New York Injury Attorneys Blog

As a Car accident lawyer in New York City, I have handled numerous car accident cases in which someone riding a bicycle was hit by a car or truck. In New York City, especially Manhattan, bicyclists are very common on the roadway. The streets congested with fast moving traffic and cars which are often switching lanes and stopping suddenly create a hazardous situation for bicyclists on New York City Streets.

The issue of fault is almost always a he said, she said situation with bicycle accidents. Nevertheless, New York law provides a powerful weapon for New York accident lawyers who represent bicycle injury victims in New York. New York Vehicle and Traffic Law 1146 states that every driver of a car or truck shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any bicyclist, or pedestrian upon any roadway and shall give warning by sounding the horn when necessary. Therefore in any accident in which a car or truck driver sees a bicyclist before the accident, they have some degree in fault for not avoiding hitting the bicyclist.

As a New York car accident lawyer, who also handles a large number of commercial trucking accidents, I have handled numerous personal injury cases involving out of state motorists who cause car accidents in New York.

One of the first questions every personal injury victim of a car accident asks their car accident lawyer is where can I sue. The answer is that New York law provides for jurisdiction over a defendant if the accident occurred in New York. Generally, the lawyer will have to file the lawsuit in the County where injured Plaintiff resides. The New York vehicle and traffic law provides that every out of State resident who drives into the State of New York, by entering New York appoints the New York Secretary of State as his agent for process of service. That means that the New York car accident lawyer can serve the summons and complaint upon the Secretary of State who will accept it on behalf of the out of state motorist. The New York car accident lawyer is required to serve an additional copy by certified mail upon the out of state motorist.

Another question New York car and truck accident lawyers hear is how much insurance is available. Many victims who have sustained personal injuries caused by out of state motorists are told by their insurance companies that they don't have insurance to cover bodily injury, or they only have minimal policies. The law in New York, which all New York car accident lawyers must be familiar with is that New York is a deemer state. This means that any insurance carrier which writes policies in New York is deemed to automatically provide the minimum requirements of the New York Insurance law to the out of state car, regardless of their actual policy limits. This means, that if the out of state car or truck is insured by a company that writes policies in New York, the out of State car is deemed to have New York's minimum requirements, the moment that the car enters the State of New York.

New York's minimum requirements are $25,000 in liability coverage and $25,000 in no fault benefits. If you have suffered a personal injury in New York with an out of state car, you should consult with a New York car accident lawyer, who is experienced in handling car accident cases involving out of state motorists.

The New York Labor Law requires that construction site owners and general contractors provide devices to protect construction workers from a fall while performing construction at a height. The Labor Law is often called the Ladder Law or the Scaffold Law. Our New York construction accident lawyers have won numerous cases on behalf of injured construction workers who had construction accidents because there were no safety lines, safety belts, harnesses or yo-yos in order to tie off lifelines, stanchions ior safety cables in the accident area.

New York construction accident lawyers who represent injured construction workers, under the ladder law have been recently been facing claims that the injured worker's actions were the only cause of the construction accident. New York injury lawyers who handle construction accident cases call this the "blame the victim defense".

Recently the New York Courts have held that liability under Labor Law 240 (the New York ladder law) does not attach when the safety devices that plaintiff alleges were absent were readily available at the work site, albeit not in the immediate vicinity of the accident, and plaintiff knew he was expected to use them but for no good reason chose not to do so, causing an accident. In such cases, the New York Courts have held that the plaintiff's own negligence is the sole proximate cause of his injury. Recently the New York Court of Appeals gave New York construction lawyers a new weapon in the fight for the injured construction worker. The Court of Appeals tightened the standards for this defense by holding that a foreman's testimony that safety devices were available for use at the project site, and that the injured construction worker violated a standing order to use certain equipment. The Court found the affidavit was insufficient to defeat an injured construction workers case were the foreman did not prove that the injured construction worker had actually been told had been told to use such safety devices. While the foreman referred to a "standing order" issued to the project foremen, directing workers to "have a harness on and be tied off," he could not say whether the order had been conveyed to the construction workers. Thus, New York construction lawyers must hold these defendants to these heightened standards to protect our injured construction worker clients.

As a New York City car accident lawyer and Westchester car accident attorney, I have handled numerous hit and run cases. The first question people ask when they suffered an injury in a hit and run car accident is what do I do? If is frustrating and confusing to not know who hit you.

The answer is don't worry, you are entitled to benefits and to recovery damages for your serious personal injury. Who is responsible to pay your benefits and to compensate you for your personal injuries depends on how your car accident happened and whether you were in a car or truck or were a pedestrian.

The New York Insurance Law has set up a fund called the New York Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnity Corporation pays for the medical bills, wages and compensates car accident injury damages for personal injuries, if there is no other insurance available. There is no other insurance available if the other car was either uninsured or it left the scene (hit and run). However, New York law requires car accident insurance companies to provide no fault and uninsured motorist benefits.

So if you were in an insured car, which was involved in a hit and run car accident, the insurance company for the car which you were in has to pay your no fault benefits and provide uninsured motorist benefits.

If you were a pedestrian and were hit by a car, which was either uninsured or fled the scene after the accident.

There are time limits to get these benefits. For example, New York Insurance Law 5208 requires that someone who sustained an injury in a hit and run car accident report the accident within 24 hours or as soon as reasonably possible to a police, peace or judicial officer or to the Commissioner of Motor Vehicle. However the law also states that the fact that the accident was not reported within twenty-four hours after the accident shall not prejudice the rights of the person if it is shown that it was not reasonably possible to make such a report or that it was made as soon as was reasonably possible. Many car insurance policies have similar language as requirements to get uninsured motorist benefits.

Unfortunately, if there was an accident, often the New York City Police Department does not respond to hit and run calls and if they do, they often loose reports. New York insurance companies are notorious for trying to deny claims because of the lack of an accident report. To prevent insurance companies from taking advantage of sloppy police work to harm their insureds who were car accident victims, the courts have consistently afforded a very liberal interpretation to the notice requirement, accepting police contacts that fall far short of the operator's obtaining a written report. If you were injured in a hit and run, in New York City or Westchester, call our New York car accident lawyers for a free consultation.

Unfortunately, many people who have suffered serious personal injuries in car accidents are victims to inadequate insurance coverage. This typically occurs where the person who is responsbile for causing the car accident or the truck accident has only a minimum policy.

Where an accident victim has suffered a serious injury caused by someone with only a minimum liability policy, New York injury lawyers who represent car accident and truck accident victims must explore the availability of supplementary underinsured benefits. The minimum insurance requirement in New York is $25,000 of liability insurance. Where an accident victim has suffered a serious personal injury such as a fracture or back injury that requires surgery or is disabling, that is insufficient.

Where the accident victim has higher insurance limits, their own insurance can be made to pay the difference between the low insurance policy of the defendant and the policy limits of the accident victims. For example, if the car accident victim has $100,000 in insurance and the person who caused the car accident has $25,000 in insurance, then, the defendant's insurance company will pay $25,000, and then the car accident victim with serious persoanl injuries can force their own insurance company to pay $75,000 (the difference between the $100,000 policy and the $25,000).

Under New York law, every car insurance policy automatically must include a S.U.M., endorsement. New York car accident lawyers must put the no fault carrier on notice of an SUM claim as soon as possible after learning the policy limits of the under insured vehicle. Also New York car accident lawyers must get consent from the S.U.M. adjuster prior to settling with the insurance carrier for the car or truck that caused the accident, or else S.U.M. benefits might be lost.

Construction Accident lawyers in New York City must be familiar with the unique challenges that face accident victims who sustain personal injury and even wrongful death because of a structural collapse. These catastrophic failures often cause serious personal injuries to construction workers because of the fault of contractors who cut corners.

Collapses are often seen during demolition, excavation and new construction. In New York, Labor Law 241(6) is often invoked to protect the injured construction worker. New York construction accident lawyers must be careful not to only rely upon Labor Law 240, since many cases have held that where the collapse is due to a vertical or lateral causes (shoring/bracing) as opposed to horizontal (falling) issue, there is no Labor Law 240 violation. Although Labor Law 240 usually applies where the ladder, scaffold, plank or other device which is supporting the construction worker collapses.

Collapse of structure due to unsupported foundation often involve violations of NYCRR 23-4.1 [a] which requires that whenever any excavation is to be performed in the vicinity of buildings, structures or utilities, the integrity, stability and structural adequacy of such buildings, structures or utilities shall be maintained at all times by the use of underpinning, sheet piling, bracing or other equivalent means to prevent damage to or failure of foundations, walls, supports or utility facilities and to prevent injury to any person. The regulation also requires that the underpinning, sheet piling and bracing be inspected at least once each day or more often if conditions warrant by an experienced, designated person.

This regulation is aimed at protecting against collapses associated with a loss of stability created by the excavation and is sufficient to establish a Labor Law 241(6) violation.

Additionally with new construction, Labor Law 200 will often provide a remedy, where structural supports are not properly supported or secured, thereby causing a collapse of a wall or ceiling. .

As an experienced New York personal injury lawyer, I have handled more slip and fall or trip and fall cases than I can remember.

A person who sustains a personal injury in a slip and fall because of a dirty or wet condition must prove the owner of the land either caused the condition or knew or should have known about the condition and failed to remedy it. The "should have known" doctrine is called constructive notice.

Personal injury lawyers may establish constructive notice through evidence that an ongoing and recurring dangerous condition existed in the area of the accident which was routinely left unaddressed by the landlord. When a landowner has actual knowledge of the tendency of a particular dangerous condition to reoccur, he is charged with constructive notice of each specific recurrence of that condition.

Therefore, to establish constructive notice of debris, New York personal injury lawyers can establish that the premises was always dirty or had a recurring tendency to be dirty. This type of evidence will establish constructive notice in a slip and fall personal injury case. .

As a New York construction accident attorney, I have seen numerous accidents where people are injured by materials that are blown or fall off of a construction site. It is incumbent on the construction and building management industries to take proactive steps to protect the public from inadequately stored materials. The recognition of these principles forms the basis for the construction industry practice of barricading and guarding construction loads, materials and activities, which is accurately codified in 12 N.Y.C.R.R. 23-1.18(c)(1) and 12 N.Y.C.R.R. 23-2.1(a), to prevent pedestrians and employees of trades on construction sites from sustaining personal injuries.
Our New York construction accident attorneys have won several cases involving personal injury where construction materials such as the sheet rock were not properly stacked flat on the ground, i.e., vertically, in direct violation of construction industry standards which are reflected in the Industrial Code [12 N.Y.C.R.R. 23-2.1(a)(1)], that require loads to be stacked such that they are stable under all conditions.

By stacking the materials against the exterior wall of the building, a lever function is created which meant that it took less force to move the materials it takes the greatest amount of force to move a load when it is at the horizontal, i.e., at zero degrees. As the load approaches the vertical or ninety degrees, the load becomes increasingly leveraged, therefore easier to maneuver
Labor Law 200 states that all places to which this chapter applies shall be so constructed, equipped, arranged, operated and conducted as to provide reasonable and adequate protection to the lives, health and safety of all persons employed therein or lawfully frequenting such places. Labor Law 241(6) likewise protects people who are lawfully frequenting the premises.

Labor Law 241(6) imposes an obligation upon all owners to make all areas in which construction, excavation or demolition work is being performed to be constructed, shored, equipped, guarded, arranged, operated and conducted as to provide reasonable and adequate protection and safety to the persons lawfully frequenting such places. See Labor Law 241(6). 12 N.Y.C.R.R. 23-2.1(a)(1) entitled maintenance and housekeeping, storage of material or equipment, states that all building materials shall be stored in a safe and orderly manner. The provision further dictates that material piles shall be stable under all conditions and so located that they do not obstruct any passageway, walkway, stairway or other thoroughfare.
The violation of the aforementioned regulation triggers Labor Law 241(6) liability.
Likewise, liability under Labor Law §200 can be imposed where a worker is injured by an unsafe manner of work or by a dangerous or defective condition at the work site. This applies to personal injury caused by unstable or improperly stacked loads.

As a New York Attorney who represents seaman who sustain personal injuries, in New York harbor, I am familiar with the doctrine of unseaworthiness. The general maritime law imposes a duty on shipowners to provide vessels, equipment and crew which are reasonably fit for their intended use. If the vessel, or its equipment or crew are not reasonably fit for their intended use, then the ship or that part of the ship or its equipment or crew, is unseaworthy. Shipowners are responsible to compensate professional mariners who sustain personal injuries because of dangerous conditions aboard a ship.

Unseaworthiness is a claim that the ship or its crew or equipment was not reasonably fit for its intended purpose. To establish an unseaworthiness claim, an injured maritime worker must establish that the ship or its equipment or crew, was unseaworthy; and that such unseaworthiness was a proximate cause of the sailor's personal injury.

A vessel may be unseaworthy because of an inadequate or incompetent crew, including the presence of especially dangerous seamen on the crew; or an assignment of an insufficient number of men to a task; or the. failure to properly maintain equipment; or the failure of equipment under normal and proper use; or misuse of even non-defective, otherwise seaworthy gear; or 'any other unsafe part of the vessel and appurtenances, or any defective gear used; or the lack of a safe means of boarding and departing the vessel.

The shipowner's duty to provide a seaworthy ship is absolute, continuing and may not be delegated to a third party. This means the shipowner is responsible for the dangerous condition aboard a ship regardless of who created it. The shipowner's lack of knowledge or lack of opportunity to correct such conditions, or the shipowner's diligence are irrelevant. If the ship or its equipment or crew (or the relevant part) was unseaworthy and such unseaworthiness was a proximate cause of an injury to plaintiff, then the shipowner is liable to the plaintiff. It is the shipowner's duty to provide a ship, equipment and crew which are reasonably fit for their intended purpose.

If a dangerous condition exists aboard a vessel, whether it was brought into existence by the ship's crew, a third party, or even a fellow employee, the shipowner would still be liable.