Contact Us
Free Consultation
* required | Privacy Policy
Hardesty, Tyde, Green & Ashton, P.A. blog
Monday, May 11, 2009
Supreme Court Rejects Drug Manufacturers' Claim that Warning Labels Prevent Lawsuits
In a recent 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court rejected claims by drug manufacturing firms that FDA approved warning labels on drugs pre-empted state lawsuits based on failure to give adequate warning of the drug's risks. In this case, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals v. Levine, a Vermont jury had awarded several million dollars to a patient whose right arm had to be amputated after she received an IV push injection of the drug, Phenergan. The lawsuit claimed Wyeth failed to provide appropriate warning of the drug's risks associated with improper administration. Wyeth argued that, even though it could have changed the label warnings without FDA approval, the FDA's approval of the original warnings essentially gave Wyeth immunity from lawsuits.
This immunity argument was flatly rejected by the Supreme Court which noted that Congress had never passed any legislation granting immunity to drug manufacturers for faulty warnings which may have been approved years ago by the FDA based on the data provided to the agency by the drug manufacturer. Clearly, if the FDA got bad information from the drug companies, it would not be able to issue proper label warnings.
This case is an important victory for patients. It makes little sense to give drug companies immunity from lawsuits when they give bad or incomplete information to the FDA. It is in everyone's best interest to make sure drug manufacturers regularly update label warnings based on the most recent information they have regarding drug risks. Our firm has handled many cases where patients have suffered serious injuries, including development of Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD), from improper administration of Phenergan. If you believe you have had a serious injury resulting from a reaction to a drug you have received, please call us for a free consultation.
This immunity argument was flatly rejected by the Supreme Court which noted that Congress had never passed any legislation granting immunity to drug manufacturers for faulty warnings which may have been approved years ago by the FDA based on the data provided to the agency by the drug manufacturer. Clearly, if the FDA got bad information from the drug companies, it would not be able to issue proper label warnings.
This case is an important victory for patients. It makes little sense to give drug companies immunity from lawsuits when they give bad or incomplete information to the FDA. It is in everyone's best interest to make sure drug manufacturers regularly update label warnings based on the most recent information they have regarding drug risks. Our firm has handled many cases where patients have suffered serious injuries, including development of Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD), from improper administration of Phenergan. If you believe you have had a serious injury resulting from a reaction to a drug you have received, please call us for a free consultation.
posted by
Attorney Frank Ashton
at
6:30 AM
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Recommends Increased Vehicle Roof Strength
Starting in 2010, car makers that want the insurance industry's highest safety ratings will have to increase roof strength on their vehicles to a 4.0 strength to weight ratio. This new insurance industry standard significantly exceeds the current government standard of 1.5. It also significantly exceeds the proposed new government standard of 2.5. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety estimates using the 4.0 strength to weight ratio could reduce injuries in rollover accidents by 40-50%.
posted by
Attorney Frank Ashton
at
6:16 AM
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Defendants' rights law challenged
In the next few weeks a decision could come down from the U.S. Supreme Court that drastically affects the rights of defendants in criminal cases, especially vulnerable defendants, including disabled and indigent defendants. The Supreme Court will rule on a case, Montejo v. Lousiana (Docket No.07-1529). This case could overrule the 1986 case of Michigan v. Jackson.
Michigan v. Jackson was a case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. This case dealt with a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel during a police interrogation. In a decision written by Justice Stevens, the Court held that once an accused individual has claimed a right to counsel at a plea hearing or other court proceeding, a waiver of that right during later police questioning would be invalid. This decision applies to defendants who agree to talk to authorities without their attorneys present.
This case is especially important for indigent or mentally challenged defendants. Those defendants could be easily convinced to talk by savvy and intelligent police officers seeking a confession.
At Hardesty, Tyde, Green & Ashton we have extensive experience representing defendants in criminal cases. Call us to see if our criminal defense attorneys can help you or someone you know.
Michigan v. Jackson was a case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. This case dealt with a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel during a police interrogation. In a decision written by Justice Stevens, the Court held that once an accused individual has claimed a right to counsel at a plea hearing or other court proceeding, a waiver of that right during later police questioning would be invalid. This decision applies to defendants who agree to talk to authorities without their attorneys present.
This case is especially important for indigent or mentally challenged defendants. Those defendants could be easily convinced to talk by savvy and intelligent police officers seeking a confession.
At Hardesty, Tyde, Green & Ashton we have extensive experience representing defendants in criminal cases. Call us to see if our criminal defense attorneys can help you or someone you know.
posted by
Attorney Mike Alfano
at
10:42 AM
Monday, April 27, 2009
Off-Road Vehicle Safety
In November 2008 the Wall Street Journal reported that federal safety regulators are investigating the safety of the Yamaha Rhino. The Rhino has been linked to some 30 deaths. The Rhino, different from an ATV, does not fall under the safety regulations that ATV's are subject to. The Wall Street Journal in a November 4, 2008 article, stated that the Rhino "is not subject to ATV safety standards because of design differences such as having a steering wheel.... But the novel off-road vehicles aren't subject to the much-tougher standards for cars either." There are no federal safety standards in place for Yamaha to conform to when designing the Rhino to make sure that it is safe for the public.
The Wall Street journal in the same article, reported that "Yamaha faces more than 200 lawsuits in state and federal courts, many alleging the Rhino's design is unsafe." In a follow-up article on April 1, 2009 the Wall Street Journal reported that "the Consumer Product Safety Commission said that Yamaha Motor Corp. has agreed to suspend the sale of its Rhino 450, 660 and 700 models." Yamaha has also agreed to offer free modifications to Rhino's already in service to make them less likely to roll over.
When the lawsuits against Yamaha began the Wall Street Journal reported that "Yamaha settled some but last year beefed up its defense and said it may start to fight rather than settle."
If you or someone you know has been injured while operating a Rhino you may be entitled to damages. For more information on how to find an experienced attorney willing to fight for you please contact us for a free consultation.
The Wall Street journal in the same article, reported that "Yamaha faces more than 200 lawsuits in state and federal courts, many alleging the Rhino's design is unsafe." In a follow-up article on April 1, 2009 the Wall Street Journal reported that "the Consumer Product Safety Commission said that Yamaha Motor Corp. has agreed to suspend the sale of its Rhino 450, 660 and 700 models." Yamaha has also agreed to offer free modifications to Rhino's already in service to make them less likely to roll over.
When the lawsuits against Yamaha began the Wall Street Journal reported that "Yamaha settled some but last year beefed up its defense and said it may start to fight rather than settle."
If you or someone you know has been injured while operating a Rhino you may be entitled to damages. For more information on how to find an experienced attorney willing to fight for you please contact us for a free consultation.
posted by
Attorney Mike Alfano
at
5:39 PM
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Disability Policies and Equitable Distribution
The Florida Second District Court of Appeal has re-affirmed (in March 2009) that disability policies from which payments constitute a substitute for future lost income are non-marital property and are not subject to equitable distribution.
If you have been injured or need assistance with a family matter contact Hardesty, Tyde, Green and Ashton.
If you have been injured or need assistance with a family matter contact Hardesty, Tyde, Green and Ashton.
posted by
Karl Green
at
1:10 PM
Monday, April 13, 2009
Child Custody Issues
Sometimes grandparents find themselves thrust into the role of seeking custody of their minor grandchild. At times the parent of the child becomes involved in drugs or develops a mental illness that prevents the parent from taking care of their child.
Often the child's parent would rather their child be with the grandparents instead of in the custody of the state in a foster home.
If you need help with issues like this call Hardesty, Tyde, Green & Ashton.
Often the child's parent would rather their child be with the grandparents instead of in the custody of the state in a foster home.
If you need help with issues like this call Hardesty, Tyde, Green & Ashton.
posted by
Karl Green
at
1:26 PM
Friday, April 03, 2009
Fighting for Injured Workers
Last year the Florida Supreme Court struck down caps on attorney fees in workers compensation cases so that attorneys representing injured workers could get paid reasonable fees.
Currently the Florida Justice Association, which represents trial lawyers, has been lobbying lawmakers to reject legislation that would reinstate the caps.
The purpose of the caps is to prevent those injured on the job from hiring a lawyer to help them with their case.
If you have been injured on the job contact Hardesty, Tyde, Green and Ashton.
Currently the Florida Justice Association, which represents trial lawyers, has been lobbying lawmakers to reject legislation that would reinstate the caps.
The purpose of the caps is to prevent those injured on the job from hiring a lawyer to help them with their case.
If you have been injured on the job contact Hardesty, Tyde, Green and Ashton.
posted by
Karl Green
at
1:29 PM
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Unique Family Law Issues for Unwed Parents
Federal researchers reported that there were 4,317,119 births in 2007 which topped a record first set in 1957 at the height of the baby boom.
Additionally births to unwed mothers reached an all-time high of about 40 percent. More than three-quarters of these women were 20 or older.
Unwed parents face a host of family law issues upon the birth of a child. Often the mother needs child support from the father and fathers often have to prove their paternity to be able to seek visitation with their child.
Hardesty, Tyde, Green and Ashton can help!
Additionally births to unwed mothers reached an all-time high of about 40 percent. More than three-quarters of these women were 20 or older.
Unwed parents face a host of family law issues upon the birth of a child. Often the mother needs child support from the father and fathers often have to prove their paternity to be able to seek visitation with their child.
Hardesty, Tyde, Green and Ashton can help!
posted by
Karl Green
at
7:45 AM
Practice Areas
- Personal Injury
- Workers Compensation
- Social Security Disability
- Military Law
- Criminal Law
- Bail Bond Reductions
- Domestic Violence
- Drug Charges
- Traffic Tickets
- DUI/DWI
- Firearm Charges
- Injunctions/Restraining Orders
- Other Charges
- Family Law
- Supreme Court Rejects Drug Manufacturers' Claim th...
- Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Recommends ...
- Defendants' rights law challenged
- Off-Road Vehicle Safety
- Disability Policies and Equitable Distribution
- Child Custody Issues
- Fighting for Injured Workers
- Unique Family Law Issues for Unwed Parents
- Insurance Greed Attempting to Crush Working Famili...
- Alimony Reduction
- August 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- October 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
- February 2009
- March 2009
- April 2009
- May 2009
Previous Posts
Archives
904-398-2212 | Contact Us
