Solomon Neuhardt applauds the FDA and helps raise awareness

The FDA announced a new and serious warning about possible liver damage from Multaq, a heart medication released in July of 2010. The drug is used to treat abnormal atrial rhythms – atrial fibrillation (Afib). It is marketed as an advance in treatment because it demonstrated a lower incidence of hospitalization than traditional drugs used for the condition. However, the FDA only approved it with under their Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), a program that monitors patients closely for adverse reactions. This system is used when the FDA feels there is enough data to release a drug for use, but not a large enough database to assure complete safety.

With two incidents of liver damage that required transplants, the FDA is now warning doctors to consider the serious risks that might come with prescribing the drug. The medication is not being removed from the market. The recommendation is that physicians monitor liver enzymes and other indicators closely. In these two cases, there was severe cell damage in the liver directly l inked to the drug.

Billings attorney Solomon Neuhardt, who handles dangerous drug cases, explains, “When patients have a serious condition to start with [heart problems] the balance between choosing a drug that is more helpful than harmful is a difficult one. Doctors are tasked with keeping abreast of all new developments and carefully considering the dangers of potent medications.”

Patients who are currently taking Multaq are advised to discuss the issue with their cardiologist. Their doctor may wish to have them come in for testing.

“Although the system in the United States is quite good for testing drugs before they reach the general population, over and over again drugs are withdrawn because serious side effects only emerge after some time in the market,” said Solomon Neuhardt. “I applaud the FDA’s care in this instance – without the careful monitoring of this drug, the liver toxicity might have gone unnoticed longer than it did.”

More information about Maltaq can be found at their website. The FDA notice is published here.

---

About Solomon Neuhardt: Solomon Neuhardt is the owner and lead attorney at Neuhardt Law Firm, a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and represents individuals and families in personal injury cases, including accidents, medical malpractice, defective products, dog bites, and insurance disputes.

A recent uptick in auto and casualty insurance company television ads caught my eye. One company in particular advertises that they are the nation’s largest. I checked Allstate’s website, and they are. A Fortune 100 company, Allstate reports $133 billion in assets. In the U.S., they are the big dogs when it comes to “personal line” insurance. Personal line refers to insurance for personal property, liability and for medical care after an accident.

Checking further, I found that profits are up. Remember the financial crash of ’08? That hit insurance companies hard because many were heavily invested in stock market instruments that fell. But, according to the Insurance Journal, by November of ’09, “Allstate Corp., the largest publicly traded U.S. home and auto insurer, reported a third quarter profit Wednesday, the improvement from a year ago loss made possible by lower catastrophe and investment losses.”

That last bit is important – “lower catastrophe and investment losses.”

A year later, in Oct of 2010, Business Week reported, “Allstate Corp., the largest publicly traded U.S. home and auto insurer, said third-quarter profit rose 66 percent as investment losses narrowed.” This was, again, in part due to lowered claims. Some actually came from a bad economy that had fewer miles driven (who could afford to take a vacation?) and less auto accident claims as a result. Generally, your automobile insurance premium is based on the value of the vehicle and coverage and not linked to the number of miles you drive.

The theme here is important. While profits may be impacted by a downturn in the stock market, one of the key movers of the bottom line is claims. If you are an insurance company, you want to reduce how much you pay out. It’s that simple.

History shows how profits tempt

It’s long been known in the insurance industry that streamlining claims processing can increase profits. In the 1990’s Allstate hired a consultant to tell them just how to do it. One of the more significant suggestions to come out was that claims could be reduced by aggressively fighting with litigation designed to lower payouts.

David Berardinelli, a lawyer involved in suits against Allstate, the method was to delay and deny claims to pressure claimants to settle for amounts less than they were due. He referred to this strategy as switching from the “good hands” to the “boxing gloves.” As part of this litigation, documents revealed some interesting quotes from Allstate’s consultant:

·       Establishing new market values [for claims] will require aggressive new litigation strategies.

·       Capturing the opportunity will require reducing the number of represented claimants and more aggressively managing the claims that do become represented.

·       Many plaintiff attorneys yield to more aggressive tactics.

·       Claims is an economic game. We will win the economics game.

·       Aggressive litigation yields positive results… UM/UIM [uninsured motorist/under insured motorist] severities can be lowered on average by 12% through aggressive litigation tactics.

The material goes on, but the theme is to play hardball with clients and their attorneys to reduce settlements.

Fast forward

This material came out because a skilled attorney investigated Allstate and uncovered it. It actually was rediscovered over and over again but kept private as part of settlement offers. The whole picture was only made public after a State Insurance Regulator got involved.

Thankfully, in Montana, we have laws that can penalize an insurance company for fraudulent business practices. They can be sued if they act unethically. Unfortunately, many of the policies recommended to Allstate are not illegal. They may be distasteful and feel like kicking a victim when they are down, but they remain legal.

The solution for those who have been injured and will have to fight to get what they are due is the same as it always was. Aggressive litigation has to be met with a powerful case that supports the claim. Only an attorney willing to “go to the mattresses” will do. When an attorney has a strong case and a reputation for being aggressive for his clients, it is actually in the insurance company’s interest to come to terms. They aren’t stupid. When a good attorney is involved, and the facts justify a substantial award, there may be no choice but to settle for a full and fair amount.

What hasn’t changed

As the economy gradually improves for the rest of us (lagging far behind the insurance industry) the same considerations will apply. Victims will continue to make claims and those claims will continue to be held to as low a payout as possible in the name of corporate profits. This won’t change. The need for a savvy attorney to handle a high-value insurance claim won’t change. The little guy will continue to bear the burden and the big guys will keep trying to get legislation in their favor. This won’t change either.

I’ll continue to fight for my clients and get them what they deserve, regardless of the tricks insurance companies want to play. That won’t change either. 

---

About Solomon Neuhardt: Solomon Neuhardt is the owner and lead attorney at Neuhardt Law Firm, a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and represents individuals and families in personal injury cases, including accidents, medical malpractice, defective products, dog bites, and insurance disputes.

Forty years ago, Katie had just turned eleven. She was in the backseat of the car, a 1969 Nash Rambler. The car was solidly built, her father was driving and her mother was in the passenger seat. There was no reason to for an eleven-year old to feel anything other than safe and secure.

The family was stopped at a major intersection, Katie’s father waiting for the light to change. Coming from the left, in cross traffic, a semi-truck started to make a right-hand turn. The driver had the green light and plenty of room to turn into the lanes on the Rambler’s left. Ordinarily, this wouldn’t be a problem. But there was a problem.

The trailer was fully loaded. The semi-truck was going a little fast. One of the outside tires on the trailer was flat. These factors combined to create a tilt towards the outside of the turn. Centrifugal force did the rest.

Katie heard her father swear. She looked up in time to see what looked like a steel wall falling slowly toward the stopped car.

There was nothing her father could do. The cross traffic prevented him from going forward and there were other cars on his right and behind. Katie remembers there was just enough time for her dad to look at his wife. She says there was a “goodbye, I love you” look exchanged. And then the overturning trailer hit.

The next thing Katie remembers is her father yelling at her to climb out the now shattered back window. The roof of the car had crushed downward so that he was pushing on her with one arm squeezed between the top of the front seat and the collapsed roof. There was a little blood from the broken glass. She could see the trailer of the truck had split open and crates were spilling out onto the hood of the car.

Fast forward

No one died. Katie and her father weren’t seriously injured.

It turned out the driver knew he had a flat but thought he could make it to his destination. The truck was also loaded improperly with the cargo distributed unevenly.

Her mother was treated and still has some back pain that comes and goes. Insurance paid for the car. Ramblers were discontinued the next model year. Forty years later, the incident should be just a long ago childhood memory; except it isn’t.

Katie has her own children now. She’s as normal as anyone, except when she’s driving anywhere near a semi-truck. She absolutely cannot travel alongside a big rig. She has a hard time even passing one on the highway. She follows them, when she can’t avoid it, at least three car-lengths behind. She is visibly shaken when she’s trapped in city traffic next to a semi-truck.

Katie avoids truck stops on the interstate. She won’t even walk next to a parked semi if there is another way to go.

There are scars and there are scars. Katie can’t get over her phobia and the little movie that plays in her head when she’s too close to a big truck – the movie where the wall of steel is falling toward her.

---

This blog post is based on a true story, but the names have been changed to protect privacy. We deal with tragic incidents like this more often than you think and it can be heartbreaking.

Solomon Neuhardt of the Neuhard Law Firm in Billings Montana gave away a brand new Blue-Ray player at the MetraPark Fair!  The fair was held from August 14th - August 21st and approximatley 400 raffle entries were received.  The booth was open from 1p.m. to midnight every day of the fair and Sol passed out free copies of his newest book, Five Big Mistakes that Can Wreck Your Accident Claim, Lost Keys Program cards, and other useful gifts.

The lucky winner was Irene Holland from Billings, Montana!  Included with a Philips Blu-Ray Player, Irene received two bestseller movies, Batman: Dark Knight and Avatar, popcorn, candy and a $25 Hasings gift card. 

We want to thank everyone who entered our raffle.  We have a great time and look forward to doing another give away like this sometime soon.  Congrats Irene!

Read more… 

 

Neuhardt Law recently assisted a Billings woman in her personal injury case against her neighbors. Ms. Person was set upon and attacked by their 3 boxer dogs in July 2009. The attack resulted in numerous bite wounds and a series of rabies shots. We produced a successful settlement for Ms. Person and the Billings Gazette recently wrote about our story, read it here.

Unintentional poisonings can lead to negligence suits.

The death of a 13 month-old boy in January of this year in Deer Lake led to a Coroner’s inquest in Powell County. Six months later the verdict is in – a poisoning due to negligence at the hands of the father. The poison? Antifreeze.

The father claims he thought it was green Kool-Aid when he filled the child’s cup with the ‘drink’. The boy died even after all possible measures were taken at Seattle Children’s Hospital. It will be up to a court to decide if the poisoning was criminal or not.

Poisonings, even among adults, are a much more common cause of injury or death than most people would believe. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports (2008) that unintentional poisonings have been trending upward since 1992. Poisonings rank second only to car crashes for causing injury or death in 34 – 55 year olds.

Most common substances in poisoning

For adults, the most common poisonings happen with drugs. Topping the list are illegal drugs, but prescription drugs also contribute. For 2006, there were about two million calls to poison control centers for unintentional poisonings and about 700,000 Emergency Room visits.

Among children under 6, the most common substances found in poisoning are:

• Cosmetics and personal care products
• Pain medications
• Vitamins
• Household cleaners
• Antihistamines and cough/cold syrups
• Plants and mushrooms

So whose fault is it?

When an adult self-administers a toxic amount of a medication trying to high, it is pretty easy to place blame, and no negligence follows from an illegal act – you can’t sue your drug dealer for product liability. On the other hand, if misleading instructions or improper packaging leads to a medication error, the fault usually falls on the supervising medical personnel. They have the expertise and the professional responsibility.

In the case of an adult exposing a child to an accidental poisoning, the circumstances surrounding the incident become critical. Society imposes a duty on adults to prevent foreseeable harm to children. If a home or a business allows children to access poisonous substances, a negligence suit might follow.

Critical to a negligence case is the standard of ‘foreseeable’ or ‘normal care’. We keep dangerous substances in child-proof containers for this reason. In the case from Deer Lake, the antifreeze was in a plain gallon jug and not the original antifreeze container. Who put it there and why? Could it really have been mistaken for green Kool-Aid? These are the types of questions settled in negligence suits.

A two step solution

Parents of toddlers can follow a two-step rule to prevent many poisonings. The first is to take the skills you’ve built up child-proofing your own house with you when you take your child outside of this protected zone. That means visits to Grandma and Grandpa’s house, daycare and other situations where your child will be free to explore. Check out the environment with your ‘educated eyes’ and do not rely on other adults to know the rules.

The second important thing to do is when you and your child are out where you cannot do the first step. If you haven’t certified an environment as poison-proof, direct supervision is your only other option. This means the grocery store (or any store), pubic park (plants and mushrooms), church, or community center.

---

About Solomon Neuhardt:

Solomon Neuhardt is the owner and lead attorney at Neuhardt Law Firm, a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and represents individuals and families in personal injury cases, including accidents, medical malpractice, defective products, dog bites, and insurance disputes.

 

How new data reinforces concussion worries.

A study commissioned by the NFL and the U.S. Congress last year to evaluate helmets used in professional football was quashed, but some data from it has recently been released. The original study was considered inconclusive and flawed; however, the results that have been released by the NFL and the player’s union show that even the best helmets used do not prevent concussion.

The significance of repeated concussions, as experienced by boxers and football players alike, is under dispute. But no one argues there aren’t long-term consequences, but how serious are they?

Dr. Bennet Omalu, a Neuropathologist at Pittsburgh University recently examined brain tissue from four former NFL players (all died between 36 and 50 years of age) and determined that repeated concussion contributed to their early deaths. Dr. Omalu told USA Today that each player reported experiencing what were likely a number of concussions during their playing careers, which later led to chronic traumatic encephalopathy–a condition common in boxers–and then extreme bouts of depression. Commenting on the brain tissue he examined, Dr. Omalu said, “On the cellular level, it looks absolutely abnormal.”

Concussion and brain injury happens when the head is rapidly decelerated. A sudden stop or jolt in any direction can cause the brain to literally bounce inside the skull. Damage can occur when the brain hits the skull wall.

Who is watching the shop?

As the public becomes aware of concussion risks in sports activities, concerns arise about who is responsible to make sure helmets in use are up to the task. One likely candidate, the Montana Food and Consumer Consumer Safety Section (of the Dept. of Public Health) only looks at complaints. They do not test helmets directly.

The U.S. Department of Transportation does impose standards on motorcycle helmets, but these generally do not apply to sporting activities. Montana motorcycle helmet information can be found here (pg 5).

Little league uses information from the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) as their guide. NOCSAE recognizes the dangers of head injury in athletes and certifies equipment for many sports. The NCAA and National Federation of State High School Associations both require NOCSAE certified helmets.

The problem remains however. In football, the way the game is played – using the head as a ‘weapon’ – continues to cause concussions, both minor and severe. On their website, the NOCSAE outlines the problem as: ”…how to protect a large, fast football player who might possess kinetic energy approaching 3,000 foot pounds and to provide such an athlete with equipment that was both protective and comfortable.”

NOCSAE has been successful in reducing acute injuries and death from head on collisions in football. Unfortunately, the problem of concussion remains. With this latest NFL report, where even the best helmets did not prevent concussion, it seems the issue needs to be reexamined.

---

About Solomon Neuhardt:

Solomon Neuhardt is the owner and lead attorney at Neuhardt Law Firm, a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and represents individuals and families in personal injury cases, including accidents, medical malpractice, defective products, dog bites, and insurance disputes.

 “Eat right, get plenty of sleep, and exercise.” That is the mantra – a recipe for good health. Americans are taking the advice to heart. For example, in Billings, there are more than a dozen commercial gyms (a few down the road in Laurel) that offer services like workouts, exercise machines and even personal trainers. There are also public exercise facilities in community centers, schools and universities. Even some hotels in Montana throw in a workout room as part of an overnight stay. But what about when the way we exercise turns out to be harmful?

It may surprise you that to build muscle, damage to muscle has to occur. This doesn’t mean outright tears or bruising, but damage at the cellular level. Sports physiologists and body builders know that increasing muscle mass involves a cycle of injury and repair – the body responds to minor trauma from exercise by adding more muscle as it heals. This is the reason behind the rule of only strenuously exercising a single muscle group every other day. It takes time to heal.

Unfortunately, the structures muscles are attached to do not react as well to injury. Tendons, bones and joints take much longer to heal and do not improve in the way muscle does. Damage to these areas may be cumulative and can mean arthritis later in life. For some, sports related injuries are just a part of doing something they love. But for those who use home exercise equipment, the idea is to become healthier, not disabled.

Recalls

The Consumer Products Safety Commission tracks recalls made by exercise equipment manufacturers. Some of the past recalls highlight problems that can happen with home exercise equipment:

• Ab Lounge – A 2004 recall because of cuts and crushing injuries to fingers when the unit was unfolded.
• Free Motion Fitness – 2006 recall because the weights on their weight machine could fall unexpectedly. (CPSC report)
• Thane and Stamina Products Inc. – both companies issue recalls in 2009 for their elliptical cross training products – for different, unrelated reasons.
• Bowflex Home Gym (by Nautilus Inc.) – 2007 recall because fasteners could come loose, allowing the flexible members to snap unexpectedly. Reports of injuries from this Chinese manufactured home gym (retail $2,300) led to the recall. This followed a 2005 recall from the same manufacturer because the lat bench was prone to breaking.
• Paramount Home Fitness – 2009 recall of their Home Curl Machine because of finger amputations and risks of other injuries.

These are just a few of the over 15 screens of exercise and sports related recalls at the CPSC. The CPSC is a publically funded government service available free of charge with an extensive website devoted to consumer safety.

Actions you can take to make sure healthy doesn’t become harmful—

• When you purchase an exercise machine, send in the warranty/registration card. This may be the only way a manufacturer has to contact you if there is a recall. Some now allow registration online through their company website.
• Whether you purchase a new machine or a used one, check the CPSC website to see if any recalls have been issued. (Search by manufacturer.) Used machines should have original owner’s manuals – if they are missing, contact the manufacturer online and request a new one (it should be free of charge).
• Read all instructions and warnings that come with your machine.
• Do not disable any safety devices – they are meant to protect you and may void any action you have if you are injured.
• >Keep children and pets away from working machines. Unplug electric machines when not in use and lock manual weight-training machines. Children are curious and may want to imitate activities they have seen.
• If you have any physical abnormality or health condition, seek professional medical advice before you start an exercise program.
• Stay within sensible guidelines, overdoing it will not make you healthier faster.
• If you or a loved one is injured by home or commercial gym equipment, do not assume you are at fault. After proper medical treatment, report the incident.

Reporting is important because most manufacturers will not issue a recall unless there is clear evidence of a problem. In Montana, you may contact the Office of Consumer Protection. You may also seek the services of an injury attorney. They can provide advice on what legal recourse is available.

---

About Solomon Neuhardt:

Solomon Neuhardt is the owner and lead attorney at Neuhardt Law Firm, a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and represents individuals and families in personal injury cases, including accidents, medical malpractice, defective products, dog bites, and insurance disputes.

According to a report published in the Associated Press in May 2010, pills are the most preferred contraceptive for American women. In a survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 16% of the married woman confirmed the use of contraceptive pills. However, the popularity of contraceptive pills, as highlighted in the report, poses a huge health risk for American women.

The Case Against Birth Control Pills

A 2006 report published by National Cancer Institute, a federal organization under the auspices of US National Institutes of Health, warned against the use of contraceptive pills. The report claimed that the extensive use of birth control pills increased the risk of breast cancer. The risk was even higher among women who had started using contraceptive pills from their teenage years.

This study was a stark contrast to the findings of Women’s Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences (Women’s CARE). According to their survey, birth control pills elevate the risk of breast cancer in women aged 35 to 64. However, in another study conducted in 2003 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an increased risk of cervical cancer was linked to the use of birth control pills.

Scientific studies have debunked claims related to a decrease in sexual desire among women due to the intake of birth control pills. However, the increased risk of breast and cervical cancer is certainly a concern area for the US Health Department.

How to File a Compensation for Health Risks due to Birth Control Pills

Victims of breast cancer should consult an expert personal injury lawyer if they have been using birth control pills for more than six months. Although there are reports from federal agencies, it is complicated to prove that the intake of birth control pills is solely responsible for breast cancer or cervical cancer. Consulting with an experienced attorney regarding your case will help you understand whether you have a valid claim and if you should seek just compensation for your suffering.

---

About Solomon Neuhardt:

Solomon Neuhardt is the owner and lead attorney at Neuhardt Law Firm, a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and represents individuals and families in personal injury cases, including accidents, medical malpractice, defective products, dog bites, and insurance disputes.

In the interest of public safety, cell phone use while driving has been made a primary offense in the state of Washington. The State Governor has signed a Senate Bill to this effect.

According to the new law, the traffic police will have the right to pull up a driver if he is caught texting or talking on the cell phone without a handsfree device while driving. The traffic cops can issue tickets to the driver as well as fine them up to $124. Earlier, cell phone use driving was considered a second-degree offence, which did not permit traffic cops from pulling a driver simply for talking on the phone while driving. However, if such an offense is coupled with a primary offense, such as over speeding or jumping a red light, then the driver could be booked for double offense.

With the new law coming into effect, Washington has become the fourth state in the US to make cell phone use while driving a primary offense.

Exemptions to the Law

In public concern, there are certain exemptions to the rule. The list of exemptions includes:

• Drivers of emergency or public support vehicles.
• If the driver is using the cell phone to seek emergency aid or report illegal activity.

In a study conducted by Utah University in the year 2005, it was found that cell phone reduces the reaction time of a driver by more than 20%. Thus, even a young driver in his 20s will behave like a 70-year-old driver while talking on a cell phone. According to the reports published by the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, cell phone usage while driving is the primary cause for more than 2,600 deaths and 330,000 injuries every year in the US.

In case you have been a victim of a vehicular accident due to the driver’s negligence due to cell phone use, you can file a personal injury lawsuit against the driver. For this, the victim has to prove the negligence of the driver through certain circumstantial evidence. Consult a personal injury lawyer for assistance in filing a claim against a reckless driver and get the compensation you deserve.

 

---

About Solomon Neuhardt:

Solomon Neuhardt is the owner and lead attorney at Neuhardt Law Firm, a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and represents individuals and families in personal injury cases, including accidents, medical malpractice, defective products, dog bites, and insurance disputes.