Articles Posted in Personal Injury

When filing a dog bite complaint, the plaintiff may pursue multiple theories of liability against the dog owner. The Animal Control Act holds dog owners strictly liable for bites and attacks by their dog. E.g. 510 ILCS 5. Prior to the passage of the Animal Control Act, a plaintiff was forced to bring a negligence cause of action. In such cases, a dog owner could plead an affirmative defense that he or she lacked knowledge that the dog would attack or bite–commonly referred to as the “one-bite” or “scienter” rule. Klatz v. Pfeffer, 333 Ill. 90, 94-95 (1928).

The Illinois legislatures adopted the “dog bite” statute, which eliminated the scienter rule. The modern “dog bite” statute states, in part: “If a dog or other animal without provocation attacks or injures any person who is peaceably conducting himself . . . the owner of such dog or other animal is liable in damages to such person for the full amount of the injury sustained.” 510 ILCS 5/16. The Illinois Supreme Court in Beckert v. Risberg held that the elements necessary to sustain an action under this section are: (1) proof of injury by the dog; (2) lack of provocation; (3) peaceable conduct; and (4) presence of the plaintiff in a place where he or she had a right to be. 33 Ill. 2d 44, 46 (1965); See https://www.chicago-injury-lawyer.org/dog-bite/. Accordingly, a dog owner may only defend an action under the statute by proving that the victim was creating a disturbance, trespassing, or tormenting the dog in a way that provoked the attack.
Continue reading

The Illinois Animal Control Act provides a basis for dog bite victims to recover if they have been the victim of a dog bite. However, an animal attack, on its own, is not necessarily an automatic basis for liability. There are rare situations that may prevent the plaintiff from proving her claim because the plaintiff was actually in control of the animal at the time of the attack, or when a defendant has given proper warnings to the victim about the presence of a dangerous dog. Although rare, these two exceptions to liability are worthy of consideration.

Exception 1: There May Be No Liability When the Victim Assumes Complete Control of the Animal.

In rare situations, a plaintiff may be barred. Van Plew v. Riccio, 317 Ill.App.3d 179 (2nd Dist. 2000). In Van Plew, a pet sitter who the dog owner hired to feed and provide water for the dog was bitten during the course of her care for the dog. The court denied recovery and stated that “where a person voluntarily accepts responsibility for controlling or caring for a dog … that person is an ‘owner’ within the meaning of the Act and is precluded from recovery under the Act.” Id. at 182. The Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court reached a similar decision in Docherty v. Sadler, 293 Ill.App.3d 892 (4th Dist. 1997), where it denied relief to a ten-year-old-child who had agreed to take care of a neighbor’s dog. However, these situations are rare and what constitutes “control” is a high bar for the defendant to meet. More often, the defendant will have retained at least partial control of the animal, thereby exposing them to potential liability. A proper investigation can often defeat this defense.
Continue reading

Motor vehicle accidents raise many complicated issues of fault and proof. One way to prove a defendant’s liability is by using an admission of guilt (“guilty plea”) in the underlying traffic court proceeding, which is ordinarily conducted soon after an accident is reported. Often, a potential defendant will plead guilty to a traffic citation. The guilty plea may be used in the civil case to demonstrate the fault of the motorist. “[G]uilty pleas to traffic offenses have been admitted in subsequent civil proceedings as admissions.” Young v. Forgas, 308 Ill.App.3d 553, 565 (4th Dist. 1999). A defendant’s claim he did not appreciate the effect of a guilty plea in a traffic case is irrelevant. As stated in Young, a “person must realize that civil litigation is a very real possibility and that the guilty plea to the traffic charge could reflect adversely upon him in a subsequent proceeding.” Id.

A guilty plea is an exception to the hearsay rule. “A guilty plea to a traffic violation is admissible as an admission against interest in a later civil action on the same facts.” Mivatovich v. Chicago Transit Authority, 112 Ill.App.2d 437, 442 (1st Dist. 1969). Courts reason that “a judicial admission is a deliberate, clear, unequivocal statement of a party about a concrete fact within that party’s peculiar knowledge.” Sohaey v. Van Cura, 240 Ill.App.3d 266, 280 (2nd Dist. 1992). “[A] judicial admission is conclusive upon the party who made it, and the party may not controvert the admission at trial or on appeal, so the effect of a judicial admission is to withdraw a fact from contention. Id., at 280-81. Additionally, “a party cannot create a question of fact for purposes of a summary judgment motion by attempting to contradict a previous judicial admission.” Id.
Continue reading

Naperville truck accidents cause serious injuries each year, including: broken bones, back and neck injuries, and in some cases even fatalities (wrongful death). The City of Naperville, recognizing the dangers posed by truck traffic, has designated specific routes for trucks. Naperville’s truck route plan has many advantages, including: reducing congestion; decreasing air pollution; and perhaps most important, providing safer neighborhood travel. By allowing trucks to “use” neighborhood streets, but forbidding travel “through” neighborhoods, Naperville’s plan recognizes the need for goods and services to be delivered to homes, businesses and facilities. The program also recognizes that limiting large truck travel (semi trailers, 18 wheelers) to specific routes is an excellent way to prevent pedestrian and motorist accidents. Statistics show that limiting the opportunities for large commercial trucks to interact with other motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists lowers the likelihood that a truck accident will occur.

Specific Initiatives

Truck traffic patterns from the area’s main highway–Route 88–place burdens on many local roads. Interstate 88 (Ronald Reagan Memorial Tollway) runs through the north part of Naperville carrying millions of tons of cargo every year. Much of that cargo must find its way to the residents and businesses that call Naperville home. In order to efficiently serve the City of Naperville, a truck permit plan has been implemented. Commercial trucks that travel upon Naperville streets pay permit fees. The City of Naperville’s Truck Route Plan provides a Designated Truck Route System and implements a Road Damage Overweight/Over-dimension Truck Permit Program. Trucks carrying heavy loads that exceed 73,280 pounds pay a fee for the privilege of using Naperville roads. The funds from the program go into the Road and Bridge Fund, which is used to repair, maintain, and construct the roads and streets in Naperville. The program represents a compromise between the need for goods to be delivered with the need to safely maintain Naperville streets. The truck permit plan promotes the following best practices and methods:

– Integrate truck route planning with land use planning.
– Coordinate the location of truck routes with roadway design and land uses.
– Consider regional implications of truck route locations.
– Enforce truck route policies.
– Reevaluate existing truck routes periodically.
Continue reading

The City of Naperville is situated in a diverse area of DuPage County. Naperville contains residential areas, commercial areas, schools, churches, parks, and rivers. In addition, unincorporated areas surround Naperville. Naperville’s recent growth and development have presented challenges for city officials, who are charged with providing and maintaining safe transportation. In order to prevent car accidents, truck accidents, and motorcycle accidents, the City of Naperville has developed a comprehensive Traffic Safety Plan (the “Plan”). A goal of the Naperville Comprehensive Transportation Safety Plan is intended to save lives and reduce injuries by lowering the number and frequency of crashes. Like the Truck Route Plan, Pedestrian Plan, and Bicycle Plan, the Traffic Safety Plan sets forth policies and practices designed to achieve the plan’s goal to reduce car accidents in Naperville.

Some of the policies include:

– Requiring developers to provide dedicated sidewalks for pedestrians and bicycles.
– Lobbying state and federal governments for additional traffic safety funds.
– Considering car crash rates or truck accident frequency when prioritizing capital
improvement projects that may impact vehicle crash rates.
– Promoting and enforcing seat belt usage to reduce injuries and save lives.

Some of the practices include:

– Considering traffic safety when reviewing new development plans.
– Developing and implementing driving education programs, especially for younger, less
experienced drivers.
– Identifying and examining locations with a high frequency of car accidents.
– Evaluating school access in terms of motor vehicle safety issues.
– Encouraging alternative forms of transportation, such as bicycles and walking paths.
– Minimizing conflicts between motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists in all future
development plans.
Continue reading

Victims of car accidents often suffer cervical (neck) strain known as “whiplash.” A whiplash injury can occur as a result of both a low speed and a high speed collision. Whiplash most often occurs in rear-end collisions. Neck injuries, including whiplash, occur because the sudden force of a vehicle impact causes the occupant to decelerate rapidly, moving the neck past its normal range of motion. The crash victim’s head moves forward, then backward, very quickly, and unexpectedly.

Treatment for whiplash can be described as a neck injury to the soft tissue of the ligaments, tendons, and muscles in the neck. A whiplash neck injury, also described as a cervical strain or sprain, is considered a hypertension neck injury. Pain in the cervical area, which is often severe, is a common symptom of whiplash injury. Other symptoms include muscle spasms, headaches, neck pain, sleep disturbance, tight muscles, low back pain, tenderness in the back of the neck, poor memory, pain in the shoulders, fatigue, dizziness, vision problems, ringing in the ears, limited range of motion, and shooting pain in the arms.
Continue reading

The aftermath of a motor vehicle accident can be legally complex. Often times, a person other than the driver to the striking vehicle, may be additionally responsible for the damages caused by a motor vehicle collision. Under Illinois law, two common scenarios in which a person or entity may be found legally responsible for damages caused by a negligent driver arise in (1) the parent-child relationship, and (2) the employer-employee relationship. Whether a parent or an employer is legally responsible for the at-fault driver will a careful analysis of the facts surrounding the accident and the relationships of the parties.

Parent-Child Relationship

If a child gets into an accident while driving his or her parents’ car, the injured plaintiff may be able to sue the parents in certain, but not all, situations. Parents are not liable for the injuries caused by their children merely because their child causes an accident. In Illinois, parents may be held liable under an “agency” theory for their child’s negligent driving if the child was engaged in running an errand for or doing the parents’ business at the time of the accident. Stellmach v. Olson, 242 Ill.App.3d 61, 64 (2nd Dist. 1993). However, the Stellmach Court explained that a parent is not liable for damages caused by a child who drove the parent’s car for the child’s own purposes, even if the parent consented to that use. Stellmach, 242 Ill.App.3d at 65. If, instead, the child was using the car to run a family errand, then the parent will be liable. Stellmach, 242 Ill.App.3d at 64. The question of whether an action is a family errand will be a question of fact for the jury to consider during the trial. Id.
Continue reading

In March 2011, the Village of Downers Grove released its Neighborhood Traffic Study (the “Study”). The Study investigated Downers Grove’s traffic issues by studying a specific section of the community– the neighborhood bounded by Main Street, Fairview Avenue, Maple Avenue, and 55th Street. Incredibly detailed and comprehensive, the Study analyzed many different issues, including: pedestrian and bicycle facilities, intersection traffic controls, parking restrictions, and daily traffic volumes. Perhaps the most important part of the meticulous study was the evaluation of the intersection at 55th Street and Washington Street.

Intersection at 55th Street and Washington Street

One of the Study’s goals was to investigate the conditions at the intersection of 55th Street and Washington Street in Downer Grove, which may be causing vehicle accidents, car accidents, truck accidents, and motorcycle accidents and to provide recommendations for limiting the number of future accidents.
Continue reading

On November 23, 2011, the U.S. Department of Transportation (“USDOT”) announced the final rule that prohibits interstate truck and bus drivers from using hand-hand cell phones while operating vehicles. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (“FMCSA”) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (“PHMSA”) finalized the rule with the power of the USDOT . The FMCSA and PHMSA determined that the prohibition was necessary to prevent injuries and deaths caused by truck accidents. In 2009, there were 5,474 deaths and nearly 500,000 injuries caused by distracted drivers.

The final rule provides for federal civil penalties of up to $2,5750 each time a commercial truck driver is caught using a hand-held cell phone while driving. Companies that are found to be permissive in allowing their drivers to use hand-held cell phones face stiff fines up to $11,000. These penalties are in addition to state sanctions, including potential suspension of commercial driver’s license (“CDL”).
Continue reading

Rear-end collisions occur every day in DuPage County. Some accidents are relatively minor and occur at slow speeds; other times, severe accidents occur as a result of a high speed, heavy impact collision. Regardless of the severity of the car accident, injuries often result. Common symptoms include pain in the head, neck, and back. Injuries may range from broken arms or legs, shoulder injuries, knee injuries, head injuries, whiplash and herniated or bulging discs.

In Illinois, the individual who rear-ends another driver is often found to be at fault in causing the accident, absent certain defenses. The rear-end driver or striking motorist who causes a rear end collision may have been following the car in front of him too closely or “tailgating.” There are exceptions to this general assumption, such as a sudden stop by the victim’s car, or in rare circumstances in which the striking motorist is confronted with a hazardous situation or sudden emergency.
Continue reading

Contact Information