Staten Island Injury Law : New York Personal Injury Lawyer & Attorney : Frank Dito : Decker, Decker, Dito & Internicola Law Firm : Traffic Accidents, Transportation Safety

Despite the City of New York continuing to downplay the significance, more and more test results have shown high levels of PCBs in New York City Public Schools. These results have come from spot checks conducted at various schools throughout the City. Last year, the City of New York entered into a stipulation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wherein a few of the more than 1,600 public schools were required to be tested for PCBs.

If levels higher than those allowed by federal law were found, the City was required to cleanup what was believed to be the source of the contamination; namely, caulking in the windows at these particular schools. However, once the caulk was removed from the windows at a few select schools, another source of contamination became apparent. The thousands of fluorescent lights hanging in our children's classrooms could be leaking PCBs into the air, causing levels more than 10 times the EPA limit of 50 parts per million.

The City, despite these findings, maintains that there is no danger as the exposure is not likely to cause immediate harm to children. What the City has sadly missed is that children are and have been exposed to PCBs in our public schools for the long term. Most public school children will be in the same school building for at least six (6) years. No one knows what the true effect of such long term exposure, despite PCB being a known carcinogen whose manufacture has been banned.

The City claims that it will cost over a billion dollars to remove and replace all the fluorescent lighting in the schools. The actual cost has been debated by the City, the EPA and parent groups. The City's words about about lack of immediate harm to students provides their true reason and true motive for such a price tag. Declaring a crisis would potentially displace 1.1 million students from their schools while the PCBs were removed and the classrooms were cleaned.  Procuring space for these 1.1 million students, setting up temporary classrooms and cleaning up what I believe to be a much bigger problem than anyone has allowed us to believe would easily eclipse the $1,000,000,000 estimate. Such a scenario would bankrupt the City and create a problem that has not short term solution. I am sure that there will be much more to this story, as my previous posts to this blog have shown. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The U.S Environmental Protection Agency has informed the City of New York that they will start to inspect public schools for PCB contamination starting next month. The EPA has advised the City to remove older fluorescent fixtures that can leak PCB into the air and onto surfaces such as desks and tables. The City has objected to the EPA's advice, saying that the fixtures pose no immediate threat and that replacing them would cost over $1 billion and result in the layoff of over 15,000 teachers. Needless to say, the EPA disputes the City's figures as to the cost.

PCB's are contained in the ballast of most fluorescent fixtures manufactured before the 1978 ban. In the average ballast, the device that controls the current in fluorescent bulbs, approximately 1 - 1 1/2 ounces of PCBs may be contained inside. The PCBs were used as an insulator to protect the electrical parts from becoming too hot and melting. When the ballast fails, it allows PCB's to leak out of the fixture.

PCBs are dangerous and readily absorbed through the skin if a student comes into direct contact with the leaked fluids. They may also be absorbed by the air that we breathe if the ballast is broken open. The dangers of long-term PCB contamination are not well known. Studies have shown that high-level exposure can cause specific types of cancer, such as liver cancer. Children exposed to PCBs have shown neurological damage, cognitive impairment and memory deficits.

What strikes me as very curious about this order is the first report of PCB contamination in New York City Schools. This blog's August 10, 2010 post spoke about the EPA's order to start testing certain schools for PCB contamination in the caulking around the windows. The City, somewhat secretly, began testing certain public schools for PCB contamination earlier in the year. The results showed PCB levels higher than the federal guidelines for long term exposure. This result appeared to be somewhat surprising to the City of New York. One has to wonder what went on behind the scenes that has actually brought the EPA to conduct their own inspections. Are the levels still highly elevated, even after the removal of the caulk? How long are we going to wait before we know the real story about the levels of contamination? Our children may be exposed to years of this contamination -  we need to write our local politician's and demand to know the real truth.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Yesterday, after 2 intense days of negotiations, the City of New York reached a settlement with the Estate of Sean Bell, who was killed by undercover New York City Police detectives the morning of his wedding. There are many out there who believe that since the police were justified in the discharge of their weapons, the Estate is not entitled to any compensation. I will not attempt to pass judgment on what occurred the night of the shooting as I am neither judge nor jury but will attempt to explain how the money was distributed. The Estate will receive $3.25 million before attorneys fees and Joseph Guzman, who was wounded in the shooting, will receive $3 million. What is glaring to me is the difference between someone alive and someone who is killed is apparently only $250,000. 

The explanation for the disparity lies in New York's archaic wrongful death laws. In New York, financial compensation is only awarded if the decedent experienced conscious pain and suffering before his death or provided financial support to his dependents. In the Sean Bell case, since he was yet to be married, his wife would be unable to claim that she was a dependent. However, Mr. Bell was the father of 2 young children and a large portion of that award will be placed in trust for their benefit by order of the Surrogate's Court, the court that has jurisdiction over estates of those who died in New York. Since Mr. Bell died instantly in the shooting, his estate receives no money for his conscious pain and suffering before he died.

Mr. Guzman was shot numerous times, shattering bones and leaving some bullets still lodged in his body. His recovery was for past and future pain and suffering, past and future medical care and lost wages from work. The amount of money that Mr. Guzman received was not based upon if he was married or if he has any children, but rather what injuries he suffered in this shooting.

As an attorney, the most difficult conversation that I have to have is when I need to explain to a mother that her son who recently died isn't worth anything but a token amount. They take solace in the fact that their child did not suffer but can't comprehend that a life can be worth so little. I have always lobbied for a change in New York State law to allow the loss of a life to be compensated, to be worth something. We have to realize that a human life is worth something.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Once again, after a snowstorm, some Staten Island residents feel that its time to drive their ATV's on City streets. In New York City, it is illegal to drive an ATV on public streets or sidewalks. Although some streets are impassable after a snow storm, it doesn't mean that the law doesn't apply any longer. Throughout the island, you can hear the sound of ATV's zipping around the streets during a storm. Some people think its fun and that it really can't harm anyone. Others don't seem to care and feel that they are entitled to ride. What they fail to realize is what happens if someone gets hurt.

In New York State, if you are hurt in a car accident, your car insurance will normally pay your medical bills. Unfortunately, an ATV is not considered a "car" under your insurance policy and you won't be eligible for your medical bills to be paid by your car insurance. Most people are totally unaware of how their car insurance protects them in case of accident until its too late. I wrote a book, The Lawyers Guide To Purchasing Car Insurance to help consumers better understand how their policy protects them. Besides the fact that riding an ATV on a City street is illegal, it can leave you open to serious financial consequences.

If you are involved in ATV accident, your car or homeowners insurance won't cover you in case of an accident. If you are riding an ATV and hit a car or even someone crossing a street, you won't have any insurance that will cover you. What that means is that your insurance company will disclaim coverage and you will be responsible for defending a lawsuit and for any money damages that the injured person may recover.  They can even come after your house. The bottom line is that an ATV is for off-road use only - don't jeopardize your financial safety for a quick ride. Its illegal and can have serious consequences.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link