Topic: Product Liability

How Come No One Is Taking My North Carolina Concussion Seriously?

June 27, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

If you suffered a concussion in Charlotte or elsewhere in North Carolina, most people will be sensitive to your situation will provide support, good wishes, and care. But not everyone will understand your dilemma or be sensitive to your medical needs. Many people just don’t understand — or at least don’t fully understand — what it means to suffer a concussion.

As a result, they may encourage victims to return to vigorous activity before such activity is safe. For instance, a high school football coach may “shrug off” a young linebacker’s complaints of headache and dizziness and encourage him to go return to a big game.

As a result of that careless decision, the poor young kid can suffer a second impact injury, which can lead to edema, permanent neurological dysfunction, stroke, and even death. On a less dramatic note, subtle actions that demonstrate a lack of compassion or understanding can also cause harm. For instance, let’s say that your young son fell off a wall and conked his head. For the past several days, he has been resting in bed for 15 hours a day. You understand that “he is not feeling good,” but you also want him to go back to school and “shake it off.” So you might gently encourage him to stop resting so much and “rejoin the world.”

Even though you may not intend to do any harm, if you rush him through the healing process, you can make rehabilitation longer, more painful, and more fraught.

Conversely, careless/uncaring people can make errors of neglect or omission that can redound to horrible effect. For instance, in the situation described above, maybe the child really needs to see a doctor immediately because he’s suffering bleeding in the brain or some other horrible symptom. If a caregiver fails to take action to get proper medical help within the proper timeframe, irreversible damage can occur.

These points may seem obvious. But many people who suffer brain injuries accidentally feed into this behavior by “striving to please” or forcing themselves too hard. Now is not the time to worry about your boss, your coach, your teacher, or your friends. Now is the time to worry about brain injury — healing from the trauma and getting the rest and astute medical care you need.

To remove at least one worry from your plate, consider getting in touch with the Charlotte traumatic brain injury law firm of DeMayo Law today. We can begin to investigate your case and make sure that you are situated for a powerful legal response, so that you can rest a little easier. Call us now at (877) 529-1222 for thorough help.

Putting the Pieces of Your Traumatic Brain Injury Together: When You Can’t Remember What Happened

June 17, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

Here’s a very common problem with North Carolina traumatic brain injury cases.

A person gets hurt in a car accident, slip and fall, workplace disaster, or a fight. But because of the brain injury, the person can’t recall the events that led to the injury in an accurate, linear, and coherent way.

So what you do?

The solution must be concocted on a case-by-case basis. Certain strategies might be useful in some cases but not others. For instance, let’s say that you got hurt at a Charlotte construction site, when a coworker switched off a piece of machinery while you were riveting. The jolt from that action set you tumbling off your platform to the ground. In that case, perhaps video footage recorded the fall, or other tracking devices might have gleaned evidence that can be used forensically to piece together the situation. Or maybe a coworker or other witness saw you fall.

What about situations in which the injured person gets hurt, and no one sees what happened?

This happens a lot with car accident cases. For instance, a person might drive solo on a wind-y Raleigh street during the middle of the winter, slip on a patch of black ice, and hit a tree. The driver might get a serious brain injury and be unable to remember why he slipped. In this kind of case, indirect forensic techniques could help to discern the cause of the accident.

For instance, maybe the tire patterns on the road could offer clues about why the car slipped on ice. Or maybe a detailed examination can reveal that the braking system failed.

The point is that, as a victim or friend/family member of a TBI victim, you don’t really need to worry about the details of the forensics as much as you do need to worry about obtaining effective legal counsel as early as you can in the process, so that that counsel can begin an immediate investigation and assemble the proper forensics.

To that end, get in touch with the DeMayo Law team today, so we can help you get a handle on your situation and build an effective case going forward.

How Much Will You Need to Be Involved with Your North Carolina Mass Tort Lawsuit?

June 9, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

You are on offense. As someone who was injured (or whose loved one was injured), you are seriously considering filing a North Carolina class action or mass tort lawsuit — or an independent personal injury action.
On the other hand, you’re dubious. The thought of getting wrapped up in some complex legal action fills you with dread, because you don’t want to get roped into being a “lead plaintiff.” You want to forget about the traumatic experience — not have to relive it for months or years.

So how much, exactly, will you have to be involved in your legal fight?
The answer depends.

Obviously, if you choose to be a lead plaintiff — and if you’re pursuing a massive case against a huge company that could settle for tens of millions of dollars — then you obviously need to be pretty involved. However, the process is less involved and less confusing than you believe.
Assuming you pick a North Carolina class action law firm that’s a good fit for your needs — that shares your values and vision, and that has the experience and resources to argue effectively on your behalf — you won’t have to do much at all. That’s one of the beautiful things about finding good legal representation: When you’re well represented, you won’t have nagging questions distracting you from your day-to-day business and from the important work of recovery. You can focus all your attention on getting better, on fixing your financial problems, and on healing yourself psychologically.
While you ultimately need to “do more work” as a plaintiff in a class action or personal injury lawsuit than would if you “did nothing” about your case, the peace of mind that you’ll get will undoubtedly cancel out the extra work that you need to do.
For instance, if you don’t do anything, you might waste hours or even days’ worth of your time ruminating about aspects of your case or aspects of how to handle an insurance company.
That’s time you will never get back — time that you could spend relaxing or being productive.
Also — it should go without saying — but if you WIN your case, you should get well compensated for your injuries and damages. You will receive nothing, if you do nothing.
In summary: If you’ve been hesitant about connecting with an attorney, that hesitancy makes all the sense in the world. However, you might find it worthy to examine what’s at to the root of that hesitancy. Are you just scared about the time commitment? Because if so, that fear really doesn’t make objective sense. If not, probe deeper to understand what’s really going on — why, fundamentally, are you resistant to getting the help that you really need?

Really Sad North Carolina Mass Tort News

June 2, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

Documenting North Carolina class action and mass tort lawsuits can be a sad and dispiriting exercise.

The lengths to which some companies will go to obfuscate the truth and to strive for profits at the expense of the wellbeing of human beings can shake one’s faith in humanity.

Consider, for instance, the recent resolution of a seriously twisted case out of New Jersey. A generic drug manufacturer, Par Pharmaceutical, pled guilty to charges to end civil and criminal investigations into its behavior. The drug maker will pay $45 million as punishment for marketing an AIDS drug, Megace ES, illegally for “off label uses.”

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) had allowed the drug maker to sell Megace ES to treat anorexia and unexplained weight loss in AIDS patients. But the company tried to expand its consumer base by selling the drug to elderly people who didn’t have AIDS.

According to a U.S. attorney who worked on the case, Paul Fishman, “Par admitted to choose to ignore [the FDA approval process for new uses of medications] in pursuit of more sales and greater profits … the conduct was wrong and went on for a long period of time.”

The company sent sales forces to call on nursing homes and hospice facilities to sell the drug. They also sought out confidential patient data to find people who could be switched to the expensive drug. According to plaintiff’s lawyers, Par refused to acknowledge the potential safety effects on patients because “there is little profit to be made by marketing the drug lawfully, due to advancements in HIV and AIDS treatments which drastically reduced the on label patient population.

It’s really a shame that we need lawyers and whistleblowers to watchdog large pharmaceutical companies and medical equipment manufacturers.

In an ideal world, these companies would do due diligence and take it upon themselves to vet their products and ensure patient health and wellbeing over their own profitability. After all, if you’re going in business to help people manage their medical conditions, your fundamental obligation is to your customers.

Unfortunately, the real world is full of disappointing situations.

If you or someone you love was harmed as a result of some company’s negligence, carelessness, omission, or other malfeasance, the law offices of Michael A. DeMayo would be happy to advise you. Please call us at (877) 529-1222 to get a confidential, free evaluation of your case. Let us help you ensure justice and gain some peace of mind.

Your North Carolina Injury is Not the End of the World (Probably)–or At Least You Won’t Feel This Unhappy Forever

May 26, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

You’re deeply depressed by your recent North Carolina injury. Whether some idiot in a truck bashed your car by blowing through a stop sign, or a doctor misread your chart and gave you a medication that made you literally sick to your stomach, you are in pain. You are angry; you are confused; and you are deeply dismayed by your situation and the prospects for your future.

Obviously, what’s done is done. You can’t go back in time and undo the North Carolina truck accident or reverse the doctor’s negligent decisions. And you may indeed have a long road to hoe. You might never regain function of your leg. You might need to be in a wheelchair for the rest of your life. You might never be able to work as you once did. The brain damage caused by the accident may permanently limit your ability to be productive to two to three hours a day.

When you sit there and contemplate these scenarios–particularly the worst case scenarios–you can easily spiral into depression and apathy. This is really unfortunate. When you are depressed and/or apathetic, you may fail to take important kinds of action–such as contacting a reputable North Carolina mass tort law firm ASAP–because you feel too hopeless to persevere.

This is a shame, because science shows that our emotional immune systems are remarkably resilient.

Even IF a worst case scenarios plays out for you–e.g. you’re permanently hobbled by the accident or no longer able to work in a career that you love–these setbacks will not doom you to a lifetime of depression and unhappiness. Or at least they don’t necessarily mark you with that destiny.

That may sound very counterintuitive. But if you look at the research, those statements bare out.

Lottery winners notoriously experience euphoria for the first weeks or months after they win. But they ultimately wind up just as happy–and just as sad!–as they were before the pay day.

Likewise, people injured so severely that they are left as quadriplegics suffer extreme depression in the first few weeks and months. But they ultimately rebound to feel just as happy as they did before the devastating event.

This isn’t to say that you don’t have problems — that you shouldn’t feel depressed or anything. Rather, you should appreciate that your current emotional state is probably temporary.

Even more importantly, you need to avoid getting trapped by your emotions into “doing nothing” and/or into making impulsive and not-strategic actions that can have negative long-term implications for your finances and healthcare options.

To that end, consider connecting with the DeMayo Law team now at (877) 529-1222 for a free consultation, so that we can put you on a more strategic path with respect to your case.

North Carolina Class Action News: Legal Fight Over High Sugar, High Caffeine Energy Drinks — A Portent of A Larger Battle To Come?

May 23, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

Are we witnessing the beginnings of a major mass tort battle in North Carolina (and well beyond?)

Perhaps so. And big beverage companies may be on the receiving end.

Last year, for instance, a woman in Australia allegedly died from over consuming Coca-Cola. According to the Chicago Sun Times, a Maryland teenager died after drinking two large Monster Energy drinks in a single 24-hour period. These drinks contain a lot of caffeine and also a lot of sugar. While testifying before Chicago City Council, Edward Burke discussed a federal report “that showed the number of annual hospital visits tied to highly caffeinated energy drinks doubled between 2007 and 2011 — to 21,000.”

According to the President of Chicago Medical Society, Dr. Howard Axe, “super caffeinated energy drinks,” such as Red Bull, Monster Energy, and Rockstar, pose serious health risks, “including possible fatalities to adults and children, particularly those with preexisting conditions.”

The legal brouhaha in Chicago is focused on the adverse health effects of over consuming caffeine. Another, potentially more fraught and momentous debate has to do with the adverse effects of the overconsumption of liquid sucrose. As most famously articulated by pediatric obesity specialist, Dr. Robert Lustig, calories from liquid sucrose may have especially adverse effect on the liver because of the way the fructose component of sucrose gets metabolized by that organ. Lustig builds the case — at least in the doses that modern North Carolinians consume sugar — that “calorie is not a calorie.” The consumption of sugary liquid beverages, like Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and even many fruit juices, may be doing tremendous harm to our population and precipitating problems like metabolic disease, obesity, diabetes, and even heart disease.

So far, obviously, we have yet to see a major class action or mass tort lawsuit against beverage companies. But some health advocates are suggesting that we may be witnessing at least the beginnings of such machinations — they compare our current era to the era a few years before Big Tobacco was held to legal account for advertising and selling dangerous products.

If you have recently been harmed by a product or service, you are probably far less interested in the legal battle over energy drinks than you are with your own wellbeing, financially, medically, and otherwise.

 The team here at the law offices of Michael A. DeMayo proudly represents victims and their families in serious North Carolina personal injury matters. Please get in touch with us today by calling (877) 529-1222, so we can provide you a free consultation and help you get educated and informed about your options.

Our Illogical Reactions to Superstitions: Really Important to Understand, If You Want to Fight Your North Carolina Class Action Optimally…

May 19, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

Whether your son broke his ribs in an SUV rollover, your husband tore his ACL on an amusement park ride, or you suffered a devastating home fire when your space heater malfunctioned, you understand you have the potential to take some kind of legal action and perhaps to participate in a North Carolina class action or mass tort lawsuit.

But you are confused about what to do next. Should you connect with a legal team like DeMayo Law or “deal with the situation yourself” — i.e. work directly with an insurance company?

Everyone has different needs and sensitivities and comforts. But it’s important to be rational rather than impulsive when you make a big decision like this.

We often play to our superstitions rather than to logical common sense.

Consider the diverse nature of our strange beliefs. Whether you are afraid of the number 13; you bet your wedding date when you play the lottery; or you worry about a black cat crossing your path or something along those lines, part of you recognizes that you’re being ridiculous with the superstitions.

You understand that that you are using “magical thinking” and not logic. But even when you “call out” your superstitions — call your own bluff — you may not be able to overpower your subconscious resistance. You may not, for instance, ever feel comfortable sleeping on the 13th floor of a hotel. If you’re Russian, you may refuse to shake someone’s hand when they reach through a doorway to you.

Depending on how deeply you hold strange beliefs, they can really hamper your life.

The point is that wrestling with such strange beliefs–even when you make those beliefs conscious and you appreciate that they’re clearly irrational–is more challenging than meets the eye.

As much as we should “trust our guts” in certain situations, we also need to learn how and when to challenge our intuitions in order to achieve best results.

To that end, if you have reservations about connecting with an attorney–or if you have some strange belief about why you are not someone who “does” lawsuits, reflect on that received wisdom. Are those concepts actually serving you right now?

Consider, for instance, the worst thing that could happen, if you got a consultation with attorney, versus the best thing that could happen if you did. That the more that you can shine rational light on your fears, the more you can move beyond them and make more compelling and useful decisions.

Class Action Lawsuits “Brewing” For Budweiser

May 13, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

Anheuser-Busch, the maker of Budweiser Beer, is facing a pretty serious class action lawsuit that alleges that the brewer watered down its products prior to bottling.

Thus far, plaintiffs in Texas, Pennsylvania, Missouri, New Jersey, Colorado, Ohio, and California have all filed suit against the beer manufacturer based on whistleblowing testimony from former high placed employees in the business–at 13 separate breweries.

Will a North Carolina class action against Budweiser be next?

Anheuser-Busch has fought back vigorously against the bad press–the company recently took out full page ads in The New York Times, The L.A. Times, and eight other major newspapers touting the fact that the company provided 71 million cans of drinking water to the American Red Cross and other disaster organizations. The cheeky headline read “they must have tested one of these.”

But a lead attorney in the case, Josh Boxer, shrugged off the newspaper ad blitz as a “classic non-denial…(the) alcohol readings, taken six times a second as the finished product is bottled, will confirm the allegations made by the growing number of former employees who keep coming forward to tell us the truth.”

In court, Anheuser-Busch will need to produce data on its internal and alcohol testing procedures. Ten different products are tangled up in the legal matter, including well-known brands like Budweiser, Michelob, and Bud Ice as well as more “exotic” brands, like Hurricane High Gravity Lager and Bud Light Lime.

Do you have a potential Charlotte class action lawsuit?

The team here at the Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo can help you understand and defend your rights to get compensation. Depending on your circumstances, you may want to file a personal injury suit or a mass tort action. Our team can help you strategize and determine the most effective, accurate course forward. Call us now for a free consultation, and get clarity on what you need to do.

The End of the Beginning of Your Quest for Justice After a North Carolina Injury

May 10, 2013, by Michael A. DeMayo

In the hours and days since your North Carolina injury–or your family member’s injury- you have been in a mad scramble to get medical care and make sense of your options.

What steps should you be taking (or not taking) to manage the medical crisis, collect evidence, and deal with the urgent logistics in your life? Who is going to take care of the kids while you’re hurt? Who’s going to handle the big work project that you had to drop to deal with the catastrophe? How will you pay the mortgage now that you’ve spent thousands of dollars out of pocket on ambulance and hospital services?

After you wrangle these urgent details, you then need to scramble to recalibrate everything in your life. You will also need to find a way to deal with the tremendous challenges of finding appropriate representation:

  • Do you have a case or not?
  • If so, what should you do first?
  • Whom can you trust?
  • How can you evaluate different law firms against one another?
  • How can you work effectively with a law firm to make sure that you get clear answers and good communication throughout the process?

All of these urgent questions might be on your mind. And they all need to be addressed.

The several lining–if there is one–is that, once you do get all of these things taken care of, assuming you have done everything effectively, you should enjoy renewed peace of mind.

The great gift that a solid North Carolina mass tort law firm can provide is the gift of clarity.

Even though your life may feel like it’s in a million pieces right now–if you know exactly what’s going to happen next and what to expect; and if you have trusted people working on your behalf–much of the stress and agitation will lift.

Obviously, even a superb law firm is not going to magically make your injury go away or eliminate the anger and frustration you feel about what happened. But you should feel a sense of relief and security that you are moving in the right direction.

And when people feel like their lives are moving in a positive direction, they often see passed their immediate limitations and handle the process with more grace and patience.

Connect with the DeMayo Law team right now for strategic, insightful assistance with your Charlotte personal injury matter.

Toddler Undergoes Surgery After Swallowing 37 Magnets

March 11, 2012, by Michael A. DeMayo

Small magnets can pose a dangerous choking hazard. Little enough to place in the mouth and easy to swallow, magnets can also pose other serious dangers—especially when more than one magnet is involved.

Unfortunately, these items don’t lose their magnetic attraction to each other even after ingestion and should they find themselves being pulled toward each other, serious human injury can result, including blood poisoning, the creation of holes in the stomach or intestines, intestinal blockage, or death. Depending on the specifics of what happened, this could be grounds for a Charlotte, North Carolina products liability case.

Recently in the US, a 3-year-old girl had to undergo surgery after she swallowed 37 Buckyballs magnets. The little pieces found each other inside her and when an X-ray was conducted the images showed that the magnets had joined up to form into the shape of a bracelet. (Buckyballs has said that it does warn about the hazards posed by its magnets, which are made for adults.)

Kids and the elderly are especially prone to serious injuries from swallowing magnets. With children, however, the risk is especially high. Very young kids are already prone to putting small items in their mouths to begin with and most of them are not yet able to realize the potential consequences of their actions. Some older kid have also been known to swallow magnets.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission says that it is aware of 33 incidents involving kids swallowing magnets. 19 of these children had to undergo surgery. One child died.

A manufacturer can be held liable for Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury if its defective or dangerous product caused the injury or death. Because of the complexity involved with these types of cases, it is important that you work with an experienced North Carolina injury law firm that understands the nature of products liability cases and knows how to pursue your financial recovery.

In North Carolina, the doctrine of contributory negligence can prevent a plaintiff from recovering anything if his/her negligence was a proximate cause of injury. However, there is a doctrine of last clear chance that can allow this plaintiff to recover compensation if it can be proven that he/she put his/her self in a state of helpless peril, the defendant knew or should have known about this perilous state and the plaintiff’s inability to get out of it and/or could have, by exercising reasonable care, prevented the injury from happening.

Every case is different. By working with an experienced Charlotte, North Carolina products liability lawyer, you increase your chances of recovery.

Contact the Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo, LLP and ask for your free case evaluation.

Toddler swallows 37 magnets, survives, MSNBC, March 6, 2012

High-powered magnets + swallowing by kids = Deadly, CPSC, November 10, 2011

Top 5 dangerous objects kids like to swallow, Time, March 6, 2012

 

More Blog Posts:

Preventing North Carolina Injuries to Kids: NHTSA Introduces ’10-Year-Old Child’ Crash Test Dummy, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, February 29, 2012

Two Newton, North Carolina High School Students Suspended Following Alleged Hazing Assault, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, December 22, 2011

Road Where Charlotte, North Carolina Truck Crash that Claimed the Lives of Two Young Brothers Happened has No Sidewalk, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, February 23, 2012

 

Anticholinergic Meds May Impair the Brain

February 27, 2012, by Michael A. DeMayo

Are some popular drugs, in fact, dangerous drugs? According to The New York Times, many people don’t realize that there are dozens of antihistamines, painkillers, and psychiatric medications that can negatively impact the brain—especially if the person is elderly. The Times reports that taking more than one of the medications that can have this effect may lead to memory loss and cognitive impairment.

These drugs, known as anticholinergics, block the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, which is usually tasked with a number of bodily functions (including cognitive function and memory production.) The drugs’ effects are cumulative.

The reason that older patients are at higher risk of brain impairment is that they are more likely than younger persons to be taking multiple medications on a regular basis. Unfortunately, doctors don’t always know about every medication a patient is taking and they don’t always assess the anticholinergic properties of the medications they prescribe.

According to new findings, reported last year in The Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, researcher of a study that followed over 13,000 British senior citizens, age 65 and above, found over a two year-period that not only did the patients taking two or more anticholinergic meds earn lower scores on cognitive function tests than elderly persons that weren’t taking this type of medication, but also, heavy med users had a 68% percent higher death rate.

In America, at least 20% of the 36 million people belonging to the age 65 and above age group take one or more anticholinergic drugs. Also, in a study of over 4,000 older people, researchers concluded that people who were taking at three or more anticholinergic drugs on a regular basis for at least 90 days were close to three times as likely as seniors that hadn’t taken this type of medication to be diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment.

Anticholinergics

Examples of popular anticholinergics: prednisone, codeine, warfarin, digoxin, Benadryl, Paxil, clozapine, and oxybutynin.  Also, there are a lot of over-the-counter medications, including Tylenol PM, antihistamines, and allergy medications, that if someone were to take them could lead to anticholinergic-related effects.

At the Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo, LLP, our Charlotte, North Carolina dangerous drug lawyers represent clients that became sick or impaired because they took a medication that caused them to suffer a severe side effect. It is important that a drug manufacturer warn of any serious side effects that may result from taking a medication. Over-the-counter drugs, which anyone can pick up without a prescription, are not exempt from this requirement.

Unfortunately, it is the patient that suffers. Examples of other medications that have been linked to serious side effects Celebrex, Fen Phen, Bextra, Fosamax, Ortho Evra, Reglan, PPA, Rezulin, Hydroxycut, HRT, Darvocet, and Darvon.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury law firm know how intimidating it can be to go after a drug company to pursue damages. There is no reason for you to do this without legal help.

Cocktail of Popular Drugs May Cloud the Brain, The New York Times, February 27, 2012

Study looks at medication risk for elderly, NHS, June 24, 2011

The Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 

More Blog Posts:

Prescription Drug-Related Injuries and Deaths Have More than Doubled, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, November 1, 2011

FDA Advisory Panel Meets to Discuss Fosamax and Other Bisphosphonates But Offers No Specific Recommendations on Duration of Long-Term Use, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, September 16, 2011

North Carolina Dangerous Drug: Wrongful Death Lawsuit Blames Yasmin and Ocella Contraceptives for Daughter’s Fatal Pulmonary Embolism, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, June 21, 2011

 

Listeria Contamination Prompts North Carolina Company to Recall Chicken Salad Products

February 7, 2012, by Michael A. DeMayo

A Bear Creek, North Carolina company is recalling approximately 1,200 lbs of a chicken salad item over concerns that the food items may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. The company is Bost Distributing Company under the business name of Harold Food Company and the

The recalled product is called “Harold Food Co. Grand Strand Deluxe Chicken Salad” (30 pounds). It contain eggs that the US Food and Drug Administration has recalled over concerns that they are contaminated with the Listeria bacteria. Each box’s “Sell By” date is February 15, 2012. Its establishment # is “P-20479.”  The food item was distributed in South Carolina and North Carolina. However, thia identifying information may no longer come with the food item if it was sold as repackaged sandwiches.

Listeria monocytogene

Consuming this bacteria can be potentially fatal. While healthy people hardly ever contract the deadly disease known as listeriosis, getting it can lead to severe headaches, high fever, nausea, and neck stiffness. It can also cause stillbirths, miscarriages, and deadly infections in babies, people with weakened immune systems, elderly persons, people suffering from HIV, and those receiving chemotherapy treatment.

North Carolina Products Liability

Food is a product that if it isn’t properly prepared, stored, or preserved, can cause illness, infection, and even death. If you believe that food that you bought or were served caused your sickness or the death of a loved one, you may have grounds for a Charlotte, North Carolina products liability lawsuit.

Food poisoning can be very painful and uncomfortable for the victim and may result in health complications. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), there are about 76 million food poisoning cases in this country alone. Some 300,000 people afflicted by food poisoning will have to go to the hospital. About 5,000 will end up dying.

You may have grounds for a North Carolina products liability case against a food manufacturer, food service provider, or restaurant. In addition to food poisoning, there may be other reasons why you would have grounds for filing a North Carolina food injury lawsuit. For instance, there may have been a foreign object in your food that caused you to break a tooth or injure your jaw. A liquid or prepared food item might have been too hot that you ended up suffering a burn injury as a result. Other illnesses that can result from contaminated food can include:

  • Salmonella
  • Botulism
  • E. coli
  • Shigella
  • Norovirus
  • Hepatitis A.

Illness and even death can also occur if a food item fails to warn that it includes a particular ingredient and because of this someone ends up getting an allergic reaction.

Do not hesitate to contact our Charlotte, North Carolina products liability law firm. The Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo LLP would like to offer you a free case evaluation.

North Carolina Firm Recalls Chicken Salad Products Due To Possible Listeria Contamination, USDA, February 7, 2012

Listeria monocytogenes, FDA

More Blog Posts: 

North Carolina Personal Injury Lawsuit: Charlotte Woman Who Lost Her Breasts and an Arm in Propeller Accident Sues For Damages, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, January 25, 2012

North Carolina Products Liability?: Toning Shoes May Cause Injury, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, August 10, 2011

North Carolina Dangerous Drug: Wrongful Death Lawsuit Blames Yasmin and Ocella Contraceptives for Daughter’s Fatal Pulmonary Embolism, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, June 21, 2011

North Carolina Personal Injury Lawsuit: Charlotte Woman Who Lost Her Breasts and an Arm in Propeller Accident Sues For Damages

January 25, 2012, by Michael A. DeMayo

Deondra Scott, a Charlotte woman who lost her breasts and an arm in a boating accident last summer, is seeking North Carolina products liability and personal injury damages. Scott was seriously injured when a boat propeller struck her during the popular Lake Bash event on Lake Norman, which is bordered by the counties of Iredell, Catawba, Mecklenburg, and Lincoln border Lake Norman.

The 25-year-old claims that while in the water the boat’s propeller hit her twice. In her North Carolina boating accident lawsuit she is suing Dennis F. Allen, David D. Orzolek, and Chaparral Boats Inc.

Scott contends that Allen, who was the boat’s operator, never drove a motorboat prior to that day and he lacked the skill to safely navigate one in a crowded, public area. She says that the propeller hit her as Allen was trying to tie it to another vessel and he still had the engine running.

Allen and Scott had come with a group of friends to the Lake Bash event. According to her North Carolina personal injury lawsuit, people shouted at him to turn off the engine but he “panicked,” redirecting the boat into reverse and causing the propeller to hit her. He then placed the boat’s gear in forward and that was when the propeller to hit her a second time.

Scott is also suing Orzolek, who is the person that Allen rented the boat from, and Chaparral Boats, the company that designed, made, and marketed the vessel. She contends that Orzolek should have known that Allen lacked the experience to safely operate the motorboat and shouldn’t have allowed him to rent the vessel. She believes that Orzolek could/should have done more to enforce appropriate safety procedures to renters.

Scott is seeking North Carolina products liability damages from Chaparral Boats. She is accusing the boat manufacturer of continuing to sell the boat even though its design isn’t safe. Scott says that designing the boat so that seven people end up seated behind the boat operator can obstruct the latter’s view. Also, she claims that the ladder and platform are located just a few feet from the propeller and the vessel came with inadequate warning signs about possible dangers, as well as lighting that wasn’t bright enough.

Scott sustained such severe injuries that she had to have her breasts and an arm amputated. She also suffered a severed sternum, lacerations on her legs, and punctured a lung. She says the accident has left her with serious psychological and emotional problems, medical expenses, permanent injury, scarring, limb loss, lost wages, and other damages.

Boat operators and boating companies must exercise caution so that they don’t end up running over swimmers or striking them with their propellers. Unfortunately, accidents do happen, and serious injuries can happen that may prove fatal. You may have grounds for a Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury case.

Read the Complaint (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Families of Two Parasailing Victims Killed in Ocean Isle Beach Sue for North Carolina Wrongful Death, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, June 25, 2010 

Preventing North Carolina Drowning Accidents: CPSC’s Pool and Spa Drain Cover Recall a Reminder that Entrapment Can Lead to Serious Injuries and Deaths, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, June 6, 2011

Products Liability: Two Families Sue for Wrongful Deaths of Loved Ones Fatally Burned While Wearing Flammable Bathrobes, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, November 6, 2009

Johnson & Johnson and 32 Other Transvaginal Mesh Manufacturers Ordered by FDA to Study Complication Rates

January 12, 2012, by Michael A. DeMayo

The Food and Drug Administration wants 33 manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products to study the rates of health complications, including organ damage, linked to these medical devices. The mandate comes six months after the federal agency reported a fivefold increase in injuries, deaths, and malfunctions related to vaginal mesh implants. The FDA has said that it so far has been unable to verify whether transvaginal mesh provides greater benefits than more traditional devices used to treat stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse.  In fact, the federal agency has warned that mesh implants have been linked to pain during sex, bleeding, infection, severe pain, pelvic perforation, urinary tract erosion, perineal cellulitis, and organ perforation. If you or someone you love suffered health complications from transvaginal mesh, do not hesitate to contact our Charlotte, North Carolina defective medical device lawyers today.

CR Bard Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals Holding Inc., and Johnson & Johnson, Boston Scientific are just a handful of the companies that the FDA has contacted. The federal regulator wants each manufacturer to gather data about potential complications and the outcomes of various transvaginal procedures and conduct trials on effectiveness and safety for three years. The FDA’s letters, which were sent out earlier this week, are calling for the studies to look into devices that are already available for use. Consumers, however, want mesh products that haven’t entered the market to be studied before they are released.

Currently, under the FDA’s 510(k) system, new mesh products that are similar to devices the federal agency has already approved don’t have to undergo human testing to receive their approval. Many of the transvaginal mesh implants that are currently in use can trace their approvals back to the Boston Scientific Corp. mesh (that was recalled in 1999.)

Transvaginal mesh devices have been blamed in over 650 products liability lawsuits against manufacturers. In 2010 alone, nearly 300,000 synthetic mesh products were implanted in women in the US.

Between 2008 and 2010 alone, the FDA was notified of 1,503 adverse occurrences related to mesh used in POP procedures—that’s 5 times more than the number of reports it received during the previous two years. It doesn’t help that for many of the women who experience transvaginal mesh complications they continued to experience ongoing pain afterwards. Additional surgeries to remove the medical device may have been required. (In some cases, the mesh can get so tangled up in scar tissue that it has to stay in the body.)

Our Charlotte, North Carolina transvaginal mesh lawyers know how devastating it can be to sustain injuries or health issues because a medical device failed and/or because of complications that you should’ve been warned about before you underwent the procedure.

J & J, CR Bard Must Study Safety of Vaginal Mesh, FDA says, Bloomberg, January 5, 2011

FDA warns against surgical mesh to repair pelvic problems, Boston.com, July 13, 2011

FDA Public Health Notification: Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh in Repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence, FDA, July 13, 2011

More Blog Posts:

North Carolina Defective Medical Device?: FDA Warns of Serious Complications from Using Transvaginal Mesh to Repair Pelvic Problems, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, July 27, 2011

FDA Study Finds that Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants Don’t Offer A Lot More Advantages Than More Traditional Devices, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, December 29, 2011

Protecting Americans from Defective Medical Devices: Is the FDA Doing Enough?, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, February 18, 2011


FDA Study Finds that Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants Don’t Offer A Lot More Advantages Than More Traditional Devices

December 29, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

According to a study commissioned by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), metal-on-metal hip implants and ceramic-on-ceramic hip implants don’t appear to offer a lot more advantages than the older ceramic-on-polyethylene and metal-on-polyethylene versions. People who were implanted with all-metal hip devices also appear twice as likely to have to undergo revision surgery.  (Researchers in charge of the study compared newer and more traditional hip implants by looking at 18 studies involving over 3,000 patients. The results from 830,000 hip replacement surgeries were also examined.)

Meantime, according to WebMD, data from the registries in England and Wales, New Zealand, and Australia showed that metal-on-metal hip implant devices have exhibited higher rates of early implant failure than the metal-on-polyethylene versions. Also, there is no evidence that the newer types of hip implants do improve quality of life or functioning or decrease the need for repeat surgeries. In fact, a recent study that was conducted in England found that all-metal hip devices had a three times greater rate of early failure than their metal and plastic counterparts, which can last for up to 15 years or longer.

Throughout the state, our Charlotte, North Carolina defective medical device lawyers represent clients who suffered injury from DePuy hip replacement devices and other hip implants. Contact the Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo, LLP today and ask for your free case evaluation.

The New York Times reports that legal and medical experts believe that hip failures could cost billions of dollars in the years to come—especially as not just one device or one company but an entire class of products are involved. Already, more than 5,000 defective all-metal replacement hip lawsuits and complaints have been filed. Many of these defective medical device lawsuits (by over 3,500 patients) were filed against Johnson & Johnson over its recalled DePuy hip implants. DePuy is also the defendant in more than 560 defective hip device lawsuits involving its Pinnacle model. In the next 10 years, tens of thousands of US patients may have to undergo replacement procedures.

Many of the devices are failing because the worn metal parts are damaging tissue, crippling patients, or shedding debris. It was just earlier this year that the FDA told 21 manufacturers of all-metal hip implant devices to commission post-market studies to determine whether their medical devices was shedding toxic amounts of metal debris inside patients.  Hip implant makers who received the notice included DePuy, Zimmer, Biomet, Stryker, and Wright Medical. One reason this debris is proving dangerous is because after the body emits scavenger cells to neutralize these foreign particles, they can turn into biologically active metal ions that can damage the muscle and tissue. Even now, there may be many implant users whose tissues are being destroyed even though they are not experiencing any obvious symptoms.

The High Cost of Failing Artificial Hips, The New York Times, December 27, 2011

Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants Offer No Advantages over Older Versions, FDA Study Finds, News Inferno, November 30, 2011

Metal-on-metal hip implants, Food and Drug Administration

More Blog Posts:

North Carolina Defective Medical Device?: FDA Warns of Serious Complications from Using Transvaginal Mesh to Repair Pelvic Problems, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, July 27, 2011

Approximately 1,000 DePuy Hip Lawsuits Already Filed Against Johnson & Johnson, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog,  July 7, 2011

Protecting Americans from Defective Medical Devices: Is the FDA Doing Enough?, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog,  February 18, 2011


 

1,433 People Died in 1,324 North Carolina Motor Vehicle Crashes in 2008, Says FARS

December 1, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

According to data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, there were 37,261 US traffic deaths in 2008. 1,433 of those fatalities occurred during the 1,324 North Carolina motor vehicle accidents that happened last year. Nationally, there were:

• 50,430 motor vehicle crashes
• 25,428 motor vehicle occupant deaths
• 714 bicyclist deaths
• 1,045 child traffic fatalities (under age 13)
• 4,054 teen traffic deaths
• 4,268 of the fatalities were older seniors (ages 70 and over)
• 4.008 large truck deaths
• 5,091 motorcyclist deaths
• 4,378 pedestrian deaths

Motor vehicle accidents continue to be a leading cause of fatalities in the US. The injuries and deaths that are a result of auto collisions can take huge physical, emotional, mental, and psychological tolls on traffic crash victims and their families. This is one reason that you should contact an experienced Charlotte, North Carolina injury law firm as soon as possible.

As our North Carolina motor vehicle crash lawyers reported previously, the number of traffic deaths declined between 2008 and 2007, when there were 1,705 traffic deaths in the state. Yet we cannot ignore the fact that lives are still being lost in motor vehicle collisions due to defective auto parts, defective roadways, and negligent drivers.

In addition to the hazards posed by drivers who drive drunk, speed, or fall asleep while operating their motor vehicles, modern technology now has presented us with the additional dangers of talking on the cell phone, text messaging, updating one’s Facebook status, or Twittering while driving. These activities may seem harmless are enough, but they really aren’t when coupled with operating a motor vehicle.

No two North Carolina traffic crashes are alike, which is why you should speak with a Charlotte motor vehicle crash lawyer who is experienced in dealing with your type of motor vehicle accident. The sooner you start exploring your legal options, the easier it will be to focus on physical recovery while your Hickory, North Carolina injury lawyer begins the claims process for you.

Fatality Facts, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Related Web Resources:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Fatality Analysis Reporting System

Charlotte, North Carolina Products Liability: Lawsuit Blames HALO SleepSack For Baby’s Tooth Injury

November 9, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

A 2-year-old must now wear a fake tooth after her real one got yanked out by the zipper tab of the HALO SleepSack that she was wearing. At the time, the title girl was just 14-months-old. Now, her family has filed a North Carolina products liability lawsuit against th wearable sleep blanket’s manufacturer.

The infant sleeper can be bought in stores, on the Internet, and at baby consignment sales. The HALO SleepSack is marketed as a blanket alternative. The company HALO told local channel WBTV that it has decided to redesign the zipper. However, it claimed that the risk of the type of accident that Taylor was involved in is under one in a million.

According to Taylor’s mom Lora Stern, the little girl’s tooth was pulled out of her gums that the blanket’s zipper tab got stuck on after the little girl kicked her feet, which, at the time, were close to her mouth. Taylor is not the only child to sustain an infant injury from the HALO SleepSack. One 9-month-old boy also sustained dental damage in a similar accident.

HALO SleepSack has also been linked to SIDS and child suffocation injuries.

Unfortunately, there are infant products out there that pose a threat of serious injury or death to babies. It is the responsibility of product manufacturers to make sure their consumer goods are free from any defects or flaws that could cause anyone to get hurt.

One of the few times that a parent or guardian can leave a baby alone without supervision is while they are sleep. This is one more reason why it is important that infant products be free from defects or dangers because there may not be an adult present protecting them from such hazards.

Even though the Consumer Product Safety Commission is responsible for recalling products that have since their release proved dangerous or unsafe, sometimes, recalls are not issued at all or they aren’t announced until after there have already been serious injuries or deaths. You may be able to file a North Carolina child injury lawsuit against a manufacturer to recover damages.

Some examples of accidents and injuries that have occurred because of unsafe or defective products:

• Suffocation
• Strangulation
• Choking
• Fall accidents
• Fingertip amputations
• Stomach problems from swallowing magnets and other small objects
• Traumatic brain injuries
• Fractures
• Eye injuries
• Burn injuries
• Lead poisoning
• Entrapment accidents

It is important that a manufacturer warn of any risks involved in using any type of consumer good and offer instructions on how to avoid them. Failure to warn of dangers or provide proper directions can be grounds for a products liability case.

There also may be other parties that can be held liable, such as the product’s distributor or seller.

Family says zipper yanked out baby’s tooth, WBTV, October 23, 2011

CPSC

SafeKids USA

More Blog Posts:
North Carolina Products Liability?: Toning Shoes May Cause Injury, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, August 10, 2011

Will New Car Seat Guidelines Decrease the Number of North Carolina Child Injuries that Occur During Traffic Crashes?, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, April 6, 2011

Drop-Side Crib Ban and Tougher Crib Safety Rules Will Hopefully Prevent Some North Carolina Child Injuries and Deaths, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, December 29, 2010

Prescription Drug-Related Injuries and Deaths Have More Than Doubled

November 1, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

A study released on Tuesday shows that the number of cases where serious health issues (including personal injury and wrongful death) were caused by prescription medication has increased dramatically between 1998 and 2007.

In 1998, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported 34,966 incidents where someone experienced adverse reactions to drugs. This year, the figure was 89,842. The study can be found in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

The FDA defines serious side effects to drugs as including resulting birth defect, wrongful death, hospitalization, or disability. The study results come from reports made by drug makers to the FDA.

Close to 1500 drugs were named for causing serious health injuries to users. Painkillers was responsible for a large number of health problems. The drug ranked number one as a cause of death over the eight-year time frame was Oxycodone, which was held responsible for 5,548 fatalities. The study can be found in the latest issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.

Every year, millions of people in the U.S. take prescription drugs and over the counter medicines to treat different health problems and medical conditions or to stay healthy. It is unfortunate that the use of certain medications have lead to serious injuries, health problems, and the death of many users.

Here is a list of some of the potentially serious and deadly side effects that can occur from a “dangerous” drug:

• Vomiting
• Stroke
• Heart attack
• Insomnia
• Kidney failure
• Birth defect
• Memory loss
• Hypertension
• Stomach aches
• Death

It is frequently not until after many victims are injured or killed because of a particular pharmaceutical drug that a drug recall is issued.

Over the years, victims of the following defective drugs have filed dangerous drug claims and lawsuits against manufacturers or other liable parties:

• Celebrex
• ReNu
• Trileptal
• Ortho Evra
• Fosamax
• Vioxx
• Bextra
• Fen Phen
• HRT
• PPA

Bad reactions to prescription drugs soar, The Washington Times, September 11, 2007

Related Web Resources:

Archives of Internal Medicine

Dangerous Prescription, PBS.org

For Many North Carolina Car Accident Victims, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Can Create Havoc

October 21, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Of the more than 2 million people injured in US auto crashes each year that are lucky enough to survive, a number of them may suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder—up to 40% even, estimates the US Department of Transportation. This is no surprise, consider that traffic collisions are among the leading causes of PTST. You may be able to obtain North Carolina car accident compensation for this and any other debilitating injuries that were caused by another party’s negligence.

Remember, physical injuries are not the only type of injuries that can occur during a motor vehicle crash. There is also pain and suffering, mental anguish, and emotional trauma. While invisible, psychological and emotional injuries can also take a toll, severely impairing a victim while negatively impacting his/her life.

PTSD
Post-traumatic stress disorder can arise after someone has suffered a life-threatening or frightening experience. This may cause severe anxiety and emotional/mental paralysis in the person. Signs of possible PTSD:

• Flashbacks of the incident
• Reliving the accident as if it were happening again now
• An irrational fear that the same accident will happen to the victim again
• Physical symptoms arising when the person is reminded what happened. Symptoms may include rapid breathing, nausea, elevated heart rate, and sweating
• Anger issues
• Sleep difficulties
• Nightmares
• Disinterest in former passions, hobbies, and activities
• The need to be constantly vigilant
• Depression
• Alcohol or drug abuse
• Emotional numbness
• Problems concentrating
• Suicidal thoughts
• Eating disorders
• A higher risk of developing physical health issues, such as diabetes, heart problems, and sexual dysfunction

PTSD can happen not just to the person that actually experienced the catastrophic incident but also to those that witnessed it or were there afterwards to help out, such as police and rescue workers. Family and close of those that were in the accident can also develop PTSD.

This condition can affect not just the victim’s personal well-being, but also his/her career and relationships. People suffering from PTSD are more likely to miss work and not do as good of a job as those without PTSD. Problems concentrating and sleep difficulties can also make it hard for the person to be productive or meet goals. The impact of all the symptoms listed above can also affect how the person relates to people and deals with life. This can place at toll on marriages, family life, and relationships.

You want to work with a Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury law firm that understands the nature of PTSD and how to prove that you developed your condition because you were involved in an accident that occurred as a result of someone else’ negligence. Remember, PTSD can occur following any type of traumatic incident. This means that if you were sexually assaulted, abused at a nursing home, the victim of a violent crime, or survived a fall at a construction site, you may have developed PTSD as a response to what happened.

The Effect of PTSD on a Person’s Life, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, September 6, 2011

Talking to Your Friends and Colleagues about a Traumatic North Carolina Car Accident, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Blog, October 19, 2011

Are Gruesome Reports About North Carolina Car Accidents Rendering Us Insensitive to Dangers of the Road?, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Blog, October 3, 2011

 

HB 542 Could Cost North Carolina Motor Vehicle Crash Victims Who Have Medical Insurance

September 24, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Beginning October 1, 2011, HB 542, a new law passed by the state’s General Assembly could reduce the amount of financial recovery a North Carolina car accident victim stands to receive. The HB 542, which allows for smaller claims for auto crash injuries, would be reduced by a victim’s medical coverage.

For example, a negligent driver and his/her car insurance company can lower the value of your North Carolina car accident compensation by only letting you claim the same amount of accident-related medical expenses that your health insurer agreed to cover. This lowers your recoverable damages, while reducing the amount that you are able to repay your insurer and your own recovery, including pain and suffering and lost wages, as well as your legal fees.

Because admission of evidence representing total medical costs is prevented under the new law, a jury won’t have this information. This means that starting next month, any settlement or damages awards have to be based on the lower figure—how much your medical insurer agreed to cover—which will result in lower recovery and verdict amounts.

While supporters of this “billed vs. paid” law” say HB 542 prevents “phantom damages” that bring up the size of recovery awards, if the person injured in a North Carolina car crash has health insurance coverage, he/she could end up losing out. Meantime, auto insurers stand to gain financially from these reductions.

Charlotte, North Carolina Personal Injury Attorney Michael DeMayo, wants to remind everyone that this law goes against the collateral-source rule that most US states follow. This rule says that the wrongdoer shouldn’t be able to benefit from an innocent citizen’s contract that the latter paid for to benefit him/her. This is why most states allow complete recover of the amounts were actually billed—not just paid—and introduction of evidence of only what the insurer paid hasn’t been allowed. Attorney DeMayo points out that while those who don’t have health insurance won’t lose anything from HB 542, it will be those who pay for health coverage each month or receive it as part of their employee benefits that will suffer.

The Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo, LLP represents North Carolina car accident victims in a number of North Carolina counties, including Cabarrus, Union, Catawba, Gaston, Mecklenburg, Stanly, Caldwell, Rowan, Lincoln, Cleveland, Robeson, Burke, Alexander, Iredell, Anson, Richmond, Scotland, and Cumberland, and South Carolina Counties, including Dillon, Marlboro, Lancaster, York, and Chesterfield. We have seen the damages that can be incurred, the bills that can accrue, and the toll that becoming the victim of a traffic crash can take on the victim and his/her family.

Tort Reform’s Defective Fix, Charlotte Business Journal, August 26, 2011 (PDF)

HB 542, North Carolina General Assembly


More Blog Posts:

Republicans Propose Bill Protecting Drug Makers from North Carolina Products Liability Lawsuits, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, March 29, 2011

Beyond “Just So Story” Theories: A Unified Solution to End (or Reduce) North Carolina Car Accidents, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Blog, September 5, 2011

Join the Fight Against Texting While Driving: Enter Our Charlotte, North Carolina Personal Injury Law Firm’s Sweepstakes on Facebook to Win a Flip Camera and Watch Our Distracted Driving Video, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, September 19, 2011

FDA Advisory Panel Meets to Discuss Fosamax and Other Bisphosphonates But Offers No Specific Recommendations on Duration of Long-Term Use

September 16, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Although a Food and Drug advisory panel is recommending that labels on bisphosphonate drugs clarify how long a patient should take them for, the panel refrained from specifying any actual time limits. The panel met because of growing concerns that using a bisphosphonate drug long-term—more than three to five years—can cause jaw bone death and thigh bone and femur fractures in women. Please contact our Charlotte, North Carolina Fosamax law firm if you are someone who has been taking bisphosphonates and developed Osteonecrosis of the jaw or suffered a bone fracture.

Bisphosphonates are often prescribed to treat osteoporosis. Fosamax, Aclasta, Reclast, Actonel, Boniva, and Altevia are examples of bisphosphonate drugs. While the FDA advisory panel acknowledged the unusually high rate of thigh fractures in women who had been taking Fosamax and other bisphosphonates for a number of years was unusually high, it also noted that there isn’t enough data available for it to make specific recommendations.

Osteonecrosis of the jaw
Also known as dead jaw, ONJ involves the death of jawbone tissue. This can lead to exposed bone, teeth loss, swelling, infection, and pain in the gum and jaw, jaw numbness, loss of sensation, gum loss, and the eventual collapse of the bone area. More than 125 ONJ cases have been linked with bisphosphonate drug use. Some researchers say that bisphosphonates stop new blood vessels from forming in the jawbone tissue.

Fractures
Considering that bisphosphonates are supposed to make bones stronger, if they are in fact actually weakening the bones, then the drug is causing damage. A number of women have come forward claiming that their femur bones snapped suddenly while they were walking. In some instances, the damage to the bones was more severe than one would typically see from this type of incident. Symptoms of a possible femur fracture can include:

• Serious pain
• Deformation in the leg area
• Tissue swelling
• Leg immobility
• Bone fragments coming through the skin

Esophageal Cancer
There is also concern that bisphosphonates increase the chance of a user developing esophageal cancer, which hits the channel in the body through which food travels to the stomach. However, there is conflicting information about that at this time. There is usually no cure for esophageal cancer.

Over 1600 Fosamax fracture complaints have already been filed.

North Carolina Dangerous Drugs
Drug makers must warn of any serious side effects that taking their medication can cause. Failure to warn of side effects or dangerous that result in serious health complications can be grounds for a North Carolina products liability lawsuit.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina defective products law firm can help you determine if your bone condition is a result of taking Fosamax or another bisphosphonate. If so, you may be entitled to North Carolina personal injury compensation from Merck, which makes Fosamax, or the manufacturer of any other bisphosphonate drugs that you may have been taking.

Fosamax Scare: Those With Osteopenia Gauge Risk, ABC News, March 10, 2010

FDA panel unclear on osteoporosis drug labels, CBS News, September 12, 2011


Related Web Resources:

Bisphosphonates, FDA

ONJ, Rheumatology.org

More Blog Posts:
North Carolina Dangerous Drug: Wrongful Death Lawsuit Blames Yasmin and Ocella Contraceptives for Daughter’s Fatal Pulmonary Embolism, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, June 21, 2011

Yaz Lawsuit Seeks Damages for Wrongful Death Teen Who Went into Cardiac Arrest While Attending Elon University in North Carolina, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, May 16, 2011

Another Dangerous Drug?: Woman Claims Humira Caused Permanent Nerve Damage, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, April 30, 2011

North Carolina 15-Passenger Van Accident on I-95 Sends Several People to Hospitals

September 6, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Several people were injured on Monday in a North Carolina 15-passenger van crash close to I-95 in Wilson County. The single-vehicle crash resulted in the van flipping over and landing upside down in a field. The Wilson County Highway Patrol says the vehicle was transporting migrant workers.

According to one witness, people were crawling out of the vehicle while others were pulled out. There was a lot of screaming by the victims, who didn’t appear to speak English. Several of the 15-passenger van victims were sent to the hospital.

15-Passenger Van Accidents
Unfortunately, 15-passenger vans are among the vehicles most at risk of rolling over during a North Carolina motor vehicle accident. This information is now common knowledge, yet many schools, groups, day care centers, camps, athletic programs, recreational centers, shuttle services, churches, hotels, and organizations continue to use 15-passenger vans for transportation. If you or someone you love was hurt in a 15-passenger van crash, do not hesitate to contact our Charlotte, North Carolina 15-passenger van law firm to request your free case evaluation.

The problem with 15-passenger vans is that they are designed in a way that when they are actually loaded to capacity cargo and passengers their rollover risk triples. Yet approximately 500,000 15-passenger vans continue to transport millions of people every year.

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, although 15-passenger vans have a lower death rate than other vehicles, it has a higher occupant fatality rate. Also, not just anyone can operate a 15-passenger van. Federal standards require that 15-passenger van drivers have a commercial driver’s license.

Because 15-passenger vans are bigger than most other autos, the driver must know how to navigate corners and turns, as well as how to safely back up. It doesn’t help that the van’s high gravity center causes the vehicle to become less stable the more weight is added to it. Too quick of a turn or lane change made or a tire blowout can cause the driver to lose control of the van, which could roll over to result in serious injuries, including head injuries, spinal cord injuries, and traumatic brain injuries.

Many people seem to forget that riding a 15-passenger van is not like riding a bus and seat belts must be used as protection in the event of a deadly crash. Yet the driver or those supervising the van or trip don’t always enforce this.

You may have reason to pursue a North Carolina personal injury case against a negligent driver of van operator or another party. You may have reason to file a North Carolina products liability lawsuit against the manufacturer of the 15-passenger van or the manufacturer of one of the vehicle’s defective/malfunctioning parts.

Several people injured in van crash, ABC11, September 5, 2011

Multiple People Hurt In Crash In Wilson, WITN, September 6, 2011


Related Web Resources:

Q&A: 15-passenger vans, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Analysis of Crashes Involving 15-Passenger Vans, NHTSA (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
Prevent North Carolina 15-Passenger Van Crashes by Not Overloading Vehicle, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Blog, October 22, 2010

Tractor-Trailer Crash Involving 15-Passenger Van Kills 11 People, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Blog, March 26, 2010

Minivan Tire Blowout Kills Six People and Injures 9 in Rollover Accident, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Blog, December 2, 2009

Heatwave Prompts NHTSA to Warn About North Carolina Child Deaths in Hot Cars

August 23, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator David Strickland is in Raleigh today to host a public meeting on hyperthermia. The session comes in the wake of one of the worst heat waves in North Carolina’s recorded history.

Hyperthermia continues to be the number one case of non-crash auto deaths for kids under age 4. According to the San Francisco State University Department of Geosciences, 22 child deaths (under age 14) from hyperthermia have already occurred in the US this year. Last year, there were 49 child fatalities from hyperthermia.

It is important that parents and guardians are aware of the dangers of hyperthermia so that they don’t leave children in the car unattended for long—especially in extremely hot weather. Kids can overheat to death when left inside a motor vehicle. The temperature in an enclosed vehicle can rise 20 degrees in just 10 minutes. One need only look at the death of 2-year-old Haile Brockington who was left in a day care van for several hours last year. Her family would go on to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the day care center and the van’s driver.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury law firm represent the families of children injured or killed in car accidents that were caused by other parties’ negligence. One area that we haven’t spoken about in the past is non-crash injuries, which involves accidents with motor vehicles where a collision isn’t necessarily involved.

Hyperthermia is just one cause of non-collision vehicle deaths to children. Other common non-crash accidents:

• A power window can trap a kid’s head, feet, fingers, neck, or feet, resulting in asphyxiation and other injuries. This is why it is so important that the power switches are locked (or don’t malfunction) to prevent such injuries.

• Vehicle rollaway involves an unattended auto with the key in the ignition potentially shifting out of park and causing the vehicle to roll away. This could cause injury to a child left in the vehicle or one standing outside in its path.

• Backover crashes involve autos being backed out of a parking lot or driveway with the driver failing to realize that there is someone behind the vehicle.

• Fall accidents while getting into our auto of a vehicle.

• Injuries caused by a car door.

• Getting cut by the license plate, bumper, or another part of an auto.

• Carbon monoxide poisoning.

Sometimes, the negligent party is another motorist, the manufacturer of a defective auto part, or the person in charge of supervising a child at the time that the accident occurred.

We know how devastating it can be to have your son or daughter get hurt—especially because another party was reckless or careless. Our Lumberton car accident lawyers would like to offer you a free evaluation of your North Carolina injuries to a minor case.

Nation’s Highway Safety Chief Discusses Ways to Prevent North Carolina Child Fatalities in Hot Cars, NHTSA, August 23, 2011

Traffic Safety, NHTSA (PDF)

Haile Brockington’s family files wrongful death lawsuit, WPTV, August 13, 2010


More Blog Posts:

Adoptive Dad of Murdered 4-Year-Old is Not Allowed to Receive North Carolina Wrongful Death Damages, Says Jury, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, August 16, 2011

Will New Car Seat Guidelines Decrease the Number of North Carolina Child Injuries in Traffic Crashes?, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, April 6, 2011

Mint Hill Dog Attack Injures Grandmother and Six-Year-Old Boy, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, December 24, 2010

North Carolina Products Liability?: Toning Shoes May Cause Injury

August 10, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

What was once considered a quick way to get a good workout may actually be a cause of personal injury. According to the Consumer Reports, toning shoes could send wearers to a doctor or an emergency room. If toning shoes are indeed causing North Carolina personal injury, the wearer may have grounds for a products liability lawsuit against the shoe manufacturer or distributor.

Consumer Reports recently examined the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s new product complaint database and found that as of May 22, 36 people said they’d been injured because of toning shoes, which were cited as a cause of injury more than any other product in the database that has only been up since March 11.

Consumer Reports’ medical experts say that the reason so many injuries have occurred is because toning shoes are designed to create instability so that wearers are forced to use muscles that they wouldn’t normally exercise while walking. The shoes design is supposed to help tone thighs, buttocks, abs, and calves. With these touted results, it is no wonder that sales for toning shoes initially soared—increasing by 400% last year—with some toning shoes costing around $200.

Yet even then, doctors, consumer advocates, and fitness gurus were skeptical about the quick results promised by the shoes’ makers. In the fall of 2010, the American Council on Exercise put out a study, which found that toning shoes have not demonstrated a significant rise in muscle activation or exercise response. The council also said there was no evidence supporting the claim that users burned more calories and strengthened their muscle tone. Now, it looks like even buyers are starting to stay away and the prices of toning shoes have gone down to $50 dollars or less.

Toning shoe-related injuries reported in the database include:
• Pain to the leg, hip, or foot
• Tendonitis
• Broken bones

Other injuries linked to toning shoes include Achilles injuries, sprains, stress fractures, strains, and injuries sustained in a North Carolina slip and fall accident.

While older people with balance issues are at higher risk of sustaining a toning shoe injury, younger people also reported getting hurt.

North Carolina Products Liability:

Design Defects
When a design defect is involved, this usually means that every product made from the same design will likely be flawed. A product may have a design defect if there was foreseeable risk that the risk of injury could have been decreased or eliminated if a different design could have been used instead.

Failure to Warn:
Not warning that using a product in a certain way could prove dangerous is also considered a product defect known as failure to warn. Unfortunately, failure to warn is a reason why many adults and children are injured by defective products.

Manufacturing Defects:
A product may have become defective during the manufacturing process. What the manufacturing defect is and how it was caused will determine how many of the products were rendered defective.

If you file a North Carolina product liability claim under strict liability, this means
that as long as the product was the direct cause of injury, you don’t have to show that negligence was a factor. Our Charlotte, North Carolina products liability law firm represent clients throughout the state.

The Craze Over ‘Toning’ Shoes Is, Well, Over, Time, July 28, 2011

Are toning shoes unsafe? Reports of injuries raise concern, Consumer Reports, May 25, 2011

Related Web Resources:

Product Complaint Database, CPSC

American Council on Exercise

More Blog Posts:
North Carolina Products Liability: CPSC Attempts to Prevent Injuries to Children with Graco High Chair Recall and Baby Sling Warning, North Carolina Injury Lawyer, March 21, 2010

American Academy of Pediatrics Want Warning Labels on Food that Pose a Child Choking Hazard, North Carolina Injury Lawyer, February 24, 2010

Products Liability: Two Families Sue for Wrongful Deaths of Loved Ones Fatally Burned While Wearing Flammable Bathrobes, North Carolina Injury Lawyer, November 6, 2009

North Carolina Defective Medical Device?: FDA Warns of Serious Complications from Using Transvaginal Mesh to Repair Pelvic Problems

July 27, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

The FDA says that serious complications have been linked to surgical mesh that is implanted in the body to repair pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. While the federal agency had issued an early warning in October 2008 about health risks linked with using this medical device to treat SUI and POP, now the government wants surgeons and patients to know that serious complications are not rare. Also, the FDA says that it is unclear whether transvaginal POP repair using mesh is in fact more effective than opting for non-mesh repair to treat the same pelvic problems.

If you or someone you love suffered the following complications after undergoing transvaginal POP repair using surgical mesh, do not hesitate to contact our Charlotte, North Carolina defective medical device law firm today:

• Mesh erosion through the vagina
• Infection
• Pain
• Dyspareunia
• Urinary problems
• Organ perforation
• Bleeding
• Neuro-muscular problems
• Vaginal scarring
• Vaginal shrinkage
• Emotional issues

The FDA says that it has received more than 2,000 reports of complications from use of surgical mesh. Many of these reports came from the manufacturers of these devices. Some patients had to undergo additional surgeries and hospitalization and experienced impaired quality of life.

Our North Carolina transvaginal mesh lawsuit law firm cannot stress how important it is for manufacturers to make products that will not cause injury or other health complications for a patient. With so many women suffering from some type of pelvic prolapse—the Los Angeles Times reports that up to 50% of all women end up suffering from this condition, which involves organs (bladder, uterus, bowel, rectum, or intestines) slipping out of place following a hysterectomy, menopause, childbirth, or with age—this condition requires treatment more often than one would think. Some 75,000 such procedures are conducted annually.

Mesh used in pelvic surgeries under scrutiny, Los Angeles Times, July 25, 2011

FDA warns against surgical mesh to repair pelvic problems, Boston.com, July 13, 2011

FDA Safety Communication: UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse, FDA, July 13, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Pelvic Organ Prolapse, American Urogynecologic Society

Stress incontinence, MedlinePlus


More Blog Posts:

Approximately 1,000 DePuy Hip Lawsuits Already Filed Against Johnson & Johnson, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, July 7, 2011

Protecting Americans from Defective Medical Devices: Is the FDA Doing Enough?, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, February 18, 2011

North Carolina Wrongful Death Results in $10M Award Against Taser

July 20, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

A federal jury has awarded the family of Darryll Wayne Turner $10M against Taser International for the teenager’s North Carolina wrongful death. The 17-year-old died in March 2008 after he was Tasered by a cop at the grocery store where he was employed.

Police were called to the Food Lion to remove Turner, who had gotten into a dispute with a store manager. According to the family’s wrongful death complaint, even though Turner was never violent, an officer stunned him with a Taser twice—the first time for 37 seconds and the next time for 5 seconds—and the teen immediately went into cardiac arrest. His family says that his death was preventable.

According to court documents, the jury found that the Taser International did not provide sufficient warning or instruction about how to properly use the stun gun. Per the plaintiffs, if the officer that shocked had Turner had received the right training, he wouldn’t have aimed the stun gun at the center of the boy’s chest, which increased the risk of cardiac arrest, or he might have found another way to detain the teenager. Turner’s family has already settled their Charlotte, North Carolina wrongful death complaint, which alleges excessive use of police force, with the city of Charlotte for $625,000.

Taser intends to contest the verdict. It says that the verdict amount will be offset by the family’s settlement with the city, in addition to $40,000 in death benefits from North Carolina workers’ compensation. The $10 million wrongful death judgment accusing Taser of North Carolina products liability is the largest settlement against Taser, which until this civil lawsuit had won 127 of the 128 cases against it.

Serious injuries have been known to follow Taser-use, which is why it is important that law enforcement officers exercise caution and discretion when using a Taser to apprehend someone. They also must receive proper training on how to use them safely. As with all products, manufacturers must warn of any risks involved in using a product and provide proper and complete instructions.

NC family awarded $10M in lawsuit against Taser, WCNC, July 20, 2011

NC family awarded $10M in lawsuit against Taser, Blue Ridge Now, July 20, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Taser International

TASER safety study triggers questions, CBS News, May 10, 2011

Use of Taser by law enforcement agencies, Stanford.edu (PDF)


More Blog Posts:

Charlotte, North Carolina Teenager Dies After Police Apprehend Him with Taser, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, March 23, 2008

Family Files North Carolina Wrongful Death Lawsuit Over Inmate Who Was Tasered While in Jail, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, November 30, 2010

Kannapolis Man’s Lawsuit Accuses Cabarrus County Sheriff’s Office of North Carolina Personal Injury, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, January 19, 2011

 

Approximately 1,000 DePuy Hip Lawsuits Already Filed Against Johnson & Johnson

July 7, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

According to The Wall Street Journal, about 1,000 defective medical device lawsuits have been filed in federal and state courts accusing Johnson & Johnson of continuing to make its metal-on-metal hip joints even while knowing that there were problems with some of them. J & J’s DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. finally recalled the hip replacement devices last year, while promising to cover all medical expenses incurred as a result of problems with the device. If you believe that the pain that you or a love one is experiencing is because of a DePuy hip implant, contact our Charlotte, North Carolina DePuy defective medical device lawyers today.

The 2010 recall included about 93,000 artificial hips—the ASR XL Acetabular Hip Replacement product and the ASR Hip Resurfacing Systems—over concerns that their failure rate was too high. The National Joint Registry of England and Wales had found that within five years of hip replacement surgery with a DePuy product, 1 in 8 patients had to undergo a revision surgery because the medical device had failed. According to J & J, about 37,000 patients in the US and approximately 93,000 patients globally had received a recalled DePuy hip device. Those who have contacted DePuy since the recall was announced have complained of inflammation, infection, pain, and cobalt and chromium, which are both potentially toxic metals appearing in the blood stream.

Going through hip replacement surgery once is uncomfortable and disruptive enough without having to do it again because the implant used was defective or failed. Not only are there risks involved anytime one undergoes surgery, but the recovery time is often long and other health complications can result.

Hip Joints Set Off New Rush to Court, The Wall Street Journal, July 8, 2011

DePuy Hip Recall Guide

New DePuy hip implant gets FDA approval amid lawsuit over old one, MEDCity, June 17, 2011

National Joint Registry of England and Wales


More Blog Posts:

Protecting Americans from Defective Medical Devices: Is the FDA Doing Enough?, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, February 18, 2011

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Products Recalled, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, September 16, 2010

Johnson & Johnson Recalls Defective Duragesic Pain Patches, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, January 5, 2009

North Carolina Dangerous Drug: Wrongful Death Lawsuit Blames Yasmin and Ocella Contraceptives for Daughter’s Fatal Pulmonary Embolism

June 21, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Scott Prewitt is seeking North Carolina wrongful death and products liability damages from Bayer, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and Intendis. He is also suing Dr. William Bryan III, Asheville Children’s Medical Center, and Kelly Klaaren for North Carolina medical negligence. Prewitt’s 15-year-old daughter, Brittany Nicole died from a pulmonary embolism while taking birth control pills to treat her acne. A doctor had prescribed the medication to her.

Brittany Nicole was just 13 when she started taking Yasmin. The following year, the same dermatologist who had prescribed that birth control pill started prescribing Ocella, which is a generic form of Yasmin, instead.

Although the USDA has approved Yasmin for contraception, the pill is not approved for treating acne. While doctors are allowed to prescribe the medication for off-label purposes, the drugs’ manufacturers are not supposed to promote the drug for these uses. Prewitt claims that Bayer did just that when marketing Yaz to dermatologists and ignored the risks involved. He also says that he and his family read and watched media that led them to conclude that it would be safe for Brittany Nicole to use Yasmin and its sister contraceptive Yaz.

Prewitt is also claiming North Carolina medical negligence against Dr. Bryan, who saw his daughter after her knee became red and swollen on June 4, 2009. The doctor diagnosed her symptoms as “superficial cellulitis.” About two weeks later, physician assistant Kelly Klaaren looked at Brittany’s rash and diagnosed her with dermatitis. The teenager collapsed nine days later and was pronounced dead.

Drug manufacturers must follow FDA regulations. They also must make sure that they market the medications in a way that doesn’t prove dangerous and let consumers and medical providers know if there are any risks involved. Failure to do either of this can be grounds for a North Carolina products liability case.

Taking the Pill for Acne Was Fatal, Dad Says, Courthouse News, June 20, 2011

Related Web Resources:
US Food and Drug Administration

Yasmin


More Blog Posts:

Yaz Lawsuit Seeks Damages for Wrongful Death Teen Who Went into Cardiac Arrest While Attending Elon University in North Carolina, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, May 16, 2011

Another Dangerous Drug?: Woman Claims Humira Caused Permanent Nerve Damage, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, April 30, 2011

Republicans Propose Bill Protecting Drug Makers from North Carolina Products Liability Lawsuits, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, March 29, 2011

Preventing North Carolina Drowning Accidents: CPSC’s Pool and Spa Drain Cover Recall a Reminder that Entrapment Can Lead to Serious Injuries and Deaths

June 6, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

The Consumer Product Safety Commission recent recall of nearly 1 million pool and spa drain covers is a good reminder to owners to make sure that their pools and spas are safe for swimmers. The recall was issued because the drain covers were manufactured by companies that had incorrectly rated how much flow the products could actually handle. Such inaccuracies could mean that some of the drain covers may still pose entrapment hazards, which can cause drowning accidents.

Swimming accidents that occur because of a defective pool or spa part can be grounds for a Charlotte, North Carolina products liability lawsuit. It is the responsibility of all manufacturers to make sure that their products are safe for use. It is also the responsibility of pool and spa owners to make sure there that there are no hazards that could cause entrapment or North Carolina drowning accidents.

The recalled spa and pool drain covers were made between December 2008 and April 2011 by a number of companies, including Waterway Plastics, Rising Dragon USA, Pentair Water Pool and Spa, which is a North Carolina based company, Hayward Pool Products, Custom Molded Products, Color Match Pool Fittings, AquaStar Pool Products Inc., Lawson Aquatics, and A&A Manufacturing. The drain covers were supposed to meet the safety standards set by the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act.

The pool safety law is supposed to prevent entrapment accidents from happening. When a child or adult gets entrapped in a spa or pool drain, it can be difficult to get free and if the person ends up submerged and stuck underwater, he/she can easily drown. One young girl sustained catastrophic injuries when a swimming pool drain suctioned out part of her intestinal tract a few years ago. Even after Abigail Taylor underwent liver, small bowel and pancreas transplants, she still died from her pool drain entrapment injuries in 2008.

Eight Manufacturers Recall Pool and In-Ground Spa Drain Covers Due to Incorrect Ratings, CPSC, May 26, 2011

Lawson Aquatics Recalls Certain Pool Drain Covers Due to Incorrect Rating; Covers Pose Possible Entrapment Hazard to Swimmers, CPSC, May 26, 2011

Girl Whose Intestines Were Partially Sucked Out by Swimming Pool Drain Dies, Fox News, March 21, 2008


Related Web Resources:

Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act (PDF)

Pool Safely


More Blog Posts:

High Point Pool Drowning Accident Claims the Life of Teenager in North Carolina, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, June 22, 2010

Fayetteville, North Carolina Wrongful Death Lawsuit for Teen’s Drowning Accident in Drainage Ditch Can Continue, Says Judge, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, August 18, 2009

North Carolina Premises Liability: Two Recent Child Drowning Accidents in Hotels Claim Lives, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, June 22, 2009

Yaz Lawsuit Seeks Damages for Wrongful Death Teen Who Went into Cardiac Arrest While Attending Elon University in North Carolina

May 16, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

The family of Michelle Pfleger has filed a products liability lawsuit against Bayer over her wrongful death. The 18-year-old was attending Elon University in North Carolina when she a blood clot went into her lungs, causing her to go into cardiac arrest and die. The plaintiffs contend that the incident was triggered by Plfeger’s use of the Yaz birth control pills for her acne.

In their Yaz lawsuit, Plfeger’s family claims that the pill doesn’t come with adequate warnings about the risks involved with taking it. It was just recently that two studies in the British Medical Journal reported a link between oral contraceptives that contain the hormone drospirenone and a higher risk of blood clots in women compared to those taking birth control pills with the hormone levonorgestrel. Yaz contains drospirenone, as does the Yasmin birth control bill. Both drugs are from Bayer. The drug manufacturer has dismissed these findings.

Some 7,000 products liability lawsuits have been filed by women accusing Bayer of failing to properly warn about the risks of certain serious side effects. Over 50 deaths linked to Yaz and Yasmin were reported to the Food and Drug Administration between 2004 and the third quarter of 2008.

Other side effects linked to Yaz and Yasmin:
• Stroke
• Pulmonary embolism
• Heart attack
• Gallbladder disease
• Liver damage
• Deep vein thrombosis
• Anaphylactic shock
• Migraines
• Weight gain
• Higher level of potassium in the blood
• Hair loss

A North Carolina dangerous drug lawsuit can allow you to hold a drug manufacturer liable for personal injury or wrongful death.

Bayer faces US lawsuit over contraceptive, AFP, May 11, 2011

Mother of Elon student sues Bayer over daughter’s death, The Business Journal, May 11, 2011


Related Web Resources:

Bayer

Yaz

Warning: Letter, FDA

British Medical Journal


More Blog Posts:

Another Dangerous Drug?: Woman Claims Humira Caused Permanent Nerve Damage, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, April 30, 2011

Topamax as a Dangerous Drug?: FDA Warns of Possible Birth Defect Risk, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, March 26, 2011

GlaxoSmithKline Settles Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Over North Carolina Wrongful Death of Man from Taking Avandia, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, January 31, 2011

Another Dangerous Drug?: Woman Claims Humira Caused Permanent Nerve Damage

April 30, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

A woman is suing Abbot Laboratories for products liability because of personal injuries she says she sustained from Taking Humira. She claims that the drug, which she took for Crohn’s disease, caused permanent nerve damage in her feet.

The plaintiff, Kara Mae Pletan said that she began to develop small fiber peripheral neuropathy three months after she started taking Humira injections. Because of the “stabbing pains and hypersensitivity” in the 32-year-old’s feet, she had to sell her family’s retail furniture store because she could no longer do her job. She also is now unable to take part in outdoor activities.

Pletan contends that even before Abbott started marketing the drug to Crohn’s disease patients, the drug manufacturer knew that the medication could cause peripheral neuropathy. Her lawyer says that Abbott has downplayed Humira’s serious side effects.

Peripheral Neuropathy
• Can cause pain and numbness in the feet and hands
• Typically creates a painful sensation that feels like burning or tingling
• Loss of sensation may cause the person to feel like he/she is wearing a glove or stocking

Initially sold as a drug for rheumatoid arthritis, Humira is now approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for five autoimmune diseases, including Crohn’s diseases. Last year, worldwide sales of Humira was $6.5 billion

Pletan is not the only person to sue Abbott over Humira. In January, plaintiff Gayathri Murthy blamed her lymphoma on the drug, which she took for arthritis. Another plaintiff who has arthritis, Maureen Calisi, also has said Humira caused her cancer.

North Carolina Dangerous Drug Lawsuits
If you believe that taking Humira caused you or your loved one to develop health complications, you should find out about your legal options for filing a North Carolina dangerous drug lawsuit.

Abbott Labs Sued on Claim Humira Caused Lasting Nerve Damage, Bloomberg, April 26, 2011

Arthritis ‘Miracle’ Drug Caused Breast Cancer, Suit Charges, Consumer Affairs, April 19, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Peripheral neuropathy, Mayo Clinic

Humira, NIH.gov

Humira

Related Web Resources:
Republicans Propose Bill Protecting Drug Makers from North Carolina Products Liability Lawsuits, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, March 29, 2011

Topamax as a Dangerous Drug?: FDA Warns of Possible Birth Defect Risk, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, March 26, 2011

GlaxoSmithKline Settles Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Over North Carolina Wrongful Death of Man from Taking Avandia, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, January 31, 2011

Will New Car Seat Guidelines Decrease the Number of North Carolina Child Injuries that Occur During Traffic Crashes?

April 6, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has updated its child safety seat guidelines. The revisions are based on the latest child restrain technologies and medical and scientific research. Our Charlotte, North Carolina child injury lawyers hope that these modifications will help decrease the number of injuries to minors during traffic crashes.

While the old guidelines were categorized by type of child seat, the new guidelines are categorized according to age. NHTSA is advising that a child should use the restraint system designated for each age until he/she outgrows the weight or height limit for that seat that the manufacturer has set.

Our Monroe, North Carolina personal injury law firm is familiar with the different type of child seat defects that can cause serious injury during a car crash, including weakened shells, flammable materials, handle defects, harness issues. That said, even if a child safety seat is free from defects, it is still important that your child that is using the car seat appropriate for his/her age and that it is properly assembled and used correctly. Families whose children are injured because of child safety seat failure may have grounds for a North Carolina products liability lawsuit against the manufacturer.

NHTSA’s Latest Car Seat Recommendations:

Newborn to 12 Months: Your baby should use a rear-facing car seat appropriate to his/her age, height, and weight.

Ages 1 to 3: NHTSA recommends keeping your child’s car seat rear-facing for as long as possible until he/she exceeds the seat manufacturer’s height or weight limits.

Ages 4 to 7: A forward-facing car seat with a harness is recommended until he/she outgrows the manufacturer limits.

Ages 8 to 12: Your child should use a booster seat until he she is grown enough to use a seat belt and have it fall over the upper thighs. The shoulder belt should be snug across the chest and shoulders. It is always safer for your son/daughter to ride the back seat.

Car crashes continue to be the number one cause of child fatalities. Child restraint systems saved nearly 9,000 lives between 1975 and 2008.

Child Safety-Seat Recommendations Revamped, ABC News, March 21, 2011

Child Safety Seat Recommendations, NHTSA

Related Web Resources:
Recommendations on Child Safety Seats, American Academy of Pediatrics

SeatCheck.org

More Blog Posts:
Keeping Your Child Safe During North Carolina Car Crashes, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Blog, September 22, 2010

North Carolina Child Death Fatality Rate was Lowest Ever in 2008, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, September 16, 2009

Motor Vehicle Accidents Continue to be the #1 Killer of Children, Says World Health Organization, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, December 29, 2008

North Carolina Injuries to Children: 1 Million Maclaren Strollers Recall Warns about Fingertip Amputation Hazard

April 1, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

North Carolina and South Carolina parents with Maclaren strollers have reason to be concerned following reports that 12 children suffered fingertip amputations in the hinges of the foldable umbrella models. Following the child injury accidents, Maclaren and the US Consumer Product Safety Commission are recalling approximately one million strollers.

In some of the injuries to children cases, fingers were lost. Carlos DeWinter, 23 months, lost his right pinky in July 2003. He underwent multiple surgeries but doctors were not able to reattach it. His family filed a products liability lawsuit against Maclaren. The injury complaint was settled out of court.

Some people are wondering why the stroller manufacturer, a company that has long enjoyed a reputation for making dependable strollers, waited until so many amputation injuries happened before announcing a recall.

Nine models are named in the recall, which includes double and single strollers: Twin Techno, Quest Sport, Volo, Easy Traveller, Techno XT, Triumph, Twin Triumph, Quest Mod, and Techno XLR. The strollers were sold in the US between 1999 and 2009.

The kids’ fingertips were amputated while the umbrella strollers were being unfolded open/locked into place. Possible laceration injuries are also a concern. As part of the recall, Maclaren is offering safety kits that provide protective shields for the hinges.

Meantime, CPSC has decided to look at other umbrella strollers that come with similar hinge mechanisms to make sure other kids are not injured in the same manner.

A finger amputation can be an extremely traumatic and painful experience. Reattaching fingertip or finger does not mean full recovery. He or she may have undergo numerous surgeries, suffer loss of feeling in the finger, and sustain permanent disfigurement.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina injury lawyers represent clients with injuries to minor complaints whose kids were injured in car accidents, truck crashes, premises liability accidents, due to medical malpractice, or because of defective products.

Government Looks at Other Strollers After Maclaren Recall, November 10, 2009

For 5 Years, Maclaren Knew Strollers Were Amputating Fingers, Gothamist, November 12, 2009

Maclaren USA Recalls to Repair Strollers Following Fingertip Amputations, CPSC, November 9, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Maclaren

Safe Kids Worldwide

Republicans Propose Bill Protecting Drug Makers from North Carolina Products Liability Lawsuits

March 29, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Under the House version of a North Carolina medical malpractice reform bill, a person injured by a drug that had been approved by government regulators would not be able to file a North Carolina dangerous drug lawsuit against manufacturer. The bill is part of a larger tort reform package that wants to cap noneconomic damages at $250,000 and for the amount that is awarded to be adjusted every three years to reflect the Consumer Price Index. Our Charlotte, North Carolina injury lawyers will continue to monitor the developments surrounding this issue, which will have an effect on medical malpractice victims.

Exempt from the proposed immunity would be drug makers that continued selling a medication even after the government ordered that it be taken off the market, as well as those that bribed a government official to get the drug approved or misrepresented/purposely kept information so that the government would approve the drug. Also, as with Senate Bill 33, the House bill only allows emergency room doctors to be held liable for North Carolina medical malpractice if he/she acted in grossly negligent manner.

North Carolina House Republicans are also pushing for the state to be able to take 3/4ths of any punitive damages over $100,000 awarded by a jury. The money would be placed in a state fund supporting public schools.

Dangerous Drug Lawsuit
Our Charlotte, North Carolina dangerous drug lawyers are well aware of the serious injuries and health issues that can result because a patient took a dangerous or defective medication. Drug manufacturers have a responsibility to make sure that their products are safe for use. They must also provide adequate warning of dangerous side effects and possible adverse reactions. If their drug contributed to causing North Carolina personal injury or wrongful death, then they should be held liable.

House bill would shield drug makers, NewsObserver, March 24, 2011

North Carolina Bill To Restrict Product Liability Suits, Pharmalot, March 24, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Read the Tort Reform Draft Bill, Representatives Rhyne and McComas (PDF)

Food and Drug Administration

Topamax as a Dangerous Drug?: FDA Warns of Possible Birth Defect Risk

March 26, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Following new data indicating that babies born to women who were pregnant when Topamax are at higher risk of developing a cleft palate, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has decided to strengthen the warning labels that come with the drug. Topamax’s generic equivalents will also get new labels. If you think there is a possibility that your child may have developed a birth defect or another serious health injury or issue from taking Topamax, you should contact our Charlotte, North Carolina dangerous drug law firm right away.

Per the new data, from the North American Antiepileptic Drug Pregnancy Registry, topiramate, which is the main ingredient in Topamax, can increase the risk of oral clefts in babies during the first trimester of a woman’s pregnancy by more than 20 times.

Other possible serious side effects:

• Other types of craniofacial defects affecting the oral cavity
• Genital birth defects
• Limb malformation
• Greater risk of spina bifida
• Persistent pulmonary hypertension
• Hypospadias
• Genital birth defects
• Congenital birth defects

Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the parent company of Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical LLC, which makes this anti-seizure/anti-migraine drug. It was just last year that two subsidiaries of Johnson & Johnson consented to paying over $81 million to settle claims by the Justice Department that they had illegally marketed Topamax to facilitate weight loss and treat bipolar disorder, alcohol dependency, and other off-label conditions that the FDA had not yet approved. A number of whistleblower complaints had also been filed accusing doctors of receiving payments to push Topamax for off-label purposes.

The FDA wants doctors and other medical professionals to make sure that they warn women of childbearing age about the risks associated with taking Topamax when prescribing it.

UPDATE: FDA Strengthens Topamax Warning On Evidence Of Birth Defects, The Wall Street Journal, March 4, 2011

Moms-to-Be: Are You Taking This Dangerous Drug?, HuffPost, March 14, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Topamax

FDA

Cleft Palate Foundation

Protecting Americans from Defective Medical Devices: Is the FDA Doing Enough?

February 18, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

According to a report in the Archives of Internal Medicine, there are questions as to whether the Food and Drug Administration is doing a good enough job of protecting Americans from defective medical devices. This is obviously an issue of concern for patients, as well as for our Charlotte, North Carolina defective medical devices attorneys who are familiar with how dangerous faulty/malfunctioning devices can be for patients.

Researchers looked at 113 devices that the FDA recalled between 2005 and 2009. The recalls were issued because of the health risks the devices posed. It now appears that 71% of these devices were approved without ever being tested on people—primarily because they were considered similar enough to at least one other product already in the marketplace. Just 19% of the products had to go through tougher review.

The FDA’s less strict approval process, which attempts to get medical devices out there sooner rather than later, is hurting patients. Yet, according to the Washington Post, seeing as over 19,000 medical devices were approved during those four years, there really weren’t that many recalls issued. FDA spokeswoman Karen Riley noted that many people have benefited from the approval of many of these medical devices. She did also say, however, that the researchers’ findings show a need for better safeguards. The agency is making 25 changes to ensure this.

While it is true that medical devices can save lives, defective ones have also been a source of serious injury and death. It is important that manufacturers make sure their products are safe before releasing them into the market and that the government does its job by checking to make sure a medical device is safe before placing its stamp of approval on it.

Examples of defective medical devices:

• DePuy Hip Replacement Systems
• Guidant Cardiac Defibrillator
• Medtronic Defibrillators
• Duragesic Pan Patch
• Nuvaring
• Knee Implants
• Guidant Pacemakers

Study of recalled medical devices faults lax FDA testing methods, The Washington Post, February 15, 2011

Medical Device Recalls and the FDA Approval Process, Archive of Internal Medicine, February 14, 2011

Related Web Resource:
US Food and Drug Administration

Related Blog Posts:
Banning Defective Medical Devices: Report Raises Questions About Whether FDA is Doing Enough to Protect People, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, November 24, 2010

Medical Device-Related Complications Send Over 70,000 Children to the ER Every Year, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, November 24, 2010

Supreme Court Places New Limits on Products Liability Lawsuits Filed Against Medical Device Manufacturers, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, February 20, 2008

South Carolina Infant Death Prompts Recall of 1.7M Summer Infant Baby Monitors

February 14, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

The deaths of two infants last year has led the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and Summer Infant Inc. to recall 1.7 million video baby monitors with electrical cords. Both babies died in strangulation accidents involving the cords. One of the child deaths occurred in Conway, South Carolina to a 6-month-old boy.

Our South Carolina products liability lawyers want to remind you that if your son or daughter was injured because of a defective or dangerous product, you may have grounds for a personal injury case. Even if the product did not malfunction or doesn’t have a design defect, if your child still got hurt or died because of the product, you still may have sufficient cause for seeking damages.

According to the CPSC, there have been seven infant strangulation accidents linked to baby monitor cords since 2004. In addition to the baby who died in South Carolina, another baby, a 10-month old Washington DC girl, was strangled in her crib because of her Summer Infant monitor’s electrical cord last year. Also recently, a 20-month-boy was almost strangled when the cord of his Summer Infant monitor ended up around his neck.

The CPSC and Summer Infant are recalling the monitors so that a new product label and instructions can be included with them. Parents and caregivers have been warned to make sure that the video baby monitor is placed more than three feet away from a child’s crib, playpen, or bed. Over 40 different models are included in the recall.

Per the CPSC, you can prevent babies and young children from strangling in monitor cords by:

• Making sure your child cannot reach the cord.
• Keeping the cord more than three feet from any part of the baby’s sleep environment.
• As your baby grows, checking regularly to make sure that the cord continues to remain out of reach.

The failure to provide the proper operating instructions or warnings can be grounds for a South Carolina products liability lawsuit if injuries or death results.

Death Prompts Baby Monitor Recall, ABC News, February 11, 2011

Children Can Strangle in Baby Monitor Cords, CPSC (PDF)

Two People Sustain Burn Injuries in Fire at Charlotte, North Carolina Nursing Home

February 12, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

Two people were transported to the hospital on Saturday night after they were injured in a fire at White Oak Manor, a Charlotte, North Carolina nursing home. According to fire investigators, one of the victims has life-threatening injuries.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury law firm is aware of the havoc burn injuries can wreak on the body. If you sustained burn injuries in a fire it is important that you seek medical attention right away. If you believed that the fire was caused by another party’s negligence, you should explore your legal options immediately.

In addition to working with an experienced Charlotte, North Carolina burn injury lawyer that understands the seriousness of your injuries and how much medical care you will likely need to recover, your legal representation can determine whether you have grounds for a case of North Carolina nursing home negligence, premises liability, and/or any other type of personal injury.

Last year, federal regulators ranked White Oak Manor as “average” during its annual survey of nursing homes.

Burn Injuries:
1st degree burns: The burn impacts the outer layer of the skin
2nd degree burns: the skin’s outer layer and the layer beneath the skin have been damaged
3rd degree burns: Impacts the deeper layers of skin and the tissue underneath it

Burn injuries can be excruciatingly painful and life-altering. While some burns can be treated with antibiotic creams, more serious burns can lead to blistering, swelling, scarring, disfigurement, infection, dehydration, amputations, loss of the sense of touch, loss of the ability to perspire, organ damage, other serious complications, and/or death.

UPDATED: Fire at Charlotte nursing home injures two, WBTV, February 12, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Burns, MedlinePlus

NC Division of Aging and Adult Services

The International Society for Burn Injuries

Related Blog Posts:
North Carolina Injury Lawsuit Seeks Damages from Pittsboro Retirement Center for Assault that Left Elderly Resident with Brain Injuries, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, January 5, 2011

Products Liability: Two Families Sue for Wrongful Deaths of Loved Ones Fatally Burned While Wearing Flammable Bathrobes, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, November 6, 2009

Goldsboro Driver Sustains Burn Injuries in Fayetteville, North Carolina Truck Crash, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, October 23, 2009

GlaxoSmithKline Settles Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Over North Carolina Wrongful Death of Man from Taking Avandia

January 31, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

GlaxoSmithKline and the family of James Burford have reached an out of court settlement over his wrongful death. The North Carolina man died in 2006. The dangerous drug agreement was reached right before the jury trial, which was set to open today. By settling, GSK avoided what could have been a large verdict amount that may have included punitive damages.

Burford, 49, took Avandia for about 15 months for his diabetes before he died from a heart attack. While the drug maker argued that Burford’s diabetes increased his risk of heart attack regardless of what drug he was taking, the family’s dangerous drug lawyers claimed that Glaxo officials kept studies showing the increased health risks linked to Avandia from regulators.

GSK is facing some 2,000 lawsuits over Avandia and has put aside about $3.4 billion to settle the cases. Bloomberg reports that thousands of lawsuits accusing Glaxo of concealing Avandia’s heart at attack risks were settled last summer for about $460 million.

In September, the Food and Drug Administration decided it was limiting use of Avandia to patients suffering from Type 2 diabetes that cannot manage this condition with other drugs. Users have to be notified of the risks Avandia poses to the heart.

Unfortunately, many people have suffered injuries or had heart attacks from using Avandia and sister drugs Avandaryl and Avandamet, which both contain Avandia. It is unfortunate when a drug that is supposed to help people causes fatal injury instead.

Dangerous Drug Lawsuits
It is negligence on the part of a drug manufacturer that fails to notify regulators and users of possible risks involved with taking a particular medication. As the plaintiff of a North Carolina dangerous drug lawsuit, you may be entitled to financial compensation for mental anguish, pain and suffering, permanent disability, medical costs, future medical bills, present and future lost wages, physical therapy expenses, and prescription costs. If your loved one has died, you may have grounds for North Carolina wrongful death recovery.

Glaxo Suit on Avandia Heart Attack Death Settled on Trial’s Eve, Bloomberg, January 31, 2011

GSK settles Avandia suit involving death of NC man before trial, WRALTechwire, January 31, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Avandia

GlaxoSmithKline

Dangerous Drug Lawsuit: Man Claims Diabetes Drug Avandia Caused Heart Attack, North Carolina Injury Lawyer, November 19, 2009

 

North Carolina Injuries and Deaths on the Job May Be Grounds for Both Third Party Lawsuits and Workers’ Compensation Claims

January 14, 2011, by Michael A. DeMayo

WRAL is reporting that according to the state Department of Labor, 48 people were killed in North Carolina work accidents in 2009. Most common causes of worker fatalities that year included an object or vehicle crushing or striking a worker, fall accidents, and electrocution accidents.

15 of the workers who died were in construction. The manufacturing and service industries saw six worker deaths each. Mecklenburg County had the most worker fatalities at seven deaths. Eight other counties, including Pitt and Nash counties, each experienced two worker deaths.

While even one worker fatality is one death too many, officials are reporting that North Carolina worker illness and injury rate is at an all-time low. They also are wondering whether concerns about the economy and job security may have distracted some workers and played a factor in some of the work-related deaths.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury law firm want to remind you that if you were injured or your loved one was killed on the job, not only is it important that you file your North Carolina workers’ compensation case, but also, you should explore whether you have grounds for a third party North Carolina wrongful death case or personal injury lawsuit with individuals or entities that aren’t your employer but whose negligence contributed to causing your work accident or illness. Unfortunately, many workers and their families don’t realize that they also may have grounds for a civil case. Possible third party lawsuits may involve products liability, motor vehicle crashes, truck accidents, slip and fall, premises liability, violent crimes, inadequate security, premises liability, or other grounds for a case.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina wrongful death law firm handles both North Carolina workers’ compensation and related third party cases.

NC workplace fatalities spike in 2010, WRAL, January 14, 2010

Related Web Resources:
North Carolina Industrial Commission

North Carolina Department of Labor

Workers’ Compensation, Nolo

Drop-Side Crib Ban and Tougher Crib Safety Rules Will Hopefully Prevent Some North Carolina Child Injuries and Deaths

December 29, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

This month, the Consumer Product Safety Administration voted to ban the manufacture and sale of drop-side cribs. The nation’s safety regulator has also passed tougher crib safety rules that will eliminate some of the hazards infants and young children have had to contend with over the years.

Beginning June 2011, drop-side cribs can no longer be sold or resold. Child-care centers and hotels have until 24 months after the rule is published to replace their drop-side cribs. Also, per the new mandatory crib standards, crib mattress support will have to be stronger, safety testing must be tougher, and crib hardware will have to be made more durable.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury law firm is pleased to hear that safety regulators are taking decisive action to protect young children from some of the dangers that cribs have posed. Since 2007, the CPSC has had to recall 11 million dangerous cribs. Many of these cribs had drop sides.

That said, drop-side defects are not the only dangers to kids when it comes to cribs. Yesterday, in its Federal Register Notice regarding the final rule regarding “Safety Standards for Full-Size Baby Cribs and Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs,” the CPSC reported 147 deaths in cribs between November 1, 2007 and April 11, 2010. While 107 of the fatalities did not involve crib-related flaws or structural failures, 35 could be attributed to structural safety issues. 18 of the fatalities involved drop-side failures. Entrapment was a factor in 34 of the child deaths. Entrapment can occur when a child gets stuck in an opening within the crib that can cause suffocation or strangulation.

Also, out of 3,520 injuries in cribs, 1,675 of them were crib-related. Fortunately, most of the injuries were not serious enough to warrant hospitalization. However, the injuries that did require hospitalization were involved fall accidents from cribs (causing head injuries, skull fractures, and limb injuries), falls inside the crib, and children getting stuck in gaps in the crib and in between a crib’s slats.

Baby Asleep in a Drop-Side Crib? Soon They’ll Be Banned, Time, December 17, 2010

Safety Standards for Full-Size Baby Cribs and Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs, Federal Register Notice, December 28, 2010 (PDF)

Related Web Resources:
Consumer Product Safety Commision

Crib safety tips, Consumer Reports

Family Agrees to $5M North Carolina Wrongful Death Settlement with Chewing Tobacco Manufacturer

December 11, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

The family of Bobby Hill have settled their North Carolina wrongful death case against US Smokeless Tobacco Co. for $5 million. Hill, who started chewing tobacco at age 13, died in 2003 from mouth and tongue cancer. He was 42. His wife Kelly sued the maker of Skoal and Copenhagen smokeless tobacco in 2005.

Hill’s family had accused the company of products liability, including the manufacturing and sale of a defective and dangerous product that it knows causes disease, addiction, and death. However, a spokesman for Altria, the company that acquired US Smokeless Tobacco last year, says the company has never made any health claims about its products and is not admitting to liability despite settling.

Since June, smokeless tobacco has to come with labels listing the risks associated with chewing tobacco, including gum disease, cancer, and tooth loss. The warning also has to say that smokeless tobacco is not a safer choice than cigarettes.

Prior to his passing, Hill underwent a number of surgeries to remove his tongue. The family’s case was strengthened by undisclosed letters from the tobacco company to minors offering free samples. The North Carolina wrongful death settlement, which is being called the first of its kind involving smokeless tobacco, could pave the way for more chewing tobacco lawsuit plaintiffs.

Oral Cancer Facts:
• Nearly 37,000 Americans are diagnosed with oral cancer annually.
• In five years, just a little over 50% of these people will still be alive.
• Oral cancer kills 8,000 people a year.
• The death rate for oral cancer is higher than the fatality rates for cervical cancer, testicular cancer, skin cancer, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and laryngeal cancer.

The National Cancer Institute says that smokeless tobacco can causes oral cancer, pancreatic cancer, esophageal cancer, gum disease, heart disease, oral lesions, leukoplakia, and other cancers. Smokeless tobacco contains nicotine and can be addictive.

Canton man’s family gets $5M in tobacco lawsuit, Citizen-Times, December 8, 2010

Chewing tobacco maker agrees to $5M settlement, TMCnet, December 10, 2010

Related Web Resources:
US Smokeless Tobacco Co.

National Cancer Institute

North Carolina Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Involving Zometa and Aredia Results in $12.8M Verdict Against Novartis AG

November 29, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A jury has awarded the family of Rita Fussman $12.8 million in their Winston-Salem, North Carolina dangerous drug lawsuit against Novartis AG. Fussman died of breast cancer in 2009. However, her family contends that prior to her passing she experienced more discomfort than she should have because the chemotherapy drugs Aredia and Zometa caused her to develop osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), which involves the decaying of the jaw bone.

After three days of deliberations, the Winston-Salem jury found that Novartis did not adequately warn Fussman about the risks associated with taking the drugs. Her family’s North Carolina products liability case is the third one involving Zometa and ONJ to go to trial. A $3.2 million jury verdict was awarded in one case last year. A second trial ended with a jury verdict.

Currently, there are about 600 to 700 dangerous drug lawsuits filed against Novartis over its bone strengthening medicines and the increased ONJ risk that they allegedly create. ONJ can lead to decay, may require jaw removal surgery, and can also cause the patient’s death. Although Novartis started warning doctors in 2005 that these drugs can cause bone damage, the Fussman family contends that the drug maker knew about the dangerous as far back as the 1980’s. Fussman started taking Zometa in 2001.

Out of the $12.8 million Winston-Salem dangerous drug award, $12.6 million is for punitive damages and $287,009 is for compensatory damages. However, because the state has a punitive damages cap, Novartis will pay the plaintiffs about $1.1 million.

Jury awards $12.8M in bone-drug lawsuit, Winston-Salem Journal, November 25, 2010

Novartis Hid Risks to Protect Sales, Lawyer Says, Bloomberg, November 19, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Novartis AG

Osteonecrosis of the jaw

Zometa

Aredia

Banning Defective Medical Devices: Report Raises Questions About Whether FDA is Doing Enough to Protect People

November 24, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A new report published in BMJ, a British medical journal, is questioning the US Food and Drug Administration’s ability to keep defective and dangerous medical devices out of the market. The paper contends that inadequate manpower, an insufficient budget, lack of authority, and the agency’s co-opting by special interests, medical devices makers, and political forces are rendering the FDA unable to do its job to protect the public.

The authors of the study, Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice instructor Shannon Brownlee and medical investigative journalist Jeanne Lenzer, talk about the deficiencies in the FDA’s post-approval surveillance process. For example, since the agency approved the vagus nerve stimulator (VNS) by Cyberonics 13 years ago, there have been reports of approximately 900 deaths involving people that used the medical device. The FDA still does not know what caused these fatalities or if a VNS even was a cause of death. Some 60,000 people are currently using a VNS, which is designed for treating epilepsy and is also approved treating depression. Cyberonics is seeking to widen the approval for VNS so that it can be used for treating traumatic brain injury, stroke, and obesity.

Recently, the FDA took back its approval of the Menaflex Collagen scaffold knee replacement device. The agency admitted that it approved the medical device without properly researching it because of political pressure and the flexible requirements that exist to fast-track certain devices. Under the 510(k) program, new medical devices can be approved quickly if their makers can show that the product works in the same that other medical devices currently in the market do.

In August, DePuy Orthopaedics recalled about 93,000 artificial hips over concerns that the medical devices had a 12 – 13% failure rate. Metal particles from the implants have also been known to cause cobalt toxicity.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina defective medical device lawyers know that it can be very upsetting to discover that you or your loved one developed health issues or now have to undergo yet another medical procedure because the manufacturer of your medical device was negligent.

Is the FDA doing its job?, Washington Post, November 3, 2010

Why the FDA can’t protect the public, BMJ, November 2010

FDA Determines Knee Device Should Not Have Been Cleared for Marketing, FDA, October 14, 2010

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Products Recalled, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, September 16, 2010

Related Web Resources:
US Food and Drug Administration

VNS Therapy, Cyberonics

Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Involving Levaquin and Ruptured Tendons Will Go to Trial

November 22, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Edward Karkoska’s dangerous drug lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, the makers of Levaquin, will go to trial, ruled a federal judge—despite efforts by the manufacturer and subsidiary Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical Inc. to have the case dismissed. Karkoska maintains that if there had been more information available about the side effects linked to the antibiotic, his doctor would have prescribed a different medication.

Karkoska is not the only person to sue Johnson & Johnson over claims of injuries sustained from taking Levaquin. He is also not the first to claim that he ruptured his tendon because of the drug. The plaintiffs have contended that if the drug manufacturer had taken greater pains to let people know about the dangerous side effects that could result from taking Levaquin, their injuries would not have happened.

Levaquin
Levaquin was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1996. The drug is used to prevent bacterial infections of the kidneys, skin, bladder, sinuses, prostate, as well as infections related to pneumonia and bronchitis. Over the years, evidence has mounted that the medication can also damage the body’s tendons. A black box warning was issued for the antibiotic in 2008, yet many doctors are still not aware that ruptured tendons is a possible side effect.

Other serious Levaquin side effects:
• Diarrhea
• Seizures
• Dizziness
• Joint pain or swelling
• Dark urine
• Yellow or pale skin
• Easy bleeding or bruising
• Skin rash
• Fever

Our Charlotte, North Carolina dangerous drug lawyers are committed to fighting for our clients’ right to injury recovery from a negligent drug manufacturer. Unfortunately, even medications that have been FDA-approved can be dangerous to ingest.

Levaquin Lawsuit Proceeds To Trial Over Ruptured Tendons, DrugAlert.org, August 6, 2010

Levaquin, Drugs.com

Related Web Resources:
Read Pretrial Order #4 (PDF)

US Food and Drug Administration

Child Injuries and Deaths Lead to Drop-Side Crib and Stroller Recalls and CPSC Warnings About Infant Sleep Positioners and Baby Monitor Cords

October 31, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Our Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury lawyers know how important it is for parents and caregivers to feel that they are doing everything possible to keep their kids’ safe. This includes buying furniture, appliances, accessories, other products that do not pose a danger to their child. Unfortunately, there are products that continue to make it into the marketplace that can cause injuries and deaths. In the event that this happens, you may have grounds for a NC products liability case.

Recently, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission announced the recall of 40,650 drop-side cribs—taking the total of drop-side cribs recalled in the past several years to some 9 million. Drop-side cribs and 3-in-1 convertible cribs affected by these latest recalls were made by Ethan Allen, Victory Land Heritage Collection, and Angel Line.

Drop-side cribs are linked to at least 32, possibly 46, toddler and infant deaths over the last decade. Safety advocates are hoping that a vote to ban drop-side cribs will soon pass.

Also recently, Graco banned about 2 million Graco Quattro Tour™ and MetroLite™ strollers following four babies died in strangulation accidents. deaths. Infants that are in the strollers but aren’t strapped in risk similar injury should they end up stuck between the stroller tray and the seat.

Meantime, six child deaths by strangulation has prompted the CPSC to issue a safety warning about baby monitor cords. The agency says that placing baby audio and video camera monitors with cords (or any type of cord, for that matter) within reach of a child can prove fatal.

In September, the CPSC and the US Food and Drug Administration issued another warning to parents and caretakers—this one involving infant sleep positioners. The agencies are reporting 12 reports of infant suffocation deaths in the last 13 years. An infant in a sleep positioner can suffocate if he/she rolls to a stomach position or gets entrapped between the positioner and the side of the crib.

The Problem With Drop-Side Cribs: More Than 40,000 Recalled, Time, October 25, 2010

Crib Recalls: Ethan Allen, Victory Land Group, Angel Line, ModernMom, October 22, 2010

4 Deaths Prompt Graco Stroller Recall, MSNBC, October 20, 2010

Infants can strangle in baby monitor cords, CPSC (PDF)

Deaths prompt CPSC, FDA warning on infant sleep positioners, CPSC/FDA, September 29, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Safe Kids USA

Choosing Safe Baby Products, KidsHealth

Charlotte, North Carolina Injury Accident: Exploding Pen Injures CMS Student

October 18, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A spokesperson for Turning Point Academy in north Charlotte is reporting that a student sustained minor injuries this morning when a pen that he was holding exploded. A bomb squad was called to the scene. At this time, no one is sure about exactly what caused the ink pen to send shards of plastic into the 14-year-old’s hands as he took off its top.

Police reportedly found some type of residue on the victim, who was taken by Medic to Presbyterian Hospital-Huntersville. Fortunately, his injuries do not appear to be life-threatening.

Middle and high school students that have experienced disciplinary issues in regular Charlotte-Mecklenburg school settings are housed at Turning Point Academy. The school has counseling resources that are there to help kids so that they can eventually go back to their former schools.

School Accidents
If your child was injured during an accident at school, you should contact a Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury law firm to determine whether you have grounds for filing an injuries to a minor claim.

School accidents do happen. However, if the school or another party was negligent in causing the injury accident, you may able to seek damages for the harm that your son or daughter has suffered. Examples of injury accidents that can occur at school:

Slip and fall
• Playground accidents
• Pool drownings
• Injury accidents while playing sports
• Accidents in the classroom
• Accidents involving defective, hazardous, or dangerous items or substances
• Inadequate security-related accidents

Your child can also get hurt because of a crime that occurs on the school grounds. Fights between kids, sexual assault crimes, and other violent crimes have been known to occur. It is important that schools take the necessary steps to keep children safe.

House searched, teens arrested in connection with school pen explosion, Charlotte Observer, October 18, 2010

Student Injured in Small Explosion at Charlotte School, MyFox8, October 18, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Do I have a personal injury case?, Nolo

Evenflo Recalls 13,792 Maestro Child Safety Seats

October 14, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Evenflo is recalling 13,792 Maestro child safety seats because of a possible crack that can form near the harness adjuster that could result in a child becoming improperly restrained. Evenflo will fix the safety issue by giving consumers a metal reinforcement plate to better support the area of the adjuster. There are no injuries reported so far.

Models affected by the recall start with the number 310. These child safety seats were made between November 24, 2009 and April 9, 2010. If you own one of these child booster seats you should contact Evenflo right away to ask for your free reinforcement plate. While you are waiting for your repair kit, NHTSA says your child can still use the seat as long as the owner’s manual is followed.

With motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of accidental death to kids under age 15, our Charlotte, North Carolina products liability attorneys and injuries to a minor lawyers know how important it is to make sure that your child is safely buckled in, whether with a seat belt or in a child safety seat.

Having your son/daughter use a defective car seat can lead to catastrophic consequences during a North Carolina car accident. You may be able to hold the product manufacturer liable.

Examples of child safety defects:

• Poor construction
• Harness defects
• Separation of base/shell
• Handle malfunctions
• Flammable material
• Sudden release
• Unanticipated rotation
• Improper or unclear instructions

A defective car seat can even make your child’s injuries from a traffic crash worse than they otherwise would have been.

Consumer Advisory: Evenflo Company Recalls 13,792 Evenflo Maestro Child Safety Seats, NHTSA, October 15, 2010

Evenflo Initiates Voluntary Safety Recall of Certain Maestro Combination Booster Seats, Evenflo, October 15, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Car Safety Seats, American Academy of Pediatrics

Child Passenger Safety, CDC

$21 Million Stevens-Johnson Syndrome Verdict Awarded to Woman Who Took Anti-Inflammatory Drug Sulindac

September 22, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A federal jury has awarded Karen Bartlett a $21 million products liability award against Mutual Pharmaceutical Company. The 51-year-old woman developed Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) after taking Sulindac, an anti-inflammatory medication that is the generic version of Clinoril.

Bartlett took Sulindac in 2005 for her shoulder pain. Two weeks later, she developed a reaction on her face. She would go on to be diagnosed with SJS and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN). Because 65% of her skin was damaged, Bartlett spent 112 days in a hospital burn unit. She is now blind and has sustained permanent injuries to her stomach, throat, and lungs. In her dangerous drug lawsuit, Bartlett accused the pharmaceutical company of failing to adequately warn about the potential side effects that Sulindac can have on her skin.

Stevens Johnson Syndrome
SJS is a rare, sometimes deadly autoimmune disease that can occur because of drug reactions and allergies. The disease can cause serious skin burns, rashes, loss of skin, and the skin condition Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis. SJS can also cause damage to mucus membranes—affecting areas such as the mouth, eyes, nose, or vagina—and internal organs. A person suffering from SJS can develop deadly infections, such as bacteremia or sepsis.

Recovery from SJS is a long and painful process. Patients usually end up in the ICU or a Burn Unit for a time.

SJS is usually a result of an adverse drug reaction. Bacterial infections and over-the-counter drugs are also possible causes of SJS.

The Food and Drug Administration now requires that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) come with a “black box” warning listing serious side effects, such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome.

SJS Lawsuit Garners Victim $21 Million, Salient News, September 20, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Sulindac Side Effects, Drugs.com

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, MayoClinic

Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Products Recalled

September 16, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., a Johnson and Johnson unit, is recalling its ASR Hip Resurfacing Systems and ASR XL Acetabular Hip Replacement products. ASR Hip Resurfacing Systems is a partial hip replacement product, and ASR XL Acetabular Hip Replacement is a total hip replacement system. Some 93,000 patients around the world have been implanted with one of these medical devices.

The recall comes in the wake of information from the National Joint Registry (NJR) of England and Wales noting that within five years of the original hip replacement procedure involving one of these products, 1 in 8 patients had to undergo a second procedure known as revision surgery. Considering that many hip replacement patients tend to be older and may be suffering from other health issues, undergoing even one surgery can be tough and can result in complications. To have to undergo a second surgery can take an even greater toll on a patient’s health, as well as cause additional pain and suffering.

Although DePuy Orthopaedics has said that it will cover medical expenses, testing, and monitoring related to the recall, it is not known at this time what the company won’t be covering and whether patients will receive medical payments in a timely manner.

Your orthopedic surgeon can help you determine how well your ASR hip implant is working and whether you need to undergo a second surgery.

Signs of a possible problem with your ASR hip implant:

• Difficulty walking
• Pain when walking
• High level of microscopic metal particles around your hip (a blood test can help determine this)
• Dislocation of the implant
• Swelling

It is important that you contact the Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo to find out if you have grounds for a North Carolina defective medical devices case.

Related Web Resources:
ASR™ Hip System Recall Guide, DePuy

DePuy Orthopaedics

National Joint Registry (NJR)

Mother Dies in North Carolina Fall Accident From Dorm Bunk Bed While Visiting Daughter at UNC-Chapel Hill

September 13, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

The mother of a 19-year-old UNC-Chapel Hill student died last month from a fatal head injury she sustained during a fall from her daughter’s dorm room bunk bed. The bed did not have safety rails. Donna Sykes was 49.

Donna was reportedly helping her daughter Jesse, who has cerebral palsy, adjust to dorm life. Jesse did not have a roommate.

According to campus officials, students have the option of elevating the beds anywhere from three inches off the ground to close to 6 ½ feet when they move into a dorm room. The beds don’t come with rails, but students can request them. Now, however, school officials are considering making the bed rails a requirement. Since Donna’s Chapel Hill fall accident, the university has received dozens of requests for the optional attachments.

According to the NewsObserver.com, one college junior, Matt Wilding, says that his bed became wobbly and unstable when he tried to elevate it to the highest height possible at the beginning of the semester. He ended up lowering the bed almost a foot so that it was raised enough that he could fit his desk and fridge underneath. Wilding says he wasn’t even aware that bedrails were an option.

According to housing director Larry Hicks, Donna Sykes’ death was the first one resulting from a bunk bed fall at the university and that in the last decade, only a handful of students have been hurt in North Carolina fall accidents from the dorm beds. Safety consultant Mark Briggs says, also in NewsObserver.com, that most fall accidents from dorm bunk beds happen because students were playing around, drunk, or having sex.

North Carolina Fall Accidents

If you or someone you love was injured in a North Carolina fall accident on someone else’s property, you may have grounds for a Chapel Hill, North Carolina personal injury case if negligence on the premise owner’s party contributed to allowing the accident to happen. If a defective or poorly designed product was involved, you also may have grounds for a North Carolina products liability case against a manufacturer.

Fall accidents—especially ones from elevated heights, can cause broken bones, spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, and even wrongful death.

UNC fields bedrail requests after deadly fall from bunk, NewsObserver, September 11, 2010

Woman’s fatal fall from dorm bunk prompts calls for bed rails, WBTV/WTVM, September 10, 2010

Related Web Resources:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Head Injury, emedicinehealth

Charlotte, North Carolina Injury Attorney Michael A. DeMayo Now a Member of the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum

August 10, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Michael A. DeMayo, a Charlotte, North Carolina personal injury lawyer, is now a member of the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum, one of the most prestigious groups of trial lawyers in the country. Members must have won multi-million dollar verdicts, settlements, and awards for their clients. Attorney DeMayo, who is founder and president of the Law Offices of Michael A. DeMayo, is also a Life Member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum. Less than 1% of US attorneys belong to this group, known for its excellence in advocacy and for having obtained for at least one client an award, settlement, or verdict of $1 million or greater.

Charlotte, Personal Injury Attorney DeMayo leads a team of dedicated professionals with over 100 years of combined legal experience. They are committed to obtaining the financial recovery that their clients and families are owed by negligent parties. Our North Carolina law firm represents victims and surviving family members with all types of injury cases, including those involving medical malpractice, automobile accidents, truck accidents, slip and fall, products liability, defective medical devices, dangerous drugs, nursing home neglect and abuse, motorcycle accidents, dog bites, pedestrian accidents, and workers’ compensation. The Law Offices of Michael DeMayo is located in Charlotte, Monroe, Hickory, and Lumberton, North Carolina. We also represent clients with South Carolina personal injury cases in the counties of Marlboro, Chesterfield, York and Lancaster.

Charlotte, North Carolina Car Accident Lawyer Michael A. DeMayo is also an active member of the community. Each year, his law firm awards college scholarships to a number of high school seniors for their innovative and creative ideas on ways to stop teens from driving drunk.

Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum & Million Dollar Advocates Forum

Michael A. DeMayo, Esq.

Verdicts & Settlements, Law Office of Michael A. DeMayo

Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Seeks Injury Compensation for Rituxan User Who is Now A Quadriplegic

August 6, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A 23-year-old man who is now a quadriplegic has filed a dangerous drug lawsuit against the makers of Rituxan. The defendants of this products liability complaint are Biogen Idec. and Genentech Inc.

Jesse Peetz started taking the immunosuppressant in 2003 to treat thrombotic thrombocytopenia purpura, an autoimmune disorder that he had been suffering from since he was 11. He contends that he was unaware that the drug would make him susceptible to developing untreatable infections. He developed a near-deadly infection in 2005 that resulted in his loss of motor function.

In his dangerous drug complaint, Peetz is accusing the defendants of failing until 2007 to warn users about the risks associated with taking the immunosuppressant. He contends that in 2003, defendants began marketing Rituxan for off-label use to treat the condition that Peetz was suffering from. Off-label means that the Food and Drug Administration had not approved this particular use for the suppressant. In 2007, BIogen Idec and Genentech finally put out a warning that use of the drug could lead to untreatable viral infections, catastrophic injury, and death.

Rituxan is FDA-approved for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The powerful drug gets rid of mature circulating B-cells for close to nine months, which can allow for the deadly viruses. Rituxan has also been linked to several cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, a deadly brain and nervous system viral infection.

Peetz took Rituxan for two years before he developed the dangerous viral inflection. Now, he depends heavily on a ventilator.

Charlotte, North Carolina Dangerous Drug Lawsuit
Just because you or your loved one took a drug prescribed by a doctor and made by a pharmaceutical company doesn’t mean that the medication is good for you. Unfortunately, dangerous drugs continue to make it out into the marketplace, posing a serious danger to people. Drug manufacturers must be held accountable for their negligence in making and designing a drug that can hurt or kill you.

Neb. man sues makers of Rituxan after infection, WTOP/AP, August 11, 2010

Lawsuit Says Rituxan Left Man A Quadriplegic, Drug Discovery and Development, August 12, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Rituxan

Genentech Inc.

Biogen Idec.

Medical Device-Related Complications Send Over 70,000 Children to the ER Every Year

July 27, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

According to a new study, more than 70,000 teenagers and children end up in the emergency room every year because of medical device complications. Other findings by the US Food and Drug Administration researchers:

• Approximately ¼ of the issues involve contact lenses use, which can lead to eye abrasions and infections.
• Hypodermic needles that break off in the skin is another common cause of medical-device-related child injuries.
• Ear tubes can cause infections.
• Illegal drug use involving hypodermic needles that break can also lead to injuries.
• Pelvic devices used to conduct gynecological exams on teenagers can cause skin tears.
• The most serious medical device-related issues involved chest catheters for cancer patient, implanted devices, and insulin pumps.

Two of the most common reasons for medical device-related to injuries to minors are misuse and malfunction. Also many medical devices used on kids were made for adults.

Our Charlotte, North Carolina defective medical devices attorneys want to remind you that you may be able to hold the manufacturer of a malfunctioning or a defective medical device liable for North Carolina products liability. Inadequate warnings or incomplete instructions can also be grounds for a case.

We know how horrible it can be to discover that the medical device your child is using is harming rather than helping him/her. In some cases, the medical professional that determined that your son or daughter should use the medical device must be held liable for North Carolina medical malpractice.

Medical Device Problems Hurt 70,000+ Kids Annually, NPR, July 26, 2010

Medical device problems hurt 70,000+ kids annually, BusinessWeek, July 26, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Injuries Among Children and Adolescents, CDC

Journal of Pediatrics

Families of Two Parasailing Victims Killed in Ocean Isle Beach Sue for North Carolina Wrongful Death

June 25, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

The families of Lorrie Shoup and Cindy Woodcock are suing Ocean Isle Beach Water Sports, North Carolina Water Sports, and owner Barrett McMullan for wrongful death. The two women died during a parasailing accident on August 28.

Woodcock, 60, and Shoup, 55, fell 500 feet into the water off Ocean Isle Beach when the tow rope linking their parachute to the boat snapped. Heavy winds dragged the parachute across the water, causing the women’s bodies to strike the pier and the boat. Autopsy results report that Shoup and Woodcock died from blunt force trauma.

According to their families’ North Carolina wrongful death lawsuit, McMullen and Thomas Povazan, the captain of the boat that was towing the two women, were negligent. The plaintiffs contend that Povazan and the ship’s mate did not give safety instructions to the women before they went parasailing. They also allegedly disregarded the other boat passengers’ pleas to pull the women back down as the winds accelerated. There were kids on the boat that reportedly witnessed the tragic accident.

Also, on the day that the Ocean Isle Beach parasailing accident happened, the National Weather Service had put out a small craft advisory warning boaters on the North Carolina coast that conditions might be dangerous because Tropical Storm Danny was picking up waves and wind. The parasail’s manufacturer had warned not to use its product in winds higher than 12 mph. Winds in the area hit 32 mph on August 28.

The victims’ families are seeking unspecified damages. Meantime, the Coast Guard is investigating the parasailing deaths.

Last year, Ocean Isle Beach Water Sports and NC Watersports filed complaints seeking to remove themselves from North Carolina wrongful death liability or limit any recovery to a $100,000 cap for the women’s parasailing deaths. The cap is the estimated value of the boat that was pulling them when they were fatally injured.

Families sue parasail operator over fatal accident, WRAL, June 24, 2010

Two Parasailing Companies File Complaint to Limit Wrongful Death Liability in Parasailing Accident that Claimed Lives of Two Women, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, October 10, 2009

Family Remembers Parasailing Victim, Digtriad, August 30, 2009

Related Web Resources:
US Coast Guard

Parasailing Tips

Dangerous Drug Lawsuit: Jury Orders Pfizer to Pay $38.4 Million To Breast Cancer Survivor Who Used Hormone Replacement Drugs

June 1, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Last month, a jury ruled against Pfizer in the dangerous drug lawsuit filed by a breast cancer survivor who used the hormone replacement drugs Prempro, Premarin, and Provera. The verdict in favor of plaintiff Donna Kendall: $28 million in punitive damages and $6.3 million in compensatory damages.

The 66-year-old woman was diagnosed with breast cancer after taking Provera and Prempro for 11 years. According to the civil jury, the three drugs contributed to causing Kendall’s breast cancer. Jury members also found that Pfizer failed to adequately warn consumers about the dangers linked to using the hormone replacement medications.

This dangerous drug verdict comes just one month after another jury ordered Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, now owned by Pfizer, to pay $75 million to a woman because she developed breast cancer after taking Prempro. Connie Barton took the hormone drug from 1997 until 2002 when she was diagnosed with breast cancer. Barton underwent a mastectomy to remove her left breast to combat the disease. She says she started taking Prempro because her doctor told her it could prevent dementia and heart disease.

Prempro and Premarin are used to treat menopause. The drugs are used by millions of Americans women who have menopause. They were told that using the HRTs could prevent major illnesses. Provera is used to treat secondary amenorrhea, abnormal uterine bleeding, and endometrial hyperplasia.

However, recent findings have linked Premarin and Prempro to breast cancer, ovarian cancer, stroke, and cardiovascular disease. Plaintiffs have filed some 13,000 products liability lawsuits against Pfizer claiming the hormone replacement drugs caused cancer and other issues.

Cancer is a serious illness. If a pharmaceutical drug caused your cancer, you may be able to obtain dangerous drug compensation from the negligent pharmaceutical company that manufactured the drug and/or failed to tell you about the associated risks.

Pfizer Ordered to Pay $34.3 Million in HRT Lawsuit, MedPage Today, November 24, 2009

Menopause, as Brought to You by Big Pharma, NY Times, December 12, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Pfizer

Hormone Replacement Therapy, Medline Plus

Allergan Ordered to Pay $15 Million Dangerous Drug Verdict For Failing to Warn About Possible Botox Side Effects

May 15, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A jury has ordered Allergan to pay a woman $15 million for the personal injuries she sustained from using Botox. The plaintiff, Dr. Sharla Helton, claims that she suffered botulism poisoning after she received Botox injections in 2006 to get rid of her wrinkles.

Jury members found that Allergan was negligent in its labeling of the Botox injections, which, at the time, did not warn that botulism might be a possible side effect. The 48-year-old gynecologist and obstetrician says that because of her health issues she was forced to resign as Lakeside Women’s Hospital’s medical director. She also had to sell her medical practice.

The verdict comes just three months after another jury ruled in Allergan’s favor in the Botox lawsuit filed by a woman seeking products liability compensation for her daughter’s wrongful death in 2007. Kristen Spears received Botox injections to treat her cerebral palsy, but Allergan’s legal team argued that she died from cerebral palsy complications and not from the drug. The jury in that case found that Allergan had provided adequate warning about the possible risks that could arise from using Botox.

Life-threatening side effects from receiving Botox treatments can include heart attacks, serious allergic reaction, arrhythmia, respiratory depression, and botulism poisoning. That said, Helton’s dangerous drug attorneys claim that there are many people out there who don’t realize that the reason they fell ill was because they were injected with Botox.

Botox is now approved for cosmetic use and for treating certain medical conditions, such as strabismus, cervical dystonia, blepharospasms, and hyperhidrosis.

Oklahoma County jury finds Botox maker negligent, awards $15 million, NewsOk, May 12, 2010

Jury Awards Doctor $15M In Lawsuit Against Botox, CBS2, May 12, 2010

F.D.A. Orders Warning Label for Botox, NY Times, April 30, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Botox Cosmetic

Allergan

Food and Drug Administration

CPSC Attempts to Prevent Child Injuries by Recalling Graco and Simplicity Cribs, Step2 Toy Drums, Gap Baby Swimsuits, Gogo Kids’ Hooded Sweatshirts, and Sportime Soccer Balls

April 30, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Our Charlotte, North Carolina products liability lawyers continue to monitor the latest consumer products recalled by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. However, we are also aware that there are many dangerous products that haven’t been recalled that can also cause serious injuries and deaths. Please do not hesitate to contact our Hickory personal injury law firm to schedule your free case evaluation.

Recent CPSC recalls this week involving product defects that can cause injuries to children:

• Along with importer The Step2 Company LLC, the CPSC and Health Canada recalled approximately 21,000 Step2® Basic Rhythms Drums™ because of worries that the plastic clips that attach the drumsticks to the drum may break. Should this happen, the small, broken pieces can pose a choking hazard to preschool age children. No injuries have been reported so far.

• About 2,400 Gogo Sports Inc. children’s hooded sweatshirts are being recalled because their drawstrings can pose a strangulation hazard to kids if they get tangled around the neck. There have been no reports of injuries.

• An unknown number of Simplicity full-size cribs have been recalled because the beds’ tubular metal mattress-support frame can come off, bend, or cause the mattress to collapse. These cribs are a strangulation and suffocation hazard. One 1-year-old child died when he became entrapped in the crib and suffocated. Another child who fell out of the crib sustained cuts to his head.

• Following 99 reports of Graco drop-side cribs by LaJobi Inc. malfunctioning, the CPSC is recalling about 217,000 cribs because the beds pose suffocation, entrapment, and fall hazards. Caregivers rescued two kids who became entrapped. Six kids were involved in crib fall accidents. One of them suffered a mild concussion.

• The CPSC is recalling about 1,000 Sportime TechnoSkin Foam Balls and TechStitched Soccer Balls because they contain excessive levels of lead that violate the federal lead paint standard. There have been no injuries or illnesses reported to date.

• Gap and the CPSC are recalling about 6,500 baby swimsuits Their halter straps were made too short, and as a result, the plastic ring near the swimsuit’s neck can press up against the infant’s throat, which can block his her/her airway. This can lead to strangulation. No injury reports have been filed.

You may have grounds for a North Carolina injuries to children lawsuit if your son or daughter was seriously injured because a product was defective or malfunctioned. Negligent manufacturers, sellers, and distributors can be held liable for North Carolina products liability.

Recalls, Consumer Product Safety Commission

Related Web Resources:
Defective Product Liability Claims: Who to Sue?, Nolo

Consumer Reports

SafeKids USA

E-Ferol: $110 Million Dangerous Drug Settlement Reached in Deaths of Babies

April 14, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A $110 million class action settlement was approved last week against the maker and distributor of E-Ferol. Carter-Glogau Laboratories was E-Ferol’s manufacturer and O’Neal, Jones & Feldman Pharmaceuticals distributed the supplement that was administered briefly during the mid-80′s.

At least 38 baby deaths are linked to E-Ferol, which was supposed to prevent blindness known as retrolental fibroplasias, that can be caused by a vitamin E deficiency. However, The plaintiffs’ lead attorney believes that many more infants died than the ones noted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The vitamin E supplement was administered intravenously and marketed as a drug that could help premature babies. E-Ferol had not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration and was recalled after approximately just five months in the market following reports of deaths in hospitals throughout the US.

Plaintiffs have accused the defendants of deceptive marketing practices, such as promoting E-Ferol as a vitamin supplement instead of a drug and giving hospitals and giving doctors the impression that the drug was FDA-approved. Carter-Glogau Laboratories and Jones & Feldman Pharmaceuticals have said that there weren’t many laws regulating vitamins back then. The two companies haven’t been in business for nearly 20 years.

In addition to the babies that died, dozens of infants that were given the drug ended up with kidney damage, blindness, brain damage, and liver damage. The symptoms became known as “E-Ferol syndrome.”

According to the CDC, about 89 hospitals administered E-Ferol to babies. While some of them willingly notified parents that they’d given their children the supplement, others were not as forthcoming and had to be legally forced to disclose this information. Many plaintiffs didn’t even know that their children had received E-Ferol until they found out about the dangerous rug lawsuit.

The class action case was brought on behalf of anyone who was administered E-Ferol between November 1, 1983 and April 30, 1984. Heirs of victims, the estates of those that died, parents of 42 babies who died, and adults that received the vitamin supplement as infants were among the plaintiffs. The defendants’ liability insurance will cover the settlement.

Hundreds of other dangerous drug lawsuits and wrongful death complaints have been filed over the injuries that were sustained by babies who were given E-Ferol.

Dangerous Drugs
Unfortunately, there are drug manufacturers that continue to market and release dangerous drugs into the marketplace. Some of these pharmaceutical companies are trusted names in the industry. You may have grounds for filing a North Carolina dangerous drug lawsuit seeking damages for personal injury, products liability, or wrongful death.

Maker of E-Ferol ordered to pay $110 million settlement in deaths of babies, Star-Telegram, April 10, 2010

Settlement Reached in E-Ferol Case, Consumer Affairs, April 12, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Three jailed for selling drug that killed 38 babies, FDA Consumer/Findarticles.com, July – August 1989

The Tragic Case History of Intravenous Vitamin E, The New York Times, May 27, 1984

Appeals Court Rules That Mother’s North Carolina Wrongful Death Lawsuit Involving Son That Fell Into Ravine After Release From Hospital Can Proceed

April 10, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

The North Carolina Court of Appeals says that Bernice Allen’s wrongful death lawsuit against Granville Medical Center can proceed. Allen’s son William, who had epilepsy, died after he was released from the hospital.

Allen says that she told the hospital to make sure that they didn’t release him after he underwent his epilepsy treatment until she arrived to pick him up. William, who was prone to seizures, could not go home alone.

Despite her request/warning, the hospital released her son. Several months later, William’s remains were discovered in a ravine.

Allen’s North Carolina wrongful death lawsuit was dismissed by the trial court because it failed to assert that an expert had reviewed the alleged incident of medical malpractice. Allen appealed. She said that her civil complaint is not seeking damages for medical malpractice. Rather, she is wanting to recover compensation for negligence, including the hospital’s alleged failure to properly supervise William while allowing him to leave the hospital without being accompanied by a responsible adult.

The appeals court judge agreed with Allen and reversed the lower court’s ruling.

Hospital Negligence
Hospitals can be held liable for medical malpractice and/or negligence. This means that they also can be held liable for the careless actions of their employees that caused someone’s North Carolina personal injuries or wrongful death.

Other reasons why you might choose to file a North Carolina injury complaint (that may not directly involve medical malpractice allegations) against a hospital:

• Slip and fall
• Inadequate security
• Sexual assault
• Premises liability
• Products liability
• Inadequate patient supervision

You have three years from the incident to file a North Carolina personal injury lawsuit claiming that the liable party or parties were negligent.

Mom Can Sue Hospital Over Son’s Release, CourthouseNews, April 8, 2010

Medical Malpractice: When Can Patients Sue a Hospital for Negligence?, Nolo

Related Web Resource:
Granville Medical Center

Dangerous Drug?: Darvon Pulled from Market Over Concerns It May Cause Potentially Fatal Heart Rhythms

April 1, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals is pulling the painkiller Darvon off the market. The Food and Drug Administration issued the ban over concerns that it causes potentially fatal heart rhythms. The FDA is also banning related brand Darvocet and wants drug manufacturers to stop marketing low-cost drugs that contain propoxyphene, which is the active ingredient in Darvon. Current Darvon users, however, are being directed keep using the drug until a replacement medication can be prescribed.

Darvon is an opioid narcotic that is prescribed for moderate to mild pain. Last year, about 10 million people were given prescriptions for Darvon and related drugs. However, the popular medication has been plagued with safety concerns for decades. Consumer watchdog group Public Citizen, which blames Darvon for several hundred deaths a year, has been pressing the FDA for a ban. Darvon has already been banned in Great Britain and the European Union following numerous suicides and accidental drug overdoses.

In January 2009, the FDA decided to keep the drug in the market but to include a stronger warning label with overdose risks. It wasn’t until a recent study showing that Darvon can cause fatal irregular heart rhythms that the federal agency finally told Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals to stop making the drug.

Dangerous Drugs
Medication prescribed to you by your doctor is not supposed to cause serious injury or death. Any potential side effects and health risks should be included in a warning to users. Unfortunately, some drugs make it into the market with FDA-approval and later prove to be more dangerous than previously thought. You may have grounds for a North Carolina dangerous drug case.

Other common side effects that have been linked to dangerous dugs:
• Birth defects
• Heart attack
• Kidney failure
• Psychological problems
• Stevens Johnson Syndrome
• Death

Our Charlotte, North Carolina dangerous drug lawyers represent clients who have suffered serious health issues or who have lost loved ones because they took a prescription drug or over-the-counter medication that caused serious injury, illness, or death.

Darvon painkiller pulled off market due to heart risks, USA Today, November 21, 2010

Popular painkillers taken off the market, Los Angeles Times, November 19, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Food and Drug Administration

Darvon, National Center for Biotechnology Information

Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals

North Carolina Products Liability: CPSC Attempts to Prevent Injuries to Children with Graco High Chair Recall and Baby Sling Warning

March 21, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Manufacturers are obligated to make products that are not a danger to consumers—especially when kids are involved. Unfortunately, this isn’t always the case, and child injuries and deaths caused by hazardous or defective products are not uncommon. This is where an experienced Charlotte, North Carolina products liability law firm that handles injuries to children cases can step in.

Earlier this month, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission warned consumers to be careful when using an infant sling to carry infants younger than 4-months. The slings, although easy to wear and convenient for breastfeeding and bonding, can pose a suffocation hazard that in the last 20 years have resulted in at least 14 deaths.

The trendy sling-style carriers can be dangerous in two ways: Its fabric can end up covering the baby’s mouth and nose, which can quickly cause suffocation, or, in the event that the baby folds his/her chin toward the chest, breathing can get obstructed and slow suffocation may occur.

Some of the infants that died while in baby slings either had breathing difficulties, were preemies, or were the low birth weight twin. Although the CPSC is not urging parents and guardians to stop using the baby slings, it is warning them to make sure that the baby is in a position that allows him/her to breath and that the fabric doesn’t end up over the infant’s face.

The CPSC, however, is asking consumers to stop using any of the 1.2 million Graco high chairs that are a potential fall hazard to kids until they get their free repair kit from the manufacturer. At least 24 injuries have been linked to the Graco Harmony™ High Chairs. Many of the injuries were head injuries. Graco has also received 464 reports citing incidents involving brackets and screws that got lose, causing the chair to become unstable and topple over.

Infant Deaths Prompt CPSC Warning About Sling Carriers for Babies, CPSC, March 12, 2010

Graco high chair recall: What you need to know, Christian Science Monitor, March 18, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Unsafe Baby Slings, The New York Times, March 12, 2010

Safe Kids USA

American Academy of Pediatrics Want Warning Labels on Food that Pose a Child Choking Hazard

February 24, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

The American Academy of Pediatrics is reporting that every five days, at least one child in the US dies from choking accidents involving food. Now, the academy is calling on food manufacturers and the federal government to put into place a food labeling system that would warn parents that the food is a choking hazard.

The academy says choking is the number one cause of fatality among kids younger than age 15, with kids under age 5 at highest risk of choking. One reason for this is that kids in this age group don’t have all of their teeth. This can make it hard for them to grind the food down enough that they can easily swallow.

More Kid Choking Accident Facts:

• Over 10,000 kids end up in the emergency room every year because of choking accidents involving food.

• A 2002 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Study reports that about 100 kids a year die from food-related choking accidents.

• HealthyChildren.org, a Web site powered by pediatricians, says food is the most common cause of child choking injuries.

Food that is small enough to enter a child’s throat yet large enough to get stuck their, blocking the airway, can cause oxygen deprivation. If not alleviated quickly enough the obstruction can lead to a traumatic brain injury and even death.

Some foods that pose a high choking hazard risk include:

• Apples
• Peanuts
• Grapes
• Raw carrots
• Hot dogs. Considered by some pediatricians as the number one food choking hazard
• Certain candies

If your son or daughter was injured or died because of a food choking accident that the manufacturer could have prevented by designing/packaging their food product in a safer form or warning parents that about the choking hazard, you may have grounds for filing a Charlotte, North Carolina injuries to children lawsuit.

Pediatricians call for a choke-proof hot dog, USA Today, February 22, 2010

Labels urged for foods that can choke kids, CNN, February 22, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Choking Episodes Among Children, CDC

Food choking hazards and children: What parents need to know, Consumer Reports

Winston-Salem Man Plans to File Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Against GlaxoSmithKline Over Poligrip-Related Injuries

February 2, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

A Winston-Salem man says he is going to sue GlaxoSmithKline for North Carolina personal injuries that he claims he sustained from using Poligrip. Johnny Howell, 53, says he started exhibiting signs of zinc poisoning in 2004, 15 years after he started using the denture cream.

It wasn’t until last year that Howell found out what was causing his disease. He says that even after receiving treatment for his condition, he has problems walking and experiences weakness and numbness in his legs. Due to a number of fall accidents, Howell broke an ankle and a rib. He must now use a walker and is unable to drive. Howell also lost his job working as a mechanic and receives disability.

While humans need zinc, too much of it can lead to calcium deficiencies, bone loss, anemia, and nerve damage, which can become permanent if excessive consumption of zinc goes on for too long. Howell is not the only person who has sustained injuries from using denture cream. There are dozens of people who say their nerve damage was caused by using Poligrip or Fixodent, which is made by Proctor & Gamble. Considering that about 40 million Americans use adhesives to keep their dentures in place, the health risk link is cause for concern.

Although the American Dental Association says it doesn’t know of any cases confirming that nerve damage is caused by dental glue, an article published in “Neurology” in 2008 linked high levels of zinc in Super Poligrip to “profound neurological disease” in patients that were examined.

GlaxoSmithKline just recently started including a warning with its Super Poligrip denture cream noting that too much zinc may cause health issues. Newsinferno.com reports that there are already scores of people that have been damaged by using denture creams and have filed their dangerous drug lawsuits.

Dangerous Drug Lawsuits
Drug manufacturers are supposed to make products that are safe for people to use. When an over-the-counter product or a prescription drug leads to dangerous side effects that a pharmaceutical company failed to warn against, those who were injured as a result may be able to obtain personal injury damages by filing a North Carolina dangerous drug lawsuit.

Zinc in denture adhesives blamed for nerve damage, Reporter News, January 18, 2010

North Carolina Man Says Poligrip Left Him Disabled, Plans Lawsuit, NewsInferno, February 3, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Poligrip, GlaxoSmithKline

Zinc poisoning, Medline Plus

American Dental Association

Products Liability: 635,000 Cribs by Dorel Asia SLR are Recalled after 1 Infant Death and 10 Injuries to Children

January 19, 2010, by Michael A. DeMayo

Dorel Asia SLR and the US Consumer Product Safety Commission are recalling about 635,000 cribs, following 10 injuries to infants and one child death. The crib manufacturer and the CPSC are concerned that if the hardware that holds up the crib’s side fails, the drop side might detach, which could lead to suffocation or entrapment.

So far, there has been one related death involving a 6-month-old Iowa baby who was fatally injured as a result of strangulation and entrapment. The CPSC and Dorel Asia have received 31 reports of drop side accidents. Six of them involved kids who became entrapped between the mattress and the crib’s drop side. Three babies sustained bruises. There have also been 36 reports of cribs’ slats breaking. Two children became entrapped because of this. Fortunately they were not injured. Seven babies sustained scratches and bruises.

Consumers are urged to stop using the recalled cribs and contact the manufacturer for a free replacement kit.

This latest crib recall comes just one day after the CPSC and Carmia Furniture recalled 1,000 Diana cribs due to worry that the slats on the drop-sides might detach, potentially causing the child to become entrapped in the crib or fall to the ground. There have been 18 reports of the slats detaching from the cribs rails.

Over the last few years, the entrapment, suffocation, and fall hazards posed by drop-side cribs have become issues of great concern to parents, guardians, and child safety advocates. Since December 2005 more than 2 million drop-side cribs have been recalled. At least 11 infant deaths have occurred because of drop-side crib defects. And there are those, including manufacturers, who are calling for a ban on the manufacture of drop-sides cribs.

Drop-Side Crib Defects
While drop-side cribs offer the convenience of allowing a parent easy access to their child because one side of the crib can be lowered, these cribs have proven prone to hardware warping, slat breakage, and drop-side detachments. These product defects can create an opening between the drop side and the crib mattress that a child can easily become entrapped in, which may lead to suffocation if the infant or toddler stays trapped for too long. A drop-side that detaches or drops suddenly can also cause fall accidents, which can lead to head injuries and other child injuries.

It is inexcusable for your child to get have gotten hurt because a product manufacturer was negligent. You may have grounds for filing a North Carolina products liability lawsuit involving injuries to a child.

Dorel Asia Recalls To Replace Cribs; Pose Strangulation and Suffocation Hazards, CPSC, January 19, 2010

Major manufacturers propose ban on drop-side cribs, Chicago Tribune, March 18, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Report: Drop side cribs can be dangerous, ABC, June 24, 2009

Dorel Industries

Family Considers Filing North Carolina Wrongful Death Lawsuit After Mental Patient Suffers Fatal Overdose

November 25, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

The family of Jefferey Scott Swaim is considering filing a North Carolina wrongful death lawsuit against Cherry Hospital. Swaim, 40, was found unconscious on a Greyhound bus two hours after he was discharged from the mental hospital.

According to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in Chapel Hill, Swaim died on July 16 from acute Fentanyl poisoning. Autopsy results show that the amount of Fentanyl he had in his blood was two times more than what is considered toxic. Goldsboro hospital had prescribed the pain patch to Swaim. Fentanyl, the medication’s active ingredient, has been linked to hundreds of overdose deaths in the US.

Swain’s death is the 11th “questionable” fatality linked to the mental hospital since 2003. In 2008, Cherry’s Medicare and Medicaid certification was revoked after patient Steven H. Sabock choked on his meds, struck his head, and than sat in a chair for almost a day without being medically treated, fed, or given anything to drink.

Swaim began his stay at the state mental hospital on July 3. He wanted the hospital to treat his suicidal thoughts and alcohol abuse. He suffered from acute pancreatitis and uncontrollable mood swings. When the hospital discharged him, they gave him two Fentanyl patches.

When his mother went to the bus station to pick him up, she found him slumped in a bus seat. He wasn’t breathing. Doctors discovered one of the pain patches in his mouth.

Medical Malpractice
A medical provider can be held liable for North Carolina medical malpractice if a patient is given the wrong drug or the wrong dose of a drug. The drug manufacturer can also be held liable if it is considered a dangerous drug that unnecessarily causes injury or death. Just last year, a Florida jury awarded one family $13.3 million because her mother died from a Fentanyl overdose. The defendant in that dangerous drug case was Johnson & Johnson, which manufacturers the Duragesic fentanyl pain patch. Fentanyl is also available under a number of generic labels.

Overdose killed mental patient, News & Observer, November 24, 2009

Fentanyl Pain Patch Wrongful Death Lawsuit Results in $13.3 Million Verdict, About Lawsuits, October 30, 2008

Related Web Resources:
Fentanyl

Cherry Hospital

Dangerous Drug Lawsuit: Man Claims Diabetes Drug Avandia Caused Heart Attack

November 19, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

A 58-year-old man has filed a dangerous drug lawsuit against GlaxosmithKline because he says that the medication Avandia caused his heart attack. Kenneth L. Bryan had taken the prescription drug for his diabetes.

In his personal injury lawsuit, Bryan claims that he suffered a heart attack two years after he started taking Avandia. As a result, he says he has had to undergo multiple angioplasties, four bi-pass surgeries, and other procedures.

Bryan contends that Avandia is an unreasonably dangerous and defective prescription drug. He is accusing drug maker Glaxo of knowing about the dangerous side effects associated with Avandia. Bryan says Glaxo breached the implied warranty of fitness and caused his injuries. Bryan is not the only person to have filed an Avandia lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline.

Other injuries and side effects that have been associated with the prescription drug include:

• Allergic reaction
• Weight gain
• Inflamed sinuses
• Congestive heart failure
• Severe allergic reaction
• Stroke
• Bone fractures
• Death

Some 4 million people took Avandia in the US in 2006. The following year, the Food and Drug Administration said that clinical trial results indicated that Avandia can increase heart attack risk by more than 40% and the number of deaths associated with heart disease by over 60%.

Drug manufacturers are not supposed to make dangerous drugs that can injure or kill users. Unfortunately, there are a number of popular drugs made by renowned pharmaceutical companies that continue to injury, health complications, and death.

In another recent Avandia lawsuit, 98 people claim they sustained serious injuries after using Avandia to treat their type 2 diabetes mellitus. The plaintiffs contend that until the medication’s label was changed on August 14, 2007, GlaxoSmithKline did not properly warn that use of the popular diabetes drug could increase the chance of heart failure. In November 2007, the label was modified again to warn that Avandia could cause myocardial ischemia.

Arkansas man claims diabetes drug caused heart attack, The Record, November 19, 2009

Same pair of lawyers gather another 90 plaintiffs in suit over Avandia, The Record, November 19, 2009

Avandia, Drugs.com

Related Web Resources:
GlaxoSmithKline

Avandia

Products Liability: Two Families Sue for Wrongful Deaths of Loved Ones Fatally Burned While Wearing Flammable Bathrobes

November 6, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

Last month, two wrongful death lawsuits were filed by plaintiffs whose loved ones died tragically when the chenille bathrobes they were wearing caught fire. Bathrobe manufacturer Blair Corp. is the defendant named in both complaints.

Atwilda Brown, was making tea when the catastrophic accident happened. She called 911 for help but died from her injuries. The cause of death on her death certificate is “from clothing catching on fire,” says her daughter Sharon Davis. Brown’s family is suing the clothing manufacturer for $30 million.

In another tragic burn accident, 81-year-old Evelyn Roguff and her 83-year-old husband Murray died when the sleeve of the robe she was wearing caught fire on the electric burner of her stove. Murray was burned while trying to save her. The couple would have been married 50 years by now. Their family is suing Blair Corp. for $1.9 million.

At least nine deaths have been linked to the flammable bathrobes. Most of the victims were older people. Five of the people that died were women. In the last seven months, 300,000 of the Blair Corp. robes have been recalled over safety concerns.

Clothing must meet specific safety standards. Defects can lead to tragic accidents, including choking accidents, strangulation accidents, and burn accidents.

All clothing sold in the US must meet the requirements of the Flammable Fabrics Act. Highly flammable clothing can prove tragic for the person wearing the dangerous fabric. Highly flammable clothing that causes North Carolina injury or death is a products liability.

Bathrobe company sued in deaths of elderly Oceanside couple, October 28, 2009

Family Sues over Connecticut Woman’s Bathrobe Fire Death, Insurance Journal, October 30, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Blair Expands Recall To All Women’s Chenille Apparel Due to Burn Hazard; Additional Reported Deaths Prompt Re-Announcement of Robe Recall, CPSC, October 22, 2009

Flammable Fabrics Act

NASCAR Driver Jeremy Mayfield Files North Carolina Wrongful Death Lawsuit Against His Stepmother

September 8, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

In North Carolina, Jeremy Mayfield, the suspended NASCAR Sprint Cup driver, is suing Lisa Mayfield, his stepmother, over his father’s wrongful death. Terry Mayfield passed away on September 5, 2007. Police and the medical examiner say that he committed suicide by shooting himself in the chest.

His son, however, disagrees. Jeremy Mayfield’s Rowan County, North Carolina wrongful death complaint contends that Lisa Mayfield’s “intentional acts” caused his father’s death.

Jeremy Mayfield says his father confronted his wife about an affair he believed she was having and asked her to leave. Several days after Terry Mayfield died, Jeremy contends that the Lisa’s lover ended his relationship with his girlfriend and went to live with Lisa. Jeremy’s North Carolina wrongful death lawsuit also accuses his stepmother of spending a loan that was supposed to go toward constructing a barn.

Lisa Mayfield maintains that she had nothing to do with her husband’s death. In July, she filed her civil lawsuit alleging defamation against Jeremy in Iredell County civil court.

Wrongful Death
Even if the person or party that you believe is responsible for your loved one’s death is not charged in criminal court, you may be able to file a North Carolina wrongful death case for your loss and associated damages.

Suing someone for wrongful death won’t bring the deceased back, but it can give you some peace to know that the liable party was held accountable for their actions.

Some grounds for filing a Wrongful Death Complaint if your family member dies as a result:

• Medical malpractice
• Premises liability
• Products liability
• Nursing home abuse
• Nursing home neglect
• Car accidents
• Truck crashes
• Pedestrian accidents
• Motorcycle collisions
• Bicycle accidents
• Bus crashes
• Train accidents
• Murder

Jeremy Mayfield Files Wrongful Death Lawsuit Against Stepmother, Sporting News, September 8, 2009

Suspended driver sued by stepmother, ESPN, July 29, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Wrongful Death, Nolo

Police called to Jeremy Mayfield’s house, Al.com, August 16, 2009

Lawsuit Accuses Toyota of Concealing Evidence in Hundreds of Rollover Accidents

September 3, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

A former attorney for Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc. is suing his former employer for allegedly forcing him to withhold evidence from the victims of hundreds of rollover accidents. Dimitrios P. Biller says that not only did the world’s largest motor vehicle manufacturer make him conceal the evidence from plaintiffs who had sustained injuries or lost loved ones, but he claims that the company then made him resign two years ago.

Biller’s complaint accuses Toyota of getting rid of information in over 300 rollover accidents. He claims the data that was concealed proved that the vehicle roofs involved in the rollover accidents were substandard. He also accuses Toyota of illegally withholding computer-stored data from products liability attorneys and wrongful death lawyers.

Biller’s lawsuit claims that the company’s engineering unit was allowed to get rid of important documents and information that should have been turned over to the plaintiffs. The complaint also charges that Toyota held back records on vehicle roof testing and design.

Biller says that he was intimidated and harassed by Toyota employees even after he left the company. Because of the pressure that he was allegedly subjected to, Biller claims that he has had to undergo psychiatric treatment over the last four years and in 2007 he was diagnosed with major depressive syndrome.

Toyota has responded to Biller’s allegations with a statement calling the attorney’s claims “misleading” and “inaccurate.” The auto manufacturing giant portrays its former managing counsel as a disgruntled former employee who did not like the fact that he had to resign.

If in fact Toyota did withhold evidence in these cases, however, this could result in the reopening of rollover cases that over the past two decades the car maker has either won or settled.

Obtaining recovery for a Charlotte rollover lawsuit usually requires the experience of a North Carolina injury law firm who understands the intricacies involved with proving that an auto manufacturer was negligent and therefore owes the plaintiff damages for products liability or wrongful death.

Toyota concealed evidence in rollover cases, ex-attorney alleges, Los Angeles Times, September 1, 2009

Toyota Accused of Hiding Evidence, CBS News, August 29, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Q&As: Rollover and roof crush, IIHS, January 2009

Roof Crush and Rollover Information Center, Public Citizen

North Carolina Fireworks Explosion Kills Four People Killed on July 4

July 6, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

Four people are dead from injuries they sustained on July 4 in Ocracoke when a truck filled with fireworks exploded. The four victims were workers who were preparing for an Outer Banks celebration for the 4th of July.

According to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives investigators, the fireworks blast was an accident that occurred while the fireworks show was being set up. The tractor-trailer was loaded with enough fireworks for a 22-minute program.

One of the victims sustained serious burn in injuries from the North Carolina fireworks accident and was flown to Pitt County Memorial Hospital in Greenville. He died on Monday. Another fireworks victim died at the accident scene. A third victim was taken to UNC-Chapel Hill Jaycee Burn Center.

The company in charge of setting up the fireworks for the Ocracoke show was Melrose South Pyrotechnics, which is located in Catawba, South Carolina. Company officials say they are working with investigators to determine the cause of the deadly blast.

Fireworks Injuries
According to the US Consumer Products Safety Commission, almost 7,000 people in the US had to go to hospital emergency rooms in 2008 because they sustained a fireworks injury. At least 11 people were killed in fireworks accidents in 2007. Almost 2/3rds of these injuries occurred within the one-month period around the 4th of July.

Common kinds of fireworks injuries include:

• Burn injuries
• Eye injuries
• Hand injuries
• Leg injuries

If you or someone you love was injured in a North Carolina fireworks accident, you may be entitled to personal injury or wrongful death recovery. Even if you were a worker injured while setting up a fireworks display, there may be third parties that can be held liable for the harm you have suffered. You also may be entitled to receive North Carolina workers’ compensation benefits.

Companies and premise owners charged with overseeing a fireworks display or any other event are responsible for making sure that there are no hazardous conditions on the premise that could cause injuries or death. Otherwise, they could be held liable for North Carolina premises liability.

4 in Outer Banks Die In Fireworks Accident, Washington Post, July 6, 2009

Death Toll Rises in Fireworks Blast, NY TImes, July 5, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Fireworks-Related Injuries, CDC

CPSC Announces Drop in Fireworks-Related Injuries; Consumers Still Urged To Celebrate Safe This July 4th, CPSC.org, June 30, 2009

Products Liability: Bausch & Lomb Pays Over $250 Million to 600 Plaintiffs for Eye Fungus Injuries

June 16, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

In the last year, optical products company Bausch & Lomb has settled almost 600 products liability lawsuits related to its ReNu MoistureLoc multi-purpose contact lense solution. Dozens of other individual personal injury complaints are still pending.

Over 700 contact lenses users in the US and Asia claim that they suffered from Fusarium keratitis because they used the solution, which was pulled off US store shelves in April 2006. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that from June 2005 to September 2006 there were 180 confirmed cases in 35 US states. After that point, the CDC stopped its surveillance.

Seven people in the US reportedly had to have an eye removed because of the infection and at least 60 people had corneal transplants to save their vision. A racecar driver’s career ended as a result of his injury. Another person who lost his eye became addicted to painkillers, resulting in the collapse of his marriage and business.

Fusarium Keratitis
This rare infection can lead to inflammation of the cornea. Victims often experience severe pain. Delayed diagnosis has been known to occur and can cause the infection to grow worse. One woman didn’t know about the recall and suffered from the infection for two months. She lost an eye.

It is still unclear how the contact solution played a role in the mass fungal outbreak. One theory is that its disinfectant got into the lenses at a very high rate and the moisturizing agents produced a biofilm that either shielded or helped grow the fungus until the infections occurred.

MoistureLoc has also been linked to different types of viral, bacterial, and parasitic ailments. Plaintiffs have filed over 500 products liability lawsuits for their injuries. One woman claims that after her eye became infected she sustained a scar that blurred her vision and took a year to heal. Bausch & Lomb is denying that there is a link between the solution and these infections.

Bausch & Lomb settles 600 eye fungus lawsuits, AP, May 31, 2009

General Information about Fusarium Keratitis, CDC, May 10, 2006

Related Web Resources:
Bausch and Lomb

Instructions for Cleaning Contact Lenses

The Law Offices of Michael A DeMayo LLP, A North Carolina Personal Injury Law Firm, Supports the Fight Against Drunk Driving and Helps to Build Habitat for Humanity Homes

May 19, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

This month, The Law Offices of Michael A DeMayo participated in two community service events. The first event was Walk Like MADD, which is hosted by Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Charlotte Personal Injury Attorney Michael A DeMayo served as the honorary chair for the annual 5k walk, which took place on May 2. Proceeds from the walk will go toward helping drunk driving victims and fund programs to prevent underage drinking and drunk driving.

Over two dozen of the North Carolina injury law firm’s employees and their families took part in the event. Together, they helped raise over $2,500. Attorney DeMayo and his staff are familiar with the struggles that drunk driving accident victims and their families face. He and his law firm represent North Carolina and South Carolina clients that have been injured and those whose loved ones have died in drunk driving accidents in their pursuit to recover personal injury or wrongful death compensation from all negligent parties. Just last year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported that both states experienced the largest spike in DUI fatalities among all US states between 2006 and 2007.

This past Saturday, employees from the Charlotte branch of the Law Offices of Michael A DeMayo participated in another event, this one at a Habitat for Humanity house. They pulled up their sleeves and spent the morning hanging dry wall at the home, which is being built for a low-income family. The North Carolina personal injury law firm, which also has law offices in Monroe and Hickory, made a $15,000 donation to this worthwhile cause.

Attorney DeMayo praised Habitat for Humanity for helping so many people in the Charlotte community that are in need of affordable housing. He also touted the benefits that his employees reaped by volunteering for this “great, team building” experience.

The Law Offices of Michael A DeMayo, LLP also helps clients with injury or wrongful death cases involving medical malpractice, nursing home abuse or neglect, defective medical devices, products liability, dog bites, and workers’ compensation.

Related Web Resources:
Walk Like MADD, Charlotte, NC

Habitat for Humanity, Charlotte

NHTSA Ranks North Carolina and South Carolina as Two US States With Greatest Increase In DUI Deaths, North Carolina Injury Lawyer Blog, September 2, 2008

North Carolina Products Liability: Tougher Roof Strength Standards Will Provide Better Rollover Crash Protection, Says US Department of Transportation

May 6, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is doubling its roof strength requirement for light vehicles weighing up to 6,000 pounds and introducing an actual requirement for vehicles weighting 6,000 to 10,000 pounds. According to US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, these tougher standards will offer passengers greater protection during rollover accidents.

The current light vehicle requirement is the ability to withstand 1.5 times the force of the vehicle’s weight. The new standard would require that a light vehicle’s roof withstand 3 times the motor vehicle’s weight. Heavier vehicles will now have to meet a roof strength requirement of 1.5 times the vehicle’s weight.

September 2012 marks the beginning of the phase in schedule of these new requirements that must be completed for all vehicles that fall under the applicable weight categories by the 2017 model year. Some 10,000 people are killed in rollover accident each year.

Kinds of Rollover Accidents:
Tripped Rollovers: When a vehicle trips over an object, like a guardrail, a curb, or a steep slope.

Un-Tripped Rollovers: Can occur when the driver is driving at a high speed and tries to avoid getting involved in an auto collision.

While driver negligence can lead to rollover accidents, auto manufacturers must make sure that they make sport utility vehicles and other autos that are designed in such a way that they prevent rollover accidents from happening. In the event of a rollover collision, then the motor vehicle must offer vehicle occupants the proper safety protections needed to minimize injuries and prevent deaths.

Other safety precautions that auto makers can include in their motor vehicles:

Electronic Stability Control: Helps drivers stay in control of the auto so that it doesn’t go off road or skid out of control.

Rollover Air Bags: Side-impact head air bags can prevent occupants from getting ejected during a rollover accident.

Seat Belts: Use of seat belts improves survival chances in a rollover crash by 75%.

Auto makers must make sure that their vehicles are free from defects and come with the proper safety precautions. When a rollover accident occurs and a person gets hurt of dies because a vehicle part was defective or the vehicle malfunctioned, the car manufacturer can be held liable for North Carolina products liability or wrongful death.

U.S. DOT Doubles Roof Strength Standard for Light Vehicles, NHTSA, April 30, 2009

Rollovers, Safercar.gov

Related Web Resource:
Read the NHTSA Final Rule (PDF)

Holly Springs Family Files First North Carolina Chinese Drywall Lawsuit

April 22, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

The first North Carolina defective Chinese drywall lawsuit has been filed. The plaintiffs are from Holly Springs and the complaint is against builder Stafford Custom Homes. Their lawsuit blames the corroding metals and putrid smell in their home on the toxic material in the walls of their residence that they say made them sick.

The plaintiffs, Mary and Daniel Flannigan, also contend that Stafford Custom Homes, in Southern Pines, should have known that the drywall could become dangerous and cause damage. The couple say they first noticed the “rotten eggs” odor before buying their residence in 2004. They said Stafford employees said that the smell was coming from the water heater.

The water heater coils were replaced and the couple later paid to have the water heater removed from under the house. Home inspectors became suspicious that mold might be growing, so Stafford Homes installed a layer of plastic in the basement to act as a vapor barrier. Despite all these changes, the smell wouldn’t go away and a number of family members began to experience chronic health issues. Also, guitar strings and jewelry are among the metals in their home that turned black.

In 2007, the evaporator coils connected to the gas furnace corroded and needed to be replaced. Last year, the Flannigans found out that their air and heating system was failing. The couple said that they were experiencing serious headaches and didn’t consider that the drywall in their home might be defective until they saw a tv news report about the Chinese-made product.

They are seeking North Carolina personal injury compensation for medical costs and to replace damaged property, including compensation for new drywall and the reconstruction of their home. They also want punitive damages.

Other North Carolina defective Chinese drywall lawsuits are expected. Just this February, the US Consumer Products Safety Commission started investigating complaints about Chinese drywall. They’ve been asking electrical engineers and toxicologists to collect samples so they could figure out the associated safety and health hazards.

In the last 10 years, millions of pounds of Chinese drywalls were installed in apartments and homes because they were costly and abundant and to meet the demands of the US housing boom. In the meantime, Congressional lawmakers have filed legislation to recall and ban drywall made in China until new safety standards for drywall are established.

Some 100,000 thousands homes in the US may be covered with Chinese drywall. The defective material has been linked to sinus and respiratory issues in some people.

North Carolina Sees First Chinese Drywall Lawsuit, NewsInferno.com, April 22, 2009

Holly Springs couple sues over Chinese drywall, The News and Observer, April 22, 2009

Related Web Resources:
CPSC: Chinese drywall poses potential risks to southeastern homes, WSLS, April 24, 2009

U.S. Lawmakers Seek Ban on Tainted Chinese Drywall, Insurance Journal, April 10, 2009

North Carolina Highway Patrol Starts "Operation Buckle Up" to Reduce Motor Vehicle Injury Accidents and Deaths

April 13, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

Operation Buckle Up begins in North Carolina today. The state and local initiative by law enforcement officers is designed to reduced the number of injury accidents and deaths, as well as prevent certain traffic violations. Over the next two weeks, police officers will crack down on motor vehicle drivers and riders that are in violation of North Carolina’s seat belt laws.

Statistics:

• 1558 people died on North Carolina’s roads in 2006.
• 48% of fatalities involved people that did not wear seat belts.
• 88.6% of people in cars and trucks are believed to be in compliance with North Carolina’s seat belt laws.

The North Carolina Highway Patrol has also been cracking down on drunk drivers. Police cited 2,905 drivers for driving while impaired between August 13 and through the Labor Day weekend ending September 3.

The areas where the largest number of drunk drivers were apprehended in North Carolina during the two-week initiative were Carteret (86), Mecklenburg, (100), and Wake (342). One Highway Patrol officer at the Lexington office says that his agency has arrested 182 people for DWI this year.

The James Madison University Web site offers the following facts and statistics about seat belt safety:

• Out of every five motor vehicle drivers, one driver will be in a traffic accident this year.
• About 35,000 people die in accidents involving a motor vehicle every year. About 50% would not have died if they were wearing seat belts at the time of the fatal crash.
• If just 172 of the 35,000 people did not die, some $100 million a year in personal injury and wrongful death recovery costs would be saved.
• Children have been known to die or be seriously injured in a motor vehicle crash because they were crushed by adults that were not wearing seatbelts.
• 80 out of every 100 children that die in a motor vehicle collision would have been saved if they had been a safety belt or child safety seat.

Many motor vehicle accidents happen because a car driver, truck driver, motorcyclist, or bus driver was negligent. If you were injured in a motor vehicle injury victim because another party was negligent—even if you were not wearing a seat belt—you should speak to a personal injury lawyer right away.

Your personal injury attorney can file a personal injury claim or lawsuit for you so that you can obtain the recovery that you need to cover your medical costs and other related damages.

If you were injured in a motor vehicle accident because of a defective seat belt, you could have grounds to file a seat belt injury claim for your injuries.

Highway Patrol focuses on seat-belt usage, The Dispatch Online, September 17, 2007

Safety Belt Statistics, James Madison University

Related Web Resources:

NC Seat Belt Law, NC Crime Control.org

The Disaster Center’s Motor Vehicle Accident Death and Injury data Index, Disaster Center.com

US Supreme Court Upholds Patient’s Right to Sue Drug Maker for Dangerous Drug Even if it Has FDA Approval

March 5, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

The Supreme Court dealt a huge blow to the pharmaceutical industry by upholding the right of patients to sue a drug maker for damages over a dangerous drug, even if the medication has Food and Drug Administration approval. While the Bush Administration told the court last year that a drug maker should be exempt from such lawsuits alleging personal injury or death, the judges, in a 6-3 decision on Wednesday, ruled otherwise.

They upheld a $6.7 million verdict that ruled in favor of Diana Levine, a musician who had her right arm amputated when she developed gangrene after being injected with Phenergan, an anti-nausea drug made by Wyeth. Levine has already settled her medical malpractice lawsuit against the clinic that administered the drug to her via IV-push, causing her artery to accidentally be injected with the powerful drug. Her dangerous drug lawsuit against Wyeth accused the drug manufacturer of failing to properly warn consumers of the risks that could arise from taking the anti-nausea medication even though its warning to use a great deal of caution when injecting the drug met FDA standards.

Levine won her civil lawsuit in Vermont civil court and Wyeth appealed the decision, arguing that federal law protected it from such lawsuits. The Court, however, found that Wyeth failed to prove that failure-to-claim warnings conflicted with federal laws regarding drug labeling. Wyeth doesn’t manufacture Phenergan any more.

This Supreme Court decision paves the way for lower court judges to allow state liability cases against drug makers to proceed even if the federal government is charged with regulating the area.

Dangerous Drugs
Unfortunately, despite regulation by the federal government, there are dangerous drugs that manage to enter the marketplace and cause injury or death to patients. Drug manufacturers must be held accountable for their dangerous or defective drugs.

Supreme Court ruling supports drug lawsuits, USA Today, March 4, 2009

Supreme Court backs patients’ right to sue drug makers, Baltimore Sun, March 4, 2009

Musician gets high court OK to sue Wyeth, March 4, 2009

Related Web Resource:
Wyeth

Wyeth V Levine, US Supreme Court Opinion (PDF)

Ban Painkiller Darvon, Says Food and Drug Administration Advisory Panel

February 2, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

In a 14-12 vote, an advisory panel for the Food and Drug Administration is recommending a ban on the prescription drug Darvon. The painkiller has been used for over 50 years.

First approved in 1957, Darvon is one of the 25 most commonly prescribed medicines. It is primarily marketed these days as Darvocet. In 2007, over 20 million prescriptions for this drug were issued.

Public Citizen, a consumer group, had asked the FDA to withdraw the Drug because its risk of overdose is so high and the amount of pain relief it actually offers is low.

The drug is marketed by Qualitest/Vintage Pharmaceuticals and Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals. Both companies maintain that the drug is effective and safe when used correctly. They also claim that there are other painkillers where the abuse risks and known consequences are far worse.

The FDA’s safety office says it found over 3,000 reports linking Darvon to serious problems, including suicide, drug overdose, and drug dependence. The office said that its findings, however, are “insufficient” for reviewers to make a decisive recommendation. Meantime, the FDA office in charge of handling painkillers says Darvon is a weak pain reliever.

Information from the US government’s Drug Abuse Warning Network found that there were 446 Darvon-related deaths in 2006 and 503 deaths in 2007. 20% of these fatalities were suicides. These figures only referred to about 30% of the country’s population.

Dangerous Drugs
Prescription drugs are not supposed to cause dangerous side effects—although the FDA is known for approving drugs that do have such side effects, as long as they don’t happen too often. Drug manufacturers and doctors are supposed to warn users of potential health complications that can arise from any prescription medications.

Sometimes, a dangerous drug is allowed to enter the marketplace. When injuries or deaths arise as a result of a dangerous drug, the victim and his or family may have grounds to file a dangerous drug lawsuit.

FDA panel recommends ban on the painkiller Darvon, Boston.com, January 30, 2009

Darvon, Drugs.com

Related Web Resources:
Petition to FDA to ban all propoxyphene (DARVON) products; prescription painkiller causes many fatalities (HRG Publication #1762), Public Citizen, February 28, 2006

Read the FDA Advisory Committee’s Briefing, January 30, 2009 (PDF)

Drug Abuse Warning Network

Johnson & Johnson Recalls Defective Duragesic Pain Patches

January 5, 2009, by Michael A. DeMayo

Johnson & Johnson is announcing the recall of two lots of Duragesic pain patches. The recall, by its PriCara Division, is being issued because tears in the patches could expose users to the product’s gel and may result in an overdose. The recalled patches were made by ALZA Corp.

Recalled lots include:

• Duragesic 50 mcg/hr patches, lot number 0817239
• Sandoz Inc 50 mcg/hr patches, lot number 0816851

J & J is conducting the recall with the Food and Drug Administration. This is not the first recall involving improperly sealed Duragesic pain patches. In February 2008, J & J recalled some 32 million Duragesic Pain Patches over similar concerns. In 2004, Janssen Pharmaceuticals Products recalled 75 patches over leakage concerns also.

In 2007, the Food and Drug Administration issued a warning that accidental overdoses have been associated with use of the pain patch. The FDA has received over 100 reports of deaths that may have been related to use of fentanyl pain patches.

Duragesic, also known as fentanyl, is an opioid pain reliever that is 100 times stronger than morphine. You are not supposed to use fentanyl if you have drug allergies or a history of mental illness, seizures, breathing problems, heart problems, drug or alcohol dependence, low blood pressure, depression, liver disease, kidney disease, a brain tumor, or a head injury. Direct skin exposure to the gel that is inside the patch can cause respiratory problems, nausea, drowsiness, sedation, serious health complications, or lead to fatal overdoses.

Direct Exposure to Duragesic’s Gel:
If you or anyone has come into direct contact with fentanyl gel, it is important that you wash the skin completely with water only. Do not use soap or rub the skin too much. Do not directly handle patches that are torn or have cut edges. Use gloves or tissue instead. You can also get rid of the patches by flushing them down the toilet.

Medical device makers and pharmaceutical drug manufacturers are supposed to make sure that their products are safe for consumer use and free from defects that can cause illness, injury, or death. If you or someone you love was injured by a defective or dangerous medical device, you may be able to file a products liability claim or lawsuit against the negligent manufacturer.

J&J Recalls Two Lots of Pain Patch, The Wall Street Journal, December 31, 2008

Duragesic Patch Recall Adds to Johnson & Johnson Patch Woes, News Inferno, February 13, 2008


Related Web Resources:

Duragesic

Johnson & Johnson

US Food and Drug Administration

North Carolina Among 32 States to Receive $62 Million Settlement from Drug Manufacturer Eli Lilly For Marketing Zyprexa for Off-Label Uses

October 16, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

Drugmaker Eli Lilly and Co. will pay $62 million to 32 US States, including North Carolina, to resolve charges that it improperly marketed Zyprexa, an antipsychotic drug. This record settlement comes a few months after North Carolina and other states reached a $58 million settlement with Merck over allegations that the drugmaker downplayed the health risks associated with the use of painkiller Vioxx in ads.

According to North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper and other state attorney generals, Eli Lilly allegedly applied deceptive and unfair marketing practices when it marketed Zyprexa for purposes that the US Food and Drug Administration had not approved. The states are also accusing the drugmaker of neglecting to properly disclose the antipsychotic drug’s side effects to health care providers.

Eli Lilly has agreed to change the way it markets Zyprexa and will no longer market it for off-label uses, which are not FDA-approved. The drugmaker must also offer objective, accurate, and scientifically supported responses to doctor queries about off-label uses and only give Zyprexa samples to physicians whose practices are in line with uses of the drug that are FDA-approved.

From the $62 million settlement, North Carolina will receive $1.8 million.

Zyprexa
This is the brand name for olanzapine, which is used to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Seven years ago, Eli Lilly began marketing Zyprexa as a drug that could be used by children for certain symptoms (rather than conditions that had been diagnosed), as well as by elderly adults suffering from dementia. Although physicians can prescribe drugs to patients for uses that are not FDA-approved, drug companies are not allowed to market medications for off-label purposes.

Dangerous Drug Litigation
If a person uses a drug for a purpose marketed by the pharmaceutical company that is not approved by the FDA and he or she is injured or dies, the drug manufacturer may be held liable in civil court for personal injury or wrongful death. Unfortunately, there have been cases where a drugmaker has released a drug into the marketplace while knowing it was potentially dangerous and marketed the medication for profit.

Eli Lilly settles Zyprexa inquiries in 32 states, AP, October 7, 2008

North Carolina to get $1.8M in Eli Lilly settlement, Triangle Business Journal, October 7, 2008

Merck agrees to settlement over Vioxx ad claims, The Bismark Tribune, May 21, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Eli Lilly and Company

Zyprexa

North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper

Epilepsy Drug Topiramate May Increase Risk of Birth Defects

September 24, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

The Official Journal of the American Academy of Neurology is reporting that results from a small study indicate that topiramate, a drug used to treat epilepsy, may increase the chances of a newborn sustaining a birth defect if a pregnant mother takes the drug.

The test involved 203 women that became pregnant while using topiramate. Of the 178 newborns, 16 of them had major birth defects. Four of the babies had cleft lips or cleft palates. Four of the male infants were born with genital birth defects.

The rate of birth defects among newborns whose mothers took topiramate was higher than for the rest of the population. More birth defects also occurred in newborns whose mothers took both topiramate and valproate (another epilepsy drug) and women who took topiramate in conjunction with other epilepsy drugs.

However, Andres Kanner, the associate director of the Epilepsy Center at the Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, says the chances that a pregnant women will have a baby with a birth defect is dependent on numerous factors, some of which were not part of this study. John Craig, the lead researcher of the study, says that additional research must be performed to confirm the results but that doctors and women that are (or are considering) getting pregnant and get migraines or have epilepsy need to be warned about the potential risks that could result from using the medication. The anti-seizure drug (Topamax is the brand name) is used to treat epilepsy and migraine headaches.

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, birth defects are the number one cause of infant fatalities. Causes of birth defects include:

Dangerous drugs
• Alcohol
• Exposure to certain environmental chemicals
• Exposure to high levels of radiations
• Birthing malpractice
• Genetics

Epilepsy Drug May Boost Birth Defect Risk, WashingtonPost.com, July 21, 2008

Epilepsy drug linked to greater birth-defect risk, USA Today, July 25, 2008

Birth Defects, HealthAtoZ.com

Related Web Resources:

Topamax

Topiramate, MedLinePlus

Birth Defects, CDC

Official Journal of the American Academy of Neurology

Allergan Sued For Failing to Warn of Botox Side Effects

August 7, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

Drug maker Allergan is being sued for failing to warn users of the dangerous side effects that can result when using Botox. The products liability lawsuit was filed on behalf of over a dozen Botox users and family members that have lost loved ones from Botox use.

Some of the plaintiffs claim that receiving Botox injections left them with certain disabilities, such as numbness, vision problems, flu-like symptoms, allergic reactions, breathing problems, and muscle weakness. Deaths allegedly caused by Botox use involved a 7-year-old girl that was given Botox injections to control limb spasticity, a 69-year-old nurse that used Botox for shoulder and neck pains, and a 71-year-old woman that was administered Botox for wrinkles around her mouth. All three alleged wrongful deaths involved use of Botox in ways that federal regulators had not approved.

The lawsuit claims that injuries occurred from both non-approved and approved uses of Botox and is calling the drug “a highly legal toxin with serious and life-threatening side effects.” It question’s Allergan’s promotion that Botox is a miracle drug.

While refusing to comment on the details of the dangerous drug lawsuit, an Allergan spokesperson claims that Botox has a remarkable safety record and that serious side effects are rarely reported.

Botox
Originally intended to treat people with crossed eyes, Botox is most often used for treating frown lines between the eyebrows. The Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of Botox for treating migraines.

Drug manufacturers are supposed to warn users of all potentially adverse side effects from using a particular medication or drug. When failure to provide proper warning results in injury or death, victims may be able to recover damages for personal injury or wrongful death.

Allergan failed to warn of dangerous Botox side effects, lawsuit claims, Los Angeles Times, July 10, 2008

Botox Lawsuit Claims Drug Has Fatal Flaws, WebMD.com, July 11, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Allergan

Botox

North Carolina Family Settles Wrongful Death Lawsuit with Harley-Davidson Motor Co.

June 6, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

In North Carolina, the family of Charles Radford Paul III, a 30-year-old Raleigh cop who died in a 2002 motorcycle crash, has settled its wrongful death lawsuit with Harley-Davidson Motor Co. and Raleigh store Ray Price Harley Davidson.

Paul died while chasing a speeding car. A draft from a tractor-trailer he was trying to overtake appeared to have made the motorcycle wobble, causing Radford to drive onto the freeway shoulder where he was thrown from his 2002 Electra Glide motorcycle.

The wrongful death lawsuit, however, says that he lost control of his motorcycle because of a high-speed wobble—a problem that has been encountered by other Harley-Davidson riders and mechanics. While some people believe the wobble is caused by a design defect in certain Harley motorcycles, others cite improper maintenance.

The confidential products liability settlement was made in December, but the lawsuit was not dismissed until last month. Paul’s family also received a workers’ compensation settlement from the city of Raleigh.

Defective motorcycles and motorcycle parts are a frequent cause of motorcycle-related injuries or deaths. Products liability lawsuits involving motorcycle accidents may cite a number of defect issues, such as:

• Defective tires
• Helmet defects
• Brake problems
• Defective pedals
• Stuck throttles
• Problems with the shock absorber
• Chain defect

Compared to other motorists, motorcycle riders are already at higher risk of injury or death when involved in traffic accidents. There is no reason that riders should be placed in greater jeopardy because a motorcycle or one of its parts was defective.

In North Carolina and South Carolina, our products liability law firm can help you pursue your personal injury or wrongful death claim against the negligent party.

Officer’s family settles motorcycle suit, News and Observer, June 3, 2008

Related Web Resource:

North Carolina State Motorcycle Laws

Justia.com

Boston Scientific Sued for Wrongful Death Caused By Defective Cardiac Defibrillator

May 20, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

The family of a man who died after he was implanted with a cardiac defibrillator is suing Boston Scientific for his wrongful death. They allege that the defibrillator was defective and caused his death. Boston Scientific used to be called Guidant Corp. Also named as defendants in the products liability lawsuit are Guidant Puerto Rico Corp. and Guidant Sales Corp.

Joseph Robert was implanted with an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD), a Medtronic InSync Sentry defibrillator with Guidant leads, on October 26, 2000. This device is designed to monitor the person’s heart and when there is rapid, abnormal heart rhythm, the ICD is supposed to send energy to the heart muscle so that the heart can beat at a normal rate again.

In 2005, Roberts was admitted to a hospital for an ICD upgrade to a Vitality 2 biventricular automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. His original ICD was being replaced because it had been found defective and dangerous. Roberts died nearly three weeks after the second device was implanted.

Patsy Roberts, one of the plaintiffs in this products liability wrongful death case, says that in 2007, she found out that Boston Scientific recalled the Vitality 2 because it was considered dangerous and defective also.

The plaintiffs claim that the defendants were grossly negligent and engaged in fraud, misrepresentation, breach of express warranties, breach of continuing duty to warn, breach of implied warrant of fitness, and breach of warrant of merchantability. They also say that the defendants violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act.

They are asking for damages for Joseph’s pain, suffering, and mental trauma before he died, as well as for their own pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of affection, grief, and other associated costs.

In North Carolina and South Carolina, our defective medical device lawyers have represented victims and their families whose lives have been catastrophically affected by a defective Guidant cardiac defibrillator. We believe that manufacturers of defective medical devices and the other liable parties should be held financially liable for your pain, suffering, and associated costs.

Wrongful death suit filed against Boston Scientific over cardiac defibrillator, Southeast Texas Record, April 21, 2008

Sudden Cardiac Deaths, Get the Facts 2006, AmericanHeart.org

Related Web Resources:

Boston Scientific

FDA: Some Guidant Defibrillators Recalled, WebMD, June 17, 2005

North Carolina Construction Worker Falls Down Elevator Shaft In Raleigh

May 13, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

In North Carolina, A construction worker was injured in Raleigh on Monday after falling down an elevator shaft while working on the RBC Plaza site. The man was in a big metal basket and being lowered down the shaft with a crane when he fell some 14 feet from the 21st floor of the high-rise construction structure. The patient was treated at WakeMed.

The injured man broke his ankle and ribs. A Hardin construction worker says that this is the first serious injury sustained by a construction worker since the construction project began in October.

Unfortunately, construction accidents have been known to occur frequently to construction workers because of the nature of their job. Crane accidents, exposure to hazardous substances, electric shock, explosions, welding accidents, defective or faulty equipment or machinery, falling from great heights, and getting hit by heavy falling or moving objects are some of the common kinds of construction injuries that occur.

Construction accidents can lead to serious injuries, such as broken bones, serious burns, traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, permanent disabilities, loss of limbs, and death. Due to the seriousness of some construction injuries and the nature of construction work, an injured person may find themselves permanently unable to work.

Workers’ Compensation benefits, which provides injury and death compensation for employees injured or killed on the job, prevent an employee for being able to sue an employer for injuries sustained on the job. However, the presence of workers’ compensation benefits does not mean that you shouldn’t contact a personal injury if you have been injured on the job in North Carolina or South Carolina.

Your workers’ compensation lawyer can make sure you are getting the maximum amount of benefits that you qualify for and that you receive your compensation as soon as possible. Your attorney can deal with the company’s insurance company to make sure that your rights are protected.

Your personal injury lawyer can also investigate your construction accident to determine whether a third party can be held liable for your injuries. The manufacturers of defective construction equipment or machinery or companies associated with the construction project are just a few third parties who could be held liable with a personal injury or wrongful death claim or lawsuit.

Fall injures worker at RBC Plaza, Newsobserver.com, October 16, 2007

Construction worker hurt in fall in Raleigh, ABC11.com, October 15, 2007

Related Web Resources:

North Carolina Statutes and Rules, Workerscompensation.com

RBC Plaza

Pitt County Grand Jury Indicts North Carolina Two Drivers Involved in Separate Deadly Car Accidents

April 17, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

In Pitt County, North Carolina, a grand jury this week indicted two men involved in separate deadly motor vehicle accidents that took place earlier this year.

Pablo Delacruz, was speeding in his Chevrolet Camaro on March 22 when he hit Harold Mills, a 75-year-old man on a bicycle. Mills was declared dead soon after he arrived at Pitt County Memorial Hospital. Delacruz had fled the accident scene but was tracked down by police after a witness wrote down his car’s license plate number.

DelaCruz was indicted for felony hit and run that caused personal injury and misdemeanor death by motor vehicle.

In the second fatal car accident, Danny Ellis Vick was driving his BMW headed north on NC 43 in Falkland Township on January 23 when he hit a car driven by 33-year-old Frankie Peaden after crossing the center line and hitting Peaden’s 1995 Toyota in a head-on collision. The North Carolina Highway Patrol says that Vick was driving under the influence of drugs.

At the time of the car accident, Vick was on parole after serving time in prison for robbery-related convictions. He was indicted this week on charges of assault with a deadly weapon and felony death by motor vehicle.

If someone you love was killed in a motor vehicle accident caused by another party’s negligence, not only can the responsible party be charged and convicted for committing a crime, but the driver may also be held liable in civil court.

In North Carolina and South Carolina, our North Carolina wrongful death law firm has helped many families recover damages from the responsible party for their loved ones’ deaths. We have successfully represented the surviving family members of people killed in truck accidents, train accidents, car accidents, bus crashes, and motorcycle collisions. We also have represented mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, husbands, and wives of people that died because of a defective product, a work-related accident, a premises liability-related crime, or any other injury accident caused by the negligence of someone else.

Two drivers from fatal wrecks indicted, The Daily Reflector, April 17, 2008

Hearing set for man in fatal wreck, The Daily Southerner, January 30, 2008

Greenville Police Investigating Hit and Run, WNCT.com, March 22, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Head-On Collisions

Things You May Not Know About Hit and Run Accidents, Deadly Roads

Teenage Son Files Lawsuit Against North Carolina Domestic Violence Shelter For Mother’s Murder

March 12, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

In North Carolina, Jeffrey Mertz is suing the REACH Shelter of Jackson County, a Sylvia domestic violence shelter for women, for the murder of his mother, Bonnie Woodring.

Mertz is accusing the shelter of not providing adequate security in September 2006 to prevent his stepfather, John “Woody” Woodring, from locating and entering the shelter.

Mertz was 13 at the time of the murder. He says that the REACH shelter did not take the necessary steps that could have prevented his stepfather from finding the shelter’s address.

In his lawsuit, Mertz says that one of the shelter’s employees had purposely left a side door unlocked so another employee could enter the premise. The unlocked door allowed Woodring to enter the shelter without permission. He was carrying a sawed off shotgun.

Woodring had threatened to kill Bonnie just three days earlier.

Mertz is suing REACH for $75,000 for failing to provide his mother with shelter. He says that suffered serious anguish from having to witness his mother’s dead body.

Premises Liability Cases
Property and premise owners are legally obligated to ensure that they maintain and provide a safe environment for patrons, visitors, residents, and/or workers where conditions are safe and there is adequate security. Each state has its own laws about how to determine liability on the part of the premise owner or manager.

Common kinds of premises liability cases include inadequate security cases, slip and fall cases, falling merchandise cases, and a defective product on a premise.

If you or someone you love was seriously injured on another party’s premise in North Carolina or South Carolina, contact our premises liability law firm today to discuss your personal injury case.

Son Of Victim Files Lawsuit Against Women’s Shelter, News Channel 7, March 11, 2008

Family sues shelter where woman was slain, Citizen-Times, March 11, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Sylva woman shot to death at shelter for women, Citizen-Times.com, December 20, 2006

REACH of Jackson County

Supreme Court Places New Limits on Products Liability Lawsuits Filed Against Medical Device Manufacturers

February 20, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

Now, more than ever, it is important to speak with an experienced defective medical device attorney to discuss your case. In an 8-1 vote today, the U.S. Supreme Court voted to place new limits on defective medical device lawsuits filed against Medtronic Inc. and other medical device manufacturers: Patients cannot sue a medical manufacturer if the product that caused the injury was cleared by a strict federal review process.

In this latest case, the Supreme Court barred a lawsuit filed by the widow of a man who was permanently injured when his Medtronic heart catheter burst while he underwent angioplasty surgery. The Medtronic product had been gone through the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s pre-market approval process. When the device burst, the patient developed a complete blockage and had to undergo emergency bypass surgery. He died three years ago.

The Bush administration and medical device manufacturers had both argued in favor of precluding state law claims with the more rigorous pre-market review process.

This new ruling could work in favor of medical devices makers that have been named as defendants in the thousands of defective products lawsuits that are still pending. It could also work in favor of drug manufacturers. Drug makers are also trying to get the U.S. Supreme Court to place limits on lawsuits filed by people injured from taking a dangerous or defective drug.

Lawsuits that will be most impacted by the ruling are cases involving medical devices that have undergone the FDA’s yearlong pre-market approval process. This is an arduous process, which is why only 43 new applications were filed in 2005. A fast-track review is available to new devices that are similar to products that are already being sold in the marketplace.

The Supreme Court’s ruling does leave room for defective medical device lawsuits filed under state rules that are considered parallel to federal requirements.

Our North Carolina and South Carolina defective products law firm has helped many injured patients and their families recover compensation from medical device makers and drug manufacturers. We have the experience and resources to help you explore your options and take the necessary and available steps to pursue your case.

Patient Medical-Device Suits Curbed by Top U.S. Court, Bloomberg.com, February 20, 2008

Justices Make It Tougher to Sue Medical Device Makers, The New York Times, February 20, 2008

Related Web Resources:

Read the Supreme Court Decision, Justia & Oyez

Medtronic, Inc.

Cause of North Carolina Plane Crash That Killed Six People is Still Under Investigation

February 4, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

The National Transportation Safety Board says that they have ruled out several possible causes of the fatal plane crash in North Carolina last Friday that killed all six people on the plane.

The Beechcraft King Air C90A twin-engine turboprop’s cockpit voice recorder has been recovered, and it will be sent to Washington D.C. for examination. NTSB investigator Todd Gunther says that federal investigators have ruled out engine failure, fire, structural defects, or pilot illness as causes of the crash.

Six men died in the crash: Steve Simpson, 46, Frank Ruggiero, 52, John Wesley Rakestraw, 50, Tony Gunter, 46, Hal Echols, 57, and Robert Butler, 49. The men were going to hunting and golf resort Primland in Virginia. All six men were from Paulding, Georgia and were prominent business and civic leaders in their community. It is not certain who was driving the plane at the time of the crash.

New radar data reveals that the plane overshot the runway when it approached Mount Airy airport for a landing before veering left and crashing in a residential area. No one on the ground was injured.

If you are a plane crash survivor or have lost a family member in an aviation accident that you believe was caused by the negligence of the pilot, the airline, aircraft or air traffic controller personnel, the manufacturer of a plane or plane part, or anyone else, you should contact our personal injury law firm right away.

Plane crash cases require the legal counsel of a law firm that understands the nature of plane collisions and is familiar with aviation law and the different regulations that govern the airline industry and its personnel.

Common causes of plane crashes include:

• Defective equipment
• Pilot error
• Design flaws
• Structural problems
• Federal Air Traffic Controllers negligence
• Flight Service Station employee negligence

Because of the nature of aviation accidents, deaths and catastrophic injuries can result during a crash involving a private plane, a helicopter, a small jet, a commercial airliner, or a pleasure craft. There may be more than one party who is liable for your plane crash.

Our North Carolina and South Carolina personal injury and wrongful death lawyers have represented over 30,000 clients. 90% of our cases are settled out of court. We also have an aggressive litigation team that can represent your lawsuit in court.

Investigators Say CVR May Shed Light Into NC King Air Downing, Aero-News.Net, February 4, 2008

Wreckage of crashed plane to be brought to Atlanta, AJC.com, February 3, 2008

Related Web Resources:

National Transportation Safety Board

Federal Aviation Administration

Medtronic Injury Case Before the Supreme Court Will Impact Fate of Defective Medical Device Lawsuits

January 17, 2008, by Michael A. DeMayo

Medical device manufacturer Medtronic wants the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that medical device makers are exempt from products liability lawsuits, if a device that caused the injury is FDA approved.

The specific case, Riegel v. Medtronic, stems from a personal injury lawsuit filed by the family of Charles Riegel, a man whose Medtronic-manufactured balloon catheter burst while he was undergoing a medical procedure to clear his arteries.

In the lawsuit against Medtronics, Riegel cited negligent design and labeling and manufacturing issues. The catheter was FDA approved. The lawsuit was thrown out at both the U.S. District Court level and the US Court of Appeals level before arriving at the Supreme Court.

Medtronics claims that amendments to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act say that FDA-approved medical devices are preempted from product liability lawsuits in state civil courts. The amendments, however, do not say that federal standards are preempted by state common law claims. This, however, is what Medtronics is claiming and the Bush Administration supports with the device maker’s assertion.

If the Supreme Court decides that Medtronics is right, anyone injured by a defective medical device won’t be able to file a personal injury claim or lawsuit.

Last December, Medtronics agreed to pay $114 million to settle 2,682 products liability lawsuits by people who had used the company’s Marquis implanted cardiac defibrillators. A battery problem had caused some of the defibrillators, implanted in patients at risk of heart attacks, to fail. ICD’s had to be surgically replaced in 11,000 patients.

Last year, Medtronic announced an international recall of heart-defibrillator wires, which were fracturing at a rapid rate. Some 235,000 people have these wires implanted in their chests.

If you have been injured or suffered health problems or have had to undergo a medical procedure because of a defective medical device, you should contact our North Carolina or South Carolina products liability law firm immediately.

Medtronic Supreme Court Case Could Have Dire Consequences for Consumers Injured by Defective Medical Devices, NewsInferno, January 3, 2008

Medtronic to Pay $114 Million In Settling Heart-Device Suits, The Wall Street Journal, December 21, 2007

Related Web Resources:

Riegel v. Medtronic, Supreme Court Docket

Medtronic

Dennis Quaid Sues Drug Maker Baxter Healthcare Corp. in Newborn Twins’ Overdose

December 7, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

Movie star Dennis Quaid and his wife Kimberly filed a products liability lawsuit against drug manufacturer Baxter Healthcare Corp. for negligence in the Heparin overdose of the couple’s newborn twins, Zoe Grace and Thomas Boone. Heparin is a blood thinning drug used to prevent blood clotting.

The couple is seeking over $50,000 in damages. In the lawsuit, the couple claims that Baxter Healthcare was negligent because it packages different sized-doses of Heparin in similar vials, which sometimes makes it confusing for health care workers to distinguish one dosage size from another. As a result, Heparin is an “unreasonably dangerous” drug.

The products liability lawsuit says that the drug maker should have recalled the vials with excessively large doses after three babies died last year because of similar mix-ups at a hospital at Clarian’s Methodist Hospital in Indianapolis. Three other infants survived similar overdoses there.

Zoe Grace and Thomas Boone Quaid were given an extremely high dosage of the blood thinner while at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. They received 1000 the amount that babies are supposed to receive, which caused the twins to bleed out. Rather than receiving 10 units of Heparin, they received 10,000 units, which is usually the amount of Heparin given to adults.

Another baby at Cedars-Sinai was also was given too much Heparin. Fortunately, the Quaid twins and the third child survived. Cedars-Sinai has apologized for the mix-up, calling it a “preventable error.”

After the deaths and injuries in Indianapolis, Baxter Healthcare issued a warning to health care workers telling them that they need to check the labels of Heparin vials to prevent similar mix-ups.

The Quaid family lawsuit says that the company should have repackaged the different doses of medicine, and the warning sent to health care providers should have come with an “urgent” label so better safety procedures could have been implemented at the different hospitals.

Drug manufacturers must test their drugs before releasing them into the marketplace. They also must include the appropriate warnings of any risks or side effects. Drug makers are required to market and package all drugs in a manner that doesn’t mislead or confuse users or health care providers.

If a person is injured or killed because of the negligence of a drug manufacturer, the injured person or his or her family (if the victim is a minor) may have grounds to file a products liability claim or lawsuit against the drug manufacturer and any other negligent parties.

Dennis Quaid, wife sue drug maker, CNN.com, December 4, 2007

Dennis Quaid and wife sue drugmaker over heparin labeling, USA Today, December 4, 2007

Baby James: Surviving a Medical Mistake, WTHR, February 15, 2007

Dennis Quaid’s newborns reportedly harmed by medical mix-up, LA Times, November 21, 2007

Related Web Resources:

Baxter Introduces New Drug Safety Packaging for High Alert Medications, Baxter.com, December 3, 2007

Baxter Healthcare

Heparin Sodium Injection (PDF)

Sam’s Club Pulls Cargill Ground Beef Off Shelves In North Carolina and Other US States

October 8, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

National warehouse chain Sam’s Club is issuing a nationwide recall of ground beef patties made by Cargill. The recall comes after four children developed E. Coli from eating the patties. Cargill is requesting that Sam’s Club customers who purchased any patties after August 26 destroy or return the frozen meat.

Food manufacturers, retailers, distributors, and restaurants are legally obligated to make sure that the food products that they make, distribute, prepare, or cook are safe for consumption. A consumer who gets sick, injured, or dies from eating a food product that wasn’t properly prepared, stored, or cooked, may have grounds to file a products liability case against any negligent party responsible for allowing the contaminated food product to enter the marketplace or restaurant dinning room.

The four kids got sick between September 10 – September 20 after they ate patties that had been purchased frozen under the name “American Chef’s Selection Angus Beef Patties” in Minnesota. Two of the children had to be hospitalized.

Cargill is one of the largest privately owned makers of food ingredients in the United States. It ships products internationally as well. The patties had a February 12, 2008 expiration date and were coded UPC 0002874907056 Item #700141.

Cargill is working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to figure out the scope of the problem. Officials had traced the source of the E.coli to a ground beef facility in Wisconsin.

E. coli is a bacterium that can be found in animals, such as cows and sheep. When meat products are not properly cooked, the bacterium can infect a person that has eaten the food product. E. coli is a foodborne bacteria that can infect humans when food that is already contaminated is undercooked. Person-to-person contact is another way to transmit E. coli. Fresh leafy vegetables, such as spinach and lettuce, and unpasteurized milk have also been known to contain E. coli.

E. coli can lead to bloody diarrhea, nonbloody diarrhea, cramping, and a sight fever. E. coli illnesses usually last between 5 to 10 days. However, kids and elderly people with a lower immune system can experience kidney failure and even death if they are infected with E coli.

The Sam’s Club-Cargill recall comes on the heels of a recent recall by Topps Meat Company to pull 21 million pounds of ground beef off shelves because of E. coli worries. The recall was one of the largest in U.S. history and forced the 67-year-old privately owned company to shut down operations.

Sam’s Club Beef Recalled After Illnesses, AP, October 6, 2007

After Extensive Beef Recall, Topps Goes Out of Business, The New York Times, October 6, 2007

Escherichia coli O157:H7, CDC.gov

Related Web Resources:

Sam’s Club Statement Regarding Minnesota Department of Health Investigation of Frozen Ground Beef Patties and E. Coli cases, Sam’s Club Press Room, October 5, 2007

Cargill Meat Solutions recalls frozen ground beef patties, Cargill, Inc., October 6, 2007

Graco and Simplicity Recall One Million Cribs After Crib Deaths

September 24, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

The Consumer Product Safety Commission announced on Friday that Simplicity is recalling 1 million cribs, some of them with the Graco label, after reports that three infants had become trapped, suffocated, and died in their defective cribs.

Reported deaths attributed to the cribs include:

• 9-month-old Liam Johns who died in a faulty crib in 2005.
• 6-month-old Edward Millwood who died in a Simplicity crib in November 2006.
• A 1-year-old died in a newer model that has not been recalled but is under investigation.

All three children were in cribs that had drop-rail sides that had been installed upside down. The error left a gap in the cribs where a child could fall into and suffocate.

At least seven other infants have gotten trapped in defective cribs. 55 incidents have been reported where the drop sides came off or did not hold to the cribs’ sides.

An attorney for Liam Johns said that it took the Consumer Product Safety Commission more than two years to respond to the complaint that the infant had died from a faulty crib.

Simplicity Inc. is the manufacturer of the cribs, all of which were made in China. This is the second largest crib recall since 1972. In another crib recall last June, the CPSC recalled 40,000 Nursery-in-a-Box cribs, also made by Simplicity. The recall was issued because the assembly instructions were incorrect.

The American Academy of Pediatrics offers the following tips on choosing a crib and ensuring that it is safe for use:

• Look for Juvenile Product Manufacturers Association (JPMA) certification.
• The slats should be no more than 2-3/8 inches apart. Widely spaced slats can trap an infant’s head.
• All joints and parts should fit tightly, and the wood must be smooth and free of splinters.
• Check for cracked and peeling paint. All surfaces should be covered with lead-free paint safe for nursery furniture.
• The end panels should be solid, without decorative cutouts. Cutout areas on panels can trap an infant’s head.
• Corner posts should be flush with the end panels or else be very, very tall (such as posts on a canopy bed). Clothing and ribbons can catch on tall corner posts and strangle an infant.
• The lowered crib sides should be at least 9 inches above the mattress support to prevent the infant from falling out. Raised crib sides should be at least 26 inches above the mattress support in its lowest position.
• The drop sides should have a locking, hand-operated latch that will not release unintentionally.
• The mattress should be the same size as the crib so there are no gaps to trap arms, body, or legs. If you can fit 2 fingers between the mattress and the side of the crib, the crib should not be used.

Injury or death to an infant caused by a defective product is grounds for a products liability claim or a wrongful death lawsuit. Manufacturers have a responsibility to ensure that their products are safe for use. Failure to do so can be grounds for a products liability case.

1 million Graco, Simplicity cribs recalled in U.S., MSNBC.com, September 21, 2007

Choosing a Crib, American Academy of Pediatrics

Related Web Resources:

About 1 Million Simplicity Cribs Recalled Due To Failures Resulting in Infant Deaths, CPSC.gov, September 21, 2007

Simplicity for Children

Mattel and Consumer Product Safety Commission Recall Another 700,000 Toys Because of Lead Paint Worries

September 4, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

Mattel Inc. and the Consumer Product Safety Commission have announced that they are recalling about 700,000 more toys that were made in China over worries that they contain too much lead paint. This is Mattel’s third massive toy recall since August, and more than 21 million toys have so far been affected.

In this latest recall, some 675,000 Barbie accessory toys—made between September 30, 2006 and August 20, 2007—and about 8,900 Big Band World 6-in-1 Bongo Band toys (part of Mattel’s Fisher-Price brand) are included. These toys were sold between July 2007 and August 2007.

So far, there are no reported personal injuries or wrongful deaths resulting from use of these toys. An injured child or adult, however, could have grounds to file a products liability lawsuit if their exposure to lead paint from any of the toys did cause him or her to become ill.

Barbie products include in the September 4, 2007 Mattel Recall:

Barbie® Dream Puppy House™ (lead paint on dog)
Barbie® Dream Kitty Condo™ Playset (lead paint on cat)
Barbie® Table and Chairs Kitchen Playset (lead paint on dog, chip platter, dinner plates)
Barbie® Bathtub and Toilet Playset (lead point on cat)
Barbie® Futon and Table Living Room Playset (lead paint on cat)
Barbie® Desk and Chair Bedroom Playset (lead paint on dog)
Barbie® Couch & Table Living Room Playset (lead paint on purse)

The CPSC Web site provides descriptions of the Big Band World toys that are part of the recall:

The recalled toys have two bongos, including one with a yellow and green plastic drum base with a blue drum surface. The other bongo is yellow and green plastic drum base with an orange drum surface with “It’s a Big, Big World” printed on it. The toys were sold with animal shaped accessories including a monkey, bird, tambourine and drum stick.

Lead paint is especially dangerous for young children and can lead to nervous system damage, brain damage, learning difficulties, behavioral problems, headaches, and hearing problems.

In North Carolina, a product’s manufacturer, retailer, or wholesaler are among the parties that can be held responsible if a person is injured or dies because of a defective or dangerous product.

There are three main causes for bringing a products liability claim or lawsuit.

• Strict liability
• Breach of Warranty
• Negligence

Thousands of Mattel toys recalled because of lead paint, CNN.com, September 4, 2007

Mattel Recalls Various Barbie® Accessory Toys Due to Violation of Lead Paint Standard, CPSC.gov, September 4, 2007

Fisher-Price Recalls Bongo Band Toys Due to Violation of Lead Paint Standard, CPSC.gov, September 4, 2007

Health Effects of Lead, EPA.gov

Related Web Resources:

Lead Poisoning, NSC.org

Voluntary Safety Recall Facts, Mattel.com

19-Year-old North Carolina Teen Dies in DWI Car Accident And Adults Are Charged With Serving Alcohol to Minors at a Party

August 28, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

Four adults in North Carolina have been charged in the deadly DWI accidental death of 19-year-old Emily Mosely on August 17. Terry Moseley, one of the adults charged, is Emily’s father. He is charged with three counts of giving alcoholic beverages to a minor.

According to North Carolina Alcohol Law Enforcement agents, Terry Mosely purchased alcohol at an ABC store in Greensboro. He then brought the alcohol to a party that was hosted by Sandra McBride, Stephen Dale McBride, and their 21-year-old son Stephen Lee McBride in Walnut Cove. All three of them are also charged with providing alcohol to teenagers.

Emily, her 18-year-old ex-boyfriend Richard Oakley, and her 16-year-old sister drank alcohol that night. Oakley says that that everyone at the party had been drinking. The prescription drug Xanax was also somehow involved.

Oakley lost control of his car near Stokesdale while driving Emily and her sister from the party. The car fell into an embankment on Lauren Road. Oakley and Emily’s sister were not seriously hurt in the car accident, but Emily was thrown out of the motor vehicle and died. Oakley has been charged with reckless driving and DWI (driving while impaired).

Terry Mosely, Stephen Lee McBride, Sandra McBride, and Stephen Dale McBride say they did not serve alcohol at the party.

Wrongful Death
When a person dies because another party acted negligently, the family members of the deceased may be able receive compensation through a wrongful death claim or lawsuit filed against the responsible parties. In North Carolina, surviving family members can recover compensation for a number of damages, including funeral/cremation/burial costs, medical costs related to the treatment of the injuries that led to the wrongful death, loss of companionship, pain and suffering, and loss of financial support.

The statute of limitations for filing a wrongful death claim in North Carolina is two years, and there may be more than one party that can be held liable for your loved one’s death—whether the negligent person(s) acted directly or indirectly to cause the deadly accident.

Deadly accidents also resulting from medical malpractice, dangerous or defective products, nursing home abuse, and unsafe premises can often lead to wrongful death claims and lawsuits against the responsible parties.

Adults Charged in Fatal DWI Accident, My Fox WGHP, August 27, 2007

Related Web Resources:

DWI, NCSU.edu

Wrongful Death Overview, Justia.com

Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards Asks President Bush to Protect Children From Dangerous Toys Following Mattel’s Toy Recall

August 17, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards has written a letter to U.S. President George Bush asking him for better toy testing and stronger measures to keep dangerous toys that are made in China outside the American consumer market.

The former North Carolina Senator’s plea came on Wednesday, one day after toymaker Mattel recalled over 18.2 million toys, many of them made in China. The product recall consists of toys with small magnets that could easily fall off and be swallowed by children. Over 400,000 of the other toys that were recalled were die-cast car toys that were made with unacceptable amount of lead paint.

The recall also includes a number of Barbie toys, Batman toys, Doggie Day Care toys, and Polly Pocket toys. Mattel is the number #1 manufacturer of toys.

In another recall earlier this month, Mattel recalled more toys that were made in China because of reports of dangerous lead paint. Sesame Street and Dora The Explorer toys from Mattel’s Fisher-Price unit were among the toys recalled.

In a press release issued on Wednesday, Senator Edwards cited other instances this year when products made in China had to be recalled—a number of them involved dangerous toys.

August 2007: Mattel recalls 9 million Chinese-made toys because of toxic levels of lead paint and dangerous magnets.

July 2007: Fisher-Price recalls 967,000 plastic pre-school toys tainted with high levels of lead, made by a Chinese vendor.

June 2007: Approximately 900,000 tubes of Chinese toothpaste containing a poison used in some antifreeze products

June 2007: As many as 450,000 tires made in China were recalled after evidence that they could be subject to tread separation– a problem that led to the nation’s largest tire recall in 2000.

June 2007: The FDA issued an alert challenging imports of farm- raised seafood from China, after testing repeatedly found contamination from carcinogens and antibiotics.

June 2007: 1.5 million “Thomas & Friends” made in China are recalled because of toxic lead surface paint.

May 2007: A Chicago Tribune analysis of all lead recalls in the past 30 years since lead paint was banned in the U.S. finds the vast majority of 133 recalls involved Chinese-manufactured products.

March 2007: An estimated 3,500 pets died after eating pet food contaminated with melamine in China

March 2007: 21,000 Sky Ranger toy airplanes made in China are recalled after at least 45 explode in the vicinity of children.

February 2007: Hasbro recalls 1 million Easy-Bake ovens made in China; 77 children report burns after getting hands or fingers stuck.

The U.S. Consumer and Product Safety Commission and the National SAFE KIDS Campaign offers a number of statistics and facts related to toy injuries.

• In 2004, at least 16 children (9 years of age and younger) sustained a fatal toy-related injury and died as a result.
• About 161,000 children (14 years of age and younger) had to go to the hospital because of an injury from a toy. Nearly 50% of these children were 4 years of age or younger.
• The number one cause of toy-related fatalities is choking.
• Suffocation, drowning, strangulation, and accidents involving a child riding a toy were the other main causes for toy-related fatalities.
• Most injuries involving toys take place around a child’s home.
• The head and face region are among the most common areas on the body where kids sustain injuries.

If your child is injured or killed because of a dangerous toy, you could have grounds to file a products liability claim or lawsuit against the negligent party or parties.

Edwards Calls on Bush, Congress to Keep Kids Toys Safe, Campaigns and Elections, August 15, 2007

Toy Injury Statistics and Incidence Rates, Cincinnati Children’s

Related Web Resources:

Mattel Issues New Recall of Toys Made in China, New York Times, August 14, 2007

List of Toys in Mattel Recall, Forbes.com, August 14, 2007

North Carolina Cyclist Dies After His Bicycle is Struck in Collision with Pickup Truck

August 13, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

Michael Davis, Jr., a Roxboro resident, died from his injuries, after his bicycle was hit by a pickup truck on Durham Road. Davis was going southbound on U.S. 501 on his bike when he was hit from the back by Lee Wayne Lunsford of Timberlake.

He was declared dead at Person Memorial Hospital in Roxboro.

Bicycle accidents can lead to serious if not fatal personal injuries. Bicycle riders have no protection (except their helmets) when they are in accidents involving other motor vehicles. Scratches, bruises, traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, broken bones, road burns, and disfigurements are just some of the injuries that can occur in a bike crash.

The Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute offers the following statistics:

• Some 85 million people ride bicycles in the US.
• 784 cyclists died in 2005 in the United States.
• More than 90% of these deaths involved motor vehicles.
• Approximately 540,000 bicyclists are treated in U.S. emergency rooms because of injuries.
• About 27,000 bicyclists are hurt enough that they are hospitalized.

Common accident scenarios involving a bicyclist and the driver of a motor vehicle include:

• A motor vehicle driver overtaking a bicycle.
• A motor vehicle driver merging (or turning) into the bicyclist’s path (or vice versa).
• The motor vehicle driver/bicyclist not yielding the right-of-way.

A person who is injured in a bicycle accident caused by a negligent driver or because a stoplight was defective or there was dangerous debris on the road might be eligible for personal injury compensation.

Roxboro man struck, killed while riding bike on 501 S., Roxboro-Courier.com, July 25, 2007

Bicycling Crashes: Crash Types, Bicycling Info.org

Helmet-Related Statistic, Helmets.org

Related Web Resources:

Bicycle Laws of North Carolina, Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation

Bicycle Safety Facts and Statistics, Federal Highway Administration

10 People are Injured and One Woman is Killed in Eastern North Carolina When Church Van and Pickup Truck Collide in Head-On Crash

August 7, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

One person has died and 10 others were injured during a head-on collision involving a Church van and a pickup truck in Eastern North Carolina on Monday.

The church van was going to a Baptist retreat center in Oak Island when the accident took place. The teenage and adult passengers in the van were members of Boonville’s Charity Baptist Church.

Norma Shore, a 60-year-old Boonville resident, is the woman who was killed in the motor vehicle crash. The injury victims were treated at Hoots Memorial Hospital in Yadkinville and at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem.

Dwaine Dobbins, the driver of the pickup truck, was injured.

Head-on collisions can often lead to serious if not fatal injuries. They are motor vehicle accidents where the impact has occurred at the front of the vehicle. A car, truck, or motorcycle can become involved in a frontal impact collision, if it collides from the front with another motor vehicle or a nonmoving object. The speed that the motor vehicle was moving at, whether or not the passengers and driver were wearing seatbelts, whether the car or truck was equipped with working airbags, and the circumstances and severity of the crash are some of the factors that can affect whether or not any personal injuries sustained by accident victims are severe and/or fatal.

Common causes of head-on crashes include:

• A motor vehicle going the wrong way on a one-way road
• A car, truck, or motorcycle trying to overtake another vehicle when there isn’t enough passing space
• The driver of the motor vehicle has lost control of the car, truck, or motorcycle, and ends up crossing over the dividing line on the road and into oncoming traffic
• Speeding
• Following another vehicle too closely
• Not stopping soon enough before colliding into another automobile
• Driving under the influence of alcohol
• A defective motor vehicle
• Careless or negligent driving

Church van wreck kills one, injures at least 10 others, Winston-Salem Journal, August 6, 2007

What factors are associated with head-on crashes?, Austin City Connect

Related Web Resources:

Preventing Head On Collisions

Head-On Collisions, Safety Transportation

North Carolina Woman Dies And Six Others Are Injured In Deadly SUV-Van Collision on South Carolina’s I-77

July 5, 2007, by Michael A. DeMayo

A North Carolina woman was killed on Tuesday when the 1995 Isuzu Trooper SUV she was riding in overturned after colliding with a 1999 Chevrolet van on South Carolina’s Interstate 77 in York County. Six other people were thrown from the sports utility vehicle. Three of these passengers were young children, ages 5,4, and 3.

The woman who died, 53-year-old Alice Mouzone, had been riding in the front passenger seat at the time of the motor vehicle accident. She was the only one who was not thrown from the SUV because she was the only person in the motor vehicle who had been wearing a seatbelt. They were headed to a 4th of July celebration when the crash occurred.

The six injured passengers were taken to a local hospital. Two of them had to airlifted from the accident scene. All seven people in the SUV were from Thomasville, North Carolina and from the same family.

The passenger and driver of the Chevrolet van were both wearing seatbelts and were not injured in the deadly motor vehicle crash.

The cause of the motor vehicle accident is under investigation.

If you or someone you love has been injured in a car accident caused by another party’s negligence, you may be able to file a personal injury claim to cover your medical and recovery costs.

Medical care for serious injuries can be expensive and ongoing, which is why you need to retain the services of an experienced personal injury lawyer that knows how to handle personal injury claims.

Potential liable parties can include a negligent driver, a manufacturer of a motor vehicle (if the car, truck, or vehicle in question was defective or malfunctioned), and possibly even the local or state government if, for instance, a faulty traffic light was the cause of an injury or wrongful death accident.

SUV rollovers are not uncommon, especially because the way this kind of vehicle is designed puts it at a greater risk for a rollover accident. A lawsuit can be filed against the manufacturer of an SUV if a person is injured or killed because of the vehicle’s design.

I-77 Accident Kills Woman And Throws 3 Children Onto Road In York County, WSOCTV.com, July 4, 2007

I-77 reopens after fatal wreck, Charlotte.com, July 3, 2007

Related Web Resources:

Rollover: The Hidden History of the SUV

The Physics of SUV Rollover Accidents

 
 

Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '}' in /home/ncarinju/public_html/wp-content/themes/demayo_blogs/footer.php on line 107