Monthly Archives: March 2009

Representing Yourself in a California Personal Injury Case is Just Plain Dumb!

California Personal Injury Lawyer, Norman Gregory Fernandez, Esq.Recently I talked to a man who was rear ended in a car accident, and suffered injuries. He received medical treatment which totaled approximately $5,000.00. He stated that the insurance company told him to submit a demand, which he did. He then told me that the insurance company kept telling him to wait just a little longer, and that they would work it out, etc.

Well guess what, the man waited for two years and two days after the accident to call me for a consultation. He is basically shit out of luck; S.O.L. for short! You see you only have two years from the date of the injury to file a lawsuit. This is also known as the statute of limitations for filing a law suit in this type of case. Ignorance of this fact is no excuse for waiting.

Had the man called me one week before the statute of limitations expired, I might have taken the case and filed the requisite lawsuit for him. Unfortunately for him, it was too late. In this mans zeal to in his mind to get more money by not getting an attorney, he got nothing. Little did he know that in the vast majority of cases, a plaintiff in a personal injury case gets more money with an attorney, then without.

I recently spoke to a lady who also happened to work for an insurance company. She had a car accident and was still treating. She was told she may need surgery. The defendant insurance company offered her $7,000.00. She talked to some (moronic) friends at her insurance company who told her it was a good offer, and she took it. She signed a settlement and release of all claims, her case is over. She calls me after the fact to see if she can get out of it. The answer was no! She is stuck with her dumb decision.

I always ask myself why persons injured in a motor vehicle accident, slip and fall, dog bite, or other type of personal injury would not at least call a personal injury attorney like me to obtain at least a free consultation to find out what their rights are? If someone was very sick would they not go see a doctor? Sure they would. So why do people try to handle personal injury cases on their own. Don’t they realize it is the dumbest thing you can do? Don’t they realize that they may be entitled to untold thousands or more in compensation for their injuries? Don’t they realize that personal injury attorney’s such as myself charge nothing unless we recover money for you.

Now granted there are tons of personal injury attorney’s out there. In my opinion most are just settlement mills looking for the quick buck. Not me or my firm!

If you have a personal injury case in California, call me for a free consultation at 800-816-1529 ext. 1. If I can help you, I will. I  will fight to get you as much money as possible in your case.

Don’t be cheap, and don’t be dumb, retain an attorney to get more money than you will on your own. Don’t be like the fools above, instead of cutting out attorneys fees; they cut themselves totally out of any real settlement!

By California Personal Injury Lawyer Norman Gregory Fernandez, © 2009

Share

Suzuki Issues Urgent Recall For GSX-R1000 Motorcycles

Product Liability Attorney Norman Gregory Fernandez discusses the urgent recall of Suzuki GSX-R1000 motorcycles.Chatsworth, California –

American Suzuki Motor Corporation announced that an extraordinary safety defect in 2005 and 2006 GSX-R1000 model sport bikes has been causing cracking and breakage in the front wheel/fork assembly and behind and below the steering neck of the motorcycle. Frame fractures are serious safety defects that destabilize and otherwise adversely affect the handling and maneuvering characteristics of motorcycles so as to make it nearly impossible for even the most experienced and talented riders to avoid a catastrophic crash.

This is a urgent safety problem. If you have one of these motorcycles DO NOT RIDE IT. CALL YOUR LOCAL SUZUKI DEALER NOW. IF YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED DUE TO THIS DEFECT CALL US NOW AT 800-816-1529 EXT. 1.

The defect in the frame of the Suzuki GSX-R1000 sport bikes is so significant that it has caused the entire front steering assembly to completely separate from the body of the motorcycle while unsuspecting drivers were in the act of operating this dangerous machine! If you or a family member has sustained injury while operating one of these Suzuki sport bikes, call the our law office at (800) 816-1529 ext. 1, so that our experienced team of trial lawyers can help you pursue compensation for your harm.

Suzuki, perhaps unsurprisingly, has refused to take responsibility for manufacturing and selling such an incredibly defective sport bike. Suzuki Motor Corporation has instead attempted to point the finger at the purchasers and drivers of their motorcycles, claiming that the cracking and breaking of these frames is attributed to reckless drivers who engage in dangerous stunts and illegal driving activities which places an unusually high amount of stress on the frame of the motorcycle.

However, Suzuki has initiated a recall campaign as of late January, 2009, in which the company will either replace broken and cracked frames or retrofit affected bikes with a brace to minimize the potential for frame cracking and breakage. This massive recall covers more than 26,000 model year 2005 and 2006 GSX-R1000 motorcycles!

If you own or ride one of these Suzuki sport bikes, you should have already received a notification letter from Suzuki explaining the possible safety defects in the frame and requesting you to return your motorcycle to a Suzuki dealership as soon as possible. Suzuki also asked its individual dealerships to attempt to personally contact customers and inform them of the recall initiative. It is of the utmost importance for all owners of a recalled sport bike to trailer the motorcycle to a Suzuki retailer before any future operation of the bike is undertaken.

A word to the wise: Do not be fooled! The frames of the recalled GSX-R1000’s may have cracks that are so faint they are not visible to the naked eye. Even the slightest of hairline cracks can lead to partial or total separation of the frame while driving. Furthermore, frames that are currently defect free may, at any moment, sustain a crack or break which can cause you and your bike to become painfully familiar with the asphalt.

Under the rules governing this recall, Suzuki must abide by guidelines approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for inspecting and remedying the dangerous sport bikes. Specifically, if Suzuki does detect any sort of crack or breakage anywhere in the frame, the company must replace the frame with a new frame that is equipped with a reinforcement brace. In the event that Suzuki does not detect any damage to the frame, a reinforcement brace must be attached to the current bike frame using bolts and epoxy adhesive. In order to provide for the safety of yourself and others, it is critical that owners of 2005 and 2006 model year GSX-R1000’s take immediate action in response to Suzuki’s recall campaign!

Suzuki claims that the reinforcement brace is made of lightweight, slender aluminum that will not affect the appearance, handling or performance of your motorcycle. Additionally, the company is providing a five-year warranty covering the frame and brace, effective as of the date of the brace installation.

If you own a motorcycle that is covered by this recall initiative, the inspection and appropriate repair or replacement will be done free of charge. However, Suzuki has noted some forms of service and repair that will not be covered under the recall. For example, customers will have to shoulder the cost of repairs attributable to crashes or other similar incidents caused by the safety defect.

If a family member has died or you or a family member has been njured while operating a Suzuki GSX-R1000 sport bike, my law firm, The Law Offices of Norman Gregory Fernandez can see to it that your legal needs are fully and carefully represented, so that you can get the compensation you are entitled to. You may call our hotline at 800-816-1529 ext. 1 for a free consultation now.
Visit the links listed below to view the Suzuki Customer Notice and Consumer Affairs Information regarding Suzuki’s recall campaign.

http://www.suzukicycles.com/Recalls/pdf/GS_GSX_GSXR_192_WebsiteLetter.pdf

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/recalls04/2009/suzuki_gsx.html

By Defective Motorcycle Personal Injury Attorney

Share

Two Car Accident’s Caused By a Possible Drunk Driver

Castaic California car accident atorneyCastaic – California

Two traffic accidents involving five vehicles on the Interstate 5 early Saturday morning led to an arrest on suspicion of DUI, the transportation of four people to the hospital and lane closures, said California Highway Patrol Officer Ben Ellis.

A sedan and a tractor trailer collided on the southbound I-5 just south of Templin Highway near Castaic at 6:03 a.m., Ellis said.

About two minutes later, the first accident led to a second collision involving a pick-up truck, an SUV, another sedan and tractor trailer already at the site, according to Ellis.

Officers arrested the male driver of the sedan in the first collision on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol. The suspect was injured in the second collision because he stepped out of his vehicle after the first collision, Ellis said.

The suspect was transported to Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital, along with the driver of the second sedan and two passengers in that vehicle, Ellis said.

CHP officers shut down the third and fourth lanes for about an hour. The first and second lanes were closed only five to 10 minutes after the crash.

Authorities still do not know what directly caused the accident.

“We’re still investigating at this point,” Ellis said.

Castaic Car Accident Attorney

Share

Federal Hearing Regarding Chatsworth California Metrolink Disaster Confirms Engineer Warned About Cell Phone Use!

NTSB federal panel hears Connex Railroad testimony about fatal Chatsworth, California Metrolink train crash.

Los Angeles, CA

The National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) www.ntsb.gov heard testimony in Washington D.C., on Tuesday, regarding the conduct of the engineer who died while operating the fatal Chatsworth Metrolink commuter train crash.

Robert M. Sanchez was the engineer, who was operating the train September 12, 2008, when he allegedly ran a red signal light and crashed into a Union Pacific freight train killing himself, 24 passengers, and injuring 135 as reported by the Los Angeles Time.

The NTSB panel heard testimony in Washington D.C. from Rick Dahl, a supervisor with Connex Railroad. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority “Metrolink commuter rail,” contracts their train operators and workers from Connex Railroad.

Dahl testified he had warned Sanchez on two separate occasions about violating railroad policy regarding cell phone use. It is a serious violation for train engineers to use their cell phones while operating a moving train. The supervisor also testified Sanchez’s phone was found in his bag in 2006, but he was not observed by supervisors using the phone.

Shortly before the Chatsworth California accident, Dahl warned Sanchez, a second time, after a conductor reported seeing Sanchez using the cell phone while at work.

The testimony remains confusing because there have been contradictory reports from four witnesses and the surviving Metrolink conductor about the color of the rail signal. They all claim, the rail signal was green and not red when the train failed to switch lines. The federal panel remains hearing testimony and the investigation is ongoing.

Chatsworth California Metrolink Train Accident Attorney

Share

The Supreme Court strikes Preemption Argument In Drug Company Case.

California Personal Injury LawyerIn one of the most eagerly awaited decisions of this Supreme Court session, the justices today ruled that drug companies are not shielded from personal injury claims even if the feds approved their products and packaging. The 6-3 decision is a victory for Diana Levine, a Vermont musician, now in her 60s, who sued drug giant Wyeth after she had to have her arm amputated because of a botched injection of the anti-nausea med Phenergan.

The ruling has wide-reaching implications for product liability and personal injury lawsuits, including those pending against Merck & Co. charging that its anti-inflammatory drug Vioxx dramatically increased heart attack and stroke risk.

“Federal law does not pre-empt Levine’s claim,” the justices wrote, “that Phenergan’s label did not contain an adequate warning about the IV-push method of administration.”

To sum the case up, Levine, a guitarist, suffered from migraines and often received an injection at a nearby clinic of Phenergan in her backside to treat related nausea symptoms. But on one tragic visit in 2000, instead of giving her a shot in the butt, the physician’s assistant attempted to inject the drug directly into a vein in her arm using an alternative approved method called intravenous push.

The worker accidentally injected the drug into Levine’s artery instead of a vein, which has the potential to cause a spasm in the artery, reducing the blood supply and sometimes leading to gangrene. Indeed, the right-handed musician rapidly developed an infection in her right hand and forearm, and doctors were forced to amputate the blackened limb in two stages.

Although the packaging was approved by the Food and Drug Administration and described the risks of Phenergan, Levine’s lawyers argued that the warning against IV-push should have been stronger. A Vermont jury awarded Levine $6.7 million in damages, and the Vermont Supreme Court upheld the decision in 2006. But Wyeth appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has now weighed in, putting the matter to rest.

The three justices who ruled against Levine were John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Samuel Alito, Jr., who penned the dissenting opinion. “[I]t is odd (to say the least) that a jury in Vermont can now order for Phenergan what the FDA has chosen not to order for mustard gas,” Alito wrote — referring to the highly toxic but powerful chemical that, despite the significant risk, can be administered via IV push as an anticancer drug.

California Products Liabilty Attorney

Share

California Medical Malpractice Cases In a Nutshell.

Medical Malpractice in a nutshell

For those of you who do not know what a medical malpractice case is, I will describe it to you in basic language. Medial malpractice is the failure of a doctor to perform like other similar doctors in the community, and this failure causes you damages.

Medical malpractice usually includes health care providers such as doctors, hospitals, nurses, dentists, or anyone providing health care services.

Some examples of medical malpractice would be: a doctor operating on the wrong body part; a doctor removing the wrong body part; failure to diagnose a medical condition; misdiagnosis; prescribing the wrong medications; leaving tools or devices in the body after surgery; negligently performing surgery; failing to warn about possible ramifications of a medical procedure, and so on.

A medical malpractice victim is entitled to special and general damages. Special damages are out of pocket losses such as medical bills, loss of wages, prescriptions, travel to and from a medical provider and so on. General Damages are pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, emotional distress, etc.

Since the 1970’s, the State of California has limited or capped general damages in medical malpractice cases to $250,000 no matter what your loss is.

I know that the $250,000 cap on general damages is absurd and way behind the times. I may discuss how unfair this cap is in another article. The purpose of the article is simply to discuss a California medical malpractice case.

If you are a victim of medical malpractice in California you can basically recover your out of pocket loss, and up to $250,000 in general damages. Because of the $250,000 cap in California, many personal injury attorneys have stopped doing medical malpractice cases because they are expensive to prosecute.

Victims of medical malpractice in California have only 1 year from the time they knew or should have known about the malpractice to sue. Furthermore, they must notify the health care provider in writing of the fact that they are going to sue, before they can sue.

For this reason it is important for medical malpractice victims to find a medical malpractice personal injury attorney such as myself, as soon as possible.

To prove that there was medical malpractice in a particular case, an expert witness is almost always necessary. In most medical malpractice cases, the expert needs to be retained at the outset of the case, to determine if there was indeed a failure of a healthcare provider to act as similar providers in the community would have.

In closing, if you feel like you may be the victim of medical malpractice, call my office forthwith at 800-816-1529 ext. 1. I will give you a free consultation.

By California Medical Malpractice Personal Injury Attorney Norman Gregory Fernandez, © 2009

Share

Man killed in highway crash with big rig Truck.

Law Office of Norman Gregory Fernandez Personal Injury NewsYERMO – California

A passenger died Monday night after the pickup truck he was riding in crashed into the back of a tractor-trailer on Interstate 15 near Yermo, according to a report from the San Bernardino County Sheriff-Coroner’s Department.

County coroners have not yet released the man’s name pending notification of his family. He and the car’s driver were in a red pickup truck on northbound Interstate 15 at the First Street overcrossing near Yermo when it slammed into the back of a big rig at 9:23 p.m., the report stated.

The driver was airlifted to Loma Linda University Hospital where he is being treated for major injuries. Both men were from San Fernando, according to a California Highway Patrol report.

The California Highway Patrol is investigation the collision.

San Bernardino Truck Accident Attorney

Share