San Francisco Injury Lawyer Blog

Oakland-San Francisco Product Liability Attorney Comments on New Strain of E. coli

November 15, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), a strain of E. coli bacteria linked to 33 illnesses in five states has been found in samples of Bravo Farms Gouda cheese, which is sold at Costco stores. The outbreak involves a rare strain of E. coli that the Centers for Disease Control have never seen before. On November 4, federal officials and Costco stores warned customers not to eat a raw milk Gouda cheese made by Bravo Farms, based in Traver, California. E. coli cases have been reported in the following states: 15 in Arizona, 10 in Colorado, 3 each in California and New Mexico, and 2 in Nevada. The CDC said 15 of the patients were hospitalized, one of whom developed hemolytic uremic syndrome, a potentially fatal kidney complication. Patients range in age from 1-18, with October 24 as the latest onset date. No deaths have been reported.

E coli that matched the strain has been found in samples from two opened packages from two different patient homes, and preliminary tests from an unopened package from a Costco store came back positive for E coli, according to the CDC. Additional tests on samples from opened packages from two other patients revealed E. coli, and more tests are underway to confirm the findings. The Bravo Farms Dutch Style Gouda cheese was offered for sale and in cheese sampling events at Costco Wholesale Corporation locations in Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada. The CDC advises Consumers in possession of this cheese that they should not eat it and that they should either return the cheese to the place of purchase or dispose of the cheese in a closed plastic bag and place it in a sealed trash can to prevent people or animals, including wild animals, from eating it.

What is being done to protect consumers? The FDA, CDC and Costco are working together on the investigation and will update the public with more information as soon as it is available. As more information becomes available, the recommendations to consumers may change. The FDA in conjunction with the state of California has initiated an investigation at Bravo Farms. Costco is advising consumers to return any remaining Bravo Farms Dutch Style Gouda cheese they may have at home to Costco for a full refund. Costco has voluntarily removed the cheese from its stores and, using card purchase records, has notified consumers by phone of the situation.

San Francisco-Oakland Injury Attorney Comments on Cruise Ship Ordeal

November 12, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Monday of this week, a Carnival Splendor cruise ship with nearly 4500 passengers, 52 of whom were senior citizens, became stranded off Mexico’s Pacific Coast. A fire in the engine room caused the ship to lose power Monday morning, only one day after it left port in Long Beach for a seven-day Mexican cruise. Because they were without power, passengers were forced to wait in hot, dark rooms, and eat rations delivered to the ship by the U.S. Navy when the ship’s refrigeration system lost power. In addition, passengers had to cope with limited food, long food lines, stinky toilets, no showers, and no lights. The only food available was canned Spam and Pop-Tarts. One passenger, a diabetic, said she did not have sufficient food to take her insulin. When her husband asked a crew member for food for his wife, he was told to give her a Tic-Tac. The National Transportation Safety Board announced Thursday that it had begun an investigation and Carnival has announced that everyone will receive a full refund.

According AOLnews.com, only one passenger suffered an injury, related to a slip and fall, but all the other passengers on the cruise left the ship safe and healthy. However, the situation could have ended- up much worse– considering the age and physical conditions of the some of the passengers– and carnival could have faced serious personal injury lawsuits–or even a wrongful death suites. For example, that woman who was unable to take her insulin could have become very ill or fallen into a coma if the ship had not been rescued in time. These kinds of cases can be tricky because they are generallly governed by the terms of the ticket and usually have a shortened statute of limitations or time within which to file a lawsuit.

If you have questions regarding personal injury law or if you have been injured while on a cruise and need an attorney, please contact our office for a free consultation. We have over 10 years experience helping injured parties get the compensation they deserve, and we will fight for your legal rights.

Oakland-San Francisco Attorney Comments on Unsafe Working Conditions

November 11, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

According to unitehere.org, housekeepers at Hyatt hotels in eight cities filed complaints with a federal agency today alleging a variety of injuries suffered as a result of the company’s policies. The workers are almost all female and are represented by the union Unite Here. They filed the complaints with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, stating they are overworked and not given proper materials to clean hotel rooms. The union’s Housekeepers Rising initiative claims that the repetition of lifting the corners of hundreds of heavy mattresses to make beds and bending on hands and knees to clean bathrooms are among the causes of numerous repetitive injuries among employees. They also claim that many of the injuries are the result of the housekeepers having to clean up to 30 rooms a day, which is apparently almost double the industrial standard. One worker described how she injured her arm while making a bed at the hotel and stated how much it changed the quality of her life -she required surgery due to the severity of it. What is more, she is not the only housekeeper who suffers these injuries, many other housekeepers suffer the same injuries.

The complaints ask OSHA to investigate the cause of the injuries. The workers also want the hotels to lower the current 30 rooms a day that housekeepers have to clean, switch from flat sheets to fitted sheets that are easier to make beds with, and provide long-handled tools that make cleaning easier. The union and hotel management have been in contract negotiations since August 2009. The union’s local chapter has held multiple strikes and protests outside Hyatt hotels in San Francisco and around the Bay Area. Of the Hyatt properties cited in the complaints, eight are located in the following cities: San Antonio, Texas, Chicago, San Francisco, Santa Clara, California, Los Angeles, Long Beach, California, Honolulu, and Indianapolis. A study last year in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine, cited by the union, that showed high rates of injuries to female housekeepers, particularly at Hyatt, was denied by Robert Webb, Hyatt’s Chief human resources officer.

Here at the Brod Law Firm, we believe everyone deserves as safe place to work. If you have a questions about workplace injury law, or if you would like to a free consultation regarding injuries you received on the job, please contact us today. We have over 10 years experience fighting and winning personal injury lawsuits, and can help you receive the compensation you deserve.

San Francisco-Oakland Injury Attorney Comments of Train Accidents

November 8, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Last week, according to SFGate, an Amtrak train struck and killed a man who was walking with a friend on railroad tracks in Albany. The accident interrupted train traffic between San Francisco Bay Area and Sacramento. Investigators interviewed the dead man’s friend to determine what happened. Amtrak said that none of the passengers aboard the train were injured and that they were transferred to another train and taken to the Emeryville station. The Union Pacific spokesman Aaron Hunt said the men trespassed onto the railroad’s tracks.
According to the Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis, between January and December of 2009, there were 153 injuries reported on train tracks, 85 of which were fatal and 28 of which occurred between Amtrak and trespassers on the tracks. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, trespassers now account for the highest number of fatalities in the railroad industry. They state that in many industrialized countries, suicides account for a large number of trespasser fatalities, and the proximity of mental health facilities to rail infrastructure accounts for many “hot spots” in trespasser incidents. They also state that there are many reasons for trespassing on railroad rights-of-way, some of which involve recreation and some that have to do with the romantic notion (planted in our minds by Hollywood) that such acts of trespassing on are some sort of type of cultural right of passage. Trespassing on railroad property is usually a misdemeanor, with penalties ranging from $100 to $1000 or jail, depending on the state. Reviews written by experts recommend, where applicable, increased enforcement and observations by local law enforcement agencies at crossings, especially near schools before and after hours, pedestrian clearance line be placed on either side of the tracks, and “No Trespassing” signs be place on railroad rights-of-way.

If you or a loved one fell victim to train accident, please contact the Brod Law Firm as soon as possible for a free consultation. Our train accident attorney can help you sort through any questions you may have, explain the legal framework surrounding train victims’ rights, and, if you end up filing a claim, help you get the compensation to which you are entitled.

Oakland-San Francisco Attorney Comments on Threat to the Class Action Suit

November 5, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

According to the Los Angeles Times, AT&T Mobility vs. Concepcion, a case involving AT&T that goes before the U.S. Supreme Court next week, will have serious ramifications for potentially millions of consumers if AT&T gets their way. If a majority of the nine justices vote on the side of AT&T, any business that issues a contract to consumers-such as for credit cards, cell phones, or cable TV-would be able to prevent them from joining class-action lawsuits. This would take away

a consumer’s leverage when they want to seek compensation from an entity, especially when small amounts of money are involved, as class actions allow plaintiffs to band together in seeking compensation or redress and gives clout to their claims. The ban on class actions could apply to employment agreements and union contracts. Consumer advocates say that without the threat of class-action lawsuits, many businesses would be free to engage in unfair or deceptive practices. A lot of people would be stripped of their right to sue over contracts violations, as not many would be willing to litigate on their own a case involving small amounts.

What is to be decided is whether the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 preempts state courts from striking down class-action bans. The federal law requires both sides in a dispute to take their grievance to an arbitrator, rather than a court, if both sides have agreed in advance to do so. Initially, AT&T asked the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California to dismiss the case because its contract forbade class actions. The court ruled that a class-action ban violates state law and is not preempted by the federal law, and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower-court ruling. Then AT&T petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case. As it stands, it looks as if high court is interested in extending the reach of the Federal Arbitration Act.

Oakland-San Francisco Injury Attorney Comments on Transportation Reform

November 4, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Transportation for America writes: America’s transportation system is half a century behind-causing unnecessary pollution, expense, and congestion. We need our leaders to invest in public transportation, high-speed passenger rail, streets safe for biking and walking, maintaining our roads and transit systems, and green innovation. Here at the Brod Law Firm we wonder if the above listed things will come true or if we as a species will ever evolve past the automobile. Nevertheless, we face huge challenges– considering the fact that the majority of the House does not fully support alternative transportation, clean energy, and protecting the environment (most experts predict a two year gridlock), and the fact that Americans love their cars. The following is just one, though there are many, good argument to pose to anyone against working toward alternative transportation.
According to the U.S. Consumer Expenditure Survey, in 2008 U.S. motorists spent on average approximately $2,700 per vehicle on ownership expenses (purchases, registration, insurance, etc.) and $1,400 on fuel and oil, and about $4,100 in total.That year, governments spent $181 billion to build and maintain roadways, or about $730 annually per registered motor vehicle. Less than half of these roadway expenses are paid by motor vehicle user fees, the rest are borne through general taxes.

Needless to say it looks like it is up to individual citizens to do their part to effect change, such as using their cars less, walking or riding bicycles more and pressuring policy makers to invest in change. If you do choose an alternative form of transportation, don’t forget to stay safe whether you decide on cycling, walking or taking public transportation. Speaking of cycling, we would like to remind cyclists about, what some consider to be, their #1 enemy: the car door. As reported in NYT, cyclists sometimes call it “the door prize,” or simply being “doored.” In addition they report that a compilation of episodes in which drivers opened the doors of their parked vehicles into the path of oncoming cyclist can be found on BicycleSafe.com, which includes details of cases from places as diverse as India, Canada, Chicago, New Orleans and San Francisco. Such collisions can seriously injury, even kill cyclists. Any cyclist who has been “doored” should contact a bicycle injury attorney. Our firm specializes in these kinds of cases and has over 10 years experience fighting for the rights of cyclists.

Oakland-San Francisco Injury Attorney Comments on Single-Vehicle Crash

November 2, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

This past week-end two women were killed and the driver was seriously injured in a single-vehicle crash on U. S. Highway 101 near Blossom Hill Road in San Jose. According to the San Jose Mercury News, the two women were riding in an Infinity sedan early Saturday when the vehicle went across two lanes of the southbound portion of the highway, then slammed into several trees. It was estimated that the driver was traveling 70 mph when he changed lanes and went off the highway. All three victims were determined to be from Fresno.

Here at the Brod Law Firm we wonder if the accident the result of an error of judgment or simply bad driving? Or was there a hazardous road condition? If there was such a condition that caused or contributed to the accident, the city or governmental agency responsible for maintaining that particular roadway could be held liable. California has statute of limitations which may prevent the victim from filing a claim against a governmental agency if too much time has passed. Still, however, many questions remain. Whatever the cause of the accident many be, it would be in the victim’s and the families’ of victims best interest to contact an experienced personal injury lawyer, one who can analyze all the particulars and hire independent experts in accident reconstruction to establish of this tragic accident and ensure they receive the justice and compensation they deserve.

In the matter of a filing a wrongful claim involving a car accident, there are a special factors that an attorney must consider. First, these kinds of accidents are caused by someone else who acted negligently, usually through bad driving. In some claims this will mean the auto maker designed the vehicle poorly. Second, there must be adequate insurance or assets to provide the basis of recoverable legal claim. Sometimes, fatal car accidents that are the result of bad driving are uncompensated because there is no money to compensate a victim’s family, as many cars are under insured with small policies. An experienced attorney will how and where to look for available monies and assets by using investigators and asset searches.

Oakland-San Francisco Attorney Comments on FDA Litigation

November 1, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Soon the FDA may seek criminal charges against drug company executives whose firms have illegally promoted drugs for unapproved uses. Prescribing a drug for an unapproved use-an act known as off-label use-is legal, but promoting it-an act known as off-label marketing-is not. Normally the FDA seeks monetary penalties against drug makers that engage in such marketing. Unfortunately these kinds of fines have shown to be ineffective in discouraging drug makers from engaging in off-label marketing. Earlier this month, according to newsinferno.com, Eric Blumberg, FDA litigation chief, told an industry audience that his agency was looking for cases to use what is known as the Park Doctrine as a tool to “change the corporate culture” of firms that have thus far shrugged off other penalties. In other words a corporate officer can now be liable for illegal corporate actions of which he should have now about or was responsible for preventing.

The Park Doctrine was established based on a case involving John Park, president of Acme Markets Inc. in 1970, a time when the company was cited for rodent infestations at a warehouse here. The FDA charged Park personally with violating sanitation laws after other rodent infestations were discovered despite a number of agency warnings. Park argued that as company president he was too far removed from warehouse supervision to be held responsible. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately agreed with the FDA that Park, as president, was responsible for ensuring rodent-free warehouses. Park got a slap on the wrist–all he had to pay a $250 fine. Prosecutors now hope to enforce stiffer penalties under the doctrine, including up to a year in prison and $100,000 fines.

Legal experts believe, the Park Doctrine can be a very powerful tool, while, at the same time, it presents prosecutors with a number of hurdles. They believe the real challenge is finding a person who was in a position to know about and prevent the conduct that occurred. In addition the other challenge would be assuring that an off-label case would hold up in court, especially if it involved executives many levels higher than the departments that committed the illegal acts, as there are certain cases where the management is so far removed from the activity and will have had no direct knowledge of an issue. So it goes without saying, to hold an executive criminally liable is a significant policy step that needs to be handled with unwavering confidence and diligence. Here at the Brod Law Firm we believe bringing criminal charges against executives is a bold and significant deterrent, despite the complexity and inherent challenges of these kinds of cases.

Oakland-San Francisco Attorney Comments on Dangerous S-Curve

October 28, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Accordign to SFGate,The family of Tahir Sheikh Fakhar, 56, who died on November 9th, 2009, after his truck flipped over a Bay Bridge wall and plunged onto Yerba Buena Island, filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the state and civil engineers who designed and warned about the dangerous S-curve that caused the accident. After the deadly accident, Caltrans ramped-up signage and added rumble strips, flashing lights and other advisories to notify drivers to slow down. The speed limit on other sections of the bridge is 50mph. Before the accident about 43 crashes had been documented on the s-curve. The wrongful death suit was filed in San Francisco Superior Court and accuses Caltrans of negligence in designing the S-curve, part of a detour installed on the bridge while a new eastern span is constructed. The suit blames the poor design and lack of warning signs and signals, and seeks unspecified damages. Bart Ney, Caltrans spokesman, stated that increased enforcement of the sped limit and public awareness has cut down on the accident rate at the S-curve.
Ironically, the S-curve was constructed to keep drivers safe, as it replaced the seismically unsafe eastern span. The new speed limit is 40 mph on the curve, which is a 10 mph decrease from the rest of the span of the bridge. Back in October 14, 2009 around 2:30 p.m., another big rig overturned at the s-curve, which prompted Caltrans officials to approve better warning signs to alert motorists to slow down, which were insufficient in preventing Fakhar’s tragic accident. The semi-truck was driven by Manuel E. Garcia Jara, 55, who had reportedly traveled across the bridge many times, but had never navigated the new S-curve, which opened on September 8th. Like Fakhar, Jara was traveling over the 40 mph limit, when his 18-wheeler entered the curve and overturned on the westbound lanes. Prior to proper warnings, the sudden and unexpected curve did not give drivers enough time to slow down until it was too late and they had already lost control of their vehicles. These accidents highlight the need for Caltrans and its engineers to better analyze future construction projects in order to prevent such catastrophic accidents. Tax payer money goes into these projects, and the public expects a high standard of safety when Caltrans builds a new project– let’s hope they have learned from their mistakes.
If you or a loved have been injured in a car or trucking accident, please call the Brod Law Firm today. We have the experience necassary to help you win the compensation you deserve.

Oakland-San Francisco Attorney Comments on Over the Counter Drugs

October 26, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

According to newsiferno.com, a lawsuit has been filed against Johnson and Johnson, claiming that it’s pain reliever Motrin caused Sabrina Brenton, a six year old girl, to lose her eyesight, one of handful of serious complications of the syndrome, after developing Stevens Johnson Syndrome. Apparently the girl was treated with three children’s Motrin for a fever, after which she soon showed symptoms of the rare yet serious and often deadly syndrome. There is no definitive cause or known trigger, but it seems that a number of anti-inflammatory drugs-NSAID’s, such as ibuprofen, have been connected to SJS cases. Noteworthy is the fact that SJS did not manifest immediately in Sabrina’s case, as symptoms were absent in the first couple of doses. Many drugs do list skin reactions as potential symptoms of an allergic reaction to the medication– which refer to skin allergies and SJS– but do not list them as specifically as possible reactions.

According to the May Clinic, Stevens-Johnson syndrome is a rare, serious disorder in which your skin and mucous membranes react severely to a medication or infection. Often, Stevens-Johnson syndrome begins with flu–like symptoms, followed by a painful red or purplish rash that spreads and blisters, eventually causing the top layer of skin to die and shed. Other Symptoms associated with the syndrome include: facial swelling; tongue swelling; skin pain; hives; blisters on skin and mucous membranes, especially in the mouth, nose, and eyes. Before the rash develops, a person with Steven-Johnson syndrome may experience burning eyes, in addition to the flu-like symptoms already mentioned. Anyone experiencing the above symptoms should seek medical attention immediately. The Mayo Clinic states that the exact causes of Stevens-Johnson syndrome can’t always be identified; however, the condition is usually an allergic reaction in response to medication, infection, or illness. Medications are the most common culprits, and they include: anti-gout medications, such as allopurinol; nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; sulfonamides and penicillins, used to treat infections; and anticonvulsants, which are used to treat seizures.

If you or a loved one has suffered due to the use of medications, over the counter or otherwise, or have questions regarding product liability law, please call our office. We have over 10 years experience pursuing product liability claims and will aggressively work on your behalf to get you the compensation you deserve.