Blog
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
Any type of fall can result in catastrophic back, neck, and spinal injuries. Sadly, many such accidents are caused by the carelessness or inattentiveness on the part the part of the victim. Rather, they occur due to the actions or negligence of the property owners.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that there were more than 28 million emergency room visits due to unintentional injuries in 2014—the most recent year for which full statistics are available. Many of these were slip and fall accidents which can incur hefty medical bills and thousands of dollars in lost wages for injured victims. It is important to note, however, that if you slipped and fell on someone else’s property, the owner or occupier of the property may be liable for your injuries and the resulting expenses.
Determining Liability
Liability for a slip and fall accident may fall on the owner of the property on which the accident occurred if:
Efforts are underway in Hartford to bolster the state’s approach to prosecuting hate crimes. A new bill has been proposed and approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee that, if enacted, would make Connecticut’s hate crime penalties among the most severe in the country. The bill’s primary sponsor, Senator Martin Looney, D-New Haven, who is also the Democratic President Pro Tempore in the Senate, says that the legislation is a necessary response to recent “incidents of intimidation and threatening based on bigotry and bias.”
Over the last few months, there have been numerous reports of hate crimes throughout the state, including bomb threats called in to Jewish Community Centers and other offenses against African-Americans, Muslims, and transgender individuals. In fact, the Anti-Defamation League, an organization founded to combat anti-Semitism and discrimination, reports that the number of hate crimes has doubled in Connecticut in the last year.
Despite a few major snowstorms—including Winter Storm Stella which virtually shut down the Northeast for a day or so—the 2016-2017 winter was a relatively mild one. While the cold season seemed to retighten its grip a little this month, spring is officially upon us and warmer weather will soon be here. Spring is a season of new beginnings, as trees begin to show signs of green once again and animals reemerge from their winter hideouts. Amidst the optimism of the season, there are also new dangers, especially for drivers, motorcycle riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians who use Connecticut’s roadways.
Roadway Wear and Tear
When the snow flies, we look to road maintenance crews to keep streets and highways safe by using snowplows, salt and sand spreaders, and other tools. These implements—along with effects of ice forming in existing cracks in the asphalt or pavement—can leave gouges, potholes, and debris in travel lanes. A driver who is even mildly distracted could easily hit a pothole, causing him or her to lose control and collide with another vehicle. Leftover sand and gravel are especially dangerous for motorcyclists who may not always see the hazard until it is too late.
Every time that a person seeks medical attention for an illness or injury, the reason for the visit is recorded in code form in the individual’s medical record. The coding system for classifying diagnoses is notoriously complex and the current iteration—known formally as the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Edition or ICD-10—includes more than 70,000 codes, with more than 3,000 dedicated just to physical injuries. Whether you have been stung by a bee or hit by a car—or even a horse-drawn buggy—there is an ICD-10 code to describe your situation.
Injury Studies
Recently, a healthcare analytic company called Amino released the results of its comprehensive analysis of about 244 million health insurance claims for services provided by medical professionals between 2012 and 2016. The research shows that Americans suffer a wide range of physical injuries but there are national trends. In addition, many states seem to have quirky conditions that set them apart from the others.
Despite aggressive, nationwide awareness campaigns over the last several decades, domestic violence and intimate partner abuse continue to plague families throughout Connecticut and across the country. Tragically, millions of people suffer abuse at the hands of a spouse, partner, or another family member each year, and an alarmingly large number of victims are hesitant or simply refuse to seek help. Sometimes, however, a domestic violence victim will have the courage to call the police, hoping that law enforcement will help resolve the problem at hand. The police arrive and arrest the alleged abuser—then proceed to arrest the victim as well. This is known as a “dual arrest,” and the rate of such arrests in Connecticut is nearly 10 times higher than the national average.
The Problems of Mandatory Arrest
Connecticut is one of 22 states with laws that require police to make an arrest when they respond to a domestic violence call. In theory, mandatory arrest laws are intended to protect victims of abuse by eliminating the need for officers to make a judgment call on the scene. But in practice, such laws have unintended consequences. Studies suggest that many victims fear additional retaliation from their abusers following a call to a police and mandatory arrest, which means mandatory arrest laws may actually be reducing calls for help.
Over the last several months, Connecticut Governor Dannel P. Malloy has been making rounds throughout the state as he tries to garner support for proposals that would continue his intended reform of the criminal justice system. The governor has labeled his efforts, which began several years ago, as “Second Chance Society” initiatives, as they focus on rehabilitating non-violent offenders and keeping them out of the state’s already crowded prisons. In 2015, Malloy was successful in getting his first series of proposals passed by the state legislature, reducing penalties and emphasizing treatment for non-violent drug offenders. This year, the governor is pushing for—among other objectives—a reform of the state’s bail programs, a change that some say is not all that necessary.
A Look at the Numbers
The Connecticut Sentencing Commission—a non-partisan committee whose membership includes judges, defense lawyers, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials—conducted a study of the current state of the bail system in Connecticut. The Commission found that of the 14,800 inmates in the state’s jails and prisons, approximately one-fourth have yet to go to trial or are awaiting sentencing. About 650 defendants are still in jail for cases in which bail was set at less than $20,000. According to the Commission’s findings, approximately 14 percent of all defendants arrested for a crime are held on some sort of financial bail.
In many car accident cases, it is very clear that the victim was injured solely as the result of the accident. Prior to the crash, the person was physically healthy, but following the collision, the individual may have broken bones, head injuries, or a variety of other problems. Sometimes, however, the extent of damage caused by the accident can be rather unclear, especially if the victim suffered from preexisting physical health issues. When this is the case, securing fair compensation may require meticulous research and preparation by an experienced personal injury lawyer as well as medical notes and testimony from doctors or surgeons.
Ashford Woman Involved in Multiple Accidents
In May 2013, a 34-year-old woman from Ashford, Connecticut was seriously hurt when her van was hit from behind by a driver in a company-owned vehicle. According to court records, the woman suffered injuries to her lumbar region, which caused lingering pain to radiate into her legs and feet. She also incurred injuries to her neck, left elbow, and left shoulder, but the focus of her claim was her back. Her condition was ultimately treated with lumbar spinal fusion surgery in June 2015, more than two years after the accident.
Over the last several years, Governor Dannel P. Malloy has spearheaded efforts to reform the Connecticut criminal justice system and to reduce the state’s prison population. In 2015, Governor Malloy successfully lobbied for the reclassification of most drug possession charges as misdemeanors as opposed to felonies, thereby reducing prison sentences for non-violent offenders. Last year, he continued promoting his “Second Chance Society” measures to reform the state’s bail system and to expand the juvenile court system’s jurisdiction to include young adults up to age 21. While the initiatives failed to gain sufficient traction during 2016, both are back on the table this year.
Raising the Age
When a juvenile breaks the law, he or she, in most cases, is subject to the jurisdiction of the state’s juvenile court system. Juvenile courts are generally more focused on education and rehabilitation than punishment. The approach is intended to prevent young offenders from becoming immersed in a criminal lifestyle, pushing them instead to become productive members of society.
When you no longer have a use for a larger household item or piece of furniture, have you ever put the item out by the street for passersby to take as needed? If someone were to stop and look more closely at your item, would you consider him or her to be trespassing? The notion of trespassing is one that can vary from one person to another. There is also a legal definition, of course, but as with most laws, the application of the definition frequently depends on the circumstances of a particular case. Trespassing is often an element in personal injury lawsuits involving dog bites, as highlighted by a recent ruling in Connecticut Superior Court.
Chair for the Taking
The case in question dates back to an incident that occurred in June 2014 when a 58-year-old Kent woman stopped to investigate a chair that had been placed near the side of the road on another’s property. The woman pulled her car into the driveway of the property and got out to look more closely at the chair. She was subsequently attacked by three dogs who lived on the property, causing nerve damage, lacerations, scarring, and disfigurement. The woman filed a lawsuit against the owner of the property and the dogs for medical expenses as well as non-economic damages.
As it currently stands, drug laws throughout the United States are very strict—loosening regulations on marijuana notwithstanding. In most states, including Connecticut, a single drug conviction can lead to serious criminal consequences and penalties that could follow an individual around for the rest of his or her life.
Unfortunately, however, many throughout the country believe that the so-called “War on Drugs” has ultimately failed. Instead of getting illegal substances off our streets and away from our children, drug problems persist and our prisons are as crowded as ever. Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy has been a leader in a new approach toward drug crimes in the state, shifting the focus, in most cases, from punishment to education and reform. Such efforts have been primarily intended for non-violent offenders and those charged with relatively minor offenses. But now, two other Connecticut lawmakers have proposed legislation that would create a new drug crime in the state: homicide by sale of an opioid.
50 Founders Plaza
