Plaintiffs' Suits Against Companies

Companies involved in many of the largest and most controversial legal clashes of recent decades are seeing a sharp decline in the number of lawsuits filed against them. Extensive information about Medical Malpractice

In recent months, judges have dismissed or challenged tens of thousands of individual cases, in matters ranging from claims of lung damage from asbestos and silica dust to allegations that the diet drug fen-phen caused heart problems. Moreover, fewer new claims like these are being launched, as state and federal courts and legislators attack the methods used by some attorneys to round up plaintiffs for large-scale litigation.

There is no comprehensive count of claims, but a look at several key areas -- particularly asbestos and silica claims -- shows large-scale litigation against single products, known as "mass torts" and "class actions," is on the wane.

"The future of mass torts and class actions is very much in question," said Geoffrey Miller, a New York University School of Law professor who teaches a course on issues in large-scale litigation.

This year, new securities-fraud class-action lawsuits are down 45%, to 61 through June from 111 in the first half of 2005, according to a new study.

Among the factors behind that drop: the federal indictment in May of the leading securities class-action law firm, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP, which is accused of paying individuals to file suits. The firm filed just 17 lawsuits in the first six months of 2006, down from 55 in 2005's first half -- and hasn't filed a class-action case since its indictment.

Another contributor is a federal judge's finding last year that nearly 10,000 claims of lung damage from silica dust "were manufactured for money." The case involved 200 companies that manufactured or used silica, which causes an incurable disease of the lungs known as silicosis caused by overexposure to silica dust, which is found in sand and rock and most commonly affects construction workers. (More cases of Injuries etc.)

Silicosis claims have soared this decade; for instance, one top manufacturer, U.S. Silica Co., had seen claims against it spike to almost 20,000 in 2003 from just a few hundred in previous years. But after defense attorneys raised questions, U.S. District Judge Janis Jack, appointed to the bench by President Clinton, found plaintiffs were being recruited even though they likely had suffered no harm. She sent all but one case back to state courts, where many have since been dropped.

The decision has had a major chilling effect on litigation involving both silicosis and asbestos, which features many of the same plaintiffs' lawyers, doctors and even plaintiffs. About 60% of the plaintiffs in the silica case had previously been plaintiffs in asbestos suits, even though it is extremely rare to get both silicosis and asbestos. One doctor has made roughly 88,000 asbestos diagnoses over the years and diagnosed about 70% of the 10,000 silicosis cases that Judge Jack found fraudulent. Her ruling also prompted congressional hearings and state and federal criminal investigations.

The recent shift comes after decades in which trial lawyers followed a tried-and-true strategy: Recruit lots of plaintiffs, then pressure companies to agree to a cash settlement in order to avoid a long, costly court battle. Law firms typically pocketed up to a third of any resulting settlement.

Litigation against manufacturers of asbestos has been a particularly crowded arena. More than 700,000 claims have been filed against more than 8,000 companies in recent decades, leading to more than $70 billion in payouts and legal bills. Those expenses have forced dozens of companies into bankruptcy.

Many claims are legitimate. Asbestos is a fire-retardant mineral that was widely used as insulation and in auto parts until the 1970s, but was banned after the inhalation of asbestos fibres was linked to cancer and other diseases. About 4,000 people a year die from mesothelioma, cancer of the membrane around the lungs, caused by asbestos, according to the World Health Organization.

But critics say the mass-litigation system gives law firms an incentive to aggressively recruit plaintiffs with dubious claims, cutting into funds left for people who were truly harmed.

"The game for plaintiffs' attorneys is: Seek out doctors willing to diagnose a problem where the vast majority of doctors would not," says Richard Nagareda, a professor at Vanderbilt University Law School. Judge Jack's silicosis opinion "really lifted the curtain," he says.

Plaintiffs' attorneys counter that the argument is a smokescreen designed to make it harder for individuals to hold companies accountable for bad behavior. While many plaintiffs may not currently be impaired from their exposure to asbestos, they point out, cancers and other diseases can take years to develop.

Mark Lanier, a plaintiffs' attorney not involved in the asbestos and silicosis litigation, says the actions of a few aggressive lawyers has fueled the perception that all plaintiffs' attorneys are "ambulance chasers."

A spokeswoman for the primary professional group for trial lawyers says pro-business groups are using isolated incidents to "distract attention" from efforts by businesses to "evade responsibility" for harming individuals. "If there are doctors or lawyers misusing the civil-justice system, they should be held accountable," says the spokeswoman, Chris Mather. "I would say the biggest problem is the negligence of big corporations."

Her group, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, voted last month to change its name to the American Association for Justice because of the negative image of the term "trial lawyers."

In recent years, legislators have taken aim at the tide of litigation. Earlier this year, Congress passed a tort-overhaul bill that makes it easier to move many class-actions out of state courts and into federal court, where judges are more likely to dismiss dubious claims. The law applies only to class-action lawsuits, or those in which many hundreds or thousands of individual claims are merged into one case, so it doesn't affect cases pursued individually, such as the majority of asbestos and silicosis suits.

Meanwhile, several states, including Florida, Georgia and Texas, have passed so-called medical-criteria bills, which require a treating physician to certify a claimant has been harmed by asbestos or silica, and not simply exposed, before a lawsuit can proceed.

In Mississippi -- a state that that developed a reputation for what became known in the legal community as "jackpot justice" due to sizeable damage awards -- lawmakers passed a legal-overhaul measure in 2004 that placed caps on punitive damages and made it difficult to shop for friendly courts.

Other court rulings also have cut down on cases. In April, state-court judges in Ohio threw out about 3,000 asbestos claims after the screening doctors, some of whom also had been involved in the silicosis litigation, refused to testify, asserting their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Another 35,000 asbestos cases, in which plaintiffs had been diagnosed by the same doctors, were put aside until they could get diagnoses from other doctors.

In June, defense attorneys filed a motion in federal court in Philadelphia seeking to have more than 100,000 asbestos cases, some involving the same doctors, dismissed.

Mississippi's state Supreme Court has issued several rulings in recent years that have made it tougher for plaintiffs. One, for instance, prevents the "bundling" of several plaintiffs into one lawsuit, a technique that can be used to tie weaker claims to a stronger case. Another decision requires that plaintiffs live in the state or show that they suffered harm while in the state before they can file a claim there.

The broadside against the silicosis and asbestos litigation may have altered the landscape for thousands of welders who claim that longtime exposure to toxic fumes from welding rods causes neurological injuries such as tremors and paralysis. Such lawsuits once were considered the next class-action wave, but plaintiffs have lost the first 11 of 12 cases that have gone to trial, and 1,600 suits have been dismissed.

Still, about 10,000 cases are pending in state and federal court. And a federal judge in April denied a motion by defense attorneys to dismiss thousands of claims for medical fraud, ruling that plaintiffs' attorneys used a "robust" screening process to "weed out" questionable claims.

The maker of fen-phen, the diet drug withdrawn from the market because it could cause heart damage, also has had some success having suits thrown out. The U.S. Attorney in Mississippi has prosecuted 26 people for filing false or fraudulent claims against the company, American Home Products, which has changed its name to Wyeth. A lawyer who represented some plaintiffs was indicted for filing false claims. Federal prosecutors in Philadelphia, where dozens of fen-phen cases were tossed out, have launched a criminal probe into some suits, say people close to the matter.

Despite the tougher landscape, plaintiffs' lawyers are pushing ahead with a number of large-scale new actions. Wyeth, for one, faces a new round of litigation involving a hormone-replacement-therapy drug, Prempro. Opening arguments were held this past week in federal court in Arkansas in the first of 5,000 cases alleging Wyeth ignored signals that Prempro could increase risk of breast cancer, heart disease and stroke. Prempro is a widely prescribed estrogen-progestin combination used to treat pre-menopausal symptoms, such as hot flashes and night sweats.

Meantime, Merck & Co. still faces more than 14,000 lawsuits alleging its painkiller Vioxx caused heart attacks and strokes. Legal observers say Merck's decision to fight each Vioxx case individually, rather than to try and reach a quick settlement, was triggered in part by the rising tide of dismissals of claims in other cases.

It remains to be seen if the drug maker's strategy will work. Fighting individual cases has the potential to be costly. Merck has won some initial cases, but has also suffered several stinging defeats, including verdicts against it in two individual cases of $253 million and $51 million.

Still, analysts estimate that by fighting cases, Merck has been able to reduce the number of estimated claims to around 40,000 from 100,000 by discouraging some potential plaintiffs and lawyers. Analysts also have lowered estimates of the company's likely total liability to $25 billion or less compared with as much as $50 billion last year, soon after Merck pulled the drug from the market.

Optional "Medical Expense" Auto Insurance-Why Its Good Coverage To Get

Many states, including Virginia, allow insurance agents to offer optional "medical expense benefits" along with a standard auto insurance policy. This coverage ("med pay" for short) provides for payment of 100% of any medical bills (up to the coverage amount, usually 1,000 to 10,000 dollars per covered vehicle) arising from a car crash/collision involving personal injury to the insured, or involving injury (more about injury legislation) to a resident relative of the insured person.

Since it is an optional coverage on your car insurance, consumers do not always buy it. Medical payments coverage says that if you or anyone else gets hurt arising out of the use of your vehicle, that the insurance company will pay medical expenses up to a certain dollar figure regardless of fault. This means even if the accident is your fault you are still covered. Moreover, if you or a family member are hurt in someone else's car, your medical payments coverage would kick in if they don't have any, or over and above the car owner's, if they do have medical payments coverage.

Typically, $1,000.00 worth of med pay coverage will only cost around $20.00 per year. I, myself, carry $10,000.00 worth of medical payments coverage on my vehicle. If you are in an accident that is not your fault and our firm is representing you, we assist in recovering medical expense benefits and do not charge any legal fees to help with this part of the case.

Medical payments coverage is still 100% of the medical bills even if you are covered by health insurance too. So, even if the bills you incur are paid by health insurance, the original total of the medical bills must still be paid by the car insurance company providing you medical payments coverage.

Last, even if the medical bills are covered by health insurance and paid by medical payments coverage, the at fault "tortfeasor" still must generally compensate the injured person for all past and future medical expenses (despite prior insurance payment through one of your own insurance sources), for past and future lost wages, for permanent impairment and disability, as well as pain and suffering type of damages. More about insurance

Civil rights

Civil rights are the protections and privileges of personal liberty given to all citizens by law. Civil rights are distinguished from "human rights" or "natural rights"—civil rights are rights that are bestowed by nations on those within their territorial boundaries, while natural or human rights are rights that many scholars claim ought to belong to all people. For example, the philosopher John Locke (1632–1704) argued that the natural rights of life, liberty and property should be converted into civil rights and protected by the sovereign state as an aspect of the social contract. Others have argued that people acquire rights as an inalienable gift from the deity or at a time of nature before governments were formed.

Laws guaranteeing civil rights may be written, derived from custom or implied. In the United States and most continental European countries, civil rights laws are most often written. In the United States, for example, laws protecting civil rights appear in the Constitution, in the amendments to the Constitution (particularly the 13th and 14th Amendments), in federal statutes, in state constitutions and statutes and even in the ordinances of counties and cities. In the United Kingdom, on the other hand, such rights are frequently granted by custom and are not memorialized in written law. "Implied" rights are rights that a court may find to exist even though not expressly guaranteed by written law or custom, on the theory that a written or customary right must necessarily include the implied right. One famous (and controversial) example of a right implied from the U.S. Constitution is the "right to privacy", which the U.S. Supreme Court found to exist in the 1965 case of Griswold v. Connecticut. In the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade, the Court found that state legislation prohibiting or limiting abortion violated this right to privacy. As a rule, state governments can expand civil rights beyond the U.S. Constitution, but they cannot diminish Constitutional rights.

Examples of civil rights and liberties include the right to get redress if injured by another, the right to privacy, the right of peaceful protest, the right to a fair investigation and trial if suspected of a crime, and more generally-based constitutional rights such as the right to vote, the right to personal freedom, the right to freedom of movement and the right of equal protection. As civilisations emerged and formalised through written constitutions, some of the more important civil rights were granted to citizens. When those grants were later found inadequate, civil rights movements emerged as the vehicle for claiming more equal protection for all citizens and advocating new laws to restrict the effect of current discriminations.

Civil rights can in one sense refer to the equal treatment of all citizens irrespective of race, sex, or other class, or it can refer to laws which invoke claims of positive liberty. An example of the former would be the decision in Brown v. Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954) which was concerned with the constitutionality of laws which imposed segregation in the education systems of some U.S states. The theories set out below explain why such laws should not be considered legitimate, but do not explain why the case failed to declare the general principle that all manifestations of segregation were a breach of civil rights (that would be more properly a question of politics). The U.S. legislature subsequently addressed the issue through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Sec. 201. which states: (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin. Some other countries have enacted similar legislation, or have given direct effect to supranational treaties and agreements such as the European Convention on Human Rights (with forty-five countries as signatories), which encompass both human rights and civil liberties.

Lawyer

A lawyer, or legal practitioner, is a person certified to give legal advice who advises clients in legal matters. Some lawyers represent clients in courts of law and in other forms of dispute resolution.

Law is a theoretical and abstract discipline, and working as a lawyer represents the "practical" application of legal theory and knowledge to solve real problems or to advance the interests of those who retain (i.e., hire) lawyers for legal services.

The role of the lawyer varies significantly across legal jurisdictions, and therefore can be treated here in only the most general terms. More information is available in country-specific articles (see below).

Criminal law

Criminal law (also known as penal law) is the body of statutory and common law that deals with crime and the legal punishment of criminal offenses. There are four theories of criminal justice: punishment, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. It is believed that imposing sanctions for the crime, society can achieve justice and a peaceable social order. This differs from civil law in that civil actions are disputes between two parties that are not of significant public concern.

The process begins with an alleged crime. A complainant makes an accusation, which is investigated by the police, acting as agents of the government. A formal charging document called a complaint or an indictment brought by a grand jury is filed with a court in the appropriate jurisdiction. If the offense is classified as a felony, the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States requires that a federal case be referred to a grand jury for an indictment. The Supreme Court has held that the right to a grand jury does not apply to the states. Therefore, each state has its own set of grand jury procedures. Some follow federal practices, but others make use of the indictment optional, and allow the prosecutor to file a complaint or information to formally charge the defendant with the crime. Two states (Connecticut and Pennsylvania) and the District of Columbia do not use grand jury indictments.

The interests of the state are represented by a prosecuting attorney, while the interests of the defendant are represented by his defense attorney or by the defendant as pro se, acting as his own attorney. The Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States guarantees a criminal defendant the right to a speedy and public trial, in both state and federal courts, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime was committed, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of Counsel for his defence.

While the specific process varies according to the local law, the process culminates with a jury trial (as required by the Sixth Amendment), followed by mandatory or discretionary appeals to higher courts.

Criminal statutes spell out the exact circumstances which constitute a crime. These circumstances are known as the elements of the offense. Unless all the elements are proven by the prosecuting authority, the defendant is not guilty of the offense. There are three kinds of elements: the act itself, the actus reus, guilty act; the requisite mental state, the mens rea, guilty mind; and the attendant circumstances. As an example, the common law definition of burglary was as follows: unlawful entry into a dwelling house at night with the intent to commit a felony therein. It is the duty of the prosecution therefore, to prove not merely the act (unlawful entry), and the mental state (the intent to commit a crime therein), but all the attendant circumstances (that it was a dwelling house, and that it was at night). Most modern criminal statutes have modified the elements, changing the "dwelling house" to a more general structure, and eliminating the "at night" element..

In defense, the accused could argue that he had no intent to commit a crime inside the house, that it occurred during the day, or that his entry was lawful. He could also, of course, argue that the incident never happened, or that someone else committed the offense.

Criminal law in most jurisdictions, both in the common and civil law traditions, is divided into two fields:

Criminal procedure regulates the process for addressing violations of criminal law
Substantive criminal law details the definition of, and punishments for, various crimes.
Criminal law distinguishes crimes from civil wrongs such as tort or breach of contract. Criminal law has been seen as a system of regulating the behavior of individuals and groups in relation to societal norms whereas civil law is aimed primarily at the relationship between private individuals and their rights and obligations under the law. Although many ancient legal systems did not clearly define a distinction between criminal and civil law, in England there was little difference until the codification of criminal law occurred in the late nineteenth century. In most U.S. law schools, the basic course in criminal law is based upon the English common criminal law of 1750 (with some minor American modifications like the clarification of mens rea in the Model Penal Code). In civil cases, the Seventh Amendment guarantees a defendant a right to a jury trial in federal court, but that right does not apply to the states (in contrast with criminal cases).

Birth Defect

Not every birth defect is the result of negligence. Sometimes serious problems arise even where the doctor and all those assisting have done everything reasonably possible to prevent them. It’s difficult for lay people to make the determination, especially when overwhelmed by the injury to their newborn child. If your child suffers from a birth defect orbirth injury that you believe is the result of medical malpractice, you should consult with an experienced birth defects attorney as soon as possible. A qualified birth injury lawyer, as those listed on this site, work with expert medical consultants and can help you determine just what happened, why it happened, and provide legal guidance and advice as to how you can best protect your child’s interests. Further, you may be entitled to substantial monetary damages for your physical and emotional pain. Do not delay in your fight for compensation.

Auto Accidents

In, 2002, An estimated 258,000 persons were injured in crashes where police reported that alcohol was present — an average of one person injured approximately every 2 minutes.

According to the National highway traffic safty administration, there were 17,419 alcohol-related fatalities in 2002 —41 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year.” In 2002, 35 percent of all traffic fatalities occurred in crashes in which at least one driver or nonoccupant had a BAC of 0.08 g/dl or greater. Sixty-eight percent of the 15,019 people killed in such crashes were intoxicated.

Approximately 1.4 million drivers were arrested in 2001 for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. This is an arrest rate of 1 for every 137 licensed drivers in the United States (2002 data not yet available). More info

Medical Malpractice

The term "medical malpractice" describes any treatment, lack of treatment, or other departure from the accepted standards of medical care, health care or safety on the part of a health care provider that causes harm to a patient. This often results in serious or catastrophic injuries.

Areas that fall under this category include (but are not limited to):
. Misdiagnosis
. Improper/substandard treatment
. Failure to treat
. Delay in treatment
. Failure to follow-up
. Prescription errors

Occurrences of medical malpractice may not be obvious to the average person. Accurate identification of medical departures requires a review and analysis by attorneys who are familiar with medicine along with the appropriate medical experts. More Info