Why Parking Lots are Fertile Ground for Accidents

August 27th, 2014

Parking lots are unique places where those frequenting them have likely been both a hurried driver and a distracted pedestrian at one time or another. There’s a lot going on in a parking lot: cars coming and going, drivers pulling in and out of parking spaces, pedestrians walking to and from business establishments, sometimes in the path of oncoming vehicles.

Although cars typically move more slowly in parking lots, drivers are also distracted (looking for that perfect spot, no doubt), traveling unpredictably in all directions, weaving back and forth, and generally putting other motorists and pedestrians at risk. Not surprisingly, the Washington Post reports that more than one in five motor vehicle accidents occur in parking lots.

Parking Lot Accident Procedure

If you’re involved in a parking lot accident, either as a motorist or pedestrian, there are certain steps you should take as soon as possible:

  • Remove the cars from the accident scene into a safer location, or if they cannot be moved, turn on your emergency flashers and exit the vehicle.
  • Check for injuries, and call for medical assistance if necessary.
  • Call the police and your insurance company to report the accident.
  • Exchange contact and insurance information with the other party involved.
  • Note the time, date, location, weather conditions, parking lot conditions, and another other important details.
  • Take pictures of the scene, the damage, and the injuries sustained if possible.
  • Get the names and phone numbers of any witnesses to the accident.
  • If you or someone else has been seriously injured, consider speaking with an accident attorney.

Fault in Parking Lot Accidents

Establishing fault in a parking lot accident can be extremely challenging, and for this reason, if you are injured, calling an attorney might be advisable. Because parking lots are typically on private property where the rules of the road don’t apply, the police might not investigate or complete a report on a parking lot accident. It generally comes down to one person’s word against the other, and insurance companies usually split the fault equally, regardless of who may have actually been to blame.

Tags: ,
Posted in News Blog, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Cubist Pharmaceuticals Recalls 100+ Lots of Cubicin

August 19th, 2014

One hundred and one production lots of the antibiotic Cubicin, the intravenously administered prescription used for the treatment of skin and bloodstream infections, was voluntarily recalled by Cubist Pharmaceuticals on August 6 due to the potential presence of glass particles in vials produced by a contract manufacturer.

When a glass particulate is present in an intravenous drug, patients are potentially at risk for the following:

  • Thromboembolism
  • Life-threatening pulmonary emboli
  • Phlebitis
  • Mechanical block of the capillaries
  • The formation of granulomas, a protective local inflammatory response to foreign material

According to the FDA, patients with a preexisting condition of trauma or another condition that affects the microvascular blood supply are at an increased safety risk.

What is Cubicin?

Cubicin is used to treat bacterial infections of the skin and underlying tissues. It is packaged in single-use vials and distributed nationwide. Common side effects include:

  • Nausea
  • Vomiting
  • Constipation
  • Diarrhea
  • Headache
  • Dizziness
  • Trouble sleeping
  • Anxiety
  • Pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site

Cubist is notifying customers of the recall by letter and telephone, and anyone with an existing inventory of the product lots listed should determine whether they have product from the recalled lots and discontinue use and arrange for return and replacement of the affected lots. The company is expecting to recall about 50,000 vials of Cubicin that were manufactured between November 2011 and February 2014.

This is the third recall in 12 months for the Lexington, Massachusetts-based drug maker, although the previous two were on a much smaller scale, they also involved supplier issues. In each instance, the presence of glass particles triggered the recall. Like the previous two, this recall is precautionary, as no complaints of trace glass particles in vials or any adverse effects associated with the product have been reported to date.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Pfizer Pays $35 Million in Rapamune Settlements

August 18th, 2014

According to the Associated Press, Pfizer plans to pay $35 million to resolve allegations by 42 states that its subsidiary, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, illegally marketed an organ transplant drug for unapproved uses.

The states’ attorneys general said on August 6, 2014 that Wyeth, which New York-based Pfizer acquired for $68 billion in 2009, trained sales representatives to encourage doctors to prescribe Rapamune for uses other than preventing rejection of transplanted kidneys. Rapamune was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1999 only for use in kidney transplant patients, and promoting drugs for uses not cleared by the FDA is illegal.

Rapamune (generic name sirolimus) lowers a person’s immune system to prevent the rejection of a transplanted kidney. It can also lower blood cells that help a body fight infections, making it easier for an individual to bleed excessively from an injury or get sick from being around others who are ill.

Other potential side effects include joint pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, stomach pain, headache, acne, and skin rash.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Pfizer will reform its marketing and promotional practices to avoid unlawfully promoting Rapamune or any Pfizer product, and will not:

  • Make false, misleading, or deceptive claims
  • Make any claim comparing the safety or efficacy of a Pfizer product to another product when that claim is not supported by substantial evidence
  • Promote any Pfizer product for uses not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration
  • Provide incentives to encourage sales for off-label uses
  • Seek to have Rapamune included in hospital protocols or standing orders unless it is to be used for an FDA-approved purpose
  • Share information describing any off-label or unapproved use of Rapamune unless such information complies with FDA regulations
  • Seek to influence the prescribing of Rapamune in hospitals or transplant centers in any manner that does not comply with federal law banning kick-backs, including through funding clinical trials

Pfizer said in a statement that the alleged illegal activity occurred before it acquired Wyeth, and did not admit any wrongdoing or liability as part of the settlement. The company agreed to pay nearly $491 million in July 2013 to resolve a similar investigation by the Department of Justice.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

RegenESlim Recalled Due to Presence of DMAA

August 15th, 2014

Regeneca Worldwide, a division of VivaCeuticals, Inc. in Las Vegas, is voluntarily recalling its RegenESlim appetite control dietary supplement due to the confirmed presence of DMAA in certain lots of the supplement. DMAA, also known as dimethylamylamine, methylhexanamine, or geranium oil/extract, is typically used as a stimulant, pre-workout, and weight loss ingredient in dietary supplement products.

The FDA has warned that DMAA is dangerous because it can narrow blood vessels and arteries and cause a corresponding rise in blood pressure or other cardiovascular problems, such as:

  • Shortness of breath
  • Arrhythmias
  • Elevated blood pressure
  • Tightening in the chest
  • Heart attack
  • Death

Until 2012, DMAA, which was first discovered by Eli Lilly and Company in 1944, was sold by numerous companies. It was marketed as the nasal decongestant Forthane until 1983, and reappeared as a dietary supplement in 2006. The FDA reported that by April 2013, it had received 86 adverse event reports from people who used DMAA, and in response sent warning letters to a total of 11 companies advising them that DMAA-containing products marketed as dietary supplements are illegal and must be taken off the market. These companies include:

  • Exclusive Supplements – Biorhythm SSIN Juice
  • Fahrenheit Nutrition – Lean Efx
  • Gaspari Nutrition – Spirodex
  • iSatori Global Technologies, LLC – PWR
  • Muscle Warfare, Inc. – Napalm
  • MuscleMeds Performance Technologies – Code Red
  • Nutrex Research – Hemo Rage Black, Lipo-6 Black Ultra Concentrate, Lipo-6 Black, Lipo-6 Black Hers Ultra Concentrate, Lipo-6 Black Hers
  • Regeneca, Inc. – RegeneSlim
  • SEI Pharmaceuticals – MethylHex 4,2
  • SNI LLC – Nitric Blast
  • USP Labs, LLC – Oxy Elite Pro, Jack3D

Although there have been no reported illnesses to date, the voluntary recall was the result of FDA analysis confirming the presence of DMAA in RegenESlim. Regeneca Worldwide is conducting a continuing investigation on the problem.

Customers who have purchased RegenESlim Lot #EX0616R15814 and Lot #11414RE5516 are advised to stop using the product immediately and return it to the place of purchase for a full refund. Adverse reactions to the supplement may be reported to the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program online, fax, or via regular mail.

RegenESlim is purchased by and distributed through direct sales in the U.S. and Puerto Rico, and also through online sales for both personal use and retail sales.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Childers, Schlueter & Smith Continue to Investigate Stryker Claims Related to Recalled Hip Implants

August 8th, 2014

Our personal injury lawyers are still investigating claims on behalf of anyone who has had revision surgery due to complications from the recalled Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II modular-neck stem implant. In July of 2012, the Stryker Corporation issued a voluntary recall of the Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck stem hip implants due to the risks associated with corrosion of the modular neck joint of the implant. For more information, check out the “Top 10 Things all Stryker Hip Implant Patients Need To Know

depuy-recallAccording to a study published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 48 percent of the total hip arthroplasties measured in the study resulted in elevated metal ion levels for the patients that received them. The study also indicated that the rate of revision surgery administered to hip implant patients was 28 percent. We believe those numbers will continue to increase in the months and years ahead based on our own specific findings.

Those patients in the study who received a modular hip implant had the Kaplan-Meier survivorship (a measure of the life cycle of a product) of their devices measured at 40 percent after 4 years even though they are intended (and marketed to patients) to last for at least 15 years.

It comes as no surprise to us that results from this new study are consistent with what our clients have been alleging all along: The Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II are defective and should have never been placed on the market. Our national hip implant attorneys are currently investigating Stryker hip implant recall claims on behalf of all persons who have received a Rejuvenate or ABG II modular-neck stem implant. This includes those that have already had a revision (replacement) of the hip device as well as those that have yet to have the recalled implant replaced.

If you or a loved one has suffered medical complications from the Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II, contact the national personal injury lawyers at Childers, Schlueter & Smith LLC for a thorough investigation into your claim. All inquiries are kept confidential and all initial consultations are free of charge.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in FDA Alerts Blog, News & Results, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Class Action Filed Against Cerezyme Manufacturer

July 5th, 2014

A class action lawsuit has been filed against Genzyme Corporation, the maker of the drug Cerezyme, after a Colorado man claimed the company distributed and sold impure and untested drugs. Cerezyme, which costs $200,000 a year or more, is prescribed to treat Gaucher disease, a rare enzyme deficiency that is inherited from an individual’s parents.

What is Cerezyme?

Cerezyme is a modified form of the human enzyme, glucocerebrosidase. It is produced using genetic engineering technology, also called recombinant DNA technology, and has been shown to be effective in the treatment of Type 1 Gaucher Disease. It is prescribed for adults and children with Type 1 Gaucher disease that results in one or more of the following symptoms:

  • Anemia
  • Low blood platelet counts
  • Enlargement of the spleen or liver
  • Bone disease


Once considered a miracle drug for those suffering from Gaucher Disease, Cerezyme was contaminated with vesivirus sometime prior to July 2009 and according to the complaint, the company cut doses to less than a third for many Gaucher patients due to a shortage of the drug. The company allegedly knew the diluted medication was experimental and dangerous and still elected to give it to certain patients, including the plaintiff, who now suffers from an incurable cancer.

According to court documents, after Genzyme contaminated its bioreactors with the dangerous virus, the company was forced to temporarily close its main factory in Boston, greatly reducing the output of Cerezyme. Genzyme did not restore full supplies of Cerezyme until January of 2011, much later than initially expected.

Because Genzyme could not meet customer demand for Cerezyme, the company implemented a plan that was designed to ration the drug that was allegedly illegal to sell or market in the first place, according to the complaint, because it was “experimental, mislabeled, impure, contaminated, ineffective, diluted and illegally substituted but marketed as if it were a beneficial treatment for Gaucher Disease,” although it was never previously tested in animals or human beings.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

California Counties Wage War Against Narcotics Industry

July 3rd, 2014

With language reminiscent of the government’s legal attack against the tobacco industry beginning in 1999, officials from Orange and Santa Clara counties in California filed suit against five of the world’s largest narcotics manufacturers last month. Both counties have been hit hard by overdose deaths, emergency room visits, and rising medical costs associated with prescription narcotics.

The lawsuit names Actavis, Endo Health Solutions Inc., Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Purdue Pharma, and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries’ Cephalon Inc. and alleges that the companies essentially caused the nation’s prescription drug epidemic through false advertising, deceptive business practices, and by creating a public nuisance to manipulate doctors and reap huge profits.

According to court documents, the companies are accused of encouraging patients to ask their doctors for painkillers such as OxyContin to treat relatively common conditions such as headaches, arthritis, and back pain. The drug manufacturers promoted these narcotic painkillers as safer than they actually and promised unproven benefits like improved sleep and quality of life, the suit says.

The drug manufacturers’ marketing campaigns, carried out over the past 20 years, have encouraged doctors to turn to narcotic prescriptions as a first resort rather than the last for all types of pain, and many patients stay on the drugs indefinitely.

Twenty years ago, the narcotics industry was selling to a relatively small market because of the long-held fear of addition that stopped doctors from prescribing the powerful painkillers for anything but cancer and end-of-life pain. The lawsuit claims that to expand their market, drug companies engaged in a dishonest campaign to reeducate doctors and revolutionized the treatment of pain associated with a wider array of ailments.

According to the suit, it was the marketing and not any medical breakthrough that heightened the prescribing of narcotics for chronic pain and increased the potential for use and abuse. Painkillers are reportedly involved in over 16,000 fatalities in the U.S. each year, beating out traffic accidents as a leading cause of death.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Georgia Car Accident Basics

February 26th, 2014

When a vehicle collides with another vehicle, pedestrian, or other obstruction, a car accident results. Car collisions can cause minor or more serious injuries, vehicle damage, property damage, and even death.

Factors Affecting the Risk of Car Accidents

Many factors contribute to the risk of car accidents, including the design of a vehicle, road conditions, debris, as well as driver skill, behavior, reaction time, and impairment. Some common types of impairments that may contribute to a higher frequency of car accidents include alcohol, physical impairments, sleep deprivation, drug and alcohol use, and driver distraction.

According to the Georgia Governor’s Office of Highway Safety, the top contributing factors of all crashes and fatal accidents in the state include:

  • Following too close
  • Failure to yield
  • Changed lanes inappropriately
  • Driver lost control
  • Object or animal in roadway
  • Improper backing
  • Disregard of stop sign or traffic signal
  • Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs
  • Improper turn

I’ve Been in an Accident – What Should I Do? 

If the accident resulted in injury or death of any person or property damage over $500, you are required to report the accident to the authorities immediately.

Georgia law requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident to do certain things, including:

  • Stop and remain at the accident scene.
  • Render reasonable assistance to anyone injured, including transporting or making arrangements to transport them to the hospital if necessary.
  • Exchange information with the other driver, including name, address, driver’s license information, and vehicle registration number.
  • Move the vehicle off the roadway onto the shoulder, emergency lane, or median if it can be safely driven and does not require towing.

You will also need to notify your insurance company of the accident, and if possible, take photographs of the accident scene, the damage to the vehicles, and any physical injuries. Always be careful about what you say after an accident. Although you have an obligation to cooperate with law enforcement and your own insurance company, you are not required to give a statement to the other driver or his insurance company – the best way to proceed is to seek legal advice first.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in News & Results, News Blog, Uncategorized | No Comments »

When Minor Impact Causes Major Injuries

February 22nd, 2014

When someone is injured in a seemingly minor collision with minimal property damage, a popular insurance defense tactic is to say that such minor impact could not have caused the plaintiff’s injuries. But no amount of expert testimony and excuses can change the fact that severe injuries often result from minor impact.

Speed and Motor Vehicle Collisions

Many people assume that the greater the speed and impact, the more serious the injuries sustained. While this may be true, it is not always the case. In the case of an automobile wreck with major or minor impact, common sense says that but for the car crash, the victim would not have suffered the injuries they did.

When a crash involves vehicles that are traveling very slowly and little or no property damage occurs, victims can still suffer significant injury and pain, particularly whiplash and other neck injuries. Although automobile bumpers may be built to withstand up to a five mile-per-hour crash without damage, the reality is that when the bumper doesn’t crumble and absorb the force of the impact, more of the crash is felt by the occupants, who are thrown forward with a severe jerking motion that causes necks to snap and backs to twist.

Injuries Can Manifest Later

What may appear to be minor injuries in the first few days and weeks after the accident can turn out to be serious injuries down the road. Some serious injuries that can occur after car crashes involving major as well as minor impact include:

  • Whiplash
  • Herniated discs
  • Lower back and neck pain
  • Concussions
  • Traumatic brain injury
  • Headaches
  • TMJ disorder

Never Underestimate Your Injuries

It’s very important that an individual exposed to impact as a result of a motor vehicle accident – no matter how insignificant the impact may seem to have been – be examined by a medical professional as soon as possible. When dealing with your body and related trauma, it is generally always better just to be safe and get checked out.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in News & Results, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Update: J&J Ordered To Pay $11.1 Million In Prolift Mesh Jury Trial

February 28th, 2013

In an update on our previous posts concerning the transvaginal mesh implant case of Gross v. Gynecare Inc., Atl-L-6966-10, Superior Court of Atlantic County, New Jersey, the same jury just returned a verdict of $7.76 Million more dollars in punitive damages. This amount is in addition to the compensatory verdict of $3.35 Million awarded earlier this week for a grand total of $11.1 Million in all.

Jurors in Atlantic City made the award today to punish J&J, the world’s largest seller of health-care products. The verdict came in the first of 4,000 lawsuits to go to trial over J&J’s pelvic mesh, including 2,100 in New Jersey. The jury of six men and three women declined to comment on its decision.

The total of $11.1 million goes to Linda Gross, a South Dakota nurse who complained of constant pain and underwent 18 operations after J&J’s Gynecare Prolift was implanted to shore up weakened pelvic muscles. On Feb. 25, the panel found that J&J and its Ethicon unit failed to warn her surgeon of the risks of the device and fraudulently misled her about the risks.

The Bloomberg news has just reported the events of the case here:

J&J Owes $7.76 Million in Punitives in Vaginal Mesh Case

Tags: , , ,
Posted in FDA Alerts Blog, News & Results, News Blog, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Call us toll-free at (800) 641-0098