Lawsuit Information Center Blog

December 17, 2020

$2 Billion Verdict in Missouri Motivates J&J to Settle Talcum Powder Lawsuits

The talcum powder lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson have been going on for years. The lawsuits allege that prolonged use of talcum powder (or “talc”), which is the active ingredient in products such as Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, can cause ovarian cancer in some women. Since the first studies linking talcum powder to cancer were made public, thousands of product liability lawsuits have been filed against J&J. The talcum powder lawsuits in federal courts have been consolidated into a class action MDL.

The latest big news is the announcement that J&J was paying $100 million to settle a large group of over 1,000 talcum powder cases in the MDL. This announcement marked a dramatic shift in J&J’s position on talcum powder claims. J&J had steadfastly refused to admit that there was anything wrong with talcum powder and the company had aggressively defended all claims.

So what prompted this change of heart? One of the primary motivating factors for J&J was a $2 billion dollar verdict awarded over the summer to 22 women in a Missouri talcum powder lawsuit. That is the kind of thing that wakes up a Fortune 500 giant like Johnson & Johnson.

December 11, 2020

Baseball-related Verdicts and Settlements

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Years, ago, I wrote a blog about a frivolous Little League baseball lawsuit. Going through that old post in 2020, I realized no one really cared seven years later. (in fact, I started to post the old post at the end of the piece but decided it was truly worthless.

But settlement and verdicts in baseball-related personal injury lawsuits does seem of interest to many of us who spend our winters indoors playing baseball and out spring, summer, and fall out on the baseball field.

Baseball-Related Verdicts and Settlements

December 11, 2020

Zantac Class Action in Federal Court – Where Are We Now?

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The last 2 years have been pretty bad for the popular heartburn drug Zantac after testing revealed that it contained significantly high levels of the carcinogen N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA). This led to Zantac being pulled off the shelves of major retailers and eventually a nationwide FDA recall.

Hundreds of individuals have now filed lawsuits against Zantac’s manufacturers. The suits alleged that taking Zantac caused the plaintiffs to develop certain types of cancer. Hundreds more Zantac cancer lawsuits are expected to be filed.

The source of all the trouble is NDMA which was in Zantac. NDMA a cancerous poison metabolizes into carcinogens like formaldehyde.

December 6, 2020

Liver-Related Malpractice Lawsuits

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

A number of cancers arise in the liver or biliary system. Unlike many cancers, liver cancer (and liver disease) appear to be on the rise. From 1999 to 2016, annual deaths from liver cancer doubled to 11,073. Liver cancer is now the fastest increasing cause of cancer death in the United States.

Why? it is a good question. The tragedy is that liver cancer is often preventable. Approximately 71 percent of liver cancer diagnoses in the U.S. can be attributable to preventable risk factors. Some of these deaths are also caused by malpractice. You need to diagnose and treat liver cancer quickly to have the best chance of curing it.

Liver Cancer Examples

November 25, 2020

Paragard and the History of IUDs and Product Liability in the U.S.

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Yesterday, I wrote about the rising Paragard litigation and the possibility of a class-action lawsuit. Today, I’m writing about the history of IUDs for birth control.

The Paragard IUD is the most recent intrauterine contraceptive device to find itself embattled in a wave of product liability lawsuits in the U.S. Like so many of its predecessors in the IUD market, the Paragard turned out to have a hidden defect that caused serious health problems in many users.

The recently discovered issue with the Paragard is that the device frequently breaks apart when doctors attempt to remove it, causing fractured shards of plastic to poke around inside the uterus. This defect has already prompted a wave of Paragard IUD lawsuits around the country.

November 20, 2020

Beovu Vision Loss Class Action Lawsuit Possible

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Recent studies and reports have found an association between Beovu and retinal vasculitis with vision loss. This comes only months after it received FDA approval.

What Is Beovu?

Brolucizumab-dbll, known by the brand name Beovu, is a vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor. It is intended to treat wet AMD (age-related macular degeneration). Beovu is manufactured by the Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis. It is administered via intravitreal injection. Beovu comes in a 6mg single-use vial. The recommended dose is a monthly injection for the first three months. This is followed by an injection every 8-12 weeks. The FDA approved Beovu in October 2019.

What Are Beovu’s Common Side Effects?

November 18, 2020

Elmiron Eye Class Action Lawsuit Settlements

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Elmiron is the brand name of a popular prescription drug manufactured by Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Millions of people take Elmiron every day to treat chronic bladder conditions. Last year, however, a research study confirmed that prolonged use of Elmiron can cause serious damage to the retinas in the eyes. Studies have conclusively established that extended use of Elmiron at high doses has caused permanent blindness and impaired vision.

After the release of these findings linking Elmiron to eye damage, a steady stream of dangerous drug lawsuits has been filed against Janssen alleging vision loss or damage caused by Elmiron. To date, just over 100 individual Elmiron lawsuits have been filed in federal courts around the country. More have been filed in state courts.

Elmiron MDL Class Action Pending

November 9, 2020

California Man Gets $9 Million for Unauthorized Penis Surgery

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

If you are having a hard time contemplating how “unauthorized penis surgery” can happen, you are not alone. I had the same reaction when I first saw the headline about this case. But as explained below, unauthorized penis surgery is something that actually happened to a man in California and he got a malpractice award of $9 million.

Before getting into the details of the case, it is worth noting here that California caps damages for pain & suffering in malpractice cases at $250,000. This is one of the strictest caps on damages in the entire country, but it didn’t prevent the plaintiff in this case from getting a big award for what happened to this penis.

This post is about this case but also provides settlement and verdicts in penis injury medical malpractice cases.

October 27, 2020

Window Tint Laws in Maryland and D.C.

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Window tints laws require a significant amount of light to be transmitted in car windows. Once pulled over, a police officer may check to see if your car’s window tints are legal or not. You may ask yourself how police officers can do that. In addition to knowing how to check for too much tint, you must know the window tint laws in both Maryland and D.C.

How do the police determine if a window has too much tint?

The only way to determine if there is an actual violation of the statute is for the officer, after stopping the vehicle, to conduct a test utilizing a “two-piece window tint meter.” When observing a vehicle without the benefit of such a device there is no definitive way to determine if the window tint on a car is in violation of the statute other than by eyeballing it.

What is the legal tint in Maryland?

In Maryland, legal tint varies by vehicle. All windows in passenger cars, convertibles, and station wagons are required to have at least 35% light transmittance. These cars are also not allowed to have red, yellow, amber, and reflective window tint.

October 9, 2020

Whistleblower Lawsuits for Unnecessary Hospitalizations (Winter v. Gardens Regional)

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Earlier this year in Winter v. Gardens Regional Hospital, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals revived a False Claims Act case filed by the Director of Care Management in a California hospital that claimed nearly $1.3 in Medicare claims that sought reimbursement for inpatient hospitalizations that were not medically necessary.

The U.S. District Court of Utah dismissed the case, without leave to amend, for failing to state a claim under the FCA. Specifically, the court believed that the qui tam plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a cause of action under the FCA because the allegations as a matter of law were “subjective medical opinions” that demonstrated a mere “difference of opinion” as to the medical necessity of inpatient hospital admissions.

Facts of Winter v. Gardens Regional Hospital