lawsuit Archives - Carey Danis & Lowe

The Most Common Cause of Truck Accidents

By | Truck Accidents, Uncategorized

truck accidentsWhat’s the most common cause of truck accidents?

Driver error.

This probably doesn’t come as a surprise, especially since driver error encompasses so much—from distracted driving to fatigue to performance pressure to driving while under the influence.

According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Administrator, Dr. Mark Rosekind, “[n]inety-four percent of crashes can be tied back to a human choice or error.” Also, an NHTSA press release from July 2016 noted “a 7.7 percent increase in motor vehicle traffic deaths in 2015”.

The high percentage of vehicular accidents attributable to driver error, in addition to the rise in 2015 fatalities, influenced Dr. Rosekind’s statement that “we need to focus our efforts on improving human behavior while promoting vehicle technology that not only protects people in crashes, but helps prevent crashes in the first place.”

90% for Decades

Driver error as the cause of around 90% of car and truck accidents in the US has been a reality for decades, as confirmed by multiple reports. An article by Stanford University’s The Center for Internet and Society provided a summary from reports published between 1979-2015.

  • 1979 — 90-93% in Tri-Level Study of the Causes of Traffic Accidents
  • 2001 — 99% in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) study
  • 2008 — 93% in National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey by NHTSA
  • 2015 — 94% in NHTSA study

Do you have a personal injury lawsuit?

If you, or someone you love, suffered injuries from a truck accident, we encourage you to explore your legal options. What’s of the utmost importance is to choose an experienced truck accident attorney, who has a record of success with these kinds of cases.

Ask an attorney at Carey Danis & Lowe about your case. We offer free, no obligation case consultations.

Call 800.721.2519, or complete our confidential online form.

Yale IVC Filter Study: Benefits Unclear

By | IVC Filters, Uncategorized

inferior vena cavaIn March 2016, a medical journal published a study on IVC filters conducted by the Yale School of Medicine. The study, “Vena Caval Filter Utilization and Outcomes in Pulmonary Embolism : Medicare Hospitalizations From 1999 to 2010”, appeared in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

The Yale researchers found that lots of patients—1 in 6—received an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter to prevent pulmonary embolism, a condition in which a blood clot is in the lungs. From their findings, they concluded that IVC filter benefits are still unclear, and that’s why the lead researcher called for additional studies.

The researchers felt that more patients received an IVC filter than necessary, and future research could potentially pinpoint which patients would be ideal candidates for an IVC filter implant.

IVC Filter Risks

Documented IVC filter risks include device migration, fracture, and perforation. IVC filters have been known to become dislodged, and migrate towards the heart and lungs.

These medical devices have also fractured, with fragments migrating to the heart and lungs. In addition, IVC filters have perforated the inferior vena cava (IVC) vein and other organs and tissues in some patients.

We can help.

If you or a loved one suffered an IVC filter injury from the Bard Recovery filter, Bard G2 filter, Cook Gunther Tulip filter, or another model of IVC filter, we encourage you to explore your legal options with one of our attorneys.

Carey Danis & Lowe offers free, no obligation case evaluations, in which we help you determine if filing an IVC filter lawsuit is right for you.

Call our law firm today — 1-800-721-2519. You can also reach us online through our confidential personal injury claim form.

Another Win for Topamax Birth Defect Victims

By | Pharmaceutical litigation, Topamax, Uncategorized

topamax-lawsuit-settlementsDrug companies manage to find a way to appeal a case. However, in a Topamax birth defect suit, the court found that there was no reason to reconsider the earlier decision affirming a $4.2 million award.

The lawsuit involves the plaintiff, April Czimmer against Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Ms. Czimmer was awarded the large verdict because the jury found that the drug maker failed to sufficiently warn doctors about the extent of the risk of birth defects developing from the use of Topamax. The jury charged that the company’s negligence was a significant factor in causing April Czimmer son’s cleft palate.

The appeal hinged on the words “substantial contributing factor”, with the pharmaceutical company saying that the phrase was vague and confusing for the jurors. However, the Pennsylvania Superior Court denied the company’s effort to reconsider the 4.2 million verdict because jury instructions followed the precedent and were clear in defining the phrase.

This is excellent news for Czimmer and her son―and for families across the US who’ve been impacted by Topamax birth defects.

CD&L can help victims of birth defects caused by Topamax.

Our Topamax lawyers are currently investigating cases involving women who took Topamax during their pregnancy, and had infants with birth defects, especially cleft lips and cleft palates.

We offer free case evaluations, during which one of our lawyers will guide you through compensation eligibility, legal options, and whether filing a Topamax birth defect lawsuit is right for you.

Please call us at 800.721.2519 to discuss how we can help you get the justice you deserve.

US Corn Farmers Cite Lost Income in GMO Corn Lawsuits

By | Class Action, GMO, Uncategorized

gmocornseedlawsuitThe estimates vary, but corn industry participants say that somewhere between $1 ‒ $3 billion is the total loss handed to the US corn industry after China’s rejection of a specific GMO corn product.

Corn industry participants, including US corn farmers, felt the financial impact of the trade disruption with China, and are stepping forward. They’re filing GMO corn seed lawsuits targeting Syngenta, a Swiss biotechnology giant.

Thousands of lawsuits

According to The Free Press, a Mankato, MN news outlet, there are around 2,000 GMO corn lawsuits pending in the US as of early November 2015. Carey Danis & Lowe GMO corn lawyers reviewed the lawsuit docket in late November 2015, and noted that the number has since risen to just under 2,500.

Boston Scientific Delays, Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits Return to State Courts

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

boston_scientifi_transvaginal_mesh_lawsuitIn late October 2015, a federal judge denied a request made by Boston Scientific, a manufacturer of vaginal mesh devices. The company sought to move 62 transvaginal mesh lawsuits, which were filed as a single multi-plaintiff suit, into a multidistrict litigation (MDL).

An MDL concerning transvaginal mesh injuries and Boston Scientific mesh products exists in a West Virginia federal court. The MDL is In re: Boston Scientific Corp., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2326, managed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia in Charleston.

The federal judge who denied Boston Scientific’s request stated that the company waited too long to move the lawsuits from state to federal court. In California, U.S. District Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell said that Boston Scientific should’ve issued their request within a year of the lawsuit’s original file date.

Since they waited too long, a state court judge has since separated the individual mesh lawsuits, and sent them back to courts in their state of origin.

This is an unfortunate turn of events for these plaintiffs. Consolidation into the MDL would bring them all one step closer to putting this difficult chapter in their lives behind them.

You don’t have to suffer alone.

We are here to help you. If you or a loved one suffered from a transvaginal mesh injury, we encourage you to explore your legal options.

Carey Danis & Lowe offers free case evaluations, during which we can discuss your compensation eligibility, and whether filing a vaginal mesh lawsuit is right for you.

Call Carey Danis & Lowe today ― 800.721.2519.

You can also reach us online by completing a confidential personal injury claim form.


You may be interested in reading…

NuvaRing Lawsuit Dismissal is a Betrayal

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, NuvaRing, Uncategorized

nuvaring_lawsuit_heart_attackErika Langhart’s family feels betrayed by the legal system. The Langharts brought a lawsuit against Merck because they believe Merck’s product NuvaRing caused their daughter’s death. Their case was dismissed, denying the couple, through a jury trial, the chance to warn other women of the drug’s life-threatening complications.

A San Francisco Superior Court dismissed the case against Merck and Company on Sept. 10, 2015. The case centered on the NuvaRing medical device, a type of hormonal birth control.

Erika Langhart had 2 heart attacks in 2011 and died on Thanksgiving day. Her parents maintain that Erika died from complications caused by NuvaRing’s desogestrel, a progestin used in the drug.

A New York law firm promised the Langharts a jury trial to broadcast their grievances against the company. Now however, there’s no chance to openly hold Merck accountable because the court dismissed the case.

A Diabolical Legal and Regulatory System

Karen Langhart, Erika’s mother, feels utterly betrayed by the legal and regulatory systems that are in place to protect people.

The Langharts were trying to safeguard and warn other young women about the dangers of NuvaRing. Stripped of the jury trial process, they’ve created a nonprofit foundation to make their voices heard. “Informed Choice for AmErika”, named for their daughter, encourages young women to research all aspects of birth control drugs before making a decision.

Nothing can be done to bring back their cherished daughter, but the Langharts continue to help women change their lives by getting informed about NuvaRing hazards.

Carey Danis and Lowe can help NuvaRing victims.

If you or someone you know has suffered from using NuvaRing, please give our product liability lawyers a call at 800.721.2519. You may be entitled to compensation for your suffering.

Our expert medical device attorneys will guide you through a free consultation. Please email us to set up an appointment today.

$2M Vaginal Mesh Verdict Tied Up in Appeals Court

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

transvaginalmeshlawsuitFast-tracking medical device approvals is tying up a $2 million jury verdict. The plaintiff in a transvaginal mesh lawsuit won a $2 million award, but now the award is under question in an appeals court.


The defendant in the case, transvaginal mesh manufacturer C.R. Bard, argues that the verdict needs to be voided. The company contends that evidence presented to the jury was incomplete.

During the trial, both parties didn’t mention how the transvaginal mesh device under question received its approval from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

With most transvaginal mesh products, companies received approval via the 510(k) process.

What’s a 510(k)?

Think of the 510(k) as a template system. A medical device manufacturer submits their transvaginal mesh device to the FDA for approval. That device wins approval due to its rigorous testing, and it becomes the template for future products.

Future transvaginal mesh devices can apply for FDA approval using the 510(k) process, and can cite similarity to that first device that received FDA approval.

In the case of transvaginal mesh, citing similarity was enough to bring these defective products to consumers.

Too many modifications

However, there comes a point when medical devices have been modified so much, they can no longer be considered similar to the first device with FDA approval. This alone should require the manufacturer of the highly-modified device to conduct rigorous research to determine safety.

This wasn’t the case for most transvaginal mesh devices, and is the reason why women all over the world are stepping forward to hold manufacturers like C.R. Bard, Ethicon, American Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific accountable.

We can help you step forward.

Are you ready to share your transvaginal mesh story? We’re here to listen, and to help you.

Our experienced transvaginal mesh lawyers are available to discuss your case during a free consultation. We’ll guide you through your legal options, compensation eligibility, and whether filing a transvaginal mesh lawsuit is the right decision for you.

Contact Carey Danis & Lowe by phone at 800.721.2519, or by completing a confidential personal injury claim form.

We look forward to hearing from you soon.

Zofran Birth Defect Lawsuit Filed in Ohio

By | Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized, Zofran

zofran-birth-defectsA mother suffered severe nausea during her pregnancy. She listened to her doctor’s recommendation to take Zofran, an anti-nausea drug that doctors sometimes prescribe off-label to treat morning sickness.

The mother took Zofran during her pregnancy, and she delivered a child with birth defects.

The suffering and emotional strain resulting from the child’s birth defects led the mother to file a Zofran birth defect lawsuit targeting the drug’s manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).

The family filed the lawsuit in July 2015 in the US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.

The child suffered from a cleft lip, cleft palate, speech impediments, and ear problems. As a result of these birth defects, the child underwent 8 reparative surgeries. According to the child’s doctors, they expect to perform future surgical operations.

This is no way for a child to grow up.

GSK must be held accountable for pushing Zofran on physicians and pregnant mothers.

According to this lawsuit’s court filing, GSK didn’t conduct studies on Zofran use during pregnancy. Instead, the pharmaceutical giant went straight to promoting the drug as safe for pregnancy. The court document states that “GSK’s conduct was tantamount to using expectant mothers and their unborn children as human guinea pigs.”

In pushing the off-label prescription of Zofran for morning sickness, GSK thought only of sales, and not at all of consumer safety.

We are here for you.

The Zofran lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe can help you and your family. If you used Zofran during your pregnancy, and your child developed birth defects in the womb, we encourage you to explore your legal options today.

Our Zofran lawyers are currently investigating birth defect cases, and are offering free case evaluations. We can help you decide if filing a lawsuit is the right decision for you and your family.

Contact Carey Danis & Lowe today.

You can reach us by phone at 800.721.2519, or by completing a confidential personal injury claim form.

TVM Dallas Case

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Anterior-Vaginal-MeshEthicon, a branch of Johnson & Johnson, failed to disclose the dangers and complications linked to its Prosima vaginal mesh device. These statements were given by experts in Texas State Court in late September.

In the first court case involving Ethicon Inc.’s Prosima product, Dallas County District Court jurors were presented internal Ethicon documents that U.S. FDA specialists and urogynecology experts said showed the company was aware the product showed more risks and potential problems than Ethicon told doctors about.

By not disclosing the vaginal mesh risks, Ethicon is to blame for her pain and suffering, says Plaintiff Carol Cavness.

In heart-wrenching testimony, Ms. Cavness told the court how the agony and limitations caused by the Prosima vaginal mesh device affected her marriage to the point of divorce. The Prosima complications also continue to hinder her relationships with her children and grandchildren because she’s no longer physically able to join in activities with them.

In addition, Carol Cavness fears losing her airline mechanic job because the physical pain impairs her ability to perform heavy physical duties required by the job.

Three of the 6 cases filed against Ethicon over its pelvic mesh products have returned jury awards ranging from $1.2 to $11.1 million.

Carey Danis & Lowe seeks justice in medical product liability cases.

If you or a loved one has suffered complications related to the vaginal mesh Prosima device, compensation for pain and suffering may be due.

Our expert product liability attorneys will guide you through a free consultation and give you details about filing a Prosima mesh lawsuit.

Please contact Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or send us an email.

Vaginal Mesh Slings Fail in about 3 Percent of Incontinence Surgeries

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Boston Scientific Ordered to Release Defective Transvaginal Mesh DocumentsBoston Scientific Ordered to Release Defective Transvaginal Mesh DocumentsA new study finds that about 1 in 30 women who opt for vaginal mesh implants need to remove or replace the devices within 10 years.

Patients fared best when sling operations were done by surgeons who performed the greatest volumes of surgeries.

The Journal of American Medical Association notes that in the United States, an estimated one in 7 adult females will have operations for urinary stress incontinence during their lifetime.

Research has linked the slings to mesh erosions, fistulas and chronic pain in the pelvic area and legs. Repairing the damage caused by vaginal slings, involves repeat surgeries to remove or replace the implants.

More than 50,000 women in the US have entered into class action lawsuits to recoup compensation for injuries caused by the mesh.

Carey Danis & Lowe seeks justice for those who have been harmed by vaginal mesh.

If you have pain and suffering related to a vaginal mesh implant, our product liability attorneys will guide you through your legal options.

During a free legal consultation, one of our defective medical device lawyers will walk you through compensation eligibility, and if applicable, the process of filing a vaginal mesh sling lawsuit.

To find out more about filing a vaginal mesh lawsuit, contact Carey Danis & Lowe by phone at 800.721.2519, or by completing a confidential personal injury claim.