Auto Accident Injury

Published on: October 28, 2012

The symptoms of bTBI (explosive blast traumatic brain injury) can actually be very subtle,

by Stephen Bilkis

The symptoms of bTBI (explosive blast traumatic brain injury) can actually be very subtle, doctors tell reps. Sometimes, there is no outward sign of injury until certain symptoms begin to arise, like headaches, vertigo, or short-term memory loss. Because of this, victims of bTBI should be evaluated by a Bronx physician or psychologist to determine how extensive their injuries might be, if any. Neurophysical evaluation should be a part of this examination. There are currently efforts to create neuropsychological tests that can be automated on laptop computer or are easy enough to be used to by first responders who may have less training.

Patient who may have PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) should see a combat stress team provider or a psychiatrist as soon as possible. It is very important to remember, sources have learned, that bTBI and PTSD can have very similar symptoms and may occur alone or together in a patient. It may be difficult to tell them apart.

When TBI may be present in a patient, that person should be excused from all combat-related duties. The patient should be put on light duty until the symptoms are gone or until he or she is moved to a place where advanced neuroimaging, like MRI, may be used, and a more detailed evaluation can be used. Brooklyn Doctors have determined that it is vital for a patient suffering TBI, or who may be suffering from it, to be treated with the utmost care, so the condition does not become worse.

Published on: October 25, 2012

Evidence Points to Welding Fumes Causing Early Parkinson-Like Brain Damage

by Stephen Bilkis

Evidence is linking exposure to welding fumes to damage done to dopaminergic neurons in the brain. This link raises a welders’ risk for Parkinson’s disease (PD).

The study of healthy welders who were exposed to manganese, positron emission tomography (PET) imaging showed reduced uptake of the tracer F-18-fluoro-L-dopa (FDOPA), which is a significant sign pointing toward dysfunction in the nigrostriatal dopamine system.

A Law Office issued a statement putting the findings into layman’s terms: “This study suggests that a substantial percent of welders may have brain injury, even if they do not have symptoms currently.”

Published on: October 22, 2012

Father Charged With Two Count of Felony Child Abuse

by Stephen Bilkis

The 38-year-olf father of a 9-week-old Grand Island girl was charged with two felony counts of child abuse last Thursday morning after the infant suffered a “severe brain injury.”

The county attorney asked for a “substantial bond” of 10% of $100,000 citing the infant’s injuries. She has retinal hemorrhaging, fluid on her brain and blood on her brain.

The baby’s long-term prognosis is unclear.

Published on: October 19, 2012

Blast TBI (traumatic brain injury) happens to many combatants

by Stephen Bilkis

Blast TBI (traumatic brain injury) happens to many combatants, according to doctors. It can rightfully be considered a new class of TBI. While it might share a lot of features with standard TBI, it has some unique aspects that are all its own.

The milder forms of TBI can be very similar to PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), but it also has distinct aspects of its own. The military currently uses civilian standards of care for TBI when it comes to bTBI (explosive blast TBI), but they are constantly revising their standards to better provide for those injured on the field, according to sources. The theater of war requires different standards of medical practice.

It is apparent that there need to be more studies done on the precise effects of bTBI, both scientifically and clinically. The research will have to be focused upon how explosive blasts can lead to TBI. It is also important to learn how prevalent this disease is, and the exact causes. Once the research reaches a certain level, it will become much easier to diagnose and treat bTBI. A clinical definition of bTBI should quickly create the means to treat bTBI, doctors in Queens and Staten Island believe.

Published on: October 17, 2012

A man was injured when he fell off a ladder

by Stephen Bilkis

A man was injured when he fell off a ladder while performing painting work at a loading dock at the Hotel. The man struck his head on the concrete sidewalk, sustaining a traumatic brain injury. The building is divided into two units: a Hotel unit and an Entertainment/Retail unit. The loading docks are owned by the Entertainment/Retail unit. The man was an employee of the managing agent of the Hotel unit which is a former owner of the Hotel unit.

There was an easement that allowed the Hotel unit to use portions of the building owned by the Entertainment/Retail unit, including the loading docks. The City of New York and the managing agent entered into a Declaration of Easement and Operating Agreement (DEOA) for the subject premises. Article of the DEOA defines the term owners as a collective reference to the Hotel Property Owner and the Entertainment/Retail Property Owner or either of them. The DEOA states that the Owner hereby grants to and declares for the benefit of the Hotel Property Owner, a non-exclusive casement for the use of the loading docks located in Entertainment/Retail Building as shown on the Attached Plans. However, the section also provides that the Entertainment/Retail Owner shall be responsible for the Maintenance of the loading docks, provided, however, that the Nassau Hotel Owner shall bear a share of such Maintenance costs based on the Owner Building Area Ratio. DEOA states that the Owners shall have the right to retain a building manager and that the building manager is to maintain the sidewalks, building security, the Service Elevator, shared Easement areas located in the cellar of the Entertainment/Retail unit, the loading docks as the Owners shall desire. It further states that the parties agree that the managing agent shall serve as the initial building manager.

By purchase agreement, the managing agent sold the Hotel unit to a real estate investment trust company. Subsequently, the managing agent assigned all of its rights in and under the DEOA, including all such rights associated with the Hotel Property Owner designee, to the real estate investment trust company, as assignee.

Published on: October 14, 2012

A man sustained severe personal injuries during the course of his employment

by Stephen Bilkis

A man sustained severe personal injuries during the course of his employment when he fell from a ladder in a warehouse owned by the accused warehouse corporation. He commenced an action alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law. The warehouse corporation brought a third-party action against the Dollar Store in Westchester which is the man’s employer to seek common-law and contractual indemnification. In two separate motions, the employer moved for summary judgment to dismiss the third-party complaint. Supreme Court denied both motions, finding issues of fact as to whether, under the Workers’ Compensation Law the man sustained a grave brain injuryand whether the employer had contractually agreed to indemnify the warehouse corporation.

Workers’ Compensation Law permits an owner to bring a third-party claim against an injured worker’s employer in only two circumstances: when the injured worker has suffered a grave brain injury or the employer has entered into a written contract to indemnify the owner. The employer asserts that the warehouse corporation failed to raise an issue of fact as to the applicability of either exception to the prohibition against third-party claims against the employers.

A grave injury is defined, in relevant part, as an acquired brain injury caused by an external physical force resulting in permanent total disability. Although the statute does not define permanent total disability, the Court of Appeals has determined that a brain injury results in permanent total disability under the Workers’ Compensation Law when the evidence establishes that the injured worker is no longer employable in any capacity. Even the employer sustained its initial burden of establishing as a matter of law that the man did not sustain a grave injury, the evidence submitted in opposition to the motion was sufficient to raise a triable question of fact.

Published on: October 9, 2012

Privacy fears lead council to object to brain injury care unit plans

by Stephen Bilkis

A community is in an uproar over plans to turn a derelict “eyesore” – property that used to be a filling station – into a specialized brain injury care unit. Residents of Staten island feel the new building will dominate their neighborhood as it would be the only two-story building in the community of bungalows.

A woman living next to the discarded lot spoke out at the meeting. “The site has been an eyesore too long and I don’t object to the idea of the brain injury clinic, but the size of the building would have to be in proportion with the bungalows on either side.”

Because of testimonies like this from the 25 community members who attended the meeting, the planning applications committee unanimously objected to the plans.

Published on: October 4, 2012

On 9 September 2000, infant plaintiff was in an infant walker

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

On 9 September 2000, infant plaintiff was in an infant walker. Thereafter, infant plaintiff fell down a stairway leading to the second floor apartment in Bronx County.

As a result, a personal injury action has been instituted. Infant plaintiff allegedly sustained the following personal injuries: traumatic brain injury; developmental delays including speech; impaired motor and sensory processing skills; blunt face and head trauma; abrasions, tenderness and swelling to nasal area.

Published on: September 28, 2012

This is a case where the Court reiterated the principle

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case where the Manhattan Court reiterated the principle that when a single indivisible injury, such as brain damage, was negligently inflicted upon the plaintiff, defendants can be held jointly and severally liable notwithstanding that the latter neither acted in concert nor concurrently with each other.

A mother, who suffered gestational diabetes during her pregnancy, gave birth to an unusually large baby who is the plaintiff in this case. At the time of the trial, plaintiff was severely and permanently retarded as a result of the brain damage she suffered at birth. The evidence established that the obstetrician who had charge of the ante partum care of plaintiff’s mother and who delivered the plaintiff, failed to ascertain pertinent medical information about the mother, incorrectly estimated the size of the infant, and employed improper surgical procedures during the delivery. It was shown that the defendant, the pediatrician under whose care Josephine came following birth, misdiagnosed and improperly treated the infant’s condition after birth. Based upon this evidence, the jury concluded that the obstetrician committed eight separate acts of medical malpractice, and the defendant pediatrician committed three separate acts of medical malpractice.

During the trial, the plaintiff’s witness concluded that neither he nor anybody else could say with certainty which of the factors caused the brain damage. Although the obstetrician’s negligence contributed to the plaintiff’s brain damage, the medical testimony demonstrated that the defendant’s negligence was also a substantial contributing cause of the injury. No testimony was adduced, however, from which the jury could delineate which aspects of the injury were caused by the respective negligence of the individual doctors.

Published on: September 24, 2012

Plaintiff is a sixth grader who instituted a claim for damages

by Stephen Bilkis

Plaintiff is a sixth grader who instituted a claim for damages against his school when he was seriously injured when he fell down an flight of stairs on his way to lunch. On January 30, 2021, plaintiff testified that he had been in math class on the second floor right before lunch. According to plaintiff, his math teacher never escorted her class to the lunchroom and that day was no exception. Plaintiff stated that at the sound of the bell, he and his friend headed to one stairwell, while the rest of the class went to the stairwell at the other side of the hall. His friend did not see any adults in the stairwell when he got there, but there were a group of older boys there who moved over as he and his friend approached. Plaintiff testified that he suddenly heard footsteps which sounded like they were coming from a herd of buffalo and the next thing he remembered was waking up in the school nurse’s office with a tissue on his forehead and blood stains on his shirt. Because of the fall, plaintiff suffered brain injury coupled with excruciating pain as being in his head, neck, and lower back. Additionally, his arms and leg were swollen and sore and he was in a neck brace.

In a testimony, plaintiff presented the written policy of IS 292 to have a teacher escort the sixth graders down to lunch from their second floor classrooms. Plaintiff claims that his teacher’s negligent failure to do so proximately caused his injury. According to plaintiff, he has a much harder time understanding his schoolwork since his accident and, as a result, his grades have substantially dropped. He also is unable to remember more than one item at a time and feels “dumb and filtrated. Plaintiff testified that he planned to attend college to study graphic design.

The Brooklyn jury found defendants are negligent in the supervision of plaintiff and found that that negligence was a substantial factor in causing the injuries sustained by him. Defendant move to have the judgment set aside or have a new trial on the issue of liability or in the alternatively, for a new trial on the issue of damages on the grounds that the awards are unsupported by evidence. The plaintiff sought for an increase in the award of damages.