United States of America

emergency room malpractice Many states are trying to carve out malpractice caps and different standards of care for emergency room doctors in medical malpractice cases.  

The thinking starts out okay.  Emergency department doctors should be given the benefit of the doubt because things are happening so quickly. But ER doctors are always getting the benefit of the doubt from jurors.  There is statistical evidence of this.  

More importantly, the standard of care already bakes in the fact that things are sometimes happening at the speed of light in the ER.  That is why reasonableness is always based on all the facts and circumstances. Continue reading

The case of Crawford v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc. is one of the most recent examples of an NEC infant formula lawsuit. The plaintiff, Candace Crawford, brought the case on behalf of her deceased infant ZaRiyah Crawford. The Complaint was filed against both Abbott Laboratories, Inc. and Mead Johnson Nutrition in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Baby ZaRiyah was born prematurely (34 weeks gestation age) at North Florida Regional Medical Center on December 2, 2019. ZaRiyah had a birthweight of just 3 pounds and 14 ounces, making rapid weight gain very important to her health. After her birth, ZaRiyah was sent to the NICU.

For the first 3 days at the NICU, Baby ZaRiyah was fed with her mother’s pumped breast milk combined with donor human breast milk. After these first 3 days, however, ZaRiyah was fed with a combination of human breast milk supplemented with Enfamil and Similac cow-milk based formulas.

Procter & Gamble issued a recall of 30 dry conditioners and shampoos because these products may contain benzene, a cancer-causing chemical P&G recalled aerosol spray products will familiar names such as Aussie, Pantene, Herbal Essence, and Waterless. dry shampoo products from Old Spice and Hair Food.

The products were made by Proctor & Gamble and distributed nationwide through online sales like Amazon and through traditional retailers.

Is this a big deal or a little deal?  Is the Benzene risk real?  This post talks about the recall and what it means.

According to a new public warning from the FDA, certain leadless pacemakers made by Medtronic have a defect that may cause them to poke holes in the heart resulting in life-threatening complications.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently posted a new warning regarding a potentially fatal defect in the Medtronic Micra leadless pacemaker devices. The November 17 warning advises doctors about new findings which show that patients with the Medtronic leadless pacemaker implanted have displayed a significantly higher risk of cardiac perforation and potentially deadly complications.

Transvenous vs. Leadless Pacemakers

YEAR / STATE

A lawsuit filed against the Cleveland VA Medical Center has settled for $500,000. The lawsuit was filed after the death of a 59 year old veteran, who was being operated on to repair a hernia. What he was not told was that the VA surgeon had only been licensed for a few months, and that this was the first time that he had ever performed the procedure by himself. Experience matters is such a cliche. In surgery, data shows time and time again that experience is everything. Sadly, a hole was made in the deceased man’s intestines during the surgery, allowing the contents of his bowel to spill out into his abdomen – a hole which the VA hospital failed to recognize for several days. The deceased became very sick after developing an infection, and died several months later. Just a tragic, sensless story.

Hernia Repair Verdicts and Settlements

YEAR / STATE

Last month, Elizabeth Burch (University of Georgia School of Law) and Margaret Williams (Johns Hopkins) published a paper entitled Perceptions of Justice in Multidistrict Litigation. The paper was based on a survey of 217 women who are plaintiffs in various mass tort MDLs. Based on this survey, the authors conclude that the MDL system for handling mass torts in federal court is deeply flawed and fails to deliver justice to victims.

This paper has been making the rounds in legal academic circles and received some attention from national news outlets like Reuters. In my humble opinion as a lawyer directly involved in the MDL mass tort system, this paper is based on an absurdly flawed survey that is not reflective of most MDL plaintiffs.

Summary of the Survey

It’s the peak of the summer beach season, but if you drop by your local retailer to pick up some sunscreen, you will likely see a lot of empty shelf space. Why? Because independent consumer product testing recently discovered that a number of major sunscreen products contained hazardous levels of benzene. Benzene is a notorious and well-known human carcinogen that is very harmful to the human body.

In response to this discovery, manufacturers and major retailers have started pulling sunscreen spray, lotion, and other products from their shelves. Now plaintiffs’ lawyers around the country are evaluating whether contaminated sunscreen lawsuits could be the next big mass tort.

Valisure Finds Dangerous Levels of Benzene in Sunscreen Products

Medical device manufacturer Boston Scientific has issued an emergency safety recall of its Vici Venous stent devices because a defect in the stents causes them to migrate once inside the body.

If you had a Vici Venous stent surgically implanted and it subsequently migrated inside your body, you may be entitled to financial compensation. Our medical device lawyers are currently new Vici Venous stent cases against Boston Scientific.

Last week, in Siebert v. Okun, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that the state’s damages cap in medical malpractice cases was constitutional, concluding the law did not violate the right to a trial by jury. This ruling struck down the Bernalillo County District Court’s 2018 ruling on Siebert v. Okun.

New Mexico’s Medical Malpractice Act

The New Mexico legislature passed the Medical Malpractice Act in 1976. The law caps damages in medical malpractice cases at $600,000. It applies to lost wages and pain and suffering. The cap excludes punitive damages and compensation for medical and rehabilitative treatments.

hernia mesh lawsuitsTo date, thousands of lawsuits related to defective hernia mesh implants have been filed in courts across the country. These suits claim that defective surgical implant devices were the cause of chronic pain, serious infections, obstructed bowels, perforated abdomen lining, and the development of adhesions. Some plaintiffs’ injuries were severe enough that they needed further surgeries to correct these issues.