Call for a professional consult today 734.281.2050

Personal Injury Cases in the News

Personal Injury Cases in the News

The Chicago Tribune recently reported that the Estate of NHL player Derek Boogaard has filed a suit against the NHL attributing his personal injury to its unlawful practices. Specifically, it is alleged that Boogaard regarded as a hockey “enforcer” took up to 10 oxycodone pain killers a day, and that the league knew or should have known, that players with brain damage are at higher risk for drug addiction.

In Michigan, the usual remedy for an injury to a worker is under the Workers’ Compensation Act, MCL 418.131. Under this statute for a work related injury the general rule is that it is the worker’s exclusive remedy. Under the statute there is a trade off in that the worker’s rights to compensation are limited but are insured in that employers defenses of worker’s comparative fault are eliminated. This is true with respect to employer negligence. However, where the employee is able to establish much more than negligence, there is the intentional tort exception to the exclusive remedy rule.

For instance, in McNees v. Cedar Stampings, Co., 184 Mich App 101 (1990) allegations that an employee was injured by a defective foot pedal while operating a stamping press was sufficient to state a claim for intentional tort. That is because the employer was aware of the defect but still ordered the employee to operate the press while knowing that an injury was likely to occur under the circumstances.

If you or a loved one have been injured at work and need legal advice, please feel free to call Guy Vining. All initial consolations are free of charge and all injury cases are handled on a contingency fee basis so that you have no obligation unless you prevail in the case.

Guy Vining practices personal injury law from his Metro-Detroit office in Taylor, Michigan. He has represented clients in personal injury actions for over 25 years in such areas as: car, boat, motorcycle, and truck accidents; slip, trip, and falls including black ice and defective design; medical and dental malpractice, denial of insurance benefits for wages, medical and home assistance to automobile accident victims.

Bankruptcy Cases in the News

Bankruptcy Cases in the News

             The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers Michigan) issued a very important decision in Richardson v. Schafer, 689 F.3d 601 (6th Cir., 2012). The case is noteworthy because it is of assistance to debtors in their bankruptcy case by allowing them to retain more property.

In this case, the debtor elected to exempt property under the Michigan State Bankruptcy Exemptions instead of the Federal Exemptions. The selection was probably because the debtor had a great deal of home equity protectable as tennants by the entireties (marital home) laws and little joint debt. The trustee, to unlock value for unsecured creditors argued that the Michigan Bankruptcy Exemptions were unconstitutional and that the debtor was only allowed the lesser exemptions provided by the general exemptions statute in Michigan.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. It held that Michigan debtors were allowed to use either set, i.e., the general exemptions under MCL 600.6023 or the Bankruptcy Exemptions under MCL 600.5451. Generally speaking the latter is more generous to debtors. This allows the debtor to retain more property for his/her fresh start. The bottom line was that the Michigan Legislature did not violate the Constitution by intruding in a Federal law.

Proper exemption planning is critical to a successful outcome in a bankruptcy case. If you or a loved one would like information concerning protection from creditors and obtaining a fresh start, just call Guy Vining. Guy Vining is pleased to discuss your situation confidentially, and without initial charge.

Guy Vining, a bankruptcy attorney, in metro-Detroit, maintains his office in Taylor, Michigan where he serves the downriver communities of Monroe, South Rockwood, Gibraltar, Brownstown Township, Grosse Ile, Woodhaven, Trenton, Southgate, Riverview, Allen Park, Lincoln Park, Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, Westland, Wayne, and Ecorse. If you or a family member of friend would like a no-obligation no cost consultation/financial analysis, just call or E-mail Guy Vining of Vining Law Group, P.L.C to schedule a meeting.]

Negligence Cases in the News: Malpractice

Negligence Cases in the News

Personal Injury — Malpractice

In a recent blog we discussed that a common theme in medical malpractice cases is failure to diagnose leading to a significant injury or death. As pointed out, a serious and common gynecological problem which sometimes goes undiagnosed is ectopic pregnancy. When timely to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy can be resolved by a salpingostomy. This is a surgery to remove the fetus from the falliopian tube before it grows so large as to cause a rupture. A ruptured falliopian tube can cause death through internal bleeding and or diminished fertility. Medical literature relates that a pregnancy in the falliopian tube is a true medical emergency and that every attempt should be made to remove the fetus before the tube is damaged.

The doctor or emergency room staff must maintain a high degree of suspicion for ectopic pregnancy in young, sexually active, women who are presenting signs of pain, cramps, bleeding, nausea, and dizziness. These warning sign in conjunction with a detailed history may suggest an abnormal pregnancy. In that case, the pregnancy can be confirmed by simple blood or urine tests. If confirmed, an immediate referral to an OBGYN specialist is called for, as well as an ultrasound, to see if there is, in fact, an abnormal pregnancy.

Ectopic pregnancy (tubal pregnancy) although a true medical emergency, if properly handled, can be successfully treated.

[Guy Vining practices personal injury law from his Metro-Detroit office in Taylor, Michigan. He has represented clients in personal injury actions for over 25 years in such areas as: car, boat, motorcycle, and truck accidents; slip, trip, and falls including black ice and defective design; medical and dental malpractice, denial of insurance benefits for wages, medical and home assistance to automobile accident victims.]

Negligence Cases in the News: Black Ice and Slip-and-fall

Negligence Cases in the News:

Personal Injury — Black Ice and Slip-and-fall

 

It’s a common occurrence in Michigan. In the winter time frequently pavement will become encased in invisible “black ice.” Due to its invisibility, black ice is a leading cause of winter time personal injury from car crashes to slip-and-falls.
Generally, in Michigan a premises owner does not have a duty to warn a shopper or even clear off snow or ice if it is visible upon a casual inspection. The Courts in Michigan have held that it is the pedestrian or shopper’s duty to avoid such hazardous conditions or to accept the consequences of a slip and fall if the lot is visibly snow covered.
On the other hand, black ice has become a recognized exception to this general rule.
In Slaughter v. Blarney Castle Oil Company, the business visitor, Mrs. Slaughter, injured her back when she slipped and fell at the Defendant’s gas station. The court of Appeals affirmed (agreed with) the decision of the trial court that black ice was an exception to the open and obvious doctrine. The Court reasoned that by definition black ice was “not open and obvious.”

 

     “Plaintiff contends that under the circumstances of this case, she had no warning of icy conditions on defendant’s premises and that, the condition therefore was not open and obvious. Further, plaintiff contends that special circumstances existed because the condition posed an unreasonable risk and was unavoidable.

 

     To determine whether black ice is open and obvious, one must consider the logic behind the open and obvious danger doctrine, which, as stated earlier, is that “an obvious danger is no danger to a reasonably careful person.” Novotney, supra at 474. We are asked to determine whether “an average user with ordinary intelligence” would be able to discover black ice “upon casual inspection,” absent the presence of snow. Id. at 475.

 

     Perhaps the best way to ascertain whether black ice is open and obvious is to examine the characteristics of black ice. Webster’s New World College Dictionary (4th ed), p151, describes black ice as “a thin, nearly invisible layer of ice on a dark surface (as a paved road or a body of water) that is difficult to see.” The American Heritage Diction of the English Language (4th ed) p191, defines black ice as “[a] thin, nearly invisible coating of ice that forms on paved surfaces.” The New Oxford American Dictionary (2nd ed), p172, describes it as “a transparent coating of ice, found esp. on a road or other paved surface.” The American Century Dictionary (2005), p60, defines it as a “thin layer of invisible ice on a road, etc.”

 

     The Overriding principle behind the many definitions of black ice is that it is invisible or nearly invisible, transparent, or nearly transparent. Such definition is inherently inconsistent with the open and obvious danger doctrine. Consequently, we decline to extend the doctrine to black ice without evidence that the black ice in question would have been visible on casual inspection before the fall or without other indicia of a potentially hazardous condition.”

 

If you or a loved one has suffered an injury from a slip and fall or car accident related to black ice, you may have a remedy in court for monetary compensation. Guy Vining of the Vining Law Group, PLC has represented many victims of slip and falls. Please feel free to call Guy Vining for a free and confidential appointment to discuss your rights.

 

[Guy Vining practices personal injury law from his Metro-Detroit office in Taylor, Michigan. He has represented clients in personal injury actions for over 25 years in such areas as: car, boat, motorcycle, and truck accidents; slip, trip, and falls including black ice and defective design; medical and dental malpractice, denial of insurance benefits for wages, medical and home assistance to automobile accident victims.]

Personal Injury Cases in the News: Falls and Black Ice

Personal Injury Cases in the News:
Personal Injury — Falls and Black Ice

 

Guy Vining of the Vining Law Group, PLC was able to settle a significant personal injury case caused by a store owner’s failure to use proper care in maintaining its parking lot. The good result was obtained because legal discovery disclosed another shopper was injured a few hours earlier. When that fact was discovered from the Defendant’s records subpoenas were issued to require that individual to give a deposition (a statement under oath).

 

The deposition was crucial because one of the important issues in such a case is notice. If the company in charge of the premises does not have notice of the hazard which caused the personal injury is near the Defendant can escape liability. In this case, however, the witness testified that she was injured due to icy conditions and reported it to the store management. Other records established that Plaintiff was injured about two hours later, and that in the intervening time, no de-icing agents were put down for the safety of customers.

 

 Icy winter conditions are a fact of life in Michigan. This means that shoppers and pedestrians must be careful. However, a shop owner owes a duty to help protect those that come to do business. The law provides that such a store owner should use reasonable care if they receive a notice of a hazardous condition. Although belittled on television and in comedy routines, there is nothing funny about slip-and-falls. These types of hazards are a leading cause of serious personal injury and even death.

 

If you or a loved one have been injured on a defective premises, call Guy Vining of the Vining Law Group today for a no-cost consultation.

 

[Guy Vining practices personal injury law from his Metro-Detroit office in Taylor, Michigan. He has represented clients in personal injury actions for over 25 years in such areas as: car, boat, motorcycle, and truck accidents; slip, trip, and falls including black ice and defective design; medical and dental malpractice, denial of insurance benefits for wages, medical and home assistance to automobile accident victims.]

Negligence Cases in the News: Bus Accident Cases

Negligence Cases in the News:
Bus Accident Cases

     The Long Beach Press reported this month that a lawsuit has been filed by families against two California bus companies. Seven people were killed when a tour bus lost its brakes coming down a mountain.

 

In Michigan, the law also imposes a duty upon public transportation companies to maintain their buses in good repair to avoid personal injury. The same is true with regard to the general safe operation of buses and cabs for the safety of their paying customers and the general public.

 

If you or a loved one are injured while a passenger on a local bus or cab through negligence of the driver or a safety defect, you may wish to speak with a lawyer to discuss your rights.

 

Guy Vining, an experienced personal injury attorney, in metro-Detroit, maintains his office in Taylor, Michigan where he serves the downriver communities of Monroe, South Rockwood, Gibraltar, Brownstown Township, Grosse Ile, Woodhaven, Trenton, Southgate, Riverview, Allen Park, Lincoln Park, Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, Westland, Wayne, and Ecorse. If you or a family member or friend would like a no-obligation, no cost, consultation/financial analysis, just call or Email Guy Vining of Vining Law Group, P.L.C. to schedule a meeting.

Negligence Cases in the News: Construction Accident Cases

Negligence Cases in the News:
Construction Accident Cases

In Michigan a general building contractor may be held liable for damages for personal injuries under certain circumstances. The very nature of construction work lends itself to the necessity of maintaining the safest work environment possible because of the propensity for crippling injuries and death. In a recent case, Guy Vining of the Vining Law Group was able to recover a significant settlement for an individual who was constructing her own home though the service of a general contractor.

In the case the home owner fell from a considerable height from an area that was left unguarded even though it was open to trade people and general laborers.

Specifically, it was alleged that a certain sub-contractor removed safety railings to perform its task but failed to reinstall it leaving a froseeably dangerous condition to exist. The evidence showed that the general contractor had retained control over the project but failed to inspect, discover and ameliorate hazardous conditions.

If you would like more information on construction injury cases call Guy Vining of the Vining Law Group. All injured workers are welcome for reliable and free consultations. These types of cases are normally prosecuted on a contingency basis so that you will pay no attorney fees unless settled to your satisfaction.

Guy Vining, an experienced negligence attorney, in metro-Detroit, maintains his office in Taylor, Michigan, where he serves the downriver communities of Monroe, South Rockwood, Gibraltar, Brownstown Township, Grosse Ile, Woodhaven, Trenton, Southgate, Riverview, Allen Park, Lincoln Park, Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, Westland, Wayne, and Ecorse. If you or a family member or friend would like a no-obligation, no cost, consultation/financial analysis, just call or Email Guy Vining of Vining Law Group, P.L.C. to schedule a meeting.

Bankruptcy Cases in the News

Bankruptcy Cases in the News

In previous blog postings we have discussed on many occasions the basic tenet that the honest debtor is entitled to relief of a discharge in bankruptcy. But what about those debtors that are dishonest or engage in risky behavior that implicate or harm others. The Bankruptcy Code provides for these types of cases in 11 USC 523 as exceptions to the general rule that in exchange for full disclosures and non-exempt assets that a debtor can obtain a complete discharge and a fresh start. In addition, a body of judge made decisions had also developed interpreting the various parts of 11 USC 523.

Most of the exceptions to discharge are common sense and are not surprising. For instance, debts arising from fraud, false pretenses, misrepresentations, luxury charges made on the eve of filing bankruptcy, child support, alimony, taxes and other types of intentional injuries. These are matters which evidence dishonorable conduct or a bad actor that should not be assisted.

In a very recent case Judge Walter Shapero of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District, Southern Division of Michigan decided a very interesting case. In that case it was fairly undisputed that the debtor was a very reckless driver of an automobile which led to an automobile crash causing personal injuries. When the debtor filed her bankruptcy In re Gumprecht, Case No.: 11-47982; Ad. Pro. No. 11-05909, the injured party objected to the discharge as being unfair based upon 11 USC 523(a)(6) a willfully caused injury. As mentioned the evidence showed that the debtor’s driving was horrendous but there was nothing to show that an injury was specifically intended or willful and malicious. Judge Sharpero held that the case must be reviewed under the standards announced in Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57 (1998) and in re Markowitz, 190 F3d 455 (6th Cir. 1999). As such, he stated:

    Until 1999, the Sixth Circuit’s standard for § 523(a)(6)’s “willful” requirement was rather lenient. As long as a debtor could be shown to have intentionally committed an act which led to an injury, he would be found to have acted “willfully” under § 523(a)(6), regardless of whether or not he actually intended the injury. Perkins v. Scharffe, 817 F.2d 392, 394 (6th Cir. 1987). Perkins was overruled in 1998 by the U.S. Supreme Court case of [Geiger]. In Geiger, the Supreme Court held that only acts done with the intent to cause the actually injury will rise to the level of a “willful and malicious injury” as used in § 523(a)(6): We now hold that unless “the actor desires to cause consequences of his act, or… believes that the consequences are substantially certain to result from it,” he has not committed a “willful and malicious injury” as defined under § 523(a)(6). [Markowitz, 190 F.3d at 464.]

Under the new standard the burden of proof is much higher for the creditor. For that reason Judge Shapero determined that the facts that the creditor could establish were insufficient and dismissed the objections to discharge.

[Guy Vining, a bankruptcy attorney, in metro-Detroit, maintains his office in Taylor, Michigan, where he serves the downriver communities of Monroe, South Rockwood, Gibraltar, Brownstown Township, Grosse Ile, Woodhaven, Trenton, Southgate, Riverview, Allen Park, Lincoln Park, Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, Westland, Wayne, and Ecorse. If you or a family member of friend would like a no-obligation no cost consultation/financial analysis, just call or E-mail Guy Vining of Vining Law Group, P.L.C to schedule a meeting.]