Many have heard of the famous Johnson and Johnson marketing slogan of “No more tears” and assumed it had been a message conveyed to no more crying. However, Johnson and Johnson have brought a lot of tears to consumers over the past three decades.Read More
Attorneys Fighting Fraternity Hazing & Abuse
If you were harmed as a result of fraternity hazing, the Reyes Browne Reilley Law Firm can help you receive compensation for the abuse you endured. The Fraternal Disorder, also known as negligence, abuse, and disregard for the safety and well-being of students, needs to be addressed by order of state laws, school policies, and the nation’s civil courts.
Our compassionate and knowledgeable attorneys are ready to assist victims who have been harmed by fraternity violence.Read More
Nearly 4 years ago, Nydia Martinez was involved in a t-bone car crash as she was leaving a parking lot in Dallas. As a result, she sustained debilitating neck injuries and back pain.
Rather than giving her the compensation required to heal from her injuries, the defense worked to minimize her claim by trying to prove the so-called “low impact” should only produce minor soft tissue damage.Read More
$4,700,000 Verdict in the 134th District Court, Dallas County, Texas.Read More
Roundup™ Weedkiller is Killing Bayer
Monday’s jury verdict was the third strike against Bayer since their 2018 acquisition of Monsanto, the makers of the cancer-causing Roundup™ weedkiller.
$2.055 billion was awarded to a California couple who blame Roundup™ for the cause of their cancer. This verdict was the largest sum that Bayer has faced to-date in relation to the backlash from their Roundup™ product.Read More
Before you buy your children’s Christmas gifts this year, it is important that you do your research.
According to World Against Toys Causing Harm (W.A.T.C.H), one child is treated in U.S emergency rooms every three minutes for a toy-related injury. In 2017, thirteen of these cases resulted in death with the victims all being under the age of twelve.
To ensure you are keeping your children and family safe this Christmas, be sure to do the following:
The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) monitors and regulates all toys on the market to ensure that products made-or imported into the United States before 1995- follow their standards.
Some of these guidelines include:
- Painted toys must use lead-free paint.
- Toys made of fabric should be labeled as flame resistant or flame retardant.
- Stuffed toys should be washable.
Avoid purchasing older toys as they may not meet current safety standards.
Between January 2017 and October 2018, an estimated 3.5 million units toys were recalled in the United States and Canada. While the CSPC provides up to date information regarding product recalls, many consumers are never notified of these updates so its imperative that you monitor these sites regularly.
Remain cautious when purchasing new toys. Defects and poor design are red flags that there is a safety concern. Carefully read any and all warning labels and look out for the letters “ASTM“. This is to let you know that the toy meets the national safety standard created by the American Society for Testing Materials.
You should also ensure that the toy you are giving your child is age appropriate. For example, toys with small parts can present an increased chocking risk for toddlers and young children.
If you believe that a toy you have purchased is unsafe or does not meet CPSC guidelines, you can call their hotline at (800) 638-CPSC.
If injured by a dangerous consumer product, you may be able to recover damages by filing a product liability lawsuit. The attorneys at Reyes, Browne & Reilley can help you get started today. Contact us now for legal help at 214-526-7900.
More than 30 million people a year go to emergency rooms for unintentional injuries, according to the CDC. In many cases, these injuries are due to the negligence of someone else. If you have never filed a claim before, you probably have a lot of questions. Luckily, trustworthy personal injury lawyers are there to help you.
The human nervous system is incredibly sensitive, and sustaining head or neck injuries after an auto or truck accident is fairly common. Even a minor fender bender can leave you with Neuropathy, or nerve damage. After being injured in a car accident, no matter how severe, it is extremely important to contact a professional personal injury lawyer to evaluate your case. Insurance companies will try their hardest to save money on payouts, often at the victim’s expense. The road to recovery can be costly, especially with nerve damage — Combining the costs of medical bills on top of time away from work can severely hurt your bank account. It’s our job to ensure these companies pay what is owed in full.
Audrey T. of Dallas, Texas, shares her Reyes Browne Reilley experience with our staff and customer service while helping her recover from damages stemming from a car wreck involving the Dallas DART.
“Hi, I’m Audrey and I’m here to talk about Reyes, Reilley, and Browne. I was in a car accident on DART back in November 2015. Um, where a young lady hit dart and um, made us slam on brakes and I fell forward and got hurt. I contacted Reyes, Browne, and Reilley and they took my case. And they worked really really hard and really really good on my case. Uh, it took a little minute because, you know, the people was, was giving us a little hard time. Tim Reyes was awesome. (laughing) He did a good job. And I am very happy with my results. Thank you Reyes, Browne, and Reilley.”
Do what Audrey did – research reviews before you decide who should fight the insurance company on your injury claim.
If you have been injured in a car or truck wreck, trust Angel Reyes and the Reyes Browne Reilley Law Firm in Dallas Texas. Fill out our form online, or call (214) 526-7900 for your FREE consultation – we will get you on the road to recovery.
On Sunday night, a self-driving car operated by Uber struck and killed a pedestrian, 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg, on North Mill Avenue in Tempe, Arizona. It appears to be the first time a self-driving car has killed a human being by force of impact. The car was traveling at 38 miles per hour.
An initial investigation by Tempe police indicated that the pedestrian might have been at fault. According to that report, Herzberg appears to have come “from the shadows,” stepping off the median into the roadway, and ending up in the path of the car while jaywalking across the street. The National Transportation Safety Board has also opened an investigation.
Likewise, it’s difficult to evaluate what this accident means for the future of autonomous cars. Crashes, injuries, and fatalities were a certainty as driverless vehicles began moving from experiment to reality.
Advocates of autonomy tend to cite overall improvements to road safety in a future of self-driving cars. Ninety-four percent of car crashes are caused by driver error, and both fully and partially autonomous cars could improve that number substantially.
Even so, crashes, injuries, and fatalities will hardly disappear when and if self-driving cars are ubiquitous. Robocars will crash into one another occasionally and, as the incident in Tempe illustrates, they will collide with pedestrians and bicyclists, too. Overall, eventually, those figures will likely number far fewer than the 37,461 people who were killed in car crashes in America in 2016.
When people get into car crashes with one another, vehicular negligence is typically the cause. Determining which party is negligent, and therefore at fault, is central to the common understanding of automotive risk. Negligence means liability, and liability translates the human failing of a vehicle operator into financial compensation—or, in some cases, criminal consequence.
Overall, there’s recognition that self-driving cars implicate the manufacturer of the vehicle more than its driver or operator. That has different implications for a company like GM, which manufactures and sells cars, than Google, which has indicated that it doesn’t have plans to make cars, only the technology that runs them. The legal scholar Bryant Walker Smith has argued that autonomous vehicles represent a shift from vehicular negligence to product liability.
On today’s roads, product liability claims arise in cases like the failure of Bridgestone/Firestone tires in the late 1990s, and the recent violent rupture of Takata airbags.
These situations represent fairly traditional examples of product liability: A company designed, manufactured, or marketed a product that didn’t do what it promised, and harmed people as a result.
The pedestrian killed by a self-driving Uber in Tempe shows that the legal implications of autonomous cars are as important, if not more so, than the technology. Read more about the possible legal action that can be taken in The Atlantic article, “Can You Sue a Robocar?”
- Page 1 of 2