If you have been the victim of a traffic accident in Oregon State, you must take several factors into consideration. Police reports, medical reports, insurance information, pictures of damage, and estimates for repair are just some of the data you need to get.

All these things help determine how much you may be able to collect in compensation from insurance companies. The value of an individual case will depend on several factors. Things that attorneys consider in determining case worth include, but are not limited to: medical bills, lost time from work, permanent disability or disfigurement, limitations on future employment, and pain and suffering.

Your spouse may also have a claim for loss of consortium, i.e. loss of spousal services, affection, etc. In other words, there is an endless list of factors which determine the outcome of your case, and only an expert accident attorney can collect and use the relevant information.

2) Najjar v. Safeway

Case No.: A121182

http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A121182.htm

AREA OF LAW: CIVIL PROCEDURE

HOLDING: (Opinion by Armstrong, J.) A trial court correctly denies a motion for summary judgment and subsequent related motions where evidence presented could reasonably lead a jury to conclude that plaintiff was a foreseeable plaintiff and that the risk of harm was foreseeable.

Furthermore, issue preclusion does not prevent litigation of an issue touched upon by the Workers’ Compensation Board when the issue was not essential to the WCB’s decision.

Abderrahim Najjar was an employee of Safeway. Wilson Lee was another employee with authority over Najjar. While off duty, Najjar assisted Lee in a failed attempt to catch a shoplifter, injuring himself in the process. Najjar filed an unsuccessful workers’ compensation claim and later sued Safeway and Lee for personal injury. Safeway and Lee (collectively “Safeway”) moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) had found that Lee had not requested Najjar’s assistance. Safeway’s summary judgment motion and later motions for directed verdict, for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for new trial failed. The jury found for Najjar, and Safeway appealed. The Court of Appeals held that the information available could reasonably lead a jury to conclude that Najjar was a foreseeable plaintiff and that the risk of harm was foreseeable. Furthermore, evidence provided by Lee and the store manager about the standard of care was sufficient to survive a motion for directed verdict. Lastly, because the disputed request for assistance was not essential to the WCB’s decision that the incident did not occur within the scope of Najjar’s employment, the Court ruled that issue preclusion did not apply to prevent litigation of the issue previously considered by the WCB. Affirmed. [Summarized by Laurie Nelson.]

Each year many people in Oregon State and Washington State are killed by either freight trains or passenger trains. Train injuries do not just cause death but also involve many people losing limbs such as an arm or leg. With many fatality or wrongful death cases involving trains ERISA often may apply. ERISA is a 1974 federal law which deals with employee retirement benefits.

Accidental death policies under ERISA often exclude or deny coverage when a death is due or results from committing or attempting to commit an assault, felony or other criminal act. Skilled railroad lawyers often try to show that the deceased person was trespassing on the railroad tracks when they were killed. In any ERISA case its important in my opinion to get an attorney early on in the case before evidence and witnesses memory fade.