Pennsylvania Law Monitor

Pennsylvania Residents Be Warned when Texting/Driving in New Jersey

R. Tyler Tomlinson — Fri, 17 May 2013 10:41:51 -0500

When Pennsylvania drivers cross over the Delaware River and go into New Jersey, they should know that the penalties for using cellphones while driving are much significant. New Jersey will soon pass a law that will dramatically increase the fines and penalties for texting while driving. Motorist caught texting or making cellphone calls while driving will face stricter penalties under the new law.

The fine for first-time distracted-driving offenders would increase from a minimum of $100 to $200, and a maximum of $400. Second-time offenders would face a fine of between $400 and $600.

For a third or subsequent offense, fines would range between $600 and $800, along with three motor vehicle penalty points. Also, a court could order a driver’s license suspended for up to 90 days.

Distracted driving is such a problem that every angle you can attack it from will help. There needs to be a culture shift so people understand how drastic the problem is.

According to the New Jersey State Police’s Fatal Motor Vehicle Crash Report for 2011, 627 people in the state were killed as a result of fatal crashes that year. Of that total, 119 killed were 29 years old or younger. “Driver inattention” was listed as the contributing factor in most of these accidents.

Should Cameras Be Required in Operating Rooms?

Michael C. Ksiazek — Fri, 10 May 2013 08:49:29 -0500

Nineteen-year old Raina Ferraro, a college freshman from Rockland County, NY, was admitted to Phelps Memorial Hospital Center for a routine endoscopy in January. She is now in a persistent vegetative state. According to a medical malpractice lawsuit filed by her parents, Raina went into cardiac and respiratory arrest due to negligent anesthesia administration resulting in severe brain damage. The parents say it took the hospital two weeks to discuss the matter with them and, when they did, the hospital was unable to explain what went wrong during Raina’s procedure.

Now, Raina’s parents are pushing lawmakers to create legislation that would require cameras in all operating rooms. The purpose of the legislation, dubbed “Raina’s Law,” would be to document proof of medical malpractice and ensure families get answers to the question of “what went wrong?” The parents want to make sure that what happened to Raina, does not happen to others.

Certificate of Merit in a Medical Malpractice Case

Edward Shensky — Wed, 08 May 2013 08:46:01 -0500

Within sixty (60) days of the filing of a Complaint with the Court in a medical malpractice case the injured party plaintiff must file a “Certificate of Merit”. The Certificate of Merit is a document that must state one of three things: 1) that an “appropriate licensed professional” has signed a written statement that the treatment provided by the medical provider fell below the standard of care and caused injury to the plaintiff; 2) that the claim is based on allegations that other persons for whom the defendant is responsible provided treatment that fell below the standard of care; or 3) that expert testimony is not needed in this case.

The “appropriate licensed professional” referenced above must meet the qualifications for an expert set forth in the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act (MCARE).

If a plaintiff fails to file a Certificate of Merit within the time frame required and has also failed to get an extension of time for doing so, the case may be dismissed. A separate Certificate of Merit must be filed for each defendant listed in the Complaint.

The qualifications for an expert under the MCARE Act will be discussed in my next Blog entry.

May is Motorcycle and Bike Safety Awareness Month

Carin A. O'Donnell — Mon, 06 May 2013 13:15:18 -0500

To keep our clients and fellow motorcyclist safe, we want to remind everyone of the “T-CLOCS” inspection checklist. “T-CLOCS” stands for Tire, Controls, Lights, Oils, Chassis and Stands. These are all things you should inspect at a minimum before you ride your motorcycle. Regarding the tires ("T"), be sure to always check the tread and air pressure. This will help you keep traction to the roadway surfaces. On the controls ( “C”) you want to look at the handlebars, levers, pedals cables, hoses and throttle. Things to look for, among other things include fraying, cuts or kinks in the cables or hoses. Your handle bars should always be straight, turn freely and your grips should be secure. Checking all of these allows your motorcycle to operate in the safest manner.

Oils (“O”) should be inspected next. You want to not only make sure nothing is leaking but also make sure you have enough fluids including hydraulics, coolants and don’t forget the fuel! You do not want to find yourself without gas, sitting on the side of the road. The Chassis ("C") is the next part of the inspection before you begin on your ride. Things you want to look out for are the front forks, shocks and the swingarm bushing/ bearings. You want to make sure all have proper pressure for the smoothest ride possible. Finally you want to check the Stands (“S”). You want to make sure there are not cracks and that the springs are in place.

We at Stark and Stark hope you have are safe each time you ride your motorcycle.

Johns Hopkins Study Shows Large Medical Malpractice Payouts Are Not the Primary Cause of Rising Health Care Costs

Michael C. Ksiazek — Fri, 03 May 2013 08:10:56 -0500

For years, some have pointed to large medical malpractice verdicts and settlements as the cause of rising health care costs. Efforts at enacting tort reform have often been premised on the idea that medical malpractice payouts are over-burdening the U.S. health care system. According to a new study from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, however, this is not true. The Johns Hopkins researchers, led by Marty Makary, M.D., M.P.H., an associate professor of surgery and health policy, reviewed medical malpractice payouts over $1 million nationwide from 2004 to 2010. They found that, during this period, those medical malpractice payments actually accounted for less than 1% of national medical expenditures in the United States.

Backlog in Processing Disability Hearing Requests

Leslie A. Mitnick — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 09:44:53 -0500

Social Security is reporting an overall increase in average hearing processing times to nearly a year in 2013. That means, if you file an appeal of the initial denial of your Social Security Disability Claim or Supplemental Security Income Claim, it may take you a year or more to get your case heard by a Social Security judge.

In addition, Social Security reports that the number of appeals is up and that disability examiners are denying a higher percentage of claims at all levels of the process.

Although a claimant may represent himself or herself at a hearing, your odds of getting a “fully favorable opinion,” which means approval of your claim, from a Social Security judge, are much better if you are represented by an attorney specializing in this area of the law. If your initial claim is denied, you have 60 days to file an appeal and request a hearing. At this point in time, you should contact an attorney to explain the appeal process and represent you at your hearing.

Leslie A. Mitnick is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Ms. Mitnick.

Tort Reform Not All It's Cracked Up to Be?

Michael C. Ksiazek — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:58:46 -0500

In 2003, Texas enacted medical malpractice tort reforms. The issue of tort reform generally arose out of the so-called “medical malpractice crisis”, which has been blogged about in this space before. The “medical malpractice crisis” is the belief that, as a result of too many frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits being filed, which physicians and their insurance companies have to defend, medical liability insurance carriers have increased insurance premiums to the point where practicing medicine was becoming cost-prohibitive for physicians in certain states. The result - or feared result - was that doctors would flee to more doctor-friendly states. A soon-to-be-released Texas study, however, would seem to refute that.

According to a draft of the study, which was conducted and authored by law professors Bernard Black (Northwestern University), David Hyman (University of Illinois) and Charles Silver (University of Texas at Austin), and is currently being peer-reviewed, there is no evidence that physicians fled Texas in high numbers prior to tort reform, or returned to Texas in high numbers after tort reform. In fact, the physician-to-patient ratio is actually worse in Texas today than it was before tort reform. Contrary to what tort reformers might suggest, it appears tort reform does not positively impact physician supply.

Michael Ksiazek is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Ksiazek.

Missed Diagnosis of Breast Cancer the Most Common Cause of Malpractice Suits Against Radiologists

Michael C. Ksiazek — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:54:44 -0500

An article in the February 2013 issue of the journal Radiology, which is published by the Radiology Society of North America, concludes that the most common general cause of medical malpractice suits filed against radiologists is error in diagnosis and, within that general category, missed diagnosis of breast cancer was the most frequent cause. This is followed by error in diagnosis of nonvertebral and spinal fractures. The study considered 8,401 radiologists in 47 states.

When it comes to breast cancer, timely and early detection is everything. If you believe that you or a loved one has been the victim of missed or delayed diagnosis of breast cancer, or any other medical condition, contact the medical malpractice attorneys at Stark & Stark for a free consultation.

Michael Ksiazek is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Ksiazek.

8 Things To Do After an Auto Accident

R. Tyler Tomlinson — Fri, 05 Apr 2013 09:28:37 -0500

STAY CALM
- Turn off your car
- If anyone is injured: give first aid if qualified or call 911
CALL THE POLICE
- Always call the police so that there is an incident report on file
- Cooperate fully with the police officer
GATHER INFORMATION - WRITE IT DOWN!
- If you are able to, and it creates no danger to yourself or others, get names, addresses and phone numbers from the witnesses
- Try to take pictures with a camera or cell phone
SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION
- If you are hurt, go to the local Emergency Room immediately
- Serious injuries do not always result in instant pain. If there is the slightest chance you may be injured, see your doctor as soon as possible
NOTIFY YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY
- Cooperate fully with your insurance company
REPORT THE ACCIDENT
- Pennsylvania law requires that you file an accident report within two days after an accident. Your insurance company or the police department will provide you with the standard form.
IF YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED, SEE A LAWYER IMMEDIATELY
- Consult an attorney who is experienced in handling auto cases. You may talk to Stark & Stark either over the phone or in person at our office. If you are unable to come to the office because of the injuries, then we will meet with you in the hospital or at your home. You do not pay any lawyers fees unless your case is successfully concluded. Call Stark & Stark at 1.800.53.LEGAL or visit us on the web at www.StarkInjuryGroup.com.
KNOW YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS
- You should know your legal rights, and you should know what to do to protect those legal rights before giving any statements to the other driver's insurance company.

Tyler Tomlinson is a Shareholder in Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Tomlinson.

Good News for Pennsylvania Drivers, Especially Teen Drivers

Joseph A. Cullen — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:58:35 -0500

In 2012, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania had the third lowest fatalities on record last year with a total of 1,310. This was slightly more than in 2011. PennDOT data from police reports also shows that there were 124,062 crashes on Pennsylvania roadways in 2012, a decrease from 125,322 in 2011. This demonstrates a trend of less accidents over the past 15 years. In fact, 15 years ago there were 144,542 Pennsylvania crashes. Obviously, the decrease in crashes and fatalities can be attributed to many factors.

One factor is the increase in young driver safety requirements signed into law by Governor Tom Corbett in 2011. The law, known as “Lacey’s Law”, was named after Lacey Gallagher from Bucks County and a constituent of State Representative Kathy Watson (R), the sponsor of the law. Lacey Gallagher died on her prom night after a car accident in which 6 teenagers were travelling in an SUV.

The new law took effect on December 27, 2011. The law has the following requirements:

In order to obtain a junior license, teens must complete 65 hours of behind-the-wheel training, 10 of which must be spent after dark and five during inclement weather.
Teens with junior licenses may have only one unrelated person in the car with them under the age of 18, unless a parent is also along for the ride.
After six months with a clean driving record, a junior license holder may transport up to three underage passengers without a parent in the vehicle.
Failing to wear a seat belt is a primary offense, meaning a police officer may pull over a car with an unbelted driver or passenger for no other reason than that he or she noticed a seat belt is not in use.

Car accidents are very serious, no matter the age of the driver or passengers. Many times, car accidents can be avoided if drivers act responsible and pay attention.

Joe Cullen is a Shareholder in Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, specializing in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Cullen.

Buy Full Tort Car Insurance

R. Tyler Tomlinson — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 13:24:16 -0500

According to legal experts across the state, Pennsylvania residents deciding which auto insurance package to buy should select a full tort policy. Full tort policies provide complete insurance protection if a policyholder is injured in an automobile accident.

Attorneys warn that a limited tort policy, which is the required minimum under Pennsylvania law, can be costly as it limits the policyholder's right to sue for pain and suffering compensation. Unfortunately, because most people are uninformed and only see the temporary financial benefits of a limited policy (limited tort holders save 15 percent on their premiums), many often fail to take advantage of full tort insurance.

Full tort gives policyholders the unlimited right to sue for pain and suffering for any injury received in an accident. Insurance experts recommend that policyholders also insist on uninsured/ underinsured motorist insurance for protection in case of an accident with another driver who is not insured. The combination of full tort and uninsured/underinsured motorist insurance offers full insurance coverage in Pennsylvania.

If you need help or have additional questions, please call Stark & Stark, P.C., at 1.800.53.LEGAL or visit us on the web at www.StarkInjuryGroup.com.

Tyler Tomlinson is a Shareholder in Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Tomlinson.

Changes in Retirement Exempt Amount under the Earnings Test

Leslie A. Mitnick — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:42:38 -0500

The Social Security Administration has made changes to the retirement earnings test for 2013. This test only applies to people who have taken early retirement and are under their full retirement age. One out of two exempt amounts applies depending upon the year you reach your full retirement age.

For people younger than the full retirement age of 66 in 2013, the annual exempt amount is $15,120. That means that for $2 earned over $15,120, Social Security will deduct $1 from your benefit amount.

For people who reach the full retirement age of 66 in 2013, the annual exempt amount is $40,080. That means that for every $3 earned over $40,080, Social Security will deduct $1 from your benefit amount.

There is no limit on earnings for individuals who reached full retirement age before 2013. These retirees will not have any benefits withheld regardless of how much money they earn.

Leslie A. Mitnick is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Ms. Mitnick.

Starting a Minority, Women, Veteran or Service-Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise in Pennsylvania

Bianca A. Smith — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 08:18:25 -0500

Are you a minority, woman, veteran or service-disabled veteran starting or currently running a business in Pennsylvania? If so, your business may be eligible for classification as a Minority Business Enterprise (MBE), Women Business Enterprise (WBE), Veteran Business Enterprise (VBE), or Service-Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise (SDVBE). Classification as one of these types of business enterprises allows a company to receive assistance from the State of Pennsylvania in the procurement of Commonwealth projects. In addition, your company will become a part of the existing and growing network of minority, women, and veteran owned businesses.

In order to receive these and other benefits, your company must apply to register with the Commonwealth. The application process can be daunting – it requires applicants to submit a substantial amount of information, including supporting documentation, related to the business and each of its owners, members, or shareholders. If you’re thinking about registering as a MBE, WBE, VBE or SDVBE, and need assistance preparing and filing your application, do not hesitate to contact the experienced attorneys at Stark & Stark for a consultation.

Bianca A. Roberto is an Associate in Stark & Stark's Business & Corporate Group in its Yardley, PA office. For questions, or additional information, please contact Ms. Roberto.

Florida Bill Would Increase Burden of Proof in Medical Malpractice Cases

Michael C. Ksiazek — Thu, 14 Mar 2013 11:04:28 -0500

A bill pending in the Florida state legislature (HB 827) would increase the burden of proof required of plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases. Currently in that state, in order to succeed plaintiffs must prove their case by the “greater weight of evidence.” Under the proposed bill, plaintiffs would have the tougher burden of proving their cases by “clear and convincing evidence.” Additionally, the bill would permit defense attorneys to speak with the plaintiff’s subsequent treating doctors without notifying the plaintiff. These changes would certainly make it more difficult for plaintiffs to receive compensation for injuries caused by medical malpractice.

In Pennsylvania, plaintiffs are required to prove their medical malpractice case by a “preponderance of the evidence,” which simply means that it is more likely than not that negligence has occurred. This is a much lower burden than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard most people are familiar with, which only applies in criminal cases. The “clear and convincing evidence” standard proposed in Florida falls in between these.

The attorneys at Stark & Stark specialize in medical malpractice. If you believe that you or a loved one has been the victim of medical malpractice, contact the attorneys at Stark & Stark for a free consultation.

Michael Ksiazek is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Ksiazek.

One Big Reason Why Employers Need to Comply with the Fair Labor Standards Act

Bianca A. Smith — Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:15:42 -0500

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes certain minimum standards for private sector, local, state and Federal government workers including a 40-hour work week, minimum wages, and overtime pay. Compliance with the FLSA is not only mandatory for employers, but necessary to protect their employees and their pockets.

In recent years, many employers have been faced with large class action lawsuits related to disputes over employees’ and independent contractors’ wages and overtime pay. In 2012, after many years of costly litigation, Rite Aid Corporation settled a class action lawsuit brought against it by 6,100 current and former employees for $20.9 million. The suit arose out of the retail giant’s failure to pay its employees for overtime worked. Rite Aid claimed the employees were not entitled to overtime payment based on their employment status as exempt employees under FLSA. The court disagreed, finding the employees were improperly categorized as exempt under the law. In 2007, the first of two class action lawsuits was filed against Wal-Mart by current and former employees who were denied overtime payment and breaks. Philadelphia Common Pleas Judge Mark Bernstein found against Wal-Mart and awarded the employees a total of $140.8 million in damages.

Employers should keep in mind that it doesn’t matter whether your company is big or small, the same rules apply and you could easily be faced with claims for violations of the FLSA. Adhering to the standards set forth in the FLSA will not only allow you to avoid expensive litigation and potentially large damage awards or settlements, it will also help to prevent your company, and its reputation, from coming under scrutiny. If a claim has been brought against your company under the FLSA, or you want to learn more about protecting your company and its employees by following the standards set forth in the FLSA, please contact the experienced attorneys at Stark & Stark to discuss your legal rights.

Bianca A. Roberto is an Associate in Stark & Stark's Business & Corporate Group in its Yardley, PA office. For questions, or additional information, please contact Ms. Roberto.

Following the Rules: The Way to Have Your Case Heard

Bianca A. Smith — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 11:30:33 -0500

Have you ever filed a pleading, motion or other legal document and had it sent back to you for a procedural error and you can’t quite figure out why? More often than not, it’s because you didn’t follow a local, state or federal rule of court when you made your filing. All too often pro se parties, and even attorneys, make the mistake of not referencing the procedural rules prior to filing an action or during the pendency of an action. Not only could this be detrimental to your case, cause additional costs and unreasonable delay, but it could bar you from having your case heard at all.

Most of the counties in Pennsylvania have different rules for each type of filing, and those rules are different in civil, criminal and family court. It is in your best interest to have an experienced attorney who knows these local rules, and knows how to use them to your advantage. Avoid unnecessary costs and delay, and the very real risk of losing your opportunity to have your day in court, and consult with one of the experienced attorneys at Stark & Stark.

Bianca A. Roberto is an Associate in Stark & Stark's Business & Corporate Group in its Yardley, PA office. For questions, or additional information, please contact Ms. Roberto.

Redefining Retirement

Leslie A. Mitnick — Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:00:22 -0500

The large demographic of Americans known as “Baby Boomers”, are starting to retire. Several retirement trends have become noticeable as the Boomers replace their parents as retired senior citizens.

1. More retired Americans are retiring in foreign countries, many of which offer year-round warm weather and lower cost of living which many retirees find appealing. These countries include Belize, Costa Rica, and Mexico, all of which are a simple plane ride away from most U.S. cities.

2. Many Boomers see retirement as the opportunity to start new businesses and new careers. As Boomers expect to live substantially longer than their parents, many are interested in continuing to work, but in a business of their own choosing. Along with this trend, Boomers are more likely to rely on new technologies which involve using the internet, social media, and self-publishing.

3. Boomers are assuming more financial support for their aged parents, and more child-rearing responsibilities for their adult children. It is not all that unusual these days for multi-generational families to again be living under one roof where costs and chores can be shared.

4. Fewer Boomers are planning the traditional Florida or Arizona retirement. Boomers are attracted to smaller cities with large universities, access to good health care, affordable housing and an active arts community. For many Boomers, proximity to their children and grandchildren remains a prime consideration.

Leslie A. Mitnick is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Ms. Mitnick.

Georgia Bill Would Take Medical Malpractice Suits Out of the Court System

Michael C. Ksiazek — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:10:02 -0500

A controversial bill that has been proposed in the Georgia state legislature would take medical malpractice lawsuits out of the court system in that state, and have them decided by an 11-member “patient injury” board. The board would be comprised of doctors, lawyers, patient advocates, an accountant, a business executive, and a hospital administrator. The stated purpose behind the measure is to save money - namely, rising healthcare costs attributed to defensive medicine - and time, as the bill’s sponsors anticipate that justice will work more quickly in the state board program than it does in the courts.

Criticism of the plan focuses on the potential for the program to actually cost Georgia taxpayers more money, as tax dollars will have to pay for the new bureaucracy; and constitutionality, as both the U.S. and Georgia state constitutions guarantee a trial by jury. The bill is opposed by the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association, a group comprised of attorneys who represent plaintiffs and who aim to protect access to the courts for all citizens of that state. Interestingly, the Medical Association of Georgia, a physician advocacy group, also opposes the bill. Their feeling is that the board system will actually increase the number of medical malpractice claims filed, in addition to increasing costs.

In Pennsylvania, while steps have been taken to ensure that only meritorious medical malpractice lawsuits are filed, individuals injured due to medical malpractice are still entitled to have their claims adjudicated in courts of law by juries of their peers. We have experienced trial attorneys at Stark & Stark who specialize in medical malpractice. If you believe that you or a loved one has been the victim of medical malpractice, contact the attorneys at Stark & Stark for a free consultation.

Michael Ksiazek is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Ksiazek.

Amendment to the Pennsylvania Landlord and Tenant Act Clarifies Landlords' Duty Regarding Tenants' Personal Property

Kenneth Ferris — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:00:13 -0500

Pennsylvania’s Act 129 of 2012 which went into effect in August amends the Pennsylvania Landlord and Tenant Act to give landlords guidance on dealing with personal property left behind by tenants who vacate a rental property.

Before Act 129, no clear statutory or regulatory guidance for landlords and tenants regarding their respective rights and duties after the tenant vacates existed. Act 129 requires tenants to remove their personal property at the time that they relinquish possession of the property. A tenant is deemed to have relinquished the premises if there is an order of possession and execution in favor of the landlord, or if the tenant has physically vacated the premises; removed substantially all personal property and has provided a forwarding address or written notice that the tenant has vacated the premises.

If a tenant’s personal property remains after relinquishment of the premises, the landlord may send notice under Act 129 to the tenant that the property has been left behind. The tenant then has 10 days from the notice to contact the landlord and state whether the tenant intends to retrieve the property. If the tenant does not contact the landlord within the ten-day period, the landlord may dispose of the property. However, if the tenant contacts the landlord within the 10 day window and advises the landlord that the tenant’s intent is to retrieve the property, the landlord must store the property for 30 days at a site of the landlord’s choosing. Property retrieved within 10 days by a tenant may not incur storage charges from a landlord, however property retrieved after the 10 day window may incur a reasonable storage fee.

While helpful to both landlords and tenants, the Act does impose statutory notice requirements, and savvy landlords should have their standard leases reviewed and updated by counsel in light of Act 129’s amendment of the Landlord and Tenant Act.

Kenneth Ferris is a member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, concentrating in Business & Corporate Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Ferris.

Bus Accidents

John F. Cordisco — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 10:20:10 -0500

As I wrote about in a previous blog, bus accident victims often suffer significant injuries which may be caused in part due to a lack of seat belts. I recently represented a woman who was seriously injured when the bus she was occupying was struck in the rear by another bus. The woman sustained a serious brain injury when she was thrown from her seat within the bus. Evidence in that case showed that the striking bus was negligent for its failure to keep a safe distance from the bus in front of it.

In the recent Calvary Coach charter bus accident in Boston, Massachusetts involving a group of students from Bristol, Pennsylvania, dozens of people were injured. The accident is currently under investigation, but initial reports indicate that the driver might have been distracted and looking at his GPS, and failed to realize that he was on a section of roadway with a restricted height limit.

More and more and more people are taking buses each year because of the high cost of air travel. But, in order to keep up with the demand and increase profit, some bus companies are failing their basic duty to keep their passengers safe. They are failing to hire and train qualified drivers, failing to follow federal and state regulations, and failing to maintain their buses in safe working condition.

If you or someone you know has been injured in a bus accident, trucking accident, or other motor vehicle collision, contact John Cordisco here. Mr. Cordisco, who grew up in Bristol, is a personal injury lawyer in Stark and Stark’s office in Bucks County, and has represented hundreds of victims of motor vehicle accidents.

John F. Cordisco is a Shareholder and member of Stark & Stark’s Yardley, PA office, specializing in Accident & Personal Injury Law. For more information, please contact Mr. Cordisco.