Suing for Injuries at Walmart and Other Big Box Stores

If you are injured by someone else’s negligence while shopping at a Walmart, or any big box store, you may be wondering what you need to do in order to recover. Depending on how the injury happened, you may be able to negotiate a settlement with a claims representative. If your claim is against Walmart itself, you’ll likely need to file a lawsuit against the store (as Walmart has a bad reputation for not settling injury claims).

What might come as a shock to many is that Walmart tops the charts when it comes to the number of lawsuits they face annually. While recent statistics are difficult to track down, at one point, the goliath faced approximately 5,000 new cases per year, or nearly 13 lawsuits every single day.

In and Around the Big Box

Big box stores like Walmart, Target, and Costco typically will have internal procedures that they will want to follow to document an injury that occurs on their premises. Usually, the internal procedures require the store management to gather information about how the injury occurred, as well as collecting witness information. If the injury is severe, sometimes a store may require a person be transported via ambulance, or be treated by paramedics on-site. While it may be helpful for your legal case to cooperate when injured, focusing on your health and safety should be your first priority.

Lawsuits from slip and fall injuries in stores are fairly common. Depending on your state’s laws, and how your injury occurred, the complexity of your case can vary drastically. Not all injuries are the result of negligence, or the fault of another. In some states, slip and fall injuries put a much higher burden of proof on the plaintiff than in others. Typical personal injury claims while shopping at a retail store will be for negligence or premises liability.

Product and Delivery Driver Liability

In addition to all the lawsuits Walmart faces for in-store injuries by customers and employees, lawsuits also occur over delivery drivers accidents and dangerous products. Most prominently, comedian Tracy Morgan was involved in a fatal bus accident caused by a Walmart truck, which resulted in a rare high value settlement from Walmart, rumored to be close to $100 million.

Related Resources:

• Injured in an accident? Get matched with a local attorney. (Consumer Injury)
• Disabled Woman’s Parents Sue Walmart Over Shoplifting Arrest (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Walmart Dress Caused Sexless Marriage, Lawsuit Claims (FindLaw’s Legally Weird)
• Long-Haired Woman Sues Walmart Over Shampoo-Related ‘Suffering’ (FindLaw’s Legally Weird)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/04/suing-for-injuries-at-walmart-and-other-big-box-stores.html

Can You Sue a Gym for Faulty Equipment?

Americans love the gym. Whether we miss the activity and exercise from recess and gym class in school or we're wistful for the waistline from our younger days, millions of us are spending millions of hours in the gym and millions of dollars on gym memberships. And we expect that gyms will show the same dedication to their equipment -- buying the best and maintaining equipment in the best condition.

But what happens when that doesn't happen? Are gyms liable for injuries caused by faulty equipment?

Waive Goodbye?

Like any other business, gyms have a duty to keep their patrons safe. But, when it comes to lawsuits regarding a gym's equipment, that liability can be complicated by a couple of factors. The first hurdle to a lawsuit may be a liability waiver, if you signed one. Many, if not all gyms require members to waive injury liability, and whether that waiver will prevent you from filing an injury lawsuit will depend on the terms of the agreement.

Some liability waivers only bar lawsuits based on gym or employee negligence, and are generally upheld in court. Other waivers attempt to provide total immunity for gyms, but can be found unenforceable if they're too broad. A gym's waiver may attempt to limit liability for equipment-related injuries, but may not cover instances where the gym failed to maintain the equipment properly, or knew the equipment was faulty and failed to fix it.

Gym Defects

Certain equipment, like treadmills, can be inherently dangerous. And some equipment may have been designed or manufactured poorly or lack adequate warnings regarding its proper use. Gym equipment manufacturers have a duty to ensure their products are safe, and may be strictly liable if a person is injured using on their product. Product liability claims against gym equipment manufacturers can be based on:

• Defects in Design: The gym equipment's design is flawed making it unreasonably dangerous to users;
• Defects in Manufacturing: The equipment was improperly manufactured, dangerously departing from the intended design; or
• Defects in Warnings: The equipment lacks adequate instructions or warnings, rendering the product unreasonably dangerous.

While equipment manufacturers can be liable for defects in their products, gyms may also be liable if they knew the equipment was dangerous and did not fix or remove it.

If you've been injured at the gym and think a faulty piece of equipment was to blame, contact an experienced personal injury attorney near you.

Related Resources:

• Injured in an accident? Get your claim reviewed by an attorney for free. (Consumer Injury)
• Top 5 Legal Tips for Gym Injuries (FindLaw's Injured)
• Treadmill Accident Leads to Brain Injury Lawsuit (FindLaw's Injured)
• Gym-aholics Be Warned: LA Fitness Wins Injury Lawsuit With Liability Waiver (FindLaw's Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/04/can-you-sue-a-gym-for-faulty-equipment.html

When Can You Sue for PTSD for Auto Accident Injuries?

When a person is injured in an auto accident, they may be entitled to recover monetary damages for their injuries. In some circumstances, an injury victim can be entitled to recover after suffering an emotional, or mental health, injury, such as post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as a result of a car accident. Unless the mental health injury rendered a person incapacitated, they will need to file a lawsuit within the normal time period allowed by their state to file.

While uncommon, in severe auto accidents, particularly when there is a loss of life, severe injuries, or maybe just a whole lot of property damage, it is easily foreseeable that an individual could suffer from PTSD. However, to establish a personal injury case based upon a PTSD diagnosis can be rather challenging. Unlike broken bones, cuts, bumps, and bruises, a mental health injury may not visible on the surface.

Problems of Proof

When suing for a PTSD injury related to a car accident, a plaintiff will need to prove that a qualified doctor made an accurate PTSD diagnosis and that the diagnosis is attributable, at least in part, to the accident. To accomplish this, it is highly likely that expert medical witness testimony will be required.

However, despite what a medical expert states, other problems could arise if the accident was only a minor accident, or there are other tragic incidents, particularly recently, in the plaintiff’s past, or a prior diagnosis for PTSD. However, even if a diagnosis may not be attributable to an accident, a flare up of PTSD symptoms may still be relevant. In other words, it can be claimed that a car accident made an individual’s PTSD worse.

One Bite of the Settlement Apple

A significant problem with PTSD auto accident claims is the timing of a settlement. Frequently, injury victims will settle their cases within 6 month or a year after their injury without ever filing a lawsuit. Just as frequently, PTSD can go undiagnosed for months, or longer if a victim does not have a solid support network. Unfortunately, in nearly every state, once a person settles a personal injury claim, they cannot reopen the case unless there are extraordinary circumstances, such as a fraud in the inducement to sign. Typically, an undiscovered injury will not qualify to reopen a settled case.

Related Resources:

• Injured in a car accident? Get your claim reviewed by an attorney for free. (Consumer Injury)
• Can You Sue Over Mental Stress, Trauma? (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Can You Get Workers’ Comp for PTSD? (FindLaw’s Injured)
• 5 Ways to Prove Emotional Distress (FindLaw’s Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/04/when-can-you-sue-for-ptsd-for-auto-accident-injuries.html

Easter Egg Hunt Injury Lawsuit: Mom Sues for $112K

The Clakamas County annual Easter Eggstravaganza egg hunt is scheduled to proceed this year with 20,000 eggs, and the Easter bunny being flown in by Helicopter, just like tradition dictates. However, a recent lawsuit for $112,000 filed against the Eggstravaganza venue and organizer as a result of an injury that occurred last year is attracting attention in the lead up to this year’s event.

Although the event is geared towards participants under 12, last year, an adult who was accompanying their child was injured when the crowd rushed in, knocking her over, causing her a severe knee injury. The injury required surgery and a protracted recovery. The lawsuit alleges that the venue and organizer were negligent in not providing sufficient staff, security, and/or crowd control to ensure the safety of attendees.

Event Organizer and Venue Liability

The organizers of an event, as well as the venue where an event takes place, can both be held liable if an event attendee is injured as a result of negligence, such as poor property conditions, or allowing overcrowding to occur. Generally, organizers and venues are responsible for ensuring the safety of their guests, and must take reasonable steps to do so. When reasonable steps are not taken, organizers and venue owners can be sued under a legal theory of negligence or premises liability.

In the Eggstravaganza case, for instance, the plaintiff is alleging that the organizers and venue allowed overcrowding to occur, and did not have effective crowd control. The complaint explains that this was case, particularly, when people who were not supposed to be on the Easter egg field, ran onto the field and knocked the plaintiff over, causing her injury.

Eggshell Plaintiffs

An injury victim can sometimes seem to have a disproportionately large injury given the circumstances surrounding an accident or event. However, under the law, a person with a pre-existing condition, or a high-susceptibility to injury, is entitled to recover for the full extent of their injuries. In lawyer-talk, these types of individuals are often referred to as eggshell plaintiffs, and can include the elderly, disabled, or those with medical conditions.

Related Resources:

• Injured in an accident? Get matched with a local attorney. (Consumer Injury)
• 3 Easter Injuries to Avoid (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Is It Legal to Dye Baby Chickens? (FindLaw’s Law and Daily Life)
• First Grader Handcuffed After Easter Egg Tantrum (FindLaw Blotter)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/04/easter-egg-hunt-injury-lawsuit-mom-sues-for-112k.html

Parents Sue Sword Maker After Teen's Traumatic Head Injury

Unfortunately for one Kentucky teen, playing sword baseball with a water-bottle resulted in a severe accidental injury that is now the subject of a product liability lawsuit. While the teen was playing with friends by using a sword as a bat, and hitting plastic water bottles with it, the sword came apart, and the blade struck the teen in the head.

The teen was in a coma for over a month, and had to undergo numerous medical procedures. Despite all this already, it is expected that his recovery will require lifelong medical care. His parents have filed a lawsuit against the sword’s manufacturer as a result of a product defect.

Defective Sword Liability

The parents of the injured teen filed a lawsuit alleging that the sword was defective because it came apart, and the defect caused the injury. Specifically, the sword’s blade and handle came apart, and the blade struck the teen in the head. The lawsuit points to the fact that the sword’s handle appeared to have been glued on, rather than secured by rivets or bolts. Additionally, it is alleged that the sword was shipped with no warnings, or descriptions, let alone any indication of whether it was intended for decorative use only, or any other uses.

These allegations may seem remote given that the the teen was engaged in an activity that’s outside normally expected uses. However, the allegations are still cognizable product liability claims. Generally, an injury must be foreseeable, but that does not mean the exact action contemplated needs to occur.

Simply swinging the sword could be such a foreseeable action, that it may not matter that the sword was being used as a bat. Since the blade came apart from the handle, the manufacturer may have a difficult time explaining how their sword, which if not labeled as a purely decorative sword, can be fit for the intended purpose of a sword, given that swords are swung both in play and in the practice of martial arts.

Related Resources:

• Injured in an accident? Get matched with a local attorney. (Consumer Injury)
• Medieval Times Sued Over Newlywed’s Eye Injury (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Is It Legal to Carry a Sword in Public? (FindLaw Blotter)
• Man Uses Sword, Guitar in Pulp Fiction-Like Tattoo Shop Attack (FindLaw’s Legally Weird)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/04/parents-sue-sword-maker-after-teens-traumatic-head-injury.html

Is the President Immune From Defamation Lawsuits?

Before he was President Donald Trump, he was host of the reality TV series "The Apprentice" Donald Trump. But his actions then may come back to legally haunt him now.

Summer Zervos, a former "Apprentice" contestant, is suing the president, claiming his denials of her sexual harassment claims amounted to defamation. But Trump's attorneys are planning to argue that the president is immune from this and other civil lawsuits while he remains in office. Is that argument going to work?

Defamatory Statements

Zervos appeared on Trump's TV show in 2006, and was seeking a job with the Trump Organization when the president allegedly groped her breast and began to kiss her aggressively against her will. Trump denied the allegations, calling them a "total fabrication" and a "hoax," while calling Zervos a "phony" and labeling other women making similar claims of sexual harassment "liars."

Zervos then sued in New York state court, claiming Trump's attack caused her emotional distress and lost business, and that Trump knew his denials of her allegations were defamatory, because he knew the truth of their interactions and "engaged regularly in this kind of unwanted sexual touching for years, and that was, in fact, how he treated women routinely and how he lived his life."

Defamation, legally speaking, refers to any false statement that hurts someone's reputation. In order to win a defamation lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove that someone made a statement, the statement was published, the statement caused an injury, the statement was false, and the statement did not fall into a privileged category.

Presidential Immunity

Bill Clinton attempted to mount the same immunity defense when he was sued by Paula Jones for sexual harassment. Back then, the Supreme Court ruled that litigation against a sitting president can proceed if it is over conduct unrelated to his public office. While conceding that point generally, Trump's attorneys are asking for deference in scheduling and for the court to stay the lawsuit until after Trump's presidency.

Trump attorney Marc Kasowitz also wrote:

"Defendant Donald J. Trump, the President of the United States, intends to file a motion to dismiss this action on the ground, among others, that the United States Constitution, including the Supremacy Clause contained therein, immunizes the President from being sued in state court while in office."

As the Washington Post points out, this issue of presidential immunity in state courts remains unresolved, as the Paula Jones case involved federal sexual harassment claims. So while the president might not be immune to defamation claims, those claims may need to be filed in federal court.

In an interesting twist to the case against Trump, one of the lawyers who successfully argued against Clinton's immunity was George T. Conway III, husband of Trump aide Kellyanne Conway and nominated by Trump to lead the Justice Department's civil division.

Related Resources:

• Find Defamation Lawyers Near You (FindLaw's Lawyer Directory)
• Trump Claims Immunity From 'Apprentice' Contestant's Lawsuit (USA Today)
• Do You Know How Slander, Libel and Defamation are Different? (FindLaw's Injured)
• Is It Worth Suing for Defamation to Protect Your Reputation? (FindLaw's Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/04/is-the-president-immune-from-defamation-lawsuits.html

Study: Payouts Are up in Medical Malpractice Lawsuits

Insurance companies might be seeing fewer medical malpractice claims, but they seem to be awarding more money to the injured patients that do make them. A new study found that paid medical malpractice claims declined almost 56 percent between 1992 and 2014, but the average payout for a successful malpractice claim jumped over 23 percent, reaching $353,000 for the 2009-2014 time period.

So what accounts for the decline in claims and rise in payouts? And what does it mean for future medical malpractice plaintiffs?

Fewer Claims = More Money

The research comes from physicians at Brigham and Women's Hospital, who analyzed numbers from a centralized database of paid malpractice claims:

Researchers report that the overall rate of claims paid on behalf of all physicians dropped by 55.7 percent. Pediatricians had the largest decline, at 75.8 percent, and cardiologists had the smallest, at 13.5 percent. After adjusting for inflation, researchers found that the amount of the payment increased by 23.3 percent and was also dependent on specialty. Neurosurgery had the highest mean payment, and dermatology had the lowest. The percentage of payments exceeding $1 million also increased during the same time period.

Dr. Adam Schaffer, an instructor at Harvard Medical School and lead author of the study, speculated that recent tort reform, which places statutory limits on medical malpractice damages, could be responsible for the decline in paid claims. "Fewer attorneys could be interested in taking claims if there's going to be a smaller potential payout, given that most attorneys are paid on a contingency basis," he explained.

Schaffer also pointed to claim screening panels and additional procedural hurdles to explain the decline in claims, but this could also account for the rise in payouts -- if only the most ironclad malpractice claims are being made and meeting the procedural requirements, the average payout per claim would be expected to rise.

What Does It All Mean?

The study could mean that lawyers are more skittish about taking on medical malpractice cases, but those that they do accept might be in for a bigger payday at the end. Medical malpractice claims are complicated, and even just dealing with a physician's insurance company can be difficult. If you've suffered an injury in a medical context, contact and experienced attorney near you.

Related Resources:

• Think you have a medical malpractice claim? Get your claim reviewed by an attorney for free. (Consumer Injury)
• Fewer Medical Malpractice Lawsuits Succeed, but Payouts Are Up (CBS News)
• Getting Paid: Collecting on a Judgment or Jury Award (FindLaw's Injured)
• How Much Is Your Personal Injury Case Worth? (FindLaw's Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/04/study-payouts-are-up-in-medical-malpractice-lawsuits.html