DuBose Law Firm, PLLC

Main navigation

You are here: Home / Archives for Dallas serious personal injury attorney

Dallas serious personal injury attorney

Less Traffic, More Fatalities

By

When the Covid-19 pandemic lock down began in earnest March of 2020, streets took on an eerie emptiness rarely seen in the Dallas area. It would seem to be good thing; in fact, there were fewer accidents and you would expect fewer serious personal injuries. However, an interesting statistic emerged that with less traffic, more fatalities happened.

In the four counties of Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, and Denton, there were 72 more fatalities than during the same period in 2019. These totaled 480 deaths from vehicle accidents. Robert Wunderlich with the Texas A&M Transportation Institute said, “It’s a very interesting phenomenon. We were surprised to see that. What you would like to see is a proportional decrease in serious crashes in conjunctions with the decrease in total crashes.”

Less traffic, more fatalities: Why?

A couple of reasons came to the forefront. Speed was number one. With fewer cars on the road, people felt they could exceed the speed limit. Engineers are now studying ways to reduce risks on less congested highways.

Another behavior adding to the deaths is an increased use of alcohol and drugs. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, “drug prevalence was high among seriously and fatally injured roadway users before the public health emergency began and was even higher during, especially for alcohol, cannabinoids (active THC), and opioids.” Before the pandemic, 50% of serious or fatal accidents involved these thought-altering substances. Now these account for 65% of serious or fatal accidents.

Are there other factors?

Perhaps not as directly involved with the problem of less traffic, more fatalities, but definitely a contributor, is the condition of streets and roadways throughout the Dallas/Ft. Worth area.

In 2017, Dallas had the 5th highest rate of fatal traffic accidents among the largest 25 cities in the U.S. In addition, it has a backlog of $2 billion in unfunded street improvement needs. Not surprising that so many streets are in disrepair. Also in 2017, Ft. Worth had the 6th highest fatality rate of the same study.

Not only are accidents caused by bad drivers, but by poorly marked lanes, illegible or non-existent signage, pot holes and a myriad of other factors. These are not only an on-site problem, but can damage cars leading to brakes needing repair and other vehicle damage.

In a Dallas City Council traffic safety plan briefing, it was noted that half of the serious accidents in Dallas are on just 8% of the city’s streets. At that meeting, the council endorsed a program called Vision Zero, run by a non-profit group. Its goal is to improve safety on those streets desperately needing attention with the target of zero fatalities.

How to stay safe?

Obviously, first is to be a good driver yourself – no speeding, no thought-altering drugs while driving.

If you live or work in Dallas, there is an interactive map showing street status, planned work, and bond projects. A look at this may help avoid an accident or car repair.

Last, remember to be a defensive driver. A long-remembered line from drivers’ training, “You can be right, dead right as you speed along, but just as dead as if you’d been wrong.”

Stay safe.

Texas Wrongful Death and Survival Claims Explained

By

There is often confusion about Texas wrongful death and survival claims, but Dallas serious personal injury attorney, Ben DuBose, explains, “When tragedy strikes and a person dies because of someone’s negligent conduct, Texas law provides for two general types of recovery in our civil court system: wrongful death and survival claims.”

Survival claims

Survival claims are those personal injury claims the deceased individual would have if they were living. The individual’s death does not extinguish these claims. Rather, they “survive” their death and belong to the estate of the decedent. Survival claims include claims for pain, suffering, mental anguish, lost wages, as well as medical expenses related to treatment of the injury that caused the death.

Wrongful death claims

In addition, claims can be brought by the family of the decedent for wrongful death. Wrongful death claims exist by statute in Texas and belong to the family members of the decedent for the loss of their spouse, parent, or child.

How wrongful death and survival claims work together

DuBose points out that “while wrongful death and survival claims are separate claims, they are brought in the same lawsuit.”

A surviving spouse, parent or child may bring the wrongful death action. However, if none of those individuals have brought the claim within three months of the death of their loved one, the executor of the estate may bring the claim.

Surviving siblings do not have standing to bring a wrongful death action in Texas. However, most states have a wrongful death statute and the classes of relatives with standing to bring a claim vary from state to state.

In some Texas wrongful death claims, exemplary damages are available. Exemplary damages are permitted if the jury finds a wrongful death is caused by a willful act or omission, or by gross negligence. The purpose of exemplary damages is not to compensate the family, but to punish a wrongdoer and to make an example that willful or grossly negligent behavior will not be tolerated.

The award of damages in a Texas wrongful death claim is typically made by a jury. The jury allocates the damage award among the surviving family members in proportion to the injury they suffered as a result of the untimely death.

The Texas wrongful death statute can be found here.

Uber Self-Driving Car Kills Pedestrian

By

The first case of a pedestrian killed by a self-driving car occurred in Tempe, Arizona. This technology is still in the experimental phase, however Uber self-driving cars are on the roads in Pittsburgh, San Francisco, and Toronto – as well as Tempe.

Are self-driving cars safer?

Increased safety was the initial premise for the existence of unmanned self-driving cars. One of the primary causes of automobile accidents is distracted driving. In a robotic car, that should not be a problem, but obviously there are issues to be addressed. Building systems to automatically react appropriately in unexpected situations is a difficult task.

What happened in Tempe?

In this case, the car did have a human in the car as a backup. It appears the car, a Volvo XC90, was going about 40 MPH on dry streets with clear weather at 10 p.m. on a Sunday. An investigation is ongoing since the safety driver did not appear impaired. The victim, a 49 year-old woman, was walking her bicycle in the street. Though this was the first accident involving a pedestrian, one of these autonomous vehicles collided with another car in March of 2017.

Safety measures in place

Because states are eager to encourage testing, there are few regulations in place – not only with Uber, but Waymo, Lyft and Cruise, owned by General Motors. Doug Ducey, governor of Arizona, said in 2017, “We needed our message to Uber, Lyft and other entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley to be that Arizona was open to new ideas.” Originally Arizona mandated a backup driver in the car, but recently that was changed to allow testing of unmanned self-driving cars. This leniency is to boost the economy by allowing a low regulatory environment.

California is on the cusp of allowing unmanned vehicles, but is still investigating the proposition. In its testing of manned self-driving cars, Waymo has produced statistics required by California. When a human has to take control, it’s called a disengagement. In just over a year, Waymo’s cars drove 350,000 miles with 63 disengagements. This averages approximately 5,600 miles between disengagement events, clearly demonstrating the need for more testing before widespread use of unmanned vehicles.

Michael Bennett, an associate research professor at Arizona State University, has been studying the reaction of the public to driverless cars and their artificial intelligence. His comment on the aftermath of the Tempe pedestrian incident reveal his conclusion, “We’ve imagined an event like this as a huge inflection point for the technology and the companies advocating for it. They’re going to have to do a lot to prove that the technology is safe.”

Who’s Fault is Injury from Self-Driving Car?

“Look for insurance companies to lobby for profound changes in state insurance requirements and state laws”, says Dallas lawyer, Ben DuBose. “However, in the Arizona Uber incident, there was a back-up driver in the car. So, there’s still a question of why the back-up driver didn’t disengage and potential liability for her. People will still need car auto insurance and will still have potential liability.”

At the same time, as we head into the self-driving car era, DuBose says to look for additional new legal theories to address the autonomous car features. Automobile manufacturers and software designers will face new product liability claims. As even Volvo Car Corp. Vice President, Anders Karrberg recently testified before Congress “[c]armakers should take liability for any system in the car. So we have declared that if there is a malfunction to the [autonomous driving] system when operating autonomously, we would take the product liability.”

Should Nursing Home Patients Have the Right to Sue?

By

Imagine being admitted as a nursing home patient for rehab from an accident. While there you contract a potentially fatal disease solely the fault of inadequate care.

Maybe you have an elderly parent in another state. You determine that a nursing home close to their friends is the only option for your parent to get the care needed. Then you hear from a visitor that your parent is being neglected, or maybe physically, mentally, or emotionally abused.

In these, and other serious personal injury cases like them, you would generally want to sue – not only for the patient, but to let others know there’s a problem.

The arbitration clause

During the Obama presidency, a ruling from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) banned facilities that accept Medicare and Medicaid funds from requiring residents to sign pre-dispute arbitration clauses. This ban gave them the option to sue – a positive step for patients already stressed.

This ruling never took place due to a preliminary injunction by the American Health Care Association, the nursing home industry trade group. Now it’s possible there will be no option to go to trial due to a new rule by the Trump administration. Nursing homes would be able to continue the requirement for new residents to sign an arbitration clause. Refusal could mean no admittance.

The proposed new rule would require the agreement to be written in plain language, not legalese, with verification that the person understands. Kelly Bagby, a senior counsel with the AARP Foundation, does not think this makes it fair. “The ‘plain language’ requirement ‘gives with one hand the idea that it’s transparent, and takes away with another by saying ‘you don’t have a choice but to sign this.’”

The pros and cons of arbitration

Signing an arbitration clause in a contract – a common procedure at admittance – takes away the patient’s right to a trial. All conflicts must go through a third-party arbitration, generally more secretive than through a civil court, and awards to the plaintiff are up to 35 percent lower. To a population already in a stressful situation, signing this is often misunderstood or perceived as just one more piece of paper to sign.

There are supporters of arbitration. As Matt Webb, senior vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for Legal Reform says, “arbitration is a system that is simpler, fairer, and faster for all parties concerned.” He goes further to say that “Studies basically show that if the arbitration agreement’s not done prior to a dispute arising, very few if anyone ever really agrees to go into arbitration at that point.”

This statement says a lot about the fairness of arbitration. If it’s so fair and simple, why wouldn’t a person agree without coercion?

What you can do

This is not a ruling – yet. If this concerns you, contact your U.S. representatives and senators and give them your opinion. “We the people” still have a voice.