Interesting lawsuit filed in Chicago this week.  McDonald’s is being sued after a young girl suffered 3rd degree burns when her hot chocolate spilled all over her.  After the famous “McDonald’s Coffee” lawsuit in which a women was awarded $2.86 million after she burned herself with hot coffee she purchased from McDonald’s, you’d think that they would learn.

McDonald’s sued over hot chocolate burn

A Chicago woman filed suit with McDonald’s Restaurants on Wednesday after her daughter was burned by spilled hot chocolate more than a year ago.

The woman purchased a hot chocolate for her daughter in April 2009 at a McDonald’s drive-thru window. She claims the lid was improperly secured on the beverage and it spilled on her daughter, causing “severe pain and scarring,” the Chicago Tribune is reporting.

The suit alleges that the restaurant staff should have known that the beverage was too hot to drink.

Our Chicago Injury Attorneys wish the girl all the best.

Our Chicago DUI Attorneys wish ex-Chicago Blackhawks’ goaler Nikolai Khabibulin all the best as he prepares to be sentenced in Arizona for DUI.

Edmonton Oilers goaltender Nikolai Khabibulin has been found guilty of speeding and driving under the influence of alcohol.

Khabibulin, 37, showed no emotion as a judge in Scottsdale, Ariz., delivered the decision following a brief trial Friday afternoon. Sentencing will take place at a date yet to be confirmed.

Khabibulin was pulled over on Feb. 8 for speeding in his black Ferrari near his Scottsdale home. He was cited for driving under the influence when the test revealed his blood alcohol content was more than twice the legal limit.

Khabibulin could face a minimum jail sentence of 30 days as well as fines and be required to use a breath-test machine before starting his vehicle. The maximum penalty for the offense is a six-month jail term.

Our Chicago Personal Injury Attorneys caught this lawsuit filed the other day by a man against a Segway Tour operator for injuries sustained when he was thrown off his Segway.

Suit: Injured Segway Rider Told to ‘Slalom’ Between Trees

Sun-Times Media Wire

Chicago – About a week after the Chicago Park District sent an e-mail to Segway tour operators warning them to stay off the grass and gardens, a man claiming he was injured when a Segway tour guide told him to “slalom” between trees filed a lawsuit against the tour company.

William Sullivan claims he was injured on March 31 he was thrown from a rented Segway during a lakefront tour from Steve’s Segway Tours LLC, according to a suit filed Tuesday in Cook County Circuit Court.

The suit claims a Steve’s Segway Tours guide took participants off the paved surface and instructed them to “slalom” between trees. Sullivan did not think he could participate and attempted to ride the Segway back onto the paved surface, where he hit a depression and was “thrown” from the vehicle, according to the suit.

Last week, the Chicago Park District sent an e-mail to Segway tour companies ordering them to stay on the paths and off the grass and gardens.

The personal injury suit is seeking more than $50,000 plus the cost of the suit.

Certainly not your run-of-the-mill auto accident.

More Lawsuits in the news.  Our Chicago injury Lawyers highlight the lawsuit filed a CSX worker who claims that his degenerative spinal condition was the result of his 42 year career at CSX.  This suit is noteworthy in that, if successful, could open up a Pandora’s box of similar lawsuits for all kinds of labor intensive businesses.

CSX conductor claims injuries over 42-year career
By Kelly Holleran – Madison St. Clair Record

A CSX Transportation worker claims his work for the railroad caused his degenerative spinal condition.

Timothy M. Thompson filed a lawsuit June 28 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against CSX Transportation.

Thompson claims that throughout his 42-year career as a conductor, he was exposed to unsafe work conditions, such as repetitive and cumulative traumas.

Because of the work CSX required Thompson perform, he suffered from a degeneration of his spine and upper extremities. In turn, he suffered great pain and disability, mental anguish and extreme nervousness; lost large sums of money; and sustained an impaired earning capacity, according to the complaint. He also incurred medical costs, lost his normal life and suffered permanent, disabling, degenerative and progressing injuries, the suit states.

In his complaint, Thompson blames CSX for causing his injuries, saying the railroad negligently failed to provide him with a safe place to work, failed to provide him with safe work conditions, failed to provide him with safe work methods and failed to provide him with safe equipment, among a number of other negligent acts.

In his three-count suit, Thompson is seeking a judgment of more than $150,000, plus costs.

Quite a retirement plan.

Our Chicago Defense Lawyers recently posted about the arrest and subsequent prosecution of 25 year old Anthony Graber who was charged with a felony for recording his arrest.  Not only is the ACLU defending Graber against these ridiculous charges but has also taken up this cause of behalf of an Illinois man charged with felony eavesdropping for recording his arrest.

ACLU challenges Illinois eavesdropping act Lawsuit cites cases of people charged with breaking the law for making audio recordings of police in action

-Chicago Tribune

It’s not unusual or illegal for police officers to flip on a camera as they get out of their squad car to talk to a driver they’ve pulled over.

But in Illinois, a civilian trying to make an audio recording of police in action is breaking the law.

“It’s an unfair and destructive double standard,” said Adam Schwartz, a lawyer with the “American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois” American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois ACLU filed a federal lawsuit in Chicago challenging the Illinois Eavesdropping Act, which makes it criminal to record not only private but also public conversations made without consent of all parties.

With cell phones that record audio and video in almost every pocket, the ability to capture public conversations, including those involving the police, is only a click away. That raises the odds any police action could wind up being recorded for posterity.

Opponents of the act say that could be a good thing and certainly shouldn’t lead to criminal charges.

The ACLU argues that the act violates the First Amendment and has been used to thwart people who simply want to monitor police activity. The head of the Chicago police union counters that such recordings could inhibit officers from doing their jobs.

What? “Inhibit officers from doing their jobs?”  How?  Do the police cameras in the squad cars inhibit officers from doing their jobs?

In its lawsuit, the ACLU pointed to six Illinois residents who have faced felony charges after being accused of violating the state’s eavesdropping law for recording police making arrests in public venues.

Experts said that although statutes like Illinois’ have been on the books for years, more arrests have occurred in recent years because of the prevalence of cell phone cameras that also record audio.

The defendant in the ACLU lawsuit is Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez, whose office is pursuing an eavesdropping case against Chicago artist Chris Drew.

In December 2009, Drew intentionally set out to break the city’s anti-peddling law by offering handmade, screen-printed patches for $1 on State Street.

The Rogers Park artist wanted to challenge the law that requires people selling their wares on the street to carry permits. Drew had a digital voice recorder tucked inside the red poncho he was wearing, and when police moved in, he made an audio recording of the arrest.

Now, in addition to charges for peddling illegally, Drew faces a felony eavesdropping charge. He is fighting the charges.

Alvarez’s office said it received a copy of the ACLU suit Thursday afternoon, had not had a chance to review it and could not comment.

Probably too busy trumping up felony charges against Drew to be bothered reading pesky lawsuits. The double standard continues.

Our Chicago DUI Lawyers highlight more hypocrisy from the world of DUI enforcement.  This time it’s an Indianapolis Police officer who killed one motorcyclist and injured 2 others when he crashed his police cruiser into the motorists.  Police responding to the crash claim that they had no idea the officer was drunk driving – despite the fact that the officer’s BAC turned out to be .019, more than twice the legal limit!  The kicker?  The DUI charges are being thrown out because of lab errors and the cover-up that occurred at the scene.

Outcry swift after DUI charges against officer dropped

Questions about how Indianapolis police have handled a fatal drunken-driving investigation of one of their own officers became that much more pointed Thursday.

Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi announced he would drop the most serious charges against officer David Bisard. Why? Because Bisard’s fellow police officers had botched the case.

The reaction was swift — and far-reaching.

An embarrassed Public Safety Director Frank Straub announced that the FBI will be brought in on the case. He also removed a lieutenant from his positions as commander of the department’s hit-and-run unit and coordinator of the multiagency Fatal Alcohol Crash Team.

One victim’s family called the dismissal a “travesty.” A legal expert said the police ineptness leaves the public with little choice but to wonder whether the bungled case was more than an accident. And Mayor Greg Ballard has become increasingly frustrated as he seeks answers, as well.

“The people in the city are not the only ones wondering what happened at the scene,” Ballard said. “I am, too.”

Straub and Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Chief Paul Ciesielski repeated their insistence Thursday that Bisard received “absolutely no deference” from fellow officers Aug. 6 after he crashed his cruiser into two motorcycles that were stopped at a light.

The impact of the crash — which occurred while Bisard, 36, was responding to a request for help serving a warrant, with his cruiser’s lights and siren activated — killed Eric Wells, 30, and seriously injured two other riders.

Bisard surrendered after prosecutors learned a blood test had shown his blood-alcohol level was 0.19 — more than twice the level at which an Indiana driver is considered intoxicated.

But that arrest didn’t come until five days after the crash because of the lag in test results. The delay in arresting Bisard drew scrutiny from some — as did the fact that no officers conducted field-sobriety or breath tests of Bisard at the scene.

Or that nobody seemed to suspect Bisard might have been drinking. Officers who interacted with Bisard after the crash have insisted he showed no signs of being impaired. But more problematic for Brizzi: The officers failed to follow proper procedures in collecting that blood sample — and it was the only evidence that Bisard was intoxicated.

Over 10 years in practice and our Chicago DUI Lawyers have NEVER had this happen to one of our clients. “Travesty” doesn’t even begin to describe this case.

Our Chicago DUI Lawyers have long argued that people arrested for DUI are subject to more abuse than any other arrestee due to the hyper-criminalization of drunk driving.  Here’s another example.

Former Provo officer accused of trading sex act in lieu of arrest

PROVO — A Provo police officer accused of threatening to take a woman to jail unless she exposed her breasts to him was arrested and booked into jail this week.

Jeffery Westerman, 33, was arrested in Utah County on Tuesday but booked into the Juab County Jail for his protection. He was booked for investigation of forcible sexual abuse and obstruction of justice.

On July 22, Westerman investigated a minor traffic accident in Provo near 300 S. University Ave. At some point during his investigation, “He used his position to request sexual favors in exchange for not filing criminal charges,” said Utah County Sheriff’s Sgt. Spencer Cannon.

There were originally two drivers involved in the traffic accident, and one driver was eventually sent away, according to a probable cause statement filed with the jail. The female driver was asked to perform sobriety tests and, according to witnesses, “wasn’t performing well,” the document states.

Westerman drove the woman’s car into a nearby parking lot. While searching the vehicle, the woman told police that Westerman “began swearing and yelling at her.”

After Westerman told her he was going to arrest her for a felony, “he gave her the option of exposing her breasts to him,” the jail report states.
Story continues below

Westerman proceeded to fondle her while “making crude sexual comments to her,” according to the report. After she put her shirt down, Westerman allegedly told her to do it again because he was going to have to explain to his supervisor why he let a DUI suspect drive home.

“She stated that she lifted her top again because she didn’t want to go to jail,” the report states, and Westerman left after allegedly fondling her a second time.

The next day, the woman went to the Utah County Sheriff’s Office to report what had happened.

Westerman told investigators he was at the accident scene for only 10 minutes. Surveillance video, however, shows he was on scene for more than 50 minutes, the jail report states. The video also showed him driving her car to a nearby parking lot and searching it, just as she reported.

The case will be reviewed by the Utah County Attorney’s Office to determine if charges should be filed.

Reviewed to see if criminal charges should be filed?  Really?  With video proof supporting all charges? How long would they have reviewed this case to determine if charges should be filed if the police officer had accused the driver of DUI?

More hysteria on the way for those accused of DUI in New York.  Our Chicago DUI Lawyers note the new law coming into effect today for those convicted of drunk driving in New York.

NY requirement for ignition interlocks in effect

ALBANY, N.Y. — Driving a car won’t be as simple as inserting a key into the ignition for anyone convicted of a drunk driving charge.

A provision of Leandra’s law that went into effect Sunday requires individuals convicted of felony or misdemeanor drunk driving to install ignition interlock systems in their cars.

The devices are connected to ignition systems and measure the alcohol in a driver’s breath. If the driver fails, the ignition is disabled.

The interlocks have to be installed for at least six months and up to three years for a misdemeanor and five years for a felony.

Okay, great.  But what effect do these devices really have?  Well, one study¹ of these devices by the State of California showed the following:

• The expected effect that an IID order/restriction issued by the court would result in a lower rate of subsequent DUI convictions was not observed. (p. 7)
• The risk of a subsequent crash was higher for drivers installing an IID, compared to drivers not installing a device; drivers installing an IID had a risk of a subsequent crash that was 84% higher than drivers not installing an IID. (p. 10)
• The results of this outcome study clearly show that IIDs are not effective in reducing DUI convictions or incidents for first DUI offenders (p.22)
  
• Because there is no evidence that interlocks are an effective traffic safety measure for first DUI offenders, the use of the devices should not be emphasized. (p. 22)

So if these devices really don’t help, why are they required by law?  Could it be money driven?  Well, let’s take a look at what is going on in a state like New Mexico, with some of the toughest DUI laws on the books. From the Albuquerque, NM Journal:

[DUI] also carries a six-month license revocation where the offender can only legally drive a vehicle that has an ignition interlock installed. This device is designed to allow only a sober individual to operate the car.

That’s where the fees kick in. The interlock runs $960 per year and there’s a $45 “interlock fee.” That, plus a $100 license fee, a $65 crime lab fee, a $75 community fee, a $200 alcohol screening fee, a $20 corrections fee. All this adds up to $1615 in extra fees combined with the fine for a total of $2115, a number which does not include the cost of increased insurance, treatment, lost wages, towing and storage, court costs and attorney fees.

Wow.  Those IIDs sure are expensive.  So where does all this end?  It doesn’t. Groups like MADD are pushing to make these devices mandatory in all cars – regardless of whether or not the owner has ever had a DUI charge.  And who could be behind such an idea?  Well, car manufactures such as Saab already have produced IID technology for their future cars – now all they need is the legislation (which MADD promotes) to make it mandatory in order to cash in.  Oh, by the way, Saab (owned by GM) is part of the Auto Alliance Group, which is a group that contributes anywhere from $100,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 to MADD².  GM individually also contributes $50,000.00 to $99,000.00 to MADD².

So it’s not about money, if that’s what you think.

¹An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Ignition Interlock in California: Report to the Legislature of the State of California

²MADD 2008-9 Annual Report

Our Chicago Lawyers are often asked about some of the stranger DUI arrests that we have heard of, or some of the craziest personal injury lawsuits that we have seen.

Well, here’s the best example of both: a crazy personal injury lawsuit that also involved DUI.

In 1992, Karen Norman, after a night of drinking, accidentally backed her car down a boat ramp and into Galveston Bay, TX. Norman was unable to remove her automatic seat belt on her Honda and drowned. Norman’s estate sued Honda for making a seat belt that their daughter, whose blood alcohol level was measured at .17 shortly after the accident, couldn’t open underwater. Surprisingly enough, a jury found Honda seventy-five percent responsible for Karen’s death and awarded her estate $65 million. Not surprising was the ruling by the appeals court, which reversed the jury’s decision.

Tragic story, no doubt, and an even stranger personal injury lawsuit.

Another odd personal injury lawsuit – this time from a New York Mets’ fan who claims it is Major League Baseball and baseball players’ fault for the shattered bat that hit him in the face.

Sox’s Castro named in fan’s broken-bat lawsuit

August 9, 2010 Tribune News Services

A New York Mets fan who says a shattered bat smashed him in the face in the Shea Stadium stands is suing the team and Major League Baseball,

claiming they didn’t do enough to protect fans from break-prone maple bats.

James G. Falzon’s lawsuits follow years of discussion of the safety of maple baseball bats, which have become increasingly popular but have been shown to break apart more readily than traditional ash bats.

Falzon is seeking unspecified damages from the team, the league, Rawlings-brand bat maker the Jarden Corp. and two players: Mets second baseman Luis Castillo, who was wielding the bat, and White Sox catcher Ramon Castro (then with the Mets), who owned it, according to the lawsuits.