Christina Ortega, her husband and son were enjoying a barbeque in a friends backyard on Sunday in El Mirage when a pit bull entered the yard through an open gate and attacked the boy. Others saw the dog, but Ortega’s 3-year-old son was attacked before he could run away. The dog grabbed him by the back of the head, tearing his scalp. His parents were also bitten as they were trying to pull him to safety. The dog then ran away.
Ortega and her son were taken to the hospital with non life-threatening injuries. The boy received several stitches in the back of his head where his scalp was torn down to the skull. Ortega and her husband suffered bite wounds on their arms which were also treated..
According to people living in the area, they had seen the dog before wandering around. Some thought he might live in the Aqua Fria River bed. Since the attack Maricopa County Animal Rabies Control Officers have been patrolling the area along with the El Mirage Police. The patrol ended when an animal control officer found the dog in the river bed Tuesday morning.
Reports have shown that the dog had a collar, leading one to believe that at some point the dog had an owner. The questions are, who and where?
In Arizona, if you are attacked and/or bitten by a dog, the owner is automatically liable. More often than not, a person’s homeowners insurances will cover the damages caused to the victim. However, some policies exclude “animal liability”, so you may want to check yours if you have a dog or other pet. The only defenses to a dog attack are trespassing (showing that the victim was in a place that he/she was not entitled to be) or provocation (provoking the animal). Clearly, neither of these defenses would apply in this case.
We wish the Ortega family a safe and speedy recovery.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at www.ZacharAssociates.com
Friday, June 26, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Toddler Dies After Being Struck by SUV in Phoenix Trailer Park
A two-year-old boy died Sunday evening after being struck by an SUV.
The toddler and his family were visiting a trailer park on Van Buren and 27th Avenue, when the boy was hit by a Ford Expedition. The driver of the Expedition had just come left around a corner in the trailer park when the accident occurred.
According to the police, neither speed nor impairment are believed to be factors in the accident, and no charges have been filed against the driver.
We can follow all the laws, obeying speed limits, stop signs, etc. There are times when we can do everything right, yet, accidents occur. We cannot always account for human involvement. We will never be able to predict 100% safety for everyone in situations where there are so many uncontrolled factors. This goes double when children are involved. According to the current investigation, the driver did everything right, yet was still unable to avoid hitting this child.
Toddlers are completely unpredictable and can never go unattended near a roadway, or any dangerous situation. For those who have young children, it seems that almost any situation can turn dangerous instantly. We have to keep in mind the issue of control, and realize with children this young, we actually have to be within “grabbing distance” at all times. I cannot count how many times I have had to yell, run, pull, or grab my children to keep them from walking into the path of an automobile. Oftentimes they just don’t think, but rather, allow us to think for them, and believe their world is protected. Unfortunately, we cannot always be there.
We cannot let our guard down in areas where we think the traffic moves so slowly there is enough time for a driver to react. In this instance I don’t know if the driver saw the child or not, but considering the automobile involved was a Ford Expedition it would even be possible that the child was small enough to get in front of the SUV without even being seen.
Our hearts go out to everyone involved in this accident. It is a horrible tragedy.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at www.ZacharAssociates.com
The toddler and his family were visiting a trailer park on Van Buren and 27th Avenue, when the boy was hit by a Ford Expedition. The driver of the Expedition had just come left around a corner in the trailer park when the accident occurred.
According to the police, neither speed nor impairment are believed to be factors in the accident, and no charges have been filed against the driver.
We can follow all the laws, obeying speed limits, stop signs, etc. There are times when we can do everything right, yet, accidents occur. We cannot always account for human involvement. We will never be able to predict 100% safety for everyone in situations where there are so many uncontrolled factors. This goes double when children are involved. According to the current investigation, the driver did everything right, yet was still unable to avoid hitting this child.
Toddlers are completely unpredictable and can never go unattended near a roadway, or any dangerous situation. For those who have young children, it seems that almost any situation can turn dangerous instantly. We have to keep in mind the issue of control, and realize with children this young, we actually have to be within “grabbing distance” at all times. I cannot count how many times I have had to yell, run, pull, or grab my children to keep them from walking into the path of an automobile. Oftentimes they just don’t think, but rather, allow us to think for them, and believe their world is protected. Unfortunately, we cannot always be there.
We cannot let our guard down in areas where we think the traffic moves so slowly there is enough time for a driver to react. In this instance I don’t know if the driver saw the child or not, but considering the automobile involved was a Ford Expedition it would even be possible that the child was small enough to get in front of the SUV without even being seen.
Our hearts go out to everyone involved in this accident. It is a horrible tragedy.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at www.ZacharAssociates.com
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Tempe Family Agrees to Settle Case Against City
After their son was killed by a speeding Tempe police officer, Jim Barker and Kelly Wilcott sued the city. They have now decided to settle their case for $1.35 million.
Kyle Barker was crossing Baseline Road near Rural Road at 2:00 on the morning November 26, 2005. At the same time, Officer William Cullins was rushing westbound on Baseline to provide backup to another officer when he struck and killed Barker. (Cullins was charged with criminal speeding and issued a civil citation for which he later paid a fine of $491).
According to the autopsy report, Barker was well over the legal blood alcohol level, at .18. According to an internal police investigation, Cullins was driving 95 mph five seconds before the accident.
Cullins was suspended without pay for one month after the investigation determined that he was driving recklessly, and that he violated no less than three (3) city policies related to obeying traffic laws and the safe operation of vehicles. The suspension was the maximum allowed by the department.
We all know police officers have to make split second decisions, which at times may cause dangerous circumstances. However, the police and fire officials are subject to the same driving laws as are ordinary citizens. Their responsibilities include, at ALL times, to use reasonable care and caution, no matter what the circumstances. The same standards of reasonable care form the basis for tort or injury law in Arizona.
Some may place blame on Kyle Barker for being intoxicated, but, being intoxicated is not a criminal offense. However, if Kyle Barker’s level of intoxication was substantial enough that he could no longer act in a reasonable fashion to provide himself basic levels of protection, then he too might have been partially to blame here. The City would have to prove that Barker’s intoxication would have prohibited him from getting to safety had he been alerted to Cullins--by the cars lights and sirens—had Cullins been using them (which he was not).
This is another sad and preventable accident. We respect the police for what they do for us every day, however, we cannot lose sight of the fact that they are not allowed to perform their duties with disregard to the same laws that we are required to follow.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at www.ZacharAssociates.com.
Kyle Barker was crossing Baseline Road near Rural Road at 2:00 on the morning November 26, 2005. At the same time, Officer William Cullins was rushing westbound on Baseline to provide backup to another officer when he struck and killed Barker. (Cullins was charged with criminal speeding and issued a civil citation for which he later paid a fine of $491).
According to the autopsy report, Barker was well over the legal blood alcohol level, at .18. According to an internal police investigation, Cullins was driving 95 mph five seconds before the accident.
Cullins was suspended without pay for one month after the investigation determined that he was driving recklessly, and that he violated no less than three (3) city policies related to obeying traffic laws and the safe operation of vehicles. The suspension was the maximum allowed by the department.
We all know police officers have to make split second decisions, which at times may cause dangerous circumstances. However, the police and fire officials are subject to the same driving laws as are ordinary citizens. Their responsibilities include, at ALL times, to use reasonable care and caution, no matter what the circumstances. The same standards of reasonable care form the basis for tort or injury law in Arizona.
Some may place blame on Kyle Barker for being intoxicated, but, being intoxicated is not a criminal offense. However, if Kyle Barker’s level of intoxication was substantial enough that he could no longer act in a reasonable fashion to provide himself basic levels of protection, then he too might have been partially to blame here. The City would have to prove that Barker’s intoxication would have prohibited him from getting to safety had he been alerted to Cullins--by the cars lights and sirens—had Cullins been using them (which he was not).
This is another sad and preventable accident. We respect the police for what they do for us every day, however, we cannot lose sight of the fact that they are not allowed to perform their duties with disregard to the same laws that we are required to follow.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at www.ZacharAssociates.com.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Boy Struck by Car
Rene Chavez, a 13-year-old boy, is now in a medically induced coma after being struck by a car on Thursday.
Rene was riding his bike on Cooper Road south of Warner when he tried to cross the street and was struck by a car. Apparently, two other cyclists had crossed the road ahead of him but traffic had picked back up by the time he attempted to cross. Rene was not wearing a helmet and had to be airlifted to a hospital immediately. He now remains in a coma at Phoenix Children’s Hospital. The driver, a 16-year-old-girl, did not receive any citations according to Sergeant Mark Marino.
“Bike helmets are like seatbelts – we recommend everyone wear a seatbelt and also a bike helmet,” stated Gilbert Fire Captain Mike Conner. It cannot be stressed enough how important it is to teach our children from the earliest age to utilize every safety precaution and tool available to us and helmets and seatbelts may very well be the two most valuable. According to studies, hospitalization due to biking accidents was down after helmet laws were passed in Seattle, New York, New Jersey, Canada, and California.
It seems, in this case, the driver may not have been found to be at fault by the police, as Chavez apparently entered the roadway right in front of her car. However, that is not always the final conclusion. While the police investigation is important, we know that the police do not always get it right. Evidence of a citation---or lack thereof—is not admissible in a civil lawsuit for damages. We always prefer to rely on our own investigators, who are generally far better educated and experienced than police officers, to determine what really happened in an accident.
Indeed, that is the rule of the courts. The police evidence may be helpful, but unless it can be determined that the investigating officer is truly qualified to give expert opinions—which is not always the case, then the opinions of the police do not come into evidence.
It is oftentimes crucial to hire an experienced and board certified personal injury attorney in these cases—as early as possible, to investigate and preserve evidence.
Our hearts go out to young Rene and his family. We will keep them in our thoughts and prayers.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Helicopter Crash Claims One
Witnesses called authorities when they saw a helicopter crash Thursday morning near Lake Pleasant. There was one man on board when officials arrived. He was pronounced dead at the scene.
It is a possibility that the helicopter struck power lines, however, investigators are still trying to determine the cause of the crash.
Officials are not releasing the name of the victim before notifying his family. The man piloting the craft was not the owner.
We have seen some disturbing crashes involving helicopters in Arizona over the last few years. In July 2007, two news helicopters crashed into each other over Phoenix Indian School Park, killing all four occupants. In June 2008, two medical helicopters en route to Flagstaff Medical Center crashed, killing all seven on board.
When a helicopter or airplane crash occurs, within minutes or hours, officials from the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) are on scene to gather evidence and investigate the cause of the crash. The NTSB is an independent body responsible for the investigations of all aircraft accidents. Determinations need to be made whether pilot error, faulty maintenance or a failed system is responsible. The NTSB uses this information, in conjunction with aircraft manufacturing and pilot training, to try to prevent similar accident from again occurring.
Whether it is an aircraft accident, car accident or other, keep in mind that a timely investigation is often key in determining what really happened. Through the passage of time, key evidence can often be lost or destroyed. In any type of accident, getting experienced legal counsel involved early can be a very important step in the process.
It is unknown at this time how the most recent helicopter crash occurred. In time, all questions will most likely be answered. Our hearts and prayers go out to the family and friends of the man who lost his life in this unfortunate accident.
It is a possibility that the helicopter struck power lines, however, investigators are still trying to determine the cause of the crash.
Officials are not releasing the name of the victim before notifying his family. The man piloting the craft was not the owner.
We have seen some disturbing crashes involving helicopters in Arizona over the last few years. In July 2007, two news helicopters crashed into each other over Phoenix Indian School Park, killing all four occupants. In June 2008, two medical helicopters en route to Flagstaff Medical Center crashed, killing all seven on board.
When a helicopter or airplane crash occurs, within minutes or hours, officials from the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) are on scene to gather evidence and investigate the cause of the crash. The NTSB is an independent body responsible for the investigations of all aircraft accidents. Determinations need to be made whether pilot error, faulty maintenance or a failed system is responsible. The NTSB uses this information, in conjunction with aircraft manufacturing and pilot training, to try to prevent similar accident from again occurring.
Whether it is an aircraft accident, car accident or other, keep in mind that a timely investigation is often key in determining what really happened. Through the passage of time, key evidence can often be lost or destroyed. In any type of accident, getting experienced legal counsel involved early can be a very important step in the process.
It is unknown at this time how the most recent helicopter crash occurred. In time, all questions will most likely be answered. Our hearts and prayers go out to the family and friends of the man who lost his life in this unfortunate accident.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
City of Phoenix Settles Case for Little Boy Who Was Shot
In 2006, six-year-old Adrian Trevino was struck in the back and paralyzed by a stray bullet from a Phoenix Police Officer’s weapon.
Adrian and his three-year-old sister were asleep in bed when a police pursuit came to a horrible ending directly outside their home. The chase began when officers pulled over a car carrying Michael Hernandez, who grabbed a gun and fled the scene. After breaking into one home and threatening a family, Hernandez evaded police and ended up near Adrian’s home, with police in pursuit. Hernandez raised his weapon, the south team opened fire, and an officer to the east returned the fire thinking it came from Hernandez. Five of this officer’s bullets struck the home Adrian was in, one which pierced a wall and struck young Adrian in the back.
Adrian’s family sued the city for physical and emotional injuries, medical expenses, lost wages, and other damages. Last week the Phoenix City Council agreed to a $6.5 million settlement.
It is so hard to assess blame in a situation such as this. We always want to assess blame. It is a way of helping us make sense for something bad that has occurred. It makes us feel more secure when we can define specific parameters to a situation as tragic as this one. Sometimes that blame is justified, sometimes it is a denial as to something we may have done wrong. Sometimes, it is just a coping mechanism.
In this case, I think we can all agree that young Adrian and his family share no blame for the incident. However, does the police officer deserve the blame? If you asked this question of 100 people, you would probably get a 50/50 split. While we can agree that police officers need some leeway to perform their jobs, we should also concede that blindly firing in the general direction of a criminal, while in a residential neighborhood, is not the best course of action. Indeed, the 4th and final rule of gun safety---which certainly the Phoenix Police officers know---is to always know what is behind your target. If you don’t know, or if you are not sure, then a better course of action might be appropriate.
The headline in the Phoenix newspaper read “Family Wins Settlement from City.” Are you kidding me? Their little boy is paralyzed for the rest of his life. The loss of enjoyment of life will be astronomical, and I’m sure the medical bills significant. The family and Adrian did not “win” anything. No one is a “winner” here. In fact, both parties have already lost. The settlement is the means that our law provides to compensate the innocent victims for the life of pain, suffering and disability that they will suffer because of a split second poor decision by this police officer.
But make no mistake. No one wins in this situation.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at www.ZacharAssociates.com .
Adrian and his three-year-old sister were asleep in bed when a police pursuit came to a horrible ending directly outside their home. The chase began when officers pulled over a car carrying Michael Hernandez, who grabbed a gun and fled the scene. After breaking into one home and threatening a family, Hernandez evaded police and ended up near Adrian’s home, with police in pursuit. Hernandez raised his weapon, the south team opened fire, and an officer to the east returned the fire thinking it came from Hernandez. Five of this officer’s bullets struck the home Adrian was in, one which pierced a wall and struck young Adrian in the back.
Adrian’s family sued the city for physical and emotional injuries, medical expenses, lost wages, and other damages. Last week the Phoenix City Council agreed to a $6.5 million settlement.
It is so hard to assess blame in a situation such as this. We always want to assess blame. It is a way of helping us make sense for something bad that has occurred. It makes us feel more secure when we can define specific parameters to a situation as tragic as this one. Sometimes that blame is justified, sometimes it is a denial as to something we may have done wrong. Sometimes, it is just a coping mechanism.
In this case, I think we can all agree that young Adrian and his family share no blame for the incident. However, does the police officer deserve the blame? If you asked this question of 100 people, you would probably get a 50/50 split. While we can agree that police officers need some leeway to perform their jobs, we should also concede that blindly firing in the general direction of a criminal, while in a residential neighborhood, is not the best course of action. Indeed, the 4th and final rule of gun safety---which certainly the Phoenix Police officers know---is to always know what is behind your target. If you don’t know, or if you are not sure, then a better course of action might be appropriate.
The headline in the Phoenix newspaper read “Family Wins Settlement from City.” Are you kidding me? Their little boy is paralyzed for the rest of his life. The loss of enjoyment of life will be astronomical, and I’m sure the medical bills significant. The family and Adrian did not “win” anything. No one is a “winner” here. In fact, both parties have already lost. The settlement is the means that our law provides to compensate the innocent victims for the life of pain, suffering and disability that they will suffer because of a split second poor decision by this police officer.
But make no mistake. No one wins in this situation.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at www.ZacharAssociates.com .
Monday, June 8, 2009
Arizona Light-Rail and Bus Collide
Early Wednesday morning, a Valley metro bus and a light-rail train collided at First Avenue and Washington Street. Eight people were taken to the hospital for injuries.
According to Metro spokeswoman Marty McNeil, video footage showed that the bus driver had a red turn arrow which he/she failed to consider. The bus tried to make a right turn onto Washington from First Avenue and collided with the train, which was approaching Washington on the right side of the bus. The circumstances remain under investigation.
However, if the bus driver did fail to stop at a right turn arrow, and this was a cause of the collision, then obviously he/she was at fault. Amid all of the recent discussions regarding the light-rail and it’s poor management and treatment of operators this accident makes me wonder if our Valley bus drivers ever received any instruction on sharing the roads with the light-rail. Considering we have now had 22 accidents involving the light-rail, wouldn’t it be prudent by now to have made sure that at least city bus driver have had new instruction on how to incorporate the trains safely into their routes? I am hoping this is a rhetorical question.
This also leads me to further ponder whether or not any mention of the light-rail has been incorporated into the Motor Vehicle Department’s driver’s license manuals. Shouldn’t new drivers learn about the light-rail before receiving their driver’s license? It clearly is not going away anytime soon. However, for those of us who already have an Arizona drivers license I did find an informative page at www.valleymetro.org if you click on METRO Light Rail under other services.
All of this aside, according to the Metro, none of the previous 21 accidents have been their driver’s fault. If the reports I have seen so far are correct, then they are not at fault in this accident either.
We know the light rail is going to take some adjustment time for all. If you travel in the area, please be careful. Injury accidents are best if avoided altogether. Thus far I don’t recall any serious injuries. Sooner or later, one will certainly occur. Who is at fault will have little meaning to the injured or their family. Let’s all keep this in mind, and all use a little more caution and observation when in the areas of the light rail.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email Chris Zachar directly at Czachar@zacharlaw.com, or visit our website at ZacharAssociates.com .
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
State Liability in School Safety
Can the state afford to not maintain school buildings? According to Tom Horne, the State Superintendent of Education, the bad economy has resulted in postponed maintenance at educational facilities.
In an article in the Arizona Republic last week, Horne was quoted saying “This year it’s understandable because the economy is doing so badly, but when there’s a recovery, I’m hoping they will fund maintenance of buildings, because the longer you wait the more expensive it is to make repairs.” OK. No argument there. But aren’t there other considerations too? How about, the longer you wait, the more likely building disrepair could lead to potentially dangerous environments for our children? Isn’t that more important than expense?
Earlier this year, two schools have had roofs collapse. Do we really have to wait until a roof collapses on the children before we make sure the buildings are safe? Will the state be better able to afford a liability lawsuit and paying damages to families more than building maintenance costs? We might find out. Let’s hope it does not come to that.
In 1996, a Kyrene school added skylights and a large air conditioning unit, without first investigating whether or not the roof could actually carry the weight. Thirteen years later the roof collapsed when the trusses around the air conditioner gave way. No children were injured at that time. However, if a child or educator had been injured or had lost their life, would the roof repair cost more than the wrongful death lawsuit? Is there someone out there actually considering this question?
How much would it cost to hire the skilled engineers to do the inspections on the over 1400 schools in Arizona? Further, is it possible that some of these engineers would agree to perform necessary inspections gratuitously, for the good of Arizona, its children and our schools? Don’t we all have a responsibility to help just a little bit in this failing economy? Has anyone thought about this? Certainly we can do more than ignore the problems and hope that nothing bad happens. We are better than this aren’t we? Is anyone listening?
In an article in the Arizona Republic last week, Horne was quoted saying “This year it’s understandable because the economy is doing so badly, but when there’s a recovery, I’m hoping they will fund maintenance of buildings, because the longer you wait the more expensive it is to make repairs.” OK. No argument there. But aren’t there other considerations too? How about, the longer you wait, the more likely building disrepair could lead to potentially dangerous environments for our children? Isn’t that more important than expense?
Earlier this year, two schools have had roofs collapse. Do we really have to wait until a roof collapses on the children before we make sure the buildings are safe? Will the state be better able to afford a liability lawsuit and paying damages to families more than building maintenance costs? We might find out. Let’s hope it does not come to that.
In 1996, a Kyrene school added skylights and a large air conditioning unit, without first investigating whether or not the roof could actually carry the weight. Thirteen years later the roof collapsed when the trusses around the air conditioner gave way. No children were injured at that time. However, if a child or educator had been injured or had lost their life, would the roof repair cost more than the wrongful death lawsuit? Is there someone out there actually considering this question?
How much would it cost to hire the skilled engineers to do the inspections on the over 1400 schools in Arizona? Further, is it possible that some of these engineers would agree to perform necessary inspections gratuitously, for the good of Arizona, its children and our schools? Don’t we all have a responsibility to help just a little bit in this failing economy? Has anyone thought about this? Certainly we can do more than ignore the problems and hope that nothing bad happens. We are better than this aren’t we? Is anyone listening?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
