When you’re hurt through the action or inaction of someone else, you know that you’ll face hurdles in your pursuit of compensation. You’ll need to meet procedural obligations. You’ll need to amass sufficient evidence. You’ll need to overcome the other side’s defenses. In some cases, you’ll also need to overcome the other side’s failure to participate in the discovery process properly. When an opponent does this, you’ll need to know how to handle it. In the case of one amusement park guest, she obtained a favorable jury instruction that helped to win her case and secure a $1.514 million damages award.
One of the biggest issues affecting many sports leagues today, from youth leagues to the big leagues, is concussions and concussion-related safety. Interscholastic sports in Illinois are no exception. A recent case from the First Appellate District Court involving a high school football player from Cook County offers important clarity regarding what is (and is not) required in a student’s injury case.
Schools have a certain legal obligation to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of their students. This obligation was the crux of one Cook County student’s lawsuit against his school district and physical education teacher for injuries he suffered during PE class. The First District Appellate Court agreed that the case should proceed to a trial, allowing the student to proceed with his argument that his teacher’s conscious decision to have students play without eyewear, even though she knew the school had protective goggles, could possibly constitute willful or wanton conduct.
Music concerts can be exciting events for the performers and especially for their fans, who flock by the tens of thousands to see their favorite artists perform. This excitement can turn into something much worse when a concert promoter fails to do a proper job of ensuring the safety of concert attendees. A woman who was injured at a Kanye West and Jay-Z concert in Chicago recently won a victory in the First District Appellate Court, with the appeals court giving the woman a renewed opportunity to pursue her damages claim, deciding that the issue of the foreseeability of the woman’s injuries was still in dispute.
When you patronize a business, you probably have a reasonable estimation of which types of risks do and don’t await you. The law says that business owners must protect you against certain risks of harm, but only those risks that are reasonably foreseeable and would not require unreasonably burdensome steps to prevent. In the case of one famous Chicago eatery known for its wild and often belligerent late-night antics, the First District Appellate Court revived a customer’s lawsuit against the establishment, concluding that the restaurant’s “schtick” had an elevated risk of harm and that the owners did not reasonably act to safeguard customers.
The mother of a high school student who died in English class recently received a favorable ruling from the Second District Appellate Court, upholding the $2.5 million jury verdict handed down against a Kendall County school district. The school’s excessively slow response to the student’s severe asthma attack and its failure to follow its own policies for medical emergencies was enough to allow a jury to find for the family and issue the award, even though school districts can be immune from suit in some injury cases.
Every summer, news sources report on cases of tragic drowning accidents involving children and pools. It is important to take the necessary preventative steps to protect your children, but sometimes accidents still happen. When they do, it may create liability on the part of the property owner. In one recent Second District Appellate Court case, however, a trial court’s judgment finding the property owner not liable in a toddler’s drowning death was upheld. The courts concluded that the boy died, not due to anything that was foreseeable by the property owner, but due to a tragic misunderstanding between the boy’s aunt and his father regarding his supervision.
Over the last few decades, close to 50,000 people have died in helicopter and small plane crashes in the U.S. This is almost ten times the number of people killed in major airline crashes. In addition, thousands of people suffer serious personal injuries and need an airplane injury attorney for legal advice.
Typically, crash investigations by federal regulators point to pilot error as the cause, but recent findings show that small plane crashes are repeatedly caused by defective parts. According to a USA TODAY investigation, defects in small planes have been ignored for years, and manufacturers have hidden problems from the public and the federal government. The report shows that manufacturers repeatedly refused to recall dangerous, defective parts, leaving thousands of small planes vulnerable to aviation accidents.
The American Nursing Association (ANA) has reported that nurses face a high risk of back injuries and other musculoskeletal disorders. The ANA also learned that a nationwide survey of more than 700 nurses found that approximately 64 percent stated that needlestick injuries and blood borne infections were a major concern to them. Fifty-five percent also believed that their workplace safety climate has negatively impacted their personal safety.
(Article continues below Infographic)
In instances where healthcare professionals such as nurses are injured on the job, they should consult with a Chicago personal injury attorney.
An Air Passenger’s Rights
Individuals board a plane without the knowledge of the rights that they have. In the event of an unexpected air crash, it pays to know what legal actions can be done in order to keep a passenger protected in court. One should know the necessary airline injury compensation that he or she can acquire in case an unforeseen incident happens.