Illinois is giving repeat DUI offenders a fifth chance. Seriously.

September 30, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Has the governor and state assembly gone too far?

Our great state is not one for second chances. It’s actually more like five.

News started trickling out last week that Governor Bruce Rauner and the Illinois General Assembly have moved forward with a measure that would give drivers convicted of multiple DUIs an opportunity to redeem themselves. Starting in January of 2015, repeat offenders that have racked up four DUIs will be eligible to receive a restricted driving permit, only after proving that they’ve been alcohol and drug-free for at least three years. As of now, four DUIs means the state revokes your license.

The Chicago Sun-Times reported that state representatives feel the new law is, in part, as much a deterrent as it is an incentive to keep people with bad records from making poor decisions. As noble as it may sound, the sentiment rings hallow in more ways than one.

I dare to guesstimate that there are thousands of people whose lives have been affected by drunk driving accidents. Using phrases like “second chance” and “turn their lives around” (language used by state reps) as public appeals for support is borderline offensive, especially when “second chance” in this case is much more than two. Surprisingly, the measure has earned the support of organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (M.A.D.D.) and Alliance Against Intoxicated Motorists. I can’t presume to know the ins and outs of those conversations, but part of me has to believe that M.A.D.D. and A.A.I.M. want to promote the same “second chance” ideals as the state. But the process by which it came together doesn’t seem to account for the folks who have lost much more than a license.

For my money, repeat-offenders deserve little, if any, sympathy when it comes to drunk driving convictions, arrests or citations. Do first-time offenders deserve a second chance? Absolutely. After that, it’s not so much a mistake as it is a pattern; justifying that kind of behavior is hard to do, yet it seems Illinois is willing to give lots of people the benefit of the doubt. That’s hard when the statistics are so unfavorable.

The Sun-Times noted that more than 5,000 people in Illinois have been convicted of at least four DUIs. Illinois state police made 5,784 DUI arrests in 2014; Chicago police logged at least 3,321. Of the more than 34,000 DUI-related arrests made in 2013, 317 people were killed because of a drunk-driving-related accident. To the families who continue to live through the impact of poor decisions, this new law can’t help but feel backwards by giving four-time offenders another opportunity to get back on the road, even if their citation never led to an accident. It’s four chances too many.

What’s worse is that the precedent for future legislation has been established. What’s to stop the governor from making it six DUIs in 2017 if he and the assembly are willing to stretch it to five in 2016? Let’s hope we can keep our “second chances” in the state to a minimum moving forward.

Defective hip implant could be cause for legal claims

September 20, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Auto accident victims could be entitled to compensation

We handle lots of collision scenarios that deal with short-term and long-term injuries resulting from auto and truck accidents. Most of the time, cases stem from the crash itself, but lately, we’ve been reviewing cases that develop after the fact, as in situations that involve faulty implants and defective products. That includes hip implants, the symptoms of which may not appear for years after the procedure.

You may know from the news that the The Stryker Rejuvenate/ABG II metal-on-metal hip implant has caused serious damage lately. Stryker, one of the world’s largest medical equipment manufacturers, has committed more than $2 billion to settle injury claims as it relates to the company’s frequently-used hip implant, subsequently recalled en mass. There could be more suits where that came from.

The company halted all global sales and production of the ABG II shortly after the company issued what it calls an “Urgent Field Safety Notice,” pointing out the potential health hazards like corrosion and “fretting,” an unsettling term that describes minute shards of metal leaching into muscle tissue and the bloodstream. It often requires revision surgery to correct allergic reactions, extreme discomfort and noticeable changes in mobility.

The lawsuits filed against Stryker continue to grow, even after the recall that dates back to 2012. It’s of particular significance to auto collision victims who, for lack of a better phrase, are suffering because of unfortunate timing. If you’ve been in an accident recently, one that required the implementation of the AGB II, you may be entitled to damages because of the effects of a defective product.

This recall has our office reviewing several potential cases and impending lawsuits to determine if our clients have a case. There are currently more than 500 lawsuits pending due to the Stryker recall, some of which may include clients of Levinson and Stefani who were in need of surgery in recent years.

If you happen to be one of the few whom have suffered because of this recall, you could be entitled to financial compensation. We are offering free consultations to determines if such cases are viable, and we welcome the opportunity to study aspects of your case.

Stryker recalled the AGB II nearly four years ago, later settling several cases in 2014 after complaints from numerous patients led to a massive recall. The symptoms of the defective hip are noticeable. They include prolonged pain in the hip or leg, swelling and a change in walking ability. Plaintiffs have received hundreds of thousands of dollars in settlements, and some prospective plaintiffs may be entitled to more based on the severity of their condition.

The basis for this particular case is an indication of negligence. There is clear evidence to suggest that Stryker distributed the implants despite failing to test them properly. And now Stryker is paying the price, literally and figuratively. If you believe you have experienced symptoms due to a defective implant, contact our office and we’ll review your case during a free consultation. Our objective is to hold negligent parties accountable, and we will work hard on your behalf to make sure, as best as possible, that it doesn’t happen again.

From a lawyer’s perspective: The brilliant, and underappreciated significance of ‘The Golden Girls’

September 14, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

I was a senior in high school when the The Golden Girls aired 30 years ago today. The NBC hit about four female retirees who shared a home in suburban Miami debuted back in 1985 to widespread critical acclaim, which it sustained for seven seasons, earning two Primetime Emmy Awards for Outstanding Comedy Series.

In 2014, the Writers Guild of America ranked the show No. 69 on its list of “101 Best Written TV Series Of All Time,” not least of which is due, in part, to its unconventional and forward-thinking premise. For all its sweet humor, there was something uniquely revolutionary about casting four senior-aged women to lead a network sitcom, in the throes of what one could argue was a culture still struggling to relinquish the Boys Club mentality.

The top three shows in 1985, after The Golden Girls, according to IMDB, were: Growing Pains starring Alan Thicke, MacGyver with Richard Dean Anderson, and Small Wonder with Tiffany Brissette (in which Brissette isn’t even human; she’s a robot created by her inventor father). Other popular shows in the ’80s: Cheers, Hill Street Blues, The Cosby Show, Newhart, and Star Trek. Count at least one male lead in each of the aforementioned shows. That’s not to suggest it was all male, all the time (The Facts of Life and Murder She Wrote stand out as two prime examples). By most executive’s standards, though, The Golden Girls was a huge gamble, a roll of the dice that ultimately paid off.

The Golden Girls predated some radical changes in the legal world, too, that would ultimately come to fruition in the early ’90s, and later, the 21^st century. Back in 1985, Sandra Day O’Connor was the only female Supreme Court Justice on the bench; Janet Reno was still eight years away from becoming the first female Attorney General of the United States; and Ruth Bader Ginsburg wouldn’t be appointed to the Supreme Court until 1993. Today, three female Supreme Court Justices (Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor) are making history; Loretta Lynch is serving as the first female African American Attorney General, and a formidable former Secretary of State (who graduated from Yale Law in 1973) is making her second run for the Presidency in 2016. Times have changed for the better and in much more radical ways.

It would be a stretch to suggest that The Golden Girls was, on its own, an agent for change in a world coming into its own. But part of me believes that a show like The Golden Girls, so timeless in its humor and so revolutionary in its concept, was able to inform popular thinking because of its mainstream fame; we saw them as larger-than-life in the twilight of life, and even then, there was never more to live for. It was dependence, independence, and freedom in its own way.

Before Dorothy, Blanche, Rose and Sophia ever hit the screen, I think a lot of TV executives couldn’t believe that four retirees living in Miami could be anything but a tepid plot. Could anyone conceive, at the time, of a female Attorney General that would go on to make some of the most consequential policy in the history of our country? And would anyone believe that three Supreme Court Justices would be doing the same in 2015? Or that Loretta Lynch could take on a giant like FIFA? I think a lot of us believed it, even if it took too long to get there. Thanks to shows like The Golden Girls, we were maybe able to get there sooner than expected.

Spinal injuries and the long road to recovery

September 11, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Auto accidents account for 36 percent of new SCI cases

Part of representing injury victims is conducting a thorough analysis of their injuries. When we submit images of dismantled cars and busted limbs, or talk in detail about the drunk driver who decided to get behind the wheel of a car on his/her way home from a bar, it’s not to indulge in gruesome details but to point out the consequences of dangerous conduct. For many of our clients that have suffered because of carelessness, it’s a long road to recovery, even a life-long affliction that never goes away.

Spinal injuries are some of the worst injuries we see on a regular basis. And unlike other injuries, they’re impossibly difficult to overcome both physically and financially. We’re talking damage to generative tissue, disc fractures and limb paralysis that require long hours of rehab. That’s to say nothing of the medical bills. The average yearly health care, living expenses and estimated lifetime costs attributed to Spinal Chord Injuries (SCI), hovers around $70,000 per year. That’s taking into account several financial variables but you get the idea. What’s worse is that victims go broke on their way to a civil case, which insurance companies aim to settle for barely a fraction of what most people would consider fair compensation. That’s a different conversation altogether. It’s these types of cases that ultimately cause more frustration than anything else, the injury notwithstanding.

The Rehab Institute of Chicago sees these cases each day. Michele Lee was one of them. Michele, just 26-years-old, was in car accident that fractured one of her vertebrae, leaving her paralyzed from the waist down. You can read about it on the Rehab Institute’s website. She suffered limited mobility in her hands and had trouble breathing. She eventually made her way back to China, only to be disappointed by the treatment she was receiving. Several hospital stints later, all of which turned out to be costly and ineffective, Lee wound up at RIC. Through the Institute’s Second Look program, she was able to get detailed evaluations and work her way back toward a relatively normal life here in Chicago.

Lee is just one of hundreds of thousands of people around the world dealing with chronic conditions that has turned into an epidemic. Roughly 450,000 people are living with SCI in the United States, 12,000 of which are newly classified each year. Thirty-six percent of all new cases are the result of motor vehicle accidents, says the Shepherd Center, a private medical hospital in Atlanta that specializes in SCI. Think about that for a minute: 36 percent of new cases are the result of motor vehicle accidents. That’s close to half. The World Health Organization notes that 90 percent of Spinal Chord Injuries are the result of traumatic causes like road traffic crashes, falls and violence. However you want to look at it, whether by global region or economic status, I think we can all agree the stats are not good.

What we aim to achieve through the legal system is to provide fair compensation for those accident victims who have suffered the consequences of negligent activity. It’s no coincidence that nearly half of spinal injuries are related to auto accidents, as they can be vicious and unexpected. We’ve handled many of these types of cases, and they’re not easy. They’re uncomfortable. And many times, it’s our job to recreate the events leading up to an accident, much of which is painful for client. We’re also here to understand the injuries of our clients as comprehensively as possible, something that most people wouldn’t necessarily assume a trial lawyer would be inclined to do. We take depositions, hire expert witnesses and gather as much information as possible to make the lives of our clients easier in the face of incomprehensible circumstances.

That’s always been our priority, and it always will be.

Consumer Reports’ ‘Worst Cars’: Is Fiat Chrysler on your safety watch list?

September 9, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Consumer Reports has released its annual list of ‘Worst Cars.’ There’s one company that stands out among the rest.

When Consumer Reports reveals its annual list of the “Worst Cars” each October, there’s at least one question I ask myself: Do these so-called “worst cars” ever get better?

Let’s compare the top four “worst cars” of 2015 with the worst of 2014: The 2015 list includes the Chrysler 200, the Landrover Discovery Sport, the Lexus NX 200t/300h and the Kia Sedona. The 2014 list ranks the Scion tC, the Chevy Spark, the Scion iQ, Mitsubishi i-MiEV, Mitsubishi Mirage, the Smart for Two and the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited as “worst cars” of the year.

Consumer Reports ranks these and other vehicles based on several factors like fuel economy and the way a car actually feels on the road. For my money, though, I’m thinking about safety. So is, in part, Consumer Reports, which states: “Safety remains a top concern for new-car shoppers, and fortunately, today’s modern cars offer more occupant protection and accident avoidance technologies than the typical model being traded in. But not all cars are equal; there are clearly those models that perform better in our dynamic tests, as well as crash tests conducted by the government and insurance industry.”

So being that not all cars are created equal, it’s no surprise that the “worst cars” list is something of an attention grabber. While the top 5–10 worst cars grab headlines each fall, other models find lesser prominence in subcategories like sedan and SUV, making the full report much more robust than what you’d think, and with many more brand name vehicles. Combing through the list and taking into account all these various subcategories, there’s at least one company that stands above (or below?) the rest. That’s Fiat Chrysler. For the last two years, Fiat Chrysler’s vehicles have been featured more times than any other company; five cars made last year’s list, which is now up to seven in 2015.

If you’ve been following the news, you know that Fiat Chrysler has been making headlines for all the wrong reasons. Two weeks ago, Chrysler recalled 200,000 2014 Jeep Cherokees because of faulty windshield wipers. Earlier this summer, two computer engineers successfully hacked the computer console of a Jeep Cherokee, deliberately leading the driver (a writer for WIRED magazine) to a ditch. The car conglomerate later recalled thousands of Cherokees after the article was published. By then the damage was done.

According to data gathered by The Detroit News, Fiat Chrysler has accounted for almost one-third of all U.S. auto recalls in 2015. This year the company set a record for 10.2 million vehicles out of 24 recall campaigns. To top things off, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration slapped Fiat Chrysler with $105 million fine for improperly recalling vehicles as part of a dozen campaigns over the last two years, the largest fine ever imposed by the NHTSA. The number was partly determined because Chrysler admitted that it failed to fix problems, or was slow to inform consumers of the defects.

So what, if anything, is changing at Fiat Chrysler? That’s a question that has yet to be answered. Regardless, the “Worst Cars” report is a barometer for consumers, one that carries weight for insurers and lawyers who are quick to take note of record-breaking fines and rankings on unflattering lists. And for Fiat Chrysler, the trust factor is getting lower and lower. Consumers should be taking note of such trends, asking themselves if any of these rankings, recalls and bad press is a byproduct of a corporate culture that’s prone to make questionable business decisions than consumer-driven ones.

Fiat Chrysler should be taking note, too, primarily about consumers who deserve safe and secure vehicles. Otherwise next year’s list will feature more of the same.

Day care ‘fight club’ is a reminder for vigilance

September 3, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Research is key to good decision-making

The first rule of Fight Club: You do not talk about Fight Club.

That’s a bit of an understatement if you’re the Lightbridge Academy Center in Cranford, New Jersey, where two former day care workers are accused of encouraging toddlers to take part in fighting and rough housing.

Yesterday, CBS reported that the staffs—22 and 28-years-old—had been encouraging kids (4 to 6 years old) to hit and shove one another. The duo took video of the scuffles and shared it on social media with their friends, sparking outrage from parents. Both are facing child abuse and child endangerment counts.

Keeping this under wraps was unlikely, no matter how much Lightbridge was hoping for it to simply fly under the radar. The CBS story mentioned that parents were stunned and outraged that such a thing could happen. The center has come forward with an apology, calling the pseudo fight club an “isolated incident.” That may not be enough to satisfy disgruntled parents. One was quoted as saying, “I hope these awful people get what they deserve,” referring to the ex-employees. The county prosecutor continues to investigate.

This scenario brings to mind several abuse cases we’ve handled involving day care centers. Parents put their trust in strangers all the time, and when strangers betray that sense of trust, it can be emotionally and physically traumatic for the child. We’ve written about insurance policies and determining whether your center is licensed and protected by insurance, just one of the many ways parents can maintain some degree of protection in the face of a legal problem, though that could turn out to be the least of your worries.

Just last year I worked on a civil case involving a child abuse case at a facility near St. Louis. This particular case was extremely painful and gut wrenching for the parents, whose six-year-old daughter was sexually abused by a day care employee. The incident in New Jersey shares a few similarities, one of which was the parents’ disbelief that a day care employee would willingly inflict harm upon a child.

Hopefully you or your family will never face the same circumstances. Here are some ways you can prevent it from happening:

The first rule of day care is…

Knowing the difference between licensed and license-exempt facilities
The state defines a day care center as “any child care facility which regularly provides day care for less than 24 hours per day for more than 8 children in a family home, or more than 3 children in a facility other than a family home, including senior citizen buildings,” just one of many criteria.

Day care centers that meet the criteria are required to file for a license barring some exemptions, which include:

The facility receives no governmental aid,
is operated as a component of religious, nonprofit elementary school,
operates primarily to provide religious education, and
meets appropriate State or local health and fire safety standards.

There are several requirements outlined by the state that allow for exemption. Understanding why a center qualifies for exemption is not necessarily a bad thing. Your preferences could simply differ from what the state requires under certain circumstances. A non-exempt facility could align with your religious beliefs, or the preferred size of the center. It could also mean different standards for employees. For example, a license-exempt facility could choose to hire employees with prior experience, paying them more than the state standard in comparison to a licensed facility. If you choose to go this route, make sure you’re thorough, as certain protections apply for licensed facilities.

Taking advantage of the Internet
Use all resources at your disposal before you make a commitment. This can range from a simple Google search to crowdsourcing consumer reviews by way of resources like Yelp, Angie’s List, even LinkedIn. You might be surprised by how much information you’ll gather by taking this first step. It may cut your options in half right from the get-go. Private School Review is another great resource that aggregates some helpful information—financial and otherwise—for private schools and a handful of daycare centers in Illinois.

Gathering references from friends/using a referral agency
Generally, nothing beats the recommendation of a friend. An endorsement from the people you trust most can provide great peace of mind. It’s also beneficial to seek out a referral agency with a proven track record of success, even a social worker that makes recommendations as part of their job. One of the best ways to do this is to seek out a social worker that’s familiar with the area.

Make a random visit
Perhaps the most productive option at your disposal is the one most parents never consider. A random visit can make or break your decision. Is it clean? Are the kids engaged? Is it well staffed? Those little things can mean a lot in the long run. You may find something that looks dirty or in disrepair. The only way to know for sure is to see it with your own eyes. If you’ve showed up randomly and the center is skeptical of giving you a tour, it’s time to cross it off your list.

Levinson and Stefani concentrates on child-injury cases as part of its practice. We offer free legal advice for families with any questions or concerns.