Articles Posted in Brooklyn

Published on:

by

The Facts:

On 28 June 2004 at 8 a.m., plaintiff slipped and fell on water located on the sixth floor bathroom of defendant-one, a property owned and managed by defendant-two. A New York Injury Lawyer said the plaintiff alleges that the dangerous water condition which caused his fall and resultant injuries was due to the defendants’ negligence.

On 7 September 2005, plaintiffs commenced the instant personal injury action.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

The Facts:

A New York Injury Lawyer said that on 30 November 1982, the primary plaintiff began to have contractions. The next day, she visited her obstetrician (the “doctor”) who told her to go home and wait. At approximately 5:30 to 5:45 a.m. on 2 December 1982, she ruptured her membranes and her doctor was called. He then advised her to go to a hospital where he would meet her. She was admitted at 8:00 a.m., but the doctor never arrived. A hospital doctor advised the plaintiff that the baby was dead in utero but that nothing could be done until her doctor arrived because she was a private patient. Hours later, after 12:30 p.m., word came that another doctor, the doctor’s partner, would be performing a caesarean. Thereafter, the stillborn child was in fact taken by caesarean.

The plaintiff and her husband commenced a medical malpracticeaction against the obstetrician and his company, the obstetrician’s partner and the Hospital where the caesarian was performed; for the personal injuries or birth injuries suffered.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

On March 26, 2009, a woman was leaving a deli located in her neighborhood. She had frequented the deli two or three times a week for ten years. On this date, as she left the deli, the heel of her shoe slipped into a crack that was concealed beneath the entryway mat and stuck there causing her to fall. She stated that she was injured in the slip and falland that she believes that the deli owners should be liable for her injuries.

The deli owners contend that there was no crack concealed under any mat intentionally or otherwise. A Long Island Personal Injury Lawyer said that they did not create a hazardous situation by placing an entryway mat at that spot, and that they have never had any notice from anyone suggesting that there was a problem with the placement of the mat. The court reviewed the contentions because the deli owners filed a motion for summary judgment releasing them from any liability associated with this case. They maintain that since there is no evidence that they created the problem, or that they were even aware that the problem existed, that the complainant has not met her burden of proof in this case and it should be dismissed.

In New York, according to the statutory law that governs any slip and fall case in which the complainant seeks to be awarded punitive damages because of an injury, they must show that certain criteria have been met. The first criteria that must be met is that there was in fact a hazardous situation. A New York Injury Lawyer said then the complainant must show that the hazardous condition was either caused by the defendants, or the defendants knew or should have known of the existence of the problem. Once the problem is brought to their attention, the defendants have a reasonable time period to correct the problem or to take steps to warn the general public that may be entering or exiting the property that the condition is present. In this case, the defendant contends that there was no hazard. They contend that the only hazard present was the 2 ½ inch high heels that the complainant was wearing that caused her to fall. They maintain that they were never advised of any hazard prior to the woman’s accident.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

On July 26, 2006, at about 11:30 at night, a woman was leaving 335 Madison Avenue where she worked. As she walked across the atrium area, she slipped on a puddle of water that was dripping from an air conditioner vent on the ceiling (slip and fall). She informed the front security attendant that there was water on the floor and that she had slipped and injured herself. However, on the next day, when she returned to work, the water was still there.

It was determined that the water had developed as a result of humidity building up on the vent because the atrium was an area of high humidity. The woman filed a personal injury lawsuit against the janitorial service and the building management for causing the condition that caused her to fall and become injured. In New York, a slip and fall injury case can only be conducted if the victim of the injury can show that the defendants who are named in the suit either caused the hazardous situation, or knew of the situation and did not take steps to rectify it. A New York Injury Lawyer said they can also show that the defendant should have known of the existence of the problem and failed to take steps to rectify the situation in a timely fashion. The defendant must be given time to correct the problem or warn the public that the hazard is present.

In this case, the building management company called their heating and air conditioning manager to testify on their behalf. His first testimony stated that at the time of the accident, the heating and air conditioning system that was located in the building did not possess a fan system to prevent water from condensing on the vents. He stated that after the accident, the equipment was retrofitted to have fans that come on in high humidity situations. However, one year later in court, he testified that the system at the time of the accident had an alarm that would sound when high humidity situations were present. After the alarm sounds, there was a fan that would come on to prevent condensation build up. Because of the testimony that he presented, the building management claimed that they had taken all of the steps that they possibly could to prevent an injury from condensation leakage. Long Island Personal Injury Lawyer said they maintained that it is the responsibility of the janitorial service to ensure that the floors are clean and dry. They requested a summary judgment on their behalf to sever them from the lawsuit.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

Children are precious. In our society, we view children as precious and irreplaceable. Unfortunately, not all people appreciate the responsibility that comes with delivering children into the world. A New York Injury Lawyer said it is heartbreaking to learn of the tragedies that befall some children. In one case, that was heard by the Family Court in Washington County on December 10, 2008, a seventeen year old mother was charged with neglecting and abusing her two month old infant daughter. The girl became pregnant by an older boy when she was in high school. She delivered the baby and returned to school. Care of the baby was shared between her family, her father’s girlfriend, the father’s family, and the father. The mother had at first lived with her own mother while she was expecting the baby, but when a fight broke out between them that involved the mother’s mother physically assaulting her, she returned to her father’s house.

The mother still lived at home with her father and his fiancé. The father lives with his parents. The infant lives primarily with the mother and her father and her father’s fiancé. The child is shuffled between the two families throughout the day. The child’s father often drives the child’s mother to school or picks her up from school to transfer the child. On January 30, 2008, the father of the child collected the mother from school and they both took the infant to her well-baby check-up where she received two vaccinations in each leg. That day and into the evening hours, the baby was restless and fussy. The mother later testified that the baby often had trembling episodes that sometimes lasted for an hour. She stated that the baby would become limp or vague as if she had just drifted off somewhere. The next two days were spent primarily with the mother since there was a heavy snowfall that kept the mother out of school for the next two days.

On Friday following the shots on Wednesday, the mother’s father took her to the Glens Falls Hospital to have an interview for a job. The baby stayed in the car with her grandfather while her mother went in for the interview. By this time, according to the mother, the child had exhibited a fever, fussy behavior, vomiting, and lethargy which the mother states she had associated with the vaccinations. The grandfather did not notice anything wrong with the child in the 45 minutes that they waited in the hospital parking lot in spite of the fact that he is a medical doctor. Following the interview, the mother returned to her boyfriend’s house with the child. The mother and father of the child, left the baby with his parents and went out for the evening to the fire department where the baby’s father volunteers. They returned to the boyfriend’s house at around 10:30 at night. When they got there, they noticed that the baby had begun to projectile vomit and looked like she was having seizures. They woke up the baby’s father’s mother who drove them to the emergency room with the child.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

Medical malpracticecan alter a person’s life. In some cases, the damage that is done is so severe that it renders the person’s quality of life unbearable. In one such case, a woman sought medical care because she was experiencing severe abdominal pain. The pain was so severe that it drove her to seek immediate correction of the problem. That put her at North Shore University Hospital at forest Hills in August of 1999. She was diagnosed with an 8 cm sized cyst on one ovary. Her initial hospitalization for removal of the cyst was on the 19th. She remained in the hospital following the removal of the cyst until the 23rd. On the 25th, she was seen by her doctor in his office. At that time, the doctor readmitted her into the hospital. She was suffering from constipation and abdominal pain. She underwent a CAT scan which revealed that she had a pocket of fluid built up in her pelvic cavity. It was drained, and discovered to be urine. At that point, the doctor called in a Urologist to see her. The Urologist put in a catheter from her left kidney to the outside of her body because there was an obstruction located in the left ureter. The woman was discharged again from the hospital on September 4, 1999.

A New York Injury Lawyer said the woman continued to suffer from abdominal pain and decided to go to a different urologist. This time, she went to Queens-Long Island Medical Group, where she was seen by a different doctor on November 17, 1999. The doctor cleaned out the catheter and her pain subsided. He told her that she needed to have exploratory surgery done in order to determine what was causing the blockage of the left ureter and to repair it. He told her that she could wait to have the procedure done until after the holidays if she desired.

In early January, the woman had to go to the emergency room where she was readmitted again. This time she had an infection at the site of the catheterization. She was given antibiotics and on January 10, of 2000, she had the exploratory surgery that the urologist had recommended. During this procedure, the surgeon discovered that there was fibrotic tissue surrounding her left ureter. He performed a procedure to reroute the urine around the obstruction and into the bladder. The woman was in the intensive care unit until January 14, 2000. The woman was not released from the hospital following this procedure until January 22, 2000.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

A general contractor was hired by a tenant of a building in Manhattan. The project was to install duct work into the intake air duct down in a shaft below street level in front of the building. A New York Injury Lawyer said the general contractor hired an air conditioning contractor to install the duct work at the job site. The air conditioning contractor subcontracted out its work to the metal sheet contractor.

The complainant was employed by the metal sheet contractor as a journeyman sheet metal worker, whose responsibilities were to hang and install duct work through the supervision of the complainant’s foreman. On November 9, 2004, the complainant and his foreman went to the building in order to install a large piece of prefabricated duct work, known as gooseneck duct, below street level. According to the complainant, the gooseneck duct was the size of a car and was approximately six feet long, six feet wide, and five feet tall, and weighed between 110 and 125 pounds. The site where the gooseneck duct was to be placed was located below a series of about 40 metal grates that were in place on the ground. Each grate measure approximately two feet by four feet, and this grating covered an area of the ground measuring approximately 12 feet by 8 feet. The vault below the grating was approximately 15 feet deep.

In order to install the gooseneck duct below ground, the grating on the street level needed to be opened. The gooseneck duct was to be lowered through an opening in the grates in order to be installed below them.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

A boy was invited by his friend to a sleep over at his house. He had been to his friend’s house several times before. A New York Injury Lawyer is friend had a family pet, a beagle-collie-Rottweiler mixed breed dog. The dog was excitable. He ran around a lot and barked. But he was not aggressive.

On that night that seven boys were at the house for the sleep over on December 31, 1998, one of the boys went down to the kitchen to use the bathroom. The family pet barked at him. The boy was not afraid. He went to the bathroom and he was already on his way back up to his friend’s room when he saw his friend’s mother with the dog.

Whenever there were visitors to their home, the family kept the dog fenced-in in the kitchen as he barked when he saw the guests. As the boy was going back up the stairs, his friend’s mother called him over and told him to put his hand out so the dog can smell him. The mother told him that the dog will remember that he had been to their house before. The boy was not afraid as his friend’s mother had the dog on a leash. When the boy reached out to the dog, the dog lunged at the boy and bit him. The boy sustained a head injurybecause of the dog attack.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

A married woman owned a property with a two-car garage. She decided to renovate the two-car garage by making it over into a guesthouse with a fireplace. She hired a general contractor to secure the necessary permits and licenses needed for the project; to hire and to supervise sub-contractors for each and every phase of the work; and to purchase insurance to shield the owner from suits in damages for any accidents that may occur during the renovation at the worksite.

The general contractor hired a company that constructs and installs drywall. It also hired a rock supplier to provide and install sheet rock as flooring. A man was hired by the rock supplier to deliver 16-foot sheet rock. A New York Injury Lawyer said he drove the truck on which the sheet rock was delivered. He also operated the boom that lifted the sheet rock from the truck bed to the forklift. A foreman from the general contractor told him to just bring the sheet rock into the garage and rest them on the long wall. The man and his helper took one sheet rock and carried it between the two of them. They entered the garage. When they got to the room where they were supposed to pile the sheet rock, the man’s right foot slipped into a hole on the cement floor of the worksite that measured about sixteen inches in diameter. There was a pipe that protruded from the hole and the man tripped on this and fell. The man could not see where he was going as he and his helper carried the sheet rock in between them. His slip and fall made him land on the sheet rock which fell and broke.

The man sustained serious personal injury and sued the owner of the premises (premises liability), her husband, the general contractor, the drywall installer, and the rock supplier for common law negligence and for negligence under the labor code to compensate him for the damages he sustained as a result of his personal injury.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

In June 1969, a woman gave birth to a baby but the baby survived only for five hours. The baby had polycystic kidney disease. This is a genetic and hereditary disease but the couple did not know this at the time of the birth of their first baby. After their first baby was born and soon after the baby died, the woman and her husband spoke to the obstetricians who took care of her during her first pregnancy.

A New York Injury Lawyer said the couple asked the obstetricians plainly if the woman gets pregnant again, would their baby also have the same disease that their first baby died of. The doctors plainly told the couple that the chance that their next baby would have the same polycystic kidney disease was practically zero. The couple relied on this advice by the obstetricians and so the woman conceived soon after.

When the woman gave birth in July 1970, their baby girl was delivered by the same obstetricians. The baby girl also had polycystic kidney disease. The second baby, however, survived for two years suffering much pain before finally succumbing to death from the same polycystic disease.

Continue reading

Contact Information