lawsuits Archive

Stryker Hip Recall, Broadspire & the Meaning of Two Words

February 7th, 2013. By AbiK

Not since the days of Monica Lewinsky has parsing the meaning of a word—or two in this case—been worthy of such scrutiny. The words, “if necessary” in this “Claims & Reimbursement FAQs” link on the Stryker website should perhaps make any hip replacement patient who’s been affected by the Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip stems recall suspect.

Why?

Well, a little walk down memory lane on LawyersandSettlements.com brings up a story we had published back when Broadspire was the third-party claims administrator brought in by J&J to handle DePuy hip replacement claims.

At the time, a Reuters article noted that the move means that Broadspire’s physicians—not the patient’s physician—will determine whether a hip should be replaced. This means that even if the patient’s physician recommends replacing the hip, if a Broadspire physician disagrees with the decision, Johnson & Johnson may not pay to cover the costs of that surgery.

So is history repeating itself?

Clearly by inserting the words “if necessary” in discussing defective hip replacement revision surgery reimbursements Broadspire retains the right to deem whether a revision surgery was necessary, or not; the “not” undoubtedly necessitating a denial—or reduction—of reimbursement.

What we’re hearing from attorneys like Ben Stewart of Stewart Law Group PLLC., who’s familiar with defective hip lawsuits, is that before a patient submits any paperwork with Broadspire—or signs anything—for a Stryker hip reimbursement claim, he or she should first talk to a lawyer.

Tags: Broadspire, Defective hip replacement, Hip Implant lawsuit, Hip Revision Surgery, Stryker Hip Recall, Stryker Rejuvenate Recall, stryker-orthopedics-rejuvenate-modular-hip-system
Posted in Defective Products, Drugs/Medical, lawsuits, Personal Injury | No Comments »

Asbestos News Roundup: 2.7.13 – Storm Damage Asbestos Problems

February 7th, 2013. By LucyC

This week’s asbestos news roundup includes all the recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.

Storm Damage and Asbestos Risk

This week, the US House completed a $60.2 billion aid plan to rebuild communities damaged by Hurricane Sandy. The measure includes $17 billion to meet the immediate needs of Sandy victims in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, and $33.5 billion for long-term reconstruction.

Hurricane Sandy destroyed or damaged tens of thousands of homes and businesses on the Eastern seaboard when it struck on October 29, 2012. Many of those structures were old enough to contain asbestos, and this poses a significant danger to clean-up and remediation crews, as well as homeowners who may attempt repairs on their own.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) warns that asbestos may be found in a wide variety of construction items, and states that cleanup at homes and businesses after a natural disaster can cause people to be exposed to asbestos containing materials found in:

• Boiler/pipe insulation

• Fireproofing

• Floor tiles

• Roofing shingles and tiles

• Transite boards used in laboratory tabletops and in acoustic panels in auditoriums, music rooms and phone booths.

Asbestos Settlements

Seattle, WA: An 89-year-old woman has been awarded $1.1 million settlement after a jury agreed that exposure to asbestos from her husband’s work clothes caused her to contract a rare form of cancer that will likely lead to her death.

Phyllis Granville brought the case against 13 defendants, claiming they negligently manufactured and sold floor tiles that were unsafe because they contained asbestos. According to court documents, her husband, Donald Granville, a floor tile installer, was exposed to asbestos from the defendants’ products while at work, which he in turn brought home on his clothes and exposed his wife of 70 years to.

“This was an extraordinarily difficult case to bring to trial, and we are very pleased we were able to provide the Granvilles some measure of financial security while they fight the effects of this horrible disease,” Matthew Bergman, the Granvilles’ attorney, said. “In most cases, mesothelioma victims had direct exposure to asbestos. While the science is clear that people like Donald can bring it home on clothes and transmit it through hugging his wife, or having her wash his clothes, these concepts are much more difficult to illustrate to a jury.”

According to Bergman, the asbestos-related mesothelioma has had a devastating effect on Phyllis, rendering her unable to breathe without oxygen, leaving her homebound. Her physicians expect that the disease, which surrounds and ultimately obliterates the lung, will be fatal.

“I never imagined Donald’s work would ever end up giving me cancer,” said Phyllis. “The manufacturers didn’t warn him about the risk of bringing asbestos home with him. It’s hard enough for us to start battling my mesothelioma, but now Donald is afraid he’s going to contract it too. We’re so thankful Bergman Draper Ladenburg helped us to get the verdict.”

The case was filed with the Seattle King County Court in September 2012, where the case spent four weeks at trial throughout January 2013. After careful deliberation, the jury reached a final verdict of $1.1 million to be paid to Granville and her husband.

According to Bergman, the verdict represents a crucial development in asbestos litigation. “The jury recognized that demonstrable harm has been done to asbestos victims,” said Bergman. “But more importantly, the verdict shows that asbestos exposure has significantly impacted people who were not present at contaminated work sites at all. We believe that the sites had a present imperative to warn their employees about the risk of asbestos contact and also subsequent dispersion.” (fortmilltimes.com)

Asbestos Hot Spots

Redondo Beach, CA: A landmark on the Redondo beach waterfront, instantly recognizable by its octagon shape, is slated for demolition because it contains asbestos. Built on the beach waterfront 34 years ago, the City Council voted to tear it down recently, citing storm damage and corrosive ocean air rendering the building unusable.

The council acted Tuesday night on a recommendation by Public Works Director Michael Witzansky, who reported that the city-owned building, which has been boarded up for years, was in imminent danger of falling down.

The building’s condition worsened significantly after recent wind storms, Witzansky reported. “The wind storms tore off some wood paneling that we had put it place a few years ago and that gave us a look at what was going on inside and it was not good,” he said.

City building inspectors determined that the condition of the building posed significant danger to the public and surrounding structures, he said. The demolition will include disposal of a small amount of asbestos, Witzansky said. “The building will come down quickly, but the removal of the debris will take some time,” he said. The building has been empty for at least eight years. (dailybreeze.com)

Tags: Asbestos, Asbestos Exposure, asbestos law, asbestos lawsuit, Asbestos Mesothelioma
Posted in Asbestos Mesothelioma, Emerging Issues, lawsuits, Settlement | No Comments »

Asbestos News Roundup: 1.31.13 – Construction Materials & Asbestos Risk

January 31st, 2013. By LucyC

Construction Materials and Asbestos Risk

Many of the materials used in construction, including welding, pipefitting, and millwright work, contained, or in some cases still contain asbestos. By the mid-20th century asbestos was being used in fire retardant coatings, concrete, bricks, pipes and fireplace cement, heat, fire, and acid resistant gaskets, pipe insulation, ceiling insulation, fireproof drywall, flooring, roofing, lawn furniture, and drywall joint compound.

It wasn’t until the 1980s that the knowledge of the dangers of asbestos exposure and related asbestos disease became more widely known amongst the general public. Consequently, millions of men and women likely worked on or around asbestos without any protection for decades.

It would not be uncommon for people to work with asbestos-containing products, either installing or removing them, which would send asbestos fibers into the air. The fibers are inhaled, and settle on people’s clothing—and that’s how asbestos disease begins. People who become ill from asbestos are usually exposed to it on a regular basis, hence the hundreds of asbestos lawsuits we are seeing now.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Jefferson County, TX: Union Pacific Railroad Co, is facing an asbestos lawsuit filed by employees who allege they developed asbestos-related lung disease due to decades’ worth of work-related exposure.

The plaintiffs, Henry J. Buckley, Gilbert A. Curtis, Ronald Morale, Jesse Sasser Jr. and Walter Williams III were employed as track laborers by Union Pacific from various times starting from 1969 to approximately 2012. In their lawsuit, the men claim that during their employment they were exposed to asbestos and asbestos-containing materials and have been diagnosed with an asbestos-related lung disease.

The defendant is accused of negligence for using asbestos-containing materials for decades after Union Pacific became aware of the harmful and/or hazardous nature of these materials; failing to inspect and remove its cars and equipment for the presence of asbestos; failing to warn the plaintiffs regarding the presence of asbestos or of the synergistic effect between smoking and asbestos exposure; failing to properly train the plaintiffs, failing to provide proper respirators or to conduct air monitoring to determine the levels of asbestos; failing to provide comprehensive medical examinations; and failing to medically monitor plaintiffs for asbestos-related conditions.

The plaintiffs are seeking an award of damages for medical expenses, mental anguish, physical pain and suffering, fear of cancer, physical impairment, interest and court costs. (setexasrecord.com)

Baton Rouge, LA: Melvin Toups has filed an asbestos lawsuit against his former employer, Ethyl Corporation, as well as manufacturers Anco Insulations, Inc., Eagle, Inc., Georgia Pacific Corporation, The McCarty Corporation, Reilly-Benton Co., Inc., Taylor-Seindenbach, Inc. and Union Carbide Corporation. Toups alleges he was exposed to the asbestos between the 1950s-70s while he worked as a boiler tender, operator and construction contractor, and it was this asbestos exposure that caused his lung cancer.

According to the lawsuit, each defendant named has allegedly engaged in the mining, processing, manufacturing, installation, maintenance, sale, use and/or distribution of asbestos and asbestos-containing products or machinery requiring or calling for the use of asbestos.

Toups alleges he was exposed to asbestos on numerous occasions and inhaled great quantities of asbestos fibers.

The defendants allegedly failed to warn Toups in a timely and adequate fashion about the dangerous health hazards associated with asbestos exposure. Further, the lawsuit claims the defendants failed to provide Toups with adequate information and reasonably safe and sufficient wearing apparel and proper protective equipment and appliances.

Additionally, the lawsuit states the defendants failed to take reasonable precautions or exercise reasonable care to publish, adopt or enforce a safety plan of handling and installing asbestos; failed to develop and utilize a substance material to eliminate asbestos fibers in the asbestos-containing products; failed to properly design and manufacture asbestos; failed to properly test products; and failed to recall and/remove asbestos-containing products from the stream of commerce.

The plaintiff’s employers and employers’ executive officers and directors are accused of failing to provide and ensure a safe workplace for their employees, failing to inspect, approve and supervise the work of the plaintiff, failing to make health and hygiene decision on any questions regarding the use of respiratory protection devices, failing to provide adequate warnings, physical examinations, safety equipment, ventilation and breathing apparatus, failing to properly hire and train their employees and failing to comply with applicable state and federal regulations regarding workplace asbestos exposure.

Toups alleges Ethyl Corporation specifically negligently failed to disclose, warn or reveal critical medical and safety information regarding asbestos to the plaintiff; failed to remove asbestos hazards from the work place; failed to properly supervise or monitor work areas for compliance with safety regulation; and failed to provide a safe and suitable means of eliminating the amount of asbestos dust in the air.

Toups is alleging negligence, fault, strict liability and willful misconduct of the defendants has resulted in his asbestos-related disease.

Toups is seeking an unspecified amount in damages for physical pain, mental anguish, medical expenses, pharmaceutical expenses, asbestos-related lung cancer, loss of earning capacity, lost earnings, loss of consortium, love affection, services and society and loss of quality of life. (louisianarecord.com)

Tags: Asbestos, Asbestos Exposure, asbestos law, asbestos lawsuit, Asbestos Mesothelioma
Posted in Asbestos Mesothelioma, lawsuits, Settlement | No Comments »

Who the Hell is Kevin Butler? Sony Sued Him, Thinking You Know Him

January 29th, 2013. By AbiK

http://youtu.be/9ONtyilKg8Q

You are so out of the loop if you don’t know Kevin Butler. But don’t feel bad—we took a completely non-scientific poll over on our Facebook page and found that no one we asked knows who the hell Kevin Butler is. Nor do they apparently care.

But Sony cared.

See, Kevin Butler is the fictitious character played by ad actor Jerry Lambert in Sony’s PlayStation commercials. Going out on a limb here, but guessing you don’t know who Jerry Lambert is either. Both Jerry and Kevin are pretty comical in the Sony commercials—but that’s neither here nor there.

Apparently, Sony thinks you know Jerry—or Kevin—and that you watch and internalize his every move. And so when Jerry went and did a commercial for Bridgestone earlier in 2012 in which a Nintendo Wii was offered as part of a promotion, and in which Jerry (not Kevin) happens to play on a Wii along with a cast of other Bridgestone “employees”, well…

You can imagine how the phones were ringing off the hook over at Sony with pissed-off consumers getting all confused at seeing Jerry play on a Wii when everyone knows his fake character, Kevin, endorses PlayStation. (That would be sarcasm for those who missed it).

In October 2012, Sony sued Jerry (they couldn’t quite sue a fictitious character, so Kevin was off the hook here) for violating the Lanham Act, misappropriation, breach of contract and tortious interference with a contractual relationship. The Lanham Act covers things like trademark infringement and trademark dilution as well as false advertising. Of course, by having a fictitious spokesperson be seen using two different video game systems, well, you can imagine the alleged damage done to PlayStation.

Regardless, Jerry (the real actor) did admit that his appearance in both company’s commercials with two different video game systems might confuse some folks. And so, the two—Jerry and Sony—settled (Bridgestone also took Jerry out of their ad).

According to the terms of the settlement as reported by Joystiq, Jerry Lambert has agreed to not appear in any advertisements that feature or mention “any other video game or computer entertainment system or video game company” for two years. Additionally, for another two years after that, he must notify Sony if he wants to appear in gaming ads so Sony can assess whether his intended performance will infringe on the Kevin Butler character.

So that’s who the heck Kevin Butler is. We’re glad the air’s been cleared as clearly a ton of folks—who didn’t even know who Kevin Butler was—were confused over which video gaming system he really preferred. Phew—disaster averted!

By the way, one astute fan of ours—named Jay (go Jay!)—did actually know that Kevin Butler was a placekicker for the University of Georgia. He went on to play in the NFL for the Bears and the Cardinals. We did not attempt to contact him for this story. Another fan, Sam, suggested that he might have been Rhett’s brother… Thanks to all who participated in our survey!

Tags: Bridgestone, Jerry Lambert, Kevin Butler, Nintendo, PlayStation, Sony, Trademark Dilution, Trademark Infringement, Wii
Posted in Celebrity, Emerging Issues, Intellectual Property, lawsuits | No Comments »

Asbestos News Roundup: 1.24.13 – Asbestos in Schools

January 24th, 2013. By LucyC

Asbestos Risk in Schools

Building materials and insulation such as drywall, floor/ceiling tile, applied fireproofing spray, and piping/boiler insulation used in the construction of schools prior to 1980, frequently contained asbestos.

While undisturbed asbestos materials generally do not pose a health risk to students and teachers, over time they can become hazardous due to deterioration or damage.

If asbestos containing materials are disturbed, (e.g. during the installation, maintenance, or removal process), asbestos fibers may become airborne and pose a health threat to students, teachers and other employees within the schools. Once asbestos fibers are inhaled or swallowed, the risk of getting an asbestos related disease, such as asbestosis or mesothelioma, also increases. Student exposure to asbestos in schools is particularly concerning because once the fibers accumulate in the lungs, the latency period between asbestos exposure and the onset of symptoms can take as long as 20 to 50 years.

The federal government has been regulating the use of asbestos in schools since the 1980’s. Schools now have regulatory requirements and management plans to reduce the risk of potential asbestos exposure for students and teachers. However, until the presence of asbestos in schools is eliminated entirely, many believe it will continue to pose a health risk.

Asbestos Lawsuit

Charleston, WV: 50 companies have been named as defendants in an asbestos lawsuit filed by Ray Earl Wamsley II who was diagnosed with asbestosis on April 11, 2012. In his lawsuit, Wamsley claims the defendants are responsible for his asbestosis disease.

Specifically, Wamsley alleges the defendants exposed him to asbestos during his employment as a head artist, decorator, pipefitter, painter and electrician’s helper from 1969 until 1993. Wamsley further claims the defendants failed to warn him of the dangers of asbestos.

The defendants are being sued based on theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentations and post-sale duty to warn, according to the suit. (wvrecord.com)

Charleston, WV: John E. Huxley and his wife, Lucille A. Huxley, have named 134 companies as defendants in their asbestos lawsuit, filed this month. In their lawsuit, they claim the defendants are responsible for Mr.Huxley’s diagnosis of asbestosis and mesothelioma.

Huxley was diagnosed with asbestosis and mesothelioma due to exposure to asbestos while employed at various job sites and locations throughout West Virginia and while his mother was employed at E.I. Du Point De Nemours & Company, according to the lawsuit.

The Huxleys claim the defendants failed to warn Mr. Huxley of the dangers of asbestos and failed to take reasonable precautions to warn him of the dangers. Further, the lawsuit states the defendants failed to place any warnings on the asbestos-containing products to warn handlers of the dangers of the products and failed to warn of the dangers of other ingredients in their products, including silica.

The Huxleys claim the defendants were negligent and caused John Huxley to suffer his lung injuries, shock and other nervous or emotional disorders. (wvrecord.com)

Charleston, WV: Norman T. Dial, who was diagnosed with mesothelioma on October 8, 2012 has filed an asbestos lawsuit, naming 70 companies as defendants responsible for his asbestos disease.

Dial and his wife, Marcia C. Dial, claim the defendants exposed him to asbestos during his employment as a store assistant, laborer, deck hand and operator from 1954 until 1999. The couple also alleges the defendants exposed Mr. Dial to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing fibers during his career and failed to warn him about the dangers.

The defendants are being sued based on theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentation and post-sale duty to warn, according to the suit.

The lawsuit contends that the defendants’ actions kept the Huxleys and others ignorant of the dangers of asbestos and other products and in this way, the conspirators aided efforts to sell products containing asbestos.(wvrecord.com)

Charleston, WV: Cletis William Adkins and his wife, Lola Lee Adkins are suing 62 companies they claim are responsible for Mr. Adkins diagnosis of asbestos-related lung cancer.

In the lawsuit, Adkins, diagnosed with lung cancer on September 10, 2012, claims the defendants exposed him to asbestos during his employment as a laborer, high lift operator and custodian from 1955 until 1994. Further, the Adkins allege the defendants exposed Cletis Adkins to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing fibers during his career and failed to warn him about the dangers.

The defendants are being sued based on theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentation and post-sale duty to warn, according to the suit. (wvrecord.com)

Tags: Asbestos, Asbestos Exposure, asbestos law, asbestos lawsuit, Asbestos Mesothelioma
Posted in Asbestos Mesothelioma, Emerging Issues, lawsuits | 1 Comment »