Category Archives: General

Myths About Driving Near Trucks

Many people feel unsafe driving around trucks due to common myths surrounding large trucks and truck drivers. However, dispelling some myths regarding driving near trucks may help you prevent being involved in a truck accident.

Myth #1 – Trucks Are Less Likely to Cause an Accident

Just because truck drivers must undergo additional testing for licenses does not necessarily mean they are safer drivers. The training to receive a commercial driver’s license is not as complicated as some would think. Additionally, truck drivers have similar challenges as other drivers such as distracted driving, driving while fatigued, failing to obey traffic laws or signs, and unfortunately driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In fact, due to the fatigue that most truck drivers face, truck drivers are oftentimes more likely to cause accidents on the roadways.

Myth #2 – Truck Drivers Are Used to Driving Without Sleep

Statistics show that any person, truck drivers included, who stay awake for more than 18 hours have delayed reflexes and judgment equivalent to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Truck drivers are required to follow very specific schedules that allow for rest breaks and sleep; however, many truck drivers fail to follow these regulations. Due to the pressure to make deliveries, and the fact that they are paid by the number of miles that they drive, many truck drivers do not follow these requirements and drive drowsy –  putting their lives and the lives of others in danger on the roadways.

Myth #3 – Large Truck Mirrors Make Accidents Less Likely

Oftentimes, people believe that the large truck mirrors increase a truck driver’s visibility which leads to fewer accidents. However, due to the size of a large truck, these mirrors still encompass huge blind spots where a truck driver can simply not see other cars on the roadways. The best rule to follow is if you cannot see the truck driver in one of his or her mirrors, the truck driver cannot see you either.

Myth #4 – Trucking Companies Cannot Be Held Liable

Some people believe that trucking companies cannot be held responsible or liable for accidents that are caused by their truck drivers. There are several ways that trucking companies can be liable for accidents involving their drivers, including negligence in hiring, inadequate truck maintenance, or failure to comply with trucking regulations.

Contact a Trucking Accident Attorney

If you or a loved one were in a car accident with a large truck, you may have the right to receive compensation for your medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Determining fault in a truck accident case is often fact-intensive and may require the opinion of an accident reconstruction expert. Even simple cases often involve extensive physical and financial damages. Contact The Law Office of Daniel A. Rose as soon as possible, and our experienced accident lawyers will help you build your personal injury case. Call for a free consultation today at 415-946-8900 or visit us online.

Posted in General
December 10th, 2019 by Daniel Rose

How Your Fitbit Could Be Used in Your Personal Injury Case

In our age of digital technology, almost all of our movements (both online and offline) can be tracked through some sort of computerized device. Technology has become so advanced that we can now wear a fitness computer on our wrists. This wearable device, Fitbit, tracks physical activity, caloric intake, daily steps, heart rate, sleep, and even weight. Documentation of physical location, activity, and health can become important evidence in your personal injury case, to show how your quality of life has been affected since the time of your personal injury due to the negligence of another.

Fitbit

A Fitbit is a wearable device that can attach to your wrist or belt. Other companies have similar products, such as the Apple iWatch, Garmin watches, and Nike trackers, along with many others. While most Fitbit owners utilize them to track their fitness levels and overall health, they can become a “black box” for the activity and even the physical location of the wearer.

Evidence in a Personal Injury Claim

A Fitbit stores a warehouse of information regarding the user. Several years ago, the first case was made to introduce fitness tracker data into evidence. Since that time, fitness tracker data has been introduced into evidence to either support or negate the stories told in the courtroom. For example, a fitness tracker device was used to prove the following:

  • That a victim was not physically at the location of the assault she claimed took place
  • The activity levels of a victim did not decrease as he suggested they did due to a personal injury claim

When an injury is not visible, it is possible to show how you have been impacted physically by the negligence of another through the data located on your Fitbit or other fitness tracker device. Oftentimes, a medical expert will be called to testify in your personal injury case. However, a fitness tracker can show how your personal injury has affected you on a daily basis and impacted the quality of your life.

It is important to note that the data discovered can also be potentially discovered by the other side to determine that your injuries are not as severe as you claim or that you were not in the physical location you testified about in a court of law. Contacting a personal injury lawyer will help you understand your rights, and how a physical tracking device could be used for or against you in your personal injury case.

Contact a Personal Injury Lawyer Today

Your Fitbit or other fitness tracker data technology could prove useful in your personal injury case.  If you have suffered a physical injury due to someone else’s negligence, find out if your Fitbit or fitness tracker can help or possibly hurt your claim. In California, call on the Law Office of Daniel H. Rose for compassionate advocacy and knowledgeable guidance. Request your complimentary consultation today by contacting our firm at 415-946-8900.

Posted in General
September 6th, 2019 by Daniel Rose

Cyclist Michael Hatch Mourned as Latest Bicycle v Shuttle Bus Collision Victim

It is clear from my representation of bicyclists who are victims of collisions with commuter related shuttle buses that shuttle bus drivers are grossly inadequately trained with respect to bicyclists on the road. This latest fatality in Santa Clara involving a 49-year-old cyclist in a bike lane with a green light is an example of driver gross negligence and simply should not have happened.

We are Presenting Sponsor of Bike East Bay’s Biketopia 2018 Member Party and Fundraiser

As we do every year, we are proud to once again be the Presenting Sponsor of Bike East Bay’s Biketopia 2018, taking place on Thursday, November 8, 2018 6:30 – 10:00 p.m. The event, which is always a lot of fun, is at a new location right next to the Ashby BART Station at Ed Roberts Campus, 3075 Adeline Street, Berkeley. Hope to see you there.

Left-turning vehicles major source of death and injury to motorcyclists as in recent fatal San Jose motorcyclist death at McKee Road

Left-turning vehicles are a major cause of motorcycle accidents, as was the case on a fatal July 14, 2018 daytime collision between a motorcyclist and a Honda CRV at McKee Road and Challenger Avenue in East San Jose.  In my experience as a motorcycle accident lawyer, automobiles way too often negligently fail to notice or yield to oncoming motorcyclists.

A Primary Cause of Injury and Death to Pedestrians and Bicyclists Traveling on Sidewalks is Vehicles Exiting Parking Lots and Driveways

One of the primary ways in which pedestrians and bicyclists traveling on sidewalks are injured or killed is by motor vehicles exiting parking lots or driveways. A recent example is the Bay Area case of an 84-year-old woman killed by a vehicle exiting a parking lot on W. El Camino Real in Sunnyvale. Based upon my experience as a pedestrian and bicycle accident lawyer, it appears that the most common way this occurs is when the pedestrian or bicyclist is traveling on the sidewalk in the opposite direction that the cars on the adjacent road are traveling.

Because the driver of the vehicle exiting the parking lot is most concerned with entering the traffic traveling in the direction the driver wishes to go, the driver quite often neglects to look for potential sidewalk traffic coming from the opposite direction. Sometimes contributing to the failure of the driver to notice pedestrians and bicyclists is the presence of things which obstruct the driver’s vision such as hedges, walls or commercial signs. Pedestrians and bicyclists injured in such collisions often report that they mistakenly believed that the driver acknowledged or noticed them before driving into them or across their path. While drivers under these circumstances are almost always held to be negligent, it would appear to be safe practice for pedestrians and bicyclists to be aware of this potential driver behavior when approaching driveways and exits.

Scooter Accidents in San Francisco Bay Area | Liability and Insurance Issues

Motorized scooter use in the San Francisco Bay Area is rapidly becoming a primary form of local transportation. Electric scooter on-demand rental companies such as Bird and LimeBike have infused the Bay Area with thousands of scooters to fill an ever-increasing consumer demand heightened by over-burdened and inadequate mass transportation services.  As a San Francisco pedestrian, bicycle and scooter accident lawyer, I see many liability insurance issues raised by the increased use of scooters.

By FASTILY [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], from Wikimedia CommonsAlong with this increased scooter use inevitably comes an increase in injury accidents involving scooters. Such accidents may involve collisions between scooters and pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcycles, automobiles, or other scooters. Although scooters are prohibited by law from driving on sidewalks pursuant to California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 21235(g), news reports indicate that scooters are being ridden to a very large degree on sidewalks, raising the risk of injurious collisions between scooters and pedestrians. Unless local law otherwise more strictly prohibits, California State law allows scooters to be operated in bicycle lanes, and in fact mandates they be ridden in Class II bicycle lanes if such lanes exist, and where such bicycle lane does not exist the scooter may be operated on the road as long as the speed limit on the road is 25 mph or less. (CVC 21229, 21230.) Thus, scooter ridership also raises the risk of injurious collisions between scooters and bicycles, and scooters and motorists. San Francisco trauma hospitals have noticed an increase in scooter related serious injuries and are setting up a scooter-related injury tracking system, as reported by the New York Times.

Unfortunately, there are some significant gaps in liability and uninsured motorist insurance coverage for accidents involving scooters. In California, there is no requirement that motorized scooters (as distinguished from mopeds) be registered or that the scooter or scooter operator carry liability insurance. Based upon my research, I am not aware of any scooter rental companies which provide their users with any significant liability insurance. This would leave someone injured due to a collision with a scooter to look to the scooter operator’s homeowners or renters insurance, as is the case when someone is injured due to the negligence of a bicyclist, or perhaps to the scooter operator’s personal assets if they are substantial.

While pedestrians, bicyclists and scooter operators may utilize whatever uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) insurance they may have on their motor vehicle policies should they be injured in an accident for which the operator of a motor vehicle is at fault, their UM/UIM coverage almost certainly will not apply when injured by the operator of a scooter. This is because California law requires only that insurers offer, in their motor vehicle policies, UM/UIM coverage for liability arising out of the use of a motor vehicle, and the Insurance Code limits its definition of “motor vehicle” to include only those vehicles which are required to be registered under California State law, and scooters are not required to be so registered. (California Insurance Code 11580.2, 11580.06.)

Another potential source of recovery for those injured in scooter accidents are the scooter rental companies or manufacturers where the accident was caused by a scooter’s mechanical defect or malfunction, or where the scooter was illegally rented to an unlicensed and un-permitted driver.  (An operator of a motorized scooter must possess a valid drivers license or instruction permit [CVC 21235(d)].)