Ovarian Cancer Allegedly Caused by Baby Powder in Illinois Product Liability Case.

When you go to the store to buy a product, you generally believe that whatever you’re buying is safe.  Of course, some items are naturally more dangerous than others, such as chain-saws and table saws.  But these are usually classified as “tools,” rather than average household products.  Anything found in your kitchen or bathroom typically falls into the latter category.

This, however, is not to say that there is nothing dangerous in the average American home.  Cleaning products, in particular, can be deadly if ingested by an unsuspecting child.  For the most part, the dangers in this area are well-documented and adults are aware of how to properly store them.  But what about the hidden dangers and the threats that linger in seemingly harmless products?  These, believe it or not, may be the greatest threat to your health. One of the more recent incidents involving consumer injury is potential cancer-causing elements allegedly being found in household baby powder.

From 1981 to 2014, Ms. Candace Lewis of Illinois used Johnson & Johnson baby powder for feminine hygiene purposes.  On March 27, 2015, Lewis filed a personal injury lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, alleging that the talc-based powder caused her to develop ovarian cancer.

According to the Madison-St. Clair Record, Lewis and her attorney, James Onder, have used epidemiological studies citing over 20 cases of ovarian cancer associated with the company’s product.  They further argue that cornstarch could have been used instead of talc as a safer alternative and allege that Johnson & Johnson marketed their baby powder as a symbol of freshness, cleanliness and purity.  Lewis is seeking more than $50,000 from the company to account for her physical injuries related to ovarian cancer.

If you or a loved one have been hurt or made sick by a company’s defective product, please call our Boston product liability lawyers today at 617-787-3700.   Your needs are our top priority!

Posted in Boston Defective Product Lawyer, Boston Personal Injury Lawyer, Boston Product Liability Lawyer | Leave a comment

Jury Awards $12.8 Million In Product Defect Case Against Walmart.

Product defects cause hundreds of thousands of injuries each year. In 2007 alone, the Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled 473 defective products. Although 2007 is a bit of an outlier, nicknamed the “Year of the Recall,” recalls account only for products that are determined to be significantly defective and dangerous. Many more individual products turn out to be defective and give rise to injury.

The most common products involved in product liability lawsuits include cars, toys, malfunctioning medical devices and industrial machinery. Ultimately, Massachusetts product engineers, manufacturers and distributors are responsible for creating and selling safe products for consumer use. When parties involved in the design, manufacture and sale of these products fail to deliver a safe product, all parties involved can be held accountable.

Shaun Joseph was recently awarded $12,797,990 after he took his personal injury lawsuit against Walmart to trial. Joseph was a construction worker doing work on a Kentucky jobsite when he was run over by a truck. Only 29-years-old at the time of the accident, the young man suffered severe and life-long personal injuries. Doctors were forced to amputate one of his legs, and he was rendered a quadriplegic as a result of the accident. He also suffered blindness in one eye as the result of a brain injury. His total medical expenses exceeded $1.2 million.

Joseph’s lawsuit against Walmart alleged that a mismatched tire on the truck involved in the crash caused the accident. A Kentucky Walmart store had installed the allegedly mismatched tire. Walmart’s expert testified at trial that the driver, Nicola Liebsch, had been speeding at the time of the crash. Joseph’s expert, who testified that Liebsch lost control of the vehicle due to a defective tire, directly contradicted Walmart’s testimony.

According to Joseph’s claim, Liebsch’s husband had noticed a flat tire on the family’s truck. He took the truck to a Walmart store to be serviced, where employees told him it could not be fixed. Alternatively, employees instructed him to purchase a new tire with a different tread that made the tire two inches larger than the tire should have been.

The lawsuit was filed by attorney Phillip Lewis. The jury deliberated and decided 10-2 that the accident was caused by Walmart’s negligent installation. The jury awarded a $12.8 million verdict.

To learn more about your potential product liability lawsuit, call the experts at 617-787-3700 to speak with a Boston product liability attorney today.

Posted in Boston Defective Product Lawyer, Boston Personal Injury Lawyer, Boston Product Liability Lawyer | Leave a comment

18-Year-Old Patient in California Sues Medical Technology Manufacturer After Contracting “Superbug”.

Ancient civilizations, such as Egypt and Greece, were some of the first to utilize a system of currency to exchange goods and services.  Prior to that, trading, bartering and servitude were the only means with which to acquire food, clothing, and other necessary wares.  However, with the use of coins and paper money, many things developed a concrete value.  Markets for certain products became very nuanced, and ever since those days, economies have shifted in accordance with supply and demand.

As a matter of principle, people will use money to get what they want.  In other circumstances, however, they may have no choice but to buy something because it is such a unique product.  Medical technology manufacturers, for example, are few and far between.  This creates a smaller market for surgical tools, X-ray equipment, and the like.  But these products are bought and sold like any other, and are therefore subject to the same set of laws.  When someone is injured or harmed by a defective product, the manufacturer may have a great deal to answer for.  Tragically, product liability lawsuits often stem from the death of an unsuspecting victim.

In October of 2014, 18-year-old Aaron Young was a patient at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, California.  According to CBS Los Angeles, Young was set to undergo an endoscopy, which is a nonsurgical procedure used to examine a person’s digestive tract.  The procedure is common, and is done with an endoscope or duodenoscope.

The hospital had recently purchased a new model of duodenoscope called the Q180V, which was manufactured by Olympus America Inc.  Young’s endoscopy seemed to go smoothly, but shortly afterward, it became apparent that something had gone terribly wrong.

Young contracted a very strong form of bacteria that made him very sick for several weeks.  He was forced to stay in the hospital and was in critical condition at several points.  To make matters worse, several other patients began showing signs of the “superbug.”  Seven other people became very ill and two of them died.

In a lawsuit filed on March 23, 2015, Young claims that the new model of the duodenoscope was created with a critical design flawThe tool was nearly impossible to clean, which meant that it was being used and reused without properly removing harmful bacteria.  The lawsuit claims that instead of providing adequate instructions on how to clean the newer model, Olympus provided hospitals with a cleaning protocol for an older endoscope with a significantly different design.

The UCLA Hospital is not named as a defendant in the suit.

Posted in Boston Defective Product Lawyer, Boston Medical Malpractice Lawyer, Boston Personal Injury Lawyer, Boston Product Liability Lawyer, Boston Wrongful Death Lawyer | Leave a comment