Latest news with #legalrights
Associated Press
2 days ago
- Associated Press
Beyond Auto Accidents: Seven Overlooked Scenarios That May Qualify for Personal Injury Claims
'Most people associate personal injury law with vehicle accidents, but the law recognizes a broader duty of care across many types of environments and relationships'— William P. Morrow OPELOUSAS, LA, UNITED STATES, July 22, 2025 / / -- While auto collisions remain a common cause of personal injury litigation, legal professionals at Morrow Law Firm in Opelousas, Louisiana, are highlighting a broader range of circumstances that may also give rise to valid injury claims. Many individuals are unaware that incidents outside of car crashes—often occurring in everyday settings—could entitle them to compensation under Louisiana law. Led by William P. Morrow, John Michael Morrow, Jr., and Stephen M. Morrow, the firm handles a wide range of injury-related matters, with a focus on helping clients understand their legal rights after being harmed due to negligence. According to William P. Morrow, a significant number of personal injury cases originate from situations that are not commonly associated with legal action. 'Most people associate personal injury law with vehicle accidents, but the law recognizes a broader duty of care across many types of environments and relationships,' said Morrow. 'When that duty is breached and harm results, the injured party may have a claim.' Morrow outlined several scenarios where individuals may be entitled to a personal injury settlement, despite no vehicles being involved: 1. Unsafe Property Conditions Slip-and-fall incidents in grocery stores, broken staircases in apartment complexes, or unmarked hazards in public buildings can result in serious injuries. Property owners are responsible for maintaining safe premises. If injuries occur due to neglected maintenance or inadequate warnings, a premises liability claim may apply. 2. Dog Bites and Animal Attacks Injuries caused by domestic animals—most commonly dogs—are often compensable when the owner fails to control the animal or fails to warn others of known risks. This includes incidents occurring on private property or in public spaces. 3. Injuries on the Job Workplace accidents that go beyond routine workers' compensation coverage may also result in personal injury claims, particularly if third-party contractors, equipment manufacturers, or property managers contribute to unsafe conditions. 4. Defective Products Injuries caused by unsafe consumer products—ranging from electronics to appliances to tools—may involve product liability claims. Manufacturers, distributors, and retailers may be held accountable for design flaws, inadequate warnings, or defective components. 5. Assault or Negligent Security Injuries resulting from criminal acts in locations such as parking garages, hotels, or apartment complexes may be linked to negligent security. When property owners fail to implement reasonable security measures in high-risk areas, resulting injuries may lead to liability. 6. Medical and Pharmaceutical Harm Negative outcomes stemming from medication errors, incorrect prescriptions, or failure to disclose known side effects may lead to personal injury claims under medical negligence or pharmaceutical liability standards. 7. Recreational and Public Venue Injuries Amusement parks, recreational facilities, concerts, and sports venues may carry liability when a patron is injured due to poor design, crowd mismanagement, or faulty equipment. Legal responsibility can extend to organizers, operators, or property owners. Each of these scenarios involves different legal frameworks, timelines, and evidence requirements. Morrow emphasized the importance of professional legal evaluation following any injury, regardless of whether it initially appears to warrant legal action. 'In many cases, individuals delay seeking legal advice because the injury did not happen in a way they associate with traditional claims,' Morrow stated. 'That delay can affect evidence collection, legal options, and ultimately the outcome of the case.' Louisiana law imposes strict filing deadlines, often referred to as prescription periods, for personal injury claims. These timeframes can vary based on the nature of the injury and the parties involved. Timely consultation with legal counsel is necessary to preserve rights and identify potential liability before the window for filing closes. Morrow Law Firm continues to provide legal representation for individuals across Louisiana who have experienced harm in a variety of settings. The firm advises that even seemingly minor incidents may have legal significance when examined in the full context of duty of care and negligence. The attorneys at Morrow Law Firm—William P. Morrow, John Michael Morrow, Jr., and Stephen M. Morrow—have represented clients in personal injury cases across Lafayette, Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, Alexandria, and other regions throughout the state. The firm remains committed to clarifying legal pathways and holding accountable those whose actions—or inaction—result in preventable harm. Morgan Thomas Rhino Digital, LLC +1 504-875-5036 email us here Visit us on social media: Facebook Legal Disclaimer: EIN Presswire provides this news content 'as is' without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Common neighbour problem plaguing Aussie houses: 'No right'
Welcome to legal column, where lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn tackle problems everyday Aussies face — whether it be consumer, property, or money matters impacting relationships or work. This week an Aussie is concerned their neighbour has built too close to their house and ruined their privacy. Question I live in Sydney and have an issue with my neighbour. Well, more that a house was built right behind us and they are high enough that they can see right over our fence and through our whole house. I hated it so much we ended up putting up a higher fence. But if they look out their upstairs window they can still see my entire backyard and into the back rooms of my house. Is there anything I can do about it? Was there something I should have done before it was built. I never considered it, and now it makes me feel our family has completely lost our privacy. RELATED Warning for working from home Aussies over common practice Little-known cryptocurrency detail that could impact millions: 'Lost forever' Centrelink act costing 'hardworking' taxpayers Answer Privacy is essential to feeling safe in your own home and it is important to understand your legal rights and the steps you can take to protect your family. Right to privacy In NSW, there is no explicit right to privacy that prevents neighbours from looking into your property. The law would not consider that your neighbour's windows or balconies looking directly into your home or yard (also known as 'mere overlooking') is unlawful. The law generally does not consider it a nuisance unless the behaviour is excessive or unreasonable. Nuisance If your neighbour's actions are causing a significant disturbance, it might be considered a nuisance. Nuisance is when someone does something that interferes with your use and enjoyment of your property. The interference must be substantial and unreasonable. Occasional or minor intrusions likely wouldn't meet the threshold. The first step would be to talk to your neighbour about the issue. They may not be aware of your concerns and might be willing to take steps to reduce the impact on you. If this doesn't resolve the issue and the visual intrusion is significant, you can take legal action to bring a civil claim of private nuisance, seeking a remedy such as an injunction to stop the behaviour. If you wish to do this, you can start by speaking to a community legal centre for advice. Criminal offences There are various offences under the Crimes Act that relate to 'peeping or prying'. However, these acts are only a crime if your neighbour was intending on observing you doing a private act, as opposed to being able to see your home purely because of the layout of your homes. If at any time you consider their conduct feels excessive or targeted, you should make a complaint to the police. Local council regulations Before a house is built during the development application stage, there are usually local council regulations, building codes and planning permissions that need to be followed. These documents often include guidelines around building height, setbacks, and privacy protections —such as requiring high windows to be frosted or mandating privacy screens on balconies. If you believe the new house does not comply with these guidelines, you might be able to lodge a complaint with your local council or NSW Fair Trading. However, the best time to act would have been during the development application stage, where you could have lodged an objection based on privacy concerns. Now that the house is built, your focus needs to shift to practical solutions like screening, planting hedges, and even negotiating with your neighbour for mutual privacy improvements. This legal information is general in nature and should not be regarded as specific legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data
Free Malaysia Today
7 days ago
- Politics
- Free Malaysia Today
Siti Kasim wins suit over unlawful arrest by Jawi officers
Siti Kasim was arrested during a 2016 raid at a transgender beauty pageant event. KUALA LUMPUR : The High Court here has ruled that the federal territories Islamic religious department (Jawi) and its officers unlawfully arrested and detained lawyer-activist Siti Kasim during a raid on a private fundraising dinner in 2016. Judge Su Tiang Joo said the court was satisfied that Siti had proven her case on a balance of probabilities. He affirmed that Siti had been present in her capacity as an assistant advocate when she was arrested at about 10.30pm on April 3, 2016, and held without basis until her release at about 2.30am the following day. Su said the religious officers involved had neither the lawful grounds to arrest Siti nor the authority to act on offences under the Penal Code. He awarded Siti RM160,000 in general and aggravated damages, along with RM100,000 in legal costs. Siti filed the civil suit against Jawi and the government in September 2019, claiming compensation for wrongful arrest and illegal detention. She contended that she suffered 'loss of freedom' for four hours after she was detained by the Jawi officers, as well as nervous shock, insult and mental anguish. She said she was only carrying out her duty as a lawyer during the raid, and insisted that she had not obstructed the officers from carrying out their duties. Siti was acquitted by the magistrates' court here on Aug 21, 2020, of a charge under Section 186 of the Penal Code for obstructing Jawi officer Nor Jihan Saleh during the raid, which took place at a transgender beauty pageant event. Lawyer A Saha Deva represented Siti, while senior federal counsel Nur Irmawatie Daud appeared for the defendants.
Globe and Mail
16-07-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Western Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Attorneys at Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. Address Retaliation for Workplace Injury Claims
Retaliation against injured workers who file for benefits remains a persistent and unlawful problem in Pennsylvania workplaces. The Western Pennsylvania workers' compensation attorneys at Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. ( are calling attention to this critical issue and encouraging injured employees to understand and assert their legal rights when faced with wrongful treatment. For many injured workers, seeking compensation is not just a financial necessity—it's a legally protected right. However, some employers respond with demotion, job reassignment, or even termination, sparking concern and confusion among employees already struggling with injury. The Western Pennsylvania workers' compensation attorneys at Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. are committed to helping workers understand that the law is on their side, and retaliation for filing a claim is prohibited. Pennsylvania law provides clear protections for employees who report job-related injuries or file workers' compensation claims. The Western Pennsylvania workers' compensation attorneys at Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. emphasize that retaliation—whether blatant or subtle—violates public policy and specific state statutes. 'The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has made it clear that the Workers' Compensation Act reflects a strong and unmistakable public policy: protecting injured workers and providing them with a path to compensation and medical care,' the firm notes in its recent guidance. At-will employment, which allows employers to terminate staff without warning, does not override these rights. In Pennsylvania, this legal framework is counterbalanced by the public policy exception. This means that while employers can make decisions about staffing, they cannot fire someone simply for asserting their legal rights, such as filing for workers' compensation after a workplace injury. Courts look at the timing and context of a firing to determine whether it was retaliatory. Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. explains that Pennsylvania's anti-retaliation statute—Title 43 P.S. § 933.10—gives injured workers powerful tools to defend their rights. The statute prohibits employers from discriminating or taking adverse action against employees for exercising their legal rights under the Workers' Compensation Act. This includes filing a claim, making a complaint about noncompliance, or simply informing coworkers about their rights. The statute even protects workers who raise concerns in good faith, even if those concerns are later found unsubstantiated. 'Retaliation after filing a workers' compensation claim is not always dramatic or immediate,' notes Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. 'In many cases, it unfolds gradually, masked as everyday management decisions or subtle changes in working conditions.' This could include reduced hours, denial of benefits, increased scrutiny, or being transferred to less desirable roles. These forms of retaliation, while harder to detect, are just as illegal. The firm also highlights a key legal provision that supports retaliation claims: if an employer takes adverse action within 90 days of an employee filing or reporting a claim, the law presumes the action was retaliatory. This 'rebuttable presumption' shifts the burden to the employer to prove a legitimate reason for the adverse action, giving workers a significant advantage in proving their case. Another common concern is whether workers' compensation benefits continue if an employee is fired. According to Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C, benefits should not automatically stop if the employee is already receiving them. However, employers may attempt to challenge ongoing payments by alleging misconduct or insubordination as grounds for termination. In these situations, the workers' compensation judge evaluates whether the injury still limits the employee's ability to work and whether the termination was justified. The firm also clarifies the difference between a workers' compensation claim and a retaliation lawsuit. While the former addresses the injury and related benefits, the latter is a separate legal action aimed at holding employers accountable for retaliatory conduct. Retaliation lawsuits may result in compensation for lost wages, emotional distress, and even punitive damages, depending on the severity of the employer's actions. For employees who have experienced job loss, demotion, or harassment after reporting a workplace injury, legal remedies may be available. Damages in a retaliation lawsuit can include back pay, front pay if reinstatement isn't possible, compensation for emotional distress, and attorney's fees. In serious cases, courts may also award punitive damages to deter future misconduct. Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. encourages any worker in Pennsylvania who suspects retaliation to document incidents, gather records, and seek legal guidance immediately. Acting quickly can help preserve evidence and ensure legal protections are upheld. Retaliation after a workplace injury isn't just unfair—it's against the law. The legal team at Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. continues to defend workers across Western Pennsylvania who are treated unfairly after filing a legitimate claim. Their approach ensures that injured employees don't face additional harm simply for standing up for their rights. Employees who believe they've been targeted after reporting a work injury are encouraged to reach out to Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. for help navigating the legal process and protecting their rights. About Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C.: Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. is a team of Western Pennsylvania workers' compensation attorneys committed to standing up for injured workers. With a focus on workplace injury claims and related retaliation cases, the firm helps clients understand their rights and take action when those rights are violated. Embeds: Youtube Video: GMB: Email and website Email: lmkelly@ Website: Media Contact Company Name: Luxenberg Garbett Kelly & George P.C. Contact Person: Lauren Kelly Gielarowski Email: Send Email Phone: (724) 658-8535 Address: 315 N Mercer St City: New Castle State: Pennsylvania 16101 Country: United States Website:
Associated Press
16-07-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
DEADLINE ALERT: Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Investigates Claims on Behalf of Investors of Biohaven
Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses Exceeding $50,000 In Biohaven To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options If you suffered losses exceeding $50,000 in Biohaven between March 24, 2023 and May 14, 2025 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310). [You may also click here for additional information] NEW YORK, July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Biohaven Ltd. ('Biohaven' or the 'Company') (NYSE: BHVN) and reminds investors of the September 12, 2025 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company. Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that: (1) troriluzole's regulatory prospects as a treatment for SCA, and/or the sufficiency of data that Biohaven submitted in support of troriluzole's regulatory approval for this indication, were overstated; (2) BHV-7000's efficacy and clinical prospects as a treatment for bipolar disorder were likewise overstated; (3) all the foregoing, once revealed, was likely to have a significant negative impact on Biohaven's business and financial condition; and (4) as a result, Defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. On May 14, 2025, Biohaven issued a press release 'announc[ing] that the Division of Neurology 1 within FDA's Office of Neuroscience informed the Company that they are extending the PDUFA date for the troriluzole new drug application (NDA) for the treatment of spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) by three months to provide time for a full review of Biohaven's recent submissions related to information requests from the FDA.' The press release further stated that "[t]he Division also informed Biohaven that it is currently planning to hold an advisory committee meeting to discuss the application, but no date has been scheduled.' On this news, Biohaven's stock price fell $3.84 per share, or 19.53%, to close at $15.82 per share on May 15, 2025. The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not. Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Biohaven's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others. To learn more about the Biohaven class action, go to or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310). Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook. Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP ( Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner. A photo accompanying this announcement is available at
