Rockford & Moline Personal Injury Lawyers - Accidents

Hard to Call Slip-and-Fall: Workers’ Compensation for Working from Home?

Nick Avgerinos — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:35:00 GMT

Everyone’s talking about the struggle to fuel our nation: where to find the cheapest gas, techniques for getting the most out of your gas, what car to drive for the best mileage, etc. But some are taking it a step further; why pay for the fuel to get to work when you could choose to not pay for fuel at all.

While some companies are offering a 4-day work week with extended hours, others are giving employees the option to work from home. Telecommuting, already increasingly popular in our age of gadget gorging and emotion via email, has attracted a new branch of followers since gas prices hit $4 and continue to climb. Sure, everyone is announcing plans to harness wind energy and offer electric cars, but until these pie-in-the-sky dreams become affordable realities, working from home is one effective way to cope with money woes for those whose jobs are conducive to such labor.

But what if you’re injured “on the job” from home? It sounds oxymoronic, but it could easily happen nowadays. The same way that you could trip and fall moving from the copy room to your desk at the office, you might slip and fall on your trip from going to grab a file from your bookshelf to sitting down at your home computer. As anyone who works from home knows, just because you’re not at the office doesn’t mean you’re having a pajama party (not that working in one’s PJs isn’t an added bonus to the work-from-home routine). The point is that if you suffer an injury arising out of and in the course of your employment, your employer should compensate you.

Obviously, the particulars are going to be especially relevant in these cases. Did you happen to trip while carefully traversing the relatively clutter-free expanse of a home office; or were you juggling a latte, a personal call, and laptop while navigating your should-have-been-cleaned-two-weeks-ago apartment when you broke your arm after falling on top of one of your piles of clothes? It’s really the details that count here.

This sort of claim relates to the newest legal frontier: internet law. That means that many details are still sketchy. With more and more of us making the virtual commute, however, the color of work-from-home claims is slowly being added. I came across an interesting case involving an employee on his way back home (where he frequently worked) from an after-hours meeting with his supervisor. He was severely injured, involved in a car accident and then hit by another vehicle after stepping outside his car.

While one’s commute is generally not covered by workers’ compensation, two notable exceptions are the dual purpose doctrine and the mutual benefit doctrine. The ‘dual purpose doctrine’ allows that workers’ compensation covers an employee when her employment creates the necessity for travel, even if she is also serving some purpose of her own. The ‘mutual benefit doctrine,’ on the other hand, establishes that injuries suffered by the employee while she is performing some activity for the mutual benefit of herself and the employer is compensable when some advantage for the employer arises out of this activity.

The court in the Missouri case described above held that the plaintiff should be covered for his injuries because he was injured on his way from work, transporting documents that he needed to continue working at home. The court explained: "compensation for injuries while traveling home may be proper under the dual purpose doctrine when it can genuinely and not fictionally be said that the home has become part of the employment premises. In those circumstances, an employee fulfills a dual purpose by traveling home: the personal purpose of making a normal trip home, and the business purpose of reaching a second employment situs. An employee demonstrates this by showing a clear business use of the home at the end of the specific journey during which the accident occurred."

As you can see, technology is quickly changing the shape of our world. And that means changes to both work life and home life, and—for most of us—the blurry new intersection of the two. The case above illustrates that it’s the nature of our activity, rather than the location where we perform it, that categorizes our space for the future.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick Avgerinos

Stay in Touch with the Cell Phone / Cancer Debate: 5 Tips to Limit Your Risk

Nick Avgerinos — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:34:00 GMT

With cell phones pressed to our ears, clipped to our belts, and putting email at our fingertips, it’s becoming hard to imagine life without them. And with our busy schedules, we don’t often take the time to consider whether that’s necessarily a good thing. Cell phone usage has exploded in the last decade, and while numerous studies have been done regarding possible health risks associated with cell phone use, the jury is still out, searching for more conclusive evidence.

The good news: most studies haven’t found any relationship between cell phones and cancer. The bad news: a new warning issued by the head of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute suggests otherwise, based on unpublished data. The new warning emphasizes the danger of cell phone use among small children, explaining that it’s most dangerous for young ones because their brains are still developing. Many have called this new warning alarmist and premature, but it seems too soon to tell its merits.

Devra Lee Davis, the director of the university's center for environmental oncology puts the point well: “The question is, do you want to play Russian roulette with your brain?” Of course, the answer is no. And we certainly don’t want to expose our children to undue health risks. (Unrelated note to parents: this new warning also offers a concrete reason for refusing to indulge your child’s premature desire to procure a cell phone.)

So, if we’re going to be safe, rather than sorry, here are 5 useful tips provided by CNN:

1. Use the speakerphone

This was, without question, the favorite alternative of the experts I talked to. Nothing is near your head. "Hold it away from a minimum of a few inches. A foot or two is ideal," said Magda Havas, an associate professor with the Institute for Health Studies at Trent University in Ontario, Canada.

Havas gives me a little math lesson. Every inch you can get away from your body, the radiation reduces very quickly. "Hold it out two inches, and the radiation drops by a factor of four. Hold it out four inches, and it drops by a factor of 16," she says.

In other words, said Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News, "every millimeter counts."

2. Use a wired headset with a ferrite bead

No, this is not a piece of jewelry. A ferrite bead is a clip you put on the wire of a headset. The concern is that the wire itself emits radiation into your ear. The bead is designed to absorb the radiation so you don't. They're inexpensive and available at stores or online.

These clips are a favorite of Slesin's. "It's the way to go," he said.

Another fan: Lawrie Challis, physicist and former chair of the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme, a government panel in Britain. "They did tests at the University of York and found that under even the worst conditions, if you use a ferrite bead, you can't even measure the radiation coming off the wire. This common device kills the radiation."

Of course, if the phone is in your pocket or clipped to your belt, all bets are off, because the phone itself will be radiating into your body. So if you're worried about radiation, keep the phone as far away as possible, and Challis adds to do your best to make sure the wire isn't touching your body.

3. Use a Bluetooth earpiece

A Bluetooth earpiece still has radiation, but it's at least 100 times less than the radiation you get when you hold a cell phone to your head, Havas says.

Our experts were split on which was better: a Bluetooth headset or a wired one. Israeli government recommendations issued this week specifically suggest a wire; Havas likes the Bluetooth. But even she says not to wear it when you're not talking; it still sends out a signal.

"Bluetooth is only whispering radiation into your ear. The problem is, some people wear it all the time," she says. "At the very least, switch it from ear to ear so you don't have too much exposure on one side."

Michael Foley, Ph.D., executive director of the Bluetooth Special Interest Group, says Bluetooth earpieces radiate 200 times less energy than cell phones. "There is no evidence that a Bluetooth headset has any adverse effects on its users," he said.

4. Use a "hollow tube" earpiece

It's just like a regular wired earpiece, except the last six inches or so -- the part next to your ear -- is a hollow tube. There's no wire under the plastic.

"You're getting the sound through the air. You're not dependent on radiofrequency waves," said Dr. David Carpenter, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of Albany.

Hollow tube earpieces can be purchased on several Web sites.

5. Get a phone with less radiation

Phone radiation is measured in specific absorption rate, or SAR. To look up the SAR for your phone, check this list on CNET.com.

You might think the experts mentioned above all use earpieces or a speakerphone. Not so. Several said they hold it right up to their heads because they use their cells so infrequently, they're not worried about radiation.

"I use it maybe once or twice a week, no more than 10 minutes," said Challis, the former head of the British committee that studied cell phones and radiation. "I use a land line whenever I can."

It's the exposure, day after day, year after year, that matters. As Challis, who's retired, puts it, "If I were younger, I'd take this much more seriously."

Only time will tell what research proves most accurate regarding the cell phone / cancer link. Until then, it’s a good idea to follow these tips: don’t put your safety on hold while we’re waiting for researchers to make the call.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick Avgerinos

Grown-Up Gaming: More than a “Wii” Personal Injury Liability

Nick Avgerinos — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:12:46 GMT

Most parents lament the passage of bygone days where kids played freeze tag and rode bikes till dusk in the summer; nowadays, there’s more inside play, focused around television, video games, and the computer. Sure, you can try to impose time limits on these gadgets, but once they’re out of your house, it’s hard to enforce those rules with his friend Jenny’s Nintendo DS or Justin’s Xbox 360.

And as if you don’t have enough to worry about with flips on your trampoline or dives into your pool, along comes the amazingly interactive Nintendo Wii. Parents seem to like the Wii, not only because of its entertainment factor, but because it gets kids up off the couch. Along with the relatively recent line of ‘Wii Fit’ games, most of the Wii games give the player some exercise because they require actual bodily movement, rather than the good old thumb workout. The problem: more interactivityàmore movementàmore injuries. Not always, but often enough to make a parent worry. If Justin hurts his wrist slicing up sushi while playing “Cooking Mama,” or Jenny slips and falls while doing a kick, playing “Dancing with the Stars,” are their parents coming to you for compensation? And would they have a case?

Well, it depends. Obviously, there’s some merit to those concerns; Nintendo introduced a wrist strap (which you can obtain free of charge) to add to controllers in order to guard against their propensity to go flying, endangering players and televisions everywhere. The company faces product design claims and you could face premises liability issues. The claims that have been brought thus far focus upon the company.

Before you start to breathe easier, though, take a look at Nintendo’s newest line of games from JV sports: Frat Party Games. One game in the series, ‘Beer Pong,’ has already been renamed ‘Pong Toss’ due to public disapproval. Sure, the name has changed, but the game is the same. The rating? It’s suitable for your children aged 13 and older. Maybe Nintendo didn’t see the latest statistics, but underage drinking is a serious problem, and I doubt introducing drinking games to a 13-year-old will do anything to help matters.

The Entertainment Software Rating Board President, Patricia Vance, defends the game’s rating, writing: “Despite being premised on a drinking game, the game's content involves essentially nothing more than tossing pingpong [sic] balls into plastic cups.” And while it might be true that the game doesn’t explicitly reference alcohol, the origins of the game aren’t exactly a secret. Even kids who don’t yet get the reference will be fully apprised with a quick Google search.

It’s a good reminder, though, that we should keep kids aware of the dangers of underage drinking—and drinking in general—because you never know where else they’re getting their information. And sometimes influence comes from the least likely of places. That’s why it’s up to us to be consistent examples of responsibility.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick Avgerinos

Look Out Below: Potholes Prevalent and Seemingly Permanent

Nick Avgerinos — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:19:00 GMT

We have certain traditions for summertime in Chicago: the Crosstown Classic, the Taste, and construction. We all know about construction season in the city, and while most of us mark it by standstill moments with our bumper-to-bumper fellow motorists, it is also concretely marked by potholes dotting the roadways.

Potholes give us a reason to welcome construction work. Given their potential for causing dangerous accidents for both cars and bikes (and everything in between), potholes merit immediate attention. Unfortunately, they are often ignored as “more pressing” matters take precedence. But as something that doesn’t just cause expensive damage to our vehicles, but can also prompt accidents (and therefore injuries), potholes are more than a cosmetic problem.

If you suffer damage to your vehicle as the result of a pothole problem, you are entitled to compensation. The Chicago Tribune recently pointed out that, if your damage occurred on the city streets, you have up to one year from the date of accident to file a claim with the city clerk’s office; you can obtain a claim form here. When reporting the damage, it’s important to give specifics, including a description of the damage, how it occurred, and a police report. Photographs of the damage are also helpful. Your claim will be investigated, and if deemed valid, the city will pay half the cost of repairs up to $2,000. Why shouldn’t all of your damage be covered? Finance Committee spokesman Donal Quinlan claims, “The logic is the driver may have had some chance to avoid the damage.”

So, how big of a problem are potholes for the city? According to the Chicago Reporter’s analysis, the Chicago Department of Transportation spent $10 million on pavement maintenance projects in 2007 and filled more than 270,000 potholes. That’s a lot of pavement. What many of us don’t realize, however, is how great an expense it is to fill these potholes. With skyrocketing gas prices, everyone needs to cut back, and that includes the city.

CNN reports that many local governments have to scale back on services in order to make ends meet; road repair is a prime example. In a recent survey by the National Association of Counties, 81% of counties reported that public safety is the area most affected by rising fuel costs. Beyond the pressure of higher gas prices, it also costs more to repair the roads. Why? Because asphalt is made largely from oil, and the price for its main component has ballooned more than 90% since last year.

Translation: expect more dangerous roadways. As a result, be extra aware of your surroundings, your fellow motorists, and construction workers toiling to fix the problem. There may be more potholes in your path, but that doesn’t obstruct your ability to exercise good driving habits.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick Avgerinos

Something to Chew Over: Are You “On-the-Job” During Your Lunch Break?

Nick Avgerinos — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:41:00 GMT

Workers’ compensation is probably something you don’t know a whole lot about, until you or a close friend suffers an on-the-job injury. Then it comes at you all too quickly.

What’s the difference between workers’ compensation and personal injury ? (If the word ‘tort’ makes you think of a tasty pastry, it’s worth your while to click around on that site.) For you, it might be a big difference in terms of the number of zeros in your award.

In Iowa , for example, workers’ compensation claims have scheduled injuries. In other words, forget everything you’ve ever been told about not being able to put a price on your life and health. Simply put, in most instances, your mangled hand is worth a specific dollar amount. Same goes for a leg, a foot, an ear, etc. The doctors provide impairment ratings which are then used to determine the value of one’s permanent condition or, the ratings set the boundaries for the value of the case. The who, what, where, when, and why is irrelevant so long as you injured a specific body part on-the-job. (Assuming no other concurrent or pre-existing injuries or conditions, the chess player and the soccer player may well end up receiving the same amount for loss of use of a foot.) However, for injuries affecting the whole body , such as back, neck, internal, neurological, and mental health to name just a few, the limitations of the scheduled injury analysis I have discussed do not apply, as these injuries are not classified as scheduled. Confused yet?

In Illinois , workers’ compensation injuries are not scheduled as they are in Iowa . In establishing case value, Illinois does not apply the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment , including the 5^th or 6^th Editions. The Illinois system is based on precedent ; that is, compensation for permanent disability is based upon what the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission has awarded in the past for similarly situated individuals.

With personal injury claims, on the other hand, specifics are very important. Were you in any way at fault? How much were your medical bills? Can you continue to work? How does the injury affect your personal life? You’re the victim and yet you’re left to prove that you deserve compensation. Doesn’t seem fair, but it’s the way the system works. The best thing you can do is be upfront and honest. It’s up to you to report your injury early and seek legal advice regarding how to proceed.

You’d think that determining what constitutes a workers’ compensation claim would be pretty straightforward. Well, you’d think wrong . The injury must arise out of and in the course of employment . Sounds redundant, doesn’t it? But often Employers escape liability by saying that an employee was technically “on-the-job,” but sustained an injury as a result of behavior not related to the job. In other words, injuries are often deemed to be sustained out of---but not in the course of---employment.

So, what about lunch breaks? As with most questions, the legal answer is “it depends.” A recent New York workers’ compensation case provides an interesting example. Like Illinois , New York Workers’ Compensation law requires that the injury arise both out of and in the course of employment. In this case, a cab driver was parked in a parking lot, eating his lunch, when approached by another motorist for assistance in jumping his car. The cab driver graciously agreed, but the battery exploded as he was securing the jumper cables, resulting in the cab driver losing his left eye. He filed for workers’ compensation….but he was on his lunch break when the injury occurred.

The case ended up in the New York Court of Appeals , which agreed with the employer that meal breaks are generally not compensable. They ruled, however, that this case was an exception. Testimony showed that drivers routinely took 15-20 minute breaks with the express permission of the employer at a location convenient for the employer. Reasoning that the general rule doesn't apply when the nature of the job dictates the time and place of the meal and the employee is still “on-the-job” at the time the break occurs. Thus, the court determined that the cab driver was injured in the course of employment.

But did his injury really arise out of employment? The New York Court of Appeals determined that if an employee is injured while involved in an activity that benefits the employer, while in the course of employment, then that employee has a workers’ compensation claim. But the cab driver here was just being a Good Samaritan , right? Wrong. The court ruled that, because the cab was clearly marked with the employer's name, the assistance created a good-will benefit to the employer. In other words, the cab driver was providing free advertisement for the employer.

As you can see, the world of workers’ compensation can be very confusing, but a good attorney can help you navigate through the details. Hopefully, you never have to deal with an on-the-job injury; but this should give you some helpful information to digest on your own lunch break today, just in case.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick Avgerinos

Creative Commuters: Many Turn to Scooters and Motorcycles to Ease Pain at the Pump

Nick Avgerinos — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:07:00 GMT

Our slowing economy and climbing oil prices explain the panic that many people are feeling when it comes time to fill up at the pump. Some are driving less, others are carpooling , and a surprising number are opting for Metra . But some of us are taking a more creative approach to commuting; these individuals are trading in their gas guzzlers to tool around on two wheels. No, I’m not talking about those grabbing their bicycles. Rather, I’m referring the spike in sales of motorcycles and scooters .

It’s not just a few people making the switch either. According to the Motorcycle Industry Council , sales are up 24% in the first few months of 2008 alone. Yamaha reports that its scooter sales are up 65% from this time last year. And Vespa set an all-time sales record in May, selling 2,758 in the United States alone. That nearly doubled its previous record. It makes sense that as gas prices continue to climb, so will these sales.

But, for drivers steering toward these creative commutes, how much savings is there really? Of course, it depends on what kind of mileage these motorists used to get; in other words, is the switch from a Hummer or a Prius ? But the manufacturer mileage claims are pretty astonishing: anywhere from 40 to 100 mpg. And with the relatively low cost of these vehicles, the savings are even greater.

But how safe are these trendy two-wheelers? Not very. In fact, in the past 10 years, fatalities have increased 127%. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration , a motorcyclist is 34 times more likely to die in an automobile crash than someone in a regular car. 34 times! That’s a pretty big risk just to save a few bucks in gas.

It makes sense that motorcycles are more dangerous given the relative size and weight of these vehicles compared to traditional cars and trucks. And with the growing number of SUVs and other oversized vehicles on the road, the size ratio is increasingly unfavorable for motorcyclists. Many motorcycle accidents are avoidable, though, simply be wearing a helmet. Not wearing a helmet might not be against the law in Illinois , but it is against good old common sense. Many Injury Board members have been writing about the importance of bike safety , particularly the importance of helmets .

Don’t think it looks cool? Well, it’s a lot cooler than sustaining preventable injuries while riding. To give you an idea of the difference wearing a helmet makes, let’s take a look at Florida , a state that used to require helmets when riding. According to Consumer Reports, “ During the 30 months after Florida repealed its helmet law in 2002, there were 40 percent more hospitalizations and a 24 percent increase in deaths compared to the 30 months before the law was changed.” That’s a pretty big difference.

So, we’re left with this question: is making the shift to two wheels worth it? Well, that’s up to you. And it has a lot to do with your personal circumstances and commitment to being a safe driver. Consumer Reports intends to develop increased testing of motorcycles, and has this blog where you can discuss the triumphs and tribulations of buying and riding motorcycles with both novice and veteran riders. If you ultimately do decide two wheels are better than four, do yourself a favor and ride off into the sunset wearing a helmet.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick Avgerinos

Worker Safety Incentive Programs: Worker vs. Co-Worker?

Nick Avgerinos — Wed, 07 May 2008 14:23:51 GMT

Promoting workplace safety is as non-controversial as promoting firearm safety, safe-driving, and energy efficiency. However, when the advancement of workplace safety pits worker against worker then controversy begins.

Encouraging labor and management to work together to reduce on-the-job injuries is a good and noble policy. Who among us wants to see an injury occur at work, particularly one that would easily have been avoided if an adequate safety program had been in place, or if the worker had followed directions? Over the years many employers have taken steps to improve workplace safety by consistently explaining and describing how jobs are to be performed, holding mandatory safety meetings and so on. Labor, and labor unions have taken action to reduce workplace injuries by forming safety committees (oftentimes with management), holding workshops for stewards, and the membership, all with the intention keeping the workplace safe.

Reducing workplace injuries produces many favorable consequences, including:

-no lost time from work

-no loss in productivity,

-no loss or reduction in household income

-no disruption to the household

-no medical costs

-reduced workers’ compensation costs

-less potential for labor-management conflict over availability and suitability of restricted work

Rewarding workers for exercising proper safety techniques, attending safety meetings or offering recommendations for improving safety practices all sounds good, right? But, here’s where worker safety incentive programs can become a problem. In these programs, the employer rewards its employees for the company having gone so many days, weeks or months without a workplace injury, or without any lost time days. The rewards may take the form of monetary compensation, awards or recognition for having reached a predetermined goal as established by the employer.

What’s the downside you ask? While workers may be encouraged to report all injuries, the reporting of an injury, regardless of how minor can cause a break in the run of consecutive injury-free days from work and, perhaps more importantly for some, no reward ($$) from the employer. By following the rules and reporting all injuries, a worker risks incurring the anger of co-workers who have been informed by their employer that they will not receive a prize. Here’s the dilemma: Report the injury and lose the reward, or don’t report the injury and risk potentially serious consequences by way of a reprimand, suspension or something worse for having failed to follow company policy. The situation becomes much more problematic down the road, if what seemed like a minor back strain that the worker chose not to report out of fear of turning the co-workers against him is later diagnosed by a doctor as a herniated disc for which surgery is needed. Now the worker has a huge problem because the workers’ compensation claim resulting from the workplace accident will likely be denied by the employer and workers’ compensation insurance company because there is no record of the worker having reported the accident to the plant nurse, supervisor, or anyone else in a managerial capacity.

What now is the worker to do if he has been taken off work by his doctor for an accident and condition that the employer has denied is work-related but prevents him from working and generating income, and which requires an operation? The problem is greatly magnified if the injured worker lacks health insurance, lacks short or long-term disability benefits, or lacks a second household income with which to pay for medical care, groceries and rent.

Worker safety programs are intended to bring workers together by providing them with a reward for having an injury free workplace. Programs that implicitly encourage the under reporting of injuries are wrong. It is simply unfair to place an employee in the position of having to forego a bonus because his friend and co-worker has suffered an injury on the job. Instead of uniting workers, the safety incentive programs may well have the unintended consequence of dividing them.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Nick Avgerinos

Protect your family before an accident happens.

Steve Smalling — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 13:09:56 GMT

All too often a client's inability to be fully compensated for personal injuries boils down to a lack of insurance coverage. While you can't control the actions of other drivers on the roadway, you can financially protect yourself from the damages they cause. You have the ability to decide for yourself the amount of coverage that is necessary to protect you and your family in the event of a catastrophic personal injury.

My son celebrated his 16th birthday with only one present on his wish list: a ride to the the secretary of state's office to get his drivers license. He had been awaiting this teenage rite of passage for months and his excitement was only outweighed by my parental anxiety. Having represented hundreds of seriously injured accident victims over the last 23 years, I am well aware of the risks he will face every time he pulls out of the driveway. While I cannot prevent him from getting into an accident there is one thing I can do. See to it that he is properly insured in the event an accident should occur.

In Illinois, the law requires every driver to maintain liability insurance on their vehicle. This coverage is triggered when a driver 's negligence is the cause of an accident. It is designed to compensate someone injured by the driver with the payment of medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering and other damages. Unfortunately, not everyone takes this law seriously. According to a 2006 study released by the Insurance Research Council, 4 out of every 25 drivers on Illnois roadways do not have any liablity insurance. Take a trip to Wisconsin and 7 out of every 50 drivers will be uninsured. Cross the Mississippi river into Davenport or Dubuque and your odds of getting hit by someone without insurance go down. Only 3 out of every 25 drivers will be uninsured. Cross your fingers and pray that the driver who hits you has been responsible enough to buy a policy.

So what happens if you are injured by an uninsured driver? You can realistically forget about recovering any damages from that person. The Ilinois Department of Transportation estimated that in 2006, there were 13,272 uninsured motorists who did not pay for damages caused by their actions. While you can file suit against an uninsured driver, the likelihood of collecting any money is virtually nonexistent under most circumstances.

Even if the at fault driver does have liability coverage, chances are it is not enough. Illinois law requires drivers to only maintain a minimum of $20,000.00 in liability coverage. The cost of basic medical care and household expenses have gone through the roof. Anyone who has been hospitalized or missed a month or more of work knows that $20,000.00 will not go very far.

Since you cannot rely on others to do what is right, you have to protect yourself. Pull out your automobile policy and look at what you have been paying those premiums for all these years. From my experience representing injury victims, often times people have no understanding of the coverages available to them under their policy. The medical coverage you see will pay for medical expenses incurred in an accident regardless of who was at fault. The uninsured motorist coverage will pay you for damages caused by an uninsured driver up to the limits indicated. The underinsured coverage will kick in if your damages exceed the amount of liabilty coverage maintained by the at fault driver. However, the underinsured limits stated in your policy will in most cases be reduced by the amount of coverage maintained by the other driver. Now ask yourself if you are comfortable putting your family behind the wheel with the dollar amount of coverage you have purchased.

Unfortunately, buying sufficient insurance coverage is not the end of the story. Should it be necessary to assert a claim for any of these coverages, chances are that your own carrier will now treat you like a claimant as opposed to the "valued customer" referenced in their premium invoices. The insurance policy is a contract containing numerous conditions and exclusions, all inserted to protect the insurance company, not the insured. If a carrier can deny a claim, it will. Consult an attorney immediately if your claim is denied or with any questions about how to obtain benefits from the policy you have purchased.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Steve Smalling

Two Workers Killed in Millstadt Construction Accident

Chrissie Cole — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:21:52 GMT

A construction worker, 38, of Ellis Grove was killed in a construction accident, Monday, when a ditch he was digging collapsed on him in Millstadt, Illinois.

Also killed in the cave-in was another worker, 48, of Benton, Illinois. Both men were employed by Midwest Petroleum and Excavating Inc.

A trench approximately eight to ten feet high collapsed on two construction workers. Emergency crews from Millstadt, St. Clair County, Swansea, Cahokia and the Illinois State Police were called at approximately 3 p.m. in an attempt to rescue the victims.

The second leading cause of construction related deaths in the United States is trench cave-ins, according to the U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

The accident is under investigation, at this time officials are unsure what caused the cave-in or what safety precautions had been taken.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Chrissie Cole

Rockford Man Arrested for Hit-and-Run

Chrissie Cole — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 02:09:50 GMT

A Rockford man who alleged struck a pedestrian, in a hit-and-run car accident, is behind bars.

The driver, 31, struck a 26-year-old woman who was walking down School Street just after 1:30 a.m. this morning when the accident occurred.

The victim's name has not yet been released pending family notification. Officials confirmed she later died at the hospital from the serious injuries she sustained in the accident. The accident is still under investigation.

The driver is facing several charges for leaving the scene of an accident that involved death. He is being held at Winnebago County Jail on a $150,000 bond.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Chrissie Cole