Massachusetts Injury Lawyer Blog

James Delayo, the former chief crane inspector for New York City, has plead guilty to accepting more than $10,000 in bribes to fake inspections and crane operator licensing test results.  Delayo has admitted to accepting bribes between 2002 and 2008 to file paperwork indicating that a Long Island-based crane company had passed inspections that never happened and to say an employee passed a licensing exam never taken.  For these and other favors, Delayo received from $200 to $3000 in individual payoffs.  An official and employee with the involved Long Island crane company, Nu-Way Crane Service, have plead not guilty to bribery and record tampering.  Delayo is currently out on bail until his sentencing on May 4th. His plea deal calls for two to six years in prison.

Delayo was arrested back in 2008 after the second of two serious construction accidents caused by massive cranes collapsing. The accidents caused the wrongful deaths of nine people. Authorities said at the time that Delayo's case was one in a series of cases against builders and inspectors accused of accepting tainted money.  Consistent with that claim, Delayo is not the only person in trouble after the 2008 crane collapses.  A crane rigging contractor has been charged with manslaughter for one collapse and a crane owner and former mechanic have been charged with manslaughter for the other collapse.  Since the 2008 accidents, New York City building officials have made changes to crane training requirements and exam procedures for some operators.  Additionally, some inspections are now performed by a national group.

To see additional coverage of this story, see this Boston Globe article.

Continue reading "Ex-NYC Chief Crane Inspector Put Lives in Danger by Accepting Bribes" »

Our Video

 We have released our first video about our medical malpractice and personal injury law firm.

According to two new studies, there may be certain times when being admitted to a hospital is more dangerous for patients. A study in the journal Medical Care found that each hospital has a unique set of factors, a "fingerprint", which in combination compromise patient safety. Researchers at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor found that four factors can affect a patient's risk of dying in the hospital- high hospital occupancy, weekend admissions, nursing staffing level, and seasonal flu. These factors not only increase mortality for individual patients but also interact with each other creating a unique level for each hospital where patient safety suffers overall as a result of medical negligence.

However, according to a column in the New York Times, hospitals that identify their set of factors can make the improvements necessary to protect patients from personal injuries.  Hospitals can schedule their elective surgeries during less busy times and have their staff get vaccinated during flu season to protect patients from exposure.  Additionally, hospitals in an area can work together to develop strategies for diverting patients.     

According to a follow up column in the New York Times, patients who are aware of these factors and in the position to elect when they admit themselves can also protect their safety.  Although both studies' authors emphasize the variable and individual risk level of each hospital, they did suggest factors for patients to consider.  For transplants, Dr. Darrell A. Campbell Jr., author of the University of Michigan study and chief of clinical affairs at the University of Michigan Health System, suggests that patient volume is positive to a degree.  However, if the overall hospital admission level is too high, consider another hospital.  Dr. Matthew Davis, an associate professor of pediatrics, internal medicine and public policy at the University of Michigan and senior author of the study, suggests that patients speak to their doctors about the timing of a treatment or procedure in relation to the hospital's workflow and get their flu shot. 

Continue reading "Is There a Bad Time to go to the Hospital? " »

Lawmakers and individuals are calling for change after seven deadly Big Dig crashes have been linked to handrails in the tunnels. State Senate President Therese Murphy has requested that the Department of Transportation, which overseas the tunnel system, review the handrails's design and safety. Between 2004 and 2008, seven of the nine fatal accidents in the Big Dig were the result of vehicles hitting the handrails. Most crash victims were dismembered.  The handrails line about six miles of the Big Dig on elevated walkways and are designed to prevent workers from tumbling into traffic.

The handrails are also the subject of litigation in Suffolk Superior Court.  The widow of State Trooper Vincent Cila, who was killed after hitting a handrail post while on a motorcycle in 2005, has filed a wrongful death suit against multiple parties, including the state Turnpike Authority.  The defendants assert that the handrails meet all applicable safety standards and regulations. 

Despite assertions to the handrails' safety, relatives and friends of crash victims are calling for the handrail design to be changed.  Experts consulted by the Boston Globe said that the handrails are flawed.  The horizontal rails are spaced far apart, allowing motorists to become entangled, and the rails are only three feet above the road, at head level.  However, handrail design may not be solely to blame for the grisly crashes. Many of the drivers killed were speeding or not wearing seatbelts.

For more information on this story, see the Boston Globe.   

Continue reading "Big Dig Handrails Under Scrutiny After Massachusetts Drivers' Deaths" »

The very people who take an oath to do no harm may be undermining patient safety systems, despite hospitals' focus on reducing medical errors. In the last decade, hospitals have ramped up patient safety systems by promoting protocols, checklists, and procedures to prevent medical errors. Hospitals have also pushed to increase transparency and disclosure of medical errors. However, studies are showing that doctors are not reporting incidents of medical negligence as often as they should. Some experts point to doctors' fear that an incident report with their name on it could damage their career permanently.

The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety reported last month that most medical residents have never filed an incident report. This is despite the fact that many residents are in fact reponsible for personal injuries or wrongful death of patients during their training. Additionally, young doctors are entering practice without being educated in patient safety, according to a report issued by experts working with the Lucian Leape Institute at the National Patient Safety Foundation. Dr. Lucian Leape, chairman of the report's committee, blames the culture of medical education for the lack of attention to patient safety. Dr. Leape believes the hierarchy, humiliation, and stress of medical education does not allow doctors' the time, sense of community, or support to disclose errors.

After historically ignoring patient safety, some medical schools and clinical training programs have introduced the subject into their curriculum. Not all institutions have succeeded, having difficulty securing financial support or experienced physician-teachers with training in patient safety. However, those institutions that have successfully implemented training programs have benefitted. The University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine instituted an extensive patient safety education program six years ago. Graduates of the school have gone on to be leaders in the field of patient safety. More recently, patient safety training was integrated into the residency program. Residents now submit over 100 incident reports- up from zero.

For more information on patient safety, see the National Patient Safety Foundation report. Also, see the New York Times article Learning to Keep Patients Safe in a Culture of Fear.

Continue reading "Patient Safety and Doctors' Fear--Improving Systems to Reduce Medical Error" »

Four companies are voluntarily recalling children's hooded sweatshirts and jackets due to the danger of children suffering personal injuries or death.  The recalled garments all have drawstrings through the hoods that pose a strangulation hazard for children.  All four companies are cooperating with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).  Baycreek Inc. of New York, NY is recalling 1,900 hooded sweatshirts.  Weeplay Kids LLC of New York, NY is recalling 11,800 hooded sweatshirts.  Bobens Trading Co., Inc. of Hicksville, NY is recalling 3,900 hooded sweatshirts and Franshaw, Inc. of New York, NY is recalling 2,400 hooded jackets; both companies' recalled garments are sold exclusively at Burlington Coat Factory.  No injuries or incidents have yet been reported.

To eliminate the risk of danger, parents should either remove the drawstring from the hood, or return the garment to the place of purchase or the manufacturer for a full refund.  The CPSC issued guidelines in 1996 for children's upper outerwear and the industry voluntarily incorporated these standards in 1997.  The guidelines provide additional information and advice on how to eliminate the risk of strangulation from hooded outerwear. 

To report an incident involving one of these garments, or a similar garment, file a consumer product incident report with CPSC. 

For more information on the Weeplay Kids recall, see http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10142.html

For more information on the Baycreek recall, see http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10144.html

For more information on the Bobens Trading Co recall, see http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10140.html

For more information on the Franshaw recall, see http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10143.html

Continue reading "Children's Sweatshirts and Jackets Recalled due to Strangulation Risk--Massachusetts Parents Take Warning" »

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that non-patient claims for personal injury resulting from medical malpractice must first be presented to the Massachusetts medical malpractice tribunal.  The tribunal's job is to review medical malpractice personal injury claims and decide whether there was actual medical malpractice involved or if the injury was merely an unfortunate medical result.

The decision concerned a hospital worker who was killed when a heavily medicated woman lost control of her car and drove it into an entrance to the Brockton Hospital where the victim worked.  The victim's wife sued the doctors for her husband's wrongful death, alleging they had failed to warn the woman that it was dangerous to drive while on her medications.

Ordinarily, medical negligence cases may only be brought by a patient against his or her medical provider. However, third parties may bring claims against a provider if the provider failed to warn the patient of the effects of medication, and the patient then injured the third party. The exception is a narrow one.

The case clarifies pre-trial procedures in such third party cases, as it was unclear whether or not an injured non-patient was required to bring their medical malpractice claim before the tribunal.  However, with today's Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling, it is now clear that any person looking to bring a claim for personal injury resulting from medical malpractice must first present their claim to the medical malpractice tribunal, whether or not they were the patient.

The case was Vasa v. Compass Medical, P.C., SJC-10457, March 2, 2010.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Court Requires Medical Malpractice Tribunal in Third Party Claims" »