Why did the engine overheat or catch on fire?

Why did the duck boat company ignore 1999 NTSB report stating that the canopies on the duck boats were unsafe?

Why did the captain of the duck boat anchor in the middle of the shipping lane?

Why didn’t the duck boat and tug boat communicate and try to avoid the collision?

Why didn’t the tug boat see the duck boat on its radar and try to avoid the collision?

Why wasn’t there a spotter on the bow of the barge looking for traffic in the shipping canal?

It has been reported that one of the two students who drowned in this disaster was a competitive swimmer.  If this person could not swim away, no one else would have a fighting chance in his position.  Duck boats are now in cities all across America.  Not only will these lawsuits compensate the families for their great losses, but a major jury verdict will make duck boats safer or eliminate them completely.  The results of these lawsuits will also force new maritime regulations and make our shipping channels safer for all. 

On another note, Mike, Jr. and his wife, Caterina helped in the search effort for the victims along the Delaware River on the morning of July 8, 2010.

“Buckle up – It’s the Law”.  “Maintain Safe Speed”. “Arrive Alive”.  We have all read the neon road signs and heard the public service announcements but should not become numb to the message.  As we approach this heavily traveled Memorial Day Weekend, remember to practice safe and defensive driving in order to avoid the tragedy of a PA car accident, pedestrian accident, Pennsylvania motorcycle accident, or PA bicycle accident. 

The Click It or Ticket effort, which refers to mandatory seatbelt use, runs from May 24 thru June 13.  In case you are unclear as to Pennsylvania’s seatbelt law, it is a secondary offense, meaning that you would initially be pulled over for another reason, such as a traffic violation, and cannot be pulled over solely for not wearing a seatbelt.  All front seat passengers are required to be buckled up.  A ticket issued for failure to wear a seatbelt can result in a fine of $60 – on top of the fine for the offense in which you were pulled over.  In addition, children between the ages of 4 – 8 must be restrained in a booster seat in any motor vehicle and children ages 8 – 18 must wear a seatbelt when riding in a motor vehicle.  Children under the age of 4 must be properly restrained in an approved child safety seat or the driver risks a fine of $100. 

Though PennDOT reports that car accident fatalities among unrestrained drivers/passengers were down last year, it is still alarming that 451 unrestrained drivers lost their lives in 2009.  Over one-half of the 2009 Pennsylvania car accident fatalities occurred in the evening, between the hours of 6 p.m. and 5:59 a.m., and over one-half of those fatalities occurred between the late night hours of 10:00 p.m. and 2:59 a.m.  Therefore, during the campaign, Pennsylvania police will sharpen nighttime enforcement.  Last year state and local police combined issued over 6,600 seatbelt citations and more than 400 child safety seat violations. 

If you are not in the habit of wearing a seatbelt, perhaps its time to start.  Research has been definitive that seatbelts do save lives.  In addition, it sets a good example to others in your family.  Many motorists will not drive responsibly so do everything in your power to protect yourself.  If you are a victim of a Pennsylvania car accident due to another’s recklessness, contact the Pennsylvania car accident lawyers at Saile & Saile LLP to schedule a free consultation.  We will fight for the compensation you deserve.

Though Kyleigh’s Law was passed with the intention of fostering safety, it has encountered much controversy.  Some opponents of the law claim that the red decal teens must apply to their front and rear license plates leaves them vulnerable to predators of all sorts, as police are not the only ones who can spot that red decal.  Many parents of New Jersey teens contend that this law creates a most unsafe environment for their children, while teens themselves have expressed concerns and fears.  Several demonstrations against the law have taken place across the state and there is a loud cry among citizens to have the law repealed.  A lawsuit was filed in New Jersey earlier this year challenging the constitutionality of the law based upon age discrimination, but was dismissed by the judge, claiming the law does not violate the New Jersey constitution.

There are additional restrictions that Kyleigh’s Law applies to New Jersey’s graduated driver’s license (GDL) program.  They include passenger limits, a stricter curfew, and a ban on hands-free communication devices.  Those driving with a learner’s permit must have an adult 21 or older, who has been licensed to drive for at least 3 years, beside them in the vehicle at all times. In addition to that licensed driver, only one passenger from outside of the household is allowed to ride in a vehicle with a permitted driver.  Probationary drivers are allowed only one passenger in the car unless a parent or guardian is in the vehicle.  Also, it is now mandated that probationary drivers not operate a motor vehicle after 11:01 p.m. and before 5:00 a.m.  Kyleigh’s law does not provide a grandfather clause, thus every teen driver holding a permit or a probationary license is subject to the terms of the law until they successfully obtain a full driver’s license or reach the age of 21, whichever comes first.

Teen drivers in NJ must be a minimum of 16 years old in order to apply for a learner’s permit.  They are required to enroll in a state approved driver training course then pass a written test.  Once the permit has been obtained a teen driver must practice supervised driving for a minimum of 6 months.  The next step is to graduate to a probationary license, which requires being at least 17 years of age and passing a road test.  The driver must complete one full year of unsupervised driving before applying for a basic license at age 18.  Age 18 is the minimum age at which a basic license (full driving privileges) will be issued in the state of NJ.  Once a teen’s full year of unsupervised, probationary driving has been completed, they no longer have to apply the red decal to their vehicle.

Car accidents are the leading cause of death for teens. Recent studies have shown that an average of 6,000 teens are involved in fatal car accidents each year; additionally 300,000 teens sustain injuries in car accidents each year.  Moreover, the risk of being involved in a car accident is highest for a teen driver within his/her first 12-24 months of driving.  The primary reasons attributed to teen car accidents are overconfidence, driving at excessive speed, driving while intoxicated (DWI/DUI), distracted driving and inexperience. 

The personal injury lawyers at Saile and Saile LLP are highly experienced in representing individuals who have been hit by careless, reckless, or immature drivers.  Learn more about recovering damages for your or a loved one’s car accident injuries by scheduling a free, no obligation consultation with our personal injury attorneys.

Since NJ enacted their GDL program in 2001, NJ car accidents are down 5 percent and traffic fatalities reduced by 15 percent.  Even so, last year in New Jersey 36 teen drivers and 8 teen passengers were killed in NJ car accidents.

Do you feel NJ’s stricter teen driving laws will continue to improve roadway safety or simply continue to anger its residents? If you think this law is good, do you feel a similar law should be applied to other age groups, such as those over 70?

For those of you who are avid riders – both beginners and veterans –  a campaign entitled “Live Free Ride Alive”, which emphasizes the importance of reducing the number of motorcycle accidents and fatalities in Pennsylvania, has recently been launched.  The campaign’s interactive website, www.LiveFreeRideAlive.com, is designed especially for you and is worth a look.

While it is extremely important for motorcycle riders to be accountable for their own safety, it is also crucial for others on the road to know that motorcycles should be respected as would be a full-size vehicle.  Motorcycles have the same rights on the road as other vehicles.  Motorcycles also have the same obligation to follow the law.  Safe motorcycling means obeying speed limits, abstaining from driving under the influence (DUI), having a valid driver’s license, minding pedestrians in crosswalks, refraining from reckless and aggressive driving behavior.  A motorcyclist can further increase his/her level of safety by wearing protective gear and taking a motorcycle safety training course.  Approved training courses are offered by the Pennsylvania Motorcycle Safety Program.

In 2009, over 3,700 Pennsylvania motorcycle accidents were reported; 204 of them involved fatal PA motorcycle accidents.  12,000 new PA motorcycle licenses were issued in 2009, and 3,000 more motorcycles were registered over the year before.  A decrease in the number of yearly Pennsylvania motorcycle accidents in many years was actually realized in 2009.  This is promising, but we still must all be mindful of doing our part by adhering to the rules of the road.  Motorcyclists are not the only ones who cause PA motorcycle accidents.  Motorcycle riders are often hit by Pennsylvania drunk drivers, or overtaken by reckless motorists.  The same is true of how many bicycle accidents happen.

Summer is nearly upon us and we all want to get out and have some fun.  However, if you are the victim of a Pennsylvania motor cycle accident, a motorcycle-car accident, a motorcycle-pedestrian accident, or a motorcycle-bicycle accident, talk to the knowledgeable accident injury attorneys at Saile & Saile LLP.

The specific types of Philadelphia car accidents to which this new rule applies include those in which only the vehicles involved are damaged and not any surrounding personal, commercial, or government property; the vehicles are able to be safely driven away from the scene of the Philadelphia car accident; and all drivers agree to remain at the scene and exchange the relevant car accident information (vehicle make and model details, VIN, license plate number, insurance coverage, owner’s address and phone number).

Before proceeding in gathering information from each other, the drivers involved in a Philadelphia car accident are asked to immediately move their cars to the side of the road out of any other lanes of traffic and illuminate hazard lights.  Drivers should then call 911, at which time they will be asked questions by emergency personnel to make sure the Philadelphia Police are not required at the car accident scene. Once it has been confirmed that Philadelphia Police will not be dispatched, the 911 operator will give drivers the contact information for the police district to which the Philadelphia car accident should be reported.

Drivers will be issued a District Control number from the Philadelphia Police Department upon report of the accident and are then able to contact their auto insurance carrier.  Officials with the Philadelphia Police Department report that they are called out to nearly 50,000 minor Philadelphia car accidents each year, which may not be the best use of their time.  This new Philadelphia car accident reporting system is expected to free-up officers to investigate more serious Philadelphia car accidents, especially those resulting in severe personal injuries or car accident fatalities.

Drivers should continue to call 911 for emergency responders following any Philadelphia car accident where personal injuries are sustained.  In addition, though the vehicle damage may be slight, drivers who suspect there are other factors at play, such as driving under the influence (DUI), distracted driving, or driver fatigue, should insist upon police presence at the scene when initially calling 911.

It is not unusual for pain resulting from back injuries, neck injuries, spinal injuries, or shoulder injuries sustained due to a car accident to present itself a day or two after being involved in a “minor accident”.  In addition how difficult will it be to actually make a police accident report in Philadelphia.  If these types of accidents are low priority, will answering the telephones to take down these reports be low priority?  What if the other driver denies that he or she was involved the Philadelphia car accident?  It is doubtful that the police will go out and inspect the vehicles for damage as they would do in a normal accident.  This may lead to increased false accident claims and insurance fraud.

Should you find that you actually have sustained personal injuries from a Pennsylvania or New Jersey car accident, contact the personal injury lawyers at Saile & Saile LLP for a free, no obligation consultation.

Attention Pennsylvania drivers:  It’s Work Zone Awareness Week (April 19 – April 23). 

Though the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) encourages motorists to use caution and care when driving through work zones at all times, this week they hope to highlight the importance of safety toward workers and motorists alike. 

In 2009, 4 highway workers and 19 motorists died unnecessarily in 1,513 Pennsylvania work zone car accidents. It is crucial for drivers to slow down in work zones as well as be attentive to sudden changes in traffic patterns in order to avoid car accidents and worker injuries.  These numbers were up considerably from 2008, at which time 1,417 car accidents occurred and there were 2 fatal accidents. 

Does it seem fair that the people who improve our roadways and bridges to make them safer for us to drive upon are at risk of being hit by our cars, trucks, and motorcycles while doing their job?  Road crews take precautions to help prevent physical harm to them, such as wearing hard hats, boots, and brightly colored safety vests.  Here’s how we can do our part to better ensure their safety:  follow the posted work zone speed limit, pay attention to work zone signs and flaggers that have been put in place, turn on your headlights, do not tailgate, and remain undistracted (i.e. no cell phone use, no texting, no programming electronic devices).

 There is a Work Zone Safety Law in effect in Pennsylvania, which states that motorists found driving 11 miles per hour (or more) over the posted speed limit in an active work zone will automatically lose their license for 15 days.  The same 15-day license suspension penalty applies to a driver involved in a Pennsylvania work zone car accident who is convicted of failing to drive at a safe speed.  Fines for traffic violations committed within an active work zone are doubled.  These traffic violations include speeding, driving under the influence, and failure to obey traffic signals.  Close to 500 Pennsylvania motorists had their licenses suspended in 2009 for committing work zone violations.

Active work zones are not hard to spot.  In fact, Pennsylvania interstate road projects with a cost of $300,000 or greater have a speed monitoring device in place displaying motorists’ speed as they enter the work zone.  Let’s start paying attention and help reduce road crew injuries and fatalities. Urge your family members and friends to do the same.

The Pennsylvania car accident injury lawyers at Saile & Saile LLP are committed to raising awareness of good driving habits in order to keep all of us who use Pennsylvania’s roadways safer and less likely to cause a PA car accident.  If you have been injured in a car accident due to someone else’s carelessness, contact us for a free consultation.

While the new law may have put into place to protect pedestrians, they need to be responsible for their actions, too.  Complying with the new law means that pedestrians must cross in a designated crosswalk where available, obey traffic signals (i.e. “walk”, “don’t walk” signs), and yield to oncoming traffic if not crossing in a cross walk.   Those pedestrians who do not follow the law can incur a fine of $54.

This change in law is notable because from 2004 – present, New Jersey has had a disproportionately high rate of pedestrian auto accident deaths, with an average of 150 per year.  This is not only the highest rate of motor vehicle-pedestrian accident fatalities of any state in the union, but it is also double that of the national average.  

As for a few other New Jersey pedestrian accident statistics, in 2009 there were 157 pedestrian accident deaths.  By the end of March (2010) there were already 28 recorded pedestrian fatalities in New Jersey since the beginning of the year, which is actually down from last year, when the number of deaths recorded during the same period was 48.  Since 2004, over 30,000 pedestrians have been injured in New Jersey car accidents.

For the many decades that the law required only yielding to pedestrians, numerous drivers did not even do that, according to safety officials in New Jersey.   Therefore, a whole new mindset will need to be adopted by New Jersey drivers, as well as drivers from neighboring states who are not conditioned to stopping at crosswalks.  This will be a big adjustment for some. It is extremely important, however, to get into the habit quickly.  Summer is coming and this law certainly does apply at the Jersey shore.  Be mindful that at every corner pedestrians are likely to be crossing and you need to stop.  In the summer of 2009, 21-year old Casey Feldman was involved in a pedestrian accident and killed while crossing at a 4-way stop intersection in Ocean City, New Jersey by a distracted driver who did not stop.

Ultimately, pedestrians and drivers alike must increase their awareness and proceed cautiously when approaching crosswalks in order to begin to effectuate a decline in the number of New Jersey motor vehicle-pedestrian accidents.  If you have been injured as a result of a pedestrian accident in NJ or PA, contact the car accident injury lawyers at Saile & Saile LLP.

Mr. Hartman is currently free on $1 million unsecured bail. He has been charged with vehicular manslaughter as a result of the September 20 Pennsylvania car accident. He is additionally facing the following charges: involuntary manslaughter, recklessly endangering another person, reckless driving, speeding, driving outside his lane, illegally changing lanes, and passing in a no passing zone.

The fatal car accident happened just before 7:00 p.m. on a Sunday evening. Mr. Hartman was traveling northbound on Washington Crossing Road behind a Toyota driven by Scott Rawicz. In this no-passing zone with a posted speed limit of 45 mph, Mr. Hartman passed the Toyota. In doing so, he moved over into the southbound lane, but overshot and drove into the grass on the side of the road. Mr. Hartman quickly lost control of his car as he tried to bring it out of the grass and back onto the road. His vehicle spun, crossed again into the northbound lane, and the two vehicles collided. The force was great enough to keep each car in motion to the point where each car came to rest only after hitting large roadside trees.

Mrs. Elizabeth Rawicz and son, Seth, were transported by air to St. Mary Medical Center. Seth was pronounced dead upon arrival. Mrs. Rawicz, who suffered brain bleeding as a result of the crash, died at the hospital within a week following the car accident. Mr. Rawicz, the only surviving occupant in the Toyota, was treated at St. Mary Medical Center for a broken wrist, and fractures to his pelvis, sternum, and toes.

At Mr. Hartman’s arraignment, the Newtown District Court Judge declared that while out on bail Mr. Hartman is permitted only to drive to and from work appointments; he is not to make any other stops.

This tragic event caused Mr. Rawicz to lose his entire family. The horrible car accident could have been completely prevented. Mr. Rawicz could pursue a wrongful death cases against Mr. Hartman from the deaths of his wife and daughter. Our thoughts are with Mr. Rawicz.

This Bill has wide support among New Jersey legislators.  If it does become law, traffic accident report forms used by New Jersey police departments will be modified to include an area for the investigating officer to report whether or not the New Jersey car accident was attributable in any way to driver inattention.

Though information pertaining to the specific type of driver distraction that was taking place at the time of the NJ car accident will be disclosed on accident reports, insurance companies would not be permitted to use the information adversely against a policyholder.

According to the proposed law, individuals are considered to be inattentive while driving if using pagers, GPS devices, radios, and all other audio/visual delivery devices.  Additionally, if a driver is fatigued, engaging in the act of personal grooming, food or beverage consumption, reading, or attending to an unsecured pet, he/she is deemed a distracted driver.

Police investigating New Jersey car accidents would also be required to report if the drivers involved were using hand held cell phones when the NJ car accident occurred, but penalties associated with the use of hand held cell phones fall under a different New Jersey law.  Driving while using a hand held cell phone in New Jersey is a primary offense and carries of fine of $100.

It is best to remain distraction-free while behind the wheel, as we all know, for the safety of yourself and of others.  If you are injured in a Pennsylvania or New Jersey car accident due to another’s carelessness, contact car accident injury lawyer Michael L. Saile, Jr. for a free consultation.

Pennsylvania does not impose absolute liability on a dog owner for harms and injuries caused by their animal.  A person injured by a dog or other animal must prove that the owner of the animal acted negligently.  Pennsylvania has abolished the One Bite Rule which required dog owners to restrain their animals after the 1^st bite.  Just because a dog or other animal has proven to be dangerous in the past, does not mean that the owner is liable. 

A plaintiff in a dog bite case must show that the owner failed to take proper actions to preclude the dog from acting in a vicious manner.  Some factors showing owner knowledge that the dog was vicious include: complaints brought to the owner’s attention, fighting with other dogs, constant confinement of the dog, warning signs on the owner’s premises, and statements by the dog owner about the dog’s behavior.

In Pennsylvania, a dog owner can assert the Doctrine of Assumption of the Risk when someone is injured by their dog or animal.  This means that if another person who knew about the vicious or dangerous propensities of the dog and chose to interact or get near the dog, that person assumed or accepted the risk of the dangerousness of the dog and cannot recover.

The most common personal injuries from dog bites and other animal injuries include scarring and disfigurement and broken bones.  The animal’s teeth many times cause puncture wounds and ripping and slicing of the skin.  Broken bones are often caused by dogs knocking people over.

A dog owner’s homeowner’s insurance policy may provide insurance coverage to pay the claim of a victim of a dog bite in Pennsylvania.  Dog bite cases are not the easiest cases to recover compensation.   The Bucks County, Pennsylvania Law Firm of Saile & Saile LLP only represents victims of serious dog bites or other dangerous animal injury cases.  Serious injuries from a dog bite case would include very bad scarring and disfigurement to visible places on the body, especially the face or badly broken bones which have caused other complications.

In the first year the pedestrian safety programs were put into practice, the state saw a 20% reduction in vehicle-pedestrian crashes/collisions. The programs stress that in New Jersey, pedestrian safety is a share responsibility.

Motorists are required by law to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks. Motorists who do not stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk (either one that is marked or unmarked) or who overtake vehicles that are stopped at a crosswalk are subject to a $100 fine, up to fifteen days in jail, and two points assessed on one’s driver’s license.

As a driver making a right turn on red, it is important to be aware of pedestrians who may be crossing in a crosswalk. This is especially essential in urban areas and suburban “downtown” settings. By law, there is a crosswalk at every intersection, even if it is not physically marked or painted as one. This is referred to as an “unmarked” crosswalk. Drivers are to yield to pedestrians crossing correctly at an intersection, whether crossing in a marked or unmarked crosswalk.

Though we all have found ourselves at one time or another stopping too far across the white line at a stop sign or having our wheels situated within the lines of a crosswalk at a traffic intersection, this is something which should be avoided. Motorists are not to block any portion of a crosswalk when stopped at a traffic light for stop sign in order to allow for pedestrians to safely pass.

It is the responsibility of the pedestrian to make sure to cross only in crosswalks and at intersections. Those crossing at any point other than a crosswalk or intersection must yield the right of way to all vehicles on the roadway. Pedestrians are not permitted to step off of a curb or sidewalk and enter a path of oncoming traffic which is too close to stop in a safe and timely manner.

According to the National Highway Traffic Association and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, there is a 5% chance of a fatal accident resulting in a pedestrian-vehicle accident of the vehicle is traveling at 20 mph, a 45% chance of a fatal accident if the vehicle is traveling at 30 mph, and an 85% chance of a of a fatal accident if the vehicle is traveling at 40 mph. As drivers in any state, we are responsible for practicing due care with respect to any pedestrian along or upon a street or roadway. At the same time, pedestrians, too, must be responsible for their safety. Be alert and aware of your surroundings at all times.

If you or a loved one is injured in a New Jersey or Pennsylvania pedestrian-car accident, contact us for a free consultation.

The most important general rule for motorists to remember is that pedestrians sometimes have the right-of-way at intersections. “When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.” One very important fact for a pedestrian to remember is that a driver may not see you. Do not assume that because you see the driver, the driver sees you. In order to avoid a very unnecessary car accident, try to make eye contact with the driver; make sure he sees you before you cross.

A driver approaching a vehicle stopped at a crosswalk or intersection (allowing a pedestrian to cross), is not permitted to pass the stopped vehicle and proceed through the intersection or crosswalk. This would, of course, compromise the safety of the pedestrian.

Though, drivers are required to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, it is still necessary for pedestrians to exercise care when entering a crosswalk by looking left-right-left for oncoming traffic. In order to avoid pedestrian–car accidents, pedestrians must take responsible safety measures. For example, the law states that pedestrians are not to suddenly step off of a curb or sidewalk and run into the path of an oncoming vehicle. Even if you are stepping off of a curb into a crosswalk, a seemingly pedestrian-protected area, it is the pedestrian’s responsibility to make sure oncoming traffic is still at a safe enough distance to be able to make a safe and complete stop at the crosswalk.

The safest approach for a pedestrian to take is to make all crossings at a corner or at a physical marked crosswalk. “Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a crosswalk at an intersection or any marked crosswalk shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.” In urban areas where traffic-control signals are in operation, it is required that pedestrians cross only in a marked crosswalk. Likewise in urban areas, it is common for vehicles to enter or emerge from an alley, side street, public parking garage, or driveway. In these cases, the driver must yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian approaching on any sidewalk extending across the alley, side-street, garage, or driveway. This rule, however, applies in all settings, not only urban communities.

In a patrolled area pedestrians and motorists alike must obey the instructions of a police officer or other official authorized to direct or regulate traffic, such as a school crossing guard. In an unpatrolled area or an area unequipped with electronic traffic control signals, such as the universal white “walk” symbol at a traffic light, drivers are required to yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian(s) crossing the roadway, whether a marked crosswalk is present in the road or not.

If a sidewalk is in place, pedestrians are required to make use of the sidewalk and are not permitted to walk upon the adjacent roadway. When a sidewalk is not available, any pedestrian walking along the roadway must remain on the shoulder, as far as possible from the edge of the roadway, and must yield the right-of-way to all vehicles on the roadway. Though the burden of safety falls on the pedestrian when walking along a roadway, we remind motorists to employ rules of common courtesy when pedestrians are present.

Pedestrians, like motorists, are required to yield the right-of-way to authorized emergency vehicles. Emergency vehicle operators, too, are obliged to exercise care to avoid colliding with other vehicles or any pedestrian.

As we all know, driving under the influence (DUI) is against the law in Pennsylvania. Additionally, it is unlawful for a pedestrian who is under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance and deemed a hazard to proceed along any street or roadway.

Only when motorists and pedestrians alike abide by the traffic laws in place and are mindful that we share the road, can the number of Pennsylvania pedestrian-car accidents be reduced. These accidents often result in the pedestrian suffering severe injuries, including head injuries/brain damage, broken bones, and even wrongful death. It is vital in this age of cell phone usage and texting while behind the wheel that we all exercise care when operating our vehicles or heading out for our morning walk.

In 2009 the number of fatalities as a result of Pennsylvania car accidents was 1,256. This is remarkable because it is the lowest recorded number of Pennsylvania car accident fatalities since 1928, the first year records were kept. The second lowest number of Pennsylvania accident fatalities was 1,328, recorded in 1944. The number of car accident deaths in 2008 was 1,468. That is a decline of 1,680 traffic accident fatalities in one year’s time!

The 3 most prevalent causes of Pennsylvania car accident deaths, as determined by PennDOT studies, are related to lack of use seat belt and child restraints, alcohol use/DUI (driving under the influence), and aggressive driving. Between 2008 and 2009 traffic deaths in the category of unrestrained individuals decreased by 116, those car accident deaths involving alcohol use declined by 89, while deaths thought to be caused by aggressive driving dropped by 11.

This achievement in reducing car accident deaths is due to a concerted effort among PennDOT, Pennsylvania State and local law enforcement, and other safety groups who work hard to educate the public on safe driving habits, as well as enforce current traffic laws. PennDOT put $11 million of federal funding toward enforcement programs to combat aggressive and impaired driving. This funding allowed 396 Pennsylvania police departments to carry out enforcement programs for aggressive driving and gave 600 police departments the wherewithal to conduct 3,000 programs to enforce against impaired driving.

PennDOT also puts about $10 million per year toward safety engineering improvements, such as centerline road rumble strip installation, traffic signalization, better signage, and utility pole relocations. These improvements are all very effective, as well as low cost. For example, a study conducted from 2000-2004 showed that there was a 35-50% reduction in the number of car accidents that occurred at the sites where center-line rumble strips had been laid and a 20-30% decrease in the number of Pennsylvania car accidents where shoulder rumble strips had been installed.

Though the overall number of Pennsylvania highway car accident deaths has gone down considerably, there is one category of drivers that has seen an increase in the number of fatalities over the last year. The age group comprised of those 65 years of age and older experienced an increase in the number of fatal highway accidents, with 276 in 2009 as compared to 259 in 2008. If you have friends or family members in this age group who continue to drive, you may be interested in referring them to the courses offered by PennDOT in their Mature Driver Improvement program. For more information, visit www.DriveSafePA.org.

PennDOT’s goal is to save at least one hundred more lives each year by way of its safety programs and enforcement initiatives. They remind us of the simple steps every motorist and passenger can take in order remain safe and help maintain the safety of others on the road: always wear seatbelts, do not ever drive after drinking, and obey the speed limit.

If you are a Pennsylvania car accident victim who sustained injuries due to someone else’s carelessness, you may be entitled to compensation. Telephone the office of Michael L. Saile, Jr. to set up a free personal injury consultation.

Ms. Atkins, who had admitted to speeding (driving 69 mph in a 40 mph zone) when she lost control of her car, plead guilty to vehicular homicide and involuntary manslaughter late last year. She was sentenced this month in Bucks County Juvenile Court to no less than six months in a locked juvenile facility in Monroe County, PA. The sentencing judge ruled that Atkins’ stay at the juvenile facility is indefinite.

Ms. Atkins must spend her upcoming spring break at the locked facility, after which she will spend the remaining weeks of the school year on house arrest, with mandated participation in juvenile programs on the weekends. Atkins begins her long-term stay at the juvenile facility as soon as she finishes classes and meets all graduation requirements. Ms. Atkins, now a resident of Bensalem, PA and a senior at Bensalem High School, is prohibited from attending her high school graduation ceremony in June. Her sentence also includes 200 hours of community service, which will have her spending some time talking to other teenagers and young adults about the dangers and consequences of reckless driving.

Additionally, Ms. Atkins has been ordered to attend regular therapy sessions, undergo drug and alcohol tests, write Alex Smolin’s parents a letter of apology, and pay a restitution fee of $14,700 to cover the cost of Ms. Smolin’s funeral. And, yes, Ms. Atkins’ driver’s license has been revoked.

The accident investigation concluded that there was cell phone use in the car around the time of the accident, but because the investigating officers were unable to determine the exact moment of impact, Ms. Atkins was not charged with offenses associated with cell phone use or distracted driving.

The Bucks County car accident investigation revealed the presence of a marijuana pipe among Ms. Atkins’ belongings, but blood tests performed on the driver showed no trace of the drug in her system at the time of the Warrington, PA car accident.

We provide this follow-up to our original article and the outcome in this case in an effort to alert both teens and their parents about the dangers of reckless and/or careless driving. In an instant, a foolish decision could result in a fatal accident or serious, life altering injuries in the case of a car accident or other event causing serious personal injury. Not only has one family lost a child, but another individual has to live with the consequences of her poor judgment for the rest of her life, as well as the loss of a dear friend. Most assuredly, Ms. Atkins’ senior year of high school and remaining teenage years are not turning out to be what she might have envisioned.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that it received notification of one hundred acceleration-related incidents at the time Toyota issued the October recall. It has been determined that among these 100 incidents, there were 17 crashes and 5 fatalities. It has been confirmed that the 5 fatalities occurred in two separate fatal accidents.

Toyota says that in the short term they will shave off a portion of current owners’ gas pedals to keep them from getting caught under the floor mats. The company is working on a new gas pedal design for the affected models, which it hopes to have ready by April. Those owners who choose to have their gas pedals reconfigured now by the dealer are also eligible to have the new and improved accelerator installed in April, or as soon as they are available.

Though the immediate remedy of a gas pedal reconfiguration has been offered by the car manufacturer, both Toyota and the NHTSA strongly urge all owners of the recalled models to promptly remove the floor mats from the driver’s side of their vehicles. Do not replace these floor mats with any other product or material.

The Toyota and Lexus models included in the October 2009 gas pedal/floor mat recall are:

1.         2005-2010 Avalon
   
2.         2007-2010 Camry
   
3.         2009-2010 Corolla
   
4.         2008-2010 Highlander
   
5.         2009-2010 Matrix
   
6.         2004-2009 Prius
   
7.         2005-2010 Tacoma
   
8.         2007-2010 Tundra
   
9.         2009-2010 Venza
   

1.     2007-2010 Lexus ES 350
   

           2006-2010 Lexus IS 250 and IS350
   

   In January 2010 Toyota issued another recall on nearly 2.3 million more automobiles for further accelerator pedal problems. Relative to the 2009 recall, Toyota rejected any notion of a mechanical flaw in the accelerators. However, the manufacturer has recently been investigating some reports of incidents involving unintended acceleration in the absence of floor mats. The company has conceded that there is a possibility that in certain models the accelerator pedals may remain in a partially depressed position or return to slowly to the idle position after the driver presses down on the gas pedal. This creates a very dangerous situation for drivers, as well as any passengers in a car afflicted with the accelerator defect.
   

   The Toyota vehicles affected by the January 2010 recall are:
   

   1.         2009-2010 RAV4
      
   2.         2009-2010 Corolla
      
   3.         2009-2010 Matrix
      
   4.         2009-2010 Avalon        
      
   5.         2009-2010 Camry
      
   6.         2010 Highlander
      
   7.         2007-2010 Tundra
      
   8.         2008-2009 Sequoia
      

       

   Roughly 1.7 million Toyota vehicles are subject to both recalls. To find out if your vehicle is involved in the recent recalls, enter your VIN on the Toyota owner’s website, www.toyotaowners.com.
   

   If your Toyota or Lexus car, truck, or SUV has malfunctioned due to manufacturer error bringing harm to you or others, contact the personal injury lawyers at Saile & Saile LLP to help you fight for the compensation you deserve.

MADD’s efforts to combat the effects of driving under the influence (DUI) in Pennsylvania are significant. MADD provides emotional and financial support to victims and their loved ones through Pennsylvania’s Crime Victims’ Compensation program. Other missions include educating Pennsylvania children about the dangers of and laws against underage drinking; using designated driver programs, safe party guides, and holiday e-cards to educate adults on ways to prevent drunk driving; ensuring our justice system is wisely handling DUI cases by monitoring the court system; supporting the development and passage of DUI-related legislation such as ignition interlock, passenger restrictions, and mandatory testing which promote MADD’s position; and recognizing, encouraging, and supporting our law enforcement officers who are our first line of defense against drunk driving.

Unless you know someone who is a drunk driving accident victim, you may not understand the depth of the loss and the support they and their families need. The work of MADD complements the work of lawyers and of the Pennsylvania Association for Justice in many ways.

Michael L. Saile, Jr. is a member of the Pennsylvania Association for Justice. If you have been injured in an accident caused by a drunk driver, telephone us for competent and aggressive legal representation.

If you would like to be on our mailing list and receive our bi-monthly legal newsletter at your home or office, submit a case submission form and provide us with your name, mailing address, and e-mail address.

January’s Saile & Saile LLP newsletter includes articles covering:  

Elder abuse in America.

An Alzheimer’s disease assistance program.

Winter weather safety reminders for drivers.

How social networking sites could negatively impact your case. 

The importance of continuing medical therapies after a car accident.

Have a look.  Let us know what you think.

Mrs. Liedtka, driving in the left lane on the New Jersey Turnpike, was traveling south near Interchange 5 early in the morning on December 2, 2009 when she reportedly came to an unexpected near stop. Her vehicle was hit by the SUV behind her, which pushed Mrs. Liedtka’s car into the center lane, only to be struck again. The second time her car was struck by a tractor trailer. The force of the truck caused Mrs. Liedtka’s car to crash into the concrete median. Upon contact with the concrete structure, her car burst into flames. Police found Mrs. Liedtka dead behind the wheel of her burnt car. The other drivers involved did not sustain injuries in this fatal accident.

Car accidents are a common occurrence on the heavily traveled roadways of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, such as the NJ Turnpike, the PA Turnpike, U.S. Route 1, and I-95 due to a number of different factors. However, this New Jersey car accident story is especially noteworthy and will give pause to any of us who might be caring for a parent or older relative. Mrs. Liedtka suffered from Alzheimer’s disease.

She had been reported as missing on December 1 after a family member had gone to her home to pick her up and found that both Mrs. Liedkta and her car were gone. Due to her mental condition, the Hamilton Township police immediately engaged endless law enforcement divisions throughout the surrounding region to try to locate Mrs. Liedtka, as well as publically broadcast missing person reports across the state of New Jersey.

Who is at fault for this deadly accident? Did Ms. Leidtka have a valid driver’s license? Should her driver’s license been taken away? Can anyone be held responsible? Tough questions…luckily no one else was injured or killed?

It is important to know and understand both the limitations and provisions of your auto insurance policy, especially if you are involved in a car accident. However, the best thing to do is to be prepared before you sustain serious injuries. There are different types of car insurance policies in Pennsylvania and New Jersey that a person can obtain with respect to recovering damages, all of which are reviewed and explained on our personal injury website. We encourage you to read up on the different coverage options in order to protect yourself and your family in case of a serious personal injury sustained in a car accident.

There is now also expansive information on our website regarding many different types of car accidents, including head-on collisions, rear-end collisions, drunk driving accidents, as well as distracted driving accidents. There are various sorts of injuries that are often associated with these types of car accidents, such as neck and back injuries and spinal injuries, which can throw your life off course for months. Motor vehicle accident injuries, as well as those injuries sustained from other types of accidents, such as slip and fall, are often painful, can cause scarring and disfigurement, and can also be costly to treat. One who is injured or maimed due to another’s negligence or irresponsibility deserves to receive fair compensation.

Visit www.pa-nj-injurylawyer.com to learn about our attorneys’ experience and knowledge in the area of personal injury practice. Our website allows you access to a lawyer through use of the “Chat with us Now” function to discuss your personal injury situation. In addition, you may e-mail the personal injury attorneys at Saile & Saile LLP with your car accident and/or personal injury information by using the contact us tab. Of course, anyone interested in speaking with us via telephone is welcome to call locally or toll-free at the phone numbers prominently displayed on the top of each page of the website.

As reported by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in 2008, 502 people in the U.S. lost their lives in car accidents on Thanksgiving Day alone. To put that statistic in perspective, 102 people are killed in fatal car accidents nationwide on a typical day. Last year’s (2008) traffic fatalities were down substantially as compared to the yearly average over the last 26 years. Some attribute that drop to high gas prices keeping people off of the roads and expect to see a rise again once the traffic accident deaths are calculated for 2009. Others attribute that drop in fatalities to better education in the areas of the seat belt usage, the dangers driving under the influence (DUI), and the importance of driving defensively and remaining alert.

Locally, State Police records show that over the 2008 Thanksgiving holiday (Wednesday – Sunday), 321 individuals were injured in Pennsylvania car accidents, with 10 fatalities. State Police report that this year (2009), 300 people were injured in Pennsylvania car accidents, with only 3 resulting deaths.

Though the number of PA car accidents was down this year, PA State Troopers issued 27% more speeding tickets and 28% more tickets for failure to wear seatbelts than they did last year.

PA State Police also saw a decrease this year in the number of those they arrested for DUI (driving under the influence) as compared to last year. In 2008, 416 Pennsylvania drivers were arrested for DUI; this year 359 Pennsylvania DUI arrests were made.

This news is good! We are now in the official “holiday season”, however, let’s not get sloppy. The holiday season brings high volumes of traffic on the roads, especially around shopping malls, distracted or impaired motorists at the wheel, and inexperienced drivers on our roadways. Those operating vehicles are encouraged get ample rest and remain alert and defensive at all times. Most importantly, we remind you not to drive after you have been drinking.

With all of these safety measures in mind, PennDOT re-launched its Operation Safe Holiday program just before Thanksgiving, which will remain in effect until the end of New Year’s weekend. Operation Safe Holiday functions with the coordinated effort of the State Police and numerous municipal police departments throughout the Commonwealth. They put in place DUI sobriety checkpoints and a variety of safety patrols in order to identify those drivers who are impaired, driving aggressively, and/or not wearing seatbelts.

PennDOT asks those who will be on the road throughout the holiday season to buckle up, refrain from aggressive driving and DUI, and, finally, resist the urge to operate your cell phone (for texting or talking) while driving. Of course, this should be the standard for all times of the year, but we stress the importance of doing your part to help keep families safe and alive during this festive time.

Young drivers are not always experienced enough to recognize dicey road conditions and challenging situations. Therefore, PennDOT recommends that distractions be greatly minimized, as they only exacerbate the driver’s lack of experience. Engaging in actions such as talking or texting on a cell phone, fiddling with the radio, eating, or adjusting climate control while driving increases the chance of an accident taking place.

PennDOT encourages adult supervision of beginner teen drivers as often as possible in order to assess the teen’s knowledge of road rules, driving skill, and overall level of maturity. Parents are also reminded by PennDOT that there are ways to greatly reduce the risk of your child becoming a Pennsylvania car accident statistic. For example, talk with your teen about safe driving before they turn 16, establish a parent/teen driving contract, limit the number of passengers a teen driver can have in the car at one time, limit the amount of dawn, dusk, and evening driving until more driving experience has been gained, and prohibit eating, drinking, talking or texting on a cell phone while driving.

The best thing a parent can do, however, to instill safe driving habits in their children is to be a good example. Observe speed limits and other rules of the road, do not tailgate, be alert and undistracted, and be courteous to other drivers.

If you were in a NJ or PA car accident caused by a distracted teenage driver, contact us for a free case evaluation.

It is believed that safety enforcement on the part of municipal police departments and the Pennsylvania State Police is in large part responsible for the rise in seat belt usage. Are you familiar with the “Click it or Ticket” campaign? PennDOT authorized close to $2.5 million of federal funds for use in this enforcement campaign. During the last 12 months, over 10,000 PA traffic violations for non-use of seat belts were issued in Pennsylvania.

PennDOT also attributes the record number of seat belt wearers to the fact that seat belt education has become more widely focused at students in grades kindergarten through 12. Law enforcement officers around the state not only present programs in schools, reaching some 47,000 students, but they also set up patrols around schools to urge young drivers and their passengers to buckle up. Students may go home and, in turn, pass on this important safety information to their parents and family members, creating a noticeable “pass-it-on” effect.

If you are unfamiliar with Pennsylvania’s seat belt law, it requires all front seat passengers to be buckled up. This PA traffic ticket can result in a fine of $60. Pennsylvania law further requires that children between the ages of 4 – 8 be restrained in an appropriate booster seat in any motor vehicle and children ages 8 – 18 wear a seat belt when riding in a motor vehicle, regardless of the area within the vehicle the child is seated. The seat belt law in Pennsylvania is secondary, meaning that drivers can only be issued a ticket if they have been stopped for another traffic offense.

Pennsylvania also has a primary child passenger safety law mandating that children under the age of 4 be properly restrained in an approved child safety seat anywhere the child is within the vehicle. Failure to comply with this law can result in a fine of $100.

PennDOT encourages drivers and passengers alike to continue to buckle up. This action will increase the chances of surviving a car accident. That’s good news for everyone. If you know someone involved in a PA or NJ car accident, the lawyers at Saile & Saile LLP can help pick up the pieces and help recover fair compensation from what a negligent driver may have taken.

If you wish to be on our mailing list, please submit a case submission form and provide us your name, mailing address, and email address. 

In October’s newsletter we discuss:  

What’s new at Saile & Saile LLP. 

What is E.N.R.A.D.D.  Philadelphia’s ranking among the safest driving cities. DUI arrests up among women. 

Whether or not to give a recorded statement to the auto insurance company. 

An important safety alert. 

NJ’s Ignition Interlock Bill.  

Health insurance Liens.

Researchers involved in the Harvard study say that American adults aged 64 and younger living without health insurance are faced with a 40 percent higher risk of death than those individuals in the same age group who have health insurance. A similar study was conducted in 1993 and revealed that people without health insurance had a 25 percent greater risk of death. This increased risk of death among the uninsured is growing for a few reasons, according to researchers: (1) the number of uninsured people is growing, and (2) there are fewer facilities available to treat the uninsured. The study documented that public hospitals and clinics in major U.S. cities are closing down altogether or greatly reducing services, leaving the uninsured with few healthcare options.

The U.S. Census Bureau reported in September that 46.3 million people in the U.S. lacked health insurance coverage in 2008, which is an increase from 2007′s rate of 45.7 million uninsured. This statistic is not clear as to what “people” were included in the accounting. Does this accounting include only naturalized U.S. citizens or does it also include undocumented individuals and other categories of non-citizens?

This study was not released without controversy. Washington, D.C. think tank, The National Center for Policy Analysis, who supports a free-market based healthcare system, feel that the Harvard researchers overstated the death risk of the uninsured. Furthermore, the researchers purportedly did not track how long the study subjects were uninsured.

We are all aware of the contentious debate over healthcare reform, which remains ongoing. Is it really healthcare reform that is being discussed, however, or is it health insurance reform? Is a government backed “single-payer” system the answer to getting more Americans insured? Are we even aware of what the true problem is and what exactly needs to change within our highly dysfunctional and extremely expensive system? There are many schools of thought and many theories posited by well-educated individuals laying out what is best for the American people in terms of attainable, affordable, effective healthcare. The question is: who is right? There is so much to consider and every component that makes up our current healthcare system must look out for its own interest.

As the nation with the most expensive healthcare system in the world, we must ask ourselves, “what are we getting?” Certainly not the distinction of being the most healthy nation in the world!

Here are a few local statistics: 13% of all Philadelphians have diabetes and 27% of Philadelphians smoke. As for national statistics: 1 out of every 3 Medicare dollars goes to pay for diabetes care; today, one-third of U.S. children and adolescents are overweight or obese. Could our healthcare system be improved greatly by promoting more preventive care? Wouldn’t health insurance rates decrease if doctors practiced more coordinated care with patients? Were back to asking ourselves what is at the crux of the healthcare problem and, ultimately, “what is the answer?”

According to reports, Mr. Bihari, traveling northbound on I-295 at about 4:10 a.m., lost control of his 2007 Harley-Davidson as he attempted to switch from the right lane to the center lane. He was thrown from his motorcycle into the center lane and struck by two cars. (NJ Police report that neither of the two drivers will be charged in this incident).

Due to the construction taking place on that section of I-295, a layer of pavement in the right lane had been removed, making the center lane at least 2 inches higher than the right lane. According to New Jersey State Police, signage is present to warn motorists of the road surface transition and a solid white line is in place to keep drivers from changing lanes in that area.

About 8 hours later, Mr. Ross, also traveling northbound on a motorcycle in the same general vicinity on I-295 in Bordentown, NJ tried to change lanes. He hit the raised surface of the road and was thrown from his bike into the air and then fell onto the pavement. Mr. Ross was transported to Capital Health Center – Fuld Campus and pronounced dead later that afternoon.

Many of us tend to ignore or forget the purpose of the solid white line. These lines indicate no lane crossing. On the other hand, was the construction signage sufficient to warn the motorists? The road must be safe at all times. Erecting a warning sign up does not necessarily relieve the construction company and/or the State of New Jersey from providing safe roads at all times.

A construction engineer and perhaps an accident reconstructionist may be utilized in this case to determine whether the road was unsafe and therefore should have been closed. Sounds like a tough case…

All three occupants of the vehicle had their seatbelts fastened and excessive speed is not being blamed for the collision. However, the driver did lose control of the car and hit a tree. Ms. Smolner was killed as a result of the crash. The driver and the other passenger were treated at Abington Memorial Hospital and released.

The car crash occurred in the afternoon on Street Road in Warrington, not far from Central Bucks High South. Ms. Smolner had just moved to the area from Miami, FL and was beginning her junior year.

Street Road in Warrington, PA is a fairly straight road. There may have been driver error or a vehicle problem which caused the accident. The Bucks County car accident may have also been caused by someone running the vehicle off the road. The Warrington Police Department should be investigating the fatal accident to find the cause. Our thoughts go out to the family of the young victim.

The Decedent was seated in the rear passenger seat. The section of the car that smashed into the utility pole was the rear passenger quadrant. She was pronounced dead at the hospital. Provinceline Road was closed for nearly 6 hours in order for police to investigate the NJ car accident and for rescue workers to dislodge each of the four passengers from the vehicle.

The driver of the vehicle and another occupant were taken to Princeton Medical Center and treated for arm and foot injuries. A fourth passenger was transported to Helene Fuld Medical Center in Trenton.

Saile & Saile LLP represents individuals who were injured in NJ car accidents.

At the time, police sought witnesses to the hit and run accident and on September 4 arrested Craig Brauer (23) of Pennington, NJ as the alleged driver of the vehicle that hit Mr. Oravsky. Hamilton Township police recovered the vehicle driven by Mr. Brauer in the New Jersey car accident.

Mr. Oravsky suffered substantial head trauma and back injuries when hit and thrown from his bike. He was transported to Capital Health where he underwent surgery the same day.

Mr. Brauer has been charged with aggravated assault, assault by auto, knowingly leaving the scene of a motor vehicle crash with injury, reckless driving, making an improper turn, and failure to report a motor vehicle accident with injury. He posted bail and was released from police custody.

Along with the nine car accident deaths, 654 Pennsylvania car accidents took place, injuring 285 people, compared to last year’s statistic of 789 collisions, with 412 injured.

By this time last year, PA State troopers issued 8,312 Pennsylvania speeding tickets, whereas last year 6,371 speeding citations were issued.

Police officers all over the country have been vigilant in their pursuit people driving under the influence (DUI). In Pennsylvania, 52 of the car accidents which took place over this Labor Day weekend were alcohol related, including one fatal PA car accident. During last year’s Labor Day driving period 90 auto accidents DUI related. Of those 90 PA car accidents, four were fatal.

PA State Police Commissioner Frank Pawlowski commented, “We saw a significant decrease not only in the number of persons killed in crashes during this year’s holiday driving period, but also a decline in the total number of crashes and resulting injuries.” These numbers represent only those accidents investigated by the PA State Police.

20-year old Joseph Gillespie of Croydon, PA lost his life in a motorcycle-car accident on July 16, 2009. Mr. Gillespie was driving his 2009 Yamaha motorcycle eastbound on Street Road in Bensalem when a motorist, a 17-year old from Northeast Philadelphia, traveling westbound proceeded to make a left turn. She cut across the eastbound lanes and in front of Mr. Gillespie’s oncoming motorcycle in order to make her turn. Mr. Gillespie struck the driver’s vehicle and was killed.

Police records indicate that neither alcohol nor drugs were linked to this fatal Bucks County accident.

In 2004 The Patient Safety Act was implemented in New Jersey, requiring hospitals to report medical errors to the State Department of Health and Senior Services. Under this Act, however, the state was not made to release specifics detailing the hospitals at which medical errors occurred.

The new legislation advances the cause of The Patient Safety Act in that the state will now be required to report annually on the hospitals responsible for making serious mistakes and the frequency with which the errors occur at each facility. Examples of these errors would include surgery performed on the wrong body part, accidental punctures to patients, and objects, such as medical instruments, being left inside a patient after a surgical procedure. Furthermore, hospitals are no longer permitted to charge patients or patients’ health insurance companies for serious preventable medical errors. The first New Jersey Hospital Performance Report to contain this newly available patient safety information will be released in late 2009.

Pennsylvania also has a patient safety reporting system, known as PA-PSRS, which was developed by the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority and went into effect in 2004. Healthcare facilities are required by the Authority to report “serious events”, as well as “near-misses”. Data collected by the Authority is analyzed in order to identify problematic trends and recommend effective changes in healthcare practices.

Many people believe that lawsuits only bring economic problems to society. When a jury awards a large figure against a negligent hospital, the safety of that hospital and other hospitals will be vastly improved.

The state of Ohio and City of Chicago, IL, are considering the use of red-light cameras in conjunction with insurance company databases to scan passing traffic for uninsured motorists. The system would check license plates caught on camera to verify that the automobile s insured.

When an uninsured automobile is identified, the owner of the vehicle will receive a letter directing him or her to fix the situation by obtaining proper auto insurance. If the driver does not comply, a fine will be issued.

The penalties for driving without car insurance in both PA & NJ include mandatory driver’s license suspensions. Will PennDot and NJDot start watching us? What’s next?

A recent study has revealed that people who text while driving are 23 more times likely to cause a car accident than drivers who are not distracted? That’s a significant probability that we need to think about.

You’re probably wondering who came upon this statistic. The Virginia Tech Transportation Institute conducted a study whereby researchers positioned cameras inside drivers’ vehicles. Researchers closely observed and documented where drivers’ eyes were fixed as they did a number of things, including texting, dialing a cellular phone, talking on a phone, and/or reaching for something.

The researchers found that those who were driving while texting and became involved in a car accident or near-accident, had taken their eyes off the road for an average of 4.6 seconds. That may not sound like a lot of time, but for the sake of illustration, that is the amount of time it takes to drive the full length of a football field at 55 mph.

As for those just talking on a cell phone, the study found that a driver’s risk of getting into a car accident is only 1.3 times greater than that of a person who is not engaging in another task while driving.

The Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study also showed, surprisingly, that drivers using a wireless headset while talking on a cell phone are not considerably safer than those using a regular handset. The safety issue regards the moving of the eyes from the road, which is done to the same degree whether using a headset or a handset. With this in mind, the institute recommends that all cell phone activity by newly licensed teenagers be banned, for they are the group most prone to using cell phones.

Is there a text message that is worth risking your life for? Most texts are nonsense anyway…

On Friday, June 26, 2009, one of the three men, Valerijs N. Belovs of Northeast Philadelphia, plead guilty to the charge of homicide by motor vehicle in Montgomery County, PA Court, as well as all other charges leveled against him, including recklessly endangering five others.

Mr. Belovs is said to have caused the January 23, 2009 truck accident when he crashed into Mr. Schreffler’s car, which was in front of him as he came at 45 mph speed around the well known Conshohocken curve, unprepared for drivers already around the bend to have been stopped due to heavy traffic volume.

Mr. Belovs was driving a tractor trailer whose brakes were not functioning properly. Once Mr. Belovs hit Mr. Schreffler’s vehicle, a chain reaction involving four additional vehicles occurred. Mr. Schreffler’s passenger, Joseph John Maylish of Media, PA suffered multiple injuries, while Mr. Schreffler was pronounced dead at the scene.

Mr. Belovs admitted in court that he was aware at the time of the Pennsylvania truck accident that his truck had no functioning brakes. Though the 18-wheeler truck Belovs was driving displayed current Pennsylvania inspection stickers, police mechanics who inspected the truck after the crash found the brakes to be severely defective. It appears from the record that Belovs’ truck had prior brake violations.

Brake probems are a common cause of truck accidents in PA and NJ. Whether the brakes are out of alignment or just need to be replaced, many truck drivers and truck companies push their trucks to the limit in order to maximize profit.

When other people are injured or killed by truck accidents caused by defective brakes, the truck drivers and their companies should be held responsible for all injuries others. If they are not help responsible by juries in court, then the dangerous conduct will continue.

This week cancer experts have placed artificial tanning (tanning beds, etc.) in the highest risk for cancer category along with cigarette smoking, and other poisonous substances. Now the question is: will this stop the tanning industry, Hollywood Tans, etc?…most likely not. The most we may see is bigger warning labels.

Tanning salons better be careful. Now that artificial tanning is labeled a highly hazardous activity which is a source of cancer, this opens tanning salons to major liability. Just like the tobacco industry was brought to court in the 1970′s and 1980′s, the tanning industry will be next.

A Plaintiff in a tanning case will have to prove causation. That means that he or she must prove that the skin cancer came from prolonged or even occasional artificial tanning. It may have been a little easier in the tobacco cases because the Plaintiffs had lung cancer, as opposed to skin cancer.

As generation x, y, and z or whatever they call themselves get older, I bet that you will be hearing about major artificial tanning cases nationwide.

For those who are familiar with our firm Saile & Saile LLP, we represent individuals charged with DUI in Bucks County and other related traffic offenses.

Please visit our Bucks County DUI website here to research Pennsylvania DUI laws and Bucks County DUI procedure. We offer a no obligation free consultation (in our office) for anyone charged with DUI in Bucks County.

“In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”

Our right to a jury trial is the backbone of our justice system. Our justice system is what has kept the United States a union.

In civil law, personal injury cases, including car accident cases are brought before a jury. In other less civilized countries, you to not have the right to redress if you were injured someone else’s recklessness. In these other countries, revenge is the only payback.

Most Americans believe that the right to a jury trial is a fundamental right…because it is. Sometimes the right to a jury trial is not accessible by all American citizens. This is because it is too expensive for the average citizen to bring a civil case to a jury trial.

I am writing this blog because yesterday I was shocked at the fee to file a personal injury case in Philadelphia Common Pleas Court.

The final cost was $599.92 and that is just to file the complaint! Perhaps it is some sort of sales ploy…like the fee couldn’t be $600…

Has our right to a jury trial been diminished?

A First Assistant D.A. is the second in charge law enforcement officer in the county. As a First Assistant, Mr. Zellis handles his own cases, manages the staff, and runs many day-to-day operations of the Bucks County District Attorney’s Office.

In addition to his vast responsibilities at the Bucks County District Attorney’s Office, Mr. Zellis is running for one of the three judge seats for that are now available in the Bucks County Common Pleas Court.

Earlier this year, Mr. Zellis was picked as one of the top three democratic candidates for judge in the primary election. David’s campaign message is that he will be a fair judge to all people. Mr. Zellis does not believe in political favoritism. To prove this, Mr. Zellis is not accepting any campaign funds from lawyers.

We all know that any successful campaign requires funding. So how does a prospective judge get the campaign funds? Who really cares which candidates are appointed as new Bucks County judges? Lawyers and politicians…

Due to his 24-year term as a Bucks County District Attorney, Mr. Zellis was not an active politician. Therefore, he was not endorsed by either of the two major parties. Furthermore, without the campaign funding from local lawyers, he is running on his extensive criminal experience and accomplishments and dedication to public service.

Part of his accomplishments as a District Attorney include the successful prosecution of over 20 homicide cases, heading the county grand jury, and the establishment of the Bucks County Crimes Against Older Adults Task Force.

I found Mr. Zellis an approachable, down to earth, and genuine person who was interested in me and listened to my concerns about the Bucks County justice system.

David currently lives in lower Bucks County where he has raised his four children. If elected judge, Mr. Zellis promises to treat everyone fairly, whether it involves a civil or criminal matter.

Today on the Stern show Artie claimed that he did not ingest any alcohol, nor had any illegal drugs in his system. He did mention that he was taking the prescribed drug, Lexapro.

A person can be found guilty of DWI if the prosecution can prove that the driver was intoxicated by a chemical substance. Drug related DWI charges are usually very difficult for the prosecution to prove in court. Unlike the common affects of alcohol use, the affects of drug use (whether legal or not) vary significatly.

Because of the diverse affects of drug use, NJ law requires that a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) be used to examine the DWI suspect and make a determination of whether the suspect was actually intoxicated.

Drug Recognition Experts are usually specially trained police officers. We have had NJ DWI cases dismissed because the DWI suspect is not promptly examined by a DRE.

Artie Lange’s urine was tested for the presence of chemical substances. Even if a high level of Lexapro is present in Artie’s urine, the prosecution will still have to prove that he was intoxicated.

Lexapro’s website does warn against using Lexapro and operating machinery and automobiles until the user is aware of the effects of the Lexapro.

Do you think Artie will be convicted?

Yesterday, in State v. Marquez, a New Jersey appeals court ruled that English is the only language applicable to a drunk driving refusal charge.

A NJ DWI suspect who claimed that he spoke only Spanish contested his NJ DWI refusal case in court claiming that he did not understand the police officer reading the “refusal warnings” in English.

New Jersey like Pennsylvania is an “informed consent” law state. This means that when you drive on a road, you consent to having your Blood Alcohol Content (B.A.C.) tested.

When a NJ police officer suspects and arrests someone for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) the officer must read specific warning language to the DWI suspect. If the NJ DWI suspect does not respond with an “unequivocal, affirmative consent” the police officer can deem the NJ DWI suspect’s actions or inaction a refusal to take B.A.C. test which will result in a separate DWI Refusal charge.

The NJ Appellate Division ruled that understanding the “refusal warnings” was not part of the statute and that it would place too much of a burden on local police officers.

The court ruled against the Defendant reasoning that because a DWI investigation is a very time sensitive it would be impossible to have a local police officer understand and translate a multitude of foreign languages.

Do you think this is fair to the DWI suspect? Should the English language rule like at Geno’s Steaks in South Philly?

Last Saturday, June 27, 2009, Mays was a passenger on a US Airways flight from Philadelphia to Tampa Florida which had a rough landing, including a collapse of the front landing gear. After the flight, Mays reported on a TV interview that he was struck in the head by falling luggage from the overhead compartment. Sometime over night, May’s wife found him dead.

Initially, it was thought that Mays died from complications of the blow to the head. If it is found that May was killed by the head injury, May’s family may have a wrongful death case against US Airways. In order to sustain a wrongful death case against US Airways, May’s family would have to prove that US Airways was negligent in the flying and landing of the jet. If negligence is proven and the cause of death was the strike to May’s head, May’s family could have a substantial wrongful death case. Because Mays so successful, he probably earned a high income. This loss of income to the May’s family could be recovered in a wrongful death case.

When a person received a strike or blow to the head, he or she could have received a traumatic brain injury. The CDC reports that 1.4 million United States citizens sustain traumatic brain injuries each year and about 50,000 people die from their injuries. The symptoms of traumatic brain injury are not easily recognizable. Traumatic brain injury symptoms include loss of concentration, memory, and thinking problems, loss of sensations, language problem, and emotional problems.

Another devastating effect of a head injury including a traumatic brain injury is a subdural hematoma. This is when blood gathers around the brain after a strike to the head. The pressure from this gathering of blood can cause sudden death. Therefore, it is extremely important that a person who has been struck in the head receive medical monitoring and attention in the emergency room of a hospital.

Our law firm represents Pennsylvania and New Jersey individuals who have been struck in the head and have suffered brain damage and other brain injuries. Many times these brain injuries are sustained during a car accident when the head strikes the windshield.

While riding westbound on Route 63 (Sumneytown Pike) in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, investigators believe that Mr. Gilbert fell off of his motorcycle into the eastbound lanes of the roadway and was struck by a motorist driving a pickup truck coming in the opposite direction.

Mr. Gilbert was pronounced dead at the scene. The unidentified driver of the pickup truck, a man from the Doylestown, PA area, was not injured.

Pennsylvania State Police are uncertain as to what caused Mr. Gilbert to lose control and fall from his motorcycle. No charges have been filed and the investigation into the motorcycle accident is ongoing.

Under this law, all persons convicted of an NJ DWI (driving while intoxicated) offense would be required to install an ignition interlock system in their vehicles. Under the current law, only repeat NJ DWI offenders are required to install the ignition interlock system.

Ricci’s Law would require ignition interlock systems to prevent a vehicle’s ignition from starting if the driver’s blood alcohol content is .04 percent or higher. The driver must actually breathe into the device once entering the vehicle and if the driver’s blood alcohol content (B.A.C.) is below the preset limit, the car will start. If the driver’s blood alcohol content (B.A.C.) exceeds the present limit, the vehicle will not start.

Ricci’s Law would make use of the interlock installation system mandatory during the drivers’ license suspension period. Additionally, the law would require the device to be in place and operational for a span of six months to one year for a first New Jersey DWI offense, two years for a second DWI offense and ten years for a third and all subsequent NJ DWI offenses.

Ricci’s Law is named in honor of 17-year old Ricci Branca from Egg Harbor Township, NJ, who was struck and killed by an NJ drunk driver while riding his bicycle. The driver who hit Ricci fled the scene of the fatal NJ car accident and was found by police to have a blood alcohol content (B.A.C.) four times higher than that of the legal limit.

Now both the New Jersey and Pennsylvania legislatures are pushing for a mandatory ignition interlock on all NJ DWI offenses and all PA DUI offenses. I predict that someday all registered vehicles will be required to have an ignition interlock.    

The incident occurred in Croydon, PA just after 3:00 a.m. when Ms. Harley was hit by a red Dodge Durango as she and a friend were attempting to cross the road at the 2500 block of Route 13. She was pronounced dead at the scene of the pedestrian-car accident.

Police did locate the SUV by evening time on Saturday, May 23, 2009, but the driver’s name has not yet been released.

If it can be proven that the Defendant driver was negligent, Ms. Harley’ family could bring a wrongful death case in the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas against the Defendant driver.

The incident in question involved a traffic stop in Bernards Township, NJ. The police officer observed a vehicle with tinted windows and no inspection sticker. The police officer then pulled the vehicle over and began to question the two occupants. The driver of the vehicle could not produce a driver’s license or an insurance card. The vehicle registration was also not in her name.

The police officer then separated the driver and passenger and questioned them about where they had been and where they were going. The driver and passenger gave conflicting answers. The police further questioned the driver and passenger. The driver finally admitted that they had been previously smoking marijuana.

The police officer then told the driver that he could bring a drug sniffing dog to search the car. The driver then admitted that there was marijuana and cocaine in the car. The driver’s, driver’s license then came up as suspended and the police officer then read the driver the Miranda rights and the driver waived her right to remain silent.

The passenger was also advised of his Miranda Rights and he also waived them. The driver and passenger were both charged with various NJ drug offenses.

The NJ Supreme Court was then asked to rule upon whether the passenger’s right of self-incrimination was violated, if the driver of the vehicle was not properly warned of her Miranda Rights before she made the incriminating statements.

The Court ruled that the right of self-incrimination under the United States and New Jersey Constitutions is a personal right that cannot be asserted by a third person such as the passenger. The Court was not willing to expand the protections of the Fifth Amendment.

Do you think this is good and fair law?

On Saturday, June 6, 2009, Calius Sykes of Willingboro, NJ was struck by a motorist as he stood at the rear of his truck, which he stopped on the side of the road on the 2800 block of Bristol Pike, very close to Street Road in Bensalem, Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

At approximately 1:15 p.m. a car skidded into the rear of his truck, striking Sykes. The car was driven by Christine Dow of Trenton, NJ, who sustained minor injuries. An ambulance rushed Mr. Sykes to Aria Health’s Torresdale campus in Philadelphia. Sykes suffered serious personal injuries.

Reports show that just a few weeks prior to this Bucks County auto accident, on Route 13 in Bensalem, a man and woman from Philadelphia were killed in a car accident near the same stretch of Bristol Pike. It has been reported that fifteen pedestrians have been fatally injured by pedestrian-car accidents on Route 13 in Bucks County, PA in the past ten years.

Perhaps local authorities or PennDot should do a traffic study on this section of Route 13 to determine the reason why there are so many serious car accidents?

Near our law office in Newtown/Langhorne, PA, we know of Middletown Township, Langhorne Borough, Newtown, Southampton police departments using the Enradd device to catch speeders.

You can read more about E.N.R.A.D.D. and how it is being used in lower Bucks County, Pennsylvania at our new Bucks County speeding ticket webpage by clicking here.

Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq., of Saile & Saile LLP represents individuals charged with speeding tickets throughout Bucks County, PA and Mercer County, NJ. Many times, Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. can reduce or eliminate NJ DMV or PennDot points and preserve your driving record.

The driver of the car Morocho-Lojano turned in front of sustained minor injuries. Witnesses stated that after the car accidents, Morocho-Lojano fled into a nearby neighborhood off of Street Road in Bensalem, PA.

Daniel Herminio was Morocho-Lojano’s passenger. Herminio was hurt in the Bensalem car accident and taken to Aria Health, Torresdale Campus Hospital.

Police report having found Morocho-Lojano hiding in the backyard of a home situated on the 2900 block of Garden Lane. Morocho-Lojano later admitted that he was in the United States illegally and had been for about four years.

Morocho-Lojano was arraigned in District Judge Leonard Brown’s court in Bensalem, PA on numerous charges, including leaving the scene of an accident involving damage or injuries. He remains in Bucks County prison on $150,000 bail.

Mr. Willis has a substantial record of criminal convictions but his most recent charge, the one to which he pleaded guilty on May 27, stems from a fatal Bristol, Bucks County car accident which occurred on November 17, 2008. Mr. Willis and his friend Seamus McNichol, also of Philadelphia, were out drinking at a club in Levittown, lower Bucks County.

Mr. Willis was intoxicated when he left the club and got behind the wheel of his vehicle, with Mr. McNichol as his passenger. Mr. Willis swerved across the road and struck a guardrail, causing his pickup truck to flip over. Mr. McNichol was pinned inside the car and pronounced dead at the scene. At the time of this fatal Bucks County car accident, Mr. Willis was driving with a suspended license due to a prior DUI conviction.

At the scene of the Bristol PA car accident witnesses reported that Mr. Willis escaped from the wreckage and then fled the scene of the DUI related car accident. Mr. Willis was apprehended a short time later at a local drug store. Once apprehended by police, Mr. Willis was given several sobriety tests, which he failed. He refused to give a blood sample.

Bucks County Common Pleas Court Judge Jeffrey Finley imposed a sentence on Mr. Willis which exceeds the state mandatory minimum and placed other restrictive provisions on Mr. Willis’ criminal sentence.

The McNichol family may have a Pennsylvania wrongful death case against Mr. Willis, and a possible Dram Shop case against the club that may have served Mr. Willis too much alcohol.

If you are legally stopped by a PA police officer and he or she believes that there is probable cause that have been driving under in the influence of an intoxicating substance, under Pennsylvania’s implied consent law, you must submit to a DUI chemical test.

If you refuse the test, you will be subject to an additional mandatory license suspension from PennDot.

For more information on the Bucks County DUI refusal charge, follow the following link at http://www.buckscountyduilawyers.com/sub/refusal.jsp.