Recently in Bicycle Accidents Category

1. Familiarity with Columbia and the surrounding area. We opened in Ellicott City eighteen years ago, and now have our main office in Columbia. Since that time we have settled or tried over 15,000 personal injury cases, many for Howard County clients. We know how to best handle a Howard County accident case just by shear experience. Our verdicts and settlements in Howard County reveal that we can recover fair compensation from every insurance carrier including Allstate, MAIF, and GEICO. Further, the Howard County criminal defense attorneys on staff here at Portner & Shure have been to court with thousands of criminal defendants and have obtained excellent results. I have lived in Ellicott City for over ten years and am active in the community. In addition, half of our staff resides in Columbia or Ellicott City. As a result, we know the tendencies of the citizens who make up juries in Howard County and we know the tendencies of most of the Howard County District Court and Circuit Court Judges. This knowledge is a great asset in Howard County personal injury jury and Howard County criminal cases.
2. Does Portner & Shure do anything special to help represent the diverse make up of the residents of Howard County?Howard County has an extremely large and active Korean community. Our Korean Department allows our Howard County personal injury law firm to help Korean speaking accident victims and Korean speaking criminal defendants in Ellicott City and Columbia. In order to assist the Spanish speaking population, we currently have a Spanich department, including Elizabeth, Norma, Claudia, Will and Cynthia, to help with Spanish speaking automobile accident victims and Spanish speaking residents charged with DWI or other criminal offenses in Ellicott City and Columbia. Lastly, we have a Chinese department, consisting of Rosanna, Jane and Christine, to help Chinese speaking automobile accident victims and Chinese speaking criminal defendants in Columbia and Ellicott City.
3. Why Portner & Shure in Howard County?

• Our foreign departments allow our Howard County law firm to help the diverse population
• Our Howard County attorneys are always available
• We have a convenient, main office located in Columbia in Howard County
• Our Howard County attorneys have experience in Howard County from working and living here for approximately eighteen years.
• Our track record of great results
• We are respected by every insurance company

1. Liability - Many Maryland auto accident cases involve a dispute over who is at fault. In a simple rear end collision, liability is often accepted when the claim is filed. If the accident involves a lane change, sudden stop, multiple impacts or two different accounts of the accident with no police report or witness, the automobile insurance company often denies liability(almost always if the carrier is Geico or MAIF). These claims end up in court where an experienced personal injury attorney has the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the other driver was at fault. The term preponderance of the evidence means more likely than not. In other words, the fate of your accident recovery often depends on the experience of the trial lawyer you retained. A "Trial Lawyer" is someone you need to hire when you first call an attorney, not just a Maryland accident lawyer. Portner & Shure's attorneys are trial attorneys and our website reflects many of the injury awards we have received in court, not just by settling.
2. Contributory Negligence - Maryland's contributory negligence doctrine is cut throat and can be a complete bar to an injured victim's recovery. Maryland personal injury attorneys often struggle to help clients because of this all or nothing rule. Under contributory negligence, the accident victim's failure to exercise a reasonable degree of care and caution, no matter how slight, is an absolute bar to recovery. If the defendant's lawyer can convince a jury that the victim was only 1% at fault, that individual will not recover any damages. Maryland personal injury lawyers have been struggling against the doctrine of contributory negligence since it was adopted by the Maryland Court of Appeals in 1847. In 1868, accident victims received some reprieve when the Court of Appeals adopted the last clear chance doctrine. The last clear chance doctrine allows recovery by an accident victim, who would other wise be barred from recovery due to contributory negligence, if the defendant had the last chance to avoid the accident. Many Maryland accident attorneys do not understand how this rule works. As a result, you must hire an experienced injury lawyer who can overcome this rule.
3. Low Property Damage - Some automobile accident claims, where liability is not disputed, don't settle. One of the main reasons these cases fail to settle is because insurance adjusters refuse to offer fair settlements in accidents where the property damage to the injured victim's vehicle amounts to less than $1,000. Insurance companies often argue, in these cases, that the medical treatment received by the injured party was not warranted considering the low impact and that the injuries suffered could not have resulted from a minor accident. The adjusters' low impact argument often fails in court. There are several arguments that can be made on behalf of a plaintiff by an experienced Maryland accident lawyer. First, large accidents with significant property damage can result in little or no injuries to those involved, while minor accidents often result in serious injuries. Second, especially in rear end collisions, the injured victim does not have a chance to brace for impact. Third, sometimes the types of vehicles involved can explain the extent of the property damage. Forth, the evaluation of the accident victim's injuries and treatment is done by medical professionals who, absent evidence to the contrary, give medical treatment that is fair and reasonable and medically necessary. In almost every district court in Maryland, Portner & Shure trial attorneys have prevailed in low impact accidents.
4. Preexisting Injury or Underlying Condition - In many personal injury cases, the injured victim may have a preexisting injury or underlying condition. In these personal injury cases, insurance companies' attorneys will argue that the individual was already injured, experiencing symptoms before the accident and that the injury was not caused by the accident. When a plaintiff has a preexisting injury, an experienced Maryland accident attorney can use medical records to show that the plaintiff was fully recovered from the accident and released from treatment. Further, the personal injury attorney can argue that the plaintiff was asymptomatic before the current accident or that the preexisting injury was made worse by the accident. If the injured accident victim has a preexisting injury, such as a degenerative back condition, the fact that the condition was exacerbated or that there was a predisposition for an injury could explain why the accident resulted in significant injury. This argument is based off of the "Egg Shell Theory" which dictates that the condition of the victim prior to the accident does not mitigate the liability of the negligent party for the injuries resulting from the accident. In other words, "you take the victim as you find them".
5. (a) Causally Related - Sometimes insurance companies and there lawyers will argue that the injuries are not causally related to the accident, and that there is no reasonable connection between the accident and the alleged injuries. For example, if an individual is involved in an automobile accident and claims that, as a result, he or she had an appendix removed there is a strong argument against that claim. However, if a person is involved in an accident, which leads to a panic attack and an overnight stay in a hospital, there is a strong argument to be made that the condition was caused or exacerbated because of another person's negligence. Again, the Maryland personal injury attorneys have to prove by, a preponderance of the evidence, that the injury was caused by the accident, which means that the injury was more likely than not caused by the accident.
(b) Medically Necessary - This defense is often used when an injury victim pursues alternative healthcare such as acupuncture, acupressure and aquatic therapy. Insurance companies and there attorneys argue that this treatment is not legitimate. At trial, defense attorneys will often make a pretrial objection to any type of acupuncture treatment. The Maryland attorneys at Portner & Shure represent many Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese accident victims. Our Maryland accident attorneys defeat the objections of defense attorneys. Acupuncture is an ancient form of medicine and to argue that an injury victim does not have an option to be treated by an acupuncturists is rarely successful at trial. In Maryland accident cases that involve more serious injuries, defense attorneys often argue that invasive procedures such as surgery and epidural steroid injections are not medically necessary. This argument is easily overcome by the expert testimony of a treating physician.
6. Assumption of the Risk - The concept of "assumption of the risk" is fairly basic. For example, bee keepers assume the risk of being stung and rock climbers assume the risk of falling to their death. Simply put, a person who engages in risky activities cannot complain when the result is injury or death. The legal concept of "assumption of the risk" is based on the same principle, but does require a more detailed explanation. In Maryland, a person assumes the risk if that individual voluntarily engages a particular action or inaction known to that person to be inherently dangerous. If that particular action or inaction leads to an accident which results in injury, there can be no claim of negligence. For example, if a person is having a particularly good time and decides to dance on top of the bar, that individual cannot claim negligence if he or she slips on a spilled drink and falls. Assumption of the risk is a favorite argument of defense lawyers in Maryland, however, it is seldom applicable in auto accident, malpractice and product liability cases. The assumption of the risk defense is often utilized successfully in Maryland slip and fall cases.
7. Subsequent Accident or Injury - If an accident victim is involved in a subsequent accident the insurance companies and their attorneys can argue that the subsequent accident superceded the prior accident. An experienced Maryland personal injury lawyer can overcome this defense by examining the medical records. If the plaintiff's complaints were resolved before the subsequent accident then the defense is without merit. In cases where the subsequent accident was minor and there was little to no treatment, the personal injury attorney can argue that the subsequent accident was merely a blip on the radar and did not impact the more serious injuries resulting from the prior accident.
8. Gaps in Treatment - Too often Maryland accident victims wait several days before they are seen by a doctor, physical therapist or chiropractor. The longer the gap between the accident and the initial medical evaluation and treatment the stronger the argument that the accident victim did not require treatment. Defense attorneys like to argue that because an accident victim didn't immediately go to the hospital or doctor that the plaintiff's complaints lose credibility. Experienced Maryland personal injury attorneys should know that, in many cases, symptoms such as pain and stiffness do not manifest until a few days after the accident. Once an initial evaluation is done, gaps between treatment can be damaging to a personal injury claim. Most treatment plans follow a schedule prescribed by a medical professional designed to reach optimal recovery. Deviation from the treatment plan should be avoided. A defense attorney, who is presented with gaps ranging from a week to a month between treatment dates, has a very strong argument against the plaintiff's claims.
9. Fair and Reasonable - This is a term based off of community standards. This argument is often used when an injury victim double treats with two chiropractors and neither of the chiropractors knows. Defense attorneys will argue that an injury victim over treated and that the length of treatment was too long. In some cases, an injury victim may get MRI's of parts of the body that weren't injured in the accident. Sometimes healthcare providers over charge or over treat. When this unfair practice occurs the healthcare provider actually comes under attack and those bills may be nullified by the court's determination. The basic rule to follow in order to avoid this defense is to treat until your injuries are resolved.
10. Poor Witness - The insurance company will often contend the accident case is worthless because the plaintiff does not present well, or is a poor witness. In these instances the carrier must be pressed to give the exact reason for this contention. Often adequate trial preparation can overcome this issue. Further, the issue may be raised due to prejudice or language barriers. Some adjusters hear a foreign accent, whether Spanish, Chinese, Korean or Vietnamese, and immediately offer less. At Portner & Shure we have experience in Maryland courts litigating cases including Spanish, Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese speaking accident victims. Our Verdicts have never suffered because one of our plaintiffs is non-English speaking.

If you are involved in an automobile accident in Howard County, you need access to an attorney who knows the local courts and has considerable past personal injury experience. You need to be assured that when you hire your Howard County personal injury law firm, you are in competent, experienced and qualified hands. In your search for the right Howard County accident attorney, your research will have been a success if you call attorney, Jon Portner, Richard Shure, Kevin Ruby or Nick Parr at Portner & Shure.

Baltimore and the surrounding area seems to have no regard for crosswalks. Maybe the color needs to be changed from white to bright red. Recently the Baltimore Metropolitan Area has suffered a rash of pedestrian, bicyclists and motorcyclists accidents. Three students have been injured at or near the Johns Hopkins campus, most notably a bicyclists who probably will never regain the majority of his cognitive functions. The family of that young man has filed a $10 million lawsuit. The biker was in a bike lane. It is unclear whether the two students struck this weekend were in a crosswalk. What is clear is that the man killed in Brooklyn Park last week was within a clearly marked crosswalk.

Bicycle accidents, laws, protests, trails are all Michael Dresser seems to write about. This guy and Mike Preston are my two least favorite Baltimore Sun journalist but I read their articles the most. Mike Dresser recently wrote an article about the creation of a new class of misdemeanor offense tailored specifically to protect bike riders and pedestrians. My last blog discussed the recent tragedy involving a Johns Hopkins student who was struck by a car while riding his bike and left in a coma. The General Assembly's approval of this new law comes on the heels of that incident. In fact, bicyclists' groups, energized by a series of fatal crashes involving motor vehicles and bikes and the recent Johns Hopkins accident, rode from Baltimore to Annapolis in support of the new law on April 6^th. One of the organizers of the ride was a woman whose husband was killed while bicycling in Baltimore County one year ago.

Recently the Baltimore area bicycling community has been united by tragedy on the campus of Johns Hopkins University. A 20 year old student at Johns Hopkins was riding his bicycle down University Parkway in Baltimore City this February when he was struck by an elderly motorist. The Johns Hopkins student is not expected to recover brain function and his family believes there is no hope for any meaningful recovery. The brain damage caused by the accident appears to be permanent. The brain injury resulted from a lack of oxygen due to the fact that the young bicyclists was pinned underneath the vehicle that struck him. The accident occurred when an 83 year-old woman made a right turn into a driveway. In addition to being run over and pinned beneath the automobile, the young man also suffered third and fourth degree burns on his face and torso along with bone fractures, cuts and bruises.

On Tuesday, August 24, 2010, Arthur John Martin, Jr., 51, a retired police officer, was riding his bicycle on Maryland 75 in Carroll County when he was struck by a tractor trailer.  The tractor trailer driver, Anthony Edward Woodie, 37, was operating his 1985 Peterbuilt on Shepherds Mill Road and was turning right on Maryland 75 when he failed to yield the right of way and struck Mr. Martin.  It was reported that Mr. Martin was thrown from his bicycle and then struck by the tractor-trailer.  He was pronounced dead at the scene.

If a motorist is riding his vehicle on the public highways under the influence of alcohol and causes an accident, should he be arrested for  "driving under the influence"?  Should these same laws apply to an individual riding his bicycle on the public highways?  If motorists  are forced to share the roads with bicycles, then perhaps they should be held accountable for obeying the laws of the highways and the same penalties and consequences should apply.

In a recent Harford County accident, a 33 year old man was leaving a bar in Bel Air on his bicycle on Thursday, August 12, 2010, when he ran into a motor vehicle.  The bicyclist, Matthew Parker was flown to Maryland Shock Trauma for head injuries.  The injuries appeared not to be life-threatening.    

A family was resting on a bench from a bicycle ride on Sunday, August 8, 2010, when a car crashed into them near Russett Green West and Ridgemoor Drive in Laurel, Maryland in Anne Arundel County. The couple was sitting on the bench with their two twin boys when a car struck a light pole and then continued on to strike the bench where they were sitting.

The operator of the vehicle, 63 year old, Ms. Ramota Oluyemisi Koletowo was rushed to the hospital where she later died.  The 36 year old man was flown to Shock Trauma and his 38 year old wife was transported to Johns Hopkins Hospital and their 4 year old son was rushed to Johns Hopkins Pediatric with head injuries.  Their second child was not injured. Police are still investigating the crash to determine whether it was fatigue or a medical emergency that contributed to the fatal car accident as Ms. Koletowo was on her way home from working an overnight shift.

Many agree that biking is good exercise, but also question whether it has to be on the same roadways that motorists use everyday to commute to and from work.  Cyclists will argue that it is better for the environment to ride a bicycle.  No one is saying not to ride a bicycle.  Instead, the majority of motorists believe that cyclists should have their own lanes and stay off the roads that were designed for automobile traffic.  

Cyclists are not permitted on roads where the posted speed limit is greater than 50 mph but are permitted on the shoulder of the road.  This still becomes a problem when there is debris, glass, uneven pavement, culverts, etc., that prevent the cyclist from riding on the shoulder and entering back into the path of the motorist.