Monday, October 16, 2017

Lawsuit: 'Violence in Charlottesville Was No Accident'

A new lawsuit against neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and white nationalist groups in the wake of violence in Charlottesville, Virginia claims the antagonists brought "semi-automatic weapons, pistols, mace, rods, armor, shields, and torches" to the city, with "the purpose of inciting violence and instilling fear within the community of Charlottesville and beyond."

The suit, filed on behalf of 11 people injured during the August clashes, charge 26 individuals and groups with negligence, conspiracy, harassment, infliction of emotional distress, and assault along with violations of the Ku Klux Klan Act and the Civil Rights Act. Here's a look:

Charlottesville Conspiracy

"In countless posts on their own websites and on social media," the lawsuit claims, "Defendants and their co-conspirators promised that there would be violence in Charlottesville, and violence there was." That violence led to multiple claims of threats, harassment, intimidation, and physical assault from counter-protestors, leading to severe physical injuries, extreme emotional distress, and even one plaintiff suffering a trauma-induced stroke.

According to the lawsuit, these injuries were not purely accidental, nor were they the result of random acts of violence from a few bad apples. "The violence, suffering, and emotional distress that occurred in Charlottesville was a direct, intended, and foreseeable result of Defendants' unlawful conspiracy," plaintiffs claim. "It was all according to plan -- a plan they spent months working out and whose implementation they actively oversaw as events unfolded on the ground."

Acts of Violence

That alleged plan gave rise to claims that the defendants violated the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871. The Act was intended to provide federal criminal and civil remedies for victims of conspiracies like those practiced by the KKK against African Americans and others. While the Supreme Court invalidated the criminal provisions of the Act in 1883, the civil remedies remain, allowing victims to sue if two or more persons "conspire or go in disguise on the highway or the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving ... any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the law."

Because they knew of the "anti-civil rights conspiracy," were in a position or had power to stop it, and either failed or refused to take any steps to stop the conspiracy, the suit also alleges violations of the Civil Rights Acts of 1866. The lawsuit includes a comprehensive list of the defendants, their roles, and their communications leading to, during, and after the Charlottesville violence, and is seeking damages for all plaintiffs as well as injunctions "enjoining Defendants from future violations of rights guaranteed by state and federal law."

Related Resources:



from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/10/lawsuit-violence-in-charlottesville-was-no-accident.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Friday, October 13, 2017

Civil Lawsuits for Sexual Assault, Harassment: Top 10 Cases and Questions

If there is anything positive to be taken from the horrific Harvey Weinstein revelations, it's that more victims of rape, sexual assault, and sexual harassment -- both male and female -- are coming forward with their stories. And as more stories are told, more lawsuits will follow.

And that will leave many people wondering whether you can sue for sexual assault or harassment, and who, other than the perpetrator, might be responsible. Here's a look:

1. Can a Victim of Rape Sue for Money Damages?

Generally speaking, rapes and sexual assaults are prosecuted (hopefully) in criminal courts. And sexual harassment claims are handled by workplace policies. But civil lawsuits based on rape and assault claims are still available.

2. Can You Sue a Doctor for Molestation or Sexual Assault?

Medical professionals and personnel, as well as the hospitals, clinics, and other care providers that employ them, can be found liable for sexual assault.

3. Ex-Tinder VP Sues Over Sexual Harassment

Sadly, sexual harassment in the workplace is not confined to a single industry, and is as common in new-school tech startups as in old-school offices.

4. Woman Sues Airbnb After Host Sexually Assaults Her

And tech companies and app makers have been targeted by customers who've been the victims of assault and rape.

5. Uber Driver Sued for Sexually Assaulting Teen

And lawsuits can target both the app maker and the perpetrator.

6. When Can You Sue a Church Leader for Sexual Assault?

As with workplace harassment and assault, there has been a rise in reporting crimes by church leaders and the clergy.

7. NJ State Trooper Alleges Sexual Assault & Harassment

Even the toughest among us -- our police and first responders -- can be victims of harassment and assault. And accusations against public employees may be more complicated than private individuals.

8. Pitt. Prison Guards Sexually Abused Inmates?

Given the stereotype of the average convict, you may not think of prison inmates as being a vulnerable population. But confinement and the imbalance of power behind bars can leave many inmates susceptible to abuse.

9. Stanford Sued for 'Systematic Negligence' for Failing to Stop Sexual Predator

With the spike in on-campus sexual assault reports, schools are put in the position of investigator, judge, jury, and protector -- one that we're finding they are ill-equipped to handle.

10. Man Convicted of Sexual Assault Sued Victim for Calling Him a Rapist on Facebook

And with the increase in accusations of sexual assault, there is bound to be a backlash of lawsuits claiming defamation based on those allegations.

Related Resources:



from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/10/civil-lawsuits-for-sexual-assault-harassment-top-10-cases-and-questions.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Wednesday, October 11, 2017

Can You Sue Airbnb If You're Filmed Without Permission?

The fact that an Indiana couple found hidden cameras in their Florida Airbnb rental, and that local law enforcement believes dozens of renters at the same location may have been illegally captured on video going back years, is distressing. But it's not new. Airbnb was sued two years ago after a German woman discovered a hidden camera in her California rental.

Clearly the owners of the rentals are violating criminal statutes and could be civilly liable for the secret surveillance, but what about Airbnb itself? Can the company be sued if guests are filmed without their permission?

Banned Cams

To be fair, Airbnb has a pretty clear electronic surveillance policy, banning any undisclosed surveillance devices and all surveillance devices from private areas like bedrooms and bathrooms, even if they've been disclosed:

If you're a host and you have any type of surveillance device in or around a listing, even if it's not turned on or hooked up, we require that you let guests know by including this information clearly in your listing description and photographs. If a host discloses the device after booking, Airbnb will allow the guest to cancel the reservation and receive a refund. Host cancellation penalties may apply.

But do Airbnb's rules absolve the company from legal liability if a host fails to abide by them?

Lodging Liability

While much of the responsibility will fall on hosts (and their insurance policies, hopefully) for injury accidents, it may be a different matter with criminal activity. Airbnb has been accused of "Superhost" badges and green check marks next to renters' names, along with the word "Verified," all without performing background checks on hosts or disclosing to guests that the company does not do background checks. Additionally, a Marriott hotel was found liable (to the tune of almost $27 million) in the Erin Andrews peephole video case for not preventing a stalker to surreptitiously record her in her hotel room.

So while it looks like Wayne Natt, who could be facing up to 30 criminal charges of video voyeurism, will be held accountable in this case, Airbnb may also be on the hook civilly for hosts' criminal activity.

Related Resources:



from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/10/can-you-sue-airbnb-if-youre-filmed-without-permission.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Could Mandalay Bay Be Liable in Las Vegas Mass Shooting?

Lawsuits seem to follow any tragedy. And when the person most directly responsible for the tragedy is no longer alive -- as is the case in so many mass shootings -- victims look for someone to hold legally accountable. Schools and movie theaters have been targeted with lawsuits after shootings before, so it's only natural to wonder whether the hotel from which Stephen Paddock killed 58 and wounded almost 500 more, the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, could be liable for the mass shooting in Las Vegas.

Here's a look at the hotel's potential legal liability following the shooting.

Everyone Suing Everyone

According to attorney Adam Sack, the possibilities for legal action after the Las Vegas shooting are limitless. "I'm telling you right now, this is going to be -- once the drama dies down -- it's going to be lawsuits after lawsuits," Sack told Radar Online. "Everyone will sue everyone. The hotel will sue the city because there wasn't property development of the road, they can sue the one who designed the hotel -- you can dream up all kinds of lawsuits that prove this attack could've been prevented."

While we're not convinced quite so many lawsuits will fly, there are bound to be lawsuits claiming Mandalay Bay was negligent in either preventing the shooting or its response.

Negligence in Nevada

Negligence liability will generally rest on whether the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of reasonable care, and, in this case, whether the Mandalay Bay had a duty to protect concertgoers from a mass murderer. While the hotel certainly has a duty to protect its guests and anyone else on its property from reasonably foreseeable hazards and dangers, what would be up for debate is whether it owed the same duty to the general public and whether a guest carrying an arsenal of weapons to his room and opening fire on a crowd below was reasonably foreseeable.

If plaintiffs can establish Mandalay Bay did have that duty, the question would be whether it breached that duty. Over three days prior to the shooting, Paddock amassed 23 guns, including AR-15-style and AK-47-style rifles, in his hotel room, allegedly carrying them up in 10 suitcases. A court could look at whether hotel staff should've spotted him making so many trips, should've seen the surveillance cameras Paddock brought and installed in the hallway, or found it suspicious he had a "Do Not Disturb" sign on his room for three straight days.

And jurors could wonder whether the hotel should've installed bulletproof glass or responded to the shooting more quickly. By all accounts, Paddock only fired on the crowd for about ten minutes until a hotel security guard arrived; Paddock fired 200 rounds through his door, wounding the guard, and police breached the door and found Paddock dead an hour later after clearing other guests of the floor.

Finally, a successful suit against Mandalay Bay would need to demonstrate that it was the hotel's breach, and not some intervening act, that caused the victims' injuries or death. This can be especially difficult in mass shootings where courts and juries are more likely to find the shooter responsible.

Concert Care

Lawsuits are also expected against the concert promoters and organizers. "They put in a fence around the area so there was only one way in and one way out -- people were basically trapped in," according to Sack. "They could easily sue the promoter; it was dangerous; they didn't have an emergency exit." It will be far easier for the concertgoers to establish that organizers owed them a duty of care. Instead, the main issue will be whether the mass shooting was foreseeable and whether more exits could've saved more lives.

Las Vegas Litigation

There's no doubt lawsuits will be filed in the wake of the shooting, against the hotel and the concert organizers. Whether those suits will be successful remains to be seen.

Related Resources:



from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/10/could-mandalay-bay-be-liable-in-las-vegas-mass-shooting.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Friday, October 6, 2017

Lawsuit: Mississippi Hospital Liable for Sex Assault by Paramedic

Hospitals, and the medical professionals they employ, are supposed to be the places and people we can turn to for care, cure, and comfort. Sadly, in doesn't always work out that way. Hospitals can make mistakes and their employees can abuse their power to take advantage of vulnerable patients.

That's what happened according to one woman's lawsuit against Baptist Memorial Hospital in Oxford, Mississippi. A Jane Doe claims a paramedic sexually assaulted her in the back of an ambulance while she was suffering from a drug overdose and being transported to the hospital.

Prison-Bound Paramedic

The EMT accused, Bryan Englebert, is now serving at least five years in prison after pleading guilty to the incident. Doe's lawsuit, however, claims the hospital failed to properly train and supervise its employees, and that patient safety policies were inadequate to protect her during the ambulance transport.

Following her arrival at BMH after a drug overdose, Doe was placed on an involuntary 72-hour psychiatric hold due to suicidal thoughts. The hospital then decided to transport her to another behavioral health care facility operated by BMH some 100 miles away. During that trip, according to the lawsuit, Englebert sexually battered and assaulted Doe while the driver, Matthew Austin, videotaped a portion of the assault

Duty-Bound Hospital

Doe is suing MH for negligence, claiming the hospital breached the duty of care it owed to her by failing to have proper procedures in place to protect her during transport, failing to follow the procedures it did have in place, failing to properly staff and monitor ambulance personnel, and failing to protect her during transport. Doe claims she was a "vulnerable adult" with a documented history of mental health issues and was incapacitated during transport, meaning she and the hospital had a special relationship under which the hospital had a duty to protect her.

She is also suing for negligent infliction of emotional distress, alleging significant physical injury, emotional distress, and mental trauma and suffering.

Related Resources:



from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/10/lawsuit-mississippi-hospital-liable-for-sex-assault-by-paramedic.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Thursday, October 5, 2017

Woman Sues Florida Dunkin' Donuts, Claims Brawl With Employee Caused Miscarriage

Aschea Austin, according to her civil complaint, visited the drive-thru South State Road Dunkin' Donuts in Margate, Florida in December 2015, four months pregnant at the time. Unhappy with her order, Austin admittedly "became a participant in a verbal, then physical altercation with Xiomara Henry," a Dunkin' employee.

One month later, Austin went to the hospital complaining of a fever, nausea, and vomiting. She later miscarried in the hospital, and is now suing the doughnut chain, claiming it and the employee are liable for the miscarriage.

But the Coffee, Tho

According to the lawsuit, this was no mere war of words. Surveillance cameras showed Austin and Henry began arguing at the drive-thru window, but the argument escalated: Henry allegedly tossed liquid filled cups at Austin and her car through the drive -thru window. "The altercation then carried on inside the business, then continued on outside in the parking lot area." Austin claims Henry "punched her in the face and kicked her in the belly at least five times, even though she pleaded with Henry to stop and told her she was pregnant.

One month later, she checked into that hospital, and had a miscarriage later that day.

Great Pain of Mind and Body

Of course the lawsuit names Henry as a defendant, but Austin is also suing Dunkin' Donuts and an unnamed manager, who not only "failed to properly supervise" Henry, but "actively participated in the escalation of the situation." Austin is suing Dunkin' Donuts for negligence, negligent hiring and retention, negligent supervision, vicarious liability, and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and is also charging assault and battery against Henry.

Austin "has suffered and will continue to suffer great pain of mind and body," her lawsuit claims, "severe and permanent emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, humiliation, and psychological injuries." She is asking for at least $5,000,000 in damages.

Related Resources:



from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/10/woman-sues-florida-dunkin-donuts-claims-brawl-with-employee-caused-miscarriage.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Tuesday, October 3, 2017

Hollywood Nursing Home Sued After Hurricane Irma Deaths

One of the most tragic stories emerging from the wake of Hurricane Irma was the death of 11 residents at a single nursing home in Hollywood, Florida. The Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills lost its air conditioning during the storm, and allegedly didn't contact 911 until two days later. Eight of the facility's patients died the next day, many from respiratory or cardiac distress, some of whom arrived at hospitals with body temperatures of 109.9, 108.5, 108.3, and 107.

There are now a multitude of lawsuits being filed against the nursing home, claiming administrators and staff were negligent in their care of residents.

The Plaintiffs

Gail Nova, Estella Hendricks, Carolyn Eatherly, Betty Hubbard, Bobby Owens, Miguel Antonio Franco, Manuel Mario Mendieta, and Albertina Vega all died in the Hollywood Hills facility, which has been shut down amid a criminal investigation. While the nursing home's owner, Jack Michel, has declined to comment on pending lawsuits, the facility insisted it called utility Florida Power & Light 50 times, and also claimed it called an emergency number issued by Florida Governor Rick Scott, all without adequate response.

The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration suspended the nursing home's license last week. According to reports, the agency had previously banned the facility from admitting new patients and from receiving Medicaid. Most recently the agency cited the Rehabilitation Center because it "failed to maintain the emergency generator."

The Defendants

There are almost too many lawsuits regarding the deaths at Hollywood Hills to count. Some have been filed by the deceased victims' families, others by survivors who endured the blistering temperatures at the facility. Some are targeted solely at the facility, its owner, and employees for not evacuating or contacting emergency services sooner, others name FPL and claim the utility should have prioritized the nursing home for power restoration.

"They should have moved them out sooner even if FPL failed to do what they had to do," Carlos Silva, a Coral Gables attorney told the Miami Herald regarding the liability of the nursing home's administrators. "They could have moved the residents across the street. Ultimately, it's their responsibility for the patients, but FPL definitely has fault here."

Related Resources:



from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/10/hollywood-nursing-home-sued-after-hurricane-irma-deaths.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)