A preliminary investigation into the accident that claimed the life of a young boy reveals that the zoo met or exceeded all safety requirements for animals and visitors, proving that no exhibit is "fail-proof" as explained by the zoo's president. The horrific accident occurred after the boy fell into an African wild dog exhibit. Although nearby staff responded "within seconds," it was too late to save the boy.

The zoo has been open since 1898 and this was the first time there's been a "visitor incident of this magnitude." The incident occurred after the boy's mother put him on a wooden railing on the edge of a viewing deck. The boy fell and bounced of the netting intended to catch him. He then dropped into the enclosure holding the dogs.

Initial reports reveal no signs of negligence - the Pittsburgh Zoo had successfully completed its five-year review in September and the U.S. Department of Agriculture had inspected zoo recently and found it safe.

Fortunately, incidents like these are rare and show the need to follow strict safety precautions on both the part of the owner/operator of the zoo as well as the patrons. Many times attending an event - whether going to the zoo where there are dangerous animals, spending the day at an amusement park riding rollercoasters or attending a baseball game with the hopes of catching a foul ball - involves a certain amount of risk taking and danger.

Whether the amount of risk you are exposed to is "reasonable" is often a legal question. If you or a loved one has been hurt as a patron, it's important to consult with an experienced Sacramento personal injury attorney. Often, determining whether you may be entitled to compensation involves a complicated analysis of the risks involved, the warnings provided and other factors.

Where an unreasonably dangerous condition exists that an owner or operator knew of or should have known of but failed to either correct or provide sufficient warning, they may be held liable for damages in a "premises liability" lawsuit.

However, in many situations the "danger" is part of the fun - such as amusement park rides where you expect to be frightened and thrilled, just not hurt. California law continues to grapple with the scope of the "assumption of risk" defense - that is where a patron "assumes the risk" of injuries from the inherent risks of an activity.

Where an owner/operator takes steps to eliminate dangers and warn of potential risks, the injured party may face challenges recovering compensation for injuries resulting from a dangerous activity. Alternatively, where an owner/operator allows an unreasonably dangerous condition to exist, they may be held responsible for harm that occurs and required to pay damages.

In the zoo instance, initial reports suggest that this was simply a tragic accident. Other zoos and exhibits are sure to examine just what happened in an effort to prevent other such incidents from occurring again.

For more information about premises liability or dangerous conditions lawsuit, contact the top Sacramento negligence attorneys at the Law Office of Frederick J. Sette for an immediate consultation.

Allstate Insurance Company has issued it annual list of safest cities for driving - this includes ranking cities based on factors such as fewest car accidents and injuries. Unfortunately, Northern California cities did not rank very high. According to the list, San Francisco ranks 185, Sacramento 140, Stockton 102 and Modesto 91. ABC News cites traffic and busy freeways as reasons big cities don't fare as well on safety rankings.

If you have been involved in a car accident in California, it is important to contact a Sacramento auto accident attorney immediately to protect your rights and to determine your next steps. Even though filing a lawsuit may be the furthest thing from your mind, understanding the steps to take and talking to an experienced Sacramento car accident lawyer can provide you valuable guidance and preserve your options should you decide to file a lawsuit in the future.

Taking the top spot as America's safety driving city is Fort Collins. Fort Collins earned the number one spot for the second year in a row. Based on statistics, an average driver in Fort Collins will have a car accident once every 14 years - nationally the average is once every 10 years.

Many factors may lead to causing a car accident in Sacramento and throughout the country. These include driver error - sometimes caused by negligent or reckless driving such as distracted driving or driving while under the influence. In fact statistics now place distracted driving as causing 80% of all accidents. Drunk driving also leads to significant number of accidents, with DUIs causing nearly 40% of all traffic deaths.

Other causes of auto accidents include defective auto parts - with a record number of recalls blamed this year on parts that were not properly tested or failed to perform as intended. In these situations, it may be possible to file a California product liability lawsuit and recover damages for injuries sustained as the result of a defective part. Another potential contributor to Sacramento car accidents is negligent roadway design. In certain circumstances the design of the road itself may cause an accident, with inadequate signage, improper warnings or lack of proper safety considerations.

Whatever the reason behind an accident, contacting an experienced Sacramento car crash attorney at once is important. By speaking to a knowledgeable Sacramento auto accident lawyer immediately, you can begin an investigation into the causes of an incident and preserve crucial evidence.

As a Sacramento personal injury lawyer, I am hopeful Northern California car accident statistic wills improve. For more information or if you or a loved one has been injured in a Sacramento car accident, please contact the dedicated Sacramento auto accident lawyers at the Law Offices of Frederick J. Sette for immediate attention.

Generally, if you've been hurt on the job California worker's compensation determines your right to recover. However, in some cases a tort remedy (i.e. filing a civil lawsuit) may be available. Other times, both types of claims may be filed. Consulting with a Sacramento worker's compensation lawyer is the best way to determine your next steps and your best options to obtain compensation when you've been injured.

On the job injuries include a variety of situations, from obvious injuries requiring medical care - such as head and brain injuries, back injuries and slips and falls - to diseases acquired from working around toxic substances such as asbestos and conditions that develop as the result of repeated strain or continuous trauma.

Where workers' compensation provides recovery to victims of work place accidents, you may be able to recover medical costs, lost income, expenses related to vocational training, permanent disability compensation and death benefits. A recent California worker's compensation case reviewed just how damages from work place injuries should be measured. Specifically, it evaluated how cost of living adjustments (COLAs) should be determined. This is a significant decision because it determines whether payments are measured prospectively from January 1st of the first year after a worker is injured or retroactively to January 1st after the year in which a worked is injured.

Here, a worker was injured in 2004 and asserted that his weekly payment should be adjusted based on his injury date. The appeals court agreed. However, the California Supreme Court overturned this decision. The Court reasoned that COLAs are intended to be "calculated and applied prospectively commencing from January 1st following the date on which the injured worker first becomes entitled to receive, and actually begins receiving such benefit payments."

Workers' compensation laws are complex and can be very confusing. An experienced Sacramento workplace accident lawyer can evaluate your circumstance and determine whether alternative avenues to compensation exist. Because recovery of damages may be limited in a worker's compensation case, filing a tort claim may provide an opportunity for greater recovery. 

Workplace accidents that may allow you to file a civil lawsuit include where a third party is somehow involved in causing the accident. This may be where a manufacturer provides malfunctioning equipment used at a work site and this equipment injures you, where you are exposed to toxic substance, if you are injured in a traffic accident caused by another driver or where a third party contractor creates a dangerous condition that leads to harm. In fact, many different types of negligence third party actions exist that may allow an individual harmed in a workplace accident to bring a civil lawsuit. Types of lawsuits available may include product liability or premises liability. If successful, you may be able to recover past and future medical costs, past and future lost wages, emotional distress and other damages, often substantially more than is available through California worker's compensation laws.

Because workplace accidents involve so many different factors and considerations, it is best to contact a Sacramento personal injury attorney to determine the best strategy for you to ensure you are compensated for your harm.

For more information, or to speak with a dedication Sacramento injury lawyer, contact the experienced Sacramento accident attorneys at the Law Offices of Frederick J. Sette for a confidential consultation.

As the result of negligence in allowing a wild-fire to burn unattended, the San Jose Mercury News reports that a former a jury has found a former schoolteacher and her relatives responsible for damages caused by one of Santa Clara County's biggest wildfires. The premises accident occurred after Margaret Pavese illegally began burning paper plates in a 55-gallon metal barrel. The Lick fire burned out of control, damaging 47.760 acres, destroying four homes and 20 buildings in the Henry Coe State Park Area. Also destroyed in the fire were papers a San Jose man - Dan Straus - had inherited from Albert Einstein, including calculations jotted down on onionskin and an envelope.

Pavese was sued for negligence as the result of allowing a dangerous condition to exist.

The concept of "premises liability" provides that owners or occupiers of land have a responsibility to keep their property free from dangerous conditions they knew of or should have known of and/or take reasonable precautions to warn of the unreasonably dangerous conditions.

Here, the jury applied a similar theory to determine that despite Margaret accepting sole responsibility for the accident, the duty to exercise reasonable care and the knowledge of the dangerous conditions created liability on behalf of the other family members. As noted by a representative - "Margaret lit the match, but we were able to convince the jury that the Pareses were all negligent. We really felt we lost a historical treasure."

Because each one of the members were found in some way to be responsible for the danger created, each of the individuals were found to be partly at fault.

Negligence involves the concepts of duty and responsibility. Here, where a duty is found to exist on one party, harm for damage caused by the failure to reasonably comply with that duty may be compensable.

For more information, or if you believe you have been harmed through the negligence of another, please contact the dedicated Sacramento personal injury and negligence attorneys at the Law Office of Frederick J. Sette.

A woman injured in a slip and fall accident while on a Carnival Cruise was awarded $2.998 million. A federal judge determined the cruise line had known about several prior accidents on the resin surface it installed on its pool deck - both on this ship and on other ships. The surface was hard and slippery as ice, leading the woman to fall and suffer a fractured patella. As a result of the fall, she needed six surgeries and will require one to two total knee replacements.

When boat accidents occur - whether a privately owned boat or a commercially owned cruise ship - the laws governing your right to recover damages and the boat owner's responsibility for reporting and providing medical attention may be complex. An experienced boat accident litigation lawyer can provide needed answers and help you obtain the compensation you are entitled to.

Here after initial discovery the cruise line admitted liability, leaving only the question of damages for trial. However, often times boat owners or operators will deny any wrongdoing requiring a skilled boat accident lawyer to show that it was the owner or operator's failure to use reasonable care that caused the accident. This may be shown in the same manner as for any personal injury - i.e. was the boat owner or operator careless or reckless and did this carelessness or recklessness injure the passenger? Where the negligence of a boat owner or operator causes an injury, compensation may be recovered.

For more information, or if you have been harmed in a boat accident, please contact the experienced Sacramento personal injury lawyers at the Law Office of Frederick J. Sette, dedicated to helping those injured for more than 15 years.

The Silicon Valley news reports that at least 78 PG&E electrical accidents have occurred in the Bay Area since 2005, with dozens of serious injuries, including burn injuries, as a result of nearly 31 explosions.

In one instance, Lisa Nash of Redwood City was burned over half her body when an electrical vault exploded underground. She received a $20 million settlement after suing PG&E. In-depth investigations are now underway after the September 9th San Bruno explosion in which 8 people died and 38 homes were destroyed.

If you or a family member has been injured in an electrical accident, it is important to contact an experienced California personal injury lawyer to discuss your options and determine your next steps. In many situations, it may be possible to be compensated for your losses.

As a result of the San Bruno incident, along with the fires and manhole blasts caused in part by aging underground electrical equipment, PG&E is evaluating how it can improve safety. With the vast majority of the accidents occurring in San Francisco, Bay Area residents and officials are fed up.

Hopefully with improved safety measures the frequency of these accidents will diminish.

For more information, or if you have received burn injuries or any other harm as the result of an electrical accident, please contact the experienced Sacramento personal injury lawyers at the Law Office of Frederick J. Sette, dedicated to helping those injured by the carelessness or recklessness of others.

Nestle has announced a Lean Cuisine spaghetti and meatball recall affecting more than 17,000 packages as the result of consumers finding pieces of red plastic in their food.

Nestle has suggested that the plastic came from a red emergency stop button, although the plant where the packages were produced reports no buttons were broken and the "emergency stop" buttons were not located near food transit locations.

If you believe you have purchased an affected product, you can contact the company directly through its website.

The recently enacted Food Safety Law aims at protecting consumer from harm as the result of contaminated food products and food borne illnesses both by lessening their frequency and imposing penalties. If you have become sick or suffered harm as the result of consuming or purchasing a contaminated product, contact an experienced California personal injury lawyer to begin investigating your case.

The new laws hope to make your food safer and include the following important provisions:

• Mandatory recalls - The FDA may now order a company to recall a product were a company fails to initiate one.

• Mandatory inspection - The Secretary of Health and Human Services is required to rank the food facilities with the highest risk for contamination and inspect the facilities at least once every three years.

• Greater access to food facilities records.

• More control over standards for imported food.

•Implementation of preventative measures, including the identification of critical points where food could become contaminated.

Significantly, the new law subjects companies that violate the act to fines as well as potential lawsuits and shields "whistle-blowers" from retaliation.

For more information about the Lean Cuisine recall, the Food Safety Act or if you have been harmed by a contaminated food product, please contact the experienced Sacramento personal injury attorneys at the Law Office of Frederick J. Sette, dedicated to protecting consumers rights for more than 15 years.

The Mercury News reports that Cal/OSHA will begin investigation into the circumstances surrounding a fatal construction accident at the Woodlake Shopping Center. A Sacramento man, Cristobal Reyes-Segura, suffered fatal injuries after falling 15 feet from a beam where he was standing to install metal studs in building frames.

Under California law, when work-place accidents occur you may have remedies both through workers' compensation and traditional tort law. The general rule is that you cannot sue your employer form on-the-job injuries. However, you may be able to submit a claim for benefit to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. Where a death occurs, these benefits are paid to your dependents. The type of compensation recoverable includes medical bills, lost income, permanent disability and death benefits. Often the amount of compensation is much lower than you would be able to recover in a civil proceeding.

Although you may not sue your employer in civil court for your workplace injuries, in some circumstances it is possible to file a lawsuit where a third party is responsible. In construction cases this may be a third party contractor, the owner of a site [who is not your employer] or other party on the premises. If one of these parties is responsible for creating an unreasonable risk of harm, providing faulty equipment, or otherwise engages in reckless or negligent conduct, they may be held responsible and required to compensate you or your family for the injuries sustained.

For more information, or if you have been injured in a construction accident or other work environment, contact the Law Office of Frederick J. Sette, dedicated to helping those injured for more than 15 years.

Last week's stand-off at the Roseville Galleria luckily ended with no injuries. According to the Sacramento Bee, a man walked into the mall's Gamestop, began talking incoherently, then ordered the employees out. The man subsequently set fire to the mall.

The fire garnered national attention as police and fire fighters mounted a massive response, surrounding the building and assisting shoppers out of the mall. The mall sustained significant water damage and the roof collapsed over two shops. Fortunately no one was harmed in the incident.

When large-scale accidents causing significant damage occur - several issues are raised. First, what is the primary cause of the accident? Here, a man suspected of arson has been arrested for the crime. Next, did those charged with responding to the accident and putting out the fire act with reasonable care? Police and employees are paid to perform their duties to an established standard of care - if their conduct falls below this threshold, liability may exist. In such instances, individuals, their employers and even local governments may be held responsible.

Finally, did the owner of the building in some way contribute to the damage by failing to protect themselves from fires? Reports have surfaced indicating that the sprinkler system failed to work properly, either as the result of a police officer or firefighter turning off the system or due to a failure of the system itself.

As the investigation into the fire continues, questions of liability will undoubtedly surface. When injuries occur, a victims' compensation depends on the answers to these questions.

For more information, or if you have been harmed in a California accident, contact the Law Office of Frederick J. Sette, helping the injured for more than 15 years.

In a recent decision, the California Supreme Court held that National Park and other recreational workers must ensure the safety of visitors, or be found liable for their actions.

The impact of this holding could have far-reaching implications throughout California - including in National Parks such as Yosemite and Muir Woods - and across the country.

In Klein v. US, a bicyclist was riding through the Angeles National Forest when he struck head-on by a car driven by a volunteer working for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. He was seriously injured in the collision.

At issue was whether a landowner owes a responsibility to those on its land for recreational purposes. Here - the landowner is the United States government. After extensive review, and based on the plain language of the statute at issue (Civil Code Section 846) the Court determined that landowners may be held liable for the negligent conduct of their employees - including vehicular negligence. The Court rejected the United States' argument that the landowners were shielded from liability for negligent acts because they were on Federal Property. Rather, the Court was swayed by California's "strong interest in promoting the safe driving of motor vehicles and in preventing or minimizing personal injuries from motor vehicle accidents."

As a California personal injury attorney, I strongly support this decision. When an individual suffers serious injuries due to the negligence of another, they should be entitled to recover damages. Hopefully this decision will lead to greater protection and safety to the hundred of thousands of individuals who enjoy our National Parks each year.