Category: Product Liability

Accident At Work? You May Have A Personal Injury Claim

Posted by drpadmin on August 18, 2020

Where you hurt while working?

People injured in an accident while working will generally have a claim for worker’s compensation. What many don’t realize is that they may also have a personal injury claim. There are important differences between a personal injury claim and a worker’s compensation claim. One of those important differences provides an important benefit to an accident victim who presents a personal injury claim and could amount to thousands of dollars.

Differences Between Worker’s Compensation and Personal Injury Law

Worker’s compensation laws arose over a century ago to provide a faster way to provide compensation to injured workers. Traditionally, the law did not distinguish between injuries at work and injuries from any other accident. Before legislatures enacted these laws, people injured at work could only receive compensation from their employer for those injuries if they showed their employer was negligent. Employers can try to escape responsibility by showing that the employee was also negligent. In some states, if the employee had any negligent, the employee couldn’t recover anything, not even for their medical bills.

Because of these harsh results and other reasons, legislatures passed laws that allowed an employee to recover against an employer for his or her work-related injury without having to show the employer’s negligence. To provide this new benefit to employees, however, legislatures required a trade-off. In exchange for not having to prove fault, legislatures prohibited employees from bringing personal injury lawsuits against the employers, with few exceptions. Nevada’s worker’s compensation statute, for example, makes worker’s compensation the “exclusive remedy” against an employer for on-the-job injuries. Another trade-off is the loss of the right to obtain compensation for pain, suffering, and lost enjoyment of life. So, under worker’s compensation laws, an employee can get compensated for medical bills and wage loss. However, the injured employee can’t get compensation for the pain and suffering he or she endured. Nevada’s worker’s compensation statutes can be found in Chapter 616A, 616B, 616C, and 616D of the Nevada Revised Statutes.

An employee may have both a worker’s compensation and personal injury claim, however, if the work-related accident was caused by someone other than an employer. That is, if an employee was in an accident while on the clock and the accident was caused by a third-person, the employee can make a worker’s compensation claim and also a claim for personal injuries against the person who caused the accident. The worker’s compensation claim will cover the medical bills and wage loss, while the personal injury claim will cover the pain, suffering, and lost enjoyment of life. Also, if the third party who caused the accident acted recklessly, intentionally, or with malice, the injured employee may have a claim for punitive damages.

Examples of Personal Injury Claims From On-The-Job Accidents

A person running an errand for work gets into a car accident and is injured. That person will have both a worker’s compensation claim and a personal injury claim. The car accident injury claim will be against the person who caused the accident and their insurance company. The experienced Las Vegas car accident attorneys at D.R. Patti & Associates have recovered millions of dollars for accident victims in this situation.

NOTABLE SETTLEMENT

Our client, a master painter, suffered a career-ending injury during a car accident in Las Vegas. While driving from one job site to another, his truck was rear-ended by an SUV. The at-fault driver’s insurance company gave our client a difficult time, because of a prior back injury. Nevertheless, shortly after filing suit, we were able to obtain about a million dollars in total settlement.

A person is injured at work while using defective product, such as a ladder, electric saw, or even a washing machine.

NOTABLE SETTLEMENT

A hotel employee’s was amputated while using a commercial washing machine at work. During their investigation, the accident lawyers at D.R. Patti & Associates discovered that the employer had hired an outside company to repair the washing machine on multiple occasions. The outside company failed to properly repair the machine, which allowed the employee to unknowingly disable the machine’s safety features. After suing both the repair company and the washing machine manufacturer, D.R. Patti & Associates was able to obtain a multi-million dollar settlement for our client’s product liability and personal injury claims.

An employee, as part of their job, is visiting a construction site that is not owned by the employer and is injured due to the negligence of someone at the construction site.
An employee is shopping on behalf of her employer and slips and falls at the store. The employee may have a premises liability claim.

In their combined 50+ years of experience, our accident attorneys have handled the simplest to the most complex accident cases. In that time, the Las Vegas personal injury lawyers at D.R. Patti & Associates have been able to obtain millions of dollars for work-related accident injuries caused by negligent third-parties. If you or a loved one have been injured in an accident while on-the-job and want to know if you also have a personal injury claim, give us a call.

Punitive Damages In Las Vegas Personal Injury Cases

Posted by drpadmin on August 11, 2020

Many people have heard the term “punitive damages” and want to know how it applies to their personal injury or car accident claim in Las Vegas. “Punitive damages” is an amount that is awarded by a jury to punish a party in a civil lawsuit. This term is also sometimes called “exemplary damages,” as the award is intended to set an example. Punitive or exemplary damages is usually contrasted with compensatory damages, which are intended to make an accident victim whole again. Compensatory damages usually include medical bills, lost income, pain and suffering, and lost enjoyment of life.

Punitive damages cannot be awarded in most cases. For a personal injury plaintiff to even be able a jury for punitive damages, the plaintiff must show that the defendant was more than negligent. Negligence generally means careless. In other words, to be able to ask for punitive damages, a plaintiff must show that a defendant was more than careless. In Nevada, usually, this means showing that a defendant acted intentionally, recklessly, or with intent to do harm. In car accident cases, punitive damages usually do not apply but may apply in drunk driving cases. It should also apply to cases where a defendant was texting and driving.

In the McDonald’s coffee cup case that a lot of people seem to know about, the biggest portion of the jury’s award was the punitive damages. The jury in that case awarded $2.7 million against McDonalds. The large jury award in the case upset many people. Those people tend to refer to the McDonald’s case as an example of a frivolous lawsuit where the accident victim became rich. However, the purpose of that $2.7 million award was to punish McDonalds. The plaintiff’s attorney in that case showed that McDonalds served their coffee at temperatures higher than other restaurants. They also showed that, in a decade, McDonalds received about 700 complaints of people suffering burns from their coffee. In awarding punitive damages against McDonalds, the jury believed that McDonalds needed to be punished for their policy and deterred from continuing to follow this policy.

Nevada Law On Punitive Damages

In Nevada, the legislature enacted laws that governs when punitive damages can be awarded. Those laws can be found in Chapter 42 of the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS). Under NRS § 42.005, a jury may award punitive damages against a defendant who “has been guilty of oppression, fraud or malice, express or implied.” NRS § 42.001 defines these terms as follows:

NRS § 42.001. Definitions; exceptions. As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires and except as otherwise provided in subsection 5 of NRS 42.005:

“Conscious disregard” means the knowledge of the probable harmful consequences of a wrongful act and a willful and deliberate failure to act to avoid those consequences.
“Fraud” means an intentional misrepresentation, deception or concealment of a material fact known to the person with the intent to deprive another person of his or her rights or property or to otherwise injure another person.
“Malice, express or implied” means conduct which is intended to injure a person or despicable conduct which is engaged in with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others.
“Oppression” means despicable conduct that subjects a person to cruel and unjust hardship with conscious disregard of the rights of the person.

The Nevada legislature also limited how much punitive damages can be awarded in most cases. Subsection (1) of NRS § 42.005 limits the amount of punitive damage awards as follows:

Except as otherwise provided in NRS § 42.007, in an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud or malice, express or implied, the plaintiff, in addition to the compensatory damages, may recover damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant. Except as otherwise provided in this section or by specific statute, an award of exemplary or punitive damages made pursuant to this section may not exceed:

(a) Three times the amount of compensatory damages awarded to the plaintiff if the amount of compensatory damages is $100,000 or more; or

(b) Three hundred thousand dollars if the amount of compensatory damages awarded to the plaintiff is less than $100,000.

The above limitation on punitive damages do not apply to product defect or product liability cases and to insurance bad faith cases, amongst others. See NRS § 42.005(2).

Examples of Punitive Damage Awards in Nevada

In a recent Las Vegas medical malpractice case, a jury assessed $8 million in punitive damages against a local hand surgeon. The jury found that the hand surgeon had committed fraud. The plaintiff, a U.S. Air Force pilot, claimed that the surgeon performed a procedure that was not the standard of care. In fact, the plaintiff presented expert testimony that no other hand surgeon ever performed or would have performed the same procedure. The plaintiff also argued that the surgeon performed the procedure in order to guarantee that the plaintiff will require future procedures, for which the surgeon can financially benefit.

In a product liability lawsuit, plaintiffs alleged that a drug manufacturer sold hormone replacement therapy drugs that increased the risk of getting breast cancer and failed to adequately warn its customers. The jury found that the defendant guilty of malice or fraud, and a separate trial was held on the question of how much the punitive damage award should be. Following that separate trial, the jury awarded a total of $99 million in punitive damages against the defendant. See Wyeth v. Rowatt, 126 Nev. 446, 244 P.3d 765 (Nev. 2010).

If you or a loved one have been injured and want to know if punitive damages apply to your personal injury case, speak to a Las Vegas personal injury and car accident attorney at D.R. Patti & Associates. Our experienced personal injury attorneys have dealt with punitive damages on many occasions and can answer your questions. Call 702-331-3391 for a free case consultation.

SAFETY GROUP CALLS FOR RECALL OF HYUNDAI AND KIA CARS FOR FIRE HAZARDS

Posted by drpadmin on October 15, 2018

Over 220 complaints of Kia and Hyundai cars spontaneously combusting has prompted the Center for Auto Safety, a non-profit consumer group, to call for the recall of about 3 million Kia and Hyundai vehicles. Previously, the Center had merely called for the National Highway Traffic Safety Institute (NHTSA) to conduct an investigation into an excessive number of Hyundai and Kia cars bursting into flames unrelated to any collision.

In a recent press release, the Center cites over 220 eerily similar incidents of Kia and Hyundai vehicles catching fire, without any collision involved, while someone was driving the car or even when the car is parked. The Center’s executive director, Jason Levine, said that the Center’s own investigation revealed “reports of almost one fire every single day” involving one of five models of Kia and Hyundai vehicles.
The Center is calling for recalls of all Kia Sorento, Kia Optima, Hyundai Sonata, and Hyundai Santa Fe for model years 2011-2014, and Kia Sorenta model years 2010-2015. Such a recall would encompass about 2.9 million Kia and Hyundai vehicles.

Some of these models are already subject to recalls for engine-related defects. It is perhaps one of the most troubling aspects of these non-collision related fires, according to the Center. It has cited over a dozen instances where the non-collision fires occurred after repairs were performed under the engine-related recall.

Co-founded by Ralph Nader in 1970, the Center seeks to protect drivers by advocating for better automobile safety regulations and campaigning for the recall and/or investigation of unsafe vehicles. In its over 40-year history, the Center played a major role in numerous recalls, including the recall of millions of Firestone tires and of over 60 million defective airbags.

If you own any of the Kia and Hyundai models identified by the Center and have suffered injuries and or other damages as a result of a non-collision related fire, you may have a claim. Contact the experienced Las Vegas products liability attorneys at D.R. Patti & Associates and see how we can assist you.