Posts Tagged ‘million vehicles’
Wednesday, April 28th, 2010
In the wake of the recent Toyota recalls covering over 8 million vehicles and counting as well as numerous fatalities and injury accidents, litigation has been filed in various states against the giant automaker and more is expected in the near future. In cases like these, where the Defendant is a corporation, the Plaintiff often has a choice as to whether they want to file the case in State or Federal court. In order to file a lawsuit such as this in federal court, the case must either address a violation of federal law OR be considered a diversity case. A diversity case is one in which the parties are located in different states AND the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. The requirement that the parties be located in different states can get complicated in the case of a corporation, but where the corporation is registered, where their main office is located and where they have done business can all be considered when deciding where they are located for purposes of the diversity test. Not surprisingly, a number of lawsuits have been filed against Toyota in federal court and more are anticipated. With the number of lawsuits expected to climb, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) has stepped in and ordered that the cases be centralized in California. Why was this done? Who is the JPML and what effect will this decision have on the litigation?
First, the JPML was created by an act of Congress back in 1968 and has two main functions. First, the Panel looks at cases filed in U.S. Federal Courts to determine if they involve a common question of fact that would serve judicial economy by bringing all the cases into one court. Second, the Panel decides where the cases will be heard if they are centralized and who the Judge will be that hears them. This is NOT the same as joining the cases for the purposes of a class action. Under a centralization order from the JPML, the cases are only brought under the jurisdiction of a single court through the pre-trial discovery stage of the proceedings. If a case is not terminated at the end of the pre-trial discovery stage, then it is remanded back to its original court of jurisdiction. The idea behind the centralization order is to prevent duplication of discovery efforts and allow the parties to work together to conserve resources for the parties as well as the judiciary.
In the Toyota cases, the JMPL has ordered that the cases be centralized in California, due in large part to the fact that the majority of the cases filed to date have been filed in California. Additionally, Toyota’s U.S. Division’s headquarters are in Torrence, California which is where the JMPL has ordered that the pre-trial process take place. U.S District Judge James V. Selna has been appointed as the Judge that will oversee the pre-trial phase of the lawsuits.
While Judge Selna will not hear cases that ultimately go to trial (unless they were originally filed in his court), the decision to centralize these cases can have a huge effect on the outcomes for the Plaintiffs. As the Judge that oversees the pre-trial discovery process, Judge Selna will make important decisions about admissibility of evidence, testimony of witnesses and many other crucial issues. If the cases are not settled or dismissed by the time that discovery process is done, then they will be returned to their original court and another Judge will have chance to impact the outcome. For now, however, the future of many Toyota recall lawsuits rests in the hands of Judge Selna.
If you have additional questions, or have been personally injured by one of the Toyota recalled vehicles, please feel free to contact California Toyota recall attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates at 1-800-300-0001 or visit him online at www.ledgerlaw.com
Tags: jurisdiction, law, lawsuit, lawsuits, litigation, million vehicles, plaintiff, plaintiffs, recalls, recent news, states, toyota, Toyota Accident Attorney, Toyota lawsuit, toyota recall, Toyota Recall Attorney, Toyota recalls, witness, witnesses
Posted in Toyota Recall Attorney | No Comments »
Monday, April 26th, 2010
Just days ago, Toyota announced yet another recall covering another 35,000 vehicles– this one for 2010 Lexus GX 460 for an issue with the Vehicle Stability Control Software. This latest recall is the second in less than two weeks for the once seemingly untouchable automaker giant. Last Friday, the automaker announced a recall of approximately 600,000 Sienna minivans for corrosion problems with the spare tire that could lead to the tire failing onto the road unexpectedly. While these two recalls in and of themselves might not appear out of the ordinary or particularly harmful to an automobile manufacturer, with Toyota’s track record over the last year they may be devastating news.
Toyota first made headlines last Fall when a family of four was killed in a runaway Lexus SUV in San Diego. The fatal accident brought attention to the numerous complaints that had been filed with the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) in the previous months – and even years – regarding unintended or sudden acceleration problems in Toyota manufactured vehicles. The accident eventually led to Toyota’s initial recall of some 4 million vehicles, but not before additional accidents and deaths were attributed to defective vehicles. The reason given for the recall was that the gas pedals were getting stuck on the floor mats. The next recall came in January and covered and additional 2.5 vehicles for a “sticky accelerator ” problems. A third recall followed in February for what appeared to be an unrelated problem with the anti-lock brake system.
From the original recall on, many consumers, regulators and government officials have been asking when Toyota new about these defective products. Families of accident victims and consumers have been asking why something wasn’t done sooner. A search of the NHTSA complaints for Toyota manufactured vehicles shows a history of “unintended acceleration” complaints that go back months-even years-before the first recall was issued. The United States government opened its own investigation into when Toyota knew about the issues and whether it acted in a timely manner to correct the problems. Under United States law, a manufacturer of any consumer product must make goof faith efforts to uncover any defects in their product, must report those defects to the proper governing bodies, and must repair, replace or refund the product. The United States government recently levied the largest fine in U.S. history against an automaker against Toyota – a hefty $16.4 million – for failure to act in a timely manner for the sticking gas pedal problems. The fine is the most allowed under current United States law, according to California recall attorney Emery Ledger. Toyota has agreed to pay the fine without protest. While not an admission of guilt, Toyota’s agreement to pay the fine may say much without actually saying anything.
If you have been the victim of an accident involving a Toyota manufactured vehicle and would like more information regarding what your legal options may be, please feel free to contact California Toyota recall attorney Emery Ledger at Ledger & Associates – 1-800-300-0001 or visit his website at www.ledgerlaw.com
Tags: acceleration, acceleration problems, accelerator, accident, accident victims, attorney, auto, automaker, automobil, complaint, deaths, defective products, defective vehicles, emery ledger, floor mat, floor mats, highway transportation, killed, law, Ledger, ledgerlaw.com, legal options, lexus, million vehicles, nhtsa, sudden acceleration, toyota, toyota recall, Toyota Recall Attorney
Posted in Attorney-Lawyer, Train Accident Lawyer | No Comments »
Monday, April 26th, 2010
Los Angeles County California is well known for its traffic. With over seven million vehicles registered within the county, it is no surprise that the roadways get a little congested occasionally! It is also no surprise that many people choose to ride a motorcycle that live in Los Angeles. Motorcycles can be less expensive to buy, less expensive to maintain and are much better on gas than a car or truck. Additionally, the weather in Los Angeles is normally conducive to riding year around making the choice to ride a motorcycle more practical. Sadly, riding a bike is also more dangerous.
Even if you take all the legally required safety precautions, you still stand a much better chance of being involved in an accident through no fault of your own than your four wheel driving counterpart says Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates. National statistics tell us that motorcycles account for about 1% of all the vehicles on the road, yet account for more than 5% of all accidents. In Los Angeles County, the numbers are even more sobering. Of the over seven million vehicles registered in Los Angeles County as of 2008, just under 150,000 of those were motorcycles. That means that in Los Angeles County, just over 2% of all registered vehicles are motorcycles – more than double the national average. This is not surprising considering what a wonderful place it is to ride. What is shocking though is that of the 52,229 injury accidents reported for the year 2008 in Los Angeles County, 2,934 of those involved motorcycles and 114 of those were fatal accidents, according to the California Highway Patrol. What those figures tell us is that although motorcycles only account for about 2% of all vehicles on L.A.’s roadways, they are involved in almost 6% of all accidents. What makes it even more frustrating for bikers is that at least two-thirds of the time, the accident was caused by someone other than the biker. The most common cause of all motorcycle accidents is another driving violating your space – usually turning in front of you. The sad truth is that despite efforts to warn drivers to look out for motorcyclists, they just don’t do it. Most drivers will tell you that they never saw the motorcycle that they hit. Unless you are a biker yourself, it may be that drivers are just not mentally trained to look for motorcycles on the roadways – they look for what they are used to seeing and riving themselves.
If you have been involved in a motorcycle accident and you believe that someone else was at fault, you may be entitled to compensation for any injuries that you suffered in the accident. Medical bills, lost wages and repairs to your bike are just a few of the things that you may be entitled to receive compensation for in a motorcycle accident case. If you would like more information, please contact Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates online at www.ledgerlaw.com or at 1-800-300-0001.
Tags: accident, accident attorney, accident case, accidents, bikers, California highway patrol, caution, compensation, emery, emery ledger, fatal accidents, fault, injury, injury accident, injury accidents, juries, law, Ledger, medical bill, medical bills, million vehicles, motorcycle accident, motorcycle accident attorney, motorcycle accidents, motorcycles, motorcyclist, motorcyclists, no fault, Personal Injury, personal injury attorney
Posted in Motorcycle Accident Lawyer | No Comments »
Thursday, April 22nd, 2010
Toyota Motor Corporation said Monday that it will not contest the record $16.4 million dollars in fines levied by United States safety regulators because the company did not inform the proper authorities as soon as it knew of problems with defective accelerator pedals in a number of its cars. The fines are the result of controversy surrounding the 8.5 million-and growing-Toyota made vehicles that have been recalled in the last year. As you may be aware, the recalls started last fall with the first recall prompted by the runaway Lexus SUV that killed all four occupants in San Diego. That recall was followed by recalls number two and three in December and February. In total, over 8.5 million vehicles have been recalled and Toyota has just announced additional recalls.
Since the original round of recalls, lawmakers, regulators and advocates have been speculating about exactly when Toyota knew about the defective parts. Under United States law, a manufacturer must make a good faith effort to find any defective parts and must report those defects that it finds immediately. They must also repair or replace any defective parts. Many critics have questioned when Toyota became aware of the problems and have asked why nothing was done sooner. The record fine – while not an admit ion of guilt on the part of Toyota – says a lot to some people.
There have been at least 50 deaths attributable to the Toyota defects and hundreds of accidents. At last count the number of lawsuits filed in the United States against the automotive giant was approaching 100. The fine Toyota has agreed to pay may be just the tip of the iceberg as far as the financial cost of the defects. Under the laws of negligence as applied in California, if you were involved in an accident in which a Toyota manufactured vehicle was responsible for the collision, you may be entitled to financial compensation for the injuries you sustained in the accident.
Under the laws of negligence, if a person, or entity, is responsible for damages that you have suffered, then they must compensate you for those damages. Much of the time, this involves a negligent driver in a car accident. It can, however, be a company that is the negligent party. If a defective part in a vehicle was the cause, or part of the cause, of an accident, then that may be considered negligence on the part of the company that manufactured the part.
What this may mean for you, if you were injured in an accident involving a Toyota manufactured vehicle, is that you may have a legal claim against Toyota for injuries that were caused by the accident. The only way to know whether you have a valid personal injury lawsuit is to consult with an experienced California personal injury attorney. The laws of negligence are very complicated and made even more so when a large corporation is involved. If you would like a free detailed evaluation of your potential personal injury claim, please contact personal injury attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates. He can be reached at 1-800-300-0001 or you may visit his website at www.ledgerlaw.com
Tags: accelerator, accelerator pedal, accident, attorney, authorities, auto, car accident, cars, cat, claim, compensation, damages, deaths, ego, emery, emery ledger, good faith, injury, injury claim, juries, killed, law, lawmakers, lawsuit, lawsuits, Ledger, ledgerlaw.com, legal claim, lexus, million vehicles, Negligence, negligent driver, noun, occupants, Personal Injury, personal injury attorney, personal injury claim, personal injury law, personal injury lawsuit, recalls, regulators, safety, safety regulators, states, toy, toyota, toyota motor, united states, vehicle
Posted in Toyota Recall Attorney | No Comments »
Sunday, March 21st, 2010
In lieu of the three recent Toyota recalls, many people are asking what legal options they may have if they have been injured in an accident involving a recalled vehicle, according to Los Angeles personal injury attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates. With over 8.5 million vehicles recalled in three separate recalls over the last six months, the number of accidents and deaths attributable to recalled vehicles continues to climb. The latest reports link over 50 deaths and hundreds of accidents to recalled Toyota manufactured vehicles. According to complaint filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), complaints involving accidents go back as far as the mid 1990’s, although cars that old are not currently part of one of the recalls. If you have been injured in an accident with a recalled vehicle, what are your legal options?
According to Los Angeles personal injury attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates, you may have a personal injury claim against the manufacturer. While each car accident has a unique set of facts, they all operate under the rules of negligence. Negligence, in legal terms, means fault or blame. In most car accidents, the negligent party is one of the drivers involved in the accident. Maybe someone ran a stop light or drifted into another lane. These are typical examples of negligence. You may not realize that a company can also be negligent.
Negligence basically requires that four elements be proven: Duty of care; breach of duty; causation; and damages, says Los Angeles personal injury attorney Emery Ledger. A vehicle manufacturer generally owes a duty of care to the people that will be driving, or riding, in a vehicle that they produce. If they have produced a vehicle with a defective part, then the argument is that they have breached their duty of care to the passengers in the vehicle. If that defective part is the cause of the accident, then causation has been met. Lastly, if someone is injured in the accident, then the damages element has also been met. While this is an overly simplified analysis of the elements of negligence, it gives you an idea how a vehicle manufacturer can be held responsible for injuries suffered in a car accident.
Additionally, in many states – California among them – more than one party can be held responsible for an accident. This is called a “comparative negligence” theory, according to Los Angeles personal injury attorney Emery Ledger. What this means is that a vehicle manufacturer and a driver could both share the blame for and accident. Only an experienced Los Angeles personal injury attorney can evaluate the specific facts and circumstances surrounding your case, but if you have been injured in a car accident involving a recalled vehicle, then you should seek the guidance of an attorney as soon as possible.
For an evaluation of you case, or if you would like additional information, contact Los Angeles personal injury attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates at 1-800-300-0001 or visit him online at www.ledgerlaw.com.
Tags: causation, claim, comparative negligence, damages, deaths, duty of care, elements of negligence, emery, emery ledger, fault, four elements, highway traffic safety, injury, injury claim, istration, juries, law, Ledger, legal options, legal terms, los angeles personal injury attorney, million vehicles, national highway traffic, national highway traffic safety, national highway traffic safety administration, Negligence, nhtsa, Personal Injury, personal injury attorney, personal injury claim, recalls, safety, toy, toyota, toyota recall, traffic, traffic safety administration, typical examples, vehicle
Posted in Toyota Recall Attorney | No Comments »
Wednesday, March 17th, 2010
If you live, work or play in Los Angeles, then you know how congested the freeways can become. You also know that all that traffic leads to some pretty nasty multi-car pile-ups on an all too frequent basis. There are over 26 million vehicles registered in Los Angeles County and over 12 million of them are on the road at any given time of the day. The county of Los Angeles has an impressive freeway system in place to hold all that traffic, but when you get that many cars all moving at one time, accidents are bound to happen. One question that Los Angeles car accident attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates gets asked a lot is “Who is at fault in one of those multi-car pileups?”
The answer to that question can be found in the laws regarding negligence in that State of California. Negligence is the legal word used to describe “fault”. Negligence is a complicated concept and exactly what is considered negligence can vary from state to state. The State of California, for instance, uses a comparative negligence approach, according to Los Angeles car accident attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates. There are two basic approaches to negligence – comparative and contributory. Under a contributory approach, if you “contributed” at all to the accident then you cannot recover anything for your injuries. Most states have abandoned the comparative approach as the results tend to be unfair. Under a comparative approach, like California’s, the negligence is apportioned according to the amount each party “contributed”. If this all sounds confusing, then imagine a simple scenario wherein car number one slammed on her brakes unexpectedly causing car number two to collide with her from the rear. Imagine also that car number two was traveling faster than the speed limit. Under a contributory approach they may both be to blame for the accident so neither one of them can recover anything. Under a comparative approach, the negligence (blame) will be apportioned to each of them – maybe 80% to driver number one and 20% to driver number two – and the driver with less blame can still recover. The amount that a driver under a comparative negligence approach can recover will then be reduced by their percentage of blame. Again, under the above scenario, if the drive two’s total damages were $10,000 then that amount would be reduced by 20% and he would only be able to recover $8,000.
As you can see, the laws of negligence are complicated. In a multi-car pile-up, each driver may share a percentage of the blame – or negligence. A car accident attorney is best suited to make a determination whether you will be able to recover in a multi-car pile-up based on his years of experience investigating and handling car accident cases. Car accidents with multiple vehicles can take months, even years, to sort through and determine who was actually at fault. If you have been involved in a multi-car pile-up and would like and experienced Los Angeles attorney to evaluate your cases and your chances of recovering compensation for your damages, then contact experienced car accident attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates online at www.ledgerlaw.com or at 1-800-300-0001
Tags: car accident attorney, car pile ups, fault, freeway, injury, juries, law, lawyer, Ledger, los angeles car accident attorney, million vehicles, Negligence, Personal Injury, personal injury law, personal injury lawyer, state of california, traffic, vehicle, who is at fault
Posted in Auto Accident Lawyer | No Comments »
Monday, March 15th, 2010
According to the California Highway Patrol (CHP), there were 667 fatal accidents and 52,229 injury accidents in Los Angeles County for the year 2008. Anyone who lives in Los Angeles County, or has ever driven there, probably doesn’t find these statistics surprising. To say that the traffic is a mess is an understatement. Estimates are that there are about 12 million vehicles on the Los Angeles freeway system on any given day. While Los Angeles does have one of the biggest and most well developed freeway systems in the world, that still makes the chances of being involved in a car accident fairly high. So why can’t all 12 million cars drive smoothly throughout the county without accidents? According to Los Angeles personal injury lawyer Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates, accidents happen for a variety of reasons, but there are a few that stand out as the most frequent causes.
Driver error is clearly the most common cause of car accidents says Los Angeles personal injury lawyer Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates. Driver error, however, can be a rather large category. The biggest sub-category within the driver error category is distracted driving. Drivers that are talking on cell phones or texting cause the most accidents, however other driver distractions cause accidents as well. Among the other forms of driver distraction are: talking to passengers; eating; dealing with children in the car; reading; applying make-up; dealing with pets in the car; and looking at other accidents. All of these forms of driver distraction can cause the driver to take his eyes off the road and in that split second cause an accident.
Drowsy driving is another big cause of accidents in Los Angeles County. “People simple do not recognize when they are too tired to drive” comments Los Angeles personal injury lawyer Emery Ledger. Whether they have been working late, didn’t sleep well the night before or are taking prescription or over-the-counter medication that makes them drowsy, the bottom line is that when someone drifts off while driving they frequently drift into someone’s else’s lane and cause an accident.
Road conditions can also play a part in car accidents. While the weather in Los Angeles County doesn’t require many to worry about driving in the snow, the rain and fog can be just as dangerous. Heavy rains can cause roads to be slick requiring drivers to alter their speed accordingly. Fog can drastically reduce visibility – also requiring driver’s to lower their speed. Los Angeles personal injury lawyer Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates tells us that many drivers fail to adjust their speed according to changing weather conditions with serious and sometimes fatal results.
Vehicle defects or failure can also be the cause of tragic accidents. As we have all heard recently, a design defect in a vehicle can lead to fatal car accidents. Mechanical problems that are the result of normal wear and tear can also lead to car accidents. Bald tires, for instance, can cause a blowout which in heavy freeway traffic can produce devastating results.
If you have been the victim of a car accident in Los Angeles and would like to have an experienced Los Angeles personal injury lawyer evaluate your case, feel free to contact Los Angeles personal injury lawyer Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates through his website at www.ledgerlaw.com or at his toll-free number 1-800-300-0001
Tags: car accident, car accidents, cars, cat, cause of accidents, distraction, distractions, driver distraction, driver error, drowsy driving, emery, fatal accidents, fatal car, fatal car accident, fatal car accidents, freeway, injury, injury accident, injury accidents, law, lawyer, Ledger, mechanical problem, million cars, million vehicles, Personal Injury, personal injury law, personal injury lawyer, road condition, road conditions, text, texting, traffic, tragic accident
Posted in Auto Accident Lawyer, Personal Injury | No Comments »
