New York City Personal Injury Lawyer - Miscellaneous

Philly Man Having Heart Attack Dies Awaiting Treatment in Hospital ER then Robbed by Drug Addicts

Paul Napoli — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:35:04 GMT

December 2, 2009

A popular Philly local musician and high school counselor went to a hospital emergency room on Saturday complaining of heart attack symptoms. He sat untreated in the waiting room for 80 minutes, where he died and three homeless drug addicts robbed him of his wristwatch.

Joaquin Rivera, 63, of Frankford, walked two blocks from his home on Duffield Street to the emergency room of Atria Health's Frankford Campus in Northeast Philadelphia, where he checked in at 10:45 p.m. complaining of pain shooting from his left arm to his chest. He took a seat in the waiting room as a nurse instructed.

At 11:00 p.m., Richard Alten, 44, signed in for treatment at the emergency room and he, along with another man and woman companion, take a seat in the waiting room. The three conversed with Rivera.

According to witnesses, police believe Rivera lapsed into unconsciousness about an hour after checking in. All caught on the hospital’s security video, one of the three people he had spoken with in the waiting room then removed Rivera’s watch and briefly passed it to Alten. Alten was then called to see ER doctors and his companions left.

Around 11:45 p.m., a witness alerted hospital security that Rivera appeared to be dead and of the robbery.

“There's no resistance from Mr. Rivera at all, which is why we believe he's probably dead. There's no stirring from him," said Capt. Jack McGinnis, a city detective, of the security video.

Police took Richard Alten into custody. The other suspects, a black woman in her thirties and 5-foot-8 black man in dark pants who limped are wanted by police. McGinnis describes the three suspects as homeless drug addicts. Police say they may release hospital security video in hopes of catching the other two suspects.

Rivera was pronounced dead At 12:04 a.m., one hour and 19 minutes after arriving at the hospital.

"My father went there complaining about chest pains," Joaquin Rivera Jr., 25, said. "They made him wait there for over an hour. That is ridiculous. I feel like the hospital killed him. "

Joaquin Rivera was a popular folk musician in Philly, especially within the Puerto Rican community. He was a bilingual counselor at Olney High School and worked for the school district 36 years.

Funeral Mass for Joaquin Rivera will be at 10 a.m. Saturday at Christ Church and St. Ambrose, 600 W. Venango St. Friends may call at 6 p.m. Friday at the John F. Givnish Funeral Home, 10975 Academy Road, and at 9 a.m. at the church. Burial will be in Greenmount Cemetery, Front and Luzerne streets.

Aria Frankford Hospital has released the following statement:

"Due to the pending criminal investigation and citing patient confidentiality, Aria Health is unable to comment with regards to the circumstances surrounding this patient's death. Aria Health is cooperating fully with the Philadelphia Police Department in connection with the investigation and offers its condolences to the patient's family. Aria officials are conducting an intensive internal investigation into this event and are coordinating their efforts with law enforcement."

Hospital negligence can result in serious injuries and even deaths. If you have been injured as the result of negligence while you were a patient in a hospital, or if a loved one died due to hospital negligence, you may be able to file a claim and collect compensation for pain and suffering, lost wages, medical expenses and other losses. Some of the most common forms of hospital negligence include wrong-site surgeries, medication errors, surgical errors, development of hospital-acquired infections, improper use of anesthesia, improper treatment of a diagnosed medical condition, failure to monitor or stabilize a patient, or improper use of a medical device. Call Napoli Bern Ripka, LLP at 888-529-4669 today to discuss your legal options.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Napoli

Study Finds Uninsured Trauma Patients 80% More Likely to Die

Paul Napoli — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 20:32:57 GMT

November 30, 2009

In a new study published in the November issue of Archives of Surgery, Harvard University and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston researchers found trauma patients without medical insurance are more likely to die those with insurance.

The researchers studied data submitted from 1,154 trauma centers to the National Trauma Data Bank for 687,091 U.S. adult patients admitted with blunt or penetrating trauma injuries from 2002 through 2006. The study did not include burn patients, people who were treated and released or those dead on arrival to the hospital.

The study researchers factored patients' age, gender, race and severity of injury and found that patients enrolled in commercial health plans, health maintenance organizations or Medicaid had an equal risk of death from traumatic injuries. Patients covered by Medicare had a 56% higher risk of death. Patients without insurance were 80% more likely to die from traumatic injuries.

"After admission to a hospital, trauma patients can have worse outcomes based on insurance status," the study authors wrote. "This concerning finding warrants more rigorous investigation to determine why such variation in mortality would exist in a system where equivalent care is not only expected but mandated by law."

The study did not identify a cause for the increased mortality rate of uninsured patients, but did say that uninsured patients may experience treatment delay or different care than insured patients. Authors cited another study of Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston by J S Haas and L Goldman that found uninsured trauma patients were less likely to be admitted to the hospital and received fewer services during their admission compared with insured trauma patients.

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act ensures that hospitals provide emergency care regardless of a patient’s ability to pay.

In 2007, according to the US Census Bureau, 45.7 million Americans (15.3%) were uninsured.

Medical malpractice occurs when a physician or other medical care provider does not follow the "reasonable standard of care" for a patient in a similar medical situation. This standard of care is based on what other people in similar professions would do when faced with the same situation. Emergency room doctors who treat trauma patients have different standards of care to uphold than specialists such as plastic surgeons and podiatrists. Medical malpractice can result in serious injuries and even death. If you have been injured as the result of medical malpractice while you were a patient in a hospital or if a loved one died due to Medical malpractice, you may be able to file a claim and collect compensation for pain and suffering, lost wages, medical expenses and other losses. Call Napoli Bern Ripka, LLP at 888-529-4669 today to discuss your legal options.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Napoli

New Law Increases Fines for Employers who Retaliate Against Employees

Paul Napoli — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 23:49:35 GMT

November 27, 2009

A new law that protects employees who report labor violations to the New York State Department of Labor from retaliation by employers went in to effect this week.

When employees file claims or provide information to the Department of Labor about violations, they may suffer employer retaliation such as discharge, demotion, pay cuts or reassignment to a less desirable work shift or work duties. Employees must be protected from such retaliations and although New York’s previous labor law prohibited employer retaliation, the new law offers a greater deterrent because of increased penalties.

Governor David A. Paterson said, “Every worker in New York is afforded basic protections under state labor law – minimum wage, meal breaks and the right to be paid in a timely manner. Oftentimes, when workers are not afforded those rights, many are too apprehensive to come forward due to fear of retaliation by their employers. This law will persuade more workers to come forward, while at the same time ensuring that lawbreaking employers who do retaliate against workers will face stiff penalties.”

Signed by Governor David A. Paterson on August 26, 2009, the new law increases the minimum civil penalty against employers who retaliate against employees from $200 to $2,000 and the maximum penalty from $1,000 to $10,000. Under the new law, the Commissioner of Labor may also award lost compensation to workers who have been victims of employer retaliation.

“All too often, workers who turn to the State Department of Labor to help them recover unpaid wages or receive help with other labor law violations end up getting fired, or are otherwise victims of workplace retaliation – including reduced hours, losses of benefits, and different work assignments – by their employers. Employers who willfully underpay their workers or otherwise violate labor rights and protections must be held accountable for their actions, and worker ‘whistleblowers’ who attempt to stand up for their rights must be able to come forward and seek help without fear of losing their jobs,” said State Senator George Onorato, the chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Labor.

Federal and state labor laws regulate the relationship between employers and employees. Labor law, also called employment law, is an entire body of laws, regulations, administrative rulings and case precedents that govern how trade unions, employees and employers must interact. This body of law also restricts some actions for these groups. These laws protect employees from being treated poorly by their employers. If an employer fails to follow these regulations, an employee may be able to file a claim for lost wages, back pay and other damages. An experienced attorney is a valuable asset to have when you are thinking of filing a labor law claim against your employer or former employer. Call Napoli Bern Ripka, LLP today at 888-529-4669 to discuss your legal options.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Napoli

Cement Truck Crashes into Chinatown Retail Store, 8 Injured

Paul Napoli — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:02:50 GMT

November 12, 2009

Around 1 p.m. Wednesday afternoon, a cement truck crashed into a wireless retail store at 145 Canal Street in Chinatown, injuring eight people.

The accident occurred shortly after the cement truck exited the Manhattan Bridge onto Canal Street, on its way to the Bowery. It severely damaged six other vehicles parked along Canal Street before plowing into the building. Firefighters used a winch on the back of a FDNY rescue truck to pull the disabled cement truck from the retail storefront. The cause of the accident is undetermined.

Four people injured in the accident were in serious, but stable condition at local hospitals. The four other victims were treated at the scene by emergency personnel and released.

Residents of Chinatown have long contended that this intersection is a hazard because it is often the site of accidents. In 2008, a commercial dump truck, traveling from the Manhattan Bridge, rammed into a bus parked in front of 147 Canal Street, killing a 57-year-old woman and injuring four others, including two police officers.

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer and State Senator Daniel Squadron and released a joint statement concerning the accident, “Our heart goes out to the victims of today’s tragic crash on Canal Street and to their families. This incident is another painful reminder of the deep need to improve pedestrian safety and traffic management in Chinatown.”

If you or loved one has been injured or loved one killed in an auto accident, Napoli Bern Ripka LLP has the experience and knowledge needed to handle your auto accident case successfully. Contact us immediately after an auto accident and we will discuss the circumstances of your case and institute a plan of action to help you get compensation for your injuries, property damage or a loved one’s wrongful death. Visit www.napolibern.com or call 1-888-529-4669 to discuss your case and find out the best course of action to ensure that you get the compensation you deserve.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Napoli

Napoli Bern Ripka LLP Continues to Investigate The Suitability of Non-Listed REITS

Adam Gana — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:33:25 GMT

Real Estate Investment Trusts (‘REITs’) are corporations that invest primarily in real estate, receive special tax designations and distribute 90% of their income to its shareholders. Investors in non-exchange traded or private REITs, also referred to as Non-Listed REITs, have sustained substantial losses.

For the past several years, investment advisors recommended REITs as a safe investment vehicle for risk adverse investors. Many investment advisors failed to disclose the extreme risks associated with investing in these types of products.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) imposes a duty on brokers to only recommend investments that are suitable to each investor’s individual risk profile and investment objectives. It is well established that before making any recommendation, an advisor must first understand the risks inherent in their proposed recommendation through diligent research and advise the investor of known risks.

Many investors allege that brokers and investment advisors were promoting non-listed REITs to elderly and conservative investors as a source of stable income providing an average return of 5-7%. Investors were never warned of the highly illiquid nature of non-listed REITs despite numerous warnings given to brokers by FINRA emphasizing this risk. Investors were unaware of the exposure to interest rate fluctuations or market risks that they were assuming with such an investment.

In addition, many advisors failed to inform investors of the exorbitant commissions associated with the sale of non-listed REITs.

To learn more about the risks of investing in non-listed REITs and whether you are entitled to be compensation for your losses, please contact Napoli Bern Ripka LLP at 212-267-3700.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Adam Gana

8 People Suffer Carbon Monoxide Poisoning at L.I. Restaurant

Paul Napoli — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:50:58 GMT

November 10, 2009

Nassau County police evacuated Ayhan’s Shish-Kebab Mediterranean Restaurant at 379 S. Oyster Bay Rd. in Plainview Monday night after reports of multiple customers falling unconscious.

Emergency workers transported eight people to area hospitals, Nassau University Medical Center and North Shore University Hospitals in Syosset and Plainview, suffering from carbon monoxide poisoning. Three other people sustained carbon monoxide poisoning, but refused medical attention.
The source of the leak was undetermined, but police say the gas in the restaurant was shut off.

This is not the first time illness has been linked to Ayhan’s Shish-Kebab Mediterranean Restaurant. In 2001, the Nassau County Health Department linked a Shigellosis outbreak to five restaurants owned by Ayhan Hassan of Port Washington, including Ayhan’s Shish-Kebab Mediterranean Restaurant in Plainview. More than 600 people complained to the Health Department of symptoms such as bloody diarrhea, fever and abdominal pain.

Shigellosis is an infectious disease caused by a group of bacteria called Shigella and often contracted by eating food contaminated when a food handler fails to wash his or her hands after using the bathroom. Most people infected with Shigella develop diarrhea, fever and stomach cramps starting a day or two after they are exposed to the bacteria. The diarrhea is often bloody. Shigellosis usually lasts 5 to 7 days, although it may be several months before a person’s bowel habits are entirely normal. A severe infection with high fever may be associated with seizures in children less than 2 years old. Children and elderly people are particularly vulnerable to shigellosis infection.

If you or a family member has suffered an injury due to someone else’s negligence, you may be entitled to compensation. Call Napoli Bern Ripka LLP at 888-529-4669, we have the experience and knowledge needed to help you file a personal injury claim and see it through to its resolution. Our experienced attorneys can answer your questions and ease your concerns so that you can concentrate on healing from your injury.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Napoli

Congress Introduces New Legislation To Create An Agency To Oversee Financial Regulation

Adam Gana — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:39:09 GMT

The U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee has recently approved a federal agency to regulate home loans, credit cards, savings accounts and other financial services despite complaints from banks and commercial businesses. The vote of 39-29 fell along party lines.

This step "sends an important signal to the American people that we will not stand by and allow big financial firms and their lobbyists to mobilize against change," Obama said in a statement.

The Financial Services Committee also approved by voice vote legislation that would impose new rules for credit cards by Dec. 1, moving up the date from mid-February. Members of the House explained that the change was necessary to prevent lenders from using the grace period to increase interest rates.

The proposed agency is the cornerstone of Obama's plan to clamp down on Wall Street and prevent much of the reckless lending that contributed to last year's near-collapse of the market.

As many lobbyists pressured lawmakers to scale back the legislation, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and other senior administration officials personally appealed to lawmakers not to strengthen the bill.

In the end, the bill exempted general retailers, auto dealers, title insurers, accountants, lawyers and others. Lawmakers said businesses would only face scrutiny if they offer financial services, such as a car loan, but that the agency would not monitor every financial transaction, including store layaway plans.

Also under the bill, all but the biggest banks were spared from routine agency inspections and no businesses were required to offer standard, government-approved financial services, as Obama had wanted.

"Everyone told me that the banks always win. Quit now because they always win," said Elizabeth Warren, who heads an independent panel that monitors the government's bank bailout program and initially proposed the concept of a consumer protection agency. "They didn't win today."

The American Bankers Association said it would continue to oppose the bill when it goes to vote in the House and potentially the Senate.

"We still have major concerns with some principal areas" including "the very broad, ill-defined authority that is granted to this new agency that could be used to justify essentially any regulatory action," said Floyd Stoner, ABA vice president for congressional relations.

Obama chastised the financial industry in his statement. "They are doing what they always do -- descending on Congress, using every bit of influence they have to maintain the status quo that has maximized their profits at the expense of American consumers, despite the fact that recently those same American consumers bailed them out as a consequence of the bad decisions that they made," he said.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Adam Gana

Hedge Fund Losses

Adam Gana — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:18:51 GMT

Napoli Bern Ripka LLP is currently seeking clients who have incurred losses due to mismanagement of their capital by hedge fund managers. Since the well-publicized blow-up of Long-Term Capital Management in 1998 and the bursting of the tech bubble, hedge funds had experienced a great run of success from 2003 through 2007, mirroring the bull-run in the U.S. stock market during this time. Due to the fact that many hedge funds were producing returns in the mid-to-low teens, along with promises made to investors of downside protection against losses, the amount of capital invested in hedge funds grew at an annual rate of around 20% and thousands of new funds were launched from 20003 through 2007. Institutional investors invested billions of dollars of capital in hedge funds, relying on the marketing of management teams that the funds could preserve capital and produce positive returns even in down markets by hedging bets through both long and short investments.

As the overall stock and credit markets began to turn south in 2008 during the credit crisis and ensuing recession, many hedge funds incurred major losses as investments declined and liquidity dried up. Institutional investors, such as pension funds and endowments, and high-net worth individuals were left with severely diminished portfolios as a result of poor risk management, over-concentration, directional investments, and risky investments in illiquid securities. Over a hundred hedge funds have shut down as a result of mismanagement of investments, and hundreds more have lost significant amounts of investor capital.

If you are an institutional investor or high net worth individual who has incurred losses due to mismanagement by hedge fund managers, please contact us regarding representation.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Adam Gana

Madoff’s Accountant Pleads Guilty, Faces Maximum 114 Years in Prison

Paul Napoli — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 22:47:28 GMT

November 7, 2009

A Department of Justice Press Release earlier this week announced that David G. Friehling, accountant for Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, LLC, plead guilty in Manhattan Federal Court to nine counts including securities fraud, investment adviser fraud, four counts of filing false audit reports with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") and three counts of obstructing or impeding the administration of the internal revenue laws. In addition to pleading guilty, Friehling has agreed to cooperate with the Government in its ongoing investigation of Bernard Madoff's fraud.

United States Attorney Preet Bharara said, "David Friehling was one of the key enablers of Bernard Madoff's historic fraud. With his guilty plea, Friehling has taken responsibility for his crimes and will now assist us in holding others accountable for their involvement in Madoff's epic fraud against so many victims."

Friehling, 49, acted as the independent auditor of the Madoff firm from 1991 until December 2008, when the fraud collapsed. He produced the firm’s certified and purportedly audited financial statements, including balance sheets, statements of income, statements of cash flows and reports of internal control. In reality, he did not conduct any independent auditing or verification of financial statements or tax returns provided by Madoff and others at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC in New York. He claims he was unaware of Madoff's Ponzi scheme, which spanned 20 years and defrauded investors of billions of dollars. It was Friehling’s accounting that kept the Ponzi scheme concealed from regulators.

Friehling faces a statutory maximum sentence of 114 years in prison and is out on bond awaiting sentencing in February 2010. He has agreed to forfeit $3.1 million, representing the total amount of compensation he received from Madoff’s firm for his accounting and tax services, plus the amount that he and his family withdrew from their investment advisory accounts with Madoff.

Has your stockbroker worked in your best interest? Napoli Bern & Ripka, LLP is currently handling hundreds of securities arbitrations throughout the continental United States. We represent individuals with a wide array of claims including claims of suitability, fraudulent omissions and representations, unauthorized trading, churning and negligence. Contact Napoli Bern Ripka, LLP today at 888-529-4669 and find out how the lawyers at this great practice can help you receive arbitration for your investment losses.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Napoli

Speculative Investing vs. Non-Speculative Investing

Adam Gana — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:20:19 GMT

In determining whether or not you may have a claim for your investment loss, you should think about whether or not your lost investment was speculative or non-speculative. Speculative investments are those investments that carry significant risk after a thorough analysis. It is possible that the purchaser will lose the principal amount in a speculative investment. Financial speculation can involve buying, holding, selling, and short-selling of stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, collectibles, real estate, derivatives, or any valuable financial instrument to profit from fluctuations in its price, regardless of its underlying value. Investment strategies that are speculative carry a high risk of loss of any unrealized profit loss as well as the principal investment itself.

Certain investment strategies can demonstrate an investor as being non-speculative. These include hedging strategies that minimizes the risk of a speculative strategy by minimizing the risk of loss. Hedging could involve trading an asset whose price has a mathematically defined relation with a speculative investment, such as a call or a put option. The purchase of a call or a put option on a security gives the buyer the right to purchase the underlying security at a given price in the future. If the price of an underlying security rises, the value of a call on that security will rise at a rate much greater than the underlying value (or if the price falls, the value of a put option will rise). Arbitrage is another type of hedging strategy, involving the simultaneous purchase and sale of identical or equivalent investments across two or more markets in order to benefit from a discrepancy in their price relationship.

A straddle is a similarly non-speculative investment strategy, which involves purchasing both a call option and a put option on a stock that is bought at the same strike price and expires at the same time. This benefits the investor as long as the market moves by a large amount in either a positive or negative direction. These different variations of hedging strategies are considered non-speculative because risk of loss to the investor is minimized by the overall value of the investor’s portfolio at any given time. Another important feature of non-speculative trading is diversification and liquidity. If an investor’s portfolio is diversified, their risk of complete loss of their investment is minimized. Similarly, if an investment is liquid, the risk of loss to that investment can be said to be non-speculative because the investor can still get realize the value of that investment by getting it back. If investments are made in illiquid products, however, those investments remain at a higher risk of loss because the value cannot be realized.

It is very important for an investor to understand speculative vs. non-speculative trading, and to communicate a distinct strategy to their brokerage firm. If an investor is risk-adverse, they should communicate this to their broker. If a broker implements a speculative strategy, their client is a non-speculative investor, and the investor sustains a loss, the investor may be entitled to that loss under securities laws. If an investor is able to articulate a non-speculative trading strategy to their broker, the broker needs to follow that strategy because to fail to do so would be unsuitable under the law. A broker also has a duty to tell the truth about whether their investment strategy is speculative or non-speculative. If an investor has instructed their broker to follow a non-speculative investment strategy, and their broker has followed a speculative strategy, or has lied about what strategy they have used, the non-speculative investor may have a serious claim that they can bring before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) through arbitration procedures.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Adam Gana