The Court of Appeals threw out a wrongful death case today because of a mistake made by the attorney.  This case illustrates the importance of hiring a personal injury that is experienced.

In the case, a teenager was killed in an automobile accident.  Her parents hired an attorney to make a claim.  Because the claim was against the State of Utah, certain procedures needed to be followed.  The attorney followed the correct procedures but followed them too slowly, allowing the statute of limitations to run.

First, on December 11, 2007 the attorney filed a notice of claim with the appropriate governmental entity.  Because the governmental entity ignored the notice, it was automatically denied on February 9, 2008.

Second, on June 10, 2008, the attorney filed a lawsuit against the governmental entity.  That case was dismissed in September 2008.  Because the case was dismissed without prejudice, the parents were allowed to refile.

Third, the attorney refiled the lawsuit on February 12, 2009.

The State argued that the lawsuit was too late.  It had to be filed within one year of February 9, 2008.  Because the lawsuit was filed 3 days late, the case should be thrown out.

The trial court agreed and dismissed the case.

The attorney for the parents did not argue that the time to file the complaint should be extended by three days.  I don’t know all of the details so maybe that argument wouldn’t work.  The argument would go something like this.  Because the original notice of claim was mailed on December 11, 2007, it should not be considered to be delivered until three days later.  Therefore, it would not be automotically denied until three days later, ie. February 12, 2008.  If that were the case, the lawsuit would have been filed within the one year time limit.

In any event, the case is now thrown out and the parents will receive no compensation from the State of Utah for their daughter’s death.

Bonnie Anderson was recently awarded $7,000,000 as personal injury compensation after developing malignant peritoneal mesothelioma as a result of being exposed to asbestos.  The asbestos came from an Exxon refi

What is unusual about this case is that Bonnie did not work for Exxon.  Instead, her husband worked there.  Bonnie was exposed to asbestos when she did her husband’s laundry.  Before placing the laundry in the washing machine, she often shook out the laundry, unkowningly causing the asbestos dust to go into the air and then be inhaled by her.  Another interesting thing about this case is that after the first trial, the jury awarded only $100,000.  The judge thought this was too low and held a second trial on the issue of damages.

Normally, we expect that the court house doors are open to everyone.  The courts are established to help us resolve disputes and to right wrongs.  They don’t discriminate against people based on race, religion, gender or age.  A recent Supreme Court decision proves that assumption wrong.

In the case, a pilot named Ostler was flying a private plane with several passengers.  The plane crashed through pilot error and everyone in the plane was killed.  One of the passengers had a girlfiend named Melissa Walker.  At the time of the crash, the Walker did not know she was pregnant.  Later she discovered she was pregnant and gave birth to a boy.  DNA testing proved that the boy was the son of one of the passengers.

Through his guardian, the child filed a wrongful death lawsuit.  He sought to recover money to help in his upbringing because his father had been killed.  The boy filed the case when he was about four years old.

The trial court threw the case out because the case had not been filed on time.  The Supreme Court agreed.  So when was the case supposed to filed?  The Supreme Court said it should have been filed before the boy was born.  Only problem is that an unborn child cannot file a claim.  The result is that the boy never had the right to file a claim for the wrongful death of his father.  Legally, he was completely denied a right given to the other passengers.  Why?  Because of his age.

I am frequently asked that question.  The answer is not easy.

In a recent case filed by Tyler Young of Provo against Smith’s Food stores, Tyler argued that his client should be entitled to compensation when she slipped and fell on a puddle of water.  The trial judge disagreed.

What the case came down to is: did the store know about the water.  The court found that the store did not know about the water.  If the store had known about the water and failed to clean it up, then yes the store would be negligent.  Because the store didn’t know about the water, the court was forced to ask a second question.  Should the store have known about the water?  That question is harder.  In almost all slip and fall cases in stores, that second question determines whether the case is a winner or a loser.

Unfortunately, the customer is not in a position to know if the store should have known about the puddle.  With investigation, sometimes evidence can be found.  In a case several years ago, a court found that a store was at fault when a customer slipped and fell on spaghetti because the spaghetti was broken into small pieces and spread over several aisles.  That showed it had been there for a long time.  In another case, a court found a store not liable because the customer could not show how long a puddle had been on the floor.

In Mr. Young’s case, the court said there was enough evidence to present the case to a jury.  The investigation had shown that a vendor had set up a booth in the store and had spilled the water when closing the booth at 5:00 p.m.  The customer fell between 5:00 and 5:20 p.m.  If the jury believes the water was on the floor long enough for Smith’s to discover it, the jury can make Smith’s pay for the injuries.  If not, Smith’s will pay nothing.

The most common tort — and the one most difficult to define — is negligence.

Negligence is defined as the failure to use reasonable due care to avoid a foreseeable harm to a person, place or thing. If you are negligent and your negligence causes injury to another person to whom you have a “duty of care,” you may be liable to pay any damages resulting from the injury caused by your carelessness.

A person may be considered “careless” or “negligent” if they do not use the kind of “due care” that is appropriate to the particular situation in question. For example, a higher level of care is called for if you are pouring boiling coffee into a friend’s glass over his lap than is called for if you are pouring cold lemonade over the kitchen sink.

Generally, the law requires that individuals exercise the same kind of “due care” that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances. This is called the “reasonable man” or “reasonable person” standard.

Some common negligence claims involve:

• Slip and fall accidents (a person slips, falls and is injured on someone else’s property)
• Alcoholic beverage liability (a provider of alcohol — either a social host or bartender — serves too many drinks to an underage or noticeably intoxicated individual who is then involved in an accident that causes injury to a third person)
• Motor vehicle accidents (accidents caused by reckless or careless driving)
• Medical malpractice (when a doctor doesn’t maintain the level of skill and knowledge commonly exercised by other doctors)

If you’ve been the victim of negligence and want legal representation that will fight for the settlement you deserve, give the Utah personal injury lawyers at Abbott & Associates a call at (800) 460-5760 or (801) 373-1112, or just fill out this form and we’ll get right back to you.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 4.5 million people are bitten by dogs each year in the U.S. Almost one in five of those who are bitten (a total of 885,000) require medical attention for dog bite-related injuries. Dog attacks represent some of the most gruesome personal injuries that are suffered, particularly because children or the elderly are often involved.

What Should I do After a Dog Bite?

In all dog bite injury cases, it is imperative to identify the attacking dog and ascertain the name of the dog’s owner, collect names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any witnesses to the incident, and take photos of the scene of the attack and your injuries. You should also call the police.

The police will help gather much of this information.  The police will also be able to ascertain if this dog has attacked someone else.  If the dog is dangerous, the police may seize the dog and put it down. Abbott & Associates can send an investigator to the scene of the attack, as well as ensure your doctor preserves all evidence of your injuries.

Do I have Any Legal Rights After a Dog Attack?

Yes.

Under Utah law anyone injured by a dog has a legal right to recover medical expenses, lost income and pain and suffering.  Dog attacks can leave gruesome injuries, including scars.  That is especially true when young children are attacked.  We have experienced attorneys who know how to get the most from your lawsuit.

If you’ve experienced a dog bite attack and want legal representation that will fight for the settlement you deserve, give the Utah personal injury lawyers at Abbott & Associates a call.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 4.5 million people are bitten by dogs each year in the U.S. Almost one in five of those who are bitten (a total of 885,000) require medical attention for dog bite-related injuries. Dog attacks represent some of the most gruesome personal injuries that are suffered, particularly because children or the elderly are often involved.

In all dog bite injury cases, it is imperative to identify the attacking dog and ascertain the name of the dog’s owner, collect names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any witnesses to the incident, and take photos of the scene of the attack and your injuries.

We can send an investigator to the scene of the attack, as well as ensure your doctor preserves all evidence of your injuries.

If you’ve experienced a dog bite attack and want legal representation that will fight for the settlement you deserve, give the Utah personal injury lawyers at Abbott & Associates a call at (800) 460-5760 or (801) 373-1112, or just fill out this form and we’ll get right back to you.

A law establishing the time limit within which a lawsuit must be brought is called a statute of limitation. Different types of cases have different statutes of limitation. Knowing which statute of limitation applies is critical, since if a lawsuit is not brought within the time limit that applies to the case, the right to sue and recover damages is forever lost.

The statute of limitations for a personal injury lawsuit is usually relatively short, ranging from as brief as 180 days to up to two years in most cases, subject to a number of factors. It is critical that you contact an attorney immediately after suffering any injury so that the appropriate statute of limitations can be determined.

You may have less than six months to file a Notice of Claim from the date of the incident which led to your injuries. At Abbott & Associates, we make sure to explore all aspects of your case as soon as possible to ensure that no claims are lost as a result of untimely action.

The Discovery Rule

Measuring the statute of limitations for a particular situation can be a complex issue. The time usually begins “to run” at the time the injury occurs, however, if a person suffers a hidden injury, the discovery rule may apply. Under the discovery rule, the time begins to run from when the person who is injured knew, or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known, that he or she was injured.

The discovery rule is commonly applied in cases involving exposure to toxic substances such as asbestos. In such cases, an injured victim normally does not manifest symptoms of injury until well after damaging exposure occurred. Obviously, such is not normally the case in situations involving motor vehicle collisions and other accidents, where injuries are generally immediately apparent.

Exceptions

Special rules apply in measuring the statute of limitations when a child is injured, in which case the time does not begin to run for an injury until the child reaches 18 years of age. These special rules may also apply to people who are mentally impaired or who leave the state for particular kinds of reasons such as for military service.

Of course, regardless of the possible availability of an exception, it is always beneficial to bring a lawsuit as soon as it is practical to do so, since the availability (and memory) of witnesses to an accident and related physical evidence is much greater shortly after an accident than after years have passed.