The parents of a 12-year-old boy who was killed in a car crash that was caused by a 14-year-old driver who was driving illegally at the time have filed a filed a car accident lawsuit against the teenage driver, according to a report from WSBT News.

The wrongful death lawsuit was filed in St. Joseph Superior Court in Indiana by Randi and Kent Downhour, whose young son, Corey, was killed last December in the tragic car accident.

Sources indicate that the lawsuit was filed against John Sult, who was driving an SUV on December 10 when it veered off an Indiana road and rolled several times. The accident killed Corey Downhour, who was riding without a seatbelt in the back seat.

According to the lawsuit, Sult was driving without a license and he was driving at an unsafe speed. The lawsuit claims that Sult “lost control of the vehicles and crashed into an embankment” as a direct “result of his negligence.”

Despite the parents’ certainty about the cause of the crash, they are still not sure who owned the car, how the teenager got the keys, and how he was able to gain control of the SUV.

And, according to the Downhour’s car accident attorney, the parents filed the lawsuit to learn what happened that night because, thus far, “[n]o one really knows the truth.”

Speculation in the local community has raised questions about whether Sult’s 17-year-old friend gave him permission to drive his car, although this person’s name has not been released, and prosecutors have not pressed charges against him.

Sources suggest that the Downhours have not been able to access information gathered by police during their investigation into the crash. The police investigation is still active, so the parents may not be able to learn this information for several months as it’s reviewed by local prosecutors.

By filing the lawsuit, the Downhours will be able to subpoena witnesses and depose various parties who might be able to offer more information about the events that led to their son’s tragic lawsuit.

In the words of the family’s attorney, “sometimes a lawsuit is the only way to get over” what they perceive as an informational “brick wall.”

Of course, the Downhours are also looking for some compensation for their loss, including damages for the cost of their son’s funeral, the loss of their child’s companionship, and the cost of their own psychiatric counseling.

This week, a judge approved a $1.9 million personal injury settlement for the son of a man who fell to his death from a Houston roller coaster in 2011, according to a recent report from the Houston Chronicle.

Sources indicate that, one year ago, Brian Greenhouse roughly 30 feet from a roller coaster at the Houston rodeo. The fall eventually killed the 47-year-old father of one, and the cause of the accident still remains in dispute, although the victim’s family claimed the ride’s restraint system was faulty.

Under the terms of the settlement, the rodeo admitted no liability, although it will provide more than $2 million in living expenses for Greenhouse’s surviving son.

The son, who is now 7 years old, will not receive the payment in one lump sum. The settlement money will be held in two annuities that reportedly guarantee $2.9 million in future benefits. If the boy lives a young life, he could collect up to $4 million.

According to sources, the personal injury award will give the boy $29,000 each year after he turns 18 for college, almost $20,000 for graduate school, and a $750 per month stipend for eight years starting in August 2022.

And the money extends beyond education. Sources say that, when the child turns 25, he will receive a guaranteed sum of $5,000 per month for 30 years. And this money is reportedly guaranteed.

He will also receive eight large lump sum payments (ranging from $50,000 to $200,000 during specific years between the ages of 25 and 60.

This is all to say that the family’s personal injury attorney did a commendable job of compensating Greenhouse’s family for the premature loss of their father. Still, though, the money is a small consolation for a 7-year-old boy who lost his father at such an early age.

The lawsuit was filed by Greenhouse’s ex-wife, Nirvana Hightower, who sued on behalf of her son. In the lawsuit, the family accused the rodeo of negligence, premises liability, and negligent hiring of a carnival ride operator.

Sources say the lawsuit asked for compensatory damages for the child for “premature termination of the parent-child relationship, including loss of the love, comfort, companionship and society that young Isaiah would, in reasonable probability, have received from his father had he lived.”

In addition to the son’s personal injury award, Greenhouse’s parents are also expected to receive more than $300,000 in damages, although the judge was quick to note that he wanted the majority of the damages to go to Greenhouse’s young son.

Two black men from Nashville have filed a racial discrimination lawsuit against “The Bachelor,” ABC’s wildly popular television series, for its allegedly discriminatory selection process, according to a recent report from Entertainment Weekly.

Sources say the class action lawsuit was filed this week by Nathaniel Claybrooks and Christopher Johnson, both football players from Tennessee.

The two men claim that they are filing a lawsuit against ABC, Bachelor executive producer Mike Fleiss, and the show’s three production companies on behalf of “all persons of color who have applied for the role of The Bachelor or Bachelorette but been denied the equal opportunity for selection on the basis of race.”

This lawsuit was announced this week through a press release distributed by the two men’s injury attorney. The release claimed that, “[o]ver a combined total of 23 seasons, neither show has ever had a Bachelor or Bachelorette of color.”

This claim, if true, would seem to give Claybrooks and Johnson a fairly strong argument in court, but sources are quick to caution that the two men have a high burden of proof in their case.

However, one California attorney who is closely associated with the entertainment industry observes that such a legal action is unprecedented, but that a successful racial discrimination lawsuit could have a widespread impact on how reality television shows select their participants.

The attorney also suggested that the class action lawsuit is not hopeless, but one major obstacle for the plaintiffs is the fact that neither one has actually been a contestant on the show.

Since they have not actually been employees of the show or its producers, the plaintiffs will have a very difficult time proving that they faced discrimination in the workplace, and will have to take another legal route to prove their claim.

Sources suggest that the plaintiffs could interview former producers for the show and sift through internal memos and contestant applications to unearth the show’s selection practices.

One observer claimed that people in the entertainment industry routinely send candid, politically incorrect emails regarding selection practices to each other. So, if the plaintiffs could access some of these conversations, they may build a stronger case.

However, ABC must only prove that it made a good faith effort to recruit participants of color, and if it is able to do so, it will likely prevail in court.

Nevertheless, even if their lawsuit is unsuccessful, Claybrooks and Johnson will have brought attention to an issue that needs to be remedied.

In a tragic example of the perils of relying on technology for medical procedures, the father of a dead 24-year-old girl has filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the manufacturer of a surgical robot that allegedly caused the woman’s untimely demise.

According to a report from Market Watch, Gilmore McCalla claims in his lawsuit that the da Vinci surgical robot, which is manufactured by Intuitive Surgery Inc., botched a relatively simple procedure and caused his daughter’s death.

Sources say that McCalla’s daughter was having a routine hysterectomy in August 2010 in a Bronx hospital when the robot allegedly performed actions that caused burns to an artery and the woman’s intestines. She died from the injuries two weeks later.

In the personal injury claim, McCalla claims that the robot was afflicted by design flaws, including poorly structured surgical arm and the machine’s reliance on electrical current that can reach internal organs and tissues.

In addition, the lawsuit suggests that the doctors who used the da Vinci robot were not properly trained how to use the machine.
Moreover, McCalla claims that Intuitive Surgery was negligent in its failure to adequately test potential complications arising from the use of the robot.

Interestingly, the lawsuit also argues that Intuitive Surgery has hidden reports of complications arising from other surgical procedures performed by the robot, and it also claims that the company has painted an unfairly healthy picture of its machine’s safety to clinics and hospitals.

The introduction of surgical robots has dramatically changed the face of modern medicine. As the costs of these machines continue to drop, hospitals are finding that using the robots is, in the long run, potentially cheaper and safer than using surgeons for basic procedures.

Sources indicate that the Bronx hospital where McCalla’s daughter tragically died paid upwards of $2 million to purchase its da Vinci surgical robot.

Reports indicate that medical journals are full of anecdotal stories about other complications involving the da Vinci robot in surgeries ranging from hysterectomies to prostate surgery to other types of gynecologic operations.

Victims of these complications often experience injuries such as burns and tears to blood vessels, intestines, and other internal organs. When these injuries occur, though, they often take a few days to manifest themselves after the surgery.

And, while many hospitals have argued that surgical robots are completely safe, the recent spate of accidents has raised an important question: are these machines a suitable replacement for experienced, competent surgeons? Or do they pose unnecessary risks?

The family of a Georgia man who was killed in a car accident allegedly caused by a speeding police officer is asking a court for $5 million in personal injury damages in a car accident lawsuit filed last week.

Sources say that, in December 2006, a car driven by 52-year-old Willie Allan Sargent was struck by a patrol car that was being driven by Gwinnett County Officer James Stoudenmire, according to a report from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

According to reports, Sargent was attempting to turn left into a local restaurant in Snellville, Georgia, when his car was struck at a high speed by Stoudenmire’s police vehicle.

When the accident occurred, Stoudenmire was reportedly responding as a backup officer to a suspicious person complaint in Snellville, and he was traveling between 78 and 80 miles per hour. After the collision, sources say that Sargent immediately died at the scene.

However, despite his car’s high speed, Stoudenmire did not use his siren or emergency flashing lights, according to the lawsuit filed by Sargent’s family.

In response to the accident, though, a spokesman for the Gwinnett County Police Department initially denied the family’s claims.

Shortly after the accident, the spokesman claimed that Stoudenmire, who was 25 years old at the time of the accident, was driving under the speed limit, and that Sargent was at fault for failing to yield to oncoming traffic.

But a few days after this claim, the spokesman changed his tune and admitted that an investigation into the crash revealed that the officer was, in fact, speeding at the time of the collision.

After the investigation revealed that the young officer was at least partially responsible for the accident, the Gwinnett County Police Department officially reprimanded Stoudenmire and temporarily suspended him from police duties.

Interestingly, Stoudenmire’s reentry into the police force was short-lived. In 2009, the officer was arrested for drunk driving while he was off-duty. Because of his actions, the police department allowed Stoudenmire to resign in lieu of termination, according to sources.

The trial to determine whether Stoudenmire caused the accident starts this week. Sources expect the trial to last three or four days.

Observers expect the police department to argue that Sargent was responsible for the accident because he had consumed alcohol before the wreck, although the family’s personal injury lawyer is likely to argue that his alcohol consumption played an insignificant role in causing the collision.

The parents of a 15-year-old Utah girl who died from injuries suffered in a fluke car accident have filed a personal injury lawsuit against the Utah Department of Transportation, according to a report from The Salt Lake Tribune.

According to the family’s car accident lawsuit, which was recently filed in a Utah district court, Michael Barneck and his young daughter, Justine, were driving west on State Road 35 one evening last July when a horrible accident occurred.

Unbeknownst to the Barnecks, the road had suffered a severe collapse since they had last driven across it, which was about an hour before the accident. The road collapse created a broad chasm that was more than 20 feet deep and 30 feet wide, according to figures provided in the lawsuit.

While he was driving along the road, Barneck struck a piece of asphalt that had been raised when the road collapsed. The speed of Barneck’s Ford Excursion carried the vehicle over the hole, and it crashed on the other side, according to a police report from the Utah Highway Patrol.

In the accident, Barneck suffered serious injuries, while his daughter eventually died from injuries she suffered in the crash.

Sources say that another car had already driven into the hole from the opposite direction earlier than night. This driver also had serious injuries, but escaped with her life.

The exact cause of the chasm is a matter of some dispute in the lawsuit. Sources indicate that the road had collapsed “as a result of water that gradually backed up at the point where the creek passes under” State Road 35 near the town of Tabiona, Utah.

The lawsuit alleges that, earlier that day, workers for the Utah Department of Transportation had been working in a nearby area where a blocked culvert caused a massive pond of water that was roughly 20 feet deep on one side of the highway.

According to the lawsuit, these workers failed to “remedy the situation” and the Utah Department of Transportation negligently failed to leave an employee at the scene to monitor the situation and warn drivers of the “dangerous conditions created by the water and saturated fill.”

The lawsuit also claims that the Utah state agency acted negligently when it failed to post warnings around the area or install temporary lighting to warn drivers.

In their lawsuit, the parents of the 15-year-old girl who died in the accident are seeking more than $1 million in personal injury compensation.

The Catholic Church has been riddled with sexual abuse controversy for decades. Accusations and lawsuits against the clergy impact the church’s reputation, causing upset among church members. The abuse cases have cost approximately $2 billion and spurred changes in how the church addresses sexual abuse accusations.

Click to view full-size

Add this image to your site using the code below

<a href=”http://www.totalinjury.com/blog/how-sexual-abuse-cases-have-affected-the-churchs-reputation/” target=”_blank” title=”Catholic Sexual Abuse Scandal”><img title=”Catholic Church Sexual Abuse” src=”http://assets.totalinjury.com/infographics/catholic-church-sex-scandal-reputation.png” border=”0″ alt=”Impact of the Catholic Church Sexual Abuse Scandal”></a> from <a href=”http://www.totalinjury.com/” target=”_blank” title=”TotalInjury.com”>TotalInjury.com</a>

*Please use the above code unaltered or include a citation of this site as the original source.

First Public Case and Response

Abuse accusations against the Catholic Church have become increasingly public over the last several decades.

1985: First Public Case of Abuse

• Rev. Gilbert Gauthe, Louisiana
• Convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison for molesting 35 children
• Case spurred additional sexual abuse accusations of priests

1992: First Response by the Catholic Church

• United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
• Policy recommendations for bishops to address sexual abuse cases

Noteworthy Cases: United States

Further accusations of sexual abuse against the church continued occurring after 1992. Below are noteworthy cases within the United States.

2002: Boston, MA

• Rev. John J. Geoghan
• Accused of abusing more than 130 boys over 3 decades
• Priest was transferred among 6 parishes

2005: Boston, MA

• Former Priest, Rev. Paul R. Shanley
• Convicted of rape and assault as a parish priest in the 1980s

2005: Philadelphia, PA

• Grand Jury found cases of abuse by 63 priests that were not addressed by the church
• No indictments because the statute of limitations ran out

2011 Philadelphia, PA

• 4 indicted on rape and assault charges:
• Father Charles Engelhardt
• Father James Brennan
• Bernard Shero (parochial school teacher)
• Edward Avery (former priest)
• Msgr. William Lynn indicted on charges of endangering children’s welfare
• First time a senior church member was charged with hiding abuse in a United States case.

2011: Kansas City, MO

• Bishop Robert Finn indicted for failure to report child abuse
• First time the leader of an American diocese was criminally liable for priests’ behaviors
• Bishop Finn settled lawsuit with 47 plaintiffs for $10 million
• Public reaction: outrage

Noteworthy Cases: Europe

The United States was not the only place the Catholic Church came under attack. In 2010, charges of abuse surfaced throughout Europe in Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Ireland. [1]

Germany

• Rev. Peter Hullermann
• 1970s: Sexual abuse accusations
• Within his parish near Essen
• 1986: Convicted of molestation
• 18-month suspended sentence
• 5 years probation
• Fined 4,000 marks
• Continued to work with children
• 1998: Sexual abuse accusations
• In his parish in Garching
• 2010: Suspended form his duties
• German Church: “Mistakes were made in his case”

The Netherlands

• 2010:
• Close to 2,000 people alleged sexual and physical abuse against the church
• Catholics living in the Netherlands accounted for 1/4th of the population
• Cardinal Adrianus Simonis’ response: “We knew noting”

Belgium

• 2010:
• Roman Catholic Bishop resigned after admitting to sexually abusing children
• 13 victims reportedly committed suicide as a result of abuse by clerics
• Belgian Church’s Response: Agreed to compensate alleged victims of clerics

Ireland

• 2009 Report from Irish Government
• Church and police covered up sexual abuse by priests in Dublin
• Report chronicled sexual, emotional, and physical abuse of orphans and foster kids within church-run residential schools
• 2010 Disclosure
• Cardinal Sean Brady coerced 2 boys 35 years ago into covering up their abuse allegations by an Irish priest
• 2010 Reaction by the Pope: “Shame and remorse for sinful and criminal acts” committed by clergy

Where the Church Currently Stands

With continued controversy and allegations of sexual abuse, the Catholic Church has taken steps to right the wrongs of the past and make amends with the Catholic community.

Vatican’s Response

• Vatican directed bishops to prioritize, address, and prevent the sexual abuse by its clerics (2011)
• Directives not binding in church law
• No enforcement procedures or punishments

United States Bishops

• In 2011, bishops voted to keep the 2002 “zero tolerance” guidelines in place with minor changes
• Victims’ advocates called for bigger changes

“Toward Healing and Renewal”

• 4-day symposium in February 2012
• Attended by more than 100 bishops, 30 religious superiors, Catholic university rectors, and abuse victims
• Areas of discussion:
• How the church can better serve victims
• Create a consistent response to abuse
• Stop future cases of abuse

Conclusion

The Catholic Church has undergone a shaking in the last several decades with sexual abuse charges and accusations in the United States and Europe. Progress has been made in addressing the crimes, and the entire church community is working together to improve the church’s reputation and the future of Catholicism.

Celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay, who is known for his combative demeanor on various cooking shows, is reportedly filing a personal injury lawsuit against a former restaurant associate for allegedly defamatory remarks directed at the chef.

Ramsay filed the lawsuit last week against Danny Lavy, who was formerly a business partner with Ramsay and helped the chef open Montreal’s Laurier BBQ restaurant, according to a report from the Washington Post.

The lawsuit also includes allegations that Lavy wrongfully kept licensing fees from Ramsay after the two split from their business partnership. In the suit, Ramsay is asking for $2.25 million in lost licensing fees, as well as $500,000 in compensation for the alleged defamation.

The lawsuit stems from events that occurred this February, when Lavy abruptly canceled his contract with Ramsay and changed the name of their restaurant from Laurier Gordon Ramsay to The Laurier 1936.

Ramsay, however, objected to this decision, claiming that the pair had agreed that Ramsay’s name would remain affixed to the marquee for ten years, unless the restaurant declared bankruptcy or failed to make at least $4 million in net sales during the first five years it was open.

In his defense, Ramsay claims that the restaurant met the sales goals, and it did not file bankruptcy, and that he is entitled to recover the lost licensing fees because he met all the obligations listed under the original licensing agreement.

Despite these claims, Lavy remains defiant, and his comments made to the Montreal Gazette when announcing the changes at the restaurant paint Ramsay in a very negative light. It is for these comments that Ramsay has leveled the defamation charges.

Specifically, the lawsuit claims that Lavy told the Montreal Gazette that Ramsay was “too busy to come to the restaurant,” and that he did not offer any expertise that the restaurant’s staff couldn’t have provided on its own.

In addition to these remarks, Lavy also apparently told the newspaper that Ramsay refused to do promotion efforts for the restaurant, did not have a substantial impact on the menu, and did not understand the other owners’ vision for the eatery.

While these remarks seem relatively innocuous, Ramsay calls them “false and defamatory” and believes that Lavy’s words have significantly harmed the value of Ramsay’s own brand.

In the words of Ramsay’s personal injury attorney, “[n]egative and critical public comments regarding the plaintiff could have the effect of decreasing the commercial value of his name and any commercial ventures associated with it.”

In one of the strangest lawsuits this humble correspondent has ever seen, a couple in Portland, Oregon recently won a $2.9 million medical malpractice settlement after alleging the doctors negligently allowed their baby, which was born with Down syndrome, to be born.

The couple alleged that doctors failed to evaluate whether their baby had Down syndrome. The parents claim that they would have terminated the pregnancy if they know about their baby’s chromosomal problems, according to a report from the New York Daily News.

In a jury trial, an Oregon jury found five separate instances of negligence on the part of Legacy Health System. The most important instance of negligence, according to the jury, was doctors’ claim to Ariel and Deborah Levy that their unborn child did not have any chromosomal problems.

The chromosome test for the baby, according to sources, was performed incorrectly, which led parents to continue with the birth of their child.

And, despite later tests that suggested that baby may have some chromosomal abnormalities, the doctors with Legacy Health System continued to insist that the baby was perfectly normal.

Despite these assurances, the Levys discovered their baby had Down syndrome about a week after the baby was born. Sources indicate that doctors had taken samples of the wrong kind of tissue when performing the Down syndrome test before the baby was born.

The Levys, somewhat predictably, have faced intense media scrutiny of their court battle and, while they say they would not have had the baby had they known of its syndrome, their personal injury attorney notes that they “love this little girl very, very much.”

In addition, their attorney notes that the couple’s goal in going to court was simply to gather enough funds to care for their four-year-old child with Down syndrome. In the words of their attorney, “[t]heir mission since the beginning was to provide for her and that’s what this is all about.

While they originally filed a lawsuit for $7 million in order to cover her medical costs for the duration of her life, jurors only awarded $2.9 million, although this sum will go a long way towards covering the costs of their special needs child.

Not surprisingly, Legacy Health System was not pleased with the verdict. After the results of the case were announced, the health care provider said that, “[w]hile Legacy Health has great respect for the judicial process, we are disappointed in today’s verdict.”

An Ohio college student has filed a federal police brutality lawsuit against a police officer who allegedly tasered her in the chest, despite the fact that the woman was only 5’2” and weighed 90 pounds.

According to a report from Patch.com, 23-year-old Chelsea Garrett was pulled over for reckless driving last November by Office Jesse Reedy, a police officer in Stow, Ohio.

Sources indicate that Garrett was disoriented while she was driving and allegedly caused an accident, fled from the scene, and almost ran into a police cruiser. After the accident, Garrett, a diabetic, admits that her disorientation was heightened by some cold medicine she had taken that day.

Nevertheless, her driving exploits were not what really got her into trouble. When she was pulled over, Garrett left her car and started approaching Reedy.

When she was within an arm’s length of Reedy, the officer reportedly knocked Garrett to the ground and then Tasered her at least twice. According to Garrett, a college student in Akron, the officer “punched her in the chest” with the Taser.

The officer disputes the claim that he punched Garrett in the chest, but sources say that footage taken from a camera in the police cruiser show Reedy knocking Garrett down, although the image is a bit out of frame.

After an investigation, the Stow Police Department cleared Reedy, who has served with that department for almost five years, of any wrongdoing in the incident.

But, after pleading guilty to her reckless driving charges, Garrett is looking for personal injury relief in the form of a police brutality lawsuit.

Her lawsuit may question the testimony of Reedy, who claims that he was concerned that, despite her small stature, Garrett could still “scratch” or “bite” him.

Key to his claim, though, is his report that Garrett refused to obey his orders when he told her to stop approaching him. Garrett’s alleged refusal to obey Reedy’s orders gave the Stow Police Department reason to forgive Reedy for his use of his Taser.

According to the committee that handled the investigation, “[i]f an officer perceives a threat through the totality of circumstances, he/she does not have to wait until they are harmed to deploy the Taser,” the committee said in its ruling.

Despite this belief, sources suggest that Garrett was clearly “hesitant and confused” when she left her car. Sources also say that her struggle with Reedy looked “pretty feeble.”

In her lawsuit, Garrett will try to prove to the court that the police could have easily handcuffed her instead of using a drastic, dangerous tool like a Taser.

This week, British Petroleum reached a massive settlement with businesses and individuals who had filed lawsuits after the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, but a much larger battle with the federal government will soon be fought.

BP and businesses and individuals affected by the giant oil spill have agreed to the terms of a settlement that would provide a total of $7.8 billion in personal injury compensation for those victimized by the environmental disaster, according to a report from Reuters.

The deal was announced this week by BP and the Plantiffs’ Steering Committee, which represented thousands of injured claimants, including fisherman, hotel and restaurant owners, homeowners, and other people who claimed they suffered damages from the oil spill created by the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig.

The settlement has temporarily delayed a planet-sized trial between BP and various parties, which have now been whittled down to an angry federal government.

That, of course, is the bad news for BP, which must still contend with its biggest legal opponent, the United States. Sources indicate that the U.S. government hopes to level billions of dollars in extra penalties against the London-based oil company.

The battle between BP and the government will take place in a New Orleans federal court, and will likely drag on for several months, given the extreme nature of the violations BP is accused of committing.

The 2010 explosion of the drilling rig killed eleven people and eventually led to the release of 4.9 million barrels of oil from the Macondo well. The spill was, by a large margin, the worst offshore oil disaster in U.S. history.

The spill led to riveting news coverage, as film crews captured stunning images of oil sweeping across the Gulf of Mexico, eventually settling in the sands and soil of the beaches of the states located along the Gulf.

These states, in fact, also represent another legal challenge to BP. Sources indicate that the five states with oil-laden coastlines have also filed lawsuits against BP and its partners.

The personal injury settlement agreement will dramatically change the face of the current trial in New Orleans. According to U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier, the settlement “would likely result in a realignment of the parties in this litigation and require substantial changes” to the current proceedings.

Judge Barbier, who will lead the trial that experts say could go through 2012, set no date for the trial to begin again, and sources indicate that he has yet to officially approve the settlement between BP and the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.

The family of a California teenager who was killed in a grisly 2006 car accident recently reached a personal injury settlement with the California Highway Patrol for its role in releasing graphic photos of the crash.

The family had claimed that the Highway Patrol was responsible for the leak of the photos, which quickly gained a large online audience, according to a report from the Los Angeles Times.

In 2006, 18-year-old Nicole Catsouras was involved in a deadly car accident that dramatically disfigured her body. Sources indicate that the impact of the crash crumpled her father’s Porsche, and nearly decapitated the young driver.

At the scene, following standard protocol, Highway Patrol investigators took several pictures of Catsouras’ body. These pictures, however, were never intended to become publicly available.

Sources say that these compromising pictures were eventually leaked to the public by two dispatchers with the highway patrol and rapidly spread to several websites online.

In response to the dispatcher’s unprofessional behavior, the family of Nicole Catsouras filed a personal injury lawsuit against the California Highway Patrol, although the lawsuit initially looked to be a lost cause.

Soon after the claim was filed, a judge in Orange County Superior Court dismissed the family’s lawsuit, claiming that the agency did not breach any legal duty that it owed to the family. At the time of the lawsuit, California did not allow family members to recover damages for an alleged invasion of privacy due to the release of pictures of dead people.

In 2010, however, the family won an appeal of the trial court’s decision, as the appellate court determined that surviving family members of the deceased do, in fact, have a right to sue for an invasion of privacy after such an incident.

After this ruling, the California Highway Patrol apparently did not like its position if the lawsuit went to trial again, and the agency agreed to reach a settlement with the grieving family.

Under the terms of the settlement, the Highway Patrol agreed to cooperate with the Catsouras family as they fight to remove the images of their dead daughter that remain on the Internet.

Images of Catsouras proliferated widely after they were released. She crashed her father’s Porsche after she took it without his permission. Before the crash, she was allegedly driving faster than 100 miles per hour on an Orange County highway.

Catsouras eventually struck another car and slammed into a toll booth, which caused her graphic fatal injuries.

Critics of Rick Santorum recently derided the Republican presidential candidate for his allegedly hypocritical views on medical malpractice lawsuits, according to a report from ABC News.

Santorum, sources say, has frequently called for limits on the amount of damages injured people can seek in a medical malpractice lawsuit, but twelve years ago, his wife Karen sued her chiropractor for a half million dollars.

His wife’s lawsuit, which was filed after the chiropractor allegedly injured her back, claimed that the injury caused her pain and prevented her from being able to campaign for her politician husband.

Santorum claims that his wife is free to make her own choices (a very noble admission on his part), but he wasn’t a completely innocent bystander during the 1999 lawsuit, as sources say he testified in court to support her case.

According to ABC News, Karen Santorum alleged in her medical malpractice claim that Dr. David Dolberg started treating her for back pain soon after she lost her newborn son.

In her lawsuit, Santorum alleged that Dr. Dolberg made the issue worse by herniating one of the disks in her back, which eventually led her to have surgery to repair the tear.

After a trial, the jury awarded Karen Santorum a $350,000 personal injury settlement, although a court later reduced her total recovery to $175,000, still a very healthy sum.

The end of the trial brought a storm of criticism from observers on both the left and right sides of the political spectrum, although, predictably, the left seemed a bit more upset.

Democrats were especially upset because, while in the U.S. House, Santorum had sponsored a bill that would have limited plaintiffs in medical malpractice to just $250,000 in non-economic damages. Democrat strategic James Carville labeled Santorum a “world class hypocrite” for supporting his wife’s lawsuit seeking $500,000.

In his defense, Santorum claimed that he was always “going to support my wife in her endeavors,” but he qualified that remark by observing “[t]hat doesn’t necessarily mean that I agree with everything that she does.”

While Santorum certainly can’t be blamed for supporting his wife’s efforts to gain legal relief for her injuries, this story raises a common obstacle for people who wish to place caps on medical malpractice damages.

It’s much easier to support stern caps on malpractice lawsuits when the decision is made in a vacuum, but when a loved one suffers a debilitating injury due to negligent medical treatment, even the harshest critic recognizes the value of seeking adequate compensation.

Lindsay Lohan, a frequent contributor to news headlines across the country, made more news a few years ago for allegedly striking a nanny pushing a stroller across a Los Angeles road .Today, that incident may be coming back to haunt her.

The nanny in question, Nubia Del Carmen Preza, has filed a car accident lawsuit against Lohan, asking for an unspecified amount of damages for her injuries, according to a recent report from MTV.com.

The alleged accident happened back in September 2010, when Lohan allegedly ran a red light in West Hollywood, California, during which she struck Preza, who was pushing a stroller across the intersection when Lohan stormed through it.

Of course, this being Hollywood, a key witness to the accident was an aspiring paparazzi photographer, Brayan Jaime.

After the accident, Jaime told the website TMZ.com that the collision between Lohan’s car and Preza qualified as a “major hit.” He also told the website that the front bumper of Lohan’s sports car hit the nanny in the leg and lifted three of the stroller’s four wheels into the air.

Despite this alleged collision with the stroller, though, Jaime claimed that the child did not appear to be injured, but he did not offer any information on Preza’s condition after the incident.

Some enterprising reporter wisely asked Jaime why he didn’t call the police immediately after he saw the “major hit,” but the photographer claimed that he didn’t have a good reason. He admitted that he should have contacted authorities, but said he “didn’t want to get involved.”

After the incident, rumors circulated that Jaime and another member of the paparazzi had camera footage of the accident, but no news outlet had verified this claim. Of course, after Preza files the personal injury lawsuit, any video footage that exists may come to light.

At press time, sources did not offer any definitive word on whether Preza suffered long-term injuries after the crash.

Some observers are also skeptical about Preza’s claim because she waited for several months before filing the lawsuit, and she did not press criminal charges against Lohan at the time of the accident.

Courts usually eye lawsuits against wealthy celebrities with some degree of healthy skepticism, particularly if the lawsuit comes years after the alleged injury was suffered.

Nevertheless, the court will take the claim seriously, and won’t rush to judgment before all the facts are available. Lohan, who has been in and out of trouble for the last several years, is surely hoping that the facts are ultimately in her favor.

Giant drug maker Pfizer could soon face a deluge of defective drug lawsuits after the company’s embarrassing recall of more than one million birth control pills left thousands of female customers nervous about potential pregnancies.

The pills are advertised as offering almost 100 percent protection against pregnancy, but this rate of success is dependent on the customer taking the pills in the proper order.

To Pfizer’s chagrin, a recent shipment of birth control pills contained pills that were placed in each package in the wrong order, a terrible mistake that led to the massive recall, according to a report from CBS News.

Typically, women take 21 birth control pills with active pregnancy-preventing ingredients that are intermixed with seven placebo pills. The pills are typically color-coded and women are instructed to not to mix the placebo pills with the active pills.

In theory, if the pills are out of order, the company’ manufacturing error could lead some consumers to take the birth control pills in the wrong order, thereby raising their risk of getting an unwanted pregnancy.

Users of Pfizer’s products, however, should not be too alarmed. According to sources, the only drug that was affected was Lo/Ovral-28 and its generic equivalent, and the company estimates that only 30 packets of the drug were flawed.

So, even though the company believes only a handful of drugs were flawed, Pfizer took extreme caution in recalling more than one million birth control pills.

And, in more good news for consumers, the recalled drug is not a particularly popular form of birth control, as it ranks 64th in the country in total sales. The generic version of the drug, though, is ranked in the top 30, according to CBS News.

People who use Lo/Ovral-28 should immediately contact their doctors to learn what steps they need to take to get back on reliable birth control pills.

In addition, users of Lo/Ovral-28 who are curious about whether they can file a defective drug lawsuit against Pfizer must recognize one important thing: for a customer to file a tort claim against the company, she must be able to prove that she suffered an actual injury.

Of course, the actual injury need not be a pregnancy—the fear of pregnancy could suffice, but such a clam would likely be a shot in the dark. The limited number of actually defective products will likely limit the number of personal injury claims that Pfizer will have to face.

Nevertheless, if you use Lo/Ovral-28 and are concerned about the potential consequences of the drug, contact a local injury attorney today for more information about your legal options.