The victim was doing everything right. He was on the job and was wearing a bright yellow safety vest. But the same cannot be said of the driver that caused the car accident. The 24-year old female was driving drunk and failed at least two sobriety tests administered at the crash scene. This would have been bad enough on its own, but it gets worse. Witnesses say she stopped briefly to check on the man, then got back in her car and drove away. She also had her young daughter in the car with her while she was driving drunk. When police found her, she gave them a false identity for herself and her child. All of this occurred while she should not have been driving at all because her license had been suspended.

All of these actions add up to a long list of charges including not stopping after a fatal accident, driving while intoxicated, driving with a minor in the car while intoxicated, giving a false identity and driving with a suspended license. Most people are familiar with the majority of these charges. But one may be a little more unknown – driving drunk with someone under the age of 18 in the car.

According to Indiana drunk driving laws, having a minor in the car with you while you are driving drunk raises the severity of the charge. A first-time offender may be charged with a misdemeanor and the minimum amount of jail time is five days or 180 hours of community service. If a minor was in the car, the charge is automatically upgraded to a class-D felony, and the minimum jail time jumps to 10 days or 360 hours of community service.

Somehow, a 14-year-old boy obtained the keys to a car and took a 13-year-old and 12-year-old for a joyride around 1:00 a.m. A combination of inexperienced driving, a slippery road, and perhaps speed caused the driver to lose control of the car. It slid off the road, rolled over, and landed in a deep ditch. The 12-year-old passenger was killed. The driver and other passenger had some broken bones, but no life-threatening injuries. No one in the car was wearing a seatbelt at the time of the crash.

The parents of the deceased victim have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the driver, both to request damages and to find out what really happened that night. Because the investigation is still open, the victim’s parents do not have access to any police information about the car accident. Their attorney states, “No one really knows the truth. There’s so many different stories about what happened that evening.” Once a lawsuit is filed, witnesses can be called to testify as to how the 14-year-old ended up with the keys to a car and what happened in the moments leading up to the crash.

While no charges have been filed against the driver or the owner of the car, it is possible that both may be charged when the investigation is complete. The driver was operating a car without a valid license, and if speeding was a factor, that could lead to another charge. If it is discovered that the owner of the car knowingly gave the keys to an unlicensed driver, he could be charged with “permitting a violation” under an Indiana state statute.

In a recent case, a jury realized the seriousness of this type of situation and awarded a child’s family $78 million in a medical malpractice case stemming from problems that started at birth. Three years ago, a woman went to the hospital because of complications with her pregnancy. The obstetrician on duty did an ultrasound and concluded that the baby had died. Almost an hour and a half later, an emergency cesarean section delivery was performed and the baby was alive. Unfortunately, the delay in the birth left the newborn with brain damage. The three-year-old has spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy.

After hearing the facts of the case from both sides, the jury decided that the hospital, rather than the attending physicians, was at fault. Testimony brought to light the fact that the ultrasound equipment provided to the doctor by the hospital was old and had not been maintained in the last ten years. Also, there was no ultrasound technician available to say the results had been misread because it was a Sunday. Rather, the technician had to be contacted at home and told to come in. It was most likely these two issues that caused the jury to place the blame on the hospital.

The $78 million medical malpractice award seems very large, but it covers a wide range of issues. The child will require a lifetime of special medical care and will most likely never be able to work to support himself. The award also takes into account the pain and suffering the child has endured and will continue to endure. Of the entire amount, $1.5 million was awarded to the child’s mother for her emotional distress. The rest of the award will be used only to pay for the child’s ongoing medical expenses and care.

A few Kentucky areas, including Louisville, Jefferson County, and Covington have passed local ordinances that prohibit anyone from being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. These ordinances cover discrimination in the workplace as well as housing and public accommodations. The only statewide protection was tested and upheld recently in Louisville, Kentucky.

In 2008, the Governor of Kentucky, Steve Beshear, signed an executive order that prohibits all state agencies from discriminating against current or potential employees because of their sexual orientation. Without this order, Governor Beshear stated “a gay person could be fired simply for being gay. A person should be hired or dismissed on the basis of whether they can do the job. Experience, qualifications, talent and performance are what matter."

This executive order was put to the test when a Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services employee claimed he was terminated in 2009 because he was gay. According to the lawsuit, numerous cabinet employees were abusing email and internet use, but this worker was singled out because of his sexual orientation. The worker’s lawyer showed that he had sent emails that included gay slang, which was the cause for his termination. A female co-worker, on the other hand, had sent emails that included photos of almost completely nude men to other people in the cabinet, but she kept her job.

The cabinet defended this action, saying the decision to fire the male worker was made while he was still in his probationary period, whereas the female worker’s case wasn’t finalized until after she had become a full-time employee. Because of this change in status, she was protected by additional rights given to permanent employees. The fired worker’s lawyer had evidence showing that his case had been purposely rushed through in order to get him fired before he became a permanent employee. This included an email marked “high importance” from his supervisor requesting information immediately “because the state would like to be able to terminate the employee while in his probation period.” This same action was not taken against the female employee who had sent the nude pictures.

The 13-year-old was killed in 2009 in a single-car accident. The wreck occurred after 10 youths had gone on a camping trip with Derek Coulter, their youth minister from Big Springs Assembly of God. At first Mr. Coulter stated that he was driving with the victim and another passenger in his SUV when he swerved to hit a deer and ran off the road. Later, another teen passenger told authorities that Mr. Coulter had allowed the victim to the driver the SUV, and he caused the accident when he lost control of the vehicle and crossed the road. Mr. Coulter then recanted his initial story, leaving the victim’s loved ones to wonder if anything he told them about that day was true.

The boy’s family filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Kentucky requesting compensation for the death of their son from Mr. Coulter and the church. Church officials denied any responsibility, saying it was not a church function and that Mr. Coulter was not acting as an employee when the car accident occurred because it was his day off. The plaintiff’s attorney argued that the church was liable because every person who attended the camping trip was a church member, Mr. Coulter referred to it as church event during the victim’s funeral, and the kids were told they were not allowed to swear on the trip because it was a church outing. Also, statements showed that Mr. Coulter had allowed several other teens to drive his car in the church parking lot on various occasions, so the church should have known it was occurring and intervened.

The jury agreed with the plaintiff and awarded the estate $2.15 million. Part of this amount will be reduced because the jury found that 20 percent of the fault went to the victim because he knew he shouldn’t have driven the car but did it anyway. Mr. Coulter’s portion, which is about half of it, may never be awarded because he has no way to pay. The church carries insurance of at least $1 million, so the estate should receive at least part of the award, unless the church appeals the decision.

The attorney did not think this was fair, so he filed an age discrimination claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC protects various groups from discrimination based on religion, gender, race, origin and age. The attorney then filed a retaliation claim because his annual bonus dropped by two-thirds after he had contacted the EEOC. A lawsuit was filed by the EEOC on his behalf in January 2010. The lawsuit sought both compensatory and punitive damages for the attorney and also asked that the firm be prohibited from "engaging in any employment practices which discriminate on the basis of age."

In April 2012, Kelley Drye & Warren settled the lawsuit against them for over $500,000. Additionally, they will provide training sessions on age discrimination for those involved in making employment decisions and they will inform the EEOC of any complaints of age discrimination they receive. When the law firm said they had voluntarily dropped the discriminatory policy after the lawsuit was filed in 2010, the EEOC defended their pursuit of the claim, saying many law firms still have these policies and ""We don't think attorneys should be forced to leave their chosen profession simply because they reach some arbitrary age if they have the skill and the energy."

Then in 2009, the nursing home contacted Ms. Garrett to tell her that her mother had died. After receiving conflicting stories about how it happened, she looked at the death certificate. It listed the cause of death as several things including heart disease and kidney disease. But when the nursing home administrator was questioned by her, he stated that her mother had choked once again, but this time she did not survive. A disagreement ensued regarding whether or not anyone at the home attempted to help or resuscitate the victim since there was not a signed “do not resuscitate” form on file.

Ms. Garrett ultimately filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the nursing home. The home settled the suit for $35,000, some of which was paid back to the home for her mother’s stay. The settlement amount may seem to be a small amount to receive for the death of one’s parent. But Ms. Garrett says she was not looking for financial compensation and didn’t even want to file a lawsuit in the first place; “I don't want people to lose their jobs because we need the home.” So why did she do it?

“I just want answers” she said, and she did not see any other way to get the information she was looking for. Understandably, when a wrongful death occurs, those who were close to or involved in the situation may not want to share any of their knowledge about what happened for fear of being held responsible or getting someone else in trouble. You can ask as many questions as you like, and they may still refuse to answer. Ms. Garrett had asked for answers and even contacted the state Department of Health, which started an investigation. She still did not know exactly what caused her mother’s death.

In a more recent tragedy, one man was killed and two others were injured in September 2011 when they were struck by lightning while working at a construction site. The two surviving victims remember watching the lightning approach the site and becoming nervous. But they were told to keep working, so they did not take shelter right away. They did finally leave the site, caring more about their safety than their jobs. But it was too late. As they were headed toward shelter, a bolt of lightning struck an 800-foot-tall crane, sending electricity through all three men. The victim who did not survive was hit the hardest because he was holding a metal bucket of concrete in his hands.

The victim’s wife has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against two of the construction companies involved in the project. The suit claims that the companies should have had the victim take shelter because of the dangerous weather that was evident both in the forecast and the lightning that was flashing through the sky. The companies are denying responsibility, saying they cannot control Mother Nature.

One of the companies has responded verbally to the lawsuit saying “We were not cited or found to be at fault by any entity investigating the incident last year, including OSHA." Even if this is true, that still does not mean filing the wrongful death lawsuit is a lost cause. If the case makes it all the way to trial, the judge and maybe a jury will hear the facts from both sides and will draw their own conclusions as to whether or not this tragedy could have been prevented. It is true that no one can control the weather, but it may be determined that there were enough warning signs to warrant bringing the workers off the site and into a safe place to ride out the storm.

Both parents, and probably many others, were surprised when criminal charges were not brought against any of the workers. But the prosecutor stated that while their actions were perhaps reckless or negligent, the workers did not act criminally, and the case would have to be fought in civil court.

In addition to finding out what happened, the parents would also like to have the responsible parties held accountable for their actions and would like to ensure that no others parents suffer through this type of tragedy in the future. Unfortunately, it does not appear they are going to get much help from the State of Indiana.

Shortly after this tragedy, Senator Greg Taylor of Indianapolis presented draft legislation that would require church-run day care centers to meet the same standards as licensed day care centers. Under current Indiana law, licensed day care centers have to meet 192 standards while church day cares only have to meet about 21 standards. Even in-home licensed day care providers have to meet 94 of the standards. Some of the standards that church day cares are not required to meet include staffing ratios and ages and training requirements. But the Senate voted 30-19 against the proposed amendment.

Samuel Cordes, the attorney representing the women, said they are “are losing a significant amount of money just because they are not men. What you're creating is second-class citizens in that workplace." The lawsuit has been filed under the federal law entitled the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA). The EPA was added as an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). This act specifically addresses the issue of equal pay for men and women. It states that unless the employees’ wages are based on a system that rates employees by seniority, merit, or volume of work produced, men and women who hold the same position should receive the same pay. In the case of the YMCA, the employees were rated by a system called the Hayes Methodology, but this test showed the women’s work was at least the same as, or even superior to, their male counterparts who were paid significantly more.

The lawsuit seeks restitution in several forms. It requests that the YMCA be prohibited from practicing pay discrimination in the future. It also asks for financial compensation for the women. All wages that should have been paid to the women over the years if their wages had been equal are being requested, as well as any interest on those wages. Punitive damages that serve to punish the defendant for their illegal acts are also being sought. The women are also asking for their attorneys’ fees to be paid in full.

The man who hit her fled the scene, making the crash a hit-and-run accident. He proceeded to wash his car and even created a one-car accident with it two days later to cover up the evidence. So not only did he not stay to help the child that he hit, he also tried to pretend that he was not at fault by tampering with the evidence.

The victim unfortunately died four days later at Kosair Children’s Hospital in Louisville, Kentucky. Would she have survived if the man who hit her stopped to help instead of running away to hide his guilt? No one will ever know. What is known is that the driver was charged with three class D felonies, reckless homicide, leaving the scene of an injury accident, and tampering with evidence. After being found guilty on all charges by a jury, on March 27, 2012, he was sentenced to five years in prison for each count, making a total of 15 years that he should remain behind bars. Throughout the entire process, the driver never took responsibility for his actions or showed any remorse.

For the family of the victim, it is at least fortunate that the guilty driver was found and justice was done. It is often difficult to locate the driver who caused a hit-and-run accident. How they proceed next is up to them, but if they have filed, or decide to file, a wrongful death lawsuit, they would most likely be awarded financial damages. This money would never replace the child they lost, nor is it meant to, but it may provide assistance in paying the medical bills and funeral costs they incurred. It may also help them to support any surviving children they may have and give them peace of mind financially so they can grieve and hopefully heal.

The reason for the crash is still unclear. According to investigators, the bus, owned by Miller Transportation in Louisville, Kentucky, was in good working order when it left the depot that morning. A bus driver that was following the bus that crashed stated that the other driver was not going above the posted 35-mph speed limit. Videotape from the bus does not show any sort of disruption on the bus that would have caused the driver to divert his attention from the road. Preliminary autopsy results on the bus driver do not indicate any medical condition that could have contributed to the crash, but this possibility has not been ruled out.

A couple other possible causes include the weather and driver distraction. The pavement was wet at the scene of the accident when police arrived, but they are unsure whether or not it was raining at the time of the crash. It is possible the wet pavement caused the bus to slide or that rain made it more difficult for the driver to see where he was going. Distracted driving is another consideration. Although none of this has been proven, the driver could have been drinking his morning coffee or checking his cell phone, taking his eyes off the road just long enough to cause the crash.

One thing that is certain is that none of the children were wearing seatbelts. This is a certainty because seatbelts are not required in school buses by law and the bus they were riding in did not have seatbelts. Some lawsuits have been filed by parents of the victims against the state of Indiana for this reason. They are placing blame on the state for the injuries to their children because the law does not require them to wear seatbelts in school buses. Five of the lawsuits filed so far in this case – including a wrongful death suit filed by the family that lost their daughter – are also holding Miller Transportation responsible because there were no seatbelts available on the bus.

In an effort to protect this segment of society, the Kentucky House of Representatives has introduced and passed HB 250. This bill, if it becomes law, would require a more thorough background check on potential and current nursing home employees. Currently, name-based background checks are run only on prospective employees that would have direct contact with the residents. Under the new bill, fingerprint checks would be done on applicants to determine if they have been convicted of a serious felony and a database search would show any record of previous abuse. Even after being hired, employees would continue to be checked to make sure they had not been convicted of a serious felony after being hired.

The bill includes $4 million worth of state or federal funding that would cover the cost of the equipment and training and the background checks until 2014. After that, the long-term care facilities would be required to either cover the cost or pass the cost on to the applicant or employee. The background checks would be done at a Cabinet for Health and Family services field office, of which there are about 36 throughout Kentucky.

Some representatives objected, stating the cost would be significantly more than the checks being done now, and that the currt checks are sufficient. Others noted that the federal funding is part of the Affordable Care Act, which may be overturned by the Supreme Court, so the funding would disappear.

The bill has passed in the House of Representatives and is headed to the Senate.

Robert Kempf and his friend had been watching the Super Bowl that Sunday, visiting with friends, drinking some alcohol. Later that night, Mr. Kempf got in his 1995 white Corvette with his friend. Once on I-71, he started speeding and lost control of the vehicle. Investigators are unsure if he ran off the road and rolled the car or if the car rolled over until it left the road. Either way, his 49-year-old passenger was killed when the car rolled onto its roof. How Mr. Kempf survived the crash is a mystery.

What is not a mystery are the factors involved in this crash. First, Mr. Kempf was driving over the posted speed limit, which makes it more difficult to control a vehicle. Second, Mr. Kempf had been drinking prior to driving the vehicle. Being under the influence of drugs or alcohol seriously hinders a driver’s ability to safely operate a vehicle. Apparently this was not the first time Mr. Kempf had driven while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. He has been charged with DUI at least three times in Louisville since the 1980s and had his license revoked at some point. He also faced drug-related charges in the past, which may mean some of his DUIs were drug-related instead of alcohol-related.

Unfortunately, this accident adds to the death toll on Kentucky roads that so far this year has exceeded 2011. According to Kentucky State Police, 64 people have died on the roads since the beginning of the year. This is an increase of five deaths over last year. Nine of the victims were killed in crashes caused by drunk drivers. The families of these victims should contact a Kentucky car accident attorney to discuss what steps can be taken. They most likely will be able to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the drunk driver, especially if he has been charged by police with driving under the influence. Damages can be awarded to cover lost income, medical expenses, and emotional distress caused by the loss of a loved one, as well as punitive damages that serve as punishment to the defendant. Attorney Steven Frederick is experienced in helping accident victims and their loved ones with their claims.

The 33-year-old driver of the vehicle stayed at the scene and was given a sobriety test. She tested at more than twice the legal limit and admitted to drinking 10 beers. She also had an open beer in the truck at the time of the accident and did not have a driver’s license. She was charged with driving under the influence, having an open container of alcohol in the truck, and driving without a valid license.

One would think that with all of the above charges brought against her, the driver would also be responsible for the death of the pedestrian, but that may not be the case in this particular accident. Preliminary investigations show that the pedestrian stepped into the road in front of the pickup truck, which would mean she caused the accident. “Someone walking in front of you, stepping in front of you, you can’t charge somebody for something that wasn’t their fault and was an accident,” according to LMPD Traffic Unit’s Lt. Doug Sweeney.

As of the end of January, the driver had only been charged with the issues listed previously, which carry a penalty of up to one year in jail. The pedestrian’s family does not think this is anywhere near harsh enough for the woman that killed their relative. They would like to see a wrongful death lawsuit filed. But the Jefferson County Attorney’s office, which is handling the case, said that is the strongest charge they can bring against her. The Commonwealth Attorney’s Office may be able to press felony charges, but will need to review the case to make that determination.