Dangerous & Defective Products Newsletter

Issue 1.04 Official Magazine of Law Offices of Richard J. Serpe, PC

Over $120 million in recoveries.

IN THIS ISSUE

$2.5 Billion Dollar Settlement for Defective Hip Implant Victims

DEFECTIVE CAR SEATS PUT 3.7 MILLION CHILDREN AT RISK GENERAL MOTORS IN HOT WATER FOR DRAGGING ITS FEET ON SAFETY ISSUES CORPORATIONS ACTING BADLY:

WHO KNOW?

AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT?

25 Y.

25 Years of practice experience

serpefirm.com

$120

The Dangerous and Defective Produtcts Newsletter

In November, 2013, the Depuy oversight committees announced a settlement program estimated to total $2.5 billion.

The settlement program covers recalled Depuy ASR hip systems. These systems were recalled in 2010 after information leaked that the defendant manufacturer knew about high failure rates and premature need for replacement. The problems with the system are component loosening, component misalignment, infection, fracture of the bone, dislocation, metal sensitivity and pain. Nearly 8,000 lawsuits were filed in this action.

DePuy, Johnson & Johnson Announce $2.5 Billion Dollar Settlement of U.S. ASR Claims The multi-district litigation is being overseen in a federal court in Ohio by Judge David Katz. The settlement details are still being finalized but on a basic level, a person who was implanted with an ASR device and underwent a revision surgery before August, 31, 2013, will be entitled to a base award of $250,000.00 This award will be reduced in consideration of certain factors such as: weight, smoking status at revision and the length of time the faulty hip system was implanted.

Emily Mapp Brannon, an attorney at the Serpe Firm, represents dozens of individuals who were impacted by this recall, right here in Hampton Roads. Unlike many firms in this area, The Serpe Firm retains mass tort cases here locally. We do not ship the cases out to firms in bigger cities. We

02 \\

find that our clients appreciate having someone to answer their questions directly and not feeling like part of a herd. We pride ourselves on personal attention and prompt response times.

If you or someone you know was impacted by the Depuy recall, feel free to call or e-mail Emily Brannon at: ebrannon@serpefirm.com

GRACO CAR SEAT RECALL AFFECTS 3.7 MILLION

On February 12, 2014, Graco announced one of the largest recalls in history for car seats. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration revealed that more than 6,100 cases had been reported to Graco wherein parents or caregivers were having great difficulty unlatching the car-seat buckle and reported their complaints directly to Graco.

As a mother, I experienced difficulty unlatching a car seat once, and it was very scary. I was at home, having removed the car seat from its base and carried it into the house. Once inside, I could not unlatch the buckle and admittedly, I started to panic. Fortunately, my husband was able to get it unbuckled. But some have not been so lucky. Imagine what would happen if there were a mechanical error, preventing unlatching after an accident.

This fear is what sparked the recall. In some of the cases reported to the NHTSA, parents or caregivers were unable to unlatch and had no choice but to cut the straps to free the child.

Investigators and emergency professionals were understandably concerned that

the product could malfunction during a true emergency and children might become trapped. The recall affects car seats made between 2009-2013 which contain the signature, QT and QT3 buckles. Bearing in mind that the NHTSA office deals with recalls daily and processes thousands, they were unusually blunt in their criticism of Graco’s recall efforts and the mechanics of the malfunctioning latches themselves.

If you think your car seat might be impacted by the recall, check out www.gracobaby.com for a link of the models which were involved and to order your replacement harness buckle. If you or someone you know has been impacted by this recall, please give us a call to discuss your rights.

The Dangerous and Defective Products Newsletter | Law Offices of Richard J. Serpe, PC

HOW NOT TO ADDRESS A VEHICLE SAFETY ISSUE! IT LOOKS LIKE GENERAL MOTORS IS IN HOT WATER. According to information obtained during a Georgia lawsuit brought on behalf of a 29-year-old woman who was killed when her 2005 Chevy Cobalt crashed in 2010, GM knew of a safety problem in the vehicle and failed to issue a recall... and specific facts that have been revealed in the case make GM sound pretty bad.

The problem with the GM vehicles is in the ignition switch.

It has been reported that using a very heavy set of keys in the ignition or driving over very bumpy roads can cause the ignition to change to the “accessory” position while you’re driving, resulting in a loss of power to the vehicle. This results in a loss of power-assisted steering and braking, and if the driver does end up crashing, the airbag won’t deploy. The black box in the vehicle in the Georgia lawsuit showed that the key was in the accessory position at the time of the crash.

Under current law, an automaker is supposed to report safety defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) within FIVE days after discovering them.

Failure to do so can result in a maximum fine of up to 35 million dollars. In 2013, a fine of $17.4 million was levied against Ford in connection with Ford Escape SUVs with gas pedals that could become stuck.

Depositions revealed that a GM engineer was test-driving a vehicle and experienced the problem in 2004, even before the vehicle in the Georgia case was sold. GM engineers determined that there was a problem in the ignition switch in 2005.

In depositions, GM representatives appeared to argue that a vehicle could still be steered and stopped without power, so it may be that the company will claim that it did not feel the defect was a “safety” problem that it was required to report.

And rather than reporting a problem to the NHTSA right away, GM waited until February 2014, a full decade after its engineer experienced the problem, to issue a recall. At first the recall covered only the Chevrolet Cobalt and Pontiac G5, which still numbered over three quarters of a million vehicles.

Originally, GM acknowledged that at least six deaths resulted

from the defect in its vehicles.

On February 25, 2014, GM expanded the recall to cover Saturn Ions, Chevrolet HHRs, Pontiac Solstices and Saturn Sky models built from 2003 to 2007, so the recall now covers over 1.3 million cars. It also has increased the number of related deaths to 13. Records show that there have been 31 frontal crashes caused by the problem.

If you’ve been injured in an accident that may be related to this recall, don’t hesitate to call our office to discuss your legal rights.

// 03

CORPORATIONS ACTING BADLY:

WHO KNEW?

AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT?

We have all seen recalls of countless products. Not just cars, but virtually every type of product on the market. Drugs that cause harmful side effects. Dangerous toys that can harm a small child.

Furniture that can tip over or break.

Multiple government agencies are charged with the responsibility to help ensure that these products are safe. These include:

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION SAFETY ADMINISTRATION Motor vehicles United States Coast Guard Watercraft Consumer Product Safety Commission Consumer goods Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Guns Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Medical devices, cosmetics, food, dietary supplements, drugs.

S

ometimes the system fails though, and good people are hurt. Sadly, sometimes the system fails because companies know that the products they’ve made are dangerous and, often for financial reasons, they do not tell anyone.

IN 2005 ONE YOUNG COLLEGE STUDENT seemingly had it all. Although he was born with a congenital heart defect, a cutting-edge defibrillator had been placed in his chest, and he was told that it would let him lead a fairly active life. If his heart rhythms were dangerously irregular, the defibrillator was designed to send an electrical jolt to his heart, restoring its healthy rhythm.

UNFORTUNATELY, one day as he enjoyed a bike ride in the majestic red rock canyons in Utah, when he needed the heart device to work, it didn’t. The young student’s heart and defibrillator both failed, and he died.

REPORTS LATER REVEALED that the maker of the defibrillator, Guidant Corporation, was aware of a design defect in its defibrillators in 2002. In fact, they made changes in an effort to repair the defect, which was related to the use of an insulation that could degrade when exposed to body fluids, resulting in a short circuit of the unit. However, after making the change, Guidant still had upwards of 37,000 of the old unit in stock and, rather than scrapping them, they continued to sell the surplus.

The process for approval of a new drug starts with a drug company running laboratory and animal testing to see if the proposed drug is safe and effective. If the results are positive, the company submits these results to the FDA for review. After waiting 30 days for FDA review, the company can then start human trials. If the company feels that the results of the human trials meet guidelines for safety and effectiveness, it can then submit a New Drug Application, supported by detailed information, including testing results and their proposed dosage, packaging, and labeling. If the FDA approves the drug, it can then be marketed. Although the process sounds straightforward, the human trials typically last more than 7 years, and it takes an average of 12 years and hundreds of millions of dollars to get a new drug from the laboratory to the pharmacy shelf.

If you’ve been hurt by a defective medical device or a dangerous drug contact Richard Serpe to discuss your case.

GUIDANT LATER CLAIMED that although they were aware of the problem, the company felt that the number of units that would fail was small, and they did not want to create a panic by informing the doctors, patients, or authorities. They said that the risks of unnecessary surgeries to replace the units outweighed the risks of failure.

This is just one story of tragedy. Undoubtedly, there are countless others.

T

HE FDA IS RESPONSIBLE for monitoring and regulating the safety of medical devices, and they also handle the approval of new drugs. Their Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) is the largest of their regulatory arms, and it tries to ensure the safety of new prescription and over the counter drugs.

// 04

Attorney Cindra Dowd

5 Important Things to Know about Product Liability Claims Have you or someone you know been injured by a defective or dangerous product? When individuals are injured by a defective or dangerous product, they may have a products liability claim. Below are 5 important things to know about product liability claims.

WHAT IS A PRODUCTS LIABILITY CLAIM? Products liability refers to an area of the law where manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, retailers and others in the chain of distribution may be held liable for the injuries caused by products that they manufacture, distribute, supply, sell or otherwise handle. The three major types of product liability claims are based on a manufacturing defect, design defect or a marketing defect such as improper labeling or a failure to warn.

IF YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED BY A DEFECTIVE OR DANGEROUS PRODUCT, DO NOT LOSE OR THROW THE PRODUCT AWAY! If you believe that you may have a claim for an injury caused by a defective or dangerous product, you should take care to safely keep the defective or dangerous product so that it can be viewed and inspected at the appropriate time. It is important to keep the product in the same condition as when the injury occurred and do not turn over the product to the manufacturer or any others who may dispose of it. Your attorney will ask you for the product so it can be inspected and it may be necessary to have the product available to show to a jury should you end up filing suit and taking the case to trial.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP ALL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE PRODUCT. When an injury occurs, you should look for and keep all of the documents you can find related to the product, including your sales receipt, instruction manuals, warranty documents, packaging materials, and communications with the manufacturer or other persons. These documents will contain important information related to the product and your claim.

USE CARE WHEN CHANGING OR ALTERING A PRODUCT. If you change or alter a product in a significant way after you have purchased it, the manufacturer of the product may not be liable for any injury you suffer. The manufacturer may argue that it could not have foreseen the change or alteration made by you and the change or alteration was the cause of your injury. It is, therefore, important to use care when deciding to change or alter a product so that you don’t render the product unsafe.

IF YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE BEEN INJURED BY A DEFECTIVE OR DANGEROUS PRODUCT, SEEK LEGAL HELP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Products liability law is complex and often requires the hiring of experts to give assistance and testimony related to the product. Most products liability claims are governed by state law and there are specific time limits to bring a claim or you will be barred forever from asserting your claim. For these reasons, it is important for you to consult with an attorney experienced in the field of products liability and to do so without undue delay. The attorneys at the Serpe Firm are experienced products liability attorneys. We have handled numerous complex products liability cases and are well-equipped to assist you with your claim.

// 05

PRSRT STD US POSTAGE

PAID

MAIL WORKS II

580 East Main Street, Suite 310, Norfolk, VA 23510

www.serpefirm.com

The Dangerous and Defective Products Newsletter

Issue 1.04

SETTLEMENTS & CASES OF INTEREST

$5,000,000.00

580 East Main Street Suite 310 Norfolk, VA 23510

defective vehicle settlement that tragically killed father and daughter

If you’ve been hurt by a dangerous or defective product contact our office today.

info@serpefirm.com www.serpefirm.com Phone

757.233.0009 Toll-Free

877.544.5323 06\\

DISCLAIMER All cases are different and the results of one case cannot be used as an indication of what our firm may obtain for a similar case.

The Dangerous and Defective Products Newsletter | Law Offices of Richard J. Serpe, PC