Hillerich & Bradsby Strikeout in Personal Injury Case

Six years ago 18 year-old Brandon Patch died when he was hit by a baseball while playing in an American League baseball game in Montana. After years of legal battles, the jury finally awarded the family $850,000 in damages. The defendant: Hillerich & Bradsby, the makers of the the Louisville Slugger baseball bat.

According to the courts, the bat company failed to adequately warn users of the dangers of aluminum bats which, according to the company, supply more power in the game when compared to the wooden alternatives. According to the courts, these aluminum bats can cause a ball to travel faster and can apparently cause a baseball to become a deadly projectile.

The family claimed that the faster speed did not give their son enough time to react in order to avoid the ball. As a result, Brandon was hit in the head, ultimately causing his death. At the time of the incident, Brandon was playing as pitcher in the game.

Interestingly enough, the jury didn’t find that the Louisville Slugger was misused in anyway nor did they find it to be defective.

In the past it was assumed that players understood the risks associated with the sport of baseball and the potential dangers of bats and balls. The Montana case, however, brings about the discussion of placing warning labels on bats to give players a greater understanding of the dangers of baseball.

Debbie Patch, Brandon’s mother, had not expected a Plaintiff’s verdict, but instead hoped that other parents and players would become more aware of the dangers involved with aluminum bats. As a result of the court decisions, however, Patch hopes that more youth leagues would switch to using wooden bats instead of the aluminum ones that played a part in her son’s death.

This is not the only personal injury case against Hillerich & Bradsby, the makers of the Louisville Slugger. Last year a New Jersey family pressed charges against the bat maker after their son suffered brain damage after an injury during a baseball game.  He was struck by a line drive off of an aluminum Slugger bat similar to the one used in Montana. The New Jersey case is still pending in the State’s Supreme Court.

As personal injury cases become more and more complex, they begin to affect different areas of society. This one, for example, can potentially impact the entire sport of baseball all over the country. As a result of both the Montana and New Jersey cases, parents and students in New Hampshire might begin to see new labels on all kinds of sporting equipment. Louisville Slugger might be the defendant in this case, but it’s possible that cases for other sports might surface in the coming years.

In order to prepare for the changes in the industry, sporting equipment companies may begin to preemptively warn individuals of the dangers of using their goods. Although this will help protect the companies against personal injury suits, it may also change the nature of sports. With the Louisville Slugger cases, for example, parents in Montana, New Jersey, and even New England may begin adopting the practices of the professional leagues by using wooden bats instead of aluminum.

We’ll have to keep an eye on this to see how far and how fast this trend might go.

DWI Program Cuts Spell Longer Sentences for Multiple Offenders

As a result of seventeen state job cuts in Laconia, some DWI offenders will be spending more time in jail than their judge required.

New Hampshire state laws surrounding DWI offenses are very strict. Individuals convicted of multiple or aggravated DWI charges must serve their sentence within 21 days of conviction.  This type of sentence comes with a contingency that they must serve at least ten days in jail, seven of which must be spent in an intervention program for offenders.

New state budget cuts and resulting job losses, however, have closed the state-run Multiple Offender Program (MOP), based in Laconia, giving convicted individuals no choice but to serve more time in jail or find alternative options.

Privately run intervention programs are certainly available to offenders, but many of these cost more than $1,000 in up-front fees.  This means that individuals who are unable to pay these private costs may have to spend up to 30 days in jail instead.

The Laconia job losses come as a result of statewide budget cuts. Nancy Rollins, the associate commissioner of health and human service, said it was a difficult decision to cut MOP.  To assist individuals, Rollins said the state may offer to pay the up-front costs of private programs and collect the costs from the offenders after the treatment has ended.

No definite plans are in place, however, and Rollins says the state is working hard to find a good working alternative to the previously state-run program.  To assist in this transition, many courts are withholding sentencing.

In 2008 there were 2,732 DWI cases in New Hampshire that involved multiple or aggravated offenses.  Seventy five percent of those cases were handled by MOP.  Now that the program is gone, government officials will be working hard to find feasible alternatives that appease the court as well as maintain an efficient system to handle these DWI cases.

For a video on this news topic, visit http://www.wmur.com/news/21341593/detail.html

Texting While Driving – The New DWI?

Over the last year more and more studies have shown that texting while driving can be extremely dangerous.  The visual distractions of text messaging can cause reckless driving and governments are now issuing new laws to target this problem.

In fact, the dangers of texting while driving have become so prevalent, texting laws are fast becoming as strong as DWI/DUI laws.  Many law enforcement officers believe that driving while texting impairs drivers in a way similar to intoxication.

New Hampshire passed a law banning texting while driving back in early August of this year.  While this is not the same as DWIs or DUIs, it’s certainly a wake-up call for people who like to multi-task and text while they drive.  The details of these laws are also different than those for driving under the influence and it’s important to take note of the rules, regulations, and potential consequences of these activities.

According to the NH texting law, any text messaging or typing (including on handheld or computers) while driving is considered a crime.  The law does, however, allow drivers to type names and numbers into their phones to make calls.

So how do the police no the difference?  In the event of an accident or other driving infringement, the officer is allowed to check the phone log provided the driver consents to a search warrant.

The New Hampshire texting law takes effect in January, 2010.

Other states have passed similar measures banning cell phones and texting.

Maine, for example, has just passed a distracted drivers law that covers texting.  Maine’s law brings attention to the level of distraction by making it a traffic infraction and penalizes drivers who cause accidents while distracted.  Although texting has become the  heated issue, the law actually covers any distraction including talking on a cell phone, eating, or any other activity.

There’s a push in Washington to get texting banned nationwide.

Whether it’s talking on the phone, using the internet, texting, or messaging, more and more drivers are attempting to stay connected behind the wheel.  As a result of these distractions, more people are getting into accidents  and states are having to find ways to deal with this new problem.  So, as communication and technology become increasingly more accessible, it’s easy to see how laws are quickly catching up with the growing trend.

How Do the Good Samaritan Laws Affect You?

You’re driving along Route 101 when suddenly the car in front of you veers sharply off the road and flips over. The driver is trapped. You want to help, but ironically find yourself paralyzed with fear. What if you wind up doing more harm than good? What if the driver or his family decides to sue you?

To curb this fear and remove legal repercussions in a lawsuit-crazed society, the Good Samaritan Law was enacted nationwide on a statutory basis. As a general rule, the Good Samaritan Law provides protection for medically untrained individuals to help those in distress. This law gives defense of the rescuer from torts that might subsequently be issued on behalf of the individual who was assisted.

New Hampshire has a general Good Samaritan Law in Section 508:12 of S.B. 67 that reads:

“If any person, in good faith, renders emergency care at the place of the happening on an emergency, or while in transit in an ambulance or rescue vehicle to a person who is in urgent need of care as a result of the emergency, and if the acts of care are made in good faith and without willful or wanton negligence, the person who renders the care is not liable in civil damages for his acts or omissions in rendering the care as long as he receives no compensation for the care from or on behalf of the person cared for, and provided further that any person rendering emergency care shall have the duty to place the injured person under the care of a physician, nurse, or other person qualified to care for such person as soon as possible and to obey the instructions of such qualified person.”

Like statutory laws in many other states, Section 508:12 provides defense from torts arising against individuals who have provided emergency aid to persons in need. This defense, however, does not extend to physicians, medical practitioners and other emergency personnel – a standard component of other Good Samaritan Laws nationwide.

Outreach to those in need – whether physically, financially or emotionally – is a charitable, noble tendency that has become a defining component of American culture. With the Good Samaritan Laws in action, you can safely give reasonable assistance to injured individuals at a motor vehicle collision or other accident without the threat of tort litigation.

So, if you are ever faced with the opportunity to rescue someone who needs your help, at least know you have legal protection if your efforts somehow backfire. If, despite the Good Samaritan Law, you are sued, a qualified personal injury attorney will take firm steps to have the law applied in your case.