Welcome to HurstInjuryLaw.com, the personal blog of William W. Hurst, Attorney at Law in Indianapolis. This is where Bill will post his research notes, case studies, and legal news for public viewing. Feel free to browse the site and use any content you find for your own blogs so long as you properly cite our site. For information on Bill's legal practice, please visit his business website at BillHurst.com.

Archive for October, 2011


Car and truck accidents often occur because of construction on the roadway, construction markings/barriers, or sometimes by driver negligence as they approach and react to a construction zone where there are workmen.  According to the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT), there are far too many fatal accidents or serious personal injury which take place in road construction areas on the highways which could have been prevented if the driver would drive slowly and be vigilant while driving through the construction zone.  Currently the Indiana Police and the Indiana Dept. of Transportation are working together to keep drivers aware, alert and under the speed limit while driving through construction zones.  A lot of their efforts involve putting the uniformed troopers into INDOT pickup trucks parked around the highway worksites.  If people do not slow down, they may get pulled over and ticketed.  Just recently, a construction worker died in a multi-car accident on the east side of Indianapolis at 30th street and Franklin Road.  Once again, the driver causing the accident was speeding through a construction zone.  The driver hit a propane tank before hitting a construction flagger who was directing traffic away from the crew that was building a barrier on Interstate 465. The worker hit by the car died at the scene.  http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-multivehicle-accident-at-30th-st-Franklin-Road-20111006,0,790331.column.

It is believed that for the past several years, approximately 500 worker deaths occur nationally in work zone traffic accidents annually.  In the past several years various governmental agencies have been obtaining construction auto accident data.  However, despite efforts, there is a lack of reasonable accident information obtained from police and public agencies responsible for work zone safety.   The Transportation Research Board uses this figure (500) in establishing a research program priority.  Despite this assumption, the best research data show that there are substantially fewer fatalities than estimated by the TRB.  Police reports vary across the county in what is reported and seldom clearly indicate “construction site” accidents or involvement in causing the accident.  Often, reports do not give sufficient details necessary to analyze accident cases.  The information that is generally in police reports make it impossible for researchers to analyze and draw conclusions about construction work zone safety.  There is currently no consistent reporting system to reliably obtain crash data.

In New Mexico, at the Transportation Research Board, a research paper by Hall and Lorenz did a study in a single State, New Mexico.  The study emphasizes the problem in construction zone accident reporting and a lack of adequate information about safety.  The research team did examine construction zone accidents on New Mexico’s rural  highways between ‘ 83 and ‘85.  They collected all accident reports, no matter how they were coded and matched these reports with construction projects during those years.  The research team compared these car accident reports with accident reports made the year prior to the construction areas in these same boundaries and roadways.  This study shows that the current accident reporting system is severely flawed.  Hundreds of accidents in construction work sites were not recorded as construction zone-related accidents on the accident reports.  This study also showed that auto and truck vehicular accidents increase by 26% during construction (with interstate highways showing the most significant increase) to 33%.  The study did note that certain accident characteristics are overrepresented in construction zone accidents such as rear-end collisions and multiple-vehicle accidents.  They also found there was no significant change in pedestrian accidents despite construction workers being present. This study concluded that the frequency of accidents in construction zones is substantially greater than indicated by the accident record system used by researchers.  www.usroads.com/journals/rmej/9905/rm990501.htm.       Despite the lack of reliable data, most researchers believe that construction zone fatalities are on the rise.
  Federal laws require the Secretary of Transportation to develop and implement work zone safety programs to improve work zone safety of construction sites and to develop uniform accident reporting of fatalities, injuries, and certain specified accident types which include the work zone accidents.  Despite this, the Highway Safety Information System has encountered a number of problems in analyzing the data.  Because of the problems of completeness and accuracy, there has been attempt by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration to have uniform information be included in police reports throughout the country indicating whether or not the auto/truck accident happened in a construction or work zone. Currently, it is believed that approximately only 14 states have an explicit data element in a databox for this information.  In a comparison to the 1988 – 1989 data with the 1991 – 1992 data in those areas, the data appears to be unreliable.  Indeed, the Michigan Department of Transportation did a similar study that showed about 85% of all police-coded work zone accidents occurred in work zones.  However, based on limited investigation of the four States selected, as many as 77% of the crashes that did occur with the four zones were not coded as work zone accidents.  One explanation for all of this is that the police officer may interpret work zone accident variables to fly only when a construction activity was present or had an influence on the accident.  These results support the need for better work zone definitions and suggest that even an explicit data element may not ensure that all work zone crashes are identified.  All studies currently are based on very limited data.  Very few studies have attempted to explicitly consider exposure to work zone activities or to develop work zone accident rates that account for the difference in exposure.  For more information regarding this, you may contact Jeffrey Paniati, Chief of FHWA, Design Division of the Office of Safety and Traffic Operations, at 703-285-2057. http://www.hsisinfo.org/pdf/zone.htm.
Recently, in Pittsburgh, investigative reporting was done which revealed that more than one-half of the vehicles passing through a construction zone on Interstate 79 in Washington County were speeding.   The investigators report that the only time that vehicles slowed was at the sight of a uniformed state trooper aiming a radar gun.  The investigators report that police and traffic safety experts say it is part of a nationwide indifference to work zone speed limits.  All of this is contrary to the advertising campaigns and new laws that emphasize the safety of construction workers.  The U.S. Department of Transportation reports that fatality rates for highway workers were twice that for other types of construction workers.  It is reported that recent studies have concluded that doubling the fines in work zones has had no impact on motorists’ habits or fatality rates.  Apparently, the only effective measure is having police in marked vehicles stationed near construction workers. http://www.workzonesafety.org/research/record/770.

     Nearly all states have increased penalties for speeding or committing other traffic violations while driving in a construction work zone.  Often the enhanced penalty consists of doubling the applicable fine had the traffic violation been committed outside the construction zone.   In others, there is a fixed dollar amount or range.  Thirty-two (32) states and the District of Columbia have doubled the fine for speeding, 24 states and the D.C. require workers to be present in a construction zone for the increased penalties to take effect, and 41 states and the District indicate that signs must be posted to alert drivers of the enhanced penalties.  For an itemization of all of these various new traffic statutes, see www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/workzone_laws.html.  Sources for this information found on this website are from the National Work Zone Safety Information Clearinghouse and the State Highway Safety Offices.
In Indiana, there are laws that require you to slow down or move over when you see vehicles and construction zone warnings on the side of the road with flashing lights on.  Governor Mitch Daniels has recently signed a new law to make construction zones even safer.  Already there are speed limit restrictions and the new law calls for fines up to $1,000 for people who break law in construction zones three (3) times within three (3) years.  There are also fines for up to $5,000 for driving recklessly/aggressively in construction zones.  Drivers who injure or kill a highway worker could end up paying a $10,000 fine and serve a maximum of eight (8) years behind bars if convicted.  There will be signs posted to warn Indiana motorists of the consequences violating these specific laws.  If you have computer access and need to know about  traffic updates and road conditions in the Indianapolis area, particularly I-465 and the construction and road updates, you can go to http://pws.trafficwise.org/ipws/ci/.  For general statewide information, see http://www.in.gov/indot/2351.htm.
  For construction workers who are hurt in these construction sites, under Indiana workers compensation laws, an employee cannot sue his or her employer for on-the-job construction injuries.  The construction workers’ compensation claim typically pays out partial lost wages, medical expenses and a compensation schedule for permanent injuries and in Indiana the benefits are generally inadequate.  While an employee cannot sue their employer under sole remedy exclusion set forth in the Workers Compensation Act, workers can sue non-coworkers, third parties or other entities who are responsible (as a result of their negligence) for their injuries. You will need to meet with an experienced attorney to evaluate these claims.

If you or a loved one has been hurt, seriously injured or killed in a construction work zone accident, you should contact an experienced attorney.  My law firm Mitchell Hurst Dick & McNelis LLC, has represented victims of construction accidents throughout the State of Indiana.  If you would like to contact us, call 1-800-636-0808 for a free consultation.  We only charge a fee when we win your case.  See our website:  www.billhurst.com.

 

www.indianapolisabogado.com

It is estimated that each year at least 1,500 people die in automobile crashes related to sleepy, fatigued, or drowsy drivers in the United States.  Each year it is further estimated that some 40,000 people are injured in these crashes.  As it is very difficult to gather the statistics, it is believed by the various statisticians’ calculations are probably underestimated.  Over 60% of all American adults who have been surveyed report that they drive while feeling drowsy; and, of these, at least 37% of the people surveyed indicate that they have dosed off while driving at least once.  In England,  research commissioned by the British government found that one-fifth of the motorway collision are caused by drivers falling asleep at the wheel and one-tenth of the crashes on all of Britain’s roads (around 23,000 a year) are also linked to fatigue   <http://AmericanIndian.net/sleepstats.html>.  
             Most physicians recommend that you should get 7 to 9 solid hours of sleep.  However, about 60% of all Americans report having sleep troubles almost every night according to this year’s National Sleep Foundation poll, and all say they have driven a vehicle while feeling drowsy in the past year.  The results of this drowsy driving according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration results in an estimated 1,550 deaths and 71,000 injuries and $12.5 billion in monetary losses. 

            Sleep related crashes are most common in young people (especially men) adults with children and shift workers.  Adults between the age of 18 and 29 are much more likely to drive while drowsy compared to other age groups.  Men are more likely than women to drive fatigued and adults with children in the household are more likely to drive drowsy than those without children.  Shift workers are more likely to drive drowsy than those who work regular daytime hours.   It is clear that the less people sleep the greater they risk a sleep-related crash occurring.  According to a recent study by the Foundation for Traffic Safety, people who sleep six to seven hours at night are twice as likely to be involved in a crash as those sleeping eight hours or more.  It is also found that people sleeping less than five hours increase their risk to four or five times.  Sleep deprivation and fatigue makes lapses of attention more likely to occur and this will play a role in driving behavior that can lead to crashes; and, for that matter, other types of accidents.  Interestingly, people tend to fall asleep more on high-speed long, boring rural highways than those who live in urban areas.  Most of these crashes and near-misses occur between 4 and 6 a.m.; midnight to 2 a.m. and 2 to 4 p.m.             
            The National Sleep Foundation researchers indicate that when one spouse does not fall asleep, it can trigger significantly more negative interactions between spouses the next day. This is particularly true of wives, as it has been found that when husbands sleep poorly there is little difference in how the couples relate.  Researchers suspect that women who have sleep problems are more likely to express stress, be irritable and verbalize those feelings.  According to the research, 42% of those polled said that when they become stressed, they also become impatient and some tend to drive faster. All of this can lead obviously to serious crashes when operating a motor vehicle  <http://drowsydriving.org/about/facts-and-stats/> . 
            Drowsy driving has also been described as distracted driving – drivers who experience drowsiness do not apply their full attention to the driving task.  Driving requires a person to be alert to their actions and surroundings at all times.  Sleepiness and driving is a dangerous combination.  Most people are aware of the dangers of drinking and driving but don’t realize that driving while drowsy can be just as fatal.  Sleepiness or fatigue causes impaired reaction time; impaired judgment and vision; problems with information processing; short-term memory issues; decreased performance, vigilance and motivation; as well as increased moodiness and aggressive behaviors. 

            There are several warning signs of drowsy driving:  1)  being unable to stop yawning, 2) having trouble keeping your eyes open and focused, 3) driving starts being sloppy and you weave, 4) hitting groove and rumble strips on the side of the road, 5) finding yourself opening a window or turning up a radio to stay alert, and 6) driving aggressively to get to your next destination because of drowsiness.  Tips on avoiding drowsy driving include, most importantly, a regular sleep schedule.  If this isn’t done, then you must respond to symptoms of fatigue by finding a safe place to stop for a break when feeling sleepy.  Remember:  driving drowsy triples your chance of having a crash or destroying someone else’s life.  If you are a young adult, you absolutely need eight hours of good rest to be alert while driving.
            There are several multi-million dollar settlements that have been awarded to families of crash victims resulting in lawsuits filed against individuals as well as businesses whose employees were involved in drowsy driving crashes. 

            If you or a loved one has been seriously injured or killed as a result of the inattention of a drowsy driver, please contact an experienced personal injury lawyer, William “Bill” Hurst .  You may visit our website at www.Billhurst.com or call 800-636-0808 for a free consultation.  We only charge a fee when we win your case.

Distracted drivers cause  most motor vehicle accidents.  Studies show that distracted drivers are a leading cause of motor vehicle accidents.  Whenever you are driving in a motor vehicle and your attention is not on the road, you are putting yourself, your passengers, other vehicles and pedestrians in danger.  In the late 1970’s Indiana University’s “Study of Pre-crash Factors Involved in Traffic Accidents” identified driver inattention as the leading cause of automobile accidents in Indiana.  Current research tells us that something between 25% to 50% of all motor vehicle crashes in the United States have driver distraction as the root cause.  http://www.smartmotorist.com/traffic-and-safety-guideline/distracted-drivers-cause-motor-vehicle-accidents.html.

There are three main types of distraction:  1) visual – taking your eyes off the road, 2) manual – taking your hands off the wheel and 3) cognitive – taking your mind off what you are doing.  While a single distraction can endanger drivers’ safety, texting is the most alarming because it involves all three types of distractions.

Of the people who are killed as a result of distracted driving, 18% of all fatalities involve reports of cell phone use as a distraction.  The age group with the greatest proportion of distracted drivers was the under 20 age group.  Sixteen percent (16%) of all drivers younger than 20 involved in fatal crashes were reported to have been distracted while driving according to a study by the National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration.  The drivers who use hand-held devices are four times more likely to get in serious crashes as reported by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety  www.distraction.gov/statistics-and-facts/.

While cell phones certainly get a lot of negative media attention, other more low-tech distractions cause most traffic accidents.  Reports of spilling coffee, dropping something on the floor while driving are two of the distractions drivers cite most frequently as reason for traffic accidents according to a recent study done by the Network of Employers for Traffic Safety (NETS). Other cited distractions include dialing the radio or working the climate control system. Some motorists even report attempting to read newspapers as a distraction while they are driving.

More than 85% of 100,000,000 cell phone users regularly talk on the phone while driving says a survey by Prevention Magazine.  In 1997, a study by the New England Journal of Medicine found drivers who talk on cell phones are four times more likely to be in an accident than drivers who don’t.     The National Safety Council has recently reported that 28% of all traffic accidents occur when people are talking on cell phones or texting. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/12/AR2010011202218.html.   Drivers throughout the country report seeing distracted drivers talk on cell phones as they drift into other lanes and run through red lights and stop signs.  Certainly all recent development in cell phone technology including voice-activated dialing and built-in speaker phones help drivers’ concentration on the roadway.  Also recent developments have been urged to lessen drivers’ cell phone usage.  Since 1995, forty states have proposed bills concerning cellular phone use in cars, but the $40 billion a year cell phone industry has successfully lobbied to keep most of these laws “off the books”.  The industry claims that not only are cellular phones safe to use while driving, but cell phones help drivers by allowing them to quickly report emergencies such as accidents and car jacking.  These proposed laws are in flux.

The vast majority of these crashes (1.4 million annually) are caused by use of cell phones in conversations with about 200,000 blamed on texting according to a report from the National Safety Council.  Because of the extent of this problem, Federal transportation officials have unveiled an organization patterned after Mothers Against Drunk Drivers that will combat driver cell phone use.  The group (“Focus Driven”) grew out of a meeting on distracted driving sponsored by the United States Department of Transportation last year. This organization will promote laws banning cell phone usage.  Currently nineteen states are reported to have banned text messaging while driving; however, in four of those states, laws require that a police officer have some other primary reason for stopping a vehicle.  This obviously makes it near impossible for police to enforce this law effectively.  President Obama last year imposed a text ban on all federal employees while using government vehicles or using government issued phones in their own vehicle.  In Indiana, a ban on texting while driving took effect July 1st.   A Butler University (Indianapolis) psychology professor has indicated that texting has become so ingrained that it is almost an addiction and the prospect of a fine up to $100 may only just make people try to hide what they are doing but not prevent it.  The professor states that she believes that this could just make the safety concerns even worse. www.wibc.com/news/Story.aspx?ID=1424968.

In addition to “Focus Driven” many other organizations have recently begun lobbying for cell phone probation laws.  For example, the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety and Nationwide Insurance states they will educate people about the risk of cell phone use while driving to create public support for laws and changing behavior to reduce crashes. http://www.nsc.org/pages/nscestimates16millioncrashescausedbydriversusingcellphonesandtexting.aspx.  It is believed law enforcement can be useful to a degree in banning specific acts but banning specific actions is not the best preventive medicine.  The National Motorists Association believes that distracted driving in all forms can best be addressed through efforts to educate of its dangers.  Reinvesting public resources into educational public relation efforts focused on inattentive driving would be far more productive use of these funds.  http://www.motorists.org/distracted-driving/.

One may ask, “Are driving distractions really as dangerous as the research has claimed they are?”  For five real life examples of distracted drivers getting into very serious accidents, see http://www.vehiclevibes.com/2010/01/distracted-driving-accidents/.  These examples range from a person looking at a Blackberry navigation to a train engineer texting while operating a train.  For example, in February 2011, an 18-year old driver was speeding and struck and killed two people and seriously injured a child in an accident in North Carolina.  This teenager was arrested at the scene and charged with “misdemeanor death”.  The child was being pushed in a stroller by his grandfather or mother when the crash occurred killing both the grandfather, the mother and critically injuring the child.  The distracted driver claims that she was reaching for her cell phone and took her eyes off the road.  This accident serves as a reminder of how easy it is to lose concentration when behind the wheel and how serious the results for doing that can be.

Scientists/researchers at the Temple University, state that while everyone knows distracted driving is dangerous, there is evidence that driver use of mobile devices is recently increasing.  The research finds there is a widening gap between the evidence of distracted driving and the laws being passed to address the problem.  The purpose of the Temple University study is a first step towards understanding which laws really “could or may” reduce distracted driving, and thus reduce related crashes and associated injuries and fatalities.  This Temple University study looked at enforcement and penalties of violations of the laws which vary from State to State as of November, 2010, which includes 39 states plus Washington, D.C.   http://www.tgdaily.com/mobility-features/56502-distracted-driving-laws-in-disarray-says-researcher.

If you or a loved one has been injured by a distracted driver, call i-800- 6360808– William “Bill” Hurst – for a free consultation.  We only charge a fee if we win your case!

Farm work rivals construction work as one of most dangerous jobs in America.  The national rate of death from farm accidents is about 22.1 deaths for 100,000 workers.  The most common injuries involve various kinds of farm equipment, structures  like gain bins (entrapments), chemical exposures, spills, fires, toxic exposures and, finally, and least likely, farm animals causing accidents resulting in injury.  Injuries involving farm tractors result in nearly 270 deaths each year in the United States and account for almost 265,000 restricted work days and some 11,000 lost time injuries.     http://deltafarmpress.com/farm-accidents-enough-enough.

            As a part of the Purdue Farm Fatality Report issued recently (2011), Bill Field, a Purdue University Farm Safety Specialist, made a chilling observation that “besides the 23 documented fatalities on Indiana farms in 2010”, he estimates that there were “slightly more than 6,770 non-fatal accidents”.  These accidents on Indiana farms ranged from a few scrapes to a crippling disability.  Certainly the worst of the lot resulted in amputations, severely mangled limbs, and spinal cord and brain injuries. While the 2010 data isn’t available at this point, 2009 estimates are that non-fatal farm injuries cost an average of $1,200 per incident.  That is an economic effect when totaled of over $8.12 million dollars annually. This estimate does not include the cost of replacement labor to help on the farm operation while the person with the injury recuperates.  You can get helpful tips for keeping your family safe at the following websites:  http://www.farmsafety.org or www.grainsafety.org and http://agrability.org.  

            As stated, tractor accidents are the major cause of farm work related deaths.  It is estimated that between 500 to 600 people are killed each year in tractor accidents.  For every person killed, another 40 are injured.  “Overturns” account for more than half of all tractor-related deaths.  Falls involving operators and extra riders (often children) account for the second leading cause of serious injury.   www.ces.Purdue.ed/extramedia/s/s-56.html.  Studies show that most of these accidents happen during peak cropping months from April to October in Indiana and most of them involve persons aged 25 to 64.  It is an important safety rule to ensure that each person who operates a tractor is trained, physically fit, and qualified to do the job.  A new tractor operator should practice with and without equipment attached prior to becoming an operator.   A skilled operator should be the trainer for the new farm worker.  The new operator can eventually take the seat and operate the tractor with the trainer standing on the drawbar to give assistance if needed before working on his own. 

            Other factors affecting the reliability and safety of the tractor operator has to do with maintenance which involves making a preoperational check of every tractor before use.  The tractor operation manual is an important safety manual and should be read, known and understood.  Following all the operation precautions recommended outlined in the manual is required for safe operation of a tractor.  More and more farmers are recognizing the safety involved in having a “cab” installed on the tractor constructed of a crush-resistant protective frame which will give the operator protection from overturns, from weather and will reduce operator fatigue. 

 Another source of tractor related injury involves the power take-offs shafts which must be guarded at all times.  There are two common types of PTO stubs shaft “shields” commonly in use to protect persons from contacting the rotating power shaft.  In all instances, the stubs shaft guard should always be in place.  Some older tractors lack adequate PTO stub shaft protection and should only be used with extra caution.  Shields are cheap insurance against serious injury.   For a lengthy list of some basic safety practices, please see www.ces.purdue.edu.   

Knowing what to do and how to do it goes a long way to ensure safe tractor operation.  It is important that the operator be in good physical and emotional condition when he is operating a tractor.  It is important that he is comfortable while operating the tractor so he can function safely in conformance with the safety recommendations of the manufacturer.

The age of an operator is in part regulated by federal and State law.  If an operator is under 18, federal labor law will affect this person’s ability to operate a tractor.  Unless you are working for a parent or a guardian on a farm owned and operated by your parent or your guardian, you are not permitted to operate a tractor for over 20 PTO-HP and certain other farm machinery.  (These farm jobs can be started at age 14 with special 4-H or VO-Agg training.)  You need to check with your County Extension also for up-to-date information regarding underage workers on farms.

If you have been injured in an accident, you should act swiftly and contact an experienced personal injury lawyer.  Our attorneys have successfully represented clients in various types of accidents resulting in large settlements and verdicts.  Call us for a free consultation at 800-636-0808 or contact us and see our website at  www.billhurst.com.   We charge a fee only if we win your case!

Copyright © 2011 William W. Hurst. All rights reserved.
Bill Hurst is a partner in Mitchell, Hurst, Dick & McNelis, LLC.
Use of the web site does not create an attorney-client relationship.