Indiana Injury And Family Lawyer Blog

When you are involved in a Highland personal injury lawsuit, you have the burden of proving your contentions. But the rules governing evidence are very complex and can be very intimidating.

Having the guidance of an experienced Highland injury attorney can mean the difference between winning and losing your case.

Martin v. St. Dominic Memorial Hospital is a case arising from a slip and fall. Martin ("plaintiff") was a patient at St. Dominic Memorial Hospital ("SDH" or "Defendant"). While attending a group therapy session within the building, plaintiff went to the bathroom. As she was walking back to the meeting, plaintiff slipped and fell onto her knees. There was a custodian waxing the floor at the time of the plaintiff's fall.

Plaintiff suffered injuries and swelling to her knees. She sued SDH for a cause of action for negligence. In order to prove your case for negligence, the plaintiff must prove each of the four elements. First, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had a duty of care to the plaintiff. Next, plaintiff must prove that the defendant breached this duty of care. Then the plaintiff has to prove that the defendants breach was the direct and proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries. Lastly, the plaintiff must prove that they suffered damages.

The court in this case dealt with the issue of whether there was enough evidence presented by the plaintiff to prove her claim that SDH was negligent. The problem arose with the question of whether the defendant's actions or omissions caused the plaintiff's injuries.

It was uncontested that the plaintiff slipped and fell causing swelling to her knees. It was also accepted that the floor was being waxed and that the plaintiff did fall because of the slippery floor.

The doctor who treated plaintiff indicated that she was suffering from arthritis in her knees before the slip and fall. And in his treatment report, the doctor said the plaintiff's meniscus tear in her left knee could have been caused by "wear and tear" or an injury. This lack of specificity was not cured by questioning from the plaintiff's attorney. Therefore, the causal link between the defendant's alleged breach of duty and the plaintiff's injuries was not established.

In order for a doctor's testimony to be sufficient in the proving of this causation element of negligence, the doctor must analyze the probabilities. The plaintiff had to prove that her injuries were the result of her slip and fall at SDH or that her fall aggravated her preexisting condition. This lack of sufficient certainty in the doctor's report means the third element of negligence was not fulfilled and therefore the negligence action was not appropriate.

The court in this case indicated that because a reasonable jury would be unable to decipher whether plaintiff's knee injuries were caused by her fall at SDH or from wear and tear due to arthritis, the defendants should be awarded with a directed verdict.

This case shows how important it is to have an attorney who can help get the evidence needed in your personal injury case.

Continue reading "The Court in Martin v. St. Dominic Memorial Hospital Explains the Indiana Personal Injury Evidence Rules " »

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), there were more than 5,400 people who were killed in distraction-related car accidents in 2009. There were thousands more who were injured during this same period. Distractions and driving just don't mix.

According to the Indiana Department of Labor, a lot of workers spend all or some or their day behind the wheel. The federal Bureau of Labor Statistics' Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (2009) reports that the single highest cause of worker death in the state of Indiana is attributed to highway vehicle accidents.

These kinds of car accidents in Highland and elsewhere account for about 20 percent of all fatal work-related accidents.

Our Highland car accident lawyers understand there are a few companies that enact cell phone policies for driving workers. In recognition of National Distracted Driving Awareness Month 2012, we encourage all employers to make sure that driving employees are safe on the road and aren't engaging in distractions. For this year's campaign, the National Safety Council (NSC) has provided employers with a sample Cell Phone Policy Kit to help kickoff safer driving habits among all employees.

In addition to targeting workers, this year's National Distracted Driving Awareness Month is also asking non-working drivers to make the pledge to curb the distractions while driving. This includes talking on cell phones, text messaging, talking with passengers, grooming, adjusting in-car controls and engaging in other forms of distraction behind the wheel.

During this month-long campaign, parents are urged to talk with teen drivers about the risks associated with distracted driving. Nearly 20 percent of all teen drivers who were involved in a fatal accident in 2009 were reported to have been distracted during the collision. As a matter of fact, about 40 percent of teens say they've been in a vehicle with a driver who was using a cell phone in a way that put the people in the car at serious risk.

Drivers who use hand-held devices behind the wheel are nearly 5 times more likely to get into a serious accident. Drivers who text message at the wheel are nearly 25 times more likely to get into a serious accident.

Here's why: Drivers who text behind the wheel take their eyes off of the road for an average of about 5 seconds each time. If you're traveling at 55 mph, that's the entire length of a football field you'd drive without even looking at the road. It's so bad that driving while using a cell phone reduces the amount of brain activity that's associated with driving by close to 40 percent.

Drivers are asked to curb the distractions behind the wheel. Keep your hands on the wheel, your eyes on the road and your mind on driving. You can help to keep you and your passengers safe on our roadways. Spread the word. It's National Distracted Driving Awareness Month 2012!

Continue reading "Distraction-Related Car Accidents in Highland and Elsewhere Killing Thousands " »

Our Lake County divorce attorneys are seeing an increasing phenomenon of older individuals who are seeking an Indiana divorce.

While enduring a divorce at any phase in your life is going to be generally unpleasant, there are pros and cons when it happens in your golden years. While most people who divorce in their 50s and 60s don't typically have to wrangle with the issue of child custody and child support, there are often still going to be issues with property distribution and discussions about alimony.

What is perhaps most concerning for an older couple enduring a divorce is what it's going to mean for your retirement. You may have gone years planning for time of travel and relaxation with your spouse, only to find yourself divorcing and completely unprepared.

Sadly, it's not just Indiana where this is happening. In fact, recent figures released by the U.S. Census Bureau indicate that in the last two decades, the divorce rate among individuals aged 48 to 66 has soared more than 50 percent. We're going to continue to see these numbers rise as Baby Boomers get older.

As any financial planner will tell you, divorce can impact your retirement account, your pension access and Social Security. However, you shouldn't let this discourage you from seeking a fresh start. Divorce in older age can seem daunting. However, with the help of an experienced Lake County family law attorney, the details are not impossible to work out. There is no reason you should suffer through what could be decades of an unhappy relationship when you have the right to peacefully enjoy the rest of your days.

Here are some basic steps you can consider taking to protect yourself in the event of an Indiana divorce:

Set up your own credit line and close any joint accounts. Once a divorce is final, you won't be able to rely on your spouse anymore, so it will be very important to develop your own credit history. If you don't have one, this is one of the first steps you should take. This is going to be the means through which you'll be able to buy or rent a new residence or get a loan.

Know the details of the debt you share with your spouse. Check your credit report. Even if your spouse was the one who ran up the high debts, you could still be held at least partially responsible, so it's a good idea to at least know where you stand. There are ways that a good attorney can help negotiate for you so you aren't stuck paying for frivolous expenses that your spouse racked up, or ensure that your spouse will be responsible for debt you accrued while paying bills or caring for your children.

Reconsider before using your retirement funds to pay for divorce expenses. Investing in a good attorney is important, but you may want to consider other ways to do that instead of taking it out of your retirement fund. You aren't likely to get that money back, and if you take it out in a lump sum, you'll likely have to pay heavy penalties and taxes on it.

Get all of your retirement and financial documents together before you meet with an attorney. This means your tax returns, bank account statements, investment documents, IRA's - everything. This will help your Indiana divorce attorney determine where you stand, and help us figure out your best options.

Continue reading "Lake County Divorce & Retirement: Know Your Options " »

Highland child support attorneys expect significant action in the area of child support modification orders after a new state law takes effect in July, which lowers the cutoff age for receiving support to 19.

Lawmakers this year lowered the emancipation age from 21 to 19.

Support for education expenses are exempted from the new law. The law takes effect July 1 and applies to all child support orders, according to Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford, who sponsored the bill. The measure made few waves amid a full legislative session that included full-day kindergarten and government reforms. But actually represents a major change in the law governing Indiana divorce and child support.

Warrick County Superior Court Judge Robert Aylsworth told the paper lowering the emancipation age is "an enormous change" that will likely result in a surge of child support modification requests and orders.

While child support is calculated using a formula set by the state, the new order means a paying parent may only be subject to the order until a child turns 19. Income and the amount of time a parent spends with the child are also factored in -- primary reasons why most child support modification orders are requested.

The change in law will likely prompt many to seek a modification order for that reason alone. Those seeking a reduction, or parents concerned support for their child may be impacted, should speak to an experienced child support lawyer. July is right around the corner and the law change will likely impact many families and young adults throughout Indiana.

Only two states and the District of Columbia continue to extend child-support orders to age 21. While there is some question about whether Indiana intended its law to be retroactive, divorce attorneys in Highland and elsewhere say it should apply to all child support orders.

The exemption for educational expenses is another bone of contention. Can a child's living expenses be considered if a child is in college but living at home? These and other questions are best answered by an experienced family law attorney. But the change in law is a clear victory for many parents who will not have to continue paying child support for an additional two years.

Others argue existing support orders should be honored. And that many fathers no longer pay after age 18 anyway. That fact waters down Indiana's overall child-support collection rate, and thus impacts federal funding.

Another issue with the education exemption: Those who have support orders in place before July 1 can still file for educational needs until age 21. But those with support orders after the law takes effect must petition for educational needs before age 19, when the support cutoff would take effect.

Continue reading "Highland Child Support Attorneys Handle Modification Orders after New Age 19 Cutoff " »

The state's court of appeals recently issued a ruling on an Indiana child custody and support case.

As our Highland divorce attorneys understand it, the case of Miller v. Carpenter involved a couple with two children - an 8-year-old son and a 10-year-old daughter - whose divorce was finalized in 2008.

According to court records, the two reached a child custody settlement in which the mother would have sole legal custody and primary physical custody of the kids. The father would then get them every other weekend and then one overnight visit mid-week. For special occasions and holidays, the pair agreed to work it out according to the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines, which lay out a very specific schedule for everything from Mother's and Father's Day to Christmas to the child's birthdays.

Further, the parents agreed that the father would receive child support credits for 98 days, rather than the approximately 130 days he actually had them (meaning he was technically paying more than he had to).

Then in mid-June, the mother filed a notice that she planned to move. While the father didn't oppose this relocation, he did request that the custody arrangement be modified. He wanted joint custody that would allow him to spend Sunday evenings with his kids, as well as the ability to pay less in child support. This would be based not only on the increased time he was spending with the children, but also on the fact that the mother had remarried, and therefore her financial situation had changed from the time of the first order.

The father argued that he felt out of the loop in parental decisions. The mother argued that the child support shouldn't be lowered because the father worked full time, yet wasn't even paying rent to his parents, with whom he lived.

Ultimately, the trial court ruled in the father's favor. Citing Indiana Code Section 31-17-2-15, it ruled that because the parents could communicate without being hostile, it would be in the best interests of the children to award joint legal custody, as well as overnight stays on Sundays, and additionally reduced his support payments from about $250 a week to $150 a week, based on the increased amount of time he was spending with the children and the fact that the mother's pay had increased and the cost of child care had gone down.

The mother appealed this decision, arguing that the lower court had abused its discretion by modifying the legal custody order, which as a result changed the physical custody order, and challenging whether the court abused its discretion by reducing the father's support payments. The mother said the fact that she had moved wasn't reason enough to make any of the modifications that were made.

The appellate judges in turn decided that the lower court did in fact err on the issue of joint custody because not enough had changed to warrant a full modification. They did, however, maintain the lower court's ruling on the amount of time the father could spend with his children because more time with him was in their best interest. Further, they said the modifications to the child support payments were warranted because:

1. The father had been initially paying about 20 percent more than he was obligated to in the first place;
2. More than a year had gone by since the original order.

While this case doesn't establish anything extraordinarily groundbreaking, what it illustrates is that Indiana child custody and Indiana child support issues are constantly evolving. People get hired and laid off and promoted. People move. People remarry. People change. And any of these circumstances can warrant another look at the original order.

Continue reading "Miller v. Carpenter: Indiana Child Custody and Support Ruling " »

In society right now there is an ongoing discussion about "Main Street v. Wall Street." So many innocent individuals are losing their rights because of the power of big business.

If you have been injured because of defective products in Highland, having your voice be heard is important not only to your family, but others like you.

Our experienced Highland injury attorneys understand what it takes to fight big business to get you the award you deserve.

Gulf Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Burris is a Minnesota case between an injured plaintiff and an insurance company over injuries sustained due to a defective product. Burris ("plaintiff") fell off a ladder manufactured by Versa and sustained serious injuries. Versa had a commercial general liability insurance policy and a "Self Insured Retention" ("SIR") endorsement with Gulf Underwriters Insurance Company ("Gulf"). Because of this policy, Burris sued Gulf for the policy limits they had in coverage for Versa.

The problem in this case arose when Gulf filed a motion for summary judgment claiming that because Versa had not complied with their obligations under the SIR potion of the policy, the plaintiff was not entitled to any benefit as a third party.

Upon examining the evidence the court did find that Versa dissolved after expiration of the policy. However, the question was whether this was a material breach of the contract for coverage under this policy. Furthermore, the court was charged with analyzing how the effects of a material breach on the insurance coverage available to third parties.

Insurance policies are often extremely confusing and full of vague terms. And Gulf's policy was not any different in this case. The court actually printed this policy in the decision to show the way key terms were used interchangeably to contradict each other. Also, the court noted that portions of this policy that were inconsistent with Gulf's contentions were left out of their previous court briefs and memorandums.

In the policy involved in this case, there was a provision that stated that regardless of compliance with obligations of the SIR, all of the provisions of the general insurance policy apply. Therefore, the court found that the amount of the coverage could be affected by non-compliance with SIR, but not the fact that coverage was available would remain a constant.

A central concept in most cases is contract law. Establishing the type of contract at question is critical in determining what law applies. A contract consists of an offer and acceptance. In order to have acceptance, there needs to be a meeting of the minds. A contract is considered executory where a contract is created but not executed because further performance by one or both of the parties is still required. Gulf argued that because Versa was not up to date with payments, this policy was an executory contract and Gulf was released from coverage obligations in accidents associated with Versa's defective products. The court here classified this as a "futile attempt" to avoid liability, and cited case law which is followed by "every court" in the county.

In Vandeveer, the court held that , "insurance policies for which the policy periods have expired and the premium has been paid are not executory contracts." In re Vanderveer Estates Holding, LLC, 328 B.R. 18, 26 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y 2005).

For the reasons stated above, this court found that this policy was not an executory contract and Gulf did not provide the court with any evidence that the contract was breached by Versa. Therefore, the defendant motion for summary judgment was dismissed and the case was remanded to the lower court.

It is very important to understand that all attorneys are responsible for the work they submit to the court. There is an obligation for attorneys to present relevant state and federal statute as well as case law that supports and contradicts their contentions. In this case the court found that the attorney was withholding information that could be detrimental to their case and they found that an award of attorney fees for the plaintiff's attorney was a proper punishment.

Continue reading "Gulf Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Burris, et al. Warns Big Business Not to Make "Futile" Arguments in Indiana Product Liability Cases " »