Cherry Hill, New Jersey Personal Injury Lawyer

Woman Gets Backs Surgery - Wakes Up To Find Tatoo Below Panty Line - Doctor Unapologetic

Mike Ferrara — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:04:49 GMT

A New Jersey woman has filed suit against an orthopedic surgeon who thought it was appropriate to place a removable tatoo on her while she was under anethesia. The doctor, Steven Kirshner, M.D. has offices in Marlton and Lumberton, New Jersey.

The red rose tatoo was placed below the panty line on the abdomen of Elizabeth Mateo of Pennsauken, N.J. on April 28, 2008. She had back surgery for a herniated disc at Virtua Hospital. The doctor is quoted as saying that he placed the removable tatoo because it was his intention to make the patient "feel better".

Arthur Caplan, M.D. Chair of the Department of Medical Ethics at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, said if the facts are true, the doctor was out of bounds. In addition to the lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey, a complaint has been filed with the New Jersey Board of Medical Examiners. An alleged former employee of Dr. Kirshner has placed an entry on the blog, phillyburbs.com, contending that she also was a victim of Dr. Kirshner's unwelcomed touches.

Early reaction to the case has been mixed with some feeling that Ms. Mateo should not have filed suit. Others feel the suit is meritorious because of the sensitive location the rose tatoo was placed without Ms Mateo's consent. Both sides agree, however, that the doctor was wrong and should be held accountable for his actions.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Your New Tires May Be Old - Go And Check Them Today

Mike Ferrara — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 00:36:14 GMT

ABC's 20/20 launched an investigation into the sale of outdated tires. They found that many stores, including big names like Sears and Goodyear, were selling old tires as new. The case began when a Newtown, PA., man bought his son "new" tires. On a road trip, the tread separated, the car swerved, and the boy died. The dad found out that the Sunoco dealer from whom he bought the tires, sold him old tires. They looked new, good tread, etc., however, they had been sitting on the shelf for a long time. Tire experts say that after six years sitting on a shelf, tires begin to dry out and are less elastic. This causes the tread to peel off the tire causing the car to swerve and weave resulting in injuries and death.

These incidents should never occur. In England, there is a rule that you can't sell tires more than 6 years old. A spokesperson for the US Rubber Manufacturers Association said he could not explain why England had such a rule. The United States needs to enact a law that prohibits old tires from being sold. We ban eggs and milk that are past their expiration dates. We need to do the same with tires.

To check the date your tires were made, look to the last numbers. For example, if the number is 4102, it means it was made in the 41st week of 2002. The number 414, means it was made in the 41st week of 1994. The tire manufacturers are award that these tires are on the shelves. They will only change their harmful practice when attorneys file unsafe products lawsuits against them.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Nearly 2 Million Americans Get Bedsores - Proper Nursing Home Care Would Eliminate Them All

Mike Ferrara — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 01:57:34 GMT

Bed sores (also known as pressure sores or decubitus ulcers) are a serious condition that can lead to infection, septicemia, gangrene and even death. Fortunately , bed sores are entirely preventable. Today, there are medical devices and protocols that ensure proper circulation to compressed tissue. No one should ever have to suffer with them.

Unfortunately , the statistics surrounding the incidence of bed sores are overwhelming . . . and tragic!

• As many as 23% of long term care residents develop bed sores at some time
• 1.8 Million Americans are affected annually by bed sores
• It has been estimated that 8% of all nursing home deaths can be attributed to bed sores

What You Can Do - Medically

If your loved one has bed sores, it is important that you seek appropriate medical help for them immediately. Ask tough questions. Go up the chain of command at the nursing home until you get the Adminstrator's attention. Tell them to take all necessary steps to immediately try to heal the sores. Keep a diary. Take names and write down who said what to you. Let them know you won't rest until you or your loved one gets proper medical care.

What You Can Do - Legally

It's also important that you hold the nursing home or long-term care facility accountable for their abuse. Your loved one may be entitled to compensation - compensation that might allow them to get the kind of care they need and that they deserve.

While no one can assure you that your loved one will receive compensation, cases involving bed sores have often resulted in just awards for the harms done to the victim. It is very important to have the nursing home and facility held personally responsible for the harms they caused. In 2008 there is absolutely no excuse for anyone to ever get a bed sore.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Michigan Drunk Driver, 24, Who Killed Mom and Her Four Kids Is Sentenced to 43 Years In Prison

Mike Ferrara — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:33:27 GMT

I hope this case reminds all of us who have one too many at a bar or at dinner, that there are serious consequences for the harm you cause. This 24 year old man was at a bar celebrating New Years. His blood alcohol was twice the permitted limit. He drove the wrong way on a freeway and killed a mom and her four young children who were coming home from Christmas shopping. The dad survived and must live and relieve this tragedy for the rest of his life. In some states, like New Jersey, the dad's grief for the loss of his family, is not compensable. It is an antiquated law that needs to be changed. In the last legislative session, the New Jersey Assembly and Senate passed legislation to allow this cause of action, only to see it vetoed by Governor Corzine. Aslo, bars who serve those who are visibly intoxicated should be held responsible for the harms that they are partially at fault for. Let's all work with groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving to do our best to curtail tragedies such as this one.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

New Jersey Doctor Suspended For Two Years For Botched Surgery and Falsifying Records - Tort Reformers Asked If Cases Like This Should Be Subject to Caps

Mike Ferrara — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 22:14:29 GMT

On June 6, 2008 a Morris County (N.J.) surgeon had his license suspended by the New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners for two years. The doctor, Morris County surgeon, Santusht Perera, M.D. practiced at the Hoboken University Medical Center . The doctor removed portions of his patient's incorrect lung during surgery and then lied about it.

In finding Dr. Perera negligent, the Board of Medical Examiners stated that "the tragic error which occurred to this patient could have been prevented had Dr. Perera simply engaged in the most basic and minimal actions that should be taken by a surgeon in caring for his patient". Not only was he found negligent, the Board also concluded that Dr. Perera lied to hide his mistake by telling his patient that the right lung tissue that was mistakenly removed contained a life threatening tumor - even though the doctor knew that there was no tumor. Dr. Perera also attempted to alter the medical records to hide his error by attempting to show that it was his plan to operate on the right lung when he actually was trying to remove a tumor in the left lung.

As a result of this negligence, Dr. Perera's patient has compromised lung function which will have serious long-term medical consequences. The patient will require a lifetime of care, be limited in his ability to earn a living to provide for his family's well being and, in all probability, will have a shortened life expectancy. Hopefully, a jury will reasonably compensate the victim for all he had to endure.

If the so-called tort-reformers and doctors had their way, any harm done by this incompetent doctor would have been capped at $250,000. What is the rationale for helping someone evade responsibility by limiting his or her exposure? Everyone should be personally responsible for the harms that they cause.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

City of Camden (N.J.) Pays Family of Murdered Daughter $1.8M For Botched 9-1-1 Call

Mike Ferrara — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 01:24:33 GMT

The City of Camden, New Jersey, has agreed to compensate the family of Christine Eberle $1.85 million as a result of the negligence of thier 9-1-1 dispatcher. The case settled several days before trial was to begin in Camden County. A mediator, retired Superior Court Judge Charles Pevite was able to get both sides to agree on the settlement. The family wanted more and the City wanted to pay less.

The tragedy begain in November of 2001 when Christine, then 26, was returning home from her job at an investment company in Philadelphia. She rode the train to Camden and got off at the Ferry Avenue station. Two men abducted her and eventually beat and strangled her to death. An eyewitness immediately called 911 when he saw what was happening, however, the 911 opeator, Marie Cupparo, said that it sounded like a domestic dispute and never entered the call into the computer. Had she done her job as she was required to do, a police car one block away would have responded with lights and sirens and the killers would have fled. In addition, all other police cars in Camden and adjoining towns would have responded.

The case was initially dismissed on legal grounds when Superior Court Charles Little determined that the 911 operator and the City were immune for their negligence. A unanimous Appellate Court disagreed and restored the case to the trial list. The New Jersey Supreme Court denied Camden's application for further review.

Christine is survived by her parents Charles and Linda Reis, a sister Mandy, 22, and a brother CJ. 19. A memorial park in her honor has been established called the Shining Star Park, and portions of the proceeds of the case will go to fund scholarhips in Christine's name. The killers were caught, plead guilty, and are serving 45 year prison terms pursuant to a plea bargain with the Camden County Prosecutor.

Christine's family was represented by Michael A. Ferrara, Jr, and Andrew Rossetti, both of Cherry Hill, New Jersey.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Judge Gives Preliminary Approval To $24 Million Settlement of Tainted Pet Food Case

Mike Ferrara — Sat, 31 May 2008 01:09:49 GMT

United States District Judge Noel Hillman, sitting in Camden, N.J., granted preliminary settlement approval today in the tainted pet food cases. Menu Foods, Inc., based in Canada, was the main defendant. The defendants have agreed to pay aggrieved pet owners in the United States and Canada all of their economic or out of pocket expenses in connection with the illness or death of their dogs and cats.

In March, 2007, Menu Foods recalled all of it's pet food when it was found to be contaminated. There have been estimates by various veterinarian groups that about 1,500 pets died from the bad food and thousands more were made sick.

The settlement calls for a total of $24 million to be paid, in addition to the $8 million already paid to pet owners. There will be notices of the class action settlement in major newspapers and periodicals. In addition, written notices will be provided to pet owners who have already filed claims and whose names are known to the Court and counsel. The notices will spell out exactly what the owners have to do to make a claims.

Each owner will be paid for actual out of pocket expenses for items such as vet and hospital bills, burial and cremation bills, replacement costs, lost earnings in connection with the pets sickness or death, transportation costs, damage to carpets and furniture, and any other reasonable related economic loss. Proof in the form of credit card bills or canceled checks will be needed, however, there will up to $900 available if proof of loss cannot be found. In addition, there will be a limited fund available for check ups for heathly pets and replacement pet food. Those limits are $400,000 and $250,000 respectively.

The notices are to be mailed or published by June 15, 2008. There will be a toll free number and a website to answer questions that the pet food owners may have. Owners will have until August 15, 2008 to opt out of the class and proceed individually. According to Menu Foods attorney Mary Gately, "A component not included in this settlement is pain and suffering damages".Many pet owners regard their pets as members of their families, however, the law of most states does not allow this type of recovery.

There will be a hearing before Judge Hillman on October 14, 2008 at which time he will decide whether or not to give final approval to the settlement. The settlment affects over 100 separate lawsuits, with 250 named plaintiffs, that have been filed in the United States and Canada. All of the cases have been consolidated in what is known as Multi-District Litigation (MDL) and are all pending in Camden, NJ before Judge Hillman. A portion of the $24 million will be for attorney fees in an amount to be determined by the judge. A CPA firm in Philadelphia has been selected to be the administrator for the claims.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

$10.2 Million Jury Verdict in New Jersey Accutane Trial

Mike Ferrara — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:43:26 GMT

A New Jersey jury has awarded $10.2 million dollars in an Accutane case. The acne drug, manufactured by Hoffman LaRoche, has found to cause serious health risks. This is the third case to have gone to trial with three wins for the person harmed by Accutane. Hoffman LaRoche has said they will try every case one at a time and deny it causes any harm Merck, the manufacturer of Vioxx, also said they would try all 55,000 cases one at a time, but eventually settled them for a total payment of $4.85 billion. Legal experts preduct Hoffman LaRoche will eventually do the same.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Workplace Injuries Continue To Decline - OSHA Steps Up Enforcement

Mike Ferrara — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:37:39 GMT

The latest government data shows that the number of workplace injuries and workplace deaths was the lowest ever recorded in 2006, the latest year available. The actual figures are 4.4 injuries or illness per 100,000 employees and 3.9 fatalities per 100,000 employees.

Still, employers can do much more to keep reducing these figures. Workplace safety should be the prime consideration of employers and general contractors. Even one serious injury or one death is too many. Every one can be avoided with proper training and proper supervision. OSHA has done a lot of good work to reduce the problems, but it can do much more.

Generally, employees injured on the job are not permitted to sue their employers. Their only remedy is to file a workers compensation claim. This "no fault" system has been around since the early 20th Century. Maybe the time has come to allow workers the right to sue their employers directly. This may have the effect of reducing the number of products liability suits that arise from workplace injuries. The issue needs to be studied and debated.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Editors of New England Journal Call For Full Disclosure of Author's Ties - Latest Find Links Lung Cancer Study to Major Tobacco Company

Mike Ferrara — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:52:52 GMT

The prestigious New England Journal of Medicine in 2006 published an article on lung cancer that found a majority of stage I lung cancers treated after theirdetection by CT screening had a favorable prognosis. One of the sponsors of the study was the "Foundation for LungCancer: Early Detection, Prevention and Treatment" The editors went on to say: "We recently learned thatthis foundation was headed by the principal investigator ofthe 2006 study, that it was housed at her academic institution,and that the only contributor during most of its existence wasthe Vector Group, the parent company of Liggett, a major tobaccocompany. We and our readers were surprised to learn that thesource of the funding of the charitable foundation was, in fact,a large corporation that could have an interest in the studyresults."

The editors in an appropriate broad swipe at this unscrupulous conduct said: "We believe that it is important that the ultimate sourceof funding be made clear to the Journal's readers. Second, itis appropriate to ask whether a study on clinical outcomes inlung cancer should be directly underwritten in part by the tobaccoindustry. Given the enormous burden of smoking-related illnessand the ongoing sale of cigarettes and other forms of tobacco,one might question the advisability of research entities acceptingfunding from tobacco companies.

The editors of this prestigious journal are to be commended for bringing this situation to light. Doctors who rely on these articles are entitled to know what is being bought and paid for by the tobacco industry. It is so outrageous that the Medical Society needs to step in and conduct a thorough investigation into how this happened, how many other times it has happened, and how to prevent it from happening again. The public deserves no less.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara