The Recall Lawyers

Police are investigating the peculiar circumstances surrounding a one car crash on Interstate 65 in Elizabethtown, Kentucky, just south of Louisville. As reported by local media, a woman named Claire R. Kahane, 75, was driving her 2006 Toyota Avalon south on I-65 with her husband in the passenger seat. The car inexplicably left the roadway, crashing head on into a tree. The driver's body was found inside the vehicle while her husband, Charles S. Kahane, was found over 900 feet away.

According to police, there is no indication that the driver made any attempt to stop the vehicle before colliding with the tree. Given Toyota's long and public problems with sudden acceleration in many of its vehicles, I would be surprised if the police do not investigate this crash to determine if, in fact, this 2006 Avalon accelerated suddenly against the driver's will similar to the hundreds of other reported incidents of Toyota sudden acceleration that have been talked about in the media and reported to authorities since the Toyota recall in 2010.

The attorneys at Jones Ward PLC represent more than ten injured plaintiffs from across the country in Toyota sudden acceleration cases, including wrongful death cases. If you or a loved one have been injured by a defective product, contact Attorney David Bryant for a free case evaluation.

The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") recently announced a recall of almost 280,000 2009 Chrysler Aspens, 2009 - 2011 Dodge Dakotas, 2009 - 2012 Dodge Rams, and 2009 Dodge Durangos for power train rear axle pinion nuts that could loosen. The cause is an undersized pinion spline that could allow motion between the pinion nut and its companion flange. If the rear axle pinion nut loosened because of the motion, the axle could lock up, causing a loss of vehicle control and potentially a serious crash.

The NHTSA has received 15 complaints alleging rear differential failures resulting in rear wheel lock-up in model year 2009 through 2010 Dodge Ram 1500 pickup trucks. The complaints allege failures at various speeds with eight of the incidents reporting failures at speeds of 35 mph or greater. Four of the complaints involving higher speed incidents allege that the failure resulted in a loss of vehicle control including spins, skids, and/or yaws.

One failure from the defect resulted in a crash into a concrete barrier. One complaint reports that loosening of the rear differential pinion nut caused the failure. Most of the complaints allege that the failure resulted in drive shaft failure including one that reported the detached shaft end punctured the fuel tank. This puncture could potentially have resulted in a serious fire.

If you or your family members have been injured because of an automaker's design or manufacturing defect, you might be eligible for a full financial recovery for your needless injuries because of the defect. Your recovery might include amounts for past and future medical expenses, vehicle damage, lost wages, and even pain and suffering, among other things.

If you questions or would like more information, contact attorney David G. Bryant at (502) 882-6000 or david@jonesward.com.

If you have a defective or recalled hip implant, you may be entitled to compensation from the company that manufactured the device. The attorneys at Jones Ward PLC represent people all over the country who have been injured by metal-on-metal hip devices such as the DePuy ASR, the Zimmer Durom, the Biomet Magnum, and the Stryker Rejuvenate.

There are numerous twists and turns in product liability lawsuits involving medical devices. Here are some of the biggest potential pitfalls:

1. My hip isn't recalled, so I don't have a case. This is not necessarily true. Most hip manufacturers don't announce a recall unless they are under pressure from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which regulates medical devices. However, some hip devices may have a failure rate that is unreasonably high, but not high enough to trigger a mandatory order from the FDA. Examples of devices in this category include the DePuy Pinnacle and the Biomet Magnum.

2. You try to negotiate with the company. This is a bad idea. In some situations, the company may offer to pay for your medical expenses and throw in some money for travel. However, it's highly unlikely that the company will agree to compensate you for pain and suffering, lost wages, and future medical problems. This is why you may want to consider hiring an experienced hip implant lawyer.

3. You wait too long to hire a lawyer and file a lawsuit. If you don't make a claim against the manufacturer of your hip implant, you may run afoul of the Statute of Limitations in your state, and lost your right to a trial by jury. The Statute differs from state to state. In Kentucky, it is one year from the date you discover your injury. In Indiana, it's two years. In Maryland, it's three years. Keep in mind that the rules can be complicated, and are not as straightforward as they might seem on the surface.

4. It's too expensive to hire a lawyer. Going up against a giant company with almost unlimited financial resources is way too expensive for the average person. That's why the attorneys at Jones Ward PLC will represent you on a contingent fee basis in your product liability lawsuit. If your claim is not resolved successfully, you don't owe anything.

5. My hip hurts, but the doctor says it doesn't need to come out. At Jones Ward PLC, we encourage patients to follow the advice of their surgeon. After all, your doctor knows your medical needs better than your lawyer. However, you may still have a case even without hip revision surgery. Maybe a cardiac problem is preventing your revision surgery. Or maybe you don't need the surgery now, but you do need it two years from now. Filing a claim for your defective hip now will preserve your rights.

There are numerous other potential complications and mistakes in hip implant cases that can be avoided with an experienced lawyer. If you have been injured by a defective hip implant, or if you want advice on the legal options that may be available to you, whether you live in California, Kentucky, New York, Florida, or another state in between, contact Attorney Alex Davis for a free consultation, or send an email to alex@jonesward.com.

Chrysler is recalling nearly 300,000 Dodge Ram and Dakota pickup trucks and Dodge and Chrysler SUVs due to a problem with the rear axle that could cause it to lock up, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Reports indicate that the rear axle pinion nuts could work themselves loose and the omission of a needed adhesive patch could potentially result in catastrophic axle lockup. This could greatly increase the likelihood of a crash.

The recall affects model-year 2009-2012 Ram 1500 pickup trucks manufactured between Feb. 27, 2008, and June 30, 2009, and between Dec. 1, 2009, and Oct. 20, 2011; model-year 2009-2011 Dodge Dakota pickup trucks manufactured from Feb. 27, 2007, through June 30, 2009, and from Dec. 1, 2009, through Sept. 30, 2011; model-year 2009 Chrysler Aspen SUVs manufactured between Jan. 3 and Dec. 18, 2008; and model-year 2009 Dodge Durango SUVs manufactured from Jan. 3 through Dec. 18, 2008.

The lawyers at Jones Ward PLC are actively investigating class action claims against Chrysler related to the rear axle recall in several pickup trucks and SUVs.

For more information, contact attorney David G. Bryant at david@jonesward.com

Last Friday, Judge Cathy Seibel in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the federal judge presiding over the consolidated Mirena litigation, held the first initial conference for the Mirena Multidistrict Litigation. Jones Ward was in attendance.

In addition to discussing organization of the lawsuits on both sides of the cases, the attorneys and the Court addressed the preliminary needs of the litigation, including how discovery, or the exchange of information, would tentatively proceed. Cooperation with a consolidated action in New Jersey, where Defendant Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., is based, was also discussed.

The conference represents the first step in managing a consolidated litigation that may encompass hundreds, or even thousands of claims. The next conference is scheduled for July 2, 2013.

The Mirena litigation continues to rise, as more and more women using Bayer's Mirena intrauterine device (IUD) suffer serious complications related to the device. So far, the consolidated action in New York includes many cases alleging that the device migrated from its intended position in the uterus and perforated the uterus, cervix, or other internal organs. Other injuries, including embedment of the device requiring surgical removal, have also been claimed.

Mirena is a t-shaped, plastic device that may provide contraception for up to five years. It was originally approved as birth control in 2000 and in 2009, the FDA approved it additionally to treat heavy menstrual bleeding.

The prescription drug and medical device attorneys at Jones Ward are currently evaluating Mirena cases involving a variety of injuries. For more information, contact attorney A. Layne Stackhouse at layne@jonesward.com.

Subaru has announced a recall of roughly 5,379 Legacy and Outback (shown right) vehicles due to a defect that can cause them to lose steering control. According to Subaru, steering shafts in the cars, all from the 2013 model year, could become disengaged, causing a loss of steering. The steering shaft is made from two pieces, an inner and an outer shaft, which, in the vehicles involved, can become separated. If that happens, the driver can lose the ability to steer the car.

Subaru first discovered the problem in one of its vehicles at its Indiana factory. Later, the company received a complaint from a customer about loss of steering in the customer's car. Subaru is notifying its dealers about the recall and plans on notifying customers soon.

Subaru dealers will replace the steering columns in all vehicles subject to the recall. Subaru has stated that if customers feel unsafe driving their vehicles before the defect can be remedied, it will arrange to have the cars brought to the dealerships.

Subaru has recalled multiple vehicles recently due to various defects. In Aril, Subaru recalled earlier model years of its Outback and Legacy for problems with corrosion in the brake lines. And in March Subaru recalled nearly 50,000 of its CrossTrek XV wages because of a problem resulting in the vehicles starting by themselves.

The auto recall lawyers at Jones Ward are dedicated to providing you with up-to-date recall information. For more information, contact attorney A. Layne Stackhouse at layne@jonesward.com.

Johnson & Johnson, the biggest healthcare product manufacturer in the world, has announced its plan to stop selling its metal-on-metal and ceramic-on-metal hip replacements. The company states its decision is made due to declining demand and in light of U.S. regulators seeking new rules for the products.

In 2010, J&J's ASR metal-on-metal hips were the subject of a widespread recall, due to various defects with the device, including problems requiring the device to be removed or "revised." The ASR recall apparently is unrelated to J&J's decision.

J&J's decision means that metal liners in the Ultamet Metal-on-Metal Articulation and the Complete Ceramic-on-Metal Acetabular Hip System will not longer be sold after August 31. The company also stated that its DePuy Orthopaedics unit (which manufactured the ASR) will stop selling related products through 2014 to simplify and streamline its offerings. J&J has made clear that its decision is not related to effectiveness and is not a recall, although its decision is made in the wake of stricter regulatory scrutiny, increasing safety problems, and a rise in the number of lawsuits over metal-on-metal hip products.

Since 2010, doctors and regulators have publically expressed concern over the numerous defects associated with metal-on-metal hip articulations that have caused serious injuries to patients, including tissue necrosis, pseudotumors, and metallosis, or metal toxicity in the blood, all of which typically require surgical removal of the device.

J&J spokespersons have stated that there has been a 90 percent decline in metal-on-metal sales in the U.S. and in Europe since 2007. J&J will continue to market other hip replacement products, however, including the Pinnacle Acetabular Cup System, and a wide range of liners and cups made with non-metal materials, including ceramic and plastic.

J&J is all too familiar with the problems associated with metal-on-metal hips, particularly since its Depuy unit's ASR was recalled. The company is facing over 10,000 lawsuits related to the ASR and lost its first jury trial this past March.

Most of these products, in fact, most metal-on-metal products on the market, are approved by the FDA through the less intensive 510(k) process, which allows a manufacturer seeking approval of a new device to base its safety and efficacy claims on prior, predicate devices already approved.

In January, the FDA announced it is requiring hip products approved under the 510(k) process to undergo more rigorous studies typically required for entirely new devices. The FDA's decision is the most recent in a string of safety alerts and new requirements concerning metal-on-metal hips.

The defective device attorneys at Jones Ward are evaluating a variety of metal-on-metal hip cases. For more information, contact attorney A. Layne Stackhouse at layne@jonesward.com.

Two attorneys at Jones Ward PLC have filed a class action lawsuit against Detroit automaker General Motors Company over a design defect in its 2011 model year and newer Chevrolet Cruze.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Louisville today, describes how the Cruze has a serious mechanical defect that causes antifreeze to leak from the radiator. The defect can lead to mechanical troubles and/or can cause a malodorous smell in the passenger compartment. General Motors concealed and has been unwilling or unable to fix this defect plaguing all model year 2011 or newer Chevrolet Cruzes.

Attorneys Jasper D. Ward and David G. Bryant, along with their co-counsel, filed the class action on behalf of Louisville resident John Mitchell and thousands of other similarly situated Cruze owners. Here are some of the claims from the complaint:

1. That General Motors violated various consumer protection statutes by withholding knowledge of the Antifreeze Leakage Defect and misrepresenting the safety and reliability of the Chevrolet Cruze with the intent that buyers would rely on such representations in deciding whether to purchase or lease a Chevrolet Cruze.

2. That General Motors violated various express and implied warranties.

3. That General Motors violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act by selling automobiles that are not fit for their ordinary purpose and then failing to repair the defect.

4. That General Motors intentionally concealed the Antifreeze Leakage Defect and denied buyers information that would have been highly relevant to their purchasing decision.

The defect has led to a substantial decrease in resale value and has forced Cruze owners to expend time and money pursuing repairs. The lawsuit seeks monetary damages on behalf of the class of Cruze owners and demands that General Motors issue a recall of all Chevrolet Cruzes subject to this lawsuit to fix the defect.

If you own a 2011 model year or newer Chevrolet Cruze and want to learn more about the class action lawsuit, contact David Bryant or Jasper Ward at 502-882-6000 or send an e-mail to david@jonesward.com.

The financial fallout of the Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant recall is deepening, with the defective device costing its manufacturer another $40 million in the last three months.

Stryker Corp., based in Michigan, has now incurred a total of $230 million in charges related to the Rejuvenate and ABGII hip devices. Both were recalled in June 2012 due to unreasonably high failure rates, which have forced hundreds of patients to undergo costly and painful revision surgeries due to metallosis and other problems.

Despite the horrific problems with the Rejuvenate, the folks at Stryker are still making plenty of money. In the first three months of 2013, Stryker reported a healthy adjusted net profit of $394 million, or more than $4 million a day.

You can read more details about the financial impact of the Stryker recall by clicking here.

For hip implant manufacturers, recalling a defective metal-on-metal hip device is just a cost of doing business. Rarely does a recall create a true financial pinch. For example, Johnson & Johnson, whose DePuy subsidiary faces more than 10,000 lawsuits over the defective ASR hip implant, has taken more than $1 billion in recall-related charges so far. But the stock price of J&J continues to climb, recently reaching a new high of $85 a share. When the company's market cap is $233 billion, it doesn't hurt too much to spend one of those billions fighting a recall.

Meanwhile, patients with defective hip implants such as the ASR, the DePuy Pinnacle, the Stryker Rejuvenate, the Biomet M2A Magnum, and the Zimmer Durom continue to suffer. The lawyers at Jones Ward PLC represent people all over the country who have been injured by these metal hip implants. The makers of these devices must be held accountable. If you or a loved one have been injured by these products, call Attorney Alex Davis or send an email to alex@jonesward.com for a free case evaluation.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, charged with overseeing the safety of consumer products, approved a notice of proposed rulemaking last week to create a federal safety standard for strollers. The new regulation aims to prevent further death and injuries to young children.

The approved safety standard implements the Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Carriages and Strollers. The commission voted 3-0 to approve the publication of the new standard. If ultimately approved, the modification requires adding language in the standard to address scissoring, shearing, and pinching hazards associated with folding or foldable strollers.

CPSC believes the new language and the standard will help reduce risks associated with the majority of hazards identified by reviewing stroller incidents. The CPSC reviewed more than 1,200 incidents, including four deaths and nearly 360 injuries occurring from 2008 through 2012.

The hazard patterns identified for stroller-related incidents include:
• wheel breakage and detachment;
• parking brake and lock mechanism failures;
• hinge issues;
• structural integrity issues;
• entrapment;
• car seat attachment;
• canopy issues; and
• handlebar failures.

CPSC staff recommends that the mandatory standard for strollers become effective 18 months following publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.

The legal team at Jones Ward handles products liability lawsuits involving a variety of injuries. For more information, contact attorney A. Layne Stackhouse at layne@jonesward.com.

Last week, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) warned the healthcare community to avoid using drugs manufactured by The Compounding Shop, a compounding pharmacy in St. Petersburg, Florida. The agency made its warning due to potential safety issues uncovered by health inspectors.

The pharmacy agreed to recall its sterile drugs, according to the FDA. The agency has stated that healthcare professionals should quarantine drugs from the company and should not use them on patients.

As a compounding pharmacy, the company mixes custom formulations of drugs to meet specific prescriptions. The Compounding Shop is soon to start notifying customers of the recall.

Compounding pharmacies have come under increased scrutiny after a national outbreak of fungal meningitis due to tainted steroid injections last year. More than 700 people were injured and more than 50 were killed due to the outbreak. The wave of inspections and recalls involving compounding pharmacy has increased even more in the past few weeks.

The dangerous drug lawyers at Jones Ward are dedicated to brining you up-to-date news about recalls and defective medical devices. For more information, contact attorney A. Layne Stackhouse at layne@jonesward.com.

Bayer's popular intrauterine device (IUD) Mirena has recently become the subject of a growing number of lawsuits claiming the device is defective and that Bayer failed to warn of serious complications associated with the device.

Approved by the FDA in 2000, Mirena is quickly becoming the most popular IUD device on the market. It is a small, t-shaped, plastic device implanted by a physician in a women's uterus. Mirena is intended to provide contraception for us to five years. Bayer has spent millions on marketing and advertising Mirena directly to consumers.

While IUDs have been used in other countries for many years, use of them is becoming much more widespread in the United States as younger women who have children are turning to long-term forms of contraception.

But lawsuits across the country now claim devastating and severe side effects due to the devices. The Mirena IUD may "migrate" from the uterus into other areas of the body. If this occurs it can perforate internal organs, which usually requires surgery to remove the device. In addition to uterine scarring, it can require surgery due to complications.

Other side effects include amenorrhea, intermenstrual bleeding and spotting, abdominal pain, pelvic pain, ovarian cysts, headaches and migraines. It can also lead to acne and significant weight gain, which increases the risk of depression and mood swings. Jones Ward is also investigating a possible link between Mirena and pseudotumor cerebri, a condition that results in swelling of the brain.

To top all this off, Mirena was marketed to "Busy Moms" as a demographic and Bayer's direct-to-consumer marketing included claims that Mirena could make a women "look and feel great" and that it could actually positively increase a woman's sex life. A recent FDA warning letter to Bayer warned that these representations were misleading and that Bayer was overemphasizing Mirena's benefits while downplaying its risks.

The defective medical devices lawyers at JONES WARD PLC are currently evaluating Mirena IUD cases. For more information, contact attorney A. Layne Stackhouse at layne@jonesward.com.

Two attorneys at Jones Ward PLC have filed a class action lawsuit against Fifth Third Bank over the company's Early Access program, which charges customers excessive interest rates in exchange for advance loans on their paychecks.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Louisville, describes how Fifth Third advertises an interest rate of 120 percent for the loan program, which has been available in Kentucky since 2009. However, some Early Access users end up paying interest rates of 300 percent, 500 percent, or even more than 1,000 percent because the loans are usually paid back within just a few days.

Attorneys Jasper Ward and Alex Davis filed the class action on behalf of Louisville resident Jesse McQuillen and thousands of other similarly situated Kentucky residents. You can download a copy of the lawsuit by clicking here. Here are some of the claims from the complaint:

• At its roots, the Early Access Program is the same as pay-day loan programs usually offered by store front cash advance businesses. These store-front operations earned a reputation for preying on the financially desperate by offering loans at interest rates that shock the conscience.
• Fifth Third preys on its customers, who find themselves in desperate need of financial support to bridge a gap between bills due and the next paycheck. The unfortunate self- reinforcing spiral that necessarily follows, and on which Fifth Third's profits necessarily depend, requires the customer to continually take out new advances to fund the customer's payments for Fifth Third's advances and usurious interest rates on past advances.
• In many instances, Fifth Third receives an APR well over 1000% to the detriment of its customers--a fact Fifth Third never discloses as a possibility to its customers.

A raft of lawsuits are underway against some of the nation's largest banks due to questionable lending practices that hurt consumers and investors.

The attorneys at Jones Ward PLC represent bank customers who have been harmed by a variety of lending practices, including unfair fees and interest rates. Last fall, attorneys Jasper Ward and Alex Davis filed a class action lawsuit against Higher One on behalf of thousands of college students who were charged improper fees for their student loans. Unfortunately, the case against Higher One is not unusual. Here's a list of some of the other bank lawsuits that are in the news this week:

• Bank of America faces a fraud lawsuit worth more than $7 billion. American International Group is suing B of A for losses it on mortgage securities issued by the bank's Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch units.
  
• SunTrust Bank is in talks to settle claims over its handling of loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration. SunTrust, based in Georgia, is under investigation by the Justice Department and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
  
• Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and 10 other banks are being sued by an Ohio union over unfair tactics related to credit default swaps in violation of antitrust laws. The Sheet Metal Workers Local No. 33 Pension Plan filed a federal lawsuit against the banks seeking damages for "substantial injuries" to its investments between 2008 and 2011.
  

If you have been harmed by an unfair banking practice, contact Attorney Alex Davis or send an email to bankfees@jonesward.com for a free case evaluation.

The Mirena IUD, an intrauterine device manufactured and sold by the pharmaceutical giant Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., has caused thousands of women to suffer significant and sometimes serious side effects. We have been blogging about a possible connection of Mirena and pseudotumor cerebri (also known as idiopathic intracranial hypertension or benign intracranial hypertension).

Jones Ward is investigating these injuries associated with Mirena--an intrauterine system inserted by a healthcare practitioner and intended as birth control for up to five years. We have received dozens of reports from women suffering from this disorder who had no signs or symptoms of the condition before using Mirena.

Pseudotumor cerebri is a condition that affects the brain and mimics a tumor, but is not actually a tumor. According to experts, pseudotumor cerebri occurs when the balance of fluid surrounding the brain is disrupted, leading to elevated pressure in the skull. The fluid within and around the brain is constantly circulating and must be produced and removed at the same rate. When this balance is disrupted, the pressure increases. Often, the condition is diagnosed and, in the short-term, treated by a lumbar puncture, or spinal tap, which relieves the pressure by extracting some of the fluid.

It is more common in women, particularly obese women or women with rapid weight gain. The pressure built up in the skull can cause severe headaches or migraines and may swell the optic nerves (which connect a person's eyes to their brain). Thus, when the condition is not treated quickly, it can lead to permanent vision loss. Many patients symptoms begin with blurred vision or a "whoosing" sound or ringing in the ears.

Symptoms of pseudotumor cerebri include:

• Blurred vision
• Buzzing sound in the ears (tinnitus)
• Dizziness
• Double vision (diplopia)
• Nausea
• Vision loss

Fortunately, pseudotumor cerebri (PTC) is often reversible, and permanent vision loss or other problems may be prevented with early treatment. The condition has been associated with levonorgestrel, the hormone released by Mirena, as well as other birth controls.

It appears the association between levonorgestrel and PTC has not been heavily evaluated in the publicly available medical literature. However, a quick google search of Mirena and PTC brings up dozens of forum websites containing hundreds of stories of real women suffering from this condition after being implanted with Mirena.

The defective drug and medical devices lawyers at JONES WARD PLC are currently evaluating Mirena cases. For more information, contact attorney A. Layne Stackhouse at layne@jonesward.com.