Why? Were you blind when walking through there? Did you not see this stuff? Would a sign saying "construction zone" have alerted you more to the fact that stuff was lying around? Does it take a "caution" sign for you to pay attention to your surroundings?
Wouldn't a little common sense have been more in order?
So you cut your arm and a HUGE piece of metal because there wasn't a "caution" sign posted on it. Like you couldn't see a HUGE piece of metal was there without a caution sign.
And are you not cautious around this type of thing without being told by a sign to be cautious?
So what you should have done was notify your manager/supervisor that you had an injury. They have procedures for such things. Such as seeing you got first aid or medical care.
But no - you continued to bleed for 2 hours and took yourself off to the hospital. So now you have no proof that you were injured at work because you didn't report it.
And by the way - I doubt it was a "gash" if there were no stitches involved.
So, what kind of lawsuit do you have in mind? I've never heard of one being filed for inconvenience.
Yes, I believe a cut on the arm will hurt for a day or two. However, doesn't prevent you from being on the computer - does it?
So, no, I don't think you have a legitimate lawsuit. You didn't report it when it happened. You waited 2 hours and dealt with it on your own. So you can't even prove that it happened at work. You didn't give your employer an opportunity to help you. There weren't even any stitches so you aren't even injured that badly.
Be sure you put "caution" signs around your house so people will not walk blindly into the walls.
Drunk driving is no accident.
There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 – 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), "A motor vehicle crash is considered to be alcohol-related if at least one driver or non-occupant (such as a pedestrian or pedalcyclist) involved in the crash is determined to have had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .01 gram per deciliter (g/dL) or higher. Thus, any fatality that occurs in an alcohol-related crash is considered an alcohol-related fatality. The term 'alcohol-related' does not indicate that a crash or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol."
Note the last paragraph, and in particular, the last sentence. This would seem to make the statistics below a little misleading since we tend to think that alcohol-related crashes are caused by drunk drivers. But if a sober driver kills an alcohol-impaired pedestrian, it's still considered an alcohol-related crash. Does this invalidate the drunk driving statistics below? No. The statistics reveal that most fatal alcohol-related crashes do indeed involve drunk drivers and far fewer of these fatalities involve intoxicated pedestrians or "bicyclists and other cyclists".
Nationwide in 2005, alcohol was present in 24 percent of the drivers involved in fatal crashes (BAC .01-.07, 4 percent; BAC .08 or greater, 20 percent).
The 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 (39% of total traffic fatalities for the year) represent a 5-percent reduction from the 17,732 alcohol related fatalities reported in 1995 (42% of the total).
The 16,885 fatalities in alcohol-related crashes during 2005 represent an average
of one alcohol-related fatality every 31 minutes.
Of the 16,885 people who died in alcohol-related crashes in 2005, 14,539 (86%) were killed in crashes where at least one driver or nonoccupant had a BAC of .08 or higher.
The drunk driving statistics show that raffic fatalities in alcohol-related crashes fell by 0.2 percent, from 16,919 in 2004 to 16,885 in 2005. [Note that this figure for 2004 is higher than what we've shown for 2004 (16,694 deaths) because our data came from preliminary reports. The final government report counted more drunk driving deaths.]
NHTSA estimates that alcohol was involved in 39 percent of fatal crashes and in
7 percent of all crashes in 2005. The national rate of alcohol-related fatalities in
motor vehicle crashes in 2005 was 0.57 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled.
An estimated 254,000 persons were injured in crashes where police reported that alcohol was present — an average of one person injured approximately every 2 minutes.
In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program
estimated that over 1.4 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. This is an arrest rate of 1 for every 139 licensed
drivers in the United States. (2005 data not yet available.)
In 2005, 21 percent of the children age 14 and younger who were killed in motor
vehicle crashes were killed in alcohol-related crashes.
In 2005, a total of 414 (21%) of the fatalities among children age 14 and younger
occurred in crashes involving alcohol. Of those 414 fatalities, more than half (224)
of those killed were passengers in vehicles with drivers with BAC levels of .01 or higher.
Another 48 children age 14 and younger who were killed in traffic crashes in 2005
were pedestrians or pedalcyclists who were struck by drivers with BAC .01 or higher.
The rate of alcohol involvement in fatal crashes is more than 3 times higher
at night as during the day. For all crashes, the alcohol involvement rate is 5 times higher at night.
The highest percentage of drivers in fatal crashes who had BAC levels of .08 or
higher was for drivers ages 21 to 24 followed by the 25 to 34 age group.
click for stats and charts of fatalities since the 90's to 2005: