Lawsuit Information Center

July 20, 2015

What Are Special Damages? | Learning About Lawsuits

The American civil justice system allows for one type of recovery in personal injury cases: damages. Damages, or compensation, can manifest themselves in a few different forms in personal injury cases. People tend to throw around terms such as “general damages,” “special damages,” “non-economic,” and “economic” damages, so this post should help you differentiate between these various types of damage awards.

What Are Special Damages?

What is so special about special damages? Well, not much other than the fact that they can be readily quantified. Whenever a car accident or other type of personal injury accident occurs, the injured person will incur expenses associated with the accident. These are hard numbers that can be measured.

February 24, 2014

Uterine Rupture Malpractice Lawsuits | What You Need to Know

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

A doctor’s failure to properly handle uterine rupture symptoms during childbirth can lead to the death of the child, and injury or death to the mother. This article discusses these cases and addresses:

The acts of a physician that lead to vaginal rupture cases.
The types of accidents that lead to large settlements and verdicts.

October 11, 2013

Gynecomastia from Risperdal Claims

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Risperdal lawsuits have have mostly been resolved as of 2024 after a global settlement was reached. We have updated this post in 2024 to talk about the Risperdal settlements and are leaving the rest of this post up for informational purposes. Our lawyers are no longer seeking new claims.

2024 Risperdal Litigation Update

The lawsuits were primarily based on allegations that Risperdal, an antipsychotic medication, led to the development of gynecomastia in boys and young men, a condition characterized by the growth of breast tissue.

August 15, 2013

Boston Scientific Vaginal Mesh Cases

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The vaginal mesh cases are heating up everywhere as plaintiffs’ lawyers, who frankly smell blood, are pushing with greater vigor to get and hold trial dates. Multi-million dollar verdicts will do that.

In the Boston Scientific transvaginal mesh cases, lawyers are pushing fast to get a trial date and are expected to get one soon. How do you define “soon” in tort law? Early next year.

All these federal cases have been consolidated in an MDL under a good judge in West Virginia. The class action lawsuit against Boston Scientific contents the mesh that was supposed to protect them from pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence has done nothing but make their health problems far worse.

April 10, 2013

Cook Medical Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Vaginal prolapse is incredibly common, with approximately 30-50% of women having some sort of prolapse during their lives. Our lawyers are investigating vaginal mesh lawsuits involving Cook Medical, in addition to other manufacturers of vaginal mesh systems.

Cook Medical Transvaginal Mesh Cases

Cook Medical held its products out as breakthrough technology

Pelvic organ prolapse is a condition in which structures such as the uterus, rectum, bladder, urethra, small bowel, or the vagina itself may begin to fall or “prolapse” out of their normal positions. These structures may eventually prolapse farther and farther into the vagina, or even through the vaginal opening, without medical treatment or surgery. Enter synthetic mesh devices. No doubt a great idea.

According to the FDA, between January 2008 and December 2010, there were nearly 3,000 adverse event reports involving transvaginal mesh devices. Side effects reported with vaginal mesh can include:

Infections
Internal bleeding
Vaginal scar tissue
Vaginal wall narrowing
Painful urination
Fistulas
Mesh shrinkage
Mesh migration
Urinary problems
Punctures to the bladder, blood vessels, bowels, or other organs in the lower abdomen
Mesh erosion into the vagina, bladder, intestines, and uterus
Pain
Painful sexual intercourse for both partners
Recurrence of incontinence
Recurrence of both pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence, or both

Cook Medical held its product out as breakthrough technology, resistant to infection, and “unlike synthetic mesh, nothing is left permanently in the body to cause problems down the road.” On the contrary, Cook Medical transvaginal mesh products have had more than their fair share of problems. (In fairness, they have all put out awful products. Cook Medical is no exception.).

March 12, 2012

Biblical References at Trial

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The Court of Appeals of Georgia, Georgia’s intermediate appellate court, wrote about a topic I touched on two years ago. In an extremely short opinion, this Georgia court was faced with the question of how far lawyers can go in referencing biblical passages in the Bible or other religious texts.

Powell v. State

The Defendant in Powell v. State appealed his conviction for aggravated assault.The evidence presented at trial showed that Powell was present during a fight between the victim and Powell’s brother-in-law. Powell had gone to the victim’s house to confront the victim’s wife about alleged theft from his sister. After the altercation ended, Powell shot the victim in the shoulder.

January 16, 2012

Smith & Nephew Knee Replacement Defect Lawsuits

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Smith & Nephew knee replacements are failing at an unacceptable rate

Our lawyers are investigating knee replacement lawsuits against Smith & Nephew.

These knee replacements have been on the market for some time. The reason for the lawsuits is simply: the Smith & Nephew knee replacements are simply failing at an unacceptable rate. These were supposed to be knee replacements that would last for 10 to 20 years. Patients who have these devices implanted may be entitled to revision surgery, medical expenses, lost wages and pain and suffering damages.

October 24, 2011

New Medicare Rule

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Medicare continues to make efforts to try, post Haro v. Sebelius, to make for an easier solution for dealing with Medicare liens. The latest? In very small cases, they are more likely to be handled by injury victims themselves as opposed to personal injury lawyers, Medicare will offer a 25% gross payment alternative to dealing with Medicare on a lien.

It is certainly not the deal of a lifetime by any stretch. More importantly, it is only for cases that do not exceed $5,000. But the option applies in:

Cases after November 7, 2011
Involve physical injury
$5,000 or less
The option is selected in a to-be-determined time frame
Medicare has yet to make a final demand
The beneficiary does not expect to receive future third party injury payments

If these conditions are satisfied, a beneficiary will resolve and satisfy Medicare’s lien by paying Medicare 25% of the insurance settlement. While the primary application will now, more than likely, be small soft tissue car accident claims, a successful run might lead to larger scale implementation down the road.

—–

October 4, 2011

Multiple Bone Fractures

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Stating the obvious, multiple fracture personal injury claims tend to be serious cases. Jury Verdict Research did a study looking at multiple fracture cases

Premises Liability: 17%
Pedestrian Accidents: 15%

June 8, 2011

Haro v. Sebelius: Medicare Liens

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

I’ve written a lot about how personal injury lawyers have to and should deal with medical and other liens. When I go back and look at the web traffic generated by these posts, it typically gets low page views, probably from the same 20 lawyers that read all of our nitty-gritty details on handling personal injury cases stuff.

Not so with Haro v. Sebelius, a new opinion from Arizona that may dramatically alter the relationship between Medicare (and Medicaid, but I lump Medicaid into Medicare for grammatical ease). I think the big difference in the impact of Haro v. Sebelius is something car accident and medical malpractice lawyers are feeling right now.

Here’s the deal in a nutshell. Haro v. Sebelius is a lawsuit filed by two Medicare beneficiaries for whom Medicare benefits were paid for treatment that was ostensibly needed as the result of a car accident. Interestingly, the car accident lawyer in this underlying case is also a named plaintiff.