This Week's Most Notable Personal Injury Stories

Happy Friday! ?? Welcome to this week's edition of Enjuris Briefs. Our team of dedicated attorney editors has hand-selected the most notable—and notably amusing—personal injury stories from the past week.

Top Legal Stories

Passengers File First Lawsuits Against Delta After Toronto Crash

Just days after Delta Air Lines offered $30,000 to each passenger aboard a flight that crash-landed and flipped on the runway in Toronto, the airline is facing two lawsuits — with more likely on the horizon. A Texas passenger claims the harrowing experience of being "suspended upside down" and "drenched with jet fuel" caused him severe emotional distress and physical injuries, while a Minneapolis woman alleges she suffered extreme bodily and mental injuries. Both lawsuits argue the flight crew failed to follow basic landing procedures.

While Delta's $30,000 offer comes with "no strings attached," passengers injured on international flights have additional rights under the Montreal Convention, which allows for compensation up to $200,000 — or more if negligence is proven. Delta has defended the qualifications of its flight crew amid online rumors and is cooperating with Canadian investigators.

Diddy’s Lawyer Quits, Says "Under No Circumstances" Can He Represent Rapper

One of Sean "Diddy" Combs' attorneys is making a dramatic exit, telling a Manhattan federal court that "under no circumstances" can he continue representing the rapper in his sex trafficking case. Defense attorney Anthony Ricco didn’t explain the reason for his sudden departure, but the court will need to approve his withdrawal before it’s official.

Combs, 55, remains jailed without bail, awaiting a May 5 trial on federal sex trafficking charges. Prosecutors allege Combs used money, drugs, and threats to coerce victims into sexual performances — part of a growing legal storm that also includes several civil sexual assault lawsuits.

Georgia Senate Advances Tort Reform Bill After Political Arm-Twisting

Georgia’s Senate passed a sweeping tort reform bill on Friday, delivering a key victory to Gov. Brian Kemp — but not without some backroom dealmaking to secure the final votes.

Senate Bill 68, which now moves to the House, would tighten the rules on when property owners can be held liable for injuries, block attorneys from recovering fees twice for the same case, and allow separate trials to determine liability and damages. It also aims to make it easier for defendants to dismiss baseless lawsuits before they rack up steep pretrial costs.

Supporters say the bill will lower business costs and reduce insurance premiums, while critics argue it guts consumer protections with no promise of savings. A late compromise — allowing jurors to see both the original medical bills and the lower amounts actually paid — helped win over skeptical Republican senators who are also attorneys. But the real power play came from Kemp’s team, which openly threatened to bankroll primary challengers against any Republican who dared oppose or weaken the bill.

SWAT Raid Leaves Innocent Homeowner in Legal Limbo — Who Pays?

After a SWAT team tore through her South Bend, Indiana home in a botched 2022 raid, Amy Hadley was left with busted windows, tear gas-soaked walls, and a house that was unlivable for days. But when Hadley tried to hold the city and police department responsible for the destruction, a federal judge tossed most of her case, ruling the damage wasn’t compensable under the Fifth Amendment. Now, Hadley’s attorney is asking the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider, arguing that police shouldn’t get a free pass to wreck innocent homeowners’ property in the name of law enforcement.

At the heart of the case is a fundamental question: When police destroy property during a lawful search, does the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause require compensation? The city argues no — damage from lawful policing isn’t a “taking.” Hadley’s lawyer says innocence matters, and property owners who haven’t committed any wrongdoing deserve compensation when their homes become collateral damage. The appellate court’s decision could have far-reaching implications for homeowners caught in the crossfire of police operations.

This case is eerily similar to another case heading to the United States Supreme Court, in which a family sued after their home was destroyed in a SWAT raid.

Parents’ Lawsuit Against YouTube & TikTok Over "Choking Challenge" Hits Legal Wall

A California federal judge has dismissed — for now — a lawsuit brought by grieving parents accusing YouTube and TikTok of failing to remove deadly “choking challenge” videos. The parents claim the platforms’ defective reporting tools gave them false hope that harmful content would be taken down, but U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia DeMarchi found the complaint lacked clarity on what specific design flaw made the tools defective.

The judge also ruled that the case largely hinges on content moderation decisions — an area shielded by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms from liability for third-party content. The court gave the parents until March 24 to amend their complaint, but unless they can find a way to sidestep Section 230, the case faces an uphill climb.

Tragic Fall Claims Life of College Gymnast — Family Files Wrongful Death Lawsuit

The family of 20-year-old Southern Connecticut State University gymnast Melanie Coleman has filed a wrongful death lawsuit following the tragic training accident that led to her death. Coleman, a nursing major and decorated student-athlete, suffered a fatal spinal cord injury in November 2019 after slipping off the uneven bars and striking her head on the wall of a foam pit at a training facility in Hamden. She passed away two days later.

The lawsuit alleges the training facility’s setup and conditions led directly to Coleman’s fatal injury, describing the incident as a violent impact that caused blunt force trauma and a broken neck. Described by coaches as a talented athlete and beloved teammate, Coleman was also a youth gymnastics instructor and had been recognized nationally for her academic and athletic achievements. The case highlights the dangers athletes face, even in training environments meant to protect them.

Amusing Legal Story

Prosecutor’s Witchcraft & Menstrual Blood Claims Get Case Tossed — No Retrial Allowed

In one of the most bizarre cases of prosecutorial misconduct in recent memory, the New Mexico Supreme Court has barred the retrial of a woman accused of murder after finding her trial was poisoned by inflammatory theatrics, including accusations of witchcraft, black-eyed possession, and even menstrual blood magic. The assistant district attorney repeatedly called the defendant a "witch" and "bruja" who controlled her husband through "menstrual blood concoctions" — all in front of the jury.

The misconduct didn’t stop there. During opening statements, the prosecutor described the defendant’s eyes turning "black with fury and rage," causing the room to feel heavy with supernatural energy. The court described the trial as a three-day "exercise in pathos and character assassination" that utterly deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Adding to the circus, the defense attorney failed to object to nearly any of it.

The New Mexico Supreme Court found the prosecutor’s conduct so outrageous — and the prejudice to the defendant so severe — that retrying her would violate double jeopardy under the state constitution. As the court bluntly put it, "there is absolutely no scenario in which it is acceptable for a prosecutor to accuse a defendant of witchcraft in a twenty-first-century court."

Quote of the Week

“It was an accident.” - Judge Jeffrey Ferguson?

In a follow-up to the story we covered in last week’s Enjuris Briefs, Orange County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Ferguson took the stand to testify in his own murder trial — claiming the fatal shooting of his wife, Sheryl Ferguson, was an accident. Ferguson admitted to drinking heavily the night of the shooting, violating his concealed carry permit, but insisted he never intended to kill her. “I didn’t mean to kill her. It was an accident,” he told the court.

Prosecutors paint a different picture, alleging the couple’s heated argument escalated when Ferguson pulled his gun from an ankle holster and shot Sheryl after she taunted him to “use a real gun.” Ferguson, however, claims his shoulder gave out while trying to place the gun on a coffee table, accidentally firing the weapon. His testimony continues this week as the case — which has already drawn national attention — moves forward.

About Enjuris

We connect individuals affected by injuries with attorneys, empowering survivors and fostering attorney growth. Join our community, trusted by over two million annual visitors, by becoming an attorney contributor or partner.

Visit Enjuris to learn more.?