Research from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign shows that the most dangerous roads for pedestrians in Connecticut are U.S. 5 (four pedestrian deaths between 2008 and 2010) and the Boston Post Road (seven deaths). According to the study, the largest number of fatal pedestrian accidents occurred in East Hartford and Westport.
Both U.S. 5 and Route 1 (the Boston Post Road) are not designed for pedestrians and bicyclists. Instead, they are arterial routes, designed to move cars quickly from one place to another. Therefore, it is no surprise that these routes led to more Connecticut pedestrian accidents than others.
Between 2008 and 2010, New Haven County had the greatest number of pedestrian fatalities (38), followed by Hartford County (34) and Fairfield County (22).
While Connecticut has taken great strides to make our roads safe for pedestrians and bicyclists, there is always more to be done both locally and statewide. In recent years, Connecticut has passed a Complete Streets law. Bridgeport, Connecticut, also has a Complete Streets policy, which has already resulted in roads that are more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly. Finally, Connecticut is currently working on corridor studies that are focused, at least in part, on bicycle and pedestrian safety.
Of course, even perfectly safe streets cannot prevent all pedestrian accidents.
Somewhere between 40 and 60 percent of all pedestrian accidents in Connecticut are caused by pedestrians. Pedestrians may be at fault when they jaywalk, walk along highways that are not meant for pedestrians, run out in front of cars or otherwise act negligently. However, that still leaves a large number of car accidents caused by motorists, many of whom simply were not paying attention when they hit a pedestrian.
If you have been injured or have lost someone in a pedestrian accident caused by a negligent motorist, you may be able to hold the motorist responsible for his or her actions through a personal injury lawsuit.
Source: Shoreline Times, “Routes 1 and 5: Most dangerous roads for pedestrians, data says,” Mark Zaretsky, Mar. 8, 2012.
Good news for the thousands on the Connecticut DCF Child Abuse Registry.
Legislation is being considered which would allow individuals to appeal if they have been on the Registry for at least 5 years. To be removed, applicants must establish that they have “rehabilitated” or that other legitimate reasons exist for removing their name. An applicant would be precluded from appealing if they were involved in any new abuse reports or DCF investigations.
I am in favor of this legislation. However, I see two problems:
1. What is the definition of “rehabilitation”? It seems too subjective. Maybe a list of identified factors should be weighed when determining one’s rehabilitative status.
2. Merely being “involved” with any new abuse reports or DCF investigations is overly harsh. It would prevent otherwise worthy applicants a right to appeal simply because they were the subject of an unfounded investigation. Any new investigation should at least be substantiated. Better yet, how about being denied a right to appeal only if the new substantiation is “substantially similar” to the prior DCF substantiation? This would be a reasonable standard and more consistent with the underlying concept of this legislation -rehabilitation.
Have a look here:
Conn. lawmakers to consider abuse registry changes – Boston.com
I told you it was coming. The Alimony Reform Bill – HB 5509 has arrived.
View it here: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2012/TOB/H/2012HB-05509-R00-HB.htm
There has been a “spirited” debate amongst the Family Bar on this Bill.
Proponents of the bill believe that the “guidelines” will bring more certainty and predictability to awards of alimony. With one less issue in play, cases will be disposed of sooner, thereby reducing conflict and minimizing legal costs and expenses. Other supporters feel that higher earning spouses (historically males) have been treated unfairly with court imposed alimony orders that are extremely high and/or lifetime alimony awards. The Bill, they suggest, reflects the growing trend of women in the workforce who are increasingly self-sufficient.
The many who oppose the Bill argue that it limits judicial independence to “craft orders” based on the specific, factual circumstances of a case. This in turn will penalize the financial “weaker” spouse who may be vulnerable economically. Another inconsistency seems to be the calculation of alimony based on gross income while the Child Support Guidelines utilize a net figure.
The Family Law Section of the Connecticut Bar Association (CBA), by a nearly unanimous vote, authorized it’s Legislation Committee to request permission to oppose the Bill on behalf of the CBA. They are considering hiring a lobbyist.
Here is one of my prior blogs on alimony reform, which sets forth additional arguments: /potential-alimony-reform-in-connecticut/
The question is not whether alimony needs reform. I think most family law attorneys would agree that some reform is needed though they might quibble about the degree to which it is necessary. Therefore, the real debate should not be about whether reform is required but rather if HB 5509 “fits the bill.”
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is investigating the 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus after it received multiple complaints alleging defects involving cruise control. Those complaints state that detached cruise-control cables caused the cars’ throttles to stick, preventing drivers from maintaining full control of the cars.
Thankfully, the NHTSA has not yet heard of any car accidents and injuries caused by these potential automobile defects.
According to the complaints, the Taurus engine revved up to 4,000 RPMs when shifted into neutral or park. Drivers were allegedly unable to stop their cars, and some drivers even had to shut off their cars’ engines or put the cars in neutral to stop them. One driver stated that he drove through a red light before being able to stop his car.
In order for comparison, and to understand the scope of the problem, the NHTSA will look at the 2001-2006 Ford Taurus models as well as the Mercury Stable. If the NHTSA’s investigation proves that there is a problem with these cars, nearly 1.92 million cars could be recalled.
Automobile defects
Hopefully, this is a case where the NHTSA will act quickly to investigate the potential automobile defects and prevent any injury-causing accidents from occurring.
Since 1966, more than 299 million motor vehicles have been recalled for safety defects. It is difficult to estimate how many individuals were injured by those defects, but sometimes defects are only recognized and fixed after they have already hurt someone.
If the NHTSA discovers that there is a defect in the Ford cars, the manufacturer will have three options to correct the defect, including repairing it, replacing the cars or refunding car owners. While fixing defects can cost car manufacturers quite a bit of money, failing to repair the defects can cost lives.
If you have been injured by a car defect, you can bring a defective product lawsuit against the manufacturer of the car or auto part that caused your accident.
Source: Detroit News, “NHTSA expands probe of stuck throttles to 1.9M Ford vehicles,” David Shepardson, Mar. 13, 2012.
In three separate libel cases, bloggers got hammered.
The verdicts:
1. $900,000
2. $553,000
3. $404,000
Ouch.
Clearly not every unflattering statement online is libelous. In fact, there are many defenses to defamation cases including the First Amendment and absolute truth. But the message has been sent. With the right set of facts, juries are awarding big money in online defamation cases. And although these cases dealt with blogs, the rationale applies to all social media such as Facebook, MySpace (does it still exist?) and other forums in the “virtual” world.
Read more here.
Flaming can be defaming – Daily Report