Deadly Bus Crash on New York State Thruway Kills 14 Passengers & Seriously Injures the Other 18 Passengers and the Bus Driver

A tour bus heading southbound on the New York State Thruway (Interstate 95) heading to Chinatown in Manhattan from the Mohegan Sun Casino in Uncasville, Connecticut, crashed into a pole (sign post), and overturned on Interstate 95 on Saturday March 12, 2011 at approximately 5:30 a.m. The accident occurred on a portion of the NYS Thruway, which is also known as the New England Thruway, and is at or near the border of Westchester County and Bronx County in New York City.

It is reported that a truck may have also been involved in the crash, and the New York State Police apparently located that truck. Reportedly, the truck was traveling in the left lane, and the bus was traveling in the center lane when the two vehicles came into contact with each other. It is reported that the bus swerved to the right, and crashed into a guardrail, and then flipped over and struck the sign post pole, which sliced the bus in half.

Police are questioning the tractor trailer driver who never stopped, but allegedly cut off the bus. The New York State Police Department is heading the investigation, and the US National Transportation Safety Board will also conduct an investigation into the fatal crash.

Fourteen passengers were killed in the crash, and the other 18 passengers and the bus driver were seriously injured. The injured were taken to Jacobi Medical Center and St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx.

The owner of the bus is reported to be World Wide Travel, a company located in Brooklyn, in New York City.

The loss of 14 passengers, as well as the serious injuries sustained by the other passengers and the bus driver is a terrible consequence of this horrific accident. We want to express our sympathy to the families of the passengers who lost their lives, and to the passengers and driver who were seriously injured.

As personal injury lawyers, many legal issues come to mind, including:

1 Will the total liability insurance available for the injured passengers, and the families of the deceased passengers be sufficient to adequately compensate them financially?

2 Will Underinsured Motorist coverage be available to supplement the liability insurance available for the injured passengers, and for the families of the deceased passengers?

3 Will claims need to be filed with MVAIC (Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation)?

4 Will the no-fault insurance coverage available from the passengers’ personal automobile insurance, as well as the from the policy insuring the bus be sufficient to pay the hospital and medical bills, as well as lost earnings of the injured passengers, and for the passenger who received hospital treatment before succumbing to the injuries sustained in the crash?

5 Will the driver of the truck (tractor/trailer) or the driver of the bus, or both, be determined to be at fault in causing the collision?

6 Is New York State or any NYS Agency partially at fault in causing this collision or exacerbating the injuries sustained, due to any possible defect in the design of the road at the accident location?

Michael W. Goldstein, Esq. has been practicing New York personal injury law since 1979, including both serious injuries, and accidental injuries causing death. If you have been seriously injured due to an accident, and would like to discuss your case with a New York Accident Lawyer, or if a close relative of yours died as a result of an accident, call our office for a free confidential consultation, either by phone or in person, or complete our questionnaire.

We aggressively represent our clients in order to maximize the monetary compensation for the injuries sustained, or for the tragic loss of a loved one, resulting from a motor vehicle crash, or other accident caused by a defendant’s negligence or other culpable conduct.

Tort Reform

Is “Tort Reform” something we need as a society, or is it just a concept derived by politicians to save big businesses, as well as insurance companies, cities, states and other municipalities from the expense of fairly compensating accident victims for injuries caused by a defendant’s negligence?

OUR OPINION

“Tort Reform” is a politically correct label for the concept of depriving accident victims of monetary compensation for their injuries caused by dangerous conditions, or by a defendant’s negligence. The proponents of “tort reform” argue that accident victims are not entitled to be compensated for their injuries, either because they must have caused their own accidents, or because they should be more careful navigating through the maze of hazardous conditions that we may face in our daily lives.

We believe that defendants must take responsibility for the hazards that they create or fail to repair, such as broken sidewalks, improperly maintained apartment buildings, wet floors that were mopped by an employee who left no warning signs, slippery supermarket floors caused by employees carrying or dragging a leaking bag of garbage, hidden staircases or open cellar doors without warning signs, inadequate lighting, dangerous products lacking readily available safety devices, and other preventable hazards that we may face because the responsible person or business was careless, negligent or simply didn’t bother to take proper precautions to protect us from dangerous conditions on their premises.

We strongly disagree with the “tort reform”advocates’ argument that people should be expected to accept those dangers as normal, and that in the event of serious injury, they should not be compensated.

If our system of justice does not hold defendants accountable for negligent conduct that causes serious injuries, there will be little incentive for landlords, store owners, manufacturers, etc. to maintain high levels of safety, which we all deserve.

Monetary Limits on Non-Monetary Damages (including pain & suffering)

Many politicians, large corporations and insurance companies are pushing the public to accept Monetary Limits on Non-Monetary Damages. If enacted, this would mean that when someone is seriously injured due to a defective product, or due to the negligence of a property owner, store, municipality, etc., the accident victim would be entitled to be reimbursed for his or her medical and hospital expenses and lost wages, but would have an artificial limit set on the money damages he or she could possible receive for the non-monetary damages, including pain, suffering, loss of quality of life, and all the other adverse changes in life that the accident caused.

OUR OPINION

It seems to us that this concept is based on the ill founded belief that accidents are just a cost of doing business for corporations, municipalities, etc., and that injuries can simply be measured in medical bills and lost salary. For example, if a young man or woman who earns $50,000 per year and is an avid participant in sports is seriously injured and confined to a wheelchair for life, the proponents of monetary limits on non-monetary damages would agree that as long as the victim receives reimbursement for medical and hospital expenses, including the cost of the wheelchair, and the lost salary of $50,000 per year (adjusted for inflation), the only additional compensation should be the maximum of the pre-set cap of perhaps $250,000 for pain suffering and loss of quality of the rest of his or her life. (It should be noted that under this theory, if the same person was a professional baseball player, the lost earnings component of monetary damages would be enormous.)

The loss of the accident victim’s active life style, loss of personal enjoyment from participating in recreational sports, and the confinement to a wheelchair, as well as permanent pain, suffering, inability to ever walk again, will all be compensated by the cost of the wheelchair plus the predetermined cap on non-economic damages. Maybe as plaintiff’s attorneys, we are biased in favor of innocent accident victims, but we don’t think that $250,000 is a fair compensation for such a tragic loss.