Do you work in or with the construction industry? If so, chances are you have heard of The United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration, otherwise known by the abbreviation “OSHA”.
Unfortunately, it happens, your case gets marked off the trial calendar. Even worse, it happened through no fault of your own. How so? Your action was consolidated with other cases, and while you have been timely complying with adversary demands and court orders, the other plaintiffs are no so diligent. The result – the note of issue is vacated and all the consolidated cases are marked off the calendar as a result of the other plaintiffs’ failure to comply with orders and/or reply to demands.
Most lawyers are well aware that when a motion in decided in their clients favor they have an obligation to serve that order on opposing counsel with notice of entry. “Where the rights of a party are or may be affected by an order, the successful moving party, in order to give validity to the order, is required to serve it on the adverse party” ( McCormick v Mars Assoc., 25 A.D.2d 433). Moreover, “[T]he party prevailing on the motion shall file the order and the papers used on the motion with the proper clerk after receiving them. If a party fails to file any papers required to be filed under this subdivision, the order may be vacated as irregular, with costs.” CPLR § 2220(a). So what are the ramifications of failing to serve your adversary with the Court’s decision? In some instances the consequences may be dire.
Many studies have been performed that conclude the ADHD and other adolescent behavioral issues are causally related to the ingestion of lead paint and lead dust.
The National Toxicology Program, U.S. Dept of Health and Human Resources, has created a comprehensive report entitled Monograph on Health Effects of Low-Lead, 10/14/2011, peer reviewed November 17-18, 2011. Specifically, this literature makes conclusions on the effects of blood lead levels with a focus on BPb levels less than 10ug/dL. As described in Section 1.2.2, the NTP’s conclusions were derived by evaluating data from epidemiological studies with a focus on blood Pb levels <10µg/dL. The evidence is discussed for specific health outcomes within each chapter, and varies by the study design and type of analysis used to examine the relationship of the health outcome with blood Pb across the hundreds of studies evaluated. In some cases, authors restricted the analysis to the population with blood Pb levels <10µg/dL, <5µg/dL, or even lower and the association of the health effect with the blood Pb level is clear. For example, Lanphear et al. (2000) reported an inverse relationship between blood Pb and academic performance in a cross-sectional study of 4853 children ages 6-16 from the NHANES-III dataset; the association with blood Pb remained significant in further analyses restricted to 4681 children with blood Pb <10µg/dL (p<0.001), and 4043 children with blood Pb <5µg/dL. In other cases, the authors reported a significant association between blood Pb and an effect in a population with a mean blood Pb level <10µg/dL. These analyses support an effect of a blood Pb level <10µg/dL, but they do not exclude the possibility that individuals significantly above or below the mean blood Pb level are driving the effect.
New York Labor Law §240 was created to protect workers from accidents involving falls from elevated work places such as ladders. When a worker is involved in demolition, construction, or alteration of a structure, New York Labor Law §240(1) imposes a nondelegable duty upon owners and contractors to provide safety devices necessary for workers subjected to elevation-related risks.
Many factors go into determining the monetary value of a personal injury lawsuit. Basically, in New York the only remedy for an injured party in a personal injury lawsuit is money damages. This requires a value to be determined for the injured party’s loss. Your attorney must create a dollar amount that they think your case is worth. If your case ever goes to trial, a jury will be asked to evaluate the facts of the case and determine if the defendant is liable and if so, they will be asked to render a dollar amount to compensate the plaintiff for their damages. In order to evaluate the value of a case an attorney must take into account many different variables.
In the context of civil litigation, often times the need arises to enter municipal records into evidence. For example, our firm recently represented a client in a medical malpractice action; as a result of the malpractice, the client required a home health aid for the remainder of her lifespan, a hefty amount of damages if sufficiently non-speculatively established at trial. While there are a number of ways the cost of the health aid could be established, such as by expert testimony by an economist; however, experts are expensive and any money spent proving the case at trial ultimately gets deducted from the client’s recovery in the form on disbursements. To preserve as much money as possible for the client, while still proving the case, a better route is needed – luckily the CPLR and the City of New York provide the better way – CPLR §4518(c) and the City’s own records.
Local Louisiana news outlets have been recently reporting stories about a woman in New Orleans who tripped and fell over a misplaced rug in a retail Macy’s store. The customer, Paunchier Bondojia, was injured as a result of the fall and has filed a lawsuit against the corporate retailer claiming that the rug created an unreasonable risk of harm and seeks compensation for her damages.
Knowing little about Ms. Bondojia’s civil claim, it is hard to evaluate whether or not she has a legitimate claim for damages. But this news article raises an interesting legal issue. I regularly am asked what constitutes a harmful tripping condition in a retail store and under what circumstances can a customer recover for personal injuries that were sustained as a result of tripping on the hazard.
Exposure to a lead-contaminated environment can cause injury to an infant even when the blood lead levels do not rise above the level defined as lead poisoning by the governmental agencies charged with setting the level that constitutes “poisoning.” Although, in 1991, the Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”) set a national action level for action on lead poisoning of 10 ug/dL, an approach followed by the New York City Department of Health (“DOH”), it left open the possibility that even lower levels of lead might be dangerous, saying:
Some studies have suggested harmful effects at even lower levels, but the body of information accumulated so far is not adequate for effects below about 10 ug/dL to be evaluated definitively.
Many parents with infant children living in urban areas of New York are unaware of how lead poisoning can effect the growth of their child. Elevated lead levels in an infant’s blood can cause serious problems in their brain development. Moreover, many parents who have children diagnosed with elevated lead levels are unaware of how this poisoning occurs. The following is a brief scientific overview of the common causes of lead poisoning and how it effects a developing infant.
The infant brain is undoubtedly sensitive to lead. The rapid of post-natal central nervous system development coincides with a time when infants are engaging in a high degree of hand-to-mouth activity. Thus, young children living in environments where there are lead hazards can ingest significant amounts of lead dust at a time when their brains are most sensitive to the toxicant’s effects.