Skip to main content

Personal Injury News: Pick Of Last Month: Apr-2024

Catholic Charities Partially Liable for Cleveland Boy's 2017 Death

Catholic Charities Partially Liable for Cleveland Boy's 2017 Death

A Cuyahoga County jury reached a verdict in the civil trial against Catholic Charities and other defendants in a case stemming from the 2017 death of a 4-year-old who was tragically found buried in his mother's backyard in Cleveland. 

The eight-member jury sided with the plaintiff in the case, for the deceased's aunt and the administrator for his estate. She was awarded $12 million. Defendants named in the complaint include Catholic Charities, a former case worker who was required to visit the kid's home, the infant's mom, and her boyfriend. Jurors also found the Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services and MetroHealth Medical Center employees or contractors liable, though they were not named in the lawsuit.

The heartbreaking case was thrust into the spotlight in December 2017, when the kid's body was found abused and buried in the backyard of the home where he lived. Six months later, the mother and her boyfriend each pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter, with both currently serving sentences of at least 25 years in prison.

In a separate case, the Catholic Charities case worker required to make monthly visits to the kid's home — was sentenced to three years behind bars after admitting to paying off the mother for the food stamp benefits that were meant for the kid and his siblings. On at least 11 occasions, the worker falsified her reports to cover up the fact she had not been inside the home, even though it was her responsibility to report neglect and abuse to the proper authorities.

In 2019, the aunt of the kid filed a complaint in civil court, claiming the defendants "turned a blind eye to clear and present indications of ongoing physical abuse and neglect, acting indifferently to Jordan's safety and well-being, leaving him exposed to longstanding and continuing harm and to his untimely death."

Catholic Charities will be required to pay no less than $960,000 of the final penalty, with the jury placing the majority of the blame for the kid's death on his mother. The plaintiffs had asked for $81 million, though it is unknown of potential punitive damages could eventually meet that number.

ISU Grad's $44M Wrongful Death Settlement

ISU Grad's $44M Wrongful Death Settlement

The family of an Illinois State University graduate has been awarded over $44 million in connection with the 2022 killing of a rideshare driver in Urbana.

An 18-year-old defendant from Champaign stands accused of entering the victim's vehicle and shooting him in the back. The plaintiff's family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the defendant's family and the car owner under the Parental Responsibility Law, as the accused was a minor at the time. On April 12, a County Judge ruled in favor of the family, awarding them $44,724,193 in damages.

An attorney confirmed that the car owner's involvement had already been settled. In an email to the car owner's mother, she expressed the belief that parents should be held accountable for their children's criminal actions. She hoped such accountability would deter similar crimes and prevent others from experiencing the loss her family endured.

The accused faces murder charges in an ongoing criminal trial scheduled to begin in June. Two accomplices who were in the car during the incident pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and received probation. According to the police, the accused shot the victim in the back, causing him to crash and subsequently succumb to his injuries at the hospital.

The victim's mother expressed that while no amount of money could bring her son back, the ruling marked the beginning of justice for their family. She emphasized that there is still more to come in terms of accountability.

The victim held degrees from both ISU and Eastern Illinois University and aspired to attend veterinary school at the University of Illinois. His family established a scholarship for ISU students studying veterinary science.

In honor of the victim, several cities, including Bloomington, Normal, Charleston, Champaign, and Urbana, declared July 17 as a day of remembrance at Miller Park Zoo.

Family of teen killed in 2019 Cleveland chase gets $4.8M

Family of teen killed in 2019 Cleveland chase gets $4.8M

The family of a 13-year-old girl who tragically lost her life in a 2019 police pursuit involving a stolen car in Cleveland has reached a settlement with the city for $4.8 million, marking the largest pursuit settlement in Ohio's history.

The incident occurred on December 20, 2019, when a car stolen by two teenagers crashed into a girl in East Cleveland during a high-speed chase. The 16-year-old driver was sentenced to 26 to 31 years in prison in October 2021, while the other teen, a passenger, received a four-year sentence in juvenile court in April 2020.

The family filed a lawsuit against the city in May 2020, alleging that former Mayor and then-police chief failed to apologize for the deadly chase. Public records revealed that the city incurred significant legal fees defending itself in the civil suit.

In response to the settlement, a city spokesperson stated that the decision was difficult, emphasizing the circumstances that led to the pursuit, including a violent armed carjacking of a 72-year-old woman. The criminals involved were swiftly identified, but chose to flee from the police, resulting in the tragic loss of the young girl's life.

The spokesperson highlighted the complexity of the situation, acknowledging the pain experienced by both the girl's family and the officers involved in the pursuit. They stressed that there were no winners or losers in such a tragic case and emphasized that if the armed carjacking had not occurred, the girl would still be alive.

Furthermore, the spokesperson addressed the progress made by the city's Division of Police under a consent decree, citing improvements in various areas such as the use of force and accountability. They expressed a commitment to building on this progress in the future.

Overall, the settlement represents a significant step towards closure for the family of the young girl, while also prompting reflection on the broader issues surrounding police pursuits and public safety.

$2.4M Settlement: Inmate's 2021 Killing

$2.4M Settlement: Inmate's 2021 Killing

The family of a 66-year-old man, strangled by a Bexar County inmate in their shared holding cell, has reached a $2.4 million settlement with the county.

The Dallas-based Law Offices filed a 69-page lawsuit last summer on behalf of the victim's loved ones, citing "significant issues" at the jail regarding staffing, conditions, and deaths. The inmate, incarcerated for shooting, had been in custody for only hours before killing the victim, who was jailed due to non-compliance with terms of a probated sentence for domestic violence.

Arrest records indicate the two men, along with a third inmate, were in a booking holding cell when another inmate alerted jail staff. The victim was found face down and unresponsive; the defendant admitted to authorities he strangled him with a bandana.

The lawsuit alleges all inmates were allowed to remain in street clothes, contributing to the victim's death. A press release from the attorney's office expressed hope that the lawsuit would prompt changes in the Bexar County jail system.

Three deaths have occurred at the Bexar County jail this year, including two from medical episodes within 24 hours last week.

Philly Judge Nixes $25M Jury Verdict

Philly Judge Nixes $25M Jury Verdict

In an unconventional ruling, a Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas judge recently voided a $25 million jury verdict for punitive damages in a 2019 truck-related accident lawsuit, deeming it "clearly inappropriate."

Despite this decision, the defendant, Ecore International, a family-owned recreational flooring firm based in Lancaster, Pa., with only four trucks, remains liable for a $1 million compensatory damages award.

In Pennsylvania, the courts of common pleas handle significant civil and criminal cases. Before the judge's intervention, the case appeared poised to become another "nuclear jury verdict," akin to past decisions that appeared biased against motor carriers.

"The court's reduction of punitive damages, known as a remittitur, was motivated by the belief that the $25 million figure strains credulity," stated an attorney. "One key outcome of this case is the acknowledgment of the limits of punitive damages and their relationship with compensatory damages."

Typically, punitive damages aim to punish individuals for misconduct, while compensatory damages seek to compensate injured parties.

The December 2019 accident was unusual as it involved one tractor-trailer colliding with another. Ecore's tractor-trailer, navigating U.S. Route 30 during adverse weather conditions at midnight, crashed into the plaintiff's parked tractor-trailer.

The plaintiff sustained a brain injury, forcing him to cease operating his truck and shut down his independent trucking business, according to court records. However, court documents hinted at a familiar narrative of plaintiff attorney strategies, often employing the "reptile method." This tactic seeks to inflate jury verdicts in truck accident cases by instilling fear in jurors and persuading them to award substantial damages.

"The insidious effect of reptile tactics is to divert jurors' attention from legal elements of a claim," as per a study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform. Court filings in this case suggest that plaintiff attorneys prevailed during the ten-day trial by incessantly arguing that the Ecore driver's speeding warranted compensatory and punitive damages against both the driver and Ecore.

"The theme was underscored by counsel's repeated use of the phrase 'speed kills' to illustrate why both the driver and Ecore should face punishment," stated Ecore's attorney.

The plaintiff's counsel apparently convinced the jury that both defendants' behavior was "reckless" and "outrageous." It was snowing on the night of the crash, and the plaintiff's attorney claimed the driver was traveling 8 mph over the speed limit when the collision occurred.

Ecore's attorneys contended that the verdict was excessive because the plaintiff's truck was illegally parked, and the Ecore truck's slight speeding was not the crash's cause.

"Plaintiff's counsel stressed that the sole rationale for awarding punitive damages was 'for their conduct in not doing a single thing to prevent the driver from speeding,'" Ecore's defense asserted in court filings. "They cannot speed, because if they speed, we know what happens. They crash. They kill. They hurt."

In conclusion, the judge's decision to reduce the punitive damages verdict and the litigation's overall outcome underscores the complexities surrounding punitive damages and the importance of maintaining a fair and just legal process.

$5.5M Awarded in Stamford Medical Malpractice Case

$5.5M Awarded in Stamford Medical Malpractice Case

According to the lawsuit, a 69-year-old man visited Stamford Hospital's emergency room in September 2018, complaining of persistent diarrhea and abdominal cramping over three weeks.

Hospital staff discharged him after diagnosing him with "traveler's diarrhea." However, he returned twice over the following days as his condition worsened.

During his final visit on September 27, 2018, doctors diagnosed him with severe chronic mesenteric ischemia, requiring surgery to address a blocked artery in his intestines. Tragically, he suffered cardiac arrest and died during emergency exploratory surgery that night.

The lawsuit, which went to trial in March, alleged negligence on the part of hospital staff and their employer, Emergency Medicine Physicians of New Haven County LLC, for failing to properly examine, test, monitor, diagnose, and treat the man, ultimately resulting in his death.

"We are pleased with the jury's decision, which validates our clients' belief that the man should not have been discharged and should not have lost his life as a consequence," stated the attorney representing the victim's wife during the three-week trial.

Reading Hospital Settles Birth Injury Case: $32.5M

Reading Hospital Settles Birth Injury Case: $32.5M

A significant settlement has been reached against Reading Hospital, resulting in millions of dollars awarded to the family of a victim.

The case involves a 5-year-old boy who sustained a brain injury at birth due to oxygen deprivation. In late September 2018, the boy's mother was admitted to Reading Hospital at nearly 39 weeks pregnant. Despite indications of an intra-amniotic infection, the hospital's labor and delivery team allegedly failed to administer antibiotics. Court documents allege that fetal distress signs were present on monitors, necessitating an earlier delivery to prevent oxygen deprivation.

As a result of the birth injury, the boy now suffers from permanent neurological damage and requires constant care. He is nonverbal, cortically blind, and reliant on tube feeding. The settlement, totaling $32.5 million, will aid in covering his ongoing care needs.

Attorneys representing the family emphasized the significance of the settlement in supporting the boy's care and assisting his mother through the challenging journey ahead.

In response to the settlement, Tower Health, the operator of Reading Hospital, issued a statement expressing respect for the family's privacy. The statement noted that the resolution was reached without admission of fault or liability by any healthcare providers at Reading Hospital, in line with their policy of not commenting on ongoing litigation.

$1.7M Settlement in LaPorte Veteran’s Wrongful Death

$1.7M Settlement in LaPorte Veteran’s Wrongful Death

Concerns over mental health care quality at South Bend’s Vets Center have been addressed with the Veterans Administration agreeing to a $1.7 million settlement for a wrongful death claim.

The victim, from LaPorte, sought mental health assistance at the clinic in April 2020. Attorneys representing the victim's widow in the wrongful death claim criticized the clinic's response, citing it as below standard and indicative of deliberate indifference to the victim's mental health needs. 

Despite warning signs, the victim was placed under the care of an unlicensed intern who conducted appointments solely over the phone.

An investigation revealed inaccuracies in the victim's suicide risk assessment. Allegedly, staff were instructed to keep risk ratings low to avoid scrutiny from senior leadership. The attorney emphasized that a more accurate rating could have made a life-saving difference.

"They’re trained to implement plans for protection," the attorney stated, highlighting the absence of crucial measures such as checking for firearms in the victim's home and ensuring medication adherence.

The victim's wife mentioned the support received from five clinic employees who acted as whistleblowers, risking their jobs to expose the situation.

The settlement, while aiding the victim's widow and five children, is seen as a gesture by the V.A. to mitigate the issue. However, the victim's wife stressed that the case was never about the money, suggesting the settlement indicated wrongdoing on the part of the government.

"It was never about the money. If anything, you giving me the money tells other people you did something wrong because maybe I’m just giving our government too much credit, l don’t think our government is going to settle for over a million dollars for something they know they were not in the wrong for," she said.

Wayne County Jury Awards $120M in Medical Malpractice Case

Wayne County Jury Awards $120M in Medical Malpractice Case

A Detroit mother and her 13-year-old son have been awarded $120 million by a Wayne County jury following a four-week-long medical malpractice trial.

The case originated from a delayed caesarean section in 2010 that resulted in severe brain damage, cerebral palsy, and developmental delays for the child. The verdict, delivered late last week, stems from a lawsuit filed against Henry Ford Health Systems in December 2020. The lawsuit alleged negligence on the part of an obstetrician and four nurses in their care of the mother and her unborn baby in June 2010. Henry Ford Health Systems has announced its intention to appeal the verdict, citing disagreement with the jury's decision.

In response to the verdict, Henry Ford Health stated, "Our patients are family, and we've been deeply saddened for the family since the birth of their son more than a decade ago." However, the health system maintains that the verdict is not consistent with the facts of the case and plans to appeal.

The incident occurred when the woman visited Henry Ford Hospital in June 2010, reporting symptoms of swelling and edema, along with possible false labor. Despite not being in active labor, the baby's oxygen levels began to drop due to umbilical cord compression and decreased variability, indicating a need for timely delivery.

Although the obstetrician called for a c-section at 9:51 p.m. due to non-reassuring fetal heart tones, the delivery was delayed until 12:11 a.m. The plaintiff's attorney argued that the delay was unnecessary and negligent, resulting in severe brain damage for the child.

The child was born with severe cerebral palsy, developmental delays, and a seizure disorder, rendering him non-verbal and fully dependent on his mother and grandmother for care. The family struggles financially to provide necessary therapy and home care for the child, and they hope the settlement will alleviate some of their financial burdens.

According to the attorney, the child's injuries are catastrophic and have robbed him of a normal life. The family's primary focus is on providing the best possible care for the child, but they face challenges due to limited resources.

While the jury's decision provides some relief for the family, they express frustration that Henry Ford Health intends to appeal the verdict. Until the appeals process is completed, the family will not receive any compensation, prolonging their financial strain.

Despite the challenges ahead, the family appreciates the jury's recognition of their suffering and hopes for a favorable resolution in the appeal process.

Overall, the case highlights the devastating consequences of medical negligence and underscores the importance of timely and appropriate medical care in preventing such tragedies.

Demand Letter or Medical Record Review?     
Free Trials + 10% Discount!