It has long been a catch phrase to say that someone has been "drinking and driving".  However, a growing epidemic amongst young drivers is "texting and driving".  A recent survey quoted in the Kansas City Star indicates that 48% of drivers age 14-24 admit to texting while driving.  For the 25-44 age group, the number is 27%. 

 

For those who don't know, texting is using your cell phone to type out messages and send them like email on a computer.  It generally requires the use of both hands and looking at the phone to see what you are typing.  This has the possibility of becoming a very serious problem on our roadways.  In my auto accident cases, we are also beginning to see a growing trend in wrecks caused because the younger driver was texting on their cell phone instead of paying attention to the road. 

 

If you have been in a car wreck and would like to speak with a St. Louis personal injury lawyer, contact Josh Myers.

A recent press release has indicated that fatal accidents in the United States have reached the lowest level in a decade.  In 2007, 41,059 people were killed in highway crashes, down more than 1,600 people from 2006.  This is the fewest fatal accidents on highways since 1994, when 40,716 people were killed.  Additionally, the fatality rate of 1.37 deaths for every 100 million miles traveled in 2007 was the lowest ever on record according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.  The government agency attributes the decrease in fatalities to safer vehicles and aggressive law enforcement. 

 

Unfortunately, motorcycle deaths buck the trend by increasing for the tenth straight year.  In 2007, there were 5,154 motorcycle deaths, and increase of more than 300 from the prior year.  The increase in motorcycle accidents is attributed to higher fuel prices, which means more people are driving motorcycles to save on fuel.  More disturbingly, nearly one-quarter of motorcycle deaths involve a driver or motorcycle rider who is drunk. 

 

If you have been involved in a motorcycle or automobile accident and wish to speak with a Missouri personal injury attorney, feel free to contact Josh Myers.  It is always free to discuss your case.

On August 19, 2008, Wyandotte County District Attorney charged Dion Jones with aggravated battery in connection with the injury of a Kansas City Police Officer in an car wreck that happened at 34^th and Webster.  After the collision, Jones attempted to flee the scene with a five-month old child in his vehicle.  In addition to the charges for the injury to the police officer, he was also charged with battery for the injury of another person in the collision, as well as leaving the scene, and endangerment of a child.  He is currently being held in custody in Wyandotte County jail in lieu of a $50,000.00 bond.

 

Often times, defendants in car accident cases are charged criminally for their actions.  If you are in an auto accident and receive a notice that a person who hit you has a criminal trial approaching, it is important for you to attend the trial and testify if asked.  Just because a person is charged with a criminal offense, it is not admissible in your case against them.  However, if they plead guilty or are convicted, this is admissible, and really helps shine the light for the jury. 

 

If you've been in a car wreck and would like to speak with a Missouri auto accident attorney, contact Josh Myers.

One of the alarming trends I am seeing in our nursing home litigation is that nursing homes are intentionally not buying liability insurance.  Liability insurance is what would cover them in the event that they negligently injure one of their residents.  Many people think that nursing homes are required to carry this type of coverage, and they are in some states.  However, in Missouri there is no such law.  You may ask, why would they not carry insurance?  Most people would think that they are trying to save money, but that is not the real reason.  Rather, the real reason is to try and dissuade any lawsuits against them, no matter how bad their conduct.  As personal injury lawyers, we spend countless hours and sometimes more than a hundred thousand dollars of our money to finance case expenses.  But few lawyers are going to make that kind of investment when the defendant does not have any insurance - and thus, no one to pay any settlement or verdict. 

 

Case in point, several years ago we represented a family for the death of their uncle due to his nursing home's outrageously negligent conduct.  What we found once we filed the lawsuit was that the home claimed that they continuously operated on a loss, and that there was no money, nor was there ever going to be any money, to pay the family.  They also claimed that there was no insurance coverage, and they basically told us to buzz off.  We refused to take no for an answer and kept on digging, and ultimately found that this home was set up as part of a corporate chain.  This is a tactic that we are now seeing all across the country.  What happens is that there is a high-level parent corporation that owns all of the nursing homes.  They then create several dummy sub-corporations.  These sub-corporations then have further sub-corporations, and on down the line until we get to the actual nursing home.  The reason that this tactic can be so dangerous is because the main purpose of the corporate structure is to insulate liability.  This means that no one else other than that specific nursing home, its own corporation, can be held responsible for their negligence.  We found that they were funneling the money from the nursing home through other various corporations up to the main corporation.  On paper, this makes it look like the nursing home itself is dirt poor, but yet the top executives were rolling in cash.  They then try to tell you that there is no insurance policy and no money and that you are wasting your time and money by suing them.  I have even read press releases in which there are now seminars put on for high level executives for various nursing home chains to instruct them on how to properly set up this structure. 

 

In our case, we were ready to go to trial and actually got the evidence to show that all these various corporations were nothing but dummy corporations.  Of course, before we got to trial, the nursing home seemed to find some money and we entered into a confidential settlement.  However, this is a problem that happens all too often, and I know that there are many lawyers out there who have been persuaded to drop the case - and this means that there are plenty of injured clients who didn't get the justice they deserved.  I think it is imperative for Missouri to enact legislation requiring all nursing homes to retain a minimum level of liability insurance.

 

If you would like to speak to a St. Louis nursing home or elder abuse attorney, feel free to contact Josh Myers.  There are never any hourly fees, and it is always free to talk about your case.

This fall, the Illinois Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of a recently enacted law which limits the amount of money recoverable in a medical malpractice lawsuit.  As it currently stands, victims of medical malpractice are limited by law to recovering no more than $500,000.00 for non-economic damages.  Non-economic damages refer to pain and suffering, and emotional and psychological injuries.  The amount that can be recovered for lost wages and medical bills is currently uncapped.  The law was passed in 2005 amidst a "crisis" in which doctors were leaving Madison and St. Clair counties.  While there probably is no argument that doctors were leaving, I strongly disagree that it has anything directly to do with lawsuits.  Rather, the issue was that the insurance companies were charging unjustifiably high insurance premiums for doctors in these areas.  For example, malpractice premiums for neurosurgeons were more than $246,000.00 in 2004. 

 

This is the same situation that we have seen in Missouri and across the country.  The problem is not a lawsuit crisis, but an insurance crisis.  The insurance companies are working hard to create an atmosphere of fear and are pointing the finger at lawsuits and trial lawyers.  They do all this to justify raising their premiums so that they can pad their bottom line.  Even worse, in January 2005, President Bush visited Collinsville, Illinois, to tout medical liability reforms to an audience of health care providers.  The problem we see today is that such high ranking politicians are backed by the fat-pocket insurance lobbyists to help reinforce this so-called "crisis."  However, no one is fighting for the rights of the individuals.  By way of these caps on damages, the insurance industry has made it near impossible for attorneys to take medical malpractice cases.  What many people don't know is that the average medical malpractice case can cost anywhere from $100,000.00 to $300,000.00 in expenses alone to prepare for trial.  These are not attorneys' fees; these are the fees for experts, exhibits, depositions, etc.  Thus, when they cap the amount that you can win at trial this close to the amount that it costs to bring the case to trial, it is not worthwhile to try these cases. 

 

Illinois has seen these laws before and, at least twice before, the State Supreme Court has ruled them as being unconstitutional.  The last time was in 1997, and the Court said then that it was for the juries to decide the amount of the verdict, not the legislature.  I can only hope that the court continues to protect the individual in this upcoming session.  It may not be long before Missouri courts also face this similar issue, and I hope that they find some strong guidance from Illinois if they do.

 

Josh Myers is a St. Louis personal injury lawyer licensed to practice in Missouri and Illinois.  If you would like to discuss your medical malpractice case, please contact him.  There are never any hourly fees and it's always free to discuss your case.   

Illinois is currently considering adding traffic cameras to the interstates to catch speeders.  Currently, there is no timetable on when the cameras will be installed.  Governor Rod Blagojevich announced the cameras as part of a plan to crack down on speeders.

 

As injury lawyers, we handle numerous auto accident cases.  The vast majority of these cases are caused by inattentive speeders.  Of course, not only are speeders more likely to cause a car wreck, their speed can lead to much more severe injuries such as whiplash, broken bones, or brain injury.  The Governor's plan is not only to raise additional revenue through catching the speeders, but also to make the streets safer.  An additional benefit that auto accident lawyers are learning the value of is that there will tapes in the traffic cameras that can be used to show what exactly happened during an accident.  In cases where both parties are disputing the facts of what happened, these videos can be invaluable.  As an Illinois injury lawyer, I am always on the lookout for new technology that can assist our cases.  If you have been injured in an auto accident and would like to speak to an Illinois injury lawyer, please contact Josh Myers.  It is always free to discuss a potential case.

One of the alarming trends I am seeing in our nursing home litigation is that nursing homes are intentionally not buying liability insurance.  Liability insurance is what would cover them in the event that they negligently injure one of their residents.  Many people think that nursing homes are required to carry this type of coverage, and they are in some states.  However, in Missouri there is no such law.  Why do nursing homes not carry liability insurance?  I think it is because they are using this tactic to try and dissuade any lawsuits against them, no matter how bad their conduct. 

 

Case in point, several years ago we represented a family for the death of their uncle due to his nursing home's outrageously negligent conduct.  What we found once we filed the lawsuit was that the home claimed that they continuously operated on a loss, and that there was no money, nor was there ever going to be any money, to pay the family.  They also claimed that there was no insurance coverage, and they basically told us to buzz off.  We refused to take no for an answer and kept on digging, and ultimately found that this home was set up as part of a corporate chain.  This is a tactic that we are now seeing all across the country.  What happens is that there is a high-level parent corporation that owns all of the nursing homes.  They then create several dummy sub-corporations.  These sub-corporations then have further sub-corporations, and on down the line until we get to the actual nursing home.  The reason that this tactic can be so dangerous is because the main purpose for the corporate structure is to insulate liability.  This means that no one other than that specific nursing home, its own corporation, can be held responsible for their negligence.  We found that they were funneling the money from the nursing home through other various corporations up to the main corporation.  On paper, this makes it look like the nursing home itself is dirt poor, but yet the top executives were rolling in cash.  They then try to tell you that there is no insurance policy and no money and that you are wasting your time and money by suing them.  I have even read press releases in which there are now seminars put on for high level executives of various nursing home chains to instruct them on how to properly set up this structure. 

 

In our case, we were ready to go to trial and actually got the evidence to show that all these various corporations were nothing but dummy corporations.  Of course, before we got to trial, the nursing home seemed to find some money and we entered into a confidential settlement.  However, this is a problem that happens all too often, and I know that there are many lawyers out there who have been persuaded to drop the case - and this means that there are plenty of injured clients who didn't get the justice they deserved.  I think it is imperative for Missouri to enact legislation requiring all nursing homes to retain a minimum level of liability insurance.

 

If you would like to speak to a St. Louis nursing home or elder abuse attorney, feel free to contact Josh Myers.  There are never any hourly fees, and it is always free to talk about your case.

This afternoon I met with a new workers compensation client.  He had recently been hurt at work when he was hit by a forklift.  His employer drove him to the emergency room.  After his examination, the emergency room doctor gave him a note saying he was to remain off work for the next 7 days.  As a St. Louis Workers Compensation Lawyer, I know that the law says the employer must pay him for his time off work, called TTD.  However, when he asked his employer, they flat out told him he isn't entitled to any TTD pay.  Incidentally, when he tried to go back to work after his 7 days that the ER doctor told him to stay home, his boss fired him. 

Not only was he abused and lied to, but his employer has refused to provide him any additional treatment for the back pain he is still suffering.  Additionally, they have not paid for the prescrition medicine he received at the ER.  Needless to say, this is a story that happens too often.  Employers either don't know the work comp laws, or they outright lie to their employers.  Luckily, my client knew he was being mistreated and I will help get things straightened out.

Because many employees do not know their rights when they are hurt on the job, I have written "The Ultimate Missouri Work Comp Book".  It is free for injured Missouri workers.  Workers Compensation laws are specific to every state.  Thus, while I am also an Illinois Workers Compensation Attorney, this book is not for Illinois workers.  However, I will be working on a book for injured Illinois workers in the near future. 

If you have been hurt at work in Missouri or Illinois and would like to speak to a St. Louis Workers Compensation Attorney, call Josh Myers.  It's always free to talk about your case. 

 

Police and ambulance were called to the scene of a very bad truck accident in Herculaneum at approximately 7:30 am on Monday, August 4, 2008.  The semi truck had collided with a least one other vehicle.  The wreck was bad enough that it caused all lanes on southbound I-55 to be shut down.  While there were injuries sustained, there is no word yet on how serious they are. 

At approximately 10 am on August 7, 2008, a woman driving westbound on I-64 hit a man walking along the side of the road.  Initially, the woman pulled over and got out of the car with her young child and flagged down another car.  The woman and her child then got in this other car and took off, leaving the man lying there.  He was rushed to SLU Hospital in serious condition.  Strangely enough, the woman returned with her husband about an hour later.  As it turned out, she did not speak fluent English, and she had gone to get her husband to have him translate.  This was a strange twist in this pedestrian accident, and I am certainly glad to know that she did not intend to flee the scene with the hopes of not getting caught. 

 

However, this incident should be a good reminder of the dangers of walking on the side of the road.  As a St. Louis pedestrian accident lawyer, I have seen too many cases of people getting hit by a car while walking along the road.  If there is no sidewalk to walk on, you should always walk on the side facing oncoming traffic so that you can at least see the cars coming towards you. 

 

Additionally, this case highlights another issue.  Many people injured in a hit-and-run accident, whether they were a pedestrian or in a car, assume there is nothing they can do because they do not know the identity of the responsible driver.  However, what most people don't know is that in every Missouri and Illinois autmobile insurance policy, you have uninsured motorist coverage.  Uninsured motorist coverage protects you in the event you do not know who hit your and it also protects you if the responsible driver does not have insurance.  A good car accident attorney will know the ins-and-outs of uninsured motorist coverage. 

 

If you've been injured in a hit-and-run accident by an unknown driver or by an uninsured driver, call St. Louis Injury Josh Myers to discuss your rights.  It's always free to talk about your case. 

Emergency crews were called to the scene of an overturned semi-truck the afternoon of August 13, 2008.  Apparently, the truck driver was making a left turn from eastbound Big Bend onto an entrance ramp of I-44.  While doing so, the truck flipped over.  Luckily, no one was injured in this accident.  However, this incident highlights a possible bigger problem.  As a Missouri truck accident lawyer, I often find that many times injuries are caused due to inexperienced drivers.  This is why we will often file suit not only against the defendant driver, but also the trucking company that hired the driver for negligent hiring and retention practices.  Many times, we find that the trucking companies will hire inexperienced drivers and do not adequately train them to drive a tractor trailer.  Even so, they still put them out on the road.  If you are searching for a St. Louis truck accident lawyer, make sure you find someone who is willing to go the distance, not only against the truck driver, but also the trucking company.  Luckily, no one was injured in this accident, unfortunately, that is not always the case.

As any trucking accident attorney can tell you, one of the biggest threats on the road is a weary truck driver.  The vast majority of the trucking accidents we see are caused by tired truckers.  There are actually laws which regulate how long truckers may drive during a given time period.  For approximately 60 years, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) stated that truckers could not drive for more than 10 hours at a time.  However, approximately one year ago, they changed that regulation so that truckers could drive up to 11 hours at one time.  

We recently passed the one year anniversary of a ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court in which they threw out that rule.  In doing so, they indicated that the FMSCA had to adequately explain their decision to add the additional hour.  Not only were they unable to do so, they freely admitted that "studies show that performance begins to degrade after the 8th hour on duty, and the degradation increases geometrically during the 10th and 11th hours."  Essentially, the FMCSA candidly admitted that their new rule would lead to further performance degradation, which means more crashes.  

I am not sure what motivated the FMCSA to increase driving hours.  However, there is no question that the roads are going to be safer due to the overturning of this rule.  I have handled a number of semi-truck collision cases.  In every case, we get not only the driver's logs, but also the bills of lading, fuel receipts, and GPS tracking information.  Basically, we get every piece of paper that can help us document how long the trucker had been driving.  All too frequently, we find that the truckers have been forging their logs, and have been driving in excess of these regulations.  If you have been involved in a trucking accident and need to speak to a Missouri or Illinois trucking attorney, feel free to contact Josh Myers.

A recent article in the Detroit News Washington Bureau highlighted a current proposal by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).  NHTSA is a federal organization who is, among other things, responsible for issuing safety specifications which auto manufacturers must meet.  More generally speaking, they are responsible for making sure that auto manufacturers do not put profits over people.  They are supposed to be looking out for our safety.  Thus, it became quite an issue at a recent hearing why the agency was seeking to preempt state court lawsuits in connection with roof strength.  If this doesn't make sense, let me give you some background.

 

"Roof Strength" refers to the specifications that auto manufacturers must meet in regards to the force that a vehicle's roof can withstand.  This is primarily an issue in traffic accidents where the car rolls over.  Obviously, when a car flips over in a wreck, it will roll over onto the roof, crushing it down to some extent, which can be very dangerous to the occupants of the car.  The current standard says that vehicles weighing 6,000 lbs or less must be able to withstand a force of 1.5 times its weight.  NHTSA is currently proposing a new standard which would require vehicles up to 10,000 lbs to have a roof that withstands 2.5 times its weight.  This in itself is a very good regulation in regards to safety.  However, what NHTSA has also tried to do is sneak in a provision preempting any state court lawsuit for roof crush in a roll-over accident.  Essentially, what this means is that if you wanted to file a products liability claim against the car manufacturer for making a roof that was weaker than it was supposed to be, you would be forbidden from filing that suit in state court.   According to the article, at least 26 state attorneys general have written NHTSA asking that the preemption provision be thrown out.  Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri questioned "Why does NHTSA feel compelled to crush the rights of states?  There is a plot somewhere in this administration so they can wipe out the rights of Americans."

 

So why is NHTSA including this insidious clause in their new regulations?  I think that I have a pretty good idea.  NHTSA estimates that a 3.0 standard would cost auto makers at least $1.1 billion more than a 2.5 standard.  It is no secret that NHTSA frequently works with the auto makers when writing these new standards.  I think that it is a pretty safe bet that the auto makers put a lot of pressure on NHTSA to include this preemption regulation.  If they think that they are going to have to pay more money to meet these stricter safety regulations, I bet that they are trying to cut down on the number of lawsuits they may have to face in the future. 

 

 Roof crush and roll-over accidents are very specialized fields in products liability cases.  It is estimated that roll-over crashes account for more than 10,000 deaths per year.  While roll-overs represent only 3% of wrecks, they count for 1/3 of fatal accidents.  If you would like to speak with an experienced products liability attorney, contact Josh Myers.