Contact Injury Attorney

206-801-1188
425-641-8010

877-50-INJURY
877-504-6587

Injury Practice Areas
Practice Area:
Injury Case Evaluation
Free personal injury attorney case evaluation.

Seattle Personal Injury Attorney » Auto Accidents

Those Who Wait

Our law firm did not participate in the lawsuit described in this article.   A woman was injured in an automobile accident on August 2, 2006. Her attorney filed a lawsuit on her behalf on July 30, 2009, a mere four days prior to the running of the statute of limitations.[1]  [2]   The injured [...]

Budget Truck Rental Sued Over Driver High on Meth

Our firm was not involved in the litigation discussed in this article.   A man smoked methamphetamine at 5:00 a.m.  At about 2:00 p.m. he rented a truck from Budget. The following afternoon he ran over a woman in a crosswalk. At the scene an officer observed the driver exhibiting symptoms of methamphetamine use: fast [...]

Tax Day Deadly

According to a recent study the rate of auto accident fatalities is measurably higher than normal on tax day.[1]   The researches looked at 30 years of data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and determined that there is a six percent increase in roadway fatalities on tax day.   According to an article [...]

Pregnant Woman Passes out Behind the Wheel Leading to Injury Accident

Our personal injury law firm was not involved in the case described. A woman who was eight months pregnant lost consciousness while driving to work in her truck. She rear ended one car and then hit a parked car. She was traveling at over 30 miles per hour when her truck crashed into the parked [...]

Auto Accident Injury Victim’s Default Judgment Set Aside

Our law firm was not involved in the personal injury lawsuit described in this article. A woman injured in a motor vehicle accident served the Washington Secretary of State because she was unable to locate the other driver to effect personal service.  The trial court entered a default judgment.  The court awarded $12,000 in general [...]

Seattle Personal Injury Attorney » Washington Personal Injury Law

Another One Bites the Dust – Yet Another Statute of Limitations Case

Our law firm was not involved in the personal injury lawsuit discussed in this article.   Typically a few times in any given year the Washington Court of Appeals upholds the dismissal of a handful of personal injury cases because of a failure to bring the case prior to the expiration of the statute of [...]

Family Jet Ski Doctrine?

Our firm was not involved in the case described in this article.   A boat driver was injured when jet skiers cut off his boat and he had to make an abrupt maneuver to avoid hitting one of the jet skis. As a result a passenger in the boat fell on the driver. The driver [...]

Insurance Companies Appeal Decisions Against the Wishes of their Customers

Some people are inclined to blame the injured party for bringing their case to court, and tend to assume that they must just be greedy and stubborn in not settling out of court.   In Washington many personal injury claims are subject to mandatory arbitration before the parties can have a jury trial.[1] Either side [...]

Parents Not Liable for Teenager’s Assault with Gun

A teenager who had been drinking assaulted with the butt of a shotgun someone who was attempting to take away his car keys. The shotgun was a gift from the minor’s parents. They allowed him to keep it in his truck.   The man suffered several facial fractures and incurred $40,000 in medical bills. He [...]

Yet Another Statute of Limitations Case

Our law firm was not involved in the personal injury case described in this article. Recently there have been several personal injury cases dismissed for failure to properly bring the action within the statute of limitations and the dismissal upheld on appeal. A case must be brought within the applicable statute if limitations period or [...]

Archive for the ‘Injury Claims Against Government’ Category

$1.3 Million Verdict Upheld on Appeal

Our law firm was not involved in the case described.

 

A man sued King County (Metro) to recover damages for severe injuries that he sustained after slipping while exiting a county operated bus on a rainy day. At trial he introduced evidence that yellow nosing strips, located at the edges of the stairs of Metro buses, become dangerously slippery when wet. At the conclusion of his case in chief, Metro moved for judgment as a matter of law based upon the lack of direct evidence that the man had stepped on a yellow nosing strip or that the strip was wet at the time of the incident. The trial court denied the motion, and the jury found that Metro’s negligence was the sole cause of the man’s injuries and found Metro liable for $1.3 million in damages.

 

Following the verdict, a juror testified that he had tested the slipperiness of a yellow nosing strip while exiting a Metro bus on the last day of trial. Although Metro knew that the court had provided bus passes to jurors for use during jury service, Metro moved for a new trial based on juror misconduct. The trial court denied the motion. The Court of Appeals agreed and upheld the verdict.[1]

 

Although this case ended well for the injured bus passenger, no two cases are exactly alike. Many factors can influence the outcome of a personal injury case. If you have questions about an injury claim you should consult an attorney.




[1] Knappett v. King County Metro, unpublished opinion (No. 65801-8-I). 

Court of Appeals Rules in Public Duty Doctrine Case

 Our Seattle injury attorney was not involved in the lawsuit described in this article.

The Washington Court of Appeals recently ruled that application of the public duty doctrine negated a claim against a fire district for the destruction of a partially constructed house and other property.[1] The same analysis applies to personal injury claims.  Read the rest of this entry »

Courts Review Tort Claim Form Requirements

Our law firm was not involved in the lawsuit described in this article.

Anyone making a claim against a government body in Washington must complete and serve a tort claim form prior to filing a lawsuit.

In a recent case the trial court dismissed a lawsuit because the claimant listed damages as “undetermined pending further investigation” and had failed to state each of his previous addresses as required. Read the rest of this entry »

Rescue Doctrine

Under the rescue doctrine a public entity has a special duty to exercise reasonable care after assuming a duty to warn or come to the aid of a particular plaintiff.[1] That special duty exists because a public entity’s assurances may induce reliance.  A person who voluntarily promises to perform a service for another in need has a duty to exercise reasonable care when the promise induces reliance and causes the promise to refrain from seeking help elsewhere.[2] Read the rest of this entry »

Failure to Enforce

Washington governmental entities are immune to liability under the public duty doctrine for duties owed to the public generally.  “Failure to enforce” is a recognized exception to this rule. Read the rest of this entry »

The Public Duty Doctrine and Legislative Intent

The public duty doctrine is a defense to claims against state and local governmental entities.  The doctrine in its simplest terms is express by the observation that a “duty to all is a duty to no one”.[1]

The legislative intent exception applies where the terms of a statute evidence a clear intent to identify and protect a particular and circumscribed class of persons.[2] The statutory language must clearly express this intent; a court will not imply it.[3] Where the legislative intent exception applies, a member of the identified class may bring a tort action against the governmental entity for its violation of the statute.[4]

Read the rest of this entry »

Public Duty Doctrine

To prove a claim for injury the injury victim must prove the existence of a duty and breach of the duty.

In Washington the state Supreme Court has adopted the public duty doctrine.[1] If the injury claim is against a non-federal governmental entity the injury claimant must prove there was a duty specific to the individual, rather to the public generally. Otherwise, if no duty of care is owed to the individual the injury claimant has no valid negligence claim. “A duty to all is a duty to no one”.[2]

Read the rest of this entry »

Attorney Rating
National Institute for Trial Advocacy - Advocate designation

Independent Attorney Rating

Personal Injury Attorney
Korean Speaking Paralegal
Testimonials. Case Results.
  • $1.3 Million Verdict Upheld on Appeal
    Our law firm was not involved in the case described.   A man sued King County (Metro) to recover damages for severe injuries that he sustained after slipping while exiting a county operated bus on a rainy day. At trial he introduced evidence that yellow nosing strips, located at the edges of the stairs of […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Drunk Man Bounced from Bar Assaults Woman in Downtown Seattle
    A man drank great quantities of alcohol of various kinds after work on Sunday, June 21, 2009. Later, he and a companion ended up at The Triple Door bar in downtown Seattle. The man recalls that he was drunk when he arrived and that he had some more to drink at The Triple Door, but […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Those Who Wait
    Our law firm did not participate in the lawsuit described in this article.   A woman was injured in an automobile accident on August 2, 2006. Her attorney filed a lawsuit on her behalf on July 30, 2009, a mere four days prior to the running of the statute of limitations.[1]  [2]   The injured […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Budget Truck Rental Sued Over Driver High on Meth
    Our firm was not involved in the litigation discussed in this article.   A man smoked methamphetamine at 5:00 a.m.  At about 2:00 p.m. he rented a truck from Budget. The following afternoon he ran over a woman in a crosswalk. At the scene an officer observed the driver exhibiting symptoms of methamphetamine use: fast […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Sloppy Carpet and Sloppy Lawyering
    Our law firm was not involved in the case described in this article.   A tenant tripped in a tear in the carpet of her apartment unit and sued the apartment complex. In the complaint the tenant alleged breach of contract and violations of federal regulations governing the structural soundness of federally subsidized housing.[1]   […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Another One Bites the Dust – Yet Another Statute of Limitations Case
    Our law firm was not involved in the personal injury lawsuit discussed in this article.   Typically a few times in any given year the Washington Court of Appeals upholds the dismissal of a handful of personal injury cases because of a failure to bring the case prior to the expiration of the statute of […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Family Jet Ski Doctrine?
    Our firm was not involved in the case described in this article.   A boat driver was injured when jet skiers cut off his boat and he had to make an abrupt maneuver to avoid hitting one of the jet skis. As a result a passenger in the boat fell on the driver. The driver […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Medical Malpractice Case Dismissed on Basketball Analogy
    Our law firm did not participate in the lawsuit described in this article. Many personal injury cases that are dismissed are dismissed because of a failure to initiate the lawsuit prior to the running of the statute of limitations.  Of dismissals upheld on appeal many, if not most, were dismissed for the same reason. In […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Tax Day Deadly
    According to a recent study the rate of auto accident fatalities is measurably higher than normal on tax day.[1]   The researches looked at 30 years of data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and determined that there is a six percent increase in roadway fatalities on tax day.   According to an article […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer
  • Slip and Fall Liability is Far From Automatic
    Many believe that a business is automatically responsible if someone falls in their business and is injured.  This is not so. In fact, slip and fall cases are among the most difficult for the injured party to seek compensation. The Court of Appeals today posted its decision in a slip and fall case. Our firm […]
    Seattle Personal Injury Lawyer