Mark Zamora
Mark Zamora is an attorney in Atlanta, Georgia. He is licensed in Florida and Georgia. A graduate of Cumberland School of Law in Birmingham, Alabama and the University of Florida, he served as a judicial law clerk to the late Edwin L. Nelson, United State District Magistrate/Judge in Birmingham, Alabama in the Northern District of Alabama. Mark is hispanic; he was a founding member of and served on the the Board of Directors of The Southwest Florida Hispanic Chamber of Commerce as well as the Hispanic American Business Association. He is past president of the EZH Alumni Association in Gainesville, Florida. He is a board member of the Southern Trial Lawyers Association.Mark's business emphasis is personal injury litigation and litigation involving unsafe drugs. His practice is nationwide in scope.
Articles By This Author
Yaz and Gallbladder Problems? (Georgia, Florida)
In order to understand the connection with Yaz gall bladder problems and gallstones, it is important to review why stones form in the first place.
Your gallbladder is a small, pear-shaped organ on the right side of your abdomen, just beneath your liver. The gallbladder holds a digestive fluid called bile that's released into your small intestine.
Gallstones (choleliths) are bodies formed within the body, by accretion or concretion.Gallstones can occur anywhere within what is known as the biliary tree, and the gallbladder as well as the the bile duct. Source.
If there are gallstones in the bile duct, the condition is known as Choledocholithiasis.
Bile contains water, cholesterol, fats, bile salts, proteins, and bilirubin—a waste product. Bile salts break up fat, and bilirubin gives bile and stool a yellowish-brown color. If the liquid bile contains too much cholesterol, bile salts, or bilirubin, it can harden into gallstones.
Source.
There is a contention that Yaz birth s are thought to elevate the level of cholesterol contained within the bile salts produced by the liver.
How does one treat gallstones?
Oral Dissolution Therapy. Oral dissolution therapy uses bile acids in pill form to dissolve gallstones and may be used in conjunction with lithotripsy, although both techniques are rarely used at present. Ursodiol (ursodeoxycholic acid, Actigall) and chenodiol (Chenix) are the standard oral bile acid drugs used for dissolution. Most physicians prefer ursodeoxycholic acid, which is considered to be among the safest of common drugs and does not seem to have significant side effects. Long-term treatment appears to notably reduce the risk of biliary pain and acute cholecystitis. The treatment is only moderately effective, however, since gallstones recur in the majority of patients. Source.
Patients may elect contact dissolution: In contact dissolution of gallstones, a solvent is usually introduced through a percutaneous trans-hepatic catheter into the gallbladder. A catheter is inserted through a small needle puncture into the gallbladder under fluoroscopic or ultrasonographic guidance. The catheter is then connected to a computerized peristaltic pump that delivers small amounts of solvent continuously to slowly dissolve the stones and removes any remaining stone fragments. Gallstones can usually be cleared in hours to days. Care must be taken to limit the time of contact between instillation and drainage to avoid discharge of this potentially toxic agent into the bile duct or the duodenum. Failure to do so may result in transient abdominal pain and duodenitis. Source.
For some, surgery is the way to address gallbladder problems.
Laparoscopic gallbladder surgery 
(cholecystectomy) removes the gallbladder and gallstones through several small incisions in the abdomen. The surgeon inflates your abdomen with air or carbon dioxide in order to see clearly.
The surgeon inserts a lighted scope attached to a video camera (laparoscope) into one incision near the belly button. The surgeon then uses a video monitor as a guide while inserting surgical instruments into the other incisions to remove your gallbladder.
Before the surgeon removes the gallbladder, you may have a special X-ray procedure called intraoperative cholangiography, which shows the anatomy of the bile ducts.
You will need general anesthesia for this surgery, which usually lasts 2 hours or less.
After surgery, bile flows from the liver (where it is made) through the common bile duct and into the small intestine. Because the gallbladder has been removed, the body can no longer store bile between meals. In most people, this has little or no effect on digestion. Source.
Symptomatic gallstones can result in extreme pain and serious medical issues. If you or someone you know has developed gallstones after taking Yaz birth control pills, you may have a legal right to file a claim, call Mark Zamora at 888-574-6454.
Blair Expands Recall of Robes, Jackets and Tops
More news on an expanded recall of Blair products:
A Pennsylvania clothing company has expanded a recall of highly flammable bathrobes, as a Connecticut woman says the company's negligence led directly to her mother's fiery death. Blair LLC, based in Warren, Pa., initially recalled 162,000 of its chenille robes in April, as it announced that it had received reports of three deaths blamed on the robes' extreme flammability.
Synthes USA, Ti Synex II Vertebral Body Replacement (VBR) Lots Numbers
Lawyers Mark Zamora and Rob Bunch are investigating these claims, and you can reach them at 404-451-7781 and 888422-2882.
Here is the information on the recalled Lots:
|
Ti Synex II Vertebral Body Replacement (VBR)
This recall involves part numbers 04.808.001-11, Synex II Central Body, Titanium (all lots).
|
||||
| Use: | This device is a vertebral body replacement device that is used in the T1-L5 portion of the spine to replace a collapsed, damaged, or unstable vertebral body due to a tumor or trauma (that is, a fracture). | |||
Chelation Therapy: Link to Heart Injuries?
Does Chelation Therapy Cause Heart Injuries? Chelation therapy is a recognized treatment for heavy metal (such as lead) poisoning. EDTA (Ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid) is injected into the blood and binds the metals, allowing them to be removed from the body in the urine.A potent chelator of cations, especially calcium, it is FDA-approved only for rapid, emergency treatments of hypercalcemia or digitalis toxicity,and for those indications it has long been obsolete. Source.
Na2EDTA is specifically contraindicated for “generalized arteriosclerosis.” Its labeling includes a “black box” warning: “The use of this drug in any particular patient is recommended only when the severity of the clinical condition justifies the aggressive measures associated with this type of therapy." You can find the warning here: http://www.circare.org/foia2/endrate_ppi19740716.pdf
Chelation therapy is not approved by the FDA to treat coronary artery disease, but some physicians and alternative medicine practitioners use it for this purpose.
In August 2002, the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), which are both components of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), announced the launch of the Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT). This placebo-controlled, double-blind study involves participants age 50 years and older who’ve had a heart attack, and is expected to reach a total enrollment of 1,950. Participants are representative of the U.S. population.
Last August, the federal Office of Human Research Protections began a probe into whether the people in the study were being fully informed of risks and adequately protected. Researchers then suspended enrollment.
The most common immediate side effects of oral chelation therapy include: skin rashes, redness and swelling, headaches, diarrhea, nausea, fainting, fatigue, joint pain, body aches, cramps and convulsions.
Kidney damage from chelation therapy has resulted in permanent damage requiring ongoing dialysis. Deaths have also occurred during chelation therapy from kidney failure and cardiac arrhythmia.
Death and permanent injury have resulted from chelation therapy, even in doctor-supervised clinical trials. The American Heart Association warns of severe and life-threatening side effects and does not endorse chelation as a treatment for heart disease.
Other observers have reported cases of hypocalcemia leading to cardiac arrhythmias and tetany; decreased blood clotting ability with abnormal bleeding; thrombophlebitis and embolism; hypoglycemia and insulin shock; severe vasculitis and autoimmune related hemolytic anemia, dermatitis with pruritus and generalized eczema; and extensive clumping of platelets in the blood of some patients with atherosclerosis and other chronic diseases.
Continue Reading...
Getting Jurors to Sympathize with Your Client
From my friend Michael Maggiano's blog, which you can find here - http://www.atriallawyersjournal.com/
I have found that too often Jurors follow the attitude of my Dad who once said laughingly, "Do as I say, not as I do." I would like to share with you an interesting Jury Tip I received from Harry Plotkin, Jury Consultant of Claremont California.
Harry's points are relevant and real. One comment on Harry's use of the words "force them to think." I am sure he meant these words figuratively as you should not be forcing the jury to do anything in voir dire -- you have not earned that right. What I believe he means to impart is that by your voir dire questioning you invite the jurors to think of what people usually do and how they usually conduct themselves; what is the usual, what is that most people really do in day to day life, not an ideal, not a super or hyper vigilant person but the average everyday conduct of going about life. I hope you find this as interesting as I have.
For the rest of the blog post, check out Michael's new blog.
FDA Phenargran Warnings
The US Food and Drug Administration has ordered the makers of a drug used to treat nausea and vomiting to put the strongest warning possible on the product due to its damaging side-effects.
It was found that tissue damage can be caused as a result of using the medication, in the worst cases leading to amputation.
Go to the FDA site for more information: fda.gov.
Georgia Supreme Court to Hear Argument on Med Mal Caps (Face Surgery Gone Wrong)
A lower court declared caps unconstitutional. Here's the story:
Atlanta, GA-- On Tuesday, September 15, 2009, the Georgia Supreme Court will hear oral arguments regarding the constitutionality of the provision that caps the amount of damages a victim of medical malpractice can secure from a jury. The plaintiffs in the case of Betty Nestlehutt and Bruce Nestlehutt v. Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C., will argue that the Georgia Supreme Court should uphold the trial court judge’s finding that O.C.G.A. § 51-13-1, as enacted in 2005, is unconstitutional.
The case arose from a medical malpractice claim filed by Adam Malone and Frank Ilardi on behalf of their clients Betty Nestlehutt and her husband Bruce Nestlehutt in the Fulton County State Court in October of 2008. Married for over 50 years, the Nestlehutts raised two children and they shared a real estate business. Bruce handled the behind-the-scenes work, and Betty, a people-person by nature, focused on client and public interaction. Competition was tough and as Betty aged she found that more and more clients seemed to prefer younger agents. So, at seventy-one years of age, Betty Nestlehutt, after much thought and consideration, sought consultation with Dr. Harvey P. Cole of Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. concerning bags under her eyes and lines around her mouth. Dr. Cole recommended she undergo several surgical procedures including a simultaneous CO2 laser resurfacing and full facelift.
Having both the CO2 laser resurfacing and full facelift done together is well-known by practicing cosmetic surgeons to be risky, as the chance of damaging the facial blood supply is greatly increased on a patient of Betty’s age and complexion. However, based on her doctor’s recommendation, Betty went through the combination of procedures and the blood supply to her face was, in fact, severely damaged.
After the surgery, the skin on Betty’s face struggled to live without its usual blood supply and after a 3-week period, died completely, leaving the once fair-skinned wife and mother with huge, gaping wounds from her temple to her jaw line, covering both sides of her face and over both of her cheeks to her chin. Betty Nestlehutt’s face, quite literally, fell off.
“Betty Nestlehutt was the face of her real estate business,” said Malone. “Her face was so horrifically disfigured that she was no longer able to even leave her house. Photographs of her disfigurement are even too gruesome for public distribution. The damage is permanent. Years later she has to wear layers of special makeup to try to give the appearance of normalcy.”
After hearing the testimony and considering all of the evidence, a jury of 12 returned with a verdict in the Nestlehutts’ favor which included a recovery of money damages for her past and future medical expenses, for damage to her relationship with her husband and $900,000 in “non-economic” damages for the devastation of her quality of life. The verdict exceeded the $350,000 cap on noneconomic damages enacted as part of SB 3 in 2005. Judge Diane Bessen declared unconstitutional the statute capping a jury’s verdict and now her decision, upon the defendant’s appeal, is before the Supreme Court.
“Judge Bessen’s order appropriately concluded that a one-size fits all predetermined cap on damages violates several protections guaranteed by the Georgia Constitution,” said Malone. “Her order balances the rights of all Georgians, young and old, rich and poor, and restores the guarantees set forth by our Constitution that were stripped away in 2005.”
Judge Bessen’s order declares the caps on damages provision unconstitutional because it violates three basic constitutional tenets: the right to trial by jury, the separation of powers doctrine and equal protection of the laws.
Under SB 3, the jury’s deliberation regarding the amount of damages to be awarded is preempted by a legislatively imposed cap—no matter how severe or catastrophic the case before them. Historically, a jury had the ability to decide the fate of its peers constrained only by the particular facts of an individual’s case, as the Founding Fathers intended. Thomas Jefferson once said, “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its Constitution.”
In her order, Judge Bessen wrote:
A limit or cap on noneconomic damages, however, invades the right to a jury trial by usurping one of the fact-finding responsibilities of the jury. If the amount of noneconomic damages awarded by the jury exceeds the statutory cap, this Code section automatically and arbitrarily reduces the verdict, without consideration of the evidence, the record, or any other fact produced at trial and found by the jury. The limitations imposed by O.C.G.A. 51-13-1 render the right of the jury to assess damages meaningless… The cap so interferes with the determination of the jury that it renders the right of a jury trial wholly unavailable.
Additionally, Judge Bessen also found that the cap on damages violates the Separation of Powers Doctrine contained in the Georgia Constitution. Three other states’ supreme courts, with similar constitutional provisions, also have struck down caps on damages on this basis. The Georgia Constitution states that: “The legislative, judicial and executive powers shall forever remain separate and distinct, and no person discharging the duties of one, shall, at the same time, exercise the functions of either of the others.” One distinct function of the judicial branch is that judges have the exclusive right to award to a party a “remittitur” – or a new trial – if a judge finds that a verdict is either excessive or inadequate. Judge Bessen’s order declares the cap on damages statute to be a “legislative remittitur” and that the legislature has unconstitutionally invaded the exclusive role of the judiciary to find facts and control judgments.
“Equally important,” the judge writes, “it does so without the option of a new trial for the injured plaintiff. As such, it unduly encroaches upon the judiciary’s constitutional right and prerogative to determine whether a jury’s assessment of damages is either too excessive or too inadequate within the meaning of the law.”
The third violation of the Constitution Judge Bessen found was that a cap on damages violates the Equal Protection provisions of the Georgia Constitution which state: “No persons shall be denied the equal protection of the laws.” To examine this violation, Judge Bessen explored whether there was a “rational relationship” between the government’s purpose and its enacted statute which treats similar parties in very different, unequal ways.
The rational relationship test basically states that a statute may be valid as long as it has a rational relationship to a governmental purpose. In the case of SB 3, the government’s stated purpose was to “promote predictability and improvement in the provision of quality health care services and the resolution of healthcare claims..., assist in promoting the provision of healthcare liability insurance by insurance providers…, [and addressed concerns about] medical providers and facilities leaving the state and the cost of malpractice awards.” For a law to be valid, a rational relationship to those goals must be proven. Judge Bessen found that the cap on damages failed the rational relationship test completely.
In holding the cap on damages provision unconstitutional, Judge Bessen wrote:
After review, this Court finds that there is no rational relationship between statute and the expressed government interest. Most obviously, it is a complete contradiction to state that the overall quality of healthcare would be improved by shielding negligent healthcare providers from liability. In fact, as recognized by other courts, a cap on noneconomic damages actually diminishes tort liability for healthcare providers and diminishes the deterrent effect of tort law… There is absolutely no evidence that these objectives are achieved by imposing a financial burden on the most victimized of plaintiffs… Based on current statistics, limiting noneconomic damage caps is not rationally related to the state purpose of reducing medical malpractice insurance rates… it appears that this statute was enacted arbitrarily, based upon speculation and conjecture rather than empirical data.
Finally, Judge Bessen found that the cap on damages violates Equal Protection because it creates different classes of victims—those injured by healthcare providers and those injured by others and those who are catastrophically injured and those who are less severely injured. Judge Bessen penned, “The cap’s greatest impact falls on those who are most severely injured, and creates classes of fully compensated victims and those only partially compensated… Similarly, the noneconomic damages cap discriminates against low-income individuals who are unable to prove large economic damages but nonetheless may sustain large noneconomic damages.”
The President of the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association, Chris Clark, has been following this case closely.
“As a trial lawyer, I represent the person, who, through no fault of their own, has been injured—sometimes severely. They miss work, accrue medical bills and—often most important to them—they suffer a loss of the quality of life that they once had,” said Clark. “Betty Nestlehutt’s severe disfigurement – which she had no part in creating – has diminished her quality of life and, in turn her husband’s and her family’s. Judge Bessen’s order was fair, upheld our Constitution, and reflected the rule of law that has stood firm since the inception of this nation.”
The argument on Tuesday was prepared by Malone and attorneys Darren Summerville of Bird Law Group, P.C. and Michael Terry of Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore, LLP. AARP, Voices for Georgia’s Children, Georgia Women for a Change and Georgia Watch all filed Amicus Briefs in support of Betty and Bruce Nestlehutt.
Communication In The Courtroom From Body Language to Computer Simulation
A great article from Michael Maggiano. Here's an excerpt - Michael is happy to send you the rest as long as 1)You are a Plaintiff's lawyer; and 2)You don't represent insurance companies. His email is listed below:
It was a warm mid-spring afternoon, some 15 years ago. I had just finished a personal injury trial and I was finally feeling the effects of the two-week trial. As I slowly packed up my message and story boards, medical charts and anatomical models, a well-known defense attorney and friend came up to me and asked me to do him a favor. He told me that he was just assigned to this courtroom to commence a personal injury case in which he was defending. He had observed my use of the storyboards, charts and models and complemented me on them. He then told me that he was here on a significant case and was surprised that his adversary had not considered using any visual aids. He asked if I would, as soon as possible, remove my gear so as not to give his adversary any thoughts on the subject. I thought at first he was joking but upon a second look at his expression, I knew he was dead serious. He then remarked to me that he is ever surprised on how few Plaintiff attorneys utilize communication tools to tell the story of their case to jurors in ways that make sense to them.
We trial lawyers prepare like crazy looking for the best experts, researching and reading all the relevant literature, rules, codes, standards, guides and regulations. We comb the universe of knowledge as we arm ourselves like warriors as we enter the arena. We fall in love with our new found skills, knowledge and command of the scientific, technical and medical jargon. By the time we enter the court room we suffer The Curse of Knowledge. We execute incredibly brilliant direct examinations of our experts and cross examination of the opposing hired witnesses. But then we lose the case. What happened? Didn’t they hear us? Sadly, they may have heard you but did not understand the message. The only persons who understood us were the lawyers, experts and perhaps the judge. We traveled through the case at Mach 2, high above the courtroom and beyond the comprehension of those who really matter - our jury.
We all suffer from the Curse of Knowledge
If you want to talk to the jurors you have to first stand in their shoes. To stand in their
shoes we need to first remove our shoes. To remove our shoes we must understand our
curse of knowledge. The medicine, the law and technology is easy for us because we have
learned and lived with it for a couple of years before we get to court. No body should know
your case better than you. But now, what do you do with the knowledge. How does it translate
to what is relevant to your jurors?
You now have to find out what the jurors want to know. What is in it for them that will
capture their interest and move them to your side of the room.
Q. WHAT IS IT THAT JURORS WANT TO KNOW.
For the rest of this article, contact: mmaggiano@maggianolaw.com.
Stella Awards
The Stella Awards® were inspired by Stella Liebeck, the Plaintiff in the McDonald's coffee case. Some folks may know that The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.
There are many debunked jury "award" reports linked to the claimed awards.
From their own site:
"Many stories are going around the 'net saying they are "The Stella Awards". Many of these stories are false, made-up, or (sometimes) true stories with false elements added to them.
The sad part: despite these stories having been debunked years ago, they not only still circulate, but many reporters, columnists and radio "personalities" still talk about them as if they were true, which says a lot about their professionalism. In many outrageous cases, these lazy "news" people will even link to this site as the source of these silly lies."
Claimed Cases -Status:
Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas, was awarded $780,000 by a jury after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running amuck inside a furniture store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at the verdict, considering the misbehaving tyke was Ms. Robertson's son. Fabricated.
Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran his hand over with a Honda Accord. Mr. Truman apparently didn't notice someone was at the wheel of the car whose hubcap he was trying to steal. Fabricated.
Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Penn., was exiting a house he finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up because the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation, so Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry dog food. Dickson sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to the tune of half a million dollars and change.Fabricated.
Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas, was awarded $14,500 and medical expenses after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's beagle. The beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced-in yard, as was Mr. Williams. The award was less than sought after because the jury felt the dog may have been provoked by Mr. Williams who, at the time, was shooting it repeatedly with a pellet gun. Fabricated.
A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania $113,500 after she slipped on a spilled soft drink and broke her coccyx. The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson threw it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument. Fabricated.
Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware, successfully sued the owner of a nightclub in a neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and knocked out her two front teeth. This occurred while Ms. Walton was trying to sneak through the window in the ladies room to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000 and dental expenses. Fabricated.
The "winner" every year: In November, Mr. Grazinski purchased a brand new 32 foot Winnebago motor home. On his first trip home, having joined the freeway, he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the drivers seat to go into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the Winnie left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him in the handbook that he could not actually do this. He was awarded $1,750,000 plus a new Winnebago. Fabricated.
Don't be fooled into believing all that you read on the web.
