Drug Label Warnings Will Be Made Simpler

Federal regulators have issued new rules designed to simplify the content of warning labels for prescription drugs. The new rules go into effect June 30.

The new labeling is required for all new drugs that come on the market and those approved in the past five years.

But the new regulations may make it tougher for people injured by drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration to sue pharmaceutical companies in state court.

The FDA indicated that drug makers who comply with its regulations should not be second-guessed in state courts

around the country. The agency’s new policy is that such lawsuits should be filed in federal court only.

Conventional wisdom is that it’s more difficult for plaintiffs to win negligence suits in federal court. State products liability laws allowed plaintiffs to sue Merck for injuries and deaths related to the Vioxx painkiller drug, for example.

The new policy does not have the force of law, but the FDA is urging state court judges to follow it.

We are available to help you assess your rights in light of the new FDA rules.

Tobacco Lawsuits Remain a Hot Area

The Florida Supreme Court recently upheld a $500,000 award to a former TWA flight attendant who blamed chronic sinusitis on secondhand smoke she inhaled in airplane cabins until smoking was banned on U.S. commercial airliners in 1990.

This is the first verdict requiring tobacco companies to pay damages to a flight attendant injured by secondhand smoke.

The Florida Supreme Court’s ruling could clear the way for trials on about 3,000 other secondhand smoke claims by flight attendants.

Tobacco lawsuits continue to be a hot area. The developments in several other major tobacco cases:

• The Florida Supreme Court is reviewing a 2003 decision overturning a record $145 billion punitive damages verdict against the tobacco industry on behalf of 700,000 Florida smokers.

• The Illinois Supreme Court recently set aside a $10.1 billion “light” cigarette verdict. In 2003, an Illinois state court judge ordered Philip Morris to pay $7.1 billion in damages to 1.1 million Illinois consumers who purchased Marlboro Lights and Cambridge Lights over the past few decades. The consumers claimed the companies falsely advertised that the “light” cigarettes were safer than regular cigarettes. Although the verdict was overturned, about 40 similar suits are pending in 20 states that have slightly different consumer protection laws.

• A federal judge is presently hearing the Department of Justice’s racketeering suit against tobacco companies. The head of the government’s trial team quit last November during an investigation of whether political influence played a role in the government’s decision to reduce the damages it’s seeking to $10 billion, down from $130 billion.

Doctors Becoming More Willing to Saying They’re Sorry

A growing trend in the medical community is for doctors to apologize to patients when injuries result from their treatment.

In the past, many doctors were reluctant to say "I’m sorry" for fear that it could be seen as an admission of guilt and used against them in court.

The "art" of saying sorry is taking hold as doctors, public relations specialists and hospital administrators say heart-felt

apologies can lessen the impulse of injured patients to sue their doctors.

While apologizing and providing an open and honest disclosure of information to patients regarding their situations is laudable, doctors do in fact make mistakes that sometimes lead to injuries. It’s important to know your rights when you’ve been injured before deciding whether a lawsuit is the way to go.

Passenger in SUV May Be at Fault for Accident

It’s a common occurrence: A passenger in a car tells the driver it’s safe to back up on to a road.

But what happens if an accident occurs? Can the passenger be sued?

According to a Florida appeals court, the answer is yes.

A passenger who volunteers to assist a driver in determining if a path of travel is clear and safe has to do so with reasonable care, the court said.

In this case, the defendant was a passenger in a SUV. He told the driver that the road was clear for him to back up. But the vehicle struck a motorcycle behind it injuring the passenger on the motorcycle.

The motorcycle passenger alleged

that the SUV passenger agreed to help the driver determine if it was safe to back up, and that he was better situated than the driver to make that determination.

The court noted that an action taken for the benefit of another, even gratuitously, has to be undertaken with care.

This is another illustration that unless you speak with a lawyer, you won’t fully understand your rights. In this case, the motorcycle passenger might be compensated for the injuries from the SUV passenger’s insurance … but that almost certainly wouldn’t have happened if the passenger hadn’t sought good legal help.

Ford Failed to Warn About Danger of Riding With Seat Reclined

A Florida jury recently hit Ford with a $12.9 million verdict because it failed to adequately warn about the dangers of riding in a moving vehicle in a reclined seat.

A Florida woman was a passenger in a Ford Aerostar minivan driven by her mother. She had the seatback fully reclined, while still wearing her seatbelt. The minivan collided with a parked vehicle. The passenger slid forward and under the belt. Then her upper body flipped over the belt with such force that it damaged her spinal cord and she is now a paraplegic.

Ford claimed the owner’s manual tells customers not to put seats in reclining

positions when the car is moving.

But the woman’s lawyers played for the jury a 2005 Ford television commercial showing a man reclined in the passenger seat with his feet resting on the dashboard. Also, a 1998 company brochure touted the reclining seats as a feature to be used while driving.

An expert testified at trial on behalf of the woman that Ford could install a device that would not allow a car to be put in drive if a seat is in a reclined position. It would be similar to the safety device that doesn’t allow a car to shift into drive unless the brake is being depressed.

Doctor is Sued for Failing to Report Signs of Child Abuse

A doctor has a duty to report suspicions of child abuse to investigators, according to a recent ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court.

A doctor who allegedly failed to tell a case worker that he suspected signs of abuse of a three-month old girl can be sued for negligence, the court concluded.

The infant was admitted to the hospital for X-rays and a CT scan of her brain, but various physicians said the results were normal and discharged her. The next day, the state child welfare agency requested a second medical opinion from another doctor.

That doctor claimed he reviewed the records and told the case worker that the baby had fluid and cystic tumor on her brain, a broken arm and fractured clavicle. He claimed he also told the case worker that he saw signs of possible abuse, but the case worker denied the doctor reported this.

The baby eventually died as result of abuse inflicted by her father.

The doctor claimed he was immune

from suit under a state law protecting individuals who "report harm." But the Tennessee Supreme Court said the law didn’t apply to the doctor because his written report did not state child abuse had occurred. The case had to go to trial to resolve the dispute over whether he actually told the case worker that he suspected child abuse.