News

This is part 1 of a 2 part series authored by United States Supreme Court Bar attorney David Slepkow concerning Physiomesh.  This series of articles pertains to whether Ethicon’s self-described “removal” of Physiomesh™ was in fact a “recall” and does it make any difference as far as injured victims are concerned? 

Hernia mesh lawsuit

Rhode Island personal injury  attorney, David Slepkow  is available for a free consultation 24/7  at 401-439-8372. He  is now reviewing  certain hernia mesh claims on behalf of seriously injured victims.  David Slepkow is also licensed to practice law in Massachusetts. He is proud to be admitted as a member of the United States Supreme Court Bar.

Who cares whether Ethicons’ conduct was a market withdrawal, a removal or a recall?

Rhode Island defective product recall attorney, David Slepkow recently authored an extensive article concerning Ethicon Physiomesh . Physiomesh is a hernia mesh product that was  removed from the Market by Johnson and Johnson’s subsidiary company Ethicon. 

Ethicon cares for some reason whether its removal will be considered by courts, victims and lawyers as a recall

David Slepkow posted an exposé on this blog, informing the public of the the dangers of Physiomesh™  to injured victims.  Apparently, Johnson and Johnsons’ subsidiary Ethicon and their corporate law firm, Butler | Snow LLP,  was displeased with David Slepkow’s exposé.  Ethicon engaged in a course of conduct to edit, censor and stop Attorney Slepkow from posting his analysis of Ethicon’s Physiomesh™ market removal.

Ethicon’s cease and desist letter to Hernia Mesh attorney David Slepkow

On February 6  2017, I received a letter from corporate counsel at Butler Snow LLP representing Ethicon, a subsidiary of Johnson and Johnson. They threatened me with legal action if I do not make it clear that, “The removal of  Physiomesh from the United States market was classified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a Market Withdrawal, not a recall.” (see letter set forth to the left).

According to the letter “Ethicon demands you confirm to me by the close of business on February 14, 2017, in writing that your firm will: (1) promptly remove the above cited statements; (2) post a clear and prominent statement on your firm’s website correcting the false statements; and (3) refrain from making the false statements or any other similar false statement about Physiomesh in any context in the future.”

Do lawyers for Johnson and Johnson have better things to do than go after a local blog

It is troubling that a  subsidiary of a seventy billion dollar a year company would send a cease and desist letter to a local Rhode Island personal injury lawyer who is exercising his free speech rights and educating the public about the alleged dangers of  Ethicon Physiomesh™.  After all, according to wikipedia Johnson & Johnson “includes some 250 subsidiary companies with operations in 60 countries and products sold in over 175 countries. Johnson & Johnson had worldwide sales of $70.1 billion during calendar year 2015.”

Ethicon and their high-powered attorneys attempt to stop attorney Slepkow from his free speech rights

Not only did they attempt to censor his RI personal injury law blog they demanded actual editorial control over the post and blog. Perhaps, Johnson and Johnson should put more resources in properly designing and engineering medical devices and less time trying to silence an attorney in the Ocean State. It is pathetic 

Nonetheless, David Slepkow is not afraid to take on corporate America, big insurance  Ethicon and Johnson and Johnson. David Slepkow will take on those who put innocent victims in danger of serious injury. David Slepkow is willing to go head to head against Ethicon’s 300 lawyer firm Butler | Snow LLP.

What cases is David reviewing on behalf of injured victims?

• Ethicon Physiomesh™ 
• Atrium C-QUR
• Composix® Kugel® mesh patches (manufactured by C.R. Bard subsidiary Davol)
• All C.R. Bard mesh patches made of Marlex polypropylene

It appears in my opinion, that Ethicon is afraid of David Slepkow exposing Ethicon’s product, Physiomesh™

My primary concern is helping injured victims get the compensation that they deserve against corporate America who put injured victims in harm’s way. David is a partner and owner of the venerable law firm of Slepkow Slepkow & Associates, Inc established in 1932.

##Full text of cease and desist letter:

Butler | Snow
February 6, 2017
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
David Slepkow
1481 Wampanoag Trail Ste. 1
East Providence, RI 02915
Dear David:
We represent Ethicon, Inc. (Ethicon), the former manufacturer of Ethicon Physiomesh™
Flexible Composite Mesh (Physiomesh™).

Ethicon has recently learned your firm is disseminating false and misleading statements about Physiomesh™. On your website, http://www.ripersonaliniurylaw.com/hemia-mesh-lawsuit/ , you refer several times to Ethicon’s removal of Physiomesh™ from the market as a “recall.” This statement is inaccurate and misplaced. The removal of Physiomesh™ from the United States market was classified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a Market Withdrawal, not a recall.

The inaccuracy of your statement may be due to your mistaken reliance upon the classification of the Market Withdrawal as a recall by foreign regulatory bodies that have different definitions for such actions under local regulations.

Ethicon demands you confirm to me by the close of business on February 14, 2017, in writing that your firm will: (1) promptly remove the above cited statements; (2) post a clear and prominent statement on your firm’s website correcting the false statements; and (3) refrain from making the false statements or any other similar false statement about  Physiomesh™ in any context in the future.

Please be advised in the event you decide to continue to disseminate false and inaccurate statements, and do not take immediately take the corrective measures outlined above, Ethicon will be compelled to take action and to pursue all rights and remedies at law and in equity. Accordingly, this letter is without prejudice to all of Ethicon’s rights and remedies, in equity, at law or otherwise. Moreover, please be advised your failure to correct the statement is potentially damaging to Ethicon and may constitute a breach of your ethical obligations.

Sincerely,
Butler Snow LLP
Ashley Nader Stubbs
Post Office Box 6010
Ridge land, MS 39158-6010

Legal Notice per Rules of Professional Responsibility: The Rhode Island Supreme Court licenses all lawyers and attorneys in the general practice of law, but does not license or certify any lawyer / attorney as an expert or specialist in any field of practice. While this firm maintains joint responsibility, most cases of this type are referred to other attorneys for principle responsibility.

Rhode Island personal injury lawyer, David Slepkow who can be reached 24/7  at 401-279-0004 is now reviewing hernia mesh claims on behalf of injured victims.  David Slepkow is also a Massachusetts injury lawyer. David is a partner and owner of the venerable law firm of Slepkow Slepkow & Associates, Inc established in 1932.  Contact attorney David Slepkow to get more information concerning: hernia mesh lawsuit settlement amounts.

David is reviewing the following cases: Ethicon Physiomesh™, Atrium C-QUR, Composix® Kugel® mesh patches (manufactured by C.R. Bard subsidiary Davol), all C.R. Bard mesh patches made of Marlex polypropylene. David provides the following information concerning Hernia Mesh litigation.

What types of complications, pain and suffering and injuries can result from defective hernia mesh?

There are dozens of complication that are caused by defective hernia mesh implanted in  a victim’s body as a result of a surgical procedure. Some of the complications constitute: Mesh migration, bacterial infections, hernia recurrence, additional surgeries to treat hernia recurrence. Lawyersandsettlements.com citing the Food and drug administration (FDA) stated listed certain complications, “Pain, Infection, Bowel obstruction, hernia recurrence, adhesion (when the mesh adheres to the patient’s tissue), infection, obstruction, adhesion (when the mesh adheres to the patient’s tissue), recurrence, perforation”  Lawyers 

What types of Hernia Mesh Claims is David Slepkow reviewing on behalf of injured victims?

• Ethicon Physiomesh™
• Atrium C-QUR
• Composix® Kugel® mesh patches (manufactured by C.R. Bard subsidiary Davol)
• All C.R. Bard mesh patches made of Marlex polypropylene

 Johnson and Johnson subsidiary, Ethicon hernia mesh product removal

On May 27th, 2016  a subsidiary of Johnson and Johnson, Ethicon,  issued an urgent medical device removal of its “ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ Flexible Composite Mesh (All Product Codes. In the letter, Johnson and Johnson stated, “We have initiated a worldwide medical device removal of ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ Flexible Composite Mesh (for laparoscopic use) (“ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ Composite Mesh”). We are removing the product following an analysis conducted at the request of the Ethicon Medical Safety Team of unpublished data from two (2) large independent hernia registries (Herniamed German Registry and Danish Hernia DatabaseDHDB). The recurrence/reoperation rates (respectively) after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair using ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ Composite Mesh were higher than the average rates of the comparator set of meshes among patients in these registries. ” Medical Device Removal of Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Mesh Page 1 of 7

The removal letter went on to state in pertinent part, “Based on the currently available data, we believe the higher rates to be a multifactorial issue (including possible product characteristics, operative and patient factors), but we have not been able to fully characterize these factors. Consequently, we have not been able at this time to issue further instructions to surgeons that might lead to a reduction in the recurrence rate and have decided to remove ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ Composite Mesh from the global market. Medical Device Removal of Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Mesh Page 1 of 7

Ethicon’s  removal of  PHYSIOMESH™ is not a recall according to Ethicon

Ethicon corporate law firm, Butler and Snow asserted in a correspondence to me on February 6 , 2016 that “The removal of Physiomesh from the United States market was classified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a Market Withdrawal, not a recall. The inaccuracy of your statement may be due to your mistaken reliance upon the classification of the Market Withdrawal as a recall by foreign regulatory bodies that have different definitions for such actions under local regulations.” see letter to left.

Ethicon also demanded that I “post a clear and prominent statement on your firm’s website correcting the false statements. Ethicon also stated, “Please be advised in the event you decide to continue to disseminate false and inaccurate statements, and do not take immediately take the corrective measures outlined above, Ethicon will be compelled to take action and to pursue all rights and remedies at law and in equity.”  Letter from Ashley Nader Stubbs to Rhode Island personal injury attorney, David Slepkow, Ashley Nader Stubbs, Suite 1400 1020 Highland Colony Parkway Ridgeland, MS 39157 www.butlersnow.com Butler Snow LLP

Ethicon’s removal of ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ is a gift to class action attorneys and hernia mesh litigation lawyers

The urgent medical device removal letter and the subsequent market removal appears to be a  stunning admission of liability on behalf of Johnson and Johnson related to ETHICON PHYSIOMESH. Product liability attorneys and surgical malpractice lawyers who specialize in defective medical device litigation have now commenced the process of holding Johnson and Johnson’s subsidiary Ethicon accountable for their conduct.

Rhode Island (RI) and Massachusetts (MA) defective medical device lawyers and product liability attorneys are preparing litigation to get justice and accountability for injured and suffering victims. A high powered hernia mesh attorney knows how to hold corporate America accountable for their malfeasance.

The Hollis Law firm states, “The Physiomesh lawsuit is against Ethicon, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. The Physiomesh is made from polypropylene and is intended for hernia repair. Ethicon has been battling lawsuits for years against its transvaginal mesh products, which are also made from polypropylene. Ethicon continues to deny the life-threatening complications that polypropylene causes. However, Ethicon issued a market withdrawal on the Physiomesh in May of 2016.” Hollis law 

Hernia mesh lawsuit settlement amounts

Many injured victims are searching google seeking information with the following types of searches “ethicon physiomesh flexible composite mesh“, “ethicon physiomesh”, “physiomesh complications”,”ethicon physiomesh 2016″, “hernia mesh lawsuit”, “surgical mesh class action lawsuit”, “hernia mesh lawsuit settlements”, “hernia mesh lawyers”, “hernia mesh surgery”.

Important things  surgical mesh victims need to know before filing a hernia mesh lawsuit:

• There is no average hernia mesh settlement amounts.
• It is important that a victim learns what you need to know before filing a hernia mesh lawsuit.
• Victims may have hernia mesh pain years later.
•  Carefully review hernia mesh lawsuit FAQS
• The factors needed to determine a fair hernia mesh settlement 2018.

Legal Notice per Rules of Professional Responsibility: The Rhode Island Supreme Court licenses all lawyers and attorneys in the general practice of law, but does not license or certify any lawyer / attorney as an expert or specialist in any field of practice. While this firm maintains joint responsibility, most cases of this type are referred to other attorneys for principle responsibility.

Do not select a personal injury lawyer solely based on a slick and expensive television advertisement.  Providence personal injury attorneys and RI attorneys who are television promoters and TV personalities are often the leader of  “personal  injury settlement mills.” A personal injury law firm mill in RI will quickly process car accident and injury causes of action often to the detriment of their clients.

AVOID: RI Settlement Mills

50 cents on the dollar

These  law firm are often known to take up to 50 cents on the dollar from the insurance company so they can move on to the next case. For these shady law firms, a case is just another product on the conveyor belt. When the insurance company refuses to play ball with the settlement mill and settle the claim quickly, these Rhode Island personal injury lawyers run for the hills and dump the case on another unsuspecting top RI injury attorney.

Lawyers afraid to got to trial

These settlement mill attorneys are afraid to take the insurance company to the woodshed and go to trial. They have no car accident and injury trial experience and just want to move cases as quickly as possible to make a quick buck.

“Settlement mill lawyers are experts at one thing – settling your case quickly to line their own pockets instead of fighting for the compensation that injured victims deserve. Settlement mill law offices are organized to benefit lawyers and insurance companies while the seriously injured can be left with much less than they need to recover and live with their injuries” The dangers of settlement mill lawyers

What is an injury law firm “settlement mill”

“A settlement mill is a law firm that handles a high volume of cases, usually specializing exclusively in a certain niche like car accident cases. These law firms, relying mainly on paralegals and administrative assistants, settle an astounding number of cases. In short, they focus on quantity and not quality. They aren’t interested in trying cases because, with the volume of cases that they have, there’s just no time for jury trials.” Why You Should Steer Clear Of A “Settlement Mill” If You Have A Serious Car Accident Case And Tips On How To Spot One Boston car accident lawyers at  The Law Office of Alan H. Crede, P.C.  Boston Blog

According to Dolman Law Group, ” A personal injury settlement mill is a high volume law practice that attempts to mass produce the settlement of injury claims while utilizing aggressive advertising campaigns in an effort to obtain clients. Settlement mills litigate a disproportionate amount of their cases and take very few cases to trial.” Dolman law 

Beware of the Bait and switch

Some settlement mill injury lawyers will say whatever needs to be said in order to secure an injured car accident victim. The unscrupulous RI car accident mill lawyer will tell the injured victim what he or she want to hear regardless of the truth. Once the auto crash victim has signed on the dotted line, the injury lawyer will reset expectations and pressure the victim to settle quickly.

Why insurance companies prefer law firm settlement mills?

An insurance adjuster gleefully smirks as another phone call comes in from a television advertising injury law firm settlement mill.  Make no mistake, big insurance is a bottom line business in which insurance companies profit if they can settle legitimate claims for peanuts. Since litigating a case is expensive, insurance adjusters would rather throw a pennies on the dollar settlement to their ‘frenemies’ at the settlement mill then litigate the claim. This is a win-win for the insurance company and for the settlement mill law firm. The real loser is the client who just got their lunch money stolen.

“Settlement mills are law firms who represent clients without any intention of taking cases to trial. The easiest way to take their 33% from injured clients’ compensation is to settle cases early and often. If you encounter a firm that advertises quick and easy settlements and has no successful trial record, you are most likely dealing with a settlement mill. These lawyers are typically interested in soft tissue damage cases, such as whiplash, because they are easy to settle with the insurance company.” Lawfirms.com

Legal Notice per Rules of Professional Responsibility: The Rhode Island Supreme Court, sitting in Providence RI, licenses all lawyers and attorneys in the general practice of law, but does not license or certify any lawyer / attorney as an expert or specialist in any field of practice. While this firm maintains joint responsibility, most cases of this type are referred to other attorneys for principle responsibility.

A Rhode Island food poisoning lawyer discusses a rare case of a big corporation settling a food poisoning case. In a refreshing show of good corporate citizenship, Chipotle steps to the plate, takes responsibility and compensates injured victims. Chipotle settled with nearly all  the victims of  the food poisoning claims. For once, a major corporation steps to the plate, pays legitimate claims and does not force victims to litigate. Whatever, their motivation was, they deserve credit for this.

RI Food Poisoning law firm

Those who follow our writings know that we have authored dozens of articles railing against big insurance. We have written about corporate greed. We have held corporate America and indemnity companies accountable for their delay, deny, denigrate the victim and litigate culture that is pervasive.

Chipotle does the right thing and pays up!

“Chipotle Mexican Grill has agreed to financial settlements with more than 100 customers who fell ill after eating at its restaurants last year, lawyers for the consumers said, as it attempts to move on from a string of food-safety problems. The burrito chain’s strategy of resolving claims out of court, which has not previously been reported, shows it wants to avoid drawn-out public battles over foodborne illnesses that battered the company’s stock price and reputation.” Insurance Journal  

“The claims, settled over the last six months or so, involved people whose illnesses were verified by medical tests, Marler said. Most were never filed in courts. The way that Chipotle has been handling the legitimate claims has been textbook appropriate,” Marler said. “They’ve taken responsibility.”

Disappointing and embarrassing

Resolving customers’ claims privately allows Chipotle to “try and move forward from a disappointing and embarrassing issue,” said Lonny Sweet, chief executive officer for The Connect Group, a marketing agency focused on food.The last thing that they want is a battle in the courtroom over paying these people money because that keeps it in the news,” said Howard Penney, a managing director for research firm Hedgeye Risk Management, who followsChipotle.”  Insurance Journal 

Cynics will be cynics

But at the end of the day, chipotle’s motivation is irrelevant. Some cynics will claim that Chipotle deserves no credit for fairly, justly and generously settling with the injured victims. These cynics will say Chipotle did it to avoid an embarrassing trial and further publicity of this unfortunate event.  But at the end of the day , chipotle’s motivation is irrelevant.  They paid the victims fairly and they deserve credit for this. They told their high powered insurance defense lawyers and adjusters to stand down, and treat victim’s justly and fairly.

No Bad faith tactics by Chipotle

There was none of the typical bad faith deleterious an incendiary insurance tactics in this case such as:

• the unfortunate practice of blaming the  injured victim for their own injury. This is a digusting practice often perpetrated by insurance
• alleging that the injured victim  actually got sick at another restaurant , fast food joint or at home
• claiming the victim had a preexisting injury (even if it was from years before) and therefore their negligence did not cause the injuries
• delaying payment so they can use the victim’s settlement money to earn further income, this is earning money off the float.
• undermining the credibility of the injured victim by bringing up old criminal convictions or irrelevant  embarrassing online posts
• forcing multiple injured victims to litigate separately to drive up their costs
• alleging that the victims were partially responsible or assumed the risk
• denying the claim. This is something insurance adjusters are very good at.
• character assassination of the victim including calling the victim a liar, criminal or untrustworthy
• alleging the injured victims over treated, under-treated or did not treat
• alleging that the victim’s injury was exaggerated or imaginary or that the victim is menatlly ill. This usually involves trying to obtain the victim’ s psychologocal records to attempt to shame them into  a pennies on the dollar settlement
•  deleterious illegal low ball settlement tactics
• seeking irrelevant information to embarrass the victims. That old nude picture that an ex put up on the internet will be fodder for de facto extortion.
• paying  top high priced  personal injury insurance defense victims to litigate for years

Hardball litigation tactics by insurance companies

Insurance carriers, corporate america and insurance adjusters often practice illegal hard ball litigation tactics that are considered bad faith. These tactics are especially prevalent in food poisoning lawsuits.The most well known and infamous tactics are delaying payment of legitimate claims, denial of claims covered by the policy and “low ball” settlement tactics.

Some other types of bad faith insurance tactics that  I see in Providence Superior Court include:

• Denial of a legitimate Rhode Island personal injury claim without providing a valid reason or any rationale or justification
• Failure to perform a thorough, fair and complete investigation into a personal injury, car accident, premises liability or property damage claim
• Delay payment for compensation of a valid claim for years or perhaps many years. Make threatening or misleading statements to  injured victims filing a claim for tort  compensation
• Misrepresent policy language or the law concerning insurance coverage
• Ignore phone calls and letters from victims and deny such calls occurred
• Prolong negotiations for a settlement unnecessarily with hopes that the victim will become desperate as a result of foreclosure or bankruptcy
• Tell the claimant the file has been lost, destroyed or transferred to another office
• Making statements that the claim was filed too late, even when the statute of limitations has not yet expired!
• Offer substantially less compensation to the RI injured victim than the value of the claim
• Refusal to pay any compensation of a valid  negligence and injury claim including wrongful death,  RI slip and fall and Providence construction accident claims
• Refuse a legitimate or reasonable request for documents, pictures or evidence they have compiled.

Food poisoning in RI

If you were injured as a result of food poisoning in RI, then contact a Rhode Island food poisoning attorney. If you were injured in an accident in Rhode Island and Providence Plantation, contact a Providence personal injury attorney. A RI personal injury lawyer  who is also  a car accident lawyer in Rhode Island will fight to get the seriously injured victim justice and compensation that they are entitled to.

Legal Notice per Rules of Professional Responsibility: The Rhode Island Supreme Court licenses all lawyers and attorneys in the general practice of law, but does not license or certify any RI food poisoning lawyer / attorney as an expert or specialist in any field of practice. While this firm maintains joint responsibility, most cases of this type are referred to other attorneys for principle responsibility.

Most of the goods bought and sold in America are transported by trucks, up to 70 percent each year and account for $671 billion worth of goods. A truck accident usually describes a large truck, over 10,000 pounds, colliding with a smaller vehicle such as a car or SUV.

RI fatal truck accident lawyer

There are as many as 15.5 million trucks operating commercially in the United States and approximately two million of those trucks are tractor trailers, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. If you were injured in a truck accident then call one of the best personal injury lawyers in RI.

The Facts About Truck Accidents in RI and across America

Despite the advantages of having trucks relay our goods over vast distances, people do get hurt or die in accidents with trucks. The FMCSA reports that 69,000 people were injured in truck accidents in 2013, and 3,554 people died. While these numbers are down, generally, from the accident and death rates in 2003 and in 1994, they are still significant.

if you were injured in a motor vehicle, car or auto collision involving a truck, a Rhode Island personal injury attorney who is also a a Rhode Island truck accident lawyer should be by your side every step of the way. A RI injury attorney with substantial experience litigating truck collisions will help you get the compensation you deserve as a result of a RI truck crash.

Rhode Island truck accident lawyer

What causes truck accidents? A number of factors contribute to accidents that involve trucks . According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, most accidents occur on weekends – up to 78 percent and 68 percent take place in rural or suburban areas. While many times it is assumed that these accidents are caused by drugs and alcohol, the Department of Transportation found in a causation study conducted in 2007 that only 1 percent of truck accidents are alcohol-related and only 2 percent are related to illegal drug use. More accidents are attributed to over-the-counter drug use (17 percent), fatigue (13 percent), speed (23 percent), and prescription drug use (26 percent).

Rhode Island truck accident lawyer

When driving around large trucks in Rhode Island, every driver should take precautions. Remember, if you can’t see their mirrors, they probably can’t see you. Being careful around trucks helps everyone stay safe.

• Only pass a  tractor trailer or semi truck on the left side and do not cut back in front of the truck until you can see both headlights of the truck in your rearview mirror.
• Do not stop abruptly in front of a  big rig truck. Trucks need much more distance to stop than cars do. It’s crucial to keep this in mind when driving in front of a truck.
• When you are behind a  18 wheeler truck on a hill, remember that they will roll back a bit in order to get in gear and proceed up hill. Leave space for the truck behind it.
•  Tractor trailer Trucks need to swing wide to the right in order to make a left turn and vice versa for a right turn. Do not try and pass a truck or run along side it while it’s making its turn.
• If you find the wind picking up on a highway while you are driving, try and stay away from trucks. Trucks can cause additional turbulence on the road and can cause smaller cars and trucks to flip or swerve. If you must pass, do it, and then get out of the way.

Always drive courteously, no matter what, and if you are in a truck accident, contact a lawyer to find out how to proceed.

Fatal truck crash in RI

If a spouse, family member or loved one was tragically killed in a deadly RI truck collision, than you need to contact a wrongful death lawyer in Rhode Island who is also an experience RI personal injury lawyer. It is important that you don not retain a Rhode Island personal injury lawyer who only handles rear end RI car crashes. This RI injury attorney may be in over his or her head in litigating a complicated RI wrongful death cause of action.

“§ 10-7-1  Liability for damages for causing death. – Whenever the death of a person shall be caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of another, and the act, neglect, or default is such as would, if death had not ensued, have entitled the party injured to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, the person who, or the corporation which, would have been liable if death had not ensued shall be liable to an action for damages, notwithstanding the death of the person injured, and although the death shall have been caused under such circumstances as amount in law to a felony.  “§ 10-7-1  Liability for damages for causing death. –  https://www.ripersonalinjurylaw.com/key-provisions-ri-wrongful-death-law/ ”

NTSB-fatal trucking wreck report

“Washington, DC. Abstract: On June 25, 2015, about 7:10 p.m., a 2007 Peterbilt truck-tractor in combination with a 2005 Great Dane semitrailer, operated by Cool Runnings Express, Inc., was traveling northbound on Interstate 75, near Chattanooga, Tennessee, when it struck the rear of a 2010 Toyota Prius at an estimated speed of 7882 mph. Traffic had slowed because of road construction and a work zone lane closure at milepost 12. The truck-tractor continued forward and collided with seven additional vehicles, forcing them into subsequent collisions. Of the 18 vehicle occupants, six died and four were injured. A postcrash fire consumed one vehicle. The truck driver was returning to the carrier terminal in London, Kentucky, having begun his trip about 5:16 a.m. in Haines City, Florida. This investigation identified the truck driver’s performance, limitations of the current drug testing program, inadequacies of driver license records and background checks, and the overrepresentation of trucks in work zone crashes as safety issues. The NTSB made new recommendations to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and the Idaho Transportation Department, and the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Tennessee Highway Patrol. In addition, the NTSB reiterated one recommendation to the Federal Highway Administration, and reiterated and reclassified one recommendation to the FMCSA.”  National Transportation Safety Board. 2016. Multivehicle Work Zone Crash on Interstate 75, Chattanooga, Tennessee, June 25, 2015. Highway Accident Report NTSB/HAR-16/01.

A New Years Eve car accident injury attorney authors this article about New Years auto accidents. Car accidents are on the rise in the United States. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 36 traffic fatalities occurred every day from 2001 to 2005.

However, over the New Years  Eve. holiday those statistics jumped to 54 each day, proving the holiday is the most dangerous time of year to be on the road. The following is an overview of how a Rhode Island personal injury lawyer or a RI auto accident attorney may be able to help if you or someone you love has been injured due to the negligence of a drunk driver.

New Years Eve Drunk Driving Accident Injury Attorney

If you have been injured in a motorcycle accident, car, truck or SUV accident on new years eve caused by an impaired driver, you have the right to file a lawsuit and request compensation for your injuries. This lawsuit is filed in civil court, which is different than the criminal proceedings the driver may face. Below are some types of damages you may be able to receive compensation for in a Rhode Island and Providence Plantations personal injury claim:

• Hospital Costs
• Medical Bills / pain and suffering
• Therapy Fees
• Alternate Transportation Costs
• Vehicle Repair Cost
• Loss Of Income
• Future Lost Income If You Are Permanently Disabled

You may also be entitled to punitive damages from the drunk driver as a result of a new years eve drunk driving accident. Punitive damages are awarded to victims to punish the tortfeasor, so hopefully they won’t drive under the influence of alcohol again.

Punitive damages laws in Rhode Island

“Recently, in Murphy v. United Steelworkers of America, 507 A.2d 1342, 1346 (R.I. 1986), this court emphasized that punitive damages are not awarded as compensation for the plaintiff but in order to punish the offender and to deter future misconduct. Again, we have also emphasized that one seeking punitive damages is required to produce “`evidence of such willfulness, recklessness or wickedness, on the part of the party at fault, as amount[s] to criminality, that for the good of society and warning to the individual, ought to be punishedd.'” Morin v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co., 478 A.2d 964, 967 (R.I. 1984).” 533 A.2d 541 (1987) Mary M. ALLEN, et al. v. Robert L. SIMMONS, et al. No. 85-542-Appeal. Supreme Court of Rhode Island. November 23, 1987. 542*542 Raymond A. LaFazia, Netti C. Vogel, Gunning, LaFazia & Gnys, Inc., Providence, for plaintiffs. Paul V. Reynolds, Boyer, Reynolds & DeMarco, Providence, for defendants. OPINION KELLEHER, Justice.

Proving Negligence in a motor vehicle intoxicated and drunk motorist wreck

When someone gets behind the wheel after drinking too much, they are acting in a reckless and negligent manner. This is usually enough to merit a civil settlement for your expenses. However, you must be able to prove that your injuries were caused by the driver in the accident. A Warwick personal injury attorney can speak with your doctors and medical experts to help prove the extent of your injuries.

Social host law

“Under the so-called “social host” law that was enacted in 2006, adults who allow underage drinking parties to be held in their homes can face criminal charges. That law added language to existing statute that enhanced the ability of law enforcement to charge adults who provide alcohol to minors. However, the Barrington incident uncovered a flaw in the new law. Police said that while they proceeded with action against the youths they encountered, they held off from charging the owner of the home because the underage drinking occurred not inside the home, but rather in the yard. Police were advised by the office of the Attorney General that, as a result, charges against the adult homeowners could not be sustained. The legislation approved by the General Assembly – sponsored by Rep. Jan P. Malik (D-Dist. 67, Barrington, Warren) and Sen. Walter S. Felag Jr. (D-Dist. 10, Warren, Bristol, Tiverton) — addresses that issue by extending the reach of the law to make adults liable for underage drinking anywhere on their property, not just within the confines of a house.” Insurance  Journal  https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2008/07/23/92106.htm

How an injury Lawyer with experience can Help

Personal injury laws in Rhode Island regarding drunk driving accidents are complex and the legal process is difficult to navigate. Hiring an experienced Cranston or East Providence personal injury lawyer to guide you through this process will help ease your mind during this difficult time. In addition, it is very important that your expenses and lost wages be calculated correctly so you receive the best settlement possible. Your Barrington, Bristol or Warren RI lawyer has experience making these calculations, increasing your chances of getting the most money for your injuries.

If you have been hurt by a drunk driver, schedule an appointment with a Rhode Island personal injury lawyer for advice. Your RI injury attorney will go over your case and advise you in the best way to move forward. Having an experienced and competent Pawtucket or Woonsocket negligence car collision injury attorney on your side can help make the entire process easier.

https://www.bactrack.com/blogs/expert-center/35042821-the-most-dangerous-times-on-the-road

A Rhode Island drunk driving injury lawyer discusses Social host liability for Christmas parties. The Christmas season is always a time for celebration, and often those celebrations are associated with Christmas parties sponsored by various groups. Employer Christmas parties are probably the most notable of these. Private Christmas parties fall under the same laws regarding liability as any other social host laws or dram shop laws. Sadly, some Christmas parties end badly when someone drinks too much and injures another motorist in a car accident.

Social host liability in RI

Motorist who drink and drive are not the only ones who can be held liable for a RI drunk driving car accident. When someone attends a party is involved in an automobile accident following the party and someone is injured, the party host and or server could be held liable.

Regardless of the seriousness of the injuries or intoxication level of a drunk driver, the individual or group hosting the party can be held liable as a co-defendant. An experienced RI personal injury and auto accident attorney can reasonably establish how much alcohol the tortfeasor consumed and whether the servers knowingly, recklessly or negligently served an obviously buzzed, intoxicated or wasted guest. In some instances, the primary defendant was actually consuming alcohol provided by the host, often with no bartender or oversight personnel.

§ 3-8-11.1. Furnishing or procurement of alcoholic beverages for underage persons.

(a) As used in this section: (1) “furnish” means to provide with, supply, give or purchase; (2) “procure” means to get possession of, obtain by particular care and effort; and (3) “permit” means to give permission for, or approval of, the possession or consumption of an alcoholic beverage by any form of conduct, that would cause a reasonable person to believe that permission or approval has been given.

(b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d) of this section it is unlawful for any person twenty-one (21) years of age or older:

(1) to purchase from any licensee or any employee of a licensee any alcoholic beverage for the sale, delivery, service of or giving away to, any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday;

(2) to purchase from any licensee or any employee of any licensee any alcoholic beverage with the intent to cause or permit said alcoholic beverage to be sold, or given to any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday;

(3) to knowingly furnish any alcoholic beverage for the sale, delivery, service of or giving to any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday;

(4) to procure alcoholic beverages for the sale, delivery, service of or giving to any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday; or

(5) to otherwise permit the consumption of alcohol by underaged persons in his or her residence or on his or her real property.

(c) Any person, between the ages of eighteen (18) and twenty-one (21) years of age, who violates subsection (b) herein, may, upon conviction, be subject to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500). In addition, any person convicted may be required to attend an educational program approved by the department of health designed to recognize the dangers of underaged drinking, and may be subject to up to thirty (30) hours of community service.

(d) This section does not apply to use, consumption or possession of alcoholic beverages by a minor for religious purposes; or to a parent or legal guardian procuring or furnishing alcohol to, or permitting the consumption of alcohol by, his or her minor child or ward.

(e) Any person who violates this section will be subject to the penalties provided in § 3-8-11.2.

History of Section.
(G.L. 1938, § 3-8-11.1; P.L. 1963, ch. 147, § 1; P.L. 1980, ch. 142, § 3; P.L. 1984, ch. 191, § 1; P.L. 2006, ch. 230, § 1; P.L. 2006, ch. 272, § 1; P.L. 2008, ch. 129, § 1; P.L. 2008, ch. 200, § 1; P.L. 2010, ch. 144, § 1.)

§ 3-8-11.2. Penalty for violation of § 3-8-11.1.

(a) Any person who violates § 3-8-11.1 and either pleads nolo contendere or is convicted of a first misdemeanor violation shall be punished by a fine of not less than three hundred fifty dollars ($350.00) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and/or imprisoned for a period not exceeding six (6) months, or both.

(b) Any person who violates § 3-8-11.1 and either pleads nolo contendre or is convicted of a second misdemeanor violation shall be punished by a fine of not less than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and/or imprisoned for a period not exceeding one year, or both.

(c) Any person who violates § 3-8-11.1 and either pleads nolo contendre or is convicted of a third or subsequent violation shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by a fine not less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) and/or imprisonment not exceeding three (3) years. Any person convicted of a second or subsequent offense under of this section shall not have any fine suspended.

History of Section.
(G.L. 1938, § 3-8-11.2; P.L. 1963, ch. 147, § 1; P.L. 1983, ch. 247, § 1; P.L. 1985, ch. 266, § 1; P.L. 1987, ch. 78, § 12; P.L. 1988, ch. 214, § 1; P.L. 2006, ch. 230, § 1; P.L. 2006, ch. 272, § 1; P.L. 2008, ch. 129, § 1; P.L. 2008, ch. 200, § 1.)

Private Individual Christmas Parties

While most “in house” Christmas parties are conducted reasonably and responsibly with respect to drinking and driving, there are also instances when illegal activity is involved. These irresponsible parties are also common for teens whose parents allow underage drinking in their home with no real chaperones in place. This means that a potential scenario for a serious accident is clearly in place, especially when a teen driver with little experience gets behind the wheel of a vehicle after consuming any amount of alcohol.

Underage drivers who are involved in an accident while drinking  can be liable for damages of any inured victims. The adults who hold these parties are just as liable as business owners who serve alcohol. Often punitive damages or even criminal charges are a result of a  Rhode Island car crash involving an underage driver who has been drinking at their home.

Restaurants and Bars

Many Christmas parties are also held in certain business establishments, country clubs, hotels, bars, taverns, VFW establishments and restaurants because of the services provided by these establishments. The liability laws that apply to restaurants and bars in the normal course of business still apply. The bars or establishments can be held responsible when an accident occurs following the party involving an attendee who drove their vehicle after consuming alcohol at the party.

Servers and Waitresses

Even the bartenders and waitresses at a Christmas party could potentially be liable as well as the party sponsors. Liability could attach if a server or bartender did not identify an intoxicated customer and continued to serve them despite the fact that they were drunk as a skunk. Forcing an intoxicated attendee or customer to leave the establishment can be problematic too, especially if they drive away from the venue.

Rhode Island personal injury lawyers

An experienced auto accident attorney in Rhode Island or a Providence car wreck lawyer will always investigation an accident injury case for all of those who may be responsible. RI social host liability accident attorneys will pinpoint any  liable deep pocket tortfeasors and pursue necessary legal action. Anyone injured in an accident during the Christmas season should always consult with a a Rhode Island personal injury attorney or RI personal injury lawyer before beginning a claim.