California Injury Lawyers Blog

State regulators have fine the Orchard-Post Acute Care $75,000 for a patient's Los Angeles County, California nursing home death. The 78-year-old man reportedly died after his feeding tube was incorrectly inserted. Per the California Department of Public Health's Web site, because of this mistake, medicine and food entered his peritoneal cavity instead of his stomach.

Following the error, the patient, who suffers from Alzheimer's an been living at the Whittier nursing home since 2008 after suffering a stroke, began complaining of stomach pain. He was transported to an emergency room where doctors discovered that his abdomen was inflamed and he was suffering from septic shock. The elderly patient underwent surgery and was hooked up to a ventilator before dying six days later.

In addition to the fine, the assisted living facility also received an "AA" citation over the incident, which is considered the most severe citation per state law. The California Department of Public Health says that inappropriate care and services resulted in the patient's passing.

This is the 63rd time in five years that the state of California has fined Orchard-Post Acute Care. When the assisted living facility was known as Royal Court Health Care, Nursing Home Compare, the federal ranking system, gave it two out of five stars.

Feeding Tubes
Some nursing home residents cannot eat and drink without the help of a feeding tube. In other instances, a feeding tube might be required to combat malnutrition or dehydration. While some feeding tubes are inserted through the nose, others must be placed into the stomach or small bowel. It is important that a feeding tube is properly inserted so the patient can receive all the nutrients that he/she needs. It is also important that the tube be inserted correctly to prevent complications. Possible risks include infection, aspiration, damage to the abdominal wall, skin irritation, and other health issues.

Dementia Patients and Feeding Tubes
A few months ago, the New York Times wrote about the use of feeding tubes for patients with dementia and the recent study, which found 13.7% of families surveyed said that doctors had inserted feeding tubes in their loved ones without obtaining anyone's consent. Considering that getting informed consent is part of proper medical procedure, even if a patient is suffering from mental illness, this finding gives one cause for concern. For 12.6% of families that did give their consent, they said they felt pressured to agree to the feeding tube. Some reported that discussion of possible risks was minimal. Also, opting to give patients with dementia feeding tubes didn't necessarily improve survival, treat bedsores, improve the quality of life, or treat pneumonia.

Nursing Home Negligence
Nursing home workers must be properly trained in working with feeding tubes. Should negligence, inexperience, or carelessness cause a person to sustain injury, illness, or not get the proper nutrition and liquids necessary to maintain his/health, the assisted living facility could be held liable for Los Angeles nursing home negligence.

State fines Whittier nursing home for resident's death, Los Angeles Times, August 17, 2011

When Demented Patients Receive Feeding Tubes, New York Times , May 9, 2011

CDPH Citation (PDF)

Read more about the nursing home fine

More Blog Posts:
San Bernardino Nursing Home Negligence?: Assisted Living Facility Fined $80,000 Over 2008 of Patient Who Became Accidentally Disconnected from Ventilator, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 8, 2011

Los Angeles Bedsore Lawsuit Claims LAC Medical Center Attempted to Conceal California Elder Neglect, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 25, 2011

Los Angeles Nursing Home Negligence?: 94-Year-Old Woman Discovered in Freezer of Calabasas Nursing Home, California Injury Lawyers Blog, November 17, 2010

Continue reading "Los Angeles County, California Nursing Home Death Leads to $75,000 Fine" »

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and nine manufacturers and distributors are voluntarily recalling about 2 million pourable gel fuel units. This latest recall comes following 65 incidents, including two deaths and 34 hospitalizations. The gel fuel has been linked to flash fires that have caused severe burn injuries to the chest, face, hands, legs, and arms. The gel fuel appears to be most dangerous while being poured into an already burning fire pot. It is at this point that it has been known to unexpectedly catch fire, spraying the flames on to people and nearby objects.

The CPSC says there are actually more victims than the number of incidents reported because some of those that have gotten hurt were the people trying to rescue victims that were directly injured by the gel fuel. If you live in San Bernardino County, Los Angeles County, Riverside County, or Orange County, California and you or someone you love suffered serious burns while using pourable gel fuel, do not hesitate to contact our Anaheim products liability law firm to request your free case evaluation.

Nearly 28 of the 65 incidents reported involved gel fuel by Napa Home & Garden, which conducted its recall last June. However, the CPSC says that all pourable fuel gels made by any manufacturer pose a burn hazard to users. The nine companies that are recalling their gel fuel products are Bird Brain Inc., Smart Solar Inc., Bond Manufacturing, Real Flame, Sunjel Company, Pacific Décor Ltd, Fuel Barons Inc., Luminosities Inc., and Lamplight Farms Inc.

The fuel gel is proving so flammable that some people are saying that once it gets stuck on clothing or skin it refuses to be exstinguished. Victims and witnesses have even compared the fuel gel to napalm, a "lethal weapon," or "gasoline in a bottle."

Among those that were recently hurt in pourable gel fuel accidents are a teenager, 14, who ended up in a coma and was hooked up to a ventilator after he suffered severe burns. Another man, 24, had to undergo multiple surgeries for his injuries, and he will likely have to undergo more procedures. His best friend was also hurt in the same incident.

Nine Manufacturers, Distributors Announce Consumer Recall of Pourable Gel Fuel Due to Burn and Flash Fire Hazards, CPSC, September 1, 2011

Gel fuel linked to flash fires, severe burns recalled, Reuters, September 1, 2011

Pourable fuel gel for firepots, Dispatch.com, June 23, 2011

Horrific burn injuries spur gel fuel inquiry, Telegram, June 11, 2011

More Blog Posts:
NFL Sued by 75 Pro Football Players in Los Angeles Superior Court For Concealing Brain Injury Risks, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 21, 2011

Another 37 Injuries Prompt CPSC To Reissue Maclaren Stroller Recall, California Injury Lawyers Blog, May 12, 2011

Huntington Beach Premises Liability Claim Seeks $500K from City Over Hemet Boy's Burn Injuries from Fall Accident into Fire Pit, California Injury Lawyers Blog, August 18, 2011

Continue reading "Orange County, California Products Liability: CPSC and Nine Manufacturers Recall 2M Pourable Gel Fuel Units Following Burn Injuries and Deaths " »

Johnson Controls has been ordered to pay Jaklin Romine $24.7 million in California auto products liability damages. Romine sustained serious spinal cord injuries and head injuries that left her permanently paralyzed from the chest down in 2006 when the vehicle of the car she was riding in collapsed during a Los Angeles County rear-end collision. Johnson Controls is the company legally responsible for designing, making, and selling the car seat.

The catastrophic collision occurred at a Pasadena intersection on October 21, 2006. During the rear-end crash, the seat Jaklin was using broke and collapsed backwards, which caused her body to slide back under the seatbelt and her head to hit the rear passenger seat.

Jaklin's Los Angeles auto products liability lawyers contended that there was no reason for why the car seat should have broken in a collision where the vehicle that was moving was going at speeds of up to 30 mph.

Seatback Collapse
Unfortunately, the lack of tougher safety standards for car seats makes it easy for manufacturers to make products that are not strong enough to withstand the force of a collision. Considering that common seatback collapse injuries can include crush injuries, spinal cord injuries, paralysis, and head injuries, more needs to be done not just be the federal government, but also by manufacturers.

Right now, car seats must only fulfill a strength requirement and they don't have to fulfill any crash testing standard. Common causes of seatback collapse include poor design, weak structure, and parts malfunction.

The failure of a car seat to stay upright and keep a passenger occupant in place can cause the person to get thrown from the vehicle or into the people sitting in the rear seats. A seat that collapses can also cause injuries to the person riding right behind. If it is the rear seat that collapses, then it is the person sitting in that seat that could get hurt. Also, A driver whose seat collapses may find it impossible to stay in control of the vehicle, which could further exacerbate the types of injuries that can result. One must also note that a vehicle occupant's seatbelt cannot properly restrain him/her if the seat collapses.

Auto Products Liability
In addition to the seat manufacturer, an auto manufacturer can also be held liable for placing defective or faulty car seats in a vehicle. For example, last year, Hyundai was ordered to pay $1.8 million in seatback collapse damages to the family of a teenager who died in a car crash. Her loved ones contend that the seat she was in shouldn't have been able to recline past 45 degrees while she was in it and that she might have otherwise survived the rollover crash that occurred when her younger sister overcorrected the SUV after falling asleep at the wheel. In 2009, a Ford Motor Corp. settled the seatback collapse lawsuit filed by one woman, who is now a quadriplegic, for more than $16 million. She contends that not only was the rear seat latch defective, but that the center lap seat belt (it wasn't accompanied by a shoulder belt) was not able to provide her with the restraint she needed when the SUV she was in was rear-ended. The impact of the crash pushed her forward into the center console and the rear of the front seat. The back seat then fell on her when its latch broke.

LA Woman Awarded $24M after Crash Collapses Her Car Seat, MyFoxLA, August 18, 2011

Teen's death in Big Country brings $1.8M judgment against Hyundai, Reporter News, April 30, 2010

Related Web Resources:
Johnson Controls

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Spinal Cord Injuries

More Blog Posts:
California Seat Belt Defect Lawsuit: US Supreme Court Says Family Can Sue Mazda for Wrongful Death, California Injury Lawyers Blog, March 2, 2011

Toyota Paid $10M California Auto Products Liability Settlement Over Saylor Family's Wrongful Deaths in Runaway Lexus, California Injury Lawyers Blog, December 23, 2010

Woman's Family Files California Auto Products Liability Lawsuit Against Toyota for Camry Car Crash that Caused Her Los Angeles County Wrongful Death, California Injury Lawyers Blog, February 10, 2010

Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, wants the FDA to recall transvaginal mesh products. The call comes following the federal agency's warning that the medical device may place patients at unnecessary risk of harm without providing sufficient clinical benefit. It was the FDA's second warning about transvaginal mesh. Please contact our Anaheim defective medical device lawyers if you believe that your injuries were caused by transvaginal mesh.

Three years ago, the FDA put out a Public Health Notification and Additional Patient Information on serious complications involving surgical mesh inserted through the vagina for treatment of stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse In this latest warning, the FDA wants health care providers and patients to know that serious complications from use of transvaginal mesh are not rare. The federal agency also says that is not certain whether transvaginal POP repair using mesh is a more successful course of treatment than existing non-mesh repair treatments for POP that also pose less risk of complications.

The FDA's review of published scientific literature between 1996 and 2011 also showed that:
• Placing the mesh for POP repair in the abdomen seems to have a lower rate of complication than placing the mesh in the vagina.

• There is a lack of evidence that transvaginal mesh directed at the back wall or the top of the vagina offers greater benefits than surgery without mesh.

• Although surgical repair through the vagina with mesh for tissue weakness between the vagina and bladder provides anatomic benefit than traditional surgery sans mesh does, symptomatic outcomes are not necessarily better.

• Mesh-related complications when used in POP repair are not linked to one particular brand. Mesh contraction and erosion can lead to painful sexual intercourse, the inability to have sex, and serious pelvic pain.

When considering surgical mesh repair to treat POP it is important to know that if there are complications, you may have to undergo additional surgery. Surgical mesh can also put the patient at risk of new complications. Although surgical mesh is a permanent implant, should complications arise, you may have to more surgeries to remove this medical device, which could impair one's quality of life. Other complications linked to mesh include, bleeding, infection, and organ perforation.

It was just last month that our Orange County, California defective medial device lawyers posted a blog about a woman who sued several manufacturers, including American Medical Systems, for Los Angeles products liability. She said the AMS vaginal sling used during her 2009 POP surgery caused her to develop serious complications and injuries. Laura Jones claims that not only did she experience severe pain and develop urinary problems but also she had to undergo several surgeries so the surgical mesh could be taken out.

In 2008, the FDA said that it had received more than 1,000 reports of surgical mesh-related complications involving the treatment of SUI and POP.

Public Citizen wants the FDA to order all mesh makers to recall all their products that are used for transvaginal repair, mandate that new transvaginal mesh devices fall under the Class III device classification, and ban current marketing efforts for current non-absorbable surgical mesh products.

Recall surgical mesh, consumer group says, Star Tribune, August 25, 2011

FDA Safety Communication: UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse, FDA, July 13, 2011

Petition to Ban Surgical Mesh for Transvaginal Repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Public Citizen

More Blog Posts:
California Defective Medical Device Cases: Lawsuits Filed by Patients Injured by Recalled DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Systems, California Injury Lawyers Blog, August 22, 2011

Woman Files California Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 5, 2011

Cancer Patient Who Could Lose Breasts Following Experimental Procedures Sues for Newport Beach Medical Malpractice and California Products Liability, California Injury Lawyers Blog, March 11, 2011

Continue reading "Public Citizen Wants Transvaginal Mesh Recalled by Food and Drug Administration" »

The Los Angeles products liability trial is underway in the California dangerous drug case filed by Christopher Trejo. The 22-year-old Honduran national, who lives in the US, is suing Johnson & Johnson, McKesson Corp., and McNeil Consumer Healthcare for personal injury. Trejo claims that he developed toxic epidermal necrolysis from taking Motrin.

In his Los Angeles dangerous drug complaint, Trejo says that he took Motrin for a fever in 2005 when he was 15 and that he followed the instructions that came with the medicine. Four days later, bloody bumps appeared in his mouth and his eyes became red. He was hospitalized and diagnosed with Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, which is a life-threatening disease that can damage the different organs and systems of the body. Skin lesions also showed up on his face, abdominal area, genitals, and other parts of his body. This was when his diagnosis was changed to toxic epidermal necrolysis.

After just a few days in the hospital, Trejo's skin started to come off his body, feet, hands, and nails. A surgeon who testified at the trial says that Trejo's wounds can be compared second-degree burns. Trejo's private parts, internal organs, and eyes have all suffered damage from TEN. He also has lost his senses of smell and taste.

Trejo is accusing J & J of failing to warn of the risks of SJS and TEN associated with taking Motrin. He also claims that the drug manufacturer misrepresented the results of the study to the Food and Drug Administration and wasn't entirely truthful about the risk of SJS when it said the drug could be sold without a prescription. The painkiller, when it used to be a prescription-only drug, apparently came with an SJS warning risk.

It was just earlier this year that a California appeals court decided that Trejo could pursue punitive damages from J & J. The appellate court supported a lower court's ruling that felt such damages should be allowed because the drug maker's decision to not to properly warn the public about TENS and SJS could be considered malice.

Drug manufacturers are supposed to warn about side effects and possible risks associated with taking a medication. While some drugs can be old over the counter, others must come with a prescription from a physician. They also should include instructions on how to properly use the drug.

Motrin
Motrin contains ibuprofin and is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). Some signs that a person who has taken Motrin may be experiencing serious side effects include swelling on the face, throat, or tongue, hives, chest pain, breathing problems, vision problems, slurred speech, balance problems, tarry, bloody, or black stools, and vomiting or coughing up unusual-looking blood. If J & J knew that Motrin could cause some people to develop SJS and TENS, the company could likely be found negligent for allowing a dangerous drug to enter the marketplace without adequate warnings about these risks.

Motrin Caused Burn-Like Wounds, Surgeon Says, Santa Monica Patch, August 18, 2011

Man claims Motrin turned his life into a nightmare, Daily Breeze, August 17, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Motrin

Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome

More Blog Posts:
Are SSRI Antidepressants Dangerous Drugs?: Their Link to Birth Defects, California Injury Lawyers Blog, August 19, 2011

Does Fosamax Increase the Risk of Esophageal Cancer?, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 31, 2011

$2M Accutane Lawsuit Awarded to Woman Who Developed Ulcerative Colitis, California Injury Lawyers Blog, May 3, 2011

Johnson & Johnson and DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. are now facing more than 2,000 defective medical device lawsuits over the DePuy ASR metal ASR hip systems that were recalled after they experienced a higher failure rate than expected after implant. Many DePuy hip replacement patients have reportedly experienced joint dislocation, swelling, pain, and, in some cases, systemic damage to the thyroid, central nervous system, or heart. Many users have also had to undergo second hip replacement surgeries because their DePuy medical device failed.

It was last year that DePuy Orthopaedics and Johnson & Johnson recalled about the ASR Hip Resurfacing Systems and the ASR XL Acetabular Hip Replacement devices (that's about 93,000 products). The announcement came after the National Joint Registry of England and Wales reported that within five years of implant, one in eight patients underwent revision surgery to replace the device. There is also concern that toxic metals from the recalled DePuy hip system are showing up in some patients' blood. If you or someone you love has experienced any of the complications mentioned above after being implanted with a DePuy hip replacement device, do not hesitate to contact our Anaheim defective medical device law firm immediately.

With so many people filing their products liability complaints against J & J, there is no doubt that the manufacturer is concerned about liability costs. Legal experts are saying that as a result, DePuy has retained the services of Broadspire Services Inc., a third party, to pay claims for out-of-pocket medical expenses related to the recall. Some believe that this is J & J's way to limit payments while obtaining medical records and other material that could be used in court.

While recalls are usually directly dealt with by companies and their lawyers, who often will go with a doctor's recommendation on whether a medical device should be replaced or removed, with Broadspire in the picture, it would be up to its doctors to decide whether or not to pay for treatment related to the DePuy medical device. There is concern by some that seeing as DePuy is footing the bill for Broadspire to do this job, conflict of interest may be a factor.

Hip replacement surgery is never easy, and many patients tend to be elderly seniors. Not only is hip replacement a painful procedure, but also recovery, as well as learning to walk with the new implanted device, can take time. In addition, having to undergo another surgery again can take a toll, and there is always risk of health complications and infection when any type of invasive procedure is involved. Contact our Orange County, California DePuy Hip Replacement law firm to request your free case evaluation.

Insight: DePuy's handling of hip recall sparks questions, Fox Business/Reuters, August 21, 2011

DePuy

Johnson & Johnson

ASR Hip Replacement Recall Guide

National Joint Registry of England and Wales

More Blog Posts:
Woman Files California Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 5, 2011

Cancer Patient Who Could Lose Breasts Following Experimental Procedures Sues for Newport Beach Medical Malpractice and California Products Liability, California Injury Lawyers Blog, March 11, 2011

CT Scans Can Increase Cancer Risk, Says Two New Studies, California Injury Lawyers Blog, December 14, 2009

According to a number of studies, SSRI antidepressants can up the risk of a pregnant mom delivering an infant with birth defects. SSRI, which stands for Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, is a class of drugs that includes the medications Zoloft, Prozac, Symbyax, Paxil, Cymbalta, Celexa, Lexapro, and Effexor. Usually prescribed to treat depression, there is now growing concern that these antidepressants are dangerous drugs for pregnant women and their babies. If you believe your child was born with a birth defect because you or your significant other took SSRI antidepressants while pregnant, do not hesitate to contact Howard Law right away. We are an Anaheim products liability law firm that represents clients throughout Orange County, Los Angeles County, Riverside County, and San Bernardino County.

Among researchers' findings are the results of a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2006. Per the study, women in their third trimester of pregnancy had a greater chance of delivering children with birth defects, such as persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN), when they took SSRIs during their third trimester. PPHN is a lung disorder that can cause the arteries to become severely restricted and the blood pressure in the heart's pulmonary artery to go up to extremely high levels. The kidneys, liver, and brain of a baby with PPHN may also become severely stressed. PPHN can lead to heart failure, seizures, kidney failure, shock, organ damage, brain hemorrhage, breathing problems, hearing problems, and developmental disorders.

Another study reported that babies of moms who took SSRIs while they were pregnant ended up suffering withdrawal symptoms from the antidepressants after they were born. Tremors and gastrointestinal issues were among the side effects.

Still another study, associated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that babies from moms who had taken SSRI antidepressants while pregnant were at greater risk of developing Anencephaly (being born without a forebrain), Omphalocele (being born with organs outside the body), and Craniosyntosis (the knitting of the bones of a baby's skull).

Some SSRI antidepressants have also been linked to congenital heart defects that can cause a child to have to undergo multiple surgeries as he/she matures into adulthood. Possible congenital heart defects:

• Tricuspic Atresia
• Pulmonary Atresia
• Atrial Septal Defect
• Truncus Arteriosus
• Double Aortic Arch

Pulmonary Stenosis and Clubfoot have also been linked to SSRI antidepressants. Also, recently, a case-control study showed that kids who experienced prenatal exposure to SSRIs had an increased chance of developing autism spectrum disorder. The findings were reported online in the Archives of General Psychiatry. The researchers, however, were also quick to conclude that prenatal SSRI exposure is not a huge risk factor for ASD.

Drug manufacturers are supposed to only market and sell drugs that are safe for use. They are also supposed to warn of serious side effects. Unfortunately, dangerous drugs can cause birth defects and other serious injuries.

Our Orange County, California SSRI birth defect attorneys would like to offer you a free case evaluation.

Pregnant Mothers Should Not Take SSRI Antidepressants, Huffington Post, July 21, 2007

SSRIs and Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension of the Newborn, Massachusetts Genera Hospital, April 24, 2006

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, Mayo Clinic

First-Trimester Use of Selective Serotonin-Reuptake Inhibitors and the Risk of Birth Defects, The New England Journal of Medicine, June 28, 2007

More Blog Posts:
Does Fosamax Increase the Risk of Esophageal Cancer?, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 31, 2011

FDA Turns Down Merck's Bid To Get Gardasil Approved as an HPV Vaccine for Women 27 and Older, California Injury Lawyers Blog, May 13, 2011

Botox Lawsuit: Allergan Ordered by Jury to Pay $212M Verdict to Man Who Suffered Brain Damage After Taking Drug to Treat Hand Cramps, California Injury Lawyers Blog, April 30, 2011

The family of Seth Richardson has filed a $500,000 Huntington Beach personal injuries to a minor claim against the city. Seth, 6, sustained serious burn injuries in April 2011 while at Huntington City Beach when he fell into a deteriorating fire pit that had a still smoldering fire in it. He sustained third-and second-degree burns on his chest and right arm, and he had to undergo weeks of treatment at an Orange, California hospital. The boy is reportedly continuing to receive medical care for his burn injuries.

Photos taken right after the Huntington Beach fall accident show that part of the concrete pit where Seth fell had deteriorated to the point that it was at sand level. While city officials say that its fire pits are checked regularly and that the ones in poor condition are replaced, Seth's dad says that the failure to properly maintain the fire pits caused Seth to get hurt. He also noted that there are no signs instructing fire pit users on how to properly extinguish their fires.

No one is tasked with monitoring the fire pits during the daytime, when they are usually use, and there are people on the beach. The city attributes this lack of supervision to staff limitations.

Premises Liability
A civil claim against a California city is usually a precursor to a legal complaint. Cities that own the beach know that there will likely be kids and others who can sustain serious injuries in fire pit accidents. It is the property owner's job to make sure that the fire pits are in proper working condition, safe for use, and do not pose a Huntington Beach premises liability hazard. This includes ensuring that the fire pit is visible, properly maintained, and placed in a location where someone can't accidentally walk/fall into one.

Two other families recently sued the city for Huntington Beach personal injury over accidents that occurred in other beach fire pits. The family of Adam Eslinger, 2, is seeking damages. Adam sustained burn injuries when he climbed into a fire pit in August 2009. In addition to burn injuries to his hands, the boy also suffered "severe emotionally trauma." Autumn Williams, 13, who rescued Adam, also sustained burn injuries. Their civil trial is scheduled for next month.

In another Huntington Beach burn accident, a Temecula family is suing the city and the state of California for the second- and third-degree burn injuries that Chad Kanow, 11, sustained on his foot in September 2009. They claim that the fire pit was "obscured with sand." That jury trial is scheduled for November.

These four children are not the only ones to get hurt in fire pit accidents. According to the UCI Burn Center, it has treated dozens of patients for burn injuries involving fire pits since 2006. If you believe your injuries, which occurred on another person's property, or was a result of the owner's negligence, you should speak with an experienced Huntington Beach personal injury law firm right away.

Woman Tossed by Cop and Boy Who Fell Into Beach Fire Pit File Claims Against Huntington Beach, OC Weekly, August 18, 2011

Boy who fell into H.B. fire pit wants $500,000, OC Register, August 18, 2011

Related Web Resources:
City of Huntington Beach

Beach fire pits and bonfires - California

More Blog Posts:

More Blog Posts:
California Burn Injury Settlement Over Hot Nacho's at Disney's Magic Kingdom is Under Consideration, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 28, 2011

6-Year-Old Sustains Orange County, California Burn Injuries After Fall Into Beach Fire Pit, California Injury Lawyers Blog, May 20, 2011

Huntington Beach Personal Injury Claim Seeks Over $500,000 for 11-Year-Old's Burn Injuries from Trip and Fall Accident into Fire Pit, California Injury Lawyers Blog, March 17, 2010

The Calayan Surgicentre Corp. has been temporarily shut down, following a sting operation by California regulators. The Los Angeles plastic surgery clinic has also been charged with practicing medicine without a license.

Medical Board of California began investigating the clinic after receiving complaints that people had been injured by laser treatments, Botox procedures, and other medical services. During the sting, at least one employee was discovered pretending to be a doctor, diagnosing a medical condition, and conducting laser treatments. If anyone was injured as a result, the clinic could be held liable for Los Angeles medical malpractice for letting an unqualified person pose as a physician and treat patients.

The West Hollywood clinic is owned by Pie and Manny Calayan. Although their Facebook pages and website refers to them as doctors, they don't have a license to practice medicine in the state of California. They do, however, have medical school diplomas from the Philippines. They also have certificates of memberships in US medical associations that allow doctors with licenses from abroad to join. The clinic's website promotes Manny as someone trained in the US.

If you or someone you love was injured while undergoing cosmetic surgery, at the Calayan Surgicentre Corp. or any other plastic surgery center, you may have reason for filing a Los Angeles plastic surgery malpractice lawsuit against the medical professional that was negligent.

Examples of injuries that can occur because of California plastic surgery malpractice:
• Blood clots
• Disfigurement
• Resurfacing complications
• Infection
• Anesthesia complications
• Traumatic brain injury
• Over-correction
• Nerve damage
• Under-correction
• Scarring
• Wrong-size implants
• Necrosis
• Seroma
• Rippling
• Asymmetry
• Encapsulation
• Breast implant leakage, deflation, or rupture
• Alterations to nipple sensation
• Nipple cover loss
• Rippling
• Dry eyes
• Burning
• Pulmonary embolism
• Too much skin taken off
• Blistering
• Emotional trauma
• Damage to the physical appearance
• Abdominal perforations
• Internal bleeding
• Skin discoloration
• Organ penetration
• Death

Los Angeles plastic surgery errors can cause serious pain and suffering and, depending on the injury that results, can scar a victim, marring his/her physical appearance for life. Considering that many people seek plastic surgery to improve or enhance their appearance, this opposite outcome can be very traumatic, altering the patient's well-being, emotional state, personal life, and/or career.

Plastic surgeons, like all physicians, must provide patients with a basic level of care. When inadequate training, inexperience, carelessness, or recklessness results in a patient getting hurt or suffering health complications, he/she may be able to file a Los Angeles personal injury case.

You will want to work with a Los Angeles plastic surgery malpractice law firm that knows how to determine what happened and who was at fault. In addition to the negligent physician/(another) medical professional. You also may be able to seek damages from the hospital or center where the botched procedure took place. The statute of limitations for filing a California medical malpractice case is one year from the date of discovery that a negligent act occurred. However, no more than three years can have passed since when the injury actually happened.

Board probes plastic surgeon's West Hollywood clinic, Los Angeles Times, August 11, 2011

Medical Board of California investigators serve search warrant on medical clinic in West Hollywood, Medical Board of California, August 11, 2011

Related Web Resource:
Calayan Surgicentre Corp.

More Blog Posts:
Family of Lawndale Woman to Pursue Los Angeles Surgery Malpractice Action Over Her California Wrongful Death from Lap-Band Surgery, California Injury Lawyers Blog, April 27, 2011

Anaheim Hills Medical Malpractice?: Cypress Plastic Surgeon on Probation After Patient Dies, California Injury Lawyers Blog, February 15, 2011

Family is Suing Encino Cosmetic Surgeon for Los Angeles Wrongful Death, California Injury Lawyers Blog, December 29, 2010

Over 200 people protested outside the Fullerton Police Department and City Hall on Saturday over the death of Kelly Thomas. The 37-year-old homeless man was apprehended last month in a violent arrest that sent him into a coma. He died soon after. Now, the public wants answers and action.

Thomas passed away on July 10, five days after an altercation with cops who were looking into reports of an attempted car burglary. According to his parents' Orange County, California wrongful death claim against the city of Fullerton, Thomas, who weighed 145-pounds, was on a bench at the Fullerton Transportation Center when six cops exercised "excessive and deadly force" on him "without justification."

The Fullerton police officers allegedly used their fists, objects, a Taser, and other forms of deadly and excessive force to restrain him even though he did not pose a threaten to the cops. The arrest was captured on video by a cell phone and has been viewed over 695,000 times on You Tube.

An autopsy that was conducted rendered inconclusive findings and toxicology results are still pending. Thomas's mom, Cathy Thomas, says her son was stunned with a Taser at least six times. He also sustained severe neck and head injuries from the arrest. Thomas's dad Ron Thomas says that his son sustained two types of severe traumatic brain injuries--one caused by blunt force trauma and the other because his heart stopped. Ron wants murder charges filed.

The six police officers involved in Thomas's arrest have since been placed on administrative leave while the investigation into the alleged incident of Fullerton police brutality takes place. Over 80 witnesses have already been interviewed. Meantime, the FBI is investigating whether Thomas' civil rights were violated. The Orange County District Attorney is also looking into this tragic incident.

According to Ron Thomas, his son suffered from schizophrenia and had not been taking his medication. His arrest is raising speculation over whether cops are trained to properly deal with those who are mentally ill. The National Alliance on Mental Illness wants the city of Fullerton, whose cops aren't specifically trained in dealing with mental illness, to look at its officer training programs and work with families with mentally ill members.

Excessive Use of Force
Police officers must never use excessive and unnecessary force when doing their job. They must also assess any arrest situation when deciding how much force to exert. In many instances, a suspect won't pose any physical danger and should be treated accordingly. In certain instances, some physical force may be required to apprehend someone.

For an unarmed person to die while being arrested--let alone be beaten by six cops--definitely raises questions regarding whether the Fullerton police officers committed Orange County, California police brutality. That said, it is important that you know that excessive use of police force doesn't have to be physical. Emotional violence, verbal assault, sexual harassment, blackmailing, and threats can be acts of police brutality when used by a cop on a member of the public. Not only is excessive use of police force is violation of one's civil rights, but also it can be grounds for a Fullerton personal injury or wrongful death case.

Homeless man's death in encounter with cops brings protests, USA Today, August 14, 2011

Six California police officers placed on leave in homeless man's death, CNN, August 4, 2011

Kelly Thomas' Parents File Claim Against Fullerton, MyFOX LA, August 12, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Police, City of Fullerton

National Alliance on Mental Illness

More Blog Posts:
Newport Beach Wrongful Death Lawsuit Blames Police for Suicide of Man While in Custody, California Injury Lawyers Blog, August 6, 2011

$2.1M Excessive Use of Force Settlement Reached in 2008 Orange County, California Wrongful Death of Inmate Detained by Cops in 2008, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 29, 2011

Huntington Beach Personal Injury Lawsuit: Man Alleging Police Brutality Claims He Was Choked by Cops, California Injury Lawyers Blog, April 26, 2011

A Los Angeles County personal injury settlement has been reached between Felipe Medina and the county. Medina was injured in a Lynwood car accident on I-105 in 2007 when the car he was in was rear-ended by a vehicle driven by a Department of Mental Health employee. The collision caused a chain reaction involving three vehicles. The case is Medina v. County of Los Angeles and Duckworth (Case No. TC022146).

Medina, 53, sustained neck, shoulder, and back injuries that have ended his career as a maintenance supervisor. He also has had to undergo a number of back operations, get several epidural injections, take prescription pain meds, and wear a back brace. Despite all this, his Los Angeles personal injury lawyer says that Medina will likely experience pain for life. Also, due to Medina's age, the fact that he cannot take on manual labor, and his lack of education, finding other work will prove tough from now on.

The Los Angeles County car crash occurred on December 20, 2007. Medina was sitting in stalled traffic when his vehicle was struck by a van driven by county employee Willie Duckworth. Police say that Duckworth, who has admitted to failing to stop in time, was operating his vehicle at an unsafe speed. The impact of the crash forced Medina's Saturn into another vehicle, which then struck another auto.

Los Angeles Car Accidents
Getting seriously hurt in a car crash can have far-reaching consequences for those involved. Not only may an injury victim have to laid up for weeks or even months, while he or she recovers, but there also may be surgeries and other medical treatment to undergo, as well as rehabilitation. This can all prove very costly for the injured party, who likely may have to take time off work, which can mean lost wages, lost benefits, and loss of employment. In some cases, the injuries may be so serious, such as with a traumatic brain injury or a spinal cord injury, that the Los Angeles auto accident victim may require 24-hour care for life. In addition to adjusting to all these life-altering changes and trying to pay for general living expenses, the injured party will likely have to contend with costly medical bills.

Seeing as your injuries, damages, and losses may be substantial, you will want to work with an experienced Los Angeles car accident law firm that knows how to determine who was responsible and what parties should be held liable. For example, if the driver that struck you was doing his/her job when the accident was happened, then you may be able to recover Los Angeles injury compensation from both him/her and his/her her employer. If the other factors were involved, such as poor road conditions or an auto defect, there also may be other liable parties.

While obtaining your Los Angeles car accident damages may not make you physically whole again or restore your life to what it was before the crash, it can help you to move forward with your life, while offering some financial relief, and allow you to hold the parties responsible liable for your pain, suffering, and other damages and losses.

Read the Los Angeles County Claims Board's Recommendation in Medina v. County of Los Angeles and Duckworth, LA County, (PDF)

Car Accidents Caused by Negligence, Nolo

California Department of Transportation

More Blog Posts:
Brea Man Files Huntington Beach Car Accident Lawsuit Blaming the City, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 7, 2011

Los Angeles Car Accident: Lawsuit Blames the County, the City of Santa Clarita Over Woman's Wrongful Death While Watching July 4 Fireworks, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 24, 2011

$4.5M California Spinal Cord Injury Settlement Reached in Case of Girl Injured While Being Rescued by CHP Following 2006 Car Crash, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 13, 2011

Public Citizen is accusing the Medical Board of California and state regulators of failing to discipline 710 doctors whose hospital privileges were revoked because of California medical malpractice, other serious mistakes, and incompetence. The non-profit consumer group's conclusions come from its analysis of the National Practitioner Data Bank.

Among the doctors who were not disciplined are 102 physicians that had been deemed an "immediate threat" to patients. The Medical Board, In its response to a letter written by Public Citizen's Dr. Sidney Wolf five months ago, said that staff vacancies and budget cuts were factors in its inaction.

Public Citizen has now written to California Governor Jerry Brown. According to Wolfe, the medical board is not acting to protect patients from these doctors with already documented poor records. Public Citizen also claims that the state doesn't seem interested in identifying these physicians.

Our Anaheim medical malpractice law firm would like to point out that disciplinary action against a negligent doctor doesn't have to happen first before you can file an Orange County, California personal injury lawsuit. We also represent victims of Los Angeles medical malpractice, San Bernardino County medical malpractice, and Riverside County medial malpractice.

Among the details Public Citizen found in the national database:
• One doctor had eight medical malpractice payouts totally about $2 million over a 17 year period. He lost his clinical privileges three times.
• Another doctor's hospital privileges were taken away because he was found to be a danger to his patients. He had six California medical malpractice payouts. One of his patients sustained serious permanent injury.
• Another doctor had 15 medical malpractice payouts. Two of the incidents involved foreign objects that were accidentally left inside patients. One of the physician's patients sustained serious permanent injury.

Unfortunately, every year there are people who sustain serious injuries and/or other health complications because a physician was negligent, careless, reckless, or made an avoidable mistake. Doctors and other medical professionals owe patients a duty of care to provide a certain standard of quality care. When failure to provide that care results in the patient getting hurt, he/she may have reason for filing a California medical malpractice lawsuit. Families of those who died because of medical negligence or neglect may have grounds for a California wrongful death complaint.

Some examples of medical mistakes:
• Medication mix-ups
• Failure to obtain informed consent
• Birthing errors
• Negligent prenatal care
• Poor post-operative care
• Anesthesia errors
• Wrong diagnosis
• Delayed diagnosis
• Wrong-site surgery
• Leaving foreign instruments in the body
• Negligent nursing care

A California medical malpractice has to be brought within a year of the claimant finding out about the negligent act but no more than three years after the date the injury incident happened. If the victim is a minor, then a California medical malpractice action has to be brought within three years of when the negligent act happened. However, if the child is younger than 6, the action has to be commenced within three years or before his/her eight birthday (whichever is a longer time period). Under California's pure comparative negligence rule, negligence on the victim's part can decrease the amount of recovery owed but it will not entirely eliminate recovery.

Report: California failed to discipline hundreds of dangerous doctors, OC Register, August 11, 2011

Read the letter from the Medical Board of California, Citizen.org (PDF)

Read the letter from Public Citizen

Related Web Resources:

National Practitioner Data Bank

Medical Board of California

Public Citizen

More Blog Posts:
Orange County, California Medical Malpractice Lawsuits Blame Roland Heights Osteopath For Two Prescription Overdose Deaths, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 13, 2011

Los Angeles Medical Malpractice: $2.25M Verdict Awarded to Eye Surgery Patient Who Suffered Brain Injury, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 17, 2011

Anaheim Medical Malpractice?: Wrong-Side Kidney Operation Performed on a Patient, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 6, 2011

Continue reading "Hundreds of Doctors Accused of California Medical Malpractice Were Not Disciplined by the State, Says Public Citizen" »

Three women are dead and two others are being treated at an Orange, California hospital after a Buena Park car crash that occurred on the I-5N Freeway on Monday night. The single-auto crash occurred as the group was driving back from Garden grove where they'd attended a service at the Crystal Cathedral.

The California Highway Patrol says that the Ford Excursion, which was moving at high speeds, went out of control to crash into a guard rail before rolling over multiple times, landing on its side, and bursting into flames. Some of the occupants were ejected from the vehicle. The police don't think the women were using seat belts.

The driver of the Ford, a 41-year-old woman, and a 16-year-old passenger are being treated at UC Medical Center. The deceased include 40-year-old Sara Flores, 24-year-old Elda Nada-Mayo, and 49-year-old Angela Cid-Del Prado. They were pronounced dead at the Orange County, California car collision site.

Rollover Accidents
Vehicle rollover crashes continue to be the cause of serious personal injury and wrongful death for many occupants. Driver error and carelessness can play a role in causing rollover crashes. However, unfortunately, some vehicles are designed in a way that can increase the chances of a vehicle rolling over during an accident. Rollover accidents can also occur because of road defects, such as a soft-road shoulder or uneven ground that can cause a motor vehicle to "trip." Other common causes of rollovers include speeding--especially when turning a corner or going around a bend--tire defects, potholes, poor weather condition, and auto malfunctions that can cause the driver to lose control of the car.

There also may auto component failures that can contribute to serious injuries during a rollover crash. For example, a faulty seat belt can cause a passenger to be ejected or crash his/her head against the ceiling. Poorly constructed vehicle roofs can also fail to protect passengers during a rollover accident.

SUV rollover crashes can result in devastating injuries, including head injuries, spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, disfigurement, burn injuries, organ damage, paralysis, and death. An experienced Orange County, California rollover crash law firm can help you determine whether or not you have grounds for an injury case against a driver, an auto manufacturer, and/or another responsible party. The sooner you get legal help, the better.

Your Buena Park personal injury lawyer can make sure your vehicle is properly stored so that the evidence it exhibits is preserved, talk to all witnesses, including paramedics and police, go through accident reports and police data, work with accident investigators and experts to examine the crash site, and deal with other matters related to your case.

3 women killed, 2 hurt in fiery crash ID'd, OC Register, August 9, 2011

3 Returning From Crystal Cathedral Service Perish in Fiery Crash, OC Weekly, August 9, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Rollover, PBS

Safercar.gov

More Blog Posts:
California SUV Rollover Lawsuit: US Supreme Court Rejects Ford Appeal Over $82 Million Auto Products Liability Verdict, California Injury Lawyers Blog, December 3, 2009

Anaheim 15-Passenger Van Rollover Accidents Can Result in Spinal Cord Injuries and Traumatic Brain Injuries, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 21, 2010

Brea Man Files Huntington Beach Car Accident Lawsuit Blaming the City, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 7, 2011

Continue reading "3 Downey Residents Killed, 2 Others Seriously Injured in Buena Park Car Accident on I-5N" »

A year after Robert Wedgeworth committed suicide while in police custody, his family has filed a Newport Beach wrongful death lawsuit against the city and members of it police department. According to his loved ones, the 43-year-old man, who suffered from bipolar disorder, was having a manic episode on July 31, 2010 when his wife, Sandy Wedgeworth, called 911 asking for an ambulance to take him to the hospital. Instead, police arrested him on suspicion of spousal abuse and took him to jail.

In their Orange County, California wrongful death complaint, the plaintiffs contend that the cops disregarded the behavioral and physical signs that Wedgeworth was exhibiting indicating that he needed medical help. Within hours of his detention, he hanged himself with bedsheets while in a jail cell. His family is accusing the NBPD of denying him the medical care that he needed.

The city of Newport Beach says the civil suit is without merit and that its police officers followed procedures and had no grounds to think that Wedgeworth posed a threat to himself or anyone else. The DA has said that criminal negligence or malice wasn't involved and that the cops medically screened Wedgeworth and checked on him each hour. However, Sandy Wedgeworth says that what she'd wanted for her husband was the 72-hour detention for observation that is granted under California's Welfare & Institutions Code 5150 for people posing a danger to themselves and others. Police had provided that for him in the past.

It was in January that Sandy Wedgeworth and other family members filed four Newport Beach wrongful death claims against the city seeking about $34 million. In addition to allegedly acting negligently when they put him in a jail cell and deprived him of his right to medical attention, she claims that the Newport beach police may have assaulted her husband. Sandy also says that they jokes about the incident as they were apprehending him. The damages she is seeking include those for loss of a father, loss of a husband, emotional distress, and loss of future earnings.

California Wrongful Death
A party may decide to file an Orange County, California wrongful death lawsuit against those he/she believes was responsible for the death of a loved one. This type of civil complaint allows the plaintiff(s) to seek damages for funeral costs, burial/cremation expenses, medical bills, lost companionship, loss of love (and also care, comfort, moral support, protection, training, assistance, guidance, society, consortium, and affection), lost wages, and lost benefits, while holding the accountable parties liable. In some cases, punitive damages may also be sought.

Every state has its own wrongful death law. In this state you have two years from the date of the accident causing the fatality to file a California wrongful death lawsuit. That said, the sooner you start working with an experienced Newport Beach personal injury law firm that can begin gathering evidence and doing the other necessary steps to prove your case, the stronger your chances for a successful outcome.

Family of man who killed himself in police custody sues Newport, Daily Pilot, August 6, 2011

Family seeks $34 million after man's jail death, OC Register, January 27, 2011

Related Web Resources:
Wrongful Death Claims: An Overview, Nolo

Newport Beach Police Department

More Blog Posts:
Family Files Claim Blaming Newport Beach Police for Orange County, California Wrongful Death of Man who Hanged Himself in Jail, California Injury Lawyers Blog, January 26, 2011

Huntington Beach Personal Injury Lawsuit: Man Alleging Police Brutality Claims He Was Choked by Cops, California Injury Lawyers Blog, April 26, 2011

Buena Park Police Brutality Alleged in 2009 Incident Involving Man Arrested at Knott's Berry Farm Amusement Park, California Injury Lawyers Blog, February 17, 2011

Recently, our Anaheim personal injury law firm wrote a blog post about a Los Angeles wrongful death trial underway between the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the mother of a blind man who was run over by a Metro Blue Line train at the Del Amo station in 2009. Now, the jury has awarded Mary Cuthbertson $17 million.

Cameron Cuthbertson, who is blind, mistakenly walked in between two rail cars thinking that the gap was an open train door. The three-car train departed as he was trying to climb back onto the train platform. The 48-year-old Compton man sustained fatal crush injuries.

In her Los Angeles County wrongful death case, Mary Cuthbertson's lawyers accused Metro of failing to put up protective barriers between cars even though they knew that not doing so placed blind people at risk of falling between the train cars--especially because a lot of them depend on trains to get around. It wasn't until after Cameron's death that the barriers were put up. Mary's Los Angeles personal injury lawyers also accuse Rosie Haynes, the train's operator, of stopping the train over two feet away from where she should have stopped, which is why Cameron tried to enter the train where he did. They contend that she had the train leave earlier than she should have and that if she'd waited Cameron may have been able to get back on the platform.

Meantime, Metro's legal team argued that their client had immunity from such lawsuits because California had approved the train's design when the line was constructed in 1990. In a statement issued after the jury's verdict, Metro said that it wasn't negligent in or responsible for Cameron's death and it may appeal.

The Blue Line was made prior to the Americans with Disabilities Act, which does not allow governments, private employers, labor unions, and employment agencies to discriminate against persons with disabilities. The ADA requires that intercity rail transport be made accessible, useful, and safe for individuals with disabilities. If the train line was set up after the ADA went into effect, the station would have had to have fencing, chains, or some other obstacle between the cars so that blind people wouldn't make the mistake that Cameron did.

That said, it is still the responsibility of property owners to make sure there are no safety hazards on a premise that could place patrons, visitors, customers, guests, or others at risk of serious Los Angeles personal injury or wrongful death. Failure to do so can be grounds for a California premises liability case.

There doesn't have to be a federal act in place for premise owners to be obligated to remedy dangerous situations and prevent accidents from happening or to be held negligent for not doing so. In situations where public transportation is involved, its owners and operators must make sure to eliminate safety risks on the vehicle and at departure and exit locations so as to minimize the chance of injury.

While the $17 million Los Angeles train accident verdict won't make up for Cameron's death, it does at least hold the MTA accountable financially. It also makes a statement so that hopefully this type of avoidable, tragic accident doesn't happen to someone else.

Compton Woman Gets $17M Judgment Against MTA For Wrongful Death Of Blind Son, CBS Los Angeles, July 29, 2011

Blind man's death on Blue Line train brings $17-million verdict, Los Angeles Times, July 30, 2011

Related Web Resources:
METRO STATEMENT RE: JURY VERDICT Mary Cuthbertson, et al. v. LACMTA, Metro

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

Facts About the Americans with Disabilities Act, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

More Blog Posts:
Los Angeles Wrongful Death Trial Underway in Case of Blind Man Who Fell Between Two Metro Blue Line Cars and Was Run Over by Train, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 27, 2011

2008 Chatsworth Train Accident: Judge Divvies Up $200M to the 98 Metro Survivors and the Families of the 24 Passengers Who Die, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 14, 2011

Amtrak Train Wreck: First Personal Injury Lawsuit Filed Against Big Rig Truck Driver, California Injury Lawyers Blog, June 28, 2011