Central New York Injury Lawyer Blog

How Personal Injury Lawyers May Become Victims Of Their Own Success

January 13, 2013 | by Michael Bersani

Not long ago cars were death traps. Then Ralph Nader, a trial lawyer, wrote a best seller called, “Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile“, published in 1965. The book detailed the resistance of the auto industry to investing in safety features, such as seat belts.

Then great trial lawyers brought a slew of products liability lawsuits against the auto manufacturers. The automobile industry responded by designing safer cars, featuring seat belts and then airbags, to avoid shelling out millions to mangled auto crash victims.

But the auto industry kept getting sued because lawyers kept arguing the vehicles could be made still safer, which spurred a leap-frogging of safer and safer designs. As a result, we now have side air bags, crash-resistant chassis, seat belt alarms, anti-lock brakes, etc.

A Central NY Legal Malpractice Case Explained

January 11, 2013 | by Michael Bersani

Just in case you were wondering how a New York legal malpractice case works (come on, admit it, you were wondering about that all day!), I have a “case study” for you.

I recently sued a lawyer on behalf of a widow and her child. I took over their case after the lawyer had mishandled it. The facts of the mishandled case went like this (in simplified form): a public official had, through his negligence, killed the widow’s husband, but before he died, he went through a terrible amount of agony and suffering. This meant that the widow had two claims:

One claim was for “wrongful death” (“WD”), which mainly means a suit for lost income. The concept of the WD suit is that, had the widow’s husband not been killed, he would have continued supporting her and their children, but now he was dead, and dead men don’t pay the bills.

Yet Another Grant Ave Car Crash In Sennett New York

January 8, 2013 | by Michael Bersani

We at the Michaels Bersani Kalabanka personal injury law firm know all too well how dangerous Grant Ave. (Route 5) is in Sennett, just outside of our hometown of Auburn, NY. If you don’t believe us, just google “car accident Grant Ave. Sennett New York” and look at the list of reported cases! Why so many?

Well, Grant Ave. is the main thoroughfare between Auburn and Syracuse. There’s way too much traffic, too many commercial parking lots to turn into and out from, and traffic moves way too fast. That’s a dangerous brew, but add to it the fact of life that many drivers just aren’t careful enough, and there you have the explanation.

Many of the car accident cases we handle happen right here in nearby Sennett on Grant Ave. In fact, we just settled a motorcycle-car collision case that took place on Grant Ave. at the intersection with the Wallmart parking lot.

In Bumpy Road For Plaintiff, Bumper Car Case Bumped (NY Injury Lawyer Explains).

January 2, 2013 | by Michael Bersani

I usual cheer for the injured plaintiff in lawsuits. I love it when wrong-doers and their insurance carriers get slammed for huge verdicts — hey, especially if it’s my case!. But every once in a while I root for the other side.

That’s how I felt about a California Supreme Court ruling that a bumper-car rider could not sue the amusement park for a broken wrist he suffered in a bumper car ride. The adult plaintiff was enjoying the bumper car ride when he was hit from the front and then from behind. She broke her wrist when she sought to brace herself on the car’s “dashboard”. A year after the accident, the amusement park owner added an island in the middle of the bumper car park — like those you see in most bumper car rides nowadays — to keep bumper car drivers headed in the same direction and minimize head-on collisions. The plaintiff’s lawyer argued, among other things, that this should have been done before his client’s accident.

The State’s highest court disagreed. It ruled that, by voluntarily engaging in the mock violence of low-speed collisions, bumper car riders assume the risks inherent that activity, just as people who play football or other sports assume the risks inherent in those sports. (We New York personal injury lawyers call this the “primary assumption of the risk doctrine” — see my prior blog post about it here.)

What’s New in New York Personal Injury Law in the New Year (2013)?

January 1, 2013 | by Michael Bersani

The biggest single change for 2013 in New York personal injury law is, without a doubt, the Uniform Notice of Claim Act, which Governor Cuomo has signed into law on December 20.

It’s a real game changer. Let me explain.

Until now, New York public entities (counties, cities, towns, villages, school districts, public authorities, fire districts, water districts, public libraries, etc.) have enjoyed disseminating a jungle of inconsistent procedural rules and time limits for starting personal injury lawsuits against them.

“Save That Evidence Or Else . . . !” Central New York Injury Lawyer Warns.

December 31, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

You get hurt. Your first thoughts are about getting medical care. You aren’t thinking about calling this Central New York personal injury lawyer or filing a lawsuit. You’re not “the suing type”, you say. But several weeks later, when you realize you may be stuck with this injury for the rest of your life, you start seething about the careless jerk who hurt you.

So you call me. Sure, you have a lot of questions, but so do I!

If you slipped and fell I am going to ask you, “do you still have the shoes you were wearing”. Why? I need those to disprove the almost certain defense that worn out or inappropriate footwear made you fall.

Central New York Personal Injury Law Firm’s Year In Review

December 15, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

As 2012 comes to a close, it’s time to look back on this year’s successes at the Central New York personal injury law office of Michaels Bersani Kalabanka. Yes, we’re proud of our victories. They have allowed us to truly help people, people we have come to care about, people we have stood beside through thick and thin from the day they were injured until the day, sometimes years later, they finally tasted sweet justice. When, after a long struggle, we finally ring the bell of justice, we celebrate.

Although we fight for fair compensation in both small and big injuries cases, the big ones stand out because they are so life-altering. Without our efforts, many of those clients would sink into financial ruin. Those unfortunate few, those severely injured victims, are not just “down on their luck”, they are crushed by the overwhelming bad luck of having been at the wrong place at the wrong time in striking distance of the wrong wrongdoer. Not only can they no longer work to support their families, not only are they swimming in unpaid medical (and other) bills, but they must wake up in pain, drag themselves through the day in pain, and then lie down in pain again, only to relive the same pain again, and again, and again, every day of their lives. It’s like a horror-movie remake of “Groundhog Day“.

From our perspective, it’s amazing, even immoral, that the insurance carriers don’t pony up a fair settlement for these clients early on. Sadly, they often wait till the eve of trial to begin to make reasonable settlement overtures. Sometimes they only “see the light” or more accurately, feel the fear of a big verdict, at trial.

New York Jury Acquits “Driving-While-Drowsy” Defendant.

December 8, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

I recently blogged about a new nationwide trend to criminalize “drowsy driving”. Caffeine-crazed prosecutors around the country are going after sleep-deprived drivers who doze off at the wheel on criminal charges including manslaughter and other serious felonies. (The prosecutorial equivalent of pouring cold water on sleepy drivers.) Could YOU end up on the receiving end of such prosecutorial zeal some day? Hey, wake up and smell the coffee — you too drive sleepy once in a while!

Yesterday, New York City prosecutors lost a nine-week multiple-manslaughter trial against a bus driver they charged with driving while drowsy. Essentially they argued that, by getting behind the wheel of the bus knowing he had not slept enough, and then causing an accident because of his sleep deprivation, he committed manslaughter and other serious crimes.

The jury disagreed. Yes, he caused one of the deadliest crashes in New York City’s history. Yes, he was probably negligent in the extreme for having driven a busload of innocent unsuspecting passengers on too little sleep. But no, he was not criminally liable.

Should Drowsie Driving Be Criminalized? Central NY Car Crash Lawyer Weighs In.

December 2, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

Just read an article in the New York Times titled, “Push to Prosecute Drowsy Driving May Hinge on Its Definition“. Before I discuss this article, I need to make a confession: I’ve done it. I have driven drowsy. I’ve felt myself nodding off at the wheel. It has happened a few times in my life, and every time it scared the crap out of me. Come on, admit it — it’s happened to you, too!

Now I (and you?) could go to jail for it. According to the article, law enforcement officials are pushing State legislators to make driving-while-drowsy a crime punishable by jail time. This follows a decades-long trend toward criminalizing dangerous driving behaviors, such as drinking-while-driving, texting-while-driving and phoning-while-driving.

Until now, law enforcement has simply coaxed the sleepy driver with friendly nudges from roadside signs, such as “You Snooze, You Lose” or “Drive Alert, Arrive Alive.” Is it a good idea to up the ante, to make it a crime?

CNY Accident Lawyer Explains: If You Can “Write” You Are More Often “Right” In Appellate Court

November 28, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

A lawyer friend of one of my partners called him yesterday to tell him that, while in a telephone conversation with one of the judges who sits in the Appellate Court in Rochester (Fourth Department), the judge asked him if he knew Michael Bersani (me). He responded, “sure, I know Mike, why”? The judge replied, “because he writes the most excellent appellate briefs”!

Very flattering, especially since I don’t even know that judge. I used to work up there clerking, many years ago, but all the judges I worked for are retired.

More important than the flattery, though, is what this could mean to my clients. I have two important appeals pending up in that Court. I argue one of them next week. Did the judge’s comment mean that this particular judge agrees with my arguments? Or does he just think I write wonderfully on a losing argument? I am hoping the judges don’t just think I can “write” well, but also that I am just plain “right” on the legal issues.