From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens¹ Bronx; Queens Accident Lawyer)

A fast-moving fire tore through a Brooklyn, New York apartment house early Thursday morning (December 31^st), taking the life of a much loved great-grandmother. Araselia Seguie, age 81, was killed in a fire that devoured her East New York apartment. Her family was able to get out and escape injury the flames and smoke.

The victim was alone in the third-floor apartment when the blaze caught. Her family, many of whom were elsewhere in the building, could not get to her; the thick black smoke and heat were too intense.

Fire Department officials report that Ms. Seguie was dead when firefighters reached her, apparently from smoke inhalation. Five firefighters were hurt fighting the fire, suffering from smoke inhalation and burns.

The cause of the blaze is under investigation; but did not appear suspicious, according to officials.

__________________________________

^{1Serving Queens neighborhoods of: Arverne, Astoria, Auburndale, Bayside, Beechhurst, Bellaire, Belle Harbor, Bellerose, Blissville, Breezy Point, Briarwood, Broad Channel, Cambria Heights, College Point, Corona, Douglaston, East Elmhurst, Edgemere, Elmhurst, Far Rockaway, Flushing, Forest Hills, Fresh Meadows, Fresh Pond, Glen Oaks, Glendale, Hillcrest, Hollis, Holliswood, Howard Beach, Hunters Point, Jackson Heights, Jamaica, Jamaica Estates, Jamaica Hills, Kew Gardens, Laurelton, Lefrak City, Linden Hill, Lindenwood, Little Neck, Long Island City, Malba, Maspeth, Middle Village, Murray Hill, Neponsit, Oakland Gardens, Ozone Park, Pomonok, Queens Village, Queensboro Hill, Rego Park, Richmond Hill, Ridgewood, Rockaway Park, Rockaway Point, Rosedale, Saint Albans, Seaside, South Jamaica, South Ozone Park, Springfield Gardens, Steinway, Sunnyside, Utopia, Wave Crest, Whitestone, Woodhaven and Woodside.}

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn¹ Queens Bronx; Brooklyn accident lawyer)

Driving drunk with a child in your car is now a felony in New York. The new law, know as either Leandra's Law or (officially as) The Child Passenger Protection Act, was inspired by the memory of 11 year-old Leandra Rosado of New York City and was signed into law by Governor Paterson on November 18, 2009. The law took effect on December 18, 2009. The child, Leandra, was killed in an accident just this past October while a passenger in the car of a friend's mother. The driver was drunk; her car flipped over on the Henry Hudson Parkway. She eventually was charged with manslaughter.

The State Senator co-sponsoring the bill was quoted as saying that last year 59 children were killed or hurt while in a car operated by a drunk driver.

The statute has several important provisions.

The courts and law enforcement authorities are scrambling to make sure that enough of these devices will be available.

________________________________

^{1  Serving Brooklyn neighborhoods of: Bath Beach, Bay Ridge, Bedford-Stuyvesant, Bensonhurst, Bergen Beach, Boerum Hill, Borough Park, Brighton Beach, Broadway Junction, Brooklyn Heights, Brownsville, Bushwick, Canarsie, Carroll Gardens, City Line, Clinton Hill, Cobble Hill, Coney Island, Crown Heights, Cypress Hills, Ditmas Park, Downtown Brooklyn, DUMBO, Dyker Heights, East Flatbush, East New York, Flatbush, Flatlands, Fort Greene, Fort Hamilton, Fulton Ferry, Georgetown, Gerritsen Beach, Gowanus, Gravesend, Greenpoint, Highland Park, Homecrest, Kensington, Manhattan Beach, Marine Park, Midwood, Mill Basin, New Lots, Ocean Hill, Ocean Parkway, Paerdegat Basin, Park Slope, Plum Beach, Prospect Heights, Prospect Lefferts Gardens, Prospect Park South, Red Hook, Remsen Village, Rugby, Sea Gate, Sheepshead Bay, Spring Creek, Sunset Park, Vinegar Hill, Williamsburg, Windsor Terrace and Wingate.}

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx¹; Bronx accident attorney)

To: Every car, truck, bus, or motorcycle owner out there. Go now and pull out a copy of your vehicle's insurance policy. If you have more than New York State's minimum liability insurance coverage limits of $25,000/$50,000/$10,000 - New York's minimum coverage limit means that you would have $25,000 per person injured, $50,000 per accident, and $10,000 for property damage - check your underinsured motorist or Supplementary Uninsured Motorist ("SUM") coverage. If you do not have higher than the $25,000 minimum in SUM coverage, call your insurance broker or insurance company and increase your SUM limits to the maximum allowable amount. This is inexpensive coverage and if you don't believe me when I tell you that it's inexpensive, just ask your broker or insurance company how little it will raise your insurance premium.

This is your best protection from the drivers of the world who may hurt or injure you in an accident and have only the $25,000 minimum insurance available. Worse yet, they may be operating a car from another state with even lower-than-New-York-insurance coverage limits or, still worse, their car may be uninsured; maybe because it's stolen, or the owner didn't pay the insurance bill, or whatever.

I am tired of telling clients who have suffered a serious injury that the most money they can get is $25,000, but that for a small additional insurance premium they could have protected themselves and had additional insurance coverage available through their own, underinsured or SUM, insurance coverage. It is my hope that in the year 2010 I won't have to have this conversation with any of my new clients.

And just as an afterthought, if you're driving around with New York's minimum insurance limits of $25,000/$50,000/$10,000 you do not have enough insurance and you should go buy more insurance coverage. That way if someone sues you for an injury sustained in an accident - be it with a car, bus, truck or motorcycle; or if they're a pedestrian or on a bicycle - you may avoid some sleepless nights worrying about protecting your personal assets from a lawsuit.

__________________________________

¹Serving Bronx neighborhods of: Baychester, Bedford Park, Belmont, Castle Hill, City Island, Clason Point, Country Club, Eastchester, Edgewater Park, Fieldston, Fordham, Hart Island, High Bridge, Hunts Point, Kings Bridge, Longwood, Melrose, Morris Park, Morrisania, Mott Haven, Mount Eden, Mount Hope, Norwood, Olinville, Parkchester, Pelham Bay, Port Morris, Rikers Island, Riverdale, Schuylerville, Soundview, Spuyten Duyvil, Throgs Neck, Unionport, University Heights, Van Nest, Wakefield, West Farms, Westchester, Westchester Square, Williamsbridge and Woodlawn.

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Bronx accident attorney)

First, this moron attorney was suspended from the practice of law for failing to register with the State and pay, like, a $300 fee. No one is hurt and no client has suffered financial injury by Clarke's inaction in failing to fill out a form and mail it with a check to New York's Office of Court Administration. However, Clarke did plenty of damage since then, and hurt his employer plenty.

Yet, it is no accident that Clarke agreed to remain suspended while the disciplinary authorities investigated claims of misconduct against him. He hoped that New York's Appellate Division would suspend him retroactive to his 2006 suspension for failing to file - for he knew he was definitely getting suspended from the practice of law for the shenanigans he pulled. He wanted to start the clock running early on his eventual suspension. But the Court didn't bite. Its punishment of Clarke (discussed below) starts running from the day of its December 10, 2009 decision.

The Court finds that "Clarke engaged in a pervasive pattern of misconduct by deceiving his employer, Fidelity National Insurance Company ("Fidelity"), and four of Fidelity's clients, with respect to work that he completely failed to perform in five separate matters, and by neglecting a total of six matters involving five separate clients."

Clarke admits all of this and, essentially, throws himself "on the mercy of the Court" for his punishment.

So what did Clarke, who worked as New York Area Counsel for Fidelity, do to injure and hurt his employer and clients?

1. a. In 2001 Clarke was to underwrite and supervise a series of mortgage refinance transactions affecting two properties in Manhattan. After the entire transaction had closed, he failed to record the mortgage documents.

b. Clarke concealed his neglect by: (1) falsely assuring counsel to the lender that the documents were recorded, and; (2) forwarding fraudulent endorsements to the Fidelity loan policies delivered at the closing, which falsely stated that the mortgage instruments were recorded and reciting City Register Filing Number ("CRFN") information which actually referred to completely unrelated transactions.

2. a. The same client hired Fidelity in 2006 to insure a refinance transaction involving the mortgages on the same properties as the first matter, which involved new money being secured by a new mortgage on each property.

b. Continuing to conceal his prior neglect, issued a title commitment on behalf of Fidelity which recited the same fraudulent CRFN information as contained in the 2003 endorsements. Based upon the new title commitment issued by respondent, the lender closed the loan transaction and Fidelity insured the new mortgage loan, unaware that the original loan documents had never been recorded. Fidelity was thus unable to record the 2006 loan documents.

3. a. Clarke became responsible in 2003 for refinancing in connection with a bankruptcy reorganization. Although a closing took place on December 24, 2003 and he recorded some documents in early July 2004, he did not record other documents until January 2005, and still others as late as April 2006. He never recorded mortgage documents with respect to properties in Suffolk County.

b. Clarke concealed his neglect by preparing and then by sending to the lender's counsel an endorsement which contained false CRFN information for documents that, at the time of its issuance, had not been recorded and for documents that he never recorded. When, in April 2006, Fidelity was advised by a borrower's counsel that the Suffolk County mortgages had never been recorded, Clarke told a Fidelity executive that he would personally record the documents, but he never did so.

4. a. In 2005 Fidelity was hired to issue a title insurance policy insuring the vesting of title in a family partnership. Following the execution of two necessary deeds, upon receipt of same, Clarke failed to record the deeds.

b. Following an inquiry from the family's counsel, Clarke assured counsel that the deeds had been recorded. He also forwarded official recording cover pages which he had fabricated and on which he had superimposed the facsimile signature of the City Registrar and the facsimile seal of the City of New York, which falsely indicated that the deeds were recorded. They contained bogus CRFN information from duly recorded instruments affecting entirely different properties in Queens.

5. a. A client hired Fidelity in May 2006 to provide title insurance for a transaction. Fidelity directed Clarke to record certain documents showing that loans for the property were paid off. He failed to file any of those documents.

The client owed combined State and City transfer taxes for these transactions totaling $472,500 and at the closing, executed the appropriate transfer tax returns and advanced $472,500 to Fidelity to issue checks to the Department of Finance. However, Clarke failed to file either the State or City transfer tax returns within the appropriate statutory period, and, in fact, never filed those returns. In December, 2006, Fidelity discovered that the accounting file for the client still showed a positive balance of $472,500.

b. In response to e-mails from Fidelity's Dallas office inquiring about the recording status of the documents, Clarke sent an e-mail falsely stating that the documents were recorded. In a subsequent e-mail to the Dallas office, he attached six documents fabricated by him to indicate that all of the documents had been recorded. Each page included false CRFN information (obtained from other duly recorded instruments regarding unrelated property), superimposed with the facsimile seal of the City Register and the facsimile seal of the City of New York.

When confronted about the transfer taxes, Clarke falsely advised Fidelity's accounting personnel that the transaction had not closed on June 16, 2006. In support of this false assertion, he produced transfer tax returns which he altered to reflect a change of the date of transfer from June 16, 2006 to November 30, 2006, which would have made the transfer tax due still within the respective statutory periods. As a result of Clarke's failure to pay the transfer taxes in the statutory period ending in July 2006, approximately $159,000 in penalties and interest accrued on the unpaid taxes until his misconduct was discovered in December 2006. Fidelity thereafter immediately paid the penalties and interest.

6. In October 2001, Clarke was assigned by Fidelity to underwrite and supervise the closing on the sale of a Manhattan condominium unit for $7,100,000. The City's Register's office rejected Fidelity's closing documents because of errors and it was Clarke's responsibility to address the errors and to forward the corrected documents to the City Register. However, he never made the corrections, he failed to have the documents recorded, and, in fact, the original documents were still in a file in his office when Fidelity fired Clarke in December 2006. Further, at the time of the October 2001 closing, the client executed tax returns and advanced $131,941.44 to Fidelity to cover combined State and City transfer taxes due on the transaction. However, Clarke never filed the tax returns, which resulted in penalties and interest accruing in the amount of $97,566.86. Fidelity paid the $97,566.86 in 2006 when it discovered Clarke's misconduct.　

Clarke has his psychologist testify at his disciplinary hearing that he suffered from clinical depression since September, 2005, including alcohol and drug abuse. And while Clarke's doctor testified that his depression was a major contributing factor to his neglect of legal matters, she could not conclude that his depression and "self-destructive" behavior were causally linked to his repeated acts of intentional deceit. And Clarke acknowledged that prescribed medication was effectively alleviating his depression by 2006, yet he continued to engage in fraudulent misconduct during that period.

New York's Appellate Division holds:

Clarke gets suspended from the practice of law for five years.

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Bronx Injury Lawyer)

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from thousands of types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. The CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard. The CPSC's work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals - contributed significantly to the decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.

Dehumidifiers take moisture out of the air. Commonly used in warm weather, Home Depot has recalled dehumidifiers that can catch fire and hurt or injure people by burning them.

The dehumidifier was sold under the name of Hampton Bay.

Imported and sold by Home Depot, about 2000 were sold.

A part in the unit can overheat, leading to an accidental fire.

Eighteen people have reported the dehumidifiers catching fire. One person reported a burn injury to the forearm.

Made in China, the dehumidifiers are beige, have four wheels, and measure 21 inches high, 13 ½ inches wide and 17 ½ inches long. "Hampton Bay" is printed on the front panel. Model HB-50 is being recalled. The model number is printed on the back interior panel.

To avoid an accident stop using this dehumidifier immediately and call Home Depot at (800) 553-3199 or visit the website at www.homedepot.com

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Bronx Injury Lawyer)

Studies show that roadway drop-offs are a common cause of serious injury in car or motorcycle accidents. Accidents involving dangerous pavement-edge drop-offs kill about 160 people and hurt 11,000 each year.

Also all too common are: misplaced concrete barriers, obsolete lane markings left in place, or neglecting to put out warning signs. Within the last five years, thousands of accidents in highway work zones across the country killed at least 4,700 people -- more than two a day -- and hurt or injured 200,000.

Aside from occasional reduced speed limit signs directed to passing motorists, there are few laws or regulations setting forth safety measures in highway work zones. Even industry standards are loosely enforced and vary from state to state. Rarely punished are contractors who engage in dangerous practices, whether they do so through ignorance, carelessness or greed.

Transportation officials tend to blame drivers, who sometimes speed in work zones, or drive while drunk or distracted. While federal authorities track the ways that drivers cause accidents, they do not devote an equal amount of attention to determine when contractors and highway planners are negligent and contribute to the happening of accidents. Accordingly, roadway work-zone crashes frequently are erroneously reported, misplacing blame.

The job of apportioning liability is left mostly to the courts and the jury system. Some states are trying to enact laws that limit the liability of highway contractors, without taking steps to protect the public by ensuring such contractors operate work sites safely, and that work site inspectors do their job properly. Thus, this brand of "tort reform" legislation - seeking to limit citizens' right to sue negligent highway construction companies - does not adequately address the problem at hand.

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Brooklyn Injury Lawyer)

The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission and the National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. (NHTSA) announced a recall of Dorel Infant Car Seat/Baby Carriers.

The child restraint handle to the seat can loosen and come off, dropping the seat (with baby in it) and potentially causing injury to the child. At least three infants have been hurt in accidents where the handle came off the car seat/carrier, causing bumps, bruises and a head injury.

This recall is for Safety 1st, Cosco, Eddie Bauer and Disney brand infant car seat/carriers manufactured in 2008 and 2009. They were sold with Travel Systems. The stroller portion of the Travel System is unaffected by the recall.

About half a million of these products have been sold.  The carriers, manufactured in China, sold here for between $120 and $220.

There is a repair kit available. Consumers should not use the handle of the car seat/carrier until a repair kit has been installed.

For additional information, contact Dorel Juvenile Group at (866) 762-3316.

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Queens accident lawyer)

New York motorists can no longer read, write or send text messages or play games on their cell phones or computers while driving. New York State's Legislature found that text messaging is an unsafe distraction to drivers that can cause accidents and injuries and, effective November 1, 2009, enacted Vehicle and Traffic Law Section 1225-d imposing a fine of up to $150.00 upon violators.

The law specifically apples to any "portable electronic device," which is defined as: a handheld mobile telephone, personal digital assistant (PDA), handheld device with mobile data access, laptop computer, pager, broadband personal communication device, two-way messaging device, electronic game, or portable computing device.

The law does not apply if you're facing an emergency. But please Dear Readers, don't lie to the police if caught, for the consequences could be worse than just a traffic ticket.

This leads to my next topic and pet peeve: texting while walking - which can be equally as dangerous as texting while driving. I've almost hurt or killed pedestrians crossing in front of me against the light, while looking down and text messaging.

According to some doctors, many young texters are tumbling face down and injuring chins, eyes, and mouths, particularly if they trip while clutching - and trying not to drop - their cell phone. And while broken teeth can bring new business to dentists, pedestrians need to pay attention. And not trip on raised sidewalks or broken sidewalk gratings or other barriers or obstructions on the street. Or worst of all (or second worst after being hit by a car), trip over another pedestrian, hurting him or her.

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Queens injury lawyer)

This case has not yet been decided by New York's attorney disciplinary authorities. But there's little doubt this lawyer will be disbarred, because he's plead guilty in Federal Court to two counts of mail fraud.

Zuber currently works for the New York City Corporation Counsel - the City's lawyers. Usually defending against lawsuits by people hurt or injured in accidents, he was earning about $80,000 per year. Zuber's actions took place before he went to work for the Corporation Counsel; he has been placed on "leave."

He committed mortgage fraud and falsified papers, including forging a judge's signature, to show his victims that there were lawsuits pending where they might recover their money. This brings me back to my blawg of November 13, 2009, about disgraced attorney Bryan J. Holzberg, who also fabricated papers for phony lawsuits to show to clients while ripping them off.

Zuber claims to have had a gambling problem.

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Queens Accident Lawyer)

Being injured in an accident is a stressful situation. Not only does it leave you with feelings of anger and resentment, it also leaves you with many questions concerning your finances. How will you be able to afford the care you need to get well again? What will you do about missed work? How will your family get along without your income? Why did this have to happen to you? While hiring a personal injury attorney will not be able to turn back the clock and reverse what happened to you, it is a path you can take to receive justice for the injury or hurt you have sustained.

Doctors will tell you that it is imperative for you to focus on positive thoughts and feelings to ease your hospital stay and speed up recovery. Positive thoughts are powerful tools for healing when you are hurt, but how can it be possible with all the aforementioned questions swirling around in your head? When you decide to hire an injury attorney to work with you on your case, your mind can rest at ease, as it is your personal injury lawyer who will take care of answering your questions.

It does not matter how or where your injury took place. If you were harmed by another, intentionally or accidentally, you are entitled to compensation. Motor vehicle accidents can cause both drivers and passengers to suffer serious spinal cord injuries. Medical malpractice is, unfortunately, not unheard of today, and everything from a misdiagnosis to an ill-prescribed drug can lead to personal injury at the fault of another. No matter the cause, you can expect great service from a well-established injury attorney who practices in a local law office. Whether you reside in Brooklyn, Queens or the Bronx, you can benefit from working with a personal injury attorney to both ease your mind as you recover from your accident and provide you with the compensation you deserve.

If the main thing causing you to stress is the thought that you must recover money in your injury case, you may wonder about the profitability of hiring a lawyer to represent you. Insurance company studies show that hiring a lawyer puts more money in the injured accident victim's pocket than going it alone without a competent personal injury attorney. Almost any personal injury attorney will give you a free initial consultation concerning about case. Pick up a telephone and maybe your hurt will stop hurting a little.

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Queens Injury Attorney)

I'd like to write about an interesting accident case that I'm handling and how a judge can sometimes get it wrong, and how a higher (appeals) court can make things right.

One snowy day, my client was working as a plumber's helper in a Manhattan building. Through tracked-in snow and what have you, the stairway leading from the street to the basement worksite was wet. My client slipped down several steps and hurt his back.

I did what any smart lawyer does where his client is badly hurt and has suffered a serious injury - I hired an expert to examine the steps. Known as "discovery and inspection" I might sometimes call on an architect or engineer or, in this case, a Certified Safety Professional, to measure and photograph the steps. To get an idea of what my expert looked at, I'll quote from his report:

                      Further, the handrail was obstructed and recessed 7 ½ inches;

                      In addition, the handrail was too high at 35 to 36 inches;

My expert found that many of these conditions violated the New York City Building Code and what we call "good and accepted safe practice." In other words, my client fell and got hurt and injured because the stairs were lousy and defective.

Defendant's lawyer applied to the Court (made a motion) for summary judgment, asking the judge to throw out my client's case on paper, without ever getting a jury to hear about how the accident happened, or about his injuries. The reason the defense (and its insurance company) presented to the judge? They claimed my client fell because the stairs were wet, and it was the middle of a storm, and the building owner could not be expected to stand by the stairs with a mop in hand to protect people climbing up or down the stairs. This is called the "storm in progress" argument, and completely ignored the defective condition of the stairway, which I had notified the other attorneys about.

The judge bought into the insurance carrier's argument and dismissed my client's case, finding that the storm in progress argument should win, even though my client's expert looked at, examined, measured and photographed the stairs. And even though the defense had no expert to say the stairs were good stairs that had nothing wrong with them.

My client and I decided to appeal the judge's decision to a higher court, known as the Appellate Division. In my client's appeal brief I adopted the findings of my Certified Safety Expert, and this is how I described the stairs:

I'm pleased to report that justice was done here, and that the appeals court reversed the lower court's decision and reinstated my client's case. The appellate court held, in part:

This means my client gets his day and court, and the defense has to defend the safety of its stairway. I should add that during the time the appeal was pending, my client underwent back surgery for his injury. For the curious among you, this 2009 decision, entitled Velez v. 955 Tenants Stockholders, Inc., can be found at 66 A.D.3d 1005.