Chesterfield injury attorney Trent S. Kerns

Author: Attorney Trent S. Kerns

Each year, a staggering number of people are killed on the shoulder of interstates.   Approximately 12% of all interstate highway deaths are pedestrians in the roadway or on the shoulder.  That’s an average of about 610 people per year in the U.S.[1] To avoid becoming one of these statistics, you should follow the following safety guidelines.[2]

1.         If there is not an emergency, don’t stop on the shoulder.

It is incredibly dangerous, especially at night, because drivers are often fatigued and cannot see what is on the shoulder.  Many times accidents happen when fatigued drivers see lights ahead and think that they belong to a car traveling in the right lane, only to find out too late that the lights are on a disabled vehicle on the shoulder.

2.         If you have a flat tire, drive to the nearest exit if possible.

In the event of a flat tire, you may worry that you are doing substantial damage to your vehicle the longer you drive on it. Your first instinct will probably be to stop the car as quickly as possible, even if that means being on the median side of the roadway. Generally, the worst you can do is foul a wheel or rim. While this may cost you anywhere from $30 to $300 depending on your vehicle, it’s better to risk the wheel damage than to risk your life on the wrong shoulder.

3.         If you must stop on the shoulder for an emergency, pull as far off the road as possible.

Make sure to get all passengers out of the vehicle and get them away from the vehicle as quickly as possible. Do not stand around your vehicle. Climb over the guardrail if there happens to be one, and wait on the other side.   If you are in an accident, pull off on the shoulder but get away from the roadway and vehicles if possible.  Recently, two men were tragically killed in the Washington, D.C., area while standing on the shoulder of the interstate exchanging information when they were struck by a motorist.[3]

4.         Stop on the right shoulder, not the left, if possible.

“It’s traditionally safer to be on the right shoulder than on the left,” according to Sgt. Tom Cunningham, a spokesperson with the Virginia State Police. “The key is to get out of the active lane of travel and to the shoulder as quickly and safely as possible.”

5.         Make your vehicle visible and warn other motorists that you are stopped.

Turn on your hazard lights.  Virginia law (Va. Code § 46.2-1040) requires that you activate your hazard lights when you are stopped in the roadway or on the paved shoulder.[4] If you have flares, use them also.

6. When a vehicle is on the shoulder, move over to the next lane if possible.

Whenever possible, you should move over to the next lane is there is a vehicle on the shoulder.  If a police or emergency vehicle is on the shoulder with flashing lights, Virginia law requires you to move over to the next lane if you can do so safely.[5] Police officers are especially at risk because of the frequency with which their job requires them to be on the shoulder of roadways.  Studies show that one officer is killed almost every month in the United States in an accident on the shoulder of the interstate.

The shoulder of the highway can be a very dangerous place.  Please drive responsibly and be aware of the dangers, so that we can all get where we are going safely.

About the Author: Trent Kerns is a Chesterfield accident attorney. For over 25 years he has worked to protect the rights of Virginia residents injured in car accidents and other difficult liability cases.

[2] See http://www.weather.com/activities/driving/drivingsafety/drivingsafetytips/breakdown.html.

[3] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/02/AR2010020200692.html.

[4] See http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+46.2-1040.

[5] See Va. Code § 46.2-921.1.at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+46.2-921.1.

Related posts

• Why do I need an attorney to represent me in my personal injury case? (0)
• Is Your Family Dog Protected Under Virginia Law in an Accident? (0)
• Closing Highway Rest Stops due to Virginia State Budget Cuts: The Impact on Drowsy Driving (0)
• Auto Insurance: Having “Full Coverage” Doesn’t Mean You Have Enough Insurance (0)

Richmond Personal Injury Attorney Priscilla Woody

Author: Attorney Priscilla Woody

If you’re involved in an accident that wasn’t your fault and you suffer injuries, it’s possible that a claim representative from the at-fault person’s company may contact you immediately afterwards and try to settle your claim.  Be careful dealing with the insurance company on your own, because you may need an experienced personal injury lawyer to help you.   Many people have settled their claims shortly after an accident, only to find out later their injuries are much more serious than they thought when they settled.

You probably don’t need an attorney if your collision is a simple “fender bender” and you aren’t injured, or if  your injuries are truly minor.   If your minor injuries heal quickly, you have only one or two visits to the doctor, and you have only a small amount in medical bills, you may not need an attorney.   My Firm’s attorneys regularly meet with people who we advise they don’t necessarily need an attorney and can probably handle the claim on their own.  Of course, some people just don’t feel comfortable trying to handle the claim on their own, and then we can assist them, too.

However, if you are hurt and unrepresented, and not familiar with claims, the hardball tactics used by some claims representatives can leave you feeling like you’re not getting all that you are entitled to, or that you are being taken advantage of in the process.  Settling quickly may not be in your best interest depending on the type of injury you sustained and the type of treatment needed to recover from your injuries.  What you don’t know can hurt you.

We see clients who try to go up against the insurance companies alone because they want to save money by not hiring an attorney; that way, they don’t have to pay the 1/3 contingency fee that personal injury attorneys usually charge, so they think they are saving money.   Or they think it is easy and they can do it themselves and get the same amount of money. Those clients that hire Allen & Allen later, after they find they cannot settle their claims, often come to us because they were victimized by the “hard ball” tactics of some insurance companies.

The claims representative for the liability insurance company (the adjuster) is a trained professional whose job is to have your claim cost the insurance company as little as possible.  That means for you to get as little as possible.   When you don’t have an attorney, the adjuster knows that you are probably not familiar with the claims process or your legal rights, and that you have some reluctance to go to an attorney.   The adjuster will tell you they will work with you and that you do not need an attorney.  In insurance company language, this is called “controlling the claim”.

The adjuster will also tell you that all they need to get things started is your recorded statement to determine liability, or that their insured has not reported the accident so they need your version of what happen.  Then the adjuster will ask a number of questions about how the accident occurred, property damage, your injuries and prior health condition and your personal data. If you give a recorded statement, you are simply giving the insurance company ammunition that they will later use against you in settlement negotiations and any future lawsuit. What you say can and will be used against you by the insurance company.

When the adjuster requests a recorded statement, they don’t tell you that you have a right to refuse[1], or that you are entitled to a copy of your recorded statement.[2] Often time by the time a client retains Allen and Allen, the claim rep has not sent the plaintiff a copy of their recorded statement and they don’t have a copy of their recorded statement so we have to request a copy for our files and the plaintiff.

In addition to the recorded statement, the adjuster will also ask for personal information.   The adjuster will use this personal data to check your record (or “claims history”) with a claims index data bank that is maintained by the insurance industry.[3] The claims index data bank contains information about your prior claims and prior injuries. Unlike other data banks like your credit score, the claims index data bank is not available to plaintiffs and their attorneys – and you can’t get a copy.

Pre-existing conditions and prior claims are fertile grounds for the insurance company as an excuse to make a low offer in your case.  By the time the adjuster offers to negotiate a settlement with you, the adjuster will already have access to the claims index data bank containing your prior claims and pre-existing health conditions. The adjuster uses the prior claims and pre-existing conditions as justification to reduce the value of your current claim by claiming the collision didn’t cause your injuries because you had already had an injury to that part of your body, or that the limitations on your activities caused by the accident weren’t that serious because you had prior health issues that already caused you to have limitations.

If you had a neck or back problem in the past and receive ”maintenance” chiropractic care, the insurer will claim you have a continuing problem even if you haven’t had any pain or problems in years.  If an x-ray or MRI shows that you have degenerative joint disease or degenerative disc disease, these pre-existing conditions become a weapon to reduce the value of your claim.  In fact, these conditions are merely part of the natural process of aging and “wear and tear” on your spine; by age 50, more than 85% of the population will have signs of these conditions, but the vast majority will have no symptoms at all![4] In looking for an excuse to pay you less for your claim, the adjuster will focus on these prior problems and conditions, regardless of whether the problems occurred in close proximity to the time of the collision, or even whether it involved the same body part injured in the collision.

In addition to the recorded statement and personal information, the claims representative will also ask you to sign a medical authorization for the insurance company to obtain your bills and medical records from the collision.   Often the adjuster will use this authorization to also obtain your prior, unrelated medical records.  Sometimes the adjuster will request video surveillance of your activities.  If the adjuster thinks any of this information is different or contradicts anything you told  the adjuster about your injuries and preexisting conditions, they will use it an excuse to pay you less.  If the adjuster thinks you are “over treating”, then you must be exaggerating your injuries so that’s a reason to pay you less.   If the adjuster thinks that you are “under treating”, that is, not following the doctor’s advice or keeping appointments, then you must not be hurt as bad as you say you are, so that’s an excuse to pay you less.  You can easily hurt your case.   By the time the adjuster makes you an offer, they know more about your injuries and health conditions than you do —  thanks to your recorded statement, the claims index data bank and access to your medical information through your medical authorization.

Allen & Allen can help you navigate through the claims process and avoid losing money which you may be entitled to but unable to obtain from the insurance company if you are unrepresented. Before going up against the insurance company alone, ask yourself:  “Am I prepared and knowledgeable enough to handle this on my own without an attorney?”  Of course, the extent of your injuries and the effect on your health and activities is important also.  The more serious your case is, and the more you have at risk, the more you have to lose.  What you need to determine is simply this: “Am I going to come out better or worse with an attorney?”

I and the other attorneys at Allen & Allen can help you answer that question.

About the Author: Priscilla Woody is a car accident attorney with Virginia based law firm Allen & Allen. Priscilla works primarily in the Richmond office of the personal injury law firm.

[2] Virginia law requires the insurance company send you a copy of your statement if you request it.  See Virginia Code §8.01-417, at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+8.01-417.

[3] See more information about this database at http://www.allenandallen.com/blog/insurance-index-data-base-system.html.

[4] “By the age of fifty, 85 percent of the population will show evidence of disc degeneration or spondylosis. Of course, the vast majority of these cases are without symptoms. It is only the patients who develop symptoms, chiefly low back pain, that need treatment.” From the Chicago Institute of Neurosurgery and Neuroresearch, at http://www.cinn.org/spine/disc-degeneration.html.

Related posts

• Auto Insurance: Having “Full Coverage” Doesn’t Mean You Have Enough Insurance (0)
• What is Tort Law? (0)
• What is mesothelioma? Why am I seeing so many commercials related to it? (0)
• Virginia Traffic Laws: Virginia Set to Raise Speed Limit to 70 MPH (0)
• Trucking Accidents: Prompt Investigation is Essential (0)

Fredericksburg Personal Injury Attorney Nathan J. D. Veldhuis

Richmond Personal Injury Attorney R. Clayton Allen

Authors: Attorneys Nathan J. D. Veldhuis & R. Clayton Allen

Contributory Negligence is the legal doctrine in Virginia which provides that a plaintiff’s negligence, no matter how slight, that contributes in some way to her injuries, no matter the extent of the negligence of the Defendant, bars the plaintiff from recovery for those injuries.  Most states have the legal doctrine of comparative negligence, which says that if both the plaintiff and the defendant are negligent, then you compare the negligence of each to determine the percentage of the plaintiff’s losses that the plaintiff can recover.[1]

The law of contributory negligence in Virginia continues to evolve.  Many of the harshest aspects of the doctrine have been further clarified by the courts, in ways that show the doctrine is more narrowly limited than was previously thought.  An example of this is in the way the doctrine has been applied to premises liability cases involving injury (so-called “slip and fall” or “trip and fall” cases).   Many plaintiffs have lost their claims for injuries resulting from a fall on an object on the floor in a grocery store because they are held to be “contributorily negligent” for not seeing what was on the floor and caused them to fall.   Applying the doctrine this harshly ignores the fact that when people walk, they do not stare at their feet or the floor in front of them.  Studies have shown that most people tend to look about 3 to 10 feet in front of them as they walk forward, and that they also look to the side and further in front of them, too.  But most retail stores have displays that are designed to draw your attention away from where you are walking and instead to merchandise offered for sale.

In 1962, the Virginia Supreme Court considered a case that involved a woman who fell when she slipped on some starch on the floor in a grocery store.[2] The Court noted that the floor was white and the puddle of starch was blue, and held that “reasonable people could not differ” that a person taking ordinary care for their own safety[3] would have seen the starch on the floor.  Therefore, “as a matter of law” [4] the woman was contributorily negligent in falling and could not recover against the store for her injuries.  The Court apparently did not put much weight on the fact that the woman was pushing a cart in front of her so her view was blocked, and that she had rounded the corner at the checkout counter just before she fell so she had only a short time to see what was on the floor.  The Court’s view appears to have been that since it was there, and since if you looked at it you would see it, then she was negligent for not seeing it.  The Court also did not seem to consider that the woman had the right to assume that the store had met its duty to keep the premises in a reasonably safe condition for her visit, and that she would not have expected such a spill to have been left on the floor in one of the busiest areas of the store in the front where all the cashiers were located.[5]

More recently, the Virginia Supreme Court was confronted with a case where a Circuit Court Judge held that “as a matter of law” a woman who fell in a Food Lion store was contributorily negligent, and dismissed her case.  The woman appealed her case.  In this case, the injured woman tripped over a metal bar attached to the floor which extended along the side and to the front of an ATM located inside the grocery store.  (Apparently these bars were to prevent shopping carts from being pushed into the ATM).  The sole issue considered on appeal was whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law.  The woman said she had walked up to the ATM with her three year old grandson.  While she was using the ATM, her grandson suddenly moved away from her causing her to turn and move towards him to stop him from running away.  As she did so, she tripped over one of the metal bars and fell, fracturing three bones in her right elbow.

The trial court (the Circuit Court) had held that the bars protruding from the sides of the ATM represented an “open and obvious” hazard and that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law because she should have seen the bars if she had looked where she was going.  This time, the Virginia Supreme Court notably expressed its dislike of trial courts’ “incorrectly short-circuiting litigation pretrial.”  The Court assumed – but did not decide — that the metal bars were an open and obvious dangerous condition on the premises.  Even so, the Court noted that the woman was distracted and was injured by an open and obvious defect that the store had created, but that there was still a jury issue as to whether the woman was contributorily negligent.  The Supreme Court said that “reasonable minds could differ” as to whether, under the circumstances of this case, the woman acted as a reasonable person would have acted using ordinary care for her own safety.

Between the first case in 1962 and the second case in 2009, the Virginia Supreme Court has gradually clarified that the proper standard is not whether a condition is “open and obvious” if you look at it, and that a person’s failure to look down while stepping forward does not, as a matter of law, constitute contributory negligence in every case.  The Court has shown an increasing “sophistication” at considering a variety of issues and facts that make up the circumstances of each case.   Considering the factors of the age and infirmity of the plaintiff, any distractions (especially those created by the store), lighting, and the many details of whether an injured person’s actions were reasonable in light of the responsibility of the store to make the premises safe for the public, and what is foreseeable, more often than not reasonable people could differ and the case should be decided by a jury.[6] In short, as a general rule, under Virginia law, if a defendant claims the injured person was negligent and that her negligence contributed to her injuries, then a jury gets to decide if the evidence supports that claim.

About the Authors: Nathan is a Fredericksburg accident attorney with Allen & Allen. He has broad litigation experience in fields as diverse as professional malpractice, personal injury, defamation, medical malpractice and mental health law. Clayton Allen is a Richmond accident attorney and is a seasoned litigator. He has successfully handled all types of personal injury cases including brain injury, car accidents, trailer trailer accidents and wrongful death.

[2] Great A&P Tea Co, v. Rosenberger, 203 Va. 378, 124 S.E.2d 26 (1962).

[3] “Negligence” is defined as the failure to use ordinary care.  “Ordinary care” is defined as “the care a reasonable person would have used under the circumstances.”  Thus the law does not require that a person be very careful or take the highest level of care; only ordinary care is required.

[4] When an issue is very clear, then a jury does not get to consider the facts to decide the issue; the court decides the issue “as a matter of law.”  In Virginia, this standard is expressed as “when reasonable people could not differ.”  In other words, all reasonable people considering the issue would have to agree. Normally only when the facts are very clear is this true.

[5] The law in Virginia requires that a business open to the public has a duty of “prevision, preparation and lookout.” This has been true since at least 1919; see the case of Pettyjohn & Sons v. Basham, 126 Va. 72, 78, 100 S.E. 813, 815 (1919).   In exercising its duty of “prevision, preparation and lookout”, a store must educate its employees about safety and specifically, about the risk and danger of falls.  In fact, falls are the largest single cause of injuries in retail stores and commercial businesses in the United States.

[6] Another interesting case involved an elderly woman who stepped from a hallway into an elevator that was misaligned (hadn’t stopped level with the hallway floor), fell and was injured.  Even though the woman testified that if she had looked directly at it, she thought she could have seen the misalignment, the Court held that factors such as the poor lighting in the hallway and the woman’s vision problems meant her contributory negligence was still an issue for the jury.  See Ravenwood Towers, Inc. v. Woodyard, 244 Va. 51, 419 S.E.2d 627 (1992).

Related posts

• Child Seat Belt and Safety Seat Laws in Virginia (0)
• “Virginia Law: Business Responsibility for Falls by Visitors and Customers” (Premises Liability) (0)
• What is Negligence? A Primer in Virginia Law (0)
• Virginia’s DUI Punishments Enhanced: Ignition Interlock (0)
• Virginia Traffic Laws: Virginia Set to Raise Speed Limit to 70 MPH (0)

Robert L. Mertig, Claims Consultant

Author: Claims Consultant Robert L. Mertig

In Virginia, we see many instances where the at-fault party has only minimum limits of automobile liability insurance coverage, and the injured party also has only the minimum limit of $25,000.[1] Under these circumstances, often the most you can recover — no matter how serious your injury or loss – is only $25,000.

Increasing your liability and UM (Uninsured Motorist) limits protects you in two ways.  If you are the at-fault party there is more money available to compensate injured parties and obtain a release on your behalf.  This increased coverage also comes into play to compensate you if the other driver (liable party) only had minimum limits of liability and your injury or damages exceeded his/her coverage.  If this happens your policy would afford coverage up to your limits less the $25,000 of the at-fault party.[2]

It is extremely important for an individual to have more than the minimum limits of 25/50 liability coverage as mandated by law in the state of Virginia.  Based on my experience as a former insurance company adjuster and with the Allen Law Firm, I would urge all Virginia motorists to increase their liability coverage to a minimum of 250/500 on their automobile insurance policies.

You may want to ask your insurance agent about adding a personal liability umbrella policy for one million dollars.  This type of policy, called a PLUP (Personal Liability Umbrella Policy), is in addition to your basic liability coverage of 250/500 and provides peace of mind if you have the misfortune to cause a serious accident that results in multiple or catastrophic injuries to another person or persons.  Unfortunately, most umbrella policies do not also include UM (Uninsured Motorist) coverage.

Please do not hesitate to call the personal injury law firm of Allen & Allen if you have any questions about your auto policy coverage.

About the Author: Bob Mertig is a claims consultant working under the supervision of Petersburg accident attorney Paul Hux. Bob assists clients in resolving their personal injury claims.

[2] See “Auto Insurance: Having ‘Full Coverage’ Doesn’t Mean You Have Enough Insurance”, at http://www.allenandallen.com/blog/auto-insurance-2.html.

Related posts

• Look Out For The Other Guy – Uninsured and Under Insured Motorist Coverage (0)
• How Much Auto Insurance Should You Buy? (0)
• Auto Insurance: Having “Full Coverage” Doesn’t Mean You Have Enough Insurance (0)
• What About My Car? How to deal with your car damage after an accident. (0)
• State of Virginia – Insurance Requirements (0)

100 Hometown Hereos

Fireworks, Baseball, and Local Heroes

Richmond, Virginia – The Virginia personal injury law firm of Allen, Allen, Allen & Allen will celebrate all 100 winners of its HOMETOWN HEROES award on August 25, 2010 at a Flying Squirrels baseball game at The Diamond in Richmond, Virginia.  Firemen, policemen, foster parents, disability advocates, and other heroes from around the Commonwealth will be highlighted throughout the evening, including fireworks in their honor.

Nominations for Allen and Allen’s 100 HOMETOWN HEROES award were accepted from April 19, 2010 to May 7, 2010.   The public was asked to complete a nomination form in honor of their favorite local community leader.  The law firm, which is celebrating its centennial anniversary, received an overwhelming response, including nominees who have made an impact in their neighborhoods in a variety of ways throughout Virginia.

“As we celebrate our 100 year anniversary we feel there’s no better time to honor the real heroes in the community – those that give back to their locality in their own way, no matter how large or small,” said  Douglas A. Barry, President of Allen and Allen.  “Our firm was founded on service, so it’s appropriate that we mark this milestone by celebrating those that provide support and assistance to others.”

Barry, who will throw the ceremonial first pitch at The Diamond on August 25th, has joined representatives from Allen and Allen at a series of events taking place throughout the summer featuring the 100 HOMETOWN HEROES in Charlottesville, Fredericksburg, Petersburg, and Greater Metro Richmond.

“Over the summer we’ve had the pleasure to get to know – and be inspired by — these impressive Virginians,” said Barry.  “We’ve celebrated at the Heritage Festival in Fredericksburg, Fridays After Five in Charlottesville, and numerous Flying Squirrels baseball games where an All Star from each region was selected to throw the first pitch.”

The culmination of the 100 HOMETOWN HEROES events will take place at The Diamond on August 25, 2010, with a grand finale featuring the personal stories of each hero and their everyday acts of heroism.

“Allen & Allen has had the pleasure of working alongside hometown heroes for the past 100 years and now it’s time to celebrate with them,” said R. Clayton Allen, Partner.  “We invite the public to join us at The Diamond to witness firsthand the heroes that we have right here in our community.  Now is the time to say thank you.”

To learn more about the 100 HOMETOWN HEROES, visit www.allenandallen.com/hometown-heroes.html

Related posts

• Allen & Allen Recognizes Hometown Heroes in Charlottesville – an NBC 29 News Story (0)
• 100 HOMETOWN HEROES Announced: Law Firm of Allen & Allen Begins Celebration Series (0)
• News Story: Hometown Heroes Honored in Charlottesville at Fridays After Five (0)
• 100 Hometown Heroes- Brought to you by the personal injury law firm of Allen & Allen (0)
• Why do I need an attorney to represent me in my personal injury case? (0)

Bridget Murray with her championship trophy from the Richmond Soap Box Derby Page Dowdy/Chesterfield Observer

Source: http://www.chesterfieldobserver.com/news/2010-08-11/Family/Racing_like_a_pro.html

Rising fifth-grader Bridget Murray is the best driver in metro Richmond – or at least the best soap box stock car driver. Bridget was recently named the champion of the stock car division of the Richmond Soap Box Derby, quite a feat for a first-time participant. Her impressive journey did not end there, however, as her first-place finish qualified her for a trip of a lifetime to the 73rd All-American Soap Box Derby in Akron, Ohio.

Bridget’s mother, LeeAnn, works as a receptionist at the Chesterfield office of the Allen & Allen Law Firm, a company with a history of involvement in the Richmond Soap Box Derby. When they offered to sponsor her daughter in the local competition, both mother and daughter jumped at the chance.

Bridget, LeeAnn and Family at the Soap Box Derby in Akron

“We had never done anything like this before, and I thought it would be something fun for Bridget to try out,” says LeeAnn. “I had volunteered at the derby for Allen & Allen for the past two years, and I knew it was an exciting event.”

So the Chester residents went out to the Richmond International Raceway Complex on June 5 to make 9-year-old Bridget’s Soap Box Derby debut. Racing in the stock car division for 8-13 year olds, Bridget and LeeAnn were both surprised when Bridget won heat after heat of races on the 800-foot course and continued to qualify for the next rounds.

“I just told her to go and have fun and enjoy herself, and she just kept winning!” laughs LeeAnn. “It wasn’t until the end that she ended up losing once to a boy, but it was double elimination, and she didn’t lose again and ended up winning the whole thing.”

“I was pretty excited to win,” adds Bridget. “I didn’t think I would; I just wanted to have fun.”

After the mother-daughter team celebrated the victory with a trophy as tall as Bridget herself, they turned their attention to Akron, Ohio, where almost 500 racers from around the world competed in the All-American Soap Box Derby. The week leading up to the big race on Saturday, July 24, was an event-filled celebration of the derby’s participants.

Bridget with her car after winning in Richmond

“On Monday morning there were all kinds of activities,” says LeeAnn. “Every racer rode by police escort to certain spots around Akron, and then they went across a stage and were introduced to the crowd.”

Later that week, the derby racers were recognized at an Akron Arrows baseball game and took part in an honorary parade around the town. Of course, anticipation was building for the big race on Saturday, and Bridget and her family were ready to try their luck on the famous Akron course.

Unfortunately, Bridget placed second in her heat during her first run and was eliminated from the competition – but that didn’t put a damper on her experience.

“I thought it was really cool,” she says of the trip. “I went there and got to race, and I got a chance to talk to the other drivers. I made a lot of friends.”

As for next year, Bridget, who loves skateboarding and hopes to be a wildlife animal rescuer when she grows up, says she will definitely defend her title at the Richmond Derby next year. LeeAnn is also looking forward to next summer’s races.

“Being able to watch her be excited was my favorite part,” LeeAnn says. “Seeing her enjoying her success, especially in Richmond, was very cool. I loved watching her smile when she was racing, and it was amazing when she won.”

Despite her big win, Bridget is modest about her success.

“I think it just happened,” she says humbly. “It was all luck.”

Related posts

• The History of Chesterfield County (0)
• Free Cab Rides Home on New Years Eve in Metro Richmond (0)
• Do I Need An Attorney After My Accident? (0)
• 100 Hometown Heroes- Brought to you by the personal injury law firm of Allen & Allen (0)
• Why I Became a Trial Attorney (0)

Virginia Personal Injury Attorney Jason W. Konvicka

Author Attorney Jason W. Konvicka

“Mesothelioma” is a rare form of cancer that typically involves the lungs, but can also affect the lining of the abdominal cavity (peritoneum) and the lining of the heart (pericardium).  The only known cause of this cancer is exposure to asbestos.

The recent increase of mesothelioma advertisements is due in part to the unusually long latency period between the exposure to asbestos and the development of mesothelioma.  The National Institute of Health and the Center for Disease Control estimate that latency period to be between 30 and 50 years.  Asbestos use in the United States peaked in 1973 when an estimated 1.6 trillion pounds were used.[1] Thus, when you consider that many of the workers who were exposed to asbestos during the 1970s are now being diagnosed with mesothelioma, the prevalence of commercials makes sense.

Sadly, countless industry workers were exposed to asbestos even though many manufacturers knew that the material was dangerous.  Further, the United States government did not attempt to regulate asbestos exposure prior to the 1970s and even then it took many years for meaningful regulations to be enacted.  Asbestos products were used in a wide range of applications.  Many of these products resulted in asbestos exposure to the workers who manufactured them as well as others who used them.  Industries involved include shipyards, refineries, power plants, steel plants, heating and construction, among others.[2]

Symptoms of mesothelioma include shortness of breath, cough, chest wall pain, and weight loss.  A chest x-ray or CT and ultimately a biopsy will assist in forming a diagnosis.  Treatment options include chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and sometimes surgery.  However, even with aggressive treatment, mesothelioma often carries a poor prognosis.

Few workers knew that they were being exposed to asbestos.  Despite knowledge of the risk, many employers did not notify their workers, or take steps to protect them from exposure.   In most cases, symptoms of mesothelioma will not appear until many years after asbestos exposure.  If you or a loved one have been diagnosed with mesothelioma or were exposed to asbestos, you may have a personal injury claim.  For more information, call one of the attorneys at personal injury law firm of Allen & Allen for a free consultation to learn about your rights.

About the Author: Richmond, VA personal injury attorney Jason Konvicka has handled complex car accident and product liability cases during his career spanning over 15 years.

[2] See “How is Asbestos Used?”, National Cancer Institute, U.S. National Institutes of Health, at http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/asbestos.

Related posts

• News Story: Hometown Heroes Honored in Charlottesville at Fridays After Five (0)
• Handling An Automobile Injury Claim on Your Own: What are the Risks? (0)
• Closing Highway Rest Stops due to Virginia State Budget Cuts: The Impact on Drowsy Driving (0)
• Allen & Allen Recognizes Hometown Heroes in Charlottesville – an NBC 29 News Story (0)

Helmet Safety

Helmets.  Many motorcyclists don’t like wearing them.  They’re heavy.  They may not fit right.  They interfere with the sense of freedom many bikers enjoy as they zip down the road on a beautiful day. However, like it or not, all motorcyclists should wear helmets when they’re riding.

According to organizations as diverse as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), wearing a helmet is the single most effective way of reducing head injuries caused by motorcycle crashes.

This reality mirrors what the motorcycle accident lawyers at Allen and Allen have seen over decades of representing motorcyclists who have survived crashes. Wearing a helmet significantly reduces nonfatal brain injuries. It makes sense. In serious accidents, motorcyclists are often thrown from their bikes and land head first.  A helmet can cushion the blow.

Helmet Use Facts and Statistics

How many motorcyclists wear helmets?

Recently, NHTSA published its Traffic Safety Facts regarding motorcycle helmet use in 2009.  Overall, the news was good.  From 2005 to 2009, helmet use increased from 48 percent to 67 percent.

In the 20 states, including Virginia, that mandate all motorcyclists wear helmets, the numbers improved from 78 percent in 2008 to 86 percent in 2009. Unfortunately, in states where helmet use is voluntary, riders wear their helmets only 55% of the time. This means the remaining 45% of cyclists are more likely to suffer severe brain injuries when they’re involved in a collision.

Are more state legislatures adopting mandatory helmet use laws?

The contrary is true. Fewer states require helmets today than did 35 years ago!

In 1975, 47 states had adopted laws mandating that all motorcycle operators and passengers wear helmets.  In 2009, only 20 states plus the District of Columbia had such laws on the books. This steep decline in mandatory helmet use laws flies in the face of strong evidence that a motorcyclist without a helmet is 40 percent more likely to suffer a fatal injury than a rider who wears one.

State legislatures are yielding to the demands of motorcyclists who believe helmet laws are an infringement on their individual rights.  Legislators ignore the fact that almost half of all motorcycle crash victims have no private health insurance coverage.  As a result, it is the government, funded by the taxpayer, which pays most of the medical bills for these victims.

Federal Motorcycle Helmet Standards

All helmets are not the same. Some motorcycle helmets are safer than others. NHTSA, an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has established minimum helmet safety standards.  Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218 ensures that riders who wear helmets meeting the standards are afforded some basic protection in a crash. Always wear a DOT or Snell approved helmet.

What to look for in a helmet?

• A DOT-compliant helmet carries an identifying sticker on the back. Make sure your helmet is DOT or Snell approved.
• Unfortunately, there are counterfeit stickers. Be on the alert for them.
• In general, if a helmet does not cover a motorcyclist’s ears or is not at least 1 inch thick, it may not meet federal standards.
• Check the condition of your helmet before you put it on. If it is damaged, inside or out, don’t use it. Remember, it is the shock absorbing foam placed inside, underneath the helmet’s hard shell, which helps prevent brain damage in the event of an accident.

Are helmets effective?

No one knows the exact numbers. However, it is estimated that helmets are about 37% effective in preventing fatal injuries to motorcycle riders and even more effective for passengers (41%).  NHSTA reckons that helmets saved the lives of 1,829 motorcyclists in 2008.  These statistics should be reason enough for every motorcyclist to put on his helmet before getting on his bike!

Related posts

• “This Christmas, Don’t Forget the Helmet” – Helmet Safety Information Just in Time for the Holidays (0)
• Summer Road Trip Safety (0)
• Ride Safely – Bicycle Safety Tips (0)
• Motorcycle Safety Tips: How to Avoid Accidents (0)
• Motorcycle Safety Tips (0)

Fredericksburg personal injury attorney David M. Williams, Jr.

Author: Attorney David M. Williams, Jr.

When driving on the highway, it’s not unusual to see police or emergency vehicles on the shoulder.   Sometimes emergency vehicles may be stopped on the highway, due to a motor vehicle accident, a tree or other debris in the road, or some other emergency.  Many drivers do not realize that Virginia law requires a driver in these situations to move over into a more distant lane, unless it would be unreasonable or unsafe to do so.  IF you cannot move over safely, then you are required to proceed with caution and at an appropriate speed.   Recently the law was expanded to include almost any vehicle that has flashing lights on the shoulder.

Virginia’s “Move Over” law was first enacted in 2002, and required drivers to move over one lane if they were passing stopped vehicles with flashing red or blue lights such as police or fire/rescue.  As of July 1, 2010, that law was amended to also include vehicles displaying amber-colored flashing lights.

The expansion of the “Move Over” law, which appears in the Virginia statutes at Virginia Code §46.2-921.1[1], was designed to give more protection to operators of tow trucks, Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) vehicles, motorist assistance vehicles, and other road maintenance or emergency vehicles displaying a flashing amber light. Now, whether you see a red, blue, or amber flashing light, you are required to do the following:

(i)         proceed with caution and, if reasonable, yield the right of way by making a lane change into a lane not adjacent to the stationary vehicle. (i.e. “Move Over”);      or

(ii)        if changing lanes would be unreasonable or unsafe, then to proceed with due caution and maintain a safe speed for highway conditions. [2]

The “Move Over” law applies only to highways that have at least four lanes and where there are at least two lanes for traffic proceeding as the approaching vehicle.

A first time violation of the law is punished as a simple traffic infraction. However, a subsequent violation involving a vehicle with flashing red or blue lights is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor. The punishment for conviction of a Class 1 misdemeanor is confinement in jail for not more than twelve months and a fine of not more than $2,500.00… either or both.

If failure to obey this law results in property damage, the violator may have their driver’s license suspended for up to a year.  If failure to obey this law results in injury or death, the violator may lose their license for as long as two years. [3]

Every year there are emergency workers who are tragically killed or seriously injured while simply doing their jobs.  Virginia’s “Move Over” law allows these workers who are protecting and serving our community to do their jobs with a little more safety and security. So remember — when you see those flashing lights ahead on the highway, please MOVE OVER, and if that’s not possible, use caution and SLOW DOWN if you can do so safely.

About the Author: Fredericksburg car accident attorney David Williams has focused his legal career almost exclusively on personal injury law, wrongful death and products liability cases. He has successfully argued cases before the Virginia Supreme Court.

[2] Same as above.

[3] Same as above.

Related posts

• “Virginia Law: Business Responsibility for Falls by Visitors and Customers” (Premises Liability) (0)
• Virginia’s DUI Punishments Enhanced: Ignition Interlock (0)
• The Virginia Tort Claims Act: It’s Not Enough to be Ordinary (0)
• The Evolving Law of Contributory Negligence: “Putting One Foot in Front of the Other” (0)
• Summer Road Trip Safety (0)

Petersburg Personal Injury Law Firm - Allen & Allen

The year 2010 marks the one hundredth anniversary of the personal injury law firm of Allen & Allen. In 1910, George E. Allen opened his first law office across the street from the Lunenburg County Courthouse. Since that day, Allen attorneys have represented thousands of Petersburg and Southside Virginia residents in their fight to obtain justice under the law.

Although George Allen moved both his law practice and his family to Richmond during the Depression, he continued to handle legal work for his old constituents in southern Virginia. This tradition continued as his firm grew and other lawyers, including his sons and grandchildren, joined him.

By the late 1980s, the Allen Firm served residents from all over Southside Virginia including Southern Chesterfield, Petersburg, Prince George, Dinwiddie, Sussex, Brunswick, Greensville, Mecklenburg, Nottoway, and Lunenburg Counties. To better serve clients, in 1988 the law firm opened a small branch office across from the historic Circuit Courthouse in Petersburg.

Needing more space, the Firm expanded the very next year, buying and renovating a stately brick house built by Archibald Graham McIlwaine in 1850 as a wedding present for his daughter Jane. Located at the corner of Market and Wythe Streets in the heart of Petersburg, the office sits only a few blocks from Interstates 85 and 95, along the state’s primary North/South traffic corridor. When the Allen Firm purchased the building, the McIlwaine house was abandoned and in disrepair; in fact, a tree had even fallen through the roof! After extensive historic renovations, the building re-opened as a home for the Firm’s Petersburg branch and has been in continuous operation since that time.

Today, as personal injury law firm of Allen & Allen ’s first one hundred years come to a close, its attorneys renew their commitment to deliver exceptional legal services to their personal injury clients in Petersburg and Southside Virginia. They also look forward to giving their clients, in the next century, the same kind of individual attention and help that clients have come to expect and rely on as they seek justice for their injuries and losses.

Paul D. Hux is the firm’s Petersburg personal injury attorney. With 20 years of experience in personal injury practice, he has established a reputation for obtaining excellent trial results on his clients’ behalf. Mr. Hux is listed in Virginia Super Lawyers, a magazine which identifies attorneys recognized by their peers for excellence in the personal injury field.

In addition, Malcolm P. McConnell and Jason W. Konvicka handle Petersburg medical malpractice cases. These attorneys represent persons who have been injured or the families of persons who have died because of medical negligence.

Related posts

• Allen & Allen Recognizes Hometown Heroes in Charlottesville – an NBC 29 News Story (0)
• Allen & Allen Celebrates 100 Years (0)
• 100 Hometown Heroes- Brought to you by the personal injury law firm of Allen & Allen (0)
• 100 HOMETOWN HEROES Grand Finale at The Diamond, August 25, 2010 (0)
• 100 HOMETOWN HEROES Announced: Law Firm of Allen & Allen Begins Celebration Series (0)