Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog

A California woman has sued Honda alleging Honda exaggerated the miles per gallon she could expect. A small claims judge agreed with her.

After purchasing a 2006 Honda Civic Hybrid, the Plaintiff expected that her vehicle would get the 50 miles per gallon that it advertised. Instead, it was only getting around 30, and never got more than 42 (personally, I’d be thrilled if my car got 30 miles per gallon, let alone 42). So she sued, asking that Honda pay for her trouble and the extra money that she spent on gas.

The judge ruled that Honda misled her when it claimed that its Civic hybrid could drive up to 50 miles on a gallon of gas, and awarded her more than $9,800 in damages.

Interestingly enough, instead of joining other Honda owners in a class-action lawsuit, she filed in small claims court (she’s a former lawyer, no surprise there). She said that a small claims suit could cost the company up to $10,000 in her case, and with 200,000 of these cars out there, if every other individual owner filed in the same manner, “That's a potential payout of $2 billion." She said that she doubts that all other owners will take the same route, but suggests that the penalty could be substantial for the company if a large percentage of the owners file individually.

As you might expect, Honda plans to appeal the decision. Ultimately, I think this is a good lawsuit because it keeps car manufacturers honest. But I don't particularly like these cases, particularly filed as individual cases just because they clog up our court system with relatively insignificant damages without physical injury. If you think Honda is not playing straight with its MPG estimate, buy a Ford.

More than five years after the gory photographs of a teenage girl killed in a horrific automobile accident were released on the internet, her family's lawsuit has come to an end. The deceased girl's family filed suit against the California Highway Patrol (CHP) for broadcasting graphic photographs of the dead girl's body over the internet, photographs which can still be found today.

The tragic story begins with the teen having driven her father's Porsche without his permission, and ends in a senseless accident with her body being maimed and nearly decapitated. After reaching speeds of more than 100 mph, the teen clipped another vehicle, swerved, and struck a toll booth. She was so badly disfigured that her family was not permitted to view her body. Sadly, they would be given the chance thanks to two CHP dispatchers who took it upon themselves to leak the photographs. The photographs, never intend for public viewing, appeared on thousands of websites. Unbelievably, many websites mocked the girl as a spoiled rich girl, who got what she deserved. She was nicknamed "Porsche Girl." The family even received anonymous taunting messages.

The family filed suit claiming an invasion of privacy. A Superior Court judge initially threw out the family’s lawsuit, concluding that the agency had not breached any legal duty to the family, as the law did not recognize the right of family members to sue for invasion of privacy involving photos of the dead at the time. But that changed in 2010 when the state's 4th District Court of Appeal reversed the decision. For the first time in California, the court established that surviving family members have a right to sue for invasion of privacy in such cases.

The family is still desperate to have the photos removed from the internet. As part of the settlement, CHP has agreed to help fight to remove the photos, experts say they will never be removed. A simple search of the family's last name brings up links to the photos.

All the way around, it is just an awful situation.

Tragically, hours after having purchased alcohol at a local market, a teenage girl was killed in an alcohol related crash. The driver, also a teen, was arrested for allegedly driving under the influence of alcohol.

Also under arrest? Two adults...and they are facing possible criminal charges of furnishing alcohol to a minor. The first is the clerk of the local market who sold alcohol to the teenager. The second is the mother of a friend of the deceased, who accompanied the teen into the market when she purchased the alcohol.

In this area of the state, a program known as TRACE (Target Responsibility for Alcohol Connected Emergencies) has conducted hundreds of alcohol investigations during the past eight years. It is that type of investigation that lead to the determination that these two supplied alcohol to the girl. What were these people thinking? Do they not know about the program? Do they think this was going to be swept under the rug? A young girl has died for goodness sake. How tragic.

My thoughts on the dram shop laws are here.

Another day another Medicaid fraud settlement. In this one, Shield Healthcare, a California medical supplier, paid $5 million to settle a whistle-blower lawsuit that alleged that Shield submitting inflated bills to California's Medicaid program. The suit claimed that the company submitted false claims and evaded the regulation’s upper billing limit. (I'd be curious how they did that. You have to admire the scope of the evil).

In a related story, California is going bankrupt.

Ocean Spray has announced that it is expanded the recall of certain production lots of its Original Flavor Craisins, Dried Cranberries product in 5-ounce, 10-ounce and 48-ounce packages, and bulk sweetened dried cranberries in 10-pound packages. The recall was made after it was determined that there may be the possible presence of very small hair-like metal fragments, though they are saying that it is unlikely to cause consumer injury.

The additional five recalled lots were only shipped to retailers in the following eight western U.S. states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington. The current affected lots are as follows:

• 5 oz Craisins: UPC: 00293-000
Best By Dates (ONLY THESE DATES FOLLOWED BY THE LETTER “M” ARE AFFECTED): Oct 27 2012 M and Oct 28 2012 M
• 10 oz Craisins: UPC: 29456-000 and 29464-000
Best By Dates (ONLY THESE DATES FOLLOWED BY THE LETTER “M” ARE AFFECTED): Oct 27 2012 M; Oct 28 2012 M; Oct 29 2012 M; Oct 30, 2012 M
• 48 oz Craisins UPC: 00678-318
Best By Dates (ONLY THESE DATES FOLLOWED BY THE LETTER “M” ARE AFFECTED): Oct 27 2012 M; Oct 28 2012 M ; Oct 29 2012; Nov 3 2012 M; Nov 4 2012 M; Nov 5 2012 M; Nov 6 2012 M; Nov 7 2012 M; Nov 8 2012 M; Nov 10 2012 M; Nov 11 2012 M; Nov 12 2012 M
• 10 lb bulk ingredient & foodservice: UPC: 03477-000
Best By Dates (ONLY THESE DATES FOLLOWED BY THE LETTER “M” ARE AFFECTED): 30 Oct 2013 M; 31 Oct 2013 M; 1 Nov 2013 M; 5 Nov 2013 M

No illnesses or adverse effects have been reported regarding these products, and the company has received no customer complaints.

• Ocean Spray Recalls Craisins

Mars Food has recalled two date codes of Uncles Ben's Whole Grain White Rice Garden Vegetable, due to an undeclared milk allergen. People who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to milk run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products.

The recall, affecting ONLY the Whole Grain White Rice Garden Vegetable, affects the 4.7 oz. (133 g) boxes with the following:

• UPC code of 54800 40778
• Best before: 08/12
• Code dates: 133BA4RP06 and 133BB4RP06

An ingredient supplier improperly included an undeclared milk ingredient in the seasoning mix used for this product. As such, consumers with milk allergies are advised not to eat the product, and consumers should return the product to the store where it was purchased for a full refund.

This product was distributed through retail stores in Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont and Wisconsin.

Mars Food US has not received any reports of illness or other consumer complaints related to this matter. No other flavors of Uncle Ben's Whole Grain White Rice or any other Uncle Ben's products are affected.

Nygala will recall approximately 10,000 Halloween Projection Flashlights, as the flashlights can overhead, blister and melt, posing a fire and burn hazard to consumers. Better late than never. I guess.

These Chinese made flashlights are black and orange plastic, and the flashlight is 6 ½ inches long with pumpkins, bats, witches, haunted houses and cats on the handle. The flashlights came with six different plastic lenses that attach to the flashlight to project various images, including a pumpkin, bat, witch, haunted house and cat. The flashlights packaging is imprinted with “Flomo,” “HW189” and UPC 677916518266 on the packaging.

The recalled Halloween flashlights were sold at discount stores in California, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas and Utah from August 2010 through October 2011 for about $1.

The firm has received one reported incident involving a flashlight that overheated, blistered and melted.

Ready Pac Foods is recalling a total of 5,379 cases of bagged salad products containing Romaine lettuce, as it has been determined that they may be contaminated with E. coli (E.coli O157:H7).

All bags are marked with the "Best if Used By" date of November 18. The following items have been recalled:

• 10oz. Ready Pac Caesar Romaine 0-77745-00202-6
• 9.25oz Ready Pac Santa Fe Caesar Complete Salad 0-77745-21404-7
• 10oz. Ready Pac Classic Caesar Complete Salad 0-77745-20566-3
• 10oz. Ready Pac Bella Romaine 0-77745-21407-8
• 10oz. Dining In Classic Caesar Salad Kit 0-11225-02530-3
• 10oz. Raley’s Caesar Romaine 0-46567-71642-8
• 10oz. Trader Joe’s Romaine Salad 0013-2145
• 16oz. Trader Joe’s Very American Salad 0020-7225
• 10oz. Safeway Farms Caesar Romaine 0-21130-98350-6
• 9oz. Safeway Farms Hearts of Romaine 0-21130-98358-2
• 10oz. Safeway Farms Complete Caesar Supreme 0-21130-33677-7
• 10.25oz Safeway Farms Complete Southwestern Ranch 0-21130-33679-1

The recall extends only to the listed products with this Use-by Date and sold in the following states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming. No other Ready Pac Foods, Inc. products are included in the recall.

United Natural Foods (UNFI) is recalling selected types of FoodMatch, Inc. Divina Stuffed Olives, as they have the potential to be contaminated with Clostridium botulinum, a bacterium which can cause life-threatening illness or death. These items have been recalled due to a lack of temperature control during the distribution process. UNFI inadvertently subjected the recall items to temperature ranges above those directed by the manufacturer.

The following products have been recalled:

• DIVINA 4 OZ OLIVES,FETA CHEESE STUFFED (blue and yellow label) UPC 63172352780
• DIVINA 4 OZ OLIVES,BLUE CHEESE STUFFED (blue label) UPC 63172352790

Divina Olives Stuffed with Feta Cheese were distributed to the Safeway stores identified below:

• #0583 1606 N Ave, Spearfish, South Dakota
• #1577 6520 S Academy Road, Colorado Springs, Colorado
• # 1615 3325 28th Street, Boulder, Colorado
• # 1644 7655 Mclaughlin Rd, Falcon, Colorado
• # 2761 1165 Main St, Lander, Wyoming
• # 2792 27152 Main St, Conifer, Colorado
• # 2910 1632 Hover Road, Longmont, Colorado
• # 0853 7625 Old Georgetown Road, Bethesda, Maryland
• # 0942 12 West Washington St, Middleburg, Virginia
• # 1283 8646 Richmond Highway, Alexandria, Virginia
• # 1606 9596 Old Keene Mill Rd, Burke, Virginia
• # 1668 5510 Norbeck Road, Rockville, Maryland
• # 1956 14939 Shady Grove Road, Rockville, Maryland
• # 2650 43150 Broadlands Plaza, Ashburn, Virginia
• # 4002 5727 Burke Center, Burke, Virginia
• # 4205 415 14th Street SE, Washington, D.C.

Date codes Best Used By: 11 JAN 2012 and Best Used By: 1 FEB 2012 sold at other retail outlets have not been affected because the products were not exposed to a lack of refrigeration controls.

Divina Olives Stuffed with Blue Cheese were distributed to the following states: Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona, Nevada, South Dakota, Colorado, Wyoming, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Washington DC through the following retail stores:

• Genuardis
• Carrs
• Safeway
• Pavilion
• Vons

Best Used By: 11 JAN 2012, Best Used By: 15 DEC 2011, Best Used By: 30 DEC 2011, Best Used By: 1 FEB 2012

These date codes sold at other retail outlets have not been affected because the products were not exposed to a lack of refrigeration controls.

No illnesses have been reported to date.

• Recall on Stuffed Bio Gaudiano Brand Organic Olives

Rice-A-Roni, the San Franscisco Treat....well, not for those with milk allergies anyway! Rice-A-Roni has recalled a small quantity of Rice-A-Roni Rice, Pilaf flavor, due to an undeclared milk allergen.

The affected Rice-A-Roni is limited to the 10.8 ounce family-size boxes, with the UPC Bar Code ending in 43004 and are stamped as Best Before Date of JUL 30 12 B on the bottom of the box. This product was originally distributed to stores in California and Arizona.

People who are allergic to milk run the risk of a serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume this product, and as such, should return it to the retailer where it was purchased for a full refund.

No other Rice-A-Roni or Pasta Roni products are affected. People who do not have milk allergies can eat this product without concern.

Foremost Foods, International has issued a recall on certain Pangasinan brand smoked seafood products, as they have the potential to be contaminated with Clostridium botulinum ("Botulism"), a bacterium which can cause life-threatening illness or death. The products were manufactured by FITRITE Incorporated of the Philippines.

Botulism is as bad as its name. It is a potentially fatal form of food poisoning. Botulism can cause many different symptoms, including general weakness, dizziness, double-vision and trouble with speaking or swallowing, difficulty in breathing, weakness of other muscles, abdominal distension and/or constipation. People experiencing these problems should seek immediate medical attention.

The affected Pangasinan brand smoked seafood products were distributed in the States of California, Nevada, and Washington through Seafood City and Manila Seafood retail stores. This recall involves products sold between March, 2010 and October, 2011. The products are sold in a clear vacuum packed plastic package and marked with the specific descriptions:

• UPC Code: 2239257451 PANGASINAN Roundscad Smoked Galunggong 60 6 oz
• UPC Code: 2239257470 PANGASINAN Mackerel Smoked Hasa Hasa 60 6 oz

The recall was initiated after the FDA sampled the product and found it to be partially uneviscerated. Consumers are warned not to use the product even if it does not look or smell spoiled. I think that, ah, anyone that learns of this recall will comply.

This week may prove to be a busy one, with four recalls announced first thing this morning.

The holiday season usually brings tins of butter cookies, but not for Rite Aid. Rite Aid has initiated a voluntary chainwide recall of approximately 85,000 tins of butter cookies, distributed by Rite Aid under the Rich Fields brand name, due to the possibility that they may be contaminated with Bacillus cereus. This microorganism may cause diarrhea, nausea and/or vomiting; however, the possibility of serious adverse health consequences is minimal.

This recall affects only the 12 oz. tins that feature either a decorative castle or Christmas designs, and sold exclusively in Rite Aid stores. Affected butter cookies can be identified by the UPC codes 01249596519 and 88411804619. The recall was initiated after the company conducted quality testing on the affected product because of an uncharacteristic odor. No other Rich Fields or Rite Aid brand products are affected by this voluntary recall.

Second recall for the day is Eating Right's Soy Protein Burgers. The packages inadvertently contain Eating Right™ Veggie Burgers, which contain milk. The label does not list milk as an ingredient. People who have allergies to milk run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reactions and should not eat this product. There is no concern for those who are not allergic to milk.

The Soy Protein Burgers were sold nationwide at:

• Safeway
• Carrs
• Dominick’s
• Genuardi’s
• Pak ‘N’ Save
• Randalls
• Tom Thumb
• Vons
• Pavilions

The retail package is a 4-count, 10-ounce carton marked with a UPC Code of 79893 80071 and one of the following lot codes on the side panel of the package: NOV 17 12 WT A or NOV 12 WT B. This product is located in the freezer case. No other Eating Right products or date codes are involved in this recall. Safeway was notified of the situation by a consumer.

Rhythm Superfoods voluntary recall of KOOL RANCH KALE CHIPS is number three for the day. The recall was initiated after it was discovered that approximately 2,700 cases of the Kool Ranch Kale Chips containing cashews were distributed in packaging that did not reveal the presence of the cashews. Subsequent investigation indicated that the problem was caused by the use of new packaging that failed to declare the cashews.

Continue reading "Monday's Food Recalls...." »

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has announced that Spin Master, Inc. has agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,300,000. The penalty agreement has been accepted provisionally by the Commission (5-0). If you read this blog regularly, you know that a $1.3 million dollar fine from the CPSC is real coin.

This settlement comes after allegations were made that Spin Master knew, but failed to report, a defect and hazard associated with Aqua Dots. It was alleged that Aqua Dots were toxic, and contained a banned hazardous substance. Spin Master failed to report the defect immediately, as required by federal law, despite numerous reports of illnesses. It was only after CPSC received two reports of children who had ingested the product and had fallen into a coma (both later recovered). Two days later, Spin Master and CPSC announced a voluntary recall of approximately 4.2 million units of Aqua Dots. This can fairly be described as pretty awful, right?

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule, regulation, standard, or ban enforced by CPSC.

Aqua Dots was a children's craft kit and toy, that consisted of tiny beads of different colors. When sprayed with water, the dots stuck together, allowing children to create various shapes and designs.

While Spin Master did obtain an outside testing company to evaluate the toxicity of the product, the testing was inadequate. The recall announced that children who swallowed the beads could become comatose, develop respiratory depression, and have seizures.

Staff alleges that the chemical composition of Aqua Dots rendered the product a banned hazardous substance, prohibiting the importation and sale of the product. The Aqua Dots beads contained a chemical that the human body will convert to gamma-hydroxy butyrate (GHB), which is also known as the "date-rape" drug. In agreeing to the settlement, Spin Master denies CPSC staff allegations that it knowingly violated the law.

Aqua Dots craft kits were sold nationwide from April 2007 to November 2007, for between $17 and $30. Target and Toys R Us were both correctly criticized when they advertised a sale on Aqua Dots, even though the recall had been announced. Target stated that the circulars were so far into production that they couldn't impact it when the recall was made. Many felt that stores should have sent the circulars back into production to remove the Aqua Dots from appearing on sale.

What you have, throughout this mess, is companies that put profits over people. Will this fine make a difference? Frankly, I doubt it.

Yamaya is recalling Masago (Capelin Roe), as it may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. The Masago (Capelin Roe) was distributed to retail stores in Los Angeles, California; Baltimore, Maryland; Atlanta, Georgia, and Mexico.

The Masago was packed in a 2 lb plastic container with a white label containing Japanese and English writing, and has “Yamaya USA, Inc.” as the brand. The label indicates Masago (Capelin Roe) and the “Item No. 09867” is printed on the box.

The recall was the result of sampling testing of the facility by the FDA, and it was revealed that this Yamaya sushi contained the bacteria. The company has ceased the production and distribution of the Masago (Capelin Roe).

To date, thankfully, there have been no illnesses reported.

There have been two separate spinach recalls today, due to concerns of Salmonella contamination.

Church Brothers has voluntarily recalled 560 bags of clipped spinach as a precaution, after one bag tested positive for Salmonella during a random sampling. The recalled product was processed on October 6, 2011 and shipped in 2.5 pound, clear bags, to Super King Markets in Los Angeles, California. The bagged spinach affected by this recall was available for sale beginning on October 7, 2011, and is stamped with a “best if used by” date of 10/23/11.

• Best By Date: 10/23/11
• Manufacturer Code10/23/2011 A279 47166

The second spinach recall has been issued by Taylor Farms, for their H-E-B Spinach Spring Mix bagged salad product, as well as deli items that use the spinach.

The affected products are as follows:

• H-E-B Spinach Spring Mix Bagged Salad 0-41220-19752-1 5-oz
• Chicken Ranch Salad 62440
• Small Chicken Ranch Salad, UPC Code: 62441
• Large Garden Salad, UPC Code: 62442
• Small Garden Salad, UPC Code: 62443
• Large Chef Salad, UPC Code: 62444
• Small Chef Salad, UPC Code: 62445
• Large Garden Salad w/Rotisserie Chicken Salad, UPC Code: 62449
• Garden Salad with Roasted Turkey, UPC Code: 62450
• Cobb Salad 6245

Salmonella, as we have written before, is a dangerous organism which can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people and others with weakened immune systems. Symptoms can include fever, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. In rare circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe illnesses such as arterial infections and arthritis.

There have been no reports of illness to date with either manufactures product.

• More Listeria Concerns - This Time It's Spinach
• Lettuce Recalls: More Salmonella
• Salmonella

Last week the lettuce recall was due to Listeria, this week we have moved on to Salmonella concerns.

Taylor Farms Retail Inc. has issued a precautionary recall of 3,265 cases of various salad blends, as a random test of packaged spinach showed the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.

The bagged salad products subject to the recall include:

• Fresh Selections Hearts of Romaine 10 oz. bag 0-11110-91044-8 TFRS277B07OOKR5L Best By 10-18-11
• Fresh Selections Leafy Romaine 10 oz. bag 0-11110-91046-2 TFRS277B07OOKR5H Best By 10-18-11
• Fresh Selections Field of Greens 10 oz. bag 0-11110-91042-4 TFRS277B07OOKR5F Best By 10-18-11
• Fresh Selections Romaine Blend 10 oz. bag 0-11110-91038-7 TFRS277B07OOKR5N Best By 10-18-11
• HEB Spring Mix 5 oz. bag 0-41220-19752-1 TFRS277B07 Best By 10-20-11
• Marketside Fresh Spinach 10oz bag 6-81131-32946-0 TFRS277A07 Guaranteed Delicious By 10-21-11
• Marketside Caesar Salad Kit 14.6 oz. bag 6-81131-38744-6 TFRS277B07 Guaranteed Delicious By 10-19-11
• Marketside Asian Salad Kit 15 oz. bag 6-81131-53211-2 TFRS277B07 Guaranteed Delicious By 10-19-11
• Marketside Southwest Salad Kit 15oz bag 6-81131-38747-7 TFRS277B07 Guaranteed Delicious By 10-19-11
• Marketside Premium Romaine 9 oz. bag 6-81131-38753-8 TFRS277B07 Guaranteed Delicious By 10-19-11
• Marketside Premium Romaine Family 18 oz. bag 6-81131-38807-8TFRS277B07 Guaranteed Delicious By 10-19-11
• Taylor Farms Field Greens 8 oz. bag 0-30223-04036-1 TFRS277B07 Best If Used By 10-20-11

The products were distributed in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Puerto Rico and sold in various retail supermarkets.

No other products or code dates are affected by this recall, and there have been no reported illnesses attributed to the recalled items.

• Lettuce Recall: Listeria Concerns

Ground beef recalls continue this week, as hundreds of thousands of pounds of ground beef have been recalled since last month, due to concerns of E. coli (Escherichia coli) contamination.

This week, over 377,000 pounds of ground beef was recalled from California and Nevada restaurants. Commercial Meat Co., based in Los Angeles, distributed the now recalled ground beef, which was discovered to have tested positive test for E. coli by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) during a routine test.

The following ground beef products are subject to recall:

• 5,10,15,20,30,40,50 and 60 lb. cases of bulk ground beef
• 5,10 and 20 lb. cases of ground beef patties
• 10,15,20,30,40 and 50 lb. cases of ground beef taco
• 5,10,15,20,25,30,40,50 and 60 lb. cases of ground beef chili

Each case bears a label with the establishment number "EST. 4873" inside the USDA mark of inspection. The products subject to recall were produced between Sept. 7, 2011 and Oct. 6, 2011, and were shipped to restaurants in California and Nevada.

Though there have been no reports of illness associated with this week's recall, Fresco Food Distribution's owner, Al Lemoi, comments that a recall of this magnitude for this company, "could be catastrophic, but for the industry it's a small insignificant amount." Ground beef is particularly susceptible to contamination. Mr. Lemoi explained that E. coli is topical, but because ground beef is grinded, bacteria can easily spread across the entire food product.

Continue reading "More Ground Beef Recalls" »

A Jury Verdict Research study found that the average personal injury verdict in California is 1,635,327. The median, which takes out huge verdicts like one in the study for over $100 million, is California.

California juries are tougher on liability: plaintiffs receive damages in 45 percent of cases that go to trial.

Last December, Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals agreed to stop selling Darvocet in the U.S. after the evidence of cardiac injuries from Darvocet reached critical mass. Darvocet lawsuits are now being filed in massive numbers. Yesterday, in San Francisco, Plaintiffs' Darvocet lawyers argued that all of the federal Darvocet cases should be centralized in an MDL which is sort of, but not really, a class action lawsuit.

These are the main points made in Darvocet lawsuits:

• Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals concealed their knowledge of Darvocet's risks from plaintiffs, the medical community, the FDA, and the American people.
• Xanodyne had a duty to warn patients about this failure to test and that they knew Darvocet had these side effects.
• Xanodyne did know of these risks after having the product on the market for ages? Ah, okay. Then Xanodyne negligently and improperly failed to perform sufficient tests, if any, concerning Darvocet's association with heart arrhythmias,myocardial infarction, and other (maybe still unknown) risks that put Darvocet's patients at risk for cardiac injury and death. Why didn't Xanodyne fully test Darvocet? Plaintiffs' Darvocet lawsuits allege Xanodyne knew, from the clinical trials and years of experience, exactly what they were going to find.

You can find a more complete overview of Darvocet lawsuits here.

Another post about a sad case that has evolved into a lawsuit that has very little chance of success or even making it to a jury. A California man filed a lawsuit against the city of San Francisco after his mother was found dead and floating in a suitcase in the San Francisco Bay last year. The wrongful death lawsuit claims should have done more to prevent the woman's death. After the tragedy, woman's boyfriend was charged with murder and awaits trial.

The crux of the lawsuit appears to be that the woman kept coming to the emergency room with injuries that reeked of domestic violence but never followed up with an investigation.

Why do I think this lawsuit fails? I don't think police have an obligation to investigate a crime that the victim does not report. Every wrongful death lawyer in California agrees with me: no attorney has taken the case.