Around 7:30 pm, wearing only his underwear, Raymond Bishop is high on mushrooms and out of control at his family home. Raymond’s parents call the police and go through the house collecting car keys; however, there is still a set of keys in his mother’s Jeep. Raymond runs outside and past the responding police officer, Andrew Force.

Raymond enters the unlocked Jeep through the front passenger door, crawls over to the driver’s seat, and starts the engine.  He puts the car in reverse and accelerates down the driveway, catching Officer Force with the opened passenger door. The force of the impact pins Officer Force’s right shoulder in between the door and the side of a trailer on the Bishops’ property.  Raymond backs out of the driveway, across the road, and into the woods, dislodging large rocks and ripping out several tree stumps along the way. The Jeep finally comes to rest atop a stone wall. Raymond is arrested and later found guilty of reckless operation, operating under the influence, and resisting arrest.

As for Officer Force, along with a traumatic hematoma to his right forearm, he sustains a right shoulder labrum tear, which requires surgical repair, physical therapy, and steroid injections. In all, Officer Force’s injuries keep him out of work for nine months.
We submitted a claim for Officer Force’s damages against Raymond with the Bishops’ auto insurer, which, in turn, denied the claim. The insurer’s investigation revealed that Raymond’s parents verbally forbid him from driving. Therefore, the denial was based on Raymond’s non-permissive use of his parents’ Jeep. We sent our own private investigator to the Bishops’ home and our investigator secured an interview with Raymond’s mother.

As it turns out, the question whether Raymond had permission to drive the Jeep was not as simple as the Bishops’ insurer made it seem. Raymond’s mother told our investigator that Raymond had permission to use the family vehicles at any time. She added that the insurer’s investigator had framed his questions in such a way that she had to answer differently than she intended. For example, she was asked if Raymond was in the right frame of mind to drive. And she was asked if she specifically gave Raymond permission to drive. The answer to those questions clearly was ‘no’.

We considered our options: 1) File a lawsuit and secure a judgment against Raymond. Then, to collect on the judgment, file a second lawsuit against the Bishops’ auto insurer, which would turn on whether we could convince a jury that Raymond’s use of the Jeep was permissive; or 2) Drop the claim against Raymond and pursue an Uninsured claim with Officer Force’s own auto insurer. In addition to the time and risk inherent with litigation, there were practical money considerations. Given the amount of the Town’s Ch. 41 lien against third-party recoveries and the anticipated costs of lengthy litigation, Officer Force would likely clear more money from a first-party claim against his own auto insurance than he might get years in the future through litigation against Raymond and the Bishops’ insurer.

Officer Force ultimately decided to drop the claim against Raymond and we obtained a $100,000 policy limit settlement with his auto insurer under his coverage for injuries caused by Uninsured autos. Fortunately, Officer Force had this Uninsured coverage. It is very important that our public safety officers understand that their personal auto insurance policies protect them as pedestrians, when traveling in someone else’s vehicle, or even while in a police cruiser. CLICK HERE to learn more.

– Jared Ballin, Esq.

​In order to protect the privacy of the injured police officer and witnesses, all names have been changed.  Any resemblance to names of real persons, past or present, is merely coincidental and not intended.  The injured officer agreed to have this article published in order that public safety officers around the Commonwealth be better educated about their legal rights to compensation when injured on duty.

This case involves an all-too familiar scenario – the police are forced to handle a disturbed and out-of-control individual resulting in an injured officer.


Drivers swerve around a young man walking around in a busy tunnel.  Shirtless and covered in soot, the young man is in obvious need of help.  A passing officer puts his lights on and parks in the travel lane, protecting the man from oncoming traffic.  The officer tries to move the young man to safety.  The young man refuses.

Additional officers respond and after some cajoling, the young man briefly sits on the curb.  Officer Sampson stands between the young man and passing vehicles.  Suddenly, the young man jumps up and punches Officer Sampson in the mouth, splitting Officer Sampson’s upper lip.  Knocked unconscious, Officer Sampson lands hard on the pavement.  Officer Sampson awakes in a pool of his own blood.  Nevertheless, Officer Sampson immediately joins the struggle to control the young man.  Officer Sampson’s use of pepper spray ultimately forces the young man to relent.

Officer Sampson recovered from his physical injuries and returned to duty.  He was later honored by his department.  The young man was found not criminally responsible for his assault on Officer Sampson due to a lack of mental capacity.

It is clear PTSD affects first responders at a significant rate.  Officer Sampson became increasingly fearful after learning a fellow officer and personal friend of his was violently injured in near identical circumstances nearly a year-to-the-day from his own attack.  Officer Sampson showed classic signs of PTSD including recurrent nightmares and sudden mood changes like unexplained rage.

The ensuing legal battle was complicated and centered around the question of whether an individual who was not criminally responsible for his actions owed any duty to the officer he attacked and whether he could be held civilly responsible.  In addition, the insurance company that insured the young man initially refused to pay the claim, arguing that the young man intentionally injured the officer.

Critical to this case was taking the young man’s father through a detailed deposition.  The father testified that his son had gone off his medication three days prior to the attack.  Arguing this case then became a delicate balance between showing two things: First, that the young man had sufficient understanding of his actions in negligently failing to take his medication; and second, that the young man negligently failed to use care in dealing with Officer Sampson, albeit without the capacity to understand the consequences of punching him.  In the end, we were successful and recovered the maximum available insurance for Officer Sampson and his family, $300,000.

It is an honor and privilege to represent those who protect and serve, and we have worked with officers over the years who have suffered PTSD.  If you or anyone you know may be dealing with such symptoms, please seek support.  There are many resources available.

Randall Jones spends the day drinking and gambling at the casino.  Just after midnight, Mr. Jones starts his drive home on a local highway.  Without warning, Mr. Jones suddenly attempts a left-hand turn directly across the path of a vehicle travelling toward him from the opposite direction with a green light.  Mr. Jones crashes into the oncoming vehicle.  That vehicle happened to be a police cruiser responding to an emergency.

Additional police respond.  They test Mr. Jones’ Blood Alcohol Content.  Mr. Jones’ BAC is over twice the legal limit.  Mr. Jones is arrested on charges for Operating Under the Influence of alcohol as well as OUI of drugs.  Apparently, Mr. Jones had also been taking prescription medication, which carried a warning for drowsiness side effects.

The officer driving the cruiser sustained injuries to his back and right arm.  Following the crash, the officer was unable to work for two months and had nearly three months of physical therapy.  The officer’s greatest concern was this crash may have affected his back where he previously had surgery.  Fortunately, the collision did not affect the officer’s prior back surgery.  Even if that were the case, though, the officer would have been entitled to fair compensation for any exacerbation of that pre-existing condition.  While many people worry that hurting the same body part previously injured may not be compensable, the law is clear – you are entitled to compensation for however a prior injury is made worse.

By forcefully arguing the extreme danger the drunk driver posed to the community, I was able to obtain a $47,000 settlement for the officer from Mr. Jones’ insurance company. The settlement amount was significant enough to repay all the officer’s lost wages, including missed overtime and details, plus more.

During the morning of August 23, 2013, a gas delivery driver for Acme Propane was driving a box truck loaded with propane cylinders.  It was a dry, clear day.  He drove past orange safety signs alerting him that he was approaching a work zone then drove over two orange cones.  He drove off the road and smashed straight into the back of a parked vehicle within the work zone, totaling it.  Initially, the police cited him for his negligence.  Sitting inside that parked vehicle was Officer Rogers.  The officer’s non-belted body was whipped backward and forward, causing nearly a year’s worth of disabling back pain requiring injections and intensive therapy to return him to duty.  During that time, a defense was mounted by the truck driver and his employer, a national company, that wrenched layers of complication onto what first appeared to be a cut and dry case.

After the crash, the truck driver was transported by ambulance to the hospital.  In the ambulance and at the hospital, he reported he had an unexpected coughing fit, then passed out before the crash.  If this was true, it would be a complete defense to any case against him and his employer under the sudden incapacitation doctrine, and Officer Rogers could not recover a penny.  The hospital doctors diagnosed the truck driver with pneumonia causing vasovagal syncope, which confirms he coughed so hard he passed out.  The truck driver’s doctor corroborated this diagnosis when he followed up.  The medical report of these diagnoses was sent to the police department which had cited the truck driver.  The department rescinded the citation.  Undeterred, we sued the truck driver and the gas company.

Erica DiMaio suddenly veers over double yellow lines on Main Street. Three eyewitnesses watch in horror as Ms. DiMaio violently crashes head on into a police cruiser operated by Officer Avery.


The Fire Department is already on scene by the time Officer Avery comes to. He wakes up to the sounds of firefighters using a reciprocating saw to detach the mangled driver door from the cruiser. Freed from the cruiser, Officer Avery is taken by helicopter to the hospital where he would remain for over two weeks.


Officer Avery’s injuries were numerous: concussion, fractured left arm and leg, five fractured ribs, and multiple lacerations. The left arm fracture required three procedures, including a surgery to implant permanent hardware. His road to recovery included extensive therapy. Despite continuing symptoms in his arms and legs, Officer Avery worked diligently with his therapists to regain strength and motion. Just shy of nine months after the crash, Officer Avery was cleared for a return to work. Officer Avery surprised everyone. He pushed his doctors to clear his return long before many thought he would be medically able. Officer Avery’s doctors and therapists documented his dedicated efforts towards his own recovery as well as his desire to return to work.

We met Officer Avery while he was still in the hospital. He expressed his good fortune to have survived this horrendous crash. However, he stressed about how he would support his family. As a ‘special’ officer, Officer Avery works part time for his municipality. Not only was he too injured to work as a police officer, he could not resume his regular occupation.

We decided to feature Officer Avery’s case not just for the monetary result, but also to inform special, reserve and part time officers of certain injury-on-duty benefits, which may be available to them. Like many police officers and firefighters working on a ‘special’, reserve or part time designation, Officer Avery relied on a second, regular occupation to support his family.

Many special officers and part time officers are unaware that Massachusetts law provides protection for special officers like Mr. Avery who are unable to work their regular occupation because of an injury-on-duty. In most circumstances, M.G.L. Chapter 32 §85H affords compensation equivalent to the average weekly pay of a first-year public safety officer while the officer is unable to work their regular occupation because of the injured-on-duty. We have found several municipalities to be unaware of this provision. This municipality was no exception.

We worked with Officer Avery’s municipality to ensure these benefits were made available to Officer Avery for the entire period he was unable to work his regular occupation. These injury-on-duty benefits helped Officer Avery survive financially while he was out of work rehabbing from his injuries. As for Officer Avery’s injury claim against Ms. DiMaio, we secured a ‘policy limit’ settlement with her insurance company for $500,000 after holding steadfast in our refusal to accept anything less. And we did all this without ever filing a lawsuit.

If you are a reserve, special or part time officer injured-on-duty and cannot return to your regular occupation, like Officer Avery, you too may be able to make a claim for full and fair compensation and receive full injury-on-duty wage benefits while you recover from your injuries.

– Jared N. Ballin, Esq. & Steven M. Ballin, Esq.

A contractor’s bucket truck is missing a piece of safety equipment – a fiberglass guard that keeps debris away from the hand controls in the bucket. Nevertheless, the contractor lends the bucket truck to a tree-cutting company.
 
A lifetime arborist has a working interview with the tree cutting company, which requires him to use the bucket truck to prune trees. After a sixty-mile drive to the worksite, he points out the missing control guard. The worker is given an ultimatum: go up in the bucket truck or go home. Hoping to secure a full-time job so he can support his family, he grabs his chainsaw and gets in the bucket truck.
 
While pruning a tree, a branch falls from a neighboring tree and lands on the controls. The bucket immediately starts to move and takes a path towards the tree he is working on. With his chainsaw in his right hand, the worker fights with his left to free the branch and regain control of the bucket. The bucket easily snaps through a branch and careens toward the trunk of the tree, smashing the worker’s left wrist in the process.  Over the coming months, the worker required surgery to repair his wrist. The worker attempted a return to his trade, but he was unable to safely operate a chainsaw. He soon came to realize he could no longer work up in the trees.
 
I filed a lawsuit on the worker’s behalf against the contractor. The contractor claimed the whereabouts of the bucket truck were unknown as it been sold about six months after the incident. The contractor also claimed to have no clue whether the control guard was missing or, for that matter, what a control guard even was. That said, the contractor blamed the tree-cutting company for using the bucket truck without the control guard in place. As for the worker, the contractor blamed him for the same reason. The contractor even went as far to say that the control guard would not have protected the worker anyway.
 
Suffice it to say, the contractor was shocked to see photographs our private investigator took of the “missing” bucket truck, which the contractor sold six months after the incident. Sure enough, the control guard was still missing. Even worse, imagine the contractor’s shock when we discovered a letter it and the tree-cutting company signed ten days before this incident. This letter acknowledged, in part, that the control guard was missing.
 
Undeterred, the contractor testified during the trial that it did not know the control guard was missing and that it never read the letter. As to the letter, the contractor claimed that it was actually written years after the incident and then back-dated. In the end, the jury saw the simple truth - the contractor knew its bucket truck was missing the control guard, but lent it out anyway to a company that lifts workers high in the air with chainsaws.
 
After years of persistent, dogged litigation, the jury delivered the highest verdict Bristol County has seen for a non-death case in years: $385,000 including $10,000 for the worker’s wife’s loss of consortium claim.

- Zachary M. Ballin, Esq.

A landlord’s tenant is the subject of a drug investigation by a joint task force.  With three knock and announce narcotic search warrants in hand, the police enter the landlord’s multi-unit rental property through the front entrance without incident.  The police search the tenant’s second floor apartment.  The police find a bag filled with heroin and the tenant is taken into custody.

While leaving the building, a local police detective slips and falls on snow and ice covered granite steps attached to the front porch.  As you may know, it is often more dangerous coming down icy stairs than going up.  The detective suffers a complete rupture of the patella tendon in his left knee.  Less than two weeks later, he had surgery under general anesthesia to repair his knee.  The detective’s condition improved with time and despite some continuing symptoms, he was cleared for a full return to work just over five months after his fall, including a short stint on light duty.

We have been making a habit of stressing the importance of documenting ice falls with photographs right away.  This case was no exception.  Similar to a case we reported on a few months ago, a fellow officer took plenty of photographs to document the condition of the stairs soon after the detective’s fall.  The photos clearly showed the front entrance covered in a thick layer of hard packed snow and ice.  In addition, the photos indicated an absence of any gutter system to direct melt water away from the roof above.  The absence of gutters allowed melt-water to drip down and refreeze to form melt water ice on the front entrance.

The photographs were critical in enabling us to settle the detective’s case with the defendant’s landlord for $150,000 without having to file a lawsuit.  Had we needed to involve the Court, the photographs would have been a crucial part of the case.

Aside from the importance of photographs, here is the takeaway for public safety officers around the state – landowners must keep their property safe for visitors where people are expected to walk.  Moreover, this holds true regardless of why you are legally at a property.  Whether it be responding to a domestic call, serving a search warrant, or anything in between, it does not change the fact that you are a lawful visitor and the landowner has a continuing obligation to make it safe for you to walk on the property.

That said, Massachusetts law is reasonable.  It recognizes we live in New England.  There is no expectation that every speck of snow and ice be removed from someone’s property.  The law does, however, impose a duty on landowners to use reasonable care in all circumstances.  Typically, this involves shoveling after a storm or putting down sand or rock salt on icy areas.  This photograph tells another story: the landowner chose to neglect the buildup of snow and ice, endangering all visitors to the property, including emergency responders.

To protect the privacy of the detective and witnesses, all names have been changed.  Any resemblance to names of real persons, past or present, is merely coincidental and not intended.

– Jared N. Ballin, Esq.

The injured detective agreed to have this article published in order that public safety officers around the Commonwealth be better educated about their legal rights to compensation when injured.

A contractor parks two large utility trucks back to back while setting up for an ongoing project on Main Street at an intersection with Booth Street.  There is heavy traffic in this area with vehicles approaching the work site from multiple directions.  Many of the vehicles pass alongside the two trucks and crew, while others come out of Booth Street entering the intersection from the north and south on either side of Main Street.  The contractor hires Officer Jeffrey to work this detail.  No other detail officers were hired.

Later that morning, two drivers approach the southbound lane of travel on Booth Street from different directions: Mr. Green approaches from the west (green car) on Main Street and Mr. Reach approaches from the north (red car) on Booth Street.  Facing west alongside the first truck, Officer Jeffrey directs vehicles past the trucks on Main Street.  Mr. Reach then crashes into Mr. Green’s vehicle as it passes by Officer Jeffrey.  Reach’s car then veers into Officer Jeffrey.  Officer Jeffrey is pinned against the contractor’s truck and killed.  Officer Jeffrey never saw Reach’s car approaching across the intersection from Booth Street.

The State Police investigation focused on Mr. Reach.  He was charged with and pled guilty to vehicular homicide.  There was, however, no investigation made regarding the contractor’s traffic control plan.  Nevertheless, I believed that the contractor blocked the southbound lane on Booth Street without planning for or warning traffic.  Therefore, I filed a lawsuit not only against Mr. Reach, but also against the contractor.

Photographs released after Mr. Reach’s criminal case was over confirmed that one of the contractor’s trucks blocked the entire southbound lane on Booth Street.  And after dozens of depositions, I discovered that besides Officer Jeffrey, the sole officer hired for the detail, the only traffic control devices utilized by the contractor were two ‘work ahead’ signs on either side of the work site on Main Street and a few cones alongside the two trucks.  As often happens to officers hired on details, Officer Jeffrey was left to cope with the confusion, congestion, and traffic as best he could in this busy, four-way intersection.

Paul Arret drives north, approaching an intersection in a residential neighborhood with his grandson in the front passenger seat. A police cruiser drives west approaching the same intersection.  Mr. Arret has a stop sign. The police officer does not. Mr. Arret does not stop. The two vehicles collide in the middle of the intersection.

​Francis Vision was standing close by and saw the whole thing. Mr. Vision tells the responding police that Mr. Arret’s vehicle ran the stop sign. The police then talk to Mr. Arret’s grandson who says that his grandfather blew the stop sign. Mr. Arret joins in as well, admitting that he was not paying attention.

As a result of the crash, the officer driving the cruiser tore his left rotator cuff tear and ruptured his biceps tendon. He needed arthroscopic surgery and had extensive physical therapy. About nine months after the crash the officer was able to return to work full duty. About a year after his return, we secured a $225,000 settlement for the officer.

– Jared Ballin, Esq.

To protect the privacy of the officer and witnesses, all names have been changed.  Any resemblance to names of real persons, past or present, is merely coincidental and not intended.

Mr. Driver travels down a road he knows very well on a clear, Fall day.  He readies himself to turn left into a gas station. Sitting in the front passenger seat is his wife who sees a motorcyclist approaching from the opposite direction. She yells to watch out. Mr. Driver does not yield the right of way to the motorcycle. Instead, he turns left toward the gas station and cuts off the motorcyclist. The motorcyclist crashes into the side of Mr. Driver’s car, ejects from his seat, hits the car and lands in the roadway. The motorcyclist is our client, Arthur Vee.

Arthur sustained a fractured right arm and fractured right lower leg.  He had surgeries where plates and screws were implanted to repair his fractures. After filing a lawsuit against Mr. Driver, we discovered he had a $1,000,000 umbrella insurance in addition to his $250,000 auto insurance policy. We quickly deposed all witnesses, including an eyewitness, who testified Mr. Driver cut off our client. We also deposed Mr. Driver, who, as it turns out, is a licensed optometrist. Nevertheless, Mr. Driver claimed during his deposition that he did not see the motorcycle until it was too late, even though his wife yelled to him to watch out for the motorcycle.

After months of inpatient and outpatient care, Arthur was able to return to work as a machinist, albeit in a limited capacity. Nearly a year and a half after the crash, Arthur was just starting to enjoy his life again when his right leg gave out while walking with his cane in an icy parking lot. His right upper leg fractured in the fall. He needed yet another surgery with more hardware. We argued this new fracture was caused by the crash because Arthur’s leg was still weak. However, Mr. Driver’s insurance company and defense lawyer refused to accept responsibility for the new fracture. We then met with Arthur’s surgeon who pointed out that Arthur’s right upper leg bone appeared fine in X-rays right after the crash; however, it appeared weak in X-rays taken before the fall in the parking lot. This weakness resulted from not being able to use his right leg after the crash during non-weight-bearing rehabilitation. Also, the area of weakness was in the exact location that was affected by the low energy fall in the parking lot. After careful review of Arthur’s X-rays before and after the fall in the parking lot, Arthur’s surgeon attributed all of the injuries, including those from the fall, to the original crash with Mr. Driver.

With the compelling deposition testimony and strong opinion of Arthur’s surgeon, we were able to reach a settlement for $1,000,000 at mediation, with $250,000 coming from Mr. Driver’s auto insurance and the remaining $750,000 coming from his umbrella policy.

​A local police officer, Gerald Seine, was off duty and riding his own motorcycle ahead of his close friend Arthur at the time of the crash. Knowing the results we have obtained for injured officers, Officer Seine referred Arthur to us. We were glad to represent Arthur and are always available to assist the friends and family of police officers.

– Steven Ballin, Esq and Jared Ballin, Esq.