Norfolk-Portsmouth Personal Injury Lawyer

GM Aims to Shirk Responsibility with Current or Pending Lawsuits

John Cooper — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:47:00 GMT

General Motors Corp. is currently re-organizing itself and plans to emerge as a new company post-Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company will be aptly named “New GM.” Unfortunately, this “new” company is still utilizing old tactics to free itself from legal liability.

Any lawsuit currently filed against GM will only be able to seek retribution via “Old GM,” which will essentially be a collection of bad assets and debt with little-to-no chance of a plaintiff securing any financial compensation for personal injury, according to the Associated Press.

However, the new GM will assume any future product liability claims. This means if the seatbelt in your GM vehicle fails to work after the new company emerges from bankruptcy, you can file a claim. But if your seatbelt failed to work and you filed a claim two months ago, you’re basically left in the lurch dealing with the ram shackled, destitute GM of yesteryear.

If this bankruptcy plan is executed, it will set a terrible precedent. Companies could use Chapter 11 as a means to avoid legal liability with pending, or active lawsuits.

In GM’s original bankruptcy plan, they had the audacity to propose leaving all legal liabilities behind after selling its "good" assets to the new, government-owned company. If GM had their way, future car-accident victims would have been unable to sue and be categorized as “unsecured creditors,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

As an injury lawyer with 20 years of experience representing clients who’ve been injured in car accidents, I’m glad GM will be obligated to take on future product liability claims but it’s outrageous that current, or pending, lawsuits with victims dealing with severe injuries will be left with little recourse for proper compensation.

About the Editors: Shapiro, Cooper Lewis & Appleton personal injury law firm is based in Virginia (VA), near the NE North Carolina (NC) border and handles car,truck,railroad, and medical negligence cases and more. Our lawyers proudly edit the Virginia Beach Injuryboard, Norfolk Injuryboard, and Northeast North Carolina Injuryboard as a pro bono public information service. Lawyers licensed in: VA, NC, SC, WV, DC, KY.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Cooper

Fentanyl/Duragesic Patch Claims: A History of Death and a Dangerous Drug

John Cooper — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:21:44 GMT

Fentanyl, a drug approximately 100 times stronger than morphine, has been linked to many fatalities due to inappropriate use and medical error. Fentanyl, also called Duragesic, was developed in 1959, is used to treat post-operative and chronic pain, and also used in clinical practice as a general anesthetic. Fentanyl is also used illegally, becoming popular in drug culture for its euphoric effects. Fentanyl has been used as a direct substitute for heroin; however, its extreme potency increases the rate of overdose and can lead to respiratory problems and even death.

Recently, Fentanyl has been the subject of law suits involving doctors and pharmaceutical companies. In 2004, five lots of the Duragesic pain patch, produced by Johnson & Johnson were recalled for problems due to Fentanyl. The Duragesic patches have contained Fentanyl since 1990; however, the defect in 2004 allowed the Fentanyl gel to leak from the patch directly onto the patient’s skin. Once Fentanyl came into contact with the patient, it was absorbed by the body in dangerously high levels. The FDA reported hundreds of fatalities due to these defective patches.

A subsidiary of Johnson and Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, was sued in 2003 due to Duragesic patches. The family of the deceased sued after the victim’s death was found to be caused by the use of the Duragesic patches for chronic hip pain. The family received 5.5 million dollars as the result of a wrongful death suit against the company. It was more than a year after this event that the company began issuing warnings about the health risks of using Duragesic patches.

Fentanyl has also been linked to medical malpractice and medication error. Cephalon has provided some important safety information to those prescribed any medication or treatment that involves Fentanyl (specifically Fentora).

- No doctor should prescribe Fentanyl products to those who are opioid in-tolerant. Such as patients taking 24 hour opioid treatment.

- Fentanyl should only be used for labeled indications

- Fentanyl is not for acute pain, or sports injuries

- Fentanyl should never be used as a replacement for other medication or treatments such as Actiq

Although there are appropriate uses for Fentanyl, you must be careful that you are not abusing the substance. Many suffer from abuse of Fentanyl simply by accident, through medical malpractice or product defect. Staying aware of possible side effects and complications with your treatment and medication will allow you to recognize problems and catch symptoms early on. Anytime you are introducing foreign substances into your body, whether prescribed or not, make sure you follow directions, and contact a medical provider if you start having any negative effects from the treatment.

Many wrongful death lawsuits against the manufacturers of Fentanyl and Duragesic pain patches have focused on defects, leaks or improper prescription of the pain patches. Our firm has investigated several deaths and it is clear that the cases we investigated involved accidental, not intented death, and toxic amounts of fentanyl, proved by autopsy toxicology reporting.

Prior fentanyl/duragesic articles we have authored:

Lethal Weapon of Overdose Death: Fentanyl

Fentanyl/Duragesic Patches Associated with Death and Overdose

Fentanyl Death Case Results and Information

Being well educated and well informed is the first step to better treatment and a brighter future. It’s your body, and you only get one. Stay healthy, and stay safe.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Cooper

Veterans Affairs Centers Lack Proper Training to Perform Endoscopies and Other Common Procedures

Jim Lewis — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:50:00 GMT

When a member of the military visits a Veterans Affairs (VA) center to get a check-up, treatment, or procedure they put their trust in the employees of that center to be up-to-date and capable of performing basic medical tasks. Unfortunately, 57 percent of VA centers do not have standard operating guidelines or properly trained staff to perform endoscopic procedures such as colonoscopies, according to the Associated Press.

As an injury lawyer with 20 years of experience representing our heroic veterans in Virginia, it’s surprising to learn our VA centers continually fail to offer proper preparation for a very common, minimally invasive procedure such as a colonoscopy.

A colonoscopy helps find tumors, ulcers, colon polyps, and inflammation or bleeding, according to WebMD.com. During the procedure, tissue samples can be collected, known as a biopsy, and abnormal growths can be removed. A colonoscopy can also be utilized to check for cancer or precancerous growths, commonly referred to as “polyps,” in the colon or rectum,

The doctor uses a tube called a colonoscope to examine the colon. Apparently, the doctors and staff at numerous VA centers improperly used a colonoscope and other endoscopic equipment or were not well-trained with these items.

An even more disturbing aspect of this revelation is the fact that in February, the VA warned roughly 10,000 former patients at facilities in Miami to get blood tests for HIV and hepatitis due to a potential infection from VA procedures.

Here’s a video discussing the HIV infections of veterans possibly from VA procedures…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HweJDx3ZFU

It’s clear the VA needs to make some dramatic changes to their policies and procedures. This lackadaisical attitude toward caring for our veterans is unacceptable. They deserve the very best care possible and a majority of VA centers simply fail at this task.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jim Lewis

Virginia Lawsuits Against Doctors and Hospitals for Medical Errors are not a Main Reason for High Health Insurance Costs

Jim Lewis — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:00:00 GMT

Anyone in Virginia Beach/Norfolk, Virginia (VA) who watches the news knows that the country has an extremely expensive medical system that doesn’t always deliver quality care. In figuring out the solutions, some of the loudest voices are the lobbyists for the doctors, hospitals and health insurance companies who often try to blame injury lawyers and medical malpractice actions as the reason for “defensive medicine” and higher healthcare costs. However, this argument has been shown to be false by various researchers who have studied the problem. Healthcare costs and health insurance premiums continue to rise whether the state is like North Carolina where there are no medical malpractice caps or the state is like Virginia where there are unfair limits as to the maximum award no matter what the harms are caused by medical errors.

In fact, Virginia lawyers making claims against the medical insurers for doctors and hospitals tend to increase the quality of care and decrease medical mistakes by weeding out incompetent and forcing health care providers to obey the medical guidelines. For example, some hospitals have been adopting better pre-surgical procedures, at least in part because of preventable errors pointed out by lawyers for patients who were victims of past errors. In Virginia Beach now most operative reports show a pause before the procedure begins to make sure that the hospital is operating on the right patient and that the surgeon and nurses know what procedure is to be performed and on what body part. By checking these things the hospital staff make sure that their operating rooms are not making obvious mistakes like doing a procedure on the left knee when they are supposed to be doing it on the right knee of the patient. When consumers and lawyers stand up and demand that changes be made, good things happen both in terms of improving health outcomes and making sure that families who have been harmed get restitution from those who were at fault.

To read more about how medical malpractice lawyers are part of the solution, not the problem, please click here.

About the Editors: Shapiro, Cooper, Lewis & Appleton personal My injury lawfirm (VA-NC law offices) edits the injury law blogs Virginia Beach Injuryboard, Norfolk Injuryboard, as well as the Northeast North Carolina Injuryboard as a pro bono service to consumers. Lawyers licensed in: VA, NC, SC, WV, DC, KY, who handle car, truck, railroad, and medical negligence cases and more.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jim Lewis

Restaurants at Waterside Receive New Alcohol Permits, Could Increase Risk of Drunk Driving and Dangerous Behavior

Emily Mapp Brannon — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:15:00 GMT

Waterside is a popular market area in downtown Norfolk, Virginia (VA) that’s been opened for 26 years. However, there has been a spike in raucous behavior – 258 calls for police assistance - and even a shooting in a Waterside parking garage, according to The Virginian-Pilot.

The restaurants inhabiting Waterside have been operating with “special exemptions” to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages. City officials recently passed a new set of “special exemptions” to continue the sale of alcohol.

As an injury lawyer concerned with the safety of our citizens, I believe the sale of alcohol at Waterside is a strong contributing factor to the increase in violence and illegal incidences in the area. I’ve represented clients who were severely injured due to drunken customers at bars and restaurants.

I understand the importance of personal responsibility when it comes to consuming alcohol at a restaurant, but city officials should have implemented stricter guidelines and regulations before granting these new permits to Waterside restaurants.

Here’s a video discussing the future of Waterside and the increased incidences of drunken brawls and violence…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJOhijTkB10

So often people go out to a restaurant, enjoy a few too many drinks, and then irresponsibly drive home. Our firm has represented numerous clients who’ve suffered horrific injuries due to drunk drivers. I’m not saying Waterside is a haven for drunk drivers, but when you look at the escalation of a police presence at Waterside and the recent shooting, it makes you wonder if a moratorium on alcohol sales may have been a better option, or at least much stricter regulations.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Emily Mapp Brannon

Nestle Toll House Cookie Dough Food Poisoning Connected to Virginia

Rick Shapiro — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:10:00 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently inspected the Danville, Virginia (VA) factory which produced the Nestle Toll House cookie dough which contained E. coli, according to the Daily Press. The reports show a complete lack of compliance on the part of Nestle USA. Between 2004 and 2007, Nestle failed to provide important documents such as complaint logs and pest-control records to the FDA.

So far, 69 people in 29 states – including Virginia (VA) – have been sickened due to the E. coli outbreak from the cookie dough. Clearly, Nestle is at fault for these illnesses due to their procrastination and sheer insolence toward FDA requests.

As an injury lawyer with 20 years of experience representing clients who’ve suffered severe injuries due to big companies failing to follow basic safety measures, it’s frustrating to hear about another company needlessly allowing people to get sick.

Here’s a video talking about the Nestle cookie dough recall due to E. coli…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLNBo6nygYE

This isn’t the first time Virginia (VA) has been embroiled in a food poisoning controversy. There was a recent outbreak of salmonella connected to peanut butter manufactured by Peanut Corp. in Lynchburg, Virginia (VA), according to Fox News. Two Virginians died as a result of this outbreak and over 500 people were sickened.

Food poisoning affects roughly 25 percent of Americans every year and if you have a case of diarrhea which lasts more than a day, there’s a 1-in-3 chance you had food poisoning, according to chinadaily.com.

When E. coli enters your body it causes abdominal cramping, vomiting, nausea, and the aforementioned diarrhea. Serious complications can occur, especially in young children, older people, and individuals with weak immune systems, according to webmd.com.

If you or a loved one has been sickened by E. coli and/or salmonella and you believe it’s related to cookie dough or peanut butter, you need to seek legal advice.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Rick Shapiro

Blaming the Train Operator is Typical Initial Response to Disasters Like the D.C. Metro Train Crash

John Cooper — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:33:25 GMT

I am an injury lawyer in Virginia who specializes in railroad accidents and works with the national plaintiff’s bar group, the AAJ, as their railroad law section chair, so I follow these kinds of metro train disasters closely. The city officials for the District of Columbia, the federal officials at the NTSB, and the officials from Metrorail have been relatively measured in saying who did what wrong to cause one Metro train with six cars to crash into and jump over the back of another on Monday, June 22, 2009. However, you can just hear the implication that this young woman who was unfortunate enough to be behind the controls and was killed on the rear-ending train was as fault. The media immediately pointed out that she was relatively new to the job of operating the Metro trains. They talked about the fact that it was a clear day, and a straight set of tracks, not in a dark subway tunnel, so that she should have been able to see what was in front of her. They pointed out that even if the train is being run in automatic, which it apparently was, that she had an emergency brake button which she can push to avoid a collision.

Sometimes a train wreck is in fact the conductor’s, engineer’s or train operator’s fault as apparently it may have been in the case in the Los Angeles Metro Link disaster a year ago. In that situation, it turned out that there really was a distraction, namely, using a cell phone that caused the person responsible for the passengers’ safety to “be asleep at the switch.” But sometimes it’s not the case that the worker in charge is a cause or a main cause of multiple people being dead or injured in the train wreck. Sometimes, the implication that it was one particular worker’s fault may be used to get the who organization off the hook for systemic problems that they knew about and failed to do anything to properly respond to.

For example, some of the information coming out in the days after this D.C. Metro two-train accident are as follows:

1. It appears that the “mushroom” button used to stop the train had been activated by the operator;

2. This old Series 1000 train may not have been properly maintenanced before the disaster;

3. The older train was not even supposed to be used as NTSB and other agencies had told the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) that these train cars were obsolete and not reasonably safe;

4. Even the older trains were supposed to have some kind of computer, automatic emergency braking to prevent trains from getting too close to one another and just this kind of collision which evidently failed; and

5. Other aspects of the train were potentially unsafe and might lead to more people dying or getting severely hurt, including the crashworthiness features of the older subway cars.

If some of these systematic factors turn out to be the main cause, then the administrators of the system are the ones who made bad choices that caused nine people to die, rather than anything that the poor employee did or didn’t do on the date of this fatal wreck.

About the Editors: Shapiro, Cooper, Lewis & Appleton personal My injury lawfirm (VA-NC law offices ) edits the injury law blogs Virginia Beach Injuryboard, Norfolk Injuryboard, as well as the Northeast North Carolina Injuryboard as a pro bono service to consumers. Lawyers licensed in: VA, NC, SC, WV, DC, KY, who handle car, truck, railroad, and medical negligence cases and more.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Cooper

Washington, DC Metro Opens $250,000 “Relief Fund” for Metro Crash Victims

Rick Shapiro — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:10:45 GMT

The Washington, DC Metro Board of Directors decided to create a relief fund totaling $250,000 for victims to help cover medical expenses, funerals, and other financial needs, according to foxbaltimore.com.

So far, nine people have been killed and over 50 people have been injured due to the Metro train accident, which occurred on June 22, 2009. Police are investigating the scene of the accident to try and determine the cause, but there is no official explanation at this time.

Many people are suggesting one of the Metro trains was equipped with outdated technology and the Board of Directors were reluctant to spend the necessary funds to update all of their trains. Our firm has written about the myriad of potential causes for the Metro train crash, but we have to wait until a full investigation is complete.

Here is a video providing details on the DC Metro crash investigation…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-V1m7ATjGc8

The DC Metro Board of Directors made a wise decision to allocate funds to assist victims with their medical expenses and families who lost a loved one with funeral costs, but if it’s determined this accident was caused by negligence on the part of s Metro train operator or a lack of sufficient upgrades by administrators for the trains, $250,000 will not be enough compensation.

As an injury lawyer with over two decades of experience, I’ve represented clients who’ve been severely injured due to horrendous accidents and the DC Metro accident is the worst in Metrorail history. The emotional ramifications for family members who lost a loved one are unquantifiable at this point.

Again, it’s a nice gesture on the Board of Director’s part, but certainly not the end. In addition to properly compensating injured victims and family members who lost a loved one, additional funds must be allocated to properly updating the safety features of these Metro trains. Steps must be taken to ensure this never happens again.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Rick Shapiro

Death Toll Rises from DC Metro Train Crash

Emily Mapp Brannon — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:48:10 GMT

The number of casualties from the June 22, 2009 Washington, DC Metro crash is now officially up to 9. It is the worst accident in the 33-year history of the Metrorail system.

When the DC Metro crash initially occurred, reports indicated four people died, but that number has steadily increased with further examination by police and other investigative agencies.

The accident involved two metro trains colliding into each other. Though, the trains were markedly different in terms of design features and safety. The train that was hit was a relatively new train, while the train that hit it was one of Metro's oldest vehicles, according to USA Today.

Here is a video providing details of the DC Metro crash…

Video

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) discovered that older trains possessed "a fundamental flaw" in their design which put passengers at a higher risk in a collision, according to USA Today.

NTSB recommended Metro either upgrade its older trains or refrain from using them. Metro did neither and Debbie Hersmann, a spokeswoman for NTSB, said Metro's response was "unacceptable" towards their recommendation for upgrades or phase out.

The disparity in design and technology could help explain how and why this tragic accident occurred. Our firm has written about potential causes of the DC Metro crash and how this could have been prevented.

As stated earlier, this is just the second crash in Metrorail’s history. In 1982, three people died and 25 were injured when a train derailed underground downtown.

I want to take a moment to send out my heart-felt condolences to the friends and family members who lost loved ones in this horrible accident. The pain from losing someone you love is virtually impossible to describe in words. But what we need to do now is fully examine what happened and implore Metro officials to take the necessary steps to prevent such a horrendous accident from ever happening again.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Emily Mapp Brannon

At least 6 Dead, 60 or More Injured in Washington, DC Area Metro Train Crash

Rick Shapiro — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:13:27 GMT

Two Metro trains collided between the Takoma Park and Fort Totten Metro stations on the red line just outside Washington, DC, and there are at least 6 confirmed deaths and at least 60 or more people injured. Pictures and video from the scene show one of the Metro railroad train cars literally still situated partly on top of a partly crushed metro train that was stationary ahead as the collision was on above ground railroad track. The Metro train which crashed into the rear of the first Metro train was a six car train destined toward the termination point of Shady Grove.

The FBI and the NTSB investigators were at the scene as this article was posted. Washington DC fire spokesman called it a "mass casualty event." Emergency rescue personnel were using special tools to try to reach persons trapped inside train cars. "We don't know the number of injuries yet; we know they've taken over 60 people off the train," Metro general manager John Cato told reporters.

According to news reports, Howard University Hospital and Washington Hospital Center were prepared to receive passengers injured in the Metro train collision, if rescued.

DC Mayor Fenty said at a news conference. "It is my present understanding that this would then be the deadliest accident in the history of our Metro train transit system."

John Catoe, Metro general manager said: “One train was stopped, waiting to get the order to pass. The next train came up behind. It, for reasons we don’t know, went into the back of that train. We will find what happened and fix what happened.”

Potential Causes

Our railroad injury law firm has handled previous railroad litigation involving an injury to a passenger involved in a similar circumstance where a Metro train collided with the rear of a second stationary Metro train inside an underground Metro stop, that occurred in Washington DC in . As a result of the NTSB investigation, there were multiple causes cited: 1) the Metro train operator allegedly actually fell sleep because of a lack of proper rest, contributing to the rear end collision of the metro trains, 2) there was a failure to have an automatic braking control system that would automatically stop the Metro train if an operator did not respond on a periodic basis to a prompt (a protection device against an operator sleeping, or for some reason being unable to control the train) and there were other contributing causes.

Here, early news reports mention ongoing track work in the area which is an ominous sign (potential interference with electronic signals?). However, at this moment there is not sufficent information to pinpoint the cause.

Other relevant articles by our law firm on general railroad injury circumstances:

Toxic Chlorine Gas Used in Recent Attack in Iraq is the Same ... Railroad Accident/FELA, Rail Crossing Attorneys: Virginia/Carolina ...