The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission estimates there are approximately 15,000 injuries treated in hospital emergency rooms nationally between November and December that involve holiday decorating. That figure has been steadily rising over the last several years. It works out to approximately 250 unintentional injuries every day during the holiday season. Holiday movies may make mishaps such as stepping on broken ornaments or falling off a ladder seem funny, but the reality of these injuries is anything but amusing.

The most common holiday decorating injuries include:

• Falls. These account for 34 percent of all emergency department treatments. Most often, these occur when people fall off ladders or roofs trying to hang decorative lights.
• Lacerations. These account for 11 percent of all holiday emergency department treatments.
• Back strains. These account for 10 percent of all hospital emergency department treatments.
• Ingestion of foreign objects. This is a major problem for children, who may grab decorations that look like holiday candy and attempt to put them in their mouths and swallow.
• Burns/ smoke inhalation. Fire departments reportedly respond to an average of 230 Christmas tree fires every December. Those incidents resulted in 10 deaths, 20 injuries and $16 million in property loss. Meanwhile, candle-related fires over a recent tow-year period resulted in 70 deaths, 680 injuries and $308 million in property losses. There are also risks with holiday lights/ extension cords, fireplaces and careless cooking.

Liability for these types of incidents will depend on whether the injury involves:

• A product defect that contributed/ caused the injury (product liability).
• An injury that occurred on someone else’s property (premises liability).

The ESFI survey indicated more than 63 percent of respondents use one or more extension cord while decorating for the holidays and 60 percent fail to inspect those cords. More than half of respondents said they don’t turn off outdoor lighted decorations when they leave home and a third leave them on when they go to bed.This can be a serious fire hazard.

So too are Christmas trees. The U.S. CPSC  recommends when it comes to trees:

• Placing lighted candles far away from trees (as well as curtains and furniture).
• Making sure artificial trees are rated fire resistant.
• Making sure live trees are fresh and well-watered (and thus less prone to dryness, which is a fire hazard).
• Place the tree away from all heat sources, including fireplaces.

And when it comes to decorating the tree, make sure to use caution when placing the top ornaments. Make sure to heed the warning labels on the ladders. Check out these Ladder Safety 101 tips. Keep small (possible choking hazard) decorations out-of-reach of children and take special care with sharp, weighted or breakable decorations.

If you or someone you love is injured in the course of decorating or in the midst of a holiday gathering, it may be worthwhile to consult with an injury attorney to determine whether you may have grounds to seek compensation for medical bills, lost wages and pain and suffering.

If you have been injured in Miami, call Chalik & Chalik at (954) 476-1000 or 1 (800) 873-9040.

Additional Resources:

‘Tis the Season to Decorate Safely, Dec. 5, 2016, CPSC

More Blog Entries:

Third-Party Liability for Distracted Driving Accidents? Dec. 10, 2016, Personal Injury Attorney Blog

This is a shocking turn of events.  Two months ago, hoverboards were among the most popular Christmas gifts, and now the entire industry is in a bit of turmoil.

There were a couple of things that were very interesting about this to me.  First, in the letter, the CPSC declares that no manufacturer in the industry meets the CPSC’s safety standards.  This is amazing.  I can’t think of another instance off the top of my head where the government has declared an entire industry unsafe.

Second, the reason provided by the CPSC was also interesting.  The CPSC declared hoverboards unsafe because of their risk of fires caused by the batteries.  This is certainly a known risk, but in my mind, not the greatest risk.

For me, the most significant risk from hoverboards is the risk of falls and related injuries.  There have been hundreds of reports of people falling off of their hoverboards and incurring significant injuries, including numerous brain injuries and fractures of various bones.  Those types of injuries have the potential to be permanently life-altering.

I don’t know how this will turn out.  At some point, after more testing is done, perhaps the government will declare that some hoverboards are safe.  But we’re clearly not at that point yet.

Houston teen Max Menchaca was enjoying a day out at a local trampoline park when he fell through a torn canvas in June 2013. He now suffers seizures as a result of sustaining traumatic brain injury after his fall.

The teen’s parents filed a personal injury lawsuit against National Trampoline Entertainment Centers and National Trampoline Entertainment Dallas, II, d/b/a “Cosmic Jump.” The suit requests damages to cover his past, current and future medical expenses, and compensation for his loss of future earnings. The family wanted to file this lawsuit to make a point that trampoline park injuries are on the rise and that, if the parks are not properly maintained, there is the potential for users to face life-altering injuries or death.

According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, there were over 94,900 emergency room visits as a result of injuries associated with trampolines. The figures are so alarming that the American Academy of Pediatrics strongly suggests not using a trampoline due to the potential for very serious injuries or death.

Menchaca’s head trauma was the result of falling into an unprotected area under the trampoline platform. The lawsuit states that the injuries were allegedly directly caused by the park negligently permitting dangerous conditions on their premises, and that the park had a duty to warn people and to provide a safe environment. California, Utah, Arizona and Michigan have new rules in place to address this safety concern. Texas does not have such rules.

How would the family pay their son’s medical bills? How would they pay for his rehabilitation or his medications? Their expenses would be enormous. The virtually ideal solution, should it suit their circumstances, would be to fill out an application for litigation funding. Pre-settlement funding is an emergency lawsuit loan, approved for qualified plaintiffs who are working with a lawyer on their case. The funds, once they are approved, are wired directly to a plaintiff’s bank account as fast as possible, which usually means within two days or less.

When funds arrive, most plaintiffs immediately take care of their medical expenses and then keep enough back to stay current on their other financial obligations, such as mortgage payments, student loans or rent. A litigation funding company completely understands the trauma a plaintiff has gone through prior to calling them. All potential applicants are treated with respect and dignity.

Daren Monroe writes for Litigation Funding Corp. To learn more about lawsuit funding and litigation funding, visit http://www.litigationfundingcorp.com/.

More than 4,500 former professional football players had entered into lawsuits against the NFL when a $765 million settlement was reached recently. Following a months-long period of court-ordered mediation, U.S. District Judge Anita Brody announced the settlement, which she must yet approve in order for it to go into effect. The plaintiffs claimed a wide variety of concussion-related symptoms, including memory loss, impaired speech and motor control, depression, and mood swings. At least two former NFL players committed suicide by self-inflicted gunshot wounds to the chest and left notes asking that their brains be donated for scientific research.

The NFL also implemented safety-oriented rule changes for the 2012 season, including prohibiting “head shots” and making them fineable, and requiring heavier protective padding. That season, 160 players were diagnosed with concussion-like symptoms, a steep decline from the previous season’s 270 such diagnoses.

Far more pressing is the issue of how to protect children who play contact sports. Over a quarter-million concussions are reported among high school athletes each year. In July, 2012, a Florida law went into effect that requires young athletes suspected of sustaining a head injury or concussion to be immediately removed from practice and competition. After completing a gradual, four-course return to play, consisting of light activity, then moderate aerobic activity, followed by drills specific to their sport, and finally full-contact practice, athletes are allowed to return to competition with a doctor’s written medical clearance.

Concussion is difficult to diagnose, but a commercial software program called ImPACT, already in use by the NFL, has recently been adopted by a number of Tampa Bay-area high schools. The program requires fully healthy athletes to complete a series of computerized cognitive tests before the season begins. Following a head injury, players must post a score as high as or higher than their baseline score before they can return to play. While the program shows promise, it is easily manipulated by players who deliberately score lower than they are able on initial tests in order to get back in the game as soon as possible in the event they are injured.

On the federal level, the Youth Sports Concussion Act was recently introduced by Senators Jay Rockefeller and Tom Udall. If passed, the bill would instruct the Consumer Product Safety Commission to review a forthcoming report from the National Academy of Sciences on sports-related concussions in young athletes. After the review, the CPSC would be authorized to issue recommendations or rule changes for manufacturers of sporting equipment.

If you need to speak with a brain injury attorney or lawyer, Call Joyce & Reyes at 1.888.771.1529 or visit more of http://www.joyceandreyespa.com/.

Family members of this six-month-old baby were utterly stunned when they checked him in his stroller and found him dead. The little boy had slid between the stroller tray and the seat, got stuck, and was strangled to death. Even though he was rushed to the local hospital, he was pronounced dead on arrival.

Unfortunately, the killer stroller had been bought at a garage sale and no one mentioned, or perhaps even knew, that it had been recalled by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. The model was the Graco Quattro, 7111BKW, called back due to the possibility of babies becoming trapped and strangling if not harnessed. The risk of strangulation was said to be highest in babies younger than a year old.

There is nothing more frightening and saddening than to find out that a child died despite a recall for a dangerous product. The people who bought the stroller at a garage sale had no idea it was dangerous. Did the people who sold the stroller? Possibly, and if they did know, and still sold the stroller anyway, it would seem they may be named in a wrongful death lawsuit.

As is stands, the maker of these strollers, despite having issued a recall, will be named in any lawsuit the parents may choose to file. The parents may also want to find out information about paying their bills and getting out of financial difficulties while they are waiting for their case to go to settlement or trial. In order to line up legal funding, they would just need to make contact with a lawsuit loan company or litigation funding company, and fill out an application for a lawsuit cash advance.

Getting pre-settlement funding once a case has been approved is a breeze, and it only takes about 24 to 48 hours or less for the funds to arrive in the plaintiff’s bank account. From there, they use the money to pay their medical and other pressing bills and then just sit back and wait for justice to be done.

During their wait, they may be approached by an insurance company wanting them to settle quickly and for a low amount. Thanks to having litigation funding in the bank, the plaintiff can turn them down flat, knowing they have money on tap to handle anything that might come up. Another benefit for plaintiffs applying for and being sent litigation funding is the fact that if they do lose their case in court, they still get to keep the money. That’s a good deal.

Daren Monroe writes for Litigation Funding Corp. To learn more about lawsuit &ufding and litigation funding, visit Litigationfundingcorp.com.