Latest Posts

Archives

Categories

Tags Cloud

Pursuing a Wrongful Death Case After a Child’s Death

The sudden death of a child is broadly considered to be one of the most traumatic and stressful experiences that someone can endure. The pain of loss that parents go through is unspeakable. A family enduring this sort of loss probably can benefit from counseling and psychiatric care. When the child’s death was the result of another person’s negligence, pursuing a claim of wrongful death is one way a family can seek some compensation for all the impacts their loved one’s passing has caused. Wrongful death is a specialized legal remedy that is available to the immediate heirs—for most children, their parents—of someone who has died as a consequence of another person’s negligence. It has unique features when compared to other personal injury causes of action. For one, it is one of the few causes of action that can be brought by someone other than the injured person or his or her estate. Second, it allows plaintiffs to demand compensation for damages that usually aren’t available in other cases. It’s important to bear in mind that a wrongful death claim is built upon a conventional negligence claim. A plaintiff in a negligence case must prove that:
  • The defendant owed a duty of care, according to applicable legal standards.
  • The defendant breached the duty of care by doing something or failing to do something.
  • As a consequence of the defendant’s breach, a person was injured.
  • The person’s injuries can be quantified as damages that can be compensated through the legal process.
The types of negligence that might cause a child’s death vary considerably. According to the National Institutes of Health, the most common causes of pediatric injury include auto accidents, suffocation, drowning, and poisoning. Negligence in auto accident cases can include things like the at-fault driver driving in violation of traffic laws, or driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Suffocation and drowning may result from a responsible person not exercising reasonable care to keep the child safe. In a wrongful death lawsuit the plaintiff can seek special types of damages. Among other things, the plaintiff can recover compensation of the plaintiff’s own grief and the costs of the plaintiff’s therapy and other treatments. The plaintiff can also seek compensation for the child’s pain and suffering in the time leading up to death. Each form of damages must be supported with sufficient evidence. For more than 45 years the law firm of Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez has represented Las Vegas clients in personal injury and wrongful death cases. We have worked hard to build a practice that is centered on caring, compassionate service to our clients. If you have suffered the loss of a child, please contact us for a free attorney consultation. Call us at 702-388-4476 or reach us through our contact page.

Exposure to Dangerous Chemicals at Work

Dangerous chemicals are more common than one might expect. Many businesses work with them. From ordinary materials like the cleaning bleach or gasoline, to more exotic industrial chemicals, exposure can cause serious injuries or even diseases like cancer and respiratory failure. Employees who are injured by exposure to chemicals at work should file a workers’ compensation claim.

Workplace safety, chemicals, and liability

Most Nevada employers who handle dangerous materials are subject to a broad range of safety regulations under the Nevada Occupational Health and Safety Act, or OSHA. Nevada’s OSHA law is a variant of the federal OSHA standard, which provides most of the key rules governing workplace safety, including rules covering chemical hazards and toxic substances. OSHA is a regulatory regime that does not provide a private remedy for someone who is injured as a consequence of an employer’s failure to comply with its requirements. Employees who wish to raise concerns with Nevada’s oversight authority are protected by whistleblower laws from retaliation by the employer. Workers’ compensation is the sole remedy available to most people who are injured on the job. The workers’ compensation system strikes a bargain between employers and employees: in exchange for requiring all employers to carry insurance that will provide benefits for their employees who are injured at work, employers are shielded from liability for most types of workplace injuries. Workers’ comp is a no-fault form of insurance, which means that the insurer will not base its coverage decisions on the extent to which the employer or employee was at fault in the accident. This does not mean that fault has no effect on workers’ compensation: if the employer is failing to adhere to safety standards, its premiums will go up or it may lose coverage altogether and be forced to shut down until the problem is corrected. This, together with the employer’s interest in having a safe and healthy workforce, should provide employers with plenty of incentive to meet or exceed OSHA standards.

Considerations for making a workers’ compensation claim

An employee who is exposed to dangerous chemicals at work should report the incident to supervisors in writing. The employee should also keep keep a copy of the report and make notes about what happened, including when and where the accident occurred and the specific chemical that was involved. If the exposure caused an immediate injury that required medical attention, letting the treating physician know that the injury was work-related is an important part of the claims process. Records become crucially important when a chemical exposure leads to long-term illness. Especially if the exposure causes a problem like cancer, the employee may not be fully aware of the disease for a long time after the initial exposure. By making detailed reports and keeping records, the employee can make future claims easier to defend. For more than 45 years the law firm of Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez has represented clients in the Las Vegas area in workers’ compensation cases. We can help anyone who has suffered a workplace injury in Nevada pursue the benefits they deserve. For a free attorney consultation, call us at 702-388-4476 or through our contact page.

Pushing Back Against Aggressive Insurance Claims Adjusters

Insurance companies are in the business of risk management, which means they go to great lengths to avoid paying more than they have to on a given claim. Claims adjusters are the foot soldiers of this process. They investigate the merits of claims and determine the amount that an insurer will pay. To improve their own performance ratings, some adjusters will use aggressive or even underhanded tactics to reduce their employers’ exposure. People who are faced with disputes with insurers may need to pursue litigation to overcome an adjuster’s strategies.

What does an insurance adjuster do?

A claims adjuster can be thought of as an investigator. They tend to have specific skills that qualify them to review evidence and determine the value that should be paid under the applicable insurance policy. Adjusters do a number of things on behalf of the insurer, including protecting it against fraudulent claims and acting as the insurer’s “eyes and ears” to evaluate the specific facts of the claim. An adjuster will often examine the physical evidence related to a claim, such as damage to an automobile or an individual’s physical injury. They may also conduct interviews with the parties and witnesses. Adjusters may also be directly involved in negotiating settlements with covered individuals, and will also be involved in any litigation that may ensue if the injured person disputes the insurer’s findings. Among other things, an adjuster may be the individual who pressures an injured person to accept a “quick cash” settlement after an accident.

Contesting an adjuster’s conclusions

Ultimately, an insurer has a legal obligation to treat each claim in good faith. Few adjusters will make it easy for an injured person to build a case of bad faith. When an adjuster’s conclusions don’t fit with the facts, the injured person needn’t accept inadequate coverage. Disputing a denied or under-compensated claim doesn’t necessarily require jumping straight to a lawsuit. The first step is often simply to reach out to the adjuster to discuss the rationale for the adjuster’s decision. In some cases, the adjuster may not have a complete set of information, or may have missed an important fact that could change how the insurer handles the case. In any dispute with an insurer, an injured individual who goes without legal assistance will be at a significant disadvantage. An adjuster’s job is to be an insurance expert. The role requires developing a sound basis for the insurer’s decisions. An individual who lacks the adjuster’s sophistication may do more harm than good while making arguments in favor of coverage. An attorney can help the claimant ask the right questions and present evidence in a manner that will give the claim a better chance of being approved. For over 40 years the law firm of Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez has helped clients in the Las Vegas area recover compensation in personal injury, auto accident, and workers’ compensation cases. If you have been injured please don’t hesitate to reach out to discuss your case with an attorney. Our initial consultations are free. Call us today at 702-388-4476 or contact us through our website.

How Social Media Use Can Endanger a Workers’ Comp Claim

A workers’ compensation claim can begin a complex and lengthy process. Especially when the injury is severe and involves high costs, an insurer’s claims adjusters will constantly search for ways to reduce their employers’ liability. Injured employees’ social media accounts are one way an insurer can investigate the merits of an employee’s claim. It’s important for the injured employee to keep their pending workers’ compensation claim in mind when they post to social media.

Insurers examine the merits of every claim

Bear in mind that an insurance adjuster’s job is to ensure that the insurer only pays for expenses that are rightfully covered under a policy. Adjusters are insurance experts. They know the cracks in a policy that might allow a claim to be partly or entirely denied. Adjusters therefore examine every claim to ensure that they tell an accurate story of the injury, its diagnosis, and how it is likely to be treated. Every insurer is vigilant against potential fraud. An employee who files a fraudulent claim will have the claim denied and may face other significant consequences, like a lost job and even criminal prosecution. Criminal fraud involves an intent to deceive the insurer, which may not be the case in many circumstances where an employee has made honest mistakes. But even an accusation of fraud can leave an injured employee without coverage.

Social media posts are a form of evidence

People who routinely use social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter can easily forget that their posts can reach a wide audience. Even if a user studiously controls their privacy choices, for example by not allowing “public” access, social media posts can become the focus of legal disputes, including administrative conflicts over denied workers’ compensation claims. What once was “private” may lose its privacy protection as a consequence of obligations in discovery or a subpoena. Social media posts can also reach coworkers and managers. Do not discount the possibility that a manager could alert an HR department about a social media post that they believe raises concerns. Cases of true fraud—where an employee is caught posting pictures of herself running a marathon two days after claiming to have a broken leg—are more common than one might expect. But social media can create hazards for injured employees in more subtle ways. Anything that contradicts the facts included in claim documents could create doubts in the mind of an insurance adjuster. In the social media world, which places a certain premium on keeping up appearances, a photograph or casual comment could cast doubt on the severity of an employee’s injury.

Call the GGRM Law Firm for help with your workers' comp claim

For over 45 years the law firm of Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez has helped clients in the Las Vegas area pursue workers’ compensation claims. We offer free attorney consultations to new clients. To schedule an appointment call us today at 702-388-4476 or send us a request through our site.

Nighttime Risks to Las Vegas Pedestrians

Las Vegas is a famously bright city at night. Yet being a pedestrian at night is considerably more dangerous than during the day. According to statistics compiled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 74% of nation-wide pedestrian fatalities in 2015 took place at night. The same report found that 76% of pedestrian deaths occurred in urban areas, and 72% happened to pedestrians who were not in an intersection. Nevada had 2.28 pedestrian deaths per 100,000 residents, placing it on the high end of that dubious statistic when compared to other states. There are several reasons why the night is especially dangerous for urban pedestrians:
  • Drunk drivers are more common at night than during the day. In the NHTSA’s analysis, about 60% of pedestrian fatalities were associated with alcohol. Pedestrians themselves may also be under the influence of alcohol, which can impair judgment and reduce reaction times.
  • Bright lights from buildings and other cars can, ironically, make less well-lit features of the roadway, including pedestrians, harder to see.
  • Night worsens the effects of environmental factors, like rain and roadway debris, that can affect a driver’s control of a vehicle, visibility, and other factors that can contribute to accidents.
  • Many drivers experience reduced acuity of vision at night. Compromised depth perception, blurry vision, and trouble with differentiating light and dark, can all reduce a driver’s ability to quickly respond to changing conditions.
When accidents happen at night, the at-fault driver may not have a clear idea of what happened. Even a driver who wasn’t under the influence of drugs or alcohol can have failed to see a pedestrian in the roadway. This can lead the two sides in the accident to have different accounts of what happened. As the driver’s insurance carrier examines the case, it may adopt the at-fault driver’s story of events as its starting point, forcing the injured person to prove the case in other ways. Today’s auto accidents tend to have a wide range of potential evidence that the plaintiff can rely upon in a legal case. Modern cars have memory. Cameras are ubiquitous, both on the car itself and around many urban spaces for security purposes. And of course, in a busy city like Las Vegas there are often other people who may be able to serve as witnesses. The attorneys at Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez have represented clients in the Las Vegas area in personal injury and auto accident cases for over four decades. If you have been injured in an accident in Las Vegas, we can help you examine your legal options for recovering compensation. For a free attorney consultation about your case call us today at 702-388-4476 or send us a request on our contact page.

Severe Allergic Reactions to Employer-Provided Meals

Although free food is a nice benefit for employees, providing food invites the relatively rare but potentially significant risk that an employee could suffer an allergic reaction. This is especially so if the allergen is not disclosed on the food’s packaging. Food provided in the workplace raises potential challenges for the employee who is injured and requires medical care. There are several dimensions that must be taken into account, such as whether the food was provided during working hours or was given to the employee to eat on personal time. These questions are important because they can determine if the employee’s illness or injury is covered by workers’ compensation insurance. Workers’ compensation law requires employers to insure their employees against injuries or illnesses that arise out of or in the course of employment. If food is provided to an employee during working hours or in connection with a work-related event, such as a meeting, the question of the injury’s work-relatedness likely will be answered in favor of coverage by workers’ compensation. Workers’ compensation coverage has good and bad elements for an employee. On the one hand, it is a form of no-fault insurance that will cover medical costs, replace wages, and provide other benefits that vary according to the nature of the employee’s illness and other factors. On the other hand, an employee is barred from filing a personal injury lawsuit against an employer for most injuries that are covered by workers’ compensation. This is true even if the employer was negligent—for example, if another employee switched the warning labels on food so the injured employee did not know about the presence of an allergen. Workers’ compensation law may not restrict an employee’s ability to sue the service or restaurant that provided the food. If in the above example the negligent act that led to a mislabeling of food was committed by the outside service, the employee may have a good case that they have failed to take reasonable precautions to notify customers about the presence of potential allergens in their food. Restaurants take pains to track common allergens, like nuts, so when they fail to do so it is often a sign of negligence and actionable by someone who gets injured as a consequence. Cases involving businesses and employment are always more complicated than they might seem. Someone who is faced with complications from an allergic reaction to workplace food should consult with an attorney to better understand how the law can help them. For more than 45 years the law firm of Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez has represented clients in the Las Vegas area in personal injury and workers’ compensation cases. For a free attorney consultation about your case, contact us at 702-388-4476 or through our contact page.

What to Do if Your Neighbor Keeps an Unsafe Dog

Dangerous dogs can threaten more than just physical injuries. They can also be a significant source of anxiety and stress. When a neighbor’s dog is known to have vicious and aggressive tendencies it can make living nearby unpleasant and even hazardous. In some cases steps can be taken to address the presence of a dangerous animal in your neighborhood.

The goal is to prevent bites before they happen

When thinking about what to do about a threatening animal it’s important to remember that the goal is to improve the safety of people around the dog. Dogs may be extremely vocal and excitable when they are behind fences or tied up, but pose little risk to people or other animals in other contexts. But other dogs may be undisciplined or highly territorial. The legal rules around dog ownership try to strike a balance between acceptable dog behavior within the boundaries of a homeowner’s property and unacceptable risks to public health. In Las Vegas all dogs older than four months must be licensed and vaccinated against rabies. Homeowners are allowed to keep their dogs off leash provided that they are confined to the dog owner’s property by a fence or other sufficiently tall and robust barrier. Absent specific rules, like an HOA’s bylaws, a dog that occasionally barks at passers-by from behind a sturdy fence probably doesn’t present a legally actionable problem

When are legal steps against a neighbor’s dog appropriate?

When a polite conversation isn’t enough to get a neighbor to address problems with a dog, there may be cause for threatening legal action in some situations. Some of the circumstances that might justify a legal response include:
  • The dog behaves aggressively and barks constantly from your neighbor’s yard while you are in your own yard, making your property unpleasant and potentially unsafe.
  • The dog routinely makes loud noises at unreasonable times, like late at night.
  • The dog has a history of behaving menacingly or biting on at least two occasions within an 18 month period, such that it qualifies as a “vicious” animal within the meaning of Chapter 7.16 of the Las Vegas Municipal Code.
Depending on the nature of the issue a homeowner could pursue several courses of action beyond speaking with the dog’s owner about the problem. Speaking with the local animal control agency may be a good first step. If the dog owner doesn’t take steps to fix a dangerous circumstance, a formal demand from an attorney may do the trick. At worst, such a demand creates an unambiguous record that the dog’s owner is on notice about the dog’s bad behavior. The next step might be to ask a court to order the dog’s owner to make changes to improve public safety or address a problem like excessive noise.

The GGRM Law Firm understands dog bite litigation

The attorneys at Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez have extensive experience with dog bite cases. We offer free attorney consultations to anyone with questions about how to handle a dog that poses a threat or has attacked someone. To schedule an appointment call us today at 702-388-4476 or contact us through our website.

Nevada Supreme Court Awards Workers’ Compensation Death Benefits to Widow of Former Reno Police Officer

If an employee dies as a result of a work-related injury or illness, the employee’s surviving family members are entitled to workers’ compensation death benefits. But it’s not always easy for family members to obtain the benefits they deserve—especially if there are disputes over liability or the value of the claim. In fact, one case involving workers’ compensation death benefits for a widow of a former police officer recently made its way to the Nevada Supreme Court. Here’s what you should know about this important case: An Overview of Laura DeMaranville vs. Employers Insurance Company of Nevada and City of Reno

Daniel DeMaranville served as a police officer for 21 years before retiring from the force in 1990 and becoming a security officer for a private company. In 2012, Daniel died from cardiac arrest shortly after undergoing gallbladder removal surgery.

After his death, Daniel’s wife, Laura DeMaranville, filed a claim for workers’ compensation death benefits. The claim was denied by both the City of Reno and Employers Insurance Company of Nevada (EICON), the company that provided workers’ compensation coverage to the city at the time Daniel was employed. Both parties argued that there was no evidence that Daniel’s death was caused by heart disease.

The denial was appealed, and an appeals officer reversed this decision. The appeals officer found:

  • There was evidence that occupational heart disease was the cause of death.
  • The City of Reno was liable since they were self-insured at the time of Daniel’s death. EICON was not liable since they no longer insured the city at the time of Daniel’s death.
  • Benefits should be calculated using the income Daniel earned as a security officer at the time of his death.
This decision was appealed to the district court, who agreed with the appeals officer’s first two conclusions, but disagreed with the method used to calculate benefits. The district court ruled that benefits should be calculated using the income Daniel earned from the City of Reno at the time of his death. Since he was not employed with the city at this time, he was not earning an income, which means benefits would equal $0. At this point, Laura appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court’s ruling addressed three questions: • Did a compensable injury cause Daniel’s death? • Who is responsible for compensating Daniel’s family? • How should the death benefits be calculated?

Did a compensable injury cause Daniel’s death?

Both Daniel’s surgeon and a cardiologist specialist agreed that heart disease caused Daniel’s death. Based on this evidence, the Supreme Court ruled that it was clear that heart disease was the cause of Daniel’s death.

By law, heart disease is considered an occupational disease if it is diagnosed in a police officer who has served for more than five years. This is true even if the heart disease is not diagnosed until after the police officer has retired. Therefore, the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiff was entitled to benefits since Daniel’s occupational heart disease was covered by the workers’ compensation system.

Who is responsible for compensating Daniel’s family?

The Supreme Court ruled that the lower courts were wrong to conclude that the City of Reno was liable for the workers’ compensation claim. Daniel’s heart disease was related to his work as a police officer. EICON was the city’s insurer the last time that Daniel was employed as a police officer. It doesn’t matter that EICON no longer insured the city at the time of Daniel’s death—the company did provide coverage when Daniel was employed and exposed to the risk of heart disease. Therefore, the court found that under the “last injurious exposure rule,” EICON was liable for compensating Daniel’s family.

How should the death benefits be calculated?

The Supreme Court also disagreed with the method used by the lower court to calculate the workers’ compensation death benefits. The law states that a spouse can recover two-thirds of the victim’s average monthly wage for the rest of their life. The law also states that the average monthly wage should be calculated by looking at the victim’s income during the 12-week period ending on the date which the injury occurred. In this case, the court found that the date which the injury occurred was the last day that Daniel was exposed to the risk of occupational heart disease, which was his last day as a police officer. Therefore, the court ruled that the benefits should be calculated using the income Daniel earned as a police officer.

Final Thoughts

This is a complex case, but it answers a lot of questions regarding occupational disease benefits, death benefits, and liability for fatal work-related illnesses. If your loved one has suffered a fatal work-related injury or illness, it’s important to seek legal representation as soon as possible.

The GGRM Law Firm Represents Victims Suffering From Occupational Diseases

The workers’ compensation attorneys at Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez have decades of experience representing clients who have been diagnosed with occupational diseases in the Las Vegas area. Our attorneys have the legal expertise and resources that you need to win the benefits you deserve. Schedule a free consultation about your case by calling 702-388-4476 or filling out the form on this contact page.

 

What Obligations Does an Employer Have to Help an Injured Employee?

Employers in Nevada have a number of obligations related to injured employees. One way to break down the obligations is to look at each of them according to when they arise. Some obligations arise as soon as the employee starts work. Others arise in the immediate response to an injury. And still others apply in the aftermath of the injury, when the employer’s assistance with the employee’s workers’ compensation claim can be the difference between an accepted or denied claim.
  1. Pre-injury obligations.
Most Nevada employers must carry workers’ compensation insurance that protects their employees in the event they are injured on the job. Not carrying insurance is a significant violation of law, subjecting the company to potential criminal prosecution, regulatory actions, and fines. Few employers want to risk losing their business over a failure to obtain workers’ compensation insurance. But from time to time an employer operates without it in hopes of saving some money, putting employees at risk. Under state and federal workplace safety laws (commonly known as OSHA) employers over a certain size have a general duty to provide a safe working environment for their employees, as well as specific obligations relating to particular hazards such as electrical or chemical work. Although OSHA rules do not provide for a private cause of action, they do provide an important baseline of safety that protects employees from working in substandard conditions.
  1. Obligations in the immediate aftermath of an injury.
When an employee suffers an injury in Nevada the employer has an obligation to assist the injured employee with obtaining emergency medical treatment. That might include calling 911, and might also include administering emergency care such as CPR, performing triage on a wound, and so forth. Many employers are taking steps to train their staff in emergency first aid, in part because such programs can help them lower workers’ compensation costs.
  1. Obligations as the employee recovers.
The recovery phase of a serious injury is where things can get quite complex. There are a range of obligations that employers have with respect to employees who have been injured on the job:
  • They may not take adverse employment actions against them based solely on their having suffered or reported an injury.
  • They must keep good records of the incident and report it to the state.
  • They are required to cooperate with any investigation that arises due to the employee’s workers’ compensation claim, such as if the insurance adjuster has questions about whether the injury was work-related.
  • They must comply with laws governing an injured employee’s options for returning to work, including offering light duty where appropriate.
  • They must make reasonable accommodations for an employee who has suffered a disability.
As one might expect, the above list only glosses over the surface of what might be involved in a given case. Quite often the injured employee can benefit from the assistance of an attorney with experience handling workers’ compensation cases. For over 45 years the law firm of Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez has helped clients in the Las Vegas area pursue workers’ compensation claims. If you have been injured at work and you have questions about how to get the coverage you deserve, call us today for a free attorney consultation at 702-388-4476 or send us a request through our site.

Hit by Debris from a Truck in Nevada

Trucks carrying gravel, construction debris, and other loose material are supposed to have covers that keep their cargoes safely under control. But accidents still happen, and some operators are more careful than others when they load their vehicles. Many of us have had our windshields cracked by a loose rock falling out of a truck. But sometimes falling debris can cause much more significant problems, including accidents that result in personal injuries. In such cases, an injured person may have a legal claim against the operator of the truck.

The rules governing cargo securement

A general principle that applies to all drivers on the road is that a driver has a legal obligation to operate his or her vehicle in a reasonably safe manner. Anyone who puts cargo on a vehicle must take reasonable steps to ensure that the cargo is safely secured against falling into the roadway or otherwise creating unsafe conditions. This is true for all drivers. For example, it applies to someone who loads a mattress onto the top of a car to bring home. Commercial cargo carriers are subject to a broad range of rules with a variety of sources. Federal law regulates many kinds of commercial vehicles that fall within the scope of interstate commerce—a broad concept that captures many types of businesses, such as those using interstate highways. Federal cargo securement rules impose specific requirements for certain types of cargo. Nevada state law may have rules that go further than the federal standards for a given type of cargo.

Suing a trucking company

Almost by definition, debris falling off a truck is a sign that the person who loaded the truck, the driver, or the business that owns the truck has failed to comply with cargo securement rules. Ideally the driver of the truck sees the accident and pulls over to render assistance and provide insurance information. Sometimes a driver may not see that debris has fallen from the back of the truck and might need to be tracked down by other means. Commercial trucking firms are required to carry significantly more insurance than ordinary drivers. Someone who has been injured in a cargo-related accident should be able to rely upon the trucking company’s insurance coverage to provide at least partial compensation for injuries. But there are cases where the insurance company refuses to provide full coverage, or where the company’s insurance limits aren’t sufficient to cover the full cost of an injury. A lawsuit may be necessary. In cases where a trucking company or its agents have failed to comply with applicable cargo securement rules, the fact of noncompliance can be an important component in litigation. As a rule, when a civil defendant was violating a law or regulation at the time of an accident, and that violation was a cause of the accident itself, the plaintiff can use the violation to establish that the defendant has committed negligence per se. This standard shifts the burden of proof to the defendant, who now must show that its negligent behavior was not the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. In cases involving loose cargo, such a case may be difficult for the defense to prove. Instead, it likely will be forced to settle on favorable terms.

The GGRM Law Firm represents auto accident victims

The attorneys at Greenman Goldberg Raby Martinez have represented clients in the Las Vegas area in auto accident cases for over four decades. If you have been injured as a result of debris falling from a truck, contact us today for a free attorney consultation about your case. Call us at 702-388-4476 or send us a request on our contact page.
1 2 3 86