Orlando Injury Lawyer Blog

Users of Advanced Medical Optics' Complete Moisture Plus Multi Purpose lens solution
filed an injury lawsuit against the maker for vision loss they suffered from using the product. The plaintiffs claim to have developed Acanthamoeba keratitis, an extremely painful infection of the cornea, from using the contact lens solution.

The seven plaintiffs represent contact lens solution users from California, Texas, Alabama, West Virginia, Illinois, Maine and Georgia. As part of their compensation for the serious eye infections they are seeking reimbursement for the cost of their surgeries, and for necessary future medical care. As Orlando injury lawyers, these product liability lawsuits are important to hold manufacturers responsible for the needless suffering they cause. The plaintiffs allege not only a defective and dangerous product, but further claim that the company failed to adequately notify consumers and retailers when AMO Complete was recalled in May.

It would certainly be tragic if consumers unknowingly continued to use a dangerous product and suffered injury. In this case, the plaintiffs are seeking to have the court force the maker AMO to provide a better recall notice so that the product is taken off the market. That will of course be the only sure way to prevent future injury.

Recently, we undertook the representation of another victim of a dangerous product that had been recalled months before his injury. Unfortunately, not much effort was put forth by the manufacturer or seller to ensure that all consumers would be notified of the danger so they would avoid purchase or usage of the product.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Consumer Products

Bookmark:

In an injury lawsuit, the jury wanted to know if it could award the plaintiff more than the $2.3 million sought in his suit against his former employer, Union Pacific Railroad railroad, for injuries that required three surgeries. The jury decided that an additional $500,000 was appropriate and awarded a total of $2.8 million to the married father of two children.

The jury also found the plaintiff to be partially at fault for his injury and reduced the award accordingly. In so doing, this jury demonstrated how well our civil justice system works. This jury properly held both the wrongdoer and the injured party accountable to the degree necessary to fairly decide the case.

Certainly the injury and damages were significant. According to reports the plaintiff lost the use of his right arm after it was crushed by a concrete railroad tie that fell off a pile at a railroad crossing. The plaintiff, who had been his family's primary breadwinner, has not worked since the accident. He has undergone three surgeries, including one shortly after the accident to treat a major medical complication. He can no longer grasp or hold anything in his right hand, bend his fingers on that hand or move his wrist much.

Dispite all these limitations, the plaintiff attended a community college in an effort to educate himself to be eligible for a desk or computer job. This gentleman clearly demonstrated a strong work ethic and a desire to be productive again.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In:

Bookmark:

A Florida doctor charged with medical malpractice and disciplinary allegations by the state faces a panel of peers who will examine his alleged mishandling of more than 10 cases, including what court documents describe as ''numerous patients deaths.'' However, the proceedings are secret. The public can't attend. When the panel reaches a decision, that, too, will be secret. If the peers decide against their report will go only to state regulators, who will conduct more closed hearings.

Even as state and local governments boast about how they are making healthcare information more available to the public, expanding websites with tons of data on hospitals and pricing, this case involving surgeon Alex Zakharia shows how much about a doctor's performance still remains hidden.

In 2004, Florida voters passed a constitutional amendment giving the public access to knowledge about botched care -- including the results of hearings like this one. But the amendment has been mired in court cases. Very little, if any, information has reached the public.

Sidney M. Wolfe, a physician with the Washington-based Public Citizen consumer group, says the healthcare industry often protects physicians. ``Doctors like to protect other doctors.''
Because problem doctors frequently slip from state to state or hospital to hospital, a federal law established the National Practitioner Data Bank, which compiles doctors' disciplinary actions, large malpractice judgments and hospital dismissals. That broad data bank is available only to select healthcare professionals. The public is denied access.

While most people want to believe and trust doctors, it is obvious that there are some who do not deserve such trust. Sadly, the medical association has such clout in Tallahassee and nation-wide that health care consumers may never have access to the information they need to be able to make an informed decision about the doctor they choose. Of course, this only hurts consumers and the majority of good doctors.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Retailers scrambled this week to keep millions of popular toys voluntarily recalled by Mattel out of the hands of consumers, pulling them off the shelves and posting warnings in their stores that they pose hazards to children. As Orlando injury lawyers, we find it unfortunate that many of these products can still be obtained online.

For example, eBay, the online auction site appears to have dozens of new Polly Pocket play sets, equipped with tiny, high-powered magnets that could cause serious injuries if swallowed. According to one news source, there was a Doggie Day Care play set and several Barbie and Tanner sets, which had been pulled because they contain similar magnets.
There were reports of 173 hits on the key words "Sarge car," referring to the tie-in toy from the Pixar movie Cars that was recalled because of high levels of lead in the decorative paint. While some sellers specified their items were the lead-free version made in Thailand, others were the lead-tainted models from China.

This week's Mattel recall, the second this month for the world's largest toy company, involved 9.6 million toys sold in the United States. There were 7.3 million Polly Pocket play sets, representing 58 models, recalled for magnet problems, along with the Barbie and the Doggie Day Care sets, and some Batman Magna and One Piece action figures. The remaining 253,000 items were the Sarge cars. Obviously, parents must remain vigilant when buying toys for their children.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Consumer Products

Bookmark:

The recall by Mattel Inc. is the latest in a summer slew that involves more than 10 million toys in the United States alone. The most alarming has been the recall of toys covered with lead-based paint. Children who ingest leaded paint can suffer brain damage, and improper disposal of lead-based paint can damage the environment. As Orlando injury lawyers this summer's recalls provide just another example of the lack of oversight in consumer products.

Mattel's recalls cover several hundred thousand "Sarge" vehicles and almost a million toys from its Fisher-Price line, including popular "Sesame Street" and "Nickelodeon" characters. Mattel's decision comes after the June recall of 1.5 million items from RC2 Corp.'s Thomas & Friends Wooden Railway toy line. There are also millions of Batman and Polly Pockets toys recalled by Mattel because of hazardous magnets.

As Orlando injury lawyers we must be skeptical when these companies say they are doing what they can to prevent accidents or lead poisoning. While it is true after the recall occurs manufacturers notify their retailer to remove the products that is too much too late. We believe more should be done to screen these toys to avoid similar hazards to children. Once the toys leave the manufacturer, millions of children are needlessly put at risk. While it may cut into the manufacturers' profit, we believe children are entitled to better safety controls from toy makers. Remember you can always see a list of recalled toys and additional information online by visiting recalls.gov or cpsc.gov.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Consumer Products

Bookmark:

Most injury victims are in an unfamiliar situation when they report their first injury claim. As we have written in our book, Seeking Justice: an Insider’s Guide for the Injured, you must think carefully before you speak to anyone. After you suffer an injury, you may be approached by the adjuster, the defendant, a police officer or others-all trying to find out: “What happened?” and “How you are doing?” What you say can dramatically effect your ability to successfully pursue an injury claim.

Just like you have seen on television in those police shows, “what you say, can and will be used against you.” Obviously, most people try to truthfully respond, however, it is how things are said, and those items that may be omitted that can create material for insurance companies to deny or reduce claims. Remember, an insurance company, as any business, wants to reduce its losses and save money. When processing your claim the adjuster can use anything you say against you in an effort to reduce the insurance company’s cost to settle your claim.

Injury which occurs at a retail store, for example, may be followed by a request that you give a statement or allow the store representative to interview you. While it is natural to want to provide information, you should never allow yourself to give a recorded statement. You should also never sign any form handed to you by the representatives of the store at which you were injured. There is simply no need to risk a misstatement or omission of some important fact. Worse, you may be handed a form or document that may clear the business of responsibility for your injury.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In:

Bookmark:

Following your injury, you completed your medical care and rehabilitation, now what? As Orlando injury lawyers, we have been asked more times than we can remember, How can I determine the value of my injury claim? Whether you were involved in a car accident, a fall or medical malpractice, there will come a time to evaluate the value of your injury claim.

Injury victims who have no lawyer and who have completed treatment will be dealing with a professional insurance adjuster when discussing the value of their injury claim. To be adequately compensated for what you've gone through you should gather all of your medical bills, your lost wages and all other out of pocket expenses during your rehabilitation and recovery.

When considering the value of an injury claim these "special damages" are important. While the pain and suffering and other non-economic losses can be substantial these quantifiable or "hard" losses are easy for the insurance company to quantify. These totals often will have a direct bearing on what an insurance company will pay.

In addition, while you may have been injured, how the injury occurred is important to the value of your claim. For example, if the liability for the accident is debatable, for example, both drivers claim to have the green light and there are no witnesses, this will directly bear on the value an insurance company will place on a claim.

So, the liability picture and the hard damages suffered will help determine the value of an injury claim. Other factors include the type of injury, the permanency of the injury, whether your earning capacity has been impacted and the impact of the injury on the quality of life. In sum, there is no exact formula, although some insurers attempt to follow guidelines that may minimize a victim's loss.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In:

Bookmark:

We often hear, “Do I have an injury case?” and “Do I need a personal injury lawyer?” As Orlando injury lawyers, we have found that some people incorrectly assume that they only need an injury lawyer for a car accident. Clearly, when you have a car accident that results in an injury to yourself caused by others then hiring a personal injury attorney may be prudent. However, there are all sorts of accidents caused by others that may give rise to an injury claim for which a personal injury lawyer may be able to help.

The first question when determining whether you need to hire an injury lawyer about a claim should be whether you suffered an injury caused by another's carelessness. If there has been no carelessness or negligence, there is usually no claim. For instance, as you walk down the aisles of your grocery store and your foot slips on some produce. You fall and break your arm. In this example, the store failed to safely maintain the premises and is negligent for letting produce fall and remain on the floor. If, however on your walk about the store, you fall for no known reason and break your arm no one other than you is responsible for your unfortunate injury.

Of course, there are many instances when a personal injury claim may be made. Besides car accidents and store negligence, there are claims resulting from medical malpractice, defective products, mold and food poisoning to name just a few. Whenever injury results from circumstances over which you had no control and another person or company could have prevented the injury, it would be appropriate to contact an Orlando injury lawyer for consultation.
There have been many ocassions where we have counseled folks that they did not need to hire a lawyer. However, it it wise to speak with a specialist in injury claims, someone board certified in civil trial law by The Florida Bar, if you have any questions about your circumstances.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In:

Bookmark:

Central American banana workers claim to have been left sterile after being exposed to a dangerous pesticide that was improperly applied and used in amounts exceeding guidelines. The lawsuit accuses Dole Fresh Fruit Co. and Standard Fruit Co., now a part of Dole, of negligence and fraudulent concealment while using the pesticide DBCP in the 1970s. The case is one of five filed in Los Angeles County by at least 5,000 agricultural workers from Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama and includes claims that Dow Chemical Co. and Amvac Chemical Corp., manufacturers of the pesticide, actively suppressed information about DBCP's reproductive toxicity.

The workers contend that Dole sprayed the pesticide rather than injecting it into the soil or mixing it with ground water as its manufacturer recommended on the product's label. As a result residue would remain in the air, on the dirt and on these plants, where the workers toiled daily. All but one of the current plaintiffs has no sperm in their bodies as a result of exposure to DBCP.

DBCP was used to kill microscopic worms on the roots of the banana plants. DBCP was approved for use in the United States by the Environmental Protection Agency until 1979. In Nicaragua, it was legal from 1973 until 1993. These claims bring to light the poor work environment that so many face to support their families.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In:

Bookmark:

A jury awarded $1.2 million to a couple whose daughter was killed when an amusement park roof broke loose during a storm. Strong winds toppled a pavilion housing The Whip ride, and the young lady was struck by the collapsing roof and pinned against a metal fence. This case was unusual in that this claim involved the structure associated with a ride and not the ride itself. For Orlando injury lawyers and lawyers throughout Florida, this case demonstrates the need to ensure local theme parks satisfy or exceed building code.

What's more, with the series of hurricanes that have exploded on our state in recent years, there is no excuse for amusement and theme parks to ignore taking all reasonable measures to prevent storm related injury and death to patrons. In this tragedy, the family's attorney said the pavilion was built with posts that did not meet the building code. Obviously, such violations can never be tolerated.

The defense in this case, as in many, raises a causation issue. That tornado-level winds toppled buildings and blew off roofs in the area; and, therefore the amusement park injury and death could not have been prevented despite all reasonable measures. To be sure whenever, an injury or death claim occurs during a natural disaster, the defendant will always have that built-in defense. To prepare properly, weather and local conditions at the time of the tragedy should be preserved. By doing so, you can evaluate what Mother Nature was doing in the area and at the time of your client's injury.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Amusement Park & Theme Park Injury

Bookmark:

The classic children’s toy, the Easy-Bake oven has been around for decades. Many a child has successfully baked his or her first cake in one. Interestingly, the older versions of this well-loved toy prove to be safer than the present model. Consequently, Hasbro Inc., the world’s second-largest toymaker, recalled about one million Easy-Bake Ovens.

Hasbro, Inc received reports of serious burns and 278 incidents of children getting hands or fingers caught in openings. The company, based in Pawtucket, R.I., had offered repair kits for the ovens in February after receiving 29 reports. However, the company decided to recall the toys after learning that part of a 5-year-old girl’s finger had to be amputated because of a severe burn, according to a company spokesman.

The company has warned consumers to stop using the ovens and contact Hasbro for instructions to exchange the toy for a voucher, the company said. Ovens sold before 2006 are not part of the recall. Hopefully, parents and grandparents will become aware of the hazard associated with this product and prevent future injury to our children.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Consumer Products

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical negligence lawyers, we must prove that our client’s received negligent or substandard medical care and suffered damages as a result. The standard of care which applies is a national one. Other states, however, continue to cling to the rule that the injured medical malpractice claimant must prove a violation of a local standard of care. That the defendant failed to do what others in the community would have done.

Throughout these states a movement is slowly building to abolish century-old medical malpractice laws that judge a doctor's performance by the medical standards existing in the physician's community. Those laws, known as "locality rules," are still on the books in 21 states. They were originally designed to protect rural doctors who lacked access to medicines and training available in big cities. But plaintiff lawyers, courts, medical professionals and a handful of legislators are calling for their demise, arguing that all present-day doctors -- regardless of where they live and practice -- have equal access to quality training and the latest medicines, and should therefore be held to the same standards.

Critics claim that locality rules unfairly dictate who gets to testify in medical malpractice cases. Plaintiffs lawyers dislike them because they mandate that only locals can be used as expert witnesses -- a tough feat in small towns where doctors are reluctant to testify against colleagues. Some judges have said the rules unfairly disqualify otherwise qualified medical experts.

Proponents of locality rules argue that they are still a necessity, particularly to insulate doctors in rural areas that have limited medical resources available. Locality rules take that into account and shield them from liability.

Locality rules vary from state to state. For example, Idaho and New York use the strictest rule, known as the "same community" standard, which bases the standard of care on what doctors in the same town are doing. Three states -- Arizona, Virginia and Washington -- use a statewide standard of care. Eleven states, including Michigan, Illinois and North Carolina, use a "same or similar community" standard, which allows for out-of-state doctors to testify in malpractice cases if they can show that their medical community standards are similar to the defendant's.

For the sake of health care consumers everywhere, these locality rules should be abolished. Medicine is no longer practiced in isolation. Doctors can stay current with their practice or specialty by simply going online. What’s more, for most cases, there is no reason why a patient in one state should be entitled to better care than one in a different state.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark: