Tim Rayne

Pennsylvania Car Accident & Personal Injury Lawyer

Tim Rayne

Pennsylvania Car Accident & Personal Injury Lawyer

Archives for October 2023

Monsanto Hit with $175 Million Verdict by Philadelphia Jury for Roundup Cancer Claim

by Leave a Comment

The first Philadelphia Roundup Cancer Trial has resulted in a $175 Million Verdict against Monsanto.

Roundup Cancer Claims
$175 Million in Philadelphia Roundup Cancer claim against Monsanto

On October 27, 2023, a Philadelphia Jury decided that Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup contained chemicals that caused the plaintiff Ernest Caranci’s cancer and that it was liable for a huge damage award for Compensatory and Punitive Damages.

Caranci’s lawyers argued that Roundup contains a combination of multiple toxic chemicals which caused Caranci to contract non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The verdict was comprised of $25 Million in Compensatory Damages for the harm to Caranci and $150 Million in Punitive Damages to punish and deter Monsanto for what the Jury found to be outrageous conduct.

Other Roundup Trials against Monsanto have had a wide range of results from Verdicts in favor of Monsanto to Plaintiff Verdicts up to $2 Million.

Some Roundup claims are subject to a huge Toxic Tort Settlement while other claims remain pending in various courts, including Philadelphia.

If you or a loved one has used Roundup for a prolonged period and has been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, you should reach out to a lawyer to learn about your legal rights. Beware that there are strict time limits for filing claims.

Tim Rayne is a Personal Injury Lawyer with the Pennsylvania and Delaware Law Firm MacElree Harvey and can be reached at 610-840-0124 or trayne@macelree.com or you can check out his website at www.TimRayneLaw.com.

What is Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress and Why Did a Pennsylvania Trial Judge Just Dismiss the Claim of a Live-In Girlfriend?

by Leave a Comment

Pennsylvania Law recognizes the validity of Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Cases, but as a Trial Judge in Columbia County Pennsylvania just ruled in the case of Lutz v. O’Connell, the claim is only available to “close relatives” and he concluded that a live-in girlfriend could not make such a claim after witnessing the death of her boyfriend in a car accident.

What is Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress?

Under Pennsylvania Law, Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (NIED) is a tort claim for compensation that arises when a close family member is in the “zone of danger” and is not injured, but witnessed the injury or death of a close family member and suffered Emotional Distress. Under these circumstances, it is deemed reasonably foreseeable that the person may suffer emotional distress and, if they can prove that they did, the person who caused the injury or death is liable to pay compensation for the emotional distress.

There are a few hurdles that must be overcome though. The person claiming must have the “close relationship”, be in the zone of danger or witness the accident, and must be able to prove the emotional distress.

What Happened in the Lutz v. O’Connell Case and Why did the Court Dismiss the NIED Claim?

In Lutz v. O’Connell, Danielle Van Voorhis was injured and George Lutz was killed in a head on car collision caused by Samantha Davis.

The lawsuit filed by Van Voorhis alleged that she and Lutz lived together in a loving relationship and considered themselves to be common law husband and wife, but their relationship began after Pennsylvania outlawed Common Law Marriage in 2004.

Van Voorhis alleged that she witnessed Lutz die at the accident scene and, as a result, suffered emotional distress.

In addition to an injury claim, Van Voorhis presented a NIED claim.

When the Defense objected to the NIED claim, the Trial Judge dismissed the Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Claim because the courts have placed limits on the claim, requiring that the claimant be “closely related” to the person suffering injury or death. The Judge found that since there was no valid marriage, the relationship was not close enough to justify a NIED claim.

The Judge noted that although a Trial Judge in a previous case allowed a NIED filed by a fiancé, subsequently the Superior Court held in another case that NIED claims should be limited to immediate family members.

Ultimately, the Trial Judge in Lutz v. O’Connell decided to narrowly construe the “closely related” element and dismiss Van Voorhis’ claim. The Judge reasoned that narrow construction was appropriate in order to prevent the floodgates of litigation to whomever claims to be “close” to the victim. To permit someone like Van Voorhis, a “loving companion”, to make a claim would result in juries having to judge the quality of a non-familial relationship to decide whether someone could present a valid NIED claim. Instead, the Judge reasoned that the bright line objective test of a valid marriage or immediate family relationship was more appropriate in the context of who should be permitted to pursue a NIED claim.

Nevertheless, please remember that this decision is only a Trial Court ruling, not one by a Pennsylvania Appellate Court, so it is not binding precedent that must be followed by other Trial Judges. So, if you think you may have a Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Claim in Pennsylvania, you should consult with an Experienced Personal Injury Lawyer for an evaluation of your specific claim.

Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyer who helps Pennsylvania Accident Victims understand their legal rights and receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Contact Tim at 610-840-0124 or trayne@macelree.com for a Free Consultation or check out his website at www.TimRayneLaw.com.

Is There Still Time to File a Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Injury Claim?

by Leave a Comment

Yes, there is still time.

The deadline for filing a Camp Lejeune Toxic Water Injury Claim is August 10, 2024.

The Camp Lejeune Justice Act was passed on August 10, 2022 and the two year Statute of Limitations is two years.

Consequently, injured victims of the Camp Lejeune Water Contamination or the heirs of deceased victims have until August 10, 2024 to file their legal claims in Court.

What Should Camp Lejeune Toxic Water Victims Who Live in Pennsylvania Do?

If you live in Pennsylvania do you have a right to present a claim on your own behalf or for a relative who has died as a result of the Camp Lejeune Water Contamination? The answer: Yes, if you meet the lawsuit criteria.

Our Pennsylvania Law Firm is helping Camp Lejeune victims and their families who live in Pennsylvania but want to know about their Camp Lejeune Water Contamination rights and want an experienced North Carolina Trial Lawyer to represent them. We are working jointly with North Carolina counsel to ensure that our Camp Lejeune clients have both a local lawyer to hold their hand and walk them through the process from here in PA and North Carolina Trial Lawyers to litigate the claims in the North Carolina Courts.

What are the Criteria to have a Valid Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Claim?

The following are the Criteria for a viable Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Case:

  • Lived on the Camp Lejeune Base in North Carolina for at least 30 days between 1953 and 1987
  • Subsequently suffered from a serious medical condition including Cancer, Fetal Death/Miscarriage, Birth Defects, Parkinson’s or other serious illness; and
  • Link between the contamination and medical condition.

If you or a family member meets the above Criteria, then you should consider investigating your legal rights to compensation from the Camp Lejeune Justice Act. The United States Congress passed this Act and set aside funds to help Camp Lejeune victims and their families.

How Much Will We Charge to Investigate and Pursue Your Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Claim?

There are no up front fees or costs charged to investigate or pursue your claims.

Both our Law Firm and the lawyers we work with in North Carolina handle Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Claims on a Contingent Fee basis. The Fee is contingent on recovery, so if you don’t recover, no fees are owed. Our fees are a percentage of the recovery and are paid out of the recovery, not out of your pocket.

Contact Tim Rayne at 610-840-0124 or trayne@macelree.com to discuss whether you meet the criteria for filing a claim under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act.

What in the World is Spoliation?

by Leave a Comment

Spoliation is a legal term that means the wrongful destruction of or failure to preserve relevant evidence.

If a party has reason to know that litigation is likely to occur, then the party has an obligation to preserve potentially relevant evidence and the failure to do so can result in penalties in the litigation.

In a Slip and Fall case, a common example of Spoliation would be the failure to preserve security video capturing a Slip and Fall incident as well as what occurred before and after the Slip and Fall.

The destruction of or failure to preserve such video could be deemed Spoliation and could result in penalties including an instruction to the Jury that they can assume that, if preserved, the video would have shown events that were unfavorable to the Defendant.

For more information on Personal Injury Topics or to get a Free Evaluation of your Personal Injury Case, Contact Tim Rayne at 610-840-0124 or traynemacelree.com or check out his website at www.TimRayneLaw.com.