Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Yaz and Beyaz May Result in Fatalities

Friday, February 26th, 2016

contraceptive-pills-849413_640

As an Alabama products liability attorney, I closely follow reports of potentially harmful medications. Yaz and Beyaz, two major birth control pills heavily promoted for their ability to control pre-menstrual issues such as bloating and acne, may come with potentially deadly side effects. Yaz and Beyaz both contain dropsirenone, a form of progestin that has been linked to significant side effects. Side effects include:

  • Heart attack
  • Deep vein thrombosis
  • Stroke
  • Blood clots
  • Pulmonary embolism
  • Abnormal heart rhythm
  • Gallbladder disorders
  • Death

The FDA has issued numerous warnings to Bayer, the manufacturer of Yaz and Beyaz, but the manufacturer continues to market the medications. The FDA has received notification of at least 50 deaths in women taking Yaz and Beyaz, including that of a 17-year-old girl. The drugs continue to be sold, and an estimated 12 million women in the U.S. have been prescribed Yaz, Beyaz, or Ocella (a generic version of the medication).

The drugs bring in billions of dollars annually in sales, even as the startling side effects continue. The pills are promoted as medication that not only prevents pregnancy, but also prevents bloating and reduces adult acne. A 2012 FDA warning states that Yaz, Beyaz, and other birth control pills with dropsirenone result in three times the chance of developing blood clots compared to birth control pills without the hormone. Although Bayer now has added a warning label to these medications, it may not be enough to prevent harmful side effects, and the pills remain on the market.

In an interview with NPR, Dr. Frits Rosendaal said that the safest birth control pill is, “surprisingly, one of the oldest pills.” He further warns about the possible risks associated with new medications and urges consumers to carefully follow reports of side effects.

At least 12,000 women have brought claims against Bayer for the side effects associated with Yaz, Beyaz, and Ocella. In July, 2015 Bayer agreed to a settlement of no less than $2 billion to resolve these claims. Other claims have been addressed separately.

If you have suffered a serious side effect as the result of taking Yaz or Beyaz, contact our Alabama products liability attorney today. Side effects like heart attack, stroke, blood clots, and pulmonary embolism can result in significant medical bills and lost wages. Our experienced Alabama products liability attorney will fight to get you the compensation you deserve as we bring these potentially dangerous drugs to light! Contact the Garmon Law Firm today online or by phone at 256-543-HURT.

Vaginal Mesh Revision Surgeries

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2016

woman-1140032_640

Thousands of women are experiencing a range of severe symptoms after vaginal mesh procedures. The transvaginal mesh implantation surgery is performed to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). After the surgery, many women report severe pain, incontinence, the inability to engage in intercourse, bleeding, erosion of the mesh through the vaginal wall and internal tissues, fatigue, and infections. The FDA now acknowledges that these side effects following vaginal mesh surgery are not rare. Many women have chosen to undergo transvaginal mesh revision surgery in an effort to alleviate their symptoms.

Revision Surgery

Although the initial mesh surgeries are performed transvaginally, some revision surgeries require a traditional open surgical procedure. This means that the surgery may be more invasive, and the risks due to bleeding and infection may be higher. In addition, any surgery comes with risks inherent to anesthesia. Risks noted with vaginal mesh revision surgery include excessive bleeding, damage to the bladder, ureters, or bowel, and even death. Risks during recovery from the surgery include blood clots, scarring, bowel obstruction, infection, an opening of the incision, and bladder incontinence.

The revision surgery is often complicated as tissue grows through the mesh, and the mesh can curl and degrade over time. Put simply, the mesh cannot easily be removed. It is composed of a polymer and over time it constricts. This process further embeds the mesh in the tissues. During surgery, the surgeon must remove an area of tissue surrounding the mesh. Sometimes the tissue has eroded through the bladder or bowel and has to be removed with extreme care in order to prevent further damage to pelvic tissues. Revision surgery is very expensive, and recovery time may be significant.

Revision Surgery Failures

Sadly, a single revision surgery may not be enough to remove all of the mesh and repair damaged tissues. Many women require multiple surgeries and even still report ongoing symptoms. Each revision surgery means greater risk of complications and the pain of recovery. A study performed by the University of Michigan indicates that 50 percent of women still report pain following revision surgery, and 25 percent still experience pain during sexual intercourse.

Medical manufacturers promoted vaginal mesh as a simple fix for incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Instead, the effects of the mesh have been devastating for a number of women. In addition to their ongoing pain and suffering, they face medical bills from revision surgeries, and months of recovery time. If your vaginal mesh surgical procedure resulted in painful side effects or you had to undergo a revision procedure, contact us online today, at 877-717-5342, or 256-543-HURT. We will fight for the compensation you deserve and justice in your case.

 

Vaccine Litigation: Routine Injections Can Result in Devastating Disabilities

Wednesday, February 10th, 2016

baby-696980_640

There is something that the big pharmaceutical’s companies do not want you to know.  While vaccines are meant to protect individuals from illness and harm they also can cause injuries including anaphylaxis, encephalopathy, Guillain Barre Syndrome, adhesive capsulitis, and even death. Minor side effects of vaccinations, such as pain at the injection site, soreness, and redness are common. Major side effects occur more often than believed and can be devastating. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) compensates victims who have been injured from a vaccination. A claimant must be able to show that, more likely than not, their injury was a result of the vaccination.

What is the NVICP and why was it created?

In the 1970s and 1980s, a number of individuals sued vaccine manufacturers after their children developed severe reactions to the DPT vaccination. As a result of ongoing lawsuits and expensive settlements, a number of manufacturers stopped making the DPT and other vaccines. At one point, only one manufacturer was making the critical vaccine. Congress was lobbied and extended protection to the big pharmaceutical companies by forming the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA). It is supposed to required physicians to present individuals with a Vaccine Information Sheet (VIS) detailing the risks and benefits of the vaccine received. It also created a system to compensate individuals injured from vaccines.

The NVICP is funded by a 75 cent tax per vaccination. As part of the act, individuals must pursue a claim through the United States Court of Federal Claims.  Individuals with specific reactions receive compensation as determined by a formula.

What is the vaccine injury table?

The vaccine injury table (VIT) was created to help individuals determined if their illnesses are the result of a vaccination. The table lists each vaccine, the related injuries/disabilities/illnesses/death, and the time period in which the onset of problems occurs. If an individual receives a vaccine and then develops an associated injury within the specified period of time, a link between the injury and vaccine may be legally found.

There are a number of reactions that may be associated with a vaccine. They include but are not limited to:

  • Anaphylaxis or anaphylactic shock
  • Brachial neuritis
  • Encephalopathy/encephalitis
  • Chronic arthritis
  • Thrombocytopenic purpura
  • Vaccine-strain measles
  • Paralytic polio
  • Vaccine-strain polio
  • Intussusception

injection-830904_640

How much compensation can I receive?

The average compensation received per NVICP claim is $782,136 through 2011, with additional funds to pay legal and attorney fees. There is a $250,000 cap per claim of death from vaccination.

What do I do if I believe I have a claim?

Most people choose to be represented by an attorney. As long as minimal requirements are met, the fund will pay for your attorney and associated legal fees. If you or your child have been injured or disabled as a result of a vaccination, contact The Garmon Law Firm today online or at 256-543-HURT. We will help you navigate the complicated NVICP process and help you receive the compensation you deserve!

Injured Lady v. Major Corporation – Judge says: “No, I will not dismiss her case. It goes to the Jury!”

Thursday, March 26th, 2015

Motion to Kick Out Our Case in “Injured, Wheelchair Bound Lady” v. “Major Corporation” – – The judge said “No”; “denied”!

Injury Lady v. Major Corporation - "No I will not dismiss her case, it goes to the jury."

Injury Lady v. Major Corporation – “No I will not dismiss her case, it goes to the jury.”

Yes, we defeated a major corporation’s motion to dismiss our client’s case and are set for trial! Although it took a lengthy process and a hearing to proceed.

In the legal system, a Motion for Summary Judgment is a way to ask the judge to “summarily” dismiss a case. Basically it’s a mechanism that allows suits to be kicked out by law. The party asking for such must establish that there (1) is no dispute of material fact and (2) they are entitled to the dismissal by law.

Well…this can often times get dicey because some lawyers whether intentionally or unintentionally cast facts in a light that is just down right false. And judges are not in the business of hearing “junk lawsuits” despite what some legislatures’ may think, so when they can they will dismiss a lawsuit. Note, we cannot blame the law makers for thinking that there are a bunch of junk cases in our court system. They have been marketed to by the big corporations. Often times unknowingly they support bills that become law which take out of the hands of the jury factual disputes that may involve serious damages, injuries or even death.

Regardless, we fought against a motion asking for our case to be dismissed. Before you get perhaps accusatory or pessimistic thinking that we are proceeding with another “junk lawsuit”, be aware (1) we do not accept meritless cases and (2) our lady is a wheelchair bound survivor of polio who fell at a defective, non-ADA compliant wheelchair ramp. And the ramp is part of an entrance to a MAJOR corporation’s mall. These are the types of injuries laws, like the ADA and State/City Building Codes, are in place to ensure that people like her, and others like you, are protected against.

With that said, we won the battle! And we are preparing to finish the war.

So if you have had doubts about our system, think if it this way. With the jury trial system, while it is not perfect just as nothing here on earth is, you are allowed to present your case to a group of individuals that you indirectly chosen and who are, at best as achievable, not personally tied to the issues at hand or the outcome. It is the best system in the world for deciding disputed facts. And in about 2 months we are set to chalk up another jury trial!

If you or a loved one has been injured. Make the responsible choice. Hire a lawyer that you can trust and that will fight for you.

We’d be honored to be those attorneys. 256-543-HURT By: Trent Garmon, JD, MA

Injured in a “hit and run”? Or hurt in a “Phantom Vehicle” collision?

Wednesday, March 4th, 2015

phantom-of-the-opera-25th-anniversary-ramin-karimloo-7

So have you been injured by a Phantom Vehicle?

Or injured in a “hit and run”??

Just as the identify of the “Phantom of the Opera” was a mystery, often times the identity of the culprits of motor vehicle collisions are unknown.  By this we are referring to the situation wherein an individual is ran off the road by a vehicle that fails to stop and return to the scene; or an individual is struck by another vehicle who flees the scene.
This type of incident usually leaves the person who was struck confused as to how to handle the situation.  They often times believe that the person who caused the incident must be located and identified before any type of compensation can be sought.
This is actually untrue.
Many insurance policies have what is referred to as “Uninsured” or “Underinsured” motorist coverage, typically abbreviated as UM/UIM.  This portion of the policy has built into it coverage for a “Phantom Vehicle” collision.  Also referred to as a “hit and run”.  Meaning that the actuarials and number guys/gals of the insurance company have already calculated into the premium quote the chance of the insurance company having to pay for damages sustained by their own insured as a result of a “hit and run” or phantom vehicle collision.
Recently a friend of mine from high school had a claim that would have fallen within this category.  She is very friendly and somewhat naively believed that “her” insurance company would “take care” of the claim.  With this I mean she simply believed that her insurance company was going to look out for her best interested, after all wheren’t they “her insurance company.”   She the claim would be handled just like “her insurance company” handled the competitive quote she received when she purchased the policy.
This is farthest from the truth, insurance wise.
If you are involved in a motor vehicle collision with someone who has no insurance, inadequate insurance or with a vehicle that flees the scene (Phantom vehicle), your insurance company then becomes as it relates to that claim akin to an adverse party.  Meaning that for every dollar that you believe you are entitled they become the bearer of that burden.
Thus, the adjuster is not your “agent” or your “advocate” in that situation.   Rather the claims adjuster of your own insurance company becomes a “protector of the pot”.  He or she is charged with protecting the pool of resources that you would be receiving compensation from.
So what’s the answer?
If you are struck by someone who has no insurance, has minimal insurance or if you are struck by someone who leaves the scene of the accident such as with a “hit and run” – – – hire a lawyer.
While that may sound self-serving and to an extent as a lawyer it is self-serving, the truth is that the duty of the lawyer and the best interest of the client have no area of conflict.  More simply stated, if you hire a lawyer on a percentage contract basis which is called a “contingency fee” basis statistics have shown that you will collect on average 3 1/2 times more than going at it without a lawyer.*  And the lawyer does not have a duty to the insurance company (other than being truthful, etc.) as does the claims adjuster.  In fact, the lawyers duty becomes to fight for you and maximize the claim on your behalf.
So think on it with us.  Do you want an “adjuster” adjusting down your claim?  Or do you want an attorney who only gets paid if you do, advising you on what a “good” settlement is.  And if that level or standard is not met, the lawyer does have the ability to file suit which ultimately is the main deterrent from getting really jerked around by the insurance company.
And remember, if you have UM/UIM there are mechanism to collect from the insurance company because of the “Phantom of the Collision”.  These mechanism were built into the policy to begin with and are there for this very, but somewhat rare, occurrence.
We stand ready to serve your Phantom Vehicle, uninsured/underinsured motorist claim or any other type of personal injury situation.  And we do so with a Zero Fee Guarantee.  We only get paid if we collect and if we cannot put more in your pocket than you could collect alone, we do not take a fee.   Feel welcome to call us 24/7 – 256-543-HURT or 1-877-717-5342
By: Trent Garmon, JD, MA
hit-and-run
*Insurance Resource Council 1999 Study of Represented v. Unrepresented Claimants

6/21/13 Update

Friday, June 21st, 2013

Despite a long battle we were victorious this week when a St. Clair County Jury returned a verdict in our favor. The battle continues, yet there was a glimmer of hope from a jury for the injured.

TOYO TIRE HOLDINGS OF AMERICAS INC. – Tire Recall due to defect which may cause Crash

Thursday, September 1st, 2011

Summary:
TOYO TIRE IS RECALLING CERTAIN TOYO BRAND TIRES, MODELS VERSADO CUV P245/55 R19 103T, VERSADO CUV P235/55 R20 102T, VERSADO CUV 235/55 R18 100V, VERSADO CUV P255/65 R18 109S, VERSADO LX II 215/60 R16 95V, OPEN COUNTRY ALL TERRAIN LT285/70 R17 121S, AND TOUREVO LS II 245/45 R18 96V; AND NITTO BRAND TERRA GRAPPLER ALL TERRAIN 255/55R18 109S, PRODUCED FROM SEPTEMBER 19, 2010, THROUGH OCTOBER 2, 2010. THE RUBBER CHEMICAL MIXTURE USED IN SOME OF THE RECALLED TIRES DOES NOT MEET TOYO’S SPECIFICATION FOR THESE TIRES.
Consequence:
SECTIONS OF THE TREAD MAY BECOME DETACHED, POTENTIALLY CAUSING LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN A CRASH

Ford F-250 & F-350 (2008-2009) – Component: TIRES:TREAD/BELT

Thursday, September 1st, 2011

Summary:
CONTINENTAL TIRE IS RECALLING CERTAIN CONTITRAC TR TIRES, SIZE LT275/70R18 125/122S OUTLINE WHITE LETTERS AND BLACK SIDEWALL, AND CONTITRAC, SIZE LT275/70R18 125/122S, BLACK SIDEWALL, PRODUCED FROM MAY 6, 2007, THROUGH SEPTEMBER 20, 2008, SOLD AS AFTERMARKET AND INSTALLED AS ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT ON SOME MODEL YEAR 2008 AND 2009 FORD F-250 AND F-350 TRUCKS. SOME OF THESE TIRES MAY EXPERIENCE UNEVEN WEAR, VIBRATION, OR PARTICULARLY UNDER CONDITIONS OF OVERLOADING OR UNDER INFLATION IN HIGH AMBIENT TEMPERATURE USAGE, SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BELT EDGES.
Consequence:
SEPARATION OF THE BELT EDGES COULD LEAD TO TREAD BELT SEPARATION, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.

Child Safety Seat – RECALL – Manufacturer: DOREL JUVENILE GROUP

Thursday, September 1st, 2011

DOREL JUVENILE GROUP (DJG) IS RECALLING CERTAIN INFANT, CONVERTIBLE, AND BOOSTER CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEMS WHICH WERE SOLD BOTH AS STAND ALONE SEATS OR PART OF A TRAVEL SYSTEM (WITH A STROLLER). THE HARNESS LOCKING AND RELEASE BUTTON DOES NOT ALWAYS RETURN TO ITS LOCKED POSITION. A BUTTON THAT IS NOT IN THE LOCKED POSITION CAN ALLOW THE HARNESS ADJUSTMENT STRAP TO SLIP BACK THROUGH THE ADJUSTER AS A CHILD MOVES AROUND IN THE SEAT AND RESULTS IN A LOOSE HARNESS. CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEMS INCLUDED IN THIS RECALL ARE CONVERTIBLE CHILD RESTRAINTS ALPHA OMEGA, ALPHA OMEGA ELITE, ENSPIRA, PRIORI, PROSPECT, AND VANTAGE; INFANT CHILD RESTRAINTS MICO AND ONBOARD. AFFECTED UNITS BEGIN WITH MODEL NUMBERS 22077, 22078, 22148, 22149, 22150, 22152, 22154, 22155, 22158, 22159, 22172, 22177, 22178, 22185, 22188, 22195, 22356, 22371, 22372, 22412, 22439, 22452, 22453, 22456, 22458, 22459, 22462, 22465, 22469, 22476, 22486, 22546, 22547, 22553, 22554, 22561, 22564, 22567, 22574, 22580, 22657, 22740, 22741, 22755, 22758, 22759, 22790, 22799, 22880, 22560, 22346, 17439, 22449, 22475, AND IC072, MANUFACTURED FROM MAY 1, 2008, THROUGH APRIL 30, 2009.

Winn Dixie RECALL

Thursday, September 1st, 2011

Winn-Dixie Issues Voluntary Recall On ‘Winn-Dixie Choco Charm Chocolate Drink’ Due To Mislabeling And Undeclared Allergen (Wed, 17 Aug 2011 14:51:00 -0400) Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., (NASDAQ: WINN) is voluntarily recalling ‘Winn-Dixie Choco Charm Chocolate Drink’ from its in-store dairy departments because the product may be mislabeled and may contain the undeclared allergen of wheat. Individuals sensitive to wheat protein can suffer a moderate-acute allergic reaction. Sold in the dairy department of Winn-Dixie and SaveRite stores, the ‘Winn-Dixie Choco Charm Chocolate Drink’ features a 128 oz. (one gallon) clear plastic bottle with a yellow bottle cap and is marked with the UPC code 21140-29830.

Designed & Developed by sleon productions