Gainesville, Ocala & Daytona Beach Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics - Most Popular

Pharmacy Board Administers Slap on the Wrist in Death Case

Jeffrey Meldon — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:42:30 GMT

This week the Board of Pharmacy of the Florida Department of Health fined pharmacist Edna Irizarry $1000 and required her to attend an 8 hour continuing education course for her role in causing the death of 3 year old Sebastian Ferrero. Horst Ferrero, his father, said "The board choose to apply the minimum penalty $1000 in Sebastian's case, although the damage inflicted to my son was the maximum possible--his death."

Sebastian's father and mother, Luisa Ferrero, choose not to file suit against any of the medical personnel involved in their son's death and instead have focused their efforts on establishing reliable patient safety protocols to assure that what happened to their son will never happen to another child. The Ferrero's received a $850,000 settlement from Shands at the University of Florida and have donated all of the money to help establish a full-service, free-standing children's hospital in Gainesville.

The young child was taken to Shands hospital last October 8 for some routine tests. Based on his weight he should have been prescribed a 5.75 gram dose of arginine. Instead Irizarry, the pharmacist in charge, signed off on a dose 10 times that. Even after the child's mother questioned the nurse on duty about the dosage, the procedure continued unabated. After the child developed a severe headache Mr. Flerrerro asked the doctor on duty to check out his son but he only looked at his chart and asked the nurse how much medication the boy had received but never examined Sebastian or the bottles of R-Gene that contained the lethal dosage.

The Pharmacy Board decided to levy the light punishment based on Ms. Irizarry's lack of prior discipline for medical negligence. The Ferroro's believe that when the mistake cost their son his life, it sends the wrong message to administer minor punishment. Harsher punishment would help spread the word among the medical community, and pharmacists, in particular, that you always need to double check your prescriptions.

This is certainly not the first and it won't be the last time the medical community fails to recognize that harsh punishment will reinforce the need to protect the public from unnecessary careless and sometimes fatal acts of negligence.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeffrey Meldon

Text Messaging: Armed and Dangerous

Jeffrey Meldon — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:35:35 GMT

Imagine driving down the road. In your car, you not only have yourself, but your young child, your spouse, or your friend. You know you’re a safe driver and you take all the precautions. But, you’re also trusting everyone else on the road to do the same. You expect them to return the favor. When you have your hands religiously at 10 and 2, you want the driver behind you, in front of you, and on either side of you to do the same thing. What if they’re texting? Diligently composing a message of genius to their friend and laughing at the new inside joke they just created? Their hands aren’t even on the wheel, let alone at 10 and 2. And their eyes? On their phone.

Texting while driving is the ultimate multitask. We have to think about what we’re going to write, the best way to say it, and the best way to abbreviate it so that it fits into the character limit on our cell phones. And using both hands to gingerly type out our thoughtful messages means only one thing: there are no hands on the wheel and our eyes and focus are not on the road.

Texting while driving has become a hot topic with both drivers and legislatures around the country. Distracted drivers lead to accidents and texting heightens distraction to a new level. Two years ago, texting was relatively obsolete. And although cell phone usage while driving has been an issue for quite some time, the texting distraction is relatively new. However, its newness does not lessen its severity.

This month, the legislature in Florida is focusing their efforts on a bill, headed up by Republican Doug Holder of Sarasota that would ban the use of text messaging while driving, which has been cited as an increased and dangerous risk to public safety on the road. As an accident attorney based in Gainesville, Florida, I applaud the Florida Legislature and Mr. Holder for their efforts towards increased public safety for all on or near the roads in Florida.

The bill will not be the first of its kind. A similar bill recently passed in the Alabama House, supported by Republican Jim McClendon, and joins seven other states, including the District of Columbia, that have bans on text messaging while driving. The numerous bills around the nation indicate a trend toward heightened awareness of the dangers surrounding texting while driving.

Statistics show that general cell phone usage, which includes texting messaging while behind the wheel, accounts for 636,000 car accidents per year nationwide, and even amounts to about 2,600 deaths. An accident in Canandaigua, New York, which led to the deaths of five high school teens, is thought to be the result of the driver texting while driving. The ban on text messaging would be an effort by legislatures to reduce these tragedies.

The National Safety Commission, which houses a variety of safety issues, including discussions on the dangers of texting. The message is clear: don’t text and drive!

As smart drivers, we wouldn’t dream of drinking and driving and should similarly avoid other distractions that take our focus, our hands, and our minds away from the road and the safety of ourselves and others.

For more information on this important topic:

Driving and Texting; A Combination Deadlier Than Drinking and Driving, Hopefully, Will Become Illegal Soon In Florida.

http://www.nationalsafetycommission.com/alerts/2009/02/new-florida-bill-aims-to-ban-texting.php

For information on Preventing an Auto Accident.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeffrey Meldon

The Never-ending Debate: The Legal Drinking Age in the U.S.

Jeffrey Meldon — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 11:40:09 GMT

As an accidet attorney in Gainesville, a resident of a university and college town, and as a parent, the debate over the legal drinking age in the U.S. is of importance and interest to me.

The History:

The debate over the legal drinking age in the U.S. has continued for decades. Prior to 1970s, for almost forty years, the majority of States voluntarily set the minimum drinking age at 21. However, in the early 1970s, in the middle of the Vietnam War, twenty nine (29) States lowered the drinking age to reflect the age laws required to enlist with the military or the right to vote. Therefore making the drinking age limit varied among the States from 18 to 21 years of age. Also, in some States, the age limit was different depending on the type of alcohol a person consumed; one had to be 18 years old to drink beer, and 20 years old to drink liquor. Because the alcohol traffic fatalities increased simultaneously with the decrease in drinking age limit, some States raised their age limit back to 21. The rest of the States kept it at 18, which caused some teens to go across their States’ borders to a neighboring State, which had a lower drinking age limit, drink there and drive back home intoxicated. Concerned with the alcohol traffic fatalities and injuries, Congress passed the National Minimum Purchase Age Act in 1984, which provided reduced federal highway funds to those states which did not have a drinking age limit of 21. Therefore, by 1988, all 50 states set the minimum drinking age at 21.

The Debate:

The proponents of a lower drinking age limit argue that the drinking age should be lowered, since at age 18 one is an adult in the eyes of the law. They assert that persons at 18 can marry, pay taxes, vote, enlist in the military, adopt, enter into legally binding contracts, be executed, sue etc. Also, relying on the fact that those under 21 were crossing borders to get alcohol in neighboring States which had lower drinking age limit during the 1970s, the proponents argue that prohibition to drink destroys moderation and promotes excessive consumption of alcohol among young people. The presidents of more than 100 colleges and universities in the U.S. state that the drinking age limit of 21 actually encourages dangerous binge drinking on campuses. Because those under 21 abuse alcohol on those occasions when they can actually get it, introducing a lower drinking age will prompt them to drink less, since they will not view alcohol as something prohibited. The proponents also say that the main goal of setting a minimum drinking age was to reduce drunk driving, and that most of those who are under 21 drink in their dorms or parties to which they walk and do not drive. They also assert that federal government should not regulate the area that has been reserves to the states by the U.S. Constitution. Another argument is that the U.S. should follow the example of the European countries, most of which have a drinking age limit of 18, where alcohol is seen as a neutral substance and people learn about drinking alcohol in moderation from the early age, thus not abusing it in the proportions it is abused in the U.S.

On the other side, those who support the drinking age limit of 21 say that there is enough evidence to show that the minimum drinking age limit of 21 saves lives every year. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that the drinking age limit of 21 has saved 18,220 lives since 1975. According to the U.S. Surgeon General, underage drinking is a leading contributor to deaths from injuries - the main cause of death for people under age 21, and drinking age limit of 21 has had positive effect on smaller number of traffic fatalities, suicide, assaults, and alcohol poisoning. Gallup Poll shows that most Americans oppose lowering the drinking age limit to 18 and support harsher penalties for underage drinkers. The supporters of the 21minimum drinking age law state that making alcohol available to those under 21 would actually increase binge-drinking and allow high school seniors to consume alcohol. They assert that while many of those under 21 still consume alcohol, they drink less and suffer less alcohol-related injuries when the drinking age limit is 21. Deferred alcohol drinking reduces the risk of abusing alcohol later in life. The supporters of the drinking age limit of 21 also argue that there is a “trickle-down” effect when young people get access to alcohol: many times, they give it to those even younger than them, thus if the drinking age is 18, 16 and 17-year-olds would also have access to alcohol.

Summary: The debate over determining the optimum drinking age to reduce alcohol traffic fatalities, injuries, alcohol dependency, and alcohol abuse is likely to continue. Regardless of whether you support the legal drinking age limit of 21 or not, you need to make sure that your children not only obey the current law, but also that they understand the dangers of drinking and the dangers of drinking and driving. Remember too, a young person’s frontal lobes are not yet fully developed; this combined with alcohol can lead to risky, dangerous and deadly behavior.

For more information, please see:

http://www.theantidrug.com

http://parentingteens.about.com/cs/teensalcohol/l/blalcohol2.htm

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeffrey Meldon

A multitasker’s admission of guilt… Rehab?...sign me up!

Jeffrey Meldon — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:41:27 GMT

What is all the buzz about multitasking while driving? I do it and it is even legal, at least in Florida!

I am a multitasking king; it is a gift of mine. I can do a quick 3 miles on the treadmill while reading the NY Times on my Kindle, talking on my cell phone, responding to emails on my Blackberry, watching the news on TV, talking to the person next to me, and drinking water all at the same time, and I haven’t injured myself or anyone else.

I am an experienced driver and can drive while looking up a phone number on my Blackberry and then chat away as I maneuver through traffic, (it is a hands-free set up, so hey!), I can even send a quick message, and I have never caused an accident... so, what is the problem with multitasking while driving? I can do it.

The answer is, plenty is wrong with driving and multitasking! In fact, more and more research is proving it to be a dangerous activity that is plaguing our society today.

We know the risks, yet we continue to do it, even me. Even being an accident attorney for over 30 years and:

knowing the risks and dangers of distracted driving, of which cell phone use is the #1 culprit,
having blogged about the risks of chatting and texting for many months now,
being aware of the news of accidents a caused by this dangerous activity,
even having represented clients that have been injured by distracted drivers,

Yet, I still do it… I admit it, I am guilty!

Obviously, we all want to believe that we can do it all; multitask away and also be a safe driver on the road, but, it is just not the case! Here are the facts:

Driving while celling (hand-held or hands-free) is as dangerous as driving drunk,
Cell chatting drivers are 4 to 5 times more likely to cause an accident,
Texting raises a driver’s crash risk by 23 times!

It really does not take a Zen Master to know how important it is to be in the moment when you drive, to not be distracted, but to just drive. We all know driving is a potentially dangerous activity that requires our full attention and doing so might save a life that could be our own or one of a loved one, yet most of us still don’t do it, and we drive distracted, ignoring the basic rules of driving:

Both hands on the wheel,
Both eyes on the road and
Our full attention and mind on the road.

Facts are Facts; we all have to admit it, including me, multitasking while driving is a dangerous risky undertaking, no matter our age, experience or how good we are at it in other areas of our life.

The reality is that we need to turn off the cell while driving and give the road our full attention that it requires and save multitasking for the treadmill, before we get on the road, at a rest stop, or when we reach our destination.

Maybe there needs to be a Rehab course for driving multitaskers? If so, sign me up!

For more information on this important topic:

Bad news for Floridians on the road, texting and celling behind the wheel remains legal

Driving Distractions 101

Today Show Video; Texting While Driving Caught on Tape

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeffrey Meldon

No Car Insurance?

Craig Cannon — Tue, 22 May 2007 08:23:41 GMT

After Oct. 1, 2007 Florida car drivers will no longer be required to carry PIP (No-Fault) car insurance and possibly no insurance at all. That's the consequence of lawmakers' inaction during the regular legislative session that ended two weeks ago. Can you imagine being able to drive a car in the state of Florida without any - zero - insurance coverage. It's crazy and ridiculous. The Florida legislature should be ashamed of itself for being duped once again by BIG INSURANCE!

Florida's no-fault car insurance law, currently requires drivers to buy a minimum of $10,000 in personal injury protection, or PIP, and $10,000 in property damage liability. If there is a car accident now, the law provides $10,000 in medical expenses and lost wages. PIP pays for 80 percent of medical bills up to $10,000 per driver and each passenger in a car involved in an accident. The PIP coverage also provides lost wages and death benefits. Property damage insurance covers damage to another person's home, car, or other property because of an accident. However, the law requiring PIP coverage in Florida is going to expire because lawmakers failed to extend it or replace it with another insurance requirement. Beacuse of how the property damage liability coverage is joined with PIP in Section 627.7275, Florida Statutes, it is also possible that the property damage requirement will expire as well.

Everyone in the auto insurance market right now is trying to figure out the impact on drivers, agents and insurers after no-fault expires. Many fear that because it won't be required drivers simply won't purchase any insurance coverage. Insurance companies like State Farm and Allstate, have lobbied hard to convince lawmakers that PIP is expensive and unneeded coverage. But responsible drivers who will buy the coverage anyway will end up paying far more for auto insurance as they add more coverage to protect themselves against uninsured drivers.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Craig Cannon

Bike Week 2009 wrapping up.

Jeffrey Meldon — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 10:54:47 GMT

Daytona Beach Bike Week 2009 is wrapping up the festivities today and regrettably there have been 7 reported deaths this past 10 days. Fortunately this number is down considerably from 2006 when there were 26 reported deaths. Perhaps the cold dry weather earlier in the week and the sunny weather the past few days helped provide some measure of safety to the motorcyclists riding and partying in Daytona Beach this bike week.

Some of the deaths could possibly have been avoided if the riders were wearing helmets but most would have occurred regardless of this safety measure. Most bikers realize that it is the other car or truck driver who is either drinking, talking on their cell phone or even texting that is responsible for most of the accidents involving motorcycles. During a bike festival where 250,000 bikes converge in one town it is likely that the number of accidents, injuries and death will increase. However credit should be given to the Daytona Beach/Volusia County law enforcement agencies for planning ahead to slow down traffic and make pedestrian crosswalks in congested areas such as the Iron Horse Saloon and Destination Daytona to reduce the risk to bikers and pedestrians alike.

Unfortunately one couple on foot was mowed down on U.S. 1 by a careless driver while they were trying to get across the street to their pickup truck parked near Smiley’s Tap and the Broken Spoke in Ormond Beach. On Saturday a pickup truck reared ended a motorcycle in Daytona Beach ejecting and killing a passenger on the bike. Alcohol may have been a factor in the case and the driver of the pickup tuck is under investigation.

Some bikers insist that loud pipes help save more lives than any other single safety measure motorcyclists can take. While some people object to the noise there is no doubt that loud pipes do indeed let car and truck drivers know they are around. Interestingly the American Motorcycle Association is concerned that the controversy over loud pipes will damage the political movement for greater biker rights. They want to make sure that bikers can have the right to choose whether to wear helmets and don’t want to put stumbling blocks in the way of legislation to create more options for bikers.

As far as I could see, the great majority of the motorcyclists in town for Bike Week 2009 acted responsibly and from all appearances had a fabulous time in the motorcycle capital of the world. Let’s hope that Bike Week 2010 is even safer than this year.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeffrey Meldon

Comparative Negligence - Do You Know What it Means For Floridians?

Jeffrey Meldon — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:56:00 GMT

In a recent Florida court case, the jury found three drivers and the Alachua Police Department to be negligent (at fault) in a fiery I-75 and Hwy. 441 crash that left one dead and two seriously injured two years ago. The jury decided that one driver and the Police Department were each 35% to blame for the accident and two other motorists, each 15%.

How can this be? This is done utilizing the doctrine of comparative negligence which Florida adopted in 1973 and falls under case law for personal injury or accident lawyers. This doctrine more accurately allows assignment of blame on a percentage basis.

What does this mean? Vehicular accidents usually result from the mistake/s made by one or more drivers or pedestrians. Many times people believe that they cannot recover any damages for loss of their property or their personal injuries if they were partially to blame for an accident. This is not always true. Florida law compares the fault of each party involved in an accident. Under the comparative negligence doctrine, a person may still be able to recover damages, even if they were partly at fault for a crash. However, the damages will be reduced by the percentage that they were found to be at fault.

For example, if you were rear-ended and the crash caused you serious personal injuries, your settlement amount may be reduced if you slowed down to make a turn but failed to signal.

What is the lesson here? Every person using the road, (whether it be a pedestrian, a motorist, or a passenger), is required to pay attention, follow traffic rules and use reasonable care on the road. If an accident victim fails to protect his or her own safety and the safety of others, he or she could be found to be partly at fault for their own injuries. Here are a few tips:

· If you are driving: avoid speeding, buckle up, always signal when making a turn, pay attention to the road, follow all road signs and laws, and do not drive a car that you know has mechanical problems.

· If you are a passenger: do not ride with a driver that you know has been drinking or is too sleepy to drive properly, and wear your seat belt.

· If you are a pedestrian: cross the street in a crosswalk, do not enter a crosswalk on red light, avoid using an MP3 player because it may prevent you from hearing a car horn or a vehicle approaching.

Dealing with the allocation of fault in accident cases can be very complicated, as there is no exact formula to determine percentages of fault. Proper investigation is of the utmost importance to help assign the fault of each party. This is one reason why if you have been involved in a serious accident, it is important to contact an experienced accident attorney ASAP before the evidence “gets cold”, witness become difficult to locate, and the facts of the case are lost. You may not need a lawyer, but with most personal injury attorneys, consultations are free, so take advantage of them and educate yourself.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeffrey Meldon

Help Tony Save Lives and Keep America’s Roads Safer.

Jeffrey Meldon — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:47:53 GMT

More of us do it every day than we’d like to admit. We know we shouldn’t; we’ve heard it’s dangerous but, we still do it. Meanwhile, one man is out to spread the word, town by town, and encourage us all to put the cell phone down while we drive. As an accident attorney and father, I applaud his efforts and want to help spread Tony's message. Here is his story:

Tony Anshutz, a former Los Angeles police officer (who now teaches SCUBA diving in Cozumel, Mexico,) is riding his motorcycle 16,000 miles in an attempt to raise awareness about the dangers associated with cell phone use while behind the wheel.

Tony became involved in the cause after meeting Dave Teater whose 12-year-old son was killed in a collision involving a driver using a cell phone. Tony is calling his adventure “Ride the Americas”, he set off on August 17 and will be stopping in small and big cities throughout North America. His goal is to promote the National Safety Council’s initiative to ban all cell phone use nationwide while driving.

Using a cell phone or smart phone while driving, in any capacity, is dangerous, and the task falls to people to self-police. Studies have shown that a driver’s level of distraction while talking on a cell phone can rival that of a person who is intoxicated. Furthermore, when we text and drive, the problem is even worse because now our eyes are not even on the road. Cell phone use while driving is the cause of 636,000 crashes and 2600 deaths annually.

Tony will be sharing stories and statistics about cell phone use including the fact that drivers using cell phones are 4 times more likely than other drives to be in a crash. Tony does not think that technology itself or cell phones in general are bad or dangerous but he says “as we become dependent on it, we must also adapt our behavior to its dangers.”

While Tony is traveling the roads of North America, he will be uploading images and logging his progress. To follow Tony’s progress as he rides across the Americas, visit http://www.ridetheamericas.com/ or join his Facebook group.

The websites include action items you can take to promote safety and the cell phone ban initiative through your own behavior, urging others to change or even by making a donation. Help Tony save lives and keep America’s roads safer.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeffrey Meldon

Spin Master Recalls Aqua Dots

Jenny Albano — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 00:41:38 GMT

Spin Master, in conjunction with the CPSC, is recalling about 4.2 million Aqua Dots because children have become unconscious and hospitalized after swallowing the beads.

The coating on the beads that causes the beads to stick to each other when water is added contains a chemical that can turn toxic when many are ingested. Children who swallow the beads can become comatose, develop respiratory depression, or have seizures.

So far two incidents have been reported to the CPSC. Two children who swallowed the Aqua Dots became dizzy and began vomiting and then fell into a comatose state. Both children, one of whom was only 20 months old, had to be hospitalized.

Aqua Dots are beads that are in a craft kit that are shaped to create multi-dimensional designs. When the beads are sprayed with water they fuse together to make the design permanent. All models of the product are being recalled; the kits include accessories such as a drying fan, applicator pen, design templates and the spray bottle.

The Aqua Dots were available in stores across the country from April 2007 to November 2007 and were manufactured in China.

For more information on this subject, please refer to our section on Defective and Dangerous Products.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jenny Albano

Woman Killed by Semi-Truck Wheel Near Ocala

Shannon Weidemann — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 21:49:18 GMT

A 30-year-old woman was killed when the car she was a passenger in was hit by a tire from a semi-truck. The accident happened early Monday morning on I-75 outside of Ocala. The car was headed north when the front wheels on a semi-truck heading south broke off the truck and came across the median. The semi-truck driver did not stop.

Lt. Mike Thomas said the truck driver stopped at a Petro Truck Stop to make repairs to the trailer, chaining up the front axle.
Witnesses at the store told investigators the truck driver said he was making a 5 a.m. delivery of potatoes to the Lakeland area and would have the trailer repaired after the delivery.

It is unknown if the driver knows he caused the accident. The Florida Highway Patrol is searching for the man and their investigation is ongoing.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Shannon Weidemann