Rhode Island Injury Lawyer Blog

According to a new GMAC Insurance report, the answer is yes. GMAC conducted testing of average americans to see if they could pass a driver's test today, and found with startling results that we would not. Teenagers endure hours of driver's education to learn obscure rules of the road in order to pass a test that they will never have to take again. According to GMAC, without the pressure of ever being tested again, we become lazy and dangerous drivers. Drivers in the Northeast, Rhode Island in particular, are the worst.

The study concluded that 1 in 11 drivers, or roughly 18 million people, would fail a driver test if it were given to them today.

The report identifies pedestrians as a group particularly harmed by our inept driving. Roughly 1 in 3 drivers would not stop for a pedestrian in the road even if they are in a crosswalk or at a yellow light. This might explain why pedestrian accidents constitute the second largest category of auto accident related deaths in the US. 43% of all pedestrian injuries and 22% of fatal injuries to pedestrians occur in collisions with motor vehicles at intersections. In addition, many pedestrians are killed on sidewalks, median strips and traffic islands.

Another problem is the growing rise of texting while driving, which while illegal in Rhode Island, is almost impossible to police. Texting while driving is more dangerous than drunk driving and is causing an increase in the number of auto accidents and accident related injuries.

Continue reading "Are Rhode Islanders the Worst Drivers in the Country?" »

El abogado Joseph Lamy está aquí para ayudar a las víctimas de accidentes u otro daño corporal dentro de nuestras comunidades Latinas en Providence, Pawtucket, Fall River, Woonsocket, Central Falls y otras áreas a sus alrededores. En mi oficina se habla Español y podemos asistirle con todo el proceso, de principio a fin.

Soy un abogado licenciado para ejercer en Rhode Island y Massachussets. Mi especialidad son los casos de daño corporal, incluyendo: accidentes de auto, accidentes de camión, accidentes de motocicleta, lesiones causadas por resbalón y caída, muerte por negligencia, negligencia médica y la responsabilidad civil del fabricante. Soy un abogado muy atento y agresivo y manejo todos los casos personalmente, de principio a fin. Antes de graduarme de la escuela de Leyes de Boston College, trabajé para una compañía de seguros nacional como mediador de reclamos por lesión. Sé exactamente como las aseguradoras evalúan esos reclamos y sé como obtener la mayor cantidad de dinero disponible para su reclamo de lesión corporal.

Me enorgullezco en ofrecer un excelente servicio al cliente. Contesto todas las llamadas telefónicas y correos electrónicos que recibo dentro de veinticuatro horas. Me aseguraré que usted entienda todos sus derechos y opciones antes de decidir si llegar a un acuerdo en el caso. Aunque mi oficina se encuentra en el centro de Providence, siempre estoy dispuesto para una consulta a domicilio o para visitar a una víctima en el hospital.

Aunque mi portal en Internet esté escrito en Inglés, tengo una página que resume mis servicios legales en Español.

Si usted, un amigo o un familiar ha sido herido en un accidente de auto, de camión o de motocicleta, o debido a un resbalón y una caída, y está buscando un abogado para daños corporales que trabaje con talento y efectividad, llame de inmediato a mi oficina para recibir una consulta gratis.

Deciding which attorney or law firm will represent you for your personal injuries sustained in an auto, truck, or motorcycle accident is a huge decision. You should conduct research (the internet has made this incredibly easy) and even talk to a few attorneys before deciding who is best to handle your case. Regardless of which attorney or law firm you decide to hire for your personal injury, it is in your best interest to hire someone to represent you.

Years ago, before law school, I worked as an injury adjuster for a national insurance company. I can say with experience that insurance companies do not want you to hire an attorney because they know the settlement for a car or truck accident without an attorney will be much lower than if you hire an attorney. That is not to say that ALL insurance companies are evil corporations looking to rob and ignore injury victims (but I do believe that may be the mission statement for at least a few insurance companies!)

There is a series of television commercials in this state for a well-known law firm (I refrain from stating their name since their advertising budget is high enough and they do not need my help) which depicts an adjuster trying to coerce an unrepresented car accident victim into singing a release only to find out that they are represented by _______ law firm. Cut to the adjuster choking on some form of food.

While these commercial spots clearly take artistic license, it is true that insurance companies would prefer that you not hire an attorney for your car or truck accident. That is because insurance companies are in the business of making money, and they do this best by withholding money from injured victims. But if you really want the insurance company and adjuster to choke on their sandwich, you need to hire the right attorney.

Attorneys across the country attend seminars and buy books regarding the inner workings of insurance companies and how they evaluate auto or truck accident cases. I, on the other hand, was on the other side and know exactly what an insurance company will do to try an find flaws in your case and how they will ultimately evaluate your injury. This knowledge is essential to helping you obtain the best possible settlement for your car or truck accident injury.

A few things to consider and take away from this post:

• It is in your best interest to hire an attorney to represent you for injuries sutained in a car or truck accident


• insurance companies know who the best attorneys are, so it is imperative that you perform some research and hire an attorney with a great reputation


• if your injury is a minor one that required only minimal or no treatment, you might be able to work directly with the insurance company

Once you have chosen to hire an attorney for your car or truck accidednt, I have written an additional post which should help you understand the settlement process.

Continue reading "Hiring an Attorney for Your Auto, Truck, or Motorcycle Accident" »

We've discussed the effects of cell phones (talking, texting, etc) in automobiles in past posts. Rhode Island is one of the many States to ban texting while driving but a recent report suggests that such laws may be ineffective in preventing auto accidents. The study compared auto accident statistics between States that have enacted cellphone bans and those States that have not enacted such bans and found little evidence that the laws were effective.

The growing concern comes amidst a University of Utah study which indicated that using a cell phone while driving was as dangerous, if not more dangerous, than driving drunk. Earlier this week Transportation Secretary,Ray LaHood, recently announced laws to prevent cell phone use by commercial truck drivers and bus drivers. However, effective efforts to curb cell phone use by the majority of drivers continues to be slow.

There is now substantial evidence that cell phones adversely affect drivers and can lead to auto accidents. If you have been involved in an auto accident and believe that the other driver was distracted by cell phone use, tell the police of your suspicion or attempt to secure eyewitnesses who can confirm the other driver was on the phone. This may help your case if liability (fault) for the auto accident is not already clear.

Continue reading "Cellphone Bans While Driving May not Prevent Auto Accidents" »

A number of agencies are reporting about a new study regarding the effect of auto accidents on pregnant women. The study gathered data on tissue composition and the dimensions of pregnant women to help design new ways to protect expectant mothers in automobiles. After reading the article, I thought that this was a subject that warrants discussion.

There are no clear statistics regarding the number of fetuses lost each year due to auto accidents but researchers believe that the number is in the thousands. Auto accidents, even relatively minor ones, are very serious for pregnant women. It is imperative that you ALWAYS seek medical attention following an auto accident even if you feel fine.

Some complications that can occur for pregnant women following an auto accident are:

• pre-term labor (premature birth)


• hemorrhaging


• high-risk pregnancy


• birth defects


• miscarriage

There is also emotional distress following an accident which can cause injury to both the unborn fetus and the expecting mother. I recommend that any pregnant woman seek immediate medical help following an auto accident, but especially if you notice vaginal bleeding or leaking of fluid, severe abdominal pain, dizziness, persistent vomiting, or any other uncommon symptom since this can be evidence of a much more serious problem with the fetus.

Continue reading "Auto Accidents and Pregnant Women" »

All-terrain vehicles (ATV's) may be a great way to explore and enjoy the countryside, but they can also be extremely dangerous. Nationwide nearly 1000 people die each year and over 150,000 are seen at emergency rooms. Like motorcycles, ATV accidents often result in very serious injuries such as fractures, head injuries, internal bleeding, etc. This is because ATV drivers and passengers have very little protection.

Rhode Island and Massachusetts have their fair share of ATV related injuries and it is important to understand your rights and options following an ATV accident. Drivers of an ATV can not make a claim if the accident is their own fault, however, there are two common scenarios in which an ATV related accident can result in a successful claim:

1. The injured party is a passenger on the ATV. Since the driver is likely to be at fault for the accident, the passenger is without negligence and can collect from the insurance company of the driver or the owner of the ATV.
2. The ATV came into collision with another vehicle (or ATV) on an open road and was not at fault for the accident.

Today, several insurance companies offer coverage for ATV's. If the ATV is not separately insured, then the homeowner's insurance may cover the loss. If there is coverage, damages can be obtained similar to an auto accident:

• Medical Bills


• Lost Wages


• Scarring


• Pain and Suffering


• Permanent Injury

Continue reading "ATV Accidents" »

Rhode Island residents injured in an auto accident in Massachusetts may have been told that Massachusetts is a no-fault State. The next reaction is to ask - What does that mean? This is a question I am asked quite frequently since our lovely State is so small it is not uncommon for Rhode Island drivers to find themselves in a car crash in Massachusetts.

No-fault liability is a program in which injured people collect money (for medical bills and lost wages) directly from their own insurance company regardless of who was at fault. This program is what is commonly referred to as PIP, or personal injury protection. It does not mean that the person who rear-ended you is not at fault for the accident. It is simply a program intended to reduce the number of lawsuits by allowing people to collect money from their own insurance company.

The benefit of a no-fault system is that it allows an at-fault driver to be compensated for his or her injuries. The drawback is that it limits the ability of an injured person, not at fault for the accident, to sue for damages. It should also be noted that PIP does not pay damages for pain and suffering.

An injured person, not at fault for the accident, can still bring a claim against the at-fault driver so long as the injury meets certain thresholds. In other words, if the injury is serious enough (i.e. scarring, fractures, etc) or the medical bills are greater than $2000.00, the injured party meets the injury threshold and can bring a claim against the at-fault driver.

In a nutshell - if you are seriously injured in an auto accident in Massachusetts, the no-fault laws will not seriously affect your claim. If, however, the injury is minor and the treatment minimal, you may be compensated solely by PIP.

Continue reading "Massachusetts is a "No Fault" State - What Does That Mean?" »

It's been a tough week for cell phone manufacturers and service providers. Recently, Rhode Island officially banned texting while driving, and today brings news of a product liability suit against cell phone manufacturer, Samsung, and service provider, Nextel.

In September of 2008, Linda Doyle, was fatally killed in an automobile accident in Oklahoma City. Ms. Doyle was killed by a woman who ran a red light at 45 mph while talking on her cell phone. The family of Ms. Doyle has brought a product liability suit against Samsung and Nextel alleging that they marketed cell phones to drivers of automobiles while failing to adequately warn of the dangers of driving while on a cell phone.

Generally, a product liability case can be brought using one of three theories of negligence:

• The product design was defective;
• The product manufacturing was defective; or
• The product lacked adequate warning or instruction.

This lawsuit clearly falls into the latter category. Similar cases have been brought in the past and failed when the defense successfully argued that people are aware of the danger of using cell phones while driving. I feel terrible for the family but believe they have an uphill battle in this case. If cases such as this are successful, it could open the door to quite a number of liability cases against cell phone manufacturers and service providers.

Continue reading "Samsung and Nextel Sued Following a Fatal Car Accident" »

The State legislature has passed a new law that allows officers to force drivers suspected of being under the influence AND are involved in accidents that cause death or serious bodily injury, to submit to a blood alcohol test.

Rhode Island law holds that any driver on a public road gives consent to a breathalyzer test if suspected of DUI. Drivers, however, can refuse to take the test. Refusal to take the breathalyzer will result in a separate charge from the DUI and will result in a loss of license, but may help avoid a DUI conviction.

This new State law denies the driver's right to refusal when the suspected DUI has led to an accident involving serious bodily injury or death. The law will really aid the prosecution for the heightened charges of R.I.G.L. 31-27-2.2 "driving under the influence of liquor or drugs, resulting in death."

I will be curious to see where the fine line is drawn in regards to "serious bodily injury." What will it take for an injury to be deemed serious enough to give the officer power to force the suspected drunk driver to submit to the chemical test. I am willing to bet that this will be the subject of much litigation in the coming years.

Rhode Island legislators are happy to have this law passed in time for the Thanksgiving weekend when a higher percentage of drunk drivers are on the road. Everyone be careful out there this weekend.

Continue reading "New Rhode Island Law Compels Blood Alcohol Testing" »

The article, "Driven to Distraction", reports that a federal study investigating the true danger of cellphone use in automobiles, was shelved to avoid a confrontation with Congress.  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, given the task of research was hesitant to become a lobby group, and chose not to release the findings.  After a freedom of Information Act filing, the information has become public.

According to their findings, "motorists talking on a phone are four times as likely to crash as other drivers, and are as likely to cause an accident as someone with a .08 blood alcohol content."  In total, the highway safety researchers estimate that cell phone use caused 955 fatalities and 240,000 accidents in 2002.

The use of cell phones, either to talk or to text, greatly increase the risk of an accident and should be discussed with your attorney when determining the liability for an auto accident.

The article, "Driven to Distraction", reports that a federal study investigating the true danger of cellphone use in automobiles, was shelved to avoid a confrontation with Congress.  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, given the task of research was hesitant to become a lobby group, and chose not to release the findings.  After a freedom of Information Act filing, the information has become public.

According to their findings, "motorists talking on a phone are four times as likely to crash as other drivers, and are as likely to cause an accident as someone with a .08 blood alcohol content."  In total, the highway safety researchers estimate that cell phone use caused 955 fatalities and 240,000 accidents in 2002.

The use of cell phones, either to talk or to text, greatly increase the risk of an accident and should be discussed with your attorney when determining the liability for an auto accident.

It  is the first and most obvious question to ask oneself if injured in an accident.  Because of my prior work experience as an adjuster for an insurance company, I seem to be asked this question an awful lot.  I have worked on both sides of an injury claim, previously for the insurance companies, and today for my injured clients.   So knowing how insurance companies evaluate claims, the question is often raised to me - does an attorney make a difference? Do I need a lawyer?

The simple answer, no surprise, is yes.  I do not give this answer simply to solicit business.  A good lawyer (and I include myself in this grouping) takes a case with the expectation that it will have to go to trial.  That said, evidence and all vital information is secured early, the theory of liability is well thought out, and the case is monitored from the onset to ensure that nothing goes wrong.  In so doing, a good lawyer gains leverage over the insurance companies.

In addition to protecting the strength of the case, a lawyer is necessary to secure a fair value for the injury suffered.  Adjusters are quick to say that they evaluate claims the same way whether a claimant has an attorney or not - and to some extent this is true.  If an injury is a relatively minor one, the evaluation will be approximately the same with or without an attorney.  If you have been seriously injured, however, you NEED an attorney to obtain fair value.  Insurance companies will make sometimes embarrassingly low offers for fractures or scarring, for example, and an unsuspecting claimant might accept such a number thinking it is a good deal.

Therefore, if you have been seriously injured in any kind of accident, hire an attorney to protect your rights and ensure that you receive full value for the injury suffered.  My office offers a free consultation and is open to discuss any questions you may have regarding the process.

Like many of you I have been following the tragic story of Kimberly Pisaturo who was killed by a school bus yesterday while walking to school.  Having brought her up, I offer my condolences to her family and friends for their loss.  But I mention this tragedy as a way of raising another topic, specifically, the way in which the media is quick to find fault with the victim.

The Projo article concerning this accident points out that Kimberly may have had a hooded sweatshirt on (suggesting that her vision was impaired), that she may have been looking down at her cell phone at the time of the accident, and that an Ipod was found on her person (both suggesting that she was distracted).  The latter is particularly ridiculous because it is certainly not worth mentioning that she had an Ipod if no one is sure that she was listening to music at the time of the accident.  To make matters worse, next to this article online is a link to another article stating "most agree Ipods and cell phones are "in" but they can be a distraction."

Does it reduce the tragedy if we walk away from the article believing it was the victim's fault? Is this article written by a defense attorney intent on painting a beneficial picture?

I was involved in a high profile case in Boston as well, in which a student was struck by a passing vehicle.  Similar to this story, the Boston Globe highlighted how the student was listening to an Ipod at the time of the accident and according to witnesses, was not paying attention.  The comment section of the newspaper was in a frenzy blaming the victim!

Reporters please - present the facts as you find them, but realize that if the victim is unable to speak for him or herself, then you are presenting an imbalanced version of events.