Philadelphia Injury Attorney Blog

Bush administration gives early Christmas card to corporate America - “A get out of jail free” card - A Pennsylvania product liability lawyer speaks out.

Last week The American Association for Justice released a report detailing how the Bush administration has engaged in a campaign to include preemption language in over 60 proposed and final regulatory rules in 7 federal agencies. The report indicates that these agencies headed by Bush administration political appointees have embarked upon an unprecedented campaign to negate the effect of state product liability laws that protect consumers and injured workers, in effect granting immunity to irresponsible corporations. One of the hallmarks of the Bush administration has made implementing the “get out of jail free” card for corporations one of its top priorities. Such efforts by the administration in their final days will leave individuals with no restitution for injuries caused by irresponsible corporations and will further stack the deck against American workers and consumers. Basically, big business gets off again and the little guy gets screwed. This campaign has been financially backed by big business lobbyists in their attempt to take the teeth out of any state consumer protection laws and further weaken regulatory scrutiny which has for many years protected consumers from dangerous and defective products.

The American Association for Justice (AAJ) filed multiple freedom of information act requests with the Federal government. The responses to these requests revealed that not only did the Executive Office direct the agencies to override state laws, it wrote the language. In effect, the Bush administration made the safety of Americans a political undertaking. I urge all consumers and readers of this blog to read the full report released by AAJ.

Long time career officials at regulatory agencies clashed with the Bush administration appointees over the attempt to provide complete immunity to corporations when defective products harm consumers. Academic commentators describe the preemption strategy as a travesty and states’ rights groups describe it as nothing more than a backdoor, underhanded means by which unelected federal bureaucrats impose their will on states. These attempts to deprive individuals of their right to the courts are unprecedented and endangers the American public in significant ways. I have always practiced law with the belief and understanding that trial lawyers complement the regulatory system. For many years, academics and the courts have recognized that the regulatory system alone does not have the resources to fully protect the public.

Continue reading " Pennsylvania Product Liability Lawsuits At Risk Thanks To Bush Administration Efforts " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Product Liability

Bookmark:

According to an article placed in The Daily Times, a suburban Philadelphia man has surrendered in the hit and run death of a high school honor student. Faith Sinclair, a 16 year old honor student, was struck on August 3rd as she was crossing a busy highway in Sharon Hill, Pennsylvania. On August 7th, a 2000 black Mercedes was seized from the garage of the alleged defendant by investors. According to reports, the Delaware County District Attorney, G. Michael Green, claim that the defendant called his boss after the accident to inform him he would not be in to work due to the fact that he had been in a fatal accident involving a young girl. The defendant was 27 years old on the day he surrendered to the authorities. He was charged with leaving the scene of a deadly accident, a felony that carries a one year mandatory minimum prison sentence and tampering with evidence. Under current Pennsylvania law, the penalty for leaving the scene of a fatal accident is a year in jail. But if the same driver stays at the scene to render assistance and is found to be under the influence of alcohol or an intoxicating substance, the penalty can be much stiffer, as much as five years. (Daily Times news article)

In my law practice at the Philadelphia personal injury law firm of Reiff and Bily, I have all too often dealt with hit and run cases and it is apparent that the current hit and run law of Pennsylvania rewards drivers who are under the influence that flee the scene of accidents. For more information on Pennsylvania laws concerning leaving the scene of an accident link to Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter C at www.dmv.state.pa.us)

Continue reading " ANOTHER DEADLY PHILADELPHIA HIT AND RUN ACCIDENT RESULTS IN THE LOSS OF LIFE OF A 16 YEAR OLD HIGH SCHOOL HONOR STUDENT - TIME TO CLOSE LOOPHOLES IN LAW " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accident , Catastrophic loss , Hit-and-Run , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

As an experienced Philadelphia personal injury attorney, I am confronted with clients who come into my office after a catastrophic automobile accident and they tell me that they have full automobile insurance coverage. Unfortunately, many times there is a car accident resulting in a fatality and the family is left without funds to pay for a proper funeral and when they look at their insurance policy, they learn that they are not covered for death benefits. Approximately once a week I am visited by clients involved in a Philadelphia car accident who believe that they have full coverage, including but not limited to full tort insurance coverage. Most of the time, these individuals were sold minimal policies by insurance agents that contain anything but full coverage.

Recently, an unfortunate story came across the wires involving the Mullen family in Athens, Pennsylvania who found out the hard way that their insurance did not cover them for death benefits. In that case, Missy Mullen’s daughter, Stephanie Mullen, was killed in a car accident on State Route 4014 in Smithville Township, Pennsylvania approximately one month ago. Missy Mullen learned that Stephanie’s Pennsylvania auto insurance policy did not have death benefits. The $5,000 cost for Stephanie’s funeral was paid by family and friends. Stephanie was cremated and now her ashes lay in a box on her bed at home and her family is in need of an additional $2,500 for the burial. Missy Mullen stated that she wanted more people to be aware of their insurance coverage so they would not have to go through something like this. (news article)

In most states, car insurance policies contain death benefits. However, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania only liability medical is required. We urge all of you to carefully examine your policies and if you have any questions regarding coverage, please do not hesitate to contact us for a free consultation.

If you or a loved one has been catastrophically injured in an accident, please contact us at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accident , Catastrophic loss , Insurance Claims , Personal Injury , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Pennsylvania Rep. Jim Wansacz ,D-114; Karen Boback, R-117; Frank Andrews Shimkus, D-113; and Ken Smith, D-112, sponsored various new bills aimed at preventing neglect of the elderly by individuals responsible for their care. The bills would toughen penalties for care givers when the neglect of individuals in their care results in death, setting new reporting requirements for neglect cases, requiring physicians to disclose any financial ownership in a long term care facility, as well as requiring the facility provide advance notice as residents are relocated.

As an experienced Philadelphia personal injury lawyer practicing elder law abuse and nursing home abuse, I have been astounded by the preponderance of the declining quality of care at nursing homes and its direct relationship to the economic and insurance crisis. Nursing home and elder abuse has come to the attention of many government agencies and many lax laws and financial webs created by private investment companies who have ownership interest in nursing homes have made it very difficult for plaintiffs who have suffered harm to succeed in court and for regulators to levy chain-wide fines due to the creation of complex corporate structures that obscured who controlled the homes. A recent report issued by Health and Human Services has found that nearly all nursing homes in the United States have received citations for health and safety violations in 2007.

When placing a loved one in a nursing home one expects, and is the right of the resident, to live in a clean, healthy, attractive and safe environment, to receive proper medical care, nursing care and rehabilitative and restorative therapy, and personal hygiene. Also, the residents have a right to be informed of his or her medical condition unless the physician indicates in the medical records that it is not in the best interest of the patient to be told. Nursing home and elder abuse is a crime against the sick, elderly and helpless. Although many cases of nursing home abuse exist, many law firms are afraid to go after the mighty Wall Street investment firms that have so cleverly created corporate webs to protect their investments.

Continue reading " PENNSYLVANIA ELDER ABUSE LAWYERS REIFF AND BILY SALUTE PENNSYLVANIA LAWMAKERS IN THEIR EFFORTS TO REVIVE BILLS TO PREVENT ELDER ABUSE IN PENNSYLVANIA " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Catastrophic loss , Negligence , Nursing Home Abuse/Neglect , Personal Injury , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

According to a recent article published by the New York Times on Sunday, October 26, 2008, so many members of the armed forces have been dying on motorcycles and sports bikes like the Ninja that the Navy and Marines have made special training mandatory. In just one weekend in September, the Navy lost four men in sport bike accidents.

As I have noted before in my blog, you can go out and purchase a motorcycle from a showroom floor without even having a motorcycle license to buy it or without having any special training. Some of the Ninja bikes will attain speeds of almost 200 mph. In the last 12 months, 50 of 58 sailors and marines killed on motorcycles were operating on such said sports bikes which are much faster than their cruiser counterparts. The Army also lost 36 soldiers on sport bike accidents in the same time period.

In just the last month in our law practice, which specializes in catastrophic personal injury accidents with an emphasis on motorcycle accidents, we noticed a tremendous amount of accidents with people under age 30 who are first time purchasers and have limited experience riding motorcycles. According to Tracy Martin who runs a private riding program aimed at high performance motorcycles, Air Force safety officials predict the military person most likely to die next is a male under the age of 25, working in maintenance, who has a sport bike and owns it less than a month. A direct correlation with those individuals represented by our law firm over the past 25 years. (New York Times article)

Continue reading " US MILITARY FORCES MAKE SPECIAL TRAINING MANDATORY FOR MOTORCYCLE RIDERS - PHILADELPHIA MOTORCYCLE LAWYER, JEFFREY REIFF, SALUTES THESE EFFORTS " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Catastrophic loss , Personal Injury , Product Liability , Wrongful Death , motorcycle accidents

Bookmark:

A PHILADELPHIA PRODUCTS LIABILITY LAWYER SAYS THAT THE PUBLIC WILL PAY A PRICE

On November 3, 2008, the pharmaceutical giant Wyeth will take its case to the United States Supreme Court to argue that FDA approval of a drug supercedes state law challenging safety, efficacy and labeling. The drugmaker and the FDA will argue that preemption by maintaining the FDA’s actions are the final word on safety and effectiveness. This Court decision is extremely important and being closely watched by drug manufacturers and plaintiffs’ attorneys on behalf of their affected clients because the ruling will determine whether patients can sue drugmakers through state law when a product has already been approved by the FDA. In a press release, the drugmaker Wyeth argued that preemption protects everyone; “The Constitutional preemption is not new; the patients and physicians need to be able to rely on a single Federal standard and guidelines with the risks, benefits and uses of medicines - the FDA-approved labeling, and upholding preemption will leave America’s courthouse doors open to injured patients.”

This case stems from an instance where Vermont musician Diana Levine was given a Wyeth nausea medication called Phenergan during a visit to a hospital emergency room. However, the drug was administered improperly, causing her to lose her right arm below the elbow. She successfully argued that even though the labeling complied with the FDA requirements, the adequacy of the warning still wasn’t established for a particular method of administering the drug. She further contended that Wyeth wasn’t prevented from adding or strengthening the warning on the label even though the FDA rejected a proposed change. In the lower courts, Levine was awarded more than $6 million dollars. In spite of appeals, the Vermont Supreme Court sided with her. But Wyeth appealed again. No surprise the White House backs Wyeth on their preemption position. (New York Times article)

This case has been referred to as the mother of all preemption cases. If the Court accepts the position set forth by Wyeth and the FDA, the result will be an unprecedented elimination of remedies available to consumers injured by drugs. Many large corporations supported by the Bush administration have vigorously pursued the preemption argument to block the roadways to courts and prevent many injured plaintiffs from full ability to exercise their Constitutional rights. Preemption is a legal doctrine based on the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution which states that when Federal and State law are at odds, Federal law will take precedent. Its application to state tort litigation represents a radical extension of its original meaning.

Continue reading " UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT TO HEAR IMPORTANT PREEMPTION CASE ON NOVEMBER 3, 2008; COURT’S DECISION WILL DETERMINE WHETHER PATIENTS CAN SUE A DRUGMAKER THROUGH STATE LAW WHEN A PRODUCT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA) " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Catastrophic loss , Personal Injury , Product Liability , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

I have been a lawyer since 1979, aggressively protecting the rights of catastrophically injured individuals. Yes, I am a greedy trial lawyer. I am greedy for justice. As I listen to politicians, including presidential candidates, conveniently noting that lawyers are like bottom feeders or the “scum of the earth” or where I hear ignorant people telling me that trial lawyers are greedy, I can only think to myself that had it not been for trial lawyers, the greed of corporate America and Wall Street would certainly doom us all. When one thinks of greed, we think intuitively that greed is bad. We think of a self-serving, selfish individual who cares about nothing but accumulating wealth. Until lately, we did not hear much about greedy banks, greedy insurance companies or greedy Wall Street investment firms. What we did hear about most is greedy trial lawyers. Today the individual taxpayers are left holding the bag for the most massive bailout of greed in the history of developed nations. It is only when we feel the pain individually that we have the tendency to catagorize something or someone as greedy. Anyone living in today’s world knows that trial lawyers have been under attack and many of the rules applicable to injured and innocent victims have been changed or legislated away to give big corporations more and more power. The most contentious area of tort reform, and the area in which tort reform advocates focus, is on personal injury and the greed of the trial lawyer.

I am fortunate to live and practice law in the United States where juries decide cases and where compensatory and punitive damages are available to injured plaintiffs and to assist in policing the system of corporate greed. Tort reform has become a contentious political issue particularly because of the alleged high cost of compensating injured victims. It is my feeling that lawyers are the silent policemen of society. We protect the hopes and the value of hope of innocent victims. How do you know if your household products or automobiles are defective and could be causing a potential injury to you or your family? How do you know if your medicines are doing more harm than good? How do you know if the toys you purchase are safe for your children? Under current law, many defective and hazardous products remain on store shelves and in medicine cabinets and are in the houses of millions of Americans and you never know they are dangerous. Government and big corporations get away with keeping this information from us. They seal public records in court cases and try to keep everything a secret, even when victims are successful in holding corporations accountable for defective and hazardous products. They are forced to enter into secrecy agreements which prevent them from informing other consumers of the injuries they defend. The practice of secrecy in tort reform is an example of how corporations can legally put profits over people. Politicians claim that lawsuit abuse destroys jobs, forces doctors out of business, and forces companies into bankruptcy. They want to deprive innocent and injured clients of the hope of the judicial system and the access to the courts dictated by the founding fathers of the United States Constitution. Corporations have and will continue to place profits over safety unless policed by trial lawyers and the court system.

Continue reading " I AM A GREEDY TRIAL LAWYER " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Catastrophic loss , Personal Injury , Premises liability , Product Liability , SUV and 15 passenger rollover , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

My mother-in-law is 92 years old and is currently a resident of a prominent assisted living facility. For the past year, many of the residents and their families have made numerous complaints about the inadequacy of the quality of care delivered in the facility. As I visited the nursing home facility over the past year, it was not uncommon to learn of the deaths of individuals who I had just seen appearing in healthy condition just weeks earlier. Apparently with the decline in the economy, the care at the nursing home had declined to less than acceptable. Many inhabitants and families were noticeably angry and lodging complaints to the young administrator who had a background, unbelievably and more surprisingly, in physical education. The number of clinical registered nurses at the facility was reduced and replaced with practical day nurses who often do not have proper or adequate training. Budgets for nursing supplies, resident activities, and other services also have decreased. When questioned about the apparent decreased standards and conditions, we were told that the company was working to improve the situation, but frankly, this has just been plain old lipservice. The company even started to re-work financial arrangements quietly with many of the residents to prevent growing attrition.

The New York Times recently conducted an analysis of nursing homes and collected data by government agencies from 2000 to 2006. The analysis noted that when nursing homes are acquired by large private investors, they cut expenses and staff (sometimes below minimum legal requirements). According to the New York Times article published on September 23, 2007, it is noted that the typical nursing home acquired by a large investment company scored worse than national rates in 12 out of 14 indicators that regulators use to track elements of long term residents. Before these homes were acquired by private investors, many of these homes scored at or above national averages in similar measurements. The article notes that private investment companies have made it very difficult for plaintiffs who have suffered harm to succeed in court and for regulators to levy chainwide fines due to the creation of complex corporate structures that have obscured who controls the nursing homes. (New York Times article)

Continue reading " THE DECLINING QUALITY OF CARE AT NURSING HOMES AND INSURANCE CRISIS - THE CRISIS THAT IS CURRENTLY EMBODYING MANY NURSING HOMES AND THEIR QUALITY OF CARE - AN AFFECTED NURSING HOME ABUSE LAWYER SPEAKS OUT " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Elder Law , Nursing Home Abuse/Neglect , Personal Injury , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Children’s product maker, Delta Enterprise Corporation, recalls 1.59 million cribs linked to infant deaths according to an article published in the Wall Street Journal on October 21, 2008. A spokesman for Delta Enterprise Corporation, a New York based company, stated that they are recalling 1.59 million cribs and the recall stems from two different types of problematic hardware used on the cribs sold from 1995 through 2005. The hardware, which includes safety pegs for one set of cribs and spring pegs for another, can create a hazard if not properly installed. The drop side of the cribs can fall and disengage creating a gap that can entrap and suffocate infants. The recall by Delta is the biggest in a series of crib investigations and recalls urged by The Consumer Product Safety Commission. In mid-September, the agency also announced a recall of 600,000 Simplicity Inc. drop side cribs involving hardware problems. A month earlier, 900,000 Simplicity convertible bassinets were recalled after Federal regulators linked the products to infant deaths from strangulation. In that case, metal bars were spaced too far apart to prevent infants from slipping through. The company has set up a website at www.cribrecallcenter.com for consumers. The site should be online by Tuesday, October 21st. Consumers may also call 1-800-876-5304. The Consumer Product Safety Commission will announce details of the recall on October 21, 2008. For more information on recalls, please see my blog article dated September 30, 2008.

Products can be purchased at many retail stores, wholesalers, supermarkets or even speciality outlets and they are all manufactured with the implicit guarantee that the purchased product is not defective. Products that are either defective or dangerous can cause injury or even death to thousands of people in Pennsylvania every year. Under the protection of product liability in Pennsylvania, consumers are often able to recover monetary damages stemming from or relating to injuries. Under Pennsylvania law, products must meet certain consumer safety requirements when being used in a lawful and normal manner.

The experienced product liability lawyers at Reiff and Bily specialize in severe and catastrophic injuries caused by defective products. We have almost thirty years of experience handling product liability cases throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and in other states across the nation. We are available to answer any of your questions regarding product liability. We offer no obligation and confidential evaluations by telephone or through our website. Please contact us today at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com if you have any questions or concerns.

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Catastrophic loss , Personal Injury , Product Liability , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

CATASTROPHIC INJURY ATTORNEY, JEFFREY REIFF, WEIGHS IN

Another four people, including a 13 month old girl, died when a medical rescue helicopter crashed in Illinois early last week. The helicopter was headed for Children’s Hospital in Chicago. Authorities state that there was no distress call made from the pilots and believe that the helicopter may have hit a radio wire before it crashed. (news article)

Just prior to this, on September 30, 2008, a helicopter operated by the Maryland State Police crashed killing four people. An investigation revealed that the rescue helicopter was not equipped with a terrain awareness system that could have warned the pilot that he was flying dangerously close to a grove of trees, according the National Transportation Safety Board. (news article)

In the last 30 years of practicing catastrophic injury law, we are all too familiar with evacuations and rescues by helicopters from serious accidents. Many of our clients have recollected that the helicopter rides have been scarier than the actual accident. In the case of the Maryland accident, according to news sources, Stephanie Younger, the mother of one of the crash victims that died, stated that her teenage daughter was well enough to call her on her cell phone after the car accident and had no obvious injuries, just pains in her chest. It should be noted that the weather at the time of the crash was rain and fog, and the helicopter was flying at night. Mrs. Younger was quoted as asking “If the weather is already bad, why would you put a child by herself and without a parent in a helicopter?” On June 8th another helicopter crash in Texas killed a patient and three crew members.

Continue reading " NINTH FATAL HELICOPTER CRASH OF THE YEAR OCCURS PROMPTING THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD TO CALL FOR AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE INCREASE OF MEDICAL HELICOPTER CRASHES " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Auto Accident , Catastrophic loss , Personal Injury , Wrongful Death

Bookmark:

Long term care insurance refers to the insurance for care taking and services beyond medical care and is used by people who have a disability or chronic illness or plainly just in their “golden years”. People are living longer these days and, unfortunately, normal health insurance policies and Medicare do not pay for long term care expenses. Long term care insurance typically covers the cost of health in your home with daily activities like bathing, dressing, eating, cleaning, adult daycare, visiting nurses, care in a nursing home or assisted living programs and services that are provided in a special residential setting other than in your home which services may include meals, health monitoring and help with daily activities.

Approximately ten years ago, a persuasive insurance agent convinced me that it was necessary to purchase long term care insurance for myself, as well as my aging parents. As any individual who has reviewed a newspaper within the past month can determine, many of the insurance companies in America are in deep financial crisis. It appears that there is much more trouble on the horizon for the beleaguered insurance industry. Recently, benefits for some 164,000 long term care policyholders at Conseco Senior Health Insurance Company may be in danger as they are moved to an independent trust. For more information on this, please see my blog article dated October 13, 2008.

Since 1979, I have exclusively devoted my legal practice to handling catastrophic injury and insurance claims cases. In the process, I have developed a fairly intimate knowledge of the insurance industry as I have worked with many experts including but not limited to actuaries, economists, lobbyists, product developers and insurance industry executives. As a financial investor, I have carefully studied trends and balance sheets of insurance companies. I have even been asked to participate in the start up of a few insurance companies. The field of long term care insurance is a fairly young industry and has been largely in the premium collection mode (to date) from the baby boomers who are now aging or have parents who are entering the “golden years” period of life. The financial weakness of the markets is starting to reveal its effect on even the major insurance industry players as they face declining sales and an aging population. Claims are being denied or delayed and premiums being increased in a more than harsh fashion in what this writer perceives as an attempt to negate or cancel policies for non-payment.

Continue reading " LONG TERM CARE INSURANCE - A CRISIS ON THE HORIZON " »

Posted by Jeffrey M. Reiff | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Catastrophic loss , Elder Law , Insurance Claims , Personal Injury

Bookmark:

As a Pennsylvania insurance claims attorney, with a 30 year history of representing catastrophically injured plaintiffs and disputes against insurance carriers solely on a contingent fee basis (we don’t get paid until we win), obviously the financial concerns of the insurance companies and their ability to pay claims is on the front burner in our law firm. In the past few weeks, AIG has been front and center in the headlines. This was followed by an incident with Conseco which was written about in my blog of October 13, 2008.

On October 1, 2008, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid emerged from a luncheon on Capitol Hill and after speaking briefly to reporters about the financial crisis, mentioned that another insurance company was in danger of following AIG into failure. He mentioned “one of the individuals in the caucus today talked about a major insurance company, with a name that everyone knows, that’s on the verge of going bankrupt.” The Senator stopped short of identifying the insurance company. However, the stock market acting in a nervous fashion revealed that shares of Prudential, Hartford Financial Services and MetLife decreased in value on the following days and have been struggling to recover. The rumor mill continues to circulate rumors and facts, non-facts and supposed facts about various individual companies, solvency of insurance companies, and general doom and gloom predictions. Shares of stock in insurance companies fluctuated wildly on the New York Stock Exchange. Prudential Financial warned last week that it would miss third quarter forecasts due to a series of hefty charges on negative results of investments. MetLife recently raised an additional $2 billion dollars in capital by selling 75 million shares at a discount, while Hartford Insurance Company received a $2.5 billion capital injection from German financial services company, Allianz. To make matters worse, many insureds can no longer afford rising rates.

Continue reading " SPECULATING ABOUT THE FINANCIAL HEALTH OF INSURANCE COMPANIES OTHER THAN AIG IN PENNSYLVANIA AND HOW IT AFFECTS CLAIMANTS " »