Personal Injury Resources

These ads drive a wedge between doctor and patient. For a while, I was both a family practitioner and a researcher, and I knew as much about the real data behind Vioxx and Celebrex as anybody. I knew they were neither safer nor more effective than the much less expensive alternatives and would tell my patients so. Nonetheless, many still demanded these drugs, which shows the tremendous power of marketing.

Most of the exhibiting companies I spoke with at the conference had all worked with personal injury law firms at one point or another, usually related to Vioxx or Bextra. This doesn’t surprise me. What concerns me is that as these marketing campaigns get further and further away from the law firm, the firm loses control and puts themselves in possible jeopardy over their connection with some of these questionable tactics. It also tends to potentially perpetuate an image problem for personal injury law firms that is big enough already.

According to the Associated Press Today, EA has settled one of the pending class action law suits against it for allegedly failing to pay overtime. They paid $15.6 million to the computer graphic artists. The suit with the engineers is still pending. Meanwhile, here is a nice cartoon.

Oh, I also found there are several class action law suits in the works for not only the rebate scam but other incidences of fraud. A San Francisco law firm has filed a class action suit against Dell Inc., and financial partner CIT Bank, claiming that they are systematically deceiving customers who buy Dell products.

In what continues to be the most comprehensive reporting of the Vioxx trial, The Wall Street Journal has an interesting piece on the novel practice of allowing jurors to ask questions during the trial. Judge Carol Higbee has allowed the jury to ask separate questions of witnesses after both lawyers have completed their direct and cross examinations, and many of the questions have raised concerns among court watches and jury consultants about the effectiveness of the plaintiff's argument.

Mesothelioma lawyers charge their clients only after the successful completion of a case. This fee plan is called a contingent fee plan wherein a percentage of the compensation received goes to the lawyer as the fee and the lawyers do not charge a fee if the victim does not get a compensation. Normally the lawyers first identify the offending party, and then file the lawsuit in the state where the laws are more pro-employees. This increases the chances of securing a positive verdict. However, in cases of companies are granted immunity under bankruptcy laws, mesothelioma lawyers are there again to assist in arranging out of court settlements.

Mesothelioma is the most serious of several asbestos-related diseases detected so far. This is because of the carcinogenic effect of asbestos particles. Asbestos can cause cancer of the lungs, esophagus, colon, rectum, stomach, vocal chords, and kidneys. About 70 percent to 80 percent of all cases of asbestos disease mesothelioma - a rare type of cancer of the mesothelium, the membrane that covers and protects most of the body internal organs – are the result of asbestos exposure at work.

This years debate resolution is “medical malpractice must be significantly reformed in the US”. I have been doing a lot of research on both the affirmative, and negative side, trying to make sure I know both sides of the case, so I can debate both sides well. It is a lot of work but at least its interesting.

Just when we thought that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers had no paper trail, we find that the law firm that she was heading at the time paid $22M to settle a class action law suit for assisting law firm clients in defrauding investors, as noted here and picked up by HuffingtonPost.com. The original source: No less than the Class Action Newsletter (May 1, 2000).