Personal Injury Primer

I’m David Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller concerned about his car catching fire and being destroyed. He pulled over, got out, and was not hurt, but he wanted to know his legal options.

Depending on the cause of the car catching on fire and resulting damages, there may be several parties that could be sued.

If the fire was caused by a design or manufacturing defect in the vehicle, the manufacturer could possibly be held liable under product liability laws.

A design or manufacturing defect would include issues such as a wiring short, a battery defect, a fuel system leak, or another engine-related problem.

Proving a defect and its connection to the fire will be challenging, not least because the car was likely destroyed in the fire. An expert would need to employ credentialed forensic analysis to piece together what happened in a manner that a court would find credible.

If a fire department puts out the fire, it may have investigated the cause of the fire, and may also prove to be an essential source of information to establish the cause.

If the fire was caused by negligence on the part of a mechanic who performed repairs or maintenance on the vehicle, the mechanic may be liable for negligence.

A mechanic’s work might come into play if parts were installed incorrectly, or wiring was left loose, or the mechanic otherwise failed to address an issue they were hired to address.

If the fire was caused by a car accident where another driver was at fault, they could be liable for damages, including the fire damage, injuries, and property damage.

If a fire were intentionally set, the parties responsible for setting the fire could be held liable for the resulting damage.

In some situations, if a fire originating on a property spreads due to negligence and subsequently engulfs a car, the party responsible for starting the fire, or a party who negligently failed to provide fire suppression equipment, may be sued for damages.

One example that comes to mind is a renter of an apartment whose car caught fire when parked at the apartment building. Because the building owner failed to install and maintain fire suppression systems as required by law, we were able to sue that party successfully.

In another case, we recovered damages for a client when a property manager allowed gasoline to be stored in a garage rented to a tenant, and the gas was stored in a way that caused a fire.

If the owner of the car that caught fire had car insurance with comprehensive coverage, that policy would likely apply to cover the costs of repairing or replacing the vehicle in the event of a fire. In most situations, insurance may be the most viable option for recovering the losses sustained in the vehicle fire.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m Katelyn Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller concerned about the discovery of mold in her apartment. She said she has been feeling sick and seeing doctors for several months, and she wanted to know her legal rights.

It is important to note that humanity has been dealing with mold for thousands of years. The Bible mentions mold in several passages, primarily in Leviticus 14, where it discusses the procedures for dealing with mold in houses.

But what does Indiana law say about suing a landlord when mold is discovered?

Under Indiana law, to prove a negligence case, a person has to establish three things: 1) a defendant owed him or her a duty of care, 2) said duty was breached, and 3) the person was injured as a result of the defendant’s breach of duty.

The first element of duty is controlled by statute in Indiana.

The Indiana legislature has enacted a statute that requires landlords to furnish tenants with safe premises. A landlord is required to deliver a rental premises to a tenant that is safe, clean, and in a habitable condition.

A court could reasonably hold that providing an apartment free from toxic mold is part of the requirement for landlords to maintain a safe, clean, and habitable condition.

But our analysis doesn’t end there.

A tenant must prove that the landlord breached its duty to provide a safe, clean, and habitable apartment.

An Indiana statute provides that a tenant may not sue in most situations unless the tenant first gives the landlord notice of the landlord’s noncompliance with its obligations under a lease, and that the landlord be given a reasonable amount of time to remedy the condition described in the tenant’s notice.

Moreover, the tenant may not prevent the landlord from accessing the rental premises to make repairs.

In short, it may be challenging to proceed with a case unless the landlord fails or refuses to remedy the condition described in a tenant’s notice.

If the tenant fails to provide the required notice, it may still be possible to hold the landlord liable if it can be shown that the landlord was aware of the mold in the apartment but did not disclose that information.

This may not be easy to establish again.

Lastly, let’s examine the third element that someone suing would need to prove — that they were injured because the landlord failed to provide a safe, clean, and habitable apartment. This would require evidence from a medical doctor stating what the mold exposure caused and the precise medical conditions identified in a lawsuit.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m Katelyn Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller concerned about the other driver’s possible lack of insurance coverage.

The caller said that the driver who hit her was entirely at fault and gave the police insurance information, but now that other driver’s insurance company claims there is no coverage and asserts that that other driver failed to cooperate with it. The woman wants to know what her rights are.

Unfortunately, this scenario is becoming increasingly common, especially among insurance carriers that fail to adhere to fair claims settlement practices.

Every insurance carrier will have a provision in its auto insurance policy that compels the insured driver to cooperate with the insurance carrier.

But what does the term ‘cooperate’ mean?

Suppose a driver who causes a crash immediately reaches out to his insurance carrier, but reaches a voicemail system. Or worse yet, what if he is compelled to speak with an artificial intelligence agent?

The driver indeed attempted to contact his insurance carrier; however, because the company had barricaded itself behind a technology wall, it interfered with the driver’s ability to report the crash to a human and proceed to cooperate with the company to explain what had happened.

Suppose the driver leaves his phone number and explains in a voicemail message what happened, asking to be called back. Now, suppose the insurance carrier tries to call back, but because the insured driver’s phone is not set up to receive voicemail, the insurance carrier can’t leave a message. Additionally, since the phone is set to block unknown callers, no call actually gets through. What happens if the insurance carrier says that its insured failed to cooperate and cancels the policy?

The short answer is that coverage could be in jeopardy, despite the insured acting reasonably.

We’ve seen this happen many times: an insurance carrier will claim a lack of cooperation when, in fact, the insurance carrier has precipitated the communication problem.

The insurance carrier will claim that it needs to be informed about the crash and investigate, obtaining a recorded statement from its insured. But if an unscrupulous insurance carrier is the one that makes communication difficult, and does so precisely so that it can deny coverage, doesn’t that rise to the level of bad faith?

Some courts have answered yes, while others have responded no.

Frequently, we have found that even in cases where an insurance carrier sends a letter claiming it cannot provide coverage to a defendant driver due to a lack of cooperation, if we proceed with filing a lawsuit against that driver, the insurance companies will change their position. Why?

Because a lawsuit requires the defendant driver to provide the lawsuit papers to the insurance carrier, it presents another avenue of cooperation.

Now the insurance company has the lawsuit papers in its possession. It can’t just claim that a failed game of phone tag permits it to escape liability. Now it has papers in its hand and no court is going to be inclined to excuse it from following its policy requirements to defend its insured.

To the caller, we would advise that she proceed to hire an attorney and file a lawsuit.

To the driver whose insurance carrier is trying to assert a lack of cooperation, we advise reporting the crash in writing, by mail or fax, or via email, if the driver encounters voicemail hell or an artificial intelligence agent when calling in to report the crash.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m David Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller who said she and her family were all hurt seriously when a semi-tractor-trailer ran them off the road after she could see that the load on the flatbed trailer shifted and the driver lost control. She wanted to know if they were limited to suing just the truck driver.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations apply to commercial truck drivers and motor carriers.

Motor carriers are legally responsible for the acts or omissions of their drivers while they are on the roadway.

Commercial motor vehicles operated by motor carriers must have a minimum of $1 million insurance coverage.

But that level of insurance can be inadequate in many serious injury situations.

So the caller’s question is reasonable given that multiple family members suffered serious injuries.

What other parties might be sued in the caller’s situation?

Often, a truck driver may be deemed to be an agent of more than one motor carrier. For example, if Motor Carrier A routes a shipment to Motor Carrier B because A does not want to ship to a specific state, both carriers may be legally liable for a driver’s negligence.

A good way to determine if more than one motor carrier is involved in a shipment is to obtain a copy of the Bill of Lading.

In the caller’s situation, there is evidence that the load may not have been adequately secured to the trailer.  Where a shipper fails to secure a load properly, the shipper may be liable.

For example, if the shipper loads a steel coil onto a trailer and fails to secure it properly, and the load shifts, causing a crash, the shipper and any party the shipper hired to load the trailer may be liable for negligence in securing the load.

Keep in mind that many motor carriers have no involvement in loading a trailer; they simply attach a tractor to it and begin transporting.

When a shipper fails to comply with regulations and mandatory safety standards regarding securing a load, they may be held liable for harm resulting from the load breaking loose and causing a collision.

A motor carrier must maintain a file that documents a driver’s qualifications. This file must contain the following materials: a written application, a three-year driving history, proof that references were contacted, medical qualification information, results of drug and alcohol screening, proof of driving competency, and documentation that the driver can read and speak English.

Sometimes, a motor carrier will hire a consultant to conduct driver screenings. If a screening consultant negligently evaluates a driver, the consultant may be held legally responsible for the crash.

Lastly, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations define a motor carrier employee as any individual who directly affects the safety of a commercial motor vehicle, including mechanics working on the tractors and trailers.

Thus, if the driver reports that the brakes failed, the mechanic’s work may be implicated as a cause of the crash. If a mechanic makes an error that results in a collision, both the mechanic and the company that hires them may also be held legally liable for the crash.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m Katelyn Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we explain the law in simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller who wanted to sue a hospital that permitted her husband, a patient at the facility, to fall out of bed and fracture his hip. She wanted to know if such care rose to the level of medical malpractice.

In general, a hospital owes a duty of care to its patients, and in most situations, keeping the patient secured in bed would qualify as medical care.

However, if her husband were not a patient but was visiting a patient and fell while napping on a cot provided by the hospital for family members, the question of legal responsibility would involve legal principles applying to premises liability, not medical care.

Here, since the caller’s husband was a patient, the hospital acted professionally as a medical service provider. However, Indiana court decisions have held that a claim involving a patient falling from a bed due to a defective rail constituted ordinary negligence, as it did not involve a breach of a duty integral to medical treatment.

Upon further questioning, the wife said that her husband was coming out of sedation for a procedure. One of the staff members admitted that the bed rail should have been secured in the up position but was in the down position due to an oversight.  The husband rolled over in bed and fell to the floor without waking up from the sedation.

Under Indiana law, hospitals owe a duty of reasonable care to their patients. They may be held liable for the negligent acts of their employees performed within the scope of their employment. A hospital may also breach its duty of care if its employees fail to recognize and report abnormalities in a patient’s condition, resulting in injury.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m David Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we explain the law in simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller who was injured at work when a car attempting to park in front of his office building mistakenly accelerated and crashed into the building, broke through the window and wall, and seriously injured building occupants. He wanted to know his legal options.

In Indiana, drivers have a duty of care when driving, which also applies to parking a vehicle.

More specifically, Indiana law imposes a duty on drivers to exercise the care that an ordinarily prudent person would use under similar circumstances, including the duty to control a vehicle safely in all circumstances to avoid collisions.

For example, drivers must maintain a proper outlook while operating a vehicle.

Also, Indiana Code 9-21-8-23 prohibits starting or stopping a parked vehicle unless the movement can be made with reasonable safety.

In most situations, a driver’s actions in accelerating and crashing into a building will result in a finding that the driver breached the duty of care to maintain control of their vehicle and avoid collisions.

The driver in the caller’s case likely bears legal responsibility for the crash under Indiana law.

One defense might be for the driver to establish that the car mechanically malfunctioned due to a product defect with the vehicle or some other cause beyond the control of the operator.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m Katelyn Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today we’re taking a look at how we can plan and prepare to keep our important documents safe and within quick reach in cases of emergency or natural disasters.

It’s common knowledge that when people get into their vehicle to drive, they should have their driver’s license, vehicle registration, and automobile insurance card with them. You never know when you might be in a situation in which you need that information. Hopefully, you won’t need it, but it is required and good to have that information on you.

What about in the context of other kinds of emergencies or natural disasters that might arise? It’s not something most people like thinking about, but it is wise to take some proactive steps to ensure you know where all of your important documents are in order to quickly grab it on the way out of your house (if there’s an evacuation) or to protect it from things like heat or water.

First of all, what kinds of documents should you prioritize as important to keep protected? Think things like:

Plan on periodically checking this stack of important documents to ensure they are up-to-date. It’s good to also keep a digital back-up of these things on a thumb drive that you can easily grab, put in your pocket, and maybe keep in a bank lock-box. The paper copies of the documents can be store in a protective plastic bag or fireproof bag. While fireproof bags are generally not designed to be subjected to direct flames for very long, they can usually withstand high temperatures well and you can also find some that are also waterproof.

Sometimes these important documents are destroyed regardless of the amount of work we take to protect them. In these cases, all is not lost. If you do need to replace something like a government-issued document, you can go to the applicable governmental agency for help with that. For example, for replacement birth certificates, you usually contact the birth state’s vital records office. If you need to replace social security cards, you contact the U.S. Social Security office. There are helpful government websites that give step-by-step instruction on what to do to replace lost or missing documents.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com. While there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m David Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

In this episode, we explore a high school junior’s innovative idea to enhance driving safety.

Despite having just a year of driving experience, this young driver’s perspective brought fresh insight to an essay competition on traffic safety.

The proposal advocates for a mandatory extension of driver education and training, surpassing the conventional training classes that most young drivers receive during high school. This additional education and training could significantly enhance driving safety.

Courts have long required traffic offenders to attend traffic safety classes as a way of rehab. These rehab courses typically include coursework on nighttime driving, the dangers posed by speeding, and the potential for harm caused by driving under the influence.

The concepts covered in a remedial driving course can potentially elevate the driving skills of all individuals. This underlines the importance of continuous education and training in driving safety.

Many European nations require more study and testing to obtain a driver’s license than the United States.

European countries have a licensing approach focusing on graduated licensing, leading to increased experience before obtaining full driving privileges.

Germany and the UK have implemented graduated licensing programs, which include a learner’s permit, provisional license, and full license with increasing privileges and restrictions.

European countries make a strong effort to make certain drivers have sufficient driving ability and competence.

Due to the European approach to licensing, many EU nations have significantly lower road fatality rates (in Denmark, for example, the rate is 27 deaths per one million inhabitants) compared to the US (11.4 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants in 2020), according to the World Health Organization.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m Katelyn Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller concerned that he’d been in a small impact crash, and no police report was made. He filed a claim with the at-fault driver’s insurance, but they say the crash never happened. He asked, did I make a big mistake?

Understandably, sometimes the urge to not take the time to call the police and have them document what happened in a crash will prevail over exercising better judgment to insist that a police report be made. Sometimes, you have to be somewhere, and the crash itself presents a stressful situation. You think that you don’t feel hurt and that the damage to the cars is minimal. Should you give in to the urge to skip calling the police?

Here are the pros and cons of taking the time to call the police, compared with taking alternative steps to document what happened during the crash.

We’ll leave it to listeners to decide what is more important, keeping in mind that the absence of a police report might adversely impact the chances of a claim for damages being approved.

The more substantial the accident and the more significant the damage, the more important it becomes to get a police report to include when filing an insurance claim. Whether a police report is required depends on the insurance policy’s wording. Typically, the policy will instruct on how and when to file a claim.

Depending on the wording of a policy, the ramifications of not having a police report may vary. In many instances, a claim without a police report may still be approved, but the approval process may take longer and require more investigation and verification of the details surrounding the crash. Depending on how much uncertainty is created by the fact that there is no police report for a given crash, the amount offered by insurance to settle a claim may be less than what you could otherwise get if you had more details known and outlined in a police report.

One of the biggest reasons people don’t call the police and get a report after a crash is that they think the crash was minor. However, the extent of property damage or physical bodily injury is not always apparent at the scene, and what may appear minor could turn out to have significant effects.

When a police report is impossible to obtain, the next best thing is to take detailed notes about the crash. Write down the date, time, and location of the crash. Note the names and contact information of all parties involved, insurance policy numbers, driver’s license numbers, and license plate numbers. Record the make and model of the vehicles involved, as well as their registered owners’ names and contact information. Gather the names and contact information of any witnesses. Take photographs and video clips of the scene of the crash.

The more information you can provide to an insurance carrier when making a claim, the better.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com. While there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”

I’m David Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s podcast discusses an issue reported in the news not long ago. The news report was that a surgeon mistakenly removed a patient’s liver during surgery instead of the patient’s spleen. The mistake cost the patient his life.

From a legal perspective, this medical mistake should result in civil liability for the surgeon and the hospital that authorized the surgeon to perform surgery. It also quite possibly will result in criminal charges against the surgeon.

I encountered a similar scenario about 30 years ago. A surgeon removed several vertebrae from the patient’s spine, resulting in immediate paralysis.

Upon investigation after the surgery, it was determined that the surgeon was addicted to a controlled substance. At the time of the surgery, he was having a hallucinatory episode, which caused him to believe that his surgery would improve the patient’s condition. Eventually, this surgeon was convicted of assault and battery and sentenced to prison.

Back to the news report of a surgeon mistakenly removing a patient’s healthy liver. I would think that there should be an immediate alcohol and drug test administered to the surgeon that removed the liver instead of the spleen.

This error is normally described as a never event, meaning it should never happen.

If the surgeon learned anything in medical school, he or she would know the difference between a liver and a spleen on simple observation. The organs are located in different locations in the body anatomically.

Further, the hospital that authorized the surgeon to perform surgery would have to answer civilly for many things, including what procedures were in place to confirm to everyone before surgery began the focus of the surgery. Before the surgery began, did everyone in the surgical room agree on the type of surgery that would be undertaken? In other words, was it announced that this was a surgery to remove the patient’s spleen because of a disease?

There would seem to be no justification in any event ever to remove a patient’s liver unless there’s going to be a transplant.

If, before raising a scalpel, the surgeon announced, “Now we are going to remove this patient’s liver,” you would expect everyone to tackle the surgeon and confiscate the knife.

If the announcement was, “Now we are going to remove the patient’s spleen,” others in the room should have become suspicious when the surgeon began cutting on the wrong side of the chest that something was terribly wrong and interrupted the surgery.

Moreover, you would expect that any nurse, anesthesiologist, or any other tech assisting in the room would have screamed out to the surgeon to stop if it was observed that the surgeon was removing the patient’s liver.

Further, had any of the participants observed that the liver was removed, you would expect that the liver would be replaced immediately to correct that mistake. Perhaps a special team of transplant vascular specialty surgeons could have been called to correct the error.

Did the hospital check the surgeon’s credentials before giving the surgeon staff privileges?

In the case, I described above that led to a patient’s paralysis, one of the assisting surgeons immediately called security to escort the intoxicated surgeon from the room. Then the surgical team did their best to try to repair the damage to the patient.

Unfortunately, there was a history of that particular surgeon being observed to be under the influence of drugs.

Was the surgeon who removed the liver under the influence of drugs at the time of the procedure? Had that surgeon been observed by others to be under the influence at other times?

Should the hospital have pulled the plug on the surgeon well before this particular event occurred? Was a program to require random drug and alcohol screenings in place?

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”