Trial Lawyer Resource Center

Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry vetoed a bill yesterday that required Oklahoma lawyers representing medical malpractice victims to obtain certificates of legal merit from a medical doctor before filing a malpractice lawsuit, citing an Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling that requiring a certificate of merit is unconstitutional.

When bringing a medical malpractice action in most jurisdictions, a medical malpractice lawyer must file a separate certificate of merit for each doctor or other medical provider setting forth that to a reasonable degree of medical probability, the medical provider's malpractice caused the plaintiff injury. I do not know the nuances of the bill.

I am sure that Governor Henry believes he is fighting for the rights of medical malpractice victims or is correct on the issue of whether the statute would pass the Oklahoma Supreme Court. But I’m not sure if a certificate of merit is a bad idea to discourage frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits. The problem is that frivolous malpractice cases reflect poorly on medical malpractice lawyers and their clients which hurts when a lawyer is trying a meritorious medical malpractice claim to a jury.

The gut reaction in any litigation context - especially medical malpractice - is that it is a zero sum game.  What is good for the bad guy is bad for the good guys. The corollary argument is that medical malpractice reform is a slippery slope: first certificates of merit and then a Texas-like cap on malpractice awards. But life is is lived on a slippery slope. Free speech and freedom of assembly can lead to chaos and police can lead to totalitarianism. At some point, in a democracy, we need to trust that we will know where to draw the lines. Accordingly, before malpractice lawyers celebrate this veto, they might want to consider whether this bill was the best thing for both Oklahoma medical malpractice lawyers and Oklahoma doctors.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

My office is investigating the makers of Total Body Formula, a supplement  that was recently recalled.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is advising consumers not to purchase or consume Total Body Formula in the flavors of Tropical Orange and Peach Nectar, or Total Body Mega Formula in the Orange/Tangerine flavor. The liquid dietary supplement products may cause severe adverse reactions, including significant hair loss, muscle cramps, diarrhea, joint pain and fatigue.

The Total Body Formula products are sold in eight-ounce and 32-ounce plastic bottles. The Total Body Mega Formula is sold in 32-ounce plastic bottles. Both products are distributed by Total Body Essential Nutrition of Atlanta. The company is the sole distributor of the products and has voluntarily recalled Total Body Formula in the flavors of Tropical Orange and Peach Nectar and Total Body Mega Formula in Orange/Tangerine flavor.

On May  1, 2008,  The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s final analysis of certain flavors of "Total Body Formula" and "Total Body Mega Formula” has detected hazardous amounts of chromium.

FDA analysis of the products found high levels of chromium among other items. The samples contained up to 3,426 micrograms of chromium for the recommended serving (17 times the recommended intake). The recommended chromium intake for an adult ranges from 35 to 45 micrograms per day.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A good friend of mine and fellow attorney Joey James has been addressing wrongs caused by Central United. That company  issued  cancer policies, and  as has been argued successfully in court, failed  to do what it promised to do in those policies.

Now,  and without  any fanfare, there is a pending State Court class action involving Central United in Alabama which Joey James is NOT a part of, and to him may make little or no sense to policyholders (depending on the facts, and for some it may make sense). There is  a fast approaching deadline.

Mr. James writes this on his blog, http://centralunitedlawsuit.blogspot.com/:

You may also reach him at: 1-877-882-0095 by phone, joey@bunchandjames.com by email.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

My friend and fellow consumer justice lawyer Joe Watkins wrote this in response to the zero verdict today in that case better known as the crazy pants lawsuit:

The administrative law judge, Roy Pearson of Washington DC, who sued a drycleaners over a pair of pants lost in court today. 

This news comes to no surprise to the President of the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association (GTLA), Joe Watkins.  “Just as we anticipated, the Civil Justice System worked today.  The Judge presiding over the case ruled in favor of the drycleaners—and against the man at the center of this ridiculous business dispute.”

Pearson filed suit against the drycleaners for $54 million after alleging that they lost a pair of his pants. “The suit itself was ludicrous.  As an attorney for 30 years I am aware of the dangers that this type of sensationalism can generate.  The general public cannot help but be engrossed in its details.  Now that the decision has been reached, the general public can bask in what is just another example of the Civil Justice System accurately and fairly working for us all,” said Watkins.

The attorney representing the drycleaners was Chris Manning, a member of the American Association for Justice (AAJ), the national affiliate of GTLA.  AAJ has been sharply critical of Judge Pearson’s lawsuit.  In April, AAJ CEO Jon Haber called on the District of Columbia Bar Association to conduct a disciplinary investigation of Judge Pearson for his conduct in this matter. Haber and AAJ President Lewis “Mike” Eidson pledged to support the defendant’s defense fund and encouraged the AAJ membership to also contribute.

“It is our hope that the resolution of this case garners as much media attention as it did when it was filed.  The public deserves to know the how the Civil Justice System works on their behalf,” said Watkins.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

We're getting everyone trained up. We're still working on getting some of the lawyers to post on a regular basis. Some are less net savvy. A number of them have been in trial. We have some great talent and we're going to work on getting them more used to the blog.

In the meantime, we're also bringing a few more lawyers on board. Tommy and Adam Malone from Atlanta, Georgia will be contributing and we are also very luck that Mitch Jackson will be a regular contributor.

Mitch had a great trial blog called 'MyTrialBlog'. He came out and did everything right out of the box, but found with his heavy trial schedule was not able to maintain a blog on a regular basis. We were able to talk him into being a contributor here on a semi-regular basis. He has generously pointed the url to his blog here and we will soon be posting the bulk of his content from MyTrialBlog.

So good things are in the works, but in the beginning of the year, we are looking forward to getting the lawyers more used to posting and providing great information to our readers.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Over the past 10 years, more and more innovative and expensive drugs have been pushed to market on what's called the "fast track" at the Federal Drug Administration.  What does the fast track achieve?  It allows big pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer, Merck, Bayer, Wyeth, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi-Aventis, Hoffman-LaRoche, AstraZeneca, etc. to rush lightly tested and sometimes barely proven drugs to the general public.  Why is this important?  Because people are getting hurt, and even killed by these drugs that are rushed to market before they are proven safe or before sterner "Black Box" warnings can be put on the labels, and in some instances, before their efficacy is proven.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

We're still in the process of getting everyone trained on how to enter posts, so the posting will be rather light for the next week.

In the meantime, enjoy the posts that are here and we'll start cranking out quality information in very short order.

So far, we've had a very positive response to the blog and all of the participants are looking forward to getting information up here on a regular basis.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks