Dangerous Products Attorney Blog

Published on: June 8, 2016

Pharmaceutical Companies May Be Held Liable for Failure to Warn Mothers of Potential Birth Defects

Court Upholds $3 Million Verdict for Failing to Warn of Birth Defects

According to one news source, a court of appeals recently upheld a $3 million verdict against a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson after a baby was born with severe birth injuries as a result of medication taken during the mother’s pregnancy. The baby’s parents brought a claim against the company, and the jury found the company liable for failing to warn the mother’s doctors of the risk of birth injuries if she took Topamax during her first trimester.

The mother took Topamax, a drug prescribed to help prevent seizures and migraine headaches. While she was pregnant, she took the drug to treat migraines—but she did not know of the dangerous effects it could have on her baby. Research has shown that 3.8 percent of children exposed to Topamax in utero during the first trimester have oral birth defects. In particular, cleft lip and cleft palate are known risks.

The couple’s daughter was born with a bilateral cleft palate and lip. The girl has had to undergo over 14 procedures, including surgeries, to treat the birth defects. She has also suffered hearing loss, speech difficulties, and bullying because of her speech and appearance. The parents were awarded $1.5 million for future health care expenses, and their daughter was awarded $1.5 million in non-economic damages.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 8, 2016

Attorney Fails to Make Timely Objection, so Judgment in Product Liability Case Must Stand

By Moll Law Group

Even when individuals have a valid claim, a lawyer’s missteps can have serious consequences for their clients. In a recent case, a judgment in favor of the defendant could not be revisited because the issue raised on appeal was not raised by the plaintiffs’ lawyer during the trial.

The Facts of the Case

A husband and wife filed a lawsuit against makers and distributors of microwave popcorn and butter flavoring. The husband ate microwave popcorn every day for 20 years. They alleged that the products caused him to develop the lung disease bronchiolitis obliterans.

At trial, the experts disagreed about what caused the husband’s sickness. Both the plaintiffs and the defendants had a number of expert witnesses who testified about his sickness and its likely cause. One of the defendant’s experts was a doctor who testified about articles that were not provided to the plaintiffs for review. The plaintiff’s lawyer objected, arguing that the witness could not testify about facts about which the plaintiffs did not have information. He argued that the plaintiffs could not adequately prepare for such testimony, and the testimony was unfair. The judge agreed, and the expert’s testimony was stricken. Accordingly, the judge instructed the jury to ignore the testimony they had heard from the expert. The trial continued, and the jury found in favor of the defendant.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 17, 2016

Products Liability Cases in Illinois

By Moll Law Group

There are a number of theories of recovery for individuals injured by defective products, and many lawsuits reference more than just one theory of recovery. In Illinois, claims arising from defective products often allege, among other potential avenues, a violation of an express warranty, a violation of an implied warranty, negligence, and strict liability.

Strict liability claims in Illinois do not require that the plaintiff prove that a defendant acted negligently. They focus on the condition of the product instead. Generally, under a strict liability theory under Illinois law, a plaintiff is required to establish that (1) the product contained a defective condition; (2) the condition made the product unreasonably dangerous; (3) the condition existed when the product left the control of the defendant; (4) the plaintiff suffered an injury; and (5) the injury was proximately caused by the product’s condition.

The decision of which claim or claims to bring depends on the facts of each case. These considerations may include the warnings the sellers provided, the relationship between the injured party and the manufacturer or retailer, the location of the defendants, and the statute of limitations. There is also a question of which companies to sue. It may make sense to sue the manufacturer directly or to sue a retailer. There are a number of factors to consider. For example, many products are made in China by a number of different manufacturers. Suing manufacturers in other countries can be complicated, and understanding whom to sue and how to do so is essential to a successful case.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 12, 2016

FDA Warns Women of Potential Risks of Essure

By Moll Law Group

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that it would take actions to provide women with information about the risks of using Essure, a form of permanent birth control. This form of birth control involves inserting flexible coils through the cervix and vagina into the fallopian tubes. After about three months, scar tissue forms around the coils and makes a barrier in order to prevent conception.

The FDA recognized that there are potential complications related to these types of implantable forms of sterilization and that it should take actions in order to address these risks. These actions include requiring a clinical study to assess the risks and requiring warnings on the product labels. The FDA stated that the actions recognize that “more rigorous research is needed to better understand if certain women are at heightened risk of complications.”

The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, protects public health by ensuring that food and drugs are safe for people to use. The FDA’s position is that while Essure is safe for most women, some women may be at risk for complications. Those complications may include pain, tears, bleeding, and allergic reactions.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 10, 2016

Expert Witnesses Precluded in BMW Birth Defect Case

By Moll Law Group

In a recent case, a child plaintiff sued BMW, claiming that his disabilities were caused by exposure to unleaded gasoline vapor from a defective fuel hose in his mother’s BMW when his mother was pregnant with him.

The Facts of the Case

In 1989, the plaintiff’s father bought his mother a new BMW 525i. The plaintiff’s mother was the only person who drove the car. In the spring of 1991, she noticed a smell of gasoline in the car at times. It caused her headaches, dizziness, and throat irritation. That summer, she became pregnant with the plaintiff. In November, a mechanic finally discovered a fuel leakage caused by a split fuel hose. The plaintiff was born in May 1992 with severe mental and physical disabilities. In 1994, BMW recalled all of their 525i vehicles made between 1989 and 1991, due to defects in the fuel hoses.

The plaintiff sued BMW in 2008, claiming that his disabilities were caused by exposure to unleaded gasoline vapor from a defective fuel hose in his mother’s BMW while he was in his mother’s womb. The plaintiff sued BMW in a personal injury action, claiming that the car’s defective fuel hose caused his injuries.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 8, 2016

Court Considers Causation Issues in Defective Gun Case

By Moll Law Group

If someone is killed by a gunshot when no one else was around, a lot of questions are left unanswered. It can be unclear whether it was an accident or whether the victim intended to take his own life. Even if it was an accident, it may be unclear what caused the gun to go off. Was it the victim’s own mistake, or was the gun defective? If a plaintiff wants to sue a gun manufacturer due to a defect, it can be a difficult case to prove. Plaintiffs often have to rely on experts to explain the defect and the cause of the accident.

In a recent case, a plaintiff struggled with these issues when she filed suit against Remington Arms Company, a gun manufacturer, after her husband died from a gunshot wound while hunting by himself. The plaintiff alleged that her husband died due to a defect in his gun, a Remington Model 700 bolt action rifle. After he failed to respond to text messages from his family, a family member went to look for him where he had been hunting. He was found dead in a tree stand with a single gunshot wound to his chest. His rifle was found on the ground 15 feet below where he was. The rifle’s safety mechanism was off, there was a spent cartridge casing in the chamber of the rifle, and there was a rope attached to the rifle.

The plaintiff’s expert had filed a report stating that the rifle fired due to a defect in its trigger system. The Remington Model 700 rifle includes a “Walker” fire control system. This particular fire control system was unique because it included a specially designed trigger mechanism. According to the expert, rifles with “Walker triggers” had fired unexpectedly before. He stated that because of the unique design, dirt, moisture, or other residue could cause the connector within the rifle to fail to return to its proper position—which then caused the rifle to fire. He stated that there was residue in the plaintiff’s husband’s rifle and that it could have hit a tree, the ground, or the rope, causing it to fire.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 5, 2016

Large Manufacturer Ordered to Pay $72 Million in Cancer-Related Lawsuit

By Moll Law Group

In a recent court decision, Johnson & Johnson, the world’s largest maker of health care products, must pay $72 million to the family of a woman who claimed that the company’s products caused her ovarian cancer and ultimately her untimely death. This recent verdict was the first time a jury found that Johnson & Johnson had to pay damages related to the company’s talc-based products.

The plaintiffs claimed that the woman’s fatal ovarian cancer was caused by the company’s use of talcum powder in its products, including in its baby powder and Shower to Shower brand. Johnson & Johnson advertised its Shower to Shower brand (which included talc) for feminine hygiene, claiming that “just a sprinkle a day keeps odor away.” In 1999, the American Cancer Society advised women to use cornstarch-based products in the genital area. Cornstarch is generally now used instead of talc as an absorbent in baby powder and feminine hygiene products. However, Johnson & Johnson continues to use talc in some of its products and maintains that it is safe. The woman used the products for 35 years for feminine hygiene. More than three years ago, she was diagnosed with ovarian cancer, which ultimately caused her death at age 62.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 2, 2016

Safer Technologies in Cars, But Not For Everyone

By Moll Law Group

Each year in the United States, there are approximately 32,000 people killed in car accidents. Many more suffer severe and debilitating injuries that last a lifetime. Accidents occur for many reasons. There are snow storms and icy road conditions, and most drivers have at one point or another inadvertently drifted into another lane or not seen another driver hiding in his or her blind spot at some point or another.

Sometimes accidents are the result of drivers being tired, intoxicated, or distracted, often by texting or talking on the phone. When this occurs, injured drivers, passengers, pedestrians, and property owners can sue for negligence and be compensated for their losses. In Illinois, injured parties can recover for out-of-pocket losses, like lost wages and reduced future income, as well as less tangible injuries, like pain and suffering and emotional distress.

Some accidents are also the result of defective auto parts. In these cases, injured parties can sue for compensation, and they do not even have to prove negligence. If a part is defective, and the part was defective when it left the automaker’s possession, the plaintiff is entitled to recover for any injuries caused by the defect.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 21, 2016

Supreme Court Allows $124 Million Judgment Against Drug Company to Stand

By Moll Law Group

According to a news article, the U.S. Supreme Court recently refused to hear a drug-maker’s appeal in a case that cost the drug company $124 million for falsely marketing a prescription medication. By declining the appeal, the court affirmed a South Carolina Supreme Court ruling that reduced the company’s damages from $327 million to $124 million, but it did not overturn a jury’s verdict that the drug company had improperly marketed the medication.

How Cases Get to the Supreme Court

Cases come to the supreme court in one of two ways. First, a case can be appealed to the court from a lower federal court ruling. These courts are called federal circuit courts. Second, a case can come to the supreme court from a state’s highest court. In either case, if the supreme court does not accept the appeal, the lower court’s decision stands.

What Happened in This Case?

The drug at issue in the South Carolina case is called Risperdal. Risperdal was introduced in 1994 for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. It is also given to patients with autism who suffer from irritability and aggressiveness. Side effects of the medication include diabetes, stroke, and weight gain.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 19, 2015

Accident-Related Injuries Can Have Many Causes Aside from the Obvious

By Moll Law Group

Among all vehicle accidents, motorcycle accidents are particularly scary. There are no seat belts or air bags to protect a motorcycle rider’s body from injury, and some states, like Illinois, have no helmet law at all.

Without these protections, when a motorcycle driver is involved in an accident, the injuries are often serious and even life-threatening. No matter how slowly a motorcycle is moving, if a rider is hit and his head hits the ground, there is the possibility of permanent damage to the rider’s brain. The same is true if a motorcycle rider is thrown into the air without a seat belt to keep him grounded.

Like all other drivers, motorcycle riders can be injured in any number of ways. With only two wheels to grip the road, bad weather and slippery streets can easily cause a motorcycle to lose traction and crash. In addition, given their size, it is easier for other drivers to lose a motorcycle in their “blind spot” while changing lanes or merging onto a busy highway.

Continue reading →