Search Results | Schmidt Kramer

1736 Results found.

Do Pedestrians Always Have the Right-of-Way When Crossing the Street in PA?

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/do-pedestrians-always-have-right-of-way-in-pennsylvania.html

The general assumption is that pedestrians always have the right of way over drivers when crossing the street. While drivers have a greater duty of care to prevent harm to residents, this does not release pedestrians from liability if they are partially responsible for the incident, such as by darting out into the road without […]

August Newsletter 2025 – Community News and Law Firm Updates!

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/august-2025-newsletter.html

Our firm is excited to share what we have been up to these past few months and some cool opportunities to be involved with our Harrisburg community! Prestigious Legal Awards and Recognition Our firm’s legal team has been recognized for multiple awards for 2025. Here are are a few of those awards and honors: Partner […]

Partner Scott Cooper Presents at PBI Personal Injury Primer Plus 2025

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/scott-cooper-presents-at-pbi-personal-injury-primer-plus-2025.html

Congratulations to Schmidt Kramer partner Scott Cooper on his recent speaking opportunity at the Pennsylvania Bar Institute’s Personal (PBI) Injury Primer Plus 2025 in Philadelphia! What Is the PBI’s Personal Injury Primer and How Do Attorneys Benefit? The Pennsylvania Bar Institute’s (PBI) offers educational opportunities for lawyers to “raise the bar” on their legal skills […]

New Pennsylvania Distracted Driving Laws in 2025: What You Need to Know

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/2025-changes-to-pa-distracted-driving-laws.html

Pennsylvania has implemented a new hands-free driving law that applies to all drivers, a critical law designed to decrease the risk of car accidents due to distracted driving. Table of Contents What Is Paul Miller’s Law and When Does it Go Into Effect? What Happens If I Get Caught Using My Phone While Driving in […]

Daryl Christopher Receives Prestigious Douglas Award From PA Assoc for Justice

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/daryl-christopher-receives-douglas-award-from-paj-2025.html

We are excited to share that on July 10, 2025, the Pennsylvania Association for Justice (PAJ) honored Daryl E. Christopher, partner at Schmidt Kramer, P.C., with the esteemed George F. Douglas Jr. Amicus Curiae Award! This prestigious award recognizes Daryl’s outstanding contributions to appellate advocacy and his unwavering commitment to justice for injured Pennsylvanians. The […]

Why Do Most Car Crashes Happen Closer to Home in Harrisburg?

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/why-many-crashes-happen-closer-to-home-harrisburg.html

Busy highways pose a lot of dangers for drivers commuting every day in heavy traffic, but it may surprise you to learn that many crashes also happen on familiar roads where Harrisburg drivers least expect them. Table of Contents Is Driving Near Your Home More Dangerous Than Highway Driving in Harrisburg? How Does Distracted Driving […]

Challenges of Linking Back Pain to a Harrisburg Car Crash

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/linking-back-injuries-to-harrisburg-car-crash.html

You may initially walk away from a car accident feeling fine, and then days later start to feel a sharp pain down your back. This is not uncommon, as initially shock and adrenaline block some degree of pain. As the shock wears off and inflammation from the crash increases in your body, what might have […]

Are Verbal Settlement Agreements Binding in a Harrisburg Car Crash Case?

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/when-verbal-car-crash-settlement-agreements-are-binding-harrisburg.html

Insurance companies often approach Harrisburg car crash victims with verbal settlement offers shortly after collisions occur. These spoken agreements can create significant legal complications that affect your compensation and future rights. Table of Contents What Is a Verbal Settlement in a Harrisburg Car Crash Case? When Does a Settlement Become Legally Binding a Pennsylvania Release […]

How Your Medical Records Can Help or Hurt Your Harrisburg Injury Claim

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/impact-of-medical-records-on-harrisburg-injury-claims.html

Your medical records play a critical role in determining the success of your Harrisburg injury claim after a car crash. These documents can help to strengthen your case and maximize your compensation or give insurance companies ammunition to reduce or deny your settlement. At Schmidt Kramer, our Harrisburg car accident lawyers know how to leverage […]

Who Is Liable for a Car Crash Caused by Loose Cargo or Falling Accidents in PA?

https://www.schmidtkramer.com/blog/liability-for-truck-crashes-caused-by-falling-cargo.html

Loose cargo and falling debris cause serious car accidents across Pennsylvania every year. When improperly secured items fall from trucks or vehicles onto roadways, innocent drivers can suffer devastating injuries and property damage. At Schmidt Kramer, our experienced truck accident attorneys in Harrisburg have successfully represented Harrisburg accident victims for decades. We do our best […]

Free Case Review

No Upfront Fees

Recent Results

$10,043,952.13 Personal Injury
Schmidt Kramer, P.C.partner Gerard C. Kramer won a personal injury action for $10,043,952.13 in Northumberland County on behalf of a volunteer firefighter who was the victim of Intentional Tort. The 50-year-old volunteer firefighter was seriously injured when a barn collapsed, causing a spinal injury which left him a paraplegic. The claim was brought against the arsonist who intentionally started the fire. It is believed that the verdict is the highest ever in Northumberland County.
View Results
$4,034,000.00 Personal Injury
Yesterday a Judge in Union County (Lewisburg, PA) awarded a couple from New Berlin, Pennsylvania, over $4,000,000 because the husband was shot while turkey hunting.You might ask yourself, how does a turkey hunting accident end up with that type of verdict? In order to understand the verdict you would have to know our clients. They are good people who had their life wrecked. Plus, you would have to know the defendant, who should not have been hunting with a gun because he was prohibited after a previous criminal conviction.It is a good verdict, because the Judge was able to do two things with his decision. First, he communicated to two very good people that their losses were something that those of us on the outside could appreciate and value. Mike Hobbins (our client) is a 51 year old guy who lost his sight because a convicted felon --who should not have even possessed a gun-- went hunting illegally, and broke with impunity the most fundamental rule in hunting: identify your target before you pull the trigger. The Judge accepted the financial loss Mr. Hobbins' suffered, but listened closely to the evidence of less tangible losses. When Mike broke down on the stand, because his daughter would end up walking him down the aisle at her wedding, as opposed to how it was supposed to go, the Judge was listening. When Mike could not keep it together, because of how emasculating it was for him not to be able to provide financially for his family, the Judge was listening. It was facts like these that the Judge cited to support the $2,000,000 award for non-economic damages. Second, the Judge wanted to send a message. Union County is a hunting county. Many of the residents hunt there, and people from outside the area come to Union County to hunt. It was my impression, from the Judge's statements as he rendered his decision, that he wanted to send a message to the people in Union County to protect them in their sport. The rules in place to restrict people convicted of crimes not to have a gun are not to be broken. Hunting is serious and you have to identify your target before you shoot. When you turn your back on the rules that are set to provide safety in a sport, you risk being an example. Here, the $1,000,000 punitive damage award sends that message loud and clear.When it really comes down to brass tacks, the right action was taken against a Defendant who may never truly appreciate what kind of impact his reckless choices caused.At Schmidt Kramer, we are injury lawyers. That means we work with people who were hurt in car accidents, who were hurt by the neglect of nursing homes, or those that were seriously injured because of the reckless, thoughtless acts of others. If you or a loved one have been injured in Pennsylvania, we may be able to help. While the verdict yesterday is not one that is representative of every case we do, it does show that serious and dedicated representation can bring good results.Joe ChapmanJanuary 18, 2013
View Results
$2,200,000.00 Auto Accidents
On Monday, January 6, 2014, Schmidt Kramer accident lawyer Scott Cooper obtained a verdict on behalf of his client who is the widow of a man who died in a fiery crash on Interstate 78 in Lebanon County. The awarded verdict of $2.2 million was in a nonjury proceeding before a federal judge in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. That verdict includes $100,000 in punitive damages assessed against the owner of the trucking company.Kamilah Claxton won summary judgment in November after the defendants, Sukhwinder Singh and the trucking company for which he worked, failed to file a brief in opposition to Claxton's motion, which was made in September. The verdict in Claxton v. Singh was issued after the court held a non-jury assessment of damages earlier this month."Mr. Sukhchan Singh, the employer, is liable on the basis of respondent superior, but was also grossly negligent in failing to maintain his vehicle in compliance with state and federal law, particularly with regard to having required safety inspections and correcting defects in its braking equipment," said U.S. District Judge William W. Caldwell of the Middle District of Pennsylvania in his opinion accompanying the verdict."He was also grossly negligent in entrusting his vehicle to Sukhwinder Singh, an inexperienced truck driver who had failed the written test and driving test multiple times before finally earning his commercial driving license," Caldwell said.
View Results
$1,200,000.00 Personal Injury
A Dauphin County jury has awarded a $1.2 million verdict to the parents of a 5-year-old who had an anoxic brain injury and stopped breathing after he had a tonsillectomy.2012-06-26 10:00:00 AMDate of Verdict: June 19. 2012Court and Case No.: C.P. Dauphin County No. 2009-CV-14003-MMJudge: Scott EvansType of Action: Medical malpracticeInjuries: Anoxic brain injuryPlaintiffs Counsel: Terry S. Hyman, Schmidt Kramer, HarrisburgPlaintiffs Experts: Dr. Anna H. Messner, liability; Lucille Packer, Pediatric Otolaryngology, Palo Alto, Calif.; Terry P. Leslie, vocations and earning capacity, Lancaster; Dr. Hilary B. Berlin, pediatric psychiatry, Great Neck, N.Y.Defense Counsel: Andrew H. Foulkrod, Darlene K. King, Foulkrod Ellis, Camp Hill, PADefense Experts: James C. Reilly, Pediatric Otolaryngology, Wilmington, DEComment: A Dauphin County jury has awarded a $1.2 million verdict to the parents of a 5-year-old who had an anoxic brain injury and stopped breathing after he had a tonsillectomy.The entire verdict came against Dr. Andrew M. Shapiro, the doctor who plaintiffs Reginald Graham and Tykeisha Metz alleged chose to have the boy monitored at a pediatric ward. The plaintiffs argued Shapiro failed to tell nurses caring for the baby about, and how to care for, the boy's enhanced risk for respiratory failure.The jury came back on June 19 and awarded Reginald Graham and Tykeisha Mets $500,000 in non-economic damages and $686,170 in loss of future earning capacity, according to the plaintiffs counsel.According to the statement, the baby's mother brought him to Shapiro because she was "'afraid that he might stop breathing during his sleep,'" the plaintiffs' pretrial statement said. Shapiro performed a sleep study and observed the baby's Apnea Hypopnea Index to be 43 — four times higher than what's considered severe. A tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy were performed.According to the plaintiffs, the baby's sleep study results put him at an increased risk for post-operative respiratory complications. Despite this, they argued in the statement, Shapiro ordered the pediatric nurses at the Harrisburg Hospital general pediatric ward to observe the boy as they would any other patients — about once every four hours.The pretrial statement said that one in four children who have an AHI in the 40s and oxygen desaturation below 80 have some type of respiratory problem. The younger the child, the greater the risk of a respiratory problem, the statement said.According to the statement, Shapiro took off the child's pulse oximeter, the finger-mounted device used to measure blood oxygen, and ordered a heart and respiratory rate monitor. The child was 11 months old at the time.The plaintiffs pled that the baby was last seen at 4 a.m. There was no record of his oxygen saturation for the next hour and 45 minutes. He stopped breathing a 6:40 a.m., and his brain was without oxygen long enough to cause demonstrable injury on an MRI."Immediately prior to his surgery, [the child] was a normal child, who could say mama, eat finger foods, and was just on the verge of walking," the statement said. "After his code, [he] was like a newborn. He could not lift his head or sit up. He could not talk. He could not move."In his pretrial statement, Shapiro argued that he recognized the child's pre-operative sleep study showed he was driven to breath by decreased blood oxygen saturation, which he said was typical in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.He argued the American Academy of Otolaryngology dictates that admission to the intensive care unit is not the standard of care. In the statement, he said nurses did not observe signs of respiratory distress. No alarms sounded until the child arrested, the statement said.He said the baby likely arrested as a result of hypoglycemia and/or an acute aspiration, which he argued would not have been identified by blood oxygen saturation.— Ben Present, of the Law Weekly
View Results
$1,024,040.80 Auto Accidents
Scott Cooper settled a wrongful death case on behalf of the widow of a police office who was killed in a car accident in the line of duty for $1,024,040.80. The claim against the other driver was amicably resolved before suit was filed for the entire available policy limits for the other driver. The case took place in Adams County, PA.
View Results

Testimonials

Very caring and compassionate
Debra Zervanos
Gerry and his team were very caring and compassionate. Gerry was always very responsive to me whether it be phone calls or emails. He kept me updated every single step of the way. His team and himself worked tirelessly to get me the best possible outcome to my situation. He was able to wrap everything up within two years with a nice bow on it. I will forever be grateful and will recommend him to everyone.
Dakota Cravener
Solid, trustworthy and lucky to have on your side! Dennis Kergick represented me and I was very impressed. Finally a down to earth and easy to talk to attorney . When the time came he was a junk yard dog and I could see the opposing counsel was intimidated. All while maintaining a professional level of respect and courtesy. Would recommend to friends and family. Keep up the good work!!
It’s hard to believe it’s been four years already, but I’m still deeply thankful for my experience with Dennis. Now living in Illinois, I’ve had some similar encounters, and people here are often surprised — and even a bit shocked — when they hear my story. They always end up admitting just how good Dennis truly was. It’s something I didn’t fully realize at the time, but the more I share, the more it’s confirmed to me. God bless, and thank you I came back stronger than ever.
I wanted you to know that I'm so glad that I switched to Schmidt Kramer and that you are my Attorney. I think you are doing a great job for me, and wanted you to know that, A+++Thank you againKen