California Injury Lawyers Blog

The family of 2-year-old River Moore is suing Johnson & Johnson for his wrongful death. The toddler died from liver failure last July after taking Children's Tylenol (the Very Berry Strawberry flavor) for his mild fever. River started spitting blood 30 minutes after and he was rushed to a hospital.

According to his family's dangerous drug lawyer, the medication has too much acetaminophen and this damaged River's liver. The Children's Tylenol that River was given was from a batch that was recalled in April 2010. (In a statement issued at the time, J & J acknowledged that some of the medications have a higher concentration of certain active ingredients than what is noted.)

The drug manufacturer said it notified doctors, consumers, regulators, and retailers about the announcement right away. However, Courthouse News reports that in their dangerous drug complaint, Katy and Daniel Moore are claiming that not only did the defendants disregard poor manufacturing conditions, but also, Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary McNeil Consumer Healthcare had contractors secretly go to stores that carried the tainted products and purchase all of them in an attempt to keep the recall a low profile one.

The Moores are accusing J & J of numerous offenses, including breach of warranty, recklessness, infliction of emotional distress, willful and reckless behavior causing death, and conspiracy. They are also suing three J & J subsidiaries, J & J CEO William Weldon, other company executives, ex- consumer health business head Colleen Goggins, and distributors and retailers who handled the drug. The family wants compensatory damages, punitive damages, interest, and payment of their legal fees.

"Unfortunately, there are prescription drugs and over-the-counter medications that end up causing thousands of deaths each year because drug manufacturers prioritized profits over people," said Orange County, California dangerous drug lawyer Vincent Howard. "It is our job to help our clients successfully navigate our complex legal system so they can receive the compensation that they are owed."

The Children's Tylenol recall is one of more than two dozen recalls that J & J has announced since September 2009. The nonprescription meds Motrin, Tylenol, and Benadryl are among these drugs.

"While no amount of money can compensate for the loss of a child, it can allow you to hold the negligent parties responsible for their actions," said Anaheim dangerous drug attorney Vincent Howard.

Couple says defective recalled Children's Tylenol killed 2-year-old son; J&J disputes that, The Washington Post/AP, January 5, 2011

Grieving Parents Blast J&J 'Stealth Recall', Courthouse News Services, January 4, 2012

More Blog Posts:
Yasmin/Yaz Birth Control Pills: FDA Advisory Panel Advises Including Blood Clot Warning on Their Labels, California Injury Lawyers Blog, December 31, 2011

$48.1M Los Angeles Products Liability Verdict Awarded to Man That Took Motrin and Developed SJS and TEN, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 7, 2011

Food and Drug Administration Advisory Panel is Worried about the Number of Injuries Linked to Fosamax, California Injury Lawyers Blog, September 16, 2011

Continue reading "Dangerous Drug Lawsuit Seeks Blames Children's Tylenol for Toddler's Death " »

As our Orange County, California defective medical device law firm mentioned in a previous blog post, Howard Law, PC, represent clients in Southern California that were been injured or have had to undergo revision surgery because the hip implant device that they were given proved faulty. Already, over 5,000 products liability lawsuits have been submitted the US by patients seeking to recover compensation. Most of the cases involve DePuy hip implant devices from Johnson & Johnson that were recalled last year. DePuy is also being sued over its line of Pinnacle hip implants.

However, as evidenced by a recent US Food and Drug Administration-commissioned study, Johnson & Johnson is not the only manufacturer making faulty hip implants. The study examined the outcomes of 830,000 hip implant procedures. 18 other studies involving more than 3,000 patients were also evaluated.

Per the FDA commissioned-study, the newer ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal implants don't exhibit a lot more benefits than their older counterparts, which are made of metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-polyethylene. Patients implanted with devices made of all-metal seem also seemed more like to undergo revision surgery to have an implant replaced.

"Getting a hip implant is a stressful surgical procedure to begin with," said Howard Law, PC partner and Anaheim defective medical device attorney Vincent Howard. "For a patient to have to undergo a second surgery because an implant failed or proved toxic is unacceptable."

In addition to earlier than acceptable failure rates, there are concerns that some of the defective devices are shedding metal debris inside their recipients. The debris is dangerous because after the combined with the scavenger cells released by the body to neutralize them, the human tissue and muscle can become damaged, potentially to crippling effect.

It wasn't too long ago that the FDA sent out notices to the makers of all-metal hip devices telling them to conduct studies to figure out whether their products were shedding toxic levels of metals. Stryker, Biomet, Zimmer, Wright Medical, and DePuy are among the companies that receive this notice.

Per medical and legal experts, hip failures could end up costing billions of dollars. Tens of thousands of people in this country alone may have to undergo revision surgery in the next decade.

"Considering that many of the patients who undergo hip implant procedures are elderly seniors, the trauma of not just one replacement surgery but two can take their physical and emotional toll," said Orange County, California defective hip implant device lawyer Vincent Howard.

Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants Offer No Advantages over Older Versions, FDA Study Finds, News Inferno, November 30, 2011

The High Cost of Failing Artificial Hips, New York Times, December 27, 2011

More Blog Posts:
California Products Liability?: FDA Warns that Lap-Band Ads are Misleading, California Injury Lawyers Blog, December 14, 2011

Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits Raise Questions About FDA's Medical Device Review Process, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 20, 2011

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

Continue reading "California Products Liability: Defective Hip Implant Devices Continue Causing Injuries" »

Wal-Mart is recalling a batch of Enfamil Newborn as a precautionary measure following a 10-day-old baby's death in Missouri from a rare bacterial infection. The powdered infant formula is sold in 12.5-once cans and the batch is lot number ZP1K7G. Some 3,000 Wal-Mart stores throughout the US will be pulling the product from their shelves.

The baby, Avery Cornett, died from Cronobacter sakazakii. It is not known at this time whether the baby formula caused the infection. C. Sakazakii has been linked to powdered infant feeding formulas, which usually aren't sterile and can become tainted with bacteria after pasteurization, while the formula is being prepared for the baby, or from products used to make the formula. It is an environmental contaminant that primarily affects infants and premature babies. Unfortunately, the bacteria can be very dangerous for them.

Mead Johnson Nutrition, which makes Enfamil Newborn, has been quick to note that the actual source of Avery's infection has not been verified. The manufacturer also stated the infant formulas are tested for bacteria before they are shipped into the marketplace.

According to Businessweek, there was another newborn that also recently developed C. Sakazakii after being given powdered formula. Fortunately, the infant recovered. A Mead Johnson spokesperson says that this incident hasn't been linked to Enfamil Newborn. (The baby reportedly drank several kinds of powdered formula.)

If, in fact, the Enfamil Newborn was the source of baby Avery's C. Sakazakii, his parents could have grounds for a products liability lawsuit against Mead Johnson. Wal-Mart could also be held responsible for selling the tainted powdered baby formula.

Products Liability
California products liability law allows a victim to hold manufacturers, sellers, wholesalers, and retailers liable for an injury caused by a product. Food is considered a product. Unfortunately, tainted, contaminated, and spoiled foods sometimes do enter the marketplace, causing food poisoning, bacterial infections, other illnesses, and even death.

"There may be other parties besides a manufacturer that should be held liable for the product defect that caused your loved one injury, illness, or death," said Howard Law, PC partner and Orange County, California products liability attorney Vincent Howard.

Sometimes, a food can become "defective" during the manufacturing process. Poor preparation can also result in food becoming contaminated or tainted. An experienced Anaheim personal injury law firm can help you determine whether the defect occurred and who should be held responsible.

Walmart pulls formula after infant dies, AP/SF Gate, December 23, 2011

Mead Johnson Drops as Wal-Mart Pulls Formula After Death, Bloomberg/Businessweek, December 22, 2011

Wal-Mart recalls powdered infant formula, Los Angeles Times, December 22, 2011

On Cronobacter sakazakii, Food Safety News, June 21, 2010

More Blog Posts from Howard Law, PC:
Be Careful If You Are Using a Turkey Fryer This Thanksgiving, California Injury Lawyers Blog, November 17, 2011

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

California Products Liability: WATCH Warns Against "10 Most Worst Toys" of 2011, California Injury Lawyers Blog, December 21, 2011

Continue reading "Wal-Mart Recalls Enfamil Newborn Baby Formula Following Infant's Death" »

With the holiday shopping season in full swing, our Orange County, California products liability lawyers want to remind parents and other gift buyers that not all toys are safe. As a matter of fact, some toys are dangerous enough that they can cause serious injuries.

To help you figure what types of toys to stay away from, World Against Toys Causing Harm, Inc. puts out a "10 Worst Toys" List each year.

WATCH's "10 Worst Toys for 2011:
1. "Gigan" Godzilla Figure: The warning label says that this toy is a potential choking hazard. What you should also know is that this Godzilla-like toy, with its pointed, sharp attachments and protrusions, also may cause puncture wound and impact injuries.
2. The Incredible Shrinky Dinks Maker: Requiring electricity, this toy oven may cause electrical shock if a child submerges it in water or changes the light bulb without pulling the plug first
3. Sword Fighting Jack Sparrow: Not only is this action figure a potential choking hazard for young kids, but the pirate's sword, which is activated by a lever that pushes Sparrow's arm up and down, may cause impact injuries, including eye injuries.
4. Stepper "Low Rise" Stilts: This toy comes with no warnings but kids can sustain head and other impact injuries in the event of a fall accident.
5. Z-Curve Bow: This bow and arrow set could cause eye injuries if one of the arrows hits a face.
6. School Bus (by Schylling): Removable rubber tires pose a potential choking hazard to young kids.
7. Pulling Animal Duck: This wooden duck comes with a 33" long cord that can pose a strangulation hazard.
8. Fold & Go Trampoline: Available in toy aisles designated for kids as young as 3, this toy has the potential to cause serious bodily injuries, including head injuries and neck injuries.
9. Power Rangers Samurai Blade: The "sword," which can stretch to two feet, may cause impact injuries.
10. Twist 'n Sort: Small wood blocks and detachable wooden pegs are choking hazards

"Just because a toy is for sale in stores doesn't mean that it is free of dangerous defects," says Howard Law, PC partner and Orange County, California toy defect attorney Vincent Howard. "It is important to hold toymakers, sellers, and distributors liable for product-related injuries sustained by your child."

California's strict liability standard means that even if the designer, seller, distributor, or manufacturer didn't do anything wrong, they can still be held liable for a product defect that existed even before the item was released into the market if that defect caused the personal injuries. Types of defects include manufacturing defects, design defects, and "failure to warn."

World Against Toys Causing Harm

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Safe Kids USA

Continue reading "California Products Liability: WATCH Warns Against "10 Most Worst Toys" of 2011 " »

The Food and Drug Administration has issued a warning to the marketing firm 1-800-GET-THIN and eight surgical centers that advertisements for the Lap-Band are misleading. The surgical device is used to treat obesity by limiting how much food a person can eat. Lap-Band is made by Allergan, which is based in Irvine.

According to the FDA, the 1-800-GET-THIN ads don't include mandatory information about all the possible side effects and risks that can come with using the Lap-Band. Certain precautions, contraindications, and other warnings are also not provided. The federal agency is worried that on the ad inserts, the font size of the information that talks about the risks is not big enough that consumers will see it.

Products Liability
Improper marketing that results in someone sustaining serious injury can be grounds for an Orange County, California products liability lawsuit. Examples of marketing defects:

• Failure to warn of dangers, risks, or side effects
• Inadequate warning
• Improper labeling
• Marketing to the wrong group (For example, promoting a product to kids when it should only be used by adults.)

1-800-GET-THIN LLC offers information sessions and consultations about Lap-Band surgeries. Of the surgical centers that received the FDA warning, a number of them are in Los Angeles County: Beverly Hills Surgery Center, Valley Surgical Center, Palmdale Ambulatory Center, Cosmopolitan Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, and Cosmopolitan Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery.

The FDA says that unless the ads are revised to address its concerns, the government agency may seize the Lap-Band or impose fines. The companies that received the FDA warning have 15 business days to present their plans for how they intend to change the ads.

"It is irresponsible to incorrectly market any product by failing to warn about the risks involved," said Howard Law, PC partner and Anaheim products liability attorney Vincent Howard. "You may be able to hold the responsible parties liable for the harm you or your loved one suffered."

Lap-Band Surgery
Considered by some to be a safer alternative to gastric bypass, Lap-Band surgery is a surgical alternative to weight loss that can be used for medical reasons or cosmetic purposes. The procedure involves using the band to section the stomach into parts. This allows food to go to the smaller sectioned off area, which will limit how much the person can take in. This usually leads to substantial weight loss. Unfortunately, injuries and deaths have occurred, and plaintiffs have come forward to file Orange County, California medical malpractice and wrongful death claims. Howard Law, PC has reported on a few of these cases and injury incidents, which you can read on our California Injury Lawyers Blog.

FDA Targets Gastric Band Weight-Loss Claims, Food and Drug Administration

Feds warn that 1-800-Get-Thin ads mislead, OC Register, December 13, 2011

FDA Warns Centers for Misleading Lap-Band Ads, ABC News/AP, December 13, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Los Angeles County Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Claims Lap-Band Surgery Caused Wife's Wrongful Death, California Injury Lawyers Blog, March 9, 2011

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

Los Angeles Medical Malpractice?: California Medical Board Investigates Surgeon Following Lawndale Woman's Death After Lap-Band Procedure, California Injury Lawyers Blog, February 4, 2011

Continue reading "California Products Liability?: FDA Warns that Lap-Band Ads are Misleading" »

A woman who works for Cal State Long Beach died yesterday when the elevator she was in malfunctioned, trapping her between two floors. As 48-year-old Annette Lujan tried to get out, the elevator, which weighs over 2000 pounds, moved, crushing her. The 48-year-old Huntington Beach woman was pronounced dead at the Los Angeles County injury accident site.Lujan was employed in the University Office of Research for Grants and Contracts.

Elevator Accidents
Elevator accidents can cause serious injuries, which is why an elevator should be properly maintained and free from any defects that might cause it to get stuck in between floors, suddenly and rapidly descend without warning, or have its doors open at the wrong moment.

Elevator entrapment can lead to asphyxiation, emotional trauma, and panic attacks. If your elevator suddenly goes into freefall, you may sustain physical injuries from the impact of landing. Walking into an open shaft that doesn't have an elevator to step into can be a traumatic and excruciating experience if one is lucky enough to survive.

Common causes of elevator accidents include:
• Mechanical malfunction
• Improper leveling that prevents the elevator from properly lining up with the floor
• Faulty wiring, which can cause accidental electrocution
• Wet floors that can lead to a Los Angeles slip and fall accident
• Inadequate repairs
• Failure to have the elevator undergo routine inspections and/or maintenance
• An elevator door defect
• Rider carelessness

The building owner where a defective elevator is located, the elevator manufacturer, or the maintenance company responsible for inspecting and keeping an elevator working are some of the parties that could be held liable for Los Angeles premises liability, personal injury, or product liability. An experienced Long Beach injury law firm can help you figure out what happened.

Also, if your elevator accident was work-related, you could be entitled to both California workers' compensation from your insurer and Los Angeles injury recovery from other responsible parties. If it was your loved one that was killed in the work accident, you may be entitled to wrongful death recovery and death benefits from the employer.

Elevator accidents kill about 27 people a year, while about 10,000 others are injured. Please call our Los Angeles personal injury law firm. Howard Law, PC would like to offer you a free consultation. Filing a Los Angeles wrongful death claim won't bring your loved one back but it can help you hold the responsible party liable while providing you with some financial relief.

Cal State Long Beach worker killed climbing from stuck elevator, Los Angeles Times, December 7, 2011

Woman dies in Calif. elevator accident, MSNBC, December 7, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Los Angeles Wrongful Death Claim Blames Metro for Man's Fatal Stabbing, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 13, 2011

Newport Beach and Costa Mesa Authorities Investigate Orange County, California Death of Woman Struck in Her Car by Fallen Eucalyptus Tree, California Injury Lawyers Blog, September 20, 2011

Mentally Ill Homeless Man Beaten by Fullerton Police Died from Asphyxia, Reports Coroner, California Injury Lawyers Blog, September 21, 2011

Continue reading "Cal State Long Beach Employee Dies in Los Angeles, California Elevator Accident" »

Honda Motor Corp. says that it is recalling Another 273,000 Acura and Honda motor vehicles over concerns that faulty air bags could prove deadly for motorists. The automaker says it will inspect another 603,000 autos to see if the same defective parts were used when repairing vehicles that had been involved in accidents.

Honda says that the side air bag on the driver's side might deploy too forcefully during a crash and that this might cause the metal inflator casing, which holds the explosive propellant to rupture. If this were to happen, then the pieces of the casing could expel, causing injuries. Takata, which is a parts supplier in Japan, made the air bag inflator.

This is the fifth recall announced by Honda over the same issue. (The number of vehicles affected is now at over 2.5 million.) The automaker expanded the recall after finding out that another driver had gotten hurt.

Autos involved in this latest recall include the:
• Civic (2001 - 2003 models)
• Accord (A number of 2001 - 2002 models)
• Odyssey (2001 - 2003 models)
• CR-V (2002 and 2003 models)
• Acura 3.2 TL (2002 and 2003 models)
• Acura 3.2 CL (2003 model)

While airbags that work properly can save lives, defective ones can prove dangerous during an Orange County, California car crash. Our Anaheim products liability lawyers are familiar with the serious injuries that can arise because of an air bag defect or another defective auto part. Please contact us to request a free case evaluation.

Common problems with defective/malfunctioning air bags that can cause Los Angeles personal injury or wrongful death:

• Failure to deploy
• Delayed deployment
• Deploying too forcefully
• Deploying when it shouldn't
• Parts shrapnel during deployment

An air bag that doesn't go off (or goes off too late) can cause the vehicle occupant to ram into the steering wheel, windshield, or another part of the vehicle, potentially resulting in internal injuries, traumatic brain injuries, or spinal cord injuries. An airbag that goes off too forcefully could cause serious impact injuries, including chest injuries, neck injuries, blindness, hearing loss, thoracic trauma, lacerations, burns, leg and arm fractures, and abrasions.

It's bad enough being involved in a catastrophic collision without having one of the vehicle's safety features fail when you need it. Auto manufacturers can be held liable for this.

A few other serious auto defects that can be grounds for Orange County, California wrongful death or personal injury:

• Tire failure, including blowouts and tread separation
• Seat belt defects
• Seatback collapse
• Brake malfunction
• Sudden unintended acceleration
• Steering wheel failure
• Rollovers
• Roof crush
• Failure of vehicle to exhibit the appropriate level of crashworthiness

Honda recalling cars to fix airbags that can kill drivers, Los Angeles Times, December 2, 2011

More Blog Posts:
CPSC Warns that Placing Your Baby's Bumbo Seat on an Elevated Surface Could Cause Serious Orange County, California Head Injuries, California Injury Lawyers Blog, November 25, 2011

Huntington Beach Wrongful Death Lawsuit in Fatal Jr. Lifeguard Boating Accident is Scheduled for Trial, California Injury Lawyers Blog, November 27, 2011

Huntington Beach Personal Injury Claims Seek Damages on Behalf of Tustin Bicycle Accident Victim and Her Husband, California Injury Lawyers Blog, November 18, 2011

Continue reading "Deadly Air Bag Defect Prompts Honda To Recall Another 273,000 Autos" »

Following reports of at least another 45 incidents involving infants involved in fall accidents when their Bumbo seats were placed on elevated surfaces, the Consumer Product Safety Commission is once again warning parents and guardians against ever using this product on a countertop, chair, table, or another surface that is above ground level. A recall issuing this same warning had been issued in 2007 and involved about 1 million Bumbo "Baby Sitter" Seats. CPSC and Bumbo International had noted that moving forward, a warning label cautioning against this specific hazard would be included with the child seats. Skull fractures, concussions, and at least one broken bone are among the injuries reported.

Babies in Bumbo seats are at risk of falling out whenever they lean forward or to the side, rock in any direction, or arch their backs. By placing this product on an elevated surface, this increases the risk of serious injuries. Our Anaheim brain injury lawyers represent children and adults who got hurt because of other parties' negligence. Please contact our Orange County, California personal injury law firm today.

The CPSC and Bumbo International also say they know of at least 50 other incidents involving babies falling or wiggling their way out of Bumbo seats that were at unknown heights or on the ground.

Babies and Head Injuries
A head injury can be dangerous for anyone--but especially for babies, whose scalps tend to be more delicate. While fortunately minor bumps and bruises can easily be alleviated with ice and loving tenderness, this doesn't mean that you shouldn't observe your child carefully for signs of a possibly more serious brain injury, such as a brain bleeding, a concussion, a skull fracture, or a traumatic brain injury.

Steps to take after your baby has struck his/her head:
• Observe your child closely over the next 24 hours and watch for any changes in behavior.
• Try not to let him/her sleep for at least an hour after the injury accident. Short naps are fine, but check on the baby frequently for changes in skin coloring or breathing or involuntary body twitches

These symptoms may be signs of a more serious head injury and you may want to seek medical help right away:
• Loss of consciousness
• Vomiting
• Confusion or disorientation
• Balance issues
• Incessant crying
• Severe headache
• Rolling or crossed eyes
• One pupil appearing larger than the other
• Vision problems

Contact our Anaheim personal injury law firm today. We represent children and adults in Los Angeles County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, and Orange County, California. We also handle California products liability cases against the manufacturers of dangerous or defective consumer goods that caused severe injury or death.

Infants in Bumbo Baby Seats Falling from Elevated Surfaces and Suffering Serious Head Injuries, CPSC, November 22, 2011

Bumbo Baby Seats Recalled, CBS News, February 11, 2009

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

Disneyland Sued For Allegedly Exposing Visitors to Lead, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 18, 2011

Orange County, California Products Liability: CPSC and Nine Manufacturers Recall 2M Pourable Gel Fuel Units Following Burn Injuries and Deaths, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 31, 2011

While frying your turkey can make for a deliciously crisp bird, you may be placing yourself at serious risk of injury. Granted, using a propane turkey fryer is a quicker alternative to using an oven, but the safety risk may not be worth the time payoff.

Not only has the National Fire Protection Association recommended that people refrain from using this type of cooking device--it doesn't believe that turkey fryers are safe for use--but also the Consumer Products Safety Commission is reporting that it has received dozens of reports of people getting burned and fires erupting. Do not hesitate to contact our Anaheim personal injury law firm if you or someone you love was hurt because of a turkey fryer in Orange County, Los Angeles County, San Bernardino County, or Riverside County.

Common scenarios where injuries involving a turkey fryer might arise:
• When the turkey is placed in a fryer while still partially frozen
• Hot oil spills or splashes--especially when the bird is removed or inserted into the fryer
• Opting to use a propane-fryer turkey inside rather than outdoors
• The oil gets ignited after hitting high temperatures or coming into contact with the open flames underneath the fryer
• A slip and fall incident occurs while attempting to move the fryer, which can cause the person to make contact with the oil

Most of the incidents reported to the CPSC took place while the oil was being heated and before the turkey was even insider the fryer. Ways to avoid injuries:

• Keep your eye on the fryer while it is in use at all times
• Place the fryer in an area that is open and a safe distance away from walls, fences, or other structures that could catch fire and burn
• Don't use a fryer indoors, including in a garage or on a porch
• Ensure that your skin is protected
• Slowly put the food in and out of the fryer
• Make sure that you are monitoring the oil temperature
• If you see smoke, turn the gas off ASAP

Consumer Group Underwriters Laboratories (UL) has studied propane fryers and found that their inadequate/lack of temperature control makes them hard to control. Considering that using a turkey fryer exactly as intended still places people at serious risk of injury raises questions as to how safe this product is and whether manufacturers are doing everything to protect consumers from personal injury, especially burn injuries. For example, Consumer Report says that there are electric turkey fryers that are much safer to use than the fryers using propane. Not only do they have automatic temperature controls that will turn the heat off before the oil becomes too hot, but also, less oil is required to operate them.

Over the years, defective product lawsuits have been filed against the makers of turkey fryers for catastrophic burn injuries and property damage.

Contact our Anaheim products liability law firm to request your free case evaluation.

CPSC Issues Safety Tips for Turkey Fryers, CPSC, November 26, 2003

Turkey Fryers, NFPA

More Blog Posts:
Disneyland Sued For Allegedly Exposing Visitors to Lead, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 18, 2011

$48.1M Los Angeles Products Liability Verdict Awarded to Man That Took Motrin and Developed SJS and TEN, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 7, 2011

California Wrongful Death Lawsuit Filed in Los Angeles Medical Malpractice Case Involving Lap-Band Patient Also Seeks Damages from Advertising Company, California Injury Lawyers Blog, September 14, 2011

With the number of transvaginal mesh lawsuits rising, the effectiveness of the Food and Drug Administration's medical review process has once again come into doubt. Apparently, defective medical lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson involve a vaginal implant that was based on a similar mesh product that was taken off the market for safety reasons more than 10 years ago. That product was called ProteGen, by Boston Scientific Corp. So why then did the FDA keep approving these new mesh products?

Questions about whether the FDA has been doing its job as watchdog started to surface in the wake of the mass recall announced last year by DePuy Orthopaedics, a J & J subsidiary, of its defective hip implant devices. Medtronic's recall of its Sprint Fidelis defibrillators following over allegedly more than a 100 deaths didn't help either.

Please do not hesitate to contact our Anaheim defective medical device lawyers if you believe that you could have a case.

According to National Women's Health Network police director Amy Allina, as reported in Bloomberg.com, the FDA's 510(k) process for approval lets manufacturers obtain product clearance if it cites similarity to a device that had been previously approved. The next device can then be cited to cleared the next one, and so one. Allina says that if the first approved medical device was recalled, the FDA won't then link it back to devices that were approved after even if they were based on the recalled product. The FDA uses the 510(k) process to approve 90% of device applications annually. The vaginal mesh products, artificial hip implants, and the Medtronic defibrillators all made it through the (510)k process.

Just recently, Boston Scientific put out a class 2 recall of its Pinnacle Pelvic Floor Repair Kits over concerns that the mesh product might detach during surgery. The transvaginal mesh product is supposed to help strengthen and stabilize the pelvic floor to treat pelvic organ proplapse.

More than 600 products liability lawsuits have been filed against vaginal mesh makers, including the one filed a couple of weeks ago by one woman against Boston Scientific. She says that because the Pinnacle pelvic mesh that was implanted in her was defective and that she sustained permanent physical injury as a result. She is seeking $1.5 million in compensatory damages for emotional trauma, medical bills, pharmaceutical costs, disability, loss of enjoyment of life, and pain and suffering.

The FDA recently warned that serious complications related to transvaginal mesh used in treating POP rare are not uncommon. Complications may include organ perforation, infection, or bleeding. Removing this medical device once implanted can be a painful and complicated process that may require numerous surgeries while placing the patient at risk of even more health complications.

Johnson & Johnson vaginal mesh lawsuits another blow to the FDA's device review process, Massdevice.com, October 20, 2011

J&J Vaginal Mesh Approved by FDA Based on Similar Device Recalled in 1999, Bloomberg, October 19, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Public Citizen Wants Transvaginal Mesh Recalled by Food and Drug Administration, California Injury Lawyers Blog, August 25, 2011

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

Continue reading "Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits Raise Questions About FDA's Medical Device Review Process" »

In Orange County Superior Court, the Mateel Environmental Justice Foundation has filed a lawsuit accusing Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S. Inc. of exposing kids to excessive levels of lead at Disneyland. The environmental group wants the amusement park to either put up health warnings or cover up the items and attractions that it believes contain too much lead.

Among the items at Disneyland the environmental group says has too much lead:

• Doorknobs and drinking fountains at popular attractions, such as the one at Minnie's house
• Brass rail chains
• Leaded glass windows, including the ones at the beauty salon in Cinderella's castle
• The handle of the sword in Sword in the Stone attraction

According to the Baltimore Sun, Mateel conducted wipe testing, which imitates what occurs when someone has physical contact with items that are tainted with lead. Test results showed that lead exposure on Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, the Haunted Mansion, and the Peter Pan ride was above .5 micrograms/day--state law mandates that anything over this amount must come with a warning.

Lead Poisoning
While the development of serious side effects from lead poisoning doesn't generally occur from having contact with too much lead just once, exposing kids to too much lead is never a good idea. Please contact our Anaheim personal injury law firm if you suspect that your son or daughter got sick or developed disabilities because of lead poisoning.

It wasn't until 1978 that lead in paint was banned for use in houses. Unfortunately, there are still homes that were made before then that may still be using paint containing too high levels of lead. Even if the paint has deteriorated to dust and chips, this still can seep into the air and cause health complications. That said, all property owners should make sure that kids and adults are not exposed to high levels of lead while on their premises.
Also, In recent years, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has had to recall millions of toys and kids' products because they contained too much lead. Many of these toys were made in China.

A child's body will more easily absorb lead into its gastrointestinal tract. Lead poisoning can cause permanent injury, as well as inattentiveness, irritability, and hyperactivity. Lead exposure can impact the brain, cause learning disabilities, hearing loss, delayed growth, permanent brain damage, and even death.

Attractions, other sites at Disneyland expose visitors to lead, group says, Baltimore Sun, October 18, 2011

Lead Danger at Disneyland, Watchdog Says, NBC, October 18, 2011

Lead, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Lead Poisoning: What It Is, How to Test, What to Do, WebMD

Consumer Product Safety Commission

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

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

Los Angeles Wrongful Death Lawsuit Filed Against Compton Unified School District by Parents of Boy Who Died in PE Class, California Injury Lawyers Blog, October 5, 2011

Continue reading "Disneyland Sued For Allegedly Exposing Visitors to Lead" »

Christopher Trejo, 22, has been awarded $48.1 million in his Los Angeles dangerous drug lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, Mcneil Consumer Healthcare, and McKesson Corp. Mcneil Consumer Healthcare, which makes Motrin, is a J & J subsidiary.

Trejo was 15 when he took Motrin to alleviate his fever and his pains from playing soccer in 2005. Not long after, the Westchester resident was diagnosed with Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and then later Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis. The illnesses left him with severe skin lesions, vision problems (he expects to be completely blind in the future) and damage to his internal organs. He also was hospitalized for days because he required treatment for his wounds, which appeared all over his body and have been likened to second-degree burns.

Trejo has lost his senses of taste and smell. He also says that his mucous membranes have also been impacted and that, as a result, his eyelids and mouth can become sealed. Trejo, who is a manager at McDonald's says that customers don't want him to serve them because they think he suffers from conjunctivitis.

In his Los Angles products liability complaint, filed in 2008, Trejo claimed design defect, negligence, and failure to warn about possible side effects. It wasn't until 2006 that Motrin added warnings of possible blisters, rashes, and red skin on its label.

The jury awarded Trejo $21.1 million for pain and suffering, $11.4 million for medical expenses and lost wages, and punitive damages: $8.79 million against Johnson & Johnson, and $6.8 million against McNeil.

Punitive Damages
Unlike compensatory damages, which are to compensate the plaintiff and make him/her whole, punitive damages are considered punishment for the defendant, as well as to discourage future bad conduct. Not every case that ends in favor of plaintiff will result in punitive damages.

In Trejo's Los Angeles dangerous drug lawsuit, his personal injury attorney had called for punitive damages, saying it would send a message to the defendants. The lawyer argued that J & J and McNeil waited to add warnings to the label for economic reasons, including "profit" and to "avoid the sales implications.' Trejo had said that if the warning of rashes, blister, and skin reddening had been on the Motrin label in 2005, he wouldn't have taken the medication.

The verdict in his California products liability case comes four months after another jury awarded the family of Brianna Maya $10 million for the burns and blindness she experienced after taking Children's Motrin in 2000. Brianna was 3 when she developed SJS and TEN.

$48M awarded to man in Motrin blood blisters case, SeattlePI, October 4, 2011

Motrin Lawsuit: Jury Awards Girl $10 Million for Burns and Blindness, ABC News, June 3, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Los Angeles Dangerous Drug Trial: Man Claims Motrin Caused Him to Develop Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, California Injury Lawyers Blog, August 23, 2011

Food and Drug Administration Advisory Panel is Worried about the Number of Injuries Linked to Fosamax, California Injury Lawyers Blog, September 16, 2011

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

Continue reading "$48.1M Los Angeles Products Liability Verdict Awarded to Man That Took Motrin and Developed SJS and TEN" »

A US Food and Drug Administration advisory panel has said that there isn't enough information available for it to recommend limits for how long a patient should take a bisphosphonate drug to treat osteoporosis. The panel, however, did say that it was concerned about the number of women claiming to have developed thigh fractures and osteonecrosis of the jaw after taking Fosamax and similar medications over several years. Numerous Fosamax fracture lawsuits have even been filed. During its meeting on Friday, the panel voted in favor of adding more information on labels about the medications' effectiveness and safety when taken long-term--over three to five years.

Some four to five million people have prescriptions for a bisphosphonate drug filled each year. Actonel, Aclasta, Bonevia, Altevia, and Reclast are other biphosphonates. The Risk Management Advisory Committee and the Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs and the Drug Safety make up the FDA's advisory panel.

Fosamax, from Merck & Co, was approved in 1995 as the first approved bisphosphonate. At that time it was believed that Fosamax could be used indefinitely. Now, however, some researchers are wondering whether the benefits of taking the drug--the medication slows the bone breakdown that can come with aging--outweigh the possibility that it may also cause the bones to become so brittle that jaw death and/or thigh fractures can occur.

According to The Wall Street Journal, one California woman who testified before the FDA advisory panel said that her fracture occurred last May while she was throwing an item in the trash. She experienced a snap and then severe pain. Prior to her injury, Lanter, 68, would bike 25 miles each week and hike three miles a day. She had been taking Fosamax to treat her osteoporosis for nine years. There were other women that also testified before the FDA advisory panel about their fractures. X-rays of the injuries demonstrated the type of bone breaks that are usually associated with those sustained in car accidents.

The FDA is now reconsidering whether it will keep approving bisphosphonates for preventing osteoporosis. It, too, is looking at whether the suspected injury risks are worth the health benefits. It was just last year that, because of these concerns, the FDA recommended that doctors periodically reassess whether a patient should keep taking bisphosphonates.

Recently, questions have also been raised over whether Fosamax causes Esophageal ulcers and inflammation, which can lead to cancer.

Fosamax Lawsuits
Our Anaheim Fosamax fracture lawyers represent clients that have suffered thigh fractures, osteonecrosis of the jaw, severely suppressed bone turnover, and other serious side effects while taking this drug. We are experienced in holding drug manufacturers liable for Orange County, California personal injury.

FDA panel unclear on osteoporosis drug labels, CBS News, September 12, 2011

FDA Panel: Won't Make Treatment Recommendation For Osteoporosis Drugs, Wall Street Journal, September 9, 2011

More Blog Posts:
FDA Advisory Panel to Review Risks Associated with Taking Fosamax, California Injury Lawyers Blog, September 8, 2011

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

Federal Fosamax Lawsuits Over Femur Fractures to be Coordinated Under Multidistrict Litigation, California Injury Lawyers Blog, July 29, 2011

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 " »

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" »