Personal Injury Category Archives — Page 22 of 23 — South Florida Injury Attorneys Blog Published by South Florida Injury Lawyers

July 5, 2021

Steps to Take After a Burn Injury

A serious burn injury can often leave victims and their families with a lifetime of physical and mental pain and suffering, lost wages from missing work, hefty medical expenses, and property damage. Depending on what caused your burn injury, negligent parties who fail to keep burn injury victims safe could be held legally liable for monetary compensation to pay for these damages. Having a qualified attorney on your side to help with your burn injury claim could be a critical step for you to pursue the full amount of compensation you legally deserve.

The reputable attorneys at Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers are standing by to discuss your burn injury claim during a free initial consultation. Our firm has over 40 years of combined legal experience while amassing more than $200 million in successful verdicts and settlements for our past clients. We have handled thousands of cases involving serious injury, including burn injury claims. Our knowledgeable attorneys know how to apply state and local laws to help you seek compensation from negligent parties that are responsible for the damages they created.

If your case is viable, we can properly guide you through the necessary steps to take throughout the legal process so that you can recover from your injuries. Read on to learn some of these crucial steps and why they are so important to the outcome of your burn injury claim.

June 21, 2021

Common Injuries Sustained in a Train Accident

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

Injuries from train accidents can range in severity from mild scratches and bruises, which can heal in a short period, to long-term catastrophic injuries that may require expensive medical care. Add to this the funds you may lose out on from missing work while you recover, the results from a serious train crash could leave you and your family in a difficult financial situation. Discussing your train accident claim with a knowledgeable attorney may be in your best interests.

The experienced attorneys at the law firm of Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers, help educate accident victims about their legal options to seek compensation to help pay for medical bills, lost wages, loss of future wages, pain and suffering, loss of consortium, and more. Our dedicated attorneys know what it takes to help victims through the legal process following a train crash. We never settle for less when it comes to protecting the rights of our clients.

Our firm has over 40 years of combined legal experience, so we have seen our fair share of train accident injury cases. Read on to find out about some of the more common types of injuries we have observed over the years and some of the physical, psychological, and emotional effects they tend to have on injury victims.

May 26, 2021

Florida Personal Injury Lawsuits Following Changes to Summary Judgment Rule

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

In December 2020, the Florida Supreme Court announced that effective May 2021, Florida state courts would begin following the federal summary judgment standard. These changes will inevitably drastically impact Florida personal injury lawsuits. Further solidifying the change, at the end of April, the Florida Supreme court reviewed comments from the legal community and amended the language of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.510 (FLRCP 1.510). The amendment “largely adopted” the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56 (FRCP 56) text as a replacement for FLRCP 1.510.

The standard governs summary motions pending or decided on or after May 1, 2021. Additionally, the Supreme Court stated that courts should allow parties to file a renewed summary judgment motion if their motion was denied under the old rule. The critical changes to the rule change involve:

The summary judgment standard now “mirrors” the standard for directed verdicts;

May 14, 2021

How Does a Medical Lien Work in a Personal Injury Case?

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

If you have an existing medical lien during your personal injury case, you may be wondering if this will prevent you from receiving financial compensation. You may need to pay your past due bills before receiving a payment from your personal injury settlement. Having an experienced lawyer look into this issue is one of the many advantages to hiring legal representation.

Learn how you can protect your rights to seek legal compensation by contacting the attorneys of Frankl and Kominsky for a cost-free initial evaluation of your injury claim. Our distinguished attorneys have over 40 years of combined legal experience.

Do not worry about medical expenses interfering with your recovery efforts. If your claim has merit, our attorneys can guide you through the legal process and help you manage any medical liens and other expenses related to your injury. Our job as a personal injury law firm is to help you pursue the fair amount of allowable compensation.

February 19, 2020

Punitive Damages in Florida Personal Injury Cases

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

When someone is injured in a Florida accident, the state’s law allows them to file a civil suit against the responsible party. If successful, plaintiffs may be able to recover monetary compensation to cover lost wages, pain and suffering, past and future medical expenses, loss of consortium, and even funeral and burial expenses. This compensation is called compensatory damages. In some cases, plaintiffs can also file for what is called punitive damages. In contrast to compensatory, Florida punitive damages focus on punishing the defendant, rather than making the plaintiff whole.

Punitive damages are only available in a small percentage of cases, where the conduct of the defendant was particularly egregious. But when they are awarded, they can be set as high as $500,000. Thus, when they are sued, it is in the defendant’s best interest to ensure that the plaintiff does not seek punitive damages. Generally, Florida has two situations in which plaintiffs can receive punitive damages—when the plaintiff can prove either intentional misconduct or gross negligence. Intentional misconduct occurs when someone knows that their conduct was dangerous and could injure someone but did it anyway. Gross negligence occurs when someone, indifferent to the life and safety of others, acts extremely recklessly or carelessly.

Plaintiffs may sometimes want to amend their complaint to seek punitive damages after it has already been filed. Section 768.72(1) of the Florida Statutes does allow plaintiffs to do just that in cases where “there is a reasonable showing by evidence in the record or proffered by the claimant which would provide a reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” Whether or not a trial court grants this amendment is very important to a case; the Florida Supreme Court held 25 years ago that appellate courts cannot review a lower court’s decision to allow an amendment to a suit to include punitive damages so long as the judge follows proper procedures.

June 12, 2019

Florida Court Allows Plaintiffs to Amend Claim to Seek Punitive Damages

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

In April of 2019, a state appellate court issued a written opinion in a Florida personal injury case discussing whether the plaintiffs were properly allowed to amend their complaint to add a claim for punitive damages against the defendant. Ultimately, the court concluded that the trial court followed the required procedures when granting the plaintiffs leave to amend, and that the appellate court did not have jurisdiction to reconsider the lower court’s substantive legal decision once it determined the procedures were followed.

According to the court’s opinion, the plaintiffs were the parents of a young girl who was seriously injured when she fell from a ride called “Psycho Swing.” The safety harness was not installed on the ride at the time of the girl’s injury. The plaintiffs filed a personal injury claim against several parties, including the defendant, which was the company that owned the ride and leased it to the company that was operating it when the plaintiff was injured. The plaintiffs claimed that the ride was missing crucial safety equipment and was being operated without the instruction manual.

Initially, the plaintiff sought punitive damages from all other defendants but not the defendant involved in this appeal. However, the plaintiffs soon after requested a second hearing, seeking leave to amend their complaint to add a claim for punitive damages against this defendant. The court considered evidence from the first hearing, as well as deposition testimony from the creator of the ride who stated, among other things, that providing the swing to another company without the safety harness was “unconscionably something that you shouldn’t do.” After hearing all the evidence, the court determined that there was a reasonable basis for the plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages. The defendant filed an immediate appeal.

April 11, 2018

Florida Court Rejects Nursing Home’s Request to Have Arbitrator Determine Validity of Arbitration Agreement

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

Earlier this month, an appellate court issued a written opinion in a Florida wrongful death case brought by a woman whose husband died while in the care of the defendant nursing home. The case required that the court determine whether the plaintiff’s claim involving the validity of the arbitration agreement should be determined by the named arbitrator, or whether it was properly before the court. Citing the lack of a delegation clause, the court determined that the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to make the determination.

Arbitration in Florida Nursing Home Cases

It is common for a Florida nursing home resident to be provided with an arbitration agreement prior to admission and asked to sign. While a nursing home cannot make admission contingent upon the signing of the agreement, that fact is rarely made known to residents and their families.

The benefits of arbitration flow mostly to the nursing home. For example, the decreased cost of litigation is more important for a nursing home, which may face frequent claims. Similarly, the confidentiality of arbitration benefits the nursing home in the event that the resident’s claim is substantiated. Finally, nursing homes are able to choose the forum where the arbitration will take place, creating the potential for favoritism and bias.

November 8, 2017

Florida Court Refuses to Consider Insurance Company’s Argument Raised for the First Time in a Post-Trial Motion

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

As a general rule, litigants in Florida car accident cases must raise any issues they have with the trial court’s decisions at the moment a decision is made. Similarly, when responding to a claim or allegation, a party should be sure to make all relevant arguments at that time. Otherwise, a court may consider the argument waived.

The purpose of the waiver rule is to encourage efficient resolution of cases. If, for example, a party were able to raise any issue at any time, courts would find themselves dealing with a never-ending series of motions and requests as the parties came up with new versions of old arguments. Instead, Florida court rules require that parties bring everything they have upfront so that the judge can make one informed decision that will not need to be revisited, absent a legal error. A recent Florida personal injury case illustrates this concept.

The Facts

The plaintiff was injured when another motorist struck her vehicle. The other motorist did not have sufficient insurance coverage to fully compensate the plaintiff for the injuries she sustained. The plaintiff, however, was covered under two other insurance policies: an Allstate policy in her mother’s name and a Geico policy in her father’s name. The Allstate policy provided $5,000 more in coverage than the Geico policy.

September 6, 2017

Maintaining a Healthy Work-Life Balance

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

As work-life balance is getting harder to maintain, partly due to the ever-evolving technology that is available to access around the clock, I would like to talk about ways of disconnecting to improve your work habits. Being good at resting is an important component in achieving a well-balanced work-life-schedule.

Unplug. As work day seems to never end, find a suitable time when you are able to shut your phone off and enjoy the moment, whether it’s with your family, friends or pets.
Don’t be a perfectionist. As you get older it’s harder to maintain perfectionist tendencies. It could be very disruptive to your everyday activities.

October 19, 2016

Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal Examines Rear-End Collision Presumption

by Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers

Under Florida law, it is presumed in rear-end collision cases that the driver of the rear vehicle was negligent. Although this presumption can be a useful tool for litigants, the presumption is not absolute, and those seeking to make recourse to this presumption must be able to show that no possible negligence on their part contributed to the collision. Questions regarding the application of this rear-end collision presumption were at the core of a recent decision from the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Padilla v. Schwartz, involving a rear-end collision on the Florida Turnpike.

As stated above, the accident at issue occurred along a stretch of the Florida Turnpike where construction was taking place. The plaintiff was driving on the turnpike when he struck the back of a vehicle being operated by the defendant. At his deposition, the plaintiff testified that he was driving within the speed limit and that he did not observe any vehicles near him until immediately before the collision. The plaintiff further testified that only shortly before the accident did he see the defendant’s vehicle, which he asserted appeared suddenly before him, and that although he applied his brakes, it was not enough to avoid striking the rear of the defendant’s vehicle. Following the accident, the plaintiff brought a negligence lawsuit against the defendant. At the conclusion of discovery, the defendant moved for summary judgment, asserting that he was entitled to the rear-end collision presumption and that the plaintiff had failed to adduce evidence to rebut the presumption that his negligence, rather than the defendant’s, caused the accident. The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment, and the plaintiff appealed.