Justia Lawyer Rating for David M. Barish

When you’re injured at work, the facts potentially can point toward lots of possibilities for defendants you can name in your workplace injury lawsuit. One possibility is the owner, operator or possessor of the job site where you were working. Another possibility, in some situations, could be your employer. In still others, you might be able to sue a contractor or a manufacturer, as well, if their acts of negligence reasonably led to your injuries. The key question that you will have to consider and answer is, “Did this person or entity have a duty of reasonable care to me?” When it comes to answering these and other essential questions as part of your case, don’t go it alone. Be sure you’re getting the answers you need by obtaining representation from a skilled Chicago injury attorney.

T.Z.’s case was an example of a circumstance where multiple entities were potentially liable. T.Z. worked for a sign company as an electrician in Chicago. His job required him to check and repair the scoreboard lights for one of Chicago’s Major League Baseball stadiums. The job meant walking along the roof of the stadium above the outfield. One day, the electrician encountered a wet area, slipped and fell. The fall caused the electrician to suffer a “career-ending” injury. Specifically, the man suffered a severe avulsion injury to his hamstring, which meant that the muscle was completely torn away from the bone. T.Z. underwent several surgeries but the nerve damage that went with the injury prevented him from returning to his electrician work, which was a profession in which he’d worked for more than three decades.

T.Z. had to consider lots of entities in his case. Getting the defendants right in your lawsuit can be essential to getting the full and fair recovery you deserve. In T.Z.’s case, the Illinois Appellate Court concluded that the electrician had viable claims against the baseball team and the team’s contractor that had installed the stadium’s roof. The court concluded that the evidence clearly pointed to the contractor having a duty of reasonable care to the baseball team in regard to its installation of the stadium roof and the baseball team clearly had a similar duty to the electrician.

Flight attendants understand that there are some varieties of physical injury risks that come with the job. Injury from unexpected turbulence is one. Injury while assisting passengers during an emergency situation might be another. Flight attendants should not, however, have to factor in facing possible injury while dealing with passengers who have become physically unruly or out of control, but it unfortunately happens.

In fact, it’s happened a lot recently. In late January, Simple Flying reported on an Australian woman, en route from Melbourne to Los Angeles, who became highly intoxicated during the flight. The crew stopped serving the woman alcohol, but that only made her angrier. After she begin stripping and throwing garments at other passengers, the flight crew and two marshals sought to restrain her and, during the melee, one of them got hit in the face and another got kicked in the chest.

In late February, Fox News had the story of a Hawaiian Airlines passenger, en route from Honolulu to South Korea, who lunged at a flight attendant and attempted to land a punch. The allegedly drunk passenger missed his target and was restrained, but imagine how much damage this man, already a convicted felon, could have done to the flight attendant if he hadn’t.

Back in February, Patch.com reported on an Uber driver who seriously injured two people when he crashed into a banquet hall in suburban Chicago. The accident caused substantial harm to a valet and a bystander standing at the front of the banquet hall in Streamwood.

This accident may trigger you to ask, what can you do legally if you’re injured by an Uber driver or a Lyft driver? Can you sue the rideshare service or is going after the driver alone your only option? Does your ability to sue the rideshare service go away if the rideshare driver was off-duty at the time of the accident? A recent case from here in Cook County offers potentially good news. As with any injury scenario, if you find yourself in that situation, you should reach out to a knowledgeable Chicago injury attorney promptly to discuss the details of your accident.

In the recent Chicago case ruling, an injured man was able to proceed against a rideshare service, even though the rideshare driver was off duty at the time of the accident. In that circumstance, the injured man was allegedly struck and injured by M.H., a driver for Uber. The injured man sued the driver and also sued Uber Technologies, Inc.

Whether you are on a city street or traveling along one of Chicago’s expressways, you are often at risk of being involved in a multi-vehicle crash. When you are injured in a multi-car accident, there may be various different methods available to you for getting compensation for the harm you suffered. Achieving the best possible result for getting the compensation you need for your injuries often requires detailed evidence, a clear understanding of exactly what happened in the crash and an in-depth knowledge of the law of liability. If you find yourself hurt as a result of a multi-vehicle accident, you should act without delay and contact a knowledgeable Chicago auto accident attorney.

The Chicago area has seen multiple fatal multi-car accidents this year. Early in the summer, a six-vehicle crash left one man dead and 12 people injured, according to a Journal & Topics report. In that accident, a 20-year-old man who allegedly was under the influence of drugs was driving northbound on Arlington Heights Road in Elk Grove Village at a high rate of speed when he entered the southbound lanes and crashed into five cars. The driver of the second of those cars died as a result of his injuries, according to the report.

Earlier in the year, ABC 7 Chicago reported on a nine-vehicle chain-reaction accident in the South Loop that also left one person dead and 11 people hurt. According to police, the driver of a white Mercedes suffered an apparent medical emergency while exiting the Eisenhower Expressway and then slammed into the rear of a Cadillac at a “high rate of speed.” The driver of the Cadillac was the crash’s single fatality, ABC reported.

When it comes to seeking, and obtaining, a substantial jury verdict in an injury case, there are often numerous components to a successful outcome. Even if you have not suffered a catastrophic injury (such as permanent paralysis), the injury you suffered may nevertheless have long-lasting or permanent negative impacts on your life. It is very important to have compiled (and presented) all the evidence you need to paint a truly clear picture of just how badly this injury has harmed you. To make sure you have the proof you need to get the compensation you deserve, be sure you have a skilled Chicago injury attorney on your side.

A case that demonstrated how the right kind of evidence can persuade a jury was the lawsuit filed by F.R. F.R. was an electrician who worked at a steel manufacturing plant in suburban Chicago. One day, while F.R. was in a lift to work on overhead light fixtures, a crane slammed into the lift, which caused F.R. to suffer major injuries to his finger, elbow, lower back, hip and shoulder.

The injured worker sued the steel company. In the trial, the steel company admitted liability and the court solely tried the issue of damages. F.R. presented considerable evidence to show how badly he was hurt, including providing multiple expert witnesses.

Accidents involving trucks, due to those vehicles’ sizes and weights, have a significant chance of causing massive injuries, whether the truck collides with a driver, passenger, bicyclist or pedestrian. These serious accidents can take place, even if the truck was traveling at a low speed. If you are hurt by a commercial truck, you may be entitled to a wide array of types of damages. To ensure that you get the compensation you deserve, make a prompt move to contact a skilled Chicago injury attorney right away.

One commercial-truck-versus-pedestrian case from Chicago, as reported by the Cook County Record, settled recently. The pedestrian, C.P., was walking near the University of Illinois at Chicago in September 2015. The woman was walking near an intersection when a commercial truck slammed into her. Unfortunately for the woman, the truck did not stop right away. After the truck ran over her, it dragged her for another 60 feet.

In any type of case where you, as a pedestrian, are hit by a large truck, the injuries have the potential to be massive or even catastrophic. That’s true if the collision is just a straightforward impact. When you combine being dragged for 60 feet on top of an impact with a massive vehicle, you have a scenario where severe injuries are a near certainty.

Aisle seats can be “prime real estate” in commercial air travel. Given the small spaces in basic economy class, larger or longer-legged passengers may desperately crave these seats, sometimes paying extra for the privilege. These seats do come with a risk, though, which is injuries involving falling baggage from the plane’s overhead bins. In these days of large checked baggage fees, passengers are more motivated than ever to stuff more and heavier items into their carry-on bags, which further heightens the risk of accidents and injuries. Whether you are a passenger injured by a falling bag or a flight attendant injured while lifting a heavy bag, you may have a claim for injuries. Be sure to contact a knowledgeable Chicago aviation injury about your situation.

A recent news report from the Denver Post served as a reminder of this hazard. Although the events happened in Colorado, the passenger and the injury could have just as easily been at Midway or O’Hare airports. C.G., the passenger, was sitting in his aisle seat on board a Southwest flight bound from Denver to Newark. As he waited for others to board, another passenger attempted to use the overheard baggage compartment above C.G. According to the injured man, the other passenger was “infirm,” which doesn’t necessarily mean he was a person with a disability, but he was simply someone who was not well equipped physically to load the heavy carry-on bag into the overheard bin.

Eventually, the struggling passenger lost control of the bag and it crashed down on C.G.’s head, shoulder and arm, the lawsuit alleged. In his lawsuit, C.G. asserted that the airline was negligent because the flight attendants on board should have noticed that the allegedly infirm passenger was having difficulty with the bag and stepped in to help the man, according to the Post report.

In a workplace injury circumstance, as with any kind of personal injury situation, cases can vary widely. Sometimes, all of the causes and relevant facts surrounding a workplace accident may be completely apparent or, at least, readily obtainable. Other times, though, there may be very important questions whose answers are difficult, or even impossible, to discover. When that happens, one thing you definitely should not do is simply give up on the possibility of obtaining compensation for the harm you suffered. One thing you definitely should do is arm yourself with complete information by consulting with a knowledgeable Chicago injury attorney. Even with some missing details, your experienced workplace injury attorney may very possibly be able to stitch together a sufficient narrative of the case that meets all of the law’s requirements for potentially obtaining an award of damages, thereby allowing you to pursue compensation either via settlement or judgment.

For one central Illinois man, the circumstances of his workplace injury were tragic. As reported by The Pantagraph, J.H. was a maintenance mechanic for a county government. J.H.’s duties included working at the county’s Law and Justice Center. One day in May 2015, co-workers found the mechanic at the bottom of an elevator shaft in the Law and Justice Center. He was dead, having perished from blunt force trauma and compressional asphyxia, which essential means being crushed to death. Investigators later discovered that the mechanic had entered the shaft in order to obtain an item that a visitor to the center had lost down the shaft, the report indicated.

Workplace accidents involving elevators, like J.H.’s fatal incident, may allow the deceased worker’s family to sue and to recover against multiple parties. In Illinois, the owner of the property where the elevator accident occurred is one person or entity that may owe compensation to the injured worker. They are required to engage in the highest degree of care to make certain that the elevators within their properties are sufficiently inspected and maintained to ensure safety.

Brain injuries can present a variety of symptoms and can impair victims in a number of ways. Obviously, there are people who suffer catastrophic brain injuries, which may cause the sufferer to experience massive cognitive impairments and delays. Many may never be able to work or care for themselves again. In addition to those injured people, however, there are those with less severe injuries, but those injuries can still have a major impact on the victim’s life. Because the brain is responsible for so many functions, even a mild or moderate injury can cause the sufferer to experience problems that get in the way of, or prevent, working or basic daily living. If you or a loved one has experienced such an injury, be sure you have a skilled Chicago injury attorney on your side to handle your case and ensure that you get every opportunity to obtain the compensation you deserve.

In a case recently reported upon by the Daily Herald, W.W. was driving his Honda motorcycle on a street in Oak Park when a woman allegedly turned her vehicle left and crashed into the motorcycle. The injuries the motorcyclist suffered were said to be major, including a torn knee ligament, broken ribs and a head injury. The head injury was possibly the worst, as it allegedly caused the motorcyclist to suffer a moderate and permanent brain injury, according to the report.

In W.W.’s case, his moderate brain injury had harmed the part of his brain that controlled concentration and control of emotions. Due to the crash, W.W. allegedly developed problems with anxiety, controlling his emotions and focusing. Clearly, when you have impairments like these, your employment prospects become substantially reduced.

Working in the “gig economy,” as opposed to traditional employment, can have certain advantages like greater flexibility. It can also have certain disadvantages, especially if you’re hurt while on the job. Many employers may strive to classify their workers as independent contractors in order to avoid certain liabilities like providing workers’ compensation insurance. This problem is of particular importance for Lyft, Uber and other rideshare drivers because they, by the very definition of their jobs, are at a highly elevated risk of suffering injuries on the job as a result of a vehicle accident. If you are a Lyft or Uber driver hurt while working, there are several things you should do to get the benefits you need and deserve. Start by getting capable legal representation from a Chicago workers’ compensation attorney.

A court ruling released last year in California is a reminder of some good news that exists for Uber and Lyft drivers in Illinois. In the California case, which was resolved by that state’s Supreme Court last April 30 and was reported by cnn.com, C.L. was a delivery driver for a courier service. The courier company classified him as an independent contractor. The driver later sued, alleging that the classification was improper and that he was really an employee.

Independent contractors versus employees

The Supreme Court sided with the worker. In reaching that decision, the court adopted something called the “ABC Test,” which is one of the most helpful tests for workers seeking to be classified as employees and not as independent contractors. That test looks at three things very closely to decide if you are an employee or an independent contractor. They are:

  • the level of control you are placed under
  • whether or not your work is “outside the usual course” of the employer’s business
  • whether or not you are engaged in an “independently established trade, business or occupation” of the same type of work

Continue reading