Bergen County Personal Injury Lawyer - Automobile Accidents

Two Killed When Carjacked SUV Plows Into Bus Stop

Chrissie Cole — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 19:28:00 GMT

A woman waiting at a bus stop was killed this morning when an SUV carjacked in Leonia struck a utility pole and lost control in Bergen County.

According to a report in the Record, the male driver of the SUV was also killed in the crash. Police told the Record that the SUV was traveling at high speeds south on Grand Ave. just after 5:00 a.m., when it struck a pole, spun around and stroke another before driving into the bus stop.

Power was knocked out in the area due to the accident. Police expect the road to be closed most, if not all of the day.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Chrissie Cole

Severe Injury/Death - Automobile Accidents

Donald Caminiti — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:00:00 GMT

Driving on congested highways can raise anyone's stress level. Unfortunately, stressed out drivers often become enraged. Presently, the state government does not track the number of road rage incidents on New Jersey roadways, but legislators consider the problem serious enough to stiffen the penalties when it leads to accidents that leave people injured according to an article published recently in the Star Ledger.

On November 13, the Assembly Judiciary Committee unanimously approved legislation that would make road rage a specific type of assault by auto and would increase the punishment for anyone convicted under the law. The potential prison sentence would be increased from no more than 18 months to up to three to five years and fines up to $15,000.

The measure (A1561) is named "Jessica's Law" for Jessica Rogers, 20, of Hamilton, who was severely injured in a road rage incident. She and her father, Scott Rogers, were at the committee meeting to push for changes in the current laws that would toughen the penalties.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Auto Accidents - Driving While Texting

Donald Caminiti — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 09:50:00 GMT

Using a cell phone, and especially texting, can serve as a major distraction while operating a motor vehicle. That goes for anyone of any age. When you factor in the
lack of experience behind the wheel that teens contend with, along with a cell phone, you've got a recipe for disaster — or worse, death.

Five states (California, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Washington) and the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands prohibit driving while talking on hand-held cell phones.

Unconvinced of the wisdom of these bans? AAA surveyed 1,000 teen drivers ages 16-17 and found that 61 percent of the group admitted to risky driving habits. Of that 61 percent, 46 percent of the teens reported texting at the wheel and 51 percent said they talk on cell phones while driving.

A research study of 900 teens from 26 high schools nationwide done by the group Students Against Destruc-tive Decisions and insurer Liberty Mutual Group revealed texting was ranked as the most distracting
activity the group of respondents participated in while driving.

Driving is a full-time job; treating it as anything less is to risk one's own safety, as well as that of other people on the road.

Texting and driving - like drinking and driving - don't mix, even if it is to text back just a single letter. Anyone operating a motor vehicle, no matter their age, should pull over if they want to make or receive a cell phone call.

Driving while texting (DWT) is nearly as dangerous as driving while intoxicated (DWI).

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Pay as You Drive Auto Insurance

Donald Caminiti — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:00:00 GMT

The Atlantic City Press recently reported that beginning Aug. 8, Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. will offer a policy that allows the company to rate drivers based on how and how far they ctually drive. Motorists must allow a high-tech monitoring device to be installed in their car that tracks speed and mileage, as well as how frequently the brakes are used, what time of day the driving is done and how quickly the car stops. The company bases insurance rates on how risky the driving behavior is.

Progressive says some drivers could save as much as 60 percent off their premiums.

The pay as you dirve approach however is not without its critics. Some worry that it penalizes night-shift workers who must drive during riskier times of day. The American Civil Liberties Union in Minnesota points to privacy issues - one more piece of personal data on a corporate computer. .

Under the Progressive program, customers can earn a first-term discount of as much as 10 percent just by signing up. When they renew their policy, the company estimates that the information gleaned during that year could lower their rates by as much as 60 percent or raise them as much as 9 percent.

New Jersey will never be a low-cost insurance state - its cost of living, density and demographic factors drive up that cost. But it can keep the cost down for some catagories of customers. But, perhaps with this new choice, some drivers will see a reduction in their insurance rates.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Emotional Distress Claims

Donald Caminiti — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:50:37 GMT

New Jerseyans who suffer emotional distress after witnessing the death or serious injury of a family member in a car accident can claim damages from auto insurance companies, the state Supreme Court ruled today.

In a 4-3 decision, the high court said that some claims of emotional trauma are not subject to the "verbal threshold" provision in the 1998 state law that limits a driver's ability to sue

The case was brought by awoman who was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder after watching her mother die when their car was rear-ended in Newark in 2000. She filed a claim based on her emotional distress, which was dismissed by a trial court in April 2004 because her own physical injuries did not meet the "verbal threshold" requirement of the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act of 1998.

The N.J. Supreme Courtshould be applauded for standing up forthose unfortunate persons who, through no fault of their own, suffer serious emotional injury as a result of having witnessed serious personal injury or death of a loved one as a result of another's negligence.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Automobile Accident/Insurance points and surcharge

Donald Caminiti — Wed, 14 May 2008 11:46:41 GMT

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently decided a case which determined whether, and under what circumstances, a driver who is involved in a single-vehicle accident resulting in no personal injury may be considered to be “at-fault” for purposes of assessing insurance eligibility rating points. Central to the court's inquiry is whether whether fault in this context is defined in negligence terms or in accordance with actuarial or underwriting concepts.

What's most important to drivers is the fact that insurance companies assess rating points as a way to raise insurance premiums.

The court noted that an “at-fault accident” is an accident in which a driver is “proportionately responsible,” and explained that a driver is “proportionately responsible if 50 percent responsible for an accident involving two drivers; if 33 1/3 percent responsible for an accident involving three drivers, etc. Specifically excluded form the definition of “at-fault,” are cases such as when the insured vehicle was lawfully parked; the insured vehicle was struck by a hit and run driver; the insured was not convicted of a traffic violation but another driver was convicted; and when the insured vehicle was struck in the rear by another vehicle.

The court determined that it was inappropriate for an insurance company to assess insurance eligibility rating points to a driver who skidded on a patch of black ice resulting in property damage to his vehicle.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Back Pain - Injury or Accident

Donald Caminiti — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:57:21 GMT

11/04 Neuroscience article shows objectively that those in chronic pain have resultant cortical atrophy. i.e. the brain shrinks. Great article. It is not the only one, by the way. Here is abstract:

1: J Neurosci. 2004 Nov 17;24(46):10410-5.

Chronic back pain is associated with decreased prefrontal and thalamic gray
matter density.

Apkarian AV, Sosa Y, Sonty S, Levy RM, Harden RN, Parrish TB, Gitelman DR.

Department of Physiology and Institute of Neuroscience, Northwestern University
Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois 60611, USA.
a-apkarian@northwestern.edu

The role of the brain in chronic pain conditions remains speculative. We
compared brain morphology of 26 chronic back pain (CBP) patients to matched
control subjects, using magnetic resonance imaging brain scan data and automated
analysis techniques. CBP patients were divided into neuropathic, exhibiting pain
because of sciatic nerve damage, and non-neuropathic groups. Pain-related
characteristics were correlated to morphometric measures. Neocortical gray
matter volume was compared after skull normalization. Patients with CBP showed
5-11% less neocortical gray matter volume than control subjects. The magnitude
of this decrease is equivalent to the gray matter volume lost in 10-20 years of
normal aging. The decreased volume was related to pain duration, indicating a
1.3 cm3 loss of gray matter for every year of chronic pain. Regional gray matter
density in 17 CBP patients was compared with matched controls using voxel-based
morphometry and nonparametric statistics. Gray matter density was reduced in
bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and right thalamus and was strongly
related to pain characteristics in a pattern distinct for neuropathic and
non-neuropathic CBP. Our results imply that CBP is accompanied by brain atrophy
and suggest that the pathophysiology of chronic pain includes thalamocortical
processes.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Use of Cell Phone while Driving

Donald Caminiti — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:08:36 GMT

International Paper Co. has agreed to pay $5.2 million to settle a lawsuit that claimed the company was liable for a car crash caused by an employee who was talking on a company-provided cell phone. The plaintiff in the case eventually lost most of her arm following medical complications. Attorneys for International Paper maintained that the employee was not talking on the cell phone at the time of the accident despite witness reports to the contrary.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Automobile Insurance

Donald Caminiti — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:44:02 GMT

The AP reported today that the Florida Insurance Commissioner suspended Allstate companies from writing new automobile insurance policies in Florida for refusing to comply fully with a subpoena from the state.

The Commissioner ended a scheduled two-day meeting Tuesday after just two hours. He reportedly was angered that Allstate officials failed to turn over some information the state requested on property coverage rates. Company officials had described the state's request as "irrelevant."

Allstate was to have provided documents into its reinsurance program and its relationship with risk modeling companies, insurance trade associations and insurance rating organizations, but instead returned a 51-page letter of objections to the state's subpoena.

"In view of Allstate's ongoing, blatant disregard of our subpoenas, I have little choice," the Commisioner said Wednesday. "Suspending their certificate of authority to write new business in our state should make my point."

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist has long criticized the insurance industry for its recalcitrance in lowering property insurance rates. He praised McCarty's action against the Illinois-based carrier.

Existing policyholders will not be affected, according to the Commissioner. Allstate must continue to service their clients and its companies must make all required statutory filings including, annual and quarterly financial statements and rate filings.

The suspension applies to Allstate Insurance Co., Allstate Indemnity Co. and Allstate Property and Casualty Co., and it only suspends the companies from writing new business in Florida.

For more information on this subject, please refer to the section on Car and Motorcycle Accidents.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti

Punitive Damages

Donald Caminiti — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:15:38 GMT

A Missouri appeals court Tuesday upheld an $8 million punitive damages judgment imposed in Jackson County against State Farm Insurance.

The case involved a lawsuit filed by Johnson County residents Jennie Hampton and Marvin Vail, who accused State Farm of malicious prosecution and breach of contract.

The case began a decade ago when Hampton reported the theft of her Toyota 4Runner, which was found abandoned and burned in Miami County, Kan. State Farm declined to pay her $10,000 claim and, working through an industry investigative service, referred the case to Johnson County prosecutors, who charged Hampton and Vail with insurance fraud.

After a jury acquitted them in 2001, they filed the civil action against State Farm.

In September 2005, a Jackson County jury awarded them each $400,000. Later that year, a judge adjusted those amounts to $250,000 because of a statutory cap, and he also assessed the punitive awards.

State Farm appealed. The Court of Appeals for the Western District of Missouri upheld the judge's actions.

For more information on this subject, please refer to the section on Car and Motorcycle Accidents.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Donald Caminiti