Boston Injury Lawyer Blog

A former Buckingham Browne & Nichols student is suing the Cambridge, Massachusetts private school for the sexual abuse he says he suffered during the 80’s at the hands of an ex-English teacher. The man that Daniel Weinreib is accusing of abusing him, Edward Washburn, is now a convicted pedophile. He taught at the school for over two decades.

In his Massachusetts sexual abuse lawsuit, Weinreib, who graduated from the school in 1989, claims that Washburn sexually abused him from 1983 to 1985. He is seeking $1 million from the Cambridge school for personal damages and stress related to the abuse incidents that he maintains could have been prevented.

Last October, Head of School Rebecca Upham issued a public apology for the school's failure to respond appropriately to Washburn’s actions. Weinreib, however, says that BB & N has failed to do enough to put into place preventative measures that would prevent future sex abuse incidents from happening.

Washburn reportedly would make friends with young students in the 80’s and take them to his house in Lexington where he would exhibit pornographic materials and encourage them to engage in sexual acts in front of him. The former English teacher has admitted to engaging in inappropriate sexual conduct with children. He was given a suspended in 1987 after pleading guilty to molesting two boys, and he only had to do community service for the Massachusetts sex abuse crimes.

The Cambridge, Massachusetts private school had to pay a $70,000 settlement because it broke the law by not immediately telling police about Washburn’s abusive acts. Recently, Upham acknowledged that another former teacher, Andrew Goldman, was convicted of two counts of sending pornography to a minor in 2007. A spokesperson for BB & N disagrees with Weinreib’s claims that the school hasn't taken appropriate steps to prevent more incidents of sexual abuse from occurring.

Man seeks $1M from Cambridge private school after alleged sexual abuse, Patriotledger.com, May 11, 2009

Private school on Watertown border says it’s sorry for abuse, Wickedlocal.com, October 15, 2008

Related Web Resources:
Opening BB & N Minds

Sexual abuse by teacher protested, Boston.com, June 8, 2008

Last Thursday, the Massachusetts Senate included and approved in its version of the state budget an amendment banning Internet use while driving—this includes text messaging, emailing, or surfing the Web while operating a motor vehicle. Bus drivers, train operators, trolley drivers, and the drivers of other public transit vehicles would be banned from holding a cell phone while driving and would only be allowed to carry the device for emergency purposes. Transit drivers that violate the ban would be fined $500. Drivers would have to pay an insurance surcharge, in addition to a $75 fine.

The amendment is intended to prevent Massachusetts motor vehicle accidents from occurring because motorists are texting while driving and comes one day after Rebecca Solomon, a Methuen teen driver, died in a single-car collision. Police are trying to determine whether the 18-year-old high school senior was texting while driving.

Earlier this month, the MBTA imposed an emergency cell phone ban on its vehicle operators following a multi-trolley crash occurred right after the trolley driver had been text messaging with his girlfriend. Nearly 50 people were injured in the Boston MBTA accident.

According to a study commissioned by Vlingo, a Cambridge, Massachusetts speech-recognition technology maker for cell phones, 1 in 4 US drivers say they text message while driving, with younger drivers more likely to engage in this form of distracted driving behavior than their older counterparts. Among those surveyed:

• Almost 60% of teen drivers say they text and drive.
• 49% of 20 – 29 year-olds send and receive texts while operating a motor vehicle.
• 13% of motorists over 50 text while driving.
• 83% of the 4,816 online survey participants think texting while driving should be banned.

Time and again, texting while driving is proving to be a dangerous habit that can cause serious motor vehicle injuries or deaths. Teenagers that text while driving are a high-risk group when it comes to getting involved in or causing a Boston motor vehicle crash. A new Nielsen study says the average teen sends almost 80-text messages daily. The habit, which even adults find hard to break, can prove fatal when an inexperience teen driver is texting while behind the steering wheel of a car.

Massachusetts Senate Budget Bans Texting while Driving, Insurance Journal, May 26, 2009

Mass. high school student dies in car crash, Telegram.com, May 21, 2009

Driving While Texting Still Popular Despite Bans: Survey, VOXEO, May 20, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Cell Phone Driving Laws, GHSA

National Safety Council

Continue reading "Boston Personal Injury Law Firm: Massachusetts Senate Approves Amendment Banning Texting and All Internet Use While Driving" »

The month of May is Motorcycle Safety Awareness month in the United States. This is a time to remind Boston motorcyclists and motor vehicle riders that they share the roads with each other and that both groups are responsible for taking the necessary precautions to prevent Massachusetts motorcycle accidents from happening.

There are about 180,000 people licensed to ride motorcycles in Massachusetts. Last year, there were 36 motorcycle deaths in the state. While drivers of cars, trucks, and buses have their gripes against riders, accusing them of speeding and not taking the necessary safety precautions to prevent motorcycle accidents from happening, motorcyclists have expressed their own frustrations, including the sentiment that they don’t think other drivers treat them like they would other motorists, with the same driving privileges and rights.

Massachusetts motorcycle accidents can lead to serious injuries for the motorcyclist, who is always at a disadvantage whenever he or she is in a traffic collision—whether alone or with another motor vehicle. One reason for this is that a rider has nothing but protective clothing and gear to cushion the impact of being in a catastrophic motorcycle crash. This is a good time to contact an experienced Boston motorcycle accident law firm to explore your legal options about obtaining financial recovery from all negligent parties.

Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month
Regardless of who may be at fault and why, Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month is a time to remind both motorcyclists and motor vehicle drivers that they “Share the Road.” The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration offers the following reminders for preventing motorcycle accidents. The suggestions are intended to keep motorcyclists and other drivers safe while preventing motor vehicle crashes:

• Motorcyclists and motor vehicle drivers have the same driving rights and privileges.
• Drivers: Remember that motorcycles are not as easy to spot as their larger motor vehicle counterparts, so be on the lookout for them and remember that it is harder to gauge how far away they are or how fast they may be approaching. Check your blind spots.

• Motorcyclists: Make yourself as visible as possible. Wear protective clothing and stay out of other drivers' blind spots.
• Give each other the full lane width. Don't try to share this space with each other.
• Signal to indicate any lane changes or merging.
• Drivers: Give motorcycles the extra room they may need to maneuver potential road hazards, such as potholes, wet surfaces, gravel, and grooved pavements.
• Motorcyclists: Give yourself the space you need to ride safely.

New Advancement In Motorcycle Safety, CBS 3, May 7, 2009

NHTSA

Related Web Resources:
Massachusetts Rider Education Program, RMV

Motorcycle Safety Foundation

Continue reading "After 36 Massachusetts Motorcycle Accident Deaths in 2008, Safety Awareness Month is a Good Time to Remind Boston Motorcyclists and Other Motorists that They "Share the Roads"" »

In Massachusetts, the family of Timothy DiLeo will receive $600,000 for his wrongful death from the city of Methuen. DiLeo died on Labor Day 2007 at Tenney Grammar School after a 1,600-pound iron gate fell on top of him. He was 11.

Two of DiLeos brothers and another boy were playing at the school when the gate fell on Timothy and his 8-year-old brother Andrew. Lifting the gate off the two boys required the strength of several men, including police officers and the boys’ father. Andrew, who survived the Massachusetts premises liability accident, sustained serious injuries. Brandon LaPorte, then 13, sustained minor leg injuries.

In September 2007, Essex County prosecutors ruled the tragic incident an accident and no criminal charges were filed. However, the city of Methuen has acknowledged liability for the Massachusetts wrongful death because it left the gate unhinged and unsecured in an area where children had access. The settlement figure is the maximum amount that the DiLeos can seek under Massachusetts law.

The city of Methuen is self-insured. This means that city councilors must approve the settlement and the “debt financing” that will go toward paying for it.

Boston Premises Liability
Any kind of unsafe condition on a Massachusetts property can be the basis for filing a Boston premises liability claim or a wrongful death lawsuit if someone gets hurt because the owner failed to and should have fixed or removed the hazardous condition on the premise.

Schools and other properties that kids frequent are responsible for making sure that any hazards on the premise are kept away from the children, who are not as astute as adults when it comes to knowing when they may be endangering themselves by playing too close to a faulty wire, climbing onto a high pile of boxes, or playing with defective tools or on top of dangerous machinery.

Family of child killed by falling gate settles lawsuit, Boston Herald, May 13, 2009

Methuen to pay $600K for iron gate death, The Eagle-Tribune, May 13, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Death of 11-Year Old Massachusetts Boy at a Methuen School in Gate Collapse Ruled Accidental, BostonInjuryLawyerBlog.com, September 4, 2007

Premises Liability Overview, Justia

City of Methuen, Massachusetts

A Quincy couple is suing Brigham and Women’s Hospital for Massachusetts personal injury, including negligence, emotional injury, and breach of contract. The hospital had accidentally destroyed all 13 frozen embryos that the plaintiffs, Julie and Michael Norton, had placed in their care. Now, the Nortons are seeking $5 million in personal injury damages.

Julie, now 37, and Michael, now 35, decided to freeze the embryos in 2001 after Julie was diagnosed with Stage III rectal/colon cancer, which is an advanced form of cancer. They were worried that her cancer treatment would make it hard for her to get pregnant later.

The embryos were supposed to be implanted in Julie when she was well enough. In 2004, doctors determined that the cancer treatment had damaged her uterus too much for her to be able to carry embryos to full term. In 2006, assisted reproductive technologies director Dr. Elizabeth Ginsburg wrote the couple to let them know that their consent that the hospital store the embryos expired in 2004.

The Nortons then wrote to Embryology Laboratory director Kathy Jackson to tell her that they planned to use the embryos within two years and reminded the hospital of Julie’s cancer patient status. The hospital had consented to store the embryos indefinitely because Julie was one of their cancer patients. Jackson wrote back, assuring them the embryos were safe.

This year, the embryos were scheduled to be implanted in a surrogate. In March, two days before the procedure, the Nortons were told that the hospital had destroyed all of their embryos. Apparently, the embryos were discarded on August 10, 2006 with the authorization of Brigham. “Abandonment” was cited as the cause of disposal.

Frozen Embryos
There are at least 400,000 frozen embryos that are stored in US clinics. Although it is always up to the patient to decide what to do with embryos they decide not to use, many clinics are concerned with what to do with embryos that are abandoned or unclaimed.

One reason that many embryos go unclaimed is that a couple may decide that they no longer want to have children but they are reluctant to destroy or get rid of the embryos. A December 2008 New York Times article says that 53% of patients don’t want to donate their unused embryos to other couples because they don’t want strangers bringing up their children. 23% would like to have the embryos stay frozen. 66% would be willing to donate the embryos for research but that option isn’t always available.

The Norton's Massachusetts personal injury lawsuit, filed in Norfolk Superior Court, names Brigham and Women’s Hospital, two lab managers, and the assisted reproductive technologies director as its defendants. The hospital is refusing to comment on the personal injury lawsuit but has released a statement apologizing to the Nortons for the medical error, acknowledging that it accidentally disposed of the couple’s embryos, and vowing to improve its procedures and policies so that this kind of medical mistake doesn’t happen again.

Couple sue Brigham over embryos' disposal, Boston.com, May 16, 2009

Parents Torn Over Fate of Frozen Embryos, NY Times, December 14, 2008

Related Web Resources:
Brigham and Women’s Hospital

What should be done with excess frozen embryos?, The Seattle Times, October 12, 2008

According to the Boston Globe, a recent study reveals that patients seeking nonurgent appointments with Boston medical specialists may have to wait anywhere from an average of 50 days to up to a year before they can actually see the doctor. While delays to see some of the area’s top medical professionals are not uncommon, doctors say a 2006 health insurance law that required hundreds of thousands of people to get insurance coverage has only added to the long wait.

Consulting and physician recruiting firm Merritt, Hawkins & Associates conducted the study, which surveyed 1,162 doctors’ office in 15 metropolitan areas. According to the findings, new patients wanting to schedule a non-emergency visit with an orthopedic surgeon, a dermatologist, a family practitioner, a cardiologist, or a gynecologist/obstetrician had to schedule their visit at least three weeks in advance of the actual visit or longer.

Reasons for nonurgent visits that required this type of wait time included gynecological visits, complete physicals, and appointments to check for skin cancer. The survey failed to report whether the appointment delays affected patients’ health or chances of recovery. Regardless, there are some important facts you need to know about what can happen when a patient’s diagnosis is delayed.

Delayed Diagnosis
While many patients may have health issues that are non-life threatening or conditions that are mild or minor enough that delayed diagnosis and treatment won’t affect their health or the outcome of their medical cases, immediate detection and diagnosis can make a huge difference for some people.

Delayed diagnosis can not only affect a sick person's prognosis, but it can alter the kinds of treatment required. If a person is at the beginning stages of a heart condition, any type of cancer, diabetes, or another kind of disease, then invasive, painful, and costly procedures (such as surgery, the removal of a breast or another body part, or intense chemotherapy) may be avoided if treatment is begun early enough.

Wrong diagnosis and delayed diagnosis are two common grounds for filing Boston medical malpractice lawsuits against medical specialists and other physicians that failed to diagnose or treat the patient in a timely manner.

Waits to see Hub doctors grow longer, Boston.com, May 15, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Merritt Hawkins and Associates

Wrong Diagnosis

Continue reading "Could Long Waits to Visit Boston Doctors Lead to Delayed Diagnosis? " »

The Daily News Tribune says that during the time it takes to compose and send a simple text message while driving (requiring the driver to take his or her eyes off the road), a motor vehicle will likely have traveled the length of a football field—enough time and distance for at least one motor vehicle crash to occur.

On Friday, a Boston Green Line MBTA train did more than that when its operator, who was sending a text message to his girlfriend, ran a red light, causing a multi-trolley crash and injuring at least 46 people. Three of the trolleys involved in the Boston train accident were totaled, and another trolley was damaged.

According to the MBTA, Quinn, an Attleboro resident, failed to step on the brakes soon enough. He will likely be fired and could face criminal charges. As an aside, his private driving record indicates that he was cited for speeding three times—in 2002 and 2007.

The MBTA prohibits its drivers from using their cell phones and similar devices in any capacity while driving. Yet this rule is often ignored. At least 9 MBTA trolley operators and bus drivers have been suspended for talking on cell phones or texting while on the job. Over the weekend, MBTA officials said its drivers are going to be banned from even carrying such devices while at work.

Texting While Driving
Text messaging while driving any kind of vehicle is considered dangerous, and some states have put laws in place to ban texting and/or talking on the cell phone while operating a motor vehicle. In Massachusetts, only school bus drivers are banned from talking on a cell phone while driving.

According to a 2006 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study, driver distraction during the three seconds prior to a motor vehicle crash is the number one cause of 78% of auto crashes and near collisions. Dialing a cell phone, reading, and applying makeup are the three activities that appeared to increase the risk that a driver might be involved in a car crash by three times. Texting while driving has been cited as a reason that some fatal train accidents and deadly motor vehicle crashes have occurred over the past few years.

Not only does texting require that a driver not look at the road while composing or reading a text message, but he or she will likely have to take at least one hand off the steering wheel to hold or operate the cell phone or PDA device. In order to avoid causing a Boston train accident or a Massachusetts car crash, drivers must have both eyes on the road at all times, with both hands controlling the steering wheel and their mind focused on the task at hand—which is to drive safely.

Negligent driving by an MBTA trolley operator can be grounds for an MBTA train accident lawsuit.

Editorial: The dangers of texting while driving, The Daily News, May 12, 2009

City man driver in T crash, The Sun Chronicle, May 12, 2009

Related Web Resources:
T crash puts spotlight on hiring criteria, Boston.com, May 12, 2009

Cell Phone Driving Laws, GHSA

MBTA

Continue reading "Boston Green Line Train Crash that Injured Dozens is A Reminder of Why Text Messaging And Driving Don’t Mix" »

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently announced the results of three front-to-front crash tests it conducted. A microcar or minicar and a midsize model from the same auto maker were used for each test. IIHS president Adrian Lund says that while there are undoubtedly benefits to buying the smaller cars, including the facts that they cost less and don't use up as much gas, these latest tests show that people may be sacrificing occupant safety for financial savings.

The IIHS tested 2009 models against each other: The Honda Fit against the Honda Accord, the Mercedes C against the Smart Fortwo, and The Toyota Camry against the Yaris. During all three tests the laws of physics won out. While the smaller cars did well in IIHS frontal offset barrier tests, they performed poorly against the larger cars—which aren’t even considered large cars compared to luxury-sized cars, pickup trucks, SUV’s, and passenger vans.

In all three tests, the bigger and heavier autos performed better in terms of occupant safety. The dummies in the smaller, lighter autos tended to be at a disadvantage. The larger, heavier vehicle ended up pushing into the smaller, lighter auto, which means that if there had been people riding in the smaller cars, they would have experienced more force upon impact than if they had been occupants in the larger autos. The greater the force, the greater the risk of injury or death, which means the chances of injury goes up when someone rides in a microcar or a minicar.

This is confirmed by auto accident statistics, which reports that the fatality rate for occupants of minicars in multiple vehicle collisions in 2007 was nearly two times that of the fatality rate for people in very big cars. It also helps for occupants of larger cars that the larger size and weight of the vehicle will likely deform or move any object it hits.

It is important that auto manufacturers make cars that are safely designed and manufactured to minimize/prevent injuries or deaths. A car maker can be held liable for Massachusetts products liability or wrongful death if their defectively designed vehicle or a defective auto part within the motor vehicle causes personal injury or wrongful death.

New crash tests demonstrate the influence of vehicle size and weight on safety in crashes; results are relevant to fuel economy policies, Insurance Institute for Highway Information, April 14, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Car Size and Weight are Crucial (PDF)

NHTSA

Continue reading "Preventing Boston Car Accidents: IIHS Says The Bigger and Heavier the Motor Vehicle, the Greater the Safety Protection Provided" »

US District Judge William G. Young is ordering the US government to pay the families of Edward “Brian” Halloran and Michael Donahue nearly $8.5 million for their Massachusetts wrongful deaths. The surviving family members of two men who were shot to death in Boston in 1982 by FBI informant James “White” Bulger.

Issuing his ruling on Friday, Judge Young accused the government of negligence, self-interested hubris, inattention, and corruption and, as a result, of causing the two men’s murders. The court had already found the FBI responsible for the men’s deaths because of the way it had managed Bulger and informant Stephen "The Rifleman" Flemmi.

Donahan, a truck driver, was an innocent bystander who just happened to be there when Bulger and another person decided to shoot Halloran. Flemmi has admitted under oath that it was ex-FBI agent John J. Conolly Jr. who informed him and Bulger that Halloran, who was also working with the FBI, had implicated them in the 1981 slaying of a Tulsa businessman.

Judge Young awarded Donahue’s widow and three sons $6.4 million for his wrongful death. He awarded Halloran’s widow over $2 million.

The US government has not decided whether it will appeal the wrongful death awards. This is the second judgment issued against the US government to the family members of people that Bulger has murdered. In 2006, a judge awarded $3.1 million to the mother and brother of Quincy fisherman John McIntyre for his murder because the FBI once again mismanaged informants Flemmi and Bulger.

Families of 'Whitey' Bulger victims win nearly $8.5m in suit, Boston.com, May 1, 2009

Families awarded $8.5m in mob case, Boston.com, May 2, 2009

Related Web Resources:
James J Bulger, FBI.gov

Stephen 'The Rifleman' Flemmi, Boston.com

Suing the Government for Negligence: The Federal Tort Claims Act, NOLO.com

Continue reading "Whitey Bulger Victims’ Families Awarded Nearly $8.5 Million for Their Massachusetts Wrongful Deaths" »