Des Moines Personal Injury Lawyer - Car Accidents

Nine children injured in two-van collision near Grimes

Steve Lombardi — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:08:00 GMT

One van tried to turn left of center onto S. 11^th Street south of Grimes off of Iowa Highway 141. An oncoming van collided with the first van sending two adults and nine children to the hospital. The van was from Oakmoor and it rolled in the ditch.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

Iowa: It’s not always the young who are distracted while driving.

Steve Lombardi — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:43:00 GMT

In this crash we have two cars entering the same intersection at once. The northbound vehicle has to stop and yield, but doesn’t. It enters the intersection striking the westbound car and is struck. The offending vehicle then entered the ditch, rolled and caught on fire. That driver was not wearing a seat belt.

The westbound vehicle (vehicle number 1) was on E53 or 240^th in Greene County. The driver was 18-years-of age.

The northbound vehicle (vehicle number 2) was on Ivy Avenue. Duty to stop and yield; according to police report. The driver was 54 years-of-age.

The accident occurred at 21:53 hours or almost 10:00 pm.

The 18-year-old woman’s life was saved by wearing her seatbelt. Her name is Hannah Marie Kitt of Jefferson, Iowa. She was injured and taken by Greene County Ambulance to the Greene County Hospital.

Radio Iowa and KSOM Radio carried this story as well although they’ve not added any further details.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

Rural Iowa driveway ditch crossings can be very dangerous

Steve Lombardi — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:40:00 GMT

In this crash a 23-year-old young man was killed in a one-car crash. He was driving a 1996 Pontiac Bonneville northbound on L48 in O’Brien County. The speed limit is 55 mph in this area, the time of the accident was 6:55 PM, he was wearing his seat belt, he was not ejected and his car movements were essentially straight. According to ISP his vision was not obscured and I can see no indication that weather was a factor.

This video, while somewhat humorous, gets across some very serious points about rural roads and driver safety.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ6y4CuAGmA

From reviewing the damage report this one vehicle collision involved at least 8 collision events. Here is my assessment from the ISP report.

1. Car enters the east ditch.

2. Car comes into contact with a field drive and then goes airborne.

3. Car comes down in the east ditch, then exits this ditch.

4. Car careens across Highway L48.

5. Car enters the ditch on the west side of the roadway.

6. Car strikes the west side fence line and finally comes to rest.

7. Car starts on fire.

8. Car suffers explosion from fire.

You may wonder what could have caused this sudden loss of control. It could be a lot of things but deer do come to mind. Young people should learn if you see a deer in the roadway and you can’t stop; then hit it. Strike it directly; don’t swerve and attempt to avoid it, just hit it. I read about E.R. doctors studying moose strikes in Maine. The moose are so tall they can come over the hood and inside the passenger compartment but they recommended the same as I did. Just hit them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-5JvACzGp8&feature=rec-HM-rev-rn

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

Stale medical bills,

Steve Lombardi — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 07:16:00 GMT

QUESTION: I was asked a question about stale medical bills and it seems to be a reoccuring problem. The question has to do with stale medical bills and a delayed billing by the medical service provider. The billing was not originally made and when it was, six years later, it was too late to file with the responsible parent's health insurance carrier. What do you do when a medical service provider bills you six years after providing medical care? Do you still owe for the service provided? What if you can't now pay them?

Previously I've had to address this same problem. The billing company came after the parent five or more years after the services were rendered. More often then not the delay puts the responsible parent outside of the allowable period for filing a health insurance claim with your insurance company. Generally most health insurance policies provide no bills would be covered after 12 months. The bills were created for care for my children and ex-wife who never turned them into my insurance or advised me so I could do it. When she filed for bankruptcy they came after me. Quite a surprise and no way was I paying them. The Judge agreed with me. He ruled the hospital and other medical service providers had a duty to turn the bills into my insurance company or to advise me within a reasonable period of time after the service or forgoe charging me as the parent. A reasonable period of time he determined to coincide with the health insurance contract one year provision. Besides that the proof stunk. The HIPPA forms were on blank paper and did not include the box descriptions to show what the amounts or numbers corresponded with. Without that proof everyone was left to guess. Okay enough talking, good luck in California. Steve Lombardi

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

Iowa Auto Accidents - Should the car be repaired or totalled?

Steve Lombardi — Fri, 09 May 2008 00:00:34 GMT

Following a wreck the insurance company wants to total the car but the client wants to have it repaired? What should it be repaired or totaled? What will the lawyer need to review in order to answer this question?

Here is the rub for the client. The client of course may only be able to pay off the loan based on what the insurance company offers to pay. The loan could have a value greater than the fair market value. So if totaled the client is in a terrible position of having a car payment but no car. The client may want the car repaired since they would at least be able to drive to work and not have to come up with a down payment to buy a new or replacement car. So what will the lawyer need to answer the client's question?

Information required to assess if what the insurance company is planning to do is fair.

Auto's make, model and year of manufacture:
Date purchased:
Purchase price: $
Where it was purchased:
Current market value:
Loan amount: $5k+
Mileage at time of purchase:
Mileage at time of wreck:
Current condition:
Were there any previous accidents between the time you purchased the car and the date of the wreck? If so what were the dates and the amount of damage?
Was there any un-repaired damage to the car at the time of the wreck? If so, what was it?
Was the title clean or branded?

Paperwork and other evidence that helps in the valuation process.

Photographs of the car just prior to wreck:
Photographs of the car after the wreck:
Damage repair estimate:
Current location of the car:
A copy of the title:

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

Farm Equipment Accidents - Road travel by teens

Steve Lombardi — Thu, 08 May 2008 00:00:18 GMT

Teach your teens about driving defensively when farm equipment may also be on the roadway. You should know that fall is the time when a greater number of accidents happen. The Iowa State Extension Office puts out a flier on how to share the road with farm vehicles.

Here are some of the tips they give on how to avoid some of the more common collisions or wrecks:

Left-turn collision
Defensive driving tips:
-Is it really turning? Don't assume a farm vehicle that pulls to the right side of the road is going to turn right, or is letting you pass. Check the operator's hand signals.
- Is there a turn signal? A flashing light on a tractor that suddenly stops flashing is a turn signal. Slow down when you see this signal.
-Where could it turn? Check the left side of the road for gates, driveways, or any place a farm vehicle might turn.

Rear-end collision
Defensive driving tips:
-Be alert. Always watch for farm vehicles on rural roads, especially at planting and harvest.
-Slow down immediately. As soon as you see a slow-moving vehicle, start to apply brakes like you would when approaching a stoplight.
-Keep your distance. Stay a safe distance behind farm vehicles. Most farm equipment is not designed to travel at speeds greater than 25 miles an hour. Even when towed behind a truck, equipment such as sprayers and fuel tanks often travels less than 25 miles an hour.

Passing collision
Defensive driving tips:
-Be patient. Don't assume the farmer can move aside to let you pass. Shoulders may be soft, wet, or steep, which can cause the farm vehicle to tip, or they may not be able to support a heavy farm vehicle.
-Make sure you're clear. When passing, make sure you can see the farm vehicle in your rear-view mirror before you get back in your lane.
-Enjoy the drive. Even if you have to slow down to 20 miles an hour and follow a tractor for two miles, it takes only six minutes of your time, about the same as waiting for two stoplights.

Stay alert, play it safe - don't blow it you're only a teenager once.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

GPS - A marketing plan that destroys good driving habits.

Steve Lombardi — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 00:00:39 GMT

Another potential source is driver distraction is the global positioning system or GPS that several manufacturers place in cars as standard equipment. As a person with a brain trained in the law it's amazing how complicated all these devices that are supposed to make our lives simpler are complicating it more and more. Good marketing doesn't necessarily translate into good driving habits.

Anyone a fan of NBC's much-loved comedy The Office? If so, remember the episode where Steve Carrol's character drove his car into a lake and blamed it on his GPS unit. We all laughed at the stupidity of the situation; turns out, in reality, such situations are not that uncommon.

But why is this kind of car wreck becoming more common? Let's review where we've been. We've looked at the cell phone call, the cell phone text messaging session, then the iPod and now the GPS or global positioning system. All very useful inventions but all extremely stupid ways to increase your chances of having a car wreck. My mother taught me to drive. That was an experience that I could certainly write a series on but out of respect for her I won't. Her method had this fictitious brake pedal on the passenger side of her Buick that we all learned to drive. She would furiously pump her right leg tapping her foot on the floor and at the same time repeat in rapid succession, "You are going to stop aren't you?" You gotta love a mother as driving instructor. She also did this thing with her arm fully extended, elbow locked and hand planted on the dash. At the time I wasn't sure what that was about, but now after four kids and a very expensive legal education I'm firmly convinced she was responsible for inventing the first airbag.

So what are some of the ways people get in trouble with the GPS? Today let's look at the GPS and train tracks.

In January 2008, a man sued a GPS service provider after his rental car got stuck on a railway and was struck by a train. You might wonder what, exactly; the gentleman was doing on the railway to begin with? Well, he was simply following his GPS unit's instructions and got stuck. That's what they say but realistically does the GPS tell you to stop on train tracks? Dolly would say you're just acting stupid but the lawyer in me says there is more to it than that which this article tells us. Let's look at the law.

Who's to blame here: the service provider whose directions weren't completely accurate and led the man to drive onto the tracks, or the individual who acted without common sense in driving on the tracks and blamed it on the device?

This reminds me of the most maligned and misunderstood McDonald's coffee case. Common sense tell us all that when you order hot coffee you'll probably get hot coffee; however, that little ditty might sell on Madison Avenue but that's too simplistic and doesn't really get at the heart of the problem. Because in that case McDonald's failed to inform customers that their coffee was approximately 20 degrees hotter than average, was according to their own trial expert not consumable and as served would give you first degree burns.

Under the products liability law, manufacturers and retailers are responsible for putting products onto the market that they know or should know are defective or potentially dangerous to consumers.

So, under this law, should GPS service providers be held liable for satellite-submitted instructions that, though helpful, are not 100% accurate?

Here a number of factors must be considered. First, was the product defective in terms of design, manufacturing, or even marketing? Also, did the GPS come equipped with a disclaimer warning users of possible miscalculations?

Provided the unit came equipped with a valid disclaimer, the driver would generally be responsible for making reasonable judgments in his/her own best interest, regardless of what the GPS recommended. It's called the reasonable-man standard.

The court would then determine whether driver responsibility is considered "an enforceable contractual provision or an unenforceable 'adhesion contract'".

Jurors ask questions too. Not necessarily required by law but they want answers having to do with common sense. They might ask simple questions, like: In what way the user was misled? Was it a rental car or his own vehicle? What in heaven's name made him stop on railroad tracks? Could I too do that?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

SUDDEN STOPPING - WHO'S TO BLAME?

Megan Roth — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:00:15 GMT

Though legislation varies county-to-county, each state has an established set of vehicle and traffic laws, each of which contains a section or subsection that states: "No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving an appropriate signal..." So that means the first driver is autmatically at fault, right? WRONG.

As has been made clear by our previous posts, we face a long list of potential distractions when driving, each of which significantly increases our risk of an accident.

Simply avoiding these devices that are distracting the driver may reduce our accident risk, but quite obviously doesn't erase it. So what about the non-technologically induced auto accidents? What happens when, without warning, a driver slams on their brakes and causes a rear-end collision with the car behind them? Who's at fault here: the driver who made the stop or the driver behind him who failed to make the stop?

Though legislation varies state-to-state, Iowa has an established a set of vehicle and traffic laws, which contains a section on braking. The Uniform Jury Instruction that a jury would see is as follows:

"A driver shall not stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving an appropriate signal to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear when there is opportunity to give the signal. The signal shall be given by either extending the hand and arm downward from the left side of the vehicle or by a brake light constructed and located on the vehicle as to give a signal of intention to stop. The brake light shall be red or yellow and shall be plainly visible and understandable in normal sunlight and at night from a distance of 100 feet to the rear. The brake light shall not project a glaring or dazzling light. A violation of this law is negligence."

So that means the first driver is automatically at fault, right? WRONG.

In the courtroom, verdicts for such cases are often circumstantial and can be tricky. First, it must be determined whether the driver gave any indication of a stop. (Brake lights are always a pretty good stopping signal.) If it's determined that he did indicate a stop (one way or another), the rear-ender is often found to have been following too closely and cited for "failure to stop".

However, in the cases where the driver gives no indication, the court must determine what prompted the non-signaled stop. One would argue that slamming on the brakes when there is no reason to do so would not under the law be an "appropriate signal".

If the driver can prove he stopped in the case of an emergency, it's often found that neither driver is liable.

If the stop is not found to be an emergency and no signal was given to indicate stopping, the first driver may be cited for negligence.

That's not to say the driver intentionally caused the accident (we hope he didn't...); however, he disregarded his duty to provide adequate, fair warning of an impending stop and, in doing so, created an undue risk of collision for other drivers.

As one can easily see, a case involving a sudden stop isn't necessarily cut and dry, nor is it easy to prove. Leave sufficient distance between the front of your car and the rear of the car in front of you to avoid having to make a sudden stop and to have enough time to react to that which is unexpected. What's the best way to avoid such a situation? Pay attention. Remember the four-second-rule from way back when? There's a reason we learned it.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Megan Roth

Auto Accidents - DOES YOUR iPOD HAVE YOU TUNING OUT?

Steve Lombardi — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 00:00:15 GMT

Researchers have identified strong links between listening to fast-paced music and driving fast and listening to loud music and driving recklessly, both of which correlate with increased accident rates. The iPod is great but until technology catches up to human frailties you need to pay less attention to your tunes and more attention to the traffic.

Our recent posts have centered around one primary issue: driver distractions. We've concluded that cell phones are dangerous because when we listen, our ability to see and react is diminished. We can't help but wonder if music has the same effect? Does hooking up your iPod tune you into the song but out to the road? Does the driver trying to change the 'station' end up being a larger distraction then just changing the radio station?

Unlike a car radio the iPod can be anywhere the cord allows it to go. Even onto the floor. Unlike the car radio the buttons are not push and play. Also the buttons are not easy to locate and to 'push' to operate. The iPod was not designed for a driver, but instead for entertainment and leisure time. It has been adapted for car use. So if you don't have a passenger and don't know how to set up a playlist forget the iPod while driving.

Turns out it does. iPods have been shown to adversely affect drivers' performances. In fact, studies have found that using an iPod while driving is roughly equivalent to using a cell phone; therefore, operating the device while driving significantly increases your risk of being involved in an accident.

And the iPod isn't alone. Israeli researchers have conducted extensive studies and have concluded that all kinds of music prove distracting to drivers. Regardless of genre or type, listening to music makes drivers less alert behind the wheel.

There are countless websites centered on music-related accidents (go ahead - Google "traffic accident" + "radio" and see what you find). Many of these websites include a description of what happened alongside images of the wreckage that resulted.

We consider such images and detailed accounts supporting evidence for what researchers have identified as strong links between listening to fast-paced music and driving fast and listening to loud music and driving recklessly, both of which correlate with increased accident rates.

As if the music isn't bad enough, now iPods and similar devices offer the video feature. Talk about multitasking - drivers can watch TV shows and music videos (among other segments) while driving. In the ever-evolving world of technology, driving Apple Corporations bottom line isn't necessarily an answer to driver boredom.

But how good can it be good when using the features limits your ability to stay in your own lane and causes significant fluctuations in your speed? We think the advance in technology is great; however, we're not so sure about the judgment of drivers who use these every evolving devices while sitting behind the wheel. We are all in the midst of what can be described as first generation technology. The second wave will have to develop audio technology that can follow verbal instructions to drive these new devices. Once the technology catches up you will have an easier time 'changing the station' without having to change your attention from traffic conditions. Until that technology catches up you need to tune the devices out and pay attention to your driving.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi

Cell Phones: University of Utah Applied Cognition Lab

Steve Lombardi — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:51 GMT

In today's post the Des Moines Injuryboard blawg provides a one stop source for a better understanding of how cell phone usage increases the risk of an auto accident.

If you have a case that involves the use of a cell phone this list of articles and web links may assist you to understand the gravity of your negligence and proximate cause question. All of the attached articles can be viewed at the University of Utah Applied Cognition Lab website.

Under David Strayer the principal investigator ACL has as its objective:

"The long-term objective or our research is to understand the impact of using advanced in-car technologies on driving performance and traffic safety. Our research addresses three specific goals limited to the most prominent communication technology, the cellular phone. First, we provide unambiguous scientific evidence demonstrating that cell phone conversations disrupt driving performance. Second, we compare and contrast the increased risk associated with cell phone use relative to other real-world activities. Finally, we provide a theoretical account for why cell phone use disrupts driving performance."

For a trial lawyer this information can be the difference between pleading simple negligence or gross negligence. If you have other suggested studies write and let us know.

Recent Publications

Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular phone. Psychological Science, 12, 462-466.

McCarley, J. S., Vais, M., Pringle, H., Kramer, A. F., Irwin, D. E., & Strayer, D. L. (2001). Conversation disrupts visual scanning of traffic scenes. Paper presented at Vision in Vehicles, Australia.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., Albert, R. W., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). Cell phone induced perceptual impairments during simulated driving. In D. V. McGehee, J. D. Lee, & M. Rizzo (Eds.) Driving Assessment 2001: International Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A. & Johnston, W. A. (2002). Why do cell phone conversations interfere with driving? Proceedings of the 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A. & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Cell phone induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 23-23.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Are we being driven to distraction? Public Policy Perspectives, Vol. 16, 1-2. (Published by the Center for Public Policy and Administration, University of Utah)

Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. (2003). Effects of cell phone conversations on younger and older drivers. In the Proceedings of the 47nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Erconomics Society (pp.. 1860-1864).

Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. & Crouch, D. J. (2003). Fatal distraction? A comparison of the cell-phone driver and the drunk driver. In D. V. McGehee, J. D. Lee, & M. Rizzo (Eds.) Driving Assessment 2003: International Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design. Published by the Public Policy Center, University of Iowa (pp. 25-30).

Strayer, D. L., Cooper, J. M., & Drews, F. A. (2004). What do drivers fail to see when conversing on a cell phone? In the Proceedings of the 48nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp 2213-2217).

Drews, F. A., Pasupathi, M., & Strayer, D. L. (2004). Passenger and cell-phone conversations in simulated driving. In the Proceedings of the 48nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp 2210-2212).

McCarley, J.S., Vais, M.J., Pringle, H., Kamer, A.F., Irwin, D.E., & Strayer, D.L. (2004) Conversation distupts change detection in complex traffic scenes. Human Factors, 46, 424-436.

Strayer, D.L., & Drews, F. A. (2004). Profiles in driver distraction: Effects of cell phone conversations on younger and older drivers. Human Factors, 46, 640-649.

Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. Crouch, D. J., & Johnston, W. A. (2005). Why do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere with Driving? In W. R. Walker and D. Herrmann (Eds.) Cognitive Technology: Essays on the Transformation of Thought and Society (pp. 51-68), McFarland & Company, Inc., Jefferson, NC.

Strayer, D. L. & Drews, F. A. (In Press). Multi-tasking in the automobile. To appear in A. Kramer, D. Wiegmann, & A. Kirlik (Eds.) Applied Attention: From Theory to Practice

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Crouch, D. J.(2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human Factors, 48, 381-391.

Strayer, D. L., & Drews, F. A.(2007). Cell-Phone-Induced Driver Distraction. Current Directions In Psychological Sicence, 16, 128-131.

Cooper, J. M., Vladisavljevic, I., Strayer, D.L., Martin, P.T.(2008). Drivers' Lane Changing Behavior While Conversing On a Cell Phone in a Variable Density Simulated Highway Environment.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Lombardi