Chris Thayer Seattle Personal Injury Attorney
(206) 340-2008
Seattle Personal Injury Attorney Chris Thayer
Handling Personal Injury Claims in the Seattle Area and Throughout Washington Since 1995

Hello, and thank you for visiting my website. My name is Chris Thayer and I am a personal injury attorney practicing in downtown Seattle. I handle personal injury, medical malpractice and wrongful death claims throughout the greater Seattle area, including Issaquah, Mercer Island and Kirkland. I am here to help you. I have developed this website to provide information about me, the services my law firm provides, and to give the consumer some basic background information and resources relating to personal injury claims in Washington state.

Contact Me

The Seattle Personal Injury Blog

Fewer DUI Arrests, but Not Fewer DUI Fatalities

Posted Friday, July 7, 2017 by Chris Thayer

Fewer people are being arrested for driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, but DUI fatalities are rising and there is no indication that there are fewer drunk or drugged drivers on Washington roads. According to the Washington Traffic Safety Commission, DUI fatalities rose steadily between 2011 and 2015, but according to the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, more than 10,000 fewer DUI suspects were arrested in 2015 than in 2011.

(Note that Washington law defines impaired driving as driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol with a blood concentration level of 0.08% or above.)

There are numerous reasons why number of DUI arrests has gone down, including a shortage of state troopers and changes in DUI procedures that have increased the amount of time required to process a DUI. Regardless of the factors involved, if you are injured by a drunk driver, you deserve compensation for your medical expenses, lost wages, and other related damages.

Recent Accidents Caused by Drunk Drivers

Here are a few examples of car accidents that were allegedly caused by people driving under the influence (in these cases, police arrested all of the alleged DUI drivers):

  • On July 1, two passengers were killed when the driver of their car lost control while going around a curve on Highway 27. The car rolled off the road and hit several trees before catching fire. The two passengers died at the scene and the driver was taken to the hospital with injuries. Police say that drugs and/or alcohol were involved, and the driver has been taken into custody.
  • On June 21, a member of the Spokane school board allegedly clipped a bicyclist and then fled the scene before crashing into a power pole. Paul Schneider was charged with, among other offenses, driving while under the influence. According to police reports, Schneider tried to pass a vehicle on Rockwood Boulevard when he hit a bicyclist who was traveling in the bike lane. He did not stop to offer assistance.
  • On June 20, a man pulled over on I-90 just east of Issaquah to help a woman having car troubles. He was struck and killed by a suspected drunk driver. The woman was also injured when the drunk driver struck her car. Her 11-year-old daughter, who was also in the car, did not sustain any injuries. The alleged drunk driver continued on past the accident but eventually lost control of his vehicle and ran off the road. Police arrested the man, who was uninjured.

These accident victims (or their families) likely have cause to bring personal injury lawsuits against the responsible parties. Note that passengers, even those riding in the car responsible for an accident, may also bring personal injury lawsuits against negligent drivers.

Contact Us Today

Contact one of our personal injury attorneys today for a free consultation if you or a loved one were injured by a drunk driver. We will help you receive the compensation that you deserve, including medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.

Potential Defenses that Might be Used Against You in a Personal Injury Case

Posted Saturday, July 1, 2017 by Chris Thayer

Before filing a personal injury lawsuit, it is important to be aware of the defenses that could be used against you. Here are several examples, which might or might not apply to your particular case. Always consult with an experienced personal injury attorney, who will help you build an effective case.

Defense 1: The Plaintiff was Under the Influence of Drugs or Alcohol.

If an injured plaintiff was under the influence of drugs or alcohol when the accident occurred, and that intoxication was a proximate cause of the injury, and a jury finds that the plaintiff was more than 50% at fault, then the fact of intoxication is a complete defense to an action for damages. The same is true in a wrongful death lawsuit, if the person killed was under the influence at the time.

That does not mean that injured plaintiffs can never recover damages if they were under the influence. Whether this defense applies depends on their level of fault.

Defense 2: The Plaintiff was Partly to Blame for his or her Own Injury.

Washington is a comparative fault state. If you are partially at fault for your injuries then any damages awarded to you will be reduced by your percentage of fault. For example, if the jury determines that you are 20% at fault, then you can only recover 80% of the damages.

Defense 3: The Plaintiff Assumed the Risk.

“Assumption of risk” is a controversial defense and is not always applicable. In fact, Washington law’s definition of “fault” includes “unreasonable assumption of risk,” which means that certain parties cannot escape legal liability by claiming that a particular injury was not their fault because the injured person knew about the risk involved.

So, what is assumption of risk? Generally, it means that when someone voluntarily participates in an activity with known, inherent risks, that person cannot sue for injuries sustained by participating in that activity unless the injuries were caused by someone else’s negligence and not the activity itself. For example, if you break a leg while playing college football you probably can not sue the school for damages because you knew the risks involved. However, if you can prove that your injury was actually caused by the school’s negligence (like improper field maintenance), you might have a case.

Defense 4: The Plaintiff did Not File the Lawsuit Within the Statutory Time Limit.

This defense is difficult to get around. Generally, there is a three-year statute of limitations in which to file a personal injury lawsuit. Adults have three years from the date of the accident to file a claim. But Washington law delays the limitations period for children. The clock does not start running until the child’s 18th birthday, which means the child has until his or her 21st birthday to file a claim.

There is an exception for medical malpractice cases where your injuries are not readily apparent. In that case, you have one year from the date the injury is discovered to file a lawsuit.

Contact Us Today

Contact one of our personal injury attorneyspersonal injury attorneys today for a free consultation if you are thinking about filing a personal injury lawsuit. We will help you build an effective case and receive the compensation that you deserve.

Amusement Park Injuries

Posted Sunday, June 25, 2017 by Chris Thayer

Thrill-seekers love visiting amusement parks. While the amusement park industry tries to ensure the safety of park-goers, sometimes the rides malfunction and riders are injured or killed as a result.

Several people were injured at a Port Townsend festival in May when a ferris wheel cart flipped over. The accident happened during the annual Rhody Festival, when three people riding the Ferris Wheel fell 15 to 18 feet to the ground. Two women and a boy were taken to local hospitals with injuries.

Government Oversight of Amusement Parks

The federal government stopped regulating amusement parks decades ago, leaving it to the states to establish their own oversight systems. Most states, including Washington, have a dedicated agency responsible for inspecting amusement park rides, but there are states that lack this oversight authority. In Washington state, the Department of Labor & Industries is responsible for inspecting amusement park rides to ensure that they have been set up properly.

The Department of Labor & Industries revoked the permit for the ferris wheel after the accident in Port Townsend. Unfortunately, this was not the first time that one of Funtastic Travelling Shows’ rides malfunctioned and caused injuries. In this case, the amusement company has taken proactive steps to make sure that the injured parties have access to the facts in case they decide to sue the company for damages. The company asked that a court force the deposition of its employees.

Other Examples of Amusement Park Accidents

In August of 2016, a man died at Wild Waves Theme Park in Federal Way. Authorities at the time called it an “apparent drowning” because his body was discovered at the bottom of one of the activity pools. Investigators later determined that the man did, in fact, drown, but the cause was unclear.

In 2013, a 52-year-old woman visiting a Six Flags in Texas fell off of a roller coaster that stands 14 stories high. She fell 75 feet and hit her head on a support beam, which was determined to be the cause of her death.

In 2011, an Iraq War veteran who had lost both of his legs in a roadside bombing visited an amusement park in New York with his nephew. A park employee told the man that he would be able to ride all of the rides despite his disability. But the veteran fell out of a roller coaster and died when the lap bar was unable to hold him.

**If You or a Loved One is Injured at an Amusement Park

** After receiving medical attention, the first thing that you should do is contact an experienced personal injury attorney, who can help you determine your next steps. One important thing to remember in filing a personal injury lawsuit is that you only have three years from the date of the injury to file your claim for damages.

Contact Us Today

Contact one of our personal injury attorneyspersonal injury attorneys today for a free consultation if you have been injured at a festival or other amusement park. We will help you receive the compensation that you deserve.

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Affects Where You Can File Lawsuits

Posted Saturday, June 17, 2017 by Chris Thayer

Sometimes the procedure matters more than the substance. For example, a lawsuit can be dismissed if the plaintiff doesn’t file it in the proper court. While that same lawsuit could be refiled in a different court, it is less costly and more efficient to get it right the first time around. Plus, there might be statute of limitations issues (the statutory time limit for bringing certain claims) if the plaintiff has to refile his or her claims elsewhere.

But a recent U.S. Supreme Court case made it a little more challenging for plaintiffs filing personal injury lawsuits. The court ruled that a railroad company could not be sued in Montana for business-related injuries that occurred outside of Montana.

The Facts of the Case

The Supreme Court case actually involved two lawsuits. One was filed by a North Dakota resident named Robert Nelson, who claimed that he injured his knee while working for BNSF Railway Company in Washington state. The second was filed by the wife of a former BNSF employee, Kelli Tyrrell, who claimed that her husband died from cancer after being exposed to chemicals during the course of his employment for the railroad. She was appointed the administrator of her husband’s estate in South Dakota.

The lawsuits were filed in Montana state courts. The Montana courts asserted personal jurisdiction over BNSF Railway under a state rule giving courts authority to decide cases involving “persons found” in Montana. (“Personal jurisdiction” refers to the authority that a court has over the particular parties in a lawsuit.) In other words, according to this rule, because BNSF Railway conducts business in Montana, the company can be sued there.

The Supreme Court’s Decision

Not so fast, said the Supreme Court. The court held that Montana’s rule permitting such overarching jurisdiction violates the U.S. Constitution. While BNSF operates railroad lines in 28 states, including Montana, the company is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in Texas. Montana cannot subject BNSF to personal jurisdiction in the state solely because the company does some business there, especially since the injuries in these lawsuits were not caused in Montana.

The court’s decision applies to every state, not just Montana. A state cannot assert personal jurisdiction over a party solely because it does business in that state.

What Does This Decision Mean For My Personal Injury Lawsuit?

It is important to understand the concept of personal jurisdiction and the limits of a particular court’s authority over a particular type of lawsuit and particular parties. The concept of personal jurisdiction is that a party must have certain contacts with a particular state in order for its courts to have authority over that party. Plaintiffs can’t just pick random jurisdictions to file lawsuits, or jurisdictions that they think might be more favorable to them. That’s important to keep in mind because plaintiffs who sue in the wrong court can easily have their claims dismissed.

Contact Us Today

Contact one of our personal injury attorneys today for a free consultation if you have been injured by someone else’s negligence. We can help you decide your best course of action, including finding the best jurisdiction for you to file your lawsuit.

Court Upholds $50 Million Wrongful Birth Verdict

Posted Saturday, June 10, 2017 by Chris Thayer

You’ve heard of a wrongful death lawsuit, but did you know that you can also sue for wrongful birth? It’s a delicate and personal issue, but unfortunately one that many families face. It involves a duty of care owed to parents and their children, who deserve to know the truth about the medical risks involved in new life.

What Is a “Wrongful Birth”?

The Washington Supreme Court first recognized that “wrongful birth” and “wrongful life” are legitimate causes of action in 1983.

Leonard Harbeson served in the air force, and during his tour of duty in 1970 his wife Jean (who was pregnant at the time) was diagnosed with epilepsy. She was prescribed an anticonvulsant drug from doctors at the air force base. She gave birth to a healthy baby boy in 1971.

Jean was eventually prescribed different drugs for her seizures. In 1972 she and Leonard talked about having another baby but were worried about the drug’s’ effect on an unborn child. Doctors told them about a few risks, and they decided to have more children. They had two daughters, born in 1974 and 1975. After their daughters were born Jean and Leonard learned of other possible side effects that their doctors didn’t warn them about – some of which afflicted their daughters. They ultimately sued, and the court held that the parents could sue for wrongful birth.

Moreover, the court found that the daughters could sue for wrongful life. According to the court, “wrongful life is the child’s equivalent of the parents’ wrongful birth action.” The doctor’s’ duty to warn of the side effects extended to the conceived children.

Recent Wrongful Birth Lawsuit

A Washington state appeals court recently upheld a jury verdict awarding $50 million to a King County couple whose son was born with severe birth defects.

Rhea and Brock Wuth were worried that their baby might be born with a rare genetic abnormality that Brock carried. He was told he had a 50 percent chance of passing the gene onto a child. So when Rhea was pregnant they asked that their doctors perform tests to determine whether their baby would be healthy. They did not want a severely disabled child and were planning to terminate the pregnancy if the baby would be born with this genetic problem. The tests came back negative, but when Oliver Wuth was born in 2008, it was clear that something was wrong.

Oliver was born with tiny hands and feet (but long fingers), legs that would not straighten, a head that was turned and bent, and an underdeveloped brain. He will require extensive medical care for the rest of his life. His parents sued for wrongful birth in 2010, claiming that the doctors failed to conduct proper genetic tests. The defendants argued that the $50 million verdict was excessive, but the appeals court upheld it.

Contact Us Today

If you find yourself in a similar situation as the Wuth family, contact one of our personal injury attorneys today for a free consultation. We can help you decide your best course of action.

Chris Thayer Seattle Personal Injury Attorney

For more information, or to schedule an initial, no obligation consultation and case evaluation, please call Chris Thayer at (206) 340-2008 or complete the contact form below:




Please note: the use of the internet for communications with Seattle Personal Injury Attorney Chris Thayer will not establish an attorney-client relationship and messages containing time-sensitive or confidential information should not be sent via e-mail.

* Indicates a required field