Atlanta Personal Injury Lawyer - Defective & Dangerous Products - Most Commented

Pet Food Recall May Prompt Property Damage Lawsuits

M. Brandon Smith — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:38:45 GMT

Menu Foods', one of the nation's largest manufacturers of dog and cat food, has issued a nationwide recall on its "cuts and gravy" style pet food after being linked to kidney failure in many animals. The pet food recall, which is estimated to include more than 60 million containers, was distributed to Wal-Mart, Kroger, Safeway, and other similar stores on Friday after more than 10 pets died from eating the contaminated pet food.

The recall covers the company's "cuts and gravy" style food, which consists of chunks of meat in gravy, sold in cans and small foil pouches between Dec. 3 and March 6 throughout the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
"At this juncture, we're not 100 percent sure what's happened," said Paul Henderson, the company's president and chief executive officer. However, the recalled products were made using wheat gluten purchased from a new supplier, since dropped for another source, spokeswoman Sarah Tuite said. Wheat gluten is a source of protein.

At this point the specific facts concerning the recall are still under investigation to determine why the popular pet food sold to millions of pet owners is causing so many animals to get sick and die. Although this recall has not been linked to any sickness in humans like the recent peanut butter recall, it will most likely prompt property damage lawsuits on behalf of those whose pets either got really sick and/or died from eating the contaminated pet food.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

Voluntary Recall Of Zelnorm Issued After Prompt By FDA

M. Brandon Smith — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:02:54 GMT

The sale of Zelnorm, (tegaserod maleate) approved in 2002 for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation, has recently been suspended by its manufacturer, Novartis, after the drug has been linked to a significant number of cardiovascular risks. This decision was made after the United State Food and Drug Administration found the drug can lead to increased occurrences of heart attack, stroke and serious chest pains. Doctor's with patients taking Zelnorm are being asked by the FDA to work with their patients to find other suitable replacement medications and therapies.

Earlier this year, Novartis gave the FDA the results of new analyses of 29 clinical studies of Zelnorm for treatment of a variety of gastrointestinal tract conditions. The analyses showed 13 of 11,614 patients given Zelnorm had serious and life-threatening cardiovascular side effects, while just one of the 7,031 patients given dummy pills did, the FDA and Novartis said in separate statements.
The FDA has told Novartis it would consider allowing a limited reintroduction of Zelnorm "if a population of patients can be identified in whom the benefits of the drug outweigh the risks," the agency said.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

Pet Food Recall Class Action Lawsuit Planned?

M. Brandon Smith — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:27:36 GMT

The law firm of Childers, Buck, & Schlueter, LLP (Atlanta, Georgia), is currently investigating property damage claims relating to the recent Menu Foods, Inc., pet food recall which has lead to the serious injury and/or death of hundreds of dogs and cats all over the nation. Based on the numerous comments to our previous posting concerning the pet food recall, many owners are now becoming aware that contaminated pet food was the cause of their pets serious health conditions, including renal failure, and/or death. Given the vast number of pets affected by this recent outbreak, our firm is considering the option of a class action property damage lawsuit to ensure pet owners rights are protected.

According to the most recent reports:

Menu Foods, the Ontario, Canada-based company that produced the pet food, said Saturday it was recalling dog food sold throughout North America under 48 brands and cat food sold under 40 brands including Iams, Nutro and Eukanuba. The food was distributed by major retailers such as Wal-Mart, Kroger and Safeway. Since that recall, two other companies, Nestle Purina PetCare Co. and Hill's Pet Nutrition Inc., said Saturday that as a precaution they were voluntarily recalling some products made by Menu Foods. A complete list of the recalled products along with product codes, descriptions and production dates was available from the Menu Foods Web site, http://www.menufoods.com/recall. The company also designated two phone numbers that pet owners could call for information 1-866-463-6738 and 1-866-895-2708.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is still investigating this incident and more information surrounding the recall is sure to come up in the coming days and weeks.

All consumers are encouraged to report adverse actions or other problems to the FDA complaint coordinator in their state.

If you have a pet that has been sick and/or died as a result of eating contaminated pet food please contact one of our attorneys now to see how we could help you out during this tragic situation. With mounting vets bills and other expenses, you should not be held responsible for someone else's negligence in placing contaminated pet food into the market place. Contact us today by clicking the link above or filling out the form at right to see how we can help.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

Yamaha Motor Corp. Experiencing Troubles with Model Rhino Vehicles

Jessica Smagacz — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:10:30 GMT

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) said yesterday that Yamaha Motor Corp. U.S.A. of Cypress, California announced a free repair program to address safety issues with all Rhino 450, 660, and 700 model off-highway recreational vehicles.

Yamaha is actually voluntarily suspending sale of these models immediately until the models are repaired. Therefore, consumers should stop using these “popular recreational vehicles” immediately until the repair completed.

“CPSC staff has investigated more than 50 incidents involving 46 driver and passenger deaths in these two Rhino models. More than two-thirds of the cases involved rollovers and many involved unbelted occupants. Of the rollover-related deaths and hundreds of reported injuries, some of which were serious, many appear to involve turns at relatively low speeds and on level terrain.”

Since Fall of 2003, about 120,000 of the 450 and 660 model Rhinos have been distributed nationwide.

If you or a loved one have questions about the Yamaha Rhino 660 or other similar ATV give our Yamaha Rhino Lawyers a call to find out more about your rights and situation. Our Georgia law firm, Childers & Schlueter L.L.P. has filed dozens of these cases already and continues to investigate them.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jessica Smagacz

Defense Verdict In Madison County Vioxx Trial

M. Brandon Smith — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 21:57:17 GMT

In the latest Vioxx trial, a Madison County jury found in favor of Merck & Co. after deliberating for more than 6 hours over the course of two days. The jury members rejected Patty Schwaller widower's claim that Merck & Co. was to blame for his wife's sudden death linked to cardiovascular side effects.

In siding with Merck, the jury concluded that Vioxx was not a "proximate cause" in the death of Patty Schwaller, who had taken the drug for about 20 months before suddenly collapsing and dying in her Granite City home.
Merck, which pulled Vioxx off the market in 2004 after its research showed it increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes, celebrated its 10th victory in 15 cases that have been tried in the mushrooming litigation over Vioxx. It was the first trial in the Midwest and had been conducted in a county known for large awards favoring plaintiffs.
Merck isn't out of the woods. The company, based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., has been deluged with more than 27,000 personal injury lawsuits and another 265 potential class-action lawsuits alleging harm from Vioxx. The company has reserved $1.64 billion in its Vioxx legal defense fund and said again Tuesday it plans to fight each lawsuit.

Attorneys for the plaintiff's estate are planning an immediate appeal to contest not on the way the trial was conducted but also to contest various other legal matters that are believed to have been reversible errors. This defense verdict is in stark contrast to a Plaintiff's verdict of $47.5 million earlier this month against Vioxx and it manufacturer Merck & Co. wherein it was said Merck & Co. failed to warn of the cardiovascular risks and dangers associated with Vioxx.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

Dodge Durango Design Defect Could Lead To Fire Hazard

M. Brandon Smith — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:26:00 GMT

Do you own a Dodge Durango? If so you ought to be aware of a potential fire hazard that can exist in a number of the vehicles relating to the wiring mechanism associated with their manufacture. This investigation involves a woman who owned a Dodge Durango that caught fire and completely destroyed the entire the vehicle without warning or other ascertainable cause. Dodge recently recalled a number of other Durangos for similar wiring problems in vehicles that have bench seats without a console. This case however involves a Durango with bucket seats and questions are now being asked as to why a recall for these vehicles have not been included as well.

If you own a Dodge Durango, you are encouraged to take your vehicle to a local dealership to see if your vehicle is susceptible to a wiring defect. If that your vehicle is determined to be affected by this defect, it will be repaired free of charge in order to eliminate this potential risk and potentially dangerous defect.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

First Peanut Butter Lawsuit Filed

M. Brandon Smith — Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:36:42 GMT

The first of what is expected to be many peanut butter lawsuits was filed on Friday concerning the recent peanut butter salmonella outbreak by a Missouri couple. The suit names ConAgra Foods Inc. as the defendant for the gastrointestinal illnesses injuries the plaintiffs sustained after eating the manufacturer's Great Value Peanut Butter back in October. The peanut butter lawsuit on behalf of the family alleges their two children had to hospitalized after consuming the contaminated peanut butter and was filed in the U.S. District Court in Kansas City.

According to AccessNorthGa.com:

The possible link to tainted peanut butter became known Wednesday when Omaha, Neb.-based ConAgra and the Food and Drug Administration announced a product recall.
Federal health investigators have said they strongly suspect Peter Pan peanut butter and certain batches of Wal-Mart's Great Value house brand, both manufactured by ConAgra.
ConAgra spokesman Chris Kircher said the company is aware of the lawsuit and will respond to it in due course, but he declined to comment on the specifics of the case because the company generally does not comment on pending litigation.

While this initial case was filed in Kansas, it is expected that many if not most all others will ultimately be filed in the state of Georgia. The responsible ConAgra plant which made and distributed all the contaminated peanut butter is located in a small Georgia town called Sylvester. As Georgia food poisoning attorneys were are actively preparing and investigating new claims linked to the Peter Pan and Great Value (walmart) peanut butter salmonella outbreak. If you or a loved one wants to find out more information salmonella and about your rights contact us immediately to ensure you are protected.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

What Is Salmonella And What Are Its Effects?

M. Brandon Smith — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:56:17 GMT

With the recent salmonella outbreak concerning Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter many people are asking the question, what is salmonella and what are its adverse effects? The short answer is that salmonella is a infectious bacteria that attacks the intestines and blood stream in most humans. The most commons effects of salmonella are diarrhea, fever, abdominal cramps which typical occur approximately 6 to 72 hours after developing the infection. While usually not deadly, those infected by salmonella at times often feel like they are not going to make it through the ordeal given the intense pains and problems it causes. For more information on the what salmonella is and the effects and complications it can have check out the cited articles above.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

Save That Peanut Butter Jar-It Is Evidence

M. Brandon Smith — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 11:22:30 GMT

When pursuing a peanut butter salmonella outbreak claim it is very important to NOT throw away the jar of peanut butter and its lid despite what others are saying at this time. It will be a very important piece of evidence in the future. Keep it in a very safe place where no one will use it again and mark it with a danger sign or note. Do not however write on the jar itself. Put it in a plastic/paper bag and write "Do Not Touch" or use similar language on it. For more information on this peanut butter salmonella outbreak it is very important to contact us immediately to ensure your rights are protected.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith

Sunscreen Manufactures Sued In A Class Action Suit

M. Brandon Smith — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 13:18:51 GMT

Five of the nation's top sunscreen manufactures have been named as defendants in a recently filed class action suit for allegedly making false and misleading claims about the effectiveness of their products. The suit claims these sunscreen producers created a false sense of security in its consumers and thereby actually caused increased dangers to them as a result.

According to ABC NEWS.com

"Sunscreen is the snake oil of the 21st century, and these companies that market it are Fortune 500 snake oil salesmen," said Samuel Rudman, a lawyer with Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman and Robbins LLP, in a news release. "False claims such as 'sunblock' 'waterproof" and 'all-day protection' should be removed from these products immediately."

Many doctors and dermatologists, who most commonly treat skin cancer, however vehemently disagree with the class action's asserted claims and suggest that the use of sunscreen in highly effective when used properly.

For more on this article and the class action suit against these sunscreen manufactures, click here....

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by M. Brandon Smith