Idaho Law Blog

Football injuries and products liability

Published on: January 19, 2017 | by Racine Olson

Recently a Chicago varsity high school player was killed when he struck his head on the ground even though he was wearing a helmet. A lawsuit was filed against the school board and the helmet manufacturer who, ironically, also makes helmets for the National Football League. The lawsuit claimed that both the school and the manufacturer had failed to take the necessary steps to make sure that the helmet the young man was wearing would function properly during normal and expected use on the football field.

The helmet manufacturer is named Riddell and is well known throughout the country. It has been making sports equipment in Illinois since 1929 and helmets have been constructed by it for decades. The helmets have air bladders that if they are not inflated properly can be unreasonably dangerous to the user. The lawsuit claimed that this was the problem in this case and led to the death of this young man. In addition, the lawsuit claims that there was a failure to properly warn users of this risk. Although this writer has not researched this particular issue, it is reported that Riddell is facing similar claims across the country from professional players and the failure to warn them of these possible risks.

2 Ways to Use Estate Planning to Provide for a Child with Addictions

Published on: January 19, 2017 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

In a perfect world, parents would not need to be concerned about helping children with addictions. However, we live in a world where people are frail, and where addictions do exist. My clients often ask me how they can properly provide for a child who has addictions in a way that will help them and yet not support the addiction after the parent is gone. The purpose of this blog is to provide a parent in this situation with 3 ways they can use their estate planning to provide for a child with addictions.

A REGULAR TRUST

Emergency Repairs to Potholes Continue on I-84

Published on: January 18, 2017 | by Racine Olson

A seven-mile stretch of I-84 between Nampa and Caldwell sustained significant damage due to winter storms and harsh weather conditions. Large potholes formed on both eastbound and westbound lanes causing accidents and serious property damage to vehicles. Vehicles sustained damage when they struck the potholes. Some went out of control and collided with other vehicles. The reported property damage included flattened tires, damaged rims and other serious types of damage, including injuries.

Potholes form after snow or rain seep into the soil under the roadway. With extremely cold temperatures, a few days of warmer weather, then the return of freezing and below temperatures, moisture formed below the pavement that caused the ground to expand, pushing the pavement up. A cavity then forms between the pavement and ground below it as the temperatures fluctuate. I-84 has a large volume of semi-truck and heavy vehicle traffic that travels on it each day. When vehicles drive over the formed cavity, the pavement cracks and gives way into the hollow space and a pothole forms.

Recognizing the safety hazards created, ITD crews have been making temporary repairs to the roadway. Exit ramps were blocked, lanes closed and speeds reduced to allow the repairs. This stretch of I-84 was scheduled to be resurfaced in 2018; however, the damage has caused ITD to advance their plans to an earlier date. The long term improvement project is budgeted for $15 million.

4 Questions About Leaving Assets to Your Children

Published on: January 17, 2017 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

In the course of my estate planning practice I have found that parents often have questions about how to leave property for their children. There are as many types of options available to a person in crafting their estate planning as there are people. however, I do find that for specific questions seem to arise regularly with my estate planning clients. The purpose of this blog is to list these four questions and provide a simple response to them.

DO I HAVE TO DISTRIBUTE ASSETS EQUALLY TO MY CHILDREN?

Injured Workers in Idaho were Given a Late Christmas Gift by the Idaho Supreme Court: Part III

Published on: January 17, 2017 | by Racine Olson

By Fred J. Lewis

In its decision, the Idaho Industrial Commission had ruled that because of the Idaho Legislature abolishing joint and several liability, an employer’s negligence was no longer an absolute bar to the exercise of its right of subrogation. The Idaho Supreme Court stated that the Commission, in establishing its “new rule”, the employer’s right of subrogation would henceforth be reduced by its proportionate share of fault contributed to the claimant’s damages. At the oral argument before the Idaho Supreme Court, I argued that the Court should stick with its 50 year old rule set forth in Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Adams that was decided in July of 1966. In Liberty, the Idaho Supreme Court had held that an employer who was contributorily negligent in the worker’s injury was not entitled to a right of reimbursement or subrogation in proceeds that the injured worker collected against a third party. The Idaho Supreme Court then referred back to the classic line out of the Witt v. Jackson case: “when the employee or his estate has been satisfied, and the employer seeks to recover the amount paid by him, from such third party, his hands ought not to have the blood of the dead or injured workman upon them, when he thus invokes the impartial powers and processes of the law”. The Supreme Court rejected the Idaho Industrial Commission’s new rule and held that proof of any negligence on the employer’s part that contributed to the injuries to one of their employees kills their right to assert a subrogated claim to the third-party proceeds of that employee obtains in a third-party lawsuit.

The takeaway from this Supreme Court decision is that an injured worker who receives injuries as a result of concurrent negligence from their employer and some third party has two claims. His first claim is against the negligent third party and he can collect on that claim and keep all the proceeds for himself. His second claim would be his Idaho workers’ compensation claim, which he could bring against his employer and their surety and would not have to pay any of the money back that he received from the third party claim, so long as he can prove his employer’s negligence also contributed to his injury. This is a great late Christmas present from the Idaho Supreme Court to the injured men and women of Idaho.

3 Ways Your Estate Planning Can Help Your Special Needs Child

Published on: January 15, 2017 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

Estate planning is a great process that can be used by a parent to create a customized plan in providing for their special needs child. A person with special needs is an individual who has either a mental or physical handicap or disability that limits their ability to function normally in life. Typically, a person with special needs usually requires a great deal of assistance to be able to handle the basic functions of life. The purpose of this blog is to provide three ways that you can use your estate planning to help your special needs child.

CREATE A SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST

PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENTS

Published on: January 14, 2017 | by Racine Olson

Traffic safety affects people on the roadways, the shoulders of the road, sidewalks, and crosswalks. It does not simply concern those who are driving. Bicyclists and pedestrians are using roadways in ever increasing numbers. Accidents affect all of those who occupy the roadway including drivers, passengers, pedestrians, runners, joggers, and cyclists. As traffic increases more and more interactions are had between cars, buses, trucks, and cyclists and pedestrians.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that more than 150,000 pedestrians were treated in emergency rooms in 2013 for nonfatal injuries in automobile-pedestrian crashes and approximately 4,735 pedestrians were killed in these same types of accidents. Think of what that means on a daily basis with regard to these types of devastating accidents. 410 pedestrians were hurt every day in 2013 one died about every two hours.

When you consider these accidents, it is obvious that someone was at fault in nearly every one of them. If the driver was at fault, an innocent pedestrian likely suffered catastrophic injuries due to the driver’s carelessness. These accidents can be prevented and avoided if all those involved the take the time to make safety a priority.

3 Ways to Create Incentives for Your Children in Your Estate Planning

Published on: January 13, 2017 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

Just recently I was reminded by a client about the need for creating incentives through estate planning for children who will survive their parents. My client came to me with some very sad stories concerning their children. Apparently the children had been noted on during their lifetimes by well-meaning parents and had not developed any Ambitions on their own, simply because they were able to rely on their parents for financial help. This client specifically asked about ways that estate planning could be used to help incentivize the children for their lives. Real estate planning provides a number of options and providing gifts to children, I have found that there are really 3 ways to create incentives for your children through your estate planning.

OPPORTUNITY FUNDING

Injured Workers in Idaho were Given a Late Christmas Gift by the Idaho Supreme Court: Part II

Published on: January 13, 2017 | by Racine Olson

By Fred Lewis

At the oral argument, I argued on Mr. Maravilla’s behalf that Simplot’s subrogated claim was separate and apart from Mr. Maravilla’s negligence claim against IIC. The Idaho Supreme Court held there were only two claims that had been asserted in Mr Maravilla’s case. First was Mr Maravilla’s own original negligence claim against IIC and second, Simplot’s present claim of subrogation against Mr. Maravilla. The Idaho Supreme Court went on to state that a critical component in deciding when claims are the same for purposes of res judicata is that the subsequent and present claims must be one that arises out of the same cause of action and should have been litigated in the first suit. Clearly, Maravilla’s cause of action in his negligence claim against IIC was based upon the October 16, 2011 industrial accident. On the other hand, Simplot’s subrogation claim is based upon Idaho Code Section §72-223 (3) and is derived from Mr Maravilla’s recovery from IIC. The Idaho Supreme Court pointed out that Mr. Maravilla’s recovery, rather than his injury, acted as the cause of action for Simplot’s subrogated claim. Simplot’s subrogated claim did not ripen until after Mr. Maravilla recovered from IIC. Therefore, Simplot’s subrogation claim and Mr. Maravilla’s negligence claims do not share a cause of action. Simplot could not bring its subrogation claim against Mr. Maravilla until Mr. Maravilla had recovered from IIC. 　The Idaho Supreme Court then held that for purposes of claim preclusion, Simplot’s subrogation claim was not the same claim as Mr. Maravilla’s negligence claim against IIC.

What is the Legal Time Limit to Probate a Will?

Published on: January 11, 2017 | by Racine Olson

By Lane V. Erickson, Attorney

As an estate planning attorney I find that my clients are often very quick to come see me after their loved one has passed away. In some instances people come to see me within a day or two So that they can get an idea of the steps that they need to take in order to preserve the decedent’s property and make sure that it is delivered to the right person. However, this is not always the case.

During my career I have often had family members come to me several years after the decedent has passed away to help them transfer property. This usually occurs when the family wants to sell a home or other real estate that still has the decedent’s name on it. The family discovers that they are unable to sell the property because they do not have the correct title to the property.