Blog

Posts in the ‘Personal Injury’ category

A Closer Look at Why HCG Diet Products are Illegal

Posted on January 31st, 2012 by Robert D. Rowland

While last month we posted about the FDA’s HCG alert advising consumers to avoid all HCG weight loss products, I wanted to take a closer look at why HCG is considered dangerous.

Unsafe Claims

Most HCG diet products are marketed in conjunction with extremely low calorie diets – as low as 500 calories a day. These diets claim consumers will lose up to 30 pounds in 30-40 days.

The problem is, any weight loss experienced is a result from severe calorie restriction – not from HCG. The FDA has approved HCG as a prescription drug for the treatment of female infertility and other medical conditions – but not for weight loss. Its prescription drug label states there “is no substantial evidence that it increases weight loss beyond that resulting from caloric restriction, that it causes a more attractive or ‘normal’ distribution of fat, or that it decreases the hunger and discomfort associated with calorie-restricted diets.”

A Dangerous Diet

Eating 500 calories a day is extremely dangerous, and can leave you at an increased risk for gallstone formation, an imbalance of the electrolytes that keep the body’s muscles and nerves functioning properly, and an irregular heartbeat. Without constant medical supervision for a condition such as obesity, such a restrictive diet could even be fatal.

FDA Legal Action

It’s illegal to sell products claiming to contain HCG as an OTC drug product. Companies marketing and selling these products could face enforcement actions, legal penalties or criminal prosecution. The FDA also advises consumers who have purchased homeopathic HCG for weight loss to stop using it, throw it out, and stop following the dieting instructions.

If you or a loved are on an HCG diet and have experienced any illnesses while taking HCG, contact Robert D. Rowland.

Medtronic INFUSE Bone Graft Off-Label Complications

Posted on December 20th, 2011 by Robert D. Rowland

It is estimated that 900,000 patients may have used the Medtronic INFUSE Bone Graft, a medical device with an active ingredient, rhBMP-2, that’s described as “a “genetically engineered version of a naturally occurring protein that is capable of initiating bone growth in specific, targeted areas of the spine.”

In 2002, the Food and Drug Administration approved INFUSE for only one type of spine surgery – anterior approach lumbar fusion. It has not been approved for any other type of spine surgeries, such as lateral or posterior approach lumbar fusion surgeries, or for surgery on the neck or cervical spine (the portion of the spine that runs from the shoulders to the head).

Despite its limited authorized use, INFUSE has been used off-label in surgeries on the lumbar or cervical spine for many patients. Today, as much as 85% of INFUSE use is off-label. In cases like these, when any drug or medical device is used off-label, the surgeon must fully disclose any and all risks prior to the surgery, so that the patient may make an informed decision as to whether or not to proceed with the surgery.

In June of 2011, a medical journal called The Spine Journal criticized earlier studies by physicians with financial ties to Medtronic that supported the widespread use of INFUSE. The Spine Journal charged “biased and corrupted research,” alleging the studies greatly understated INFUSE’s serious side effects and risks. In fact, in none of the 13 trials funded by Medtronic were any adverse events disclosed.

U.S. regulators and other research has now shown that up to 50% of patients who have received an INFUSE implant have suffered adverse effects, including ectopic bone growth, uncontrolled bone growth, swelling in the neck and throat, infection, inflammatory cyst formation, cancer, and infertility in men.

Have you or a loved one suffered side effects after receiving an INFUSE implant? Contact Robert D. Rowland.

The HCG Diet Alert

Posted on December 16th, 2011 by Katie A. Hubbard

The HCG diet is everywhere you look these days. From online advertising to your local chiropractor’s office, it is being marketed as a weight-loss wonder drug. HCG, or Human Chorionic Gonadotropin, is a hormone that women produce during pregnancy. It is now being used as a homeopathic weight loss supplement in the form of drops, pellets or sprays that are ingested or injected into the body. The entities that are promoting this hormone claim that it allows the body to metabolize fat and use it for energy. This along with a 500-calorie diet is said to produce significant weight loss results.

A quick Google search will lead to countless websites selling HCG, and any search for HCG side effects is filled with ads promoting the substance. Like many other diet fads, there is a lack of long-term research on side effects that can be caused by adding this hormone to your diet at such a high level.

The FDA has not approved HCG for weight loss, and is advising consumers to avoid all HCG weight loss products. Along with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), they have issued letters to companies warning them that they are selling illegal homeopathic HCG weight-loss drugs that have not been approved by FDA, and that make unsupported claims. The FDA advises consumers who have purchased homeopathic HCG for weight loss to stop using it, throw it out, and stop following the dieting instructions.

If you or a loved are on an HCG diet and have experienced any illnesses while taking HCG, contact Katie A Hubbard.

New FDA Warnings for Vaginal Mesh Implant

Posted on October 24th, 2011 by Robert D. Rowland

In August 2011, the FDA issued new warnings for vaginal mesh – a medical implant designed specifically for repairs of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), as well as urinary stress incontinence. During pelvic organ prolapse, the internal structures that support the pelvic organs such as the bladder, uterus, and bowel drop from their normal position and “prolapse” into the vagina.

The FDA warns that the risks of placing mesh through the vagina to repair pelvic organ prolapse may outweigh its benefits, as the number of adverse events has increased since it first issued a safety communication in 2008.

The most frequent complications reported to the FDA for surgical mesh devices for POP repair include:
• Erosion or protrusion of the mesh from the soft tissues
• Pain, including pain with intercourse
• Infections in the area of the mesh
• Urinary tract problems
• Bleeding from the mesh site
• Damage to nearby organs

There have also been reports of recurrent prolapse, neuro-muscular problems, vaginal scarring/shrinkage, and emotional problems. Many of these complications require additional intervention, including medical or surgical treatment and hospitalization.

In a study of almost 12,000 women, approximately 10% of women experienced mesh erosion within a year after surgery (Abed, 2011), and problems with the mesh tend to develop at least a month after surgery for POP (Caquant, 2008).

If you or a loved one have received a vaginal mesh implant and are experiencing issues, contact Robert D. Rowland to discuss your case.

How to choose a personal injury attorney & what to expect

Posted on July 25th, 2011 by Robert D. Rowland

Want to listen to a podcast of this blog? Click the link at the bottom of the post.

Tips on how to pick the personal injury attorney that’s right for you: an interview with GHAR attorney Robert Rowland.

What does personal injury law cover?
Personal injury law covers slipping and falling, auto accidents, medical malpractice, pharmaceutical cases – just to name a few.

What should someone look for in an attorney?
A key consideration is to look for an attorney who has experience representing plaintiffs, but who also has experience working for the defense. An attorney with this understanding will have the knowledge of how both sides work – and they’ll know how to get the best and fastest results for their clients. It’s especially important for people with personal injury claims, as they’re for the most part in dire financial straits and don’t have a lot of time to wait.

What are the top 3 things to consider when hiring an attorney?
1. Experience: You want someone who has experience in the specific type of case you’re dealing with.
2. Support and resources: Make sure they have the lawyers and resources to handle a substantial case.
3. Personal connection: The connection you have with your attorney is like any other business/working relationship. Make sure you get along with the person that’s going to be representing you. It’s also ok to ask for a recommendation from a former client.

How much should your lawyer charge?
There is a standard fee – an amount that goes to the lawyer if they claim anything through settlement or verdict, normally 1/3 or 40%.

It’s fair to ask a lawyer up front, “What do you think about this case?” If you’ve hired an experienced lawyer who has handled a case like yours, they should be able to provide you with insight, and know the appropriate fee.

What should people do if they have anxiety about lawyers?
You can always ask for a second opinion by asking another lawyer his or her thoughts on your case. But don’t see another lawyer if you already have hired a lawyer. Also, do research on the law firm: how long have they been around? What’s their reputation? There are some smaller law firms that ask their clients to front the cost of the case, which is normally a red flag. Ask the lawyer if they’ve ever tried a case, because some may have only dealt with settlements. Also ask, “Do I have to pay if we lose?” The answer should be no, but that may not necessarily be true with every firm.

What happens once you hire a lawyer?
After you’ve decided to hire an attorney, they’ll normally send you a contract of employment along with authorizations. Authorizations allow the lawyers to obtain copies of your medical records and medical bills which can be used in the case. If the person has suffered a loss in income they’ll get wage authorizations, which determines how much they’ve lost. Typically it will take ninety days to six months to get authorizations and records cleared. Unfortunately, there’s nothing the lawyer can really do to speed up the time it takes for doctors to clear these requests. The lawyers may also make settlement demands before they file the lawsuit – if it allows the client to get compensated quicker, it also gives them time with the information before they file the lawsuit.

How often should you expect to speak with someone in the firm that’s representing you?
Once you’ve returned the authorizations, six months is the absolute longest you should have to wait to hear form your attorney. It’s the most time it could take for them to receive your records. After that point, it’s absolutely ok to call and ask about the status of your case. Remember: it’s your case, it’s not their case.

After this point, you should keep up with your attorney on what has been filed for the case: a settlement demand, a complaint or petition, interrogatories (questions from the defense), and eventually the case itself.

How does a personal injury case end?
In the case of a personal injury settlement, there will be a deposition of everyone’s testimonies. Then your lawyer and you would have a conversation about what amount of money they’ll need in a settlement. This pertains to a client’s medical bills, loss of income, future loss of income, ongoing medical costs. You should also ask your lawyer: what are the chances this case will go to trial? Does it look like they’ll settle? Have you seen this sort of case before?

If you would like to discuss your personal injury case, contact Robert D. Rowland.

Listen to an interview podcast on this subject with Robert D. Rowland by clicking below:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Bertuzzi’s Gruesome Violence on NHL Ice – Against the Law?

Posted on April 30th, 2010 by The Firm

As a commercial litigators, much of our day is spent in a courtroom addressing complex business issues and disputes. Law in and of itself can be a competitive environment – just like sports – and sometimes the two cross paths.

In March 2004, hockey player Todd Bertuzzi punched player Steve Moore from behind, and in the process, may have changed the legal landscape of professional hockey forever.  Some of you may recall this incident. On March 8, 2004, the Colorado Avalanche were set to face the Vancouver Canucks. There was some bad blood between the teams and it was rumored before the game that the Canucks were looking for revenge.

Bertuzzi, a noted tough guy, attempted to entice Moore into an a fight.  When Moore ignored Bertuzzi’s attempts, Bertuzzi came up from behind Moore and sucker punched him in the side of the face and threw his  head into the ice with the weight of his body behind him.  Moore was unconscious from the blow and suffered a broken neck with fractures in the C3 and C4 vertebrae and a T1 avulsion fracture.  Moore’s professional hockey career was over.

A civil lawsuit followed and is currently pending before the Ontario Superior Court.  When incidents like this occur, lawyers immediately think of the doctrine of assumption of risk.  Basically, this means that a person who voluntarily assumes a risk of harm arising from the negligent or reckless conduct of others cannot recover for injuries resulting from that harm.  This doctrine is always present in contact sports, and for this reason, most injuries in sports are not compensable.

In Illinois, for instance, the Supreme Court expounded on the “contact sports exception” to ordinary negligence.  Karas v. Strevell, 227 Ill.2d 440, 884 N.E.2d 122 (2008).  The Illinois Supreme Court concluded that, “in a full contact sport such as ice hockey or tackle football, a participant breaches a duty of care to a coparticipant only if the participant intentionally injures the coparticipant or engages in conduct ‘totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport.’”  Id. at 459.  This is a significant ruling when considering the Court’s rationale.  The Illinois Supreme Court is saying that in situations other than injuries that were intentionally caused, even if the players’ actions are with complete disregard for the safety of the injured player, the conduct must still be totally outside the range of activities for the sport.

The best way to explain this is by applying it to the facts of that particular case.  In Karas, the Court analyzed a situation where a player was checked from behind into the boards when he was skating for the puck.  The Court reasoned conduct such as body checking is within the range of normal activity of a hockey game, even if checking from behind is against the rules.  However, the Court inferred that if the plaintiff had been struck from behind away from the play and action of the game, that may well be a breach of the standard adopted by Illinois.

When applying the above reasoning to the facts in Karas, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled the plaintiff had no case.  Would this same standard make Bertuzzi liable for his actions in Illinois?  The answer is: It depends.

Fighting is an inherent part of professional hockey.  For hockey, more so than other sports, it is hard to draw the line on conduct outside the range of ordinary activity.  Sure Bertuzzi’s actions were intentional, but even he admits he had no intention of injuring Moore.  In hockey, you check or hit opposing players to gain a strategic advantage on the puck.  You are not meaning to hurt players, but rather you want to take them out of the play.

But when you watch Bertuzzi’s actions you will see Moore had no interest in fighting Bertuzzi and Bertuzzi’s actions had no connection to the play.  Surely, a professional hockey player does not expect another player to sucker punch him from behind and drive his head into the ice.  This was an intentional act that ended someone’s career.  The law should not protect such actions among sports’ participants.

In Illinois, the Courts may likely say that getting punched in the face is part of the sport.  However, the fact that Moore was skating away from Bertuzzi and Bertuzzi’s actions were completely unrelated to the play of the game, may make him liable in Illinois. Surely, this is outside the range of ordinary activity in a hockey game.  Bertuzzi gained no advantage on the play by knocking Moore out. I hope the Illinois courts would agree.

Of course, fighting is only allowed in professional hockey, but rulings such as Karas should be concerning for hockey parents, particularly when considering younger players.

Contact us today to discuss this or other Business or Commercial legal issues.

A Colossus Mistake

Posted on January 26th, 2010 by The Firm

Colossus is a claims evaluation software program used by 25% of the insurance companies to assist with determining the settlement value of personal injury claims. The following companies use Colossus: Allstate, American Family, CNS, Farmers, The Hartford, Met Auto and Life, Travelers and USAA. While the insurance companies claim that the program is just a tool to aid its adjusters, many adjusters have come forward saying that the Colossus numbers are those used for settlement offers.

We normally caution our clients against trusting insurance adjusters. But at least adjusters are human and can look at photographs, listen to eye witness statements, take into account pain and suffering, and recognize drastic life-style changes after an accident. Colossus isn’t human. It uses formulas, not compassion. A computer cannot give consideration to the effects of losing your job, permanent scarring, painful medical procedures or lost time with your family. Colossus looks at the entered data only. It will search for surgical procedures, diagnostic testing (MRIs, x-rays, CT scans) and lost wages. It will determine what your medical diagnosis is and assign a certain dollar value according to that diagnosis.

Juries do not evaluate claims like this. Think about this situation – you are in a car accident and while your pain is immediate, you hope it will go away. When it doesn’t, you go to your doctor who runs several tests on you. All the tests are normal. Although there is nothing that can be done to help you medically, you experience daily pain. You cannot hold your grandchildren. You can no longer play golf. A jury would find that you have suffered a loss. Colossus, however, would consider you to have no injury at all. To trust Colossus as the authority on what your claim is worth would be a huge mistake. You have already been injured. If you are dealing with an insurance adjuster, it is in your best interest to hire an attorney who has experience with Colossus so that you are not injured again.

To learn more, contact Robert D. Rowland.

Check Yourself Before You Wreck Yourself!

Posted on December 21st, 2009 by The Firm

Been in a car accident?  Check out these 7 deadly sins that can wreck your case.

1.  Failing to call the police - Don’t ever assume that it will later be obvious what happened.  Call the police and tell your story.

2.  Providing a recorded statement to an insurance adjuster - Whether it is your company or the other driver’s, don’t speak to the adjuster without first talking to an attorney.  Despite what the commercials say, the insurance company is not on your side – you are not in good hands.

3.  Failing to see your doctor after a traumatic event - You may not think you are hurt but you are not a doctor.  If for, whatever reason, you didn’t go to the hospital from the scene be sure to follow-up with your primary care physician as soon as possible.  Insurance adjusters, and more importantly, jurors, notice when you take too long to make that appointment.  They will say, he couldn’t have been that hurt, he didn’t see a doctor for a month!

4.  Failing to be honest with your doctor - If something hurts, tell your doctor.  If it doesn’t hurt, please don’t say it does.  This is a common theme you will hear from us – be honest.  If you are honest, you have nothing to be nervous about.  Don’t conceal prior injuries.  Don’t assume that your minor pain is no big deal.  Let the doctor do his job.

5.  Talking to your doctor about a potential lawsuit - If you walk into your appointment asking if you will get money for your injury, your doctor isn’t going to trust you and neither will the jury.  Keep your lawsuit and your medical treatment separate.  Most doctors do not want to be involved in a lawsuit.  If you seem focused on your case, it may compromise your medical treatment.  Your first priority should be your health.

6.  Missing or showing up late for medical appointments - If you don’t care about your health, why should the insurance adjuster?  Better yet, why should the jury?  Missed appointments are indeed something the jury will hear about.  Just don’t do it.

7.  Failing to be honest with your attorney - We are here to help you.  If you aren’t honest with us, we cannot help you.  The insurance company will pay large sums of money to prove you aren’t hurt.  If you say you can’t move, they will try to videotape you mowing the lawn.  We need to always be updated on your health status so that we can properly represent you.  Finding out at trial that you aren’t as hurt as you said you were is too late.  Likewise, if you have a skeleton in your past that could affect the case, it is better to be up-front with us.

To learn more about Personal Injury, contact Bob Rowland.

$1.3 Million Award Against Missouri Department of Transportation

Posted on November 24th, 2009 by The Firm

A former member of GHAR represented the family of Jemma Dant, a 28 year-old woman who was tragically killed on December 6, 2005. Ms. Dant, on what would have been her second day at a new job, was sitting in traffic on westbound 44 at Vandeventer. Traffic backup was so severe that Ms. Dant was 1450 feet from the exit. The backup caused her to sit, stopped, on the actual interstate where cars were traveling at high speeds. At the same time, a tractor trailer was traveling in the middle lane. The truck driver saw that his exit was after Vandeventer so he merged right. He saw that traffic was stopped and although he tried, was unable to stop his truck resulting in a collision with Ms. Dant’s vehicle. The collision was so violent that it shoved Ms. Dant’s car underneath the tractor trailer stopped in front of her, killing her instantly.

We all know how big and scary semi-trucks can be, especially when traveling fast. Most people fear driving too close to a semi because we know it is impossible for a, 80,000 pound truck to stop quickly. MoDot knew that traffic was backing up at this location for two years prior to this accident. In fact, it had a plan in place since 2003 to try to correct the problem. Even though it knew of the danger, MoDot did not warn motorists of the stopped traffic. We filed suit against MoDot and the truck driver, on behalf of Ms. Dant’s family. We settled out of court with the truck driver and his family.

The case was tried to a panel of three Arbitrators on November 9, 2009. We argued that the stopped traffic on the highway caused a dangerous condition that motorists should have been warned of. MoDot could have put in place signing telling thru traffic to stay out of the far right lane. It could have put up signing warning motorists of the traffic backup. We see signs similar to this all over today. MoDot had no answer as to why there were no signs. They didn’t think the signs were needed. A MoDot engineer even argued that putting up a sign would have been too difficult because the wind would have blown it down.

The Arbitrators agreed with us that MoDot was partly responsible for Ms. Dant’s death. They agreed that while the truck driver was to blame, MoDot shared that blame for failing to warn motorists, especially out-of-town motorists. An award of $1.3 million was entered in favor of the family. According to Missouri law, MoDot can only be liable up to $378,814 in such a case. This award will be reduced to the current cap.

This was one of the most unfortunate cases I have ever worked on not only because of the immense loss, but because it was preventable. Hopefully, this case will be a reminder to MoDot, and other public entities, that corners should not be cut when it comes to human life.

To learn more, contact us

Personal Injuries and Workers’ Compensation – Don’t Speak to the Insurance Company!

Posted on November 24th, 2009 by The Firm

Nothing is more frustrating to me than when an insurance company takes advantage of an injured person. It happens frequently. As soon as you notify the insurance company of your injury, whether it be from a fall, injury at work, or automobile accident, the insurance company will immediately try to take your recorded statement. Is the adjuster doing this to help you get compensated for your harms and losses? Absolutely not! He/she is trying to box in your story. The insurance adjuster knows it is unlikely that you have already hired an attorney to help you so the adjuster will try to get you to speak early. An attorney can help you avoid certain pitfalls – like providing details you aren’t sure of, downplaying your injuries, and providing irrelevant information.

If you are asked to provide a recorded statement, kindly tell the adjuster that you will be happy to do so, after you hire counsel. Then, hire counsel! We can walk through the likely questions with you and discuss your case. You likely have questions – the insurance adjuster is not the one to ask. The insurance company can, and will, withhold any benefits due to you until you provide a recorded statement which it is why it is crucial to find legal representation quickly. If you were in an automobile accident, it may make sense for you to contact your own insurance company but there are exceptions. You need to speak to an attorney about that question. Until you hire an attorney, follow your doctor’s advise, get well, and do not speak to the insurance company.

To learn more or to discuss Workers’ Compensation, contact Robert Rowland.