An exploding battery can cause more harm than people may realize. Numerous individuals have suffered serious injuries from exploding lithium-ion batteries, and in fact, exploding batteries have even caused death in some cases. If you were injured by an exploding battery that has a defect, then you could be eligible for substantial compensation. Reach out to a New York City product liability lawyer to learn more about what this requires.
When it comes to lithium-ion battery hazards, the main causes of harm are fires and explosions. If a defect is present, these batteries are known to catch on fire or explode. The risk comes from the unpredictability
of these explosions and how close the person is to the battery when this happens.
A common concern is how many products these lithium-ion batteries can be found in. Lithium-ion batteries are used in phones, e-cigarettes, hoverboards, electric vehicles, certain train cars, hoverboards, and laptops. One small fire from an unchecked lithium-ion battery can spread into a major house fire if no one sees the battery catch fire.
Exploding lithium-ion batteries can dismember fingers if people have the battery near or in their hands. These explosions can result in a variety of other injuries like thermal burns, lacerations, tissue damage, vision loss, hearing problems, and infections depending on the injury severity. Deaths have been reported in rare cases.
The most hazardous part about defective lithium-ion batteries is not always knowing when they will catch fire or explode. This makes it hard to be cautious with lithium-ion batteries. Some of the most common causes of lithium-battery explosions are not easily detected:
You can sue for an exploding lithium-ion battery if you can prove the injuries you suffered and the defect that caused the explosion. This same rule applies if your lithium-ion battery caught fire and caused injuries or property damages. Filing a product liability lawsuit requires determining what type of defect caused your injuries.
The three types of product defects are manufacturing defects, marketing defects, and design defects. Manufacturing defects may only exist in your lithium-ion battery because they involve a one-time mistake made during factory production. Whereas design defects exist in every released version of the product and may result in multiple battery explosions.
Marketing defects are a lack of warning labels and instructions for safe use. For example, a lack of instructions on how to safely charge and store a lithium-ion battery could be a reason to sue. Consider contacting a New York City product liability lawyer to find out what steps you can take to sue.
No one should have to pay for injuries caused by a defective product. Contact the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm by dialing (212) 566-1000 to talk to a Puerto Rico product liability attorney for a consultation today. Our legal team can help you obtain compensation for damages caused by an exploding battery like medical bills and emotional distress. We serve clients throughout New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
The harm caused by defective surgical mesh can be severe. Some patients suffer prolonged pain, internal organ damage, and life-threatening injuries. Medical bills to remove the surgical mesh and repair the damages caused can be expensive. You may not have to pay for these expenses if the manufacturer or surgeon was at fault. Discuss your situation with a New York City medical malpractice lawyer to find out if you can sue.
One of the most common types of surgical mesh associated with injuries to patients involves surgical mesh for hernia repairs. There have been many recalled surgical mesh implants associated with hernia surgeries.
Anytime a medical device like surgical mesh is reported as dangerous to patients, the device is recalled from consumer use.
Those who were harmed by defective surgical mesh tended to suffer various types of injuries. Some of the most common injuries caused by surgical mesh defects with hernia repairs include:
Many of these complications can become dangerous if left untreated. Organ obstructions and perforations can lead to severe consequences. Surgical repairs for these types of damages can be expensive. This is especially true for mesh migration when the mesh moves to a different location within the body. Mesh shrinkage can also inflict internal damage and pain.
You might be able to sue for surgical mesh injuries if you suffered harm as a result of negligence. The manufacturer of the surgical mesh or the surgeon who performed the surgical mesh procedure could be held liable. Filing a surgical mesh lawsuit requires figuring out who was at fault.
A doctor could be held liable if the doctor knowingly used a defective or recalled surgical mesh. There are several signs of negligence to be aware of. Doctors who claim you need additional surgeries due to mesh complications might be covering up a mesh defect. Some doctors may say this but then say the surgery is too risky.
The manufacturer of the surgical mesh could be held liable if they produced the mesh with a defect. This defect could exist in the design of the mesh or may have occurred during mass production. Design defects often lead to recalls because they exist in all released versions of the product.
Consider contacting a New York City product liability lawyer if you are unsure who was at fault for your injuries. An experienced lawyer can help you figure out who was responsible and collect evidence for your claim. Depending on the situation, you could be eligible for significant compensation.
You may not have to pay for the damages you suffered from a defective surgical mesh. Do not hesitate to contact the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm by dialing (212) 566-1000 today to talk to a Long Island product liability attorney for a consultation. Our legal team is ready to increase your chances of compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and lost wages. We serve clients throughout New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
All it takes is one product defect to result in serious injuries and harm to consumers. Increasing your awareness of types of product defects and product recalls might help you avoid these types of injuries. If you were injured by a product, then you might be able to sue for substantial compensation. All you have to do is reach out to a New York City personal injury attorney to see what legal steps to take.
Avoiding injuries from defective products starts with knowing about the types of defects that cause injuries. The three main types of product defects are marketing defects, manufacturing defects, and design defects. Being able to identify these ahead of time could potentially prevent an injury.
Marketing defects can be found on labels, instructions, packaging, and product stickers. What often happens is a lack of information about the safe use of the product. If the product looks dangerous when used a certain way, then precautions could prevent an accident.
Design defects exist within the design of the product and might involve internal or overall mechanisms that go wrong. Manufacturing defects may include minor issues like loose screws, cracked pieces, or missing parts. In some cases, these can be dangerous. For example, car seats with loose screws could make the seatbelt fail.
Checking product recall lists online is also a helpful tool for avoiding defective products. There are a variety of websites like the Food and Drug Administration, Recalls.gov, and Foodsafety.gov that can be used to keep track of the most recent product recalls. Products are recalled when they pose hazards to consumers.
If you suspect the product you are using has faults, then consider checking these online product recall sites. See if this product is listed and if so, the best step might be to avoid using the product. Some people are able to request a refund.
In the event that you were injured by a defective product, you might be able to file a product liability lawsuit for compensation. A product liability claim involves first identifying the type of defect that caused your injury. Then the damages caused and ties to the product manufacturer must be proven.
You can prove this by collecting and documenting as much evidence as possible. Write down what happened and details about the product defect. Take pictures of the product defect, your injuries, and any other damages like property damage. Some cases like these may require evidence from receipts, product blueprints, and documents.
Consider contacting a New York City product liability lawyer for more information on how to file your lawsuit. A lawyer can help you obtain significant compensation.
Going up against a product company can be intimidating. Feel free to call the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm today at (212) 566-1000 to speak with a New York product liability lawyer for a consultation today. Our team of attorneys can help you obtain compensation for any injuries or damages you suffered from a defective product. We can be found in New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Almost every medication has side effects listed on the label. The primary reason for this is to avoid being sued. However, when a side effect is experienced but not listed on the label, then the medication company could be liable. If you suffered unexpected harm from a medication, then you might be able to sue the prescribing medical professional or medication company. Talk to a New York medical malpractice lawyer to explore your options.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) describes adverse medication reactions, or side effects, as unwanted effects caused by a medication. In some cases, these side effects are common and mild, rare and severe, or rare and mild. Medications with common and severe side effects often do not make it into the market.
A single medication can cause adverse side effects but so can mixing medications. This can happen by accident when patients are prescribed multiple medications at once. These medication interactions can lead to worse side effects than if the medications were taken alone.
All of these are reasons why most medication labels have extensive lists of side effects and warnings. Many warning labels will instruct consumers not to mix the medication with specific types of medications. Some medications have labels that warn consumers against driving or operating heavy machinery due to the side effects.
Doctors are also expected to warn patients about potential adverse side effects. This includes side effects that could lead to high risks while driving. pregnant, or consuming certain substances like alcohol. Ignoring these warnings comes down to the liability of the patient. When no warnings are given, liability for harm falls onto the prescriber or manufacturer of the medication.
If you suffered significant harm from a defective medication and you were not warned about this harm, then you might be able to sue. Medical malpractice claims can be filed against doctors who fail to warn patients. A product liability claim can be filed against the medication manufacturer if a mistake was made with the product itself.
Filing a product liability claim related to medication side effects often comes down to identifying marketing defects. A marketing defect occurs when a product fails to properly label or provide instructions for safe use. Medications that exclude information and labels about side effects, negative medication interactions, and what to avoid while on the medication fit this standard.
Consider contacting a New York product liability lawyer if you suspect a marketing defect. Collect evidence by keeping the defective product, documenting your damages, and with copies of medical records.
You could be eligible for compensation if you suffered harm from a faulty medication. Call the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm today at (212) 566-1000 to talk to a New York product liability attorney for a free consultation. Our San Juan team of lawyers might be able to increase your chances of compensation for medical bills, emotional distress, and other damages caused by the medication. We serve clients in New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Losing a loved one to an unexpected accident can be a shocking and disheartening experience to go through. The last thing many people want during these times is additional stress from financial losses. An unexpected loss may lead to several financial obstacles when loved ones are unprepared. This is when many people wonder if they can sue for wrongful death. Talk to a New York City wrongful death attorney to learn more.
Many people wonder what counts as wrongful death. A wrongful death claim can be filed when a third party is at fault for the death of someone else. This means another person or business was directly or
partially at fault for the injury that led to the passing.
Some of the most common examples of wrongful death causes include car accidents, assault, workplace accidents, and medical malpractice. While the person who caused the death may not have intended for the death to occur, this does not make them immune to liability. Even if the cause was accidental, someone could still be sued for negligence.
Negligence can take two forms, an act of commission and an act of omission. Acts of commission mean a reckless or careless action that caused harm to someone else. Whereas acts of omission are failures to take certain actions to prevent harm to someone. When these lead to death, a wrongful death claim can be filed.
A wrongful death claim can also be filed when the cause was intentional. People who assault other people may not have intended to cause the loss of someone's life, but the assault was intentional. Consider contacting a New York City wrongful death lawyer if you have questions about any of this.
Now that you know when you can sue for wrongful death, you might be wondering if you or someone else can sue. Those who can sue for wrongful death are generally limited to family members of the deceased loved one. This mostly means immediate family members like spouses and children.
However, in some cases, distant family members like grandparents can file a wrongful death claim. In cases like these, the grandparents may need to prove they were the guardians of the person who passed away. There must be some type of close tie between them.
In certain cases, financial dependents can also sue for wrongful death, especially if their lives have been disrupted. This could be someone who was living with the person and who was financially dependent on the deceased loved one.
Navigating the legal aspects of a wrongful death claim is not always easy. Contact the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm by dialing (212) 566-1000 to speak with a New York wrongful death lawyer for a free consultation today. Our Puerto Rico legal team is ready to help you obtain compensation for funeral costs, pain and suffering, and income loss. We can be found throughout New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
All it takes is one diagnostic error to change a patient's life in drastic ways. The effects of a diagnostic error depend on how severe the error is and what medical condition the person is dealing with. Some diagnostic mistakes involve minor effects while others can be life-threatening. You might be able to take legal action if this happened to you. All you have to do is discuss your situation with a New York City medical malpractice lawyer who can help.
The harm caused by diagnostic errors is more widespread than many people might think. Thousands of patients are injured or pass away each year in the United States as a result of diagnostic errors. Many of the patients who live are left with lifelong disabilities and impairments.
This is how one diagnostic error can change the rest of someone's life. Out of the thousands of medical malpractice claims filed each year, diagnostic errors represent some of the most common forms of malpractice. Compared to other forms of medical malpractice, diagnostic mistakes tend to lead to more deaths and disabilities.
Diagnostic errors can occur in several different ways. The three main types of diagnostic errors are missed diagnoses, delayed diagnoses, and wrong diagnoses. Missed diagnoses, the most common type, occur when a medical professional misses a symptom or sign and fails to diagnose a medical condition. When the medical condition is something as serious as cancer, the result of missing this can be catastrophic.
Delayed diagnoses can have similar effects on a patient with cancer. If a doctor fails to detect cancer soon enough, then this delays treatment which could result in cancer spreading. Wrong diagnoses may lead to unnecessary tests and treatments that fail to treat the underlying condition, wasting time and money.
When it comes to diagnostic error causes, these can happen during almost any phase of the diagnostic process. The phases of the diagnostic process include presentation, history taking, physical exam, tests, assessment, referral, and follow-up. An error could be deemed negligent if there is reason to believe there was an act of commission or omission.
An act of commission can happen during diagnosing when a doctor does something wrong or incorrect during the diagnosis. This might be intentionally ignoring test results or symptoms. Omission happens when a doctor fails to do the right thing or fails to take the required steps in the diagnostic process.
You may not have to pay for your medical bills and other damages if your health provider acted negligently. Consider contacting a New York City medical malpractice lawyer if you have questions about suing.
You may not have to pay for the negative effects of misdiagnosis. Call the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm at (212) 566-1000 today to talk to a New York medical malpractice attorney for a free consultation. Our Bronx legal team can help you obtain compensation for lost wages, pain and suffering, and medical costs. We serve clients in New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
A defective medication can lead to a multitude of medical complications. These complications range from mild side effects to severe allergic reactions and life-threatening effects. Some people may suffer worsening symptoms or use a medication that fails to treat their medical condition. Consider talking to a New York City product liability attorney if you have questions about how to file a lawsuit.
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recalls new medications each year, for a variety of reasons. Some of the most common causes of defective medications include incorrect dosing,
contamination, mislabeling, and medication defects. These errors may happen during the design, manufacturing, or shipping of the medication.
Recalls happen when the medication is deemed harmful to the public and must be removed from shelves. Some recalls are more serious than others. Class I recalls are done for medications that have been known or could cause injuries or death. Whereas class II recalls are for medications that induce temporary negative effects. Lastly, class III recalls handling medications with labeling mistakes.
Faulty medications can result in mild to severe consequences depending on the defect. For example, a minor mislabeling error may lead to a simple lack of information about the product. However, a mislabeling error that lists the wrong dosage or frequency to use the medication could lead to an overdose.
Accidental contamination of a medication product during factory production can be as severe as death. This could be caused by deadly chemicals, cancer-causing chemicals, or chemicals that induce severe allergic reactions. Too much of one ingredient due to a factory error can also lead to severe side effects or overdoses.
A pharmaceutical company can be sued with a product liability claim if it sold a defective medication that caused harm to the public. This harm can be mental or physical and may include damages like pain and suffering, emotional distress, and medical costs. The three types of defects you can sue for are:
Design defects exist in the product itself. They impact every released version of the medication. Common examples might be medications that were not adequately tested in labs before public release. These medications may come with adverse side effects.
Manufacturing defects occur when factory errors are made. They may only impact one or a small subset of released products. One example would be the wrong dosage. Marketing defects involve mislabeling, like when allergy warnings or safe use instructions for the medication are not listed.
Try contacting a New York City product liability lawyer if you have questions about suing.
Going up against a pharmaceutical company alone can feel intimidating. Contact the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm by dialing (212) 566-1000 to speak with a New York product liability lawyer for a free consultation today. Our Westchester legal team is prepared to help you obtain compensation for medical bills, pain and suffering, and lost income. We serve clients throughout New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
If you were injured or significantly harmed by a defective medical device, then you could be eligible for substantial compensation. Depending on the circumstances, you might be able to file a lawsuit against your doctor or the product manufacturer. The hard part is figuring out who to sue and how to sue. Feel free to reach out to a New York City product liability lawyer for answers.
Medical devices are recalled by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) each year due to defects. The harm caused by defective medical devices ranges from mild discomfort to life-threatening injuries. Depending on the type of medical device that becomes defective, a person could be left with permanent harm.
Some of the most common defective medical devices that have been recalled over the past several years are implants. Surgical mesh was recalled after the mesh shrunk over time, resulting in severe pain in patients who had the mesh implanted in them. What happened is surgical mesh manufacturers were able to skip testing of their product with legal loopholes.
Many medical device companies will attempt to do the same thing to speed up their revenue. An implanted lap band designed to reduce eating for purposes of helping patients lose weight ended up injuring patients. The lap band had started causing many patients chronic nausea, vomiting, and little to no results with weight loss.
Metal hip implants were recalled after several implant failures with one patient suffering the effects of metal debris poisoning. Other patients suffered chronic pain and injuries from these hip implants. Some patients struggled with physical activities as a result.
You might be wondering if you should sue your doctor or the medical device manufacturer for your injuries. This can be a difficult question because the answer depends on who was negligent. If the doctor knowingly used a defective medical device, then the doctor could be held liable.
A damaged or defective medical device for one medical device only could be a user error by a doctor or a manufacturing error. Having a manufacturing error would mean you would sue the product manufacturer. This involves filing a product liability lawsuit against the medical device company.
Taking an action like this can be intimidating but might be easier than suing your doctor if you have evidence. You must prove a defect in the design, manufacturing, or marketing of the medical device. Pictures of the damage, defects, and blueprints all serve as evidence.
Try contacting a New York City product liability lawyer if you have questions about what other steps to take.
Figuring out how to sue for a defective medical device can be complicated. Contact the Sullivan and Brill Law Firm by dialing (212) 566-1000 today to speak with a New York medical malpractice lawyer for a free consultation. Our San Juan legal team might be able to help you obtain compensation for medical bills, emotional distress, and lost income. We serve clients throughout New York City, Long Island, Kings, Bronx, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland Counties, and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
After years of ongoing lawsuits alleging Johnson & Johnson hid the associated increased risk to ovarian cancer, the company has finally announced it will discontinue the sale of Talcum Powder products in the U.S and Canada. At the start of this litigation, the goal was only to get the large conglomerate to warn of the increased risk of cancer on the label. The discontinuance of sale and production of talc-based baby powder is a far bigger win for society then anticipated. It is estimated that approximately 10% of the 21,000 plus ovarian cancer diagnosis-es each year are attributable to the genital use of talc powder. This action ensures that there will never be new users and current use of this harmful product will stop.
The talcum powder federal multi-district litigation officially formed in 2016, but there have been single event cases dating back to the 1970s. Johnson & Johnson has aggressively fought the claims defending the purity of the product. Early cases were dismissed or voluntarily discontinued while J&J withheld research and documents indicating that the genital use of talcum powder was associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer. Beginning in 2016, jury trials in Missouri and California began resulting in multi-million dollar verdicts on behalf of victims who developed cancer after using talcum baby powder. Regardless of the trial verdicts, J&J continued to back the product. The company ignored the scientific evidence that showed an increased risk of cancer from using talc-based powder and continued to put the consumer in harm's way to deepen its own pockets. In 2017, evidence emerged that J&J's talcum powder contained small amounts of asbestos, a dangerous mineral that causes mesothelioma. J&J denied the claims. In October of 2019, the FDA tested random containers of J&J talc powder and found unsafe levels of asbestos. Johnson & Johnson was forced to recall the affected lots. Afterward, they continued to steadfastly defend the product.
The announcement discontinuing the sale of the product comes shortly after the MDL judge ruled that the vast majority of the plaintiff's proposed expert witness testimony was valid and could be heard by the jury at trial. As J&J pulls the product, it still claims that there is no increased risk of cancer and it continues to sell the product in other countries. It has rationalized the discontinuance of the product as a commercial decision based upon declining sales. Although baby powder makes up only a small portion of Johnson & Johnson's revenue, the talc story has tarnished its reputation. Regardless of the justifications it gives to the public, the litigation brought to light a blatant disregard for the consumer and a willingness to place profits over the safety of the public. Like many similar litigations in the past, this litigation rid the public of a product that provided no medical benefit, but imposed significant harm.
On May 15, 2020, a proposed plan of settlement was agreed to in the Imerys bankruptcy to compensate women harmed by talcum powder. Imerys has coined itself as the world leader in the production and processing of minerals. The French-based multinational corporation has been named in the talcum powder litigation as the primary supplier for Johnson & Johnson's talcum baby powder. Over the past decade, it has faced liability lawsuits. In 2018, Imerys settled the claims of 22 women for 5.5 million in Missouri prior to trial. The trial proceeded against Johnson & Johnson and resulted in a 4.7 billion dollar verdict. In February 2019, Imerys's North American Subsidies filed for bankruptcy. As part of the bankruptcy resolution, Imerys is proposing, subject to court approval, to auction off the North American operations and put the proceeds into a trust fund for current and future women that develop ovarian cancer from their use of talcum powder. Essentially, it is offering to settle the present and future claims for the fair market value for the North American operations. In return, it will no longer be named as a defendant future liability lawsuits. "Today's announcement marks an important step toward a permanent resolution of historic talc-related liabilities," said Alessandro Dazza, Imerys' Chief Executive Officer. "The Plan, once approved by the relevant Courts, represents a favorable outcome for the Group and the Talc Subsidiaries, and will enable the Group to focus on its current operations and move forward free from these past liabilities." Under the proposed plan, the completion of the sale is expected to occur in the fourth quarter of 2020. The ramifications for the Talcum Powder multidistrict litigation and for Johnson & Johnson remain unclear. Learn more with Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys in New York.
In April of 2019, the 3M Dual Sided Combat Earplugs multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) was created and assigned to Judge M. Casey Rodgers in the Northern District of Florida. The MDL includes lawsuits against 3M alleging that the plaintiff suffered hearing loss and/or tinnitus as a result of the use of the defective 3M dual-sided earplugs that 3M exclusively supplied to the military between 2003 and 2015. After its formation, Judge Rodgers appointed a plaintiff steering committee, which is a group of attorneys designated to organize and lead all of the attorneys throughout the country that are representing veterans in the litigation. This enables the attorneys to collectively work together, share resources and file cases against 3M in a uniform manner.
For the past year, the litigation has been in the discovery phase. Discovery is the process of obtaining the relevant documents and information related to building the case. Hundreds of thousands of documents related to the design, manufacturing, marketing, safety testing and sale of the 3M earplugs have been produced, and sworn testimony has been taken from many witnesses with knowledge of these issues.
The judge has prioritized the production of documents and depositions relating to 3M's government contractor immunity defense. This defense would provide 3M Company with immunity from being sued. Recently, the parties have filed motions for summary judgment on this defense. Summary judgment is a process by which both sides present their evidence and written legal argument on whether a defense should apply in a case. Judge Rodgers will soon rule on whether the government contractor defense applies to this case. If Judge Roger's rules the way 3M is requesting, all of the cases will be dismissed. If the judge rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the defense will be dismissed, and the litigation will continue.
Simultaneous with discovery, the judge has been developing and executing a bellwether selection process. The bellwether selection process is a process by which a small number of individual cases are chosen for trial. Bellwether trials are the initial trials that are used to get a sense of how juries will evaluate the evidence to assist both sides in moving the MDL towards resolution. As of December of 2019, there were 139,693 individuals that had filed claims. Out of those, 1% were randomly selected to be considered for a potential bellwether case. Next, the cases were analyzed to identify characteristics that were most representative of the whole population. The characteristics found in that analysis were then applied to the 1%, which narrowed the pool to 175 individuals. Of those, 20 cases plus five alternate cases were chosen to be the bellwether trials.
The court has laid out a timeline for general discovery to be completed by July of 2020. Thereafter, discovery in the bellwether trials will be completed, and the first bellwether trials are anticipated to begin in the spring of 2021.
If you or a loved one has suffered hearing loss or tinnitus as a result of using the 3M Dual-Sided Earplugs while serving in the United States Military, please contact our office at 212-566-1000 to speak to an attorney that can help you. Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys in New York provide expert legal guidance for your defective earplug claims. Contact us today!
After years of push back from Johnson & Johnson claiming it's baby powder products are completely safe, J&J has recalled over 33,000 bottles. The recall came after the Food and Drug Administration found unsafe levels of asbestos, a carcinogen, in some bottles.
For years, Johnson & Johnson has defended the purity of baby powder products in lawsuits filed by women throughout the country. The women have alleged that J&J's talc baby powder contained asbestos and fibrous talcum which has caused their ovarian and mesothelioma cancer. The individuals perusing the lawsuit are suing on the grounds that Johnson & Johnson did not warn of the increased risk of developing cancer despite being aware of them for decades, and even going as far as to cover up the evidence. Often times, these diagnoses are fatal and despite numerous extremely high jury verdicts in favor of the plaintiffs, J&J has stood by their product. They have appealed every trial decision and there have been no publicly reported settlements, instead they have vigorously fought individuals who have been harmed by their corporate misconduct.
The tests run by the FDA show trace levels of asbestos in the 22-ounce bottles from lot number 22318RB. Johnson & Johnson responded with the recall, saying they are “taking an overabundance of caution” and they also advise any individuals with baby powder from lot number 22318RB to discontinue use immediately. Although Johnson & Johnson has issued this recall after significant pressure from the FDA and public, they continue to defend their product stating that they will “determine the integrity of the tested sample and the validity of the test results”
The FDA spokeswomen, Gloria Sánchez-Contreras, responded to the accusation stating “The F.D.A. stands by the quality of its testing and results.”
Until this point, Johnson & Johnson has never recalled any of its baby powder products. They have remained on the shelves as many individuals unassumingly continue the use of a product that has caused illness in so many others. Baby powder is classified as a cosmetic product. It has no therapeutic or medical benefit whatsoever. Personal care and cosmetic products do not have to be tested by the FDA before they go to market. They are only tested, very occasionally, after public concern has been raised. Previous FDA tests of J&J baby powder from earlier this year and one from ten years ago did not find asbestos. However, there is no safe level of asbestos. Health risk increase with more frequent use but evidence suggests any amount of exposure can be harmful. Many companies that carry baby powder, such as Rite Aid, Walgreens and CVS have taken all baby powder bottles off its shelves. Other carriers like Walmart, have chosen to only remove certain lot number bottles of the 22-ounce powder. Other companies have begun to sell and market cornstarch-based alternatives which are said to have the same feeling as talcum powder without the increased risk for disease.
Although baby powder itself makes up a smaller portion of J&J sales, the threat to the company's reputation is significant. Many consumers are saying enough is enough to the corporation profiting at the expense of their safety. Johnson & Johnson has found themselves in a very unfavorable light as many ongoing litigations have fallen in the plaintiff's favor recently. Time and time again J&J continued corporate misconduct has harmed the consumer. Other litigations Johnson & Johnson are responsible for include; Risperdal, Pelvic Transvaginal Mesh, Pinnacle Acetabular Cup, Xarelto, Marketing for Opioids and many more. Johnson& Johnson has had complete disregard for the wellbeing of the consumer, selling these harmful products where oftentimes, internal documents confirm that they were aware of the risks but ignored it and hid the knowledge from the public. Their goal was and continues to be, only to deepen their pockets, even at the expense of the consumer's health. Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys in New York are here to help if you’ve been affected by the Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder recall.
This month attorneys have filed a request to centralize the Allergan Biocell textured breast implants lawsuits into a multidistrict litigation, also known as an MDL. The Judicial Panel of Multidistrict Litigation, JPML, is a panel of judges who will decided whether to grant this request. An MDL would consolidate the several class action lawsuits that have been filed, along with any individual cases that have been or will be filed since the recall of the breast implants into one litigation before the same judge.
The FDA has reported that women with Allergan textured breast implants have a six fold increase in the risk of developing breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, BIA-ALCL, a cancer associated with the recalled product, over any other manufacturer. The plaintiffs argue that these cases should be consolidated because of the number of women that have been affected and the commonality of their claims. Thousands of women have the recalled implants and hundreds have already began to exhibit symptoms of BIA-ALCL.
Although Allergan has agreed to cover the cost to replace the implant itself, it has not agreed to supplement any of the expenses associated with the replacement, such has the removal surgery or medical monitoring costs. The plaintiffs motion seeks to centralize the pending cases before the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee or the United States District Court for the Central District of California. While the class action lawsuits have initiated the consolidation, individual BIA-ALCL claims will likely also be centralized into the MDL and will preserve their individual identities, utilizing the MDL processes while moving toward trial. Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys in New York are here to help victims seek justice and compensation for injuries related to these recalled implants. Contact us today for expert legal guidance.
Less than a month after textured breast implant manufacturer, Allergan, announced its voluntary recall, two women have filed a class-action lawsuit against the company. On July 24th, Allergan recalled certain textured breast implants and tissue expanders. On July 30th, Allergan announced it will pay to cover the cost of a new implant itself, but will not cover the cost of the surgery to remove and replace them.
The two women who have filed the lawsuit allege that Allegeran was aware of the increased risk of developing BIA-ALCL and dismissed and downplayed the potential risks. Like many others, these two women have spent large sums of money unbeknownst to them that the product could increase their risk of developing cancer. The class action seeks to compel Allergan to cover the costs associated with explanting the recalled product and replacing them with a safe option.
The lawyers at Sullivan & Brill, LLP are currently representing women that have been implanted with these recalled breast implants and are investigating the strength of their legal claims. No one should have to deal with the anxiety and stress of living with a recalled product inside their bodies. A medical device manufacturer has a duty to ensure that the device is reasonably safe for its intended purpose and to warn consumers of the risks of which it is aware. If the medical device is not suited for its intended purpose or if the manufacturer is aware of risks, but does not warn of these risks, the company should be held responsible for the harm the device causes.
Contact Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys for a free consultation on whether you have a viable claim, call 212-566-1000 or complete the form on the right and one of our attorneys will contact you.
If you were one of the 147 million individuals affected by the Equifax data breach you are now eligible to submit a claim. In 2017, Equifax had the largest data breach in history. On July 22, 2019, the Federal Trade Commission stated Equifax had agreed to pay at least $575 million up to $700 million to help compensate victims of hackers who stole personal information from the Equifax servers. The complete release can be found here.
Follow the link to see if you were affected by the breach. If you were Equifax is offering 10 years free creditor monitoring or if you already have credit monitoring you can choose to receive a $125 check. Additionally, Equifax is offering further compensation, up to 20,000, to those who have 1. had to spend time recovering from the breach or 2. If you lost or spent money because of the breach. If you have lost 10 hours or less you can be compensated for 25 per hour lost. Beyond ten hours individuals will have to show the appropriate documentation to prove the loss of time and or money. You can click here for the link to file your claim. The deadline to file is January 22, 2020. Learn how to claim your compensation from the Equifax data breach with Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys.
Since the 1970s, concerns about Johnson & Johnson's talc powder have grown. Talcum powder is a substance made from a mineral consisting of magnesium, silicon, and oxygen. Since the late 1800's Johnson & Johnson has been adding fragrance to it and marketing it to women for genital use to absorb moisture in the skin and reduce friction. Studies have provided increasing evidence that the product causes ovarian cancer in women who use the powder regularly.
However, the company refuses to put warning labels on its product. Instead of warning women, it continues to target women to increase sales. Six juries in Missouri have heard the evidence against Johnson & Johnson and five of them have found that its conduct warranted a significant award of punitive damages. In the latest development, a California jury, awarded a victim of ovarian cancer $417,000,000, over $300,000,000 of which was punitive damages.
Here's what you need to know about the case.
Eva Echeverria, a 62-year-old woman, recently brought a lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson. She claimed its talcum powder was responsible for her ovarian cancer. Echeverria had started using the company's talc powder when she was 11 years old, and her diagnosis of ovarian cancer occurred in 2007.
Johnson & Johnson, the biggest healthcare company in the world, had been aware of concerns about its product for decades. However, it persisted in selling talc powder without warning labels. The repeated use for many years, according to Echeverria, led to the development of her ovarian cancer. She sought to hold the company liable for failing to warn her about the risks associated with its product, and for advertising talc powder to women without disclosing the warnings.
The claim was filed with the California Superior Court of Los Angeles County. The lawsuit is the first talcum powder case to go to trial in California. The trial lasted 3 weeks, and the jury deliberated for two days before making a final judgment.
The selection of the jury began on July 24, 2017, and the opening statements began on July 26. The plaintiff presented arguments for 10 days and presented evidence of five experts. Afterward, the defendant presented counter-arguments for four days, offering testimony of four experts.
Echeverria claimed her use of Johnson & Johnson's talc powder had led to her cancer. The jury found the company, as well as Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., liable for her illness. It ordered the company to pay Echeverria a total of $417 million in compensation, including $347 million in punitive damages.
Johnson & Johnson currently faces 5,500 claims in U.S. courts regarding the use of its talc powder, and a spokesperson said it would appeal the court's decision. The company claimed there was not enough evidence to prove that its talc powder caused Echeverria's ovarian cancer. Nonetheless, the jury found the company liable and determined to hold it responsible for the negative health effects of its product and for its irresponsible marketing practices.
At Sullivan & Brill, LLP, we are dedicated to providing passionate legal assistance. If you have suffered from cancer caused by talc powder, our firm can represent you in court. We can build your case, discuss your options, and work hard to hold Johnson & Johnson, and other companies, responsible for failing to warn consumers about hazardous healthcare products.
Contact our office today to schedule a free consultation.
For more information about Talcum Powder read more here.
Last night, the fifth Missouri jury to consider whether Johnson & Johnson's talc powder caused the Plaintiff's ovarian cancer returned a verdict resoundingly answering that question in the affirmative. It awarded the Plaintiff over $110,000,000, of which, $105,000,000 was punitive damages intending to punish J&J for its deceitful conduct.
The Plaintiff was a resident of West Virginia that had used Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower products for over 40 years. At the time of trial, she was battling Stage III(c) ovarian cancer that had reoccurred and spread to her liver. Her case was chosen by the Defense because it felt it had a strong argument that her ovarian cancer was not caused by her use of talc powder. The entire defense centered on that argument and little effort was made to challenge the Plaintiff's evidence that talc generally causes ovarian cancer.
This verdict followed a jury verdict in favor of J&J in March of 2017 and the dismissal of 200 cases in New Jersey by Judge Johnson, who ruled that the Plaintiff's scientific evidence was not sufficient to support a finding that the genital use of talc causes ovarian cancer. That decision is presently on appeal. The first three jury verdicts in St. Louis came down in favor of the Plaintiffs and also included substantial punitive damages awards.
If you or a loved one developed ovarian cancer after the use of talc powder, it's important to speak with a New York City injury lawyer about your legal options. Contact our experienced and dedicated legal team at Sullivan & Brill, LLP to discuss your case. There are no fees until we secure compensation for our clients. Call 212.566.1000 today!
After losing three straight trials in a St. Louis trial court, Johnson & Johnson filed a request that the cases be moved to another court. Three different St. Louis juries in the past year have returned verdicts in excess of $50 million against Johnson & Johnson for failing to warn consumers that genital use of its talc powder increased the risk of ovarian cancer. Rather than accepting these verdicts and removing its talc based products from the market, Johnson & Johnson continues to maintain that its talc powder is safe.
It explains the verdicts by asserting that the plaintiff's lawyers have tainted the jury pool by spending $10 million advertising the dangers of talc powder in the past year, a disproportionate amount, they claim, being spent in St. Louis. The trial judge that has presided over the three trials, Judge Rex Burlison, denied Johnson & Johnson's request. Johnson & Johnson is appealing that decision to Missouri's intermediate appellate court, the Missouri Court of Appeals. Call Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys to learn more about how these legal battles impact victims and their rights.
In the past two months, there have been three significant developments in the talc powder litigation pending in state and federal court. First, on September 2, 2016, a New Jersey judge dismissed 200 cases pending against Johnson & Johnson in state court. The judge found that the plaintiff's experts did not reliably establish the connection between the perineal use of talc powder and ovarian cancer. You can read the judges decision here. Lawyers on behalf of the plaintiffs are appealing this decision.
The following month, on October 4, 2016, the Judicial Panel on Multi-district Litigation issued a decision consolidating all federal cases pending against Johnson & Johnson and Imerys Talc America, Inc. This decision creates what is commonly known as in MDL, or multidistrict litigation. A multidistrict litigation is a mechanism to consolidate similar lawsuits pending in federal court around the country into one centralized federal court. In this case, the panel chose the District of New Jersey and assigned the case to Judge Wolfson, who is presently presiding over the most advanced case pending against Johnson & Johnson in federal court. The consolidation of cases allows plaintiffs attorneys from across the country to pool their resources, it voids duplicative discovery in multiple jurisdictions and minimizes inconsistent judicial rulings.
Finally, on October 27, 2016, a St. Louis Missouri jury returned a verdict excess of $70 million. This was the third case to go to trial against Johnson & Johnson. The first two cases went to trial in early 2016 and resulted in verdicts of $50 million and $70 million. In all three cases, the jury was convinced that Johnson & Johnson was aware that the perennial use of its talc powder carried an increased risk of causing ovarian cancer, yet it did not warn consumers of this danger. Some of the scientific research and documents produced in the litigation establish that Johnson & Johnson was aware of this risk as early as the 1970s.
These developments clearly indicate that this litigation is picking up steam quickly. They also indicated, however, that the ultimate outcome of the litigation is far from clear. Johnson & Johnson will surely challenge the plaintiffs' expert testimony in the MDL and will ask Judge Wolfson to dismiss all cases pending in federal court on the same grounds that the New Jersey state court cases were dismissed. Call Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys to get expert legal advice and support for your talc powder-related injury claims.
Copyright © Sullivan Brill Personal Injury Attorneys
