Trusted, Honored, and Awarded
Over $225 Million Recovered For Our Clients

Bay Area balcony collapse blamed on rotted structural wood

It has been a difficult month for Bay Area residents after hearing the news of a tragic and fatal balcony collapse. On June 16, six young adults were killed and another seven were seriously injured when the balcony of a Berkeley apartment building detached from the building and plummeted five stories to the street below.

Most of the victims were students from Ireland. All were attending a birthday party in the apartment building. Because the building is less than 10 years old, it seemed clear that the cause of the accident could not have been normal age-related deterioration. That suspicion was confirmed earlier this week, when inspectors determined that the balcony collapse was caused by severe dry rot due to inadequate weather-proofing.

The floor of the balcony was composed of a concrete slab apparently supported by wooden beams. Inspectors noted that the ends of the deck joists jutting out of the exterior wall had sustained water damage and were severely rotted. The weight of the balcony (including the weight of 13 people standing on it) was too heavy to be supported by the compromised beams.

A tragic incident like this one is likely to prompt a premises liability lawsuit. But certain details about this case make it difficult to predict who exactly can be held liable.

According to news sources, the building plans were approved by the city, which meant that they complied with the California Building code. It had also been inspected as required by code. Yet a collapse like this one should not have happened in a structurally sound building. Are the codes in need of reform? Have inspections been too lax? Did the builders forget certain steps or use inferior materials?

At this point, there are many questions that need to be answered. One thing is clear, however: This balcony collapse didn’t need to happen and should have been prevented.

Source: NBC Bay Area, “City Inspectors Find Badly Rotted Beams After Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse,” Riya Bhattacharjee, June 23, 2015

Could this be a solution to drunk driving accidents?

When it comes to solving society's most vexing problems, there are disagreements over the best approaches to take. Many Americans believe that legislators and other elected officials should be responsible for solving problems by passing and enforcing laws. But there are those who believe that technology can solve at least some of the problems that laws and law enforcement have been unable to effectively address.

Drunk driving is one of those problems. Every year, approximately 10,000 people are killed in drunk-driving accidents on U.S. roads. This is in spite of ever-harsher DUI laws and penalties. Ignition interlock devices have proven effective at reducing recidivism rates among convicted drunk drivers. Could they eventually prevent drunk driving altogether?

Recently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced that it is working with researchers and automakers on a prototype program called the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS). It features two types of alcohol detection and measurement methods that could someday become standard in all automobiles.

The first is like the breathalyzer in an ignition interlock device. Instead of blowing through a tube, however, the device just takes readings from the breath exhaled in the cab of the car. The other method involves contact with the skin while the driver presses a button. Infrared lights shined into the tissue of a person's finger could actually measure their blood-alcohol level.

The technology is at least five years away from being practically available. And there are no guarantees that DADSS would become standard in all new vehicles. But the promise of this technology is immense. Let's hope it is put to good use.

Report: California leads the nation in dog-related injuries

Most dog owners know that their pets are not automatically socialized with other dogs and people. Dogs have to be taught how to behave and respect others’ space. In fact, not properly training and controlling a dog can have serious consequences like bites and knockdowns.

With that in mind, you might be interested in the findings of a recent insurance industry report. More dog-related injury claims were filed in California than in any other state in 2014, and that same year, dog-related injuries cost insurers a total of about $531 million.

The cost per claim varied from state to state, but the average cost was more than $32,000. After all, dog bites and knockdown injuries can require extensive medical treatment, including reconstructive surgery and rehabilitation. Dog bite victims may also have to take a leave of absence from work in order to deal with their injuries.

The report points to human shortcomings as a major cause of dog attacks and knockdowns. Seniors, children and bicyclists were also found to be particularly vulnerable to knockdown injuries.

California dog attack law allows for dog bite and knockdown victims to sue dog owners or others who should reasonably have control over pets. You could be on someone else’s property or in a public place; dog owners can still be held strictly liable for any damages suffered in an attack or knockdown. The law does not require you to prove negligence on the part of the dog owner in order for you receive compensation for a dog-related injury.

For more on dog bites, knockdowns and premises liability, please see Winer, McKenna & Burritt’s dog attack overview.

Toyota recall scandal results in another court loss for automaker

With the major auto recall scandals of the past year, it is easy to forget about earlier events that dominated the news just a few years ago. Perhaps the most notable was the Toyota recall related to sticking pedals and issues of “sudden, unintended acceleration.” The first cases to make headlines involved devastating car accidents here in California.

While much of the scandal played out publicly between 2009 and 2011, Toyota continues to face legal repercussions. Earlier this month, in fact, a judge increased a jury award stemming from a February trial. The award against Toyota was increased from $10 million to about $14 million in damages.

The accident that sparked the lawsuit occurred way back in 2006 and involved an allegedly defective Toyota Camry made in 1996. In that accident, a Minnesota man was driving with his family (including his pregnant wife) when his brakes allegedly malfunctioned and he slammed his car into a vehicle stopped at a red light.

Three people were killed in the crash and two more were badly injured. The Camry driver was charged with and convicted of careless driving and vehicular homicide. He spent years in prison before news of the Toyota recall allowed him to challenge his convictions.

In a separate trial earlier this year, the jury found Toyota liable and awarded plaintiffs $10 million. The Camry driver was also deemed responsible for the crash but only 40 percent responsible. He was also awarded damages in the jury ruling. Earlier this month, the judge increased the total award to $14 million in recognition of what many of the plaintiffs had suffered.

Victims who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in a car accident often find themselves struggling with even the most basic aspects of recovery. If the legal aftermath of the crash involves criminal prosecution and allegations of product liability, things become even more complicated. Hopefully, decisions made by the jury and judge will help all victims gain a sense of closure and healing.

Source: Courthouse News Service, “Toyota Must Pay $14M Liability for 2006 Crash,” Adam Klasfeld, June 16, 2015

Damage cap could leave Amtrak train crash victims shortchanged

Travel by rail has long been a transportation option in the United States, but use of trains has not been widespread. For most of the past century, the automobile has been king, largely thanks to an impressive highway system and the cost effectiveness of mass production.

Here in California, light rail trains have come into greater use in major cities. And nationwide, train travel seems to be on the rise. Unfortunately, the increase in train ridership has been accompanied by an increase in serious train accidents. These include accidents at railroad crossings and accidents involving train derailment.

One of the largest accidents in recent history was the derailment of an Amtrak train in Philadelphia in May. In that accident, a train traveling at more than twice the safe speed limit derailed when going around a curve in the tracks. Eight people were killed and more than 200 suffered injuries. Many of those injuries were severe, and some victims have already incurred hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills. Approximately two dozen lawsuits have so far been filed against Amtrak.

Sadly, there is a problem that could leave victims with unpaid medical bills and other costs, even after being compensated. In the late 1990s, when Congress reauthorized Amtrak, legislators put a cap on the company’s liability for any single accident. The cap of $200 million was meant to ensure that railroad companies were not forced out of operation by major lawsuits.

If the cap stays in place, the more than 208 victims and their families will have to share that fixed amount of money. It may seem like a large amount, but it will likely be insufficient to adequately cover all medical bills and other costs victims incurred related to the accident. Instead of compensating each victim/family the full amount that they need and deserve, judges may be forced to prioritize some victims over others based on the limitations of an arbitrary damage cap.

There’s a possibility that the cap could be raised to $295 million because of a provision in the most recent bill to finance the Highway Trust Fund. But even if it passes, the higher cap will still likely be too small to fully compensate victims.

It’s unclear exactly how the Amtrak cases will play out. But as America continues to expand its investment in rail travel (including California’s plans for high-speed rail), train accident liability is an issue that will only become more pressing.

Drunk drivers over the July 4th holiday

This coming weekend there is a fairly good chance that people throughout the Oakland area will celebrate the nation’s birthday by consuming alcoholic beverages. In situations such as this it is likely that some people will get into their car to drive despite being over the legal limit. As a result of that activity it is possible that a motor vehicle accident could occur.

Any time a car accident takes place it is possible that serious injuries could be the result. When someone suffers a traumatic brain injury or spinal injury, his or her life can be changed forever.

In the most serious situations those involved in the crash could die. When those individuals have not done anything wrong, and their injuries or loss of life could have been avoided, the situation is even more difficult to handle.

Following an accident of this nature those involved or impacted may be unsure about what their options are. In the midst of grieving about what has happened, it may be tempting to take the easiest path in resolving legal matters that arise. Agreeing to a settlement with the insurance company of the drunk driver without having a lawyer there to advocate for you could be a big mistake. Initial offers are almost always low and may not come anywhere near covering the expenses that arise as a result of the drunk driving accident.

Regardless of when the drunk driving accident occurs, if you suffer injuries in the incident you need to make sure you get what you deserve. An attorney can assist with that. For more information on filing a claim following a drunk driving accident please see our website.

Fatal building collapse brings criminal charges & lawsuits

In news reports about construction and demolition accidents, the injured victims are often workers doing the construction or demolition. They may have been harmed due to negligent planning, unsafe working conditions or a host of other safety hazards.

As tragic as these cases are, it is even more tragic to hear about construction/demolition accidents that injure and kill others near the worksite. In densely populated cities here in California and throughout the country, on-the-job safety is even more important precisely because of how close worksites may be to neighboring buildings.

Readers here in the Bay Area may remember a tragedy that occurred two years ago on the other side of the country. In June 2013, a masonry wall collapsed during building demolition and fell onto a one-story Salvation Army thrift store next to the worksite. The collapse killed six people and left another 13 victims injured.

Two people faced criminal charges in the wake of the accident: The operator of the excavator and the demolition contractor who hired him. An accident investigation revealed that the contractor ordered the demolition of the front and rear walls first because he wanted to salvage wooden beams and joists in the demolished buildings. This left a three-story masonry wall unsupported by the rest of the structure. That wall should have been dismantled by hand from the top down.

The excavator operator recently pled guilty to several criminal charges and will likely be imprisoned for between 10 and 20 years. The contractor has yet to be tried. The two men and the site developer have also been named as defendants in a number of civil lawsuits.

After accidents like this, it is common for victims and their families to seek compensation for personal injury, wrongful death and premises liability. While no amount of money can replace what has been lost, victim compensation is nonetheless necessary and appropriate.

Source: Philly.com, “Guilty plea in Salvation Army thrift store collapse,” Joseph A. Slobodzian, July 21, 2015

Possibly drunk driver kills 1 pedestrian, injures 5 others

While the following story is a bit older, it brings up the very important matter of pedestrian accidents. In this case, the accident turned tragic when a drunk driver plowed into numerous pedestrians on the sidewalk.

The wreck occurred last month in Vallejo, California, when a 65-year-old man was allegedly driving around with alcohol in his system. Police have confirmed that the driver likely had "intoxication issues." The driver hit six pedestrians in total and he damaged numerous pieces of property along the sidewalk in the process.

One of the pedestrians was killed in the accident, while five other pedestrians were either hospitalized in conditions that ranged from serious to critical. 

This is obviously an extreme example of a pedestrian accident, but if the driver involved was indeed intoxicated, he will rightly suffer the consequences for his actions. Still, even though this wreck may seem straightforward and clear-cut, the legal claims involved could be more complicated than it may seem.

Pedestrian accidents are often more convoluted than they need to be. That doesn't mean that an injured pedestrian should balk at the idea of pursuing legal action. Far from it, in fact. Instead, this is just something to keep in mind if you are pursuing such litigation. 

Negligence on the part of a driver or reckless driving often plays a role in pedestrian accident. Proving this negligence or recklessness can be difficult, but armed with this evidence, an injured pedestrian can (and should) consider legal action to help him or her get the justice they deserve.

Source: KRON, "Six pedestrians involved in deadly Vallejo accident; intoxication may have been a factor," Annie Andersen, June 19, 2015

Take me out to the ballgame – then to the hospital

For many Americans, there’s no place better to spend a summer evening than the ballpark. Baseball is still America’s pastime, and going to major league games provides great nostalgia as well as entertainment.

We’re all familiar with the sensory experience at the ballpark: The smell of the food, the sound of the crack of the bat. But what about the sting of the foul ball, or the concussion caused by a broken bat? Fan injuries caused by balls and bats are surprisingly common, and these incidents can even be fatal. According to one study, about 1,750 fans are injured each year while attending major league games – mostly by foul balls.

Do injured fans have legal recourse, or do we just have to accept the risks associated with watching the game in-person? This is a difficult question to answer, because courts around the United States don’t always rule consistently on issues related to spectator injuries.

Many baseball parks include warnings on tickets, signs and in PA announcements essentially saying that the owners assume no liability for injuries suffered as a result of flying objects related to the game (bats, balls, etc). They also argue in court that watching baseball is an inherently dangerous activity, and fans know or should know the risks they are taking.

Does this mean, however, that stadium owners don’t have to make the game as safe as it can reasonably be for spectators? Recently, an Oakland A’s fan filed a lawsuit in Northern California against Major League Baseball. The plaintiff, who is seeking class-action status on behalf of other fans, argues that safety netting should be installed in every major league stadium down the first and third base lines. In her opinion, these nets should extend all the way to the foul poles.

Team and stadium owners must walk a fine line when it comes to safety vs. entertainment. On one hand, spectators like the idea of catching a foul ball. On the other hand, no fan wants to suffer permanent brain damage or death as the result of a speeding ball or broken piece of bat. And stadium owners don’t want to face premises liability lawsuits, even if their liability protection is well established.

It will be interesting to see how this lawsuit will impact netting policies at major league stadiums, if at all.

Dealing with the drawn-out aftermath of an auto accident

Although an automobile accident can happen in an instant, the aftermath of that accident can play out for years. If the crash is severe – leading to serious injury or death – victims and their families can be left with physical and emotional damage that may never go away.

That very well may be the case for comedian Tracy Morgan, who was seriously injured in a truck accident in June 2014. Readers may remember that as Morgan and friends were driving back from a comedy show, a dangerously fatigued truck driver slammed into the back of their limousine, killing one passenger and injuring others.

According to news reports, Tracy Morgan has only recently begun making television appearances and giving interviews. The crash left him with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury. Since that day, he has struggled with memory issues and has even had to relearn how to walk.

As bad as his physical injuries are, Mr. Morgan seems to struggle equally with the loss of James McNair, who was better known as Jimmy Mack. McNair was Morgan’s friend and “comrade in comedy,” and was killed while riding with Morgan that day.

Finally, the legal aftermath of an automobile accident can also drag on for months or years. The truck driver who caused the crash is facing serious criminal charges and may also be facing a number of civil lawsuits as well, but none of these matters have yet been resolved. And it was only recently that the National Transportation Safety Board completed its official investigation into the crash. Unsurprisingly, the NTSB confirmed that the crash was primarily caused by fatigued driving.

A car or truck accident can change life in an instant. Sometimes that means losing a loved one. Sometimes that means suffering serious injury or permanent disability. Often, it means months of paperwork, phone calls and long waits to resolve insurance and legal issues.

If you’ve been injured or lost a loved one in a preventable auto accident, the aftermath can feel overwhelming. But if you decide that legal action is necessary, hiring an experienced and caring attorney can make the process much easier and less frustrating.

If You Are Wronged, We Will Make It Right. Schedule A Free Confidential Consultation At Winer, Burritt, Scott & Jacobs, LLP, we empower our clients. We take on the largest law firms, toughest insurance defense lawyers and largest companies with confidence. * Bold text labels are required for submission | We practice in California only.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.