• 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

Blog

Donate to Rep. Reaves-Harris’ Coat Drive

December 16, 2015 by Ken Levinson Leave a Comment

Holiday Coat Drive
Our good friend and state representative Pamela Reaves-Harris has been sponsoring a holiday coat drive since November, and the people of Illinois’ 10th District are about to reap the benefits of her good work. Starting tomorrow, Rep. Reaves-Harris and her team will be distributing all donated coats to adults and children at the Major Adams Community Committee (125 N. Hoyne Ave. Chicago) between 5–7pm.

Rep. Reaves-Harris’ team has been working with local organizations and volunteers, including Button and Zipper​, a city-wide coat drive organization, to gather as many coats as possible. Chicago winters can be some of harshest and grueling winter’s in the Midwest. It’s an especially difficult time for homeless, destitute families, or those who can’t afford a warm coat.

All coats should be gently-used or new, clean and in good condition. There’s still time to donate. If you have a spare coat lying around, or need a coat, this is a great opportunity to make sure it gets put to good use. You can drop off coats at the Major Adams Community Committee or at Rep. Reaves-Harris’ District office (115 N. Damen Chicago).

For more info, you can contact Rep. Reaves-Harris’ district office at 312-877-5074 or visit her website.

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.

VIDEO: An insurance representative called. What do I do?

November 23, 2015 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

On_the_phone
In this edition of “60 seconds with Levinson and Stefani,” Ken talks the importance of contacting a lawyer before speaking to an insurance company representative. As we’ve talked about before, insurance companies are loath to part with their money. One of the ways they can avoid doling out settlement checks is by taking advantage of what you may not necessarily know.

In the days after a crash, odds are you’re going to receive a phone call from an insurance rep, and it’s probably not a call you’re prepared to take. Why? Because no matter how nice the rep sounds on the other line, they’re banking on innocent missteps to protect their company from further liability. It’s a tactic as old as time. Unfortunately, it’s a tactic that keeps working.

How do they do it? There are any number of ways insurance companies may try to employ said tactics, the end goal of which is to lock you in a statement that could come back to haunt you during a potential trial. They may ask tricky questions about your driving habits, or if you were on the phone while you were driving, for example. They could ask about your health history and what types of medication you take. If you’re willing to answer, they’re willing to put it on the record.

As Ken states, a lawyer should be one of your first calls in the aftermath of a crash to help you avoid these types of situations. A lawyer can also advise you on the proper course of action and protect your legal rights. Contacting a lawyer immediately will save you time, money and, ultimately, lots of anxiety.

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.

How to hold insurance companies accountable

November 12, 2015 by Jay Stefani Leave a Comment

woman stacking and organizing change
It’s no secret that insurance companies are loath to part with their money. An auto collision may run you somewhere in the neighborhood of $5,000 (property damage, medical bills, etc.) depending on your deductible. Anything after that, you assume, is your insurance carrier’s financial responsibility. That may be true in principle, but there’s more than one way to skin a cat as the saying goes. The skinning in this scenario happens when insurance companies try to take advantage of loopholes to avoid the burden of heavy crash-related costs. It’s effectively taking money out of your pocket and, at its worst, putting your safety in jeopardy.

We were reminded of this with a bit of recent news. One hundred repair shops in Massachusetts have filed lawsuits against insurance companies for skimping out on safety in favor of surreptitious cost-cutting measures, according to a report by WCVB 5 in Boston. The newsroom is reporting that various insurance companies are sending banged up cars to preferred body shops, pressuring the owners to use cheaper parts instead of the proper ones. And as WCVB 5 also revealed, the parts are often cheaper and not properly tested.

This wouldn’t be unique to Boston. The cost-cutting methods of insurers are nothing new, though it can be a shock to our clients during settlement talks when they suddenly realize just how little insurance companies are willing to pay to compensate for an crash and/or injury. It’s one of the reasons we are forced to go to court to fight for clients in the first place. Our role, in one respect, is to isolate exploitation and get compensation for what was taken from you. How do we do this? That’s somewhat of a loaded question but it’s partly about pinpointing loopholes and identifying negligence that may have come at your expense. That’s why we preach conscientious consumerism whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Nearby in Maryland, for example, drivers took their complaints about a State Farm insurance hike to the local legislature. The hike, which purportedly raised rates on insurance holders that had been in accidents that weren’t their fault, was deemed too vague by the state to constitute a raise in rates. State Farm has since rescinded some of those rates and repaid insurance carriers a portion of the money, all thanks to consumers that nudged the state agency to look over some less-than-specific letters sent to policy holders. Though its nice to see a state agency keep close watch over a big insurer like State Farm, it’s safe to assume that the average Joe is simply taking most insurance companies at face value.

The State Farm situation in Maryland and the scams up in Massachusetts serve as two topical reminders for drivers and others to stay vigilant. We’re not trying to scare you away from your insurance company, just to emphasize that there are always entities looking to cheat the system. Don’t be cheated. Keep a healthy dose of skepticism in your back pocket. You never know when it may come in handy.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 114
  • Page 115
  • Page 116
  • Page 117
  • Page 118
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 128
  • Go to Next Page »

Levinson and Stefani Injury Lawyers in Chicago / Attorney Advertising