Skip to main content
The Liability Issue at the Heart of Naya Rivera’s Untimely Death

Can Masahiro Tanaka Sue Over Head Injury?

Written by MichaelEhline on . Posted in California Accident Injury News.

Tanaka Likely Has A TBI?

Just over a week ago, baseball saw a traumatic injury caused by a mishap on the field. While training for the Coronavirus-shortened baseball season, pitcher Masahiro Tanaka was disabled after getting struck by a batted ball. This most likely caused a TBI in the Yankee star pitcher.

The AP covered the situation after Tanaka’s fellow teammate, Aaron Judge, hit him with a line drive. A traumatic brain injury takes many forms, including sports-related issues. A line drive to the head like this is enough to cause a concussion. Repeated concussions can lead to CTE or Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy.

Can a Player Sue Due to a TBI?

Under Knight v. Jewett, it is highly doubtful Tanaka can sue MLB if he “assumed the risk” of being injured in baseball’s professional sport, with all its known risks. But like the NFL’s football helmet scandal, it remains to be seen if an exception makes clear getting hit in the head by a baseball without proper head protection is or is not a risk in the sport based upon these facts. But here, on its face, Tanaka was engaged in baseball. So it is unlikely a lawsuit against MLB will hunt unless…

One thing is sure that bodes poorly for the League. Batters wear hard hats to reduce their risks of hard baseball head strikes during batting and running the mounds. So, we already know the League is on notice that its employees are at severe risk from baseballs flying around the diamond. Yet, a tiny batted ball falling from the sky with its sun, clouds, wind, and unpredictable weather is expected to be caught by a player looking up, who is only wearing a softcover and zero face protection.

Consumers like to buy baseball caps. And MLB knows the players deserve better head protection, not just for batters. However, pitchers don’t wear batter hard hats, even though depending on skill level, a wooden batted baseball can travel at over 101 miles per hour, and a pitched fastball ball may exceed 100 miles per hour. All it takes is one ball in the face, and you are dead or seriously hurt. So the League, in effect, has chosen profits, selling baseball caps, over its players because wearing your favorite team’s hard hat is not fashionable for a team supporter who wants to buy sports apparel.

There are two separate questions at play here:

  • The first is whether or not a player will sue.
  • The other is whether or not a player has solid moral or legal grounds to sue.

In this case, Tanaka likely will not sue due to his million-dollar contract. The contract probably contains a waiver provision, where Tanaka signed away his right to sue for any injuries while engaging in club-related sporting activities. However, he would have the full right to do so if there were safety, equipment, or other conditions in or around the danger zone that were not inherent in the sport. Traumatic brain injuries, especially in sports, are now only understood as frequency and causes are concerned.

Such accidents, especially in contact sports like football, destroyed dozens of lives and careers, such as brain injuries from bad helmets, Junior Seau, and his wrongful suicide. In the case of former Patriots star Aaron Hernandez, it destroyed his career. It likely also played a role in his violent behavior, including committing murder. It possibly also contributed to his suicide.

Tanaka would be well within his rights to sue the Yankees or MLB for the injury. MLB knew or should have known that head injuries from baseball strikes are highly likely to result in death or serious injuries. Repeated exposure to concussions and other TBIs is expected to cause severe short-, medium-, and long-term consequences for MLB as it did for the NFL.

Significant sports leagues can no longer avoid the reality: TBIs destroy careers and lives. Just look at MMA star Matt Hughes and his Instagram channel to see the difficulties in brain injury healing. It’s a tough row to hoe.

The cost of long-term physical and cognitive care would be at the foot of the League. Furthermore, Tanaka would spark a precedent that protects future players from severe head injuries. For more info on TBIs and similar head injury cases, contact me at michael@ehlinelaw.com or keep reading our site for regular updates.

Citation:

“Should baseball players wear helmets?”

“Bat and Batted Ball Fatalities.”

“The Physics of Baseball.”

Continue reading

How Employers Can Prevent Construction Site Accidents and Injuries like this

Treatment Recommendations For Minor Burns

Written by MichaelEhline on . Posted in Burn Injury Blog.

Auto accidents, fires, explosions, and other incidents can potentially lead to a minor burn injury, which can become serious, causing infection, tissue damage, scarring, emotional trauma, and more. Burn complications can affect a victim’s lifestyle and, in worse cases, lead to death. Although a prescription drug prescribed during a medical emergency reduces pain, burn care requires more than disease control through painkillers.

The pain subsides significantly depending on any allergic reaction and overall wound care. The emergency department will provide medical advice. Below, our top Los Angeles burn injury lawyers will discuss other ways to reduce pain and how to hold the liable party accountable for your break blisters and other injuries.

Minor Burns, Like a First Degree Burn, Can Still Be Painful – Learn Treatment Methods, Here

Electrical burns to kids around the house will result in a more significant degree of burn than an adult would experience from most first-degree burns over their total body surface area. Almost always, the kids burn worse than grown-ups. If you or your loved one have had injuries from burns due to someone else’s negligence, reach out to Ehline Law and our Los Angeles burn injury lawyers today for legal representation and outpatient management!

How Do I Treat My First-Degree Burns or a Minor Burn?

Here, we are not covering second-degree burns. Instead, our focus will be on first-degree burns caused by the most common household injuries. There are different ways of treating a minor first-degree burn. To me, you can treat a little burn, like first-degree burns, with a cold, wet cloth.

For major burns, like third-degree burns or even partial-thickness burns, you need to seek proper medical attention, while treatment for minor burns (first-degree burns) at home is possible with a few medications, a cold, wet cloth, and some quick first aid.

When you get burned, you should first cool the burn down by putting the burn area under cool, running water. Ensure the water is not cold or freezing, as this can lead to loss of body heat, and hypothermia might set in, complicating things further.

Once the minor burns have cooled down, if you’re wearing accessories like rings, it is best to take them off before the burn area swells, which might make it difficult to remove later on. Quickly and gently remove any accessories you might be wearing that come in contact with the burn area.

You may notice that the burned area is developing blisters fast, and some blisters might have fluid that protects you against infection. This might not happen with first-degree burns, but it could with other superficial burns and even worsen the burn. You may want to break the blister b,  but don’t do it; let it open up over time. If it does, wash it and apply antibiotic ointments (even petroleum jelly) to the area covering the skin’s deeper layers.

It would help if you kept the minor burn from drying out. An aloe vera moisturizer or cream can soothe the wounds. Start applying the aloe vera lotion once the burn area has cooled down completely. A sterile gauze bandage should be applied to the area for wound dressing to ensure that air does not enter the site. This will help relieve pain and protect the skin from blisters.

At times, you may find that the pain is too much to handle, and in such situations, you can take over-the-counter pain medications or pain-reducing antibiotic ointment to get some pain relief. If the burn heals, seek medical care for a tetanus shot if you notice an infection.

Implement First Aid To Promote Healing to First-Degree Burns

There are more than 1.1 million burn cases in the United States, and according to the American Burn Association, 10,000 people die annually out of this. First-degree burns are the most minor and typically are not a medical emergency. Sometimes, a clean, wet cloth with some mild soap can bring relief before you apply ointments over the affected top layer of skin.

Many first-degree burns heal over time by themselves, but having the correct first aid can promote the burn wound healing process and ensure a better cosmetic outcome of the burn injury as the burn heals.

End the Burning Process

The critical part of first aid for burns is to end the burning process. If you’re near a fire, extinguish the heat source immediately to avoid other first-degree superficial burns. If you’ve caught fire, you should lay on the ground, start rolling to douse the fire, and immediately remove your clothing, as these can retain heat and further aggravate the burned skin wounds. However, do not remove nylon clothing as it can stick to the skin, and for electrical burns, disconnect the electrical source before giving first aid to the victim.

Once the victim is away from the source of the burns, look at the first-degree burn. These are seldom medical emergencies. You may see redness or blisters. These injuries are emergencies if you see black skin or other tissue, like muscles. Follow the procedure below to immediately deliver the right first aid if you are dealing with first-degree burns.

  • Burn to cool: Within 20 minutes of the injury, the burn victim must apply active cooling to any burns, whether first, second, or third-degree burns. Place the burn area directly under running cool water for 20 minutes to help soothe the pain, remove anything touching the burn if possible, and stabilize the victim. Avoid ice water at all costs, as it can further deteriorate the burned area due to vasoconstriction and hypothermia.
  • Analgesia: Burned skin exposes nerves and tissues, which can cause pain, and simply covering the wound can reduce the pain levels; however, in extreme cases, doctors can administer opioid medications. To treat burns, taking ibuprofen or any non-steroid anti-inflammatory over-the-counter drugs can ease swelling and reduce pain.
  • Burn coverings: Many medical sources recommend using clingfilm to cover burns, as it is sterile as long as users remove the first few inches of the roll. Lay the clingfilm over the wound and keep the burn warm by placing a blanket over it. Wrapping clingfilm tightly around the burn wound can cause constriction, complicate the injuries, and cause infection. So, make sure it’s loose, even when treating a first-degree burn.

Once these steps are complete, victims must head to a hospital immediately for immediate assessment and start any medical treatments if the wounds are severe. Applying creams can affect the assessment stage. However, cooling gels are a great alternative to creams; you can use them at this stage.

Benefits of Cooling Burn Injuries with Water

There are several benefits of using cool water to cool burn injuries. Cooling water has been a great first response to surface cooling after getting burn injuries, and many doctors and study papers agree with this. Medical professionals recommend cooling burned skin with cool water as a pre-hospital initial burn management technique to reduce burn progression.

The recommended time to run water over the burn injuries is around 20 minutes. However, the fear of burn wounds aggravating does not allow victims to lay their wounds under running water for that long as, in their mind, seeking medical attention immediately is the right way to manage burn wounds.

Running burn wounds under cool water reduces pain and stops the burn. It also cleans the wound and minimizes scarring due to fluid build-up.

Cling Film For Dressing Burn Wounds are the Best

This may sound unorthodox, as many of us grab bandages or cotton cloth to cover wounds. However, studies have shown that cling film is the best for dressing burn wounds. This is because cling film is highly sterile and transparent, allowing victims to see their burn wounds and monitor them as time passes.

Using bandages on wounds can cause pain when removing the dressing to check up on the burns, which is why many health professionals recommend clingfilm, which has sterile, non-adhesive properties. You can even consider using a sterile, non-adhesive bandage to cover your wounds.

Can I Start Minor Burn Management at Home?

A burns victim should always consult a burns unit to understand burn management procedures if they have any doubts properly.

Burn management is essential to ensure that the burn does not progress or worsen. In many cases where the burn affects the feet and legs, victims must have their legs elevated for at least 48 hours, which is impossible while managing burns at home.

The severity of the burn doesn’t matter when it comes to diagnosis and treatment. Even minor burns should be appropriately treated, as the wound can complicate things if not managed or contained. So, follow the steps mentioned previously to ensure proper outpatient management.

Minor Burns and Outpatient Management

Medical professionals recommend outpatient management to treat small or minor burns, so he’s laid down some rules to help you determine if you qualify for this treatment. Burns cover less than 10% of an adult’s body or 5% of a child’s.

  • Full-thickness burns covering less than 1% of the victim’s body
  • Victims who don’t have more than two diseases simultaneously

Let’s look at when you should change your burns dressings if you’re under outpatient management.

When Should I Change Dressings for My Burn?

Healthcare professionals recommend aseptic techniques when hanging dressings for burns to avoid further contamination or build-up of bacteria. This is why a victim must change the burn dressing after the first 48 hours following the burn incident and then every 5 days until the wound is Healed. You can change the intervals to an earlier time if you find the wound requires a dressing, and for that, you can look out for the following signs:

  • Smelly wound
  • Soiled dressing
  • Contaminated dressing
  • Slipped dressing
  • Infection (a fever is a good indicator of an infection starting.).

Now, let’s look at how you can change your burn injury wound dressing the right way.

How Do I Change My Burn Injury Wound Dressing?

Here are the steps to follow to change the burn injury wound dressing.

  • Monitor the burn injury, depending on the injury and the dressing. If it is entirely soaked, you may need to change the wound dressing after the first 24 hours.
  • After 48 hours, remove your dressing and assess your burn wounds to see if it is making any positive progress. You can use topical agents like flamazine during this stage.
  • Victims using flamazine to treat their wounds must wash them every few days and reapply the medicine to keep it fresh and uncontaminated.
  • Change the dressing if it becomes smelly, contaminated, or completely soaked from the fluid developing in the burn wounds.

Knowing the right way to clean burns is essential, so let’s review the recommended practices.

How Do I Clean My Burns?

Other burns require different cleaning methods and techniques to ensure quick healing progress. Assessing the burns is the first step to identifying what kind of burn you must adopt and implementing the appropriate cleaning methods.

How Do I Clean My Facial Burn?

Here is what you should do if you have facial burns.

  • Flamazine: Flamazine is a cream that removes bacteria from wounds. After the initial burn management stage, victims can start using it to clean their burns and improve the healing process. Daily Face Burn Management: The face is one of the body’s most sensitive parts, and following the proper face management techniques during burns can improve the cosmetic outlook. Victims of face burns should wash their face with dilute chlorhexidine solution twice a day as it aids in wound healing. Using the undiluted solution will stop the healing process and worsen the wound. Victims need to ensure their faces are entirely relaxed during sleep without any pressure applied to them. They also need to ensure that their head is not wholly laid flat, so using two pillows to elevate the face will provide sufficient relief during sleep.
  • Pruritis: Post-burn pruritus occurs during the healing stage and is quite common. Victims must massage their face burns with aloe vera to get immediate relief from itching, as itching can worsen the burn. Taking antihistamines can calm things down a bit.

How Long Until My Burn Injury Heals?

The burns should heal in three weeks; if they do not recover, it is best to contact a plastic surgeon to examine the wounds. Use moisturizers to avoid dry, scaly scales, and apply sunblock when going out for at least six months to protect the skin from the sun.

Why Trust Us With Your Burn Claim?

Ehline Law is a personal injury law firm on a mission to protect the rights of Americans. Michael Ehline, Founder of Ehline Law, was a former US Marine trial lawyer serving the country.

After an honorable discharge, Ehline served the United States citizens once more through his private legal practice. Compassion and care are at the core of Ehline Law, which is why we have had phenomenal success, with over 3,000 clients recovering over $150 million in compensation.

Our Los Angeles burn injury lawyers have the right experience to assess your case, determine your claims, collect evidence to prove negligence and ensure swift recovery so that you don’t have to shoulder medical costs due to someone else’s negligence.

Where Can I Get Free Legal Advice From A Burn Injury Lawyer Near Me?

Ehline Law has over 15 law offices across California, servicing areas like Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, and nearby cities. If you or your loved one has gotten burn injuries due to someone else’s fault, contact us at (213) 596-9642 and get a free consultation today without any legal obligations to continue!

Our Los Angeles burn injury lawyers will assess your case and give you free legal advice to help you move forward. We also work on a no-win, no-fee basis, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case. Call us now for more information, or visit any of our prestigious law offices for more details.

Continue reading

Can Family Sue? CA Vagrant Throws Old Woman Into Oncoming Train

Can Family Sue? CA Vagrant Throws Old Woman Into Oncoming Train

Written by MichaelEhline on . Posted in Train Accidents Blog.

The answer is maybe, and an actual train accident attorney in California will explain why. The family of 74-year-old Corazon Dandan, who tragically lost her life after a homeless man pushed a 74-year-old woman into a Millbrae bound train. This was at a downtown San Francisco station, and this article is for the family who might be exploring their legal options, maybe even against BART Police.

It appears evident that safety concerns related to dangerous vagrants at train stations, particularly by the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), have been an ongoing issue. When a woman dies like this, can the family hold the train company accountable for the homicide?

What about suing the Powell Street Station BART system? At the outset, the transient will likely be charged with criminal elder abuse, assuming he is booked at all. Knowing Gavin Newsom and his prosecutors, San Francisco County Jail has probably already released this killer.

And you can’t sue a vagrant with no money, right? So that leaves the survivor’s representative to sue for the killing, but who? Here are your options to begin the investigation: the train company, government agencies, or someone responsible for security. So the answer is you may be able to sue someone over the murder, says California train accident attorney Michael Ehline.

In cases of wrongful death, certain key elements must be established: 

  • Duty of Care: BART investigators had a duty to ensure the safety of its passengers, including maintaining a secure environment at its stations.
  • Breach of Duty: The presence of a dangerous vagrant who managed to push Dandan onto the tracks could be seen as a breach of this duty.
  • Causation: The breach must have directly led to the injury and subsequent death of Dandan.
  • Damages: The family must show the quantifiable impact of Dandan’s death, such as emotional distress, medical expenses, and loss of income.

“With a proven track record, Ehline Law Firm has secured millions for families of wrongful death train accident victims,” says Michael Ehline, the founder. “We understand the pain and suffering that comes from losing a loved one and are dedicated to holding negligent entities accountable.”

Element

Duty of Care

The train company had an obligation to ensure a safe environment for its passengers. Breach of Duty The breach could involve inadequate security measures to prevent unauthorized access by dangerous individuals.

Causation

There must be a direct link between the train company’s breach of duty and the fatal incident.

Damages Dandan’s family can claim financial losses, emotional suffering, and punitive damages.

Legal precedents for suing a train company in wrongful death cases involving third-party actions often revolve around foreseeability and duty of care. Train companies, much like authorities, carry the legal obligation of ensuring passenger safety. This duty entails taking reasonable measures to prevent foreseeable harm, even if such harm comes from third parties, such as vagrants or criminals. 

Case Law

A key precedent in this area is the case of Weirum v. RKO General, Inc. (1975), where the California Supreme Court held that a radio station could be held liable for the wrongful death of a motorist caused by a reckless driver incited by a radio contest. The court underscored the foreseeability of harm and the duty to avoid creating unreasonable risks. 

In Lopez v. Southern California Rapid Transit District (1985), the California Supreme Court ruled a public transit authority could be liable for injuries from third-party criminal acts. The court emphasized the role of foreseeability and the obligation to maintain a safe passenger environment. 

Another significant case is Delta Airlines, Inc. v. August (1981), in which the U.S. Supreme Court discussed an airline’s responsibility to protect passengers from foreseeable harm, including third-party actions. Although this case involved an airline, duty of care and foreseeability principles are also highly relevant to train companies. 

Unforeseeable?

Train companies might present several defenses in wrongful death cases involving third-party actions. One common defense is the lack of foreseeability, arguing that the criminal act was unpredictable and, therefore, couldn’t have been reasonably prevented. Another defense is contributory negligence, where the company claims that the victim’s actions contributed to the incident. 

Train companies might invoke the defense of an intervening cause, contending that the third party’s criminal act was an independent, unforeseeable event that breaks the chain of causation, thereby absolving the company of liability. They may point to compliance with industry standards and regulations as proof of reasonable measures to ensure passenger safety. 

Ultimately, the success of a wrongful death claim involving third-party actions hinges on specifics. This includes the foreseeability of the harm, the measures the company took to prevent such damage, and the legal arguments from both sides.

What Defenses Are Available to Train Companies in Injury Cases?

BART may rely on several defenses to mitigate its liability. For one thing, police have no duty to protect individuals, so it is doubtful suing the police would work. The other potential defendants could argue the unforeseeability of Belmont’s actions, claiming that erratic behavior is challenging to stop despite reasonable security measures. Additionally, BART might assert that they had protocols like surveillance and station patrols to prevent such tragedies. 

Contributory or Comparative Negligence

  • Contributory Negligence: In some areas, if a plaintiff is even slightly at fault for their injuries, they might not be able to recover any damages.
  • Comparative Negligence: In other jurisdictions, a plaintiff’s compensation may be reduced according to their percentage of fault.

There are two types: 

Pure Comparative Negligence: Under this rule, such as in California, a plaintiff can recover damages even if they are 99% at fault, but their percentage of fault will reduce their recovery.

  • Modified Comparative Negligence: In this case, a plaintiff can only recover if they are less than 50% or 51% at fault, depending on the state.

Assumption of Risk

The defense might argue that the plaintiff voluntarily assumed known risks associated with being in a dangerous area filled with homeless individuals. For example, if someone crosses a railroad track with clear warnings, the train company might claim the person assumed the risk. 

Preemption by Federal Law

Train companies could argue that federal regulations, like those under the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA), preempt state laws, shielding them from liability if they comply with federal standards. 

Statute of Limitations

The defense might assert that the plaintiff’s claim is time-barred if not filed within the legal timeframe allowed for these cases. 

Lack of Causation

The train company could argue that another factor caused the plaintiff’s injuries, not its actions or negligence. 

Compliance with Regulations

Demonstrating compliance with safety regulations and standards can be a defense against negligence claims by the train company. 

Sovereign Immunity

If the train company operates under government authority, it might invoke sovereign immunity, thus barring certain types of lawsuits unless the government consents. 

Act of God

The train company might claim that an unavoidable natural event, like an earthquake or severe weather, caused the injury, which they could not have reasonably anticipated or prevented. 

Third-Party Fault

The company could argue that a third party, such as another vehicle driver or the manufacturer of train parts, was responsible for the plaintiff’s injuries. 

Employee’s Scope of Employment

If an employee’s actions caused the injury, the train company might argue that the employee acted outside their employment scope.

Passenger Misconduct

The train company could claim that the plaintiffs’ misconduct, such as ignoring safety warnings or engaging in risky behavior, led to their injuries. Here, the decedent’s nephew Alvin Dandan told police she was returning home from a shift as a telephone operator at the Parc 55 hotel. Alvin Dandan is a doctor in St. Louis and credits his aunt with helping him through medical school. 

Dandan’s tragic death underscores the persistent issues in California. While the homelessness crisis is a longstanding issue the state struggles to address— 28 percent of the nation’s homeless reside here—the crime problem should be more manageable. 

Belmont, Dandan’s alleged murderer, was a turnstile jumper. He did not have a ticket to ride BART and should not have been on the platform path in the first place. Law-abiding individuals typically don’t jump turnstiles; those with unlawful behavior usually do. 

In a broader sense, under California’s justice system and punishment, criminals are considered victims, and district attorneys are urged to show compassion rather than enforce the law. If you know someone who died as the result of illegal immigration assaults, homeless criminals, or another issue, you know California needs scrutiny.

Holding the California Leviathan Accountable

Police interviewed witnesses and reviewed the surveillance video last Tuesday. We hope to see that footage soon. Understanding the various defenses available to train companies that night is crucial as Dandan’s family navigates a wrongful death lawsuit.

Seeking legal action could bring about some measure of justice and help prevent similar tragedies. We hope the arrested individual pays for their crime if they are guilty. We encourage the family to investigate the head-on collision death and help give California an education in the process.

Citations:

Hunter Biden Influence Peddling

Hunter Biden Could Be Jailed after Failing to Register as Foreign Agent

Written by MichaelEhline on . Posted in Government Tort Blog.

Legal Experts Think President Behind Influence Peddling Scheme

Ultimate Guide to Understanding Influence Peddling

Having volunteered time lobbying for cruise ship victims, Ehline Law has always followed lobbying laws as an adjunct to our law practice. Here is an interesting story for our readers. According to a recent report, Hunter Biden could be jailed after failing to register as a foreign agent. Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) 1938, Biden must register as a foreign agent rather than a lobbyist for domestic interests, as reports indicate his business dealings in China, Ukraine, and other countries.

This Ehline Law blog will cover the Hunter Biden story that has made its way to the White House.

Biden Could Face Jail Time for Overseas Business Dealings

The investigations first began in 2018 but caught fuel when authorities retrieved copies of Biden’s laptop hard drive, which revealed documents and audio clips, raising serious red flags for his role beyond serving domestic interests.

Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act 1938, those working for a foreign principal (including influential private interests and foreign companies) must register with the government. However, those violating the law under the 1938 Act may face up to five years of jail time and a $250,000 fine.

Inquiry into Burisma: Biden Puts Pressure on Ukraine

The Justice Department is currently inquiring about Hunter Biden’s taxes and foreign business dealings. While Biden was on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy holding company for a group of energy exploration and production companies, he introduced Burisma’s top executive to his father, President Joe Biden. The latter, at the time, was the United States Vice President.

Later, evidence revealed that the US vice president at the time pressured Ukraine into removing someone investigating the holding company, a move that raises questions about the type of business deals Hunter Biden was carrying out.

Audio Clips Revealing Discussions with CEFC China Energy

Buried in Biden’s laptop, the federal investigation team found a 47-minute audio clip of Hunter Biden discussing his relationship with the top executive of CEFC, a Chinese conglomerate company. The audio clip also revealed a $1 million retainer contract with Biden for matters related to US law.

The company was intimately involved in shaping the US policy towards China when Joe Biden was the vice president of the United States. According to government records, over 14 months, Hunter Biden and his uncle received over $4.8 million for agreeing to represent Patrick Ho, a CEFC official.

In 2017, another agreement with the CEFC took place that stated Hunter would receive a one-time payment of $500,000 while James Biden would receive $65,000 monthly, another dent in the Biden story.

Biden’s Meetings with Foreign Officials

Further records from Biden’s laptop showed his meetings with foreign officials. One such meeting with Crown Prince Alexander Karadordevic of Yugoslavia revealed that the prince asked Hunter to put in a good word with Joe Biden.

Craig Engle, a FARA expert, shared his views on the incident, stating that if Hunter relayed the foreign official’s message requesting government assistance from the US, it would constitute a FARA registrable event. Craig Engle says that FARA has become a part of the investigation given the nature of the client and work and Hunter’s relationship with Joe Biden.

These are just some of the few business dealings reported by the Washington Examiner and many others, raising serious concerns that Biden may be cashing in on his father’s political stature, leading to a FARA-registrable event.

Investigation into Biden’s Finances Reaches a “Critical Stage”

Experts believe Biden may face serious jail time in federal prison and penalties for failing to comply with FARA rules on conducting business transactions overseas.

According to George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley, the case was already substantial, but the recent disclosures of additional foreign contacts further bolstered the case against Hunter Biden.

Besides facing the consequences under the FARA Act, Biden may also face scrutiny over tax avoidance and not disclosing the truth about his illegal firearm purchase.

“Joe Biden Could Be the Receipt of the Funds” and Criminally Liable – Turley

Law Professor Turley also spoke about the influence-peddling schemes that directly reference Joe Biden as he could also be the receipt of the funds.

In June 2022, Sinopec, a Chinese oil and gas enterprise based in Beijing, purchased 950,000 barrels of American Oil during the Biden administration. Hunter was also tied to the deal, one of the additional foreign contacts found during the investigations.

The FBI found text messages on Biden’s Laptop that indicated that Joe Biden was a beneficiary of the funds received by Hunter from his overseas business deals. The evidence revealed that Hunter was paying for his father’s expenses while in office during the Obama administration.

The laptop contained emails dated June 2010 with attachments labeled as “JRB Bills,” which are the initials of the current President, Joseph Robinette Biden.

According to the attachments, some of the expenses included:

  • $1,239 – Air conditioner repair
  • $1,475 – Labor charges for a painter
  • $2,600 – Stone wall repair.

Tony Bobulinski, Hunter’s former business partner, gave an interview on Fox News stating the details of the deal between Hunter and CEFC and shed light on the email sent by James Gilliar, another partner in the venture, regarding the percentage splits. It included a 10% share for Joe Biden, too.

In his new book, Peter Schweizer, an American political consultant, illustrates how the Hunter Biden Story became a Joe Biden story. He explains that Joe Biden is a planet, and the moons of the family, Hunter Biden, and others revolve around it.

Unequal Application of Justice in the Land of the Free

The evidence in the Hunter Biden story suggests not only Hunter Biden’s involvement with foreign corporations but also a request for US government assistance to foreign principals.

Ron Johnson, a Republican senator, expressed his views on FARA, stating it has been a challenging law to prosecute, historically, regarding Democrats and the Elites of this country. Some legal experts are skeptical that the Department of Justice will play its role in ensuring swift and equal application of justice in the country. Many believe Hunter will face watered-down charges and a plea agreement that could lead to sealing records, denying Americans the truth, and the deep-rootedness of Biden family corruption.

At Ehline Law, our personal injury attorneys dedicate their lives to ensuring swift justice for injured victims across California. If you suffer injuries due to someone else’s fault, you need a reputable and skilled attorney to represent you and help recover compensation.

Whether it is motorcyclists or the justice system in the country, there is a particular bias everywhere that can hinder seeking justice. However, our attorneys are ready to stand by your side and fight for your rights. Contact us at (833) LETS-SUE for a free consultation with our legal experts on your case.

Sue Boeing over Erased Security Footage?

Can You Sue Boeing over Erased Security Footage?

Written by MichaelEhline on . Posted in Piloting and Aviation Accident Blog.

I am Michael Ehline, a Los Angeles and Texas airplane accident attorney. I have helped aviation victims for almost two decades, from falling luggage to helicopter crashes. I have represented thousands of injury victims since 2005 and have lobbied Congress for stronger transportation safety regulations. Can you imagine being aboard, flying with 400-600 Knott winds in your face, sitting in a seat, freezing to death? Since an incident involving an Alaska Airlines flight and a Boeing airplane departing from Portland, questions have been flying around faster than a jumbo jet at cruising speed. 

In this case, a door panel blew out while the jet flew at 16,000 feet on January 5, 2023. Here, whistleblower John Barnett testified about his employer, Boeing, and the poor airworthiness of the planes he worked on. The following day, he was found dead in his truck after he failed to show up for the second part of his testimony. 

The people on that plane suffered severe emotional distress that will stay with them for life. How the aircraft was ever declared safe for takeoff remains a mystery and has fostered an environment of intense interest in the travel community. They are lucky the pilots made it back to Portland International Airport alive.

Security Camera Footage, Repairs, Suicide?

In recent weeks, a now-dead whistleblower, John Barnett, has blown the doors off of what appears to be a vast cover-up, placing cost-cutting and inclusiveness over airline passenger safety. His comments were about a Boeing Manufacturing plant in Charleston. This particular Alaska Airlines plane was there in September last year and delivered in October. This is also where the Alaska plane (Alaska Airlines Flight 1282) was built. 

Missing Bolts?

In that case, it appears Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems, a private contractor, did rivet repairs. Four bolts were missing from the blowout panel/fuselage, which caused the panel to blow out. Based on its preliminary report, the head NTSB official is trying to find the person who removed and replaced the door panel, as the security footage was taped over.

“After retiring in 2019, Barnett accused Boeing, his employer of 32 years, of cutting corners and using sub-standard parts to build planes. He claimed to have reported this to management and been ignored, though Boeing has denied this.” – Newsweek.

Warned Media He Would Not Kill Himself

On March 9, 2024, he said he was not “suicidal,” then he allegedly killed himself.

Barnett said the company had not taken action, spurring him to go public out of concern for people’s safety. His lawyers are investigating, saying there is no way this is a suicide.

“We need more information about what happened to John,” said attorneys Robert Turkewitz and Brian Knowles. The security camera footage of work done to an Alaska Airlines plane, a Boeing 737 Max 9, has gone missing, raising suspicions of foul play. Whether there is a lawsuit for spoliation of evidence depends. However, no matter where the accident occurred, Boeing can be sued for negligence. It depends partly on the terms and services of the passenger ticket, including a jurisdiction and venue clause to sue. Let’s break it down. 

National Transportation Safety Board & Boeing’s Side

In their defense, Boeing told ABC News it would support the NTSB’s investigation, saying, “Transparently and proactively, we have supported all regulatory inquiries into this accident.” “We have worked hard to honor the rules about releasing investigative information in an environment of intense interest from our employees, customers, and other stakeholders, and we will continue our efforts to do so.”

“During a routine Alaska Airlines flight earlier this year, a Boeing plane’s door blew out mid-flight. Since that unnerving event, federal investigators have been tirelessly scrutinizing Boeing’s production process, seeking insight into what exactly went wrong.”

However, National Transportation Safety Board Chair Jennifer Homendy said her investigation has been hindered by Boeing’s lack of ‘essential’ documentation to understand the door malfunction’s nexus.

Boeing Security Footage of 737 Max Door Work Overwritten: NTSB

The report footage was ERASED. The National Transportation Safety Board’s letter to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation proclaims the missing footage is hampering the accident investigation. “To date, we still do not know who performed the work to open, reinstall, and close the door plug on the accident aircraft,” according to the NTSB. It has been unable to interview the door crew manager at the Renton, Washington facility. He remains on medical leave. The agency stressed it is not trying to punish the worker(s).

Boeing manufactures aircraft subject to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. The FAA has specific documentation and record-keeping rules, but these typically concern aircraft design, manufacture, and maintenance of the aircraft. We could find no regulations about recording and saving repair work footage.

Are you feeling confused? Feeling frustrated? Let’s investigate this surprising development further and see if a lawsuit against Boeing is viable. 

Boeing/United Airlines Problem

From allegations of poor flight controls and cutting corners, the NTSB has a lot on its hand with Boeing and now United. Scott Kirby, CEO of United Airlines, threatened to trim Boeing orders since its fleet of MAX 9 aircraft was grounded. This came after the Alaska Airlines door blowout.

Jennifer Homendy, chair of the NTSB, said a midair door blowout like the Boeing 737 MAX 9 fiasco” “can happen again.” She inferred there is a “problem with the process” of aircraft production.

Boeing Generally In Trouble?

As we delve into the meat of the issue, some spotlighted facts you ought to convenience yourself with include: 

Boeing released hundreds of pages of emails and internal communications to the Federal Aviation Administration concerning Boeing’s 737 Max jetliner. Jennifer Homendy is culling its safety culture and records spanning numerous years. Boeing initially delayed its response but finally disclosed other records for scrutiny.

Boeing has assured cooperation with the NTSB investigation, even if formal requests for such corrective actions have not been issued. 

Boeing Employees and Regulators

If need be, Boeing can reject NTSB findings– and demand further investigation or corrective actions. Some Boeing employees cast a doubtful shadow on the design of the Max and its simulator software. Part of Boeing’s decision-making process may involve automated processing. This is where machine learning and artificial intelligence come into play to refine its services.

Boeing’s woes also hit carriers like Southwest Airlines, which exclusively flies Boeing 737s. Southwest lowered its 2024 capacity growth projection as a result. Go deeper: Boeing 737 Max production plagued by numerous problems, FAA audit finds

Can You Sue for Erasing – Civilly?

Although we found nothing about criminal/federal regulations, it could be prudent not to maintain recorded footage. A court could also consider it the destruction of evidence. You probably can’t sue Boeing for overwriting tapes, but discovery sanctions may be at play when you sue. 

Can You Get Money for Spoliation?

The answer to the question, “Can I sue Boeing for spoliation of evidence over-erased security footage?” depends. Spoliation of evidence is a crucial concept in legal proceedings. It involves intentional, negligent, or accidental withholding, hiding, altering, or destroying evidence relevant to a legal proceeding. 

The opposing party’s intentional or negligent destruction or alteration of evidence could reveal details crucial to your case. Evidence tampering is often referred to as ‘spoliation of evidence.’  

According to American Bar Association Rule 3.4 and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, destroying, altering, or concealing a document or other material relevant to a matter can lead to sanctions and severe professional consequences for the attorney involved. Notice they don’t say you can sue. For sure, in California, you’d have no case.

“Spoliation was a cause of action to sue in addition to the underlying action. Originally, spoliation damages were awarded by a jury in the case in chief, whereas modernly, discovery sanctions are awarded by a judge. Most California plaintiff’s lawyers hate that the California Supreme Court eliminated our ability to sue for a once-popular cause of action called “spoliation.” It was considered a tort to spoil or “destroy” evidence.” (Source Spoliation, Ehline Law.)

Are you so, taking Boeing to court for destruction of evidence? In theory, yes, it’s possible. But you’ll need to be armed with a thorough understanding of the doctrine in your state, solid evidence, and an experienced legal team to stand a chance.

Other Legal Grounds Grounds?

  • Products Liability: This law allows some plaintiffs to sue a manufacturer if a product causes injury or damage due to design flaws, manufacturing defects, or false advertising. Here, Alask and passengers could file.
  • Ordinary Negligence: You could sue if Boeing or Alaska Airline’s lack of reasonable care caused harm. If they failed to reasonably protect crucial security footage, which is part of their policy, perhaps a claim exists. Alaska should have noticed missing rivets before taking off, and that isn’t very careful if so. 
  • Breach of warranty: If a company violates its guarantee about the safety or function of a product, you may sue it under breach of warranty laws. Passengers and Alaska must prove that the breach directly led to harm.

The investigation into Boeing encompasses so many facets. 

  • Is Boeing expected to retain all forms of documentation and footage? What about evidence not directly related to the operation of the airplanes?
  • What legal protections exist for passengers where safety is compromised? 

Damages

The passengers and Alaska have claims against Boeing. They would be entitled to economic losses and general damages. If Boeing knowingly destroyed or overwrote security footage, it could face legal consequences.

What About Wrongful Death of Whistleblower?

For now, it’s just a conspiracy theory that Boeing or an assassin took out the whistleblower here. Although suspicious, the survivors must show more than just a theory. A Boeing spokesperson sent condolences to the family.

Panel Blowout Evidence

While there may not be specific legal requirements for Boeing to retain security footage, there could be ethical or industry best practice standards encouraging retention. Failure to adhere could potentially damage Boeing’s reputation, which could result in other negative consequences. Standards are important, and we hope Boeing acts transparently and proactively. Any release of investigative information is vital to show Boeing is acting in good faith.

Conclusion

For sure, now there is an active case, there are rules about the release of public and confidential information. Unless it can be proven to have been done to conceal evidence, the taped-over security footage is probably not unlawful. This case highlights the complex interplay between corporate transparency, liability, and passenger safety. This case could be a game-changer in understanding passenger rights, corporate responsibility, and air travel. We’ll keep you in the loop as updates occur. Call (213) 596-9642 to learn if you have a case.

Citations:

  • Newsweek
  • Business Insider