Mesothelioma Asbestos Lawyer, DuBose Law Firm, PLLC

Main navigation

You are here: Home / Archives for texas personal injury lawyer

texas personal injury lawyer

The Life or Death Decisions of Autonomous Vehicles

By

Though not seen often – yet – autonomous vehicles are on the streets bringing the advantages of artificial intelligence (AI). The goal is to make driving decisions without the human tendencies toward distraction or impaired driving. These autonomous vehicles also must make life or death decisions when an unexpected event occurs. On what basis are these critical decisions made? Can this be programmed into a software driven car or truck?

Autonomous Vehicles Making Life or Death Decisions

Can moral decisions be programmed? If a self-driven car judges a potentially fatal accident is imminent, does it choose to sacrifice passengers or pedestrians? Does the number in each group matter; two passengers or five pedestrians? What if the passengers include a child and the pedestrians comprise a group of elderly citizens? Should it endanger passengers to avoid hitting an animal? These and millions of other difficult scenarios have been discussed for years. There is even a website platform, the Moral Machine, created by MIT Media Labs where anyone is invited to make judgements in these situations. So far, people in over 200 countries have contributed.

What does data show?

Interesting data has been uncovered from the Moral Machine regarding the decisions people would make. In general, there is a consensus to save children over adults. Yet, in Far Eastern countries, the elderly would be saved first. So, even areas of the world come to different decisions – Western, Eastern, Southern – especially in complex situations.

Nicholas Evans, philosophy professor at the University of Massachusetts, writes, “You could program a car to minimize the number of deaths or life-years lost in any situation, but then something counter-intuitive happens. When there’s a choice between a two-person car and you alone in your self-driving car, the result would be to run you off the road. People are much less likely to buy self-driving vehicles if they think theirs might kill them on purpose and be programmed to do so.” What people say in surveys versus what they would want to happen if they, or loved ones, are involved varies greatly.

Though extremely difficult to program to fit so many scenarios, there must be moral programming for the AI to make the autonomous vehicles accepted. This is especially true since there is not a global consensus for the morality of any given situation. In addition to life or death decisions, the vehicle is computing routes, traffic, obstacles, speed, condition of vehicle and countless other parameters.

What is next?

The ultimate goal is reducing accidents exponentially. Until almost all vehicles are controlled by AI and can interact, that will not happen. Even then, everyone who has anything electronic knows that there can be bugs and glitches, service going down, hackers, and the unknown.

Once there is an accident, there will need to be a decision on liability. These computer-driven vehicles will be equipped with essentially “black boxes” that record the previous 30 seconds or so of data. This information will make it easier to reconstruct what occurred, but who is to blame? What stage of the vehicle’s development created this accident: software developer, vehicle manufacturer, communication provider, or one of the other multiple vendors supplying parts?

Much is still unknown as this is a huge change in transportation globally. As more and more of these vehicles are introduced to our streets and highways, data collected will lead to more answers and probably more questions as well.  

Statistics on Vaping-related Diseases and Deaths Rise

By

Statistics on vaping-related diseases and deaths rise almost daily, it seems.

  • On August 23, the first vape-related death was found. This patient used vaping for the nicotine content.
  • Another five deaths were reported within a month – some using vapes containing THC, others nicotine.
  • On September 11, the Trump Administration pushed for a ban on all flavored e-cigarettes in the US because of the attraction to under-aged youth.
  • By September 12, The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported a confirmed 26 states reported 380 cases of illness from vaping in addition to the six deaths.
  • September 15, Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York announced the first state ban on all flavored e-cigarettes, except tobacco and menthol. Michigan followed with their statewide ban.
  • By September 26, The CDC stats rose to 805 cases of lung injury in 46 states and one territory. The death toll was 12 people.
  • By October 4, the FDA published a statement, “[T]he agency believes it is prudent to stop using vaping products that contain THC or that have had any substances added to them, including those purchased from retail establishments. Simply put, inhaling harmful contaminants in the lungs could put a patient’s health at risk and should be avoided.” The FDA warning included purchasing vapes containing THC from retail stores or on the street.

Vaping-related diseases and deaths in Texas

These confirmed cases may be the first wave of a tsunami of illness and death from these innocent-appearing and marketed devices. It is notable that September 25th, the CEO of Juul, Kevin Bruns, stepped down from his position. Juul launched in 2015 and by 2017 had a larger e-cigarette market share than any other competitor, including the major tobacco companies. At the time Bruns resigned, Juul published a release stating Juul “suspended all broadcast, print and digital product advertising in the US.”

As of October 9th, 95 cases of severe lung diseases were reported by Texas health officials. These patients reported vaping before symptoms began. One person died as a result according to the Texas Department of State Health Services (TDHS). Another 28 deaths possibly involving vaping are under investigation. These patients are between 13 and 75 years of age, with a median age of 22. One quarter of patients are minors. TDHS reported approximately 9 in 10 cases vaped marijuana or THC, though the dangers of nicotine are not insignificant and much is still to be researched.

Texas is a big state, with many students in the vulnerable ages of the vaping trend. The Texas A&M University system now bans e-cigarettes and vaping in every “building, outside space, parking lot, garage and laboratory” according to John Sharp, chancellor of the Texas A&M system – this means all properties, not just the 11 universities. The University of Texas system also banned vaping in an overall tobacco ban in 2017, however, the American College Health Association recommends institutions go further. Since the wording might be misconstrued as applying only to traditional tobacco products, the association believes the wording must reflect strict no-tobacco language and include all methods of smoking, including e-cigarettes and vaping. 

Will the bans help?

A USA TODAY/Ipsos poll showed 80% of people agree purchasing of vaping devices should not be allowed for people under 21. 59% of respondents believe the ban will lead users to the black market, while 82% of vapers think that is true. Users also say government regulations will not reduce users, according to another survey.

If you are vaping, consider your health and that of those around you. Statistics are not in your favor.

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.

Popcorn Lung in E-Cigarette Users A Possibility

By

According to a Harvard study, a chemical, diacetyl, may cause a condition called Popcorn Lung in e-cigarette users. Popcorn lung was first observed in the early 2000s when workers at a microwave popcorn factory were sickened by breathing the chemical, used because of its buttery flavor.

Popcorn lung in e-cigarette users

E-cigarettes come in many flavors, making them appealing to teenagers as well as adults. Most users think these are a healthy substitute for smoking cigarettes. Unfortunately, they are misguided. The same chemical, diacetyl, that produced irreversible bronchiolitis obliterans and even death to workers in popcorn factories, is present in many of the flavored ‘juices’ of e-cigarettes.

Harvard researchers found that 39 of 51 e-cigarette brands contained diacetyl and, of the two other harmful chemicals present, 23 included 2,3 pentanedione and 46 contained acetoin. In total, approximately 92 percent of e-cigarettes tested had at least one of the three chemicals.

What is popcorn lung?

The scientific disease name, bronchiolitis obliterans, is actually a scarring of the lungs’ small air sacs. This scarring thickens and narrows the airways. Though the common disease name, popcorn lung, sounds harmless, it definitely is not. The devastating results are coughing, wheezing, and shortness of breath – similar symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) – and can lead to death.

Why is this legal?

Once the effects on popcorn workers were discovered, diacetyl was removed from popcorn products. However, until the May 5th announcement by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that they will extend their oversight on tobacco products to include e-cigarettes, there was no FDA oversight. This announcement means that in August key provisions of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act on sales, marketing, and manufacturing of e-cigarettes will be enforced, but there is a caveat. For three years manufacturers can test their products and complete FDA applications for review while their products can remain in the market.

The 2015 Harvard study concluded, “Because of the associations between diacetyl and bronchiolitis obliterans and other severe respiratory diseases observed in workers, urgent action is recommended to further evaluate this potentially widespread exposure via flavored e-cigarettes.”

While there are groups wanting more proof that there is actual danger, the American Lung Association thinks the danger is real, three years is too long, and the FDA should quickly require removing diacetyl and all other harmful chemicals from e-cigarettes.

Learn more

Even if you are still undecided about the effects of diacetyl in vaping, there are many other additives in e-cigarettes that are harmful, including nicotine, formaldehyde, carbonyl compounds, metals, propylene glycol, glycerol, fine particulate matter, and flavoring chemicals.

Here are two good links. For more public information on e-cigarettes and lung health and for a number of articles on how to quit – or help someone else quit – smoking.

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.”