Lansing Personal Injury Lawyer - lawsuit

Connecticut AG Announces Suit Against CVS for Selling Expired Products

David Mittleman — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 10:00:00 GMT

New York Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo, recently sued and successfully settled with CVS for $875,000 after discovering that the pharmaceutical company was selling expired products at 60% of its New York stores. Now Connecticut Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal is following in a similar vein.

According to a statement from AG Blumenthal, his office is suing a unit of CVS Caremark Corp. for selling expired over-the-counter drugs and products in its stores in Connecticut. Specifically, according to his statement, investigators from his office found expired food, beverages, as well as the expired over-the-counter medications. In total, the expired merchandise was on sale in 20 or more CVS stores between 2008 and 2009.

A CVS spokeswoman claims that the company only became aware of a problem after it received notice of the suit from AG Blumenthal’s announcement on Monday. Nevertheless, the company maintains that the health and safety of its customers is its top priority and is committed to maintaining proper inventory management to ensure that expired products don’t sit on store shelves. However, the Connecticut branches may still face a similar fate to that of their New York counterparts.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Florida Jury Lights Up Big Tobacco for $300 Million

David Mittleman — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:49:02 GMT

In a clear message to the cigarette manufacturer, Philip Morris, a Florida jury has ordered the company to pay $300 million in damages to ex-smoker, Cindy Naugle, who is wheelchair-bound due to her emphysema. The verdict represents the largest in the series of Engle-Progeny cases tried to date.

Naugle will receive $56.6 million in past and future medical expenses as well as $244 million in punitive damages. Nevertheless, Philip Morris has already stated that it will seek further review of the verdict, arguing that there were “numerous erroneous rulings by the trial judge” and that the punitive damages award was “grossly excessive”.

Naugle’s is but one of the 8,000 individual cases brought against big tobacco since a 2006 Florida Supreme Court ruling that tossed out a massive class-action lawsuit that covered some 700,000 smokers. Despite the dismissal of the class action suit, the high court allowed members of the class to file individual complaints. Also, the high court allowed the initial jury’s finding that big tobacco knowingly sold dangerous products and hid risks from people to be presented in Ms. Naugle’s trial. The initial suit that was overturned by the Florida Supreme Court, Engel v. Progeny, resulted in damages of $145 billion.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Judge Orders Slew of Lawsuits Over Seroquel Back to Home Courts

David Mittleman — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:00:00 GMT

AstraZeneca is faced with loads of trouble lately. For instance, I recently wrote about a current federal lawsuit against the pharmaceutical giant, alleging that the company paid a Chicago-based psychiatrist to overprescribe the anti-psychotic drug Seroquel to his nursing home bound patients. According to recent reports, the company may have even more problems related to Seroquel.

AstraZeneca may face as many as 6,000 trials of lawsuits claiming that Seroquel caused diabetes. U.S. District Judge, Anne Conway, recently recommended sending the slew of suits back to their home courts for trial as test cases. The lawyers for former Seroquel users contend that they are ready to move forward with their clients’ claims that the London-based pharmaceutical company downplayed Seroquel’s diabetes risks.

Nevertheless, AstraZeneca’s lawyers asked the judge to send back only a limited number of the 14,000 lawsuits, arguing that the cases would place an undue burden on judges across the country. In spite of the company’s estimated $623 million in legal defense costs this year, the company’s stocks have risen by 11% this year on the New York Stock Exchange.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

AstraZeneca Allegedly Paid Psychiatrist to Over-Prescribe Anti-Psychotic Medication to Patients

David Mittleman — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 10:00:00 GMT

The pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca may have found it’s most lucrative salesman yet when they discovered Chicago psychiatrist Dr. Michael Reinstein. Indeed, Reinstein was allegedly bringing the company a small fortune in sales by promoting the anti-psychotic drug Seroquel to his mentally ill patients in Chicago-area nursing homes. Furthermore, Reinstein allegedly published research findings that promoted the effectiveness of the drug.

AstraZeneca allegedly paid Reinstein over $490,000 over a decade to peddle their drug. During the same time period, Reinstein faced accusations from his colleagues at the Maxwell Manor nursing home where he worked that he overmedicated his patients. In fact, complaints from patients were so bad that a security guard had to accompany Reinstein on his visits to the nursing home. Some staffers even accused him of convincing patients to take the powerful antipsychotic drug by promising them they would receive passes to leave the nursing home. However, Maxwell Manor closed its doors in 2000, after state officials shut it down for inadequate care and wretched conditions. Now Dr. Reinstein works for other Chicago-area nursing homes and apparently has continued his drug-peddling ways.

While it isn’t illegal for doctors to be paid for conducting research on behalf of drugmakers, health professionals who have encountered Dr. Reinstein have had similar concerns as those of his former colleagues at Maxwell Manor. For example, the case manager at Grasmere Place nursing home in Chicago wondered why Dr. Reinstein put his patients on twice as many drugs as other psychiatrists at the nursing home. There is not a federal lawsuit against AstraZeneca for their actions in paying Dr. Reinstein to allegedly over-prescribe Seroquel. Specifically, court documents show that Reinstein ordered Seroquel for as many as 1,000 Chicago-area Medicaid patients per year, which cost taxpayers as estimated $7.6 million per year. AstraZeneca maintains that they did not profit from the increase in Seroquel sales in Chicago. Rather, they continue to argue that they paid Dr. Reinstein for his promotional work and research only.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Federal Judge Approves $5.9 Million Settlement for Inmates Affected by Strip-Search Policy

David Mittleman — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:00:00 GMT

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania—the city has long since had a procedure that involved strip-searching every person admitted into the city’s prison system. However, a federal judge has finally brought closure to the civil rights suit that challenged that blanket policy.

In fact, the judge approved a $5.9 million settlement that will be divided between two groups: arrestees who were sent to prison on misdemeanor charges and had no previous arrests for drug charges or violent crimes, will receive $1,400 each. The second group of arrestees includes those with riskier claims involving drug or violence charges, and will receive $100 each. Overall, 5,321 individuals filed claims and will receive compensation. Furthermore, the city will also adopt a new policy that replaces strip-searches with non-invasive metal detectors and ion scanners that can detect smuggled weapons.

The lawsuit covered the years between 2003 and 2007 and involved approximately 37,000 inmates who were strip-searched upon entering the Philadelphia prison system. The law firm of Levin, Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman, began receiving complaints from their clients that they were forced to submit to “visual cavity searches”. Even new inmates who were held overnight with no bail money were forced to submit to the policy. The lawyers involved in the suit estimated that they spent a total of 2,877.65 hours on the case, and were determined to win. As Levin stated: “[p]eople only see cases when you are successful.”

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

CVS Pharmacy Settles with NY Officials After Selling Expired Products

David Mittleman — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:33:31 GMT

New York Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo, recently announced that CVS Pharmacy, Inc. has agreed to pay $875,000 in settlement costs after the company sold expired products. The officials discovered that CVS was selling expired products, including food, medicine, and baby formula, after canvassing 60% of CVS stores across New York State. Some of the expired products were over 2 years outdated.

CVS has had similar problems in the past: in fact, the lawsuit accused the company of breaching a prior agreement with New York officials to stop sales of expired products. CVS spokesman, Mike DeAngelis, recently stated that the company is committed to keeping expired products off of store shelves. However, he declined to admit any wrongdoing and also added that he is unaware of any customers who were harmed from using expired products.

Cuomo experienced similar problems with other stores in the past. The most recent case involved Rite Aid, which settled with New York officials in 2008.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

AAJ Debunks Myths About Medical Negligence

David Mittleman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 12:46:56 GMT

President Obama promised a floor debate on health care reform in the House, and now that promise is coming to fruition. The debate is sure to include the classic opponents of healthcare reform, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as well as other tort reform proponents such as the asbestos, insurance, and pharmaceutical companies. However, one of the most problematic arguments used by these groups is that medical malpractice lawsuits are the basis for the rising cost of healthcare and that the answer is not healthcare reform. Instead, they argue that limiting “frivolous lawsuits” is the panacea to our country’s healthcare cost woes.

The American Association for Justice (AAJ), a trial lawyers group based Washington, D.C, recently released a 30-page report (pdf) outlining the pertinent arguments of the debate. Specifically, the five myths the AAJ outlines are:

Myth #1: There are too many frivolous lawsuits, and curbing the number of lawsuits would cut down the cost of healthcare.

The actual number of lawsuits filed per year is questionable. What most people don’t understand is that trial lawyers don’t have near the financial power that an insurance company does. Specifically, insurance companies can spend enormous, and seemingly endless, amounts of money to win a case. Plaintiffs’ attorneys, on the other hand, are on very tight budgets and must question the validity of every case that might come their way. Wasting money attempting to prove a case that doesn’t have merit is nonsensical, so plaintiffs’ attorneys aren’t scooping up every case possible, contrary to popular belief.

While the number of frivolous lawsuits is questionable, the number of medical negligence cases aren’t: in fact, according to the Institute of Medicine’s 1999 “To Err is Human” report, 98,000 people are killed in hospitals each year from preventable medical errors.

Furthermore, a Hearts Newspaper Group “Dead by Mistake” investigation into medical malpractice found that the number of patients affected was closer to 200,000, when hospital-acquired infections were taken into consideration.

Are all of these individuals affected by medical negligence flocking to file lawsuits? Apparently not: according to a Harvard study, only 1 in 8 people injured by medical negligence filed a malpractice claim.

Other myths included in the AAJ report include:

Myth #2:

Malpractice claims drive up the cost of healthcare

Myth #3:

Doctors are fleeing

Myth #4:

Malpractice Claims Drive up Doctors’ Premiums

Myth #5:

Tort reform will lower insurance rates

For additional information on the myths surrounding healthcare reform and the costs of healthcare, see AAJ's "Debunking the Myths".

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Michigan Sued for Cutting Off Medicaid Dental Benefits to Poor and Disabled

David Mittleman — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:00:00 GMT

Along with other devastating cuts, Governor Granholm has been forced to cut Medicaid dental benefits for low-income and disabled adults. However, a lawsuit was recently filed on behalf of 400,000 adult Medicaid recipients who are affected by the cut.

With an already extremely strained budget, Governor Granholm proposed a tax on doctors to restore some Medicaid funding. However, the state Senate vehemently rejected the idea. As a result, there was no funding available to provide the vitally important Medicaid dental coverage.

The lawsuit was spurred by the recent death of a developmentally disabled Alpena County woman covered by Medicaid, who died last week after an infection in her mouth went untreated. The suit contends that the State of Michigan is legally bound to provide dental coverage to low-income and disabled adults because it failed to notify the federal government of the change in policy. Granholm issued the executive order in May that eliminated funding for adult dental coverage effective July 1.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Family of Jennifer Strange Wins $16.5 Million for Water-Drinking Contest Death

David Mittleman — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:34:54 GMT

Thanks to a Sacramento County jury, the notorious case of Jennifer Strange, a young mother of three who died after participating in a radio station’s water-drinking contest, has come to a close. Jennifer’s family will receive $16.5 for their daughter’s 2007 death after the jury found the radio station liable for the actions of its employees.

Sacramento radio station KDND-FM held a contest in January 2007 called “Hold Your Wee for a Wii”, a contest whereby participants were instructed to hold their urine for as long as possible after drinking large amounts of water. Jennifer died of acute water intoxication after consuming nearly two gallons of water. In response, the plaintiff’s attorneys filed the wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of Jennifer’s husband and their two sons, as well as her oldest son and his father.

The plaintiff’s attorneys alleged that the radio station was negligent in holding the contest. However, the defense attorneys countered that Jennifer’s death was her own fault by “contributory negligence”. Nevertheless, jurors ultimately found Entercom Sacramento LLC liable for the actions of its employees at radio station KDND-FM.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Homes Constructed With Chinese Drywall Are Worthless, Homeowners Allege

David Mittleman — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:41:59 GMT

Many homeowners are experiencing similar dismay after moving into their “dream homes” just a few years ago. For example, a recent NYT article featured Bill Morgan, a retired policeman, who moved his wife and daughter into a newly built home in Virginia. However, within short order, Morgan’s family was forced to move after suffering constant nosebleeds and headaches. Moreover, the house had a persistent and lingering stench of rotten eggs and all of the metal appliances and door frames in the home turned black.

Lawsuits are cropping up from American homebuyers, who allege that their homes were constructed with imported Chinese drywall. Specifically, the lawsuits claim that the drywall, imported during the housing boom a few years ago, is contaminated with sulfuric compounds. So far, 300 people have filed lawsuits in Louisiana alone, with another 500 in Florida. In response, the Consumer Product Safety Commission will release the results of a study this month that will hopefully indicate whether or not the Chinese drywall is causing the alleged problems.

Nevertheless, investigators for the CPSC are finding it difficult to trace the source of the drywall. Many imported drywall sheets are simply marked with “made in China”, with no further information on the manufacturers. Unfortunately, many homeowners were forced to file lawsuits to attempt to recoup some of their losses. Specifically, many insurance companies have refused to pay claims file by homeowners, arguing that their policies do not cover issues caused by pollutants.

Mr. Morgan bought his house back in 2006 after living with his family in a FEMA provided trailer for three years. His first home was destroyed by Hurricane Isabel in 2003. He still drops by his dream home to cut the grass, but there is no equity left in the house because of the apparent destruction from the Chinese drywall.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman