• Skip to main content

Levinson and Stefani Injury Lawyers

Client-first legal representation for injury victims. Injured? Free Consultation:

(312) 376-3812

  • Home
  • About Us
    • Attorneys
      • Ken Levinson
      • Jay Stefani
      • Vanessa A. Gebka
    • Practice Areas
      • Truck Crashes
      • Bus Collisions
      • Auto Accidents
      • Child Injuries
  • Firm News
  • Library
    • Articles
    • Cases
    • Law
    • Video
  • Blog
  • For Lawyers
    • Focus Groups
  • Free Case Review

Ken Levinson

Madigan’s 2015 Safe Shopping Guide highlights digital safety practices

December 3, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

2015_Safe_Shopping_Guide-1
One of the things we look forward to each holiday season is the Illinois Attorney General’s Safe Shopping Guide. Among the things detailed by Lisa Madigan and her staff is a host of information about various products that could cause, or have caused, havoc for consumers. But this year’s list contained a relatively new angle with respect to consumer safety, one that focused primarily on the smallest and most impressionable consumers: your kids. We found it to be one of the more insightful reports in recent memory, if only because the newest generation of children has never known a world without the Internet. The 2015 Guide sheds a little light on what to be aware of, should you be in the market for an iPad, smartphone or the like.

The new offering, “Creating a Positive Digital Culture in Your Home,” made sure to include useful tips on how to promote a safe learning environment for the tech savvy generation that is digesting more information via smartphone and tablet than ever before. If you’re considering buying devices for your kids this holiday season, this is the list for you.

This year’s guide provides a how-to list of points that stresses the importance of establishing age-appropriate limits on these devices so parents can monitor what their kids are accessing online. As Madigan states early on, recent studies show that an increasing number of children are left to use mobile and Internet-accessible on their own. Nearly 88% of American teens, ages 13–18, own or have access to a mobile phone; 73% of teens have smartphones. Even more remarkable, most of them started using mobile devices in their first year of life, according to statistics gathered by the AG’s office. The responsibility of having access to the Internet 24/7 is a responsibility many of us take for granted.

As a result, kids are exposed to the dangers of the Internet at increasingly younger ages. Madigan proposes a list of ten things that parents should take note of during the holiday season. Especially interesting, and worth pointing out, is bullet point number 6, the “use agreement.” Establishing those boundaries early on is a great way to hold you and your kids accountable in the future.

Top Ten:

  1. Maintain open communication with your child about technology and the appropriate uses of it.
  2. Make sure your child knows they cannot be anonymous on the Internet.
  3. Talk to your child about what should never be posted online and the dangers of posting too much information.
  4. Explain that posting online is just like writing in permanent marker – it cannot be erased.
  5. Engage your child in continuous conversations about how to behave online.
  6. Complete a “use agreement” with your child and talk about respecting others online. Establish and enforce household rules for technology usage.
  7. Discuss why strong passwords are important, how to create them and the need to keep them private. Obtain all passwords for devices and apps.
  8. Stay informed on your child’s Internet habits, review their user history and observe their social media activity. Know who their friends and followers are. (Taking it one step further, my wife and I don’t allow our children to erase their history. There’s consequences if we catch them doing so.)
  9. Be aware of changes in your child’s behavior that may indicate cyberbullying.
  10. Never threaten to take away your child’s phone or Internet access. This could prevent them from approaching you in the future about online problems.

Turning the dial up to 11:

(Bonus) 11. And in an ode to the Old West, we require our three boys to hand in their pistols/devices before they head off to bed, keeping distractions to a minimum.

Read the complete safety guide here.

How Takata became a dirty word

November 19, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Airbag
Photo: Wikimedia Commons


It started in the early 2000s. That’s when Takata started tinkering with ammonium nitrate, a chemical compound used to inflate its airbags, one of the company’s most lucrative endeavors. The Japanese manufacturer favored the chemical compound over other options, even as the compound came into question because of its vulnerability to changing temperatures and moisture. It’s been pointed out that Takata knew about the liabilities since 2004.

Years and several lawsuits later, Takata is finding out how damaging that decision has become. Clients like Mitsubishi, Toyota, Honda and other automakers are distancing themselves from what has turned into the biggest automotive safety recall in history. On November 3, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration administered the largest civil penalty in its existence against Takata. The grand total comes out to $200 million, a total that Takata may not be able to overcome.

The NHTSA, a division of the U.S. Department of Transportation, announced that it had issued two orders designed to protect drivers and travelers from Takata airbag inflators, the culprit that utilizes the phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate propellant to inflate its airbags. The propellant reportedly causes explosive ruptures that have been linked to at least eight deaths and hundreds of injuries.

Takata must now face the consequences for violating the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and cease production of inflators that use phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate propellant. The NHTSA is going the extra mile by seeking an independent monitor to keep tabs on Takata and its operations, an oversight period that will last for five years. (The NHTSA is currently seeking qualified candidates to apply for the position.)

The U.S. has ordered automakers to replace Takata airbags in 19 million vehicles, a process that could take as long as four years. But as auto partners begin shunning Takata parts in an effort to protect their reputation, consumers may be the ones who suffer the consequences. If Takata goes under as a result of the penalties and loss of business (airbags account for 40% of its business), there’s questions as to who/what will be responsible for replacing the defective airbags.

The NHTSA has come out with a list of cars and trucks from 12 different automakers deemed Priority One for replacement of Takata airbag inflators. The list includes makes from BMW, Fiat-Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Suburu and Toyota. Takata’s partners continue to bail out, consumers continue to sue and a federal agency continues to monitor operations. That will easily turn your company into a dirty word.

Complete list of recalled vehicles is below (Source: NHTSA). Do you own of one of these cars? Do you have questions about your legal recourse? Give us a call.

Automaker Model Model Year
BMW 328i 2000
M3 2001-2006
M5 2002-2003
323i 2000
325Ci 2002-2006
330Ci 2002-2006
325iT 2002-2003
325XiT 2002-2003
325i 2001-2006
325Xi 2001-2005
330i 2001-2006
330Xi 2001-2005
525i 2002-200
530i 2002-2003
540i 2002-2003
X5 3.0i 2003-2004
X5 4.4i 2003-2004
Automaker Model Model Year
FCA (Chrysler) Chrysler Aspen 2007-2008
Chrysler 300 2005-2010
Chrysler 300C 2005-2010
Chrysler SRT8 2005-2010
Dodge Challenger 2008-2010
Dodge Charger 2006-2010
Dodge Dakota 2005-2011
Dodge Durango 2004-2008
Dodge Magnum 2005-2008
Dodge Ram 1500 2003-2009
Dodge Ram 2500 2003-2009
Dodge Ram 3500 2003-2009
Dodge Ram 4500 2008-2010
Dodge Ram 5500 2008-2010
Automaker Model Model Year
Daimler Trucks North America Sterling Bullet 4500 2008-2009
Sterling Bullet 5500 2008-2009
Automaker Model Model Year
Daimler Vans USA LLC Dodge Sprinter 2500 2007-2008
Dodge Sprinter 3500 2007-2008
Freightliner Sprinter 2500 2007-2008
Freightliner Sprinter 3500 2007-2008
Automaker Model Model Year
Ford Ranger 2004-2006
GT 2005-2006
Mustang 2005-2014
Automaker Model Model Year
General Motors (GM) Chevrolet Silverado 2500 2007-2008
Chevrolet Silverado 3500 2007-2008
GMC Sierra 2500 2007-2008
GMC Sierra 3500 2007-2008
Pontiac Vibe 2003-2007
Saab 9-2x 2005
Automaker Model Model Year
Honda Accord 2001-2007
Civic 2001-2005
Civic Hybrid 2003-2005
Civic CNGNEW 2001-2004
CR-V 2002-2006
Element 2003-2011
Odyssey 2002-2004
Pilot 2003-2008
Ridgeline 2006
Acura CL 2003
Acura TL 2002-2003
Acura MDX 2003-2006
Acura RL 2005
Automaker Model Model Year
Mazda B-Series Truck 2004-2006
Mazda6 2003-2008
Mazda Mazdaspeed6 2006-2007
MPV 2004-2005
RX-8 2004-2008
Automaker Model Model Year
Mitsubishi Lancer 2004-2006
Lancer Evolution 2004-2006
Lancer Sportback 2004
Mitsubishi Raider 2006-2009
Automaker Model Model Year
Nissan Nissan Maxima 2001-2003
Nissan Sentra 2002-2006
Nissan Pathfinder 2002-2004
Infiniti I30 2001
Infiniti FX35 2003-2005
Infiniti FX45 2003-2005
Infiniti I35 2002-2004
Infiniti M35 2006
Infiniti M45 2006
Infiniti QX4 2002-2003
Automaker Model Model Year
Subaru Baja 2003-2005
Impreza 2004-2005
Legacy 2003-2005
Outback 2003-2005
Automaker Model Model Year
Toyota Corolla 2003-2007
Corolla Matrix 2003-2007
Rav4 2004-2005
Sequoia 2002-2007
Tundra 2003-2006
Lexus SC 2002-2007

Understanding the role of punitive damages in big verdicts

November 16, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Sliding-door-settlement
A 61-year-old man from Springfield might be $21.5 million richer because of an injury he suffered on a cruise ship in May of 2011. And just like that the debate over big jury verdicts is once again in the news.

If you haven’t heard, here’s the summary: James Hausman and his wife were aboard the Holland America Cruise Line when a sliding door slammed against Hausman’s temple, causing him to momentarily lose balance. What looks relatively innocuous on security cameras turns out to be much more severe. He later experienced seizures, memory loss and vertigo. Hausman filed a lawsuit against the cruise line for negligence, and a jury felt there was enough evidence to award $5 million for future and past pain and suffering, and $16.5 million in punitive damages, a judgment the cruise line is now appealing and calling excessive.

Like the infamous McDonalds coffee incident before it, this case has all the drama of a made-for-TV movie, drumming up public ire while giving legal analysts a chance to shed light on what the verdict actually means, and how it relates to the larger goals of tort law. Dan Abrams, the legal analyst for Good Morning America, called the verdict “nuts,” saying these types of cases are partly why the American public distrusts the legal system, even though he agreed that Hausman deserved to recover damages. It would be wrong, though, to overlook just how important punitive damages are in situations like this, and why trial lawyers seek big numbers in personal injury cases at all. Abrams may be right to a degree about public perception, but it’s hard to criticize the jury’s decision without having been in the room to hear the facts and assess the credibility of the witnesses.


ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos

Thanks to a security camera, we’re able to see the extent of what happened to Hausman. It’s not necessarily jarring, which, unfortunately, leads to somewhat cynical conclusions. As the story and video began circulating on social media, commenters predictably had lots to say.

“As many times as I got hit by a sliding door or elevator door, I never thought to sue someone for millions. Great idea I guess 🙂 21.5 million is ridiculous,” said one commenter.

“So he gets his head stuck in a door—guess he didn’t have very good reflexes to stop it to start out with. So sick of this sue happy society,” said another.

That people associate such a huge sum with the individual is the problem trial lawyers have had to contend with since the beginning. On top of it, these types of cases are almost always a battle of David vs. Goliath, where corporate defense attorneys are given limitless financial resources.

Really, the role of punitive damages is one of contextual significance and a matter of public safety. During the case, the plaintiff attorney Rick Friedman uncovered that nearly 34 incidents involving sliding doors had occurred on the Holland America cruise line dating back three years. Executives did little to rectify the situation and it finally came back to haunt them. A jury found enough reason to punish Holland America for failing to protect Hausman and other passengers by choosing to ignore an ongoing problem. When Friedman laid out his settlement demands (which the cruise line balked at since the case eventually went to trial) it wasn’t to make one man richer, but to make a large corporation think twice about its decision-making. Since this has all happened, you can be sure Holland America is taking a harder look at every single sliding door and other safety hazards on its ships. Taking $21.5 million out of the coffers is bound to have an impact.

And therein lies the power of punitive damages. You’ll often hear personal injury lawyers use the word negligence. That’s a word that puts large corporations on their heels because it implies a willingness to neglect an ongoing problem. If it proves to be true, then continuous neglect turns into a matter of public safety. All this is to say that the role of punitive damages in personal injury cases is to send a message. Hausman may reap the monetary benefits of this particular message, but it’s worth pointing out that his wife said she’d give it all back if it meant her husband could function normally again. We hear that a lot with our clients, too. Unlike big companies/corporations, money is always the least of their problems.

Tainted candy: myth or fact?

October 30, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Candy-Corn
Harrowing tales abound on Halloween. You’ve heard the stories: needles, razor blades and little pieces of glass hidden inside candy treats. It’s the nightmare parents have been dreading since, well, the beginning of the holiday, even if most consider it to be an urban legend. But the instances that have made their way to the mainstream have scared enough parents into believing that anything’s possible, and so the stories persist.

Broadly speaking, the stories began back when mom-and-pop shops started transforming from wholesome, intimate storefronts to industrial giants. The birth of assembly-line production allowed manufacturers to churn out mass quantities of goodies to the public, thanks to the help of their employees. And as more than one “stranger” started handling the goods, the speculation that at least one nefarious employee reveled in putting sharp objects into chocolate bars went wild, however strange it sounded.

Whether urban myth or not, you’d be hard pressed to find someone who hasn’t, at the very least, heard about shady candy practices. Sensationalized? Maybe. But that’s not stopping people from being overly cautious. Chicago Parent had a great throwback of safety tips from 1985, one of which touched on candy safety. And wouldn’t you know it, someone’s cousin stumbled upon a razor blade stuffed inside a candy bar 30 years ago. So whether you subscribe to the idea that tainted candy is a real danger or not, the fact remains: bad people continue to do bad things. There’s no downside to doing a quick check on your kids’ bounty.

It got us thinking about a few specific candies to watch for, and we’ve put together a quick list of the prime candidates based on several factors: size, content and disguise. Our list is also based on previously documented stories and findings online. We also have two professional dads in our midst who have seen their share of candy-coated delights, so science-based or not, you know you’re getting the advice of two sound experts in the field of kid candy mayhem.

Snickers

Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Snickers are big. Snickers are dense. Snickers are long. Snickers are prime candidates for tricks instead of treats. The chocolate coated, caramel and peanut-based treat encompasses just about every red flag when it comes to hiding something. It’s easy to pack a little in a lot: pennies, razors, nails and broken shards of glass. Or it’s easy to simply hide something sinister like a pin needle in a dense center without drawing much attention. The Lakewood neighborhood in Denver reported several needles being found inside Snickers Bars last Halloween, prompting the city to issue a warning.

Inspect for frayed edges, already opened packaging and small holes that look suspicious. Your best bet is to break the bar in half and do a quick scan of the contents. And when in doubt, throw it out.

Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups

Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Reese’s are big. Reese’s are dense… You get where we’re going. Peanut butter cups have almost the same characteristics of a Snickers bar only the danger lies closer to the surface. Your child is more likely to take a bigger chomp out of a Reese’s cup, which may induce them to swallow the razor rather than biting it. And the thinner the razor, the harder they are to find.

In 2011, a father in New Mexico discovered a razor blade in his son’s Reese’s cup, slid sideways into the buttery portion with an edge protruding on the side. Thanks to dutiful inspection, John Martinez was able to spare his son the consequences of a traumatic outcome.

Rock Candy

Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

The Contra Costa Times published a disturbing story about an 8-year-old girl who happened to stumble upon 0.1 grams of crystal meth in her candy bag. And for those of you who don’t know anything about meth (with the exception of having watched a few Breaking Bad episodes) would be surprised to learn that the crystalized drug looks identical to the crystals of rock candy that has proven to be popular among kids. In fact, diehard Breaking Bad fans have reproduced rock candy to look like the meth on the show. So that should give you a good idea of how easy it is to disguise this particular trick.

The likelihood of stumbling upon crystal meth is pretty low. Even so, it’s happened. This trick is difficult to test in any form, so if there’s any hint of skepticism, chuck in the garbage.

Lollipops and Gummy Bears

Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Believe it or not, Lolli’s and Gummy’s are even more “disguisable” than you think. Last year, the Denver Police put out a Public Service Announcement on its Facebook page, warning parents of marijuana-laced treats that looked nearly identical to the real thing. Translucence is a big key to figuring out the difference, but it’s minute. As recommended by a few experts, it’s best to allow your kids to trick-or-treat with a small container and then dumping the contents into a bigger bag that parents can control. That will prevent kids from eating random pieces of candy before you’ve had a chance for inspection. As is often the case, parents can see things that a child can’t, so make sure at least one adult has had a chance to look things over. One more thing: Never accept fruit or anything that isn’t wrapped. And again, when in doubt, throw it out.

Have a safe Halloween, everyone.

Four things you should accomplish after an accident

October 26, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

It’s hard to think about the legal implications of an auto accident in the aftermath of a crash. The reaction, whether it’s the crash victim or a family member, is to focus on his/her injuries versus a protracted legal battle. I recently returned from teaching at the AAJ Trucking College in Dallas, where about 100 lawyers came together to discuss their cases and gain insight into legal know-hows. It reminded me of a few points that crash victims should be thinking about in the event of an accident, things that could prove to be difference makers once your lawyer starts negotiating a settlement or starts preparing for a trial.

What you know is that you’ve been hurt. What you don’t know is that insurance companies have taken steps to protect their interests almost immediately.

We’ve put together an informal checklist to make you aware of legal protections and to help you avoid the pitfalls of the shady business practices of insurance companies at the expense of someone’s inexperience. Contrary to what they tell you, insurance companies are looking to pay as little as possible, no matter how much they like to pretend. Of the dozens of crash cases we see each year, the bottom line is money: one side is looking for fair compensation (injured clients) while the other is looking to save themselves from paying more than they have to (insurance companies). That’s a different discussion entirely, but in the meantime keep these things in mind if you ever find yourself in an auto accident.

Contact a lawyer immediately

You’d be surprised to learn that some people wait until it’s too late. Our team fields calls each day from crash victims who take insurance companies at face value. Clients tell us how, in the beginning, insurers claim that ensuing compensation will be fair and equitable. Whether that turns out to be true is not necessarily the case. If you think about it from the perspective of an insurance claims representative, their goal is simple: save money, however possible. If that means pulling the wool over your eyes, then so be it. Our job is to make sure that doesn’t happen. You’ll save yourself a world of angst just by taking the time to contact the appropriate people with the appropriate resources.

By contacting a lawyer immediately, you’ve done three things: You’ve a) contacted someone who will protect your interests from the beginning of the process, b) you’ve contacted someone who knows the ins and outs of legal necessities (in the case of a truck crash, for example, gaining access to a black box, video surveillance, driving logs, etc. before they somehow “disappear”) and c) you’ve contacted someone who’s familiar with what fair compensation is and how to assess your injuries and the damage you’ve sustained. In short, lawyers are your vessel for full protection when your immediate concerns should be about your health.

Gather all relevant details of your crash

This might seem self-explanatory, and it may seem like it’s a job for someone else, namely the responding officer. It’s not necessarily enough. What’s worse, it’s likely not the first thing that’s on your mind after a crash. Still, witnesses are one of the most important factors in any injury case for obvious reasons. Did your accident take place at a nearby school or in front of a supermarket? Did it happen in your neighborhood or in a populated region? Did someone take pictures?

These are the details that can prove effective during settlement negotiations or a trial, even something as simple as noting the time of day, taking note of a cell phone log, or even the type of shirt the driver was wearing (was it a novelty shirt that, however jokingly, referenced fast driving?). All the ammunition you can muster will only help to serve your interests. Recounting them by putting it on paper will keep you ahead of the game.

Think of a family member/friend that might be willing to help

An auto accident can be a traumatizing experience. One of the things that many people find helpful is asking a friend and/or family member to act on their behalf. The scope of which you decided to allow your friend or family member to be involved is up to you, but the purpose is to take undue stress off your shoulders. If that means organizing a schedule of events, keeping up to speed with updates or acting as liaison to your lawyer, then all the better. The point is to make sure your interests are protected from the start and throughout the process of litigation.

Get to the “human level”

Trust is the most important part of any relationship. That goes for your lawyer, too. You need to feel safe. You need to feel comfortable. That’s part of our job, but you can’t take things for granted. There are questions you want to ask: “Have you handled a case like this before?” for example. “Are you licensed to practice in Illinois?” Sound bizarre? You’d be surprised just how many people are willing to take on a case without the proper licensure. To use an old adage: no question is a bad question. The more comfortable you feel, the better the opportunity for a seamless process and peace of mind. Build together, grow together, win together.

Traffic deaths in cars? U.S. is No. 1

October 20, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

The World Health Organization released numbers on Monday morning as part of its “Global Status Report on Road Safety 2015,” prompting the Wall Street Journal to promote a headline on social media titled “11 Deadliest Places to Drive.” I came across the article as I was scrolling through my news feed and noticed that the United States ranks sixth on WSJ’s Deadliest list with more than 34,000 traffic deaths per year, trailing densely populated countries like China and India. Also tucked in the report: The U.S. ranks first in the percentage of traffic deaths in cars. More on that in a sec.

You can click here for a comprehensive look at the WHO report, but here are some highlights in the meantime:

  • 105 countries have good seat-belt laws that apply to all occupants;
  • 47 countries have good speed laws defining a national urban maximum speed limit of 50 Km/h and empowering local authorities to further reduce speed limits;
  • 34 countries have a good drink–driving law with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit of less than or equal to 0.05 g/dl as well as lower limits of less than or equal to 0.02 g/dl for young and novice drivers;
  • 44 countries have helmet laws that apply to all drivers, passengers, roads and engine types; require the helmet to be fastened and refer to a particular helmet standard;
  • 53 countries have a child restraint law for occupants of vehicles based on age, height or weight, and apply an age or height restriction on children sitting in the front seat.

The stats seemingly provide positive news given how many cars/drivers there are on the road. In fact, this year’s total traffic-related deaths (1.25 million around the world) are slightly down from last year’s total.

The bad news, however, is that the numbers are still way too high, and the U.S. is No. 1 when it comes to the percentage of traffic deaths in cars at 64 percent; meaning 64 percent of most traffic deaths took place in cars, as opposed to a pedestrian who may have been struck by a vehicle while walking. That’s higher than Russia, Iran, Brazil and China, the next five respective leaders, one of which has a gross population that’s more than triple the number of people living in the U.S.

Screen Shot 2015-10-19 at 3.15.07 PM
Source: World Health Organization

What does the WHO report mean as it relates to drivers in the U.S.? On the surface, it could mean that many of us are simply bad drivers. More likely, it means that driving laws in the U.S.—whether it involves seat belt enforcement, hours-of-service laws, or speed limit restrictions—need to be re-evaluated. The WHO noted in its report that countries that have the most success reducing the number of road traffic deaths have done so through legislation and an emphasis on enforcement.

If you’re like us, that means taking a closer look at lax trucking legislation that could spell problems down the road. Earlier this month, Jay wrote about semi-trucks getting heavier by the ton, and we’ve been keeping watch on a law that may eventually allow 18-year-olds to get behind the wheel of a 40-ton tractor-trailer. Insurance policies are capped at a level that often proves meager for truck crash victims, forcing many of them to battle it out in court for an equitable sum. Here in Illinois, for example, the state increased the maximum speed limit at the beginning of the 2015 for trucks in certain rural parts of the state—from 55mph to 60mph. The question safety advocates were asking: was it really necessary?

The bottom line with regard to all of this is that, yet again, the driving laws in the U.S. need to be looked at with a more critical eye. As mentioned, traffic-related deaths have decreased in comparison to years past: that’s a shred of progress, but it’s still happening too slow. It’s time to start moving a little faster.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Page 7
  • Page 8
  • Page 9
  • Go to Next Page »

Levinson and Stefani Injury Lawyers in Chicago / Attorney Advertising