Product Liability Law Blog

Chrysler Recalls 127,350 Chrysler 300 and Dodge Chargers Over ABS and ESC Safety Concerns

Mon, 14 May 2012 22:03:18 -0700

Chrysler Group, which is primarily owned by Fiat SpA has announced the recall of 127,350 Dodger Charger and Chrysler 300 motor vehicles in the United States and Canada due potential safety issues involving the vehicles' anti-lock braking systems and electronic stability control system. The recalled vehicles are 2011 and 2012 models. The automaker says no related accidents or injuries have been reported.

According to the company's filing with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, there is a fuse in the vehicles' power distribution center that might overheat, which could cause the electronic stability control system and the anti-lock breaks to malfunction. Should this happen, the driver could lose control of the vehicle.

In a separate announcement, Chrysler is recalling 471 Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan vehicles over concerns that the vehicle's right side rear lift gate pinch sensor could malfunction. If this were to happen, the power rear door might close down on a body part rather than automatically swing back up.

A lift gate pinch sensors that works properly is supposed to prevent such crush accidents from happening. Right now, there are reportedly are no reports of injuries or deaths related to this safety issue.

Our auto products liability lawyers represent clients injured because of an auto defect that caused a car crash or injured them in some other way. Your initial case evaluation with The Gilbert Law Group is free.

Even with Chrysler's acquisition by Fiat in 2009, after it filed for federal bankruptcy protection, and now a growth in profits and sales, the automaker still hasn't been able to get rid of its "reputation for lousy quality," says the Wall Street Journal. Its newer models even received their highest ratings in a long time in the yearly reliability survey put out by Consumer Reports in 2011. Yet Chrysler must still contend with safety issues involving its older vehicles, as well as some affecting its newer autos.

For example, there have been reports of 23 complaints involving fires and Jeep Wranglers. In March, the auto manufacturer recalled close to 210,000 Jeep Liberty SUVs, 2004 and 2005 models because of possible problems with rear lower control arms that could fracture due to corrosion from the road salt used in some states.

Automakers cannot afford to make vehicles with safety issues that could potentially cause serious injuries or deaths Our auto defect attorneys know how intimidating it can be to pursue a large manufacturer for products liability damages and this is where we come in. We are an experienced auto products liability law firm that has the resources, manpower, and team of knowledgeable legal professionals and experts that can go after the financial recovery that you are owed.

Chrysler recalls minivans for tailgate pinch, USA Today, May 10, 2012

Chrysler recalls 210,000 Jeep Liberty SUVs, MSNBC, March 10, 2012

New Chrysler Battling Old Defects, Wall Street Journal, May 10, 2012

More Blog Posts:
California Motorcycle Defect Lawsuit: Man Sues BMW Claiming Bike Seat Caused Lasting Erectile Dysfunction, Product Liability Law Blog, April 29, 2012

Texas Air Bag Defect Lawsuit Seeks Damages from General Motors After Car Crash Leaves Woman with Severe Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, April 23, 2012

AUTO SAFETY AND ACCIDENT CLAIMS, Product Liability Law Blog, March 27, 2012

Phthalates, Lead and Other Toxic Chemicals Found in Popular Gardening Products, Says Study

Mon, 07 May 2012 20:20:28 -0700

According to a report issued by HealthyStuff.org, a nonprofit environmental research group, there are enough toxic chemicals found in garden houses and other gardening products to warrant a "high concern" notation. The study looked at 90 garden houses, 23 garden tools, 53 gloves, and 13 kneeling pads that were bought from popular retail stores, such as Wal-Mart and Lowe's, Target, and Home Depot.

Per the study's findings:
• 100% of the PVC garden hoses tested positive for phthalates.

• 30% of all the products tested contained over 100 parts per million of lead in at least one component. (This is rather high, considering that the CPSC now limits lead amounts to 100 parts per million in children's products.)

• Phthalates and lead levels in the gloves and water hoses that were tested went over the CPSC's allowable levels for other products.

• There were garden hose brass fittings containing levels of lead that went over even the Safe Water Drinking Act standard for brass fittings in residential water fixtures.

While HealthyStuff.org was most concerned about garden hoses and how much toxic chemicals they might contain, the group was also worried about vinyl garden gloves and the amount of phthalates found in them.

Products Liabilitiy
If exposure to lead or phthalates or any other toxic chemical in a product has caused someone injury, illness, disability, or death, the victim and his/her family may have reason to pursue a products liability case against the manufacturer, distributor, and/or seller.

Exposure to too high levels of lead can cause lead poisoning, leading to brain damage, hearing problems, learning disabilities, and even death. In recent years, the CPSC recalled millions of products, primarily made for children and babies, because they contained too much lead. Many of these products were made abroad.

Meantime, there have been different reports about phthalates, which is used to soften plastic, and what can happen to someone who has been exposed to too much. Some studies have linked phthalates to genital birth defects, changes in baby boys' reproductive hormones, an increased risk of breast cancer, liver cancer, and as having an adverse effect on the kidneys, blood, and/or reproductive system.

Not only are manufacturers supposed to make sure that their products are safe for use, but they also need to warn about any health or injury risks. Failure to warn or provide instructions on how to safely use a product can be grounds for a product defect lawsuit.

Please contact The Gilbert Law Group and ask to speak with one our experienced products liability lawyers today. We represent clients that have been injured or fallen ill because of dangerous, toxic, or defective household appliances, furniture, clothing, toys, accessories, motor vehicles, and other consumer products.

2012 Garden Products Study, Healthy Stuff

Garden hoses often contain phthalates and lead, study says, Los Angeles Times, May 4, 2012

CPSC Announces New, Lower Limit for Lead Content in Children's Products, CPSC, July 15, 2011

Phthalates: Hidden Dangers In Everyday Products, Healthy Child, June 29, 2011

More Blog Posts:
CPSC Stopped About 647,000 Unsafe Products from Entering the US During 1st Quarter of Fiscal Year 2012, Product Liability Law Blog, April 10, 2012

CPSC Now Ready to Talk About Tougher Safety Regulations for Table Saws, Product Liability Law Blog, September 28, 2011

Preventing Injuries to Children: Are Gas Fireplaces a Burn Hazard?, Product Liability Law Blog, March 8, 2010

Portable Pools are a Drowning Danger to Kids Under Age 5

Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:09:58 -0700

According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, every year it receives about 35 reports involving children under age 5 who drowned in a portable pool. Portable pool deaths compromise 11% of all pool drowning fatalities involving kids in that age range--clearly evidence that contrary to popular presumption, these moveable pools, even the small blow-up ones, can be dangerous especially when left unsupervised and with water inside.

Affirming the CPSC's concerns was a study published last year in the journal Pediatrics.
Researchers at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus and Independent Safety Consulting reported 35-near drownings and 209 fatalities involving kids under age 12 and portable pools between 2001 and 2009. 94% of the drowning victims were under the age of 5. 81% of the drowning accidents happen in the summer. That's one child death in a portable pool every five days.

The study examined small wading pools no deeper than 18 inches, inflatable pools, other soft-sided pools with a depth no greater than 4 feet. Anecdotal evidence suggested that many parents will often select a portable pool for its convenience, low cost, and easy assembly without much thought to safety. For many of those that opted to buy a portable pool, pool alarms, fences, safety covers, and ladders that were removable or lockable appeared to be unavailable to them or out of their price range.

Considering that it takes just a few inches of water for someone to drown in, it is important that portable pools are made as safe as possible for children. This includes making sure that a warning of the drowning risks involved and how to prevent such tragic accidents from happening are included. Pool owners are also responsible for making sure that a pool is made inaccessible to kids and others who might try to hop in unsupervised. Prevention might include locking up the pool or emptying out the water or making sure there are barricades around it that a young child cannot get over without permission or supervision.

With drownings continuing to be the number two cause of accidental deaths for young kids, our swimming pool accident lawyers want you to know that if you believe that your child drowned because of someone else's negligence, you may have grounds for a child injury lawsuit or a wrongful death case.

The Gilbert Law Group represents children and their families with swimming pool accident cases involving portable pools, in ground pools, hot tubs, and other bodies of water. Sometimes the liable party is a property owner or someone who was supposed to be properly supervising the victim, in other cases, it is the manufacturer of a dangerous pool or a pool part, such as a pool or hot tub drain that malfunctioned.

Drowning is Silent: Portable Pools, CPSC, April 24, 2012

Unintentional Drowning: Fact Sheet, CDC

Portable pools claim a child's life every 5 days, MSNBC, June 20, 2011

More Blog Posts:
Toys 'R' Us Ordered to Pay $20.6M Products Liability Lawsuit in Inflatable Pool Slide Death, Product Liability Law Blog, October 26, 2011

More Than 1500 Drowning Deaths Reported This Season, Product Liability Law Blog, September 24, 2011

Inflatable Pools Pose Significant Drowning Risk to Young Children, Says American Academy of Pediatrics, Product Liability Law Blog, July 13, 2011

California Motorcycle Defect Lawsuit: Man Sues BMW Claiming Bike Seat Caused Lasting Erectile Dysfunction

Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:30:36 -0700

Motorcycle rider Henry Wolf has filed a California auto products liability lawsuit against BMW North America and Corbin-Pacific. Wolf claims that the "ridge-like" seat of his 1993 BMW bike caused him to suffer priapism. He contends that the condition, which causes a lasting erection, has been going on for 20 months now.

The case is Wolf v. BMW. The plaintiff says that he developed this dysfunction after going on a four-hour ride on his BMW bike in 2010 and the problem hasn't gone away since then. He is blaming the ribbed "banana" seat of his motorcycle for his condition.

Because of his priapism, Wolf cannot take part in sexual activity and has experienced mental and emotional suffering. He wants BMW and the seat maker to compensate him for lost income, products liability, medical costs, general damage, and emotional harm.

This is the first time that motorcycle banana-design seats have been linked to erectile dysfunction. In the past, others have blamed them for infertility and causing impotence because of vibrations and the seat's configuration. While no credible connection has been found between motorcycles and infertility, there have been studies that say one does exist.

Although Wolf's grounds for a California motorcycle defect lawsuit may be a first, bikes, like all motor vehicles, can have serious parts defects that may up the risk of catastrophic accident happening. You want to work with a products liability law firm that knows how to successfully pursue your recovery for injuries and death caused by:

• A tire blowout
• Motorcycle seat defect
• Brake problems
• Faulty accelerators
• Gas tank defects
• Motorcycle fires
• Engine problems
• Helmet defects

With just a helmet and protective clothing, motorcycle riders are much more vulnerable to serious injuries and death during a traffic crash than the occupants of motor vehicles. A motorcycle defect can cause a catastrophic collision with another vehicle or a single bike accident. The rider could get thrown from the bike, landing on the freeway (upping the risk of getting hit by oncoming traffic), onto a wall or barricade, or into another vehicle.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in 2010 there was a slight increase in US motorcycle deaths, with 4,502 fatalities compared to 4,469 motorcycle accident deaths in 2009. There was, however, a decline in the number of motorcycle injury victims with 82,000 injuries in 2010 compared to 90,000 the year before. Drunk driving played a factor in 1,285 motorcycle crash fatalities.

Man sues BMW for 20-month erection after bike ride, USA Today, April 29, 2012

Man sues BMW for giving him 20-month erection after motorcycle ride, Torque News, April 29, 2012

Priapism, Mayo Clinic

More Blog Posts:
Texas Air Bag Defect Lawsuit Seeks Damages from General Motors After Car Crash Leaves Woman with Severe Injuries, The Gilbert Law Group, April 23, 2012

AUTO SAFETY AND ACCIDENT CLAIMS, The Gilbert Law Group, March 27, 2012

NHTSA Proposes New Rule Tackling Keyless Ignition Dangers, The Gilbert Law Group, March 21, 2012

Texas Air Bag Defect Lawsuit Seeks Damages from General Motors After Car Crash Leaves Woman with Severe Injuries

Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:11:59 -0700

The son of a woman who he claims was left incapacitated after sustaining serious injuries in a car crash is suing General Motors for Texas auto products liability. Carolyn Gill's son Rick Gill filed a personal injury complaint last month.

Per the Texas air bag defect lawsuit, Gill was traveling in a 2004 Buick Le Sabre on September 12, 2011 when she lost control of the car, which went off the road, rolled over, and landed on its side. At the time, she was seated correctly and wearing a three-point seatbelt but her air bag did not deploy.

Gill contends that GM made an unreasonably dangerous vehicle because it came with air bags that did not properly protect or restrain her, thereby violating the crashworthiness principals. She is seeking Texas auto defect damages for disfigurement, pain and suffering, mental distress, emotional trauma, impairment, loss of consortium, decreased capacity to enjoy life, interference with everyday activities, and other costs.

Crashworthiness Principals
There are two types of auto products liability lawsuit. The first one involves causation, in which a car defect causes the crash that results in serious injury or wrongful death. The second type is based on violation of the crashworthiness principals.

While it is acknowledged that some collisions are inevitable, it is still the responsibility of a car manufacturer to make sure that it gives vehicle occupants reasonable protections in the event of one. For example, a vehicle that is crashworthy should be able to allow for adequate occupant survival space while limiting how much the passenger compartment is violated upon impact, prevent occupant ejection, adequately restrain passengers, and not increase the risk of an auto fire. Air bags, seat belts, and other safety features are some of the basic elements used to enhance an auto's crashworthiness. When such safety elements are not installed or have key defects that prevent them from protecting a vehicle occupant, then a plaintiff may be able to raise questions about whether/not an auto was adequately crashworthy.

Not only are air bags essential to protecting a passenger in the event of a deadly crash, but also certain defects can cause them to be a source of injury to a victim. You want to work with an air bag defect law firm that understands the nature of air bag-involved collisions and can pinpoint what aspect of this safety feature's technology failed or was poorly designed, causing it to not deploy when needed or deploy unnecessarily.
Common injuries from air bag deployment may include eye injuries, face trauma, jaw injuries, spinal cord injuries, decapitation, rib fractures, heart damage, lung injuries, shoulder injuries, forearm injuries, and other serious injuries.

Suit against GM claims vehicle's airbags failed to deploy, The Southeast Texas Record, March 27, 2012

Air Bags, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

More Blog Posts:
Auto Safety and Accident Claims, Product Liability Law Blog, March 27, 2012

Recently Recalled Honda Civic Blamed in Georgia Air Bag Defect Lawsuit, Product Liability Law Blog, December 31, 2012

Air Bag Defect Prompts Honda to Recall another 273,000 Autos, Product Liability Law Blog, November 30, 2011

NHTSA Proposes 'Brake-Throttle Override' Standard to Prevent Unintended Acceleration Crashes

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 17:55:09 -0700

In the wake of the deadly 2009 San Diego, California car crash that killed four people because of Lexus sudden unintended acceleration, the US Department of Transportation is proposing that current safety standards be updated and a Break-Throttle Override' requirement implemented so that drivers are better able to stop a motor vehicle should the accelerator and brakes pedals end up pressed down simultaneously by letting the motorist still have control of the brakes. Research by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that such changes would decrease the chances of a vehicle going into sudden unintended acceleration and prevent motor vehicle collisions that are caused by a trapped or stuck accelerator pedal.

If approved, auto manufacturers would have approximately two years to come into compliance with the new standard. The proposal would update current throttle control disconnection test procedures for passenger vehicles, buses, and trucks. Vehicles with a GVW of 10,000 lbs. or under would be required to include Brake-Throttle Override (BTO) system tasked with making sure the vehicle stops if the accelerator and brake pedals are applied at the same time.

Following the Lexus sudden unintended acceleration crash over 2 ½ years ago that killed four family members, Toyota proceeded to recall millions of vehicles over ill-fitting floor mats that might entrap an accelerator pedal, sticky gas pedals, and other safety issues linked to its vehicles suddenly speeding up and out of the driver's control. Numerous auto products liability and wrongful death claims were also filed following reports of hundreds of related injuries and deaths. At least one person was released from prison after it was discovered that Toyota sudden unintended acceleration and not driver negligence caused the fatal car accident he was involved in.

Toyota has since implemented a brake-override system standard, and a lot of other car manufacturers either already have such a system in place or are in the process of implementing one for their vehicles. Despite these efforts, federal transportation safety officials believe a new standard would ensure that every light truck and car sold in the US has this type of brake system in place.

Our auto products liability law firm represents clients with Lexus/Toyota sudden unintended acceleration claims in the US. We applaud the Department of Transportation's efforts to eliminate two of the main causes of SUA. However, it also has become apparent that sticky gas pedals and ill-fitting floor mats are not the only reason why a vehicle might suddenly accelerate. Of the more than 2,000 reports of Lexus and Toyota vehicles abruptly speeding up and out of control, over half of the incidents involved Toyota vehicles not included on the manufacturer's recall list.

USDOT Proposes Updated Safety Standard to Prioritize Braking Control, Reduce Risk of High-Speed Unintended Acceleration for Nation's Cars, NHTSA, April 12, 2012

Federal regulators want brake-override systems in all cars, Los Angeles Times, April 13, 2012

More Blog Posts:
Toyota Sudden Unintended Acceleration: Engineers Reportedly Discovered an Electronic Software Problem in Test Vehicle, Reports CNN, Product Liability Law Blog, February 29, 2012

Florida Auto Products Liability: Toyota Smart Key Blamed for Woman's Carbon Monoxide Death, Product Liability Law Blog, July 8, 2011

Wrongful Death Trial Over Utah Toyota Sudden Acceleration Lawsuit is Scheduled for 2013, Product Liability Law Blog, June 17, 2011

CPSC Stopped About 647,000 Unsafe Products from Entering the US During 1st Quarter of Fiscal Year 2012

Tue, 10 Apr 2012 13:03:38 -0700

In the first quarter of fiscal year 2012, Consumer Product Safety Commission port investigators and US Customs Border Protection agents have stopped nearly 650,000 units (of approximately 240 different noncomplying products) from entering the country and reaching consumers. They screened over 2,900 shipments at ports of entry throughout the country and pulled the items that they determined were unsafe and/or violated US safety rules.

Most of the products that the agents and inspectors halted were for children (527,950 units). Some of the reasons they didn't make it through included lead paint violations, small parts, phthalates, which are banned from child products, tracking label violations, misbranding, and other violations involving art materials, battery-operated toys, baby walkers, magnets, baby rattles, clacker balls, and toys with sharp points or chemical hazards. Adult products (119,410) that were stopped included holiday lights, hair dryers, lighters, luminaries, fireworks, and bicycles.

In fiscal year 2011, the federal safety agency had examined over 9,900 product shipments at US ports. Nearly 4.5 million units of products considered hazardous or violative were stopped from reaching consumers.

Products Liability
At The Gilbert Law Group, our products liability lawyers have the skills and experience to represent children and adults injured by defective products, including dangerous or hazardous toys, appliances, furniture, electrical products, recreational equipment, and accessories. Even though the CPSC works hard to prevent manufacturers and distributors from producing and bringing unsafe products into the marketplace, it is obvious from the number of recalls that continue to be announced every month that there are many unsafe units that still manage to make their way in, posing a serious injury and health risk to consumers.

This month alone there have been over 10 products recalled already over fire dangers, fall hazards, fingertip amputation and laceration risks, and suffocation and entrapment dangers. Recalled items included approximately 16,700 Rockland Furniture Drop-side cribs for the usual strangulation, suffocation, and entrapment hazards posed by this type of design, about 40,000 Topeak Babyseat II Bicycle Carrier Seats (the grab bar's hinge mechanism can cause fingertip amputation and laceration injuries), around 2,000 Viking dishwashers due to an electrical issue that may cause them to overheat and start a fire, and more than 307,000 Office Depot® Brand Biella Leather Desk Chairs that can cause fall injuries should the chair to come off its base. Already there have been several reports of minor injuries.

Port Surveillance News: CPSC Investigators Find, Stop Nearly 650,000 Unsafe Products at the Start of Fiscal Year 2012, CPSC, April 5, 2012

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Consumer Reports

More Blog Posts:
Even as Number of Children's Product Recalls Went Down in 2011, Injuries Rose, Product Liability Law Blog, April 13, 2012

More Pourable Gel Fuel Recalled by Manufacturers, Product Liability Law Blog, September 30, 2011

CPSC Now Ready to Talk About Tougher Safety Regulations for Table Saws, Product Liability Law Blog, September 28, 2011

Whistleblower Lawsuits: WellCare Health Plans Settles Medicare/Medicaid Allegations for $137.5 Million

Wed, 04 Apr 2012 11:03:14 -0700

Four whistleblower lawsuits accusing WellCare Health Plans, Inc. of submitting false Medicaid and Medicare claims have ended with the company agreeing to pay $137.5 million to settle the allegations made. The lawsuits were filed under the federal False Claims Act's qui tam provisions, and whistleblowers are entitled to a share of the settlement.

Per the whistleblower lawsuits, WellCare Health Plans engaged in several schemes to turn in false claims to Medicaid and Medicare programs. Alleged tactics included inflating how much it claimed it was spending on medical care so it wouldn't have to give money back to Medicaid and other state programs, keeping the overpayments for infant care it got from Florida Medicaid, taking part in "cherrypicking" health patients so as to not have to pay future costs, committing other marketing abuses, falsifying information so that patients' medical conditions and the treatments they obtained were misrepresented, manipulating performance metrics related to its call center, and running a bogus Special Investigations Unit.

Under the terms of the qui tam settlement, WellCare must pay the $137.5 million, plus interest, to the US government and the states of Florida, Connecticut, Hawaii, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, New York, Missouri, and Ohio. If the company is sold or undergoes a change in control within the next three years, it also might have to pay a $35 million contingent payment.

This is the second monetary settlement that WellCare has agreed to pay since the government began a civil and criminal probe into the company six years ago. In 2009, WellCare agreed to pay $80 million in restitution and other matters to resolve possible criminal charges over losses by the Florida Medicaid and Healthy Kids programs.

Under the False Claims Act, whistleblowers that file a complaint are entitled to a percentage of what the US government gets back. The first whistleblower to initiate the case against WellCare, financial analyst Sean Hellein, will get about $20.75 million. The three other whistleblowers will share about $4.6 million and they may get more if WellCare does make a contingency payment,

If you are someone who is considering blowing the whistle against an entity or individual that you think may be defrauding the US government or a state, there are a number of whistleblower legal requirements that you should know about:

• The fraud that you wish to report can't have yet been disclosed in a government report or the media.

• The fraudulent act needs to have been committed against a government entity that has a law allowing for whistleblower claims to be brought.

• A whistleblower claim generally has to be submitted within six years of the fraudulent act. In certain cases, however, the statute of limitations for bringing a qui tam lawsuit is 10 years.

• A member of the Armed Forces cannot bring a whistleblower claim against a fellow Armed Forces member.

• Whistleblower claims cannot be brought against a judicial official, a Congress member, or a senior branch executive member.

You should also know that under the 'first to file' rule, the first person to file a whistleblower claim against a company or individual will likely be the one to get the majority, if not all, of what the government gets back from the wrongdoer.

Please contact our whistleblower lawyers at The Gilbert Law Group today.

WellCare Health Plans, Inc. Agrees To Pay $137.5 Million To Resolve False Claims Act Allegations, Justice.gov, April 3, 2012

WellCare Health Plans whistle-blower to receive about $21 million, Tampa Bay Times, April 4, 2012

More Blog Posts:
Odyssey HealthCare Settles for $25M Whistleblower Lawsuit Over Medicare Billing Fraud Allegations, Product Liability Law Blog, March 6, 2012

Roche Settles Whistleblower Lawsuit for $20M, Product Liability Law Blog, December 19, 2011

Secret Whistleblower Played Key Role in Bank of New York Mellon Investigation, Product Liability Law Blog, October 31, 2011

Is Your Wire Grill Brush a Dangerous Product?

Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:04:28 -0700

With the weather getting warmer, more people will be going outside to turn on the grill and start cooking meat, poultry, and other food items. While grilling is considered healthier than frying foods, there are also some risks involved. E.coli risks go up if you fail to properly grill your meat or chicken or you cook contaminated food products and burnt meat can contain carcinogens. However, there is another possible health risk being reported that involves use of a wire grill brush. Used to free up charred remains from the grill and protect the grill rack from damage, some medical professionals are reporting that there are patients seeking treatment for injuries because they've accidentally ingested the brush's wire bristles.

According to a study involving doctors at Rhode Island Hospital, between May 2009 and November 2010, six patients were admitted to the emergency room there because of wire bristle ingestion. These patients came in complaining of abdominal pain and painful swallowing. They all had just eaten grilled meat. CT scan and x-ray results showed that there were wires in the abdomens and throats of the patients. The doctors determined that these were the grill brush bristles that had come off and gotten stuck in the meat.

The study's lead author, radiologist David Grand, says they don't know if this is a widespread problem. He is, however, calling for more research. Meantime, our products liability law firm will continue to monitor developments surrounding the wire grill brush and we will bring you updates.

The doctors had to perform surgery on three of the patients to remove the bristles. Two of these procedures were done on the small intestine, another on the liver. They also took out bristle wires from the necks of three patients. The findings from their study can be found online in the American Journal of Roentgenology.

Obviously, getting wire bristles stuck in your throat or in one of your internal organs can be very painful and could lead to serious health problems--not to mention the complications that might result from having to undergo surgery to remedy the matter.

Grill brush bristles aren't the only products that can cause a grilling accident. Unstable grills that have a defective support design can cause a fire and/or burn injuries, as can propane tank defects. Sometimes the danger is the person grilling because of inexperience or carelessness. Not knowing how to operate a grill or placing it in an area of the backyard that makes it a fire hazard can up the chance of serious injuries or death. Also, person in charge of food might leave meat products out in the sun too long, causing bacteria to grow, which can potentially lead to stomach illnesses and other health issues for those eating.

Our products liability lawyers represent persons that are seriously injured because of dangerous, defective, and/or poorly designed products. We also represent burn victims injured in accidents. Contact The Gilbert Law Group today.

Watch The Wire: How Your Grill Brush Could Make You Sick, NPR, March 30, 2012

RI Hospital warns of wire grill brush dangers, The Examiner, March 28, 2012

Backyard barbecues are a big part of summer fun, but avoiding their hidden dangers is key to staying healthy and enjoying a cookout, a doctor suggests, USA Today/AP, July 22, 2011

American Journal of Roentgenology

More Blog Posts:
Portland, Oregon Child Injury: 3-Year-Old Undergoes Surgery After Swallowing 37 Buckyball Earth Magnets, Product Liability Law Blog, March 16, 2012

More Pourable Gel Fuel Recalled by Manufacturers, Product Liability Law Blog, September 30, 2011

CPSC Now Ready to Talk About Tougher Safety Regulations for Table Saws, Product Liability Law Blog, September 28, 2011

Even as Number of Children's Product Recalls Went Down in 2011, Injuries Rose

Wed, 28 Mar 2012 20:01:15 -0700

According to a report released by Kids In Danger (KID), although the number of children's products that were recalled last year declined by 24%, there was a 7% increase in the number injuries and incidents related to the recalls. The advocacy group says that because of the confidentiality involving the recall process, it can be hard to figure out the reason for the decrease in recalls. For example, could there really be less dangerous products in the marketplace now or was the Consumer Product Safety Commission unable to get companies to recall certain products?

The decline in recalls, however, does come just as new requirements for testing and standards have gone into effect as part of the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). That said, any child injuries caused by any products, whether recalled or not, is never a positive development. Our products liability lawyers at the Gilbert Law Group make it our business to help children and their families obtain the personal injury or wrongful death compensation that they are owed.

Per some of KID's findings in its report, in 2011:
• The CPSC recalled 121 children's products (39% of the total products it recalled).
• There were over 11.6 million units of kids products recalled.
• Three recalls involved at least a million units or more, respectively.
• The biggest recalls involved 1.7 million baby monitors (over concerns they posed a strangulation hazard) and 1.7 million toy tools and workbenches over worries that their parts might end up stuck in a child's throat.
• 30% of the children's products recalled were nursery products.
• 26% of the children's products recalled were toys.
• Little girl's KEDS shoes with decorative stars caused the most injuries with 27 laceration reports.
• 14 sleep environment products, including a bassinet, a crib, a canopy bed, and bunk beds were recalled.
• Prior to its recalled, the Adventure Playset Swingset was named in 500 incident reports.
• A remote control chopper, a swing set, and pogo sticks received over 100 reports before their recalls were announced.

Children and babies are vulnerable to serious injuries and even death when exposed to a product that is unsafe for use. It is unfortunate that there are still kids' products out there that continue to pose the hazards of choking, laceration, suffocation, strangulation, toxic poisoning, or other dangers.

You may be able to sue the manufacturer, distributor, seller, or retailer that allowed you to have access/purchase a dangerous/defective/malfunctioning product. Even when a product is used as intended, if it proves to be dangerous and causes serious harm, you still may have grounds for a products liability case.

A Measure of Safety: Children's Product Recalls in 2011, KIDS in Danger, KIDS, March 26, 2012

Read the Report (PDF)

Consumer Product Safety Commission

More Blog Posts:
Consumer Groups Coalition Ask CPSC to Recall Bumbo Baby Seat, Product Liability Law Blog, February 7, 2012

Clothing Defects: Apparel Industry Must Follow Standards for Children's Loungewear and Sleepwear, Says CPSC, Product Liability Law Blog, January 18, 2012

Can Loud Toys Impair Children's Hearing?, Product Liability Law Blog, January 12, 2012

AUTO SAFETY AND ACCIDENT CLAIMS

Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:28:51 -0700

By Jim Gilbert and Rick Friedman

(Jim Gilbert and Rick Friedman are long-time friends and fellow members of the Inner Circle of Advocates, a select group comprised of 100 of the most elite plaintiffs' attorneys in the nation. Jim conducts a nationwide products liability and personal injury practice from Arvada, Colorado (http://www.thegilbertlawgroup.com), while Rick conducts a nationwide trial practice from offices in Anchorage, Alaska and Seattle, Washington (http://www.friedmanrubin.com). This article was jointly written by Jim and Rick after several conversations during which they compared notes on auto safety and experiences with accident claims.)

If you are ever injured or die in an accident, it will most likely occur while you are in a car. Yet most Americans know surprisingly little about what makes a car safe, what to look for when shopping for a car, and what to do to protect their rights if they are in an auto accident.

Legal obligations of vehicle manufacturers
· A manufacturer must sell vehicles that provide reasonable protection to occupants in most kinds of accidents.
· Federal law requires that all motor vehicles sold in the U.S. comply with specified crashworthiness and other safety standards.
· Federal safety standards are minimum standards and may not protect you in an accident.
· A manufacturer is civilly responsible for injuries caused by an uncrashworthy vehicle, whether or not the vehicle complies with federal safety standards.
· You may have a legitimate claim for damages against the manufacturer of a defective and unreasonably dangerous vehicle, even though you or others believe you were "at fault" in the accident; after all, manufacturers know when they design a vehicle that accidents will happen and that their vehicles must be reasonably crashworthy.

What to look for when buying a car
Available safety features (some are standard and some are costly options; your budget will determine your selection):
· Adaptive headlights: motors drive headlights to follow the path of the vehicle.
· Backup monitors: cameras or sensors allow driver to see and/or be warned of persons or objects when backing or parking.
· Blind spot detection: cameras and/or sound devices allow driver to see/be aware of vehicles in the blind spot.
· Bluetooth connectivity: allows hands-free cell phone use.
· Collision mitigation braking: radar or laser-activated application of brakes when sensing an imminent crash.
· Electronic stability control: computer reduces engine speed and/or provides wheel-selective braking when detecting a skid.
· Event data recorders: computer constantly monitors speed, braking etc. and preserves the info for a specific time period, usually about 30 seconds.
· Head-up display: projects vehicle monitors (speed, GPS, etc.) onto the windshield so the driver doesn't have to look downward.
· Head restraint upgrades: intended to reduce whiplash in rear-end collisions.
· Lane departure warning systems: warns driver who strays from lane.
· Night vision assist: near-infrared lights or thermographic cameras permit longer-ranged vision at night and provide higher performance in rain and snow.
· Pre-crash occupant positioning: removes slack from seatbelts and applies brakes in an imminent frontal type collision.
· Rollover sensors: deploy side airbags and activate pretensioners in an imminent rollover through a computer monitoring system.
· Seat belt energy management systems: allow controlled belt yielding in a crash, mitigating force on the occupant's chest.
· Sensitive airbag systems: sense the difference in size and weight of the occupants and deploy the air bags accordingly, thus reducing airbag injuries.
· Side door beams: reduce door intrusion into the passenger compartment in side-impact crashes.
· Side-curtain air bags: side airbags (curtains) deploy in certain types of collisions, providing enhanced head and upper-torso protection.
· Tire pressure monitoring: warns the driver of reduced air pressure in all tires.
· Collapsible pedals: pedals pivot away from the passenger cabin in a crash, thus mitigating foot and lower leg injuries.
· Seat belt pretensioner: tightens seatbelt to a specified load level when sensing a crash.

Good sources of safety information
· National Highway Safety Traffic Administration (NHTSA)
· Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)
· Consumer Reports

NHTSA 5-star vehicle rating system
The NHTSA 5-Star Safety Ratings System evaluates the safety of passenger cars, SUVs, vans and pickup trucks in three broad areas - frontal crash, side crash, and rollover resistance. For model year 2011, NHTSA will rate 24 passenger cars, 20 sport utility vehicles, two vans and nine pickups under the new ratings system. Overall star rating will be shown on the window sticker beginning with model year 2011.
· Frontal impact Vehicle with crash test dummies in front seats is crashed into a fixed barrier at 35 mph, which is equivalent to a head-on collision between two similar vehicles of substantially the same weight each moving at 35 mph.
· Side barrier crash Standing vehicle with belted dummy in front and rear is hit in the side by a moving 3015 pound barrier to simulate an intersection crash.
· Side pole crash Vehicle angled at 75° with belted smaller dummy representing an adult female in driver's seat, is pulled sideways at 20 mph into a 25-cm diameter pole at the driver's seating position, representing a side-impact crash involving a narrow, fixed object like a utility pole or tree.
· Rollover testing An at -rest laboratory measurement that determines how "top-heavy" a vehicle is, coupled with a severe turning maneuver on a test track that tests whether a vehicle is vulnerable to tipping up on the road.

NOTE: Despite the fact that rear collisions are frequent and can cause death or severe injuries, at present there is no crash test to simulate a rear collision, due to NHTSA's limited budget
In each test using crash test dummies, the dummies have sensors positioned at various locations to measure the amount of force that would be exerted on the human body. Each vehicle tested (not all vehicles are tested each year) is given a one-star to five-star rating, with five stars being the highest. Beginning with 2011 models, an overall 5-star rating is also used. See your vehicle's ratings here.

NHTSA announced in October 2011 the lineup of model year 2012 passenger vehicles that will be tested as part of its 5-star safety ratings program. The program's crash tests will provide consumer safety information on approximately 81 percent of model year 2012 passenger vehicles sold in the United States, while rollover tests will provide information on 92 percent of the 2012 fleet.

Significance of number of stars in NHTSA's 5-star rating program
· Frontal crash
§ 5 stars = 10% or less chance of serious injury to the head or chest
§ 4 stars = 11 to 20% chance of serious injury to the head or chest
§ 3 stars = 21 to 35% chance of serious injury to the head or chest
§ 2 stars = 36 to 45% chance of serious injury to the head or chest
§ 1 star = 46% or greater chance of serious injury to the head or chest

· Side crash (incorporated with pole crash test)
§ 5 stars = 5% or less chance of serious injury
§ 4 stars = 6% to 10% chance of serious injury
§ 3 stars = 11% to 20% chance of serious injury
§ 2 stars = 21% to 25% chance of serious injury
§ 1 star = 26% or greater chance of serious injury

· Rollover (rate is expressed as a percentage of all single vehicle accidents)
§ 5 stars = rollover rate of 10% or less
§ 4 stars = rollover rate of between 10 and 19%
§ 3 stars = rollover rate of between 20 and 29%
§ 2 stars = rollover rate of between 30 and 39%
§ 1 star = rollover rate greater than 40%

What to avoid
· Vehicles that do poorly on NHTSA, IIHS or Consumer Reports testing, evaluations or ratings.
· NHTSA recommends considering vehicles with crash avoidance technologies that meet the 5-Star Safety Ratings minimum performance tests, such as forward collision warning (FCW), lane departure warning (LDW), and electronic stability control (ESC). All of the 2011 model year vehicles currently rated have ESC as standard, except for the Nissan Versa, in which it is optional.
· Vehicles that have a poor safety record in the real world (see the above websites).

Children and vehicle safety
· Every state has its own laws regarding child restraint regulations.
· You should carefully follow the recommendations of your car seat manufacturer.

NHTSA recommends as follows:
· Birth to12 months: always in an approved, rear-facing seat
· 1 to 3 years: keep in rear facing seat as long as possible until the child reaches the height or weight limits prescribed by the seat manufacturer, then in a forward-facing seat with a harness.
· 4 to 7 years: keep in a forward-facing seat with harness until the child reaches the height or weight limits prescribed by the seat manufacturer, then in a booster seat in the vehicle's back seat.
· 8 to 12 years: keep child in a booster seat until he or she is big enough to fit in a seat belt properly; the lap belt must lie snugly across the upper thighs, not the stomach; the shoulder belt should lie snug across the shoulder and chest and not cross the neck or face; your child should still ride in the back seat because it's safer there.
· Certified technicians will inspect and verify your car seat installation (free of charge in most places); click here to find the inspection station nearest you.
· Utilize NHTSA's 5-star ease of use rating system here.

Pregnant women and belt usage
· Many pregnant women rationally but wrongly believe that the lap belt part of the restraint system may damage the fetus in a forward-type collision; consequently, many pregnant women do not wear the belt at all (about 62% of the time), or wear it improperly, such as over the shoulder only or behind the back.
· Medical experts and vehicle safety groups have sponsored studies that conclude that a properly worn shoulder and lap belt clearly protects the fetus and would prevent about 85% of disabling injuries to or death of a fetus in motor vehicle crashes.

Tires and safety
· Tire wear depends on many factors, including driving style, vehicle load, air pressure (under inflation is worse), unbalanced tires, type of terrain, failure to balance and rotate tires regularly, worn shocks or struts, suspension misalignment, climatic conditions including ambient temperature, and damage caused by road hazards.
· With age, tire components dry out, hastened by oxidation, causing the adhesion between the tire components (layers) to wear out, leading to possible tread separation, often with catastrophic results.
· Experts, including some vehicle manufacturers, say that a tire should not be kept in service and may become dangerous after six years.
· Replacing and mounting tires:
§ Replace all four tires at the same time if possible.
§ When replacing only two tires, always have the new tires mounted on the rear axle, regardless of which wheels are the drive wheels.
§ If only one tire is replaced, pair it with the tire with the best tread and mount them on the rear axle.
§ Surprisingly, some tire dealers, especially smaller ones, are not aware of these safe mounting practices, so you must insist that they mount the tires as above.

What to do if you are in a car crash
· Remain at the scene and seek medical help as required.
· Notify police authorities.
· Exchange insurance and identifying information with other driver(s).
· Notify your insurance company as required by your policy.
· Preserve evidence by:
§ Taking photos of vehicles and accident scene;
§ Storing and maintaining your vehicle in its post-accident condition (further damage, loss of parts, tampering, etc. may adversely affect any future lawsuit);
§ If you are injured, seeking an experienced, qualified attorney's advice to protect your legal rights (there are variable state time limits for filing a lawsuit, so you should act promptly).

Do you have brain injury?
· Brain injuries may be "invisible" and the injured person may not immediately be aware of the injury.
· Brain injury can result even from low-impact crashes.
· Brain injury symptoms may be mild, such as fatigue, headache, poor attention or concentration, loss of balance, mood changes and the like.
· Severe symptoms may include any of the above and cognitive deficits, speech and language problems; sensory, perceptual, hearing, vision, smell and taste problems; seizures, paralysis, spasticity, personality changes and many others.
· If you or those around you notice any of the above symptoms following a car collision, tell your doctors.

Dealing with insurance companies
· You have an obligation to cooperate with your own insurance company, though they may eventually become your adversary.
· Keep in mind that your insurance company is in business to make money; every dollar paid out in claims reduces their bottom line.
· Contact your insurance company as soon as you get home from the accident. Most policies require a signed proof of loss within a certain time limit.
· Don't give a recorded or written statement to your insurance company until you review your policy and understand your coverage. If you have doubts, contact an attorney.
· Don't withhold information when you give your statement to your insurer. It's likely they will conduct their own investigation, and if it's found that you lied or left out important details it could affect the coverage you are entitled to or even invalidate your policy.
· Whenever you speak with your insurance company, take detailed notes, like:
· Name of person you spoke with.
· Their job title or position at the insurance company.
· Accident details you provided.
· What they said to you.

Keeping track of expenses and lost income related to your claim
· Missed time from work.
· Property damage to vehicle or contents
· Cost of alternative transportation
· Medical Bills
· Mileage to doctor and therapy appointments
· Services performed by family members or others on your behalf.

Contacting an Attorney
While it is possible to negotiate and settle your personal injury claim without involving an attorney, it is dangerous to do so. Remember that insurance companies are trying to offer you the very least amount of compensation they can get away with. Even if you are facing financial difficulties resulting from your car accident and feel pressured to accept a premature, inadequate settlement, do not sign any releases or waivers without first talking to an experience personal injury attorney.

NHTSA Proposes New Rule Tackling Keyless Ignition Dangers

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 13:15:28 -0700

Under a rule proposed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, vehicles with keyless ignition systems would either automatically put the autos in park or notify drivers when the vehicle has been left unattended. The proposed rule comes in the wake of the injuries and deaths that have arisen when people have exited their autos without realizing they've forgotten to shut off the engine.

Keyless ignition systems usually come with a device, such as a fob, that when in the vehicle can allow the driver to start the auto with the mere turn of the switch or the push of a button. However, this has led to some serious incidents and injuries. For example, one of the complaints the NHTSA has received is from a driver claiming to have been dragged through a parking lot after the car started rolling off on its own. The vehicle stopped on the driver's foot. There have also been reported incidents of people dying from carbon monoxide poisoning because a vehicle was left running in an attached garage. Toyota has already been sued for auto products liability by plaintiffs blaming the vehicle's keyless ignition feature for personal injury or wrongful death.

One woman, Mary Rivera, now suffers from permanent brain damage because she left her Lexus's engine running in the attached garage of her residence on February 27, 2009. Her partner Ernest Codelia, who was with her, died from his carbon monoxide poisoning-related injuries.

In their New York auto products liability lawsuit, Codelia's family blamed the Lexus's keyless ignition system for not coming with a shutdown switch that would automatically have activated when the vehicle was left unoccupied and/or unmoving with the engine still running for an extended period of time. They also contended that the keyless ignition system is in violation of federal safety standards because the vehicle can keep running even if the key fob is in someone's pocket, making the risk of accidentally leaving the vehicle on while unattended even higher.

Our auto products liability lawyers represent clients injured because of vehicle defects and malfunctions. Even if a vehicle part or feature works as intended, if it proves to be too dangerous, this can be grounds for an auto defect lawsuit.

NHTSA is proposing standardizing keyless ignition systems that would automatically shut off the vehicles after the power button is held for just half a second. The federal safety agency is also calling for a loud warning sound to go off if a motorist exits the vehicle without placing it in park mode. The sound would continue until the driver makes the necessary adjustment. If the driver were to get out with the key fob without shutting down the car, a warning sound would go off.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; 49 CFR Part 571, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention; Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0174, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, March 5, 2012

Proposed Rulemaking; 49 CFR Part 571, Law.Cornell.Edu

Toyota sued in carbon monoxide tragedy that killed 79-year-old lawyer, New York Daily News, November 10, 2012

More Blog Posts:
Toyota Auto Products Liability Lawsuit Claims Keyless Lexus Caused Carbon Monoxide Death and Brain Injury, Product Liability Law Blog, November 16, 2010

Illinois Auto Defect Lawsuit Blames Ford For Truck Fire That Burned House Down, Product Liability Law Blog, September 21, 2011

New York Tire Blowout: 2 Killed in Tour Bus Crash Carrying Indian Tourists, Product Liability Law Blog, July 27, 2011

Portland, Oregon Child Injury: 3-Year-Old Undergoes Surgery After Swallowing 37 Buckyball Earth Magnets

Fri, 16 Mar 2012 18:25:14 -0700

A toddler is recovering after undergoing surgery to remove 37 Buckyball earth magnets that she had swallowed. The small pieces came together inside her stomach to form the shape of a large circle.

Payton Bushnell was rushed to the hospital after she fell ill. Her family thought she was suffering form the stomach flu. Instead, what happened was that the magnetic balls pulled the little girl's intestines together and tore holes in her stomach and intestine. Following the incident, Buckyballs, put out a notice reminding parents that its products are for adult use only.

While Bushnell is fortunate in that she is expected to recover, the Portland, Oregon child injury accident highlights the dangers involved with small magnets and the risk they pose to young children, who are prone to putting small objects in the mouth. The Consumer Product Safety Commission has warned that a child that swallows at least two magnets is at risk of fatal injury. Even when inside the body, magnets continue to be drawn toward each other. They can create holes in the stomach, block or twist up the intestines, or cause sepsis and/or death. Sometimes, surgeons may be forced to remove parts of the intestines in order to get all the magnets out and repair the damage.

A parent may not even realize that a child has swallowed a small magnet--especially if the boy or girl is too young to speak or explain what happened. Nausea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, and vomiting are some of the symptoms indicating that your child may have swallowed a magnet. (Even older kids have been known to accidentally ingest magnets. They might try to use the magnet as a pretend nose ring or tongue ring. They, too, place themselves at risk of similar injuries as their younger counterparts.)

Product manufacturers whose products include small magnets are supposed to make sure that they include a warning of potential injuries. If the product is for kids, then they need to make sure the magnetic parts are not small enough to swallow or cannot be easily removed.

If it becomes apparent that a product becomes an injury hazard even when designed and used as intended, then this could mean that the product is a dangerous one and unsafe for use. Our Portland, Oregon products liability lawyers represent families whose children were injured or died because of product defects. The Gilbert Law Group also has child injury lawyers who represent clients throughout the US.

It is not that difficult for a child to get a hold of the magnets, especially if one were to separate from the rest of the product and land on the ground where it would within easy reach. A parent may not even know that the part has gone missing. Last November, the CPSC reported that the danger posed by small magnets continues to be a growing problem.

Portland, Ore., 3-Year-old Ingests 37 Magnets, ABC News, March , 2012

High-Powered Magnets + Swallowing by Kids = Deadly, CPSC, November 10, 2011

Buckyballs

More Blog Posts:
Swallowing High-Powered Magnets Can Be Deadly for Kids, Warns CPSC, Product Liability Law Blog, November 6, 2011

Latest Magnetic Building Kit Recall Is A Reminder That Swallowing Magnets Can Cause Serious Injuries, Product Liability Law Blog, January 29, 2008

MEGA Brands and Battat Recall 2.4 Million China-Made Toys with Magnets, Product Liability Law Blog, March 17, 2008

Toyota and Chrysler Announce Large Auto Recalls

Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:56:17 -0700

Just when Toyota had almost stopped making headlines after a few years of nonstop exposure due to claims blaming sudden unintended acceleration accidents involving its vehicles for injuries and deaths and the recalls of millions of vehicles, the automaker recently found itself among the day's top stories once again. CNN recently revealed that it had seen a "confidential" document from 2006 noting that Toyota engineers noticed an electronic software issue in one of its test vehicles that caused the vehicle to accelerate suddenly and unintentionally. Toyota, which is defending itself in scores of auto products liability lawsuits and wrongful death claims, denied that the document is evidence of such a safety issue.

Also, last week, the automaker announced another recall. The vehicles included this time are about 682,000 Venza, Camry, and Tacoma vehicles There are a number of Venza ('09 - '11 models) and Camry ('09 models) vehicles that may have gotten silicon grease into the stop-lamp switch while they were at the factory. Toyota says this could lead to greater electrical resistance that may activate warning lights on the engine, stop the transmission from being able to shift out of park, prevent the engine from starting, or keep the stop lights from working. A number of Tacoma trucks ('05 - early '09 models) are part of the recall because unless their steering wheel spiral cable assembly is replaced, an airbag could become disabled if the cable rubs against the retainer.

Also announcing a big recall is Chrysler. Nearly 210,000 Jeep Liberty SUV's ('04-05 models) are involved over concerns that rust might cause a rear suspension part to break. The car manufacturer knows of 83 reports of such failures but is not aware of any related car crashes at this time. This recall, however, is not national and it is taking place in just 20 states. (According to the New York Times, consumer advocates typically are not fans of what is known as a regional recall because the owners of autos are known to move to another region, which means the driver of a vehicle involved might not know about the recall or able to avail of a free safety repair.)

One other automaker that may have to announce its own recall is Ford Motor Corp. According to the NHTSA, the traffic safety agency has received 14 complaints from motorists who claim they have a hard time getting their auto to stop when after the throttles got stuck in the open position the vehicle accelerated.

Investigators are examining the cruise control cables that allegedly came off in some Ford Tauruses ('05 and '06 models). Some of the drivers have said that in order to get the autos to stop, they not only had to step on the breaks but also the vehicle's gear had to be shifted into neutral or stop. (In certain incidents, after the vehicle was placed in neutral or stop its engine revved to up to 4,000 revolutions a minute. Some 360, 000 Ford vehicles may be involved. NHTSA says it will decide whether a recall is necessary after it finishes its probe.

Chrysler Recalls 210,000 Jeep Liberty S.U.V.'s for Rust-Prone Suspension, The New York Times, March 7, 2012

Toyota Recall: How A Hiccup Became A Big Headache, Forbes, March 8, 2012

U.S. investigates Ford Tauruses for stuck throttles, CNN, March 12, 2012

More Blog Posts:
12-Year-Old Awarded $12 Million Tire Defect Verdict Against Michelin, Product Liability Law Blog, September 29, 2009

Recently Recalled Honda Civic Blamed in Georgia Air Bag Defect Lawsuit, Product Liability Law Blog, December 31, 2011

Honda, Ford, Chrysler, Volvo, Nissan and Toyota Announce Auto Recalls, Product Liability Law Blog, August 8, 2011

Odyssey HealthCare Settles for $25M Whistleblower Lawsuit Over Medicare Billing Fraud Allegations

Tue, 06 Mar 2012 17:42:21 -0700

Gentiva subsidiary Odyssey HealthCare will pay $25 million to settle a whistleblower lawsuit filed by one of its former nurses. The plaintiffs accused the hospice care company of enrolling patients that hadn't received terminal diagnoses of six months or less to live to receive round-the-clock care.

In the Qui Tam complaint, Odyssey is accused of engaging in Medicare billing fraud between 2006 and 2009. One of the plaintiffs, registered nurse Jane Tuchalski, also filed a separate claim contending that she was fired because she complained about the company's practices. That, too, has also been settled.

Gentiva Healthcare, also a hospice care provider, bought Odyssey in 2010. Under Medicare's hospice benefits, only patients who are expected to die within a certain period of time are covered to receive 24-hour in-home nursing service. Continuous care is for patients undergoing an acute crisis with symptoms that can only be controlled with expert nursing care. The terminal diagnosis must be for no more than six months. The reimbursement rate for these types of services is the highest rate that a hospice can receive (up to several hundred dollars more a day than what is reimbursed for routine care).

Because more than whistleblower lawsuit was submitted against Odyssey for the alleged improper billing of continuous care services, all of the plaintiffs, who are former Odyssey employees are entitled to a percentage of the $25 million settlement. This means they will share about $4.6 million.

When Medicare billing fraud happens, it is the taxpayers who pay. Examples of this type of fraud include billing for medical services and goods that were never provided, as well as procedures and tests that were not required, double billing, up-coding, unbundling, and medical equipment fraud.

In order to combat Medicare fraud and other types of fraud against the US and the states, the Federal False Claims Act lets citizens act as whistleblowers to expose fraudulent behavior. Our whistleblower attorneys at The Gilbert Law Group know how intimidating it can be to out against your employer or another institution. However, by doing so you may be doing a great service. You also may be entitled to a portion of the settlement government obtains.

Also, you should know that if you are blowing the whistle on the company that you work for, the False Claims Act protects you from retaliation. In the event that action was taken against you because you exposed your employer, you are entitled to get back double the wages you lost from when you were let go or placed on leave.

Whistle-blower case on hospice fraud settled for $25 million, JS Online, March 1, 2012

Hospice Provider Odyssey Healthcare Agrees to Pay $25 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations, Justice.gov, March 1, 2012

More Blog Posts:
Whistleblower Cases Result In Record $2.8B Recovery During Fiscal Year 2011, Product Liability Law Blog, December 23, 2011

Roche Settles Whistleblower Lawsuit for $20M, Product Liability Law Blog, December 19, 2011

Secret Whistleblower Played Key Role in Bank of New York Mellon Investigation, Product Liability Law Blog, October 31, 2011