San Francisco Injury Lawyer Blog

Apropos our last blog, we would like to comment on other safety improvements created for San Francisco’s streets. Monday of this week, SFMTA crews have installed new continental crosswalks at the intersection of Harrison and Main streets, and the pedestrian countdown signals have been timed to give pedestrians a four second head start, according to a report by streetsblog.org. The report points out it has been seven years since advocates in Rincon Hill began lobbying the agency for changes following the death of retired sf state journalism professor Beverley Keyes (see: our blog on that particular accident). Harrison and main is notorious for being one of the more dangerous intersections in the city, and drivers often lose their patience at that spot, as it serves as four-lane westbound throughfare for people headed in that dirction, and there is a fifth eastbound lane that carries 12,000 drivers daily, most of whom are strictly headed to the bay bridge. Drivers routinely speed and block the crosswalk as they crawl towards their destinations. Three people have died there since 2003, and many others have been injured.

We are lucky that city officials are paying attention to the need for safety improvements and are figuring out ways, fiscally, to make them happen. But what about the rest of the country? We found some insight into that question in separate report by streetsblog.org that highlights the fact our country’s roads, bridges and transit systems are deteriorating, the effects of which are gradual and difficult to detect, and describes what will happen if government fails to act and spend money on the problem. As a result, we would like to share what we learned. According to the report, if government decides to defer maintenance costs, it will cost families and businesses directly. To be more specific, damaged roads lead to damaged private and commercial vehicles, and extra miles driven to avoid congested roadways lead to more money spent on gas, and unreliable roads lead to unreliable transit and commercial trucking routes, which will ultimately lead to diminished productivity becuase people won't arrive to work on time. And, if spending costs are reduced by a third, as Rep. John Mica has proposed, then by 2040 efficiency related losses are expected to directly result in the loss of 400,000 jobs. On top of that, if current investment trends stay the same, then by 2020 businesses would need to pay an extra $430 billion in transportation costs, household incomes would fall by $7,000 and U.S. exports would fall by $28 billion.

So it makes sense when economic experts proclaim that reducing infrastructure spending to ease the debt crisis will make the crisis worse than it already is, and that whether we borrow money or defer maintenance, either way, we would be transferring that cost on future generations. But the failure to do nothing will definitely erode our nation’s economy further, hurt our global economic competitiveness and degrade the quality of life for all. In this situation, less is definitely not more. It will be interesting to watch how this plays out, as there is no easy solution.

Continue reading " New Crosswalk for a Dangerous San Francisco Intersection, and Other Issues Regarding Road Improvements " »

Last week the SFMTA approved a measure to lower speed limits on Harrison and Bryant Streets from 30 mph to 24 mph, according to a report by streetsblog.org. We think that is a great idea and would like to point out a few impotant bits of information from that report. It turns out that pedestrian crashes are reported to be the most highly concentrated in this area. Last year, 240 people were injured and four were killed on SOMA’s streets—a situation that proves costly to the city. The Department of Public Health reported that the average price of admitting an injured pedestrian to the hospital is nearly $80,000, of which 76% is paid by public funds, and that at least 20 percent of pedestrian crashes go unreported. Hopefully this measure will improve safety in the area without costing the SFMTA too much, as they have less than $1 million in revenue available to them each year for pedestrian improvement projects, which, as they always claim, is their biggest hurdle. Other projects, like the proposed 15 mph school zone pilot, have been on hold as the agency waits for grants to do study and implementation. Lack of proper funding has been such an impediment to safety improvements, as well as good old fashioned bureaucracy, that the agency hopes to create change with the help of community groups and other city agencies, not just government funding, just like what took place for Cesar Chavez Street improvements.

Earlier this year, also according to streetsblog.org, the SFMTA approved a blue print to improve safety project on Cesar Chavez street, a project that had been in the works for five years and was created by the department of Public Works, the Public utilities Commission, and the SFMTA. They all worked together to build the project, and, for the all those who participated, it proved to be a powerfully inspiring example of what can happen when community groups band together. The safety plan includes cost-efficient features, such as bike lanes, a landscaped median, and sidewalk bulb-outs, as well as sewer pipe and lighting projects that have already been planned by the PUC. The changes will no doubt be a welcome sight for cyclists, drivers, pedestrians, and residents alike, as that stretch of road has been dangerous and unsightly for years, and was just becoming worse. Construction on the street portion of the plan is scheduled for the fall. New speed limits along the Embarcadero to 13th street at Harrison and the Embarcadero to 11th street at Bryant are also expected to receive approval from the SFTA in the near future.

With two to three people being hit by cars every day on San Francisco Streets, these changes are likely going to save lives and ease the economic toll from injury accidents. Pedestrian accidents alone have racked up millions of dollars worth of bills for injuries, and, as a consequence, advocates have urged safety measures be taken immediately. Residents can no longer afford to pay the price for living in a district with lacking safety conditions. San Francisco has been celebrated for being a walking city, but how can that be if you are four times more likely to die walking than if you are driving? Hopefully, the upcoming safety projects lower those statistics and help make walking safely in the city a reality for everyone.

Continue reading " Safety Improvements Scheduled for San Francisco Streets " »

Nancy Ho, a 25-year-old cyclist was struck by a food delivery truck in downtown San Francisco on Tuesday. The truck was heading west on Mission, and s much as I would not like to say the next part, it must be said: the cyclist made an illegal left turn onto Fremont in front of the truck and was not wearing a helmet. Consequently, sadly and unfortunately, she died yesterday, as reported by sfweekly. Maybe this young cyclist didn’t know that she was making an illegal turn until it was too late. Maybe she did know. But this is not the time or place to make contentious arguments in either direction. We will never know what she was thinking. Either way it is simply tragic, and sometimes and accident is just accident. However, this incident does underscore the importance of keeping safe out there on San Francisco’s bustling streets, whether you are driving, walking, or cycling, and that is a point we cannot stress that enough. (For information on bike safety and road rules, see our former post-- San Francisco Bike Attorney: Bike Accidents with Cars or Trucks)
Cyclists must remember that their lives are at stake once they start pedaling. Every moment counts out there. Wearing a helmet, cycling defensively and not taking any chances by assuming that drivers are looking out for you is a great way to stay safe and a great way to stack the deck your favor. Also, knowing your bike route before you hit you road could save your life. Our friends over at the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, folks who work hard campaigning for a complete system of safe bikeways to be built throughout San Francisco, offer free workshops on how to ride your bike safely, confidently, and respectfully. We encourage both novice and experienced cyclists alike to sit in on these classes --from which the former can learn something new and the latter can pull information they may have forgotten or never knew. With all the recent bike and pedestrian accidents, we feel the need to share some other general safety tips for cyclists:
Be extremely aware of traffic around you and be prepared to brake in an instant.
Yield to all pedestrians (this is not just a tip—it is the law).
Use extreme caution when cycling past park cars, as driver may not see you when the open the door or when pulling out of the space.
Stay out of a driver’s blind spot and make sure you are noticed as much as possible.
Avoid traveling alongside cars when moving thru intersections, as they might turn into you without signaling.

Continue reading " A Young Cyclist Tragically Dies After Being Hit in San Francisco " »

Last week a cyclist ran a red light on the Embarcadero and hit a pedestrian, sending her to the hospital with a life threatening head injury. The cyclist was not injured and has not been cited or arrested for the infraction. The police may or may not file charges, as the investigation is pending. Here in California cyclists face the same potential legal repercussions a driver of a car involved in a car accident might face, if they were found to be responsible. Albie Esparza, the officer on the scene, pointed out cyclists need to remember to stop at every stop sign and every stop light, as they are considered a motor vehicle, with the human being acting as the motor. He also pointed out, in not so many words, that while officers do conduct traffic stops on cyclists, it just isn’t practical to go after a cyclist every time they commit infraction.

Often we hear about pedestrians who have been injured by cars, but few pedestrians are injured by cyclists. This kind of thing, however rare it may be, can happen to any cyclist and pedestrian at any moment. In their fight for their right to share on the road, some cyclists have forgotten the bigger picture: that everyone has the right expect others to follow the rules of the road and that drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians need to look out for each other. At the same time, however, the rules of safety on the road go both ways-- both drivers and non drivers need to be aware of traffic. It is true that pedestrians need to learn how to walk defensively in this city, as sidewalks are occupied by not just pedestrians. They are home to rollerbladers, skateboarders, scooters, and even segways. And the intersections between sidewalks include not only cars—there are bicycles, skateboarders, and scooters there, too. Pedestrians need to look out for their own safety and not assume cars and bicyclist are paying attention. It would be wise for all pedestrians in San Francisco to adapt situational awareness everywhere they walk. It is important for pedestrians to stay out of a driver’s blind spot, make eye contact with drivers when crossing busy streets, and cross the street only when it is safe, not only when the signal tells your or when you have the right of way. Keeping things in perspective is key. It doesn’t matter if you have the right of way when an inattentive driver comes along and runs over you. Being right isn’t always point out there in the streets. Staying alive is.

Continue reading " A Cyclist Injurs a Pedestrian--Not the Usual Type of San Francisco Bicycle Accident " »

52-year-old Dr. Kevin Mack died yesterday morning, and three others were injured at the intersection of Octavia and Hayes. A big rig carrying cars crashed into a UCSF shuttle transporting employees to work. UCSF still have not made officials had no immediate comment. The big-rig was headed north on Octavia at Oak Street. Mack was ejected in the crash and landed underneath the big-rig. Three other passengers, ranging in age from 58-85 years of age, were taken to San Francisco General Hospital for treatment of minor injuries. Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi aknowleged the crash underscores the sometimes dangerous conditions on Octavia Boulevard. He said: “I am acutely aware of the ongoing concerns generated by traffic and those trying to negotiate in and around Octavia...the area is especially confusing to visitors in San Francisco,” such as out-of-state drivers."

Our research revealed that Octavia Boulevard was designed to resemble, both form and function, the multi-way boulevards found in many high-density European cities, which began in the age of horse-drawn carriages and foot traffic, and then had to find ways to accommodate cars. The urban planners of Octavia decided that such boulevards were pleasant, functional, and contrary to their reputation in America, not dangerous at all. They rejected the latter idea and made believe that the boulevards are better and less rigid than typical American streets and that they would allow pedestrians and cars to make instinctive, rather than enforced, room for one another. Well, that is nice in theory, but this is not Europe—and although Europhiles would like to believe San Francisco is like Europe—it is not. Over there, the driving situation is organized chaos, and everyone is on the same page. We have yet to catch on to that spirit. What is more, that boulevard carries many out-of-towners into the city, like this truck driver from min, who are not familiar with our hilly streets, nor our street engineering, such as that on Octavia. At the same time, there is no telling if that accident wouldn’t have happened all the same if the truck driver were familiar with our streets. We won’t know until the investigation is over, but the truck driver said he had the right of ways, and so did a witness, who said that the shuttle ran the red light. So maybe this is a straightforward case of driver inattention and has nothing to do with street engineering.

Continue reading " When a Big-Rig and Shuttle Bus Collide " »

An Illinois woman has filed a lawsuit against AstraZeneca, accusing them of failing to provide adequate warnings about the risks associated with taking the drug. In the lawsuit she claims its prescription heartburn drugs—Prilosec and Nexium, also known as protein pump inhibitors—caused her to suffer multiple and painful fractures of her feet. In March of this year the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warned that prescription versions of these drugs were associated with increased risk of fractures, and, in May 2010, the agency announced it would be adding information about the potential fracture risk to the Nexium label. All this came on the heels of a review of several epidemiological studies which reported an increased risk of the wrist, spine and hip associated with the use of protein pump inhibitors.
After reading about the new lawsuit, two jury verdicts having to do with protein pump inhibitors come to mind, both of which involved wrongful death settlements whose parties remain anonymous for the purposes of confidentiality. The first case is medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff suffered from gastric problems, was diagnosed with different gastric disorders, and was prescribed Prilosec over 38 times when he actually had gastric cancer, and, according to the lawsuit, died because he had not been timely treated or diagnosed by doctors who were negligent in failing to order and perform the proper diagnostic test. The family was awarded over a million dollars. The other case involved a man who had cardiovascular issues and high cholesterol, was prescribed Prilosec, (as side note: in this particular case the reason he was prescribed Prilosec is unknown, as the case details remain confidential, but research suggests the drug may lower cholesterol levels by inhibiting the amounts of cholesterol-producing enzymes produced in the liver), and he then died after having an adverse reaction to the drug. The family received a half a million dollars.
With more and more people being prescribed protein pump inhibitors at an alarming, and perhaps even an indiscriminate, rate, it is no wonder there are not more lawsuits pending. The newness of such drugs poses a real problem for consumers because doctors and researchers really don’t know, and won’t know for a very long time, what the long term affects of these drugs will be. It is like patients are guinea pigs in a large experiment which, for the most part, seems to be out of control. The current studies and reports produce finding that are not concrete, nor are any of them final; they’re open ended and vague, and they’ve only just begun.

Continue reading " The Complicated and Dangerous Side Effects of Prescription Drugs " »

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard a case that addressed the rights of employees to bring certain class-action lawsuits. In Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, et al., which was decided on June 20, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the claims of over one million women, who were suing Wal-Mart based on discrimination in the workplace. There was no decision by the U.S. Supreme Court as to whether or not the women were, in fact, discriminated against on the basis of their gender in decisions regarding pay and promotions. Instead, it was decided that the women could not proceed as a class action to bring their claims. Part of the Court’s rationale was based on the plaintiffs’ inability to show a “communality of issue”, or that the plaintiffs had all suffered essentially the same harm.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23 (a)(2) requires a party seeking class certification to prove that the class has common "questions of law or fact.” The Supreme Court essentially held that the class in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes was not certified properly, and relied upon its decision in General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon 457 U.S. 147, 157-158 (1982) to reject the class for a lack of communality. In Falcon, the U.S. Supreme Court found a wide gap between the claims of promotion discrimination and the allegations that the company had a policy to engage in such discrimination.

The impact of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes will affect the ability of other class-action cases to become certified in areas that certainly include employment, but also include products liability or consumer class-action claims.

Continue reading " U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes will affect the certification of many class-action lawsuits " »

During your commute do you ever long to finish that novel you started six months ago, or play on your iPad, or start knitting that sweater for your 6 year old nephew, or finish that report your boss asked for last week, or unwrap and take a bite out of the tuna sandwich you made for lunch? If you live in Nevada, you can. Nevada just passed a law requiring the Nevada DMV to set guidelines for a person to obtain an autonomous vehicle driver’s license. So, sometime in future, anyone in Nevada longing to unleash the rebel inside will finally get to feel the pleasure of driving and texting with a cop driving right behind them. Just think of it, it’s like giving the finger to the existing rules your driving instructor hammered into your brain, rules having to do with keeping your eyes on the road and both hands on the wheel, the very rules created to maintain order and safety on our roads. The creators and supporters of the law, and the cars, contend that the driverless car can speed up traffic times, invite greater packing of cars sharing the road, give city’s the opportunity to take in more cars, allow drivers more free time to work or enjoy their commute, and, most importantly, save lives by reducing traffic accidents caused by careless or inattentive (or even drunk) drivers. We’ll see what other amendments get tacked on to this law once the driverless cars are bought and driven. Really, how much can a driver sit back and not pay attention? What if the car malfunctions and an accident occurs? Will Google and auto manufacturers be exempt from liability when software or hardware malfunctions and causes an accident? Some economic experts suggest that a company may be not be so willing to accept legal liability associated with selling driverless cars and may not want to invest significant capital to help further the technology.

There are some other issues to consider as well. What if one these robotic cars breaks a traffic law? Who pays the fine then? How will they handle in some sort of unpredictable situation? Then who is responsible, the human or the car? Are we ready as a society to allow robots to control our live and to blindly accept they will keep us safe? More of these types of questions will present themselves down the road (pardon the pun) to be sure. How the law is interpreted and analyzed when it shows up in a courtroom, and how it morphs over time, and whether the law will be interpreted how the legislature intended will be interesting to watch. Because, like every law with its plain language, the courts will, most likely, have to decide what protections are applicable to car owners and their manufacturers and who is liable for negligence after an accident. The legal community will also have ample opportunity to examine and reexamine the language of the law. The next important question is: when will California pass its own hands free law?

Continue reading " The Dawn of Driverless Cars in Nevada, and Perhaps the San Francisco Bay Area " »

Yesterday, a woman lying the tracks at Glen Park Station escaped with minor injuries after a train traveling at 30mph passed over her, according sfexaminer.com. Bart police shut down the station during the morning commute to determine how the woman managed to get on the tracks. The spokesman for Bart said that a train operator tried to slow down when he saw the woman standing up on the Glen Park tracks at around 8:15 a.m. The woman managed to lie flat on her back as the train traveled over her. Seven train cars passed over before she was able to climb up out of the tracks. When BART police found her she was covered in soot and distraught, but without major injuries. The woman was not a disabled or blind passenger. She went to the hospital for evaluation of her injuries. As a result of the incident, passengers traveling in all directions experienced major delays yesterday.

It is astonishing that the woman walked away without any major injuries. There has been several train accidents involving pedestrians in the Bay Area this year, and those victims were not as lucky. Common injuries from train accidents include brain injury, spinal cord injury, broken bones and fractures, internal organ damage, and death. Train accidents involving pedestrians usually occur because people, for whatever reason, either purposefully or by accident, wander onto train property and rights-of-way.

If you or someone you know sustained an injury related to a BART accident, or any other form of public transportation, please contact our firm for a free consultation. After sustaining a personal injury in accident involving BART or other public transportation, you want to make sure to hire an experienced personal injury attorney, as different municipal transportation case has different insurance procedures. Here at the Brod Law Firm we will be there to guide you through the process, make sure your rights are protected, and make it easy help you get the compensation you deserve.