Greg Sutphin

Watch Out for Products with Button Batteries

March 2, 2017 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

When was the last time you put one of those big, clunky D-sized batteries in any kind of a product? Instead, you probably put a wafer or "button" battery in your remote control, camera, key fob, hearing aid or other product. But these batteries can pose a serious health risk, especially to children who may do what children do with lots of things—put them in their mouths.

According to published reports, over 3,000 small children required emergency care last year after swallowing a button battery. Medical professionals warn that ingesting a battery of any kind can have serious consequences, from suffocation to choking, even causing death. Furthermore, because batteries carry an electrical current, they can cause a chemical reaction with liquids, including saliva, resulting in serious internal burns. The small batteries can also become lodged in a nasal passage or an ear.

Warning Signs that Your Child May Have Swallowed a Battery

Here are some telltale signs that your child has ingested a button battery:

Excessive drooling
Hoarseness
Vomiting, gagging or any difficulty swallowing
Complaints of chest or abdominal pain
Sudden crying
Bloody saliva or stools

Doctors advise against giving your child anything to eat or drink if you suspect that the child has swallowed a battery. Don’t try the Heimlich, either—take the child to an emergency medical facility as soon as possible.

Contact the Law Offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq. Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC

We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.

The Standard of Care in a Negligence Lawsuit

February 8, 2017 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

When you suffer a needless injury because of the careless acts of another person, there are several different legal theories that may be used to pursue compensation for your losses. In most instances, however, your claim will be based on an allegation of “negligence.” Negligence is a legal term, with specific elements that must be proven in court:

You must show that the defendant breached an accepted “standard of care”
You must show a causal link between the defendant’s conduct and your injury
You must show that you suffered actual losses as a result of the accident

The Standard of Care

As the common law of negligence has evolved, the courts have established and reinforced the concept that everyone has a duty, in everything they do, to exercise a certain level of care. Whether you are behind the wheel of a motor vehicle, maintaining steps or stairs, designing or operating a power tool or manufacturing a consumer product, it is expected that you will exercise a certain minimal level of care, so as not to pose an unreasonable risk to others. The standard in New Jersey, as in other states, is general – you must act as a “reasonable person” would act.

Some states have narrowed that definition a little, holding that a reasonable person is an “average person of ordinary prudence.” The ultimate determination of whether a defendant breached a duty of care rests with the jury, though. Juries are tasked with determining the facts in a case, and whether the defendant acted reasonably is considered an issue of fact.

Click here to learn about causation in a personal injury lawsuit.

Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

The Common Types of Construction Site Injuries

January 5, 2017 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

Though the common perception is that medical errors are few and far between, recent studies seem to indicate otherwise. One report found that nearly every American will receive an incorrect diagnosis at some point in their life. Medical industry watchdogs say the factors that most often contribute to misdiagnosis or failure to diagnose are:

Negligence or carelessness caused by fatigue or understaffing
Miscommunication between doctors, nurses and patients
An unwillingness by doctors to acknowledge or discuss errors that are made

Far too often, according to much research, doctors and nurses don’t include the patient in critical discussions and make diagnostic assessments without gathering adequate information from the patient. Researchers stress the need to talk directly to the patient and learn about symptoms, rather than simply relying on medical tests.

Critics also point to what they call a “culture of silence” among medical professionals — the idea that, when mistakes are made, they cannot be discussed. They say that just the opposite approach is necessary — the best way to learn from mistakes is to fully discuss them, so that others don’t end up making the same errors.

The studies have not been limited to misdiagnoses, though. One report found that in one of every 10,000 surgeries, some tool or product is wrongfully left in a body cavity and that surgeons perform the wrong surgery or operate on the wrong body part in one of every 100,000 cases. Critics say the reasons for such errors mirror those for misdiagnosis — poor communication, overworked doctors and a “hush-hush” atmosphere about mistakes.

Contact Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

Damages Available in a Wrongful Death

December 8, 2016 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

wrongful-death

In the aftermath of the accidental or wrongful death of a loved one, it can be difficult to even think about a lawsuit to recover damages. While nothing can bring back your loved one, you are entitled to hold those responsible accountable for your losses. But what can you recover, and how are your losses calculated?

In a wrongful death lawsuit, the damages (compensation for losses) are generally one of three types:

Economic losses — losses that represent tangible or out-of-pocket losses
Noneconomic losses — those losses that are less tangible
Punitive damages — losses designed to punish the wrongdoer or to send a message to others

Economic Losses

You are entitled to recover compensation for any actual expenses incurred as a result of the accident, or any benefits you would have received, had your loved one not died. This may include:

Lost wages or income of a parent, spouse or guardian
Lost benefits, such as medical insurance or pension/retirement benefits
The diminished value of an inheritance because of the wrongful death
Any medical expenses you or your loved one’s estate had to pay for medical care as a result of the accident, but before death
Funeral and burial expenses
The value of any other services the deceased would have provided

Noneconomic Losses

These types of damages represent fewer tangible injuries, such as:

Any emotional pain or suffering you experienced because of the death of your loved one
Loss of companionship or consortium with a spouse
Loss of the care, guidance, nurturing, protection or training of a parent or guardian
Loss of the love or society of a family member

Punitive Damages

It’s extremely difficult to get punitive damages in a personal injury or wrongful death case, unless you can show that the defendant acted with reckless disregard for the safety of others or of the value of human life

Contact Our Office

We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.

Dangerous and Defective Product Claims

November 15, 2016 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

Dangerous-Product

From the founding of America, the legal principle of contributory negligence, carried over from English common law, has been applied to personal injury claims. Under the concept, if a person suffering a personal injury was in any way negligent or careless, and thereby contributed to his or her own injury, that fact could be used to complete bar or eliminate any recovery for the injury suffered.

Because of perceptions that the doctrine of contributory negligence was too harsh, and because of the successful efforts of many defense lawyer to find some level of contributory negligence in nearly every personal injury claim, the law has been modified in every state by the new principle of comparative, rather than contributory, negligence.

Under the doctrine of comparative negligence, the finder of fact in a personal injury case (the judge or the jury) must first determine the full amount of damages sustained by an injured party. The judge/jury must then determine if the injured party was negligent in any way and, if so, to what extent.

At that point, the various states take one of two approaches. In many states, the percentage by which the injured party was at fault is simply applied to the total amount of losses, thereby reducing the damage award. For example, if an injured party shows $1 million in losses, but the jury finds that he or she was 25% responsible, the award will be reduced to $750,000. If the plaintiff (the injured party) was found to be 75% responsible, he or she will still receive $250,000.

In states such as New Jersey, however, that have adopted what is known as “modified comparative negligence,” an injured party can receive a damage award only if his or her degree of fault falls below a certain level, typically 50% (the standard in New Jersey). Accordingly, in the above example, if the plaintiff is found to be 51% responsible, there will be no damage award.

Contact Us

At the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, we offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.

Slip-and-Fall Injuries in New Jersey

October 5, 2016 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

Under the laws of New Jersey, the owners or persons in control of residential or commercial property have a duty to maintain the premises in such a way as to minimize the risk of injury to anyone legally on the property. This is known as “premises liability” law.

Slip and Fall

The Responsibilities of Property Owners/Managers/Occupants in New Jersey

In New Jersey, as in other states, anyone who has responsibility for maintaining real property can be found liable when someone suffers an injury because of improper maintenance or lack of maintenance of the property. That will typically include the owner of the property, but it can also include property managers or tenants.

The first duty of such a person is to reasonably monitor the premises so as to be made aware of any potential safety risk. Note that there is no absolute duty to prevent injury, only to take reasonable steps to minimize the risk of injury. However, where a reasonable person would expect certain conditions to occur — snowfall or the collection of ice in a northern climate, for instance — a property manager/owner/tenant may have liability even if there was no actual knowledge of the condition, if a reasonable person would have anticipated the condition.

Once a property owner is aware (or circumstances dictate that the property owner should have been aware) of a dangerous condition, the property owner must either take reasonable measures to fix the problem, must cordon off the area to prevent access or must provide reasonable warning of the potential dangers.

The Status of the Visitor

A defendant’s duty to a person injured on real property varies, based on the legal status of the visitor:

Invitees — If the person is on the property legally and has been expressly or impliedly invited there by the owner, for purposes that benefit the owner, that person is an invitee. A landowner owes the highest duty to an invitee — to take reasonable care to prevent injury
Licensees — If a visitor is on property with permission, but for his or her own benefit, that person is referred to as a licensee. A property owner’s duty to a licensee is only to warn of conditions of which the owner is aware and which the visitor would not be likely to discover
Trespassers — If the person is on the property without legal permission or right, the landowner typically owes no duty, unless the visitor is a minor. Landowners have a duty with respect to what are known as “attractive nuisances,” generally man-made objects or devices that would be attractive to a minor, such as a swimming pool or gravel pile.

Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

The Standard of Care in Medical Malpractice Claims

September 25, 2016 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

The Standard of Care in Medical Malpractice Claims

When you have been injured because of the actions of another person, the most common legal theory used to pursue compensation or damages is the theory of negligence. Under a theory of negligence, there’s an assumption that everyone must exercise a minimum level of care in all activities. In a typical negligence case, the standard of care is that of a reasonable person — an average person of ordinary prudence.

In medical malpractice cases, though, the standard of care is different. Because of the training that medical professionals receive, and because of the trust that lay people must necessarily put in medical professionals, doctors and nurses are customarily held to a higher standard of care. Here are the basics of that elevated level of responsibility.

Was the care that the medical professional provided comparable to that which would have been expected from a reasonably skilled and competent medical professional?
Was the care commensurate with that which would have been expected from a medical professional with similar education and experience as the defendant?
Was the care equal to that expected from a similarly trained and experienced medical professional in the same medical community?

As a rule, these are questions of fact, to be determined by a jury. However, in practice, the establishment of the standard of care in a medical malpractice case is done through testimony from expert witnesses, typically professionals in the same field and same community

Contact Us

Comparative Negligence in New Jersey

September 4, 2016 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

Comparative-Negligence-in-New-Jersey

When you have suffered an injury through no fault of your own, you look to the wrongdoer to compensate you for all your losses. But what if you were partially at fault? What if you acted carelessly or negligently and your actions contributed to causing the accident? Can you still recover compensation? Are there any limitations?

Under the laws of negligence, the prevailing concept for centuries was the doctrine of contributory negligence. This principle held that if the injured party was at fault in any way or to any degree, he or she could not recover damages for any losses sustained. Because of this principle, defense attorneys would routinely look for any evidence of carelessness on the part of a plaintiff. Eventually, the law began to change, as lawmakers, judges and lawyers saw a basic unfairness in preventing a minimally responsible plaintiff from recovering compensation from a clearly negligent defendant. As a result, the doctrine of contributory negligence was replaced by the concept of comparative negligence.

Two forms of comparative negligence have developed across the country. Some states have adopted what is known as “pure comparative negligence,” where an injured party is always entitled to some recovery, provided all the elements of the case are established. With pure comparative negligence, the jury makes a determination of the full extent of a plaintiff’s losses and then assesses a percentage of liability to the plaintiff. For example, if the damages are established at $250,000 and the plaintiff is determined to be 10% responsible, the damage award will be reduced by 10%, or $25,000.

In other states, including New Jersey, a form of “modified comparative negligence” applies. In these jurisdictions, a plaintiff may only recover compensation if his or her percentage of liability falls below a certain level, typically 50%. Accordingly, if the plaintiff was 51% responsible or higher, there is no recovery.

Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

Pokemon Personal Injuries Proliferate

August 30, 2016 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

A picture of a Pokeball

Authorities in the United States haven’t taken any action yet, but if the rate of injuries tied to the immensely popular application Pokemon Go! continue, you just might find yourself in a traffic net where police officers aren’t checking to see if you’ve been drinking they’re looking to see if you are ‒ playing Pokemon Go! According to news reports, Japanese police recently issued hundreds of tickets to motorists who were playing the game while driving. Law enforcement officers in Thailand also set up a similar roadblock, arresting 12 drivers.

The major cause of their concern? The rising incidence of injuries involving motorists playing the game while driving. In Massachusetts, police say a motorist on the highway caused a multicar accident when he was distracted in his hunt for Pikachus, Bulbasaurs and other creatures. A man in Baltimore sideswiped a police cruiser while playing the game behind the wheel. Niantic, the developer of the application, has issued an upgrade that requires anyone playing the game in a moving vehicle to tap a button that says “I’m a passenger.” They acknowledge, though, that there’s no way to verify if the person tapping the icon is really a passenger or is operating the vehicle.

The risk of personal injury, though, is not limited to motor vehicle accidents. Just moments after the game’s release in June 2016, a man in Washington, D.C., broke his foot when he fell into a ditch. He admitted that he had his focus on his device, not on the terrain in front of him. In Florida, a resident mistook two teenagers for burglars and fired shots at their car. They were simply playing Pokemon Go!

Contact Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

New Jersey High Court Says Trial Can Determine Liability of Water Park

July 1, 2016 by Greg Sutphin Leave a Comment

Liability of Water Park

The New Jersey Supreme Court has reinstated a personal injury claim against Sahara Sam’s Oasis, the popular Berlin water park. Justices unanimously held that a jury could determine whether the owners of the park were grossly negligent for failing to provide adequate warnings.

According to court filings, Roy Steinberg, the plaintiff in the personal injury claim, took his grandchildren to the park in April 2010. He attempted to surf, using a device called a “flow board,” similar to a surf board. He fell, striking his head on the bottom of the pool, and was then thrown into the wall by a wave. Steinberg fractured his spine, which led to some paralysis in his legs.

Steinberg sued the park, alleging that Sahara Sam employees failed to correctly instruct him in the use of the flow board and that the owners of the park failed to post appropriate warnings about the risks involved. According to Steinberg, the manufacturers of the flow board recommend that first-time users assume a prone position, rather than a standing position, until they get a sense of balance. Steinberg fell from a standing position. In addition, his attorneys argue that the manufacturer advised purchasers of the product, starting in 2008, to warn potential users of the risks, telling them that “surfing is an extreme sport and a high-risk recreational activity,” and warning them “you will fall.” Sahara Sam’s had warnings in place, but they did not include the above language.

At the initial trial, the court found that the warnings used by Sahara Sam’s, combined with the waiver of liability form, which Steinberg signed, prevented Steinberg from pursuing a claim based on gross negligence. The New Jersey appellate court agreed, but the Supreme Court reversed, saying that it was within the prerogative of the jury to determine if Sahara Sam’s had failed to exercise “the slightest degree of care,” the current standard in New Jersey for gross negligence.

Contact Us

« Previous Page
1
…
5
6
7
8
9
…
15
Next Page »

Contact Us Today

Contact Us Today

Watch Out for Products with Button Batteries

Warning Signs that Your Child May Have Swallowed a Battery

Contact the Law Offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq. Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC

The Standard of Care in a Negligence Lawsuit

The Standard of Care

Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

The Common Types of Construction Site Injuries

Contact Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

Damages Available in a Wrongful Death

Economic Losses

Noneconomic Losses

Punitive Damages

Contact Our Office

Dangerous and Defective Product Claims

Contact Us

Slip-and-Fall Injuries in New Jersey

The Responsibilities of Property Owners/Managers/Occupants in New Jersey

The Status of the Visitor

Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

The Standard of Care in Medical Malpractice Claims

Contact Us

Comparative Negligence in New Jersey

Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

Pokemon Personal Injuries Proliferate

Contact Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.

New Jersey High Court Says Trial Can Determine Liability of Water Park

Contact Us