Tag

payment Archives - Carey Danis & Lowe

Medical Lending & Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

transvaginal_mesh_lawsuit_settlements_mdl_multidistrict_litigation_class_action_lawsuit_vaginal_mesh_fda_lawsuitsImagine this: you’ve filed a transvaginal mesh lawsuit and one day, the pain and discomfort you’ve been suffering through on account of your mesh device pushes you to the edge. You decide that now’s the time to change things, to remove your transvaginal mesh device. But, there’s one thing holding you back―the cost of the surgery.

That’s where medical lending companies come in.

According to a recent Reuters article, medical funding has become a big business when it comes to transvaginal mesh removal surgeries.

These medical lending companies seek out plaintiffs in transvaginal mesh lawsuits. The company absorbs the cost of the surgery, and tells the patient that they’ll expect payment plus interest once the lawsuit reaches a settlement.

This is the exact point where these companies make their money.

They charge astronomical amounts for mesh removal surgeries, and also tack on high interest rates. In the Reuters article, a medical funder, MedStar, charged a plaintiff a 50% annual interest rate.

For that particular plaintiff, Traci Rizzo, MedStar’s charges weren’t made clear to her until she received her transvaginal mesh settlement, along with MedStar’s payment request. The request amount came as a huge surprise to her.

Though it’s true that these medical lenders are allowing very injured women to receive the surgical operations they so desperately need, the argument can also be made that these companies are also taking advantage of vaginal mesh victims.

According to Reuters, MedStar is no longer in operation. However, for anyone looking to a medical funder for financial help for a transvaginal mesh removal surgery, it is highly recommended to keep in mind what happened to Traci Rizzo, and women like her, before making a decision.

WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU

Have you been injured by transvaginal mesh? If so, Carey Danis & Lowe can help you.

We have a team of experienced trial attorneys who are currently investigating transvaginal mesh cases. Contact our law firm for a free case evaluation, and one of our lawyers can guide you through your legal options, compensation eligibility, and whether filing a transvaginal mesh lawsuit is right for you.

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

 

You may also be interested in reading…

DePuy ASR Settlement News: Claims Administrator Named & Compensation Packages Outlined

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

depuy_asr_hip_replacement_lawsuits_2013_mdl_litigation_lawsuit_settlementsThe St. Louis class action attorneys at Carey Danis & Lowe have been closely following the DePuy ASR settlement following the announcement of Johnson & Johnson and DePuy’s $2.5 billion deal. The latest in the DePuy ASR settlement involves the naming of a claims administrator to assist with the settlement process, and a document that more clearly outlines the deal’s three compensation packages.

The $2.5 billion settlement deal announced in November is estimated to settle approximately 8,000 of 12,000 DePuy ASR hip lawsuits filed across the country.

A federal court in Ohio named retired Judge James J. McMonigle as the claims administrator. The court also named three special masters to assist with the settlement process.

Thousands of DePuy lawsuits have been consolidated into the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, which is the court managing the settlement process. The DePuy multidistrict litigation (MDL) is known as In re: DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. ASR Hip Implant Products MDL no. 2197.

The Ohio federal court also released a document with detailed information on benefit packages. According to the document, there are three compensation packages.

The first compensation package is called the base payment, which involves a $250,000 award. This award can be reduced depending upon a variety of factors, including weight and history of smoking.

The second compensation package applies only to those plaintiffs who have undergone surgical operations to remove and replace the DePuy ASR hip implant in both left and right hips. Those plaintiffs qualifying for this compensatory award will receive an additional $250,000. Unlike the base payment package, this benefit calls to pay the full $250,000 to the plaintiff, with no reductions for weight, history of smoking, and other health factors.

The third package, called the Extraordinary Injury Fund (EIF), will provide benefits to those plaintiffs who experienced significant health complications due to the DePuy ASR hip implant. These health complications and injuries include pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), infection, stroke, myocardial infarction, death, and any other injuries incurred during revision surgeries.

It is important to note that the current settlement deal does not prohibit plaintiffs from seeking compensation for their injuries relating to the hip implant in the future.

If you have any questions about the DePuy ASR settlement, please contact one of our DePuy ASR hip attorneys at Carey Danis & Lowe. Learn more about the settlement, discuss your legal options in a free initial consultation, and get assistance with filing a DePuy ASR hip lawsuit.

Concerns about metal-on-metal hip implants and health complications can be addressed to a Carey Danis & Lowe on-staff nurse. Our team of medical experts are available to provide you with the most accurate information about metal-on-metal hip implants.

Share your DePuy ASR hip story with Carey Danis & Lowe today. Call us at 800.721.2519, or submit a confidential personal injury claim form.

For the latest DePuy ASR settlement news, read the Carey Danis & Lowe personal injury litigation blog.

Kransky v. DePuy Jury Awards Plaintiff $8.3 Million Compensatory Award

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Kransky v. DePuy Jury Awards Plaintiff $8.3 Million Compensatory AwardOn March 8, the jury in Kransky v. DePuy awarded the plaintiff in the case a compensatory award of $8.3 million. The compensatory damages to be paid to the plaintiff, Loren Kransky, by Johnson & Johnson cover Kransky’s pain and suffering after receiving an implant of the DePuy ASR Hip.

However, the jury decided against awarding punitive damages because they believe that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy had supplied sufficient warning about the health risks involved with the use of the DePuy ASR Hip implant.

Kransky v. DePuy was the first DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit to go to trial in approximately 10,750, according to a Bloomberg article about the case.

Kransky filed his DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit alleging that the hip implant designed and developed by DePuy, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, created a defective medical device. In addition, Kransky claimed that the defective design of the DePuy ASR Hip caused severe pain, numerous revision surgeries, and other serious health complications.

Furthermore, Kransky claimed that the metal-on-metal design of the DePuy ASR Hip caused metal ions to enter into his bloodstream resulting in metallosis, or metal poisoning.

Kransky v. DePuy was heard over a five week period in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles.

Following the jury’s ruling, a DePuy spokesperson stated that the medical device manufacturer plans to appeal the ruling in regard to the hip implant’s faulty design citing the company’s belief that the ASR Hip Replacement system works correctly. Furthermore, DePuy stated that the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) review of the DePuy ASR Hip was not provided to the jury.

The next ASR Hip lawsuit to go to trial is a case being head in an Illinois state court in Chicago. The Illinois DePuy ASR Hip trial started on March 11, and involves the plaintiff, Carol Strum.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe who work in trials involving defective medical devices believe that the $8.3 million compensatory award bestowed upon Kransky is a testament to the damages that the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system has caused for individuals. Though no punitive damages were awarded to Kransky in his trial, Carey Danis & Lowe is interested in seeing if Strum’s trial will involve payment by Johnson & Johnson and DePuy of compensatory and punitive damages.

If you or someone you love has been injured by an implant of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe. For a free legal evaluation and to file a DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit, contact a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or submit a legal claim form.

Carey Danis & Lowe Optimistic About DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuits Following Johnson & Johnson Loss

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Published March 19, 2013 by PR Web

St. Louis, Missouri (PRWEB) March 19, 2013

Carey Danis & Lowe Optimistic About DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuits Following Johnson & Johnson LossWith defective medical device lawyers currently investigating DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system cases, Carey Danis & Lowe is optimistic about the future of DePuy ASR Hip lawsuits that go to trial. Kransky v. DePuy, a case being heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles, involved the plaintiff, Loren Kransky, and resulted in Kransky receiving a compensatory award of $8.3 million, according to a New York Times report on the [DePuy trial].

Though the 12-person jury in Kransky v. DePuy did not award the plaintiff with a punitive damages, as detailed in the New York Times article, a second DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit has gone to trial in Chicago. The trial in Chicago presents another opportunity for a jury to award a plaintiff with compensatory and punitive damages.

Defective medical device lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are closely following the Chicago trial, known as Strum v. DePuy, 2011-L-9352, Circuit Court of Cook County. Carey Danis & Lowe will watch the case to see what evidence will be brought before the jury, and if this evidence persuades them that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy should be punished through payment of punitive damages for malicious and negligent business practices regarding the development and marketing of the DePuy ASR Hip.

A Bloomberg article on Strum v. DePuy states that the trial began with opening statements on March 11, so there remains much more information to be brought forth before the jury.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are hopeful that individuals who have been injured by the DePuy ASR Hip implant will be compensated for undergoing numerous revision surgeries, pain resulting from a defective metal-on-metal hip, and other losses resulting from the hip implant. Carey Danis & Lowe is encouraging injured parties to contact the law firm about DePuy ASR Hip cases, especially in light of the Kransky v. DePuy verdict.

For more information about contacting Carey Danis & Lowe about a DePuy ASR Hip case, visit https://www.careydanis.com.

Discover Card & Capital One Pay Settlements for Telemarketing Fraud

By | Class Action, Consumer protection, Uncategorized, Unfair Deceptive Trades

Published October 16, 2012 by LawsuitInformation.org

Discover Card & Capital One Pay Settlements for Telemarketing FraudLate last month, a settlement was reached in a lawsuit between Discover Card and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the FDIC. Discover Card had been charged by federal regulators and consumers of fraudulent business practices.

In the federal regulators’ investigation, they discovered that the credit card company’s telemarketers would use ambiguous and vague language when introducing credit card customers to Discover Card’s various programs. Often, these telephone marketing strategies would employ the technique of speaking quickly so as to become unintelligible.

Often, fast speech was used when discussing the fees and terms and conditions of Discover Card programs. In addition to deliberately unintelligible speech, telemarketers gave a false impression to customers of these Discover Card products and programs being free and delivering certain benefits, which ultimately, was understood to be far from the truth.

These Discover Card programs included payment protection, credit score monitoring, identity theft protection, and the like. In their investigation, it became clear to federal regulators that, without the approval of their customers, Discover’s telemarketers were often adding these programs and various other fees attached to them onto their customers’ credit card statements.

As a result of employing such deceptive marketing strategies, Discover Card will pay a fine to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the FDIC in the amount of $14 million. Approximately 3.5 million Discover Card customers will receive recompense in the amount of $200 million for the losses incurred via enrollment in these fraudulent credit programs. It is estimated that about 2 million customers will receive compensation for all fees charged by Discover over the period of December 7, 2007 through August 31, 2011.

Moreover, Discover Card has agreed that it will reform its telemarketing strategy. Also, the credit card company has agreed to hire a nonpartisan auditor whose responsibility it will be to insure that Discover Card does not engage in fraudulent and misleading marketing tactics.

Back in July of this year, Capital One settled a similar lawsuit regarding claims filed against the credit card company and their deceptive telemarketing strategy. The Capital One settlement amounted to $150 million to compensate two million of their customers. In addition to the consumer recompense, Capital One paid the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau a fine of $25 million. Furthermore, the credit card company agreed to pay another fine in the amount of $35 million due to the Office of the Comptroller of Currency.

If you feel that you have been the victim of such unfair and deceptive trade practices, contact a consumer protection lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe.

Bank of America Credit Protection Plus Class Action

By | Predatory Lending, Uncategorized, Unfair Deceptive Trades

Bank of America Credit Protection Plus Class ActionCarey Danis & Lowe is currently investigating claims that Bank of America is engaging in unfair and deceptive trade practices in connection with the sale and administration of their Credit Protection Plus program, which is a debt suspension / debt cancellation plan offered to its card members for a fee.

In particular, CD&L is investigating claims that Bank of America enrolls card members into their payment protection plan without first determining whether the consumer is qualified to ever receive benefits under the program. The result is that card members are paying fees even though they can never receive benefits.

In addition, the lawyers at CD&L are investigating whether Bank of America is enrolling card members into the Credit Protection Plus program without their consent or authorization and subsequently charging them a recurring monthly fee.

If you were enrolled into a payment protection plan or program without your consent, please contact us today.

Banana Republic Card Security Program Class Action

By | Predatory Lending, Uncategorized, Unfair Deceptive Trades

Banana Republic Card Security Credit Card Payment Protection Plan Scam Class Action LawsuitCarey Danis & Lowe is currently investigating claims that Banana Republic is engaging in unfair and deceptive trade practices in connection with the sale and administration of their Card Security Program, which is a debt suspension / debt cancellation plan offered to its card members for a fee.

In particular, CD&L is investigating claims that Banana Republic enrolls card members into their payment protection plan without first determining whether the consumer is qualified to ever receive benefits under the program. The result is that card members are paying fees even though they can never receive benefits.

In addition, the lawyers at CD&L are investigating whether Banana Republic is enrolling card members into the Card Security Program without their consent or authorization and subsequently charging them a recurring monthly fee.

If you were enrolled into a payment protection plan or program without your consent, please contact us today.