When a Buffalo resident suffers a personal injury in a motor vehicle accident, he or she is required to meet the “serious injury” threshold before damages may be recovered.  Briefly put, the purpose of the “serious injury” threshold is to weed out cases involving only minor injuries.  New York State law sets forth several categories of serious injury that define when an injury qualifies.

Recently, the highest court in New York State, the Court of Appeals, issued a ruling addressing three separate cases involving serious injury:  Perl v. Meher, Adler v. Bayer and Moonan v. Batchi.  The rulings in these cases provide the lower courts with additional guidance regarding when an injury qualifies as a serious injury.
While the cases addressed several issues related to the serious injury threshold, perhaps the most important issue involved the handling of pre-existing conditions.  This is an issue when, for example, an older plaintiff has signs of arthritis in the neck but suffers additional injury to the neck following the motor vehicle collision.  The defense frequently argues in such cases that the entire injury is pre-existing and, therefore, the judge should dismiss the case because there is no proof of serious injury.

The Court of Appeals found that in such cases, whether the condition was pre-existing or caused by the accident is a question of fact that should generally be left to the jury’s decision.  So long as both sides present competent medical proof regarding their position, the judge should allow the jury to make the decision instead of dismissing the personal injury lawsuit.

{ 0 comments }

As experienced Buffalo personal injury attorneys, we have seen the damage caused when tractor-trailers and other commercial vehicles are involved in motor vehicle collisions.  Because of the strong potential for catastrophic personal injury or death in these types of accidents, the drivers of these types of large vehicles have been subject to additional regulation for years.  Recently, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) released new regulations further limiting the number of hours commercial truck drivers may work based on growing concerns of driver fatigue.

Given the distances many commercial truck drivers are expected to cover and the pressure to make timely deliveries, truck drivers’ work hours have been strictly regulated.  Based on recent studies regarding the effects of driver fatigue and how long an individual may drive before fatigue sets in, the FMCSA determined that reduced weekly work hours and mandated additional rest time was necessary for safety.

Significant changes include a reduction in the maximum number of hours a commercial truck driver may work in a seven-day period from 82 hours to 70 hours, and a requirement barring truck drivers from driving after working more than eight continuous hours unless they take at least a 30 minute break.

It was anticipated that the FMCSA also would be reducing the maximum number of driving hours per day from 11 to 10.  While the organization has declined to do so, it has stated an intent to continue analyzing data and researching this issue to determine if a reduction is warranted.  Commercial truck drivers and trucking companies must comply with these new regulations by July 1, 2013.

When releasing these new regulations, the Department of Transportation confirmed that the primary focus was on reducing driver fatigue and preventing truck accidents caused by fatigue.  In an effort to give the regulations additional force and reduce personal injuries and deaths caused by truck accidents, the fines for violating the provisions have also been significantly increased.

{ 0 comments }

It is no surprise that the percentage of Buffalo personal injury auto accidents that may be attributable to distracted driving seems to have increased as cell phones and texting have become prevalent.  Recently, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Administrator David Strickland noted that the biggest challenge his agency faces is finding the right balance between new technologies that make it easier for drivers to report serious accidents – potentially saving lives – and the potential for the very same technology to distract drivers and cause personal injury accidents.

Automakers have increasingly incorporated new communications technology into their vehicles that can be helpful in obtaining help during an emergency.  Unfortunately, many of these devices and systems rely upon cell phones or other electronic technology that has been established to lead to accidents by distracting drivers. 
Mr. Strickland noted that 90 percent of motor vehicle accidents are the fault of drivers, and that the NHTSA is concerned over the number of motor vehicle deaths that are caused by distracted driving.  He also discussed the issue of texting and driving.  Currently, many states and cities, including New York State, ban texting while driving.  There is, however, no NHTSA guideline in place.  Mr. Strickland indicated that they are working with automakers and cellular phone companies to determine the appropriate standard.

Overall, he expressed a hope that once the distracted driving issues are resolved, these technologies could be used to help reduce the serious personal injury and death caused by motor vehicle accidents.

{ 0 comments }

Next time you take a walk around Buffalo, pay attention to the sound of the cars.  While we have all complained at some point about cars and trucks roaring by and disturbing our peace and quiet, a recent study by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) has found that this noise helps pedestrians and bicyclists avoid serious injury.

This government study involved research into accidents involving hybrid vehicles, which usually run on electric power at slower speeds and, as a result, emit little noise.  While the percentage of hybrid vehicles on the roads today is still small, auto manufacturers are releasing a number of new hybrid and fully electric models in 2012, and the number of these vehicles on the roads in expected to grow significantly in the next few years.  The NHTSA conducted this study based on concerns that this influx of quiet vehicles on the roads may ultimately prove hazardous.

The study found that hybrid cars were twice as likely to strike a pedestrian or bicyclist as vehicles with internal combustion engines.  The primary reason for this dramatic difference would appear to be that pedestrians and bicyclists did not hear the hybrid vehicle approaching prior to being struck.  While this finding should concern everyone, it is of specific significance to the blind and visually-impaired, who are at greater risk because they rely on their ability to hear vehicles when walking on or near roadways.

Because the number of quiet vehicles on the roads is expected to increase significantly, the NHTSA is proposing that hybrid and electric vehicles be required by law to make noise at slower speeds.  In an effort to come up with a sound that would both protect pedestrians and bicyclists and work for drivers who want a nice, quiet car, the NHTSA has both consulted with professional sound studios and accepted proposals on Facebook.

If you have been injured by a car, please feel free to call us at 716-542-5444.  We would be happy to explain your legal rights to you.

{ 0 comments }