Topamax Birth Defect Lawyer - Now Reviewing Cases

I'm now reviewing Topamax birth defect cases.  Especially those cases in which a child was born with a cleft lip or a cleft palate.  These injuries have been linked to the usage of Topamax during pregnancy.  The FDA has recently issued an advisory regarding the usage of Topamax while pregnant.

Other birth defects linked to Topamax are spina bifida, genital defects, and low birth weight.  These birth defects were 11 times more likely to occur when the mother took Topamax than when the mother did not.

Contact me using the contact form above, or e-mail me at justinian@justinian.us if you'd like to discuss your potential Topamax birth defect lawsuit.

New Asbestos Website Launched

I've recently launched the Asbestos Legal Journal.  It is a blog about asbestos and mesothelioma lawsuits written from the perspective of a plaintiffs' lawyer.  I'll be blogging about  my day-to-day experiences working on asbestos lawsuits, as well as detailing the history of asbestos litigation.  I'm particularly excited to have a place where I can share the thousands of damning documents that show just how little asbestos companies cared about the people they killed.

I'm also going to be creating a very detailed timeline of asbestos that dates all the way back to ancient Rome.  The timeline will be complete with citations to scholarly articles and other resources to back up any allegations I make.  The story of asbestos hasn't yet been properly told on the web, and I hope to change that.

If you've got any questions about asbestos, mesothelioma, or lawsuits relating to either of those, feel free to contact me.

Female Floridians File Frivolous Four Loco Lawsuit

I’m a plaintiffs’ product liability lawyer.  I’m therefore generally on the side of those who are injured by defective products.  But this lawsuit epitomizes a frivolous lawsuit:

Janice Rivera, 20, was ejected from a car on State Road 417 in an Aug. 13 crash in Seminole County. The driver of the car, Danielle C. Joseph, 20, who is also named a defendant in the suit, drank the energy drink Four Loco before she struck another car while driving at a high rate of speed.

Source: Woman sues over 'blackout' drink - News

So, an underage girl illegally consumes some Four Loco.  She then drives at a high rate of speed while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage.  Her underage passenger is injured and sues the manufacturer of the drink. 

I’m probably a bit more pro-plaintiff than your average juror, and even I think that Four Loco shouldn’t pay a dime here.  For one thing, the driver who consumed the beverage was underage and thus illegally consumed the beverage.  That alone should absolve Four Loco of any liability. 

The case is even worse if the passenger knew that the driver had been drinking.  If you voluntarily step into a vehicle that’s being driven by someone you know has been drinking, you’re an idiot.  And juries don’t like to give money to idiots. 

Four Loco, which is premixed with the stimulants taurine, guarine and caffeine, are made to appeal to younger drinkers because "it tastes more like a soft drink than an alcoholic beverage," Rivera's lawsuit states.

* * * *

"The presence of stimulants in an alcoholic beverage is a dangerous and potentially fatal combination," the suit states. "Because the consumer will engage in dangerous behavior such as driving because he or she will not feel intoxicated."

With respect to the first point about flavoring: Lots of (gross) people like to mix Red Bull with Vodka.  Should Red Bull be held liable under the same theory?  After all it’s reasonably foreseeable to Red Bull that someone will slam one back with a few shots of Vodka.  And let’s not forget that Coke (or Pepsi) contains stimulants.  People have been drinking Rum/Whiskey/etc. & Coke for years.

The second point about stimulants preventing people from feeling intoxicated is going to be problematic.  Is there any reliable scientific evidence to back that up?  Have their been any peer-reviewed studies to support it?  “Feeling” drunk is obviously subjective and will thus be difficult to prove.

The first and second points imply that alcoholic beverage manufacturers are supposed to make awful-tasting drinks that make you feel intoxicated.  I’m not aware of any legal authority that supports that implication.

My prediction:  This case will not survive summary judgment.  If it does survive summary judgment, I’ll buy the plaintiff’s lawyer a drink.

DePuy Hip Replacement Lawsuits Are Going To Be Big

I spent several hours last week reviewing the evidence surrounding the DePuy ASR and ASR XL hip recall, and I've come to the conclusion that these are going to be great lawsuits from a damages perspective.

Some people who received recalled DePuy hip replacements have had to undergo multiple hip replacement surgeries.  The medical bills alone from those surgeries are probably going to be close to six figures.  On top of that, the DePuy hips can cause cobalt and chromium metal shavings to enter the bloodstream.  This in turn can lead to muscle necrosis, which is irreversible. 

A worst-case scenario is that bone and muscle decay is so extreme that a patient cannot be fitted with another hip replacement.  If that happens, a person may become unable to walk.  Considering that the market for DePuy ASR hips was younger, more active people, the damages may be quite large.

I'm working right now on putting up a De Puy hip lawyer website to share some more of the information about the ASR hips that I've discovered.  And of course, if you'd like more information, feel free to contact me directly.

Los Angeles Juries Aren’t Always Pro-Plaintiff

Generally speaking, California is where a plaintiff is best off bringing a product liability lawsuit.  But not always, as shown by this defense verdict in a case against a helmet manufacturer. 

Lawyers for Richard and Kandy Eubanks had asked for $18 million in damages, most of it for the future lifetime care of their 20-year-old son, Justin, who was 17 at the time of the crash.

* * * *

He was traveling 20 to 30 mph when he was hurled over the handlebars and his bike landed on top of him, causing his helmet to crack, according to the suit filed a year after the crash. His parents maintained the plastic SixSixOne Flight model was defective and that KBC gave insufficient label warnings concerning its protection capabilities.

According to Johnson, a stronger material like carbon fiber could have made a difference for Eubanks. But he said KBC used plastic because it was less expensive.

Source: Jury rejects parents' lawsuit against helmet maker - ContraCostaTimes.com

The plaintiffs apparently brought claims under both design-defect theories and failure-to-warn theories.  The jury rejected both theories, and found in favor of the helmet manufacturer.  One thing I would like to know is the cost difference between a carbon fiber helmet and a plastic helmet.  I know that at one point in time carbon fiber was extremely expensive, but I’m not sure if it still is.  If it is substantially more expensive than plastic, the jury may have rightly found that plastic was a permissible design.

One thing that the article discusses is that the helmet meets all federal standards.  Defendants often argue that if their product meets federal standards, it is automatically safe.  I disagree, and here’s why: Every automobile, drug, or medical device that has ever been recalled initially met a federal safety standard.