Advanced Search

Date: 
Saturday, June 6, 2015

At about 10:44 a.m., an SUV was attempting to make a left turn from Byron Highway when it was hit on the driver's side by a pickup truck that was behind it. Both vehicles ended up overturning in the collision. So far, an 89-year-old woman and 40-year-old man have both been confirmed dead. An unknown amount of people were taken to hospitals by helicopter and ambulance, but both children and adults were injured. Check back for udpates on this developing story.

Date: 
Friday, April 17, 2015
59-year-old Harold Heinbigner was driving a Syar Industries street sweeper on Highway 221 near Syar Industries' front entrance shortly after 1:00 p.m., when he attempted to make a u-turn, but drove into the path of an SUV driven by Melissa Alvarez, 33. The collision caused the SUV to suddenly catch fire, but Heinbigner fortunately got both Alvarez and her 3-year-old male passenger from the vehicle. Alvarez suffered serious injuries but is now in stable condition, while Heinbigner sustained more moderate injuries and the child only had minor injuries. 

 

Off-duty officer injured in motorcycle accident with a car and his lawyers win their lawsuit against negligent motorist

Accident Type: 
Motorcycle Accident
Incident Date: 
Saturday, October 8, 2005
Result Date: 
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Monetary Result: 
$742,907
  On Oct. 8, 2005, Ronald Knittel, 50, a K­9 officer with the federal government, was riding his motorcycle in Concord, CA. On the road ahead of him, motorist Nancy Choi was lost, looking for a soccer field. She pulled to the right to begin a U­turn, however Knittel misunderstood, thinking she was letting him pass. He attempted to pass her on the left within the lane. When Choi began the U-turn, Knittel swerved to the left in an attempt to avoid collision, but his motorcycle crashed into the left front side of her car. The motorcycle slid, hit the curb and threw Knittel roughly 15 feet onto the air, throwing him onto the asphalt. Due to the accident, Knittel lost consciousness and experienced temporary lower extremity paralysis. He was hospitalized overnight, then released as stable. He claimed headaches, radiating arm pain, lower back and leg pain. Knittel sued Choi for her negligence in causing the accident. Choi denied pulling to the right and testified that she activated her turn signal. She intended to pull into the driveway of an air ambulance business. Her lawyers argued that Knittel simply passed a slow-­moving vehicle at approximately 50 mph only four feet to the left of the centerline and that he did not notice Choi’s turn signal as he was focused on an oncoming vehicle. Knittel insisted that he could no longer take the pain and planned to retire in April 2010 at age 55 after 20 years of service. Although Knittel worked full time since his return to work in January 2006, due to his early retirement and inability to work overtime since the accident, Knittel contended that his pension would be less than it would have been, had there been no accident. Choi's attorneys responded that Knittel had only a transient aggravation to his pre­existing chronic neck and back problems, for which he underwent three sets of MRIs (two neck, one back) before the accident. Her attorneys also denied that Knittel needed surgery, contending that the accident caused a flare up or aggravation lasting about three months. Ultimately, Knittel and his attorneys won, awarding him $742,907. Choi was determined to be 75-percent at fault, while Knittel was found to be 25-percent at fault.

Deceased motorcyclist's parents and their lawyers win their case against a laundry company after one of their drivers struck and killed their son

Accident Type: 
Motorcycle Accident
Incident Date: 
Monday, February 1, 1988
Result Date: 
Saturday, December 1, 1990
Monetary Result: 
$850,000

Mr. Martin, a 23-year-old airline baggage clerk was riding his motorcycle in February, 1988 when it collided with a laundry delivery truck owned by Peerless Laundry making a left turn into Martin's path. Mr. Martin died as a result of the accident.

Martin's parents decided to sue the laundry company for the wrongful death of their son. During the trial, it was revealed that the driver at the time was actually an accounts-payable clerk who happened to be filling in as a driver that day. Martin's parents and their lawyers argued that the laundry company was negligent in using an untrained employee as a driver, and that the driver was searching for an address at the time of the accident. They produced witnesses that stated that their son was driving within the speed limit with his headlight on at the time of the crash.

The dendant laundry company contended that the driver was not negligent. They argued that Martin was driving over 100 MPH at the time of the crash without his headlight on.

In the end, the jury sided with Martin's parents and their lawyers, awarding them $850,000.

Lawyers of deceased youth's parents win their clients $567,345 after their son died in a motorcycle accident with a commercial vehicle

Accident Type: 
Motorcycle Accident
Incident Date: 
Friday, May 8, 1987
Result Date: 
Monday, April 2, 1990
Monetary Result: 
$907,751
  This accident was occured when a 17-year-old motorcyclist collided with a commercial vehicle at a busy intersection, resulting in the youth's death. The incident occurred at 7 p.m. on May 8, 1987 in clear weather, at an intersection with two lanes and a left­ hand turn lane running south to north and two lanes north to south, in the City of Lafayette, California. Michael Richardson, 45-years-old and Audrey Richardson are the parents of a 17-year-old boy who was killed in a motorcycle accident. They argued that an employee of the defending copmany, Style Master Exteriors, who was driving a car, took an illegal left turn which blocked the boy’s right of way. The boy’s motorcycle crashed into the car, and he died at the site of the accident. The parents claimed the illegal left turn was the cause of the accident and that the driver, and therefore his comapany as well, were the negligent party. The case was settled against the driver himself before trial for his insurance policy limits of $15,000. The driver's employer, Style Master Exteriors, argued the crash was caused by the negligence of the motorcycle rider. They alleged that the motorcyclist was racing with another boy. They claimed he therefore was driving too fast and following the other boy too closely, and that this caused him to be inattentive to vehicles in the intersection. The employer further claimed that, because the boy died of a head injury and was not wearing a helmet, his injuries were caused by his own negligence. The vehicle driver's employer also claimed the boy’s mother negligently entrusted her son with the motorcycle. Ultimately, the Richardsons won their suit against the employer of the vehicle's driver, Style Master Exteriors. The total amount awarded to the deceased motorcyclist's parents totaled $907,751. Their son, however, was found to be 37.5% at fault, and therefore the total amount they recieved totaled $567,345.

Lawyers of deceased motorcyclist's family win their case against the City of San Francisco, awarding the family $792,500

Accident Type: 
Motorcycle Accident
Incident Date: 
Monday, June 28, 1982
Result Date: 
Friday, September 4, 1987
Monetary Result: 
$792,500
  Henry Washington, 51, was driving his motorcyle west on Folsom Street at 10:00 a.m. on June 28, 1982, in San Francisco. At the intersection of 13th Street, a car made a left turn and Washington ran into the vehicle, killing him. Washinton's surviving family decided to sue the city of San Francisco for negligent road design. They argued that dangerous conditions existed at this intersection due to 13th Street being directly under a freeway. It was claimed that the freeway support pillars, located on the center median strip, blocked the view of oncoming traffic to left turning vehicles. Their lawyers brought expert witnesses to testify. An accident reconstructionist testified that the configuration of the intersection, and its restricted sight lines, did not allow sufficient reaction times to allow a left turning vehicle to perceive and avoid a collision in these circumstances. In addition, they also brought a traffic engineer who testified that the intersection was dangerous, and that a protected left turn arrow phase was feasible at the intersection, and would have alleviated the danger. The City of San Francisco's lawyers argued that there was sufficient sight distance to allow left turning vehicles to see oncoming traffic. It was further claimed that the accident history did not show a dangerous condition. Their lawyers also brought expert witnesses to the stand. An engineering photographer testified that his photographs showed a good sight line between the vehicles, for at least three and a half seconds before the collision point. Ultimately the case was won by Washington's family. Their award was valued at $792,500, however it was reduced as 60% of liability was with the left-turning driver, 25% to the city, and 15% to Washington himself.