Chico Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics

DUIs Down as a Whole, But Female DUIs are Up

Amber Wheat — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:59:08 GMT

MSNBC reports that more women are getting arrested for drunk driving than ever before. They speculate that pressure to be the "perfect wife and mother" is driving women to drink in secret and not admit that they need help. Whereas men are often social drinkers and cannot hide their habits from friends and family like women can. Friends and family can then encourage their loved ones to get help and face their problems.

I don't know if I believe that is why female arrests are up and male arrests are down. I could believe that women have always had this issue and police officers aren't letting women off the hook anymore. I can also believe that the number of women who drink regularly is up because of the state of our country. I would attribute drinking to escape the pressures of life more to working women who have to maintain a household and be the bread winner than to homemakers who feel the pressure to be "perfect".

Something I don't understand is why these prevention programs and campaigns are working for men, but not for women. Women are supposed to be more sensitive and more empathetic, you would think that they would not be willing to take the risk of drinking and driving. They could seriously hurt or kill themselves and those around them.

That is another issue brought up in the article, drunk driving with children in the car. They brought up Schuler, who was the driver in a collision that killed eight people including herself, her daughter, and her three nieces. Schuler's family has denied that she drank or used drugs, the investigation is ongoing. But the thought is pretty scary. It is bad enough that people (not just women) still get into a vehicle and think they can drive safely after having a few drinks, but to do that with kids in the car? Horrific!

As always, drinking and driving comes about from a series of choices. MADD and other anti-drunk driving groups often focus on the consequences of those choices to convince people not to drink and drive. Perhaps if we gave people more choices to choose from they would not get behind the wheel. Also, take the choice away from them. The bill introduced by Assemblyman Mike Feuer to require DUI offenders to install ignition-interlock devices in their vehicles recently passed. It has had success in other states and hopefully it will be a success here as well. Whatever is being done is working because the incidents are down, but it's time to focus on campaigns that will appeal to women, because drunk driving should not be on the rise at all, not for any group of people, it needs to stop altogether.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

CHP "Zero Tolerance Day" Hopes to Make an Impact

John Demas — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:07:05 GMT

Yesterday was the California Highway Patrol's "Zero Tolerance Day". The CHP stopped motorists for everyday traffic violations like speeding, tailgaiting, and most recently texting. While these and other activities are against the law everyday, the CHP typically devotes their time and energy to stopping the more dangerous and reckless drivers on the road. But yesterday, strict enforcement was in effect. The CHP hopes to remind people that unsafe lane changes and not wearing your seatbelt, along with a multitude of common violations, can get you pulled over. This day has come and gone, but you never know when they will have another one or where it will be in effect. So be careful out there motorists!

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Demas

Greatest Risk on the Road is Carried by Pedestrians and Cyclists

Amber Wheat — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:10:29 GMT

Pedestrians and bike riders are the most at risk when they get into collisions with vehicles. The fact that they are unprotected from the physical forces often leaves them in serious condition or worse.

In Sacramento, a sting operation by the Sacramento Police Department at four different intersections in April led to twenty-six citations. They chose spots that were complained about by citizens and spent a few hours ticketing drivers who did not yield to undercover citizens. In California, pedestrians have the right of way, but they also have a responsibility for their own safety as well.

The Sacramento Police Department recommends that a pedestrian make eye-contact with a driver and give them time to stop, slow, or respond in some other way. Once contact has been made and the pedestrian enters the crosswalk, the vehicles must wait until they are completely out of the crosswalk before proceeding.

I know that many people will turn right or left after a pedestrian has gotten past the halfway point of a crosswalk, but you can be cited for that behavior and there's a good reason why. Drivers rely on other drivers to communicate what is going on in an intersection. I am the kind of person who would assume a pedestrian is not in the crosswalk if I saw a car driver across it.

The Sacramento PD issued a statement warning citizens that these stings will continue. It is obviously important to them to see some change in our community and prevent some of the serious injuries and deaths that occur in these instances. Injuries like the poor fifty-year-old man who was transported to Stanford Hospital in serious condition after being struck in Palo Alto.

Thankfully, not all instances of pedestrian v. vehicle collisions are so bad. A thirteen-year-old girl was struck by Deborah Sutterfield on Olive Highway. Although the vehicle sustained major damage, the girl miraculously only sustained minor injuries. A rare and wonderful outcome.

Pedestrains are not the only ones in danger either. During good weather many people enjoy a bicycle ride now and then. It is wonderful exercise and there are many beautiful trails in Sacramento, Chico, and the surrounding areas. Folsom has even won awards for their biking trails. But, again, bikers are not protected from injury when they get involved with vehicle collisions.

A six-year-old girl was recently struck by a vehicle in Magalia. It is believed that the poor girl lost control of her bike and the driver was unable to stop. As of June 13, Haleigh Cuevas is still in critical condition. It was reported that she was not wearing a helmet or even shoes. It's summertime and the kids are out of school, so please, please, please be safe. Wear a helmet. Save your life.

The friends and family of Devante Parker know how important it is to stay safe. He was struck while he was on his bicycle. His death has affected his entire community. There are so many people out walking and biking everyday that it is becoming very important that drivers know the law and stay vigilant. When a vehicle hits another vehicle it is scary and damaging, but when a vehicle hits a person who is not surrounded by one ton of metal and safety features, the consequences can be devastating.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

Davis Prepares for Possibility of Bus Crash

John Demas — Thu, 14 May 2009 12:54:41 GMT

The city of Davis is taking a proactive step toward lessening the damage that can be caused by bus crashes. In recent months we have seen the devastation they can cause. Four bus crashes have occurred in California since October of 2008. The latest was Saturday, May 2, 2009, near Perris, California. The passengers were headed back to Colton after a city-sponsored trip to San Diego for a Cinco de Mayo festival. All 28 passengers were injured, eight of them critically.

These crashes are becoming more and more frequent. Just last week I wrote about the Soledad crash that killed five people. Citizens are still reeling from that horrific incident and now we are faced with a fourth bus crash. Before investigators even have a chance to determine what caused the Soledad crash, the Perris crash occurs.

Perris actually has very different circumstances. The bus veered to the right and left the roadway on I-215. It collided with a sound wall and continued forward still veering to the right and scraping against the wall until the wall stopped. The bus then proceeded to continue forward and veer right until it hit a second sound wall.

I know that investigators are working hard to find out what is going on with all of these crashes, but it is worrisome that they are all happening at the same time. My law partner blogged about negligent hiring after the Colusa crash because the driver was unlicenced and not supposed to be driving. The Squaw Creek bus crash killed one person and injured twenty-seven others. Investigators are looking into driver fatigue as a cause.

People have begun calling for stricter punishments and increased regulation. Will that really solve the problems? Do we really know why these crashes are happening? Is it human error or is there some sort of mechanical defect in the design of these tour buses? There are so many questions and so few answers. In time, investigators will submit reports and I can only hope that they will find a way to prevent future collisions that cause so much injury and death.

In the meantime, the City of Davis is fighting back in another way. A problem with the Colusa Casino crash was with the emergency response. Many agencies responded, but helicopters that will actually closer to the crash, didn’t get the call. Since then, response time has been improved, but Davis officials believe that practice makes perfect.

Their simulation put a bus on it’s side and used real-life scenarios such as victims refusing to leave the side of their friend, miscommunication between agencies, and a high volume of victims needing care. The emergency responders and hospital worked together to see what worked, what didn’t work, and how to best handle the situation if the worst should occur in their town.

It is a step in the right direction, and although we hope they will never need to use the knowledge they gained in this exercise, it is commendable that they are aware of the possibility and doing something to prepare for it.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Demas

ABC Reports that Helmets can Prevent Head Injuries

Barbara Burks — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:21:20 GMT

In a short article by Alicia Malaby of News10 ABC in Sacramento, the truth comes out about helmets. It turns out, they can save your life. Shockingly, most people were not surprised by this revelation. The article didn’t seem to have much a goal other than to inform the public that they should were helmets while they are participating in outdoor sports.

Ms. Malaby did make reference to the recent death of actress Natasha Richardson, who was severely injured in a skiing accident. It is unknown if a helmet could have saved her life, but it is well-known that helmets can at least lessen the damage sustained to the head in most cases.

Dr. Sam Ciricillo of Sutter Neurosciences even went on record to say that a majority of head injury victims would have sustained less damage to their heads if they had been wearing a helmet. Still, this is not news.

Our office is a proponent of child safety and has always strongly encouraged the use of helmets while riding bicycles or motorcycles. Mr. Demas also makes sure the public knows that not all helmets are created equal. For the best protection a helmet should be approved by the Department of Transportation and/or the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The commentary on Ms. Malaby’s article is interesting. They believe that Ms. Malaby supports the creation of a law requiring helmets for skiiers. In reality, she only mentioned a lack of such a law.

What do you think? One commentator said, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.” Is a helmet law for skiiers and snowboarders the answer? The general public is aware that helmets save lives and yet they choose not to wear them anyway. Is that their right? Should it be?

If it were up to the people, would you vote the requirement into law?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Barbara Burks

U.S. Attorney General Announces New Pot Policy

Amber Wheat — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 14:42:09 GMT

This has kind of become a pet issue of mine. Medical marijuana is legal in California, but under federal law, possession and sale of marijuana is illegal. Under the Bush administration, violators of the federal law were raided up and down the central district in California. Of the 75 raids that took place over the last three and a half years, only several people have been prosecuted (and those are the ones who supposedly violated state law as well as the federal law). But the medical marijuana dispensaries have no more need to fear (as long as they are operating legally within the state laws).

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Drug Enforcement Agency will not target the dispensaries within states with medical marijuana laws as long as they are following their state laws. Many people have argued the federal government doesn’t have the right to interfere with medical prescriptions given by doctors. Others have said that federal law trumps state law and that state laws can be more restrictive than federal, but not less.

I have always advocated states’ rights and believe that our forefathers understood the benefits of a loose central government. The United States of America is a large country with very different environments. There is a huge difference between California and New York and what is good for one state is not necessarily good for the other. The name of our country is very indicative of our system as well. It says what we are and where! We are a nation of states! Yes we are united, but above all we are individual regions and each region should be run by the people who live there.

That is the opinion that has spurred this new policy. The medical marijuana program was voted into place by the people of California and the federal government shouldn’t undo or hinder our decisions when it comes to medical care of our citizens. I believe this policy will go a long way toward fairness and transparency in the law. It will be more clear as to which actions are legal and which actions will be prosecuted. Then owners and operators of such medical marijuana dispensaries can make informed decisions on how they do business.

What are your thoughts? Do you think this system will work? Will we see an increase or decrease in illegal sales through dispensaries?

For that matter, what do you think about states’ rights? I’m curious. I personally think the federal government should back off a bit and let us do our own thing, but I wonder what you think. Let me know!

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

Flight from Oroville to Butte Ends in Deadly Crash

John Demas — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:05:30 GMT

Tragedy struck on Sunday, March 22, 2009, when many, including seven children, were killed in a fiery plane crash outside of the Bert Mooney airport. The original reports said seventeen were dead, but that number has been lowered to fourteen.

It is now believed that the flight, which left from Oroville Municipal Airport, was intended to be a ski trip for the children aboard. The crash is being investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board. So far, the victims have not been officially identified. Initial reports stated that local residents were not believed to be on the flight, but The Napa Valley Register reports that a family of five from St. Helena, CA, were among the victims.

Eyewitnesses say the plane jerked sharply to the left and then went into a nosedive. The Pilatus PC-12 was meant to safely carry 12 adults. It is unclear at this time if the increase in passengers had anything to do with the crash since half of the passengers were children. The reason for the diversion to Butte is also being investigated since the original flight plan called for the plane to land in Bozeman, MT.

In the last three months four planes have crashed. Thankfully, two of those flights did not contain any casualties. A great loss of life can occur with plane crashes due to the sizes and speeds of the machinery involved in flight. There are many questions and few answers at the moment. Hopefully, after the investigation is concluded we can determine what caused the crash and can work toward preventing something like this from happening again.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Demas

A Californian Assemblyman is Looking to Cash in on Pot

Amber Wheat — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:41:28 GMT

Tom Ammiano introduced a proposal on Monday to legalize marijuana and tax it. He wants the legal age to partake in marijuana to be the same as alcohol, 21 years. The proposal asks for a tax of $50 for the sale of every ounce of pot. He wants to see our retail stores with pot on the shelves.

There are so many complications with this issue. I have heard of marijuana being laced with other substances, so who would regulate the growth, processing, and packaging of marijuana? The FDA can’t do it, they are a federal agency and marijuana is still illegal under federal law. Will there be name brands on our convenience store shelves? Fields of marijuana crops?

The News10 article that broke the news has received many comments from members of the community and a few of their comments have made me worry. Of course driving under the influence will still be illegal, but our county doesn’t even have drunk driving under control, so why are we inviting more problems in? Another comment mentioned taking the revenue away from gangs and putting it into legitimate business, just who do you think is going to be selling the stuff legally? Retailers will have to buy it from somebody if they want to stock it and right now the only people who are growing it are doing it illegally or for medical purposes.

I previously held a stance that even medical marijuana should not be legal, that opinion changed thanks to this community and the information they imparted to me. So, I guess I am asking you again. What are the risks and benefits in this situation? When people are in pain and need relief from suffering that easily outweighs the risks associated with legalizing medical marijuana. When college students and parents just want to kick back and relax, is it really worth it?

What do you think? If it came down to a vote of the citizens in California would you vote for or against legalizing marijuana?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat

The FDA is Finally Taking Steps to Reduce Painkiller Abuse

Barbara Burks — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:15:29 GMT

The FDA is a strange best. Sometimes people have a hard time understanding their motives, as many of you may know from my assistant’s previous posts on the FDA. One thing that I know they are responsible for is the safety of drugs, but now, they are taking responsibility for the abuse of certain drugs.

I am torn on this issue at the moment and I would appreciate your input. Federal health regulators are requiring drugmakers to somehow reduce the misuse of the products they put out on the market. Now I have always believed that what you do with a product determines whether or not it is defective when someone is injured. If you are hanging a folding chair from a tree and trying to swing, you can’t sue the chair company for a defective product because they could not possibly foresee that use for the chair and protect or warn consumers against it.

So why is it the manufacturer’s responsibility if someone chooses to use it in a way it isn’t meant to be used. I assume if the FDA already approved the drug for sale in the U.S. that it has been rigorously tested and that complications such as addiction and potentially harmful side effects have been minimized as much as possible. Maybe I assume too much.

I really like the idea or tamper-proof painkillers like those King Pharmaceuticals and Pain Therapeutics are making, but those won’t work for everyone. Sometimes people can’t swallow pills and sometimes the duration of the patches is needed. How is a company supposed to reduce abuse in those instances?

How do you compromise between creating effective medicine and creating medicine that won’t work if you don’t use it just right?

If these high-dose opiate painkillers are killing people, then maybe the answer is not reducing their misuse by the medicating population (an impossible feat), but taking them off the market. Find new ways to combat the pain (or old ways, I’m told cannabis doesn’t kill people).

As long as these products are out there they are going to be abused. And not just by the prescription holder. More and more kids are getting a hold of their parents’ or grandparents’ medications. Putting the responsibility on the manufacturers is just going to make the medication cost more and make blaming the pharmaceutical companies easier. What ever happened to responsibility for one’s own actions?

What do you think? Comments are most appreciated. I am always looking for different points of view and counterpoints.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Barbara Burks

No Proof Cell Phone Laws Prevent Collisions!

Amber Wheat — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:15:42 GMT

Last year, California instituted a new law that required the use of a hands-free device if you are driving a car. Common sense should tell people that talking on the phone while driving is very dangerous. And it’s not just because one hand isn’t on the wheel. Many people drive without both hands on the wheel even when they are not talking on the phone. The real danger comes from the distraction it causes.

When someone is talking or doing any other task while driving, their attention is being diverted from the road. It is the same with eating, changing discs, reaching for something in the back, and trying to read to a map.

Since January 1, 2009, text messaging while driving is now also illegal in California. Another law put into place that shouldn’t have to be. People should know better. A motor vehicle is a huge piece of machinery and has the potential of causing great harm. It’s operation is a responsibility that should not be taken lightly.

California is one of six states to introduce these cell phone use laws. The first was New York in 2001. Right after the new law was put into place the number of crashes with cell phone use as a contributing factor went down, but over the years it went back up. The theory is that, just like the speed limit, people violate it thinking that the likelihood they will be caught is minimal.

This trend may also be true in California, only time will tell. In the District of Columbia, the numbers decreased and stayed down. Last year there were eight fatalities where cell phone use was deemed a factor out of a total 3,967 fatalities in California. I wonder what the statistic would be in they counted all distractions.

Cell phones and their use are not the root of the problem. It is about responsibility and accountability. People are making bad choices out there on the road and the effects are felt throughout society. It’s not just about the people getting hurt, they have someone to fight for them. That’s why we at Demas & Rosenthal do what we do, because adverse drivers make choices and innocent injured parties shouldn’t have to live with the consequences.

The cost of insurance, the cost of healthcare, the sheer amount of manpower needed to police the roads and highways, city planning costs, utility pole placement, the cost of electricity, the cost of fuel, repair and maintenance on our streets, and vehicle repairs; all of it is effected by how we choose to operate our motor vehicles. And of course, death and injury. Funeral costs, doctors visits, ambulance rides, autopsy reports, medication, and hospitalization are all effected as well.

It is sad that something that should be common sense has to be made into a law, but at least law enforcement agencies are making some money off of it. A violation of these cell phone laws could cost somebody up to $50. Since the hands-free law went into effect in July, the California Highway Patrol alone has issued more than 48,000 citations.

Have these laws changed your habits? Do they go too far? Not far enough? What do you think?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Wheat