301 Massachusetts Avenue
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Free Case Evaluation
In Indiana and Indianapolis, motorcycles are seeing a resurgence in popularity. Motorcycle accidents can be particularly tricky as the resulting injuries are generally far more severe than those experienced in other auto accidents. Contacting a motorcycle accident lawyer can help tremendously in recovering damages or compensation for your situation. If you or a loved one drives a motorcycle, it is important to know what steps need be taken after a crash to ensure the best possible outcome for you and your family. Immediately following the accident you should try to document the scene and write down any details about involved parties, vehicles, buildings/structures, etc. This information will likely prove valuable if your case is escalated to the courts. Of course, if you have any injuries, you likely won’t be coherent enough to take detailed notes. That’s why your first priority should be to receive medical attention for your injuries. Even if your injuries seem minor, this step can go a long way to protect your interests if a court trial becomes necessary. Additionally, you must follow all of your physician’s advice about how to treat and care for your injury, including any medications, procedures, or follow-up visits.

Assuming you aren’t completely incapacitated after your motorcycle accident, you’d next want to contact authorities. Police reports, when available, are usually taken as one of the more reliable pieces of evidence. A police report (or lack thereof) can also be seen as an indication of the severity of the accident – if no police were called to the scene, was it really all that bad? One must also take into consideration the statute of limitations for motorcycle accidents in Indianapolis specifically. The state of Indiana allows parties two years to file any claims related to the crash, which starts counting down on the day of the incident. This includes claims for injuries, damages to property, and even extends to wrongful death lawsuits related to the motorcycle accident.
Takata Corp. suffered another blow as Ford Motor Co. announced that it will not be using air bag inflators in future vehicles. Takata inflators have sent shrapnel into drivers and passengers when they explode with too much force. Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker declined to say which current Ford vehicles contain the Takata inflators.
Today, the Court of Appeals issued a decision striking a blow against the trial tactics of the insurance industry. Here in Indiana, when someone is injured by the negligence of another that person is entitled to the "reasonable value" of the medical treatment she was forced to undergo. In Patchett v. Lee, Case No. 29A04-1501-CT-00001, State Farm argued that it should be allowed to provide the jury with the amounts Healthy Indiana Plan (a Medicaid program) paid on Plaintiff's behalf in an effort to establish the "reasonable value" of Plaintiff's medical treatment. Noting that HIP paid approximately 13% of what Plaintiff's doctors charged, the Court of Appeals held that evidence of the HIP payments were properly excluded by the trial court as not being probative of reasonable value. A copy of the opinion can be found here (click on the "Opinion" link in the upper right corner of the docket). Riley Williams & Piatt attorney, Joe Williams provided briefing and oral argument for the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association, which assisted the Court in reaching its decision. The Court of Appeals' opinion cited to both Joe's brief and his oral argument. His oral argument starts at 32:15 here. When asked about the Court's decision, Joe said, "In reading the Court's decision, I was impressed with how thoroughly the panel reviewed the issue before reaching such a just conclusion. This decision will assist many Hoosiers in obtaining the justice to which they are entitled after being hurt by the carelessness of another."
Medical malpractice attorney William Riley, of Riley Williams & Piatt, LLC, commented today on the news of the American Cancer Society’s studies on prostate cancer: “It appears that the number of men diagnosed with prostate cancer has decreased along with those screened for the disease. There is evidence that most prostate cancers are slow growing and it is likely that a man will die with the cancer, rather than from it. However, this is a very specific question that needs to be carefully considered by clinicians. Most never equals all and in all situations of risk there is a numerator. No man wants to be the numerator. A proper work up and an informed patient are the best way for doctors to treat their patients. At the end of the day, neither the doctor nor the patient really want care to turn into a lawsuit.”
The FDA said certain lab-developed tests (LDTs) may be producing erroneous results. LDTs are produced and performed in a single hospital and do not utilize standard diagnostic equipment. LDTs can involve prenatal tests, ovarian cancer, whooping cough and human papillomavirus. William Riley, of Riley Williams & Piatt, LLC, stated, “It is important for the FDA to step in and regulate these tests under existing medical device law. Some laboratories are marketing this service on a national basis and these test results are too important to patients to leave in an unregulated Wild West environment.” For more information please visit: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/InVitroDiagnostics/ucm407296.htm
Corporate America has a new shield: forced arbitration. Most every time you buy a cell phone, subscribe to a cable television service, or place a loved one in a nursing home, corporate America is requiring you to give up your rights. Buried in each of these contracts is often found a forced arbitration clause and a waiver of your right to protect yourself in a class action. But, why?

Class actions filed in courts are often times the only thing that can hold a corporation responsible for its misconduct. When a cellular service provider sneaks an illegal $50.00 charge onto every customer's bill, it reaps enormous gain. But no one person has the time or resources to challenge an illegal practice for $50.00. Only when a customer can challenge the practice on behalf of all customers can someone afford to challenge the nearly endless resources of a large corporation.
Medical Malpractice refers to an event or circumstance in which a healthcare professional’s actions or lack of, result in injury or harm to the patient. Essentially, when the care provided to the patient is substandard and it results in negative consequences for the patient, malpractice has been committed. It is important to note that in order to establish (and prove) a medical professional committed malpractice it must be proven that

a) They made a mistake
Workplace injuries are inevitable and while preventable, occur frequently, especially in industries where the workforce performs manual labor. Industries or jobs requiring employees to operate heavy machinery or equipment pose a greater risk to employee safety. Equipment failure, negligence and faulty infrastructure are some of the common factors causing on injuries on the job.

While this is so, a workplace injury can occur anywhere and once liability is determined, the employee is entitled to compensation for their injuries as well as coverage for lost wages in the event they are unable to perform their job duties or in some cases, continue their career.
Anyone who has suffered a personal injury has many things to consider both immediately after the incident and in the weeks that follow. Immediately following an accident, it’s very important to seek medical care for your injuries. If you wait any amount of time, be it an hour, a day, or a week, courts will likely take your waiting as indication that your injuries may not be all that serious (and, therefore, not all that deserving of compensation). In addition, defense can then argue that your injury actually occurred during this waiting period. Even if you are unsure of the severity of your injury, receiving a proper medical assessment can prove to be invaluable evidence during trial. This applies to most types of personal injury cases, including negligence, motor vehicle accidents, defamation, medical injury, product liability, or wrongful death. Whether you were injured by a defective product or suffered a work-related injury, you must follow all the advice and treatment recommendations from your medical doctor for your best chance of recovering any damages. This includes follow-up visits, therapy, medications, or whatever medical discourse is suggested by your medical professional. The bottom line is this: If you hope to recover damages from a personal injury lawsuit, you must go to a medical doctor and follow every piece of their advice.

In addition, Indiana has strict guidelines on the time limit to file any personal injury claims. This makes it even more important to consult with an experienced attorney as soon as possible to discuss the legal validity of your case. For most types of personal injury cases, that timeline is 2 years (this can vary depending on the situation). Indiana operates on a modified comparative negligence, which means that someone may only recover damages if they are less than 50% at fault for the accident/incidence, and that damages are rewarded based on percentage fault. So if you are suing for $100,000 in damages and the court finds that you were 20% at fault and the defending party was 80% at fault, the defendant would end up paying out $80,000 (80% of $100,000).
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today declared Theranos Inc.’s tiny vials (called nanotainers) used for collecting finger pricked blood from patients an “uncleared medical device.” The FDA investigation which began on August 25 found a number of problems with the quality assurance process utilized by Theranos. Evidently, according to reports, Theranos did not meet with suppliers to determine if their products met the Theranos own specifications.
It appears that decision makers in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) may be on the verge of requiring expedited recalls for car makers and suppliers impacted by the rupture prone Takata air bag. As a spokesperson for NHTSA stated, “We will use every tool available to protect public safety.” The Takata airbags have been linked to eight deaths and more than 100 injuries. William Riley, of Riley Williams & Piatt, LLC stated, “The needless personal injuries and deaths that have occurred because of the actions of Takata are an example of what happens when a company ceases to care about people. Corporations are composed of people and as we have recently seen with Volkswagen, some of these corporations have created cultures of deceit in their employees and officers.”

For more information please visit: http://www.safercar.gov/rs/takata/takatalist.html

The National Cancer Institute has placed women in the age group of 55-64 at the highest risk of contracting breast cancer. The percentage of new breast cancer cases by age for the years 2008-2012 was 25.6% The next highest age groups were 65-74 at 21.9% and 45-54 at 21.6% . Annual screenings can cut the risk of death by 15% to 40%. Due to widespread mammography, the vast majority of the roughly 230,000 annual new cases of breast cancer are detected early. William Riley, of Riley Williams &Piatt, LLC, who has practiced in the area of medical malpractice and personal injury for over 25 years stated that, “early diagnosis leads to a survival chance that can exceed 90% in cases of breast cancer.” Riley went on to say, “The most tragic situations that I have seen in cases is when a doctor fails to listen to the patient’s complaint of a breast mass. A woman in that situation should seek a second opinion from another physician.” For more information: http://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/risk-fact-sheet
The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) today published revised breast cancer screening criteria of the American Cancer Society. The updated guidelines recommend annual breast cancer screenings at age 45 instead of 40 and switching to every other year at age 55. The article makes it clear this is not a blanket recommendation. Medical malpractice attorneys at Riley Williams & Piatt, LLC stated, “The recommendation are for women at an average risk for breast cancer. Undoubtedly doctors will continue to order more intensive screening for individuals at a higher risk.” The Riley Williams & Piatt, LLC attorneys went on the say, “Our experience in medical malpractice cases and personal injury cases indicate a continued validity to breast self-examinations.”
Of interest to class action lawyers is the case of Campbell-Ewald Company v. Gomez currently pending before the United States Supreme Court. The issues presented are: whether a case becomes moot when the plaintiff receives an offer of complete relief on his or her claim; whether the answer to the first question is different if the case is a putative class action; and, whether the doctrine of derivative sovereign immunity for government contractors is restricted to property damage arising out of a public works project. Oral argument on the matter occurred on October 14, 2005. The case arose out of an unsolicited text message that Jose Gomez received. This spam text was a violation of Federal law. Campbell-Ewald attempted to quash the putative class action by offering Mr. Gomez the maximum offered under Federal law for spam texting -$1500. William Riley commenting on this case stated, “This represents a dangerous approach that defendants could exploit to continue their economic wrongdoing to an entire class of individuals - while minimizing their economic risk of that wrong doing.” Riley Williams & Piatt, LLC will continue to monitor the case and its certain impact on class action law.
On October 15th Volkswagen announced it would recall 8.5 million cars across the European Union. This came as a result of an order from German regulators in the KBA. Globally the company could be required to recall 11 million vehicles, which some analysts have estimated could cost Volkswagen $40 billion. The company has until the end of November in Germany to explain how it can fix the problem. The New York Times reports the EPA plans to issue a recall once it is satisfied with VW’s proposed fix.
Riley Williams & Piatt has filed a class-action lawsuit for Tom Richards against Volkswagen of America, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana . Mr. Richards seeks to represent all Hoosiers who have purchased a Volkswagen from 2009 - 2015. “I’m very upset,” Mr. Richards stated in response to a reporter’s question. Mr. Richards purchased a 2011 Volkswagen Jetta TDI. Only recently did he learn that the vehicle had been equipped with a “defeat device” that allowed it to pass EPA standards for testing, while putting out pollution 40 times higher than EPA requirements. “I’ve had a couple of VW’s before and was very pleased with the cars that I’ve had. But this one now, it’s not what I want. It’s not what I bought. It’s not what I want,” said Richards. “Volkswagen decided to lie to 11 million American consumers and I don’t know how many Hoosiers. But, the vehicle was engineered to lie. Volkswagen set out to do something incredibly wrong,” stated William Riley.
Personal Injury is an umbrella term that encompasses any physical injuries as well emotional or psychological damage that occurred as the result of an accident or incident. Personal Injury lawsuits are common as the injured have rights and the incentive to protect them. The implications for the injured party vary drastically depending on the severity of the accident. For some, a small settlement suffices which in most cases will include medical expenses, any property damage incurred (ie: auto collisions), pain and suffering, punitive damages and lost wages. In other cases, unfortunately the injuries can be permanent and irreversible. When a persons is subject to pain indefinitely and future ailments are uncertain it is imperative that the individual is compensated accordingly to ensure their needs are met in the immediate and long term future.

There are many situations in which an injury could warrant a civil suit. Some of the most frequent instances are motor vehicle accidents, construction site accidents (where safety standards are violated), institutions where negligence results in injury and suffering ( such as medical malpractice) and defective products where poorly constructed materials or dangerous chemicals cause injury to a consumer who is using the product for its intended purpose. If you or a loved one has been injured there are a number of important steps to take early on to make sure your case is handled properly. While most settlements are reached without going to trial, having strong documentation of the losses suffered (monetary and physical) will be necessary to secure just compensation.
Medical Malpractice can be confusing and difficult to actually prosecute. In any Medical Malpractice case, you need to prove the negligence or fault of the medical professional, and you also have to prove that their negligence or fault resulted in injuries on your end. Anyone making these claims are often treated by several medical professionals and perhaps have even undergone several different procedures, so it can be difficult to determine exact fault in certain cases.

There is a time limit to filing a medical malpractice lawsuit, so it’s important to understand and acknowledge Indiana’s Statute of Limitations regarding medical malpractice claims. Indiana specifically gives a two-year time limit to file any claims, and that two-year time limit starts when the medical injury starts – immediately following the procedure that caused it, or if the symptoms aren’t apparent right away, the date that the symptoms started. The implication of this is you cannot wait. The day you notice symptoms should be the day you contact a legal professional or begin the filing process. If the patient suffering injury is less than 6 years old the time limit is extended, and parents/guardians have until the child turns eight years old to file a claim.