Showing posts with label New York Vioxx Lawyer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York Vioxx Lawyer. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

James, Hoyer, Newcomer & SmiljanichQui Tam Whistleblower

We believe getting control of the facts is the best game plan for success. Unlike other law firms, we have the unique staff and experience to deliver on this vision. James Hoyers full-time investigators and our media team give our class actions, consumer fraud cases and whistleblower qui tam complaints unparalleled authority. Former prosecutors, former FBI agents and former investigative journalists work to uncover the facts that will make a difference in our clients cases, across the U.S. and around the globe. Individuals, organizations and government agencies have hired James Hoyer for our extraordinary fact-gathering abilities.

Our independent investigations lead to positive and specific outcomes: Justice for victims. Rewards for whistleblowers. Effective aid for government agencies. Its often been said the legal process is a search for the truth. But there can be no truth without facts. At James Hoyer, we know how to find those facts and make them work for you.

Read more about us and our unique experience in our Firm Biography.

James Hoyers lawyers have spent years representing whistleblowers in qui tam cases. We know that the process is complex and that no two cases are the same. We know that the single most important element is how your case is conveyed to the government. And we know that you are investing in us as much as we are investing in your case. That is why we use Genu, an innovative cloud based solution for managing cases and investigations in an online collaborative environment that gets the most out of your knowledge. Genu was developed by Chris Hoyers software company Flat Rock Systems. Click on the video to see how Genu helps us help you.

Click here to find out more about being a whistleblower or click here to contact us about filing a case.

Monday, March 1, 2010

William D. Shapiro - California Class Action Litigation Lawyer

Partner

Download VCard

Orange County Office:
Phone: (949) 720-1288
Fax: (949) 720-1292

19 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach California 92660

Inland Empire Office:
Phone: 909-890-1000
Fax: 909-890-1001

893 East Brier Dr.
San Bernardino California 92408

A partner in Robinson Calcagnie Robinson Shapiro Davis, Inc., William D. Shapiro is a Fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers (ACTL), a Fellow in the International Academy of Trial Lawyers (IATL), a Fellow in the International Society of Barristers (ISOB), as well as being an Advocate in the American Board of Trial Advocates (A.B.O.T.A). Holding the highest possible A-V rating from Martindale Hubbell, for over 25 years, they have listed Mr. Shapiro as One of the Premier Lawyers in America. Having handled hundreds of State and Federal actions involving serious personal injury and wrongful death, William Shapiro is Board Certified by the National Board of Trial Advocacy and is recognized by the State Bar of CA as a Specialist in Civil Trial Advocacy. Listed in the Top 100 Lawyers by the National Trial Lawyers, Mr. Shapiro was profiled one of Americas Best Lawyers by U.S. News & World Report, a Superlawyer by Los Angeles Magazine, is listed as One of the Top Attorneys in the IE, by Inland Empire Magazine and is featured as one of the Top Attorneys in Orange County, by the Orange County Register. In 2010, Mr. Shapiro was a nominee for Consumer Attorney of the Year, by the Consumer Attorneys of California; in 2012 and 2013, he was nominated, Trial Lawyer of the Year by the Consumer Attorneys of the IE; in 2013, he was named Personal Injury, Top Gun, Trial Lawyer of the Year by the Orange County Trial Lawyers Association as well as being nominated Trial Lawyer of the Year, by Cal ABOTA and in 2014, he was named Trial Lawyer of the Year by Consumer Attorneys of the Inland Empire, and was again nominated Trial Lawyer of the Year by Cal ABOTA. In 2011, in recognition of an exemplary career and outstanding community and professional service,Mr. Shapiro was inducted into the Hall of Fame of his law school, Western State University, College of Law where he is anAdjunct Professor in Trial Practice.

Mr. Shapiro currently serves on the Board of Directors of the IATL; on the National Board of ABOTA and was a Trustee for the ABOTA Foundation where he is a Legacy Fellow. He serves on the Board of Governors for the Consumer Attorneys of California; on the Executive Board of the Consumer Attorneys of the Inland Empire; and for over 30 years has been on the Executive Board of the Legal Aid Society of San Bernardino. Mr. Shapiro is Past President of the San Bernardino / Riverside Chapter of ABOTA; Past President of the San Bernardino County Bar Association; Past President of the Consumer Attorneys of California, Inland Chapter; and Past President of the Joseph B. Campbell INN of Court. In addition, Mr. Shapiro is a member of the American Association for Justice, the Orange County and Western Trial Lawyers Association, the San Bernardino, Orange and Riverside County Bar Associations as well as the American, California and Federal Bar Associations.

For his extensive pro bono efforts, in 1999 the San Bernardino County Bar Association presented him with the coveted Matthew Kearney Award, for outstanding contribution to the community through 20 years of dedicated service to Legal Aid. In 2013, the Legal Aid Society of San Bernardino presented him with the Access to Justice Award, with appreciation for selfless dedication and volunteer services to ensure access to justice for all, for which he received Congressional Recognition from United States Congress woman, Gloria Negrete McLeod and the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors. On multiple occasions, Manual Ramirez, Presiding Justice of Californias 4th District Court of Appeal, Division Two, presented Mr. Shapiro the Ralph N.Kleps Award, For Improvement in the Administration of the Courts. He, along with his wife Susan established the William and Susan Shapiro Scholarship which is presented annually at Western State University, College of Law.

Mr. Shapiro received his Bachelor of Science and Teaching Credentials from California State University at Fullerton and his Juris Doctor from Western State University, College of Law. In addition to these academic credentials, Mr. Shapiro remains active in the education of trial practice being on the faculty of Western State University School of Law, as well as being on the faculty of the ABOTA Trial College at Harvard Law School. In addition, he is active as a presenter in Masters in Trial programs nationally as well as teaching and attending Continuing Education of Bar programs, conferences and seminars both nationally and internationally.

For over 35 years, Mr. Shapiros legal career has been dedicated to working on behalf of injured victims of negligent conduct, defective products and dangerous premises having handled cases throughout the United States. Mr. Shapiro has obtained numerous 7 and 8 figure verdicts and settlements on behalf of his clients, most recently a personal injury jury verdict just under $12,000,000 as well as a wrongful death/personal injury judgment in excess of $26,500,000 including $6,000,000 in punitive damages.

In addition to membership in the California Bar, Mr. Shapiro is admitted to practice before the Federal Courts including the Central District Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court.

Mr. Shapiro has contributed to the development of California law having several published appellate Opinions, most recently expanding the going and coming rule in Lobo vs. Tamco (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 297. A former Assistant Professor of Law of Torts, Product Liability and Legal Ethics, Mr. Shapiro was, and continues to be honored to join those featured in many Masters in Trial demonstrations of ABOTA, Trials by the Masters presentations by the University of La Verne Law School, and Masters Roundtables, hosted by CAOC and INNs of Court. Mr. Shapiro has been a speaker and presenter at countless conferences and seminars both nationally and internationally speaking on trial practice and related topics. Mr. Shapiro is married to Sue having 3 sons, Matthew, Brian and Kevin.

Education:

Western State University College of Law, Fullerton, California
Juris Doctor, 1978
Phi Alpha Delta Legal Fraternity, Charter Member

California State University, Fullerton, California
California State Teaching Credential, K-12, 1975

California State University, Fullerton, California
Bachelor of Science, Physical Education, 1974

Chaffey College, Alta Loma, California;
Associate of Arts, General Education 1972

Bar Admissions:

State Bar of California, 1979
U.S. District Court Central District of California, 1979
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Central District of California, 1979
U.S. Tax Court, 1982
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, 1986
U.S. Supreme Court, 1986
U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, 2013

Membership:

American College of Trial Lawyers, Fellow;

International Academy of Trial Lawyers, Fellow
Board of Directors; International Relations and Site Committees;

International Society of Barristers, Fellow;

American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA) rank: Advocate
National Rep, 2010-Current;
National Committees: Civility, Professionalism and Ethics, Awards, Trial College, Chapter Relations;

ABOTA Foundation, Legacy Fellow;
Trustee, 2011-2014;
Co-chair 2010 Leadership conference, New Orleans, LA

National Board of Trial Advocacy, Board Certified, Civil Trial Advocacy, 1991-Current;

State Bar of California,
Specialist in Civil Trial Advocacy;

American Bar Association,

Committees: Trial, Torts and Insurance Section

Consumer Attorneys of California State Board of Governors (2009-Current)
Consumer Attorneys of Inland Empire
Past President (1982-1984) Executive Board (2009-Current)

American Association for Justice, (1979-Current)
San Bernardino County Bar Association
Past President (2008) Fee Dispute Arbitrator, Medical Legal Committee

American Inns of Court, Joseph B. Campbell Chapter
Past President, 1996;Master & Mentor

Riverside County Bar Association (1992-Current)
Orange County Bar Association (2012-Current)
Federal Bar Association (2000BCurrent)
Orange County Trial Lawyers Association (2006-Current)
Western Trial Lawyers Association (2007-Current)
Million and Multi-Million Dollar Verdict Forum
United States Supreme Court Historical Society

Recognition:

Best Lawyers in America, U.S. News & World Report;

SuperLawyer, Los Angeles Times Magazine;

Best Lawyers in Orange County, Orange County Register, Metro;

Best Lawyers in Inland Empire, Inland Empire Magazine;

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Lawyers of America;

RCRSD, named One of Americas 30 Most Influential Law Firms by Trial Lawyer Magazine;

Southern Californias Top Rated Lawyers, American Law Magazine, published in LA Times;

A-V Preeminent, One of the Pre-eminent lawyers in America, Martindale-Hubbell;

Civil Trial Advocacy, Specialization by State Bar of California;

Board Certification in Civil Trial Advocacy; National Board of Trial Advocacy;

Master, Joseph B. Campbell INNs of Court;

Recognition for expertise in Bad Faith, Personal Injury & Product Liability Trials, Consumer Attorneys of California;

California Judicial College, Attorney participant (1986)

Awards:

Trial Lawyer of the Year, 2014 Consumer Attorneys of California, Inland Empire Chapter;

John B. Surr Award, 2013, presented by the San Bernardino County Bar Association:
Awarded to the Member of the Legal Community Who has Best Exemplified the High
Standards of the Profession and the Administration of Justice

Top Gun, Trial Lawyer of the Year, 2013, Orange County Trial Lawyers Association;

Trial Lawyer of the Year, 2013 nomination, Consumer Attorneys of Los Angeles;

Trial Lawyer of the Year, 2013 nomination, CAL American Board of Trial Advocates;

Access to Justice Award, 2012 presented by San Bernardino Legal Aid Society,
Awarded for exceptional service in providing access to the courts for those in need.

Hall of Fame, Western State University College of Law. Induction, 2011;

Trial Lawyer of the Year, 2011 & 2012 nomination, Consumer Attorneys of CA, IE;

Presidents Award, (2011 & 2012) presented by CAOC, IE;

Presidents Award, (2011) presented by ABOTA IE;

Consumer Attorney of the Year, 2010 nomination, Consumer Attorneys of California;

Matthew Kearney Award, (1999) presented by SBCBA & Legal Aid Society,
Awarded to the Member of the Community who has best Exemplified the High Purposes of the
Legal Aid Society
.

Kleps Award (1996 & 2002) presented by Presiding Justice Manual Ramirez of the 4th District Court
of Appeal, for improvement in the administration of the courts.

Leadership:

John Lewis King Scholarship fund, Board of Directors;

Western State University, College of Law, Deans Counsel;

International Academy of Trial Lawyers, Board of Directors, 2011-Current;

ABOTA National Board of Directors, 2009-Current;

ABOTA Foundation, Trustee, 2011-2014;

Consumer Attorneys of California, Board of Governors, 2009-Current;

San Bernardino County Bar Association, President, 2008; Executive Board 2004-2008;

San Bernardino/Riverside Chapter ABOTA, President, 2008, Executive Board 2004-2013;

Joseph B. Campbell, INNs of Court, President, 1996;

Consumer Attorneys of California, Inland Chapter, President, 1984-1986; Ex Board 2009- Current;

Legal Aid Society of San Bernardino, Executive Board of Directors, 1980 Present;

Western State University, College of Law, President, Student Bar Association, 1977-78

Judicial Service:

I. Judge Pro-Tem/Mediator (Hearings, Trial Settlement Conferences, (1988- Current);

  • 4th District Court of Appeal, San Bernardino, California (1988-Current);
  • San Bernardino & Riverside County Superior Courts (1987-Current);
  • Administrative Hearing Officer; County of San Bernardino (1991-Present)

II. Arbitrator/Mediator Appointments (1995-Current);

  • Panel member of, Settlement Now (1985-1993);
  • Panel member of, Judicate-West Click Here (1983-Current)
  • Panel member of the, American Arbitration Association (1983-1990)
  • Private Appointment as Arbitrator/Mediator

Instruction

Adjunct Professor of Law, Trial Practice, Western State University, College of Law;

Trial Practice, Faculty, ABOTA Trial College, Harvard Law School 2012-Present;

Civility Now, ABOTA, Multiple presentations on Civility, 2008-Current;

Masters Panel, Consumer Attorneys of CA, Conferences

Trial of the Masters, La Verne School of Law, 2011

Evidence, Trial Practice; Lecturer, LaVerne School of Law, 2011- Present

Masters in Trial, American Board of Trial Advocates, (Nationally)

Evidence, Trial Practice; Lecturer, California Southern School of Law 2002-2003.

Civil Trial Conference; Riverside County Bar Association, UCLA, Lake Arrowhead, CA (1985-1992)

Dangers of 3 wheel ATC design, Testimony: Consumer Product Safety Commission (1985)

Product Liability, Torts & Ethics, Asst. Prof, Western State Univ, School of Law (1981-85)

Seminars and Programs, SBCBA, RCBA, INN of Court, various Trial Lawyer Assoc, Ins Co, other.

Presentations:

June, 2014Trial Practice Faculty; ABOTA Trial College
Harvard Law School
Cambridge, MS
January, 2014Civility Matters American Association of Law Schools
New York City, New York
November, 2013Trial Advocacy
The Philosphy of the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA);
American INNs of Court, Jospeh B. Campbell Chapter
San Bernardino, CA
November, 2013Mediation; When to Reveal your Surprise Trial Information
Consumer Attorneys of California; Annual Convention
San Francisco, CA
November, 2013Tips on Trial Practice Civil Symposium, San Bernardino County Bar Association
San Bernardino, CA
October, 2013Presentation of Trial Judge of the Year Award;
Honorable Marsha Slough
American Board of Trial Advocates,
Riverside, CA
September, 2013Civility Matters
University of LaVerne Law School
Ontario, CA
June, 2013Deans Counsel
Western State University, College of Law
Fullerton, CA
May, 2013Trial Lawyer of the Year nomination,
Consumer Attorneys of CA. IE.Palm Desert, CA.
May, 2013Technology in Opening Statements and Closing Arguments
Consumer Attorneys of California
Palm Springs, CA
April, 2013Stories from the Bench
Consumer Attorneys of Inland EmpireOntario, CA
March, 2013Trial Lawyer of the Year nomination,
Cal ABOTA, Rancho Valencia Resort
Rancho Santa Fe, CA
January, 2013Civility Matters
American Association of Law Schools
New Orleans, LA
April 19, 2012Civil Trial Practice
Civil Symposium, San Bernardino County Bar Association
San Bernardino, CA
January, 2013Voir Dire
Masters in Trial ABOTA Orange County,
Chapman Law School
Orange, CA
April 27- 29, 2012Discussion with the Masters
Palm Springs Seminar, Consumer Attorneys of California
Palm Springs, CA
June 9, 2012Teachers Law School Faculty
Los Angeles Unified School District
Los Angeles, CA
July 29 August 4Trial Practice Faculty; ABOTA Trial College
Harvard Law SchoolCambridge, MS
November, 2012Products Liability
Annual Convention Consumer Attorneys of California
San Francisco, CA
November, 2012Trial By The Masters California College Of Trial Arts;
Consumer Attorneys of California
San Francisco, CA
June, 2011Bridging the Gap, A welcome to new lawyers
Presentation with Justice Douglas Miller
San Bernardino County Public DefendersSan Bernardino, CA
May, 2011Presentation of Trial Judge of the Year Honorable Douglas E. Weathers
Consumer Attorneys of the Inland EmpirePalm Springs, CA
May, 2011Presenting Damages in a Wrongful Death Case
Consumer Attorneys of California
Palm Springs, CA
March, 2011Trial Judge for Litigators, Trial Practice Statewide Competition
Changes in Californias Going and Coming Rule
Riverside, CA
March, 2011The intake of a Personal Injury case
University of LaVerne Law School
Ontario, CA
March, 2011Admitting documentary evidence Trial Practice presentation
University of LaVerne Law School
Ontario, CA
April, 2011Civility in LitigationAmerican INNs of Court, Joseph B. Campbell INN,
San Bernardino, CA
April, 2011Arguing damages for the death of a minor
Masters in Trial Panel, Consumer Attorneys of CA
Palm Springs, CA
January 2011Leadership Conference Co-Chair, American Board of Trial AdvocatesNew Leaders Conference,New Orleans, LA
December, 2010Opening Statement in a Dangerous Condition Case
Masters in Trial ABOTA Sacramento Chapter
Sacramento, CA
December, 2010Changes in Californias Going and Coming RuleInland Chapter of the Consumer Attorneys of CaliforniaRiverside, CA
November, 2010Arguing Damages in a Wrongful Death Case49th Annual Convention of the Consumer Attorneys of California
San Francisco, CA
June, 2010Cross Examination of Police a OfficerMasters in Trial, ABOTA
Chapman Law School,
Orange, CA
April, 2010Masters in Trial, Round Table Discussion
Palm Springs Seminar, Consumer Attorneys of California
Rancho Mirage, CA
March, 2010A Trial with the Masters Mock Trial: Direct and Cross Examination
University of La Verne Law School
Ontario, CA
November, 2009Constitution Day, ABOTA, Assembly Chambers of the Capital
Sacramento, CA
November, 2009Career Day Highgrove School
Riverside, CA
November, 2008Developing a successful Personal Injury PracticeJoseph B. Campbell INNs of CourtSan Bernardino, CA
November, 2008Judicial Evaluations
Orange County Trial Lawyers Association
Tustin, CA
March, 2008Development of Civil Trial Skills
Civil Symposium; San Bernardino County Bar AssociationSan Bernardino, CA
February, 2008Promoting Chapter Success
Leadership Conference, American Board of Trial AdvocatesDallas, TX
February, 2008Courts into the Schools
4th District Court of Appeal Outreach Program
Chaffey High SchoolOntario, CA
January, 2008Bridging the Gap, an introduction into law.
Riverside Bar AssociationRiverside, CA
1980-PresentParticipation in Legal Aid, Law Week and Speaker for Programs of the San Bernardino County Bar Association California Trial Lawyers Association, Consumer Attorneys of California.

Non-Legal Association Memberships

1974-PresentSCUBA INSTRUCTOR, Professional Association of Scuba Diving Instructors (PADI.) Open Water Instructor, No: OWSI 7245

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Consumer Fraud Reporting and Legal Help

Businesses have a responsibility to American consumers. Consumer fraud lawsuits seek to protect the rights of consumers that fall victim to deceptive marketing practices, false or misleading advertising, or any other type of unfair business practice. Contact a lawyer to report fraud.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Partners in New York, Philadelphia and Newark - Seeger

A founding member of Seeger Weiss LLP, Christopher A. Seeger is one of the nation's most versatile, respected and accomplished attorneys in cases related to drug and toxic injury.

Stephen A. Weiss co-founded Seeger Weiss in 1999 after spending a decade at a nationally prominent corporate defense firm where he represented numerous Fortune 500 companies in environmental and other commercial litigation.

David R. Buchanan focuses his practice on complex individual and class action litigation involving pharmaceutical injury, securities and investment fraud, consumer protection, and pension litigation.

Diogenes (Dion) Kekatos handles complex and class action litigation in both state and federal courts in such areas as ERISA, civil RICO, consumer fraud, environmental, antitrust, and mass tort litigation and he has immeasurable knowledge in class certification motion practice.

Moshe Horn has earned a national reputation as a trial lawyer as well as an insightful trial strategist, and is skilled in the nuances of jury research and selection in both civil and criminal matters.

Laurence Valere Nassif has tried several cases to verdict, and was a member of the Firm's trial team that achieved a $47.5 million verdict for Vioxx-related cardiovascular injury in Humeston v. Merck & Co. in 2007.

Jonathan Shub is recognized as one of the nation's leading consumer rights lawyers, based on his vast experience representing classes of individuals against well-known manufacturers of consumer products.

Michael L. Rosenberg graduated from the University of Delaware (B.A., 1986) and earned his law degree from Rutgers-Camden School of Law (J.D., 1989).

Eric H. Jaso, a former federal prosecutor and official of the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education, draws on his extensive previous experience in government and private practice in representing whistleblowers who report fraud against the government.

Sindhu S. Daniel is a partner in the firms Newark office. She is the lead attorney responsible for managing intake, pre-litigation investigation, case-specific discovery, and settlement administration for all pharmaceutical drug and medical device mass torts handled by the Firm.

Friday, February 26, 2010

Possible Class Action Lawsuit against Vioxx

Vioxx (Rofecoxib) is a Cox-2 inhibitor that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1999 for the treatment of arthritis, osteoarthritis, menstrual pain and for the management of acute pain in adults. Serious concerns have been raised in recent months regarding the use of Vioxx, Vioxx side effects on kidney and cardiovascular health, and the increased risk of heart attack and stroke.

Vioxx is an anti-inflammatory drug, which means it reduces internal inflammation. Vioxx, along with Aspirin, is part of the class of drugs known as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) i.e. it is not a steroid. Vioxx is analgesic, (it eliminates pain) and it is antipyretic (it reduces fevers). Its active ingredient is rofecoxib.

Vioxx withdrawn from the market

Vioxx was pulled off the shelves worldwide on September 30th after a clinical study confirmed concerns that it raises the risk of heart attack and stroke, which can lead to serious and permanent injuries and death. More than 2 million people worldwide are using Vioxx.

Complications begin approximately 18 months after patients start taking Vioxx. Previous clinical trials had linked Vioxx to an increase in blood clots and other cardiovascular problems, including heart attack, chest pain related to heart disease, stroke and sudden death. Vioxx users were more than twice as likely to experience heart problems than patients using the control drug.

The results of clinical studies with one drug in a given class do not necessarily apply to other drugs in the same class. All NSAIDs have some risks, such as gastrointestinal (stomach) bleeding, and liver and kidney toxicity, when taken chronically.

Vioxx advisory from FDA

Doctors are being told to take patients off Vioxx. Please talk to your Doctor as soon as possible about switching to another drug. The FDA has issued a public health advisory, and plans to work closely with Merck to coordinate the withdrawal of Vioxx from the US market.

For further information, and to receive a refund on the Vioxx you have purchased, please go to http://www.vioxx.com.

Vioxx Class Action Inquiry

Bagolie Friedman is also investigating claims caused by Bextra, another Cox-II inhibitor manufactured by Pfizer. Bextra causes the same problems as Vioxx. If you or a loved one have suffered heart attack or stroke, or if a loved one has died while taking Vioxx or Bextra, please contact us today!

Free Case Review!

Click here for a free Vioxx / Bextra case review.

Thursday, February 25, 2010

New Mexico Workers Compensation Lawyer - LegalInfo

New Mexico Workers Compensation Lawyer

If you have been injured on the job, you have a right to file for workers' compensation. On-the-job injuries can occur over time in the form of repetitive use injuries, or they can happen all of a sudden, as a result of an accident such as a slip and fall or a machinery malfunction. Your employer should clearly post on your employee information board the instructions that tell you what procedures to follow to file a claim. You may need to hire a workers' compensation attorney to represent you and fight for appropriate medical care and compensation.

Worker's compensation is a type of insurance that provides restitution for medical care for employees that are injured while in the place of employment, in exchange for the forfeit of the employee's right to sue the employer under the umbrella of negligence. Plans fluctuate according to different state court districts, though they can be made for weekly payments instead of wages as a type of disability insurance, compensation for past and future economic losses, the payment or reimbursement of the medical expenses as a type of health insurance, and benefits payable to the depends of workers who were killed as a type of life insurance.

In the mandated job fields, employers purchase insurance to cover worker's compensation claims, which means you are dealing with an insurance company when you file a claim. The insurance companies' sole purpose is to pay as little as possible, if anything, on your claim. For this reason, it's a good idea to consult with and hire a worker's compensation attorney to fight for the lost wages and medical care you deserve.

There are generally three parts to a workers' compensation claim: lost wage recovery, medical treatment and the determination of any permanent loss of function. If your claim is accepted, this process can go somewhat smoothly. If your claim is denied, as many are, you will need to hire a worker's compensation attorney. Your attorney can assist you through depositions, filings, court hearings and appeals. There are many deadlines to be met and obstacles to be overcome when you are fighting a denial.

The insurance company may fight your claim all the way to the courtroom, in which case you must appear in front of a judge. Often, attorneys for the insurance company will attempt to degrade your credibility and make you look as untrustworthy as possible. It is possible to represent yourself, but without a legal background you can really damage your case.

New Mexico currently caps attorneys' fees for workers compensation cases at $16,500. There is no cap on the amount that the employer or the employer's insurance company can pay their attorney. The best advice for New Mexico workers is to document fully any injury that occurs at work or as a result of working, follow the required reporting guidelines laid out by your employer and contact a worker's compensation lawyer as soon as possible to review your case. Do not give a taped statement to the insurance company until you are fully aware of your rights and the laws governing workers' compensation in New Mexico.

The only exception to the Workers' Compensation Act's mandate of coverage is in § 52-1-6(A), which provides that the Act, "shall not apply to employers of private domestic servants and farm and ranch laborers."

In New Mexico, that serves to be a bigger problem than in most states. There are approximately 11,000 agricultural workers in New Mexico. The majority of these workers are seasonal employee's. Farm and ranch work can be dangerous, especially without the proper safety equipment or training. Health insurance, most farm and ranch workers can not afford. Only 1% of farm workers in New Mexico have private health insurance. When workers are hurt on-the-job, they are often left with few options when seeking medical care. Many do not get the medical treatment that they need because they can not afford. The New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty is fighting to include agricultural workers within the worker's compensation insurance system.

LegalInfo

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

New Jersey Accident Attorney Bagolie Friedman Injury Lawyers

Get the Guidance You Need to Take Back Your Life Today Without Spending a Single Cent

If youre hurt or someone you love is the victim of an auto accident, workplace injury, medical malpractice or any other accident caused by the negligence of another person, you are probably wondering what your legal options are in the state of New Jersey.

Your aggravation only escalates when you add in repair costs, lost wages, medical bills and the assortment of New Jersey accident attorneys  promising to help you. With ever-changing laws and so much misinformation available, its a wonder why more injury victims dont just give up and live with the damages caused by unexpected accidents.

Keep in mind, however, your frustrations are only natural they likely have nothing to do with you. So if youre feeling more confused than empowered, take a deep breath and relax. Were about to take aim at your confusion and give you the guidance you need to get your life back on track.

Is Your New Jersey Accident Attorney Telling You
These Truths About Your Situation?

With so many New Jersey accident attorneys available for representation after an accident, its difficult to determine which one is the best fit for your situation. So we wont waste your time telling you how we protect your legal rights you already know thats our responsibility.

Youve also seen enough lofty promises used by some accident attorneys in New Jersey to secure you as a client. Instead, well just give you the truth: The best way we can help is by first listening to you. That way we get a complete understanding of the details surrounding your situation.

And dont worry, talking to us is easy. When you call with a legal problem, you wont be charged for our time we wont confuse you with fast-talking legal jargon and you wont feel pressure to make an appointment. You can also send us an e-mail, or well even come to you.

Free Case Evaluation

What Sets Bagolie Friedmans Accident Attorneys Apart from Other Injury Law Firms in New Jersey?

Whether you need professional representation or advice on questions related to medical malpractice, workers compensation claims,  nursing home abuse, or car crashes, you always get the experience of personal injury attorneys who have successfully represented victims against

  • Insurance companies,
  • Pharmaceutical companies,
  • Medical device manufacturers,
  • Municipalities,
  • Consumer product manufacturers,
  • Automobile makers,
  • Asbestos manufacturers,
  • Discriminating employers,
  • Landlords,
  • Construction contractors,
  • Hospitals,
  • Nursing homes,
  • Airlines, and
  • Other negligent organizations.

You also get a proven track record and an unmatched commitment to clients that begins with your FREE no-obligation case evaluation to assess your situation. Youll receive an easy-to-understand explanation of your legal options and a detailed description of all legal fees, which in most cases are not charged unless our accident attorneys win your case.

Free Case Evaluation
When we move forward with your case, youll get a comprehensive investigation into all evidence and a plan of action backed by two decades of experience. Youll also receive regular updates on your case.

Get started today by calling 1-866-333-3LAW (1-866-333-3529). Were available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And remember, we dont charge for our time, so you can always get the answers you need.

Sincerely,

Ricky Bagolie & Alan T. Friedman

P.S. When you call, be sure to ask about cases weve won that were similar to yours whether it was an auto accident, workplace injury, medical malpractice or any other situation caused by someone elses negligence.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Vioxx Class Action

The deadline to submit claim packages for the Canadian Vioxx Class Action expired on August 19, 2013.

We are now in the process of evaluating the claim packages received to determine if the packages are complete.

If your claim package is determined to be incomplete you will receive a Deficiency Notice.  The Deficiency Notice will identify all of the deficiencies in your claim package.  You will be afforded 30 days from the date of the Notice to cure all of the deficiencies using the Supplemental Claim Form.  If you fail to cure all of the deficiencies noted in your Deficiency Notice within the 30 day deadline, your claim will be extinguished.

The Claims Administrator will not be issuing postcards to confirm receipt of Supplemental Claim Packages.  If you require confirmation of delivery for your Supplemental Claim Package please contact the Claims Administrator at vioxx@nptricepoint.com.  You will receive a response within 1 week.

Should you wish to send your documents to the Claims Administrator via courier please use our physical address:

NPT RicePoint Class Action Services

Vioxx Class Action

300-633 Colborne St.

London, ON  N6B 2V3

Communication from the Claims Administrator will be sent to your legal counsel, if applicable.  If you are not represented by a lawyer, but have a legal representative, communication will be sent directly to your legal representative.  If you have not identified a lawyer or a legal representative in your Primary/Derivative Claimant Claim Form, all communication will be sent directly to the claimant.

 

Monday, February 22, 2010

Lawsuit Loans Add New Risk for the Injured

Larry Long, debilitated by a stroke while using the pain medicine Vioxx, was facing eviction from his Georgia home in 2008. He could not wait for the impending settlement of a class-action lawsuit against the drugs maker, so he borrowed $9,150 from Oasis Legal Finance, pledging to repay the Illinois company from his winnings.

By the time Mr. Long received an initial settlement payment of $27,000, just 18 months later, he owed Oasis almost the entire sum: $23,588.

Ernesto Kho had pressing needs of his own. Medical bills had piled up after he was injured in a 2004 car accident. So he borrowed $10,500 from Cambridge Management Group, another company that lends money to plaintiffs in personal-injury lawsuits. Two years later, Mr. Kho, a New Jersey resident, got a $75,000 settlement and a bill from Cambridge for $35,939.

The business of lending to plaintiffs arose over the last decade, part of a trend in which banks, hedge funds and private investors are putting money into other peoples lawsuits. But the industry, which now lends plaintiffs more than $100 million a year, remains unregulated in most states, free to ignore laws that protect people who borrow from most other kinds of lenders.

Unrestrained by laws that cap interest rates, the rates charged by lawsuit lenders often exceed 100 percent a year, according to a review by The New York Times and the Center for Public Integrity. Furthermore, companies are not required to provide clear and complete pricing information and the details they do give are often misleading.

A growing number of lawyers, judges and regulators say that the regulatory vacuum is allowing lawsuit lenders to siphon away too much of the money won by plaintiffs.

It takes advantage of the meek, the weak and the ignorant, said Robert J. Genis, a personal-injury lawyer in the Bronx who said that he had warned clients against borrowing. It is legal loan-sharking.

Colorado filed suit in December against Oasis and LawCash, two of the largest companies, charging them with violating the states lending laws.

It looks like a loan and smells like a loan and we believe that these are, in fact, high-cost loans, John W. Suthers, the states attorney general, said in a recent interview. I can see a legitimate role for it, but that doesnt mean that they shouldnt be subject to regulation.

The companies, however, say that they are not lenders because plaintiffs are not required to repay the money if they lose their cases. The industry refers to the transactions as investments, advances, financing or funding. The argument has persuaded regulators in many states, including New York, that lawsuit lenders are not subject to existing lending laws. Oasis and LawCash have now filed suit against Colorado, asking the court to prevent the state from using lending laws to regulate the industry.

Companies also say that they must charge high prices because betting on lawsuits is very risky. Borrowers can lose, or win less than expected, or cases can simply drag on, delaying repayment until the profit is drained from the investment.

To fortify its position, the industry has started volunteering to be regulated but on its own terms. The companies, and lawyers who support the industry, have lobbied state legislatures to establish rules like licensing and disclosure requirements, but also to make clear that some rules, like price caps, do not apply.

Maine and Ohio passed the first such laws in 2008, followed by Nebraska last year. Sympathetic legislators introduced bills in six other states last year; the measures passed the state Senates in New York and Illinois.

Harvey Hirschfeld, a founder of LawCash who keeps binders filled with thank-you notes from borrowers on a shelf in his Brooklyn office, said lawmakers had responded to plaintiffs needs.

Sometimes people are in the wrong place at the wrong time, they get in an accident, theyre out of work, they dont have cash sitting in the bank, their friends cant help, and theyre faced with a terrible situation, said Mr. Hirschfeld, who also is chairman of the industrys trade group. Its not for everyone, but its there when you need it.

High Rates, Low Risk

There was little risk in lending money to Larry Long. The maker of Vioxx, Merck, had already agreed to settle the Vioxx class action. The projected payouts were relatively easy to calculate: Mr. Longs lawyer estimated that he would eventually get a total of about $80,000.

Oasis still imposed its standard pricing: 50 percent of the loan amount if repayment was made within six months, with regular increases thereafter.

Mr. Long and his wife resented the high cost, but they had run through their savings. Mr. Long was legally blind and needed regular dialysis. His wife, Deborah, had left work to care for him. They borrowed $3,000 in February 2008, $3,000 in March and $3,150 in July. We were having a crisis, and they knew we were having a crisis, Mrs. Long said. They take advantage of people that are in need.

Oasis made loans on similar terms to 43 Vioxx plaintiffs, totaling about $224,000.

Orran L. Brown, the Virginia lawyer appointed to disburse the settlement, described the cost of the loans as unconscionable.

There was very little risk of nonrecovery, but they were charging full freight, he said.

But Gary Chodes, the companys chief, said the performance of the Vioxx loans showed why Oasis must charge high rates. Eight of the 43 borrowers failed to qualify for the settlement, he said, and an additional seven did not win enough to pay the full amount that they owed.

The company waived its claim against the Longs after the couple complained to the federal judge overseeing the Vioxx case. Mr. Chodes said that Oasis acted out of compassion for the couples personal difficulties, but that the company had done nothing wrong. The Longs asked for money and Oasis clearly explained its terms, Mr. Chodes said. He provided copies of documents on which Mr. Long had recorded his thanks for the loans.

We were there when he needed help with his house note and his car note and his medical bills. And he was plenty grateful at the time, Mr. Chodes said.

Lenders more often invest in cases even earlier in the process, before a settlement is on the table.

James N. Giordano, chief executive of Cambridge Management Group, a New Jersey lender, compared the deals to venture capital. Its as if your buddy came up to you and said, Im starting a business, I need $25,000 and, by the way, you may never get your money back,  he said.

Lawsuit lenders, however, are much better than venture firms at picking winners. Lenders pay lawyers to screen cases, looking for slam-dunks like Vioxx. Three of the largest companies each estimated that they rejected about 70 percent of applications. Oasis said it had approved about 80,000 of 250,000 applications in recent years. To further limit losses, companies say they generally lend no more than 10 or 20 percent of the amount they expect the borrower to win.

Companies say they still lose money in a significant share of cases, from 5 to 20 percent, although there is no way to verify those numbers.

But courts in several states including Michigan, New York and North Carolina have ruled in recent years that individual borrowers did not need to repay lawsuit loans, finding that the apparent risks did not justify the outsize prices. The rulings have encouraged lenders to avoid judicial scrutiny. Dimitri Mishiev, who runs Alliance Claim Funding, another Brooklyn lender, said that while his prices were fair, he tried to invest only in cases he expected to be settled before trial.

Everything that might have to go before a judge, you stay away because you dont want the judge to be in the position of saying, I dont want that level of payment. I think its unreasonable,  Mr. Mishiev said. We dont want judges to shine a light on us.

Truth in Lending

Lawsuit lenders do not advertise prices; they advertise convenience. They send letters to people who file suits, and run ads on daytime and late-night television, emphasizing that money is available quickly and easily.

When David Kert, a personal-injury lawyer, took a job in 2007 screening applicants for the lender Whitehaven Plaintiff Funding in New York City, he said he was told not to mention the cost of the loans unless asked directly.

Mr. Kert spent the next year answering 50 to 60 calls each workday from plaintiffs and their lawyers. He said many of those people ended up taking loans from Whitehaven without ever asking the price as high as 99 percent of the loan amount in the first year.

Im sorry I spent any time there, Mr. Kert said recently.

Whitehaven did not return calls for comment, but other industry executives are quick to note that borrowers are consenting adults. Furthermore, under the terms of a 2005 agreement between the largest lenders and the New York attorney generals office, borrowers must be given a table showing what they will owe at six-month intervals. The agreement also requires lenders to obtain the signed consent of the borrowers lawyer.

I dont know any other industry that is as clear as that. Everything is written on the contract and the attorney is reviewing it for you, Mr. Hirschfeld said.

But these safeguards are significantly less strict than the requirements that state and federal laws impose on other consumer lenders. They do not dictate how interest rates should be calculated, for example, making it difficult for borrowers to compare prices.

Moreover, outside of New York and the few states that regulate the industry, lenders are not required to follow those procedures and in several cases examined by The Times and the Center for Public Integrity, they did not do so.

Carolyn Williams borrowed $5,000 in 2007 from USClaims, a Delaware lender, while pursuing a disability lawsuit against her former employer, an Alabama nursing home. Three years later, her case is unresolved. Her debt stands at $18,976.

Ms. Williams, who left her nursing job after experiencing a debilitating asthma attack, contacted USClaims after seeing an ad on late-night television. She was struggling to pay her bills and her case, which argues that the asthma had been caused by exposure to floor cleaning chemicals, was moving slowly. Two days after she called USClaims, the company wired $5,000 to her bank account.

Ms. Williams said she did not ask about the cost of the loan and she was not told. Her lawyer, Timothy Hughes, said he was not contacted by USClaims until after the loan was made. The contract Ms. Williams signed quoted an annual interest rate of 39 percent, compounded monthly. In fact, she was charged interest and fees equaling 76 percent of the loan amount in the first year.

I was definitely misled, Ms. Williams said recently. I never expected that high of a rate.

Darryl Levine, the president of Delaware-based USClaims, said Ms. Williamss complaint was groundless because the contract clearly showed how much she would owe.

In over 14 years in this business, I have never had any complaint about the rate-of-return disclosure, Mr. Levine said.

Seeking State Approval

The industrys pursuit of regulation on its own terms began in Maine in 2007.

Sharon Anglin Treat, a lawyer and state legislator, had proposed a bill making clear that lawsuit lenders were subject to state consumer protection laws. She said she could not understand why the industry should be allowed to charge higher rates than other lenders.

Oasis, LawCash and other companies persuaded other legislators to reverse the intent of the bill, instead making clear that the rules did not apply to lawsuit loans. Both Ms. Treat and Mr. Hirschfeld said the debate turned on the testimony of three Maine residents who had benefited from the loans. These are powerful companies that have lots of money, and they brought in people with these sob stories, Ms. Treat said.

Supporters of lawsuit lending next turned its attention to Ohio, where the states Supreme Court had declared lawsuit lending illegal in 2003. This time, Mr. Hirschfeld said that the industry asked lawyers throughout the state for examples of clients who had suffered because they were not able to borrow money. Both chambers of the legislature voted unanimously in 2008 to legalize the loans.

Last year, Nebraska followed suit, passing a bill sponsored by State Senator Steve Lathrop, a trial lawyer.

My own personal view of these groups is that I discourage clients from using them, Mr. Lathrop said during the final debate. I tell them, go borrow from anybody you can before you have to use them.

But, he concluded, the reality is, sometimes theres no other place to turn.

This project was initiated by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit investigative journalism organization in Washington. It is based on reporting by Ben Hallman and Caitlin Ginley of the center and Binyamin Appelbaum of The Times, and was written by Mr. Appelbaum.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

New York No-Fault Insurance Law 2012 APIP and OBEL

New York State law requires that every NY issued auto insurance policy provide a minimum of No-Fault insurance coverage of $50,000 for basic economic loss. This PIP (personal injury protection) coverage protects every person in a car and it includes payment for these types of accident-caused expenses: all necessary medical expenses, lost wages up to $2,000 per month, all other reasonable and necessary expenses, and a $2,000 death benefit.

As a No-Fault benefit, every vehicle occupant receives these benefits without any proof of a drivers fault or negligence in causing the crash. This New York no-fault insurance coverage is important for our clients who are hurt in a vehicle accident; we actively work with our clients to make sure that the insurance company pays for all medical care and treatment that they and their doctors feel is medically needed.

New York law also provides a way to obtain more no-fault coverage than the NY State minimum: an option to buy additional coverage through either APIP (additional PIP) or OBEL (optional basic economic loss). Both of these options provide extra protection beyond the mandatory $50,000 coverage. You must pay an additional premium for both APIP and OBEL coverage.

APIP Coverage

APIP coverage provides a higher overall policy limit and the right to receive more than the $2,000 in lost wages benefits. It is typically offered in increments of $50,000.  There are different types of APIP coverage and one can purchase APIP protection for lost wages, medical expenses or additional expenses.

OBEL Coverage

OBEL coverage also provides additional coverage of up to $25,000 beyond the $50,000 in basic economic loss coverage (total of $75,000). This coverage is triggered after the mandatory PIP coverage of $50,000 is exhausted. With OBEL coverage, the injured person decides who will receive the money. For instance, you may have the OBEL coverage reimburse your physical therapist or be paid to you for your lost wages. This coverage only becomes available after you have exhausted the initial $50,000 of basic economic loss coverage.

Benefits of APIP and OBEL Coverage

Both APIP and OBEL coverage are valuable to consider when you buy or renew your auto insurance in New York because with the levels of current wages and medical costs, the NY minimum can leave an insured person or their family member with many unpaid medical bills and lost wages that can affect your ability to support yourself and your family.

An auto accident can easily leave an injured victim with financial hardship and the inability to pay their normal bills for food and their home or apartment. For example, wage benefits under the minimum no-fault policy only provide 80% of your lost wages with a maximum of $2000 per month (eg. only up to $24,000 for an entire year). Additional APIP coverage will allow you to increase that monthly amount so more of your monthly salary is covered. For example: if you earn $4000 per month, you can purchase an APIP policy that will increase your lost wage earnings to $4000 per month. If you are injured in a motor vehicle accident and are unable to work and earn your living to support yourself and your family, APIP will cover 80% of $4000; the underlying no-fault policy will pay the first $2000 and APIP would cover the remaining amount.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Recalls: Your American Rights - RYAR.org Bextra Vioxx

As an American citizen, you have certain rights and privileges in dealing with the makers of potentially defective and /or deadly drugs and other consumer products; whether they are recalled by choice or as a matter of law. This site is dedicated to providing you with the information that you need to know in order to understand your rights and take full advantage of the American justice system.

Have You Been Harmed By One Of The Drugs Or Other Medical Products Covered On This Site?

If so, you may have a possible legal case against the manufacturer of the potentially dangerous drug or medical product. Simply fill out the short form below and an experienced legal expert will contact you as soon as possible!

Defibrillator Recall. One of the leading retailers of cardiac defibrillators in the United States is recalling over 50,000 defibrillators due to possible defects. This defibrillator recall is being on based on the fact that it has been found that some of these devices are beginning to short circuit therefore causing problems in the wiring and as a result, not working properly. Click on any of the links below for more information on the possible side effects and recall of this potentially dangerous or deadly medical device:

Bextra Recall. Another popular Cox-2 Inhibitor known as Bextra came into the spotlight today as news of a recall was announced. Bextra, produced by the Pfizer corporation, is the same type of drug as Vioxx which has been found to cause blood clots, heart attacks, heart disease, stroke, and other serious and life threatening illnesses. Click on any of the links below for more information on the possible side effects and recall of the drug Bextra.

Vioxx Recall. On September 30th, 2004 Merck, the manufacturer of the drug Vioxx, began the process of a voluntary Vioxx recall on this extremely profitable drug. Raking up over 2.5 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR in sales for Merck, over 105 MILLION people have taken Vioxx since it hit the market several years ago. Vioxx has been shown to cause blood clots, heart disease, heart attacks, stroke, and a number of other potentially life threatening illnesses. Click below for more information on all aspects of preserving your American rights during this Vioxx recall.

Other Potentially Dangerous Drugs:

Friday, February 19, 2010

New Jersey Business Center Resources, Articles, Blogs

Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

© 2014 New Jersey On-Line LLC. All rights reserved (About Us).
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of New Jersey On-Line LLC.

Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site. Contact interactivity management.

Ad Choices

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Vioxx Lawsuit - Vioxx Side Effects - LawInfo

Vioxx litigation is under fierce scrutiny from pharmaceutical companies, lawyers, consumers and corporate officials trying to predict the outlook for Merck, the maker of Vioxx. The company vowed to fight more than 4,200 state and federal Vioxx-related lawsuits pending across the country. If you have a potential case, contact one of our Vioxx attorneys and preserve your legal rights and potential settlement.

Given the recent verdict, lawyers and analysts expect a flood of new lawsuits against Merck. The company has set aside $675 million to fight them, but analysts say Merck may need to reserve funds to pay for verdicts. If you have a history with Vioxx and have experienced side-effects from this drug, contact a Vioxx attorney.

Merck plans to appeal the $253.4 verdict jurors awarded on August 19 to Robert Ernst's widow, Carol. The award reflects a combination of her husband's lost pay as a Wal-Mart produce manager, their mental anguish, her loss of companionship and punitive damages.

To learn more about the side effects of Vioxx and the recall, contact one of our lawyers. The arthritis drug Vioxx was removed from shelves on September 30, 2004 by its manufacturer, Merck, in response to a three-year study identifying health risks associated with taking the drug. Vioxx has been linked to increased risk of heart attack, stroke, sudden cardiac death and more. Side effects of Vioxx can include diarrhea, nausea and heartburn, but many patients may not associate these effects with the use of Vioxx.

Vioxx information will provide you with the latest information about the drug and its side-effects as well as clinical studies and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) resources:

Lawyers Taking Your Vioxx Case

On this site, you will find law firms staffed with qualified and experienced attorneys who specialize in cases such as these. They are Lead Counsel members, which means, among other things, that they have been practicing for several years, dedicate themselves to this type of issue, and have never had any disciplinary action taken against them by their local bar association.

Plaintiffs in cases such as these typically seek to recover damages for medical costs, lost wages and pain and suffering. Click through on any of the firms listed here, and feel free to ask questions in regard to your situation. The vioxx lawyers displayed here will be able to handle your inquiry quickly and responsibly, and if they feel that further discussion and investigation is warranted, they will take you through the process.

If you have suffered as a result of taking the drug Vioxx, now is the time to assert your rights. Contact one of our experienced Vioxx attorneys to file your claim.

For assistance with your Vioxx case, click here to find Vioxx Lawyers near you or find Lawyers in a different state.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Personal injury Law Firm in Philadelphia NYC

Fighting hard to obtain every dollar you deserve

THE YANKOWITZ LAW FIRM is a well-respected and nationally recognized plaintiffs personal injury law firm.  We have offices in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, as well as associated and affiliated offices throughout the United States.  Our firm represents seriously injured victims of construction accidents, medical malpractice, nursing home neglect and abuse, motor vehicle accidents, unsafe drugs and products, unsafe premises, environmental and toxic torts, and workplace accidents.

If you or somebody you love has been seriously injured in an accident or through medical malpractice, by an unsafe drug or neglect or abuse, you need a firm that wont back down and will fight hard for every dollar you deserve. The Yankowitz Law Firm is ready to help you recover the compensation that you need and deserve. Our team of experienced litigation and trial attorneys, paralegals, investigators, and experts zealously fight for our clients interests. We do not back down from billion dollar corporations, insurance companies or their representatives. Over the course of 30 years, Attorney Jack Yankowitz has successfully led his legal team, recovering hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements and verdicts for his clients and their families. Attorney Jack Yankowitz is a long-time member of the invitation only Million Dollar Advocates Forum, he has been profiled in Whos Who in American Law and Whos Who in America and he has been selected as one of New York States TOP 100 TRIAL LAWYERS by the National Trial Lawyers Association.

We understand that serious personal injury lawsuits can involve difficult or tragic circumstances for our clients.  During such times, we work hard to relieve any anxiety you might have about the legal process so that you can focus on healing and moving forward with your life. Throughout your case, we perform our legal duties with the highest degree of professionalism and personal care.  We always make ourselves available for questions and concerns and keep our clients promptly apprised of all developments.  Attorney Jack Yankowitz and his legal team will guide you through the legal process with sensitivity and understanding so that you are comfortable and informed.

A personal approach to every client

Attorney Jack Yankowitz and The Yankowitz Law Firm legal team have earned the trust of thousands of clients whom we have guided, professionally and compassionately, through the litigation process. We truly care about the needs of our clients, protecting their legal rights and obtaining the justice and compensation they deserve.  Insight into our commitment and dedication to each and every client is evidenced by our reputation as a firm that wont back down and will fight hard for every dollar you deserve.

Every case is very important to the individual client as well as to our firm. We encourage our clients to call our toll free number 1-800-LAW-3333 whenever they have a question or concern.  Attorney Jack Yankowitz and his legal team are available to alleviate concerns and to answer questions when they arise.

We have the experience and resources to make certain your case is handled in the professional manner to which you are entitled and deserve.   Feel free to call our toll-free number 1-800-LAW-3333and speak to a member of our legal team.  If you would like, ask to speak with Attorney Jack Yankowitz directly.  Of course, you are welcome to visit one of our offices.  However, we understand the difficulties that your injuries and accident have caused you and your family.  You have enough on your mind and do not need to be concerned about coming to one of our offices to obtain our legal representation. For your convenience, a member of our legal team will gladly visit with you in your home or at the hospital or nursing home.

FREE CALL.  FREE CONSULTATION.

The call and advice are free. When you retain THE YANKOWITZ LAW FIRM, we represent you on a contingency basis (meaning our fee is earned and paid only from the money we recover on your behalf at the conclusion of your case).

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Seeger Weiss LLP - Complex Litigation, Trial Lawyers

Located in New YorkNew Jersey, and Pennsylvania, Seeger Weiss is perennially named by thenational legal media as one of the nation's top plaintiff's law firms. The firm has earned its reputation in a variety of legal disciplines, includingsecurities and investment fraud, qui tam (whistleblower), antitrust, commercialdisputes, pharmaceutical injury, personal injury, medical malpractice, environmentaland asbestos exposure, consumer class actions, product defect, as well asERISA, and wage and hour cases.

Laudedby the legal community and major publications, Seeger Weiss has gained therespect of the plaintiffs and defense bar alike for its willingness to alwaystake on the tough cases and jump right into the heart of everything wheneveryone else is afraid, according to Legal 500. The National Law Journal observes that Seeger Weissattorneys consistently rank among the countrys top plaintiffs lawyers. Itsno surprise, then, that the NLJ has named Seeger Weiss to itsprestigious Plaintiffs Hot List. The firms lawyers have received individualpraise on national and regional stages, and are consistently selected forinclusion in Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers (New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania), and Law Dragon 500 and 3000.

Serving thousands of clients nationwide, Seeger Weiss championsplaintiffs with the vision and tenacity that the legal community has come toexpect.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Houston Law Firm, New York Law Firm, Los Angeles Law Firm

In addition to representing individuals, The Lanier Law Firm has significant experience working on behalf of businesses suing for breach of contract, patent infringement, employment disputes, antitrust, fraud, and other causes of action.

Our Commercial Litigation Practice Group helps businesses in legal actions against larger competitors who use unfair and illegal business practices to gain a competitive edge. Our aggressive approach to business litigation has resulted in several noteworthy and often highly confidential recoveries for our clients.

Not only do our business clients benefit from our courtroom expertise, but many of our opponents have gone on to hire us to represent them in their own disputes. Clearly, they know that it's better to have The Lanier Law Firm with them than against them.

Learn More >

Sunday, February 14, 2010

New York Mesothelioma Lawyers Belluck & Fox LLP

New York Mesothelioma Lawyers With A National Reputation

NYC Skyline

MMDAF_logoPeople with mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases deserve compensation. The attorneys at Belluck & Fox know how to obtain justice for you and your family.

The truth is that the asbestos companies knowingly exposed workers and their families to deadly asbestos fibers. Asbestos is the only known cause of mesothelioma and one of the main causes of lung cancer.  Our new york mesothelioma lawyers stand up for asbestos victims. We have secured more than $600 million for our clients and their families including two recent mesothelioma verdicts of $32 million and $19.5 million.

Do not wait the time for action is now.  If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, put the New York lawyers at Belluck & Fox, LLP to work for you and your family.   Call (877) 637-6843 or fill out our online contact form for a free consultation.

Experienced Legal Help On Mesothelioma and Asbestos Claims

A diagnosis of mesothelioma is overwhelming you can rest assured your legal claim is in experienced hands. Our experienced asbestos cancer lawyers have achieved nationwide recognition for helping families like yours. Let us focus on your legal case while you concentrate on your health.

  • Belluck & Fox is listed as one of Americas best law firms by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers magazine.
  • Partner Joseph W. Belluck has attained an AV rating from Martindale-Hubbell  (the highest ethical rating for lawyers) and has been named one of the Best Lawyers in American and a Super Lawyer.
  • Partner Jordan Fox is one of the nations top mesothelioma lawyers in the United States and has had two mesothelioma verdicts recognized as the National Law Journals Largest Verdict of the Year.

Belluck & Fox provides personalized and professional legal representation for asbestos victims across the United States including New York City and New York State. Our lawyers have successfully handled hundreds of mesothelioma cases. That means we have the experience and know-how to get you and your family compensation.  We have a large database of the asbestos products and companies that may have caused your disease. Let us put that experience to work for you.


Belluck & Fox Files Mesothelioma Cases Across New York State

Belluck & Fox prosecutes mesothelioma cases in New York City and in every county in New York State no other law firm covers as much ground as we do. During the past five years, Belluck & Fox has filed cases in Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, Utica, Watertown, Ticonderoga, Seneca Falls, Niagara Falls, Troy, Corning, Elmira, Binghamton, Glens Falls, Poughkeepsie, Kingston, Waterloo, Rome, Ithaca, Jamestown, Olean, Plattsburgh, Massena, Schenectady, and Oswego. We provide individual and professional legal representation, and can help you and your family. For more information, click here.

Saturday, February 13, 2010

Vioxx Side Effects Lawsuits Side Effects: Heart Attack


CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD INFO PACKAGE

Vioxx | Lawsuits, Lawyers | Side Effects: Heart Attack, Stroke, Blood Clots, Heart Problems

Parker Waichman LLP Representing Vioxx Heart Attack & Stroke Victims

Nationwide Since 2001. Merck & Co. removed its blockbuster arthritis drug Vioxx (Generic: Rofecoxib) from the market worldwide because new data from a clinical trial found an increased risk of heart attack and stroke. Merck decided to remove the drug from the market on September 30, 2004, after data from the trial showed an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, blood clots and other cardiovascular complications. Parker & Waichman has been the choice for Vioxx victims in need of a pharmaceutical liability lawyer since 2001.

Vioxx Recall Timeline

Lancet Says Vioxx Should Have Been Recalled in 2000

Documents May Show Merck Knew About Vioxx Side Effects

The data comes from a three-year study aimed at showing that Vioxx at a 25 milligram dose prevents recurrence of polyps in the colon and rectum. The trial was stopped after Merck discovered the higher heart risk compared to patients taking dummy pills.

Before the withdrawal of Vioxx, the FDA announced that patients taking Vioxx have a 50 percent greater chance of heart attacks and sudden cardiac death. he study, presented at an epidemiologists conference, also found patients taking the highest recommended daily dosage of Vioxx had three times the risk of heart attack and sudden cardiac death as those not taking standard painkillers.

The popular and heavily advertised arthritis drugs Vioxx and Celebrex have been linked by researchers to an increase in the risk of blood clots, heart attacks and strokes.The study from the Cleveland Clinic appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association and was based on an analysis of previous clinical trials. Celebrex and Vioxx are projected to produce U.S. sales greater than $6 billion this year.

In a study of more than 8,000 patients that compared the COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib Vioxx) with the traditional NSAID naproxen, the risk of cardiovascular problems, including heart attack,chest pain related to heart disease, stroke, sudden death and blood clots, was more than two times higher in the rofecoxib group than in the naproxen group.

Vioxx, like Celebrex,  is classified as a COX-2 inhibitor, or coxib. COX-2 inhibitors, like older drugs such as ibuprofen and naproxen, are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDs. Older NSAIDs reduce inflammation by blocking an enzyme called COX-2, but they also block another enzyme called COX-1. This enzyme helps protect the lining of the stomach, so blocking COX-2 can cause stomach irritation. COX-2 inhibitors only block COX-2, leaving the stomach-protecting COX-1 alone.

In 2000, Merck spent $160.8 million on direct to consumer Vioxx marketing. Many people are familiar with Vioxx television advertisements featuring the famous figure skater Dorothy Hamill. Sid Wolfe, a physician and director of the Health Research Group of the advocacy group Public Citizen in Washington, D.C. said "Dorothy Hamill doesn't tell people they have a four times higher risk of a heart attack on Vioxx.

Legal Help For Victims Affected By Vioxx

If you or a loved one took Vioxx and suffered side effects, please fill out the form at the right for a free case evaluation by a qualified drug side effects attorney or call us anytime at 1-800-YOURLAWYER (1-800-968-7529).

Friday, February 12, 2010

Meet the Team at Finz & Finz, P.C. - Finz & Finz, New York, NY

Partners

Associate Attorneys

Of Counsel to the Firm

Support Personnel

The attorneys at Finz & Finz, P.C. are nationally renowned advocates for victims of personal injury accidents, medical malpractice, and product and drug liability.

The Finz firm lawyers are highly trained and experienced in all aspects of personal injury and wrongful death matters and have obtained record breaking results for clients throughout New York and nationwide.

If you or a loved one has suffered due to the negligence of another, the lawyers at Finz & Finz, P.C. can help you maximize compensation for your medical bills, wage loss, pain and suffering and other hardships.

Obtain a Free Case Review

If you, a family member or a friend has suffered a personal injury as a result of an accident, negligence, medical malpractice, a defective drug, defective product, or toxins, contact a top New York personal injury lawyer at the Finz firm now toll free at (855) TOP-FIRM or simply fill out the Free Case Evaluation form.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Personal Injury Lawyer New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia

At the Locks Law Firm, we have obtained millions of dollars in personal injury verdicts and settlements on behalf of thousands of clients. Our team of 23 personal injury attorneys handles claims involving mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses, dangerous pharmaceuticals, defective products, catastrophic personal injuries, medical malpractice, and auto accidents. With three conveniently located offices throughout the tri-state area in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Cherry Hill, New Jersey; and Manhattan, New York a personal injury lawyer at our firm can help you establish the liability of the party responsible for your suffering and obtain the financial compensation to which you are entitled. Contact the Locks Law Firm today to schedule a free consultation and case review.

Client Success Stories

Below are some of the many instances in which our clients have greatly benefited from the experience, dedication, and hard work of an attorney at our law offices in Manhattan, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Each personal injury lawyer at the Locks Law Firm brings that same commitment to every case we handle.

Class Action Victory for NY Tenants

Andrew P. Bell from Locks Law Firm and co-counsel gained approval from Southern District of New York Judge Lewis A. Kaplan for an order approving a plan submitted by Plaintiffs and the Class for distribution of a cy pres fund (a class action settlement fund) of approximately $1.2 million in White v. First Advantage SafeRent, Inc. (04 CV 01611). The funds have been distributed to The New York Bar Foundation, which will provide funding through its grant making program for projects to be conducted by The Legal Aid Society, Legal Services NYC, City-Wide Task Force on Housing Court, Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project and the New York State Bar Association.

The case was brought in 2004 as a class action that alleged the defendant had issued thousands of tenant screening reports to prospective landlords that violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act and the New York Deceptive Practices Act by failing to accurately, completely and clearly disclose information about Housing Court cases brought against New York City tenants. Part of the settlement of the case, which was approved by Judge Kaplan, included the payment of damages, that ultimately will fund tenant screening and awareness programs.

These funds have been used to further the goal of increasing awareness of tenant screening and the duties and obligations under fair credit laws and will enable the recipient organizations to attend and conduct training programs; conduct outreach to community groups, tenants, and small property landlords; and create and distribute educational and training materials about tenant screening issues. The projects were conducted through joint efforts by the organizations and in an efficient and cost-effective manner.

Back to top

Kiddie Kollege Victory for Children

A group of children, former students of a South Jersey daycare, who were exposed to mercury on a daily basis, were assured future medical screening thanks to Jim Pettit and Pamela Lee of the Locks Law Firm, and counsel from several other firms. Jim Pettit was the Court-Appointed Lead Counsel. The class sought medical monitoring and was not seeking personal injury damages.

The children all formerly attended Kiddie Kollege, a daycare situated in a former thermometer factory building that was contaminated with mercury. The children, who banded together in a class action law suit, will be entitled to medical monitoring in the form of neuropsychological testing, valued at $1.5 million. The testing will help the doctors and families of the children identify future illnesses and the information will be input into a database made available to the children's pediatrician and parents. Children are more susceptible to neurotoxins than are adults.

The successful verdict for the children was the result of a 5 week bench trial before Judge James Rafferty in Woodbury, New Jersey, after 4 long years of hard-fought litigation.

Other defendants offered settlements to the victims before the verdict, including $965,000 from the real estate individuals and agencies in the first week of trial and $950,000 from the County of Gloucester just minutes before the verdict was delivered.

Liability was proportioned among the defendants as follows: State of NJ (10%), County of Gloucester (20%), Township of Franklin (35%), and the Sullivan defendants (real estate individuals and agencies) (35%). The State and the Township, therefore, are still on the hook.

The case was a further victory because of helpful legal rulings on the lack of Tort Claims Act immunity for the governmental defendants, which will assist future plaintiffs in their claims against negligent public entities.

Back to top

Locks Law Firm's Michael Galpern Achieves Nationwide Settlement of Staples Wage and Hour Cases

Michael Galpern of the Locks Law Firm, LLC, as co-lead counsel of the Multi-District Litigation (MDL), finalized a global settlement agreement between Staples, Inc. and its assistant store managers concerning wage and hour lawsuits that involved the alleged misclassification of those assistant store managers who sought overtime pay for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. Plaintiffs contended that overtime pay was required by the Fair Labor Standards Act and the laws of certain states.

Under the global settlement, Staples agreed to pay $42 million to resolve the allegations and end the litigation that has been ongoing for the past several years. Mr. Galpern and plaintiffs' co-counsel previously obtained a $4.9 million judgment against Staples, Inc. on February 19, 2009 on behalf of 343 Staples' assistant sales managers against Staples after a month and half long jury trial in the United States District Court in New Jersey (Stillman v. Staples, Inc., 07-cv-849, D.N.J.). As part of the settlement, Staples also agreed to drop its appeal of that judgment.

That case and 11 other cases were centralized in the United Stated District Court for the District of New Jersey as part of a MDL. The settlement amount resolved claims for damages dating back as far as 2002 for some of the settlement class members and covered more than 5,000 current and former associates from all states in which Staples does business outside of California.

Plaintiffs and their counsel believe the settlement to be an excellent result for the present and former Staples assistant managers because the settlement provided a definite and sure recovery long before any possible payment could have been achieved through continued litigation. The settlement avoided the possibility of adverse rulings or even no recovery at all.

Locks Law Firm has represented thousands of employees over the past decade in law suits against employers for failure to pay overtime wages and for improperly classifying their employees as exempt from federal and state overtime requirements. The Firm has offices in Philadelphia and New York City, and in Cherry Hill and Englewood Cliffs in New Jersey. Please visit our website, www.lockslaw.com, for more information about our Firm.

Back to top

$550,000 Recovered after Truck Accident

Karl Friedrichs and Mike Galpern successfully recovered $550,000 for a 29 year-old pick-up truck driver and automobile salesman in Camden who sustained a closed head injury after a tractor-trailer made a left turn into his path. The injuries to the truck driver included permanent tinnitus - cognitive deficits involving memory and concentration - and lumbar and cervical herniations.

Back to top

Lawn Tractor Manufacturer Settles for Confidential Amount

Partner Marc P. Weingarten and attorney Mary H. Grabish Gaffney recently settled the case of Robert Cooper, Deceased v. MTD Products, Inc. and Bull International, Inc. Mr. Cooper was mowing the large lawn of a friend using a Zero Turning Radius (ZTR) lawn tractor manufactured by MTD and sold by Bull. The tractor turned over while on an incline and it landed on top of Mr. Cooper, who was suffocated to death. There were no witnesses. Marc and Mary filed suit in state court in Philadelphia.

The theory of liability was that the tractor was defectively manufactured because it did not have a roll bar or seat belt. Marc and Mary offered, through expert engineering and product design witnesses, that if such protection had been provided, Mr. Cooper may well have walked away from the accident. The accident occurred in Fayette County in western Pennsylvania and the defendants tried four separate times to move the case out of Philadelphia, but Marc and Mary were successful in keeping it here.

Mr. Cooper was survived by his wife Janet, who brought suit under the Pennsylvania Wrongful Death and Survival Statutes on behalf of herself and her husbands estate. Mr. Cooper was a retired coal miner, aged 72 at the time of his death.

The case was called to jury trial before Judge Paul Panepinto. Just prior to the selection of the jury, the retailer, Bull, settled. The manufacturer, MTD, settled the case just after jury selection for an amount which it has requested be kept confidential.

Back to top

Over $1 Million Awarded in Recent Mesothelioma Cases

Marc P. Weingarten, a partner in the Philadelphia office of Locks Law and Joseph M. McGill, a senior associate in that office, recently were successful in the jury trials in Philadelphia state court for two gentlemen who tragically died of mesothelioma. The cases were tried together, in a consolidated manner, before one jury. One man died of mesothelioma at the age of 93 and was awarded $492,000. The other gentleman died of mesothelioma at the age of 63 and was awarded $732,000.

These trials were unique because the only exposure they had to asbestos was in the installation and repair of automobile brakes and clutches. These so-called friction defendants have a scorched earth policy of never settling cases, although in these cases they offered each plaintiff $100,000 to settle before the trial began. The 93-year-old victim was able to prove his case against Bendix and the other gentleman proved his case against Borg-Warner.

The defendants claimed that the type of asbestos in their products could not cause asbestos and that the plaintiffs would not have been exposed to sufficient quantities of their product to cause any disease, but the jury believed the testimony of the expert witnesses called to testify by Marc and Joe and found for the plaintiffs.

Back to top

$1.2 Million Class Action Settlement Fund Established

Partner Andrew Bell has helped secure a cy pres fund (a class action settlement fund) of approximately $1.2 million in White v. First Advantage SafeRent, Inc. The case was brought in 2004 as a class action that alleged the defendant had issued thousands of tenant screening reports to prospective landlords that violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act and the New York Deceptive Practices Act by failing to accurately, completely and clearly disclose information about Housing Court cases brought against New York City tenants. Part of the settlement of the case, which was approved by Judge Kaplan, included the payment of damages, that ultimately will fund tenant screening and awareness programs.

Back to top

LOCKS LAW FIRM OBTAINS $2.5 MILLION IN JURY VERDICT AGAINST STAPLES, INC.

The Locks Law Firm recently served as lead counsel in a case in which a New Jersey federal court awarded almost $2.5 million against Staples Inc. (NasdaqGS: SPLS) to 342 Staples Sales Managers in a case brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Following a six week trial, the jury unanimously determined that Staples had failed to comply with the law in classifying the Sales Managers as exempt under the Act and failing to pay them overtime. The jury also found that Staples had acted willfully in violating the FLSA. This is the first FLSA jury verdict in New Jersey, and one of the first in the country where a jury agreed that an employer willfully violated the FLSA. Staples liability could be increased next month when the Court will be hearing Plaintiffs application for the imposition of liquidated damages in an amount equal to the jury verdict and for attorneys costs and fees. The case was the first of several collective and class action lawsuits against Staples for misclassification of store managers that are now pending in federal courts. Plaintiffs counsel plan to move those other cases to trial on behalf of the rest of Staples managers.

Back to top

Medical Negligence and Medical Malpractice

Joe McGill tried a medical malpractice case in Pennsylvania Federal Court and won a verdict of 3.6 million dollars. The plaintiff, age 55, was treated in the emergency room of a county hospital and was discharged without specific treatment for myocardial infarction. This occurred because two EKGs which reflected a significant elevation were misread and critical blood tests showing elevated cardiac enzyme levels and troponin levels which were not communicated to the physicians in charge of the plaintiff before discharge.

The result was that the Plaintiff suffered permanent myocardial damage, an extended hospital stay, aggravation of his previously dormant diabetes, a-fibrillation, shock liver, kidney failure and various other complications which included a shortened life expectancy.

The result was that the Plaintiff suffered permanent myocardial damage, an extended hospital stay, aggravation of his previously dormant diabetes, a-fibrillation, shock liver, kidney failure and various other complications which included a shortened life expectancy.

The $3.6 million verdict included an award of $675,000.00 for loss of consortium.

Back to top

Pharmaceutical Litigation

Steven Knowlton achieved a seven figure settlement for a client who suffered a debilitating stroke as a result of the use of an over-the-counter cough cold preparation that contained the now banned substance, phenylpropanolamine, or PPA. While working, our client used a single recommended dose of the medication for a runny nose and cough. Two hours later, suffering the worst headache of my life our client was taken to the hospital where the diagnosis of a cerebral hemorrhage was determined after diagnostic testing. Despite extensive and aggressive rehabilitation, and the attitude of a warrior, our client was left disabled. After 4 years of litigation and within 6 weeks of jury selection a settlement was reached.

Back to top

Pharmaceutical Litigation

Locks Law Firm partner and Pennsylvania personal injury attorney Marc P. Weingarten represented a client who took a drug manufactured by a major pharmaceutical company to treat gastrointestinal problems. Her use of the drug caused bowel impaction so severe that much of her intestine and rectum had to be surgically removed. After a year of litigation, the manufacturer settled the case and was so concerned about the amount of the settlement that they requested the details be kept secret.

Back to top

Medical Malpractice/Failure to Diagnose a Spinal Abscess

Tom Gowen, Locks Law Firm's partner and Pennsylvania personal injury attorney, obtained a substantial settlement for a client who presented to the emergency room three times and his family doctor twice over the course of a week with severe pain in his neck. None of them ordered an emergent MRI and instead prescribed pain medications and muscle relaxants, calling the condition neck strain.   Eight hours after the last appointment, he fell over quadriplegic.  When taken to the hospital, it was determined by MRI that he had a spinal abscess which was surgically drained.  He did regain the use of his limbs after a year of intensive physical therapy, but continues to suffer from neurogenic pain.  Mr. Gowen successfully argued that the doctors failed to make a differential diagnosis and rule out potentially serious causes of the severe pain before making a diagnosis of garden variety neck pain.

Back to top

Medical Negligence

Our Pennsylvania firm's partner and personal injury attorney Jerry A. Lindheim successfully settled a medical negligence matter involving the failure of a surgeon to report malignant pathology results to the patient after a surgical procedure. The physician removed the patient's gallbladder, but did not inform him and his family that he found cancer in the removed organ. The man did not have the opportunity to receive timely cancer treatment that could have prolonged his life. The cancer soon spread to his chest cavity, and the man died. Mr. Lindheim recovered a substantial settlement for the man's widow and children.

Back to top

Failure to Diagnose an Emerging Stroke

A client of attorney Tom Gowen came to the hospital in Norristown, Pennsylvania on three separate occasions complaining of severe headaches, which the doctors called a migraine. On the fourth occasion, within two weeks after a doctor had told her family to keep her home and give her pain medication, her family brought her to the hospital, at which time she had some focal neurological signs.  Finally, a CT scan of the brain was ordered and large white spots appeared indicating bleeding into the brain.  An MRI confirmed that the bleeding had occurred at different times over the prior several weeks.   Mr. Gowen argued that his client suffered permanent brain damage as a result of the failure of the doctors to make a differential diagnosis and to use the tools at their disposal, including a CT Scan and an MRI, to make an accurate diagnosis before damage to the brain occurred.  A substantial recovery was made for the plaintiff in this case.

Back to top

Pharmaceutical Injury

New Jersey partner and personal injury lawyer, Jim Pettit, a certified civil trial attorney, has successfully handled multiple cases involving serious injury caused by prescription drugs.  He was also a lead trial counsel in the Vioxx litigation.

Among the numerous significant pharmaceutical cases that he has handled, Mr. Pettit represented the family of a woman who ingested certain drugs and later suffered serious medical problems necessitating surgery. She subsequently died. Mr. Pettit sued the maker of the drugs and built a case demonstrating that the drugs caused the plaintiff's injuries and ultimate death, despite vigorous opposition from the defense. Mr. Pettit was able to negotiate a settlement of $5.5 million.

He also achieved a $3 million settlement in another case against a major drug company after his client suffered a serious medical problem as a result of taking the company's prescription medication.

Back to top

Failure to Diagnose Renal Insufficiency

New Jersey personal injury attorney, Mike Galpern settled a medical malpractice matter for $700,000 as a jury was ready to be selected for trial on behalf of a 31-year-old woman, who had begun treating with primary care physician three years before. She had a family history of kidney disease.  The family physician ordered routine blood work as part of his care. Mr. Galpern also was sent the results of blood work in his role as the plaintiff's attending physician when the plaintiff was hospitalized on several occasions for various reasons. The lab results of the blood work showed a consistent pattern of progressive renal insufficiency. Despite this pattern of worsening renal insufficiency, the doctor failed to diagnose the plaintiff's renal insufficiency, failed to order appropriate tests, and failed to discuss various treatment options for her. More specifically, he failed to inform her of the renal insufficiency for over a year subsequent to his own recognition of her condition, and admitted that his delay contributed to a progression of her kidney disease.

Unfortunately, the plaintiff was diagnosed with renal failure after being hospitalized three years after beginning treatment with the defendant doctor. As a result of the delay by the defendant, the plaintiff's kidney function deteriorated to the point where she required immediate dialysis and has been undergoing dialysis three times per week ever since.

Back to top

Podiatric Malpractice

Mike Galpern has successfully handled several significant podiatric malpractice cases. In one case, the plaintiff, a 58-year-old woman, sued her podiatrist after an improperly performed bunion surgery left her with permanent, severe pain and an inability to walk any distance. Due to the plaintiff overcompensating when she walked, she developed a problem with her right knee, leading to the need for knee replacement surgery. The plaintiff's treating orthopedist who performed the knee replacement confirmed that the surgery was necessitated by the negligent bunion surgery. The case settled after the matter was scheduled for trial and before opening statements.

In another case, the plaintiff, a 53-year-old woman, suffered a raised toe deformity of her second toe after an improperly performed bunion surgery. A second surgery was necessary to correct the deformity and included placing a screw in the plaintiff's foot. The parties settled after going to mediation before a retired judge.

Back to top

Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy

New Jersey personal injury attorney, Mike Galpern, successfully resolved a podiatric malpractice case that led to reflex sympathetic dystrophy also known as complex regional pain syndrome. The plaintiff underwent hammertoe surgery on her left foot. During subsequent postoperative visits with the doctor, she repeatedly complained of severe pain and burning in her left foot. The doctor ignored those complaints and proceeded with the surgery on her right foot on January 8, 1998. As a result of the doctor's failure to heed her complaints of pain and burning, Plaintiff subsequently developed Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy Syndrome and is now completely disabled by her illness. Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD) is a chronic pain disease. In addition to burning pain, other symptoms of this disease include swelling, color and temperature abnormalities in the affected part, unusual sweating, and nail changes.

Mr. Galpern's client was employed by the state of New Jersey for 18 years as a secretarial assistant at a youth correctional facility. She was forced to apply for early retirement and was later approved for Social Security Disability because of this painful injury.  At trial, expert physicians testified that the Plaintiff's injuries were due to the Defendant doctor's failure to recognize the development of chronic regional pain syndrome, failing to seek early treatment, and performing the surgical procedure on the right extremity. After two weeks of testimony, Michael Galpern was able to successfully negotiate a settlement in the amount of $500,000.

Back to top

Failure to Diagnose Deep Vein Thrombosis

Mike A. Galpern recently settled a medical malpractice case against an oncologist. His client had begun treating for breast cancer with, an oncologist. Plaintiff underwent chemotherapy under the direction this cancer specialist and was to begin radiation treat­ments. On several occasions, she complained to her doctor of shortness of breath and leg pain. The doctor ignored those complaints and continued treatment.  She continued to complain of the symptoms and finally the doctor scheduled her for testing at the hospital. The following day while she was en route to the hospital the plaintiff collapsed and died of an undiagnosed blood clot known as a deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism.
The defendant's insurance company presented two expert witnesses at trial, one of whom testified that the doctor acted appropriately, the other who testified that she had a pre-existing 5 cm breast cancer with positive lymph nodes and thus had only a 20-30% chance of surviving anyway.   Mr. Galpern negotiated a $500,000 settlement for the plaintiff during trial.

Back to top

Failure to Diagnose Child Abuse

The infant dependent of an Air Force recruit was taken to the medical providers at a major Air Force base with unexplained signs of bleeding from the mouth, and a tear in the posterior pharynx and soft pallet.  Doctors on another visit also noticed blood in the baby's diaper. At six months of age while with his father, the baby was reported to have swallowed a toy and could not breathe. By the time medics removed the toy with a hemostat, the baby had been anoxic for seven minutes. Taken to a major Philadelphia hospital at this point, the child abuse protocol was done and found seven fractured ribs in remote stages of healing. The baby was catastrophically brain damaged.

Locks Law Firm partner Tom Gowen brought a claim for the baby under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the United States. The claim was for failure to diagnose and report child abuse when confronted with an unexplained injury in the mouth and throat, six months before the ultimate catastrophic injury was caused. Medical experts recognizing the critical need to interrupt the cycle of child abuse when it presents with unexplained injuries before those injuries progress to catastrophic. Mr. Gowen and his co-counsel, Robert Bokelman, were able to obtain a seven figure settlement for the infant for the failure to diagnose child abuse. The claim was brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act in federal court in California.

Back to top

Failure to Diagnose and Properly Treat Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma

A failure to diagnose and properly treat non-Hodgkins lymphoma resulted in a $500,000 verdict for the estate of a Montgomery County man where the treating oncologist argued with the radiologist that the condition had not transformed from an indolent lymphoma to an aggressive lymphoma.  As a result the oncologist reduced the chemotherapy regimen resulting in recurrence of the tumor and spread to distant parts of the body resulting in debilitating salvage treatment and ultimate death from the disease.

Back to top

Surgical Site Infection

A woman underwent a hernia repair in which supportive mesh was inserted. Subsequent to the surgery, the woman experienced fever, purulent drainage, pain, and redness all telltale signs of infection. Despite these red flags, the surgeon failed to simply culture the wound, and the woman went without proper treatment. The infection spread throughout her body, and she required multiple corrective surgeries. Pennsylvania personal injury attorney Jerry A. Lindheim successfully negotiated substantial compensation for the woman's medical expenses, pain, and suffering.

Back to top

Negligent Laparoscopic Cholesystectomy

Modern medicine has provided the means of removing the gall bladder through a small incision, which if done properly, results in shorter hospital stays, less pain for the patient and quicker recovery.  However, particularly when the gall bladder is inflamed, the surgeon at times fails to properly identify the structures which he is cutting and a serious situation develops. Locks Law Firm partner and personal injury attorney Tom Gowen represented a 65 year old man who had his gall bladder removed laparoscopically but the surgeon cut the bile duct and failed to fix it before closing.  After the patients condition deteriorated for over a week, the surgeon recognized that he had cut the duct and emergency surgery performed by a liver transplant team was necessary. Mr. Gowen obtained a high six figure settlement for the client in this case.

Back to top

Failure to Diagnose and Treat a Nosocomial Infection

Public awareness of hospital-based infections is on the rise, particularly in Pennsylvania where the Commonwealth is requiring the reporting of statistics on these infections by the hospital.  Our law firm's partner and attorney Tom Gowen was able to obtain a sizable settlement for a client who underwent spinal surgery and contracted an intra-operative staff infection. The patient's husband called the doctor's office and reported drainage from the wound on four occasions, but the nurse did not give the message to the doctor and told the patient's husband to treat it at home. Eventually the wound opened and led to multiple additional surgeries to debride the wound and eventually to remove the spinal hardware. It was recognized on cross examination of the defendant's infectious disease expert that the best chance to treat a staph infection when hardware is placed in the body is at the earliest possible time. The failure of the nurse to bring the patient back to the hospital and have the doctors intervene promptly with aggressive antibiotic treatment resulted in significant suffering and removal of the spinal hardware.

Back to top

Negligent Surgeon

A gentleman underwent gallbladder surgery during which the surgeon negligently cut the bile duct, causing copious amounts of foul drainage to contaminate his body and cause infection in his abdominal cavity. A relatively simple procedure escalated into a surgical repair and extended hospitalization. Despite an obviously negligent surgical performance, the surgeon dismissed the wife and children's emotional concern for their father, husband, and provider. Such arrogance facilitated a substantial settlement for the man and his family.

Back to top

Medication Error

Locks Law Firm partner Jerry A. Lindheim successfully negotiated a settlement on behalf of an elderly woman. A pharmacy negligently dispensed a cancer drug with toxic and lethal effects instead of the medication her physician prescribed. Because the two medicines had similar appearance, the elderly woman unknowingly took the toxic medication. After several days of consuming the drug, the woman collapsed, and her children found her in a comatose state. Fortunately, after prolonged hospitalization and extensive medical intervention, the woman was nursed back to health. Mr. Lindheim was able to negotiate a substantial settlement to cover the hospital charges and to compensate her for pain, suffering, and other losses.

Back to top

Pharmaceutical Injury

Pennsylvania personal injury lawyer Jerry A. Lindheim settled a case against a major drug company in which his client took a prescription medication and suffered a hemorrhagic stroke.  Mr. Lindheim successfully defeated a motion to dismiss the action because of restrictive statute of limitations and statute of repose.  Thereafter, the case settled in excess of $1 million. Mr. Lindheim settled multiple cases against pharmaceutical companies for over-the-counter medications causing hemorrhagic strokes in excess of $2 million.

Back to top

Product Liability

Defectively Designed Fuel System

Steve Knowlton recently achieved a multi-million dollar settlement for our client who was severely burned when the car she was driving was struck from behind and exploded. The case was brought in 1998 against a major auto manufacturer alleging that the post collision fuel fed fire (PCFFF) was the result of a defectively designed fuel system. Expert analysis of the wreckage of the car revealed that the gas tank was driven into the drive shaft of the vehicle causing it to split and spill gas, resulting in a fire that claimed the lives of three other passengers and caused severe burns to our client, the driver. After nearly eight years of litigation, the review of over 3 million pages of documents, some of which revealed that the manufacturer clearly knew of the risk of this exact defect, and the review of tens of thousands of hours of crash test videos, the auto manufacturer agreed to settle the case---requiring complete confidentiality.

Back to top

Ladders

One of the most common causes of accidental injury in the United States are falls from ladders. Locks Law Firm's Jerry A. Lindheim has represented clients who were injured in falls from extension ladders, step ladders, job built ladders, and rope ladders.  In one case, he obtained a substantial settlement for a nuclear coatings inspector who suffered a serious back injury when a rope ladder that had failed and been repaired with duct tape by a contractor  was put back in service and then failed again when he was ascending it through a narrow shaft in a nuclear power plant.

In another case, he obtained a settlement for a client who suffered a brain injury when a thirty-foot extension ladder telescoped while he was climbing it.  Through extensive analysis of the ladder and the scene and testing of the ladder, Tom Gowen and the expert he retained were able to demonstrate the failure mode of the ladder and the means to prevent such failures in future designs.

Additionally, he has represented workers who have fallen from scaffolding lacking OSHA-required guard rail and improperly constructed scaffolding resulting in serious injuries.  

Back to top

Scaffolds

When racing to raise the level of masonry scaffolding on a construction project in New Jersey, a contractor's employees failed to place the necessary supports under the corner pieces of masonry scaffolding at the fifth story.  The plaintiff, a master bricklayer, suffered severe fractures of the heel, leg and pelvis when he stepped on the corner piece while returning to work.  He fell five stories onto the ground.  A significant settlement was obtained after the negligence of the contractor was proved and the defense was persuaded that New Jersey law should apply to the case, even though the contractor and the plaintiff were both from Pennsylvania.

Back to top

Trampolines

Backyard trampolines are among the most dangerous pieces of recreational equipment on the market today and most homeowners who buy them for their children don't realize it.  The industry attempts to shift responsibility for all injuries onto the homeowner through standards that require unrealistic levels of adult supervision and which do not require the mandatory use of enclosures or effective warnings.  Locks Law Firm lawyer Tom Gowen represented a 14-year-old boy who was playing catch on a trampoline with two friends.  As the boys bounced on the 15-foot trampoline surface, Mr. Gowen's client was struck in the eye while coming down by the elbow of one of his friends who was going up on the same trampoline.  There was no adult supervision present in the backyard at the time and the homeowner did not realize that more than one child should never be allowed to jump on a trampoline at a time.  Mr. Gowen's client suffered a fractured orbital bone, which entrapped a muscle in the eye and has caused permanent double vision.  He obtained a substantial settlement against the homeowner with contribution from the manufacturer.

In another trampoline case, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland agreed with Mr. Gowen's position in a trampoline case and denied motions of both the manufacturer and the homeowner to dismiss his case, which led to settlement for his client.  The court wrote an excellent opinion at Celmer v. Jumpking and Zacharia 2006 U.S. Dist. Ct. Lexis 34104, 2006 WL 1520689.  Mr. Gowen asserted that the manufacturer had failed to provide an enclosure for the trampoline to prevent someone from being thrown off, that it failed to adequately warn against multiple jumpers, and that it unreasonably placed the burden of injury prevention on the homeowner.  The homeowner was not trained in trampoline injury prevention or gymnastics and did not realize that more than one jumper at a time should never be allowed to jump or that the industry expects competent adult supervision to be present at the trampoline whenever in use.  Both the manufacturer and homeowner contributed to the settlement of the case.

Back to top

Failure to Guard or Warn

Tom Gowen, our Pennsylvania personal injury lawyer, represented burn victims who were covered with melted plastic and rubber which erupted from a plastic injection molder in once case and an extruder in the other.  In neither case were the machines equipped with pressure relief valves and the plastic injection molder lacked a lock on the view plate which blew off the machine when gases from the melting of the plastic inside expanded rapidly do to a clog down line in the machine. Both men suffered facial and upper body burns when they were coated with molten plastic and rubber.  Settlements were obtained from the machine manufacturers.

Personal injury lawyer Jerry A. Lindheim was able to obtain insurance coverage on behalf of an injured client and ultimately settled a conveyor belt accident claim for the full limits of the insurance policy, in addition to obtaining excess damages for bad faith in denying insurance coverage.

Back to top

Diving Board Accident

Personal injury lawyer Jerry A. Lindheim successfully settled a claim on behalf of a man who was injured due to an excessive oscillation of a diving board at a home swimming pool.  During the case, Mr. Lindheim retained an expert to inspect the board. Mr. Lindheim discovered that, in anticipation of the expert inspection, the home owner had switched the diving board on which Mr. Lindheim's client was injured with another one. Due to the spoliation of evidence and threat of sanctions and punitive damages, Mr. Lindheim was able to obtain the full policy limits for his client.

Back to top

Propane Gas Explosion

Locks Law Firm partner and Pennsylvania personal injury attorney Tom Gowen was lead counsel representing six men who were badly burned when a propane gas canister brought into a truck repair garage during the winter ruptured at a weak weld and sprayed the contained gas toward an open flame space heater attached to the ceiling of the truck repair garage. The resulting explosion caused severe burns to two men and moderate burns to four others.

Mr. Gowen was able to demonstrate that the propane tank had been overfilled, that the filler for the company selling the gas did not know the limits of the canister and that the driver of the delivery truck did not know that he was required to remove gas canisters before taking the truck indoors for repairs to avoid gas expansion and rupture of the tank when the canisters were exposed to higher indoor temperatures in the winter.   A settlement of $6.5 million dollars was agreed upon prior to trial in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

Back to top

Failed Medical Device

Steve Knowlton recently achieved a six-figure settlement of a lawsuit brought on behalf of a 56-year-old woman who underwent four surgeries to correct damage caused by a faulty hip implant. The device had been in place for almost six years when the plaintiff began to experience pain and other symptoms that required medical attention.  Her orthopedist determined that the implant had failed, been dislodged and had caused damage to her joint. Multiple surgeries and a new device were required as a result.

Back to top

Defectively Designed Automobile

Jim Pettit recently was admitted pro hac vice in Maryland to handle a complex case against an automobile manufacturer that designed its vehicle with a "grab bar" on the dashboard. When the car crashed into another vehicle, our client, a front-seat passenger, reached for the bar and the airbag deployed, breaking one hand and several fingers on the other hand. Her local Maryland lawyer handled the case against the driver of the car in which she was a passenger. Mr. Pettit handled the product liability case against the manufacturer, which then settled for $125,000 only ten months after Mr. Pettit began handling the case.

Back to top

Workplace Injury

Jim Pettit settled a matter involving the tragic death of a worker who had a coworker raise him by a forklift to a 15-foot height, where he stood on a piece of equipment and then fell. At first blush, the matter might seem to be limited to a Workers' Compensation claim against the employer but Mr. Pettit took the case and established liability against the manufacturer and installer of the machine on which the worker was standing. The theory of liability involved a defectively designed machine and failure to warn. The matter settled for $650,000 despite a relatively modest income loss and a strenuous defense mounted by the defendant corporations and their professionals.

Automobile Accidents and Auto Insurance Cases

Automobile Insurance Coverage

Our Pennsylvania firm's personal injury lawyer Jerry A. Lindheim represented a gentleman in a motor vehicle accident.  Dispute centered on whether the client was insured under the automobile policy.  After evidence and testimony, the court concluded that the client was insured and covered for the loss.

Back to top

Trucking Accidents

Joe McGill represented a family in a truck accident case where a stalled passenger vehicle was rear-ended by a tractor trailer. The driver of the stalled vehicle was a mother of two small children. While the woman called for assistance on the shoulder, a truck approached from behind. Although he had adequate time to see the car, the driver failed to control his truck as he approached the stalled vehicle. The truck struck the car with a massive impact and a subsequent fire. The vehicle was destroyed, and tragically, both children were killed by the flames. Mr. McGill negotiated a seven figure settlement for the family against the trucking company.

In a truck rollover case, our personal injury attorney Tom Gowen was able to use the laws of physics to demonstrate that the improper loading of an eighteen wheeler by a product shipper caused the load to shift on a curve and caused the truck to roll over, killing the driver. Mr. Gowen obtained a substantial settlement for the driver's widow after eliminating alternative causes of the accident and showing that the load pattern used by the shipper was prone to load shift particularly when the truck went into a curve as occurred in this case.

In another trucking case, he represented a client whose unnecessary death could have been prevented by providing a rear end loader track truck with an interlock on the gearing system. In that case, on the last stop of a rainy day, Mr. Gowen's client, a helper on the truck, ran to the back of the truck, which was backing up toward an apartment building. When the truck stopped, he threw a switch to send power to the trash compacter, but he did not know that the driver had not yet completed the shift out of reverse to neutral.  When he threw the PTO at the back of the truck, the truck accelerated uncontrollably and crushed him between it and the apartment building.  Mr. Gowen was able to demonstrate that the accident should have been prevented by equipping the truck with an interlock on the PTO that would not have allowed the helper to shift the PTO until the gear in the cab was fully in neutral.  He obtained substantial funding for the child of the deceased client through demonstrating the defective nature of the product.

Back to top

Highway Accident

Pennsylvania personal injury attorney Jerry A. Lindheim successfully tried a case involving an intersection/highway accident.  The defendant disputed liability for the accident. Mr. Lindheim's client, a 57 year-old woman, suffered a herniated disc and underwent microscopic surgery to repair the injury caused in the automobile accident. The verdict was in excess of $600,000.

Back to top

Automobile Accidents

Joe McGill litigated an auto accident case where our client was rear-ended by another vehicle, causing severe neck and lower back pain, multiple radiculopathies and root irritations. He was diagnosed with a permanent disability. Joe McGill negotiated for the limits of the negligent partys insurance policy for $100,000.00 and proceeded to litigate an underinsurance claim which resulted in an award of additional $400,000.00.

Locks Law partner Jerry A. Lindheim negotiated a settlement of a motor vehicle accident involving a husband and wife who were rear-ended by a commercial waste disposal truck.  Both husband and wife were transported to a local hospital for head and neck injuries.  He was able to settle the mater with the waste disposal truck insurance company for $975,000.

Back to top

Automobile Fatality

Karl Friedrichs settled claims against several defendants involved in a motor vehicle accident on the Garden State Parkway that resulted in the death of a 19-year-old college student. The claims against the defendants alleged negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle in which the plaintiff was a passenger before being ejected onto the roadway and negligence on the part of another driver who struck her while she lay in the roadway, critically injured.  Additionally, a claim was brought alleging negligence for service of alcohol to a minor by a home owner prior to the accident. The evidence established, through professional review by a forensic pathologist, that the college student was still alive after being ejected onto the roadway but before being struck by the second driver.

Back to top

Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy

Locks Law Firm partner Tom Gowen has represented clients in three automobile accident cases where traumatic injuries to the bodies of the plaintiffs led to the development of reflex sympathetic dystrophy, also known as complex regional pain syndrome. High six figure settlements were obtained in each case, one in the middle of trial when Mr. Gowen showed through expert neurologists the progression of the original injury to RSD and the severe and debilitating pain that was associated with the condition.  He effectively cross examined defense experts who disputed the existence of RSD and showed that his clients' continuing, pain, weakness and disability resulted from the original automobile crash. 

Back to top

Industrial Equipment Injuries

A farmer, working by himself, harvesting the corn crop with the aid of a tractor drawn mechanical cornpicker, notices that the husking box has become clogged. The farmer gets off his tractor and goes back to determine the problem.  He sees a husk of corn stuck between the rollers, which caused the clutch to slip and the roll to stop.  He reaches into the husking box and pulls on the top of the corn husk, thinking he can safely pull it out, much as a person might pull a piece of paper out of a copy machine.

But little does he know that as soon as he pulls on the husk, the clutch will engage and the roll will begin moving at 12 feet per second approximately four times faster than human reaction time.  Before he even realizes what happened, the farmer's arm is drawn between the rollers and crushed.

Tom Gowen has represented two farmers under identical circumstances, who suffered amputations of their arms to a point above the elbow while being trapped between the rolls of the cornpicker. He proved that the farm equipment manufacturers knew for years that these severe injuries were happening frequently during the corn harvest and they could have prevented virtually all of them by equipping the machines with an interlocked cover that would have disengaged the power to the rollers whenever the lid was lifted. He showed that the technology for this type of guard had been known since before the beginning of the twentieth century and would not interfere with operation of the machine.  He recovered substantial settlements in these cases after trial of the first.

Back to top

Exposure

Mesothelioma

Mesothelioma can be caused by exposure to small amounts of asbestos. The attorneys at the Locks Law Firm have successfully handled asbestos cases for persons who were exposed to asbestos brought home on the clothing of family members. For example, a case for a woman who developed mesothelioma at age 63 as a result of washing the clothing of her insulator husband was settled for over one million dollars.

Mesothelioma from Childhood Asbestos Exposure. Lisa's case was one of the most unusual, most rewarding and most successful mesothelioma cases ever handled by the attorneys of the Locks Law Firm. Working along with Steven J. Nolan, Esquire, of Towson, Maryland, Michael Leh and other attorneys in the Locks Law Firm represented Lisa, who was diagnosed with mesothelioma at age 33. She was exposed to Georgia-Pacific Ready-Mix joint compound when she was eight years old. Her father finished the walls and ceiling of the rec room and basement in their home using Ready-Mix, which contained 3% chrysotile asbestos. Eight year old Lisa was exposed from watching her father work.

The jury awarded $9,188,000.00: $1.9 million for loss wages, $253,000.00 for medical expenses, $2.1 million for loss of consortium and the remainder for pain and suffering. Since Maryland has a statutory cap on non-economic damages, it was necessary to prove that Lisa's mesothelioma began to develop prior to 1986, in order to obtain more than $350,000.00 for pain and suffering.

Georgia-Pacifics appeals were unsuccessful, and the case was eventually settled. Unfortunately, by that time, Lisa had passed away, leaving the money to her widower, Scott, and her daughter, Danielle, who was just two years old at the time of trial.

Back to top

Gasoline

A case was brought on behalf of the family of a man who was exposed to gasoline while driving a tanker truck which delivered gasoline from distribution terminals to service stations and who died of myelodysplastic syndrome. The case was settled with a major oil company for a substantial, confidential amount.

Back to top

Benzene Exposure

Michael Leh and Andrew DuPont have settled numerous cases brought on behalf of persons who have developed disease as a result of exposure to benzene-containing products, and have many more such cases representing refinery workers, furniture refinishers, and printers pending throughout the country.

Mr. Leh and Mr. DuPont have recently settled three separate cases involving persons who were diagnosed with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). The first involved a man who was diagnosed with AML at age 31 and died of that cancer at 33, leaving behind a wife and two young children. He worked as a sportcraft technician repairing motorcycles, watercraft, snowmobiles, and ATVs and in doing so was exposed to benzene-containing solvents.

Another case involved a man who was diagnosed with AML at age 28 and died at age 32. He was an automotive mechanic and was exposed to solvents used in repairing cars. The third case was settled on behalf of a man who worked as an auto body technician, repairing and painting the bodies of automobiles. He was exposed to both spray paints and solvents that contained benzene. All three cases were settled with numerous major corporations who manufactured or sold the benzene-containing products to which they were exposed.

The Locks Law Firm also recently settled a case brought by a woman suffering from AML who lives in Toms River, New Jersey and was allegedly exposed to benzene-containing products not in the workplace, but in the environment around her home.

Back to top

Asbestos Cases

Asbestos Personal Injury

Our firm has represented clients in more than 50 jury verdicts in federal and state courts in Pennsylvania, New York, Kentucky, and Maryland totaling millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages, including the first asbestos trial in Pennsylvania.

Back to top

Joe McGill tried an asbestos case where a 66 year old retired sheet metal worker from Westinghouse Electric suffered and died from malignant mesothelioma resulting from the inhalation of asbestos fibers from products at Westinghouse. The jury returned a verdict of 1.85 million dollars. This unfortunate mans spouse of 44 years was awarded 1.6 million dollars of that verdict because of her claim for loss of consortium, which is the loss of the society, companionship, affection, guidance and comfort of her spouse. This was one of the largest loss of consortium verdicts in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Joe McGill tried an asbestos case in Federal Court in KY where a seventy-four year old laborer who worked at several worksites had died from lung cancer resulting from the inhalation of asbestos fibers from products to which he was exposed at those worksites. The jury reached a verdict of $750,000.00 despite a lifetime history of smoking and $500,000.00 of that was loss of consortium.

Back to top

Michael Leh and Joseph McGill obtained what is believed to be the only verdict against Sears, Roebuck and Company in a case alleging exposure to asbestos-containing shingles. The plaintiff was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma at the age of 75 and died of that horrible disease one year later. Fifty years earlier, he and his two brothers had re-shingled his home in Philadelphia using asbestos-containing shingles that they purchased at Sears. They applied shingles in their spare time over a two month period. Sears argued that his mesothelioma was caused not by exposure to the shingles, but by his exposure to asbestos-containing insulation product while working as an electrician at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard for two years. The jury found Sears liable for one hundred percent of a substantial six-figure verdict. The case settled following the trial.

Back to top

Asbestos Property Damage

Locks Law Firm has represented numerous school districts, municipalities, and states in asbestos removal litigation, resulting in jury trials and settlements of multiple millions of dollars on behalf of the taxpayers in those jurisdictions.

Asbestos Legislation

Partner Marc P. Weingarten's appellate advocacy has resulted in changing the law in numerous jurisdictions to benefit injured people, including establishing the law of Pennsylvania with respect to proof needed to win an asbestos case and also establishing that Kentucky workers are allowed to sue manufacturers of asbestos products even if they were employed by them.

Back to top

Traumatic Brain Injury

Locks Law Firm attorney Tom Gowen obtained a verdict of $1.2 million for a 50-year-old woman who was severely injured in a head-on automobile accident with a car passing a truck on a two-lane highway.  His client, a local businesswoman, was hospitalized for several months and had ongoing symptoms of brain injury, even though she appeared perfectly fine to the casual observer by the time of trial.  By developing the neuropsychological and neurological evidence and effectively cross examining the defense experts, he was able to obtain a verdict of $1.2 million dollars in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

Mike Galpern recently negotiated and settled a serious motor-vehicle case resulting in traumatic brain injury for $1 million.  The plaintiff was a 17 year old passenger in a car being driven by his intoxicated 19 year old friend.  The driver lost control of  his vehicle and crashed into a bridge abutment.  The plaintiff was ejected from the car and thrown 100 feet.  He was found by paramedics to have profuse bleeding and a depression on the right side of his head, with blood coming from his ear.

Mr. Doe was airlifted to the local trauma center, where a CT of the head confirmed a severe closed head injury, including skull fractures, extensive blood collections and cerebral edema . Mr. Doe remained hospitalized for nearly three months. He continued to slowly progress, and by the time he was released to go home, he was able to walk on his own. In the following months, Mr. Doe continued to receive extensive outpatient physical and cognitive therapy. Although he has made significant progress, he still has significant physical disabilities and cognitive impairments. Mr. Galpern was able to successfully settle the matter with the driver's auto insurance company for $1 million prior to having filed a lawsuit. Mr. Galpern also was able to secure an additional $240,000 of insurance coverage to pay for Mr. Doe's medical bills.

New Jersey partner, Jim Pettit, Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney, obtained a substantial jury verdict against DaimlerChrysler Corporation (now known as Chrysler Corporation). The client suffered Traumatic Brain Injury (sometimes called Closed Head Injury) when her minivan was rear-ended. Mr. Pettit proved that the seat back design was defective. The jury awarded $2.1 million dollars in damages.

Back to top

Carbon Monoxide

Locks Law Firm Partner Tom Gowen has handled a number of carbon monoxide poisoning cases. Most prominently, he pursued the case of a young man who suffered serious brain injury from a faulty heating system in an apartment building where the victim was living.  The evidence demonstrated neglect by the building owners and acquiescence by furnace repair companies in doing band-aid repairs for a heating system that needed to be replaced.  The plaintiff suffered progressive neurological deficits beginning with severe headaches and flu like symptoms, progressing to incoordination, foot drop, memory loss and Parkinsonian-like symptoms resulting from continuing exposure to carbon monoxide from the defective heating system.   After extensive discovery, the case settled for $3.5 million to compensate for severe brain injury and permanent impairment in cognitive abilities and motor function.

Back to top

Other Personal Injuries

Amusement Ride Case

The first-million-dollar verdict in the history of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania was obtained by Locks Law Firm attorney Tom Gowen in representing a 15 year old girl who suffered severe leg injuries when the pin attaching the gondola of the Paratrooper amusement ride on which she was riding with her boyfriend failed and allowed the gondola to fall thirty feet. In the fall, the young girl suffered a near severing of her foot, fracture of the tibial plateau and fracture of the femur.  Mr. Gowen proved that the Paratrooper ride had been inadequately lubricated in part because of the poor maintenance practices of the amusement park and in part because of a failure of the oil channel to transmit oil to the surface of the pin causing excessive abrasion and fatigue failure. After deliberating for six hours, the jury awarded a verdict against both defendants of $1.2 million dollars.

Back to top

Dangerous Trees

Often when a tree falls onto a roadway in an inhabited area, property owners or building contractors can be shown to be negligent by failing to protect the trees, by failing to take down dangerously diseased or dying trees, or by covering the root systems with fill or concrete.  After a 150-year-old oak tree that appeared healthy to a casual observer fell onto the car killing a woman who was riding in the vehicle, Locks Law Firm attorney Tom Gowen was able to prove that a builder had piled fill on top of the roots on one side of the oak tree thereby depriving the roots of oxygen. Mr. Gowen retained expert archeologists, geologists and arborists to prove that despite the builder's denial, fill from off site was placed over the roots in the year of the construction project and that the injury to the tree also began in the same year.  The expert reading of the rings of the tree demonstrated the decline of the root system on the side of the tree away from the road on which the fill had been piled when a house was built.  Through production of this evidence a substantial settlement was obtained for his client's estate.

Back to top

Nursing Home Neglect

Personal injury lawyer Jerry A. Lindheim represented an elderly woman who had limited ability to walk independently. She moved to an assisted living facility, where her needs could be met and her well-being could be safeguarded. Instead, the elderly lady experienced nursing home neglect when the nursing staff left her alone to walk into the dining room for her meal. The abandoned woman was forced to enter the dining room unassisted for dinner, and she tripped and fell over a negligently designed threshold. She fell to the ground and shattered her hip. Mr. Lindheim successfully negotiated a settlement for the woman, which allowed her to seek care in a safer facility.

Back to top

Burns

Manhattan-area personal injury lawyer Jerry A. Lindheim successfully represented a young college woman who was injured during a chemistry class, sustaining second and third degree burns, due to negligence on the part of the college. The college endangered its chemistry students by disabling audible alarms on the fume hood that sound when vapors accumulate. The young woman was burned when the vapors combusted. Mr. Lindheim resolved the case in the young woman's favor for a substantial, confidential amount.

Back to top

Premises Liability/School Accident

Locks Law partner Jerry A. Lindheim settled a matter involving inadequate education and training of a college student in performing class activities.  The student sustained a cervical fracture when performing at a school sanctioned event.  The defense countered that the student assumed the risk of his injuries.  However, Mr. Lindheim was able to establish that the method that his client used in performing this activity was identical to the method used by other students who performed the activity at other universities.  In addition, Mr. Lindheim was able to establish that the activity had been outlawed or banned by other institutions years before his client was injured.  The case settled for six figures shortly thereafter.

Back to top

Personal Injury/Environmental Contamination

Since early 2001, the Locks Law Firm has represented nearly 1,200 victims of gasoline leaks from underground storage tanks at service stations in Hazelton, Pennsylvania.  We sued four major oil companies, including the biggest corporation in the world, and many distributors and service station operators.  Claims include more than twenty personal injury claims for the development of leukemias and lymphomas, as well as property damage, nuisance, and medical monitoring.  In 2007, about half of the defendants entered into significant but confidential settlements.  The suit continues against the remaining defendants, and the case is scheduled to go to trial in late 2008.

Back to top

Defective Passenger Airplane

Locks Law attorneys obtained a verdict against Boeing in New Jersey Federal Court, proving that the Boeing 757 was defectively designed, causing injury to a flight attendant.

Toxic Neuropathy

Our firm's attorney Tom Gowen brought suit on behalf of an art student against her college after she suffered a severe toxic neuropathy from exposure to hexacarbon solvents in her art materials in poorly ventilated classrooms.   The art materials contained n-hexane, toluene, xylene, and ethyl methyl ketone. The student suffered severe respiratory distress, loss of vocal strength, foot drop ad severe headaches as a result of the exposure to these toxic solvents in the sprays and fixatives used by the art students in classes without proper ventilation.

Back to top

Police Liability

Personal injury lawyer Karl Friedrichs reached a confidential settlement with a local township in Gloucester County and an officer on the county's police force in a wrongful death lawsuit brought on behalf of the estate of an 18-year-old township resident, who died from injuries sustained in an automobile accident with a police car.  The settlement concluded three years of litigation against the municipality. 

The accident occurred while the officer, a ten-year patrolman with the police department, was responding to an emergency dispatch call.  The accident occurred on a two-lane road with a posted speed limit of 35 mph.  The Estate alleged that while en route to the emergency call, the officer failed to activate his overhead lights and siren, while traveling at speeds approaching 90 mph.  The collision occurred when the officer was unable to yield as he approached the vehicle ahead of him, driven by the plaintiff-decedent, which was attempting to make a left-hand turn off of Broad Street on to a side street. 

Discovery in the case revealed that the police department failed to have any written guidelines that addressed the proper way for an officer to respond to an emergency call.  Still, the defendants attempted to dismiss the case, asserting that the state's Tort Claims Act provided them with immunity from liability.  The court denied the defendants' motions, and the case settled while scheduled for trial.  The Estate was prepared to offer into evidence at trial the expert testimony of a police procedure expert and an accident reconstructionist to support its liability claims.

Back to top

Supreme Court Medical Malpractice Victory

Tom Gowen represents a woman who after having worked in a factory for 25 years had repetitive stress injuries to her hand and wrist. She went to a general surgeon, whom she had previously known, who recommended doing Carpal Tunnel Surgery and a deQuervains Release in two separate procedures. The Carpal Tunnel went reasonably well but she was in severe pain after the deQuervains release. This lady had great faith in her surgeon and returned to him regularly for 13 months, having EMGs that he ordered and going to see an orthopedic consultant as well and no one diagnosed her condition. It was not until she went to another surgeon, this time a hand surgeon, who ultimately re-opened her wrist and found that the original surgeon had severed a nerve and had failed to accomplish the deQuervains release that she knew that she had actually been injured in the surgery. She filed her case two years before her first meeting with the last surgeon, but the defense asked the court for summary judgment based on the statute of limitations and the court found that she must have known that she was injured even though her doctors did not. Mr. Gowen appealed her case to the Superior Court which agreed in a two to one vote with the trial court. Then Mr.Gowen appealed her case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. After extensive briefing and oral argument, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the decision of the lower courts and returned the case for trial. The Supreme Court did a lengthy analysis of the discovery rule as it is applied in Pennsylvania to toll the running of the statute of limitations in cases where the plaintiff is not aware that she has an injury or its cause despite being reasonably diligent in seeking a medical explanation for her condition. In this case even though she knew that her arm was very painful and that her hand eventually became claw like, no doctor was able to tell her that she had a lacerated nerve or whether she had a natural condition like deQuervains disease, arthritis or epicondylitis. It was not until the last surgeon re-opened her wrist and saw what had occurred that she could have had the requisite knowledge to know that she was injured by the surgery. Mr. Gowen argued that she should have two years from the date that she knew the nature of her injury and the cause of her pain to file suit. Pennsylvania has many confusing cases in this area of the law and Justice Baer and Justice McCaffrey urged the Court to more clearly define the law so that the plaintiff would have to have enough knowledge of her injury so that she or her lawyer could provide enough information to a reviewing expert, to obtain a Certificate of Merit. The majority of the Court, found in favor of Mr. Gowens client, stated several principles that should be helpful in future cases including that it would not hold that a lay plaintiff should be held to a higher standard of medical knowledge than had been communicated to her by the doctors on whom she relied.

Back to top

Contact a Personal Injury Attorney

Although we are pleased to share examples of our past successes, we are most excited about the next case we will handle. Contact the Locks Law Firm to schedule a case consultation if you have been injured as a result of another party's negligence or misconduct. An experienced Pennsylvania, New Jersey, or Manhattan personal injury lawyer at our firm has the skill and knowledge necessary to obtain the compensation you deserve.

Back to top

Contact a Pennsylvania, New Jersey, or Manhattan personal injury lawyer to schedule a free consultation.