Share With Caution – How Social Media Can Hurt Your Personal Injury Case

October 16, 2011

Social media is everywhere these days, and every day more and more people are signing up.  In fact, these sites are changing the way people communicate and share information. Much like the invention of email, and the telephone before that, social media is a part of our lives that is probably here to stay. Recently, Mashable reported that Facebook garnered more than 1 trillion page views per month in June and July of 2011. Facebook received approximately 870 million unique visitors in June and 860 million in July. Each visitor averaged approximately 1,160 page views and 40 per visit, with the average time spent on the site at around 25 minutes per user. Just imagine what these numbers could be like in 5 or 10 more years.

In the next few years, social media sites may be as popular as email is today, and I expect to see less people using email in favor of communicating through social media sites (like Facebook Messages). If you don’t agree, ask someone under the age of 25 years old if they use email. Because so many of our friends and clients use Facebook, Earle & Smith has had a Facebook page for the past couple of years. Although many law firms are reluctant to be on Facebook, if our clients and friends are using Facebook, why shouldn’t we? On our Facebook page we try to have conversations about driving safety, insurance issues, the law, and share information useful to our readers.

However, there are some things to be aware of when using Facebook.  Most importantly, keep in mind that it really is a public place.  Even if you have the most restrictive privacy settings, it’s a good idea not to post anything that you don’t want to be public. It’s also a good idea to remember that if you have a pending legal matter like a divorce or personal injury case, what you post on social media sites may be used against you.  This is a controversial and unsettled area of the law, so it’s a good idea to exercise caution while using social media sites because it’s certainly possible that an attorney may subpoena information about your social media profile. At the very least, if your privacy settings allow your posts to be public, an attorney can easily view your posts or photographs and potentially find information to use against you in your legal matter.

Because of this possibility, we urge our clients to check the privacy settings for their profiles to make sure that only friends can see what is posted, especially photographs (In the New York case of Romano v. Steelcase, the defense attorneys in a personal injury case argued they were suspicious of the plaintiff’s claims that she was bedridden because her Facebook profile photo showed her standing in front of her home. See Eric Turkewitz’ blog on this topic for more legal analysis).  At a minimum, do not post anything to your profile that discusses your lawsuit or your injuries. It is also a good idea to be skeptical of friend requests from strangers while your claim is pending to prevent other parties from trying to get information from your profile that could be used against you.

Simply put, your options are to either be more careful or quit using social media completely.  If you’re hooked on social media, then just remember not to post anything about yourself that you wouldn’t want to see in the newspaper (for our younger readers, newspapers were made of paper and read by a lot of people to get the news). Use good common sense, and you should be fine. See you on Facebook.

Leave a Comment » | Automobile Accidents | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Thank You for Your Jury Service

September 27, 2011

Despite that feeling of frustration some people get when they open the mail and see a jury summons, most of us realize that our jury system is essential to our democracy and our freedom.  The right to trial by jury in a civil case is found in the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution which says:

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Because our system of justice would not function without jurors, it is absolutely vital that  attorneys and the courts never take jurors for granted, and never take for granted the sacrifice they make to be away from their jobs and their families to serve on a jury.

I thought about this recently when my partner and I went to trial on an automobile accident case here in Orlando.  While my partner was asking questions of the potential jurors during jury selection, I was carefully listening to their answers, but I was also imagining what each of the jurors might be thinking. This was just of couple of weeks after the Casey Anthony trial and I’m sure most of the jurors had seen the verbal beating and name-calling those jurors had taken from the likes of Nancy Grace and Casey Anthony protesters.  Some of our jurors were anxious, some were angry, some were bored, some were excited, some were happy, but the one thing they all had in common – they were all willing to answer the call and appear for jury duty.

I was also thinking of my wife who had recently been summoned for jury duty.  She was called for jury duty and asked whether it would be a hardship for her to return the next day for the trial. Although she was more than willing to serve as a juror, she is self-employed and had several appointments with clients the following day and went through a lot of difficulty to reschedule her appointments.  So when asked if she would have a hardship if she were selected and had to come back the next day, she truthfully told the attorneys how she felt – it would not only be a hardship for her, but for her clients who were counting on seeing her the following day.  Much to her surprise, she was selected to come back the next day to serve as a juror.  No doubt she was stressed about being selected, and she scrambled the rest of the afternoon to once again reschedule a full day of appointments (it didn’t help that ultimately the case was dismissed by the judge half-way through trial because the prosecutor didn’t have enough evidence).  Although this may not have been a reason to strike her from the jury panel for cause, a juror in that position is not a juror I would want on my client’s jury.

In our trial, we did not hesitate to ask the judge to release any jurors who could not serve due to a hardship. An angry or stressed juror is not good for either side, and most attorneys would not ask such a juror to serve. However, most jurors would probably prefer not to lose a day at work or be away from their family, but not every juror can be excused or else no one would be left to serve.  So for those that do serve, it is the responsibility of the attorneys to make sure they keep the jurors’ comfort and convenience in mind while zealously representing the cause of their client. Some basic things we attorneys need to remember about jurors:

  1. Don’t take the jurors’ service for granted.
  2. Don’t waste the jurors’ time.
  3. Don’t bore the jurors.

Attorneys should always see the trial through the eyes of the jury. When deciding how much information to present, how many witnesses to call, or how long a closing argument should last, think about how jurors are feeling about what they are seeing and hearing. If certain testimony or some witness isn’t absolutely necessary, then don’t call that witness. If it’s not necessary to take an hour to do a closing argument, take as little time as necessary.   When closing argument goes too long, you can see jurors tuning out. When you’ve lost your jurors’ attention, you’ve probably lost your case. Although each case is different, less is usually more.

As an attorney, I would find it extremely difficult to take two or three (or more) days off to serve on a jury.  Our jurors should be honored for their service, and appreciated for their sacrifice, and if we are truly thankful to them, we shouldn’t take them, their service, or their sacrifice for granted.

Leave a Comment » | Automobile Accidents, Firm News, Trial | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Orlando, Still a Dangerous Place for Pedestrians

June 3, 2011

Metro Orlando has once again topped the list of the most dangerous cities in America for pedestrians. The results are based on a pedestrian danger index created by Transportation for America that calculates the number and rate of pedestrian deaths relative to the percent of people who walk in the community. The last time I wrote about this in 2009 Orlando-Kissimmee ranked number one because of its high fatality rate of 2.9 deaths per 100,000 residents, despite the small number of residents who walk to work. This time, the rate climbed to 3 deaths per 100,000 residents. Based upon 10 years of fatality data, the study finds that between the years 2000 and 2009, 5,163 people were killed while walking in Florida. The study also estimates that the cost to the state was $22.20 billion, and that reducing pedestrian fatalities by just 10% would have saved Florida $2.22 billion over 10 years. Four metro areas in Florida made the top 10 which makes Florida the most deadly state for pedestrians, according to the study.

 Officials Question Results

Central Florida officials disputed the results in 2009 and have again questioned the validity of such rankings arguing that the injuries and deaths per 100,000 are artificially inflated by the millions of tourists who come to Orlando every year. Although calculations and indexes can be subject to interpretation, and Orlando recently reported that it had over 50 million tourists visit in 2010, the number of deaths are still significant, and we can do better.

Who is to Blame?

Transportation for America supports use of alternative forms of transportation and argues that pedestrian deaths are predictable because we have historically designed roadways for cars and ignored design standards that are more pedestrian-friendly. Roads are built to move traffic quickly and little thought goes into how people that walk or ride bicycles will use the roadways for travel. The group correctly points out that most pedestrian deaths are labeled “accidents” and attributed to error by the driver or the pedestrian. If I asked you to guess the most dangerous roadways in Orlando for pedestrian accidents, you would probably answer Colonial Drive, Highway 50, State Road 436, Orange Blossom Trail and U.S. Highway 192. You would at least guess 3 or 4 correctly. That’s because we all know those are dangerous areas because of the density of traffic and how wide the roads are. I once represented a client who was partially blind and struck by a car running a red light. What was chilling was my client’s account of how difficult it was for her and her children to get across Highway 192 before the light changed. Most of us probably take our ability to cross the street for granted. Most of us probably take having cars for granted, and when we do walk, we probably take sidewalks for granted too.

Not Everyone Owns a Car

A couple of months ago I met Timothy McKinney from United Global Outreach who was speaking at a Kiwanis meeting I was attending.  Mr. McKinney’s organization is leading a community revitalization campaign in Bithlo, which is just outside of Orlando. Growing up in the Orlando area, I knew of Bithlo as the local punch line for jokes about poor folks who live in trailers. Although I knew the community was neglected, I hadn’t really thought about what it was like for someone in Bithlo to get to work or go to a doctor. Mr. McKinney told stories of residents walking several miles along the shoulder of the highway just to get to a bus stop. Several  years ago our public transportation service, LYNX, stopped offering bus service to Bithlo due to funding cuts. Many of the residents do not have transportation and have to walk to get to work, to a grocery store, or to a bus stop. Because they cannot afford to own a car, they have no choice but to make the dangerous walk down Highway 50.

The statistics cited by the Transportation for America study show that pedestrian fatalities disproportionately affect seniors and minorities. The fatality rate for seniors is 3.7 per 100,000 compared with 2.7 for people under 65. The average for Hispanics was 37 percent higher than non-Hispanic whites, and the rate for African-Americans was 48 percent higher than non-Hispanic whites.  These differences can likely be attributed to income levels. Consider that lower income residents are less likely to own automobiles and tend to walk more. Also, most higher income neighborhoods are not adjacent to high traffic areas, in contrast to apartment complexes which are usually built closer to major roadways.

What’s the Answer

Transportation for America argues that it simply comes down to infrastructure and smart design. As pointed out in the report, more attention and money must be spent on the problem.  Smart design means transportation agencies must make pedestrian safety a priority and not just design roadways for speeding traffic. Obviously, Floridians rely heavily on automobiles for transportation.  When we had the chance to build high speed rail, Governor Scott killed the plan and rejected federal money because he argued there wouldn’t be enough riders to justify the cost.  So, Florida will continue to do what we’ve always done -  build more roads and add more lanes. But, at what cost to our safety and our prosperity? Sure, as long as we have our weather and the attractions, the tourists will come. But what about businesses and new residents? Infrastructure and quality of life are vital to our long term economic development, and transportation band-aids will never be in our long term interest.

When times are tough and our state budget is out of whack, it’s easy to brush a problem under the rug in the name of fiscal responsibility. U.S Rep. John Mica of Winter Park wants to lift the requirement that 10 percent of federal gas tax proceeds be spent on things like sidewalks and bike lanes. Governor Scott’s new Secretary of Transportation, Ananth Prasad, recently testified before Congress saying, “We must give serious consideration to whether—when resources and dollars are at a premium—spending money on sidewalks, bike trails, beautification, and other projects like this is the most prudent use of taxpayer money.” Beautification is one thing, but saving lives is another.  We can and should do better.  Growth is inevitable and necessary, but we must have responsible growth. To grow our economy and be attractive to job-creators, we’ve got to have safer streets and sidewalks that make our state a better place to live and work. Ignoring the problem is not the answer. Please share your opinion with me in the comments below.

Leave a Comment » | Automobile Accidents, Avoiding Accidents, Injuries, Pedestrian Safety, Public Safety, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Update on House Bill to Ban Red-light Cameras

April 22, 2011

As reported by the Florida Sun Sentinel, after an  emotional 90 minute debate on Wednesday, the House Appropriations Committee voted 12-9 to send HB 4087 to the full House.  The bill would repeal the law enacted just last year that allows municipalities to use red-light cameras to issue tickets to motorists for running red-lights.  Some argue, including the bill’s sponsor, that red-light cameras actually increase accidents.  However, many law enforcement agencies and sheriffs across the state support the cameras and say they save lives by reducing automobile accidents and intersection collisions.  Melissa Wandall, whose husband was killed by a red-light runner in 2003, has been a strong advocate for the cameras which led to last year’s bill being named the “Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act”.  She testified in the hearing on Wednesday and asked lawmakers to keep the current law allowing cameras, saying, “Red means stop, simple as that. We learned that in kindergarten”. There is also the financial cost to governments if the law is repealed because the state could lose as much as $86.3 million next year and local governments could lose $71.7 million the following year.

Tell us what you think in our facebook poll or in the comments below.

Leave a Comment » | Automobile Accidents, Avoiding Accidents, Injuries, Public Safety | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Right to Privacy While Running a Red-light?

March 31, 2011

Red-light cameras reduce auto accidents

In Orlando, red-light cameras have been in use since September 2008, but some legislators want to ban the cameras completely. The program uses cameras at intersections to issue tickets to any driver that runs a red-light. Obviously, this results in additional revenue to the city, but more importantly it punishes those who run red-lights and acts as a deterrent for other drivers. In our personal injury law firm, some of the most destructive car accidents we see happen at intersection collisions where the at-fault driver ran a red-light at a high speed. Simply put, red-light running causes serious injuries or death.

As reported by the Orlando Sentinel, accidents fell by 33 percent the first year of the program. Although more recent statistics are not available, it’s likely that accidents have decreased even more as drivers’ awareness of the cameras has led to less red-light running for fear of being caught on camera. It also frees up law enforcement to attend to more urgent police work. How many times have you seen someone run a red-light and say to yourself, “I wish a police officer was here to see that”. Cameras can see those red-light runners 24 hours a day. On Monday, city commissioners took steps to add more intersection cameras for a total of 22 cameras at 14 intersections.

In 2010, the Florida legislature approved the use of red-light cameras by municipalities and counties and established standards for the programs. The law, titled the Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act, was named for the 30-year-old husband and father-to-be who was killed by a red light-runner in 2003. However, only one year later, Rep. Richard Corcoran and Sen. Rene Garcia, along with co-sponsors, are trying to reverse the law and ban all red-light cameras in Florida. Critics claim the law is just a way for cities to generate revenue, and a case of “big-brother” government spying on citizens and invading our right to privacy. On the other hand, many supporters of red-light cameras, including law enforcement, say the cameras are making our roads safer. “I think it’s a terrible thing to even attempt to repeal the red light camera bill,” said Capt. Michael Fewless of the Orange County Sheriff’s Office. “It’s a public safety thing. It saves life.” In a February press release, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety detailed its findings that red light cameras saved 159 lives in 2004-08 in 14 of the biggest US cities, and had the cameras been in place in all major cities, a total of 815 deaths would have been prevented during that same time.

Last year, the legislature killed a bill that would have prevented texting while driving. This year, some legislators are trying to do away with red-light cameras by grandstanding in the name of privacy rights. The fact of the matter is that our roads are more dangerous than ever before. Government can and should take reasonable steps to make our roads safer. Although there have been some problems with these programs, such as tickets issued in error, the problems are far outweighed by the benefit of saving lives. There’s always room for improvement of red-light camera programs, but a complete ban goes too far. Do you think there is a right of privacy in running a red-light? Tell us what you think in the comment section below or vote in our poll on our facebook page. You can also contact these legislators and tell them how you feel about the issue.

Rep. Richard Corcoran at 850-488-8528 or richard.corcoran@myfloridahouse.gov
Senate Majority Leader Andy Gardiner at 850-487-5047 or gardiner.andy.web@flsenate.gov
Sen. Rene Garcia at 850-487-5106 or garcia.rene.web@flsenate.gov

Leave a Comment » | Avoiding Accidents, Injuries, Public Safety, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Progressive to Offer Monitors to Evaluate Drivers

December 12, 2010

Progressive is launching a program to monitor its customers’ driving habits with a tiny computer device, in exchange for possible premium discounts. Progressive will provide the customer with a device that plugs into the diagnostic port of a vehicle which will collect data about the driving habits of the customer for 30 days. The device will capture information about how often the person drives, the time of day they drive, and information about driving habits like braking. If the customer passes the “test”, they may be eligible for discounts on their auto insurance (what happens if you get into a car crash while you’re being monitored?). What do you think about your insurance company monitoring your driving habits? How would you do? Please share your comments below.

For the complete story, click here.

Leave a Comment » | Automobile Insurance, Avoiding Accidents, Public Safety | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Did You Know it’s Drowsy Driving Prevention Week?

November 14, 2010

The National Sleep Foundation has launched a public awareness campaign to educate drivers about how lack of sleep effects road safety. The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety released a new study which demonstrates that driving while drowsy is a bigger problem than previously thought. The study showed that drowsy driving results in one in six deadly crashes, one in eight that result in hospitalization, and one in fourteen in which a vehicle had to be towed. This study shows that the problem is more severe than shown in previous estimates.

The National Sleep Foundation has a website devoted to the topic at www.drowsydriving.org. The group points out that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that drowsy driving results in 1,550 deaths, 71,000 injuries and more than 100,000 accidents each year. The study also shows that younger drivers age 16-24 were almost two times as likely to be involved in a drowsy driving crash as older drivers. Over half of the drowsy driving crashes involved a driver drifting into other lanes or even off the road.

The website has lots of useful information for how to prevent drowsy driving and a public service announcement about drowsy driving on You Tube.

Leave a Comment » | Avoiding Accidents, Injuries, Public Safety | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Florida Theme Parks Well Protected from Wrongful Death Lawsuits

September 14, 2010

It’s no surprise that the business interests of Florida, including the theme parks, have stacked the deck in their favor when it comes to how the law treats injured workers in Florida. For workers injured at Florida theme parks, the law is not on their side. That’s because Florida’s workers’ compensation law was re-written by insurance and big business industry lobbyists in 2003. Gov. Jeb Bush and the Republican-controlled Legislature approved a 182-page rewrite of the state’s workers’ compensation laws that increased some benefits, but cut many others. The law gave businesses a great deal more protection from lawsuits by workers than ever before. Although the law’s stated purpose was to reduce costs, it did so at the expense of Florida’s hard-working families.

Because of these changes, the families of the Disney monorail driver killed in July 2009 and the SeaWorld trainer that drowned earlier this year may not ever be able to receive justice for the loss of their loved ones – even if Disney and SeaWorld were clearly at fault. As pointed out in the article, federal regulators cited Disney with a “serious” safety violation and “noted multiple monorail-policy lapses” and found SeaWorld’s safety violation to be “willful”. Even with these findings, Disney and SeaWorld may not have much to worry about since our state laws protect them at the expense of the families of deceased workers. We can all agree that frivolous lawsuits are bad for society, but do these cases sound “frivolous” to you? Tell us what you think.

Disney wrongful death lawsuits: Disney well protected against wrongful death lawsuits – OrlandoSentinel.com.

Leave a Comment » | Public Safety, Theme Park Injuries | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Child’s Death Shows Danger of Beach Driving

August 4, 2010

Driving Accidents on Daytona BeachGrowing up in Orlando, I spent at lot of time at Daytona Beach with my family and driving on the beach was one of the reasons to go to Daytona. These days, however, the risk to pedestrians, especially children, is just too great to justify driving on the beach. As Scott Maxwell argues in a recent column in the Orlando Sentinel, it’s time for Volusia County leaders to do something about driving on the beach after another child was recently killed after being run over by a car. As Maxwell points out, if the beach is our playground, why can we drive there? What do you think?

Leave a Comment » | Avoiding Accidents, Public Safety | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

Guardrails Reduce Traffic Fatalities

July 7, 2010

Yesterday’s Orlando Sentinel reported that five years after guardrails were installed in the median of Florida’s Turnpike, fatal accidents and deaths from automobile crashes on the turnpike have been reduced by more than half. Although urban areas have had guardrails along the turnpike for years, many rural areas, including Osceola County, did not have them. The article attributes the decline of traffic deaths to the reduction of accidents from out-of-control cars crossing the median and striking oncoming traffic head-on. These types of accidents are extremely dangerous because they usually occur at very high speeds. Florida Highway Patrol Sgt. Jorge Delahoz was quoted as saying, “We’ve cut our fatalities in half. We’re proud of it, and we want to keep them low”. The Sentinel said that prior to installing the new guardrails in 2003 and 2004 there were a total of 142 fatal turnpike crashes, which claimed 187 lives. Since the new rails were put in place, in 2008 and 2009 the total dropped to just 73 fatal crashes killing 82 people.

There is a downside to guardrails which is that most people who run off the road get control of their vehicle without crossing the median. If there’s a barrier, people will hit it which does cause additional injuries that may not have occurred if the guardrails were not in place. However, it’s well worth the risk of these additional minor accidents if fatalities can be prevented. Because State officials finally said enough is enough and made sure to spend the money necessary to put in the guardrails, many lives have been saved. It goes to show that if you want to prevent automobile accidents, there are positive things government can do to make it happen.

Leave a Comment » | Avoiding Accidents, Injuries, Public Safety | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by C. Todd Smith

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.