Tragedy struck Greyhound, the nation’s largest intercity bus carrier, during a fatal crash in California last week.

Six people were killed and 20 others were wounded in the culmination of a series of even deadly events, according to the California Highway Patrol.

The ill-fated Greyhound bus was traveling from Los Angeles to Sacramento, and carrying 36 passengers, according to a report in the LA Times.

At around 2:00 in the morning, a Chevrolet Trailblazer traveling north on California Highway 99 in Fresno made an abrupt left turn from the right hand lane. This maneuver led the car straight into the median rail, causing the SUV to roll over and block the left-hand lane. Tragically, all three women in the Trailblazer were killed.

Shortly after the SUV rolled over, the Greyhound approached in the left-hand lane of Highway 99. Reports indicate that the overturned Trailblazer probably didn’t have its lights on, so the Greyhound driver did not see the obstacle until it was too late.

After striking the overturned car, the Greyhound bus careened off the highway and fell down a 15-foot embankment, eventually coming to rest after hitting a eucalyptus tree. In the aftermath of the crash, photos revealed eucalyptus limbs sticking out of large holes in the shattered bus.

The impact of the crash destroyed the front end of the bus, which killed the bus driver, James Jewett, who had driven for 32 years for Greyhound without a single incident. Two other bus passengers died.

According to the Sacramento Bee, Greyhound released a statement after the crash praising Jewett as “an excellent driver with a clean driving record.” Greyhound also described the former driver as a “very well-respected member of the Greyhound family.”

In addition to the death of Jewett and the three women who were in the overturned Trailblazer, another man and woman who were passengers in the bus were killed. Both were over the age of 60.

While bus travel is becoming increasingly popular, especially as the cost of a plane ticket rises, bus accidents are surprisingly common occurrences. Reports indicate that the Sacramento area alone has seen four fatal bus accidents in the last ten years. Across the country, thousands of people are injured in bus accidents every year.

If you have been injured in a bus accident, an experienced personal injury attorney may be able to help you seek a remedy for your injury.

In disturbing news for one of baseball’s most iconic mascots, a 75-year-old woman recently filed a personal injury lawsuit against the Phillie Phanatic for his antics during a minor league game.

According to the Philadelphia Daily News, the plaintiff, Grace Crass, alleges that the giant, green, furry creature lumbered through the stands and stepped onto her legs during a game in Reading, Pennsylvania.

She further claims that the pressure of the famous mascot on her legs triggered her previously dormant arthritis. After the incident, she had to receive knee replacements, though it is questionable whether the mascot’s antics directly led to this procedure.

Crass is seeking more than $50,000 in damages due to sports spectator injury from multiple defendants, including the Philadelphia Phillies, the Reading Phillies, and Tom Burgoyne, the man inside the Phillie Phanatic costume on that fateful day.

The plaintiff’s attorney, John Speicher, has maintained a sense of humor about the lawsuit. He claims his friends have teased him that “this is like suing Santa Claus.”

In addition, the plaintiff’s personal injury attorney is concerned about the type of responses the Phanatic will offer to the claim. Speicher anticipates that the Phanatic, upon arrival at the deposition, will merely “stick his stomach and tongue out at me and not say anything.”

According to a study published in the Cardozo Law Review, the Phillie Phanatic has been sued more often than any other mascot affiliated with major league baseball. The mascot has been sued at least three times, including a personal injury lawsuit stemming from an incident where a fan received an overly aggressive hug from the giant green mascot.

However, the researchers were quick to observe that the Phillie Phanatic’s lengthy history of lawsuits is likely attributable to the mascot’s unusual longevity. Most teams change their mascots frequently over the course of a few decades, but the Phillie Phanatic has held on for a long time due to the character’s popularity with fans.

Another theory is that the mascot’s large, bulky suit prevents the man inside the costume from having full range of motion, leading to awkward, potentially dangerous falls.

Of course, the mascot is also known for his wild antics, and the Phanatic’s need to top previous frenzied displays of baseball fervor could also explain the occurrence of several personal injury lawsuits.

In defense of the embattled character, Bob Jarvis, a professor of sports law who penned the law review article on the big green mascot, claims that the “Phanatic is a classic character” who is “part of the game of baseball.”

The outcome of the pending legislation against the beloved mascot may determine whether the Phillie Phanatic will continue to be a staple of Philadelphia baseball games.

A class action lawsuit could tarnish the shine of one of the world’s biggest brands.

The defective product lawsuit lists many complaints against the latest version of the Apple iPhone, as well as AT&T, the company which provides phone and data service to the phone’s users.

Filed by Maryland residents, the lawsuit alleges that Apple and AT&T are guilty of breach of warranty, deceptive trade practices, negligence, fraud, and misrepresentation.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, each complaint addresses the allegedly faulty design of the new iPhone 4’s antenna.

The lawsuit claims that the placement of the antenna within the iPhone’s metal frame renders cell phone reception poor for people who hold the phone by the left hand corner. Somehow, the complaint says, such use prevents the antenna from working properly.

The plaintiffs claim that both Apple and AT&T knew of the shoddy design before launching the sale of the new product.

Reports indicate that the personal injury plaintiffs have experienced multiple dropped calls as a result of the product’s design, and as a result the plaintiffs cannot use the phones for their marketed purpose: making calls.

According to the defective product lawsuit, the number of affected customers could reach into the millions. Thus, the suit was filed as a class action claim.

In an email to the technology website engadget, an Apple executive recommended the following remedy to its customers:

“If you ever experience this on your iPhone 4, avoid gripping it in the lower left corner in a way that covers both sides of the black strip in the metal band, or simply use one of many available cases.”

This response has only given fodder for further backlash against the company, as many customers complain that such advice simply blames the consumer for reception troubles, and frees Apple from any blame related to reception issues.

However, others claim that antenna attenuation is a common problem for cell phones, and that this is a frivolous lawsuit.

Further, according to the New York Times, the latest edition of the iPhone actually gets better reception than previous iterations of the popular device. In repeated consumer tests, reviewers reported an increase in the range of the cell phone’s reception capabilities.

In fact, the same Times article suggests that a bigger controversy surrounds the computer algorithm created by Apple that determines the number of digital reception bars that are placed in the corner of the screen.

Apple itself has admitted that this algorithm is wrong and has sometimes misrepresented the actual strength of the users’ reception.

While this suit may indeed be frivolous, it will soon have more company in court. In addition to the Maryland residents’ claim, at least three other lawsuits have been filed in response to the allegedly malfunctioning antennas.

Providing further hope for victims of sexual abuse, a lawsuit against the Vatican has leapt over another hurdle.

According to the Associated Press, the Supreme Court recently refused to stop a sexual abuse lawsuit filed by an Oregon man against the Vatican.

In the lawsuit, the accuser alleges that he was sexually abused as a teenager in Portland, Ore., by Rev. Andrew Ronan. According to sources, the Catholic Church had already transferred Rev. Ronan twice before, from Ireland to Chicago and then to Portland, in the wake of sexual abuse accusations.

The lawsuit says the Vatican acted irresponsibly by transferring the offending priest from city to city despite repeated allegations of sexual abuse.

In an effort to dismiss the case, the Vatican, operating under its legal name as the Holy See, appealed an appellate court decision allowing the case to proceed. However, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case, allowing the trial to move forward.

According to the Christian Science Monitor, the Vatican’s primary defense rests on the longstanding doctrine that sovereign foreign nations cannot be sued in American courts. Historically, the Vatican has been considered a sovereign foreign nation.

However, there is an exception to this rule. Under the Foreign Services Immunities Act, a foreign nation can be sued in a U.S. court if the illegal act was performed by an employee or official of the foreign country “while acting within the scope of his office or employment.”

Arguing against this exception, the Vatican claimed it could not be held responsible for the alleged acts of Rev. Ronan because his acts were completely unrelated to his employment as a priest.

Since sexual abuse is not part of a priest’s work for the Catholic Church, the Vatican should not be responsible for paying damages related to such acts.

In response, the accuser’s attorneys argued that the priest used his position as a member of the clergy to gain the trust of young boys. As a result of the access to children granted to him by the church, the priest was able to perform the alleged abusive acts.

After reviewing these competing claims, both the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, saying that the priest was serving as an employee of the Catholic Church at the time of the alleged sexual abuse.

As a result, the trial will move forward, and its outcome will likely have a significant impact on future lawsuits against the Catholic Church.

If you or a loved one has been a victim of sexual abuse, a personal injury attorney can help you navigate through the sensitive and complex issues such a case presents.