Mirena Side Effects Lead to Early Hysterectomy for Young Plaintiff
Lawyersandsettlements.com; June 17, 2013
Kelli Baugh was only in her 20s when she faced a total hysterectomy, experienced the rigors of surgically induced menopause, and required daily doses of estrogen. Why? Mirena birth control side effects.
The Mirena intrauterine device (IUD) is an implanted device designed to provide trouble-free birth control for upwards of five years. First introduced in 2000, the Mirena IUD has been gaining in popularity, not the least of which is due to recent health care changes in the US that provide women access to all forms of birth control, regardless of cost. To date, there are more than two million women in the US currently using the Mirena device.
But there have been growing concerns over Mirena uterine perforation, and the tendency for the device to migrate away from its placement zone over time. Lawsuits continue to be filed, and Kelli Baugh’s may be the first to go to trial. Kelli Baugh v. Bayer Corporation (USDC, District of South Carolina, 4:11-cv-00525) was scheduled for a May 6, 2013 trial date.
Lawsuits against Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of the Mirena IUD, have been filed in state court in New Jersey, where Bayer maintains its US headquarters. More than 60 lawsuits against Bayer are currently pending in state court, together with all future Mirena lawsuits filed in the state of New Jersey transferred to state court in Bergen County. The centralization was so ordered by the state Supreme Court, with Judge Brian Martinotti having scheduled a hearing on the case for June 17.
To read the complete article, please click here: https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/articles/mirena-IUD/mirena-birth-control-side-effects-10-18804.html?utm_expid=3607522-2&utm_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawyersandsettlements.com%2F#.UcBat_XRZfw
Lawyersandsettlements.com; June 17, 2013
“I was divorced and lost everything because of Adderall,” says Christie, who was wrongly diagnosed with ADHD and regretfully wound up having a “manic episode,” one of Adderall side effects.
Christie, 37 years old and a registered nurse, believes that her ex-husband, family and friends would be more understanding if they knew about the effects of Adderall and intends to let them know about the dangers of Adderall. She might also want to add her prescribing doctor to that list.
“My doctor thought I had ADHD because I was spaced out and fatigued during a check-up at her office four years ago so she prescribed Adderall,” Christie explains. “The drug worked; I started feeling like I was cured from the fatigue. However, I felt too good: My judgment was so skewed - I believed that I would not suffer any consequences from my actions.”
Christie was later told by her psychiatrist that she was experiencing full-blown mania, something that she had never before experienced.
To read the complete article, please click here:
The Apple e-books Trial Takes a Detour into the Absurd
Fortune; June 18, 2013
What started as a small "gotcha" moment in the cross examination of a mid-level Apple (AAPL) executive last week grew into a federal case -- literally -- on Monday, the ninth day of testimony in U.S.A. v. Apple.
The latest McGuffin in the Department of Justice's antitrust case against Apple is an e-mail signed by Steve Jobs and addressed to Eddy Cue -- the Apple senior vice president whom the government claims was the "ringmaster" of a conspiracy to raise the price of e-books in 2010.
The evidence was first sprung on Keith Moerer, the head of Apple's iBookstore, by Dan McCuaig, a DOJ attorney, in the last hour of the sixth day. Moerer and his colleague Kevin Saul had both testified that Apple was "indifferent" to what kind of agreement the publishers signed with Amazon (AMZN), then the dominant e-book seller with a 90% market share. But in an e-mail in response to some price cap changes proposed by Eddy Cue, Jobs had written on Jan. 14, 2010:
To read the complete article, please click this link: https://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/06/18/apple-ebook-smoking-gun/
Ask a Lawyer: Did Superman Have a Legal Obligation to Save Lives in Man of Steel?
Wired; June 17, 2013
In Man of Steel, the latest film about Superman, we see a version of the iconic DC Comics hero who exists largely without agency. Decisions are made for him; restrictions are imposed upon him by others, or else the course he takes seems both obvious and narrow. But there are a few key points in the film in which he makes decisions with particularly interesting legal ramifications. Perhaps the most important one is when he allows his father, Jonathan Kent, to be killed by a tornado, in order to protect the secret of his superpowers. Clearly, Jonathan Kent had reasons for urging Clark not to save him, and Clark had reasons to obey, but what does the law say about it? Can someone like Superman simply sit back and watch someone die, knowing it was entirely in his power to save them?
To read the complete article, please click this link: https://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/06/man-of-steel-legal-lawyer/
Clarence Thomas’s Legal Time Machine Zooms to 1789
Bloomberg; June 17, 2013
Don’t let the U.S. Supreme Court’s very contemporary cases on gene patenting and same-sex marriage fool you: At least one justice is still living in the 18th century and doesn’t care who knows it.
Justice Clarence Thomas followed his astonishingly consistent originalism in Alleyne v. U.S. today, joined by the court’s four liberals -- and none of its conservatives -- in holding that a fact that increases a defendant’s mandatory minimum sentence must be found true by the jury, not by the judge alone.
Just a few minutes earlier, however, it was announced that Thomas had provided the deciding vote in Salinas v. Texas, arguing that a defendant’s exercising the right to remain silent can be used by the prosecutor to argue to the jury that silence is evidence of guilt.
From a policy perspective, these two opinions, one liberal and one conservative, make no sense. The only way to reconcile them is to enter the mind of Justice Thomas, in which the court’s job is to bring us back to the nation’s founding and damn the consequences.
To read the complete story, please click here: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-17/clarence-thomas-s-legal-time-machine-zooms-to-1789.html
McDonald’s Worker Says She Was Required to Receive Pay on Fee-Laden Debit Card
ABC News; June 17, 2013
A former McDonald's worker in Pennsylvania is suing a franchiser owner saying she was required to receive her wages through a debit card that charged fees, resulting in some hourly employees receiving less than minimum wage.
Natalie Gunshannon, a single mother, 27, said she and other workers were paid through a JPMorgan Chase Payroll Card, which has a $1.50 fee for ATM withdrawals, a $10 inactivity fee after 90 days, and a 75 cent online payment fee per transaction and other fees.
Gunshannon, who filed a lawsuit in the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas, is hoping to have her case certified as a class action on behalf of the other employees who were paid with the Payroll card.
"It's a violation of the law," said Gunshannon's attorney, Michael Cefalo. "They're entitled to a choice to be paid in cash or check. Fees connected to this debit card which employees have to pay to get their wages which is unfair."
To read the complete story, please click here: https://abcnews.go.com/Business/mcdonalds-worker-sues-franchise-paying-wages-debit-card/story?id=19420181#.Ub9qavXRZfw
Bank of America Paid Bonuses to Foreclose: Lawsuit
CNBC; June 17, 2013
Bank of America routinely denied qualified borrowers a chance to modify their loans to more affordable terms and paid cash bonuses to bank staffers for pushing homeowners into foreclosure, according to affidavits filed last week in a Massachusetts lawsuit.
"We were told to lie to customers," said Simone Gordon, who worked in the bank's loss mitigation department until February 2012. "Site leaders regularly told us that the more we delayed the HAMP [loan] modification process, the more fees Bank of America would collect."
In sworn testimony, six former employees describe what they saw behind the scenes of an often opaque process that has frustrated homeowners, their attorneys and housing counselors.
They describe systematic efforts to undermine the program by routinely denying loan modifications to qualified applicants, withholding reviews of completed applications, steering applicants to costlier "in-house" loans and paying bonuses to employees based on the number of new foreclosures they initiated.
To read the complete story, please click here: https://www.cnbc.com/id/100818866
NCAA May Seek to Recover Legal Fees in O’Bannon Case
USA Today; June 14, 2013
If the NCAA prevails in an lawsuit pertaining to the use of college athletes' names and likenesses, it could take what it says is an usual step in anti-trust cases: It may try to recover millions of dollars in legal expenses from the plaintiffs' lead law firm, the NCAA's chief legal officer told USA TODAY Sports on Friday.
The case has been going on for more than four years and while U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken is scheduled to hold a key hearing Wednesday, there is no sign that the litigation will be concluded anytime soon. A trial is currently set for June 2014, but the NCAA and its co-defendants on Thursday asked Wilken to reset the case schedule in a way that would move the trial date back at least three more months.
To read more, click here: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2013/06/14/ncaa-name-and-likeness-obannon-legal-fees/2425099/
Analysts Can’t Eavesdrop on Domestic Calls without ‘Proper Legal Authorization’
Politico; June 16, 2013 The director of national intelligence pushed back on assertions that the National Security Agency can listen in on domestic U.S. phone calls based solely on an analyst’s decision. “The statement that a single analyst can eavesdrop on domestic communications without proper legal authorization is incorrect and was not briefed to Congress,” the office of the DNI said in statement Sunday night. “Members have been briefed on the implementation of Section 702, that it targets foreigners located overseas for a valid foreign intelligence purpose, and that it cannot be used to target Americans anywhere in the world.”
Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/dni-analysts-cant-eavesdrop-on-domestic-calls-without-proper-legal-authorization-92886.html#ixzz2WU7qaIU2
The National Trial Lawyers is honored to announce that Top 100 Executive Committee member, Morris Dees, has been chosen to receive the American Bar Association’s highest award, the coveted ABA Medal. Morris will accept the award on August 7 at this year’s American Bar Association’s annual meeting in Chicago. The rare ABA Medal is only awarded to the lawyer or lawyers the ABA’s Board of Governors deem to have dedicated exceptional service to the legal community. Morris is best known as a zealous Civil Rights advocate and as a co-founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Throughout the years, Morris’ fearless role as a Civil Rights lawyer and activist has played a pivotal part in the integration of public institutions and the demise of white supremacist hate groups. The National Trial Lawyers proudly congratulates Morris on this great achievement. For more information, please visit: https://www.abanow.org/
The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100 and Top 40 Under 40 member, Mark Andrews, recently obtained a record-setting $21 million compensatory-only verdict in Alabama. The case arose out of catastrophic injuries suffered by his client when a piece of heavy grade sheet metal fell and impaled the Plaintiff’s face while she was working at a Wal-Mart Distribution Center. The force of the blow caused extensive facial trauma, along with epileptic and non-epileptic seizures which remained uncontrolled even with significant levels of medication. The National Trial Lawyers is pleased to announce that the $21 million verdict has been recognized by several Law Journals and has also been documented by the Alabama Jury Verdict Reporter as the largest compensatory-only verdict for a negligence action in the history of the State of Alabama. Mark is a Partner at Morris, Carey, Andrews, Talmadge & Driggers in Dothan, Alabama. For more information, please visit: https://www.mcatlaw.com/.
Burg Simpson attorneys, Michael S. Burg, Holly Kammerer, Steven G. Greenlee and Stephen J. Burg recently received a $4.1 million jury verdict on behalf of their client who was seriously injured while working at a Colorado gas drill site. At trial, the attorneys successfully proved that Tesco, the corporation that operated the drill site, did not properly train its employees and failed to make the drilling procedures safe. In addition to the compensatory damages, the jury awarded $1.5 million in punitive damages. The National Trial Lawyers applauds the attorneys for their victory. Michael is an Executive Committee member of The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100. Holly and Steven Greenlee are both members of The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100. Stephen Burg is an Executive Committee member for The National Trial Lawyers: Top 40 Under 40 as well as a member of The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100. For more information, please visit https://www.burgsimpson.com/.
On June 20, 2012, Lance Swanner of The Cochran Firm and Fernando Chavez of The Chavez Firm met with leaders from across the county and various Obama Administration members to discuss immigration reform at the White House Immigration Community Leaders Briefing. This exclusive, invitation-only meeting held at the White House was an all-day event that focused on the new deferred action policy and the challenges and legal issues involved with its implementation. The National Trial Lawyers proudly supports Lance and Fernando in their fight to seek equal justice for all. Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, addressed the attendees along with other Administrative leaders including the Senior Economic Advisor, the Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. Lance is an Executive Committee member for The National Trial Lawyers: Top 40 Under 40 and The National Latino Trial Lawyers, as well as a member of The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100. Fernando currently serves as President of National Latino Trial Lawyers and is an Executive Committee member of The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100. For more information, please visit www.whitehouse.gov.
Petraeus Scandal Figure Sues FBI, Pentagon over Alleged Leaks
Thomson Reuters; June 4, 2013
A Tampa woman whose name surfaced in the scandal involving former CIA Director David Petraeus' extramarital affair has sued the FBI, Defense Department and unidentified government officials alleging they defamed her and violated her rights.
In a 65-page complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Washington on Monday, Tampa socialite Jill Kelley and her husband, Scott, said government officials willfully leaked damaging false information about the pair to the media.
News outlets suggested that Kelley and General John Allen, one-time commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, had exchanged embarrassing personal emails.
The lawsuit said Kelley was subjected to public "ridicule, moral opprobrium, scorn and derision" and asked the court to order government agencies and officials to apologize formally to the Kelleys and to award them damages. No figure was mentioned.
To read the complete article, please click here:
Lawyers Push for Federal Rule Exception to Save Girl
ABC News; June 4, 2013
Lawyers for 10-year-old Sarah Murnaghan, who has been denied a lung transplant because of a controversial federal policy, say Health and Human Services' Secretary Kathleen Sebelius' decision to review the policy -- but not in time to save Sarah -- is unconstitutional.
Sarah would be at the top of the adult lung transplant list if she were 12, because she only has weeks to live and a lung transplant would as-good-as cure her of cystic fibrosis.
The Murnaghan family is fighting a little known organ transplant policy that is effectively pushing Sarah to the bottom of the adult transplant waiting list because it mandates that adult lungs be offered to all adult patients before they can be offered to someone under 12 years old.
Law firm Pepper Hamilton LLP wrote a letter to Sebelius on Monday calling the policy "unfair, arbitrary and capricious" and saying that Sebelius's failure to make an exceptionis is a violation of Sarah's constitutional rights to "due process" and "equal protection," according to a family statement.
To read the complete article, please click here: