Posts Tagged ‘Personal Injury Lawyer’

Congress Works to Increase Food Safety

Tuesday, December 21st, 2010

With the rash of recalls in recent years:  eggs, peanut butter, even spinach, it is difficult to feel confident in our nation’s food supply.  Our top Chicago injury attorneys understand that under the current food safety regime, there is good reason to be nervous.  And although lawsuits are a useful and valid tool after an outbreak has occurred, there is no substitute for preventing food-contamination outbreaks in the first place.  Unfortunately, while America once made great strides in constantly increasing food safety, that trend has ceased and even reversed in the past decade.

Much of the problem lies with the lack of true regulatory oversight.  The various component parts involved in overseeing and maintaining food safety are split between a large number of different federal departments and regulatory agencies.  And the FDA has chosen to focus almost entirely on overseeing the safety of medicines and medical devices – a highly important task – to such an extent that many in our society and government have forgotten that the “F” in “FDA” stands for food.

But as this legislative session draws to a close, Democrats and Republicans have come together in a rare show of bipartisanship to pass important legislation that will enhance our nation’s food safety and supply.

The status of the legislation is still unclear, as the House and Senate have passed slightly different versions of the legislation that have not yet been reconciled.  However, due to the extensive similarities between the House and Senate versions, the strong bipartisan support the legislation enjoys, and the backing of President Obama, our products liability lawyers believe that it is only a matter of time until the bill becomes law.

Unfortunately, this bill will do nothing to consolidate the scattered food safety functions into a single federal department or agency.  Still, the bill is a giant step forward.  The primary strength of the bill is the new strength it grants to the FDA – increasing the number of inspections the FDA must conduct, and providing the funding to make those inspections a reality. The FDA would also be given the authority, for the first time, to oversee farming, and to demand instead of request recalls of tainted products.

The legislation also addresses the rapidly-growing problem of the safety of food imports.  Although we often think of food as being domestically grown and produced, the truth is that a shocking proportion of the foods Americans eat originates overseas.  Around twenty percent of our nation’s food, and over thirty percent of its seafood, is imported.  And while the manufacture and growth of foodstuffs is often far less regulated overseas, imported food receives very little inspection under current law.

Indeed, the FDA currently conducts an inspection of less than one pound of food for each million pounds that are imported.  With that rate of review, it is surprising that even more food problems have not occurred.

The new legislation would significantly improve the oversight of imported food.  Not only would inspections of imported food increase, but the legislation would also give the FDA the power to inspect foreign processing plants themselves.  And, perhaps most importantly, it would allow the FDA to set standards for how food must be grown and processed if it is to be imported into the United States.

No one, including the experienced products liability lawyers of Passen Law Group, believes that the new food safety legislation will single-handedly fix the nation’s food safety problems.  Even after this legislation takes effect, there will still be outbreaks and recalls such as we have seen in recent years.  But there will be fewer outbreaks, fewer recalls, and fewer deaths.

Although he may be overconfident in the power of legislation, perhaps Senator Tom Harkin, (D) Iowa, the chairman of the Senate’s health committee and a key supporter of this legislation, put it best:  “This legislation means that parents who tell their kids to eat their spinach can be assured that it won’t make them sick.”

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago products liability lawyer at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

Defensive Cycling Can Prevent Accidents With Negligent Drivers

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

Chicago bicycle accident lawyer 300x200 Defensive Cycling Can Prevent Accidents With Negligent DriversExperts believe that the interactions between cars and bicycles are continually improving in the Chicago area.  This is partly due to the construction of many new bike lanes around the city.  It is also due to the fact that most Chicago bicyclists are also motorists, and vice versa.  This gives each an understanding of the risks facing the other, and improves safety for all.

While our Chicago personal injury attorneys are pleased to hear that the situation may be improving, we urge cyclists to avoid complacency.  Many motorists are still stubbornly unaware of the bicycles around them.  This negligence can lead to accidents, injury and death for bicyclists.

Crashes involving cars and bicycles are still surprisingly common in Chicago.  In fact, in 2008 alone (the most recent year for which complete data is available), there were 1,494 such crashes.  During that same period nationwide, accidents between cars and bicycles killed over 700 people and injured another 52,000.

That’s why defensive bicycling is so important.  Our Chicago personal injury attorneys would love to see more bicyclists taking the steps that can protect them from the common, but inexcusable, negligence of motorists.  This begins with always wearing a helmet – the single most important thing any bicyclist can do to prevent injury and death.  In addition, bicyclists should always ride on the road, not the sidewalk, and ride with traffic, not against.  In addition, there are a number of common accident scenarios that cyclists can take steps to prevent.

Avoiding cars entering the roadway from the right is a simple but essential safety precaution.  In fact, the single most common accident involving bicyclists is one where the cyclist is struck by a car pulling out of a driveway, alley, or side street on the right-hand side of the road.  This is often because cyclists tend to ride as far to the right as possible, to avoid traffic on the road.  Unfortunately, this makes it more difficult for cars entering the roadway from the right to see the cyclist.  Bicyclists must thus remain aware, slowing down if they see cars entering the roadway, using lights or horns, and making eye contact with these drivers whenever possible.

Another peril of biking as far to the right as possible is parked cars on the right hand side of the road.  It is surprisingly common for bicyclists to be struck by car doors opening into their pathway.  Again, awareness and avoiding biking on the far right of the lane can help prevent these accidents and resulting injuries.  Of course, motorists could prevent these accidents by the simple expedient of checking for upcoming bicyclists before opening their doors.  However, our Chicago accident attorneys have learned that you cannot expect others not to be negligent:  you must take whatever steps possible to ensure your own safety.

Biking to the right of cars can also be dangerous in many ways.  Bicyclists should never pass a car on the right, as drivers tend to be unaware that a biker is approaching on that side.  Bicyclists should also never stop to the right of a car at a red light:  drivers are again often unaware of their presence, and can strike them by turning right when the light turns green.  Instead, bikers at red lights should stop in the middle of the lane.

Finally, bikers must bike defensively to avoid being hit from behind.  When biking at night, cyclist should be sure to have a rear-facing light, or at minimum a reflector facing the rear.  Bikers should also check behind them carefully before merging left out of a parking lane, bike lane, or right-hand lane.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago personal injury lawyer at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

Red-Light Cameras Do Not Make Intersections Safer

Monday, July 5th, 2010

Chicago intersection camera 262x300 Red Light Cameras Do Not Make Intersections SaferCook County recently announced plans to install twenty new red-light cameras throughout the Chicago suburbs, in what the County Board describes as a one-year pilot program.  The suburbs targeted to receive these new cameras, however, are protesting and considering legal action.  Our Chicago car accident lawyers believe this chain of events engenders many questions:  Why is the County doing this?  Why are the suburbs protesting?  And does all of this really make Chicago-area drivers any safer?

We have been following this story with great interest.  Although red-light cameras are increasingly popular with various levels of government, the most recent data shows that they do not make intersections safer.  Indeed, it now appears that the opposite may be true.  So why install more?  The answer is simple:  the almighty dollar.

The University of Illinois at Chicago recently performed a comprehensive analysis of accidents at Chicago intersections, including the 188 Chicago intersections with red-light cameras.  The study was based on data from the Illinois Department of transportation, and was performed by comparing accident data from the year before the Chicago red-light cameras were installed, and the year after.

What the UIC researchers found will not shock intelligent observers, but is certainly shocking in light of Cook County’s hunger for more cameras:  although accidents in the Chicago area decreased overall, there has been no decrease in car accidents at intersections with red-light cameras.  Indeed, at area intersections where a red-light camera was installed, accidents have actually increased by five percent.  UIC Assistant Professor Rajiv Shah, discussing the study, summed up the importance of the data.  “The clearest thing is the red light cameras have not changed driving behavior in any significant pattern.”

So, why the continued interest in red-light cameras?  Chicago-area governments would have you believe that they are only concerned with your safety. Even after the UIC study was made public, the Chicago Department of Transportation continued to insist that red-light cameras increase public safety.  The CDOT has publicly stated that the UIC study was flawed, because it included data on accidents that occurred up to 250 feet from the center of the intersection.  The CDOT states that it is conducting its own analysis, using a much more limited definition of an “intersection,” and that its “preliminary analysis” shows a twenty percent reduction in crashes at intersections with cameras.  That must be a narrow definition indeed.

So why does Cook County want to install new cameras?  Anyone who has been following the County’s recent budget woes should easily answer that question.  Our Chicago personal injury attorneys know that red-light cameras mean big bucks for those who install them, plain and simple.  If you think that this is an overly cynical view, consider the following:  the county has already budgeted for a minimum of $2 million in revenue from the twenty proposed cameras.  And the City of Chicago collected around $109 million from red-light camera revenues between 2003, when it began installing the cameras, through 2008 – with about $44 million of that coming in 2008 alone.

The greed associated with these cameras is not limited to the County Board.  FOX Chicago News reported early in 2010 that yellow lights at Chicago intersections with red-light cameras (installed by the City) had been set shorter – and even failed to meet the federally-required minimum of three seconds in length.  You don’t need a traffic expert to tell you that shortening the length of a yellow light is not a move designed to increase safety.  This action is designed to catch more drivers, and increase the revenue from red-light cameras.

It remains to be seen whether the Chicago suburbs will be successful in their fight to keep the Cook County Board from installing red-light cameras within suburban municipalities.  But our Chicago car crash lawyers believe that such cameras will be installed in any event.  What the current fight will determine is who will install them, and thus who will receive the revenue.

While suburban residents may believe that their municipal governments are fighting to keep such cameras out, the fact remains that none of these governments have stated a blanket opposition to red-light cameras, or even championed the UIC’s safety data.  Instead, they have simply insisted that the County Board does not have the authority to install the cameras, because the municipalities police the roads.  If they win that battle, expect to see the suburbs themselves install cameras in the near future.

After all, red-light cameras are now big business.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago personal injury lawyer at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

Personal Injury Litigation Needed to Force Automobile Safety

Thursday, June 3rd, 2010

Customers and citizens throughout the United States are in an uproar over the latest revelations about the abhorrent conduct of Toyota motor company.  First, we learned that Toyota waited at least four months, after learning that its accelerators could become stuck, before informing U.S. authorities.  Then, it came to light that Toyota waited at least a year, after learning of a dangerous defect in SUV and pickup steering systems which can can cause drivers to lose control of the vehicle, before informing U.S. authorities and issuing a recall.  Thus, the purpose of personal injury litigation.

Although customers are currently outraged at Toyota for its conduct, the simple truth is that Toyota’s actions are part of a larger pattern.  Again and again, automakers (and other companies) absolutely refuse to consider the safety of customers and the public.  Only when civil litigation – including both compensatory and punitive damages – force these companies into action will they correct dangerous designs or defects, or put in place basic safety precautions.  That’s why top Chicago personal injury attorneys and products liability lawyers like those at Passen Law Group are so important.  Without lawsuits, these dangerous products, whether automobiles, drugs, or others, would be allowed to remain on the market.

Another prime example is unsafe power windows.  So-called “rocker” switches, or push-down switches, which caused windows to close when the button was pressed, were exceedingly dangerous to children.  That’s why foreign governments had rules governing power windows and prohibiting the use of such switches.  The U.S. government, however, had no such rule or regulation.  This was true even though the problem was well known:  for instance, in three months in 2004, power windows caused the deaths of at least seven children.

Yet automakers continued to use these dangerous switches on power windows in U.S. cars, even though they used safer options for their foreign versions of the same vehicles.  It was not until product liability litigation made the automakers pay that they chose to install safe power windows here in the U.S., as well.

This same story played out in yet another context in the “illusory park” transmissions of Chrysler,   Dodge, and Ford vehicles produced throughout the 70s, 80s, and 90s.  This known defect caused drivers to think that they had secured their vehicle when, in fact, the car’s transmission did not recognize that it was in “park.”  Over the course of years, this transmission defect caused at least 90 known injuries and deaths.

This included one well-known incident where a mother, pregnant with twins, placed her Dodge minivan in “park” with her four-year-old daughter inside.  When the vehicle began to roll away, the mother attempted to stop it.  She was crushed and killed in the attempt.

When litigation was brought, the lawyers uncovered the sad, yet predictable truth:  Ford engineers had been aware of the defect since at least 1971, but had done nothing.  Only after losing two civil lawsuits did the company finally correct the defective design.

This repeating pattern of misconduct by automakers (although certainly not unique to the auto industry) illustrates why the U.S. justice system is so important.  Only when those who suffer injuries come forward and make these companies pay are they willing to do the right thing.  If you or someone you love has been injured or killed and you suspect that a design defect may be to blame, our Chicago wrongful death lawyers can help you to investigate the circumstances of your injury, and decide whether to file a civil action.  Your courage may be all that stands between the next customer and injury or death.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago car accident attorney at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

Medical Malpractice Tort Reform: Setting the Record Straight

Monday, May 24th, 2010

Medical malpractice lawsuits enable patients, and their families, who have been suffered significant, permanent injuries or death as a result of preventable medical errors, to receive compensation.  In 2008, more than 80 percent of malpractice payments went to victims who sustained quadriplegia, brain damage or death.  Passen Law Group’s top-rated Chicago medical malpractice lawyers are fighting to preserve the right of patients to access the civil justice system.

Unfortunately, as we saw during the federal health care reform debates, the powerful insurance lobby has pressed for medical liability “tort reform” — in other words, taking away the right to have a jury award compensation to malpractice victims.  Thankfully, organizations like Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization, has been combating these scare tactics with actual facts.

The organization recently published a Fact Sheet regarding medical malpractice, and the impact of tort reform:

  • In 2009, a study by Hearst newspapers found that approximately 200,000 Americans die each year from preventable medical errors and hospital acquired infections
  • In 1999, the Institute of Medicine estimated that medical malpractice cost $17 billion to $29 billion annually for lost income, lost household production, disability and health care costs
  • Medical liability tort reform failed in Texas.  Since enacting in 2003: cost of diagnostic testing grown 50 percent faster than national average; cost of health insurance has more than doubled; growth of doctors per capita has slowed
  • Medical malpractice lawsuits are rare:  2008 saw the fewest number of medical malpractice payments since 1990.

Fortunately, medical liability “reform” was not implemented in this year’s federal health care reform law.  Not that this will stop the insurance lobbyists from continuing to push individual states to adopt such reform, or to attempt to re-introduce such measures at the federal level in coming years.

Each Chicago medical malpractice attorney at Passen Law Group understands the devastating impact medical negligence can have on the individual patient, and their families.  We believe malpractice litigation serves as a strong deterrent to the medical profession — to place patient safety at utmost importance — and to implement safe practices in their profession.  We will continue to fight against any efforts to “reform” the way patients seek justice for their injuries.

For a free consultation with a Chicago personal injury lawyer with Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.