According to the lawsuit filed in federal court by the plaintiffs and their injury attorneys, Theodule took money from investors, promising that he would double it in a short period of time. The SEC has said that Theodule lost $18 million just in 2007 and that he merely repaid earlier investors with the new money coming from more current investors in the scheme – none of the money was actually ever traded or otherwise generating profits. Initially, he did repay the investors. One Haitian-American man apparently invested $25,000 initially and was so delighted with the $50,000 check he received three months later that he sent Theodule another $100,000. The man has never been repaid.

A class action suit is pending against Theodule, who has relocated to Georgia. The complaint paints a dark picture of the man who seems to have run a fraudulent pyramid scheme based on false trust, saying, “Theodule used his Haitian background, his self-proclaimed status as a 'man of God,' and his purported interest in helping to build wealth for his fellow Haitians to solicit funds from members of the Haitian community.” Theodule appears to have used the millions generated to indulge in extravagant personal expenditures, such as expensive cars, cash, and to misappropriate nearly $4 million into his own bank accounts. Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyers Alitowski and Moore condemn preying upon local citizens in order to defraud them.

Fraud is considered an economic tort, meaning that the recovery is due for the financial loss. Specifically, fraud is defined as deception intended to achieve a personal gain or to hurt another person. Most commonly, fraud takes its form similar to the Theodule case: Person A is tricked into giving her money to Person B because A is told it is being used differently than it actually is. For instance, if B pocketed the money but had told A it was to invest for A’s benefit or to give to charity, B would have engaged in a fraudulent transaction. A would be able to file a civil suit to recover the money she lost to B.

Similarly, if the allegations contained in the lawsuit against Theodule are accurate, he will be liable to his investors. If there is sufficient evidence, the court will find him liable for the losses of his “investors” because he engaged in fraud, deceiving his Haitian-American backers into believing that the was investing their funds in a project with a return. The transaction would not have been fraudulent (although it would have been misrepresentation) if he had just lied, but the fact that he apparently pocketed substantial sums of money for his personal use makes his actions more serious.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

PN’s injury attorney in California has said that the Intuit case is among the worst spamming he has seen. In addition to the misleading subject lines, sheer massive quantity, and failure of Intuit to unsubscribe the company from the unsolicited emails, the emails interfered with daily business functioning. PN says that the spam emails were sent in quantities as large as thousands in a single day. The high volume prevented correct functioning of their computer equipment. Computers would crash during bouts of intense spamming, causing loss of employees’ time, delays in conducting business, and the loss of unsaved work.

This will not be Intuit’s first appearance in a courtroom. Previously, Intuit settled a class action suit related to its distribution of faulty software. One business owner described the horrifying experience as “every computer user's worst nightmare. My company lost its invoicing, sales reports, inventories, day to day working files, pictures, and other files containing financial information. The files lost represent hundreds of hours of work." The users affected received compensation for their losses related to the installation of a $99 software created by Intuit.

The Boca Raton management company suing Intuit for spamming claims it never requested any emails; they were completely unsolicited. Intuit allegedly told the company that it would not receive further emails, but did not follow up.

California law allows statutory damages in the case of unsolicited email of the type that PN says Intuit sent. In accordance with California law, PN has requested damages of $1,000 per email. PN has currently documented nearly 13,000 email received at a single email address during a period of about six weeks in October and November 2008.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

The ATRF has called the south Florida metropolitan area “a proverbial launching pad for class actions, dubious claims and novel legal theories.” The lawyer-operated American Center for Justice dismissed the Judicial Hellhole designation, saying that the list has been "widely debunked."

The ATRF and similar tort reform entities operate on the premise that the Americans litigate excessively and that jury awards are too large when compensating people who have been hurt. Unfortunately, these views fail to adequately address the problem that injured individuals deserve full and fair compensation for their injuries. Broward injury attorneys want their clients to be able to pay their medical bills, for instance.

Compensatory damages are specifically calculable figures designed to make the plaintiff as whole as possible after his injury. For example, after determining that the defendant was responsible for the injury, it will calculate damages such as medical expenses, lost wages, and disfigurement. Fort Lauderdale injury lawyers and the local judges evaluate many factors to reach an exact number. Compensatory damages allow an injured person to pay his bills and recover the basic losses he sustained from the defendant’s actions.

Punitive damages cannot be specifically calculated in the same way that lost wages are. Instead, juries and judges award them based on the gravity of the particular situation, although Florida caps the amount of punitive damages available. Nevertheless, they can serve two important purposes. First, they provide additional compensation to the plaintiff when the defendant’s behavior was so egregious that the compensatory damages are insufficient. Secondly, and very importantly, they serve a social purpose: punitive damages can seriously discourage intentionally damaging behavior. For instance, a large punitive damages award against a company that knowingly lied about putting lead in its paint will strongly discourage other paint companies from engaging in the same behavior.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Recently, the case of a 77-year-old woman who lived in a Florida nursing home was raped by another resident, 83-year-old Ivey Edwards. Although the stereotypical image of nursing home residents may be feeble, Edwards was a known sex offender. Fort Lauderdale families looking for care for their loved ones may inquire about the quality of the medical care and the attentiveness of the staff, but should they also be worried that a nursing home will not adequately screen other residents?

In another newsworthy case, the Florida Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that nursing homes – unlike other health care facilities – do not have to provide patients’ records. The Court determined that the nursing homes were not health care facilities in the sense of doctor’s offices or hospitals. Since the Florida Constitution requires that patients have a “right to know,” or to check their medical records for medical malpractice.

The Florida Supreme Court decision arose out of the death of Marlene Gagnon, whose five children sued a nursing home after her death. The nursing home maintains that Gagnon died of a heart attack, but her children believe that she actually died from choking on coleslaw. Her doctors forbade her from eating that food due to the risk. The nursing home has refused to release their internal incident report on the matter. With the new interpretation of the Florida Constitution, the nursing home does not have to divulge the records. Their Florida personal injury lawyer was critical of the decision, saying, "This strips constitutional rights from the elderly. . .This is just an invitation to more elder abuse." Nonetheless, the Gagnon family’s Florida injury attorney believes that they have obtained enough other relevant documents to prove that Gagnon died from choking rather than a heart attack.

If you or a loved one has suffered in a nursing home or due to a physician’s medical malpractice, contact Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyers Andrew Alitowski and William Moore to learn about your options. Although monetary damages cannot erase your experiences, they can defray other expenses and provide a strong disincentive for nursing homes to allow future abuse.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Perhaps the intentional tort the Fort Lauderdale public is most familiar with is battery. Battery is defined as intentionally causing harmful or offensive contact to a person. Occasionally, it can also be harmful or offensive contact to something on the person, such as a woman’s purse. The person who caused the contact – the defendant, if he is being sued – need not have hit the plaintiff with his bare hands to recover for battery. Although that is one possibility, the defendant could also have made the contact with an instrument. For instance, if Danny purposely shoved Wanda into Peggy, Danny would be liable to Peggy for her injuries. Wanda would not be responsible to Peggy, but Danny would also probably be liable to her for any injuries she suffered, as well. Similarly, if Danny intentionally hit Peggy with his car, he could be held civilly liable for her damages in that scenario, too. If you have suffered a battery, contact south Florida personal injury lawyer Andrew Alitowski.

Assault is likely the next best known intentional tort in Broward County. To show assault, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant intentionally caused the plaintiff apprehension of offensive or harmful contact. Another way of saying this is that the plaintiff was reasonably afraid that she was going to suffer a battery. For instance, if Denise approached Pamela waving a realistic toy gun and threatening to shoot her, Pamela has a cause of action against Denise. Despite the impossibility of a real shooting, Denise intentionally made Pamela fear just that.

Intentional inflection of emotional distress is another tort worth discussion. Although it is usually part of a bigger lawsuit – rather than a stand alone issue – the residents of south Florida have almost certainly heard of it. In most cases, the defendant’s conduct must be outrageously outside of the standards of decency and calculated to cause the plaintiff extreme distress. The plaintiff will often demonstrate physical symptoms of her distress, such as the inability to sleep or stress-related headaches, although such symptoms are not necessary. For instance, telling the plaintiff that her father was murdered in an extremely horrific way, such that plaintiff suffered blood pressure-related complications, could set the stage for a successful intentional infliction of emotional distress lawsuit.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Article contributed by Mallory Shipman, Attorney-at-Law.

Dignitary torts are those injuries which harm a person in different way – it is injury to one’s dignity. Most famously, defamation is a dignitary tort. To prove defamation, a person must communicate a false statement about someone that is harmful to that person’s reputation. Generally, it is at least implied to be factual; an obvious joke, for instance, is not considered defamatory. Defamation can be in the form of slander, which is spoken, or libel, which is written defamatory language. For instance, Alice, a nurse, attends the Broward County Nurses Association dinner, where she imparts gossip about Betty (also a nurse). Betty, Alice says authoritatively, neglects her elderly patients because “they’re going to die soon enough, anyway.” A statement like that could have a significant impact on Betty’s reputation, her career, and her earning potential. Betty could likely win a defamation lawsuit against Alice on the basis of Alice’s slander. Of course, if Alice’s statement was accurate, Betty will not be able to recover monetary damages from Alice. Likewise, if Alice had made that statement to Betty alone – not in front of any other person – Betty would be unable to recover, even if the statement were inaccurate. The information must be passed along to other people.

Invasion of privacy is another dignitary tort worth mentioning. Generally, the plaintiff was intruded upon in some area in which a reasonable person would have expected privacy. For instance, if a private citizen bugged a hotel room with listening devices to detect personal conversations, it would likely be an invasion of privacy. Also, appropriating the plaintiff’s image for commercial benefit falls within invasion of privacy. If the manufacturer of Wheaties put Michael Jordan’s picture on the box without his permission, with the goal of increasing sales, Michael Jordan would have a cause of action against the company.

Alienation of affections is an old-fashioned dignitary tort, little used and no longer even a cause of action. Florida and 41 other states removed it as a cause of action prior to 1935; it remains valid in Hawaii and seven others. Alienation of affections refers to suing the person believed responsible for causing a marriage to fail, typically the other spouse’s paramour. Extramarital sexual relations need not be proven and, occasionally, former spouses have sued family members or others who counseled in favor of divorce, rather than an illicit adulterous lover.

These are just a few examples of dignitary torts. Contact a Florida injury lawyer if you have been injured.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Article contributed by Mallory Shipman, Attorney-at-Law.

What happens when the plaintiff was at fault, too? The person she sues, the defendant, will not want to pay for the entirety of her injuries if he only caused part of them. Florida law recognizes that it would be unfair for him to do so. The state uses pure comparative negligence, a system which apportions fault between the plaintiff and defendant(s). The defendant must pay only the damages for which he is at fault.

For instance, assume that Bertha was riding her bicycle in the bike lane on a crowded Hollywood street. She was riding in the bike lane, wearing her helmet. She stopped at a red light, but not wanting to be late to class, she went on through. Bertha had a red light and the crosswalk signal indicated that pedestrians should not walk. Nonetheless, she continued through, not realizing that oncoming traffic had a left turn signal. Cara, who was driving her car to play in her afternoon bowling league, was turning left. Although Cara was able to brake, the car still hit Bertha. Since Bertha had worn her helmet, her injuries were painful but not life-threatening. Bertha sued Cara to recover for her injuries, alleging that Cara was negligent in the operation of her vehicle. The jury determined that Bertha’s injuries amounted to $10,000. Additionally, the jury found that Bertha was 65 percent at fault and Cara was 35 percent at fault. Under Florida law, Cara owes Bertha $3,500.

In most states, that degree of fault on the part of the plaintiff would bar her recovery from a defendant. Florida and 12 other states use a pure comparative negligence system in which any plaintiff who is less than 100 percent at fault can recover for the percentage of her injuries caused by the defendant(s).

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Article contributed by Mallory Shipman, Attorney-at-Law.

It’s entirely possible that Drivers A and B caused equal damage to Driver X’s health. But what if Car A hit Truck X so hard that the truck flipped over, whereas Car B was driven by a 105-year-old great-grandmother at the rate of 17 miles per hour? For these complicated scenarios, Florida completely abolished joint and several liability in 2006. When there are multiple defendants who are actually or potentially at fault for a person’s injuries, the plaintiff may sue both and recover the appropriate share from each.

In these types of cases, the jury or the judge will determine the percentage of the judgment award that each defendant owes. That determination is made exclusively by an examination of the facts surrounding the incident that injured the plaintiff and does not concern a defendant’s ability or inability to pay. In this case, the jury could award the plaintiff $2 million, while apportioning 85 percent of the fault to Driver A and 15 percent to driver B. Therefore, Driver A would be responsible for paying $1.7 million and Driver be would be liable for $300,000.

Prior to the abolition of joint and several liability in Florida, which took place over a period of two decades, the judgment could have been enforced in full against either party. Even if Driver B had only been responsible for one percent, Driver X would have been able to recover 100 percent of the verdict. If Driver B was a wealthy heiress and paid the $2 million, her only recourse for the $1.7 million that she paid for Driver A would be to seek contribution from him. Of course, it is highly likely that Driver A would never be able or willing to contribute the $1.7 million.

While that concept seems fair – that each defendant should only be responsible for the percentage he is at fault – a number of states retain joint and several liability. Why? The reasoning is that the person who should not be left in the cold is the plaintiff. Instead of only recovering a small percentage of what he is due, another defendant who is at fault is better off paying off the judgment for all of the defendants.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Article contributed by Mallory Shipman, Attorney-at-Law.

Elaine Hess is the widow of Stuart Hess, who was 55 at the time of his death from lung cancer. With her Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyer, she is suing tobacco company Philip Morris for the wrongful death of her husband. Hess asserts that her husband was so addicted to cigarettes that he could not quit smoking, despite his best efforts when confronted with a life-threatening smoking-related illness.

Robert Procter, an expert witness for the plaintiff, inadvertently caused a mistrial yesterday, the second day of the trial, by using an inflammatory racist word. The expert witness was explaining his scholarly research into racism and the tobacco industry when he used the term. The plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer indicated that the research cannot be properly explained to the jury without employing that specific term because it is highly relevant to the issue of racism. Procter teaches the history of science at Stanford University.

The plaintiff’s attorney said, “[Procter] mentioned it within context of his research project, but the judge felt that the context the jury heard it within was prejudicial . . . that the jury was hearing about racism by the tobacco industry." He also indicated that the jury was racially diverse. Officials for Philip Morris, the tobacco company, believed that the mistrial was the correct action for the judge to take. They believed that the use of the racial slur was so inflammatory, regardless of the context, that the jury would be unable to remain impartial when evaluating the facts. The tobacco company conceded in its opening statement that cigarettes can be addictive, but it was up to the jury in this case to determine whether or not Mr. Hess was addicted to cigarettes.

Since the Florida Supreme Court ruled last year that the tobacco personal injury lawsuits in the state should be heard individually, rather than as a class action suit, thousands of plaintiffs across the state have filed their case against Big Tobacco. Of those, 122 have been filed in the circuit court in Broward County. To date, 165 personal injury tobacco cases have been filed in Palm Beach County.

The original tobacco personal injury lawsuit was filed in Miami-Dade County and resulted in an award of $150 billion, the largest verdict in U.S. history. The plaintiffs were approximately 700,000 Floridians who alleged injuries caused by the tobacco companies and their products.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Medical malpractice occurs when a health care provider injures a patient by providing inadequate or inappropriate care under the circumstances. Our Broward personal injury lawyer can explain the possible injuries for which you could recover. Medical malpractice injuries could be death, worsening of your condition, increased pain, complications, or other problems associated with the negligent care. In an emergency room situation, medical malpractice may be more difficult to prove: you may have to show that the doctor or nurse acted with “reckless disregard” when rendering care for you. A Fort Lauderdale injury attorney can advise you on the standard of care the providers should have adhered to in your case.

Generally, doctors carry malpractice insurance. In Florida, doctors must usually either carry a minimum amount of insurance or maintain a certain amount of assets for use the in the event that they commit medical malpractice. Unfortunately, any Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyer knows that the malpractice insurance may be insufficient. In the event that the doctor injures you beyond what his insurance can pay for, he will be personally responsible to you for the difference.

A Broward injury lawyer will typically represent the patient herself or certain family members in a Florida medical malpractice suit. Family members can usually only recover if the patient died or the injuries are permanent. Children who are under the age of 25 whose parent suffered an injury, parents of children under the age of 25 who were injured, and spouses can sue. If the patient died from her injuries, her estate may sue to recover damages which will be distributed to the heirs in accordance with the intestacy statute or the will of the deceased patient.

Our Fort Lauderdale personal injury attorney is accustomed to working with the Florida medical malpractice statute of limitations. When you are injured by a health care provider’s negligence, you have only two years to sue after you find out or should have found out about the injury. A patient is required to reasonable investigate the symptoms of the injury in order to uncover the medical malpractice. Unless the medical professional has actually taken steps to misrepresent your care or to hide the injury inflicted, you cannot sue more than four years after the injury occurred. Even if you had no way of knowing about your injury until more than four years after it was incurred, you cannot sue if your doctor did not try to deceive you.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Article contributed by Mallory Shipman, Attorney-at-Law.

First of all, seek medical attention and follow the advice of your doctor. When possible, you will want to find out the history of the dog, including the owner and all veterinarian records. Any Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyer will tell you that safeguarding your health is the most important aspect of any animal bite ordeal.

A Broward personal injury attorney can help you enforce your rights. Under Florida law, the owner of a dog is liable for the injuries inflicted if you are bitten. This is true so long as you were either in a public place or you were lawfully on private premises. For instance, if you were visiting your friend for dinner when her German shepherd bit you in the kitchen, your friend is liable for the injuries. Likewise, if you were bitten on a public street, sidewalk, park, or other public property, the owner is liable.

If the owner had a “Bad Dog” sign, indicating a dangerous animal’s presence, the owner may only be liable if she was negligent in her supervision or containment of the animal. A Broward personal injury attorney knows that the sign serves as a warning to outsiders who may be unfamiliar with the dog’s dangerous tendencies. The exception to this is children under six years of age: those very young children are always protected by the law. The owner will be liable regardless of whether she was negligent in containing or supervising the dog, if the dog caused injury to the child under the age of six.

Similarly, the owner is liable for damages the dog causes to your pets or your livestock. If your neighbor’s dog comes onto your property and attacks your cat, your toy poodle, or your cattle, for instance, the owner will be liable to you for your damages. Our Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyer is familiar with the complexities of dog bite cases and the amount of damage just one dog can cause to your person, your animals, and your property.

The owner’s liability for his dog’s behavior does not depend on whether or not he had prior knowledge of the dog’s dangerous tendencies. In some states, the owner must know of the dog’s danger; in Florida, such knowledge is irrelevant. Our Broward personal injury lawyer knows the ins and outs of dog bite liability in Florida.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Article contributed by Mallory Shipman, Attorney-at-Law.

The first new trial began in Broward County this week with jury selection by the plaintiff’s personal injury attorney and the tobacco companies’ defense team. The jury will hear opening statements beginning on Monday and the circuit court judge has insisted that the trial end by December 19, refusing to reconvene the court in the new year. Personal injury attorneys familiar with the case had planned on a short, streamlined process in the wake of the Florida Supreme Court ruling, but this case is anticipated to take several weeks.

The Broward County plaintiff is Elaine Hess, who is suing for the wrongful death of her husband, Stuart. The couple was married for over thirty years and resided in south Florida. Ms. Hess and her personal injury lawyer will first have to prove that she was part of the class of litigants to whom the Florida Supreme Court decision applies. The jury will have to determine the answers to two questions. First, was Stuart Hess addicted to cigarettes? If he was addicted, did that addiction lead to his death?

The personal injury lawyers working on behalf of the plaintiffs in this Broward County case believe the answer to both of those questions is yes, although the defense team plans to argue that Mr. Hess continued smoking despite his awareness of its effect on his health.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

First Trial Under Landmark Fla. Tobacco Ruling To Begin, Law.com, November 26, 2008

According to her south Florida personal injury lawyer, the girl suffered significant emotional damage. Siriwat denied responsibility throughout the trial. The verdict in the victim’s favor was “therapeutic” because it is a public recognition of the harm the former family friend caused her. The victim believes that this acknowledgement of the harm inflicted will allow her to move on with her life. Boca Raton police investigated the allegations of sexual abuse and the Palm Beach County State Attorney’s Office initially filed charged, but the criminal charged were later dropped. As a result, Siriwat faced a civil jury in the victim’s personal injury case, but was not subject to criminal penalties. There is not yet any information on whether or not Siliwat plans to file an appeal in this case to challenge the finding or the large verdict.

Situations in which victims can win personal injury lawsuits without a criminal verdict, despite allegations of criminal behavior, are fairly common. This case is similar to the famous O.J. Simpson case, in which Simpson was acquitted of criminal charges related to the murder of his Nicole Brown Simpson, his ex-wife, and Ronald Goldman. The jury in that case did not find that the prosecution proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt, which requires a very high degree of proof. However, Simpson later lost a civil case filed by the Goldman family arising from the same matter. The Goldmans were awarded $8.5 million in compensatory damages for the wrongful death of Ronald Goldman. Discrepancies like these can occur because the standard in civil cases is much lower than in criminal. The plaintiff must only prove that he was injured and that the defendant was responsible for his damages by a preponderance of the evidence, which is generally interpreted to mean ‘more likely than not.’ It was easier, then, for the Goldman family to show that O.J. Simpson was liable than it was for the prosecutors to demonstrate that Simpson was criminally culpable.

This article is intended to be informational and not to provide legal advice.

Jury unanimous: Simpson is Liable, CNN, Feb. 4, 1997

$27 Million Dollar Verdict in Sex Abuse Case, CBS12, Nov. 5, 2008

Malignant mesothelioma is caused by earlier exposure to asbestos, often by breathing in the particles. The cancer cells invade the mesothelium, which is the layer of tissue covering human internal organs. It occurs in the lungs in most cases.

The Broward jury found that Ford Motor Co. was responsible for Daly’s injuries dating back to the 1970s. The dangers of asbestos were documented decades ago, with the first lawsuit arising in 1929. Nonetheless, the United States did not issue regulations on the use of asbestos until 1989; even today, consumer products can legally contain very small amounts of asbestos. Other countries, such as Australia, have banned its use entirely. As a result of the lack of regulation and the negligent use of asbestos well after its dangers were documented, thousands of people like Daly develop mesothelioma and other cancers each year. Although asbestos were not yet regulated by the federal government, Ford should nonetheless have taken measures to prevent asbestos exposure.

Personal injury suits arising out of the workplace are quite common. Exposure to asbestos is no longer one of the most prevalent workplace hazards, although it is extremely serious due to the likelihood of contracting a terminal cancer. More commonly, workers suffer injuries from the operation of machines, from repetitive strain, fires, or electrical equipment. Workers may be hurt from falling in dangerous conditions.

Companies have a duty to take measures to provide their employees with a safe place to work. For instance, the company should provide its employees with training in the operation of dangerous equipment. In some cases, the company may even have a duty of care to an employee’s family member: the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled in September that a factory was negligent in failing to warn its employees of the dangers of asbestos. As a result, the daughter of a former employee contracted mesothelioma due to exposure to fibers on her father’s clothes (Satterfield v. Breeding Insulation). The company was aware of the dangers of asbestos at the time. The Court determined that although the insulation factory might not have foreseen the risk to family members, the risks of using asbestos and the impact on those exposed to the fibers were foreseeable.

Woman awarded $3.6 million in asbestos case, Miami Herald, November 6, 2008

According to investigators, Plevniak submitted to toxicology testing to determine if he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident. Results are not yet available and no charges have been filed against Plevniak at this point in time.

Unfortunately, car accidents are one of the most common personal injury claims [link to Contact Us] plaintiffs’ lawyers see. According to the National Highway Traffic Association and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, about 11 percent of all traffic accidents involve pedestrians. About 5,000 American pedestrians are killed each year in car accidents and another 64,000 suffer non-fatal injuries. A large portion of these accidents occur in poor lighting, on the weekends, and at intersections. Elderly people are particularly vulnerable to injury in pedestrian car accidents. They are involved in more pedestrian accidents than any other group besides small children. Additionally, those over the age of 70 are about twice as likely to suffer a fatal accident as a pedestrian than people under the age of 70.

Many of the 64,000 pedestrians who survive the car accident still incur serious injuries. Some of these injuries are permanently disabling. Examples include:

• Broken bones
• Head and brain injuries
• Concussions
• Back injuries
• Damage to internal organs
• Internal bleeding
• Spinal injuries, including quadriplegia and paraplegia
• Many others

Pedestrians who have been injured in car accidents due to the negligence of the driver may be able to recover monetary damages. Damages may be available for medical expenses, pain and suffering, loss of wages, and/or emotional distress associated with the accident. If the pedestrian was killed in the accident, his family may be able to recover for wrongful death and other damages, including loss of a family member’s company, services in the home, the loss of a spouse’s consortium, medical expenses, funeral costs, and/or lost wages. No amount of compensation can bring back a loved one, but recovering damages can help you take care of your family.

Woman, 74, dies when car backs into her west of Boca Raton, The Palm Beach Post, November 10, 2008