For many people, Google’s map services have replaced traditional maps as the primary way to figure out how to get from Point A to Point B. With directions for cars, pedestrians, cyclists and public transportation users, Google Maps have been a useful resource for millions of people.

The ubiquitous service, however, is not without its critics. A woman who resides in Utah recently lost a personal injury lawsuit against the technology giant after she claimed Google Maps led her down a dangerous path.

The woman, Lauren Rosenberg, alleged that she relied on walking directions given by Google Maps and suffered a severe injury after being struck by a car as a result.

Rosenberg claimed that Google Maps wrongfully led her down a rural highway that did not have sidewalks or proper lighting, putting her at a heightened risk for potential run-ins with vehicles. She was traveling at night and it was apparently dark at the time of the alleged accident.

According to sources, Rosenberg accrued medical expenses of more than $100,000 as a result of being struck by the car.

Rosenberg claimed that Google was negligent in directing her to take a dangerous route. She also claimed that she relied on Google’s directions when plotting her trip.

In its defense, Google argued that it did not owe her a duty because it did not have a specific legal relationship with every individual Google Maps user.

Perhaps more convincingly, Google also cited an explicit disclaimer on Google Maps warning users that walking routes may not have sidewalks or designated walking paths. Indeed, when one searches for a pedestrian route on Google Maps, such a disclaimer is highlighted in yellow above the directions.

The court that heard the lawsuit ultimately agreed with Google’s arguments, saying that allowing individual users to sue Google each time they were misled would force the company to face “nearly unlimited liability.”

If such a precedent was set, Google would likely spend all of its time and resources fighting disgruntled Google Maps users. Even worse, such an outcome would potentially allow people to sue for allegedly flawed search engine results.

The court also wanted to promote old-fashioned common sense, which might dictate that traveling along a rural highway without a sidewalk at night is not the wisest course of action, regardless of Google’s instructions.

While Rosenberg lost her case, negligence lawsuits are often filed in car accident cases. If, for example, a pedestrian is struck by a car that is speeding or ignoring traffic signals, the injured walker may be able to file a personal injury claim.

Thus, if the CEO of Google had been speeding in a car on official Google business and struck Rosenberg, she may have had a stronger case.

If you have been injured in a car accident due to someone else’s negligent actions, contact a local injury lawyer today to learn more about your legal options.

In past few weeks, the sexual assault trial against Dominique Strauss-Kahn has taken a surprising turn, as New York prosecutors discovered several inconsistencies in the accuser’s story.

The woman who accused Strauss-Kahn of sexual assault is a 32 year-old immigrant from Guinea who had been working as a maid at Strauss-Kahn’s hotel.

According to prosecutors, her allegations against the former head of the International Monetary Fund were weakened by past lies she told to authorities about her personal background.

Among the untruths the woman is alleged to have made were claims in her asylum paperwork that she had previously been raped.

In addition, investigators found that the woman allegedly discussed the potential financial benefits of filing a lawsuit against Strauss-Kahn shortly after the purported assault.

While these claims have severely weakened the criminal case against Strauss-Kahn, the woman has shifted gears and is reportedly filing a personal injury lawsuit against the New York Post for libel.

According to sources, Strauss-Kahn’s accuser has filed a libel suit against the newspaper and five of its employees after it reported that she was a prostitute. She claims that this allegation is false and defamatory.

The lawsuit cites the New York Post’s articles from July 2 to July 4 that referred to the hotel maid as a “hooker” who “routinely traded sex for money with male guests.”

The newspaper went so far as to accuse the woman of continuing to work as a prostitute after the alleged incident with Strauss-Kahn while being protected by the New York District Attorney’s office.

In a terse comment offered to Reuters reports, a spokesperson for the New York Post said that the newspaper stood by its comments.

Thus, while the criminal case against Strauss-Kahn appears to be on life support, his accuser hopes to obtain legal relief against a newspaper that published allegedly defamatory remarks about her.

In libel lawsuits, the bar for celebrities to prove libel is often much higher than the bar for ordinary citizens. Celebrities and public figures subject themselves to higher thresholds of satire and ridicule due to their frequent presence in the public eye.

Since the woman is a non-celebrity, she may have a better chance of proving that she suffered real harm from the newspaper’s allegations.

If you or someone you know has suffered economic or personal injury from false reporting, whether it was on the Internet, in a newspaper, or on television, you may be able to seek legal relief.

The laws governing slander and libel, though, vary according to state. As a result, it may be beneficial to ask a local lawyer questions about your local laws.

Contact a local injury lawyer today to learn more information about filing a libel lawsuit.

A grisly train accident last month in the Nevada desert killed several passengers and injured many more. The accident was caused by a truck driver who ignored warning signals and drove into the path of the train.

The driver of the truck, who was killed in the wreck, managed to slam on his brakes and skidded for roughly 100 yards. These efforts, however, did not prevent the truck from striking the train, causing it to derail.

As might be expected, lawsuits have started to reach the embattled train company. Recently, an Amtrak employee filed a personal injury lawsuit against the company for policies that she alleges made escaping the wreckage of the train more difficult.

The Amtrak attendant who filed the train accident lawsuit, 26-year-old Lana Dickerson, claims that she was attempting to lead surviving passengers out of a burning train struck by the truck when their escape route was blocked by a locked baggage car door.

According to sources, Dickerson then had to turn around, travel past dead bodies in the smoking car, including the body of a dead co-worker, and lead the passengers out through a window.

By exiting through the window, Dickerson and the surrounding passengers had to leap roughly 15 feet into the rocky rail bed.

Sources indicate that Dickerson’s lawsuit also names the trucking company that hired the negligent driver, but it focuses primarily on Amtrak’s policy that result in the locked baggage car door.

Lawyers on both sides of the case are still investigating whether Amtrak had an official policy that required this door to be locked. Some critics, however, say that these doors should not be blocked when a train is in operation.

Investigators from Amtrak and the National Transportation Safety Board are still studying the crash.

According to a spokesperson from Amtrak, though, the crash was entirely the result of the wayward truck striking the train at a highway crossing. No mechanical failures on the train during the accident have been discovered.

In addition to the truck driver and the conductor, four other people were killed during the accident.

After her heroic efforts, Dickerson was flown to a hospital where she was treated for injuries to her head, face, knees, hands, and spine. She also is seeking treatment for emotional trauma suffered after seeing the carnage created by the crash.

In addition to Dickerson’s claim, another Amtrak attendant has filed a lawsuit against the estate of the truck driver who was killed in the wreck, as well as his employer, John Davis Trucking Co. of Battle Mountain, Nevada.

While these lawsuits may provide needed relief for the victims, the plaintiffs hope they will also lead to improved safety measures in the future.

Some sources estimate that more than 3,000 train accidents occur each year. If you have been injured in a train accident, you may be able to seek legal relief.

To learn more about your legal options after a train crash, contact a local injury lawyer today.

It’s been years of back and forth, but the case is now finally resolved. A Los Angeles jury ordered actress Sharon Stone to pay $232,000 to a man who says he was injured on her property in 2006.

Stone’s Property

This incident allegedly took place at Stone’s estate in the Los Angeles area, which in 1995, soon after becoming a megastar due to the hit movie “Basic Instinct”.

Stone planned to spend a couple of years expanding and refurbishing the 11,000 square-foot Mediterranean-style home (complete with a tennis court and a pool) before moving onto the property.

Lawsuit Details

Peter Krause (not the actor by the same name) says he fell more than 15 feet into a ravine while installing outdoor wiring for a backyard sound system on her estate. Apparently, he tried to grab onto a lattice fence on top of a retaining wall. When the fence collapsed, he slid onto a neighbor’s adjoining property, seriously damaging his knee.

Because of the injury, he asserts that he’s been limited in his job prospects. Two years after this alleged incident, he filed the lawsuit against Stone.

Krause’s lawyer, John Torjesen, argued that Stone’s fence was in violation of a Los Angeles city code that requires property owners to have sturdy fences on their land.

When Stone testified in her own defense, she claimed that she always has had a chain-link fence surrounding her backyard. The implication was that this situation could never have happened. Her fence was not made of wood as the plaintiff had stated.

Furthermore, Stone informed the jury that she enjoys gardening so she examines her property often. She also claimed that she had no firsthand knowledge Krause was ever injured on her estate.

In addition to the case’s unusual nature, jury selection brought one of its most memorable moments. A potential juror claimed she couldn’t consider the circumstances in a neutral way because she has no respect for Stone’s work as an actress.

The judge ignored her request to be released and sent her back into the jury pool.

The Verdict

The jury deliberated for an entire day before determining that Stone was at fault. They concluded that her fence was indeed inadequate and held her responsible.

Originally, Krause had asked for $1.5 million, which included pain and suffering as well as lost wages.

While Stone’s attorney, Jerry Popovich, agreed that medical damages did come to $33,000, he argued that Krause shouldn’t receive more than $120,000 for the rest of his claims.

In the end, the jury decided that Stone should pay Krause $232,000 to compensate him for his injuries.

Popovich is currently considering an appeal.

Police brutality cases often arise from violent interactions between the police and relatively young citizens. Sometimes, though, unique circumstances lead to bizarre uses of police force against people of all ages - even the elderly.

Recently, an 85 year-old resident of Alabama filed a personal injury lawsuit against the town of Fairhope, alleging that he was beaten by a police officer in an incident in 2009.

According to sources, the incident started when the man who filed the police brutality claim, Dorsey Henderson, witnessed a purported drunk-driving accident in front of his house.

After seeing the accident, Henderson somehow subdued the driver who caused the one-car collision, holding him until police arrived. When the police arrived shortly thereafter, the parties’ stories diverge.

Henderson claims that the officer in question, Trent Scott, grabbed his right arm, slammed him into his gravel driveway, and struck various parts of his body, including his head, neck, and back.

However, in Scott’s defense, the city attorney claims that Henderson refused to obey the officer’s instructions and “was aggressively inserting himself into the situation.” Other comments by the police indicate that Henderson was attempting to make a citizen’s arrest, which Scott said didn’t exist in Alabama.

Regardless of the cause of the physical altercation, Henderson claims he suffered serious injuries and is seeking at least $250,000 in personal injury compensation from the city of Fairhope.

Henderson says he suffered a broken nose, several contusions, and has had multiple surgeries on his right shoulder to repair ligament damage in his rotator cuff.

Sources indicate that Scott has been a member of the city’s police department since 2005, and was named the “officer of the month” in November of 2010.

Henderson, though, has credentials of his own. The alert citizen is a retired Army intelligence officer and a veteran of World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. He speculates that the officer became upset after Henderson called him “son” rather than “sir.”

The lawsuit further alleges that Henderson’s wife told the dispatcher that her husband was being beaten, and when an ambulance arrived, Scott allegedly said that Henderson did not need an ambulance.

Later in the night, however, one of Scott’s superior officers called the ambulance back to the scene, the elderly man was treated by local paramedics.

Local police officers have a monopoly on the lawful use of force, so courts take police brutality claims very seriously. These cases, though, can be very complex, as it can be tricky to prove that an officer acted illegally.

If you or someone you know has been victimized by police brutality, you may be able to seek legal relief by filing a personal injury lawsuit.

To learn more about your legal rights and options, contact a local injury lawyer today.

The loss of their young son four years ago still causes daily pain for Rebecca Ives and Kevan Francis, but they were heartened by a recent decision that they hope will change the government’s policies regarding dangerous animals on public lands.

The family of Samuel Ives filed a personal injury lawsuit against federal and state authorities after Samuel, who was only 11 years old, was fatally attacked by a bear while his family was hiking in Utah’s American Fork Canyon.

According to sources, in their first animal attack lawsuit against the federal government, Ives and Francis recently won a judgment of $1.95 million. The judge determined that government employees acted negligently when they failed to notify Samuel’s family that a dangerous bear was near the camping area.

While another lawsuit against state authorities is still pending, the first settlement determined that the federal authorities were 65 percent responsible for the accident, the state employees held 10 percent of the blame, and Samuel’s family bore 25 percent of the responsibility.

This case offers a prime example of contributory negligence, which may reduce the amount of damages a plaintiff can recover, but does not necessarily prevent them from obtaining some legal relief.

After the decision was announced, sources indicate that Rebecca Ives expressed her desire that the outcome would change the way government officials warn park attendees of dangerous animals.

Ives believes that Samuel’s death could have been avoided. She claims the bear that dragged Samuel out of his tent and killed him had previously attacked another hiker. As a result, she says the park authorities should have notified the family of the presence of a highly dangerous animal.

In its defense, the government pointed to signs in the canyon warning hikers that bears were in the vicinity. Ives, however, argues that more specific warnings should be given to campers, particularly when an aggressive bear is in the area.

Ives and her attorney both claimed that the government had considered implementing such a policy before the accident, but never acted on the measure. Enacting a personalized warning system, though, would be very costly for cash-strapped public land agencies.

Nevertheless, Samuel Ives’ parents are hoping their lawsuit convinces the government to create a sort of “Sam Alert” that would give campers more detailed warnings about the presence of bears that have previously attacked other people.

Animal attacks occur fairly frequently, both in rural and urban areas. Wild areas pose obvious risks of attacks from snakes, bears, and other dangerous animals. In addition, residents of cities face a risk of animal attacks, particularly from dogs and other domesticated animals.

If you have been the victim of an animal attack, and would like to learn more about your legal rights and options, contact a local injury lawyer today.

A ceremony with a tragic result at an Arizona sweat lodge in 2009 shook a small community and led to an avalanche of litigation. Finally, some of the families of the deceased have obtained legal relief.

After three people died during a sweat lodge ritual, the families of the victims and seven other participants in the ceremony filed a personal injury lawsuit against Michael and Amayra Hamilton, who own the Angel Valley Retreat Center near Sedona, Arizona.

According to reports, the lawsuit recently culminated in a personal injury settlement in which the Hamiltons do not admit to guilt but presumably parted with a fair amount of money. The exact terms of the settlement were not disclosed due to a confidentiality agreement between the parties.

Sources indicate that the original lawsuit was just one among a series of lawsuits filed against the Hamiltons after the 2009 incident. Most of these lawsuits alleged negligence, wrongful death, and fraud.

In addition, another man who actually led the ill-fated ceremony, James Arthur Ray, is still in the midst of a manslaughter trial which has yet to reach a conclusion.

In the lawsuit that recently reached a settlement, the families of the three deceased victims, Kirby Brown, James Shore, and Liz Neuman, alleged that other people had become very ill in previous ceremonies led by Ray at the Angel Valley Retreat Center.

As a result, the families claimed that the Hamiltons acted with an “evil mind” when they allowed new ceremonies to proceed.

Moreover, they claimed that the Hamiltons failed to adequately warn the participants of the dangers of the ceremony, failed to provide proper medical care, and did not take measures to ensure that the sweat lodge was safely constructed.

In response to these claims, however, Amayra Hamilton told the Associated Press in 2010 that she and her husband felt “very much at peace with what we did and did not do.”

Again, the terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but the original lawsuit sought damages that were “fair and just” for the victims’ families, as well as compensation for medical bills and attorneys’ fees.

The sweat lodge fiasco brought more financial pain for the Hamiltons, who had already filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection before the sweat lodge ceremony went awry in 2009.

To help with their litigation costs, the Hamiltons have also filed a lawsuit against Ray, the man who led the ceremony, and his California Company, alleging that the litigation and negative publicity had caused irreparable harm.

Wrongful death claims arise from a number of different circumstances, ranging from accidents at work to fatal car wrecks. Personal injury laws allow the victims’ families to seek legal relief in civil court.

If someone you love has passed away due to the negligent or intentional actions of another person, you may be able to pursue a personal injury claim.

To learn more about your legal rights and options, contact a local injury attorney today.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the beleaguered former head of the International Monetary Fund, recently made headlines when he allegedly assaulted a maid at Sofitel Hotel in New York.

The allegations have led to a firestorm of international media speculation, as some French press claimed the entire mess was a set-up aimed at destroying Strauss-Kahn’s political career, while other French citizens have brought forth new allegations of sexual assult against the popular figure.

In the wake of the alleged attack, Strauss-Kahn’s first concern is defending himself in a pending criminal trial in New York. According to sources, he was recently indicted by a grand jury, and his fate will eventually be determined at trial.

Regardless of the outcome of the criminal trial, a recent article in Reuters discussed the possibility that the woman who was allegedly attacked might file a personal injury lawsuit filed in civil court.

While the prosecution must prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal trial, civil claims, such as sexual assault lawsuit, need only be proven by the preponderance of evidence.

The preponderance of evidence standard is a much lower threshold than its criminal counterpart, partially because civil trials cannot result in jail time for the defendant, but they may result in millions of dollars of damages for the plaintiff.

In this case, the victim’s attorney said she has no current plans to file a civil lawsuit, but some attorneys claim that a potential lawsuit could be very valuable, especially since Strauss-Kahn reportedly has very deep pockets.

In a civil trial, the alleged victim would be able to pursue compensation for her pain and suffering after the attack, as well as any medical bills she accrued. She may also seek damages for lost time at work.

Other attorneys also speculate that the victim could seek punitive damages in a civil trial, which would potentially allow her to ask for information about Strauss-Kahn’s wealth, figures that could sway a jury’s decision.

In another bizarre twist, a potential sexual assault lawsuit could also try to name the International Monetary Fund as a defendant, if Strauss-Kahn was working on official business during his stay at the hotel.

Again, this is all purely speculation, but it is fair to say that these are very nervous times for Strauss-Kahn.

While attacks against hotel maids by famous French politicians are relatively rare, sexual violence occurs far too often in the United States.

In order to provide justice for victims of these attacks, personal injury laws in every state offer victims a chance to seek legal relief from their attackers.

If you or someone you love has been the victim of sexual abuse, contact a local injury lawyer in your area to learn more about your legal rights.

The Dallas Cowboys, once dubbed “America’s Team,” have faced plenty of controversies in the past few decades. The antics of players such as Michael Irvin, Nate Newton, and the iconic Terrell Owens have kept the Cowboys in the limelight, despite disappointing performances on the field.

A recent controversy, though, does not involve the actions of a player, nor does it revolve around the controversial decisions of the team’s famous owner, Jerry Jones. It may, however, soon become the most expensive gaffe in franchise history.

According to sources, a Dallas Cowboys spokeswoman recently filed a personal injury lawsuit against the team for injuries allegedly suffered when the team’s practice facility collapsed in 2009.

The woman, Jancy Briles, who remains a member of the football team’s public relations staff, filed an injury lawsuit against the companies that played a role in designing and building the ill-fated practice field.

The facility, which was encased in a shell of steel and fabric, collapsed during a team event in the spring of 2009, leading to shocking news footage of a seemingly flimsy structure falling on people trapped inside.

The building, which housed a total of 88,000 square feet, fell in a relatively mild wind storm, which brought wind gusts of roughly 60 mph. Sources indicate that the National Institute of Standards and Technology said the structure should have been able to withstand the force of such winds.

As a result of the collapse, Briles, who was among those trapped inside, claims that she suffered “serious, debilitating and permanent injuries,” though she declined to publicly elaborate on the nature of her ailments.

Those allegedly responsible for the shoddy construction of the facility include Summit Structures LLC, a Pennsylvania company, and its corporate parent, Cover-All Building Systems Inc, which filed for bankruptcy shortly after the building’s collapse.

If prior lawsuits related to the incident are any indication of Briles’ potential success in court, she may be feeling confident about her odds of obtaining a personal injury settlement.

Cowboys scout Rich Behm was paralyzed by the falling structure, and special teams coach Joe DeCamillis suffered a fractured neck, but they eventually won settlements totaling more than $35 million from the owner of the Cowboys and Summit Structures.

In addition, one player, tight end Jamar Hunt, received a settlement with an undisclosed price tag after the falling roof of the facility herniated a disk in his neck.

Injuries related to poorly constructed buildings and other public spaces are more common than people might think. If you or someone you know has suffered a similar injury, you may be eligible to file an injury lawsuit.

To learn more about your claim, contact a local injury lawyer today for further information about your legal options.

While last year’s dramatic rescue of trapped coal miners in Chile received international attention, coal mining accidents still regularly occur in the United States, often with little press coverage at all.

This year, in western Kentucky, two coal miners tragically lost their lives after the roof of a mine in which they were working collapsed.

Recently, the families of Justin Travis and Michael Carter, the two men who lost their lives in the accident, filed a personal injury lawsuit against Alliance Resource Partners, whose subsidiary, Webster County Coal, was in charge of the worker’s mine.

Travis and Carter, 27 and 28 years old, respectively, had been clearing loose rock in a mine on the border of Webster and Hopkins counties when the roof caved in, trapping both men and ultimately killing them.

According to the company, the collapse of the roof was due to a geographic anomaly that could not have reasonably been discovered by company officials prior to the accident.

Sources indicate, however, that the company was cited for safety violations more than 1,000 times between the date of the accident and July of 2009.

One violation highlighted by reporting sources was a notice of noncompliance issued by the Kentucky Office of Mine Safety and Licensing for Webster County Coal’s failure to have proper roof control plans in certain underground mines.

Three months after this violation, part of the roof of another underground mine collapsed due to slippery rock formations, although this incident did not cause any injuries.

In their injury complaint, the families of the deceased miners allege that Webster County Coal and its corporate parent favored increased production over the safety of the miners.

The families are each seeking $9 million in compensation for personal injury and wrongful death claims. Moreover, they are seeking several million dollars worth of punitive damages.

In addition to their claims against the mining company and its corporate parent, the families also alleged wrongdoing on the part of the Mine Safety and Health Administration, which oversees the health of workers in American mines.

According to the plaintiffs, the agency did not adequately inspect the mining facilities, failed to properly document the company’s violations, and turned a blind eye as the company violated safety regulations.

While coal mining accidents can have tragic consequences, they are not the only type of on-the-job injury that may result in serious injury or death.

Factory jobs, agricultural work, and employment in the construction sector are all examples of industries that often cause injuries.

If you or someone you love has been injured at work, you may be able to file a personal injury lawsuit to seek legal relief.

To learn more about your legal rights and options, contact a local injury lawyer today.

Concussions have recently taken center stage in the debate over the treatment of athletes, particularly football players. High-profile brain injuries to professional athletes have served as a warning to football players at every level.

While the long-term effects of concussions remain somewhat unclear, many doctors and scientists are urging sports teams to treat head injuries with extreme caution. A recent lawsuit alleges that one high school failed to heed this advice.

Zachary Alt, 19, of Fawn, Pennsylvania has filed a personal injury lawsuit in federal court against the Highlands School District, alleging that coaches and administrators failed to treat him with adequate care after he suffered a head injury.

The former football player claims that a trainer and coach jeopardized his health by putting him back into games after he suffered serious brain injuries.

According to sources, Alt’s mother claims that her son cannot work a full-time job because he has experienced depression, insomnia, and nausea since a helmet-to-helmet tackle occurred in two games in 2007, when Alt was a high school sophomore.

During one game in October of 2007, Alt alleges that he was not properly evaluated by the training staff after a head injury, and continued to play despite his concerns. To make matters worse, a similar helmet-to-helmet injury allegedly occurred a few weeks later during a playoff game.

After the second injury, Alt again remained in the game, despite his mother’s claim that he appeared disoriented on the sidelines. Shortly after the game, Alt’s mother took him to an emergency room, where his head injury was diagnosed.

The Alts also claim that Zachary’s schoolwork and attendance suffered after his injury, although the complaint admits that he received mostly A’s after the injury and later graduated from the school.

Sources indicate that Alt started playing football at the tender age of 8, and played a prominent role on the Highlands High School football team as a fullback, despite his relatively small stature.

Alt’s lawsuit has attracted a lot of attention in western Pennsylvania, a region that has seen two high school students suffer fatal concussions in the last six years.

In response to Alt’s complaint, Highland officials refused to comment on the pending litigation, saying they had not yet reviewed the lawsuit.

In the lawsuit, Alt is seeking more than $75,000 in damages, and claims that the school violated his constitutional right to education through their treatment of his head injuries. Among other people, the lawsuit names the athletic trainer, an assistant principal, and the school’s principal as defendants.

If you or someone you know has suffered a traumatic brain or spinal injury from an athletic event, and believe that the injury was poorly treated, you may be able to seek personal injury relief.

In addition, brain injuries from a number of other sources, including car accidents, medical malpractice, or on-the-job remedies, may lead to a personal injury lawsuit.

For more information on injury laws in your state, contact a local injury attorney today.

The social benefit of large jury settlements is sometimes challenged by critics of American litigation, but a recent court decision says that people who bring personal injury claims are entitled to a fair shot at justice.

The Utah Supreme Court recently ruled that the validity of a personal injury claim was unfairly questioned by a tactless defense attorney in a personal injury trial.

The trial, prompted by a personal injury lawsuit filed by John and Norrine Boyle, arose out of an accident in which the Boyles were struck by a truck while walking across a crosswalk in a grocery store parking lot.

According to sources, John Boyle, who had previously been a professional golfer, suffered a serious back injury that severely limited his strength and flexibility. As a result of their injuries, the Boyles filed a personal injury claim in Utah.

In the closing arguments of the Boyle’s trial, the defense attorney for the truck driver unfairly compared the Boyle’s claim to the now infamous McDonald’s coffee product liability lawsuit.

In the McDonald’s coffee lawsuit, which ended in 1994, a jury award a woman nearly $3 million after she suffered severe burns when she spilled hot coffee that she had purchased from McDonald’s.

Some critics have suggested this case represents the excesses of some personal injury settlements, while others point to McDonald’s heightened safety measures after the trial as proof that personal injury lawsuits can have positive social outcomes.

This, after all, is one of the key purposes of personal injury litigation—to deter other actors from engaging in behavior that poses a risk to public health.

Regardless of the validity of the famous case, the Utah Supreme Court recently determined that the defense attorney’s remark during the trial may have tainted the jury, and called for a new trial.

The Utah Supreme Court also reprimanded the trial judge for allowing the comment to be made, claiming that the McDonald’s case is misunderstood by the public and comparing it to the Boyle’s legitimate claim may have convinced the jury to give a smaller settlement.

In the original trial, the Boyles sought $458,000 in damages but the jury only awarded $62,500. The higher court theorized that the jury was reluctant to give the Boyles sufficient compensation due to the defense’s offhand remark about high settlements.

Whether you have been injured in a car accident or by a defective product, personal injury laws may allow you to seek legal relief.

And, while personal injury claims may compensate victims for medical expenses or lost time at work, they are also designed to prevent future injuries.

As a result, the perceived social stigma created by some critics of personal injury settlements may be wholly unfounded.

If you have recently suffered an injury due to someone else’s negligent or intentional actions, contact a local injury lawyer today for more information.

The calm, almost stoic demeanor of stereotypical FBI agents suggests that they are immune to the sudden losses of temper that sometimes strike less well-trained citizens.

A recent personal injury lawsuit, however, alleges that an FBI employee engaged in a shocking act of road rage.

The auto accident at issue in the lawsuit occurred in Washington, D.C., where two journalists were allegedly the victims of a hit and run accident involving an on-duty FBI employee.

According to sources, the lawsuit claims that Thomas Bagnall and William Greenback were unloading a television camera and other pieces of equipment into the National Press Club when they were struck by a motorist.

When Bagnall and Greenback were unloading their equipment, an FBI employee, Joy Ellen Mullinax, honked the horn of her Hyundai Accent and allegedly yelled at the two men. In response, Bagnall told her to simply drive around them.

Shortly thereafter, the journalist claim that Mullinax accelerated her car and ran into both Bagnall and Greenback. The lawsuit further alleges that Mullinax pinned Greenback between her car and a third vehicle, and the man was finally flung onto the hood of Mullinax’s vehicle.

A woman who witnessed the car accident, and later called 911, said the aggressive driver “clearly lost her cool” and that the accident was “clearly intentional.”

Despite the seriousness of the alleged offense, D.C. police only ticketed Mullinax for changing lanes without caution. Adding intrigue to the accident, the lawsuit also claims that uniformed FBI officers were seen speaking with the D.C. police who were writing the traffic report.

In their complaint, the injured journalists say that Mullinax should face more serious charges, including striking a pedestrian, leaving the scene of an accident, reckless driving and endangerment.

In the lawsuit, filed Monday in D.C. Superior Court, the journalists are seeking a combined $1 million in compensatory and punitive damages.

While car accidents involving FBI agents do not occur every day, motor vehicle accidents are a common cause of serious injuries for American drivers.

If you have been injured in a car accident, and the accident was due to the negligent or intentional actions of someone else, you may also be able to file a personal injury lawsuit.

A personal injury settlement for a valid auto accident claim could result in several different types of compensatory damages, including compensation for medical bills, pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and lost wages.

In cases where the guilty party acted in a particularly egregious manner, car accident victims may also be eligible for punitive damages, which are intended to punish the person who caused the accident.

Car accident laws, though, vary widely by state. To learn more about your legal rights after a car accident, contact a local injury lawyer today.

Energy drinks are often praised for boosting energy levels, but one unlucky man from Federal Way, Washington experienced an unwelcome shot of adrenaline from a recent drink.

Vitaliy Sulzhik, the surprised customer, recently filed a personal injury lawsuit against Hansen Distributing Company, the maker of Monster Energy Drink, after allegedly discovering a dead mouse in a can of the popular energy drink.

According to sources, the incident occurred on March 20, 2010, when Sulzhik bought a Monster Energy Drink from a local convenience store.

After his purchase, Sulzhik consumed the entire drink. He became suspicious of the contents of the can when he noticed that the can was still heavy after he had completed his energy drink. Out of respect for the reader, Sulzhik’s reaction upon discovering a dead mouse at the bottom of the cam will be mercifully omitted from this account.

Soon after discovering the rodent who had sought free rent in his can, Sulzhik contacted an injury attorney, who sent the can to forensic specialists, where the validity of Sulzhik’s claim was allegedly confirmed.

To add another bizarre twist to the story, x-rays and autopsies performed on the hapless mouse revealed that the mouse had not suffered any trauma from a mouse trap or any kind of poison.

As there is no proof that the mouse was killed and forced into the can, Sulzhik’s claim is strengthened because it appears the mouse may have voluntarily entered the can at some time during the production process.

Sources indicate, however, that the energy drink’s manufacturer is skeptical of Sulzhik’s allegation. A statement recently released by Hansen Distributing Company claims that, if the mouse had entered the can during the production process, it would have decomposed and rendered the product undrinkable.

A key issue at trial may be whether Sulzhik was truly able to consume the entire drink without noticing the presence of the mouse.

To no one’s surprise, Sulzhik says that has not yet drank from a can since the incident.

In his complaint, Sulzhik has alleged both negligence and product liability on the part of Hansen Distributing Company. He has yet to place a specific dollar amount on his claim.

Defective product lawsuits come in all shapes and sizes. People often file lawsuits when they are injured by a defective consumer good, such as a faulty prescription drug or tainted food.

Food recalls often occur as a result of vegetables and meat tainted with bacteria, such as salmonella or E. coli. Of course, the presence of a small mammal in a package of food or drink may also prompt a valid personal injury claim.

If you have suffered an injury due to tainted food or another type of defective product, contact a local injury lawyer today to learn about your legal rights.

Bret Michaels, famous for his long tenure with the rock band Poison as well as his recent appearances on reality television, recently filed a personal injury lawsuit against CBS and Tony Award Productions for an injury suffered during an awards show in 2009.

According to sources, the lawsuit alleges that producers of the Tony Awards failed to properly inform Michaels of how to exit the stage after his performance.

The lawsuit claims that Michaels expressed concern about safely exiting the stage, and where he should stand during his live performance. In response, the producers of the show allegedly told Michaels that he should simply leave via the back of the stage.

This, however, proved to be unhelpful information, as Michaels was struck by a large sign falling from the ceiling after his performance of the popular Poison song “Nothin’ But a Good Time.”

The impact of the collision broke the singer’s nose and split his lip. Allegedly, Michaels was not told that this sign would be descending immediately after the show.

These injuries did not prove to be debilitating until six months after the injury, when Michaels suffered a frightening subarachnoid hemorrhage, a medical term that refers to bleeding beneath the thin layer of tissue covering the brain.

This injury was almost fatal for Michaels, who eventually recovered, but likely accrued a large amount of medical bills in the wake of the accident.

The lawsuit, which was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, claims that CBS and Tony Award Productions were responsible for the personal injury. Michaels has also alleged that the producers of the show blamed him for the accident, claiming he was standing in the wrong place when the collision occurred.

All brain injuries are very serious, and must be treated with extreme caution. Brain injuries may occur as a result of a car accident, physical abuse, or negligent medical treatment.

Even if you suffered a minor injury, symptoms of potentially serious brain trauma may include nausea, depression, and irritability.

If you or someone you love has suffered a brain injury due to someone’s negligent or intentional actions, you may be eligible to seek legal relief through a brain injury lawsuit.

A successful personal injury claim may allow a person to recover expenses related to rehabilitation, other medical costs, lost wages, or pain and suffering. Brain injuries may also force people to use special transportation or use household medical help.

The legal system provides a wide range of protections for people who suffer personal injuries.

To learn more about pursing a personal injury claim, contact a local injury lawyer today.