Search This Blog

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Study Finds Criminal Pasts of Nursing Home Workers

Nursing Home Abuse CriminalMore than 90 percent of nursing homes employ one or more people who have been convicted of at least one crime, federal investigators said Wednesday in a new report. In addition, they said, 5 percent of all nursing home employees have at least one criminal conviction.

The report was issued by Daniel R. Levinson, inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, who obtained the names of more than 35,000 nursing home employees and then checked with theFederal Bureau of Investigation to see if they had criminal records.

“Our analysis of F.B.I. criminal history records revealed that 92 percent of nursing facilities employed at least one individual with at least one criminal conviction,” Mr. Levinson said. “Nearly half of nursing facilities employed five or more individuals with at least one conviction. For example, a nursing facility with a total of 164 employees had 34 employees with at least one conviction each.”

click here to read the FULL ARTICLE

Buttafuoco & Associates

Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice Attorneys

Voted BEST LAW FIRM five years in a row!

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

On ‘Dooring’ of Bicyclists, and Experts’ Fees

AL BAKER - Cyclists sometimes call it “the door prize,” or simply being “doored.”

And in a city where the tension between two- and four-wheeled transportation devices can sometimes seem as shrill as the sound of squeaky brakes, accounts of collisions between bicyclists and drivers are passed around on blogs, in newspapers and among members of various cycling clubs and organizations.

One compilation of episodes in which drivers opened the doors of their parked vehicles into the path of oncoming cyclists can be found on and includes details of cases from places as diverse as India, Canada, Chicago, New Orleans and San Francisco.

Among the harrowing accounts is one about Dana Laird, 36, a “doctoral student at the Fletcher School of International Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts,” who was killed in 2002 as she rode along Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge, Mass.

It said: “A motorist opened the door of a parked sport utility vehicle across the bike lane in which Ms. Laird was traveling. Ms. Laird swerved and lost control. According to eyewitness accounts, she yelled, `flew through the air,’ and apparently struck the door. She went under the right rear wheels of a passing transit bus, and she was killed instantly.”

Such collisions are not foreign in New York City — and they can lead to occasional charges being lodged by the police or prosecutors, depending on the circumstances.

In a crash on Atlantic and Washington Avenues in Brooklyn on Sept. 11, a driver opened her car door into the path of Jasmine Herron, who was bicycling by, sending her into an oncoming bus that struck and killed her, officials said. Among the charges filed against the driver, Krystal Francis, was “opening and closing vehicle doors,” a violation of Section 1214 of the State Vehicle and Traffic Law, according to a criminal complaint from the Brooklyn district attorney’s office.

The charge popped up again, this time phrased as “unsafely exiting a vehicle,” in a crash in East Harlem on Friday. In that case, the driver of a 2008 Honda was issued with a summons for “unsafely exiting a vehicle” for opening his car door and causing a bicyclist to fall into the path of an oncoming truck, which killed him, the police said.

The Honda driver, who was not identified by name, was in his parked car and opened his door as the rider, Marcus Ewing, 27, was pedaling his Cannondale bicycle eastbound on East 120th Street, just west of Third Avenue, about 8 a.m., the police said.

The driver of the truck that hit Mr. Ewing was issued five summonses, for equipment violations.

As for the driver whose door knocked over Mr. Ewing, the charge he faces — unsafely exiting a vehicle — “is a V.T.L. traffic summons” (Vehicle and Traffic Law) and not one found in the New York State penal code, according to one city official.

Another official said such citations were aimed at preventing drivers from opening their car doors into traffic in ways that would create “dangerous conditions for bicyclists or motorists” coming by at the same time.

“You cannot just swing your car door open,” the official said.

“It is not that often that officers issue those kinds of tickets,” the official said. And sometimes, it requires a patrol officer to witness the offending behavior for it to rise to a summons, or an inquiry by the Accident Investigation Squad when a death is involved. Then, that sole charge can carry similar penalties to other traffic violations, like going through a red light, the official said.

Whether termed “unsafely exiting a vehicle” or something else, Nick Cantiello, a spokesman for the State Department of Motor Vehicles, sent along a copy of Section 1214 of the State Vehicle and Traffic Law. It said:

Opening and closing vehicle doors. No person shall open the door of a motor vehicle on the side available to moving traffic unless and until it is reasonably safe to do so, and can be done without interfering with the movement of other traffic, nor shall any person leave a door open on the side of a vehicle available to moving traffic for a period of time longer than necessary to load or unload passengers.

Mr. Cantiello said the fine for the violation could be as much as $150. Asked about the number of “doorings” — in which people open a door into a bike or a car — he said that as of Oct. 22, there had been 147 tickets issued for that offense around the state.

In all of 2009, he said, there were 179; in all of 2008 there were 207; and in 2007 there were 164.

“So it’s not a lot,” he said. “You can see there’s not a real trend there.”

A spokesman for the New York Police Department said the department did not keep statistics on such incidents around the five boroughs.

Noah S. Budnick, the deputy director of Transportation Alternatives, a nonprofit pedestrian and bicycle transportation group financed by members, said the issue of cyclists being hit by doors had long been a concern.

“It’s always been a top complaint and, anecdotally, a major contributing factor to crashes in New York City,” he said. “If you talk to anyone who’s ridden a bike in New York, everyone has a story about, at best, narrowly avoiding a car door that’s been swung open in their path and bike riders quickly learn that one of the safest ways to ride is to take the whole lane, so they are not biking in the door zone.”

Of Fees for Experts

There it was in black and white on Page 103 of a new study critiquing the Police Department’s controversial stop-question-and-frisk policy: the hourly rate a Columbia Law Professor received for his work.

“I have been compensated for this work at the rate of $350 per hour,” the professor, Jeffrey A. Fagan, wrote. There was no total, but one can imagine it was high, as he spent 15 months over three years on the project.

He even scribbled in the date, as another contemporaneous bit of evidence: Oct. 15, 2010.

The study — for the Center for Constitutional Rights — found that in more than 30 percent of the street stops, officers either lacked the kind of suspicion necessary to make a stop constitutional or did not include enough data on the stop to determine whether it was legally justified.

Eleven days later, when Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly was asked for his response, he took the occasion to point out that Professor Fagan was paid well. (Still, he overinflated the price a bit, asserting that the professor was paid $375 an hour.)

“This is a document prepared for plaintiffs who paid that sort of money to have this document prepared,” Mr. Kelly said. “When you pay that sort of money, you’re going to get a view point that pretty much goes along with your view point.”

Mr. Kelly called Professor Fagan’s 217-page study (pdf) “an advocacy paper.”

“I wouldn’t take the position that this is an objective document,” he said.

But wait. Mr. Kelly acknowledged that the city was paying its own expert, Dennis C. Smith, a professor at the Robert F. Wagner School of Public Service of New York University, to write its own study. He said Professor Fagan “had three years to develop” his study, while the city had “30 days to respond.” His point: It will cost less money.

Questions about Professor Smith’s fee hung in the air: At what hourly rate was he being paid? Over what time? And by whom?

Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman, responded in an e-mail: “unknown at this hour — but not $375 an hour for three years.” In another e-mail, on Wednesday, he said Professor Smith was not paid by the Police Department and referred questions to the city’s Law Department, which did not immediately respond to questions.

Professor Fagan, in this current effort, has been paid for about 15 months’ worth of work, according to people familiar with the arrangement. But he has done research, and published on the subject, for more than a decade. Before beginning on his work on the current study, he worked for the City Council under a contract to Columbia University, with the payments going to the school. It was the same arrangement when he worked for the state attorney general’s office under a contract to Columbia as part of that office’s 1999 study of the issue.

Some critics and law enforcement analysts raised the same sort of questions when the Police Department — through the Police Foundation — commissioned the nonprofit Rand Corporation in early 2007 for an independent study of the stop-and-frisk issue.

The department was under fire because the increasing number of street stops were leading some critics to suggest that minorities were unfairly singled out, a charge that the police have repeatedly denied. The Rand study (pdf), in November 2007, found no racial profiling being done by police officers in New York.

At the time, the study was said to cost in the six figures — and at least $120,000 — a bill footed by the foundation, a charity that supports the department. The police on Wednesday reiterated that figure.

Buttafuoco & Associates
Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice Attorneys
Voted BEST LAW FIRM five years in a row!
$250+ Million recovered for our clients.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Jennie-O Recalls 55,000 Pounds of Turkey Burger Over Salmonella

Fox News reports....

Jennie-O Turkey recalled 55,000 pounds of turkey burger this weekend after being linked to a dozen cases of salmonella in 10 states.

The raw, frozen turkey burgers were sold nationwide exclusively at Sam’s Club stores. They were sold in boxes of 12 individually wrapped burgers labeled “Jennie-O Turkey Store All Natural Lean White Meat Turkey Burgers.” Each carton weighs four pounds.

The recalled cartons have a use-by date of Dec. 23, 2011, and an identifying lot code of 32710 through 32780 printed on the side panel of each box. The consumer UPC is 042222-261081. The products were packaged on Nov. 23, 2010.

The Willmar company is advising that consumers who have the burgers in their freezer to avoid eating them.

“Instead we are asking that consumers return this product to a Sam’s Club store for a full refund,” the company said on its website.

Jennie-O has established an online resource center at to provide more information to consumers about the voluntary recall.

Hormel Foods, the parent company of Jennie-O, also operates a toll-free Consumer Response Center at 1-800-621-3505.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service began investigating after the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services reported a case of salmonellosis, which is caused by salmonella bacteria and is usually foodborne.

The investigation then widened to include Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio and Washington in addition to Wisconsin. Twelve people became sick. According to the Food Safety and Inspection Service, three of those who were sickened specifically reported eating Jennie-O turkey burgers before the onset of illness and hospitalization.
All the illnesses occurred between December 2010 and March of this year. The last case was reported on March 14.

Salmonella hadar, the type of bacteria reportedly involved in the outbreak, is most often found among poultry.

The USDA, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and state public health agencies are continuing their investigation. Authorities said that as more information is collected, the recall could widen to include additional turkey products.

The government is advising consumers to use extra caution when preparing raw turkey. To prevent salmonellosis and other foodborne illnesses, people should wash their hands in warm soapy water for at least 20 seconds before and after handling raw meat and poultry. Poultry should be cooked to an internal temperature of at least 165 degrees F.

Symptoms of salmonella poisoning include diarrhea, abdominal cramps and fever within six to 72 hours of infection. Additional symptoms may be chills, headache, nausea and vomiting that can last up to one week.

Salmonellosis can be especially severe, and possibly life-threatening, to infants, the elderly and individuals with a compromised immune system.

Buttafuoco & Associates
Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice Attorneys
Voted BEST LAW FIRM five years in a row!

Tuesday, May 03, 2011

Disney Princess Plastic Trikes Recalled by Kiddieland Due to Laceration Hazard

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and Health Canada, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

Name of Product: Disney Princess Plastic Racing Trikes

Units: About 9,000 in the U.S. and 700 in Canada

Manufacturer: Kiddieland Toys Limited, of Scituate, Mass.

Hazard: The plastic castle display and the princess figures protruding from the top of the handle bar pose a laceration hazard if a child falls on it.

Incidents/Injuries: CPSC and Kiddieland have received three reports of children suffering facial lacerations.

Description: This recall involves the Disney Princess Plastic Racing Trikes. The trikes are pink and fuchsia with a purple seat and wheels. On top of the handlebar, there is a rotating castle display surrounded by three princess figures. "Disney Princess" is printed on the label in front of the trike just below the handlebar.

Sold at: Target, JCPenney, Meijer and H.E.B. stores nationwide and on the Web at from January 2009 through April 2011 for about $50.

Manufactured in: China

Remedy: Consumers should immediately take the trikes away from children and contact Kiddieland for a free replacement handlebar with an enclosed rotating display.

Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Kiddieland at (800) 430-5307 anytime, or visit the firm's website at

Buttafuoco & Associates
Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice Attorneys
Voted BEST LAW FIRM five years in a row!