Traveling in a car or other motor vehicle always includes the risk of being in a car accident, but if drivers use care to operate their vehicles responsibly, this risk is relatively small. Unfortunately, not all drivers appreciate the need to act reasonably, and some even engage in reckless driving, which puts everyone in the vicinity in danger of being injured. Traveling at high speeds, weaving erratically in and out of traffic, and ignoring traffic signals are all examples of behavior that could be reckless. If another driver or passenger is injured because of a person’s reckless behavior, he/she will likely face legal liability for the harm caused.

The accidents that result from reckless driving are some of the worst on the road, and can greatly alter the lives of the victims. A man in Elkville was recently arrested for reckless driving near local schools, following multiple instances of erratic driving, including speeding past school buses unloading children. While, thankfully, no one was hurt, this situation illustrates how serious reckless driving can be, and shows that it can implicate not only liability for a personal injury but also criminal consequences if egregious. A discussion of what it means to engage in reckless driving, and the potential liability these drivers face if an accident occurs that results in injury, will follow below.

What Counts as Reckless Driving?

Statistics show that everyone should expect to experience a car accident at some point in their lives, typically three to four per person, though most are not serious. When serious accidents occur, and especially if it appears a driver was operating his/her vehicle in blatant disregard of others on road, moving violations are likely. Whether it be speeding, swerving between lanes without signaling, or other forms of erratic driving, putting others at unnecessary risk is often classified as reckless driving.

Getting behind the wheel of a car is inherently risky, but when someone chooses to drive drunk, the danger is exponentially increased. Car accidents happen every day, and sometimes people are hurt, but accidents involving drunk drivers tend to be much more serious because intoxicated drivers tend to drive quite erratically and can unknowingly cross over into oncoming traffic, or enter a highway from the wrong direction. The resulting injuries can be devastating, and force the victim to incur high medical bills and months or years of lost wages trying to recover. In some cases, the victims do not survive, and the need for compensation by the family is even greater.

As an example, a Waukegan woman was charged with DUI and aggravated DUI causing death when she ran a red light and killed a married couple in the ensuing crash. The woman was found to be intoxicated at more than twice the legal limit. However, criminal culpability for driving while intoxicated does not automatically equal civil liability for car accident injuries. Fault must still be proven, and in drunk driving cases it is important to look at the responsibility of both the driver and the establishment who served the alcohol, as both could be liable for accident injuries. A discussion of how drunk driving impacts a car accident personal injury case, will follow below.

Holding the Driver Responsible

In order to hold anyone at fault for an injury, it is first necessary to prove he/she was negligent. Negligence essentially means that a person failed to exercise reasonable care, an obligation all drivers have to operate their vehicles – in a safe and prudent manner and that this failure led to an injury. On the issue of a drunk driver, a person can be held both criminally and civilly responsible for their actions. Thus, if the driver that caused the injury was drunk, he/she can still be sued to recover medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, etc.

Driving a commercial truck is a skill that is attained through proper training and experience. The size and delayed responsiveness, compared to the average passenger vehicle, make operating these trucks an endeavor that creates a heightened chance of a serious accident. Trucking accidents are more likely to produce severe injury and death due to the extent of the damage sustained by the other vehicle. Regulators, understanding this risk, have strict rules about the licensure of operators, necessary training and trip standards, as well as load restrictions and other various requirements, all in an effort to reduce the occurrence of accidents.

Because of the risk these vehicles pose to the life and health of others on the road in the event of an accident, one area of truck operation that is of particular focus by regulators is the amount of hours a driver may be on the road before a substantial break is required (currently, 11 hours). Drivers are required to log their hours to ensure compliance. However, the delivery schedules imposed on many drivers make complying with this rule practically impossible, leading some to drive while extremely fatigued, and later falsify log books to avoid violations that can put their license at risk for suspension or revocation.

This practice can be deadly in an accident, and make the driver and trucking company liable to victims for compensation. A discussion of the physics behind why most trucking accidents produce catastrophic injuries, and how a victim may seek to hold those at fault legally responsible, will follow below.

Dog bites are somewhat rare. Nevertheless, owners bear a large responsibility to keep their animals from harming other people and can be held legally liable for injuries that result from an animal attack.

Illinois law is stringent about holding owners liable for the actions of their animals. This approach is in place to protect members of the public that have no reason to anticipate an animal attack, as well as to ensure owners take proper precautions to keep their animal from posing a danger. This responsibility is increased if animal control determines the dog should be labeled as “dangerous,” a designation assigned following an attack or threatening behavior.

The standards for labeling a dog as dangerous are set at the local level and the city of La Salle proposed expanding its dangerous dog ordinance to include attacks against other dogs, and not just people, as a qualifying event. The potential physical injury and emotional trauma these attacks can provoke are behind the strength of these ordinances, and victims of dog bites need to understand what their options are when these incidents occur. A look at the owner’s general liability for a dog bite, and what happens when an animal is declared dangerous, will follow below.

People are injured in slip and fall accidents on a daily basis, and depending upon the height of the fall, the type of surface, and the victim’s ability to react, these accidents can easily lead to serious injury. Slip and falls can happen anywhere, including at a store, a neighbor’s home, or a public sidewalk. All property owners, including the government, have a duty to keep their premises in a safe condition, and failure to do so can lead to legal liability if a person is injured as a result.

In Illinois, winter will be here soon enough, and everyone knows the dangers presented by the accumulation of snow and ice. A New Lenox man sued Lowe’s earlier this year after he fell on an uneven surface covered in water, ice, and snow. Given the fact that everyone faces this type of risk when they venture out of their homes, it is important to understand how the law addresses legal responsibility if a fall and injury do occur. In addition, people should understand how liability for the accumulation of snow and ice is handled under Illinois law.

General Rules for Slip and Fall Liability

Property owners have a duty of care to protect people visiting for business or social purposes from harm (trespassers receive no legal protection against injury, except for intentional reckless acts by the property owner). Specifically, all property owners, whether private or open to the public, have a duty of reasonable care to keep their premises safe by fixing problems or warning guests of dangerous conditions they would not otherwise reasonably understand exist. This includes a duty on the part of the owner to inspect for potential problems and remedy them within a reasonable time. For example, if a store employee sees a spill on the floor in an area used by customers, waiting four hours to clean it up is likely too long, and this delay can expose the business to liability if a customer slipped, fell, and was injured in the interim.