Author Archive for David Brown – Page 75

Consolidation of Defective Hip Implant Lawsuits

A number of lawsuits relating to Stryker hip implants are set to be consolidated. This means that a single judge at the Massachusetts federal court will handle all the cases over the next several weeks. The decision was reached after about three dozen cases of alleged defects to a prosthetic hip replacement device from Stryker were reviewed. The US Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (JPML) agreed to transfer all the cases to US District Judge Indira Talwani, a judge in the District of Massachusetts.

What is multidistrict litigation?
When the federal court system identifies several similar cases that follow a particular line of argument, multidistrict litigation (MDL) can be used to consolidate the cases to a single judge in the pre-trial stage.
A good number of the pending implant cases against Stryker are complaints about corrosion of the device, commonly known as LFIT V40. According to the transfer order, such corrosion can result in serious health complications, necessitating surgery to remove and replace the device.

The defendant’s argument
Stryker, the manufacturer of the implant and the defendant in these cases, has argued against the consolidation of the cases. The defendant claims that there are only a few actions when it comes to the device. The JPML has disagreed with this argument, stating that the order reveals a total of 33 pending Stryker hip replacement cases in 17 different districts.
In 2016, Stryker had received an unexpected high number of complaints of taper lock failure in their devices. This forced the company to voluntarily recall some of the hip implant devices in August of the same year. Most of the complaints focused on specific sizes of the devices that had been manufactured before 2011. With the current consolidated cases, Stryker had requested that the MDL be renamed so that the name “Stryker” is replaced with “HOC.” The manufacturer had also requested that the lawsuits be limited to the recalled hip implant devices that had experienced taper lock failure. The JPML has since disagreed with this request.

Reasons for turning down the request
The reasons given for turning down the request are that the Stryker brand name had been used to market the device. Based on the transfer order, the JPML also declined to restrict the scope of the lawsuit to the recalled devices. This is because, rather than complaints about taper lock issues, most plaintiffs had complained about corrosion and metal debris problems. This means that even devices that had not been recalled will be included in the MDL.

Club Negligence Causes the Drowning of a 4-Year-Old Girl in Downers Grove

Last Father’s Day saw the near drowning of a 4-year-old girl who was later pronounced dead while receiving treatment in a hospital. The girl had accompanied her parents to a private club in Downers Grove where the incident occurred. Anna Trent of Downers Grove has now filed a suit in DuPage County court against the club for the wrongful death of their daughter.

A closer scrutiny of this case reveals imminent negligence on the side of the club. Evidence points that before Anna was found floating in the deeper area of the pool, her parents had left her playing in the shallow part in the presence of lifeguards. This clearly reveals that the lifeguards did not monitor the swimming properly, which from a broader perspective indicates a lack of proper training.

Even after the drowning victim was recovered from the swimming pool, the lifeguards could not perform Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and the child’s aunt and father had to do it in a bid to save their girl’s life.

The club also lacked proper resuscitation equipment at the pool, which might have contributed to her death. Anna’s demise comes at a time when the drowning death toll for younger children is on the rise.

Based on federal government statistics, submersion injuries remain the second-leading cause of unintentional deaths among children between the age of 1 to 14 years. Further evidence reveals that children between the age of 1 to 4 years are at the greatest risk of accidental drowning and injury-related deaths. For every four children who are rushed to the hospital for drowning-related emergencies, another one child dies from the submersion injuries.

Although the case against the club is still hanging in the balance and we cannot predict what the final ruling will be, there are several things we can dissect from this case. To begin with,swimming pool deaths and injuries are subject to both federal and county laws. If everything goes well, the suing party, Ann’s parents, may be entitled to the following types of damages:

  • Loss of enjoyment of life,
  • Loss of love and companionship,
  • Mental anguish,
  • Medical expenses encountered while Ann was hospitalized, and
  • Pain and suffering.

Everything will depend on how well the family’s attorney proves the negligence case against the Downers Grove club.

Wells Fargo Says It Will Pay $110 Million To Settle The Lawsuit Regarding Fake Accounts

Wells Fargo & Co finally agreed to pay $110 million over a lawsuit that was filed by customers who complained that there were over 2 million accounts its employees opened for them without their approval. The bank announced this announcement on Tuesday. This will be the first private settlement that they have reached since the company paid $185 million to the federal and California authorities last year. Authorities said that the workers were driven by high pressures which made them open bank and credit accounts without customers’ authorization and they even used forged signatures.

They also revealed that there was a federal regulator that had downgraded its rating under a law meant to help in monitoring and promoting banking practices to the minority and low-income earners. This move restricts Wells’ business which includes opening more branches.

This funds settlement will include the clients who had opened new accounts without their authorization. This will go even for those who were signed up for products they did not agree to which goes back to Jan 1, 2009.

Wells Fargo said that they believe that the settlement will help resolve the other 11 pending lawsuits filed against it. However, Wells stated that they are refraining from insisting on their right to take the customers into third-party arbitration instead of going to the court.

They said that after paying the $110 million, they would cover the customers’ out of pocket losses or any fee that they might have incurred through the unauthorized accounts. The rest of the money will then be split among the impacted customers.

The San Francisco-based bank has been experiencing a decline in new account openings, and it has been working to restore the customers’ trust. This scandal has led to the retirement of its chief executive, John Stumpf. Wells has since then changed its sales practices and had called millions of customers to check if their accounts were opened genuinely.

Some of the named plaintiffs include Shahriar Jabbari from California and Kaylee Heffelfinger from Arizona. The two had two accounts each from Wells, but the bank had opened nine and seven accounts respectively for them without their approval.

This bank still has a lot of work to do to restore the customer’s trust, but they are doing the best they can.

 

Will Petco Be Held Liable for Selling a Rat Carrying an Infectious Disease?

Opening statements have concluded for a civil suit involving a San Diego family seeking damages after their ten year-old son tragically died of rat bite fever.  The boy contracted the rare disease from his new pet rat purchased by his grandmother from one of the stores in the Petco chain.

Lawyers for Petco stated that their client followed all laws that they are required to in selling rodents and that all purchases come with literature that explains the possibility of rodents carrying and passing diseases and bacteria.  Additionally Petco lawyers stated that all pets come with danger and consider the case with Aiden to be an isolated incident and far from an epidemic.

The attorney for the family disagrees stating that more than 16 children have been infected by the disease and claims that Petco should be held responsible for not requiring that the rats be tested before they were sold and failing to put the informational brochure on rat bite fever where it was visible to customers.

The jury will be responsible in determining whether or not Petco was responsible in selling a defective product and whether or not they acted reasonable and appropriately once they were informed of Aiden’s infectious illness.

Symptoms of rat bite fever are similar to the flu and can often be mistaken for it.  Symptoms can include,

  • Headache
  • Fever
  • Chills
  • Pain the Joints
  • Vomiting
  • Diarrhea
  • Muscle Pain
  • Skin Rashes Primarily on the Arms

While the infection can be fatal due to complications it is usually treatable with a round of antibiotics if caught in time.  Most often the disease is transmitted via a rat or rodent bite, but in the case of Aiden no bite had occurred.  It is believed that due to his routine contact and bathing with his pet, he contracted the disease through the animal’s saliva.

If you or someone you know suffered from a pet related disease and want to discuss your legal options, contact an attorney today to see if you or your loved one might be entitled to compensation.

The Legacy of An Unnecessary Death

In 2012 a 43 year-old woman named Carmen Alexander came to the Emergency Room at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital with a large bruise on her chest, a high white blood cell count—which indicates unchecked infection—difficulty breathing, and nausea. The doctors sent her home later that day.  She died two days later.

Carmen Alexander was a victim of necrotizing fasciitis, a rare but potentially deadly infection caused by bacteria that rapidly destroy tissue as they multiply. By the time she was discharged from the Emergency Room, her lungs were filling up with blood. When she returned to the ER the following day in severe distress, she was admitted directly to the Intensive Care Unit, where a surgical team couldn’t save her, despite having the correct diagnosis.

Ms. Alexander’s family recognized that the Emergency Room physicians made a critical error when they decided to send her home after her initial visit, and her three teenaged children sued the hospital.  “The evidence was right in front of them,” said Vadim Hsu, the children’s guardian. “It should have made the physician jump out of her skin.”

It took almost exactly 5 years after Alexander’s death for the plaintiffs to settle the case.  The total fees and costs were about $200,000, and each child will receive a total of slightly over $132,000.  For them, though, it’s not about the money.  “What the upshot of this lawsuit was, was to put in place measures to idiot-proof policy and procedure,” said Hsu. “There needed to be a system in place so that a doctor who ordered the test in the first place actually reads the test and does something about it.”

Cottage Hospital has changed its Emergency Room policies to require physicians to respond immediately to white blood cell counts as high as Ms. Alexander’s.  Dr. Edmund Wroblewski, the hospital’s vice president of Medical Affairs, wrote a letter to her children stating “Had this change in policy been made prior to your mother’s death, she would not have been discharged from our hospital on February 19, 2012.”

While the circumstances surrounding Ms. Alexander’s death were tragic, patients who appear at the Emergency Room with the same symptoms are now protected against her fate. The lawsuit and the policy changes that resulted, said Hsu, ensure that she “didn’t die in vain.”

Malaysia Airlines Victims’ Families Sue Boeing in Extensive Lawsuit

Boeing is being targeted by an extensive lawsuit filed on behalf of 44 of the 239 passengers who died on Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, the flight that was lost over the South Indian Ocean in 2014. The lawsuit, filed by the victims’ family members, seeks actual and punitive or exemplary damages. It also demands a jury trial.

The complaint, filed March 4, 2017, claims that Boeing made several mistakes, many of them regarding the manufacture of the plane, which resulted in the death of all souls aboard when the plane went down. The complaint also alleges that Boeing did not make enough effort or any effort at all to locate the wreckage and provide closure to the families of the victims.

The plaintiffs allege that the plane had serious and unreasonable defects due to the way in which it was built. The lawsuit states that the electrical wiring on the plane was defective and subject to come into contact with combustible sources, such as the flight crews’ emergency oxygen supply. It also states that the oxygen supply was not fully protected with conductive oxygen supply hoses. Several components were also defective, including the transponder, pressurization system and suppression systems.

All of these defects conspired to create an electrical fire and extensive systems failure, which ultimately resulted in the loss of the aircraft and the persons aboard.

The suit also alleges that the plane would have been located if it weren’t for Boeing’s decision to equip the plane with outdated Emergency Locator Transmitters. The ones attached to the Flight Data Recorder and the Cockpit Voice Recorder were ineffective, argues the complaint, especially in crashes involving water. Better technology was available at the time of the plane’s construction.

The lack of action taken my the manufacture has also caused the victims’ families grief and has not allowed them to find closure. “Boeing has taken no action to find the missing aircraft,” states the complaint. All search efforts have been led by the Australia Air Safety Investigative Board, but those efforts have been called off.

The attorneys representing the plaintiffs include Mary F. Schiavo and James R. Brauchle of Motley Rice LLC as well as Keke Feng. Gregory D. Keith is the special administrator on the case.

Kimberly-Clark Sued For ‘Natural’ Claim on Baby Wipes

A San Diego mother is suing personal care giant Kimberly-Clark for including a synthetic chemical in baby wipes that were labeled ‘natural, and ‘hypoallergenic.’ The chemical, phenoxyethanol, may cause vomiting and diarrhea in infants, according to the Food and Drug Administration. The chemical is used to maintain freshness in the wipes.

Brittany Sebastian bought a package of Huggies Natural Care Baby Wipes in the fall of 2016 based in part on the company’s assertion that the wipes were ‘natural,’ ‘gentle,’ and ‘hypoallergenic.’ The suit states that, had Sebastian known that the wipes contained the chemical, she would have purchased another brand of wipes. In the suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, Sebastian is seeking damages for deceptive advertising, unlawful business practices, and other charges.

Phenoxyethanol can irritate skin and is poisonous if ingested, according to the suit. In France, consumers have been urged not to use wipes which contain the chemical on children under three due to concerns about developmental and reproductive toxicity. The suit indicates that long-term exposure to phenoxyethanol has caused organ damage. The chemical has been used for many years instead of parabens and preservatives that release formaldehyde, as both of those products have been linked to cancer.

Phenoxyethanol is used in small quantities in several other products that claim to be natural, such as some Honest Company cleaning products and Whole Foods’ Premium Baby Care products.

The Honest Company recognized the controversy around the chemical on its blog, stating that “Most of the studies that have found significant negative health impacts are based on full-strength or high-dose exposures. In real life usage, exposures are quite small.”

The lawsuit notes the presence of other synthetic chemicals, including caprylil glycol, which acts as a preservative and skin conditioner; cocamidopropyl betaine, a cleanser; and sodium citrate, which helps keep the wipes white.

Kimberly-Clark denies wrongdoing in the case and has indicated it will defend its brand and products. A spokesman for the company indicated that no safety event was indicated in the suit, and it does not allege any injury or risk of injury to a consumer.

A Defective Robot Causes the Death of a Michigan Woman at Workplace

A man blames five robotics, welding, and automotive companies for his wife’s death. He claims that the five companies did not design, build and test the robot thoroughly. Wanda Holbrook, a former employee at Venta Ionia LLC, a company that deals with stamping, molding and other related services for chrome-plated plastics, bumpers and trailer hitches, was found dead after a robot crashed her head. The robot is said to have been malfunctioning, and it crushed her while she was adjusting a machine, as narrated by her husband during a lawsuit.

She was working in either of section 140 or 150 when a robot from section 130 approached her and hit her hard and crushed her head.

Holbrook was then found by her colleagues who announced the death was an instant one due to head trauma. Her husband filed a lawsuit, blaming Prodomax Automation Canada, Flex-n-gate LLC, FANUC Corp; Nachi Robotic System Inc. and Lincoln Company for Wanda’s untimely death. FANUC America and Lincoln are blamed for making the robot while Flex-N-Gate and Prodomax are blamed for helping in installation and servicing of the robot. It was a fault for the robot to move from section 130 to section 140 where it attacked the employee. It also made a mistake of trying to load a hitch assembly since the fixture was already loaded. The complaint said that there must have been a system failure in the robot and the defects caused it to kill Wanda.

According to the lawsuit, the automation system in those working sections was not safe enough, and this must have contributed to the incident too. The safety doors made to prevent robots from moving around from one section to another were not competent enough as claimed by the deceased’s husband. The estate where she came from has sought compensation for the wrongful death and product liability. They are represented by Matthew Wikander and Smith Haughey Rice. However, Amanda Butler declined the lawsuit claims but offered his message of condolence to the family. He said that their company provides adequate safety and that the claims that the safety regulations were not effective were not accurate, but they had to review the lawsuit completely before making any comments. Prodomax, Flex-N-Gate, and Nerch had not yet replied to the emails sent to them requesting their comments on the same.

Yelp Facing Class Action Suit Over Recording Customer Calls without Notification

Yelp, a website that matches customers to local businesses, faces a class action suit in Los Angeles. This case, number BC652472 filed in the Superior Court of California in Los Angeles, has wide implications for customer service practices in nearly all industries that have representatives answering phone calls that are recorded. These phone calls are usually tethered to disclaimers that calls are recorded “for Quality Assurance purposes.” Yelp, apparently, left that part out of its interactions with one caller.

Plaintiff David Schram of Los Angeles, filed a punitive class action suit on March 2, 2017. The suit alleges that Yelp Inc. did not follow California Penal Code 632. Schram, an attorney, stated that Yelp recorded his calls with their financial department without permission, thereby breaking the law. Schram went through an automated system that failed to advise him he was being recorded and neither customer service representative he spoke with told Schram the current conversation was being recorded. Only after these calls took place did a customer service agent inform Schram that all sales and customer service calls were recorded.

California Penal Code 632 states that entities that “intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication…shall be punished” by a fine up to $2,500 and up to one year in prison.

In the suit, lead plaintiff Schram states that Yelp had a pattern of recording calls without informing the callers beforehand. The number of class members will depend on other Yelp callers stepping forward to join the allegations in the lawsuit. Schram thought it could be many thousands. The suit calls for punitive and statutory damages. This could be as much as $5,000 for every violation and a fine of $2,500 for every violation. If Yelp is convicted of any of the charges, the fine per violation could go as high as $10,000, according to the Penal Code 632.

Total damages in the case, if successful, would depend on how many prior Yelp callers learn of the lawsuit and become class members.

SoyNut Butter Co. Sued on the Grounds of E. Coli Contamination

Just a few days after recalling its I.M Healthy SoyNut butter, SoyNut Butter Co. gets sued by parents of an 8-year-old child hospitalized with E. coli after consuming the spread.

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that the boy is one of the 12 people infected with E. coli. So far, the outbreak has been reported in five states — Arizona, Oregon, New Jersey, California, and Maryland. Out of the 12 infected, eleven of them are children.

Erin Simmons and Mosby of California argue that their son was diagnosed with hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) after regularly eating the SoyNut butter, which is the company’s peanut butter substitute. The condition was so dire that the young boy had to undergo a blood transfusion and dialysis — hospitalized at Stanford Children’s Hospital for 21 days.

E. coli (Escherichia coli) is a bacterium that thrives in animals and human’s digestive tracts. A person can become infected with E. coli after getting into contact with stool, or feces, of animals or humans. It mostly happens when you eat food or drink water that is already contaminated by the E. coli bacterium. Out of the many types of E. coli, only a few of them are harmful and may cause the following:

  • Bloody diarrhea
  • Severe anemia
  • Kidney Failure
  • Urinary tract infections
  • Sometimes death

Although the case is still ongoing and we cannot predict what the final judgment will be, there are a few things to understand about this case, which can shape and influence the verdict. These are:

  1. Most cases arising from a food poisoning fall under product liability, meaning that SoyNut Butter Co. may be held liable for selling defective products.
  2. SoyNut Butter Co. could also be held liable for negligence. The company did not provide a safe environment for the production or manufacture of the SoyNut butter.
  3. There is also another possibility that the company may be held liable for breach of implied warranty. This concerns about the notion that products sold to the ordinary consumers should meet their expectations.