Central New York Injury Lawyer Blog

NY Bike Accident Lawyer — Die On Your Bike With Good Protection

April 1, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

Maybe you can, but I can’t. I can’t do it. I can’t get on my road bike without thinking, at least a little bit, about getting injured or killed on it. That’s probably because, as a Central and Syracuse New York bicycle accident lawyer, I see some pretty nasty bike injuries, and worse, all the time.

It’s not easy to forget the danger. Just today my cousin, an avid cyclist, was hit and killed by a pickup truck while biking out in Oregon where he lived and worked. As I heard about him, all I could think was, “but for the grace of God, there go I”.

Death seems to be falling all around me, like killer raindrops. I blogged the other day about my brother’s recent sudden death, and now my cousin, only 60 years old.

Brain Injured Snowmobile Accident Victim Paints For CNY Injury Lawyer.

March 31, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

Some of our former Central and Syracuse New York personal injury clients become lifelong friends. One example is Mary. Even six years or so after we settled her case, she keeps in touch, stops by the office, and emails us regularly.

Mary suffered a terrible traumatic brain injury (“TBI”).. She was a passenger in a snowmobile that collided with another snowmobile. About 6 years ago, my partner, David Kalabanka, got her a 7 figure settlement against the responsible party’s insurance carrier and worked out a structured settlement that will pay her several millions of dollars, in monthly installments, over the rest of her life. David did an awesome job representing her.

Mary can’t work a conventional job. No one would hire her. Her brain injury has left her noticeably “different”. She talks with an unsettling voice and intonation. She speaks whatever she thinks, and this, of course, is not socially acceptable. She sees double, too.

Cornell University Student Suicides – Can Cornell Be Held Liable?

March 27, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

Anyone familiar with Ithaca is also familiar with the ubiquitous bumper sticker and City slogan “Ithaca Is Gorges”. Bridges span those gorges, right on or near Cornell University’s campus, and students traverse those bridges by foot on their way to and from classes and town. When you combine Ithaca’s gloomy climate with the Ivy League pressure cooker, it’s no surprise that many of those students (a Cornell study says about 15%) frequently contemplate suicide, including jumping from the bridges. And over the years, many have! More specifically, from 1990 to 2010, there were 29 suicide attempts, 27 of which were successful, on the seven bridges located on or near campus.

Cornell was concerned enough about the bridges’ magnet-like pull on suicide contemplators so as to undertake anti-suicide bridge renovations in 2006 or so. At that time a virtually suicide-proof alteration — the installation of nets under the bridge — was rejected apparently because it would tarnish the scenery. Instead Cornell took half-measures, like building the parapets of the bridges a bit higher, and curving them somewhat. When several more kids threw themselves to their death from those same bridges, Cornell did an about face and is now implementing the net concept.

But in the meantime, the parents of one of those recent suicides have brought a New York wrongful death case against Cornell, and the City of Ithaca as owner of the bridge in question, alleging, basically, that they should have gotten it right the first time.

Cornell University Student Suicides – Can Cornell Be Held Liable?

March 26, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

Anyone familiar with Ithaca is also familiar with the ubiquitous bumper sticker and City slogan “Ithaca Is Gorges”. But bridges span those gorges, right on or near Cornell University’s campus, and students traverse those bridges by foot on their way to and from classes and town. When you combine Ithaca’s gloomy climate with the Ivy League pressure cooker, it’s no surprise that many of those students (a Cornell study says about 15%) frequently contemplate suicide, including jumping from the bridges. And over the years, many have! More specifically, from 1990 to 2010, there were 29 suicide attempts, 27 of which were successful, on the seven bridges located on or near campus.

Cornell was so concerned about the bridges’ magnet-like pull on suicide contemplators that it undertook anti-suicide bridge renovations in 2006 or so. But at that time a virtually suicide-proof alteration — the installation of nets under the bridges — was rejected because it would tarnish the scenery. Instead Cornell took half-measures, like building the side walls of the bridges a bit higher, and curving them somewhat. When several more kids threw themselves to their death from those same bridges, Cornell did an about face and is now implementing the net concept.

But the parents of one of the kids who jumped after the renovations have sued Cornell, and the City of Ithaca as owner of the bridge in question, alleging, basically, that they should have gotten it right the first time.

Syracuse NY Personal Injury Lawyer Wins More Than $3 Million For Security Guard Shot in Rochester Convenience Store Holdup

March 26, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

My fellow Syracuse personal injury lawyer, Joseph Cote, who besides being a great lawyer, is a really nice guy, recently won a nearly $3.4 million Rochester NY personal injury verdict for a security guard shot in the face during a robbery at a Wilson Farms convenience store in Rochester.

The jury held the chain-convenience store’s corporate owner 50% responsible and the robber (who was never caught) 50% liable. How could the store be held liable, even half liable, for an armed robber shooting its security guard? Well, Joe argued that the convenience store should have required its employees to move cash from the store to the bank more often. Instead, Wilson Farms became a favorite piggy bank for armed robbers because they knew there was likely to be a big payday inside. In the past decade, armed robbers targeted the Rochester area Wilson Farms stores a grand total of 126 times, which included six shootings and one death.

Joe’s argument reminds me of what Jesse James said when asked why he robbed banks: “Because that’s where the money is”, he quipped.

Is A New York Driver Who Has A Seizure And Causes An Accident Liable For The Injuries And Death He May Cause?

March 25, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

Last week in Auburn, NY, on Lake Avenue, not too far from the New York personal injury and auto accident law firm of Michaels Bersani Kalabanka, P.C., a 24-year old driver had a seizure and crashed his car into a house porch. No one, except the driver, was injured, but what if they were? What if someone was on the porch and got hurt? Could that person sue the driver for the injuries?

You might think, “gee, it wasn’t really the kid’s fault that he had a seizure, so how can you blame him”? You might be right. Or not.

All 50 states require drivers with a seizure history to report this in their application for a driver’s license or license renewal. All 50 states deny drivers’ licenses to those who suffer frequent seizures that cannot be controlled by medication. All 50 states have rules regarding when and how a license may be acquired for those with seizures that can be controlled by medication.

Can You Sue Drug Manufacturers For Failure to Warn? It May Depend On Whether You Purchased Generic Or Name-Brand Drugs

March 23, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

The New York Times just reported on a problem I blogged about many months ago: Brand-name drug producers can be sued for failing to provide adequate warnings of prescription drug dangers while the producers of the generic form of the drug cannot. Why? Because the Supreme Court says so. I refer you to the Times article as well as to my previous blog post.

The Times article demonstrates the stark unfairness of this state of the law with a “tale of two cities”. In the first case, a woman had to have her hand amputated after an emergency room nurse injected her with an anti-nausea drug, causing gangrene. The drug happened to be a generic drug. She sued for the manufacturer for failure to warn about the risks of injecting it, and her case was dismissed. Another woman with the same injury who was injected with the same drug, but of the brand-name variety, sued on the same facts, and won big ($6.8 million). A $6.8 million dollar difference due solely to the “luck of the draw” in that the hospital in the first case used a generic drug and in the second case used a brand name.

Justice? Go figure.

Cyclists Get Riled Up About Police Unfairness, Central NY Bicycle Accident Lawyer Reports

March 22, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

The first automobile accident in the United States was in New York City in 1896, when a motor vehicle collided with a bicyclist, causing the cyclist to break a leg. And that was just the beginning. From there, it was downhill for cyclists.

When a motorist and cyclist collide, the cyclist invariably bears the brunt of the damage. But the truth is that’s just the beginning. After the cyclist is injured or killed because of some distracted motorist’s negligence, the police often find some way to ride roughshod over the cyclist in their accident reports. From my experience representing injured bicyclists throughout the Syracuse and Central New York area, I can say that the police often seem to find a way to blame the cyclist and pardon the motorist. Forget about the forensic evidence at the scene — the police are likely to sympathize with, and believe, the motorist’s excuse that the cyclist “just came out of nowhere”.

Like most people who drive cars but don’t ride bikes, police tend to have subconscious biases in favor of motorists and against cyclists. And unless you have a good New York bicycle accident lawyer who knows how to carefully screen juries for anti-cyclist or anti-motorcyclist prejudice, the jury will likely do you in, too.

Central NY Motorcycle Lawyer Spring Motorcycling Tip; Think “They All Want To Murder Me”!

March 19, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

In this balmy Central New York May, with the little snow that ever fell a distant memory, the biker’s feel that call of the wild — that desire to feel the wind in your face and hear the roar between your butt and the road. Motorcyclists all over Central New York are dusting off their bikes, revving up their motors, and checking their tire pressure.

But special dangers lurk on the roads in spring. Residual salt and sand might be found at corners, intersections and even on the main roads and highways. Stopping or turning too fast on sand can make you slide, fall, lose control or cross over into the oncoming lane.

Here’s another danger: Over the long winter, those four-wheeled drivers have forgotten what a two-wheel vehicle looks like. Or at least lost the habit of looking out for them. Wise advice: Ride as if every motorist is out to murder you. Just believe it! You will thus avoid them at every opportunity, and you will be doubly happy if they turn out to have no such murderous intent.

Central New York Injury Lawyer Gets Lucky Break On A Dog Bite Case

March 18, 2012 | by Michael Bersani

I just got a lucky break on a Geneva NY dog bite case. I’ll tell you about it in a minute. But first let me tell you about an article I just read about animal attack cases in the New York Law Journal, which concluded that “New York is perhaps the toughest jurisdiction in the nation to be in” for dog bite (or any animal attack) cases. Why?

There is kind of a paradox in New York. On the one hand, New York is a “strict liability” state for animal attack (including dog bite) cases. That means that you don’t even have to prove that the animal’s owner was “negligent” or careless. If the dog bit you, or the animal attacked you, and you are injured, the owner is strictly (automatically) liable, BUT ONLY IF _______ (I’ll fill in the blank later). In other words, even if the owner was very careful in, for example, tying up the dog, but some neighborhood kids let him lose as a kind of gag, and the dog then bites someone, the owner is still liable BUT ONLY IF _____. The law is generous to animal attack or dog bit victims, BUT ONLY IF _____.

OK, enough already. Only if what? Only if the owner “KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN OF THE ANIMAL’S VICIOUS PROPENSITIES“.