.

Read more…

The Law Offices of Gene Hagood
1520 E. Highway 6
Alvin, TX 77511
(281) 331-5757

When two sisters died in an accident with a tractor trailer, the parents of the girls formed a safety advocacy organization called AnnaLeaha and Mary for Truck Safety. The organization was founded because the deadly truck accident with the girls could have been prevented. The parents believe the truck driver had been on the road for too long, and that underride guards could have saved the lives of their kids. Underride guards stop vehicles from sliding underneath trucks when an accident happens. The car the girls were in went under the truck when the tractor-trailer hit their vehicle.

Underride accidents are disproportionately deadly. Rules to impose stricter standards for underride guards could make a big impact in reducing fatal truck accidents. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has been urging stricter rules on underride protection equipment for more than a decade.  However, it was not until December of 2015- well after the death of the two sisters- that action was taken. Finally, in December of 2015, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration put forth a Notice of Proposed Rule Making. There is still a long process until the new rule becomes law, if it ever does.

Regulators are Not Doing Enough to Prevent Truck Accidents

AnnaLeaha and Mary for Truck Safety is one of many advocacy groups which believes federal regulators are not doing enough to prevent truck accidents or to prevent other types of collisions from occurring.  Consumer Affairs indicated that safety advocates have long been lamenting the lack of progress by National Transportation Safety Administration and other federal regulators. Advocates complain that NHTSA has just two percent of the budget from the Department of Transportation. Further, while DOT has been “celebrating” and congratulating itself for its safety efforts, an estimated two million Americans have died in car accidents since DOT took over on overseeing federal highway safety efforts.

Read more…

Law Offices of Michael J. Gopin, PLLC
10516 Montwood
El Paso, TX 79935
Phone: (915) 532-1111
Fax: (915) 633-8383

Truck accidents are a very real danger on roads throughout the United States, with National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reporting 330,000 trucks were involved in 2012 collisions. Almost 4,000 people died in 2012 truck crashes, and 104,000 people got hurt.

Because West Virginia truck accidents are so common, it would seem any rules or regulations passed by the federal government would be aimed at bringing down the rate of deadly accidents. Unfortunately, this is not the trend which is occurring. In fact, recent actions taken by federal law makers seem to be going in the opposite direction and making the roads less safe.

Are Federal Lawmakers Undermining Truck Safety Rules?

One successful effort on the part of federal lawmakers to undermine truck safety rules came in the December 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act. This Act was a piece of budget legislation aimed at keeping the government funded and open. Although it had virtually nothing to do with trucking regulations, there was a provision stuck into it which forced the suspension of a Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulation (FMCSR) related to hours-on-duty.

The Act ended up suspending a rule which had been put in place related to a 34-hour rest break for truckers who had driven 60 hours over a week or 70 hours over eight days. FMCSRs stipulated a 34-hour rest break in these situations, with two periods of the rest break taking place between 1:00 AM and 5:00 AM.  Trucking industry groups had objected to this because they didn’t want to have to be on the roads during the day and industry groups even challenged the regulation in court and lost. Federal lawmakers, however, caved to those who wanted the rest break rules thrown out and included the provision suspending them in the must-pass budget legislation.

Read more…

Klie Law Offices
85 West Main Street
Buckhannon, WV 26201
Toll Free: (866) 408-9059
Local: (304) 472-5007
Fax: (304) 472-1126