Product Liability Lawyer Blog

January 9, 2016

Drug Company Hopes Xarelto Can Finally Overtake Warfarin Due to Antidote

With the regular NFL season coming to close and playoffs heating up, there will be more people watching football than at any other point in the season. This will, of course, culminate with Super Bowl 50. During the Super Bowl, many will tune in for the big game and others will come just for the commercials. Super Bowl commercials are such a big draw that advertisers will pay over $10 million for a single 30-second spot.

As we have seen during the regular season, we can expect to see commercials for Xarelto, along with Pradaxa and Eliquis, and possibly Savaysa. These are all members of a new class of drugs called New Oral Anticoagulants (NOAC). They are prescribed for patients who suffer from a serious, but manageable health condition known as atrial fibrillation (Afib). Afib patients have an irregular heartbeat that causes large clots to form deep within in the veins of the legs in a condition known as deep vein thrombosis (DVT). When one of these clots breaks free where it has formed, it can travel through the bloodstream causing disastrous results. It can puncture a hole in the lungs known as a pulmonary embolism (PE) that can be deadly. The clots can also block the flow of blood to the brain, causing a stroke. Continue reading

January 7, 2016

Mary Meeks v. Hologic, Inc.: Defective Medical Devices

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Mary Meeks v. Hologic, Inc., a case from the Supreme Court of Mississippi, involved a doctor at a women’s clinic who performed an outpatient diagnostic procedure known as a hysteroscopy as well an endometrial ablation on the plaintiff. During this procedure, her doctor used a Novasure medical device. Hologic is the medical device company that manufactures Novasure.

Two days after having the medical procedure, plaintiff went back to the medical center complaining of vomiting, nausea, and pain in her abdomen. Doctors did an initial test and determined plaintiff had a perforated uterus and the surrounding wall was blanched in a manner consistent with being burned. Continue reading

January 4, 2016

Yates v. Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharma., Inc: Defective Drug Lawsuits

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Yates v. Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharma., Inc, a case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, involves a plaintiff who began going to her OB/GYN when she was 17 years old in 2004. She first went to the doctor because she was sexually active and was experiencing menstrual cramps.

Her doctor spoke with her about her choices for contraceptives and discussed the risks associated with each of the options. One of the choices for birth control was ORTHO EVRA and another was Depo-Provera. The doctor testified that she customarily warned all patients about the risks of taking birth control before writing a prescription. Continue reading

January 1, 2016

Weight Loss Surgery Before Knee Replacement Surgery may Reduce Complications

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Knee replacement surgery is becoming more and more popular in the United States each and every year. While the procedure was traditionally done as an elective surgery for elderly patients who could no longer stand to live with their arthritis pain that had become quite severe, today, younger patients are having the procedure done to cope with arthritis and injury caused by athletic activities like long distance running.

There is no question that having a knee replaced is a major undertaking, and there is going to be great deal of pain and suffering during the recovery period. However, if the artificial knee itself was defectively designed, there is obviously a much higher chance patients will have significant complications, including a total device failure. This will cause the need for a second or Continue reading

December 31, 2015

FDA Approves Pradaxa for Hip Replacement Patients

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Pradaxa is a medication used to reduce the risk of serious clotting disorder in patients who suffer from a potentially serious medical condition known as atrial fibrillation (Afib). Afib patients are at higher risk for forming large blood clots deep within the veins on their legs and other extremities. These blood clots can form in the legs and then break lose and travel through a patient’s circulatory system, which is another deadly medical condition, know as Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT).

When a DVT clot travels through the circulatory system, it can become lodged in the lungs and tear a hole known as a pulmonary embolism (PE) or block the blood to the brain, causing a stroke. To reduce this risk, patients need either a traditional blood thinner like warfarin (Coumadin) or one of the new anticoagulants like Pradaxa, Eliquis, Xarelto, or Savaysa. Continue reading

December 28, 2015

Daniel v. Ford Motor Company: Products Liability Cases

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Daniel v. Ford Motor Company, a case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, involved a plaintiff who filed a class action lawsuit against defendant in which he alleged that defendant breached its implied and express warranties and also engaged in fraud when selling vehicles with a defectively manufactured rear suspension system.

In the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) as adopted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, any merchant who sells a product to a consumer makes an implied warranty of merchantability. In this context, merchant means a regular seller of goods of a type. For example, if you buy a toaster oven from Sears, they are regular seller of that item and are therefore a merchant of goods of that kind. On the other hand, if you buy a lawnmower off Craigslist, it is more likely than not that the seller of the lawnmower was a not a lawnmower dealer but was simply selling his or her own used lawnmower. Since the seller is not a merchant, he or she is not giving an implied warranty of merchantability. However, he or she would still be liable for negligence if there was a known defect that caused a personal injury to buyer, and that known defect was never disclosed. Continue reading

December 24, 2015

Are Boston Injured Victims Bringing Enough Product Liability Claims?

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Tort reform advocates argue Americans are too litigious and aim for limitations on the rights of consumers to sue. Clauses built into consumer product purchase agreements limiting class action rights and mandating arbitration are some of many ways in which companies aim to limit the litigation they are exposed to. News stories are also released purporting to show frivolous lawsuits in order to raise suspicions about the legitimacy of claims based on product defects- even though the facts often show these lawsuits are not actually frivolous at all.

Consumer advocate Ralph Nader is fighting back against the misconceptions that are being pushed by big business. In a recent interview published in Parade Magazine, Nader argued there are actually not enough cases being brought to hold manufacturers accountable when they cause harm to the public.

Injured Victims are Not Bringing Enough Product Liability Lawsuits

December 21, 2015

Could New Regulations Address Dangerous Chemicals in Cosmetics?

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Cosmetics and skin care products are some of the most widely purchased products within the United States. Consumers spend as much as $50 billion every single year on beauty products. Unfortunately, it turns out that some of the skin care and cosmetic products on the market could actually contain chemicals that are very harmful to health.

Although the skin care and cosmetics market are largely unregulated, manufacturers still have basic obligations to make sure their products are reasonably safe and to provide warnings about risks to users. Cosmetics manufacturers who fail to test products for safety and alert customers to dangers may find themselves being sued if products make people sick. Even the threat of litigation, however, does not appear to deter manufacturers from continuing to sell products that could cause harm. Now, lawmakers are finally considering taking legal action aimed at protecting people from the risks of their skin care and beauty products.

December 18, 2015

Majority of Product Recalls are Household Goods

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Products are recalled because they present a danger to their users. Ideally, manufacturers will take action to recall products before someone actually gets hurt. Unfortunately, this does not always happen. That means every time a product is released which subsequently turns out to be dangerous, there is a significant risk someone will be hurt or killed before the manufacturer identifies the issues and institutes a recall.

Individual consumers especially, need to be concerned about the significant dangers associated with defective products because a new report reveals the vast majority of recalled goods are household products used by individuals and families.

December 15, 2015

Defective Holiday Decorations Can Lead to House Fires

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Decorating your home for the holidays can be a joyful experience. EFSI reports as many as 86 percent of Americans do at least some home decorating as a part of their holiday celebrations.

Unfortunately, decorative products can sometimes be poorly designed or badly made and can turn into a major hazard. It is imperative homeowners, renters, and commercial property owners understand risks associated with holiday décor so they can look for safe products and avoid potentially causing serious injuries to themselves or others. Continue reading