![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Eric Turkewitz, The Turkewitz Law Firm, New York, NY |
||||||||||||||||||||
Friday, September 7, 2007Personal Injury Law Round-Up #27 The New York Personal Injury Law presents the week that was:Prior to suit, we'll explore some related issues: Ronald Miller starts us off with a discussion of medical malpractice caps in Illinois and Maryland at the Maryland Lawyer Blog; The Consumer Law and Policy Blog picks up a New York Times story on the Consumer Product Safety Commission and how the Bush administration has allowed corporate lobbyists into policy making positions to further the position of big business over consumer protections. The result? Injuries, death and tainted products. They also pick up on the third recall from Mattel. This time it's Barbie accessories; David Lowe picks up the story of lung disease from an ingredient in artificially flavored popcorn (which previously was found to affect workers, not consumers, see Round-Up #24). You'll find the most comprehensive materials on the web regarding "Popcorn Lung" at The Pump Handle. There's also an interview on the subject with pulmonologist Cecile Rose at the WSJ Health Blog; Drug safety pops up in a New England Journal of Medicine editorial, and the FDA's inadequate response to the Institute of Medicine's 2006 report (via TortsProf); Last week's round-up had a small give-and-take on the contingency fee, and David Giacalone continues on at f/k/a with contingency fees and the clueless fiduciary. This part of his post jumped out at me: "Tort lawyers ...obtain repayment of substantially all litigation expenses they advance, including expenses advanced in the cases where they do not prevail." Perhaps in academic theory the expenses can be recouped on a lost case, but not in the real world where many claimants simply don't have the money. Not only is the risk of laying out many thousands in disbursements real, but from the business end it doesn't even begin to address the harsh cash-flow problems of funding cases for years before they finally come to trial (see for example, Medical Malpractice Economics); At Point of Law, Walter Olson points to a New York Times article today that questions the accuracy of some of the data regarding health problems to ground zero workers. And into the cauldron of litigation we go: Sheila Scheuerman from TortsProf reports that Greek victims of a Nazi atrocity may sue Germany; The Kentucky Law Review reports that a trial against an obstetrician accused of unnecessary hysterectomies was continued due to protests (note: Only lawyers use the word "continued" when we really mean postponed). The protests were due, in part, to a letter circulated around the medical community. The eventual verdict is here; With trials coming up regarding the September 11 attacks, MassTorts prof Howard Erichson tries to figure out exactly what it is that the plaintiff's want...is it really money? A trial is starting in Texas over the 2005 BP explosion that killed 15 people and will be about, as TortDeform reports, whether the oil giant put profits over safety; A partial settlement was reached in the catastrophic Rhode Island night club fire that killed 100 people and injured 200 more in 2003 when the manager for Great White ignited a pyrotechnics display. Four defendants coughed up $13.5M. There are still 93 other defendants. The New York Times (reg. req.) has the story as does the Boston Globe (no reg.): Mary Whisner from Trial AD notes a $5M medical malpractice verdict in a case where the jury disagreed with a report from the state's Department of Health that claimed the doctor's conduct fell within the standard of care. From the comment section of the blog, it looks as if a juror has responded. I let jury blogging guru Anne Reed know, and she followed up at Deliberations with, If Your Juror Were Writing Online, Could You Find It? And a federal judge has ordered Iran to pay $2.65 billion to the families of the 241 U.S. service members killed in the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut. A bit more from PrairiePundit. And finally:
(Eric Turkewitz is a personal injury attorney in New York.) Labels: Personal Injury Law Round-Up
The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way. Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained. Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice. Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.
|
Subscribe by Email
|
|||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||
![]() |
An Affiliate of the Law.com Network
|
![]() |
|||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
Copyright © 2007 Eric Turkewitz & The Turkewitz Law Firm
About the New York Personal Injury Law Blog:
An attorney's blog on New York personal injury law,
medical malpractice, the civil justice system
and cases of interest.
|
|
Design by Lidija Tomas Design / Studio 4D |