Category Archives: Personal Injury

A personal injury or accident can alter your life forever. You may be able to get support with expenses from a personal injury settlement by contacting an based personal injury lawyer NOW.

Jail Violence Creates Surge of Personal Injury Claims

Monsanto Given Legal Shield in a Chemical Safety Bill

WASHINGTON — Facing hundreds of millions of dollars in lawsuits, the giant biotechnology companyMonsanto last year received a legislative gift from the House of Representatives, a one-paragraph addition to a sweeping chemical safety bill that could help shield it from legal liability for a toxic chemical only it made.

Monsanto insists it did not ask for the addition. House aides deny it is a gift at all. But the provision would benefitthe only manufacturer in the United States of now-banned polychlorinated biphenyls, chemicals known as PCBs, a mainstay of Monsanto sales for decades. The PCB provision is one of several sticking points that negotiators must finesse before Congress can pass a law to revamp the way thousands of chemicals are regulated in the United States.

“Call me a dreamer, but I wish for a Congress that would help cities with their homeless crises instead of protecting multinational corporations that poison our environment,” said Pete Holmes, the city attorney for Seattle, one of six cities suing Monsanto to help cover the costs of reducing PCB discharge from their sewers.

The House and the Senate last year both passed versions of legislation to replace the 40-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act, a law that theEnvironmental Protection Agency acknowledged had become so unworkable that as many as 1,000 hazardous chemicals still on sale today needed to be evaluated to see if they should be banned or restricted.

Democrats and Republicans—along with the chemical industry and even some environmentalists—agree that the pending legislation would be a major improvement over existing law.But from legal liability shields to state-based regulatory authority, the House and Senate versions have major differences to resolve. The remaining disputes revolve around the basics of pre-emption: Who gets to sue? Andwho gets to regulate the chemical industry?

A Monsanto spokeswoman said the company had received no special treatment from the House or the Senate.

“Monsanto does not consider either version of the bill, with respect to the effect on preemption, to be a ‘gift,’ ” the spokeswoman, Charla Lord, said.

Already, attorneys general and top environmental regulators from 15 states have written to leaders in Congress demanding changes.

“Our future work depends on striking the right balance to strengthen the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s abilities and funding, without limiting state powers in creating and enforcing needed protections,” said aletter, obtained by The New York Times, sent by the top environmental regulators in California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Washington and West Virginia.

Screen Shot 2016-02-29 at 9.57.25 PM

Some of the most vociferous objections relate to the so-called Monsanto Clause. The provision does not mention the company by name, but between the early 1930s and 1977, Monsanto manufactured almost all of the 1.25 billion pounds of PCBs sold in the United States.

The chemicals were initially admired for their ability to prevent fires and explosions in electrical transformers and other equipment. But as the use of PCBs skyrocketed nationwide in products as varied as paints, pesticides and even carbonless copy paper, evidence mounted that they were contaminating the environment and potentially causing health problemsincluding cancer and immune-system complications. The E.P.A. banned their production in 1979.

PCB litigation has surged in the last year as cities and school systems struggle to comply with directives from federal and state regulators to reduce PCB levels in sewer discharge and in caulk once used to construct schools. Separately, a group of individuals who received diagnoses of a form of cancer known as non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma sued Monsanto last year, claiming the company should pay damages.

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, in a June reportaccompanying its version of the legislation, asserted that neither existing toxic chemical law nor any revisions pending in Congress should be seen as a way to “pre-empt, displace or supplant” the right to sue for damages in lawsuits like the ones filed against Monsanto.

The House also voted to preserve the right to sue if individuals or local governments believe they have been harmed by a chemical, regardless of future federal regulations of the substance. But a critical paragraph added to the House bill in late May made sure past regulatory requirements by the E.P.A. would continue to disqualify legal claims, and it specifically referred to the section of the 1976 toxic chemical law governing PCBs, giving Monsanto clearer authority in the future to ask judges to dismiss lawsuits filed against it.

Congressional aides involved in the drafting said the language was inserted at the request of Republican staff members at the House Energy and Commerce Committee. One Republican committee aide disputed any suggestion that this was a gift to Monsanto, but he said he was not allowed to discuss the issue on the record.

And Ms. Lord, the Monsanto spokeswoman, said the company did not ask for the change.

Read Full  Article – http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/business/monsanto-could-benefit-from-a-chemical-safety-bill.html?_r=0

Am I legally responsible for shoveling my sidewalk?

By Victoria Dalton
on February 14, 2016 at 6:41 AM, updated February 14, 2016 at 6:42 AM

As we brave the wintery cold, Valentine’s Day brings some warmth to our hearts and reminds us of when we fell head over heels in love with that special someone.

Falling head over heels is only good when love is involved.   Walking on snow and ice covered sidewalks can result in a nasty slip and fall.  Serious injuries can occur which may bring unexpected medical treatment and bills.  Is anyone legally responsible when these accidents occur?

In some instances, a property owner may be responsible when someone falls head over heels on their property. This week, Your Legal Corner will discuss the various factors that govern sidewalk liability.

Type of Property

The law distinguishes the level of care to be provided to a pedestrian based upon the type of property involved.  For example, the level of care required for a residential property owner is quite different and much less when compared to a commercial property owner.

Residential Property

With a residential property, the sidewalk that abuts or is in front of your premises is considered public property.  As a result, the general rule is a homeowner is not responsible for the condition of the public sidewalk in front of the home.  There is no duty to maintain the sidewalk in front of the premises in a safe condition.  However, it would be too simple if that was the only rule and there were no exceptions.

If a homeowner attempts to make repairs to correct some defect or clears the sidewalk from ice or snow, they may be held legally responsible if their actions are done negligently and result in a new or increased element of danger to a pedestrian.

For example, if a property owner undertakes to shovel the snow covered sidewalk and leaves a thin layer of ice but does not spread salt, they could be held responsible for a fall for increasing the element of danger that previously did not exist.

Additionally, the driveway and walkway leading up to the property is always the responsibility of the homeowner. Therefore in this instance there is in most cases homeowner liability for slip and falls on their property.

Commercial Property     

 Commercial property owners have a higher duty of care when it comes to sidewalk liability.  Their responsibility can best be described in one word, “reasonableness.”

The owner of a commercial property has a duty to use reasonable care to ensure the sidewalk abutting their property is safe for pedestrians using them.  They must determine whether the condition of the sidewalk poses an unreasonable risk of harm.  If so, they must take action in a reasonable period of time to correct the condition.

Notably, a commercial property owner is required to take affirmative steps to correct any dangerous condition.  Especially with snow and ice, they must remain vigilant to ensure that changing conditions are addressed in a timely manner.

Homeowner or Condominium Association 

In this type of living arrangement many individuals have left their traditional neighborhood to live in an “over 55” or condominium community.  Who is responsible for the sidewalks in a private community?

In a recent decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court determined that the rule governing residential property owners does not apply where the association controls the sidewalks.  The bylaws of the homeowners’ association typically spell out a duty on the association to maintain sidewalks and common areas.  As such, they have a duty to maintain those areas in a safe condition.

As you can see the rules are somewhat confusing. Should you suffer from a slip and fall, it is best to contact a personal injury attorney to know for sure who is legally responsible.

Hopefully, this Valentine’s Day is only filled with love and fond memories of when you first fell head over heels!!!

Till next time, God bless, keep smiling, when Your Legal Corner will discuss  “A Patient’s Bill of Rights.” Victoria M. Dalton is a dedicated Family/Elder Law Attorney with the Law Offices of Hoffman DiMuzio. Email correspondence tovdalton@hoffmandimuzio.com or call 856-845-8243.

Please note that Your Legal Corner was created to provide educational material about the law and is not legal advice.

Read Full Article – http://www.nj.com/south-jersey-voices/index.ssf/2016/02/head_over_heels_liability_when.html

L.A. prosecutors file criminal charges in methane leak near Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES |

Los Angeles prosecutors filed criminal charges against the Southern California Gas company on Tuesday over a huge methane leak near the city that has forced thousands of residents from their homes since October.

The four misdemeanor charges accuse SoCalGas, a division of San Diego-based Sempra Energy, of failing to report the release of hazardous materials following the underground pipeline rupture and discharging air contaminants.

“While we recognize that neither the criminal charges nor the civil lawsuits will offer the residents of Los Angeles County a complete solution, it is important that Southern California Gas Co. be held responsible for its criminal actions,” District Attorney Jackie Lacey said in a written statement.

Lacey’s move came on the same day that California Attorney General Kamala Harris sued Southern California Gas Co, accusing the utility of violating state health and safety laws by failing to promptly control the escaping gas and report the leak to authorities.

The lawsuit also cites environmental damage caused by the uncontrolled release of 80,000 metric tons of methane, the prime component of natural gas and a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

The leak stems from an underground pipeline rupture at the company’s 3,600-acre (1,457-hectare) Aliso Canyon natural gas storage field. The largest such leak ever in California, at its height it accounted for a fourth of all methane emissions statewide.

The lawsuit amends a civil complaint brought in December by the Los Angeles city attorney and later joined by Los Angeles County. It seeks civil penalties and court orders requiring the utility to immediately take all steps necessary to mitigate the leak, repair the damage and prevent future discharges.

Several attempts to halt the methane release have failed, but the company said it hopes to plug the leak by the end of the month through a relief well.

Read Full – http://www.reuters.com/article/us-california-methane-lawsuit-idUSKCN0VB25M

Erin Brockovich appeals to Porter Ranch residents as law firms push gas leak suits

Alice Walton and Louis Sahagun Contact Reporters

Movie-famous activist Erin Brockovich stood in front of 400 Porter Ranch residents on a recent weeknight and told a disturbing personal story.

“When I first came to Porter Ranch I couldn’t believe it,” she said of her visit to the community closest to Southern California Gas Co.’s leaking well. “I was in somebody’s house and within 10 minutes, I started feeling kind of dizzy.”

She said she saw a doctor who told her she “had what they called a chemically induced kind of bronchitis.”

The message was clear. If Brockovich, 55, became ill after just 10 minutes, Southern California Gas Co.’s ruptured well must be harming anyone who breathes the fumes even for a short time — and for that, the victims should get compensation. Brockovich and the law firm she was advocating for, Weitz & Luxenberg, invited the residents to join their lawsuits against the gas company.

Across the region, other law firms are holding similar meetings and running advertising campaigns using a mix of dire warnings about health risks and reduced property values, promises of money and practical advice to try to persuade aggrieved Porter Ranch families to join lawsuits.

Since the leak began at the Aliso Canyon well nearly three months ago, at least 25 lawsuits have been filed seeking damages from the utility and its parent firm, Sempra Energy. The attorneys say their take could range from almost nothing to more than one-third of the awards, depending on the outcome of the cases.

A majority of the lawsuits have been filed by residents of Porter Ranch, a community of 30,000 people in the rolling hills of the north San Fernando Valley. The legal actions claim negligence, hazardous activity, nuisance and trespass and seek compensation for emotional and physical injuries, as well as for diminished property values.

Read Full Article – http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-porter-ranch-lawyers-20160119-story.html