San Francisco Injury Lawyer Blog

San Francisco Injury Attorney Comments on Vaccine Injury

August 2, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

The FDA has updated the warnings and precautions sections of the prescribing information for Afluria to inform healthcare professionals that the Afluria vaccine has been associated with an increased incidence of fever and febrile seizure among young children (according to confirmed reports in Australia), mainly among those younger than 5 years. Also according to the FDA, various investigations into the cause of the febrile seizures seen with Afluria vaccine are still ongoing. The FDA is collaborating with Australia’s regulatory authority, other international regulatory counterparts, and CSL to obtain additional information, stay apprised and take part in the investigations. The FDA and the CDC are working together and are closely monitoring the continued safety of influenza vaccines. Both Healthcare professionals and patients are being encouraged to report adverse events or side effects related to the use the influenza vaccines to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting system, the national vaccine safety surveillance program co-sponsored by the CDC and FDA.

In 1986 Congress created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) to award compensation to individuals who suffer vaccine injury. Even though vaccines undergo rigorous reviews to ensure safety, numerous lawsuits have been filed alleging injuries from vaccines. These types of lawsuits typically allege either that the drug manufacturer failed to properly warn of side effects, that the drugs were inherently unsafe, or that the manufacturer or the FDA was negligent in testing the vaccine safety. There is still much debate about whether flu vaccines helps or not, or even if it is safe. Any person not sure about whether or not they should take the flu vaccine should talk with a health care professional about their concerns and the risks involved, and if they decide to be vaccinated, they should take the flu vaccine from a licensed healthcare professional.
If you believe you have been injured by a vaccine or a prescription drug, you may be able to file a claim seeking compensation for related medical expenses, pain and suffering and future lost earnings. Contact the Brod Law firm for more information about legal claims that may be available to you.

San Francisco Pharma Attorney Comments on Latest FDA Drug Warning

July 30, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

This week, the FDA has issued a warning to physicians and patients that the intravenous antibiotic Cubicin can cause life-threatening eosinophilic pneumonia, which is caused the accumulation of a type of white blood cells, called eosinophils, in the lungs. Symptoms include fever, cough, shortness of breath and difficult breathing. According to their data, The FDA has identified seven confirmed cases of eosinophilic pneumonia between 2004 and 2010 and an additional 36 possible cases. Of the seven confirmed cases, all were older than 60, and all were prescribed Cubicin for non-FDA approved conditions. Cubicin was approved in September 2003 for treatment of sercous skin infections and in 2006 for the treatment of bloodstream infections. In 2007 its label was modified to indicate an increased risk for pulmonary eosinophilia, the increased concentration of eosinophis in the blood. The FDA has requested that Cubist, the manufacturer of the product, revise its label to reflect the newly recognized danger.
News like this suggests approval by the FDA hardly has anything to do with the safety or efficacy of a drug. What is more, by the time a drug is recalled, many people have already been injured or killed. As drug companies continue to market new drugs and downplay serious health effects in their relentless pursuit of profit, the public will always be at risk. Each year United States and multi-national pharmaceutical companies bring new and different products to market–some of which have adequately been tested and some that have not. Many of these drugs are causing human pain and suffering, rather than relieving it. Here at the Brod Law Firm, we have experience representing victims of injury and wrongful death due to prescription, and non-prescription drugs, which have caused harm. Whether you or a loved one have sustained injury or death as the result of preventable side effects from a prescription drug or over-the-counter remedy, we are available to investigate your claim and represent you if your loss is the result of drug manufacturer wrongdoing.

Product Liability Attorney Comments on BPA Found on Cash Register Receipts

July 29, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Your trip to the grocery could end up costing you more than the total printed on your receipt. The Environmental Working Group has just released lab tests showing the synthetic estrogen BPA is found in high levels on cash register receipts. Bisphenol A (BPA) has been linked to cancer, abnormal reproductive system development, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disorders and asthma. Health professionals and scientists have been trying to get BPAs banned from food packaging to prevent BPAs from leaching into infant formulas, canned foods, and beverages. It turns out that major retailers are using BPA contaminated paper in their receipts including: McDonald’s, CVS, KFC, Whole Foods, Walmart, Safeway, and the US Postal Service. However, many receipts contain little or no BPAs such as those at Target, Starbucks, and Bank of America ATMs. What is scary is about this new discovery is that the paper used in the receipts that contain BPA look no different than papers that do not.

Research has demonstrated that this BPA leaches out of polycarbonate plastics, out of the resins used to line most food cans and out of dental sealants. When we hear about polycarbonate bottles and BPA, the amount of BPA leaching out is so minimal that it can only be measured in nanograms. Now, when we hear about average cash register receipt containing BPA, the amount of BPA leaching out is so great that it is measured in milligrams! And the BPA that is leaching out from receipts is free BPA, free meaning the individual molecules are loose and ready for uptake. However there is no research yet that shows exactly how much BPA can rub off onto fingers from receipt papers, if it penetrates through the skin – and if it does, how much gets into the circulation and if it can reach organs throughout the body. Here at the Brod Law firm we believe that the government should mandate labeling of any and all products that contain BPA, including receipts-since they are the biggest threat-at the point of purchase. That way, at least consumers would know the risks involved regarding their purchases and, most importantly, if they should wash their hands after picking up a BPA-laced receipt.

Fresno Greyhound Bus Crash

July 23, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Last night, on July 22, 2010, a Greyhound bus heading from Los Angeles to Sacramento hit an overturned SUV, killing six people, including three passengers in the SUV, and injuring many more. The CHP (California Highway Patrol) has not determined what caused the SUV, a Chevy Trailblazer, to turn over, and it is unclear as to whether or not the headlights were on, which would have affected the Greyhound bus driver’s ability to see it.

There were more than 30 people on the bus, which was not equipped with seatbelts for its passengers. California Vehicle Code Section 23715 requires taxicabs to install seatbelts in their vehicles, which addresses the policy to reduce highway deaths and injuries by encouraging the use of seatbelts. While the cause of this tragedy has yet to be determined, if the Greyhound bus involved had seatbelts available to its passengers, the number of serious injuries, and possibly some fatalities, would almost certainly have been reduced.

If you or a member of your family has been involved in a bus accident or a vehicle rollover, please call the Brod Law Firm, P.C. for a free consultation.

San Francisco Bus Accident Attorney Comments on Bus Safety

July 23, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Apropo our last blog, there is some addition information we would like to share. But before we do that, the following is a quick recap. Last week, according to AOL news, a Greyhound bus carrying 47 people on its way to Sacramento from Los Angeles crashed on a highway in California’s Central Valley on Thursday, killing six and injuring many others. The California Highway Patrol Officer at the scene said the bus driver swerved to try and avoid another crash involving an overturned SUV and slammed into a concrete center divider and then struck another vehicle shortly after 2am. The bus then went down an embankment, hit a eucalyptus tree and came to rest on a freeway off-ramp. 47 people were on board, six people died, and the driver was among the dead. This story brings to light two issues: SUV safety and bus safety.

First, this accident happened because the driver of the bus swerved to avoid an overturned SUV and could have been avoided if the SUV had not rolled over and obstructed the path of traffic, which forces the question–Why are some people are still under the impression that bigger is safer? Even though there is plenty evidence showing that SUV’s have a propensity for rollovers and instability at high speeds due their high center of gravity, plenty of people are still buying/driving them. Second, the accident resulted in serious injuries and 6 deaths, which forces the question–Can buses be made safer so that accidents such as this don’t have such catastrophic results? It turns out that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration(NHTSA) is making it a priority to improve motor coach safety. In a meeting held in June 2010 they announced specific ways in which they will go about doing that. They will begin by addressing the root causes of motor coach crashes, such as driver fatigue, inattention, medical conditions and the oversight of unsafe carriers. Then they plan to address the root causes of fatalities and injuries in motor coaches by developing requirements for seatbelts for all seating positions to prevent ejections, strengthening the bus structure surrounding the windows to improve their crashworthiness, conducting verification rollover testing, develop performance requirements for motor coach structural integrity, leasing and testing Electronic Stability Controls to decide if they should be standard, upgrading the performance of tires used on motor coaches, and developing more stringent flammability and fire countermeasures and detection requirements. Here at the Brod Law Firm, we believe that consumers decisions about what form of travel they purchase should be tempered by their own research into the risks involved-which may, or may not, give them a better chance of staying safe than if they had not.

San Francisco Dog Bite Attorney Comments on San Francisco’s Pit Bull Ordinance

July 20, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

Today, the San Francisco Examiner, reported that two dogs were euthanized this week following an attack in Golden Gate Park earlier this month. According to SFGate, on July 1, 2010 three people were attacked by one of two dogs–both of which were running loose through Golden Gate Park. One person, a 70 year old woman, was taken to San Francisco General Hospital with bites on her lower legs. An unidentified man in his 40s was taken to UCSF Medical Center with bites on his leg. And another woman had her clothes torn but was not hurt. Both dogs captured at the time of incident were believed to have had bitten the victims, but the city’s Animal Care and Control confirmed later that only one of the animals – an unneutered male pit bull – was believed to be responsible for all the bites. Authorities believe both dogs probably have owners because they were in good health and wearing harnesses. The owners could face civil, criminal or administrative charges.

California dog law allows breeds to be regulated, including requiring them to be spayed and neutered. And San Francisco has its own law that targets pit bulls. Under the ordinance, pit bull owners are required to spay or neuter the breed, and get breeding permits from the city San Francisco’s. The law also allows animal control officers to issue a fix-it ticket to noncompliant dog owners, requiring that the pit bull be sterilized within two weeks. Animal Control officers also hand out information on low-cost and free surgeries. Officers follow up with visits to the homes of owners who have not complied. A first violation can bring a citation and $500 fine and may result in the Department impounding the pit bull and disposing of the pit bull. A second violation of this section by the owner, guardian or keeper, shall be a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period not to exceed six months or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. In addition, a second violation may result in the Department impounding the pit bull and disposing of the pit bull.

It is important to note that the law is not intended to criminalize bill bull ownership, as it takes into consideration there are a lot of people that can’t afford to spay or neuter their dog, rather it is intended to remove animals that pose a danger. Here at the Brod Law Firm, we believe the law is good for everyone–spaying and neutering is good for pit bulls because it reduceds the number of unwanted pups, and it is good for the citizens of San Francisco, as it stunts aggressive behavior-which can often lead to bites, maulings, or in the most drastic case, killings. No one would disagree that a bite from a pit bull is potentially far more dangerous than a bite from other dogs due to the simple fact that they have more muscle and strength in a single bite. If you have been bitten by a pit bull or any other dog, or, if you have questions regarding dog bit law, please call us.

California Judge Approves Class Action Against Apple & AT&T

July 16, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

This week, according to the Huffington Post, Judge James Ware of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has approved a class action, monopoly abuse lawsuit against Apple and AT&T. The class action brings together several individual claims filed by iPhone buyers dating back to late 2007. An amended complaint was filed in June 2008, the basis of which deals with Apple’s practice of “locking” iPhones so that they can only be used on AT&T’s network. The lawsuit also accused Apple of secretly making AT&T its exclusive iPhone partner in the U.S. for five years. Consumers who bought the iPhone were duped into a five year relationship with AT&T, after they had signed a two year contract with AT&T, and were essentially locked into staying with AT&T if they wanted to keep their phone. In addition, the lawsuit claims that the actions hurt competition and drove up prices for consumers . The lawsuit also seeks an injunction to prevent Apple from selling locked iPhones in the U.S. and from determining what iPhone programs people can install.

At the moment iPhone 4 consumers have three options to deal with the reception problem: 1)hold their phones in an akward manner; 2)return their phones and pay a 10% restocking fee; or 3) or purchase an Apple “bumper” case for their phones, which costs $29.99 on top of the premium their already paid premium. Without the class action iPhone consumers have no other leverage or relief. Here at the Brod Law Firm, we were wondering when something like this would happen two the largest companies in the U.S. For some time the public has not been properly informmed or even been made aware of corporate practices, and a class action case such is this is needed to force corporations to undertake informational campaigns, which would give consumers an opportunity to make educated decisions when purchasing products.

Most consumers do not fully understand how powerful these corporations are and how they may harm competition in the market. What is more, competition in the technology market is very different from competition in traditional markets. Specifically speaking, the technology market has powerful “network effects(FYI: the term ‘network’ refers to a common user base, not the physical wires or wireless systems that connect pieces of electronics).” What all this means is that the “first movers ( the term ‘first mover’ refers to the first significant company to move into a market)” in the technology market have an advantage over the “late movers” and rivals who have incompatible products–by setting up a dominant, proprietary standard-and, thus, make it difficult, if not impossible, to compete. If you feel that you been treated unfairly due to an iPhone 4 issue or have questions regarding any other defective product or class action issue, please contact our firm.

California Nursing Home Abuse Verdict

July 14, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

California’s Elder Abuse and Dependant Adult Civil Protection Act (the “Act”) is relatively new legislation, which was intended to protect the abuse of an elder or a dependent adult. The abuse can be physical or financial, and may be evident in a case of neglect, abandonment, isolation or abduction. As cases of elder abuse become reported, the Act helps to provide a way in which violations can be addressed, extreme wrongdoers can be punished, ideally to prevent others from becoming victims of elder abuse.

In Humboldt County, a jury awarded a verdict of nearly $619 million based upon health code violations against Skilled Healthcare, one of the largest nursing chains in the United States. The verdict did not include punitive damages, which were to be decided at a later time. The class action lawsuit involved approximately 32,000 patients. The facilities involved with the health code violations were: Eureka Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC; Granada Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC; Pacific Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC; Seaview Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center, LLC; and St. Luke Heathcare and Rehabilitation, LLC .

Ideally, jury verdicts like the recent one in Humboldt County will send a message to nursing facilities across California and the rest of the country. If you abuse elderly or dependent citizens, you will pay. If you or an elderly member of your family has been the victim of ) Financial Abuse; 2) Physical Abuse and Neglect; and 3) Abduction, please call the Brod Law Firm, P.C. for a free consultation.

Curiosity Killed the Cat and the Right to a Fair Trial. San Francisco Personal Injury Attorney Comments on How the Internet is Affecting the Justice System.

July 9, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

There is a growing concern over how the instant accessibility of information online is affecting, even threatening, the legal system. The following is a scenario that is becoming popular: Prior to a trial a prospective juror conducts a few quick Google searches of the parties involved in the trial. During the trial, evidence is presented, and the juror Googles whatever info there is regarding that evidence (even though the judge already admonished the jurors regarding this particular practice). Then, during deliberation, the juror tells another juror about what was found during the web search prior to trial and during trial. Some other jurors hear the exchange. Finally, the jury reaches its verdict, let’s say for the defense. Next, a motion is filed by the plaintiff, and the trial court sets aside the verdict, finding that one juror had introduced extrinsic evidence into deliberation that prejudiced the jury and swayed the outcome. For those of you who don’t know, extrinsic evidence includes knowledge relevant to the facts in issue not obtained through the introduction of evidence but acquired prior to trial. So, it goes without saying, that all such types of internet research by a juror prior to trial without notice to the court and counsel can lead to mistrials, which not only delays justice but furthers the cost, inconvenience and emotional stress of all parties.

The flip side of the internet’s influence over a case or trial has to do with attorneys using it to find evidence against opposing parties or information on prospective jurors. Divorce attorneys, especially, are using the internet, usually via social networking sites, to gather personal information about their client’s soon-to-be-ex and use it as leverage or as a way to cast doubt on the character of the soon-to-be ex. Also, a lawyer can check their client’s presence on the web for any information that could be used by the ex’s legal team. And when it comes to picking a jury, lawyers sometimes pay more attention to their computer screens during a voir dire than on the answers jurors are giving. Any attorney that thinks this is a good idea should consider the ethical and legal rules that may apply. Here at the Brod Law Firm we are noticing more and more how an individual’s presence on the web could potentially hurt them if they become involved in a lawsuit. It is a brave new world out there, people. Proceed with caution.

San Francisco’s Civil Grand Jury Makes Recommendations on Bridging the Divide Between Cyclists and Drivers

July 2, 2010 | Gregory J. Brod

In a recent article in the NYT about double parked cars on Sundays in San Francisco, the ongoing conflict between cars and cyclists is paid some attention. According the article, cyclists are angered by the police and the Department of Parking and Traffic policy of ignoring, and neglecting to enforce, ordinances against double parking during weekend church services. The article also points out that the number of new cyclists has increased strongly here in San Francisco. Sadly, however, some new cyclists are all over the road (a point not mentioned in the article) and don’t know the rules–giving the seasoned, well-behaved, law abiding cyclist a bad name. That said, we no longer need anti-car this or anti-bike that banter-we just need proper legislation. Thankfully we have the politically savvy people at the San Francisco Bike Coalition working tirelessly to help with that.

Speaking of the need for proper legislation and people tirelessly working to bring about change, the practice of allowing double parking on Sunday’s is a slap in the face to the city’s Transit-First policy and the new Civil Grand Jury investigative report that has made recommendations for easing the tensions between drivers and cyclists. The report, titled Sharing the Roadway: From Confrontation to Conversation, states that its purpose is to focus city attention on identified barriers to the successful implementation of the San Francisco Bicycle Plan: serious mistrust, conflict and misunderstandings among city stakeholders including motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. Also in the report, the Jury states its desire to move towards everyone seeing him/her self as part of the community sharing the roadway. In addition, enforcement of traffic codes is recommended and seen as the key to keeping roads safe and encouraging new and prospective cyclist to begin cycling in the city. And, in its summary, it states that education can bridge the mistrust, misunderstanding, and misperception motorists and cyclists have of each other, and shift (society) toward a more unified cultural perspective and coexistence.

Here at the Brod Law Firm, we couldn’t agree more with the recommendations of the report. During our years of fighting for people who have been injured on the road, due to road rage or driver inattention, and listening to all the stories of near misses, we sometimes feel that we, as a society, are living in the dark ages, psychologically. I mean how come some people don’t know how to share the road? And, why is that when a person is cut off by another on the road, they take it personally and feel as if something was stolen from them. Or, seen from another point of view, why are those people, those people who are cutting off the other people, either not paying attention or doing it intentionally? Is it really so hard for us to share the road? Will people in the future look back at us and laugh, or will they feel sorry for us? We have been on this planet such a long time; one would think our psyches would have evolved and adapted to sharing by now. I guess, considering that the automobile is a comparatively new invention and that evolutionary adaptations don’t happen overnight, we may need to wait decades before we see progress in the area of sharing.