You have been involved in an incident/accident where you sustained injury. You hired the attorney/law firm you thought best for your case.
It all sounded good when you signed the papers. Now, the attorney/law firm will not return your calls.
What can you do?
First, the papers you signed are called a “fee agreement”. The purpose is to outline the fee understanding between you and your attorney/law firm.
It is not a “contract”, so you are not bound to keep the attorney/law firm. You can change at any time.
You have to wonder why the attorney/law firm is not returning your calls. Too busy? Your case not important? Poor management? Something else?
Either way, you have the right to expect better of your attorney/law firm. If you are not getting answers from them, maybe it is time to look elsewhere.
Where to look for a new attorney? Look online, and check out the reviews left by other clients. Hopefully, this way you will find an attorney/law firm more responsive to your case.
Though there is a stigma about older drivers being
"unsafe" on roads, studies actually show that older drivers are some
of the safest drivers on the road today. By 2030, 1 out of 5 drivers will be 65
years of age or older.
“Though the natural changes that occur with age can have an adverse impact
on one’s driving ability, decades of road experience makes older drivers’
statistically one of the safest groups on the road,” said Linda Gorman,
director of communications and public affairs for AAA Arizona. “As an advocate
for the motoring public, AAA believes it is important for senior drivers to
learn how to compensate for those changes so that they can stay on the road
longer and safer.”
Below
are myths that are commonly associated with “old” drivers.
MYTH:
The fewer older drivers, the safer the roadways
FACT: While there’s no such
thing as the perfect driver, senior drivers tend to be safer drivers. In
fact, ages 64 to 69 are statistically the safest drivers on the road,
according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. With
their experience, seniors are less likely to drive distracted or impaired;
tend to drive when conditions are safest; and don’t take as many risks,
such as not driving at night.
MYTH:
Older drivers are resistant to changes in driving laws.
FACT: Though such laws as
seat-belt use weren’t enacted for decades after many older drivers
received their licenses, seniors are the most likely to buckle up – and
therefore model safe driving habits to their passengers. In fact, 77 percent
of older motor vehicle occupants (drivers and passengers) involved in
fatal crashes were wearing seat belts at the time of the crash, compared
to 63 percent for adult occupants (18 to 64 years of age).
MYTH:
Aging makes most older adults high-risk drivers.
FACT: While specific abilities
needed to drive safely, such as vision, memory, strength, reaction time
and flexibility, decline as we age, the rate of change varies greatly.
Many older drivers do not differ significantly from middle-age drivers in
their driving skills. However, it’s important that senior drivers
recognize changes as they age and take advantage of resources to help
combat them.
“A lot of misconceptions remain about older drivers,” Gorman said. “Through
workshops, such as Safe Driving for Mature Drivers, AAA is working to educate
motorists on the strengths and weaknesses of drivers of any age.”
Scenario: You have
been in an accident. You are injured and need medical care. You're
going to be missing work for a time, and you still have bills to pay. This has
never happened to you before, and you're not sure what to do next. What do you
do?
As
you talk to your friends, watch TV or surf the internet, you see ads for accident
attorneys that say things like "free initial consultation" or
"no recovery, no fee" or something like that. You probably
think---wait, attorneys are expensive. Can this really be free? It
seems too good, or too easy, to be true.
So,
first question, is it true?
Answer:
Oftentimes, the simple answer is the easiest answer and the best answer.
And in this circumstance, the answer is almost always "YES”, the
initial consultation is free.
Next
question: How can attorneys do that?
Answer:
When you go to a store to buy something, do you have to pay an admission fee?
When you go into a restaurant to get something to eat, do you have to pay
a charge before walking in the door? Of course, the answer is no.
Personal injury lawyers work much the same way.
You
see, when you make an appointment with a personal injury attorney, the personal
injury lawyer is both buying and selling. First, the lawyer
must "buy” into your case.
He must believe the facts you are telling
him and must believe that with those facts, you have a claim that is worth
pursuing. At the same time, if the attorney believes it is a claim worth
pursuing, he has to "sell" himself, that is, instill the confidence
in you to help you believe that he is the best attorney for your case.
The
great majority of people who have been involved in an accident do not have the
means to pay an “admission fee” to speak with an attorney. Likewise, they
do not have the financial means to pay an attorney's regular charges, win, lose
or draw. In the United States, the laws allow attorneys to handle cases
by contingency fee. What that means, is that the attorney only gets paid
(generally a percentage of the case) if he is able to obtain a recovery in the
case for his client. In this sense, the advertising slogan really is
true: No recovery, no fee.
Question: But how can attorneys do that?
Answer:
This is where experience counts.
Would
you want a dentist performing open-heart surgery on you? Of course
not. In addition, you shouldn't want a divorce or other type of attorney
to handle your personal injury case.
Experienced personal injury
attorneys can offer free consultations, and handle cases on a no recovery, no
fee basis, because their education, background and experience helps them
understand that much better when a person has a valid case and when a person
does not. If the attorney does not believe the case to be valid, the
attorney simply turns it down. If the attorney believes the case is
valid and decides to accept the case, it still does not guarantee a recovery,
but it puts you in the best position to get to a recovery.
Question: Is it easy after that for an experienced attorney?
Answer:
Not even close.
As an experienced personal injury attorney, having been in the profession for
21 years, I can tell you it is anything but easy. Once the decision is
made to accept the case, I understand that my staff and I will be putting in
hundreds if not thousands of hours, in addition to advancing costs ($$), in
order to investigate the claim properly to obtain the best recovery for our
client.
It is our responsibility to put the case in the best position to
obtain the best recovery for our clients. However, remember, just as hard
as my staff and I are fighting to get the best result for a client, there is
likely an attorney on the other side who is fighting equally hard to get the
best result for his client or insurance company. Both sides think in the
end they are going to win.
Again, this is where experience counts.
Know the law, know the facts, know your client’s case and understand,
through experience, how a judge or a jury will likely interpret the facts
should the case get that far. That only comes with experience.
In
choosing the right attorney, look only for an experienced personal
injury attorney, and one who has been declared to be a "Certified
Specialist in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death" by State Bar of Arizona.
These attorneys have the knowledge and experience to handle your case
better than anyone, and most often, don't charge any more than the other guys.
If the price is the same, why would you choose anything but the best?
Because
of their track record of success, these attorneys don't need to charge an
"admission fee" to allow you to speak to them. With their
experience, a careful screening of the information you provide them or their
staff allows them to make a further determination as to whether they want to
meet with you. If they make the decision to meet with you to further
discuss your case, then this "initial consultation" is always
"free". There are no hidden costs, or strings Attached.
Thereafter, if they decide to take your case, if they tell you that there
is “no fee until a recovery” for you, you can believe that as well.
Look
for an experienced personal injury attorney. Look for a Certified
Specialist in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death. The State Bar of
Arizona has determined these attorneys to be the most experienced, the most
honest and the most ethical of the attorneys practicing in their field.
Free
initial consultation? 100% accurate. No recovery, no fee?
Absolutely.
Spring break is just around the corner and we know that many
college students will be found on beaches in the warm and sunny weather venues. With that relaxation being the main priority of most, many tend to forget the simple things to remember in order to keep themselves safe. Below are 10 tips to help you stay safe while on vacation during spring
break:
1.
Book a hotel in a central location to limit the need to drive.
The closer your hotel is to the beach, downtown or other areas where you plan
to spend most of your time, the less likely you'll be to get lost or to be
involved in a car crash. Avoid unlicensed taxi cabs by asking your hotel,
restaurant or club to summon a ride for you, and if in doubt, pass up the car
and wait for another one.
2.
Avoid going out and/or traveling alone at night. There really
is safety in numbers, and you and your friends can watch out for each other.
Walking alone or even clubbing alone can make you a vulnerable target to people
whose intentions are less than pure. Even a two-minute walk can be dangerous
when you're alone at night - especially if you've been drinking.
3.
Never go off with a stranger. Spring break can be a great time
to meet new people, but that doesn't mean you should leave your group of
friends to spend time with people you don't know. Even if your new
acquaintances just want to walk down the street, stick to your group or at
least bring along someone you know and trust.
4.
Limit alcohol consumption to a reasonable level. Overdoing it
on alcoholic drinks impairs your judgment, making you more susceptible to
accidents and crime. Pace yourself, and avoid drinks with high alcohol content,
like shots. Not only is it safer all around, you'll feel a lot better in the
morning. If you plan to drink, always designate a sober companion in your group
who can make executive decisions about everyone's safety.
5. Buddy System Yes, it sounds a little like summer
camp in the third grade. However having an appointed buddy while on spring
break is the number one best safety precaution. Especially if you are traveling
in a large group, this person should help to make sure you get from place to
place and keep tabs on you at clubs and when drinking. This works both ways, so
you should keep an eye out for them too.
6.
Remember that sun exposure and alcohol don't mix. Spring break
often involves lots of time lounging in the sun and in hot tubs, both of which
can intensify the effects of alcohol in the body. Take it easy, and remember to
slather up with sunscreen with an SPF of at least 15, even when it's cloudy.
7.
Use appropriate safety gear for sports and other recreational activities. Whether
you're driving a scooter, skateboarding or just riding on a boat, protect
yourself with any necessary equipment like helmets, knee pads and life jackets.
8. Don't Drink and Drive No kidding, but when you’re
under the influence in a foreign place, people can make bad decisions. Best
bet? Just take a cab.
9.
Know what to do in an emergency. It's easy to forget that in
foreign nations, the phone number for emergency response is not 9-1-1. A State
Department website called Students
Abroad provides a list of these numbers along with detailed tips for health
emergencies, evacuations, natural disasters, crime victims and assistance to
U.S. citizens arrested abroad.
10.
If you're traveling abroad, sign up online for the U.S. Department of State's Smart Traveler Enrollment Program(STEP).
The STEP program enables the State Department to contact you in case of a
family emergency, or to notify you of a crisis near your travel destination. You
can also download a Smart
Traveler iPhone App that provides additional tips and information.
Remember, staying safe should be the main priority of anyone. Especially those who are going on vacation or just taking a break from the same routine and heading out of town for some recharging time. Be safe everyone and have a great spring break!
In the article, “Run of the Mill Justice”, Nora Freeman Engstrom of Stanford
Law School interviewed lawyers and paralegals at the "settlement
mill" law firms, as well as studying their not-infrequent
disciplinary files. What she found would look quite familiar to anybody
involved in the securities class-action business: A small group of
goal-directed players who engage in repeated rounds of the same game.
Her conclusion is surprising, but logical. Law firm "settlement
mills" work because insurance companies like them. The financial
"benefit" to insurance companies in just the incentive they hope for
in personal injury cases.
Insurance companies choose to cooperate with settlement mills, in part
because settlement mills appear willing to settle the largest claims — which
present the highest chance of a catastrophic verdict — at an attractive
discount. In addition, settlement mills and insurance companies share two sets
of overlapping interests: speed and certainty. Insurers, it appears, cooperate
with settlement mills, in even marginal cases, because cooperation is
profitable. It is attractive to insurance companies to pay a settlement
mill less than they believe they would have to pay a law firm that is not a
settlement mill.
The article (hat tip to Drug and Device Law for bringing it to my attention)
offers a fascinating tour through a little-scrutinized arm of the legal
industry in which lawyers with little or no courtroom experience use
advertising to draw in unsophisticated clients and process their claims at
industrial levels of efficiency. Many of the claims involve “soft-tissue”
injuries like neck sprains, which insurance-company research has shown tend to
multiply in value when a lawyer is involved.
The problems arise, and opportunity for insurance companies arise, because
settlement mill lawyers have no intention of filing suit---and the insurance
companies know it. (Engstrom cites one Louisiana firm that tried four cases in
a year and lost all of them, before deciding that was no way to make
money in the law.) As she suggests, insurance adjusters know this. So they are
more than willing to pay hundreds of questionable soft-tissue claims at $2,500
or $5,000 a pop to insure that the truly dangerous accident case, the kind the
right jury might decide was worth substantially more, to an injured person,
gets settled along with the rest. (Of course, the injured person never
receives this information.)
Statistics show the trend. From 1992 to 2001 the number of accident suits
filed in 17 states representing 53% of the U.S. population fell 14%, while the
actual number of accidents rose. Insurance companies tell you that the US is
"lawsuit crazy". these statistics tell quite a different story.
the number of accidents has substantially increased, yet the number of
lawsuits has substantially decreased. Lawsuit crazy? Hardly.
There are winners and losers in this game, Engstrom writes. The
winners are the settlement-mill lawyers, who make nice incomes despite having
subpar legal skills. the insurance companies also win, by paying less on
claims to victims represented by settlement mill lawyers. The losers are
the people injured in the accidents, and they never even know it. they
are told that their case is not worth much, that a lawsuit will be expensive
and take a long time. They end up consenting to low settlements
"just to go away."
There are now so many of these mills, whose advertising engulf both TV and
radio advertising. In addition, there are many law firms who know
virtually NOTHING about personal injury cases, yet are willing to accept them
in the hopes of making quick money.
How do you know the difference between a good, experienced lawyer and the
others? The simple response: Ask. Ask the lawyer if he is
experienced. Ask what percentage of his practice is devoted to personal
injury. Ask if he files lawsuits and how many he has been involved in.
Ask if he tries cases in court--and how many. Most importantly, ask
if your lawyer is a Certified Specialist in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death.
(Note: Less than 1% of all Arizona attorneys are Certified
Specialists.).
It is sometimes difficult to choose the right attorney for your case.
Most importantly, above all else, you should feel comfortable with your
attorney. Asking the above questions should help.
There are many products that are on store shelves that we choose to buy and take home and have a sense of trust of the product because it’s a reputable company who made the product, and because you bought the product from a reputable store.
But what happens if the product has a mechanical flaw, or design that can potentially be dangerous?
The first thing you should always do is call the manufacturer and report it the appropriate government agency.
Input like this helps keeps products safe for all consumers when purchasing goods.
If you have been injured by a defective product, the best things for you to do after you have treatment for the injury is then to call a Phoenix Defective Products Attorney that has experience in dealing with these types of cases. The key is to always protect your rights and to protect your loved ones from dangerous products.
Dangerous products in Arizona get reported every year and recalls are put in place to keep you from having a defective product in your home and most importantly keep you from getting injured.
Below are a few places you can get in touch with if you feel your product is potentially dangerous.
One of the airline passengers who bit into a sandwich containing a one-inch needle earlier this week has now been put on antiretroviral drugs used for the treatment of HIV, and says the FBI is investigating the incidents aboard four Delta Air Lines flights as a criminal case.
James Tonges said he was placed on the drug Truvada, which has recently been approved by the FDA, following the incident aboard a Delta flight from Amsterdam to Minneapolis-St. Paul. Half a dozen sewing needles have now been found in sandwiches on four separate Delta flights, and Tonges, who was sitting in his flight's business elite cabin, was unfortunate to have bitten into one of them.
"It was on the second bite into the sandwich, it actually poked the top of my mouth. It was about one inch long, straight needle," Tonges told "Good Morning America." "Since it punctured the top of my mouth, I had to be put on medication, and we're waiting to see if there's any type of substance on the needle. They're doing their examination right now."
Tonges and another passenger sustained minor injuries after biting into the sandwiches and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)officials found a third needle after confiscating the sandwiches, according to an official report. Dr. Jack A. Drogt, a passenger Tonges had coincidentally met aboard his flight over to Europe, also found a needle in his sandwich.
Federal authorities including the FBI are investigating who had access to the food for flights originating out of Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport bound for the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.
Drogt also told "Good Morning America" Tuesday that his teenage son, who was travelling from Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport on a different flight, was also a victim, and authorities are investigating.
"That was the uncanny thing," Drogt said. "When I landed I spoke to the FBI, then I called my wife to let her know what had happened. She said something happened to our son on a parallel flight from Amsterdam to Atlanta."
The teen would not surrender the needle to authorities, who noted he told them that he planned to use it as evidence in a lawsuit.
Although federal air marshals were aboard the Minneapolis-St. Paul-bound flight, they were not notified of the incident by the crew, authorities said, until deplaning. At that point the air marshals turned the incident over to the FBI, which was working with CBP and local police to investigate how the needles were put in the meat.
Delta airlines released a statement saying it "has taken immediate action with our in-flight caterer at Amsterdam to ensure the safety and quality of the food we provide onboard our aircraft."
The sandwiches were prepared in the kitchen of the Gate Gourmet catering company at Schiphol airport. All such sandwiches have now been removed from flights and replaced with pizzas.
Gate Gourmet operates in 28 countries and serves an average of 9,700 flights every day of the year -- and over 300 million passengers annually.
"You can't check every sandwich that goes aboard a plane," former FBI special agent Brad Garrett told ABC News. "This demonstrates to people who want to do bad things … this is a gaping hole."
In a statement Gate Gourmet said, "We take this matter very seriously. Gate Gourmet immediately launched a full investigation to determine the root cause of this disturbing incident, and we are treating this as a criminal act."
Weird case. Is the airline liable?
Under a theory of "strict products liability", the airline cold be liable. The law places the burden of providing for safe products on the person/entity that sells them in the course of business.
But did the airline do anything wrong? It is possible the needle was there when the sandwich came on the plane. Does the airline have a duty to "inspect" every sandwich? Of course not.
Regardless, the airline looks bad, and likely will settle the case quickly to avoid the negative publicity.
Did you know that Trial Lawyers are a big part of the safety net that comprises your everyday life? You may not know it, but virtually every product that you own, from make-up to food to clothing to vehicles to toys to lawn-mowers to baby cribs and more, have specific regulations and standards set to help keep you and your loved ones safe while using these various products.
Every day, the work of Trial Lawyers | personal injury lawyers are helping to enforce the safety consciousness of the manufacturers of these products. The laws of the United States, and the “promise” of enforcement by the Trial Lawyers assure accountability. It is this same process that makes up the laws, rules and standards for manufacturers who make consumer goods.
In 2011 there was a recall of over 14,000 toasters that could catch fire once they were plugged in. Without accountability, would this recall have occurred? Likely not.
In 2011 the Ipod Nano was recalled due to it possibly over-heating the battery that could cause injury. Why? Because Apple knew that if injuries occurred from a normal and foreseeable use of its product, it would be liable.
In 2010 a baby crib manufacturer recalled baby cribs that could cause infants to get stuck in the headboard causing suffocation. No secret here---babies start dying from an unsafe product, and a serious wake up call is needed for the manufacturer. Any better wake up call than being held legally and financially accountable?
In 2007 the “Easy-Bake Oven” toy was recalled due to over-heating and causing burns to children. Private corporation are profit-minded. They must turn a profit to stay in business and to keep their shareholders happy. Lawsuits for injuries caused by defective products threaten a company’s financial viability. The answer: Make a product right, and safe, the first time.
In 1978 Ford recalled the Ford Pinto because of it’s ability to easily explode while driven. Sadly, Ford knew of the defects before it ever sold the Pinto, but decided that a re-design or a recall would be more expensive that paying the few lawsuits that might be filed. Bad decision. This one cost them millions.
In 2000 Firestone Tires recalled defective tires that killed 25 people because of tire tread separation. The wrongful death litigation that followed changed drastically the manner in which Firestone made its tires. People are much safer today because of it.
In 2007 a recall of home electric heaters were recalled due to the oil-filled heater causing injuries and burns to consumers. Voluntary recall? Likely not.
In 2006 spinach was recalled due to over 180 people getting sick due to E.coli in the tainted product, which caused a massive recall in the food product. The consequence has completely changed the manner in which food is grown, cataloged and protected, making it far safer for the consumer.
The above examples show how just about every consumer product in one way or another has been set to strict standards in order to keep you and your family safe. With Trial Lawyers holding these massive companies accountable, it allows the consumer to have confidence and comfort in the products they are purchasing on a daily basis.
Without laws, and the Trial Lawyers to “promise” enforcement, there would be no accountability and would be no way to compel manufacturers and sellers from making safe products. Their bottom line would be most important---meaning lower costs to produce, which directly affects the safety involved.
Trial Lawyers are necessary to keeping America safe. Think about it.
Scenario: You are at a nice restaurant eating your dinner. You order a meat or fish product, after all, who wouldn’t. Then, as you take a bite, you feel something lodge in your throat, and you begin to choke. At once, you sense a sudden and extreme fear. You cannot breath. You gesture wildly, but no sound comes out. Some one runs up behind you and performs the Heimlich, dislodging the foreign object, and leaving you feeling embarrassed and exhausted. You may require medical attention, which brings with it medical bills.
Question: Is the restaurant at fault, and does the law require them to pay for the medical expenses?
Thanksgiving is here and Christmas is right around the corner. Along with the coming end of year panic comes the end of year gorging ourselves with food (everyone say “YES!!!!”). During the holidays, turkey bones are not thought of as pesky, but rather, are sought out by young children like buried treasures. However, as exciting as finding one at home may be, finding one in your food at a restaurant may bring a little less excitement (see paragraph number one above).
Choking can be very scary for anyone and with good reason. Over 17,000 children under the age of 14 are treated for choking every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and prevention. Keep in mind this number only includes children.
Adults don’t often worry about choking on their food until after it happens. We don’t go to a restaurant prepared to find something in our food large enough or sharp enough to hurt us. But what happens when we are caught off guard by an unexpected object in our food at a restaurant? Is the restaurant responsible? Is it a restaurant employee’s duty to help us in any way they can, including performing the Heimlich Maneuver?
The answers are “maybe” and “no”. In fact, none of the 50 sates has a law compelling a restaurant employee to perform the Heimlich Maneuver on a choking patron. Only one state, Connecticut, has a law that requires restaurant employees to know the maneuver, although they are not required to perform it should the need arise. (What?!)
What do restaurants have to do to protect us from encountering a choking hazard in the food they provide to us? Well, according to the Uniform Commercial Code a restaurant provides an “implied warranty” that their food is “merchantable”. A warranty is a promise by the seller that the goods being sold will conform to certain qualities, characteristics, or conditions. This means they have to serve food that is fit for human consumption. (“Fit for human consumption” has nothing to do with the nutritional value of the food or the taste of the food.)
When it comes to objects in food, some states use a Foreign/Natural Test in deciding liability in some cases. This means they look to whether the object found was foreign or natural to the food. For example, a turkey bone is natural to turkey whereas a marble is not. If the object found is not natural, than a restaurant may well be liable to the injured patron under the “product liability” laws. Medical bills, pain and suffering, all can be claimed under this scenario. .
Many states are leaning more to the Reasonable Expectation Test, which asks the question, “Should the consumer reasonably expect or anticipate the specific object in the food?” One would think that the same conclusions would come from this as the Foreign/Natural Test, however apparently “reasonable minds” can differ quite a bit. A good example here is one person finding part of a peach pit in a peach pie may think, “Oh, there is no way to avoid that,” whereas another person may think “I would never expect to find a pit in something that has been so processed.” What would you expect?
When it comes down to it, an injured victim must prove that the object was foreign or unexpected, and caused their injuries. They then must prove the nature and extent of the damage they have suffered as a result of the object. As a personal injury attorney who has experience with product liability cases, I know what it takes to be successful with cases like this. However, these cases can be very difficult, and it is hard to predict which will be successful because of the non-uniformity of which test to use and the span of what is considered “reasonable” to different people.
Regardless, why are we talking about “personal injuries so close to the holidays????? We need to be careful about what we eat, but we also need to enjoy ourselves. Happy “hunting” this holiday season, and here’s wishing you a bone free hunt!!
The Supreme Court ruling last week in Wyeth vs. Levine opened the door for all consumers to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable when they sell unsafe products. In fact, the Court decided that these claims can now be brought in State courts.
The drug manufacturer, Wyeth, was arguing that since the FDA had approved their anti-nausea drug Phenergan, they shouldn’t be held liable for damages it caused to patients prescribed the drug. They argued that FDA approval superseded state level “failure to warn” claims. Basically, they were arguing that a drug company cannot be responsible for any damages their drugs may cause after it has been approved by the FDA.
Diane Levine sued Wyeth in Washington State Court after losing her arm to gangrene, brought on by taking Phenergan. The jury awarded Levine $6.7 million in damages. Wyeth appealed to Vermont’s Supreme Court, which upheld the jury’s decision in favor of Levine. Wyeth then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which also ruled in favor of Levine.
The big manufacturers favor “preemption”, a doctrine that holds that federal law will override state law if there is a conflict between the two. The big manufacturers also argue that the FDA is best qualified to weigh all risks and benefits associated with a drug, and if the FDA says it is OK, then nobody should be able to challenge that.
This mindset is very similar to the old cigarette company defenses. For years they argued that they complied with the federal government’s requirement to tell people that cigarettes may be hazardous to health, by placing the warning on the packs. They argued that they should not be subject to lawsuits, because they did everything that the government told them to do. (In the meantime, they place dangerous and addicting compounds into the cigarettes to get people hooked on them.)
Big manufacturers are afraid of juries. They believe if juries in state courts are given the freedom to question the FDA’s rulings, then claims against pharmaceutical companies may get out of hand. In truth, they do not want to ever be held accountable, and so they send their lobbyists and millions of lobby dollars to Washington D.C. to get laws enacted that insulate them from consumer lawsuits. Obviously, it doesn’t always work, and sometime, the consumers rightfully win.
In truth, consumer lawsuits are the only thing keeping these giant drug companies in check. The threat of litigation for years has made the products in the United States a bit more expensive perhaps, but at the same time, much safer. Isn’t it a good idea to pay a few pennies more for a product, and know that it is safe, as opposed to not having these protections?
It seems that by this decision, the Supreme Court is alerting manufacturers that they are responsible for providing appropriate information regarding risks and dangers of their products to consumers. Is that a bad thing? Certainly not. It should be a minimum that we expect, especially from these big multi-billion dollar drug manufacturers. Of course, there is always the possibility of human error and we will never be able to prevent all types of mistakes. However, that is best sorted out though the legal, civil process. That is exactly what the court are for, and cases like this are the exact reasons that our forefathers wrote a document we live by, called the US Constitution.
