Boston Injury Lawyer Blog

June 21, 2016

Liability Questions Surround Tragic Orlando Alligator Attack

Last Tuesday, June 14, 2016, a two-year-old boy was with his family at Disney World Resort in Orlando, Florida when he was attacked by an alligator. The boy was playing in less than a foot of water when an almost 7 foot long alligator grabbed him and dragged him into the Seven Seas Lagoon by the popular Grand Floridian Hotel. After hours of searching, the boy’s body was found the next day less than 15 feet from where the alligator originally snatched him. An autopsy was performed, and the cause of death was determined to be drowning and traumatic injuries. Since his death, there have been many questions of liability regarding the incident. There were “No-swimming” signs posted around the beach and warnings regarding deep water and steep drop-offs, but there were no signs that warning of alligators. Now the question is can Disney be held liable for this boy’s death for having prior knowledge of these alligators and failing to warn its guests of the potential dangers?

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission estimates that there are about 1.3 million alligators in Florida, most of these being found in the wild. Of these alligators, most do not cause problems, but there are time when alligators attack or can be a pest to communities. The Statewide Nuisance Alligator Program (SNAP), the program responsible for dealing with alligator-related complaints, reported receiving 13,962 nuisance alligator complaints in 2015. Disney was aware of the presence of alligators in their lakes and lagoons; it even has its own wildlife-management team. One Disney grounds keeper confirmed this and also said that the gators rarely come on shore but “you should not go in the water.” The so-called Seven Seas Lagoon where the attack happened is a man made lagoon but it is connected to other bodies of water in areas packed with alligators. During the search for the boy’s body, five alligators were removed and all were euthanized to see if one of them was the gator who attacked the child. Continue reading

June 20, 2016

Dangers of Fireworks as the Fourth of July Approaches

by Altman & Altman

Many sports fans remember the tragedy shortly after the Fourth of July last year involving Giants defensive end Jason Pierre-Paul. At a holiday cookout in his hometown of Deerfield Beach, Florida, Pierre-Paul and his friends were celebrating the day by setting off $1,100 worth of fireworks for the whole neighborhood. They had passed several hours enjoying the firework show and decided they would call it a night. One friend, however, pointed out that there were only a few fireworks left, so they might as well set off the last few, right? Pierre-Paul grabbed one of the last fireworks and attempted to light the fuse seven times to no avail as the wind kept blowing out his lighter. Pierre-Paul stated in an interview with Sports Illustrated that he remembered thinking Let me try one more time… The firework finally ignited and immediately there was a deafening BOOM and a blinding green light that witnesses say engulfed Pierre-Paul. The firework had exploded in his hand. Pierre-Paul was in shock. He had been setting off his own fireworks for his neighborhood since he was 15 years old, and this kind of accident had never occurred. After this accident, Pierre-Paul had to endure 8 surgeries total and a skin graft in an attempt to make his hand as operational as possible. Several of the bones in his fingers needed to be removed, and his hand is visibly deformed. He has since returned to the sport, but his returning season has been underwhelming when compared to his seasons before his accident.

This is a case in point as to how dangerous lighting fireworks can be, and with the Fourth of July right around the corner, it is essential that we all take precautions to prevent such accidents from occurring. According to the American Pyrotechnics Association (APA), more than 14,000 fireworks displays take place in the U.S. every fourth of the July. The APA also estimates that backyard fireworks have more than doubled between 2000 and 2007, reaching 238 million pounds of fireworks. “Backyard fireworks” are common but are extremely dangerous, even to those who have been setting them off for years. Most people do not completely understand the potential risks they take when using consumer fireworks. According to the National Fire Protection Association, U.S. emergency rooms treated an estimated 11,400 people for firework related injuries in 2013, 55 percent of these injuries being to the extremities and 38 percent to the head. Typically, rates of firework related injuries are highest among infants and teenagers. Males are also more likely to be injured by fireworks than females. However, it is important to remember that anyone can be injured by fireworks, even observers at a town firework show. There are precautions you can take in order to prevent severe injury while using fireworks. These safety tips include:

Make sure fireworks are legal in your area before buying or using them.

June 20, 2016

Whistleblowers of Financial Fraud

by Altman & Altman

In the past, the primary whistle blower act in place has been the Federal False Claims Act, which was enacted during the Civil War to combat fraud against the federal government by suppliers to the Union Army. Also commonly called “Lincoln’s Law”, the False Claims Act was rarely used until it was completely overhauled in 1986. The 1986 amendments were prompted by publicized reports of abuses in the defense contracting industry, in which the government was being exponentially overcharged for household items. During the revamp, more financial incentives were put into place and barriers to actions against those who allegedly submitted false claims to the government were reduced. Since the new 1986 amendments were passed, the False Claims Act has become the government’s most effective and successful tool in combating unneeded or fraudulent federal spending.

From 1986 to 2015, this Act has retrieved over $48 billion as an outcome of cases filed under Lincoln’s Act. Although this Act proved to be quite successful with federal fraud, it cannot pursue cases of financial fraud that do not involve the government. The Act does not protect against those who blow the whistle against financial companies or corporations unless the federal government is somehow also experiencing some financial loss. With the Great Recession, came ample motive to enact a new law protecting whistle blowers of financial institutions.

In 2010, shortly after the housing bubble burst, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was passed. This act was implemented to prevent any future reckless financial behavior as well as to incite, reward, and protect whistle blowers. This act protects those who can provide novel insider evidence of financial fraud to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. If a whistle blower, also called a relator, brings original insider information forward and the agency can successfully have a suit against the accused, the relator can potentially receive 10 to 30 percent of the total fines the accused is charged with. In addition to this financial incentive, the Dodd-Frank Act also protects whistle blowers from those trying to retaliate, such as the whistle blower’s boss or company. The Act allows the relator to take those seeking retaliation to court. The overall success of the False Claims Act has been due to the whistle blowers responding to the qui tam provisions of the Act. These provisions essentially allow any person to file a case on the behalf of the federal government. Qui tam provisions make it easier to sift through false claims made to the government. Continue reading

June 16, 2016

GM Unveils Rear Seat Reminder

by Altman & Altman

General Motors has just introduced a feature they call the “Rear Seat Reminder” for their U.S. customers. This feature prompts drivers to check the back seat as they leave their vehicles under specific conditions. This technology is believed to be the first of its kind in the automobile industry. There have been too many tragic stories of children being left in cars and dying while their parents run errands. About half of the children under age 14 who die of heatstroke in cars are actually forgotten. From 1998 to the present, 673 children have died from heatstroke after being left in cars, 54 percent being forgotten. The consumer website for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration notes the extreme temperatures that the interior of vehicles can reach. It only takes ten minutes for the temperature inside a vehicle to rise over 20 degrees Fahrenheit. Even if it’s 60 degrees outside, the temperature inside a vehicle can be as high as 110 degrees.

Although parents or pet owners may not even consider the hazards of temperature when it’s a breezy 60 degrees outside, children and pets can easily die of heatstroke if left in cars for any amount of time. In addition to this negligence, belongings left in the back seat of cars are often targets for theft. Almost 23 percent of theft in 2014 involved items from a motor vehicle. Spreading this kind of awareness of the dangers of leaving children and belongings in cars can prevent unnecessary deaths or robberies, but GM goes further by trying to prevent deaths from busy parents who genuinely forget their children through their new Rear Seat Reminder feature. GM global safety strategy engineer Tricia Morrow states, “Whether it’s your lunch, laptop, pet or most importantly, your child, it’s easier than it seems to forget what’s in the back seat when moving between life’s events.” This new feature will appear as a standard feature first in GM’s 2017 GMC Acadia SUV to U.S. customers. Continue reading

June 15, 2016

What to Do if You’re Involved in a Rear-end Collision in Massachusetts

by Altman & Altman

Most people think they would know what to do in the event of a car accident. If there are no serious injuries, you just exchange information and call the insurance company, right? But many of us underestimate how shaken up we would be in a collision, even if no serious injuries are immediately apparent. Rear-end collisions can be especially frightening. One minute you’re sitting at a stop light, thinking about what you’re going to make for dinner, and then CRASH. Even without injuries, the effects of such an accident can leave you emotionally shaken and unsure of what to do next. Contact a Boston Car Accident Lawyer Today.

The 4 R’s of Motor Vehicle Collisions

The good news is, there’s an easy way to remember what to do in the event of a rear-end collision. Just remember the 4 R’s; review, report, record, and reach out.

Review: Although you can never really be ‘prepared’ for a car accident, there are steps you can take to increase your chances of reacting appropriately if an accident occurs. For starters, immediately following an accident, review the situation. Is anyone injured? Injuries, minor and severe, take priority over property damage. If no injuries are present, review property damage. Is your car damaged? What about the other driver’s car? What about surrounding property? Take a quick mental note of any visible damage and move to step 2.

Report: If no injuries or damages are apparent, you probably don’t need to report the accident to the police. However, if there is significant damage or anyone suffered injuries, you should immediately contact the police. In addition to offering protection if emotions become heightened, police can investigate the accident and create an official report. This can be immensely helpful in a lawsuit. Once the police have been contacted, call your insurance company. Timely reporting is crucial if you wish to file an insurance claim.

Record: A permanent record of the accident scene, contact details, witness statements, medical expenses, and property damage can be your best friend after a car accident. Record every detail possible, and do it as soon as possible. While you’re still at the scene of the accident, talk to other drivers, passengers, and witnesses to get their perspective on what happened, before their memories fade. Jot down your own account of what happened as well. Take pictures of the scene, including damage to the car(s) and any other property, and any factors that may have contributed to the accident, such as an icy road, or a difficult-to-see stop sign positioned behind a large tree or improperly-parked vehicle.

Reach out: If you or anyone else involved in the accident suffered injuries, or if there was significant property damage, you should reach out to a skilled motor vehicle accident attorney. Many personal injury lawyers will be willing to work on a contingency basis, meaning they don’t get paid unless your claim is successful. Whether you’ve been injured, or someone is blaming you for their injuries, you will want the help of an experienced auto accident lawyer.

June 15, 2016

BMW Recalling Over 600K SUV’s

by Altman & Altman

BMW has announced that it will be recalling 622,000 SUVs worldwide due to potential problems with the child seat anchors in the vehicles. According to the report, these anchors may become damaged over time and therefore do not secure the seat properly. The models included in the recall are certain X3 SUV models including the xDrive 28i, xDrive28i, and xDrive35i model years 2011 through 2017, as well as X4 SUV models including the xDrive 28d, xDrive28i, xDrive35i, and xDriveM40i model years 2015 through 2017. There are about 189,000 vehicles being recalled in the U.S. alone. Documents posted on Tuesday June 14 by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration explained that anchor bars for child seats in the SUVs could become damaged when people use European-style child seats. Therefore, most owners of the affected models in the U.S. do not experience issues because typically they use child seats with flexible Latch connectors, which do not cause the problem.

BMW originally discovered the problem with anchor bars in March when a customer in Europe reported a damaged anchor. The report stated that an unoccupied child seat moved sideways when the 2011 BMW X3 vehicle made a turn. The owner discovered that this was due to damage on one of the lower anchor bars. Two more similar reports were also presented to BMW, both from Europe. Upon investigation, more anchor bar claims were discovered, where one instance included the anchor bar completely breaking. In its recall summary, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated, “The affected vehicles have lower anchor bars for securing child-restraint seats that may become damaged when using the European-Isofix-type rigid-style connector child-restraint system.” NHTSA also noted that these damaged anchor bars could increase a child’s risk of injury during a crash. BMW said that it is not aware of any injuries or fatalities related to problems included in the recall. To solve the problem, dealers will fuse a reinforcing bracket to the lower anchor bars at no charge to owners. This recall is expected to start July 12, 2016 Continue reading

June 14, 2016

IRS Tax Evasion Whistleblowing – What You Need to Know

by Altman & Altman

What if revealing information could land you with millions in rewards? The IRS can award money to those who provide “specific and credible information” to the IRS if the material yields collection of taxes, penalties, interest or other forms of collection from the defiant taxpayer. The IRS is specific in noting that the information needs to be concrete and proven, not simply “educated guesses” and that proves a substantial Federal tax issue. The information must also be relatively new, as the statute of limitations on corporate and individual cases can be as short as three years. There is no statute of limitations for fraud, but these issues are more difficult, and therefore are often avoided by the IRS.

If a case is strong, there are two types of potential awards granted by the IRS. First are awards issued to those who report cases with total values less than $2 million or with individuals who earn less than $200,000 annually. These awards are smaller but still can be substantial. The IRS can offer a maximum reward of 15 percent up to $10 million. These awards are discretionary and therefore cannot be appealed to the Tax Court. In 2006, the IRS instituted a new whistle-blower program to attempt to catch more “big cheaters”. In these cases, the total amount in dispute must surpass $2 million in addition to a few other requirements.

If the case involves an individual, his or here annual gross income must be upwards of $200,000. If the case adheres to these clauses, the IRS will pay 15 to 30 percent of the amount collected to the whistleblower. In these cases, the whistleblower can appeal the claim to the Tax Court. Since new incentives have been implemented, the IRS has received various tips from about 476 individuals identifying 1,246 taxpayers in 2008, the first full year the program was implemented. These tips have been well supported with documentation involving billions of dollars in taxes, penalties, and interest.

Most often, the individuals who contact the IRS with tips are disgruntled middle-ranking employees at large corporations. It is believed that these workers inform on those in upper management because they feel stuck in their positions at work and frustrated with the tax evasion that they know to be occurring. Informant identity is not made public, but often times the person’s name is obvious based on the information provided. This fact which might incite retaliation, along with the extensive amounts of information that are required to complete the forms in a report to the IRS (i.e. the accused’s social security number) often deter individuals from making reports. Continue reading

June 13, 2016

Medicare Fraud At Skilled Nursing Facilities

by Altman & Altman

Often times after older citizens suffer an incapacitating illness or stroke, they require some time to recover in a rehabilitation center. However, there are some cases in which these skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) partake in fraudulent behavior. The way this scam works is often through a type of billing fraud called “upcoding”. Upcoding is when a provider, such as an SNF, bills a health insurance payer, in this case Medicare, using a false current procedural terminology (CPT) code for a more costly service than was performed. Upcoding is understandably illegal because it forces individual patients and taxpayers to pay more so that the providers get paid more money. In addition to stealing money from patients, it also puts false information on their medical records. This is not only dangerous, but it may affect the patient’s future ability to get insurance. SNFs also may place patients into the highest Resource Utilization Group (RUG) category. This is another scam used by SNFs because by doing this, the center receives the most Medicare money paid by the government. In this group, patients receive excessive physical and occupational therapy, which is often unnecessary and can even be unsafe for the patient.

According to a New York Times article published in September 2015, Inspector General Levinson reported SNFs have been classifying patients in the highest level of therapy group at an increasing rate. The article states that increases in SNF billing for placing patients in RUG accounted for $1.1 billion in Medicare payments in 2012 and 2013. Additionally, fraudulent SNF billings in 2009 resulted in $1.5 billion of inappropriate Medicare payments.

Fraud in skilled nursing facilities is relatively prevalent. This year, the country’s largest nursing home therapy provider, Kindred/Rehabcare, paid $125 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations. The providers RehabCare Group Inc., RehabCare Group East Inc. and their parent, Kindred Healthcare Inc. were involved in a government lawsuit in which they were accused of allowing their SNFs to submit false claims to Medicare. Nationally, RehabCare provides rehabilitation therapy to patients through more than 1,000 SNFs in 44 states. The government filed a complaint, which claimed that RehabCare’s policies were directed at receiving the highest reimbursement level regardless of the clinical needs of its patients. U.S. Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz for the District of Massachusetts claimed RehabCare was involved in several schemes in which they “engaged in a systematic and broad-ranging scheme to increase profits by delivering, or purporting to deliver, therapy in a manner that was focused on increasing Medicare reimbursement rather than on clinical needs of patients.” Along with the initial $125 million paid by Kindred/RehabCare, there were also settlements with four SNFs for their role in submitting fraudulent claims. Continue reading

June 7, 2016

What are the Most Dangerous Items in Your Home?

by Altman & Altman

The home should be a place of comfort and security. You can adjust the thermostat to keep warm in the winter and cool in the summer, prepare nutritious meals in your kitchen, read in your favorite armchair, take hot baths after a long day, and sleep peacefully in your cozy bed at night. But don’t let these comforts of home fool you into thinking accidents can’t happen. Serious injuries and fatalities occur at home all the time. Especially homes with little children running around – take a minute to look around to make sure that your keeping your house as safe as possible. Kids have a knack fro getting into the most obscure places and spaces. Safeguard your house by being aware of these most dangerous household items.

Cleaning Supplies

Harmful chemicals in cleaning supplies, such as bleach, can be extremely toxic. Unfortunately, curious youngsters can’t distinguish a deadly chemical from the juice or milk in their sippy cup. Make sure that bottle tops are screwed on tightly and that all harmful cleaning solutions are kept on high shelves, well out of a child’s reach. In addition to being dangerous if ingested, cleaning supplies can also be flammable, and can explode under certain circumstances. To prevent combustion and explosions, store chemicals at the proper temperature.

Refrigerators and Freezers

Young children love to hide in small places, including refrigerators, washing machines and dryers, and walk-in or deep freezers. Newer models often lock from the inside, which helps a child escape. But many older models do not have this feature. When not in use, make sure all appliances are locked, and always do a quick interior check before using a washing machine or dryer.

Sheds

The inside of a shed is often quite messy, filled with toxic chemicals, paint supplies, and dangerous tools. Guests see the inside of your house, but rarely the inside of your shed. Therefore, keeping it clean and throwing out old chemicals, rusty tools, and rotting wood isn’t usually a priority. However, young children may see your shed and think it’s perfect for a game of hide-and-seek, or for playing house.

To avoid serious injuries and death, keep your shed organized. Paint and toxic chemicals should be stored as they are in your home, safely out of the reach of children. The same goes for tools. Discard rotten wood, rusty tools, and anything else that presents an unnecessary risk. It is also important to use caution when placing items on shelves. Overstocking shelves, and allowing items to hang over the edge can spell disaster for someone walking or playing underneath. Continue reading

June 6, 2016

Summer Camp Injuries

by Altman & Altman

Swimming Pool Accidents

Summer camps often involve swimming. Although swimming pools can provide great fun, and respite from the hot sun, they can also pose dangers. Minor injuries from pool chemical reactions and slips on wet surfaces are common, but campers can also suffer more serious injuries, such as electrocution from improperly wired pool lights, and drowning. Contact a Boston Personal Injury Lawyer Today.

If your child is injured in a pool-related accident while at summer camp, what do you do?

To successfully sue for damages, you must prove a breach of duty, and that damages occurred due to that breach. What is a breach of duty? Camp owners have a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect campers from harm. If the camp owner failed to take reasonable care, he or she may be found liable for negligence. For example, if a camp owner neglects to put a fence around the perimeter of the pool and an unsupervised camper sneaks in and drowns, the owner will likely be held responsible.

Who is Responsible for Summer Camp Injuries?

In most cases, the camp itself is responsible for keeping your children out of harm’s way. In order to uphold this duty, camps are required to take proper precautions and exercise good judgment, both before the camp begins and while it is underway.

In addition to inspecting grounds and facilities to ensure that they are free of hazards, camps typically have to perform background checks on staff. If a camp fails to perform this type of background check and a staff member harms a child, the camp will likely be found negligent.

There are certain injuries for which a camp is not responsible, however. For example, inherently-risky activities, such as football camp, may require that you sign a waiver for injuries that may occur during play. Basically, you assume reasonable risk. However, injuries that fall outside the parameters of reasonable risk, such as heat stroke due to the lack of water breaks on a 100 degree day, is another story altogether.

The bottom line is, kids get injured at camp. It’s the nature and severity of those injuries that determines whether or not a lawsuit is in order.

Are Liability Waivers Enforceable by Law?

The short answer is yes. Camp waivers are generally two-part forms; the ‘assumption of risk’ part and the ‘release of liability’ part. The assumption of risk section basically says you will not sue the camp for a risk that you acknowledged at the time of signing. For example, if your child is in hiking camp and he falls while hiking and breaks his leg, you can’t sue. If, however, the instructor accidentally shoots your child in the eye with an unauthorized bb gun, you have some options. You didn’t assume the risk of shooting injuries during hiking camp, therefore, the ‘assumption of risk’ is not applicable.

The release of liability, on the other hand, basically absolves the camp from all injuries suffered while on the grounds. While a waiver for negligence is usually enforceable, it should include an exception for malicious and intentional acts. Without this, the waiver is most likely unenforceable. Continue reading