|
|
|
Personal Injury
|
Medical Malpractice
|
40 Lawyers with Offices in New York City,
Garden City, Suffolk County and New Jersey
|
|
SPBMC Newsletter � Spring 2013
|
Latest News
 | | Breezy Point homes on fire during Superstorm Sandy |
Breezy Point LIPA Litigation
Sullivan Papain has filed dozens of Notices of Claim against the Long Island Power Authority, the utility providing the Breezy Point and Belle Harbor neighborhoods of Queens with electricity.
The firm's clients charge LIPA with negligence in its management of the electrical system during Superstorm Sandy. Although a mandatory evacuation was in place for the Rockaway Peninsula and LIPA knew that its electrical systems there faced 11 feet or more of ocean storm surge, LIPA failed to "de-energize" its operations. When saltwater came into contact with the LIPA system, short circuits started fires that burned down more than 130 homes. LIPA failed to heed utility industry protocol that calls for shutting down power in the face of a severe flood. The purpose of this procedure is to protect property from fires.
Consolidated Edison protected Manhattan, as well as Coney Island, Brighton Beach and Sheepshead Bay, just to the north of Breezy Point, by cutting off power before Sandy. LIPA even cut power to Fire Island to the east, anticipating fire hazards and the fact that floods would prevent effective firefighting responses, but failed to do so on the Rockaway Peninsula.
Good Day New York interviewed senior partner, Nicholas Papain and Breezy Point resident, Linda Strong about the litigation. Watch here.
|
|
Recent Results Achieved for Our Clients
$11.5 Million for pedestrian on a park path struck down by a large dead tree limb that fell some 30 feet; resulting in severe brain injury and spinal cord damage with incomplete paraplegia - ASIA-C classification and multiple fractures of the spine and skull, requiring numerous surgical procedures, extensive hospitalization and ongoing rehabilitation. It was claimed that the tree limb should have been removed long before the accident because of its hazardous condition.
$11.25 Million for a child who was the victim of medical malpractice when a hospital did not properly diagnose and remove her spinal abscess. The abscess compressed her spinal cord causing her to become a paraplegic. The hospital doctors disregarded all of the early warning signs of her spinal condition and also misread her MRI.
$5.875 Million for elevator car passenger, whose leg and arm were crushed when the car ascended with its doors still open. It was claimed that a mechanic had improperly bypassed a safety interlock which allowed the elevator to ascend with the doors still open.
$3.35 Million for a 56 year-old woman who suffered a 15-month delay in the diagnosis of a rare soft-tissue cancer. Her dermatologist never performed a biopsy or other diagnostic tests on the lump on her thigh. She then went to a plastic surgeon who improperly tried to remove the cancerous tumor with an unsafe procedure, which resulted in the contamination of her thigh with cancer cells. The delay in diagnosis and improper surgical procedure caused her cancer to grow and spread.
$2.6 Million for the failure to timely diagnose bladder cancer in a man in his early 60s, resulting in its spread and metastasis throughout the body, depriving him of a reasonable chance of cure from his cancer.
$2.4 Million for a 67 year-old female, who underwent a routine colonoscopy and sustained a perforation of the colon. The perforation went undiagnosed until three days after the procedure, during which time she developed peritonitis. Thereafter, the plaintiff required an emergency laparotomy to repair the perforation, colostomy and numerous surgeries to repair small bowel obstructions.
$2 Million for a 74 year-old male in good health who underwent elective surgery to remove his gallbladder. It was claimed that the procedure was negligently performed in that the plaintiff suffered an occlusion of the common bile duct, which went undiagnosed until one month after surgery.
$1.575 Million for the conscious pain and suffering and wrongful death of an 18 year-old rear seat passenger in a motor vehicle that was involved in an intersection collision with a Mack truck. The young man died as a result of the sequellae and complications of a severe traumatic closed head injury suffered in the accident.
$1.12 Million for the conscious pain and suffering and wrongful death of a 57 year-old construction worker struck and killed by a truck that was backing up. It was claimed that defendants, including the general contractor, failed to implement an appropriate traffic control program.
*Prior results cannot and do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter.
|
|
Social Media and Litigation
by Frank V. Floriani
If you are currently involved in or are contemplating litigation, be careful what you put on your Facebook page (and other social media sites). Your photos and comments can come back to haunt you. If you were involved in an accident and have brought a lawsuit, typically you must give testimony under oath (meaning your testimony is subject to the laws regarding perjury) at a pre-trial deposition. An astute defense lawyer can take out your Facebook postings and try to make it look like you can do the things you claim you are limited in doing or can't do at all. They may not in fact be harmful to your case but, if your lawyer did not check your postings before your deposition, you may be caught off guard at the deposition and you may end up testifying to something which can hurt your case. Your lawyer should have asked you when you retained him or her whether you had in fact posted anything on social media (which is what I do) so you could have handled the situation differently. If your lawyer knows about it ahead of time he or she usually can handle it. Read the rest of the article here. For more information about our litigation practice, click here. |
|
 Reading the Signs of What a Baby is Telling You In-Utero Can Prevent Babies Born with Brain Damage
by Elizabeth Montesano
Did you know that a baby can give you vital information on how it is doing in-utero?
Electronic fetal heart monitoring is a way doctors check on a baby's health before it is even born. This type of monitoring is done during pregnancy, labor and delivery to keep track of the heart rate of a baby, the contractions of the uterus and to tell you how the baby is reacting to the contractions. The baby's heart rate is a very good way to tell whether it is doing well, or may have some problem and needs to be delivered right away.
An imminent delivery may be necessary when a baby's heart rate changes. The electronic fetal heart monitoring can pick up on those changes and alert doctors and nurses to the signs of fetal distress. Fetal distress can be due to a baby's inability to receive sufficient oxygen. When a baby is deprived of oxygen for a prolonged period of time, brain damage can occur, resulting in life long disabilities and devastating injuries including paralysis, cerebral palsy and developmental delays. If there are signs of fetal distress, an emergency delivery can be performed to prevent these devastating and life long conditions in a baby.
Read the rest of the article here.
For more information about medical malpractice and birth injuries, click here.
|
|
|
 An Owner's Liability for the Acts of its Dog
An owner of a dog who knows, or has reason to know, that his or her animal has a vicious disposition or a vicious propensity will be strictly liable for injuries or property damage caused by its animal. The term "vicious disposition" includes not only "biting," but also the jumping up and on to people, the showing of teeth, growling and pulling at a chain when tied up. The term "vicious propensity" means a natural inclination or habitual tendency to act in a manner that might endanger the person or property of others.
Responsibility for vicious animal attacks can also extend to a landlord where he or she knowingly allows a tenant to keep a vicious animal on the premises and where the landlord fails to take any steps to protect others living at the premises from attack. The owner of a vicious dog will also be liable for a victim's injuries suffered in attempting to avoid an attack, such as where the victim is struck by an automobile, or falls down, attempting to evade or run from an attacking dog.
Read the rest of the article here.
For more information about personal injuries, click here.
|
But, in New Jersey ...
Our firm is one of the few plaintiff's personal injury firms with established full service offices in both New York and New Jersey. Many of our clients live in New York but work in New Jersey or vice versa. As a result, when our clients are injured, we have to know the laws of both States that apply to their case. Not surprisingly, there are big differences between the two States. Here are a few examples.
In New York, someone injured in an accident generally has three years to file suit. But, in New Jersey, an injured person has only two years to sue.
In New York, if you are injured through the negligence of a doctor, the patient has 2-1/2 years from the date of the last treatment by that doctor within which to file suit. But, in New Jersey, you would usually have a longer period of time - two years from the day you knew or should have known that the doctor did something wrong that injured you. Thus, for example, in a case where you believe your doctor failed to recognize and treat your breast cancer in a timely fashion, you have two years from the day you learned you had cancer within which to file suit, not from the day he missed the cancer. This is very beneficial to the patient, because the cancer missed may not be found until several years after treatment ends. So, in New Jersey, you need not worry about running out of time to sue, if the doctor keeps telling you you are okay.
Both New York and New Jersey require you to have a serious injury in order to meet their threshold requirements when involved in an automobile accident. However, how the States define a serious injury, are very different. For example, in New York, one way to meet this threshold is if you sustained a fracture but in New Jersey, in order for a fracture to be sufficient, the law mandates that it be one that is displaced, a bone that is not only cracked but also out of alignment. These differences, amongst others, are important for an attorney to be aware of, especially when advising a client of his or her rights.
Many times, the actions of both the injured person and the defendant cause the accident. There is a big difference between New York and New Jersey in the effect of the injured person's own negligence on the result in the case. In both States, the jury decides how much each side contributed to the accident, on a percentage basis. However, the defendant is not required to pay the percentage of the judgment caused by the plaintiff in both States. For example, in New York, even if the defendant is only 10% at fault, the plaintiff can still collect that 10%. However, in New Jersey, a plaintiff who is 51% at fault does not collect the defendant's 49% share of fault - he collects nothing. Being found 51% at fault in New Jersey is the same as losing the case. A very harsh law indeed!
Whether you are a New York or a New Jersey resident, when you find yourself injured in the other State, get help from a firm that knows the laws and practices on both sides of the river. Our firm is one of the few plaintiffs' personal injury firms with established full service offices in both New York and New Jersey. We are here to assist you and answer any questions about your rights.
For more information about our firm, click here.
|
|
Our Offices
Call us at any of these locations to schedule a free consultation with a personal injury lawyer.
120 Broadway, New York, NY 10271
P: 212-732-9000
1140 Franklin Avenue, Garden City, NY 11530
P: 516-742-0707
33105 Main Road, Cutchogue, NY 11935 P: 631-734-2500
126 State Street, Hackensack, NJ 07601 P: 201-342-0037
|
Disclaimer: This newsletter is for education and information purposes only, and is not intended to provide legal advice. No attorney-client relationship exists or is created by the use of this newsletter. This newsletter should not be used as a substitute for legal advice.Attorney Advertising
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
