Chicago Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog

I don't think that any of us anticipated such a mild winter this year, especially with Accuweather's prediction late last year that Chicago would see 50 to 60 inches of snow this winter. Instead, we've seen nary a bit. I must admit, I am fine with the lack of snow.

Of course, that does not mean that our roads are not riddled with potholes. It is typically the freezing and then reheating of pavement that causes potholes to form. They may become larger and more severe as roads are over-used and subject to severe wear and tear. According to a recent article in the Chicago Tribune: "Potholes represent part of a growing problem with crumbling roads across Illinois." The article further states that "[s]tate roads are wearing out 33 percent faster than they are being repaired, according to a new study by the Transportation for Illinois Coalition." Furthermore, the Coalition found that "[o]n average, motorists pay an additional $340 per year in the Chicago area in vehicle costs from poor road conditions."

Potholes that go unrepaired are hazards that can cause car crashes and property damage. The suspension and shock systems in vehicles suffer greatly, and unsuspecting drivers could face potentially serious injuries, especially if the driver loses control of the vehicle and crashes into another vehicle. Motorcyclists and bicyclists are particularly vulnerable to injury if they hit a pothole. The Chicago car crash attorneys recognize that motorcyclists or bicyclists that hit a pothole may easily fall and suffer severe injuries or death.

The Illinois motorcycle accident attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll are presently working on a number of serious motorcycle accident matters and actively pursuing justice for those who were wrongly injured. A few of the motorcycle accident cases we are pursuing include: a Naperville man who was seriously injured when the driver of a vehicle lost control, drove in the opposite lane of traffic and collided with the motorcyclist who was patiently waiting at a red light on his stopped Harley Davidson; a Tinley Park woman who was involved in a serious accident in Joliet while she was riding on the back of a Harley Davidson; and a matter involving a St. Charles resident, who nearly required a leg amputation, after a vehicle hit him.

Continue reading "BEWARE OF POTHOLES " »

During the last few weeks of December, the First District Illinois Appellate Court decided what one trial judge called a "tragically bizarre case." As experienced Illinois personal injury attorneys, we read new court rulings on a regular basis. The "tragically bizarre case" was Zokhrabov v. Park, 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 1298 (1st Dist. 2011). There, eighteen year-old Hiroyuki Joho was killed when an Amtrak train struck him while he was in a crosswalk at a Chicago Metra Station. A large portion of Joho's body "was propelled about 100 feet onto the southbound platform where it struck 58-year-old Gayane Zokhrabov from behind, knocking her to the ground. She sustained a shoulder injury, a leg fracture, and a wrist fracture." 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 1298, *2. Zokhrabov sued Joho's estate for her injuries. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment as to the proximate cause of the incident. Zokhrabov claimed Joho owed her a duty while walking in and around the Metra station and that he breached that duty when he: "(a) carelessly and negligently failed to keep a proper lookout for approaching trains; (b) carelessly and negligently ran in the path of an approaching [Amtrak] train; or (c) carelessly and negligently failed to yield the right-of-way to approaching trains." Id. Park, on behalf of Joho's estate, argued Joho did not owe Zokhrabov a duty of care. The trial court ruled in favor of Park. Zokhrabov appealed.

The First District Illinois Appellate Court, applying a traditional analysis of duty, reversed and remanded, finding Zokhrabov was a foreseeable plaintiff and that as a result, Joho owed her a duty. What does that mean? When determining whether a duty of care exists in a particular set of circumstances, Illinois courts will consider, among other factors, the reasonable foreseeability that the defendant's conduct may injure another. Other factors that courts consider are the reasonable likelihood of an injury, the magnitude of the burden imposed by guarding against the harm, and the consequences of placing the burden on the defendant. Id. at *10.

In the Zokhrabov case, the First District Appellate Court decided that it was reasonably foreseeable that a train would strike, kill and fling Joho's body onto the passenger platform where Zokhrabov was waiting for her train to arrive. The Court further found that Joho acted negligently by crossing the tracks when he did and that his negligence could cause someone else's injury. The reasonable likelihood of causing an injury was great given the speed and force of the oncoming Amtrak train. The magnitude of the burden imposed by guarding against the harm was insignificant; Joho only needed to take a moment to pause, look at the tracks and cross when it was safe. Finally, placing this burden on Joho would have been minimal. Id. at 22.

What about the fact that the trial judge called the accident "tragically bizarre"? That doesn't sound like something that can be considered "foreseeable," does it? The First District Appellate court had an answer: There is a general proposition that there is no duty to anticipate and prevent injuries that occur due to unusual and extraordinary circumstances. See, Cunis v. Brennan, 56 Ill. 2d 372 (1974). However, the Appellate Court did not find that proposition persuasive in this case. Since there are no Illinois cases factually similar to the Zokhrabov case, the Court relied on traditional duty analysis and found that the injury was foreseeable, thereby creating a duty of care.

Continue reading "FIRST DISTRICT APPELLATE COURT DECIDED WHAT TRIAL JUDGE CALLED A "TRAGICALLY BIZARRE CASE"" »

As Illinois personal injury attorneys, we must stay up to date on new laws at all times. Effective January 2012, Illinois legislatures have added over 200 new laws affecting Illinois citizens. WSILTV.com published a list of the new laws. Here are a few that could impact the rights of personal injury victims:

Motorcycle Red Lights (HB 2860/PA 97-0627): This new law permits motorcyclists, who are stopped at a red light, "to proceed through the light if, after waiting a reasonable length of time, the red light fails to change to green."

Seat Belts (HB 219/PA 97-0016): The Chicago Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog reported on this one in July of 2011. Illinois's new seatbelt law requires even adult passengers sitting in the back seat of a moving vehicle to wear a seat belt. The law also requires individuals 18 and younger, who happen to be riding in a taxi cab for school-related purposes, to wear a seat belt.

Smoke Detectors (HB 1398/PA 97-0447): This law requires "hotels to be equipped with at least one smoke detector within 15 feet of every room that is used for sleeping purposes." Hopefully, this law will help prevent fires that cause serious burn injuries and wrongful death.

Uninsured Driving (HB 2267/PA 97-0407): This law fixes a $2,500 fine, plus any applicable jail time, for individuals "convicted of driving an uninsured vehicle that results in bodily harm to another person," if the individual has "two or more convictions for driving an uninsured vehicle." A person convicted of third violation will be required to pay a $1000 fine, if the person has not caused bodily harm to another person.

Vehicle Occupancy Restrictions (HB 1315/PA 97-0017): The Chicago Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog also commented on this law back in July of 2011. The Vehicle Occupancy Restrictions law makes it illegal for passengers to ride in trailers, wagons and other vehicles while they are being towed on highways, with the exemption of farm-related activities and parades.

Medical Malpractice (HB 1476/PA 97-0449): This law permits the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR) to provide information to the public concerning complaints against doctors or medical professionals. The law will help patients more thoroughly research the doctors and medical professionals who treat them.

Continue reading "OVER 200 NEW LAWS ADDED TO ILLINOIS'S BOOKS" »

The Illinois wrongful death attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll have helped numerous families deal with the untimely death of a family member due to someone else's negligence. Wrongful death lawsuits present numerous issues, one being obtaining the victim's medical records, especially to determine if negligence caused or contributed to the victim's death. In the past, the deceased person's legal representative, usually a family member, was required to open an estate for the victim before being granted access to the medical records of the person that passed away. However, last month, Illinois' Governor Quinn signed a law that may make the process of obtaining a loved one's medical records a bit easier. The bill has been codified as 735 ILCS 5/8-2001.5 (2011). It states, in pertinent part:

"Authorization for release of a deceased patient's records. (a) …When no executor, administrator, or agent exists, and the person did not specifically object to disclosure of his or her records in writing, then a deceased person's health care records may be released upon the written request of:

(1) the deceased person's surviving spouse; or

(2) if there is no surviving spouse, any one or more of the following: (i) an adult son or daughter of the deceased, (ii) a parent of the deceased, or (iii) an adult brother or sister of the deceased.

(b) Health care facilities and practitioners are authorized to provide a copy of a deceased patient's records based upon a person's payment of the statutory fee and signed "Authorized Relative Certification", attesting to the fact that the person is authorized to receive such records under this Section. *** "

Upon request for records of a deceased patient, the named authorized relative must furnish the medical facility or practitioner with a certified copy of the deceased person's death certificate. The statute provides direction for preparing the Authorized Relative Certification, detailing the specific language that the requesting party should use.

The Illinois wrongful death and injury attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll think that this statute can provide some comfort for the deceased person's family. We applaud the Illinois legislature for simplifying what can be an otherwise cumbersome and time-consuming process. Families dealing with the loss of a loved one, especially when that loss may be attributed to another person's negligence, often suffer greatly.

Continue reading "ILLINOIS WRONGFUL DEATH ATTORNEYS: OBTAINING A DECEDENT'S MEDICAL RECORDS" »

Every month, Chicago personal injury lawyer Jeffrey J. Kroll contributes to the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin in his column Balancing Life and the Law.

In this month's article, "Lawyers should take the reins with future damages", Jeff puts a holiday spin on the discussion of maximize damages for client's future medical expenses, lost earnings, future pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement and loss of consortium damages in a light of the ever-changing American economy and political climate. Here is an excerpt from his article:

My firm represents individuals who have been severely injured as a result of someone else's negligent acts. One of the most difficult tasks we have is ensuring our clients receive full and fair compensation. Before entering into a settlement or suggesting an amount of compensation to a jury, we must determine a sufficient amount of money that will provide for the individual well beyond the date of trial. Often, our clients' lives have been shattered by unnecessary and unexpected injuries. Many can no longer work or care for themselves.

In my humble opinion (with the full disclosure that I am a plaintiff's attorney), the injured party deserves the benefit of the doubt. This isn't just a "holiday, be generous" message. (Although, I am in the spirit this year; Christmas music plays in my office even as I write this article.) Who will care for the injured if their settlement or verdict award does not cover medical and daily living costs well into the future? I have yet to hear of Santa and his elves stuffing stockings with prescription medications, physical therapy, joint replacement surgeries or checks to cover insurance premiums. No one can depend on the future of Medicare and Medicaid either — nor should they have to. The harm perpetrated on the injured will consistently ripple through the individual's family, emotionally and economically. Not only do family members live with the changed — depressed and likely disabled — person, but often they also must care for the victim of negligence. The cynic will say "Well, that's the family's job. They should take care of them." But how fair is that?

The only way to protect the victim and the family, and to provide them with some piece of mind when it comes to future finances, is to maximize damages for future medical expenses, lost earnings, even future pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement and loss of consortium. Speculative damages, you might say. But there is nothing speculative about the ongoing pain and suffering that my clients will endure. Nor is there anything speculative about the medical care that they will require for the rest of their lives.

Then, there is the whole business of future damages discounted to present cash value. All future damages, except for pain and suffering, disfigurement, disability and loss of society and consortium, must be reduced to present cash value. This has become the preferred method of determining future damages. While there is no requirement that the trial attorney present actuarial or statistical evidence to the jury to determine present cash value (Robinson v. Greeley & Hansen, 114 Ill.App.3d 720, 725 (2d Dist.1983)), it certainly can be helpful at times. Of course, mortality tables also help plot the course. But how do we plan for other economic and political changes? Right now, the future of health care in this country is unknown. Regardless of which side of the aisle you prefer, we will all be affected by the changing American medical infrastructure at some point. Medical costs seem to be rising as quickly and as steadily as the cost of college. Life-care planners and economists can help us plan for our clients' futures, but we are ultimately the clients' advocates and must direct the outcome.

Read the entire article.

Continue reading "BALANCING LIFE AND THE LAW" »

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has made a bold recommendation: All state governments should institute laws prohibiting all drivers from using portable electronic devices, including cell phones, when driving. As Chicago accident injury attorneys, we are very pleased with the NTSB recommendation and hope that all drivers embrace it.

Currently, 35 states, including Illinois, as well the District of Columbia, prohibit drivers from sending text messages while driving. See 625 ILCS 5/12-610.2. In 31 of those states, including Illinois, sending a text message while driving is considered a primary offense, meaning a police officer can pull over a driver just for texting while driving. So far, no state has instituted a ban on all wireless phone use for drivers; however, nine states (and D.C.) prohibit drivers from using handheld cell phones while driving. In Illinois, drivers may not use a wireless telephone at any time while operating a motor vehicle on a roadway in a school speed zone, or on a highway in a construction or maintenance speed zone. 625 ILCS 5/12-610.1(e). Thanks to a city-wide ban, drivers in Chicago may not use a hand-held cell phone while driving. Otherwise, drivers under 19 years of age, who hold instruction permits or graduated licenses, and school bus drivers may not use a wireless telephone while driving. 625 ILCS 5/12-610.1(b).

According to USA Today, NTSB issued the recommendation for a ban on all cell phone use for drivers upon completion of a hearing related to an August 2010 Missouri highway crash, which included four vehicles and two school buses, killing two people and injuring 38 others. Evidence at the hearing revealed that a pickup truck driver, who also died in the crash, caused the collision after "sending 11 text messages in the 11 minutes before the crash."

According to a recent NHTSA study,

"most drivers will answer a call while driving and most will continue to drive after answering. About 2 out of 10 drivers (18%) report that they have sent text messages or e-mails while driving; about half (49%) of those 21 to 24 years old report doing so. More than half believe that using a cell phone and or sending a text message/e-mail makes no difference on their driving performance, yet as passengers, 90% said they would feel very unsafe if their driver was talking on a handheld cell phone or texting/e-mailing while traveling with them."

NTSB also reports that approximately "3902 traffic fatalities in 2010 were blamed on distracted drivers." As a result, sending text messages while driving is rivaling the reckless nature of driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Everyone wants to stop crashes caused by distracted driving, but with personal beliefs like those stated above in the NHTSA study -- that "using a cell phone or sending a text message/e-mail makes no difference on their driving performance" -- it is difficult to get drivers to understand the real risks tied to the behavior. The Department of Transportation has implemented a new website and continues to make efforts to deliver the message to drivers. In 2010, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) also banned commercial drivers from text messaging while operating trucks and buses. Last month, FMCSA extended the prohibition to the use of hand-held cell phones for truck and bus drivers, implementing a $2750 fine for violators.

Continue reading "CHICAGO ACCIDENT INJURY ATTORNEY EMBRACES NTSB'S RECOMMENDED BAN ON CELL PHONE USE FOR DRIVERS" »

Many drivers appreciate the fact that their vehicle requires time and distance to make a safe stop. However, some fail to gauge time and distance properly, tailgating other vehicles too closely, and causing rear-end car and truck accidents. As Chicago car accident and injury attorneys, we have seen the devastating result of cars and trucks that collide with another vehicle from the rear.

Following vehicles too closely, or tailgating, is the cause of most rear-end collisions, according to the Illinois Secretary of State. As a result, most motorists could probably stand to be reminded of the three-second rule.

The three-second rule works like this: Using caution while driving, choose a fixed object up ahead of you on the road. When the vehicle in front of you passes the object, begin counting "one-thousand-one, one-thousand-two," and so on. If you count to "one-thousand-three" before your vehicle passes your chosen object, you are following too closely. Of course, this only applies when you are traveling a well-paved road in good weather conditions. If weather and road conditions are bad, widen the gap between you and the vehicle in front of you. Be prepared to expect the unexpected. Also, as you increase your speed, it is a good idea to increase the distance between you and the vehicle in front of you.

The Illinois Secretary of State provides some guidance on how you should adjust speed to match the flow of traffic. For example, if you are traveling 25 miles per hour, your vehicle will cover approximately 37 feet in 1 second. A vehicle following the three-second rule will maintain a distance of 111 feet from the car in front of it. If you are driving faster, say at 55 miles per hour, your vehicle will travel 81 feet per second. Per the three-second rule, you should stay 243 feet behind the driver in front of you. In other words, 4/5ths of length of a football field.

Rear-impact car accidents can cause very serious personal injuries, including severe neck, back or spinal cord injuries and even wrongful death. People involved in rear-end car crashes are typically subjected to a great amount of force, which may result in severe injuries.

Often, the at fault driver in a rear-impact car accident will argue that he did not anticipate that the driver in front of him would stop so suddenly. However, Illinois drivers have a duty to anticipate sudden stops. Ferguson v. Zeman, 109 Ill.App.2d 417 (1st Dist. 1969) (finding the trial court improperly directed a verdict for the defendants where the evidence showed that defendants were negligently following too closely).

Continue reading "CHICAGO CAR ACCIDENT ATTORNEY: WHAT IS CONSIDERED A SAFE STOPPING DISTANCE?" »

Many drivers appreciate the fact that their vehicle requires time and distance to make a safe stop. However, some fail to gauge time and distance properly, tailgating other vehicles too closely, and causing rear-end car and truck accidents. As Chicago car accident and injury attorneys, we have seen the devastating result of cars and trucks that collide with another vehicle from the rear.

Following vehicles too closely, or tailgating, is the cause of most rear-end collisions, according to the Illinois Secretary of State. As a result, most motorists could probably stand to be reminded of the three-second rule.

The three-second rule works like this: Using caution while driving, choose a fixed object up ahead of you on the road. When the vehicle in front of you passes the object, begin counting "one-thousand-one, one-thousand-two," and so on. If you count to "one-thousand-three" before your vehicle passes your chosen object, you are following too closely. Of course, this only applies when you are traveling a well-paved road in good weather conditions. If weather and road conditions are bad, widen the gap between you and the vehicle in front of you. Be prepared to expect the unexpected. Also, as you increase your speed, it is a good idea to increase the distance between you and the vehicle in front of you.

The Illinois Secretary of State provides some guidance on how you should adjust speed to match the flow of traffic. For example, if you are traveling 25 miles per hour, your vehicle will cover approximately 37 feet in 1 second. A vehicle following the three-second rule will maintain a distance of 111 feet from the car in front of it. If you are driving faster, say at 55 miles per hour, your vehicle will travel 81 feet per second. Per the three-second rule, you should stay 243 feet behind the driver in front of you. In other words, 4/5ths of length of a football field.

Rear-impact car accidents can cause very serious personal injuries, including severe neck, back or spinal cord injuries and even wrongful death. People involved in rear-end car crashes are typically subjected to a great amount of force, which may result in severe injuries.

Often, the at fault driver in a rear-impact car accident will argue that he did not anticipate that the driver in front of him would stop so suddenly. However, Illinois drivers have a duty to anticipate sudden stops. Ferguson v. Zeman, 109 Ill.App.2d 417 (1st Dist. 1969) (finding the trial court improperly directed a verdict for the defendants where the evidence showed that defendants were negligently following too closely).

Continue reading "CHICAGO CAR ACCIDENT ATTORNEY: WHAT IS CONSIDERED A SAFE STOPPING DISTANCE?" »

The personal injury and wrongful death attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll just reviewed a new study released by the national consumer rights organization, the Center for Justice & Democracy, which found that news coverage of civil jury verdicts fails to provide an accurate picture of the civil justice system and that certain new media trends are making the situation even worse. As Chicago personal injury attorneys with over twenty years of experience handling high-profile cases, we were not surprised by these findings. We know that the American public rarely is exposed to the whole picture when it comes to lawsuits since large companies often employ large marketing and advertising agencies to spin the facts of lawsuits in their favor and against the innocent victims. The documentary "Hot Coffee" did an excellent job exposing the truth when it comes to the civil justice system and settlements and verdicts against companies, organizations, and/or doctors and hospitals.

The Center for Justice & Democracy's new study entitled Headline Blues: Civil Justice In The Age Of New Media, takes another look at the problems that media pose to the civil justice system, following up on its 2001 study, Reading Between the Headlines: The Media and Jury Verdicts, which "found the media’s coverage of verdicts to be deeply skewed, fueling common misperceptions that civil juries routinely award plaintiffs eye-popping verdicts for frivolous claims." While the new Headline Blues' study found the same to be true, it highlights new media trends that further distort reporting.

As one could imagine, the way that we obtain news on a daily basis has drastically changed since 2001. While traditional media sources, such as television and newspapers, have not been completely replaced, new outlets such as online newspapers, social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter, and even Google News, often draw in readers with a very limited description of a case and sometimes merely a headline, which may not accurately report a news story.

The researchers of the Headlines Blues' study searched Google News and the Top 25 blogs at Technorati blog for civil jury verdicts and settlements between May 1, 2011 and July 20, 2011. They selected articles reporting civil jury verdicts and settlements in cases involving physical injuries, examining several aspects of each article. The study found that 39 percent of the articles reporting a "plaintiff win" mentioned only the monetary amount of the award and the type of case in the headline, "but nothing about the defendant’s misconduct. Another 14.5 percent mentioned only the monetary award, excluding any information about the type of case or injury." As a plaintiff's personal injury attorney, I know that there can be a connection between the defendant's conduct and the amount of the verdict.

Our personal injury attorneys found this example from the study quite telling:

Headline: Woman wins $3.25 million in verdict [Mill Valley Herald, June 22, 2011]. The full article revealed:

"A Mill Valley woman who suffered severe chemical burns after a Lake Tahoe casino mistakenly served her a caustic cleaning solution in a water bottle has been awarded $3.25 million in damages by a San Francisco Superior Court jury, according to her attorney. "Julia Ellis received the award for medical bills and pain and suffering in a civil verdict delivered June 13, attorney Christopher B. Dolan said in a statement.

"Ellis was staying at Harvey’s Lake Tahoe on Dec. 2, 2007, when she asked a bartender for a bottle of water. Ellis was given a Harrah’s-branded bottle of water, took a large drink, and immediately began screaming in pain, Dolan said. She was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that the bottle contained a caustic cleaning solution.

"It was later determined that an employee had poured the solution from its larger storage container into an empty, unmarked water bottle and left it in the kitchen, where it was then inadvertently served to Ellis, Dolan said."

Headline Blues, pp. 4-5.

The study further found that for every story reporting a defense win, where a plaintiff received no award, there were six other stories reporting plaintiffs' wins, giving the skewed impression that plaintiffs win much more often than defendants. In fact, plaintiffs "prevail in only 51.3 of tort cases before juries, and 56.2 percent of the time before judges." Headline Blues, pp. 5-6.

The study recognizes that news outlets are pressured to produce news at a vastly accelerating pace; however, it also recognizes that the public and the civil justice system in general suffer as a result. Jeffrey J. Kroll has lectured for the Illinois Institute of Continuing Legal Education on the topic of managing the media in high profile cases, including how to deal with pretrial publicity.

Continue reading "MEDIA'S SKEWED COVERAGE OF THE CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM" »

Many of the personal injury clients that we serve at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll must undergo MRIs prescribed by their doctors after becoming injured as a result of another person's negligence. An MRI, or magnetic resonance imaging, is a radiological technique that doctors use to see inside the body. MRIs are a common, diagnostic test, and typically make it easier for doctors to distinguish problematic tissues from normal tissues. MRIs differ from x-rays and CT scans by using magnetic fields opposed to radiation, which make x-rays and CT scans possible. MRIs are thought to be reasonably safe; however, as one recent CNN article pointed out, "if mistakes are made, they can hurt or even kill you."

CNN reported four main ways MRIs can go wrong:

(1) Projectiles: MRI machines contain powerful magnets that can attract other metal objects. Serious, injury-causing problems can occur if a patient is being scanned when a metal object collides with the MRI machine. CNN reported a New York child who "was killed in 2001 when the MRI machine sucked an oxygen canister into the machine where he was being scanned." Projectiles can be prevented if the MRI technicians follow proper policies and procedures.

(2) Burns: The RF transmitters in MRI can produce intense heat. Problems occur if a patient accidentally touches the walls of the MRI tunnel or is not checked properly for electrical conductors that can pick up concentrated RF frequencies. MRI technicians should make sure there is enough material between the patient and the wall to prevent burning.

(3) Hearing loss: If you have ever had an MRI, you know that the machines make a lot of noise. One CNN interviewee compared the MRI noise level to the level of noise exposure near a jet aircraft. Repeated MRIs raise the risk for hearing loss. Hearing loss can easily be prevented by providing patients with earplugs or earphones.

(4) Implants and medical devices: The magnetic fields in MRIs can move or damage metal devices implanted in a person's body, such as aneurysm clips and pacemakers. Although most current medical devices are MRI-safe, anyone undergoing an MRI should advise the MRI technician of the presence of a medical device before undergoing the scan.

To ensure your safety before undergoing an MRI, make sure you thoroughly complete MRI questionnaires or screening forms presented to you by the MRI facility. Review the answers with the MRI technician. You must also remove all metal from your body before an MRI. Any metal, such as a medical device or bullet, etc., which cannot be removed, must be discussed with a technician and a doctor. Be sure that you are provided ear protection that fits you properly. Notify the technician if you notice any open doors, loose wires or metallic objects that could be attracted to the magnetic field of the MRI machine. Avoid contact with the inside of the MRI machine's walls.

The Chicago personal injury and wrongful death attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll are dedicated to serving injured individuals and their families in personal injury and wrongful death actions. For over twenty years, Jeffrey J. Kroll has assisted injured clients in Illinois and throughout the United States. Our personal injury and wrongful death attorneys have achieved many multimillion dollar verdicts and settlements in a wide variety of practice areas including trucking accidents, auto crashes, medical malpractice, workplace injuries, train accidents, barge accidents and bus and taxi cab collisions.

Continue reading "WHAT TO KNOW BEFORE YOUR MRI" »

Our Chicago personal injury attorneys recently filed suit against a Naperville man who negligently crashed into our client, a 60-year old Aurora man, in a multi-vehicle accident that occurred in Naperville in September. The story was recently featured in Naperville Patch. Our client and his passenger suffered numerous life-threatening injuries after being thrown from the Harley Davidson motorcycle that they were riding. Our client is now disabled, and his estate has filed a lawsuit against the Naperville man in DuPage County. On the day of the accident, the Naperville police issued the Naperville man a traffic citation for driving left of center.

The complaint alleges the Naperville man was negligent of one or more of the following according to Illinois Compiled Statutes:
- Negligently operated his motor vehicle.
- Proceeded at a speed which was greater than reasonable and proper with regard to traffic conditions and the use of the highway, or which endangered the safety of persons or property.
- Failed to decrease speed so as to avoid colliding with another vehicle (or person).
- Failed to drive vehicle as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane without first ascertaining that movement from such lane could be made with safety.
- Failed to drive upon the right half of the roadway.
- Failed to give audible warning with his horn when such warning was reasonable necessary to insure safety.
- Was otherwise careless and negligent.

Continue reading "CHICAGO PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY FILES LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF DISABLED MOTORCYCLIST" »

Chicago is a vacation destination. Around every corner, visitors can find interesting and appealing attractions and historical landmarks, from the Chicago River architectural tours to the Picasso at Daley Center Plaza. As one of the largest, and most beautiful cities in American (in my opinion), it is no wonder that Chicago has become a top spot for both tourism and business. In 2009, for example, Chicago attracted 39.5 million visitors, including 28.8 million domestic leisure travelers, 9.6 million business travelers and 1.13 million overseas visitors. Chicago Office of Tourism, 2009 Statistical Information.

While tourists come to Chicago to enjoy all that our fine city has to offer, no one ever expects to be involved in a life-altering automobile collision while on vacation. Unfortunately, with the hectic state of traffic in Chicago, visitors are often involved in automobile accidents while here. In such situations, visitors must understand the complexities of Illinois law and the avenues of compensation available to them. Illinois law may differ from the visitor's home state (or country) laws. With travelers involved, collision cases often become complicated due to out-of-state or out-of-country insurance companies, which often contract under a different system of justice, especially when a tourist is struck by a bus, cab or truck.

There are many issues to consider after an automobile collision, regardless of whether the victim is a tourist or not. As a result, any individual injured in car accident should consult an experienced Chicago personal injury attorney to identify the responsible party or parties, conduct an investigation and compile evidence. Numerous factors, such as insurance issues and monetary damages, require an in-depth analysis by an attorney with knowledge of Illinois law.

Continue reading "INJURED WHILE ON VACATION IN CHICAGO?" »

At a conference discussing the human impact of road collisions, RTE News reported that “European research has found that depression, anger, anxiety attacks and suicidal feelings are more common in relatives of those disabled by road accidents than the victims themselves.” This ripple effect is not a surprising discovery since often the loved ones of those injured in car crashes have an overwhelming desire to help the injured family member, but become severely frustrated when they can do nothing to relieve the injured person’s residual pain and disability. Unfortunately, this emotional distress suffered by family members is not typically a compensable injury in Illinois.

The conference-goers also discussed another study of U.S. car crash victims “which found that two years after a collision 40% of victims had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD] and 90% had developed driving difficulties.”

"The Psychological Impact of Litigation: Compensation Neurosis, Malingering, PTSD, Secondary Traumatization, and Other Lessons From MVAs," 55 DePaul L. Rev. 627 (2005-2006), documented the studies of the Albany Motor Vehicle Accident Project (Albany Project), which also concluded that approximately forty percent of car crash victims developed PTSD within two years after a crash. The Albany researchers set out to determine whether the predominant thinking in the 1980s -- that the diagnosis of PTSD required trauma outside the range of usual experience, like combat – was true. Id. at 617-8. Over a five-year period, the Albany Project studied 158 car crash victims to assess the psychological impact on the victims for up to two years. After performing extensive studies, the researchers successfully debunked old thoughts about the disorder, concluding that car crash victims can, and do, in fact suffer from PTSD. Id. at 619.

Continue reading "CONFERENCE EXPLORES IMPACT OF ROAD COLLISIONS ON THE INJURED, FAMILY MEMBERS" »

While the title may be encouraging, it may also be misleading. It is true that motorcycle deaths have fallen by roughly 10% nationally and closer to 18% in the Six County Chicagoland area from 2008 to 2009. The Illinois State Police did have a campaign to reduce motorcycle accidents and fatalities in 2009.

Perhaps the safety tips are working, but the fact of the matter is the staggering economy has something to do with the decrease in deaths. Motorcycles, for many, are a discretionary item. Discretionary items are some of the first things that are eliminated when one’s pocketbook is hit.

On a different but related note, there are better motorcycle helmets. There are newer safety campaigns aimed at auto drivers being more aware and more conscious of motorcyclists.
Finally, one cannot count out our “weather” for the drop in motorcycle deaths. Since the 2009 riding season, it has been colder and wetter than normal. This may yet be another factor in reducing the number of motorcyclists on the road.

The Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll handles transportation negligence personal injury and wrongful death matters.

With the weather turning warm and more hours of daylight, more and more people will take to the roads on their motorcycles. Sadly, it seems like every weekend we are reading about someone being killed or seriously injured in a motorcycle crash. There were 5,290 motorcycle crash fatalities in the U.S. in 2008 alone. There are many causes to motorcycle accidents; bad roads, motorist inattention, excessive speed, bad weather, etc. Whatever the reason, the statistics are mounting at a somewhat rapid rate. In fact, motorcyclist fatalities now account for 10% of all motor vehicle traffic crash fatalities.

Typically, most of the fatalities involve motorcyclists age 20 to 29according to statistics kept by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration. With the lack of experience most of the motorcyclists have, it does not take much thought to figure out that motorcycles have the potential to be death traps. Here are some ways that motorcyclists can make this hobby safe and enjoyable:

1. Watch Your Speed - Motorcycles accelerate the fastest of all vehicles on the road. Trucks and buses accelerate the slowest. Be careful and maintain a safe speed.

2. Check Yourself and Your Bike - Do a quick safety inspection of your bike before going out for a ride and wear protective clothing and a helmet. Proper maintenance and protective clothing will reduce the chance of a crash and diminish the severity of an injury if you are involved in a crash.

3. Drive to Survive - Motorcycles are the smallest vehicles on the road and provide virtually no protection in a crash. Often, other drivers will not see your motorcycle in their rear or side view mirrors. Ride with caution and drive defensively. This will prevent other drivers from causing an accident with you.

4. Watch the No-Zones - Never hang out in a truck's blind spot or "no-zone. Trucks have large no-zones on both sides, in front and behind. If you are riding in a no-zone the truck driver cannot see you. Take particular caution if you are riding near trucks. Many crashes occur when motorcycles are riding in a truck's front no-zone and need to stop. Motorcycles can stop much faster than a truck and crashes often occur when truck driver's can't see the motorcycle in their no-zone and can't stop in time to avoid a crash.

Continue reading "MOTORCYCLISTS BEWARE: SUMMER TRAFFIC SEASON IS HERE" »

Oprah Winfrey highlighted the dangers of distracted driving on her January 18, 2010 show. Oprah is asking everyone to take a "no phone zone" pledge promising to not text or talk on the phone while driving.

As a Chicago personal injury attorney, I have seen the devastating effects of distracted driving and have made an effort to increase public awareness of the problem on this blog. From Boston, to California, here in Illinois, and around the world, distracted driving is a serious problem. It is great to see Oprah focusing everyone's attention on this serious hazard.

Remember, while texting and talking are serious forms of distracted driving and behavior that need to be stopped, please do not do anything that diverts your attention from the road in front of you!

This past Saturday a motorcyclist was killed in central Illinois when he was struck by a boat that flew off its trailer and into oncoming traffic after the driver of the trailer hit a guardrail. The motorcyclist was not wearing a helmet. An autopsy report concluded that the man died from multiple injuries.

A research note from August, 2005 prepared by the National Highway Traffic Safety Adminsitration's National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NHTSA NCSA) reported that helmets are roughly 37% effective in preventing fatalities. In 2003, there were 3,661 rider deaths in fatal motorcycle crashes. An effectiveness of 37% for motorcycle helmets suggests that an estimated 1,158 additional motorcyclists would have died were it not for the fact that they were wearing helmets. Had all motorcyclists consistently worn proper helmets, an additioanl 640 motorcyclists could have survived otherwise fatal crashes in 2003.

Currently, there is no law in Illinois requring motorcyclists to wear helmets. The only "equipment" that Illinois law mandates motorcyclists to use are glasses, goggles or a transparent shield. (See Section 11-1404 specifically).

Illinois is only one of three states in the entire country that has no motorcycle helmet law in any form. This is shocking considering the value of a helmet. Hopefully Illinois will catch up with her sister states soon and enact life-saving legislation.

For more information on the history of helmet laws (or lack thereof) in Illinois, click here.

Continue reading "NO HELMET, NO HARLEY" »