Orlando Personal Injury And Workers' Compensation Law Blog

When you look at the raw statistics, motorcyclists die far less often in total than people in passenger cars. In 2017, for instance, around 5,000 motorcyclists lost their lives. In 2016, it was nearly 5,300. Considering that around 30,000 die annually in motor vehicle accidents, this makes motorcycles appear safer.

They're not. The difference is just that people ride them far less often. Reports actually show that fatal motorcycle accidents happen 28 times more often than fatal crashes involving people in passenger vehicles. That report focused the statistics by looking at the deaths per vehicle mile traveled.

Do you ever feel like you see an endless string of distracted drivers? Every time you have to wait at a stoplight and honk your horn when it turns green, you know that driver ahead of you was on the phone. It never seems to end.

Part of the problem is that people really just do not realize how dangerous distraction can be. That's why they keep getting distracted and causing deadly accidents. To help raise awareness, here are a few key facts you need to be aware of:

• It takes lives. A total of 3,166 people died in 2017 in accidents that people could prove were linked to distracted driving. The real total is probably far higher, as you can't always prove it.
• The average length of texting distraction is five seconds. That's enough to cover 100 yards at 55 mph. You could cross a football field without looking.
• It's not just texting. Other "nondriving activities" also lead to distraction and accidents. Examples include typing on the GPS and talking to passengers.
• Parents have a massive impact on their kids. While teens get blamed for a lot of distracted driving -- and they are involved -- it is up to parents to set a good example, and show them how to drive safely. After all, people at any age cause distractions, accidents, injuries and deaths every year.

Product liability cases used to be simpler back when manufacturers sold directly (or nearly directly) to consumers. Liability rested with manufacturers, and there were few middlemen involved in the process.

That’s no longer the reality. As a recent lawsuit demonstrates, blame can be shared by multiple defendants, and it is not always clear what amount of liability each party should assume.

When discussing the concept of “premises liability,” many lawyers use grocery store spills as an example because it is a hazard familiar to all of us. Broken jars, freshly mopped floors and vegetables that fall on the floor create the perfect conditions for slip-and-fall accidents. If grocery store employees fail to notice and or address the hazardous conditions, the store can be held liable for injuries suffered by customers.

It is perhaps fitting, then, that some grocery stores are turning to technology to solve what has been a persistent problem leading to accidents and liability. A news article from earlier this year notes that certain grocery chains in the U.S. and elsewhere are employing specialized robots to detect slip-and-fall hazards and alert employees while also staying out of the way of shoppers.