Pittsburgh Medical Malpractice Blog

Motorcycle enthusiasts won a big victory in 2003 by having Pennsylvania’s helmet law stricken. But this decision came under scrutiny after the recent accident report of a 53 old, David Robinson. He was travelling on Quarry road and as he approached a curve, his motorcycle crossed the central line and stuck an embankment. As a result, he slid for about 150 feet and his head hit the pavement resulting in a fatal injury. Though no one can say with conviction that he would have survived had he been wearing a helmet, Capt. Tom Roche said that he believes the man may have. He said he appreciates the freedom of riders being given the choice to wear a helmet but notes that incidents such as this could be prevented. Now, a western Pennsylvania lawmaker is trying to restore the law of mandatory wearing of helmets.

The current state law allows the motorcyclist to ride without a helmet if he is more than 21 years old. The rider must also have a license to operate a motorcycle for more than two years or he should have completed a motor cycle safety course approved by PennDOT. The state representative, Dan Frankel who is the lead sponsor of House Bill 945 (restore the law of mandatory wearing of helmets) has reintroduced legislation to restore the helmet law in Harrisburg. For riders under 21 years, the representative introduced a bill to provide for special license plates.

In his support, Frankel reported a study which shows the staggering costs of health care because of the serious injuries as a result of not wearing helmets. The study compared two years pre helmet law (2001 and 2002) and two years post helmet law (2004 and 2005). The head injury deaths were increased by 66% and people hospitalized due to head injury increased by 78%. Thus, the number of injuries increased much more rapidly than did the number of riders on the road. The study also showed an increase of 132% of acute-care hospital charges for motorcycle related head injuries. This doesn’t include rehabilitation costs and long term care.

Motorcycle fatalities have increased from 152 in 2004 to 185 in 2006 and the main injuries that occur due to the accident include Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), spinal cord injury, broken bones and internal bleeding etc. Wearing a helmet will help to reduce the seriousness of TBI and spinal cord injury. A rider injured in a motorcycle accident can claim money for medical expenses and also file a claim for pain and suffering.

State Rep. Frank Farry, R-142, of Langhorne suggested that he would read the bill and analyze the data that shows the amount of head related injures before and after the law and then comment on the action. He feels that it would be a burden to the tax payers if the freedom of wearing helmet results in injuries and fatalities.

“This study shows an incredibly dramatic increase in head injuries and hospitalizations that exceeds the increase in the number of motorcycle riders in Pennsylvania. The implications of this for health care costs are staggering and affect everyone, through tax-funded health care, health insurance premiums and covering uncompensated care," said Frankel

The riders have a different story. About 25 bikers were taking a break from their motorcycle rides at Brian's Harley-Davidson/Buell in Middletown on Saturday. About half of them decided not to wear helmet. Two veterans who have been riding Harleys since the early 1970s suggested that the decision to wear helmet should be left to the rider. One of the riders, Bob Adler also said that wearing a helmet confuses him and he prefers to ride without helmet. He also stated that the main reason for accidents is due to cars and trucks not paying attention to motorcyclists. He added that he maintains distance between himself and cars and so stayed accident free for all the while without wearing a helmet.

With summer now here, more motorcyclists are getting their bikes out and hitting the open road. Combined with the rising gas prices more people are buying motorcycles and the roads are becoming more populated with the 2-wheelers. Unfortunately, there seems to be an underlying prejudice against motorcyclists that many times results in law investigators placing blame on riders without proper examination of the case facts.

Sadly, motorcycle accidents often result in such serious injuries that victims have difficulty managing even day-to-day tasks, are unable to work, and sometimes require long-term care. Because of the bias that motorcyclists are less responsible drivers, personal injury cases involving bikes can be extremely difficult to win.
At Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. our experienced lawyers will fight to ensure you receive proper compensation for your motorcycle injuries. If you or a member of your family has suffered a serious injury, it is important to recover the resources you will need for medical care and other necessary expenses. We invite you to contact our Pittsburgh office for a free consultation and case review. Our personal injury lawyers will only take your case if they feel it will improve your situation.

Motorcycle enthusiasts won a big victory in 2003 by having Pennsylvania’s helmet law stricken. But this decision came under scrutiny after the recent accident report of a 53 old, David Robinson. He was travelling on Quarry road and as he approached a curve, his motorcycle crossed the central line and stuck an embankment. As a result, he slid for about 150 feet and his head hit the pavement resulting in a fatal injury. Though no one can say with conviction that he would have survived had he been wearing a helmet, Capt. Tom Roche said that he believes the man may have. He said he appreciates the freedom of riders being given the choice to wear a helmet but notes that incidents such as this could be prevented. Now, a western Pennsylvania lawmaker is trying to restore the law of mandatory wearing of helmets.

The current state law allows the motorcyclist to ride without a helmet if he is more than 21 years old. The rider must also have a license to operate a motorcycle for more than two years or he should have completed a motor cycle safety course approved by PennDOT. The state representative, Dan Frankel who is the lead sponsor of House Bill 945 (restore the law of mandatory wearing of helmets) has reintroduced legislation to restore the helmet law in Harrisburg. For riders under 21 years, the representative introduced a bill to provide for special license plates.

In his support, Frankel reported a study which shows the staggering costs of health care because of the serious injuries as a result of not wearing helmets. The study compared two years pre helmet law (2001 and 2002) and two years post helmet law (2004 and 2005). The head injury deaths were increased by 66% and people hospitalized due to head injury increased by 78%. Thus, the number of injuries increased much more rapidly than did the number of riders on the road. The study also showed an increase of 132% of acute-care hospital charges for motorcycle related head injuries. This doesn’t include rehabilitation costs and long term care.

Motorcycle fatalities have increased from 152 in 2004 to 185 in 2006 and the main injuries that occur due to the accident include Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), spinal cord injury, broken bones and internal bleeding etc. Wearing a helmet will help to reduce the seriousness of TBI and spinal cord injury. A rider injured in a motorcycle accident can claim money for medical expenses and also file a claim for pain and suffering.

State Rep. Frank Farry, R-142, of Langhorne suggested that he would read the bill and analyze the data that shows the amount of head related injures before and after the law and then comment on the action. He feels that it would be a burden to the tax payers if the freedom of wearing helmet results in injuries and fatalities.

“This study shows an incredibly dramatic increase in head injuries and hospitalizations that exceeds the increase in the number of motorcycle riders in Pennsylvania. The implications of this for health care costs are staggering and affect everyone, through tax-funded health care, health insurance premiums and covering uncompensated care," said Frankel

The riders have a different story. About 25 bikers were taking a break from their motorcycle rides at Brian's Harley-Davidson/Buell in Middletown on Saturday. About half of them decided not to wear helmet. Two veterans who have been riding Harleys since the early 1970s suggested that the decision to wear helmet should be left to the rider. One of the riders, Bob Adler also said that wearing a helmet confuses him and he prefers to ride without helmet. He also stated that the main reason for accidents is due to cars and trucks not paying attention to motorcyclists. He added that he maintains distance between himself and cars and so stayed accident free for all the while without wearing a helmet.

With summer now here, more motorcyclists are getting their bikes out and hitting the open road. Combined with the rising gas prices more people are buying motorcycles and the roads are becoming more populated with the 2-wheelers. Unfortunately, there seems to be an underlying prejudice against motorcyclists that many times results in law investigators placing blame on riders without proper examination of the case facts.

Sadly, motorcycle accidents often result in such serious injuries that victims have difficulty managing even day-to-day tasks, are unable to work, and sometimes require long-term care. Because of the bias that motorcyclists are less responsible drivers, personal injury cases involving bikes can be extremely difficult to win.
At Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. our experienced lawyers will fight to ensure you receive proper compensation for your motorcycle injuries. If you or a member of your family has suffered a serious injury, it is important to recover the resources you will need for medical care and other necessary expenses. We invite you to contact our Pittsburgh office for a free consultation and case review. Our personal injury lawyers will only take your case if they feel it will improve your situation.

Millions of Americans start their day with a cup of coffee and some pay outrageous prices for their morning fix. My law school roommate went through a pound of coffee a week. Being on a tight, student budget, I often indulged as well since there was rarely anything else to drink in the apartment. I drank so much coffee that I honestly lost the attraction to do it.

A similar thing happened in college with mac ‘n cheese but that’s a tale for another day. Add a balance disorder and the doctor’s advice to avoid excessive caffeine and coffee has not been welcome in my life for decades. That said, I never had disdain for coffee nor the folks who drink it. That all changed in 1994 when 70 year old Stella Liebeck suffered serious burns from a hot coffee spill at McDonald’s.

I lost count, years ago, of how many jurors cited the “McDonald’s coffee case” as prime example of why there should be a limit on juror awards. The tales of a jury system gone mad echoed through the halls of every courthouse I have been in since that verdict. I also lost count of the number of times that I have tried to explain the truths behind Stella’s case: that McDonald’s knowingly decided to serve its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees (40 above industry standards and recommendations) because it increased sales, how McDonald’s knew its coffee severely burned multiple people every year, how McDonald’s decided to pay the burn victims instead of serving safer coffee, how all Stella wanted to settle her claim was her medical bills paid and McDonald’s refused (she was hospitalized for 8 days), how the jury awarded Stella one weeks worth of coffee sales to teach McDonald’s a lesson, and how the judge reduced the award.

My goal in these discussions was never to convince my audience anything about Stella’s case. To the contrary, I only wanted them to understand that the 12 people who heard all of evidence made a decision and, as a result, justice was served. One of the founding ideals upon which this country was founded was a trial by jury. Although not perfect, our civil justice system is still the greatest system known to man. Trial by jury is a fundamental right that all citizens should fight to preserve. I am always shocked by the public’s willingness to concede their fundamental rights back to the government. For this, we unquestionably have the media to blame. The media’s sensationalism of Stella’s claim was so irresponsible as to be criminal. The true facts of her case were never made known. And true facts are rarely reported by mainstream media. There is nothing sexy, nothing worth reporting, when a child who was severely injured by a doctor’s incompetence receives a verdict that is capped by tort reform laws. There is nothing sexy, nothing worth reporting when a family who lost their father receives $15,000 because that is all the insurance that the state requires a bad driver to purchase. Instead, the media ceases on large awards, twists the facts and frightens the public into believing that the civil justice system is out of control, that lawyers are to blame for the rising costs of health care and are chasing doctors from the state. None of it is true. To repeat, none of it is true.

Unfortunately, I don’t have the time or the money to bring the truth to the millions of Americans who have been hoodwinked and fooled by powerful lobbyist groups advancing their own agendas ahead of the fundamental rights of American citizens. Fortunately, Susan Saladoff, a trial lawyer, took the time to make a difference. Her movie “Hot Coffee” airing on HBO is an insightful look into the David versus Goliath world that an ordinary citizen faces when tragedy strikes and the citizen needs the civil justice system. If you have not seen the movie, you should - if for no other reason, to understand how important the civil justice system will be in the event that you or a loved one is seriously injured by the carelessness of another.

Visit the website at http://hotcoffeethemovie.com

Here is a glimpse of what you will see - Watch Trailer

After watching Hot Coffee, regardless of your previous views, I hope you will understand why I am proud to say that I am a trial lawyer representing victims of preventable tragedies. I won’t ask you to like me – a trial lawyer! No big deal there, I get my rewards from the people I am privileged to help. My hope is that you at least understand me, understand us trial lawyers. Also, I hope you will become an advocate for the civil justice jury system where a jury of your peers hears all of the facts and dispenses justice unfettered by limitations imposed by the government. As Americans we owe it to each other to preserve our fundamental rights free from government intrusion. I certainly hope that views can be changed by a movie instead of by being thrust into a warped system of justice because of a family tragedy only to learn that the government has restricted the system’s ability to help. Trust me, I have met too many clients in my life who said, “If I had only known the truth, I never would have supported the changes.” If the current trends aren’t changed, someday the government’s response may be to ban the sale of coffee. Stranger things have happened.

The legal profession often has negative connotations associated with it, especially in the field of personal injury law. When an individual thinks of a personal injury lawyer, they often conjure images of a man with a briefcase who pounds the hallways of a hospital attempting to secure business from injured patients or a man chasing an ambulance. In reality, these stereotypical images could not be further from the truth. Lawyers, in every field of the legal profession, are held to a high standard of professional ethics and conduct and the court systems go to great lengths to ensure that those standards carry on.  In fact, no other profession has stricter ethical standards than the legal profession. 

A recent article from The Journal Gazette cites that on October 14th, 2010, the Indiana Supreme Court amended the professional attorney conduct rules to prevent personal injury lawyers from contacting the victims or families of victims immediately after they have been involved in an accident. With seventy years experience as personal injury attorneys, we highly value the victim’s desire for privacy and recuperation time in order to make informed decisions after an incident.  At Rosen Louik & Perry we have never actively “chased” a case and we never would.  Hiring a lawyer is an important decision and we respect the privacy and decision-making process of potential clients.  As a result, we wait to be contacted by friends or family members and are always ready to provide immediate help once contacted. 

Under the new Indiana rules, solicitation of business by an attorney or law firm cannot occur until a minimum of 30 days has passed after the date of the accident. Essentially, an attorney is forbidden to contact an accident victim in person, through hand written letters, or electronic solicitation. This amendment has been put into place to protect those who are injured or who are grieving the loss of a loved one. The ISBA Special Committee on Lawyer Advertising Rules Committee does admit that, in the past, abuse of victims, during this highly sensitized period, has occurred. Attorneys or law firms who do not adhere to these rules may be charged with professional misconduct. The Indiana State Supreme Court has the final jurisdiction over attorney discipline.

In addition to protect fragile victims of an accident, the Indiana State Supreme Court also hopes that these new rules of conduct will enable the state’s citizens to obtain the required information to make informed choices concerning their legal rights. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision, it is expected that other states will quickly follow suit in adopting similar legislation. In addition to the aforementioned changes, other modifications have been enacted to more closely follow the American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct.  The rules have been devised to modify attorney communication in general, but with particular regards to the manners in which attorneys advertise. Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Shepherd explained the ruling in further detail stating, “Indiana is fortunate the overwhelming majority of attorneys act in a reasonable and honorable manner. These rule changes are designed to ensure that practice continues.”

In some instances, it will be necessary for the victim of an accident, or the family of the victim, to retain legal counsel. By their own admission, most insurance companies attempt to settle injury claims as quickly as possible. Protracted litigation often costs insurance companies money that they are not willing to spend. Most times, the settlement offer of an insurance company will not be adequate enough to cover all of the medical expenses or property damage costs that the victim of an accident incurs, let alone provide adequate compensation for pain and suffering.   Whenever there is any question, the person injured or their family should immediately contact an attorney.  In firms like Rosen Louik & Perry, there is NEVER a fee for consultation.  Under certain conditions, the victim of an accident should always retain legal counsel, such as:

• A dispute over who was at fault in the accident.


• If the victim was seriously injured in the accident. Serious injuries are not always immediately evident in an accident.


• If an individual is involved in an accident with an uninsured or underinsured motorist.

Seeking recommendations from friends and family members can  provide an ideal starting point in the search for a personal injury lawyer. Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. has settled hundreds of personal injury cases and maintains a supreme satisfaction rate and reputation.

The practice of personal injury law requires intricate analysis, ongoing strategic decisions, negotiating skills and many other variables that can directly affect the outcome of a victim’s claim or case. Therefore, it is imperative that an accident victim choose an attorney who has experience on their side. The victim of an accident has only one opportunity to pursue a claim, and it should not be unnecessarily wasted. Although an automobile accident can be both an emotionally and physically devastating time for an individual or the family of a deceased victim, the victim(s) will be able to obtain solace from the fact that provisions have been enacted to protect their rights. Whether in Indiana or another state, the personal injury attorney that the victim selects will be required to adhere to the professional standards as set forth by The American Bar Association and state law

When people think of premises liability, they probably immediately think of someone slipping and falling in a store or on a faulty sidewalk. However, landlords, employers, elevator companies, and even mass transit authorities can all be responsible for injuries on their property or equipment they operate. Every year, individuals are injured in accidents that occur when premises and equipment are not properly maintained or managed. These injuries can range from cuts, bruises, broken or fractured limbs, to injuries such as brain injuries or even death.

Elevator accidents are considered premises liability cases. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 60 fatalities involving elevator accidents between 1992 ands 2003. The Consumer Product Safety Commission reported 9,800 elevator injuries in 1994 involving victims being sent to hospitals. There are approximately 500,000 elevators across the United States, with millions of individual elevator trips taken each day. Although state regulations cover the safe construction, operation, and maintenance of elevators, non-compliance with these regulations is common. Common elevator accidents involve:

• Sudden acceleration or deceleration of speed
• Sudden stops
• Stopping in between floors
• Failing to stop so that the bottom of the elevator is level with the floor
• Falling elevator
• Getting struck by or caught between the elevator doors
• Trip accidents
• Fall accidents

Property owners who have elevators on their premises have an obligation to make sure that the elevator is working properly, and that all maintenance checks and repairs are up-to-date. Failure to fulfill these obligations can be grounds for a premises liablity claim and a lawsuit.

If you have been injured in an elevator accident, or if your loved one has been injured or killed in an elevator accident, you should consult with a skilled premises liability attorney to determine if your have a claim and to help protect your legal rights.

The personal injury or wrongful death aspect of such a case is best dealt with by an attorney who has the experience and knowledge that will help ensure the best possible outcome for you or your loved one. Contact the personal injury lawyers at Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. to obtain your FREE consultation. Our law firm has handled hundreds of personal injury and premises liability cases.

A report released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that there were 41,057 motor vehicle related deaths in 2007. According to its 2007 Annual Assessment of Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatalities and People Injured, there was a drop in total deaths from 42,708 deaths in 2006 to 41,059 fatalities in 2007, a 3.9% decrease. The report also indicated a decline in the number of motor vehicle injury victims, from 2,575,000 injuries in 2006 to 2,491,000 injury victims in 2007.

Being involved in a motor vehicle accident impacts on your property, your health and even your life. Such accidents occur because of driver error, negligence, and manufacturing defects. No matter what the cause or result, a motor vehicle accident can turn your life into a prolonged struggle.

For decades, our personal injury lawyers have focused on our clients needs, and we have never lost sight of who we represent and why. We have represented clients in cases involving private passenger vehicles, commercial trucks, motorcycles and pedestrian accidents. Our primary goal is to achieve the best possible result for all of our clients. Our commitment to our clients starts from the beginning with our intake process. At every stage of your case, our attorneys track the progress of your case with personal involvement to protect your interests. Contact the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania law firm of Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. for your FREE consultation today.

PITTSBURGH -- A construction worker died on August 11, 2008 while working on a building under construction at Technology Drive. The 26 year-old man was found lying on the roof of the building that was under construction.

Due to the dangerous nature of construction sites, construction accidents can lead to serious injury or even death. Some workers suffer catastrophic injuries such as a brain injury, spinal cord injuries, amputation, and complex fractures which can cause permanent disabilities. When a worker dies due to the negligence or wrongful conduct of another, the surviving family members may have reason to file a wrongful death action. At Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. we realize that pursuing a wrongful death action will not bring your loved one back to you, but it may ensure that you and your children will have increased financial security in the years to come. Our experienced wrongful death lawyers will provide you with the compassion and personal attention you deserve. Please contact us today for your free consultation.

Continue reading Oakland Construction Worker, Ex-H.S. Football Champ Dies On Job

If you’ve been injured in an accident, or if you have suffered injuries as a result of medical negligence, you will need to contact an experienced attorney who can help you through these difficult times. Choosing the right attorney can be very complicated. You may ask yourself, “What is a personal injury attorney, and why would I need an attorney who specializes in personal injury?”

The answer is quite simple: a personal injury attorney has the knowledge and experience in tort law (civil wrongs) as well as expertise in valuing such claims, which includes both economic and non-economic damages. If you are injured as a result of an auto accident, truck accident or medical malpractice, you should also ask if your attorney is an experienced trial attorney because in this day and age, more and more cases must go to trial in order to recover the damages to which you are entitled to recover. Good trial lawyers have mastered the Rules of Evidence, which is essential in proving your case. They have developed a keen knack for what does and doesn’t work in the courtroom. Good trial lawyers tend to be intuitive, understanding what is and is not important about proving your case. Excellent trial lawyers are respected and often times even feared by their adversaries not because they are abrasive or unduly aggressive, but because of their eloquence, competence, and preparation. Good trial lawyers are effective in appealing to juries.

For seventy years the attorneys at Rosen Louik and Perry, have been helping victims of serious injury recover compensation for their losses. For the past thirty years, we have focused exclusively on personal injury and medical malpractice law. Our attorneys are skilled trial lawyers, committed to providing all people, regardless of income, with equal access to the courts. We understand what our seriously-injured clients are going through and how their lives have been damaged and tragically affected. We put our heart and soul into representing our clients, taking all necessary steps to obtain for our clients the justice they deserve.

If you or a loved one has suffered injuries as a result of someone’s negligence, please contact the law firm of Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. for a FREE consultation. The Pittsburgh, PA law firm of Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. has experienced personal injury and trial lawyers who have obtained outstanding results in cases involving traumatic brain injury, head injury, personal injury, wrongful death, auto accident, trucking accident, industrial accidents and medical malpractice. At Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C., we pride ourselves on providing the highest quality service. We believe people deserve compensation for injuries caused by the negligence of others

According to the Center for Disease Control, 3,300 deaths were caused by drowning or submersion in 2000, with 25% of the victims being children under 16. Although drowning can occur in a number of places, including public and private swimming pools, open recreational waterways such as lakes and ponds, spas, hot tubs and even bathtubs, many of these accidents occur in backyard swimming pools. About 350 children under the age of 5 drown in backyard pools each year. Drowning is the second leading cause of death for this age group after motor vehicle accidents. Another 2,600 children are treated in hospital emergency rooms each year for near-drowning incidents. In non-fatal cases, an estimated 20% percent of victims suffer severe, permanent neurological disability due to brain damage, which can generally result after four minutes of submersion.

Property owners are responsible for providing reasonable and effective barriers to their property, especially if they have a pool or hot tub, because these features are considered an attractive nuisance. However, proving a property owner’s negligence can be difficult. An early and thorough investigation is necessary to handling these cases.

If you or someone you know has died or suffered a serious injury as a result of a swimming pool accident, please contact the Pittsburgh, PA law firm of Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. Let our experienced team of personal injury lawyers help you with your case. Contact us today for a FREE consultation.

According to statistics, nearly five million Americans are bitten by dogs every year. On average, 16% (one of six) of all dog bite victims seek medical attention for their injuries. If you have been attacked and bitten by a dog, you may be wondering if you need to contact a lawyer, or if you even have a case.

The experienced personal injury lawyers at the Pittsburgh law firm of Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. can help. During our free evaluation of your case, we can examine all the details of the dog attack. In deciding whether your claim is worth pursuing, Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. will consider some of the following factors:

§ The severity of your injuries
§ The medical expenses incurred, as well as any future medical expenses
§ Any scarring or disfugurement resulting from the dog bite attack
§ Lost income from work due to your injuries

RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DOG’S OWNER

In Pennsylvania, owners are legally responsible for the behavior of their dogs. In most dog bite cases, the dog's owner is required to pay all medical bills and lost wages associated with a dog attack. If the dog’s owner has homeowner’s insurance, that insurance most often will pay for injuries sustained when a dog attacks and bites someone. Dog attacks account for nearly 33% of all homeowner’s liability claims yearly.

PENNSYLVANIA DOG LAW

Confinement of Dogs Statute

Pennsylvania’s Dog Law requires owners and keepers to have reasonable control over their dogs at all times. The law also requires owners to confine their dogs on their premises, and to restrain their dogs with a collar, chain, or other device to prevent straying. Dog bite victims who prove that the dog’s owner violated Pennsylvania’s confinement statute may recover under a theory of negligence per se.

COMMON LAW LIABILITY

In order to recover damages under Pennsylvania’s common law, the injured person must show that the dog’s owner was negligent and that the negligence caused the injuries.

At Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C., our personal injury lawyers have successfully represented individuals who have sustained permanent scarring and other serious injuries from being bitten or attacked by a dog. If you have been injured or attacked by a dog in Pittsburgh, PA, or the surrounding areas, or if you know someone who has been bitten by a dog, please contact Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. to set up your FREE, no obligation consult.

Resources:
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture
Dogbitelaw.com
Dogexpert.com

Slip and fall accidents can occur at any time, but they seem to occur more often during the winter months in Pennsylvania, when snow, ice, and water can accumulate on sidewalks, in parking lots, and on floors, making these areas particular dangerous for pedestrians. If you have been injured in an accident on someone else’s property, you may be able to file a premises liability lawsuit. Slip, trip and fall accidents are generally considered "premises liability" cases, which arise when property owners or custodians negligently maintain their property, or the conditions of the property are unreasonably dangerous. Many states have laws that require landowners to maintain their property so that it does not present an unreasonable risk of harm to those that visit the property. These laws often pertain to both business owners and homeowners.

The Pittsburgh law firm of Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. represents plaintiffs in slip and fall (premises liability) cases throughout the state of Pennsylvania. If you believe you have been injured as a result of a slip and fall accident, please contact our firm today for a FREE consultation.

It used to be that only bikers and gang members sported tattoos but not anymore. Tattoos are incredibly popular, especially among teenagers, and getting rid of a tattoo may be as popular as getting one and can be a lot more painful There are several methods available for tattoo removal. Successful removal depends on a variety of factors; such as type of ink, depth of ink, intensity of color, and the age of the tattoo. Some of the methods currently used to remove tattoos are:

Dermabrasion:
This method uses a rapidly rotating, diamond tipped, skin sanding instrument to remove the tattoo pigment under the skin. This method will always result in a scar.

Surgical Excision:
This method involves cutting the tattooed portion of the flesh away, and in some cases, requires a skin graft from another part of the body. This method will always result in a scar.

Laser Techniques
There are several types of laser techniques available. The type of laser used depends on the size and location of the tattoo, the type and/or color of the tattoo pigment. Some laser type descriptions:

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Laser:
Uses infrared light beam to vaporize the skin and remove tattoo pigment. The resulting wound and scarring are similar to the dermabrasion technique.

Q-Switched (Rapid Pulsed) Nd-YAT Laser:
Explodes or fragments pigment particles under the skin for the body's immune system to remove. This method is said to be superior in the removal of red ink. Results vary, with some sources indicating that the treatment produces virtually no scar; and others indicating that it may generate a textural change in the skin, and has been known to cause tissue splattering and bleeding. This treatment requires multiple treatment sessions and treatment is more costly.

Q-Switched Ruby Laser:
This method removes green and black inks very well. As above, some sources indicate little or no scar; while others indicate potential for breaking of the skin, frank bleeding or tissue splatter.

As one of our clients found out, tatoo removal should definitely be left to the professionals. Rhonda Smith got a tattoo when was 17 years old. Now she’s 34 and the mother of an eight month old who decided it was time to have the tattoo removed. Now, all she has to show is a nasty scar that used to be a tattoo.

“It’s disgusting,” said Smith. “It’s horrible” Smith had her tattoo removed using a series of laser treatments that promised no pain and no scarring.“Unless I can find the plastic surgeon willing to do the skin graft for cosmetic reasons, I will have this the rest of my life,” said Smith. Smith says the tattoo scar is painful and she cannot expose it to the sun.

Smith went to the Pennsylvania Institute of Electrology & Laser Clinic to have her tattoo removed. She says in a lawsuit she's filed that the staff wasn't trained. Smith’s lawyer Jon Perry states, “It’s just unfathomable that individuals can use lasers without medical training.” Her lawyer says she walked right into a business that's unregulated.

They used machines that real doctors are supposed to use but the business has no doctors -- not even a nurse on staff. “They used the wrong laser,” said Perry. “(It) had too intense of a light beam. It severely burned her skin and now she's left with a keloid scar which is far worse than the tattoo she wanted to have removed.”

If you must have a tattoo removed, you should have it done by a doctor or plastic surgeon. If you are an injured party pursuing a case, the personal injury law firm of Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. can help. Conact Rosen Louik & Perry, P.C. for more information and/or a free consultation.

Innocent people regularly suffer grievous injures because of the negligence of others. Those innocent victims can obtain compensation for their injuries by resort to our civil justice system. The civil justice system is all too often the only way to hold wrongdoers accountable for their actions. For some time, however, wrongdoers have used lobbyists and public relations campaigns in an attempt to limit an innocent victim’s access to the courts by claiming that a “crisis” exists in the civil litigation system in general and with medical malpractice in particular. Compelling evidence shows that the claims of a “crisis” are simply not true.

In an article entitled “The gloves are off” in the July 2006 issue of Trial, Bill Straub, the deputy director of communications at the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, compellingly argues that corporate America’s focus on tort reform has only one goal—the maximization of profits by preventing innocent victims from obtaining compensation from corporate wrongdoers. However, rather than be honest about its aims, big business has instead demonized trial lawyers, the innocent victims’ protectors of last resort, by claiming that trial lawyers are ruining the U.S. economy. Straub asserts that the time has come for trial lawyers to fight back by exposing big business’ true goals.

Proponents of tort reform regularly complain that trial lawyers are “getting rich” by obtaining compensation for innocent victims. Straub points out the hypocrisy of this claim when, in 2005, the head of Exxon was paid $48.9 million, the head of Occidental Petroleum was paid $64.3 million, and the head of United-Health Group, Inc. was paid $37.7 million. (In fact, the pay of a typical CEO of a Standard & Poor’s 500 company was $11.8 million in 2005).

Straub also points to many instances where the desire for increased corporate profits comes at the expense of consumer safety. After all, the evidence is clear that Merck & Co. continued to market Vioxx long after it knew that the drug increased the risk of heart problems and strokes. Moreover, auto manufacturers balked at installing seat belts and air bags. Clothing manufacturers refused to use flame-resistant materials in children’s pajamas. Presented with these examples, Straub poses the question of who remains to protect people. He also answers that question. “The nation’s civil justice system has become the last line of defense—the place where even the most powerful are called to account for their misconduct. It’s the duty of trial lawyers to guide the maimed, the jobless, and families of the deceased through the dense thicket of laws, regulations, and practice rules that lead to fair compensation. And it’s a job that ought to be done unapologetically.”

Source: Trial

Even though over 1.5 million Americans are injured each year because of prescription medication errors, knowledgeable patients can protect themselves. The Institute of Medicine recommends that you do the following:

(1) Maintain a list of all prescription and non-prescription drugs, vitamins, and other dietary supplements used, and take this list whenever you visit your doctor or other health-care provider;
(2) Ask your doctor for written instructions on taking prescription medicine—compare those instructions with the instructions on your medicine bottle;
(3) Ask your doctor and the pharmacist about side effects of all prescription drugs;
(4) Use the same pharmacy whenever possible because most pharmacies maintain a computer system that will flag drugs that can interact dangerously;
(5) Read the information leaflet that comes with prescription drugs;
(6) If your pills look different when you obtain a refill, do not assume that the manufacturer changed the size, shape, or color—ask questions to make certain you did not receive the wrong medicine.

If you are a patient in a hospital, the Institute of Medicine recommends the following:

(1) Before surgery, ask if there are any medicines that you should avoid or stop taking beforehand;
(2) Ask your doctors and nurses about the drugs you are being given, why they are being given, and what effects you can expect from the drugs;
(3) Before being discharged, ask for a list of all medications you should take at home and instructions for taking that medication;
(4) Ask a relative or other person to make sure that the three steps mentioned above are taken if your condition prevents you from doing them yourself.

As you can see from this list, you can prevent unnecessary injuries in many cases simply by asking questions and making sure you receive satisfactory answers to all of your questions.

Source: Institute of Health

(In addition to representing the victims of medical malpractice, this office represents injured parties in a number of other contexts. As a result, this blog will at times contain entries that are not directly related to medical malpratice, and this is one of those entries. Almost all of us have been involved in automobile accidents. All to often, people injured in an auto accident are severely prejudiced and not allowed to make a full recovery because of decisions made when purchasing automobile insurance. The information contained here should allow you to make reasoned decisions about your auto insurance.)

In this age of mandatory automobile insurance in Pennsylvania (and most if not all other states), vehicle owners must purchase such insurance. Insurance companies and their agents often inform us that by waiving or limiting certain types of coverage, we can save money. Unfortunately, too many of us fail to understand what we are giving up to obtain lower premiums. All too often, we make decisions that are “penny wise but pound foolish.”

Continue reading "Purchasing Automobile Insurance-What Your Insurance Company Isn’t Telling You" »