On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

One of the main reasons that retail stores and businesses put out signage warning about wet floors and other potential hazards is not so much to protect their customers but to protect themselves. While there could still be an accident, not warning others about a wet surface could open a door to a lawsuit over premises liability. Like every state, Connecticut has laws that govern how negligence cases can be pursued.

There are laws that deal with negligence on the part of another party or a business that results in someone suffering physical harm. While the majority of the states have done away with contributory negligence, most states — including Connecticut — do have a comparative scale when it comes to filing a negligent personal injury lawsuit. Contributory negligence laws made it difficult for an injured party to collect in a personal injury case because the laws stated that even if the injured party was one percent at fault, then the judge could not allow the party to collect any damages.

Connecticut is one of the many states that have comparative negligence laws. As long as an injured party was not more than 50 percent at fault, then he or she can file a personal injury suit against the parties responsible. This is considered a modified comparative law. In the pure form of the law, a person can collect if he or she is even 99 percent to blame for the accident. Furthermore, if there is more than one party at fault in a negligence suit, then the responsibility can be separated by degrees.

An injured party can decide to leave an at-fault party out of a lawsuit if there are others who are deemed more at fault. There are stipulations in place that protect some entities from being sued if one suffers an injury on site, such as a school (in most, but not all circumstances). If a Connecticut resident suffers an injury that he or she believes is a premises liability case, then that person can consult with a personal injury attorney who can provide more information about the merits of the case.

Source: FindLaw, “Connecticut Negligence Laws“, Accessed on April 1, 2017

Posted in Premises Liability | No Comments »

On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

It is not uncommon to hear of bed bug infestations at hotels in Connecticut and elsewhere. These little pests may pack a small bite, but they can do a lot of damage — physically, psychologically and even financially. Anyone who has suffered as a result of coming in contact with these bugs during a hotel stay may be able to file a premises liability claim against the property owners and any others believed responsible.

Currently, Connecticut does not really have any laws regarding bed bug infestations. Like most other states, property owners are just responsible for maintaining clean environments. If bed bugs are found, appropriate actions to remedy the situation are to be taken.

Quite a few people think that bed bugs are harmless, though disgusting. However, for some who come in contact with these bugs, allergic reactions, rashes and scarring can occur. In some cases, the scarring may be permanent. Not only will this be physically damaging, but it can have long-term psychological consequences as well. Bed bugs are also great hitchhikers and will attach to clothing or suitcases, so some victims of hotel infestations may bring the problem home with them, which can be expensive to resolve.

When staying at a hotel, whether in Connecticut or elsewhere, it is reasonable to expect a room that is clean and free of pests. Those who find otherwise and who have suffered as a result may have legal recourse. With the assistance of an experienced attorney, a premises liability claim may be filed in civil court. If litigation proves successful, damages may be awarded.

Source: USA Today, “Hotel Obligations for Bed Bugs“, Christopher Michael, Accessed on Jan. 8, 2017

Posted in Premises Liability | No Comments »

On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

Parents who allow their children to attend occasions such as music festivals in Connecticut or elsewhere would naturally want to have comfort in knowing that there will be sufficient control and medical care in the events of emergencies. Visitors to such venues will want to feel that they are entering a safe environment. Raves are sometimes known to have elements present that may endanger the lives of others due to the availability of illegal substances, and organizers may be held responsible via premises liability lawsuits if guests suffer injuries or worse.

One such lawsuit was recently filed by the parents of a 19-year-old girl who died of a drug overdose at a music festival in another state last summer. The organizers of the rave, along with other entities, were named as defendants in the lawsuit. It is alleged that the girl’s death was preventable. According to the complaint, the defendants should have been aware of the fact that such festivals are commonly associated with the availability of drugs such as Ecstasy. It is claimed that the dangers were largely ignored in favor of the revenue potential.

Court documents indicate that the attendance figure at the rave was recorded as 65,000 while only four stations were established to provide medical services. Furthermore, it is alleged that the medical personnel who treated the unresponsive girl were not adequately trained to handle the emergency. The suit also noted that another 18-year-old girl died from an overdose of Ecstasy earlier that day and that the emergency stations were overwhelmed by approximately 50 other festival attendees who suffered comas and seizures caused by drugs.

Connecticut families who have lost loved ones due to the actions — or -non-actions — of others retain the right to pursue claims for financial relief. Individuals or organizers of events could be held accountable through the judicial system. A premises liability lawsuit can be filed in a civil court, and upon proof of negligence, the court may award a monetary judgment to cover documented losses.

Source: NBC Los Angeles, “Family Sues Music Festival After Daughter’s OD“, July 27, 2016

Posted in Premises Liability | No Comments »

On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

Time and again, we’ve heard about this type of scenario playing out somewhere in our state: An individual goes to a party and starts drinking. He is having a great time and throwing back drink after drink. At the end of the night, he stumbled out to his vehicle and heads home. On the way home, he hits and kills a pedestrian crossing the road. It’s a horrible situation but one that unfortunately happens every year in our state.

In this type of situation, one might wonder who is to blame. There is pretty obvious blame that can be put on the driver, but what about the host of the party? This is where premises liability law comes into play and it can differ widely state to state.

Some states have dram shop laws. This type of law can hold businesses liable for continuing to serve alcohol to a clearly intoxicated person who then ends up injuring another person. That business could then be found liable for any injuries suffered by the victim. In some states, this type of law also covers social hosts.

Other states have specific social host laws. In fact, have social host liability laws that are considered general and nine states have such laws that pertain specifically to minors. As you can imagine, if someone serves a minor alcohol and that minor ended up dying in a drunk driving accident, the person who provided the alcohol could and should be held liable.

These types of situations are definitely not cut and dry so it makes sense to work with an attorney to understand what your options are. Many people may feel uncomfortable trying to place blame on someone else if their loved one died in this type of scenario, but it’s important to remember that there are often state laws that govern liability in such cases.

Posted in Premises Liability | No Comments »

On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

Company owners nationwide, including in Connecticut, must be selective when they choose marketing gimmicks to promote their businesses. A steakhouse chain with outlets nationwide is facing a premises liability lawsuit involving a promotion tactic that allegedly caused serious personal injury to a customer in another state. The recent federal lawsuit alleges that discarded peanut shells on the floor of the restaurant caused the plaintiff to fall to the ground.

The lawsuit claims that over 400 restaurants belonging to this group allow peanut shells to be discarded onto the restaurant floors by patrons and bartenders. It is alleged that even if customers collect the empty shells on their tables, servers merely toss them onto the floor, causing hazardous circumstances. This Feb. 2015 accidentally allegedly fractured the kneecap of the plaintiff in four places, resulting in medical expenses, lost wages and physical impairment.

It is claimed that the company’s negligence was willful as it has faced similar claims in the past. A woman suffered a similar type of injury in 2008 after slipping on peanut shells, and she ultimately received $43,000 in damages. In 2013, another injured victim sought over $1 million after a slip-and-fall incident in one of the company’s restaurants. A confidential settlement was reached in that case in 2015.

Connecticut victims of slip-and-fall incidents caused by the negligence of property owners and/or those in possession of the property retain the right to pursue financial relief for damages sustained. A victim is free to seek the support and guidance of a premises liability attorney. Proving negligence on the part of the defendant/s is vital to the successful presentation of such a claim. Along with medical expenses, other documented financial and emotional losses will also be considered for monetary restitution once liability has been properly established.

Source: desmoinesregister.com, “Iowa man sues Texas Roadhouse after slipping on peanuts“, Grant Rodgers, May 9, 2016

Posted in Premises Liability | No Comments »

If you or a loved one has been exposed to lead-contaminated drinking water in Connecticut, you may be wondering whether you have legal grounds to sue. The short answer is: yes, you may be able to pursue legal action, depending on the circumstances of your exposure and who is responsible.

Understanding Lead Contamination in Public Water Systems

Recent years have brought national attention to the dangers of lead in drinking water. The Flint, Michigan water crisis is a well-known example, where government agencies and private contractors faced lawsuits after switching the city’s water supply led to widespread lead poisoning. Families affected by the crisis—especially those with children—have sought financial compensation for the harm caused by exposure.

Unfortunately, lead contamination is not limited to Flint. A USA Today investigation revealed that hundreds of public water systems across the United States have tested positive for unsafe levels of lead. According to WTNH News 8, more than 50 public water systems in Connecticut were identified as having lead levels above safe limits.

What Is a Public Water System?

A public water system (PWS) is any water supply that serves more than 25 individuals. These systems can include:

• Schools and daycare centers
• Apartment buildings
• Office buildings
• Parks and recreational facilities

In Connecticut, there are roughly 2,000 public water systems. The state Department of Public Health acknowledges that it cannot guarantee the safety of every system, particularly since the pipes in individual buildings may still contain lead. While the state claims the water sent to these locations is treated and clean, contamination can still occur within outdated infrastructure.

Are Landlords and Property Owners Responsible?

If you live or work in a building with a private or semi-public water system, the property owner or landlord may be responsible for regular water quality testing. Connecticut law requires them to:

• Conduct routine water testing
• Submit reports on contamination levels
• Take corrective action if unsafe levels of lead are detected

Currently, 14 systems in Connecticut are known to exceed safe lead levels, according to health officials. If your property is one of them and you’ve suffered harm due to exposure, you may have a valid lead poisoning lawsuit.

Can I File a Lawsuit for Lead Exposure in Connecticut?

If you or your child has been diagnosed with lead poisoning or has experienced symptoms of lead exposure—such as developmental delays, behavioral issues, or other health problems—you may be eligible to seek compensation. A successful legal claim can help recover:

• Medical expenses
• Pain and suffering
• Emotional distress
• Ongoing care or rehabilitation costs

Why Speak With a Connecticut Lead Contamination Lawyer?

Determining liability in lead exposure cases can be complex. It often involves proving:

• The source of the lead contamination
• The responsible party (government agency, landlord, contractor, etc.)
• That the exposure directly caused your injuries

At Adler Law Group, LLC, we have experience handling toxic exposure and environmental injury cases. Our legal team can investigate your situation, identify liable parties, and fight for the compensation you deserve.

---

Get Legal Help for Lead Water Contamination in Connecticut

If you suspect that you or a family member has been exposed to lead-contaminated water in Connecticut, don’t wait. Contact Adler Law Group, LLC today for a free consultation. Our team is here to help you understand your rights and explore your legal options.

Call us now or visit our website to schedule your consultation.

Posted in Premises Liability | No Comments »

On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

We have written a lot previously on this blog about the rights people have to seek and possibly be compensated for pain and suffering inflicted by another person’s pet dog, cat or other animal.

That such means of recovery are available under the law is only right. The injuries that are caused by such attacks can require long-term medical treatment and result in serious physical disfigurement. There is also the possibility of psychological trauma to the victim. Any way you look at it, animal attacks can be devastating. If they happened because of negligence on the part of pet’s owner or keeper, they should expect to be held accountable.

But what about those instances in which a beloved companion pet is left with a keeper and winds up attacked by another animal in the facility? Doesn’t the same notion of strict liability that holds owners and keepers in Connecticut legally responsible for any injury or damage done by animals in their charge apply?

The answer is that it well might. It depends on the elements of the case and interpretations of the applicable laws. That’s why it’s always important to speak with an attorney who has a depth of experience in such cases.

A case out of Rhode Island may serve as an example. A kennel owner in Providence is under the shadow of an order to close his boarding facility and he could also be required to pay a $15,000 fine. The penalties — the first under a new animal protection law in the state — stem from an incident in which one dog attacked another. The victim dog had to be put down.

An investigation of the matter concluded that the animals hadn’t been under proper supervision and that the kennel’s license wasn’t valid because of a change in ownership. The current owner is appealing the closure order and he continues operating pending that appeal.

If you’ve been the victim of an animal attack or lost a beloved companion animal due to the negligence by someone you entrusted with its care, you should make sure you know what your rights are for seeking recovery.

Posted in Animal Bites | No Comments »

On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

The mother of two children killed in a deadly car crash last week in Bristol, Connecticut, is said to be working with an attorney, even as she recovers from her own injuries suffered in the wreck. Seeking such help of an experienced personal injury lawyer is always recommended. In this case, it may be crucial in ensuring that the facts of the incident are nailed down and to hold the responsible party fully accountable.

At this point, there appears to be some significant confusion over what may have occurred. When police first reported the accident, they told news outlets that the mother of the two little girls, aged seven and four, had crossed over the center yellow line. She was driving a compact car. Her vehicle collided with a Ford Windstar van.

But days later, the woman’s family said that police had admitted that they had been mistaken — that it was the van that had crossed over the center lines. The NBC TV affiliate in Bristol says police won’t confirm that their previous information was incorrect. They do say that the investigation is continuing and that more witnesses have been interviewed since the crash.

What is not in dispute is that there are two young children dead and four other people injured as a result of this crash. The mother and an adult male passenger from the compact car are reportedly recovering. The Bristol Press reports that the driver and a second person in the van were also seriously hurt in the crash.

Meanwhile, the mother’s attorney is asking for the public to respect his client’s privacy at this time of deep loss. He says he is confident that when the police investigation is completed it will show that she was not responsible in any way.

Source: NBCConnecticut.com, “Family of 2 Girls Who Died in Bristol Crash Disputes Police Account,” Catalina Trivino, Dec. 17, 2015

Posted in Car Accidents | No Comments »

On Behalf of Adler Law Group, LLC

Most Connecticut teenagers can’t wait to come of the age when they can get their license to drive. That age is 16. It’s a big moment. It’s also a lot of responsibility to place in the hands of someone who is so young and inexperienced at a task that can have such serious repercussions if something goes wrong.

State lawmakers are not unaware of the risks that are involved when young people get behind the wheel. That’s why there are laws on the books that restrict behaviors. Among them is one that states that new young drivers are not supposed to carry any passengers, except a licensed instructor, a licensed person with at least 4 years of safe driving on record or a licensed parent or legal guardian.

To reinforce those measures state statute also opens parents to potential liability if a young driver violates restrictions and then is found to be responsible for an accident that leaves a victim injured or killed.

This may be something that is on the minds of a 16-year-old Killingworth girl and her parents right now. According to authorities, she was driving an SUV that was involved in a head-on collision with some motorcyclists last month. The crash left one motorcyclist dead and two others injured.

While an investigation is apparently still ongoing, state police say the driver of the SUV was in violation of the law related to passengers in that she had two other 16-year-old girls in the vehicle with her at the time of the crash. Some experts in the area of motoring safety say the risk of a crash rises exponentially for teen drivers for every teen passenger being carried.

Connecticut law is considered to have some of toughest laws on the books on teenage driving, but as we’ve noted — parents have the potential to be held to account if a young driver gets in an accident that causes property damage or physical injury. Whenever such legal question arise, speaking with an experienced attorney is advisable.

Posted in Motorcycle Accidents | No Comments »