Bus Crash Driver Medical Emergency Defense Motion Denied

The District Court in Freeborn County, Minnesota has denied the defendant’s motion for Summary Judgement in the I-90 bus crash of November 18, 2009.  The coach tour bus owned by Strain Tours (dba Bold Lines) was returning from Diamond Jo Casino to Rochester MN when it crossed the center line of I-90 near Austin MN passing through the median and turning over on its side, injuring twenty-two and killing two passengers. The bus driver and tour bus company asked the Court to dismiss plaintiff’s claims alleging the driver suffered a sudden medical emergency.  Defendants claimed the driver suffered an unexpected internal bleed that caused a loss of consciousness resulting in the crash.  Plaintiffs presented evidence showing the driver suffered from untreated sleep apnea and lied to doctors and DOT medical examiners about his condition in order to maintain his commercial license.  Plaintiffs also presented medical evidence showing the driver’s post-crash condition was consistent with hypersomnolence (falling asleep) and was not consistent with a loss of consciousness from internal bleeding.

The Court’s Memorandum set forth the following findings:  ”

In this case the Court received and reviewed the following:  a) A large volume of conflicting medical evidence regarding the cause of the bus driver’s sudden loss of consciousness;  b) The fact that the bus driver was diagnosed with and suffered from obstructive sleep apnea;  c) That the bus driver lied to physicians regarding his medical history and medical condition;  d) That the bus driver lied to the DOT examiners regarding his medical history and medical condition; and e) That the bus driver may have been exhibiting symptoms of his prior medical condition immediately preceding the accident.”

Posted in Bus Accidents, Falling Asleep While Driving, Medical Emergency Defense | Leave a comment

Underpayment of Benefits Identified

Mr. Patterson represented an injured worker who had sustained a wrist injury. The injured worker had already been paid for 104 weeks of wage loss benefits. Upon meeting with the injured worker, Mr. Patterson quickly identified that the workers' compensation insurer had miscalculated the average weekly wage, and had underpaid the injured worker approximately $215.00 per week. Over the 104 weeks of benefits paid, this resulted in a total underpayment of approximately $22,360.00. Mr. Patterson secured payment of the $22.360.00 on behalf of his client. Additionally, this injured worker had been assigned a 7% permanent partial disability rating by his doctor. Mr. Patterson reviewed the rating and determined that it was incorrect. He then wrote a letter to the injured workers doctor and secured a higher permanent partial disability rating of 17%. This resulted in increased compensation to the injured worker of almost $10,000.00.

Paul Dahlberg

Thomas R. Patterson is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 19 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. Mr. Patterson has been named a Super Lawyer in the field of Workers’ Compensation by the publication Law and Politics for the past 5 years

Contact Attorney Thomas Patterson at t.patterson@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Sample Cases | Leave a comment

Employer and Insurer Found Liable for Employee's Injuries Suffered in Motor Vehicle Accident

Mr. Patterson represented a Home Health Care worker who injured his neck in a work related motor vehicle accident. After accepting liability for more than six months, the workers' compensation insurer obtained an independent medical evaluation supporting the Employer and Insurer's defense that the Employee had sustained only a temporary injury to his pre-existing degenerative neck condition. Mr. Patterson obtained expert testimony from the Employee's treating surgeon as well as their own independent medical report from an orthopedic surgeon, and established compensability. At a worker's compensation hearing, the Employer and Insurer were found liable for his injury and they were ordered to pay for the Employee's two level cervical fusion. In addition, the judge ordered payment of 104 weeks of wage loss benefits and a 15% permanent partial disability. The Employee was also provided the assistance of a qualified rehabilitation consultant to help medically manage his case and assist with finding future employment within his physical capabilities.

Paul Dahlberg

Thomas R. Patterson is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 19 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. Mr. Patterson has been named a Super Lawyer in the field of Workers’ Compensation by the publication Law and Politics for the past 5 years

Contact Attorney Thomas Patterson at t.patterson@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Sample Cases | 1 Comment

Successful Workers' Compensation Settlement

Mr. Patterson represented a worker who sustained multiple unreported low back injuries, between 1995 through 2005 with multiple Employers and Insurers. Mr. Patterson obtained expert testimony from an orthopedic surgeon who provided his opinion that the Employee's prior unreported injuries, as well his current work duties, were a substantial contributing factor to his need for surgery. The four separate Employers and Insurers each obtained independent medical reports opining that the Employee's condition was not work related. Mr. Patterson successfully negotiated a $155,000.00 settlement on behalf of the Employee.

Paul Dahlberg

Thomas R. Patterson is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 19 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. Mr. Patterson has been named a Super Lawyer in the field of Workers’ Compensation by the publication Law and Politics for the past 5 years

Contact Attorney Thomas Patterson at t.patterson@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Sample Cases | Leave a comment

Truck Driver with Traumatic Brain Injury Continues to Receive Benefits

Mr. Patterson represented a truck driver who sustained multiple orthopedic injuries and a traumatic brain injury as a result of a single vehicle accident. The workers' compensation insurer contended the Employee suffered from a personal medical condition which caused the accident and resulting injuries. The workers' compensation insurer also contended that the Employee had been warned not to drive and that this constituted a prohibited act, a defense to the compensability of the Employee's claim. After multiple depositions and a workers' compensation hearing, the compensation judge determined that the Employee's claim was compensable and awarded more than $60,000.00 of permanent partial disability and wage loss benefits. The Employee continues to receive permanent total disability benefits, social security benefits and medical benefits today.

Paul Dahlberg

Thomas R. Patterson is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 19 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. Mr. Patterson has been named a Super Lawyer in the field of Workers’ Compensation by the publication Law and Politics for the past 5 years

Contact Attorney Thomas Patterson at t.patterson@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Sample Cases | Leave a comment

Dog Bites and Injuries: Dog Owners liable for Injuries Caused by Dog, not just Bites or Vicious Attacks

Minnesota Statute § 347.22 mandates that an owner is liable to the full amount of the injury sustained if a dog injures any person who is acting peaceably in any place where the person may lawfully be.  Case law makes it clear that application of the statute is not limited to vicious attacks.  The statute clearly applies to trigger liability when a dog, even without the intent to attack or be vicious, directly causes injury to someone.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals in Boitz v. Preblich, 405 N.W.2d 907 (Minn. App. 1987) found that the statute applied when the defendant’s thirty pound Springer Spaniel ran out of the door and down a footpath as the plaintiff was walking.  The dog “bumped into the back of his legs” and the plaintiff fell down breaking his wrist.  The Court found that the statute applied even where the dog just bumped into the plaintiff.  Again the Court of Appeals demonstrated the breadth of the statute in Morris v. Weatherly, 488 N.W.2d 508 (Minn. App. 1992) when they found that the statute applied when a dog ran at the plaintiff causing him to attempt to dismount off of his bike and resulting in his falling to the ground and tearing his rotator cuff.  The Court of Appeals in Morris found the statute applied even though there was no physical contact between the dog and the plaintiff.  Finally, in Lewellin, on behalf of heirs of Lewellin v. Huber, 645 N.W.2d 62 (Minn. 1991) the Minnesota Supreme Court addressed application of the statute when a dog “injures” someone as opposed to “attacks” them.  The Minnesota Supreme Court said that the intent of the legislation would cover “when a dog exuberantly jumps upon or unintentionally runs into a person and injures that person”.  The case law addressing the application of Minn. Stat. § 347.22 makes it clear that the dog’s owners in this case would be liable.

Leave a comment

Negligent Towing – Failure to Control Your Trailer

Improperly securing a load or trailer can be very dangerous. When a driver loses control of their trailer or the load they are carrying shift, very serious accidents and injuries can result. This is more common in the spring and early summer in Minnesota as boating and farming activities increase. The Minnesota state patrol urges drivers to make sure The Minnesota State Patrol is investigating the accident and has urged drivers hauling trailers to make sure hitches are fitted properly on the ball and locking mechanisms are secured. Fault will generally lie with the driver of the vehicle and the owner of the vehicle for failing to operate the vehicle safely. Fault may also rest with the person who owns the trailer, or who secured the trailer or load prior to departure.

An example of this type of shared fault is found in a Minnesota Supreme Court case where a trailer with a 2-inch socket was attached by a supplier's employee to a customer's car which had a ball 1 7/8 inches in diameter and the employee at no time fastening the safety chains or coupling the brakes, and where the customer subsequently detached the trailer and reattached it to his car in the manner in which he observed the supplier's employee do it, but also attached the safety chains thereto, it was held that the supplier would be held liable for injuries to persons in an oncoming car which was struck by the trailer after it had become detached from the customer's car. The court noted that the safety chains which had been supplied by the employee and which had broken in the accident were far below the tensile strength required by statute, further held that even if the customer was negligent in furnishing his part of the attachment, or in attempting to attach the trailer on his own, this did not relieve the supplier from his negligence in furnishing defective parts which were the proximate cause of the trailer subsequently becoming detached. Kothe v. Tysdale, 46 N.W.2d 233 (Minn.1951).

Investigation will be very important in a case involving a loose trailer or a improperly secured load. The claims may very well go beyond simple negligence of the driver and include legitimate claims against those responsible for the load.

Paul Dahlberg

Paul R. Dahlberg is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 18 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. He is a member of the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and was a ten-year member of the Minnesota Trial Lawyers Association Board of Governors.

Contact Attorney Paul Dahlberg at p.dahlberg@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Investigation, Towing | Leave a comment

Should I give a statement to the insurance company?

Should I give a statement to the insurance company?

602.01 CERTAIN STATEMENTS PRESUMED TO BE FRAUDULENT.
Any statement secured from an injured person at any time within 30 days after such injuries were sustained shall be presumably fraudulent in the trial of any action for damages for injuries sustained by such person or for the death of such person as the result of such injuries. No statement can be used as evidence in any court unless the party so obtaining the statement shall give to such injured person a copy thereof within 30 days after the same was made.

When you've been injured in an accident the insurance company may want to take a "statement”.  They will ask you questions about how the accident happened and the extent of your injuries.  These statements can be very important in your case.   Information you provide in a statement can be used against you later in a deposition or at trial if you are not careful.  Sometimes the insurance company is looking for ways to avoid coverage under the insurance policies.  A savvy It is always a good idea to consult with an experienced injury lawyer before you speak to the insurance company or an investigator about your accident or injuries.

Paul Dahlberg

Paul R. Dahlberg is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 18 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. He is a member of the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and was a ten-year member of the Minnesota Trial Lawyers Association Board of Governors.

Contact Attorney Paul Dahlberg at p.dahlberg@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Investigation | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Hit and Run Cases and Accidents caused by an Unidentified or Phantom Vehicle.

"Uninsured motorist coverage” (also known as UM coverage) pursuant to Minnesota law explicitly includes a hit and run motor vehicle.” Minn. Stat. § 65B.43, subd. 18. Caselaw has held that the term "hit-and-run” is synonymous with an accident where the driver flees from the scene, even though no physical contact occurred between the phantom vehicle and the vehicle of the person making the uninsured motorist claim. Halseth v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 268 N.W.2d 730 (Minn. 1978).  Prior to 1975, the law allowed UM claims where the driver that caused the accident is unidentified, but the actual contact between colliding vehicles was required.  Minnesota law does not presently require physical contact with the phantom vehicle for an uninsured motorist claim to exist.  Heldt v. Truck Ins. Exchange, No., C7-94-1009, 1995 WL 1496 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995).

An important distinction exists, however, differentiating between "hit and run” situations which is "an accident causing damages where the driver flees from the scene” and situations where the driver at fault is unidentified because the claimant simply did not obtain the necessary information to be able to identify the defendant.  See Lhotka v. Illinois Farmers Ins. Co., 572 N.W.2d 772 (Minn. 1998) and Sao v American Family Ins. Group, C7-98-2010, 1999 WL 26213 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999).

Investigation is critical in UM cases involving hit and run or phantom vehicles.  Physical evidence and witness statements are crucial to the success of these claims, so fact gathering by an experienced personal injury lawyer is key.

Paul Dahlberg

Paul R. Dahlberg is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 18 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. He is a member of the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and was a ten-year member of the Minnesota Trial Lawyers Association Board of Governors.

Contact Attorney Paul Dahlberg at p.dahlberg@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Uninsured Motorist Coverage | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Children's Cases: Special rules apply to civil claims brought on behalf of minors

Anytime the plaintiff in a civil lawsuit is a minor (under 18), there are special rules which must be kept in mind.  Minnesota Statutes require certain procedures be followed when handling such a claim.  These rules affect the ethical obligations if the attorney requires court approval of all settlements, and affect the distribution of the proceeds after the case is resolved.

Court Approval of all Settlements

By law every settlement involving a child must be approved by the court.  This law is in place to protect the child's best interests from influence from insurance companies, attorneys, and parents.  It is also in place because minors cannot legally enter a binding contract.

Distribution of Funds

Any funds recovered on behalf of the child are placed in trust until the child turns 18.  These funds cannot be accessed without a court order.  Often they will be placed in a Certificate of Deposit (CD) or other conservative interest-bearing investment account at a local bank.  After turning 18, the funds are at the child's sole disposal and discretion.  Your lawyer will typically provide a referral to an investment counselor or financial institution that can provide advice to make the most of the child's asset once they reach adulthood.

Structured Settlements

A Structured Settlement is an agreement to make a series of partial payments over a period of years, rather than one lump sum payment.  In effect, agreeing to a structured settlement is like agreeing to let an insurance company invest the settlement proceeds.  Structures control the disbursement of proceeds even after the claimant is an adult, thereby reducing the likelihood that the asset will be squandered.  Structures can have significant tax benefits because not only is the original settlement not taxable, but the interest earned prior to disbursement may also be tax free.

An experienced personal injury attorney can help you understand what settlement options will be in the best interest of your child when resolving their civil claims.

Paul Dahlberg

Paul R. Dahlberg is an injury lawyer with the Rochester MN law firm of Patterson Dahlberg. For over 18 years he has helped hundreds of people in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa who have been seriously injured or lost loved ones in accidents. He is a member of the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and was a ten-year member of the Minnesota Trial Lawyers Association Board of Governors.

Contact Attorney Paul Dahlberg at p.dahlberg@pattersondahlberg.com or call 877-288-9122.

Posted in Children | Tagged , , | Leave a comment