Philadelphia Injury Attorney Blog

As an experienced automobile defect and car accident attorney for over three decades, I recognize one thing, cars should be designed safely for everyone whether they are adults or children. Unfortunately, when it comes to safety many of the large automobile manufacturers have sacrificed the interests of both children and those individuals that are above or below average sized individuals.

Each year, thousands of children are seriously injured and killed due to poor seat belt fit or improper restraint systems in the vehicle.

Many times child and infant car seats are improperly designed or have manufacturing defects presenting hidden dangers. Children between the ages of 4 and 8 under 80 lbs. are typically less than 48 inches tall and are exposed to a higher risk of catastrophic injury or wrongful death than an adult because adult safety seat belts are designed to protect adults and not children. When a seat belt fails to protect or fit an individual correctly, there is an excellent chance that in a catastrophic accident restrained individuals will sustain a submersion injury, rollover injury, or positioning injury leading to catastrophic injuries such as quadriplegia, paraplegia, or death.

The Pennsylvania automobile defect and product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily understand that prevention of injuries must always be priority number one rather than profits for automobile manufacturers. Seat belt restraint systems are design issues and defectively designed or manufactured seat belts and seat belt buckles that lead to potential failures, unlatch, false latch, inadvertent latch, and retractor failures create a catastrophically dangerous situation that many people do not learn of until it is just too late.

The National Highway Safety Administration is charged with writing and enforcing safety, theft resistance, and fuel economy guidelines for motor vehicles. However, as an experienced Pennsylvania automobile product liability attorney who has handled a substantial number of catastrophic car accident cases, I am well aware that these are only minimal standards and guidelines.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, (FMVSS), are regulations written in terms of the minimum safety performance requirements for motor vehicles, motor vehicle items, and motor vehicle equipment. Many of the big auto makers take pride in announcing that their vehicles meet these “minimal” standards, however, a safely designed car should exceed these standards, especially if there is a safer design alternative.

In 1980, NHTSA recognized the need for safer interiors of vehicles and identified improvements to padding and cushioning in the event of an accident. In 1989, the application of one inch of padding was required to interior surfaces which was indicated to reduce head trauma by half as much. The Department of Transportation estimated the cost of padding all roof, rails, and areas likely to have an impact was approximately $33 per car.

Safety is not one thing, it’s everything. Understanding that NHTSA or FMVSS government standards are only minimal guidelines and applying conventional wisdom that cars and motor vehicles should be safe makes it intolerable and unacceptable when automobile manufacturers cut corners and emphasize safety over profits. While automobile manufacturers always speak about compliance with federal standards, standard testing typically does not call for all types of situations or applications.

Keeping this in mind, if you or a loved one has been involved in a serious motor vehicle accident, you may want to contact an experienced car accident and automotive product liability attorney to fully evaluate your claim and search the road less traveled for answers and proper compensation. The experienced Pennsylvania car accident and automotive product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily always offer a free, no obligation consultation. Contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

When I was a young teenager in school one of my favorite books to read was “To Kill A Mockingbird”. Atticus Finch, the fictional protagonist of the Pulitzer Prize winning novel is a lawyer in a small Alabama county and has been named as one of the greatest heroes in American film. In a rousing speech given to the jury, Finch claims “There is one way in this country in which all men are created equal – there is one human institution that makes a pauper the equal of a Rockefeller, the stupid man the equal of an Einstein, and the ignorant man the equal of any college President. That institution gentlemen is the court”.

Although fictional, Atticus Finch has always been one of my heroes and one of the main reasons that I became a lawyer.

Every person is entitled to every presumption of reaching the heights of a lifetime without sustaining injuries that could have been easily prevented had it not been for the negligence of others, or a defectively designed product.

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability and motor vehicle defect lawyer for over three decades, I have recognized that money, power, and greed often leads to ruthless and preventable catastrophic injuries and deaths that will greatly affect my clients and their families for the rest of their life. Many times when I visit a new case, I seethe with anger (which is not a bad starting point) as I search to put the pieces of the puzzle together which will shine a light on how my clients and their families were betrayed. In most cases the facts reveal that the victim suffered a wrong and is fully entitled to justice. One must always stand for something or you fall for anything.

I see how insurance companies and corporate defendants continue to turn their backs on catastrophically injured individuals or the victims of families who are wrongfully killed when the bills of life keep coming and the medical costs keep accumulating. I do believe that the right to enjoy one’s life in a safe and proper manner is not one thing, it is everything. Jeffrey Reiff is the founding partner of Reiff and Bily, a catastrophic injury and wrongful death law firm in Philadelphia, PA.

It has often been stated by legislators and lawmakers that greedy trial lawyers and their clients take advantage of the legal system by seeking large verdicts after they are injured by the negligence of another or by a defectively designed or defectively manufactured product.

For years, as an experienced catastrophic injury attorney, I would have friends talk to me about the famous “McDonald’s coffee case” when in fact they had no idea what that case was really about. In fact, the hot coffee propaganda campaign in the newspapers was funded by major corporations who have spent millions of dollars to distort the case promoting tort reform.

I urge all of my readers to view “Hot Coffee” which clearly reveals how large businesses and corporations aided by the media manipulated the public with lies to protect corporate interests. The film follows the lives of four individuals whose lives were devastated by the attacks on our courts, and challenges assumptions many Americans hold about “jackpot justice”.

For over three decades, I have recognized that the collective 500 years of wisdom of individuals comprising a jury have more common sense than anyone else in the courtroom. It is conventional wisdom that products, cars, amusement rides, and premises should be safe from defects. Occupy Wall Street began a worldwide movement protesting social and economic inequality, corporate greed, as well as corruption and the undue influence that corporations have. The 7th Amendment of the United States Constitution grants us all the right to a trial by a jury of our peers.

Many of the product liability cases that our office regularly investigates and litigates involves someone’s deepest and darkest fears coming true. Imagine receiving a phone call in the middle of the night notifying you that your child or another loved one has been wrongfully killed as a result of being involved in a car accident caused by a defective product design or mechanism that the manufacturers have known for years created an unsafe condition. Everyone has the right to expect that when they purchase an automobile, they are buying a safe car and that safety should never be an option. Yet, in many of our automobile product liability cases, we have been able to show that automobile manufacturers concealed known defects putting the profitability and greed of corporate interests above consumer safety. Simply put, cutting corners on product design or manufacture and not putting safety first is never acceptable. The prevention of an injury must always be priority number one. Cars should be designed to be safe for everyone, adults and children. Concealing safety issues with bold faced lies in the name of business and profits is simply intolerable.

The experienced Philadelphia product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily understand that one must never be afraid to stand up to big business and corporations. If you or a loved one has been injured by the defective design or manufacture of a product, contact one of our experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers for a free, no obligation consultation toll free at 1-800-421-95959 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

For over three decades, I have been practicing catastrophic injury and wrongful death law and all too often a catastrophic injury or wrongful death is caused by a clear violation of laws that have minimal if any enforcement guidelines and “teeth”.
Recently the Concordia cruise ship disaster illustrated just how many deaths and catastrophic injuries could be caused in an industry guided by rules that were spottily enforced. Every time an accident happens whether it involves a cruise ship, bus accident, trucking accident, amusement park accident, or product liability claim, authorities and experts are quick to state that the event is a wake-up call that highlights longstanding safety concerns.

In Philadelphia, we continue to have an escalating hit and run car accident crisis due to the fact that there are several well-known loopholes in the laws and yet legislators refuse to take steps to change and enforce codes which should in reality punish violators.

The law firm of Reiff and Bily has handled many amusement park accident cases, and yet the enforcement of these safety regulations is spotty despite the volume of rules and amount of unreported amusement park and water park accidents. Many industries escape regulatory scrutiny and it comes as no shock that catastrophic accidents occur when safety protocols are not followed and enforced. Rules and regulations without enforcement are meaningless and if the rules and regulations provide a mechanism for enforcement, individuals or corporations in positions of power often think (as demonstrated by their action or non-action) that they are above these rules and think that they can escape liability by the use of a creative lawyer or legal system which fails to enforce said rules and regulations. If our system chooses to ignore rules and regulations, it fosters a system where it is easier for individuals and corporations to become and remain corrupt then to remain honest.

I have always believed that laws not enforced cease to be laws, and rights not defended may wither away. I believe that the courtroom with proper legal representation makes equals of all men and that an injured victim must ensure that laws are followed and enforced. While catastrophic injury and personal injury lawyers will continue to be bashed by corporations and insurance companies who continue to delay, deny, and defend rightful claims, I for one understand that enforcement of laws and prosecution of wrongdoers are necessary to protect the public and promote order which is the first requisite of liberty and justice.

Several weeks ago, a sweet and innocent 7-year-old girl was tragically burned to death in her Burlington County, New Jersey home as her four siblings attempted to rescue her. Immediate public opinion pointed a finger at the victim’s mother who was not home but had left her 14-year-old daughter in charge of the household to babysit while she had to quickly take care of a pressing family issue.

Posted blogs and public opinion attempted to blame the mother for leaving the children home alone without an adult, claiming that she was irresponsible. What these reports failed to mention was that Mom was a highly responsible individual and that the 14-year-old and other children in charge of the babysitting duties were well trained and that the 14-year-old was in fact was a highly responsible honor student. One can only imagine the emotional scarring and infliction of emotional distress sustained by Mom and the surviving siblings of the 7-year-old. While those who were quick to judge on the blogs claim it was due to matches or accidental fire caused by the children’s negligence, without conclusions to confirm the same, it strikes me that most of the public opinion blog postings were critically unfair, unfounded, judgmental, and prejudicial.

As one can imagine, the grieving mother, age 34, was interrogated by local detectives and those so quick to judge may fail to recognize or care about the real cause of the fire which took this precious young girl’s life.

In fact, the faulty and defective wiring and defective power strip located within the rental household were initially determined to have caused the fire.

Additionally, it is interesting to note that fire officials had to call in a tanker truck due to inadequate water supplies in the neighborhood required for quickly extinguishing the fire.

The experienced product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily were called upon to investigate this tragic situation and our initial evaluation and investigation reveals just how far fetched the initial prejudicial blogs and public comments were concerning fault for this tragic loss.

Yes, I have seen this scenario before where parents are blamed for negligent supervision and for causing the death of their children due to irresponsibility resulting in tragic consequences, and it never ceases to amaze me how quick people are to jump to judgment without knowing all of the facts.

If you or a loved one sustained a catastrophic injury or wrongful death, don’t assume the facts to be as they initially appear or are represented by other individuals.

A little bit of knowledge or hypothesis by individuals who do not possess all of the facts or skills necessary to reach an objective conclusion can be a dangerous thing, and it pays to place an independent team of experienced catastrophic injury, wrongful death, and product liability lawyers on your side who will completely and independently investigate the situation, with no obligation, to let you know your alternatives.

The catastrophic burn injury and product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily always offer a free, no obligation consultation, and we ask you to keep 7-year-old Lamiyah Graves and her family in your prayers.

Over the last three decades our experienced Philadelphia trial lawyers have successfully represented individuals who were injured as a result of medical malpractice as well as product liability due to design and manufacturing defects. Over the last few years, we have witnessed a recall of many surgically implanted medical devices due to mechanical failures or design defects. Notably and more recently in 2010, Johnson & Johnson recalled its ASR XL DePuy tabular metal on metal hip implant after data from a recent study indicated that there was a more than normal failure rate identified due to component loosening, component misalignment, infection, bone fractures, dislocation, metal sensitivity, pain, tissue damage, and muscle damage.

Our DePuy implant failure and recall lawyers have been investigating and litigating a number of these cases, and our investigations have revealed that many renowned physicians who were using this device were also victims because they had not been warned by the manufacturer that the devices they were using and implanting in their patients were dangerous. While many lawyers have chosen to litigate against the physicians for malpractice and negligence, our skilled product liability lawyers understand that in an era of medical malpractice caps and severe limitations on medical malpractice verdicts, it is important to explore all of the alternatives and to look in other directions. In fact, a doctor who unknowingly implanted a defectively designed or manufactured product is now in a position to be one of the best witnesses and advocates for the plaintiff.

In another case of which we have learned involving botched circumcisions, a minimal offer was made by the medical malpractice insurance carrier. However, a skilled team of product liability lawyers decided to investigate and research the circumcision device itself. A circumcision tool known as a “mogen clamp” was routinely used by physicians performing circumcisions. Unfortunately an investigation revealed that the mogen clamp had been linked to numerous penile amputations, and unlike other circumcision tools did not provide for protection for the head of the penis and was designed so that the physician could not see the head of the penis when applying the scalpel to the foreskin. The device’s manufacturer and distributor removed it from the market in 1994 after an injury report but did not recall the clamp or send doctors a warning letter. In 2000, the FDA informed the circumcision tool’s manufacturer to warn all doctors who might be using the clamp. However, the company did not do so.

Very simply put, the underlying product liability cases in these situations are much stronger than a typical medical malpractice or negligence situation and serve as a perfect example of how a creative trial lawyer with years of experience can think out of the box and do what is best for his client when traveling down a road often less traveled.

The skilled Pennsylvania medical malpractice and product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily have consistently placed the safety of consumers and patients above the bottom line of manufacturers who design and manufacture defective products, and we always offer a free, no obligation consultation. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

I have been actively practicing law since 1979 and yet many times when I meet colleagues who are trial lawyers they cannot help but tell me how much they hate the profession and can’t wait to get out. Many of my colleagues drink to forget and eliminate the stresses of the profession. On the other hand, there are many lawyers such as myself and my partners who love to practice law and feel blessed to have the opportunity to represent so many wonderful clients in need of our services. The practice regularly gives us energy as rise to new and different legal and interpersonal client challenges.

Since 1979, I have vigorously represented clients who have been catastrophically injured or wrongfully killed due to the negligence of another or due to a defectively designed or defectively manufactured product. I have always been amazed at how insurance companies and their “hired gun” defense attorneys attempt to minimize the value of a life changing injury, disfigurement, loss of reputation, impairment of mental and physical capacity, frustration, humiliation, degradation and an non-inclusive list of other factors when these same people will purchase pieces of art at prices in the millions or hundreds of millions of dollars. I have often asked myself why is a piece of art worth more than the value of a lost life or worth more than the injuries sustained by one whose life has been catastrophically changed due to the negligence of profit seeking motives of another. I have understood that as an experienced Philadelphia trial lawyer, I deal with situations on a daily basis where we must face the value of our client’s lost hope or dreams and yes, while many of the cases involve some of the most depressing facts that one could conceive, I still believe that in representing seriously injured clients, the loss of their dreams is much more important than the intangible value of a piece of art and have always given of myself 110% percent to help my injured clients and their families recover compensatory damages necessary to keep their dreams and hopes alive. Being a lawyer defines my life and I look forward every day to giving the best counsel possible to my clients. I understand that the greatest use of a life is to spend your time doing something that will outlast it and I know that the finest trial lawyers that I work with love what they do and understand that the pursuit of justice is truth in action. We understand that every individual and corporate entity has a responsibility for injustice anywhere in life and everywhere in the community.

I recently resolved a case for a confidentially significant amount of money for a young woman who sustained permanent injuries and severe scarring when she was struck by a heavy self closing corridor door in her school hallway. The young lady was walking with friends through the school hallway and a heavy glass paned corridor door closed quickly on her. She put up her hand to protect herself whereupon her hand broke through one of the “safety door” glass panes.

The experienced Pennsylvania premise liability and product defect lawyers of Reiff and Bily hired an engineer and architect to examine and analyze the circumstances of the glass failure and the results of the inspection and analysis were more concerning and alarming then one would believe. Each one of the “safety” doors had 15 rectangular glass panes with exposed areas of panes approximately 8" x 14". I remember being in school when doorway and window glass panes were a wired glass and hexagonal chicken wire pattern yet these doors were just clear unlaminated plate glass. Not only that, the doors were old, heavy doors with failing hydraulic closers mounted at the top that were leaking oil or fluid creating excessive force. Architecturally, there is a difference between safety glass and fire rated glass. Safety glass is intended to reduce the likelihood of severe cuts to people as well as resist breaking in the first place. Wired glass is not safety glass but many times individuals operate under the common misconception that it is. When the school doors were analyzed, they failed a closing speed and closing force test in that they closed in approximately two seconds versus the suggested five second minimum. Obviously, anyone attempting to prevent the door from closing on them would naturally put their hand in the air and the combination of the force of the door closing and the lack of safety glass presented a hazardous and grave danger of high magnitude to innocent and unknowing students. Of course, it is reasonably foreseeable for a student to instinctively put her hand up to block a door closing. Many times, doors have push plates which are fastened to doors for the purpose of providing a spot for pedestrians to place their hands to push a door open. In crowded conditions the chance of missing the plate inadvertently is great and not all students, especially younger ones, understand to use the plate.

Our case was successfully settled against the building owner and school who was determined to be responsible for safety and maintenance and should have noticed non-safety glass used on these doors and should have foreseen that a grave accident such as that caused to our young client. Our skilled premise liability and glass accident lawyers were able to prove violations of applicable property maintenance codes including those of BOCA, ICC, and City codes. The hazardous conditions were easily correctable at a minimal cost. Failure to take action fell below the duty of care owed by institutional facilities such as the school to students attending the school and their parents. Our skilled school accident lawyers were able to prove that the hazards and engineering and architectural failures created a grave danger to students resulting in a substantial confidential resolution prior to trial. For more information, please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

I remember walking with my parents and as I grew older, walking with my friends on brisk Halloween evenings wearing a close fitting Halloween mask with only two small holes for breathing, I remember distinctly the warm condensation building up under the mask as I went door to door “trick or treating”. What many parents never think of and should be on alert for is the risk of suffocation by your child under too tight a Halloween mask with spaces too small for proper and safe breathing. This risk can be even greater when children running with their friends up and down steps, doorway to doorway, exert themselves and the body has a greater need for oxygen.

Recently Target recalled thousands of frog theme Halloween masks citing just a suffocation risk. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a recall for children’s frog masks imported by Target Corporation citing that the plush frog mask lacked proper ventilation when secured in place across a child’s face presenting a suffocation hazard. Thankfully no injuries were reported at the time of the recall. The mask was manufactured in China and sold at Target stores nationwide from August 20 to September 2011 for approximately $1.00. Consumers have been advised to take the masks and return them to Target for a full refund.

I have read other blogs stating that you “get what you pay for”. However as an experienced product liability attorney who has handled many dangerous and defective toy cases where children have choked or suffocated due to a loose part, I believe that safety rather than profitability should always be priority number one and if there is a risk of suffocation or hazard to a child, it doesn’t matter what you pay. The product simply should not be on the market.

If you have one of these masks, it is probably best to simply throw it out to avoid your child accidentally putting it on as chance favors the prepared mind. The experienced Pennsylvania child injury and defective toy and product liability law firm of Reiff and Bily have been steadfast consumer stalwarts for product safety for over three decades and always offer a free, no obligation consultation to victim’s and their families of those catastrophically injured or wrongfully killed due to the negligence of others or product liability defectively designed or defectively manufactured products.

For more information, please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

For over thirty years, I have worked closely with the medical community in my capacity as a lawyer investigating and litigating cases involving closed head traumas and mild to severe brain injuries, as well as intracranial hemorrhages. Many times individuals who do not possess proper medical insurance do not receive adequate or proper screening after an accident or violent impact to their head. Left untreated, a mild TBI or intracranial hemorrhage can have a considerable impact in the reduction of one’s quality of life and can many times lead to death if improperly diagnosed.

Studies and statistics have indicated that African-American and Hispanic children are less likely than Caucasian children to receive cranial CT scans in emergency departments following minor head trauma according to a study presented at the 2011 American Academy of Pediatrics national conference. Many physicians that I have discussed this situation with claim that those who sustain a minor head trauma “are probably at low risk anyway” for a clinically important brain injury. However, one’s socioeconomic status or lack of insurance or ignorance of the insurance and billing systems should not stand in the way of a proper diagnosis and the safe practice of medicine. Many times an impact to the head is the result of a car accident, product defect, or other type of negligence, and third party’s and third party insurance companies may be responsible for medical bills and resulting financial, emotional, and payment of medical bills. Simply stated, I have noted that many individuals contact our office with symptoms of traumatic brain injury and closed head trauma and have not received proper medical treatment because they were afraid that they would be responsible for paying the bills and did not have adequate personal medical insurance. In fact, many hospitals and physicians will not treat these people unless there is a letter of protection from a lawyer representing them or the lawyer’s office has done the ground work to secure funding for the diagnostic testing. What we do know is that individuals with a moderate or severe traumatic brain injury have a much lower health-related quality of life at times compared to others. It is important to immediately diagnose and effectively treat a brain injury.

Continue reading "Why Is It That Mild Traumatic Brain Injuries and Intracranial Hemorrhages Are Not So Readily Diagnosed. Is It A Patient Or Medical Issue?" »

How many times have you been driving down the highway and seen treads, shredded tires, or torn pieces of tires sitting on the side of the road on the shoulder. The sale of used tires and retreaded tires is booming. While a significant number of vehicle crashes are caused as a result of tire failures, and even though the purchaser believed they were getting safe tires based upon the visual conditions, many times the bargain leads to a catastrophic accident. Many times tires possess defects that cannot be easily detected visually. Oxidation or micro-cracks in tires can lead to a catastrophic tread or belt separation. However, unfortunately, the age of a tire does not prevent it from being sold at a cheap price on the used tire market or the retread market.

We recently successfully resolved a case where a tire experienced a belt separation causing the vehicle to lose control. The tire manufacturer claimed there was no defect on the tire. Most times, the tire installer or customer does not possess the ability to spot loose cords or belt separation in a tire, and unfortunately used tires are not subject to any federal standards. The road fitness of a tire is governed only under state tread depth laws.

Every year thousands of people will die and even more will be catastrophically injured due to the use of defective retread tires on vehicles. Environmentalists claim that retreading tires saves huge amounts of natural resources as opposed to replacing worn tires. However, safety should always take priority over profitability. Simply put, retread tires are second hand tires that have just been recoated with a tread veneer creating a potentially volatile situation.

Continue reading "A Tire Tread Separation Often Results In Lose Of Control Of A Vehicle With Tragic Consequences" »

The past is often a great predictor of the future. Many times by carefully investigating and gathering evidence of other similar instances involving a product defect, manufacturing defect, or design defect, which results in a catastrophic injury or wrongful death an experienced and skilled product liability attorney will be able use this as the best weapon in the arsenal when taking on manufacturers who claim that the accident was a freak occurrence or unique situation.

The skilled and experienced auto liability defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily have worked with lawyers across the United States for over three decades sharing documents, discovery, as well as evidence of other similar instances. We have developed an extraordinary national network of talented counsel, investigators, and experts who have been involved in similar cases and take a team approach to resolving auto product liability cases that involve seat back defects, seat belt defects, tire failures, SUV rollovers, crashworthiness, airbag defects, and roof crush. Several times a year, we meet as a group of lawyers working on similar cases to brainstorm and discuss issues and concerns with particular vehicle manufacturers, as well as current trial strategies that have been successful. Obviously there are many common product design and manufacturing failures and information is the greatest commodity.

While gathering OSI or other similar instances in a product liability case may be difficult for a “lone wolf” attorney, the experienced product liability and auto defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily work with teams of investigators, experts, and experienced lawyers throughout the United States and possess the experience, knowledge, and documents to fight against some of the world’s largest manufacturers. We continue to practice law representing catastrophically injured victims and those wrongfully killed with a motto that adversity causes some men to break and others to break records. We have a passion for justice.

Reiff & Bily is a catastrophic injury and wrongful death law firm based in Pennsylvania with emphasis on product liability and automotive defect claims. The lawyers of Reiff & Bily have recently joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm and together our attorneys have been awarded over $2 billion dollars since the mid-1950's. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

The law firm of Reiff & Bily has joined forces with the Beasley Firm and together the Beasley Reiff Law Group now offers for free “My Lawyer - Travels With Me” iPhone and Android application to help Pennsylvania residents who are involved in a catastrophic accident.

The law firm of Reiff & Bily and the Beasley Firm are two nationally recognized law firms dedicated to serving those who have been catastrophically injured or wrongful death due to defective products, medical malpractice, premise liability, and amusement park or water park accidents. Together our lawyers have been awarded over $2 billion dollars in verdicts and settlements since the mid-1950's.

Our new “My Lawyer - Travels With Me” application will provide all of the tools to those injured in an accident to take timely and lawful action in order to protect their legal interests and financial future.

What started out as an evening event with laughter, smiles, cider, and ginger snaps for a large family group ended up as a frightful hayride adventure resulting in broken bones, bruises, neck and back injuries when the seats and trailer being pulled by the truck broke apart. One of the young ladies was pinned underneath the side of the trailer that fell. According to one of the parties, the trailer had a shaky feel to it and as it gained speed going down the hill seemed to disintegrate.

Haunted hayrides seem innocuous and innocent to those of us who welcome Fall and look forward “Kodak” moments with the kids. Unfortunately, dangers that lurk about hayrides are not limited to those dressed in costumes attempting to scare the daylights out of you. The real dangers lie in defectively manufactured, designed and maintained trailers, that are covered with hay and blankets, and often overloaded when they carry the hay riders. Many times hayrides are operated by profit driven individuals or businesses who fail to understand that safety of the rider is paramount to profitability. Hayride operators owe a duty to their riders to properly maintain and inspect the trailer, seats, and railings, as well as provide proper and safe control and supervision of the riders. Many times the truck is being operated by someone with a curious or questionable background and if they take a sharp turn or make a sudden stop or travel too quickly down a hill, there may be an accident waiting to happen. According to news reports, this past weekend many hayride accidents occurred throughout the United States due to failure to have proper safety restraints or restrictions and governance.

Our hearts, thoughts, and prayers go out to those injured in hayride accidents. While I don’t wish to take the fun out of life, I just want you to make sure that before you go on a hayride, do a little bit of due diligence and recognize that accidents do happen. Make sure the facility has an excellent record of success and safety and don’t be afraid to ask questions.

The experienced hayride and amusement accident and premise liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily have evaluated thousands of cases involving catastrophic injuries, broken arms, and unfortunately wrongful deaths, and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for victims and their families. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

Heart disease and elevated cholesterol is genetic in my family. Although I maintain an active workout regimen and try to eat healthy, I have tried many different brands of statins and have had many different side effects. However, in the last few years, I have been taking Crestor in an attempt to lower cholesterol levels. Unfortunately as an experienced product liability lawyer who has investigated and litigated many cases involving product failure or failure to warn, I have now come to learn that recent studies have linked the drug Crestor to cases of cardiomyopathy due to depletion of coenzyme CoQ10 which occurs as the medications lowers cholesterol levels. It has been alleged that AstraZeneca, the manufacturer of Crestor, was aware of the risk and failed to warn physicians and patients. AstraZeneca maintains that so long as Crestor is taken according to properly prescribed instructions, there is nothing wrong with the product. The manufacturer further states that patients should not be discouraged from following physician’s advice.

If you have been taking Crestor and have sustained any problems, it is important that you contact your physician with any questions or concerns. A press release issued by Public Citizen claims “It becomes clearer by the day that this drug is uniquely toxic without offering any unique benefit and it must be removed from the market”. I have reluctantly taken statins because of such fears. However, the FDA has now identified patients who have been diagnosed with Rhabdomyolsis after using the Crestor statin.

The Pennsylvania pharmaceutical liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily are currently investigating cases where individuals have been diagnosed by a doctor as having a medical condition caused by Crestor including but not limited to Rhabdomyolsis, hemorrhage, drug induced hepatitis, acute renal failure, Stevens Johnson syndrome, and myogolobinura. Our lawyers are currently involved with teams of many other lawyers throughout the United States actively investigating Crestor cases. Recently the defective product and pharmaceutical litigation law firm of Reiff & Bily has joined forces with the Beasley Firm to create the Beasley Reiff Law Group. Together our attorneys have been awarded billions of dollars since the mid-1950's. As always, we offer a free, no obligation consultation. Contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

As a Philadelphia car accident and catastrophic injury lawyer who has been representing catastrophically injured victims, and their families, for more then three decades, I worry that internet and television marketing by many lawyers has led to a high number of victims and their families receiving what many would consider to be improper and inadequate legal representation. Many lawyers just look for an “Easy A”. Too many times attorneys hoping to earn a quick and easy referral fee will spend tens of thousands of dollars even hundreds of thousands of dollars a month designing websites or TV advertising that inaccurately portrays their abilities. It is the goal of these attorneys to make perspective clients believe they are hiring experienced attorneys, who have recovered multi-million dollar verdicts, and are amongst the top car accident lawyers, truck accident lawyers, S.U.V. van rollover lawyers, medical malpractice lawyers, and Products liability lawyers in the field.

Lately I have received an alarming number of phone calls from seriously injured car and truck accident victims who were mislead by what I call a “parasite lawyer”. A “parasite lawyer” is a lawyer who oftentimes lacks experience but attempts to conceal this by purchasing “black hat” internet links and creating embellished website content to make prospective clients believe they are hiring an experienced lawyer or law firm to represent their legal interests when in reality they are hiring a lawyer who simply thereafter refers their case to another attorney for a fee. I call this the “Easy A” system whereby an inexperienced attorney, or an attorney who has no interest in representing you or your loved ones, tacks a fee onto your recovery for doing nothing more then referring your case to another attorney. Frequently many of these marketing attorneys operate their websites from out of state and have creative advertising joint and cooperative ventures with other lawyers and law firms creating the illusion that they are something more then they really are. Always pay attention to the disclaimers and small print at the bottom or end of the advertisement as it quickly passes you by.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a car accident, truck accident, tractor trailer accident, bus accident, boat accident, S.U.V roll over accident, 15 passenger van rollover accident, amusement park accidents, premise liability accident, slip and fall accident, burned in a fire, bitten or attacked by a dog, the victim of inadequate security, falsely imprisoned, sexually assaulted, injured on a cruise ship, injured on a plane, in a construction accident or injured as a result of a defective product or medical malpractice you may be eligible to recover for your injuries.

As an experienced and highly rated Pennsylvania Super Lawyer with decades of experience, whose law firm has handled and collected hundreds of millions of dollars in recoveries for catastrophically injured victims, and their families, as well as those who have sustained wrongful deaths, I strongly advise that you personally interview the attorney who will be handling your legal case. Do not be afraid to ask for references. Make sure that he or she is regularly available to meet and speak with you about your case as it develops. Make sure your case is not being handed over to a paralegal or newly graduated lawyer who might lack the required experience. Inquire whether or not the lawyer has ever had any disciplinary issues or is even licensed to practice law in your state. Inquire about independent and non biased reviews of your lawyer from third party ranking or rating organization. Check the attorney's ranking on Avvo or the Martindale-Hubble record of standing. Never be afraid to get a second opinion from another lawyer if you don't like what you are hearing or don't feel comfortable as the case develops.

After all you only get one bite at the apple, and the selection of your lawyer may be one of the most important lifetime decisions that you will ever make.
Chance will always favor the prepared mind.

All personal injury cases involve unexpected encounters with others which goes the wrong way whether it be a car accident, slip and fall accident, or a product liability claim. As a personal injury accident lawyer who has represented thousands of clients for more then three decades I understand what it is to walk in the client’s shoes.

Many clients have come to my law firm after a frustrating experience with another lawyer who did not communicate in a timely or responsible manner with the client or victim’s family members after they had already been burdened by the financial and emotional pressures of a tragic accident. After the initial meeting, the smiling lawyer dropped off of the “communications map”. When a personal injury lawyer is retained to represent a victim and their family after a catastrophic injury or wrongful death has occurred, it is perhaps one of the most important relationships that will ever be formed between individuals who may not have ever known each other before. It is important that the lawyer and the client communicate and make all major decisions together and have open conversations in a civil professional and cordial fashion. Litigation breeds anxiety in clients. It is important that the attorney communicate realistic ideas about the value of the client’s case and their prospects of success clearly and candidly.

The experienced catastrophic injury and wrongful death lawyers of Reiff & Bily have been litigating legal claims on behalf of injured clients involving medical malpractice, amusement park liability, defective products, and premise liability since 1979 and we always try to carefully explain the elements and issues of each case to all potential clients as well as explaining our burden of proof. As each case is unique, it is impossible to determine the value of a case in the initial stages, and past results do not necessarily guarantee similar results in a similar case. When something bad happens to a client, it is human nature to want to hear good news. However, one must be honest and candid with the client for the client to understand that our civil justice system is based upon concepts of fairness and reasonable restitution. Many clients mistakenly think that because they were in an accident, they are guaranteed a retirement check. This is not always the case.

When you go to a fine and experienced lawyer, it is analogous to going to a tailor to have a suit custom made. Every situation will be different and the experienced lawyer like the experienced tailor knows how to fit the unique facts of the situation in a custom and individual fashion in order to maximize the result. Years of experience not only benefits the client but also serves as an advantage when dealing or negotiating with insurance companies and defense attorneys who understand the character traits and integrity standards maintained by a particular lawyer or law firm.



Continue reading "Why It Pays To Hire An Injury or Accident Lawyer With Decades Of Experience and Who Has Had His Own Injury Claim – No Substitute For Experience and Empathy" »

In mid-August 2011, a portion of the mast of Sea Dragon amusement ride at Morey’s Pier in Wildwood, New Jersey fell onto riders in yet another amusement park accident. Although the mast performed no mechanical or structural function, and was utilized solely as decoration, a danger was obviously presented to thrill seeking riders of the amusement attraction. According to the preliminary report issued by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs Division and Carnival Amusement Ride Safety, the mast falling was caused by the failure of parent steel that connected the lower and top portions of the mast. The mast is constructed of two pieces of piping/tubing. The top of the mast was constructed with thin wall tubing while the lower portion was constructed of the heavier wall material, the report states that pieces were welded together about halfway up the height of the mast. The top half of the mast, the piece that fell, was sitting on top of the lower half and was welded with a filet weld to the plate. There was significant corrosion on the interior of both the thin walled section of the mast, as well as the plate that was used as a means to connect the lower and upper portion of the mast, the State concluded. “When the material above the weld failed, there was no secondary support to keep the mast from separating and fell”. The broken mast fell upon riders injuring 5 and the State has now only allowed similar rides to operate if the mast is removed.

As an experienced amusement park accident attorney who has handled a number of claims at seashore amusement park and resorts and an experienced sailor who has spent a great deal of time in salt water and ocean environments, I have always expressed concern for metallurgical failure and corrosion in salt air when the natural seaside environment elements comes into contact with metal.

I am concerned that many seashore amusement parks fail to properly inspect and train employees often placing profitability ahead of safety. Our experienced amusement park accident attorneys have investigated and successfully handled a number of claims in amusement and product failure, metallurgical failures due to corrosion, defective product design, and/or inadequate training and maintenance procedures. Safety should always be priority number one when it comes to thrill seekers who come to amusement parks.

The experienced amusement accident lawyers of Reiff & Bily have received top accolades for over three decades of representing catastrophically injured victims and their families who have been wrongful killed as a result of the negligence of others or defective product design or maintenance.

Recently we have joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm and together our attorneys have been awarded over $2 billion dollars since the mid-1950's. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

Over the last 30 years the hayride accident law firm of Reiff & Bily has successfully represented victims of amusement park accidents and those that occur at carnivals and seasonal hayrides. Recently an amusement ride operator was jailed on charges that he was drunk and urinated in the sight of riders while operating such a ride at a Pennsylvania farm show. The amusement operator was charged with reckless endangerment, open lewdness, and public drunkenness. In another case in which our amusement accident and hayride injury law firm was involved, we represented the family of a victim who was run over by a tractor trailer hayride at a suburban Philadelphia farm during a school event. The background investigation of the tractor operator noted that he had less than a stellar history and was in fact was not even a licensed driver, yet he was entrusted to drive and operate a ride that would carry thousands of children throughout the amusement season.

In Pennsylvania, an amusement ride is legally described as any mechanical device or combination devices including electrical equipment which is the integral part of a device or devices which carry passengers along for the primary purpose of giving passengers amusement pleasure, thrills, or excitement. The same includes any tram, open car, combination of open car or wagons pulled by a tractor or motorized device which may not be licensed by the Secretary of State, and the operator of the same is defined as one who has a duty to control the operation of the amusement ride or attraction at a carnival or fair and any person who operates an amusement ride or amusement attraction at a carnival or fair must obtain a permit for the same. The operator of such amusement attractions or rides is obligated to perform a criminal history and perform a check of the national sex offender public registry at the time they are hired and annually thereafter if they are in continued employment. Unfortunately individuals who are under the age of 17 are exempt from criminal history background checks. Unfortunately, we have found some amusement parks, carnivals, or hayride operations keep shoddy records, fail to check for substance abuse, evidence of required criminal history, or sex offense information, and in fact, hire drivers of motor vehicles that are non-licensed.

The purpose of the carnival and amusement ride safety act obviously is self explanatory. If an amusement operator fails to pay heed to these requirements, taking shortcuts and placing profitability over safety, and if an accident happens, they can be held legally responsible for resulting financial and emotional injuries that may be sustained by catastrophically injured victims and their families or those who are wrongfully killed due to their negligence.

Since 1979, the experienced Philadelphia carnival, amusement lawyers, and hayride accident attorneys of Reiff & Bily have successfully represented victims and their families and those who have been catastrophically injured or wrongfully killed due to the negligence of others, defective products, or defective maintenance, or improper hiring procedures. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

As an experienced serious injury lawyer and wrongful death lawyer for over three and a half decades who has handled many significant and high profile cases, a factor that cannot be ignored in the thorough preparation of a case is what happens when individuals express biased views or attack you client on social media or public internet forums.

Recently, our firm was retained to represent the interests of a family who lost their daughter in a high profile accident. When the news of our law firm’s engagement was published in various newspapers, the client, the client’s family, and our law firm were attacked. Immediately without knowing many of the factors behind the accident, the cause of the accident was squarely placed on the victim and the lawyers were attacked as being money hungry greedy individuals stating falsehoods based upon facts that bore no reality to the actual factors surrounding this catastrophic accident.

I recently has the opportunity to discuss this tragic incident at a football game with a stranger who told me he was aware of the accident but based upon his reviews of onsite social network accounts, he clearly was convinced that the accident in question was the victim’s fault. As I reviewed many social forums and online posts, I could understand how one could easily reach this conclusion. However, after I carefully explained the true and accurate facts to this individual, he was surprised and quickly reversed his original, unsupportable position and opinion.

While social media has a valuable aspect to it, it also presents a challenge to lawyers and their clients who must overcome the intoxication of bias by forces of opposition. Unfortunately despite the best efforts to explain the truth, an ignorant critic or consumer can post relentless and unforgiving attacks on victims and their families when they are at their lowest point without any rights, responsibility, or retribution.

Unfortunately, the reality is that many who talk or post the most on social networks have the least to say and after 30 years of successfully representing victims and their families, I have learned that nothing is what it seems at first. If the truth doesn’t save us from the inequities and injustice of the world then what does it say about all of us?

Jeffrey M. Reiff is a catastrophic injury and wrongful death attorney with the law firm of Reiff & Bily who has successfully represented victims and their families as a result of catastrophic injuries and wrongful deaths sustained by the negligence of others and the use of defectively designed and maintained products since 1979. Reiff & Bily always offers a free, no obligation confidential consultation to those seeking unbiased and honest opinions about the merits of a legal claim. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com

When you purchase a child restraint car seats for your infant or small child, you trust that the child restraint car seat will protect them in the event of a car accident. Studies have revealed that a small child or infant in a car traveling at 30 miles per hour, can be hurtled forward with a force 30 to 60 times their body weight. The National Highway and Safety Administration (NHTSA) recommends that small children weighing less then 40 lbs be securely fastened into a child safety seat to maximize their safety should the car come to a sudden stop or is involved in a car accident. Since 2005 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) along with manufactures have recalled millions of defective child car seats designed to protect small children and infants traveling in cars. The child car seat and safety bench recalls included booster, convertible and infant seat models, as well as seat benches found to be improperly mounted in Mercedes-Benz and Freightliner Vehicles. A list of recently recalled seat benches and child car seats include but are not limited too;

- 2011 Sprinter 2500 Seat Benches

Seat benches were found to have inadequate latch brackets that were not properly welded.

- Dorel Infant, convertible and booster child restraints car seats

Child and infant car seats were were found to have a defective lock and release button that did not always return to the locked position.

- Chaperone Infant car seats

Chaperone Infant car seats were recalled due to findings that a number of harness chest clips came apart creating a potential choking hazard to infants.

While government standards set fourth the guidelines manufactures must follow in the production and design of child and infant car seats, oftentimes manufacture defects are not identified until a car accident or other tragic event catastrophically injures or claims the life of a small child or infant.

The experienced defective child car seat and product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily have over 30 years experience representing generations of Pennsylvanians in product liability and defective child car seat cases. The lawyers of Reiff & Bily’s product liability litigation team have recently joined forces with the Beasley Firm to create the Beasley Reiff Law Group. Together our attorneys have been awarded over $2 billion dollars since 1958 representing the interests of catastrophically injured victims and their families. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation.  For more information contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com. 

When a catastrophic accident occurs, helicopter evacuation is often used to save lives. However, last year a record number of people died aboard helicopter medical evacuation aircraft.

In 2009, there was twice as many deaths as any other year and the accidents happened not only in bad weather but in good weather as well. Our office was recently contacted by an individual who was previously employed by a helicopter medical evacuation service where an investigation was commenced by the FAA and found numerous safety violations with one of the aircraft deemed unworthy and unsafe for flying. It is alleged that one of the Directors and mechanics is under investigation by the FAA and allegedly facing potential criminal charges.

As Pennsylvania catastrophic injury lawyers, we are familiar with heli-vac EMS programs and our lawyers have also litigated product liability and aviation disasters for many decades. I am somewhat concerned due to the fact that this industry has been slow to improve itself in the maintenance and safety arena and many operating shortcuts are being taken in the hopes of improving profitability and the bottom line. There are approximately 850 to 1,000 EMS helicopters operated in the U.S. privately and no doubt is a lucrative business as I have had many opportunities to review the bills and even pay the same on behalf of injured clients. A typical flight can cost in the arena of about $10,000 and each year approximately 500,000 people fly on EMS helicopters. Many pilots claim that the industry is “frustrated” that their emergency helicopters keep crashing killing people that they are trying to save as while operators and owners were advised continue to stress profitability above safety. Until the government mandates safety regulations with teeth, this is sure to be an area of growing concern. Nothing could be worse for the family of a catastrophic accident victim to learn of the death of a family member while being transported on a medi-vac helicopter that was designed to save their life.

Transportation and pilot experts claim that the FAA may not be moving as quickly as necessary and that this is an ever growing problematic situation. As emergency rooms in rural areas close down or are ill equipped to handle a catastrophic case, medivac use will be more and more common and safety should never be an option. The skilled catastrophic lawyers of Reiff & Bily have recently joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm to create the Beasley Reiff Law Group. Together we have been awarded over $2 billion dollars in settlements, verdicts, and awards since 1958. For more information, please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

Negligence or the use of a defective product on a work site around electrical components often results in serious consequences including but not limited to heart attacks, muscle and tissue destruction, burns, and unfortunately wrongful death.

Over the past weekend, two separate workers were killed in separate electrical-related accidents. One gentleman, 35-years old, died while installing cables at a camp for oil and gas workers and another individual was killed while working on a power transmission project. With the deluge of rain and water caused by Hurricane Irene and other abnormally huge weather moisture systems, power lines have been downed leading to injuries and deaths by workers and other innocent citizens who have come into contact with high voltage lines. In one case, a victim was killed by electrocution when he stepped out of his home and touched a railing that had been impacted with a high voltage line. If you are in the vicinity of a downed power line, do not take any chances as there is an extreme risk of electrocution injuries or death.

I live in a wooded area and numerous power lines seem to be tangled or down due to sustained gusty winds, fallen trees, and heavy rainfall. As I traveled into upstate Pennsylvania on a case last week, I saw more low hanging electrical wires than ever. It is important for parents to keep children and pets away from these wires and to always assume that they are live and energized.

If you or a loved one has suffered an electric shock injury or death, it is important to contact an experienced electrocution attorney who will immediately commence a proper investigation and assist you or your loved ones through the emotional, financial, and legal issues that may arise.

For over three and a half decades, the consumer product and safety and electrocution attorneys of Reiff & Bily have successfully represented generations of Philadelphians and Pennsylvanians who have sustained wrongful death or catastrophic injuries due to the negligence of others or use of defective products. As always, we offer a free, no obligation consultation. For more information, please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

For over three decades, our experienced auto and defective seat back lawyers have investigated and litigated auto product defect cases and those which involve catastrophic injury resulting from a defective seat back. Unfortunately many cars have defective seat design and in a low or medium speed collision the seat fails and allows the occupant to be thrust forward or rearward or even ejected from the vehicle. This type of action often results in a catastrophic injury including but not limited to paraplegia, quadriplegia and brain dysfunction. When a seat collapses or is thrust forward, the effectiveness of the restraint system notably fails and injuries may also be caused to passengers in the rear of the vehicle as the seat collapses upon them with increased load and forces.

Automobile manufacturers have been aware of seat back failures and defects for decades and have taken little steps to improve safety due to the fact that the governmental safety standards establish a weak minimum for safety.

Recently there has been a wake of recalls for defective seat backs. In the last year, Ford recalled many 2011 Explorers with allegations that the potential for defective seat backs may not provide required strength in a crash increasing the risk of injury. Unfortunately manufacturers of car seats are not required to test car seats in crash tests and our skilled auto product defect and seat back defect attorneys do not believe that safety standards are stringent enough to prevent fatalities and catastrophic injuries due to lack of proper seat strength standards.

Recently our experienced auto product defect lawyers have joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm to create the Beasley Reiff Law Group and together have been awarded more than $2 billion dollars in settlements, awards, and verdicts since 1958. For more information, please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

When a vehicle is in a collision, the last thing that you expect to happen is that the fuel tank will rupture and that the occupants will be trapped in a fiery fuel fed explosion. The rupture of a fuel tank often leads to a catastrophic event when the escaping vapors mix quickly with the air and are ignited often times resulting in a fiery explosion.

Automakers and fuel tank manufacturers have known for years that fuel tank integrity is an important element if the vehicle impacts with another vehicle, rolls over or has another impact with a fixed object. Most people will remember the notorious Ford Pinto which almost always sustained a gas tank rupture in crashes over 25 mph. Typically in a Pinto rear-end collision, the rear-end of the car would buckle, ride up the seat back, and the tube leading to the gas tank would be ripped away from the tank itself and gas would immediately leak on the roadway around the car. The buckled gas tank would be jammed up against the different housing and protruding bolts would often gash holes in the tank and spill more gas on the road. All that was needed to spark an explosion was a cigarette, scraping metal, or an electrical spark and a flame would engulf the vehicle and the passengers inside. Added to the fact, if the doors were jammed, the passengers would be unable to get out and would burn to death. Lawyers were able to demonstrate successfully that Ford engineers put profits ahead of safety concerns and unfortunately even today, many vehicle manufacturers still place gas tanks and fuel lines in unsafe locations and use cheap materials to manufacture fuel tanks and fuel delivery systems and must be held accountable for the results of their actions.

Many times the placement of a fuel tank on the side or rear of a vehicle where it can be punctured is a recurring problem, as well as the use of cheap and unsafe materials connecting fuel tanks to fuel filter necks. Many times manufacturers of fuel tanks in vehicles utilize unsafe materials in the manufacturer of fuel delivery lines. When you pay your hard earned dollars for a motor vehicle, whether it be a motorcycle or automobile, you have every right to expect that it is crashworthy and will protect you in a foreseeable collision.

The experienced Pennsylvania automotive product liability and gas tank explosion and fuel fed fire defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily have dedicated their practice to representing those catastrophically injured or wrongful killed due to car accidents and auto product defects. Many of these claims have been referred to us by other lawyers who understand that we have years of experience in this complex legal arena. Recently the Philadelphia car accident and auto product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily have joined forces with the Beasley Firm and together our attorneys have been awarded billions of dollars since 1957. As always, we offer a free, confidential no obligation consultation if you wish to discuss your claim. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

For over three decades my partners, associates, and I have investigated and litigated many claims against manufacturers of defective products. A defective product usually involves a design defect, manufacturing defect, or marketing defect. The law holds manufacturers, sellers, and distributors of products responsible for products that pose a danger to users or consumers as a result of a design or manufacturing defect.

Unfortunately many product defect legal cases involve allegations of fraud or unfair business practices and many manufacturers of defective products that cause catastrophic disfiguring injuries or wrongful death will go to great lengths to conceal the cause of an injury or death despite the fact that they knew for decades about root causes of a problem. Many large corporations employ systematic and exact strategies that are carefully hidden from public eye until a skilled and experienced product liability lawyers carefully investigate and dissect these claims based upon a catastrophic injury or wrongful death.

In many of our product liability legal cases, we have reviewed confidential intra and inter-company communications clearly revealing coverups and on many occasions whistleblower employees have come forward with knowledge of evidence concealment involving the manufacturer. Taking on major corporations for product defects litigation requires legal skill and experience that often takes decades to develop. Product liability litigation matters are generally intellectually challenging and complex.

Since 1979 the experienced Pennsylvania product liability attorneys of Reiff & Bily have been researching and litigating numerous product defect and design cases with great success. Recently our skilled product liability trial lawyers have joined forces with the legendary product liability lawyers of the Beasley Firm to create the Beasley Reiff Law Group. Together our job is to determine who is responsible for placing victims and their families in an unforeseen and unimaginable position when tragedy strikes. We believe that manufacturers must be held accountable for product defects and the lack of concern for consumer safety and always believe that safety should never be an option and always trumps profitability.

Since 1957, the combined forces of our lawyers have recovered over $2 billion dollars. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation to those injured as a result of a defective product. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

According to news sources, Morey’s Pier in Wildwood, NJ was the scene of yet another terrible amusement park ride accident. At just after 9 p.m. on Friday, August 19, 2011, emergency response staff responded to a report of a partial amusement ride collapse when the center mast of the sea dragon snapped, injuring five people at Morey’s Mariner’s Landing Pier. This is the second time in two months that young innocent and unsuspecting victims have been injured at a Morey’s Amusement park attraction in Wildwood. Recently 11 year old Abiah Jones tragically fell to her death while riding the Ferris wheel on June 3rd 2011. As one of the attorneys intimately involved in the investigation and litigation of the Abiah Jones death case tragedy, our hearts, thoughts, and prayers go out to the victims, and their families. Once again questions are raised as to the inspection, maintenance and operation procedures maintained by Morey’s. Safety must always be the utmost priority for all amusement park operators. We have repeatedly called for Federal oversight and reporting of amusement park accidents and safety concerns.

The experienced amusement park accident lawyers of Reiff & Bily in conjunction with the. Legendary Philadelphia trial lawyers of the Beasley Firm have joined forces to form the Beasley Reiff Law Group and are currently representing multiple victims of amusement park accidents. We strongly recommend that the victim’s and their family members do not talk to any insurance adjusters or attorneys for Morey’s Pier until they have consulted their own experienced and independent catastrophic injury, wrongful death, or amusement accident lawyer who will independently investigate the incident with experienced safety and Amusement operations experts.

The Ford Motor Company announced that it will recall over 1 million pickup trucks including the popular F-150 due to corrosion problems involving straps that hold fuel tanks to the truck. The recall effects 1.2 million older trucks sold or registered in 21 states, and it was noted that the corrosion problem was more prominent in colder regions due to corrosion from roadway salt. Ford announced that it will repair the trucks for free.

Models affected are 1997 to 2003 Ford F-150, 2004 F-150 Heritage, 1997-1999 F-250, 2002 to 2003 Lincoln Blackwood. This announcement follows another major recall involving Ford’s F series truck which has been one of the best selling vehicles in America.

In April, Ford expanded a recall of F-150 pickups to about 1.2 million vehicles due to front airbags which could deflate without the vehicle being involved in a crash.

The Philadelphia auto defect product liability and defective airbag law firm of Reiff & Bily salute Ford’s proactive stance in these recalls.

In recent weeks, two catastrophic deaths took the life of two special Americans. One an 11-year old honor student at Morey’s Pier in Wildwood and the second an American war hero, Sgt. James Hackemer, 29, who died on the Ride Of Steel roller coaster at Darien Lake Theme Amusement Park located east of Buffalo, NY. Hackemer had lost both his legs in a roadside bomb explosion while deployed to Iraq in 2008 and had to be assisted on the coaster. Just 11 days after turning eleven, Abiah Jones was on a school trip to a Wildwood, NJ amusement park to celebrate students who attained honorary scholastic achievement. In both cases, the question arises why park employees of the respective amusement parks let these individuals on the rides, and both incidents have sparked a renewed effort to place fixed site theme parks under federal regulatory oversight.

U.S. Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA7) stated that local and state regulators who currently oversee amusement parks may lack budget resources and technical experience to carry out effective safety checks and investigate accidents. Rep. Markey plans to introduce legislation which he has proposed multiple times before the make fixed site amusement parks subject to regulatory authority of the CPSC, a federal consumer protection body, in an attempt to prevent future injuries. Owners of amusement parks as well as industry lobbyists oppose the legislation. Safety should be the number one concern, and as an experienced product liability and amusement park accident attorney who has fought for decades on behalf of catastrophically injured victims and those wrongfully killed due to the negligence of others and/or defectively manufactured and designed products. I believe safety should never be an option, and I believe that Federal oversight would most likely go a long way towards improving amusement park safety and question why the amusement industry is so opposed to it if they claim they are already operating safely and taking all steps to insure that accidents do not occur. I for one believe that the proposed check and balance legislation can only benefit rather than have a detrimental effect.

In the beginning of June, unfortunately, Abiah Jones, age 11, tragically fell to her death at Morey’s Pier in Wildwood, New Jersey. On Friday evening, July 8, 2011 war hero, Sgt. James T. Hackemer, 29, who lost both his legs in Iraq died after falling from a ride on a steel roller coaster at the Darien Lake Theme Park resort.

As an experienced amusement park accident attorney who has been intimately involved investigating and litigating amusement park cases for over three decades, I am extraordinarily concerned that the amusement park industry is one of the most highly unregulated industries, yet we entrust our children to thrill rides confidently assuming that they are safe and have been inspected. Massachusetts Congressman Edward J. Markey notes that he has been trying for years to pass a bill entitled The National Amusement Park Rides Safety Act that would close the number of loopholes regarding oversight of amusement park rides. The Bill calls for restoration of the Consumer Product Safety Commissions ability to oversee fixed site amusement rides, a job that the Commission had until 1981 when an amendment to the Consumer Product Safety Act was passed removing language that gave the Commission responsibility over its rides. The change would also give the CPSC the authority to investigate accidents in amusement parks and then allow the CPSC to share information with operators of the same rides in other states before accidents occur and develop plans to correct problems and reduce risks of harm. The CPSC would also be able to compile comprehensive safety information for consumers.

In a tightened economy, many amusement parks seem to be taking short cuts on safety and putting profitability first. I for one believe that safety should never be an option and yet many amusement park owners and operators who are members of the International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions have issued several statements in response to Congressman Markey’s bill stating that it is not necessary as the Bill “seeks to address a problem that does not exist”. The International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions cites the industry’s outstanding safety record, and as an experienced amusement park accident attorney, I am well aware that many accidents that occur at amusement parks are not reported and those accident situations that are resolved are generally resolved in a confidential manner. In my opinion, many amusement parks operate in an atmosphere where politicians and inspectors seem to take protective measures in favor of the amusement parks due to the fact that they contribute so much to local economies.

As I have been intimately involved as an amusement park accident attorney in several amusement park accidents where investigators found no fault, it has been quite mind boggling when our own independent experts perform an independent and non-biased analysis that seems to be completely at odds with those of the park with the amusement park owner and operator. One must ask themselves if these rides are so safe why not make them more transparent and promote the Bill which would insure their safety. My own personal opinion is that in many states, the situation is not so dissimilar to the fox guarding the hen house.

Continue reading "Experienced Amusement Park Accident Attorney Suggests That It Is Time For Lawmakers To Close The Loopholes In View Of Recent Amusement Park Accidents And Deaths - Calls For Transparency In Reporting Requirements" »

As an  experienced Philadelphia product liability lawyerfor over three decades, I have always believed that manufacturers and distributors of retail products should emphasize safety first rather than bottom line return to shareholders.

Recently a story surfaced whereupon the Viking Range Corporation was aware for years of a defect involving refrigerator door hinge mechanisms that were resulting in incidents and injuries to customers yet they failed to report the alleged defective product situation immediately to the CPSC as required by federal law.

According to news sources Viking first reported the safety defect to the commission in April 2009 and agreed to a recall in June 2009. However a subsequent investigation conducted by the CPSC staff indicated that by the time of the initial report, the firm was aware of at least ten reports of injuries involving Viking refrigerator hinge failures over a period of several years. In June 2009, the CPSC and Viking Range Corporation announced a recall of more than 45,000 Viking Refrigerators and announced a potential hazard where it was noted that refrigerator hinges and hardware that attached to the doors in the refrigerator could loosen, sag, and detach posing an impact injury to consumers if the door detached. Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to report to CPSC within 24 hours after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which can create a potential product hazard or creates an unreasonable risk of injury or death or fails to comply with any consumer product safety or any other rule regulation standard or enforced by the CPSC.

Continue reading "Experienced Philadelphia Product Liability Lawyer Calls Attention To Federal Laws That Require Manufacturers, Distributors, and Retailers To Report Information Concerning Product Defects To CPSC Within 24 Hours" »

Earlier this year, a 32-foot fiberglass cabin cruiser boat exploded in Del Ray Beach, Florida killing a man and burning others on board the boat. The explosion took place when one of the individuals was working on the engine after the tank was filled with approximately 50 gallons of gas. Investigators concluded that gas leaks and vapors filled the engine room and I suspect that the engine must have started, igniting the fumes and triggering the explosion after the boaters stopped to refuel the vessel at a marina. The owner of the boat told investigators that after fueling, the smell of gasoline permeated the air after which point one of the victims on the vessel began to look for leaks in the engine compartment and thereafter heard a pop and saw flames. The day after the explosion, state investigators found a burned body in the charred hole of the boat. The headline of the newspaper indicated that the explosion that killed the man was deemed “accidental”.

As an experienced boater for over 50 years who has skippered just about every type of water craft, I also happen to have over three decades of experience as a boating accident lawyerinvestigating and litigating boating accident and boat explosion cases. There is one thing of which I am certain, that boating explosion cases do not happen on their own and always involve a proximate cause whether it be negligence or design or  manufacturing defect.

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyer who has worked on fuel fed fire legal cases both in the automotive, motorcycle, and boating arena, boat explosion accidents often lead to catastrophic injuries or death. Lately the United States Coast Guard has noticed a dramatic increase in boating fatalities and explosions. Most times injuries and deaths could have been prevented if proper safety procedures were followed.

Continue reading "Investigation Into A Florida Boat Explosion Concludes That Leaking Gas and Vapors In Engine Room Was The Cause - Boating Accident and Explosion Lawyer Weighs In" »

Several times a year my wife drops a small fortune to have her hair straightened in what is known as a Brazilian blow out procedure. When she comes home, her hair has an odor that is anything but pleasant and the same lasts for a few days. Although I must admit she looks sexier than ever and loves her straightened hair, I became concerned when I started to review warnings issued by the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration warning hair salon owners, workers, and consumers about potential exposure to formaldehyde used in some hair smoothing and straightening products including the Brazilian blow out brand. Tests indicated dangerously high levels of formaldehyde in the hair salon using these hair straightening products even though many of the products are often listed as formaldehyde free. Many clients and workers were found to have allergic reactions including nose bleeds and eye irritations. Unfortunately many of the hair straightening products or products used by hair care services are not required to list their ingredients and clients, workers, and consumers may not even know what is in the products they are utilizing.

As an  experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyer, I think it is essential to the safety of workers and clients and anyone exposed to a potentially dangerous product or material to mandate health warnings on all hair care products including but not limited to hair straightening products. In Canada, many of the products were pulled off the shelves and the FDA now notes that it has begun looking at the complaints about hair straightening products.

Our office has received a number of calls from clients who had the hair straightening solution put on their head and claim that their head or scalp is burned for a number of weeks and some have even claimed a loss of hair. Although every situation must be considerate of “the goods, the bads, and the uglies,” one must ask them self if the quest for beauty is worth the risks of potential physical danger or physical harm.

Continue reading "Are Brazilian Hair Straightening Blowouts Dangerous? - Experienced Product Liability Lawyer Weighs In" »

The defective trailer hitch and trucking accident lawyers of Reiff & Bily urge all of our readers to follow safety tips offered in a new Purdue Extension Guide entitled AKeep The Trailer Connected To The Truck; Understanding The Hitch System.

As experienced Pennsylvania defective trailer and truck accident attorneys, we have investigated many claims where people were either catastrophically injured or wrongfully killed due to the negligence of another or a manufacturing or design defect involving a trailer hitch. Unfortunately, many people hitch trailers to cars without having full knowledge of how to properly do the same and therefore, create a risk of harm and danger to other innocent pedestrians or vehicles on the highway. Trucks, receivers, inserts, and balls all have a rating that list the maximum pulling weights with the lowest rated ball and components determining how much can be pulled. For example if a truck, receiver, and insert ratings are 5,000 lbs but the ball can only tow 2,500 lbs, the load should be no more than 2,500 lbs. We have found that many truckers or individuals pull more than the safety load putting strains on the system and causing a failure. Safety chains should also be employed and should be strong enough to hold the trailer if the hitch fails. It is important to confirm that emergency brake cables are functioning and properly connected to the trailer and that the loads are properly placed to minimize stress on the hitch system. In a recent traffic safety presentation to commercial groups, many attendees noted that they experienced a trailer coming loose or detached from a truck. One can only imagine the consequences when this occurs on a busy highway. As an experienced defective trailer hitch attorney who has investigated all too many of these cases, I can tell you that the results are generally tragic, resulting in catastrophic injury or wrongful death.

The defective trailer hitch and trucking accident attorneys of Reiff & Bily have recently joined forces with the Beasley Firm to create the Beasley Reiff Law Group. Our skilled defective trailer hitch and trucking accident attorneys have decades of experience representing those catastrophically injured or wrongfully killed due to the negligence of others as well as product defects. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation. Please contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

As July 4th officially kicks off the summer season many of us will be hosting or be guests at barbecues. Many of the newer barbecues utilize propane tanks to fuel the system. Propane is pressurized and put into the tank and safety dictates that one must make sure that the tank is not rusted or corroded and that all the fuel fittings are properly secured. Thirty liters of propane equals 750 mg of energy and 750 mega joules of energy is approximately equal to 170 kilograms of TNT or 8 millionths of a kilogram of nuclear grade uranium and has the energy equivalent and release of the force of 9 fully loaded semi-trucks being dropped from a kilometer high off the ground. Similarly enough energy is released to melt 2.25 tons of ice.

Typically propane tanks do not explode on their own. Generally human error or negligence is a primary factor contributing to any type of propane explosion and propane fed fire accident. If you are using propane to fuel your barbecue, make sure that you are using and storing it in accordance with NFPA requirements. You must fully understand that the integrity of the propane bottle must be maintained and one must always keep the propane cylinder away from an area where there is an extreme build up of heat or fire. Many times a fire or explosion can be caused by a leak near an ignition source such as a cigarette or spark. Many times propane fires or explosions occur due to negligent handling by an individual or refueling station or due to the defective manufacture and construction of the propane fuel. Obviously a propane explosion can cause catastrophic injuries
and wrongful death. Many times these injuries include amputations, blindness, loss of hearing, permanent scarring, spinal injuries, brain injuries, and paraplegia.

The fuel fed fire and propane explosion lawyers of the Beasley Reiff Law Group are stalwarts for consumer safety and suggest that if you are using a propane gas tank you should have it routinely inspected and maintained and make sure the tank is properly installed to reduce the risk of fire and explosion. If a propane tank is not properly maintained, there is a potential to suffer a tank and fuel delivery system failure and increases the risk of excessive heat or sparks coming into the tank which could ignite the gas and cause explosions.

Continue reading "A Defective Propane Tank Can Create An Explosion To Multiple Kilograms Of TNT Warns Experienced Pennsylvania Product Liability and Explosion Lawyer" »

A school trip to a water park by 9-year old Jeremy Molumba ended tragically after the young boy was swept toward the deep end by surging water in a wave pool. According to news sources, a classmate tried to grip his friends hand before a second wave pushed him below the water surface. According to sources, the 4th grader remained at the bottom of the pool for more than one hour before anyone came to his rescue.

As an experienced amusement park and water park accident attorney, the first thing that came to my mind was where were the lifeguards or other supervisors whose job it is to maintain safe watch over the guests of the park? The guests of the park are identified legally as business invitees and are owed the highest duty of care. Other issues should be explored such as: Was the water cloudy? Was the water so cloudy or dirty that they could not see the child laying on the bottom? Was the drainage and pump system working properly or was there too much force and suction which forced the young man under the water and to the bottom? Individuals in wave pools regularly sustain injuries ranging from lacerations, bruises, brain injuries, neck and back injuries, drownings, paraplegia, quadriplegia, and sometimes death. Many times they are the result of slippery surfaces, polluted water, and improper supervision. When water park employees, managers, or operators are negligent, it is all too easy for an otherwise innocent and unknowing individual to get in trouble and sustain a catastrophic injury by submersion or suffer death by drowning. Unfortunately many water parks are not currently regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission and many water park and amusement park owners vehemently oppose federal oversight of safety regulations and reporting that many legislators seek to give the CPSC authority over water park and federal theme parks. Many water parks are not in conformance with the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act which requires installing drain covers that meet ANSA/ASNE A112.19.8-27 standards on every drains or grates. It also requires the installation of an automatic shut off system, drainage gravity system, and a safety vacuum system, suction limiting vent system, or drain disabler. Many times loud music in a pool area or in a wave pool area prevents lifeguards from hearing calls of distress and many times the bottom of the wave pool is slippery due to the presence of algae. Crowd control issues and the adequate amount and training of lifeguards and supervisors and maintenance staff is an essential element of safety. It has been noted that there has been a sharp increase of drownings among children up through the age of 12 and although amusement parks and water park attractions appear to be safe, when you combine negligent supervision, premise liability defects, as well as a potential for defective design and manufacturing defects, many accidents occur that could have easily been avoided.

If you or a loved one has sustained an injury in anamusement park or water park, or has suffered a drowning or water submersion injury, the experienced amusement park and water park lawyers of the www.beasleyreifflawgroup.com offer a free, no obligation confidential consultation. We have been stalwarts of consumer and amusement and water park safety for over half a century and our attorneys and our legal team has been awarded over $2 billion since 1958. Contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

As an experienced Philadelphia bicycle accident attorney and an avid cyclist, my biggest fear is being hit by another vehicle or in fact striking a bicycle while in my vehicle. As I have noted in my many blogs, bicycle ridership in Philadelphia is on the up swing and unfortunately, so are the amount of bicycle accidents.

Our hearts and prayers go out to the 33-year old victim of the latest catastrophic bicycle accident. According to initial news reports, the gentleman on the bicycle was wearing a helmet and suffered a severe head trauma after he was struck by a 2010 Toyota Camry and slammed into the car’s windshield upon impact causing him to be tossed into the air and landing on the roadway. I wish the unidentified victim a quick, speedy, and quick recovery. The catastrophically injured bicycle accident victim in this case would be well advised to contact an experienced Philadelphia bicycle accident lawyer who will better explain their rights and options. As the biker was also wearing a helmet, the helmet manufacturer may possibly be at fault for a design or manufacturing product defect. Since this bicycle accident involved a car, an experienced Philadelphia car accident lawyer can also advise them about how the victim’s own car insurance policy might apply and be able to recover compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, cost of hospitalization, physical therapy, and pain and suffering.

The experienced Philadelphia bicycle accident attorneys of Reiff & Bily have recently joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm to create the Beasley Reiff Law Group. We always offer a free, no obligation confidential consultation to bicyclists after a bicycle accident. The advice we give may be priceless. Together our accomplished bicycle accident and catastrophic injury and wrongful death attorneys have been awarded over $2 billion dollars since 1958. For more information, please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

According to a report published on June 10, 2011 in the New York Times a citronella scented fire gel used to ward off insects on hot summer nights has a history of combusting causing disfiguring burns to the users face and body. The fire gel is manufactured by Fuel Barons Inc. and also contains a certification of safety from Fuel Barons who allegedly intended the communication to inform consumers that the fuel was environmentally friendly as it was made from recycled post-consumer waste and does not emit toxins when it burns. According to news sources, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has received at least 8 reported incidents of explosions involving fire gel and ceramic pots, although it is not clear whether these incidents all involve fire gel or other fuel gel products.

The experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily recently learned of a situation involving a bad burn injury caused from a citronella urn distributed by Napa Home and Garden Inc. in Duluth, GA. The product is identified as Napa Fire and is marketed as pourable eco gel fuel. When a product is marketed with a certification of safety, the consumer has a reasonable belief to assume that it is safe for every day use and that it will not explode near a flame as victims are claiming.

Our skilled Pennsylvania products liability lawyers are working with other lawyers across the nation to further independently investigate this potentially dangerous product. If you or a loved one has suffered an injury resulting from the use of a fire-gel, please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com for a free, no obligation consultation.

Over the last 30 years as an  experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyer, I have been confronted with many cases involving a catastrophic injury or wrongful death and must carefully try to evaluate all of the circumstances surrounding the situation and identify if a product defect was the cause of the victim's injury or death. The issues that we often face consistent with a product or vehicle defect evaluation are:

Was the design proper and was the product manufacturer consistent with the design considering the assembly materials?
Was the design so defective that it was destined to fail and cause injury?
Were the proper materials used in the construction of the product?
Was the product designed in such a safe manner to withstand expected and foreseeable use as well as abuse?

Many  product liability legal cases require not only the experience of a skilled product liability lawyer but also will require complex forensic testing, and accident reconstruction. In accordance with scientific methodology and protocol that will survive defense challenges. It is extremely important to preserve the product after the accident to avoid the spoliation of evidence. In one of our recent cases, we do not believe that a prior attorney understood the basics of a product liability case despite his yellow page ads to the contrary and in fact spoiled the evidence leading to a legal malpractice case rather than a product liability claim.

Continue reading "Experienced Pennsylvania Product Liability Lawyers Warn That Identifying and Proving Defects Is Not Always Obvious and Often Requires Some High Tech Engineering and Forensic Work" »

According to the Coast Guard, nine people have died in the first two weeks of June in the waters of the mid-Atlantic due to boating accidents and a string of drowning accidents. Unfortunately most of the boating deaths could have been avoided due to the fact that some of the fatalities involved in boating accidents were not wearing life jackets. The failure to wear a life jacket resulted in 75% of all boating deaths in 2010 and of those drowning victims, 88% were not wearing life jackets.

Adding to these grim statistics is a report that many beach town resorts, including Delaware beaches, are struggling to fill lifeguard slots. The News Journal of Wilmington reports there are only 19 openings and 9 applicants for lifeguard duty at Cape Henlopen State Park, Delaware Seashore Park, and Fenwick Island State Park. Unfortunately part of the problem is due to the low salary of $10.00 per hour.

As an experienced boating accident and drowning accident lawyer, I am very much well aware that the summer season brings its share of tragedies. However most boaters and swimmers must be aware of the dangers and as beach resorts derive a significant portion of their revenue from visitors why not pay a little bit more to hire qualified lifeguards. A survey indicated that nearby municipalities pay only one to two dollars more for lifeguards and have no problem filling the spots. Never skimp on safety.

Continue reading "Nine Deaths By Drowning or Boating Accidents Before Summer Even Starts - Experienced Boating Accident and Drowning Lawyer Weighs In" »

I am 56 years old and unfortunately like many others in America have been prescribed statins as a prophylactic means of preventing heart disease and increased cholesterol. I have been prescribed at least 3 or 4 different brands of the cholesterol drugs. However, I have had to discontinue them due to what I can only describe as excruciating muscle pain.

Recently the FDA issued a warning to the medical community as well as consumers concerning risks of muscle damage and Rhabdomyolysis caused by high doses of the cholesterol drug Simvastatin. On June 8, 2011, a drug safety communication was issued noting that the FDA is recommending limited usage of 80 milligrams of Simvastin doses due to the increased risk of muscle damage. Patients taking a Simvastatin dosage of 80 milligrams daily may have an increased risk of myopathy compared to patients taking lower doses of this drug or drugs in the same class. The risk appears to be higher during the first year of treatment and is often the result of interactions with certain medicines and is frequently associated with a genetic predisposition toward Simvastatin-related myopathies.

Myopathy is a muscle disease which often results in muscle pain, tenderness, weakness, or an elevation of muscle enzymes in the blood (creatine kinase or CK). The most serious form of myopathy Zocor can lead to is Rhabdomyolysis which can cause serious and potentially life threatening kidney damage or kidney failure.

The pharmaceutical drug team at Reiff & Bily in conjunction with the Beasley Firm have joined forces to work as the Beasley Reiff Law Group. Our skilled pharmaceutical and Zocor lawyers are now reviewing individual cases. If you are taking the highest approved dose of Zocor, we recommend that you immediately contact your doctor and carefully weigh the risks versus benefits of continued use. Zocor was first approved for use in the United States in 1991 but the patent for the drug expired on June 23, 2006 opening up the markets to generic brands as well. Since then in 2008, the FDA has issued its first warning pertaining to Rhabdomyolysis being linked to Zocor use. In March 2010, the FDA issued two more warnings. In the first warning, it asked healthcare professionals to avoid prescribing Zocor dosages higher than 40mg. where patients were taking other medications and stressed that taking the drug in 80 mg. dosages may also increase the likelihood of patients developing that same disease. Despite those warnings, many doctors and health professionals continue to prescribe the high dose of cholesterol fighting drugs to patients.

Continue reading "Pennsylvania Drug Defect Lawyers Reviewing Zocor Claims For Rhabdomyolysis Muscle Damage" »

As an seat belt design defects and flaws, it is important to understand that airbags and seat belts compliment each other in their function and new automotive technology has advanced to the point where airbag systems and occupant restraints are completely intertwined. Most airbag sensor modules report back to an event data recorder. A poorly designed airbag sensor will often deprive the occupant of pretensioner on the seat belt. Load limiters are specifically designed to work with airbags and if an airbag fails to deploy a seat belt can spool out dangerously exposing the occupant to a catastrophic injury and unfortunately many times a fatality. The intertwining of the smart systems controlling airbags and seat belts in vehicles requires a non-failure and proper design of the load limiters and pretensioners.

A poorly designed occupant classification sensor often results in the failure of an airbag to deploy. It is important in any type of airbag and seat belt failure case to immediately secure the vehicle and avoid spoilation of evidence so that valuable forensic evidence can be collected from the date recorders, as well as vehicle examination, to support a seat back or airbag defect claim.

Unfortunately, our office was just retained in a tragic case where a child was brain damaged and lost vision only to discover that the prior lawyer who handled the case never sent a non-spoilation letter and failed to preserve the evidence. Despite the fact that the first attorney has repeatedly informed the clients that the vehicle was in a secure and safe environment, the vehicle turned out to be left in a junk yard with the allegedly defective components cannibalized and the vehicle became a storage facility for used tires.

Continue reading "Airbags and Seat Belts Must Work Together As They Are Complimentary In Fashion and A Failure Of Any Components Can Be Catastrophic" »

According to a news release from Morey’s Pier in Wildwood, NJ a “young female” was injured as a result of an incident on one of the largest ferris wheels on the East Coast of the United States. Early news reports are indicating that witnesses state that she unfortunately died as a result of her injuries. The young female victim was flown by helicopter to a local hospital. A spokesperson for Morey’s Pier noted that the exact cause of the accident has not been determined and an investigation is underway.

Our hearts, thoughts, and prayers go out to the young victim, her family and friends and as an experienced amusement park accident attorney I would welcome an independent third party investigation and evaluation of what went wrong.

The lawyers of Reiff & Bily in conjunction with the lawyers of the Beasley Firm have joined forces to form the Beasley Reiff Law Group and are currently representing multiple victims of amusement park accidents at the New Jersey seashore. We also recommend the victim’s surviving family not talk to any insurance adjusters or attorneys for Morey’s Pier until they have consulted their own experienced catastrophic injury, wrongful death, or amusement accident lawyer who will independently fight for their rights and look out for their best interests. Many times the corporations that run large amusement parks have powerful legal defense teams on their side and will have their insurance people work on a case right away to protect their interests rather than those of the victims. It is important for amusement park victims not to sign any papers or agreements without consulting an experienced amusement park lawyer first.

As an experienced amusement park accident lawyer, I have a number of questions and concerns. Was this ride accident the result of negligence on the part of the amusement park? Was the ride maintained and inspected as required by state laws? Was the ride accident the result of defective parts or components of the ride? Was there an electrical, mechanical, or metallurgical failure? Was there a safety or system failure? Were the operators properly trained and given background checks? Was the accident caused by operator error? Depending on where fault lies, the appropriate parties can be held responsible for the accident and resulting injuries. An experienced Pennsylvania and New Jersey amusement park accident attorney will diligently investigate this claim with the best third party experts and accident reconstructionists to insure the victim’s rights are protected and that they receive just compensation for injuries and losses. For a free, no obligation consultation contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595. The skilled catastrophic injury and wrongful death lawyers of the Beasley Reiff Law Group have been awarded billions of dollars since 1958 representing the interests of catastrophically injured victims and their families.

As an experienced Pennsylvania boating accident attorney, I recently reviewed a story that took place on a lake in Minnesota when a 27-year old girl and her 30-year old girlfriend were killed in an easily preventable boating accident when a 24-foot lake boat she was operating violently crashed into two boat lifts and hit a tree. According to the investigative report there was evidence of intoxication by the boat operator and alcohol was found on the boat. This story is not so unique and I can personally relate to this story as my father was an innocent passenger on a high performance speed boat operated by a fairly prominent Philadelphian who as it turned out was intoxicated and was involved in a catastrophic accident injuring his passengers. The accident involving my father occurred as a result of the intoxicated boat operator’s negligent operation of the high speed boat where he throttled his boat to a high rate of speed in excess of 60 mph and jumped a high wake of a passing boat causing him to lose control of the boat where everyone onboard, including the intoxicated boat operator, was ejected from the boat resulting in catastrophic and permanent injuries. One thing is for certain - high speed power boats and alcohol never mix and often lead to a deadly combination.

As an experienced boat skipper for a great majority of my lifetime, I have owned and operated sail boats, motor boats, jet skis and recently owned and operated a 36-foot racing speed boat that was capable of reaching 80 mph. I have flown airplanes, driven motorcycles, and driven racing cars, and it is safe for me to state that the high speed motor boat was probably one of the most dangerous vehicles or craft that I have ever operated which I can only describe as moments of pure pleasure punctuated by moments of extreme fear. When you are traveling at a high rate of speed over the waterways hitting a wave the wrong way or hitting submerged object it can cause a catastrophic incident of flip over to occur in just an instant. Operating a high speed boat required my full attention and complete concentration and I am afraid to say, almost more. In fact, I might state that it was so scary that I would dare not consider imbibing in the slightest bit of alcohol or any other substance due to my natural fear factor.

Continue reading "The Water Is Often A Place For Dreams and Memories To Be Made But Offers Little Or No Forgiveness When There Is An Accident" »

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability and defective product lawyer for over three decades, I am witnessing an ever increasing call to safety as federal agencies and have put more pressure on manufacturers to recall allegedly dangerous products. As more and more consumers complain about problems over the internet and as more and more bloggers are able to express concerns about potentially dangerous situations and products, recalls seem to be occurring on a daily basis being led by the auto industry.

If you receive a recall notice, this experienced Pennsylvania liability lawyer advises you to act swiftly to avoid injury regardless of whether or not you consider the safety issue to be serious. The internet is turning out to be one of the consumers best friends when it comes to product safety by keeping necessary pressure on manufacturers who are normally accustomed to emphasizing profitability and return to shareholders rather than safety.

If you or a loved one has been injured by a defective product, put decades of legal experience on your side to help you recover the financial damages you deserve. Reiff & Bily has recently joined forces with the Beasley Firm and together our accomplished trial lawyers have been awarded over $2 billion dollars since 1958. For a free, no obligation consultation contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

As a result of a recent rash of storms and severe weather across the United States, many people turn to power generators during resulting power outages.

Recently the CPSC warned consumers never to use a generator indoors including basements, garages, crawl spaces, and sheds even with ventilation as exhaust fumes contain high levels of carbon monoxide which can become deadly if inhaled. Carbon monoxide is often referred to as a silent killer. Inhalation can quickly lead to full incapacitation and death. Common symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning include but are not limited to dizziness, nausea, vomiting, weakness, vertigo, and a general feeling of malaise. As chance favors the prepared mind, it is probably not a bad idea to have properly operating smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors in your home.

The carbon monoxide poisoning and exposure law firm of Reiff & Bily is committed to protecting the public from unreasonable risks of injury and death due to defective consumer products. Over the past three decades, our lawyers have successfully litigated cases involving defective toys, defective vehicles, defective tools, and defective electrical devices.

Each year in America close to 70,000 people will sustain serious injury caused by lawn mowers. Almost 10,000 will be younger than 18-years old. The American Academy of Pediatrics has noted that the power lawn mower is one of the most dangerous tools around the home.

As an experienced Pennsylvania lawn mower accident and product liability attorney, we receive many calls each year concerning children who sustain severe injuries and sometimes unfortunately death as a result of a lawn mower related accident. Unfortunately many lawn mowers have design defects and warning failures and lack of proper safeguards. Many times parents entrust their children mow the lawn despite the fact that the child does not possess the necessary level of maturity, judgement, strength, or coordination. Experts suggest that most children should not operate a walk behind power mower until they are at least 12-years old or ride on a lawn mower until they are at the age of driving or at least 16-years old. There is not a week that goes by where one does not learn of an amputation or limb shredding accident as a result of a lawn mower blade. Lawn mower rollover and amputation accidents are daily occurrences in the United States.

Other common injuries resulting from lawn mower rollover accidents include asphyxiation, permanent scarring, broken bones, dislocation, burns, and loss of eyesight. The Pennsylvania defective product and lawn mower accident attorneys of Reiff & Bily believe that manufacturers are obligated to produce reasonably safe lawn mowers for foreseeable uses. When the manufacturer fails in this responsibility, they must be held responsible for the injuries caused by the defective product. Many lawn mower injuries could have been prevented if the manufacturer installed rollover protection systems or guards.

Continue reading "American Academy of Pediatrics Claims That A Power Lawn Mower Is One Of The Most Dangerous Tools Around The Home - Lawn Mower Accident Lawyer Weighs In" »

Summer is just around the corner and amusement parks are advertising rides offering “maximum fear”, “ultimate thrill”, “the tallest”, the fastest roller coaster”, “pulse quickening vertical drops”, and “white knuckled adventures while standing upside down”. It seems that many amusement park operators are constantly upgrading their offerings in the competition to attract new customers and increase profitability, but this experienced amusement park accident lawyer and consumer safety advocate asks at what cost to safety concerns?

Frankly, when I grew up in the 1960's, the most exciting rides were the salt and pepper shaker or the scrambler. Today I read about rides with “minimum confinement” and “maximum fear”. In the last year, there were many stories concerning amusement park disasters around the world. As an experienced amusement park accident lawyer, I probably see the worst scenarios involving catastrophic injuries and death that one could imagine and my sensors are alerted when I read about a new ride that is “scarier but less confining”. A visit to the website www.rideaccidents.com reveals just how dangerous many amusement attractions can be.

According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission over 7,000 people will visit emergency rooms in the United States this year due to injuries sustained in an amusement ride accident. Children have the highest risk of falls or ejections mid-ride. Unfortunately, the amusement ride industry is not regulated by uniform standards and reporting of accidents is poor to non-existent with many cover ups. Most amusement park safety is governed by local laws in jurisdictions where the amusement park has strong political clout and hence, laws may be one-sided in favor of the amusement facility. Rides at amusement and water parks are exempt from federal safety oversight. Surprisingly, only 24 states have implemented a program for amusement park accident investigations and 11 states rely on insurance companies or 3rd party inspectors to audit safety compliance issues. Many states have no established regulations for amusement ride safety.

In one of our cases, a woman and her son were on a coaster ride when the chain snapped while pulling the car up a steep incline. The insurance providers and adjusters were operated by the same company that operated the unsafe ride. In the same case, the amusement park was located in a municipality and state that had strong laws favoring the entertainment and amusement industry and an independent investigation revealed that the amusement park was a major contributor to the local political machine.

As an experienced amusement park accident lawyer, I welcome stricter federal and state standards and safety regulations for U.S. amusement rides and hope that we are not pushing the envelope too far in exchange for profits when it comes to the safety of newly designed amusement attractions.

As a result of an extraordinary amount of product failure, damage to health, lawsuits, and product recalls, the United States Food and Drug Administration has ordered manufacturers of metal on metal artificial hips to study them and report back. In early May letters were sent to 20 manufacturers of a popular class of hip implants requiring them to determine whether patients experience effects from the shedding of the material due to the fact that there have been numerous reports claimed of soft tissue damage and excessive levels of metal in the blood stream as a result of metal shavings coming off on a hip’s head due to metal upon metal contact and movement.

The FDA claims that it is not concerned about any particular manufacturer’s product at this time but rather the types of implants as a group. Approximately 250,000 artificial hips are implanted each year in America and approximately 1/3 of the 250,000 are metal upon metal versions. Metal upon metal devices have been manufactured by Johnson & Johnson, DePuy, Stryker, Zimmer, and Biomet. DePuy has recalled its popular ACR system in March which is made of a colbalt-chrome molybdenum alloy with a porous coating following a couple of previous Johnson & Johnson recalls. Experts claim that this situation is not unique to Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy implant product. Experts claim that they have known for some time that metal particles around implants can cause damage of bone and/or tissue surrounding an implant and joint.

Continue reading "FDA Has Ordered Manufacturers Of Metal On Metal Artificial Hips To Conduct Studies and Report Back - Defective Hip Implant Lawyer Weighs In" »

When I was a young boy, I slept in a bunk bed with my younger brother on the top. When I went to college, I shared a room with two other men in the dormitory and also slept on the bottom of the bunk bed and one of my pervasive thoughts was what would happen if the top bunk fell on top of me? Just about every bottom bunkers nightmare.

Recently a recall of defective bunk beds was made by Dorel Asia SRL. Dorel Asia SRL recalled approximately 444,000 wooden bunk beds in the United States and a further 21,700 bunk beds in Canada due to wooden side rails that run from the headboard to the footboard and holds the bunk bed’s mattress in place and can split and cause the bunk bed to collapse posing a fall hazard to consumers. The recalled bunk beds were sold at Walmart, KMart, and Target stores and online at www.walmart.com, and www.kmart.com.

If you own a bunk bed, it is important to be certain that your bunk bed is safe and not subject to a product recall. If you or a loved one has suffered an injury from using the affected products or any other defective product, the Pennsylvania product defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily would be glad to offer a free, no obligation and confidential consultation. We always offer a no recovery, zero fee guarantee which means if we do not win your case, we do not charge you a fee. Contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com.

In early May of 2011, multiple news sources reported that a passenger from the Carnival Sensation cruise ship was fatally injured in a serious jet ski accident rented during a port call in Nassau. A second passenger sustained serious injuries. A representative from Carnival cruise line stated that the passengers rented the jet ski directly from a local vendor. As an experienced water craft and boating accident attorney and one who has operated motor boats for almost a half century, any time I read about a jet ski accident I cannot all but think how unsafe and potentially dangerous these water craft are in the hands of untrained and inexperienced riders.

Every year thousands of people will be killed or injured due to improper and careless operation of jet skis or other personal water craft. Even as an experienced boater, I was involved in a nearly fatal jet ski accident with my young son riding on the back of a jet ski many years ago at a resort in Puerto Rico. Jet skis are powerful machines and lose control very easily when operated by someone with little or no experience. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of this unfortunate jet ski accident, and the families of the victims would be well served to hire an experienced and jet ski and personal water craft attorney to fully investigate whether or not the concessionaire who rented the jet skis provided appropriate instruction in the operation of the jet ski and whether or not the jet ski was properly equipped with a kill switch. A personal water craft attorney should investigate whether there were any potential defects to the jet ski which could cause steering errors or the inability to dethrottle.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a water craft accident, please contact one of our experienced Philadelphia water craft and boating accident attorneys for a free, no obligation consultation online at www.beasleyreifflawgroup.com.

Honda expanded a recall for allegedly defective airbags that may explode with dangerous force. The recall includes an additional 833,000 vehicles. Honda informs that the airbags can inflate with too much force and a casing can break causing a risk of injury or death.

Since 2008, Honda has recalled almost 1.7 million vehicles due to the airbag problem. Over-aggressive airbags pose a potentially dangerous situation to drivers and passengers and this experienced airbag defect lawyer salutes Honda’s efforts and advises anyone who owns or operates a Honda vehicle subject to the recall to immediately return the vehicle to the dealer for inspection and correction of a potential airbag defect.

Toyota announced another voluntary recall of approximately 308,000 SUVs from the 2007 to 2008 model years over fears of airbags not working in the event of certain accidents, or in the worse case scenario, opening without reason. The new Toyota recall affects 214,000 RAV and 94,000 Highlander/Highlander HV models from 2007 to 2008 model years with the recall involving the curtain shield airbag sensor assembly. Apparently it seems that sensors are failing which means that in the event of a rollover accident, the airbag may not open or in the worse case scenario, the airbag could open without and without an impact. Although Toyota claims that this is an unlikely event, they are issuing the recall and made a point of mentioning that the same is possible.

As an experienced Pennsylvania airbag defect lawyer, I am well aware of the dangers that can occur from an over-aggressive deployment and non-deployment or a faulty deployment. We urge all of the readers of this article to contact your Toyota dealership and take your car in immediately if it is one of the vehicles embodied by the recall notice. Chance favors the prepared man and we salute Toyota’s efforts in notifying consumers when it became aware of the problem.

If you or a loved one has suffered a catastrophic injury or fatality due to an alleged airbag defect, please feel free to contact one of our experienced Philadelphia airbag defect lawyers for a free, no obligation consultation. The Philadelphia airbag defect law firm of Reiff & Bily has recently joined forced with the legendary Beasley Firm and together have been awarded over $2 billion dollars for injured clients. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation. Contact us online at www.beasleyreifflawgroup.com or toll free at 1-800-588-0130.

After a 2008 Toyota Corolla airbag failed to deploy after a vehicle hit a deer at 55 mph, the U.S. National Highway and Transportation Safety Authority was called in to investigate a potential airbag defect issue. Thankfully, no one was hurt in this accident. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration indicated that the possible recall could affect as many as 170,000 vehicles as the Corolla has been Toyota’s second best selling model after the Camry. Since 2009, Toyota has recalled more than 13.7 million vehicles in the United States to address safety complaints, with the most prominent being the unintended acceleration issue.

At the Philadelphia auto product liability and airbag defect firm of Reiff & Bily, we have had extensive experience investigating airbag defects. Airbags are supposed to meet the needs of the occupant in a variety of crash situations. In the last year, numerous other automobile manufacturers recalled their vehicles due to airbag defects and component failures. Many times smart airbag sensor systems fail and many times defective airbag design or installation can fool a smart airbag into not deploying when it should deploy or to over-aggressively deploy. The Philadelphia airbag defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily salute the efforts of NHTSA in investigating this potential hazardous situation and applaud Toyota’s efforts to further investigate a potentially hazardous problem. Our skilled Pennsylvania auto defect and defective airbag lawyers have acquired years of unmatched experience in fighting against some of the world’s largest automobile manufacturers and manufacturers of defective component parts with some of the highest record breaking results achieved for our clients injured by airbag defects.

Recently the Philadelphia airbag defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily have joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm to form the Beasley Reiff Law Group. For a free, no obligation consultation, please contact us online at www.beasleyreifflawgroup.com or toll free at 1-800-588-0130.

Recently a product liability legal claim was settled for a confidential amount by the manufacturer of a pet door that provided an escape for a 2-year old boy who crawled through the door and drowned in a swimming pool. The parents of the 2-year old alleged that the pet door was defective and unreasonably dangerous and that it lacked warnings about unintended use by children. Plaintiffs also uncovered evidence that the company knew of prior fatal accidents with children involving the pet door.

As experienced Pennsylvania swimming pool accident and product liability lawyers, we are well aware that a little known cause of childhood injuries and deaths are pet doors. Since 1966, there have been over one hundred documented cases of children endangered after exiting a home via a pet door. Nearly 3/4 of these unfortunately resulted in a catastrophic injury or wrongful death. Most parents are simply unaware that a child or infant can easily escape through a small pet door opening. Just a few years ago in a local Delaware case, another 3-year old girl was found in several feet of rain water collected in the cover of a covered pool after she crawled out of her home.

Drowning and swimming pool deaths involving children is on the rise, and it is just that time of year when parents must take safety precautions around a swimming pool environment. Ownership and operation of a swimming pool carries with it a strong responsibility to protect others on your premises particularly young children. Our experienced swimming pool and hot tub accident attorneys have represented victims and the families of victims who sustained catastrophic injuries and wrongful death as a result of swimming pool and hot tub accidents. Drowning is the second leading cause of accidental injury or death among children ages 1 to14 and the leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 4. The most common place for a 1 to 4-year old child to drown is in a home swimming pool and in nearly 9 out 10 drowning deaths, a parent or caregiver claimed to be watching the child.

Continue reading "Pet Doors Near Swimming Pool Can Be Extremely Hazardous To Young Children" »

I wrote an article a few weeks ago entitled Recalls, Recalls, Recalls, What’s Going On?. Recently an abundance of recalls has been initiated by product manufacturers or by the government regulatory agencies. Typically a recall is only issued when evidence is presented that the product has a potentially dangerous defect that can cause a catastrophic injury or wrongful death to the customers. By the time of the recall, many innocent individuals have been catastrophically injured or killed by the product.

As an experienced Philadelphia product liability and defective product attorney who has successfully fought for the rights of injured consumers for over 3 decades, we welcome the fact that manufacturers are coming forth to recall a product once they are aware of the danger. However, there are still many dangerous products in the marketplace that continue to catastrophically injure and kill innocent children and other consumers.

Since 1979 when I first started to litigate product liability cases, manufacturers would go to great lengths to cover up any and all documentation concerning defects are they were more concerned with shareholders than consumer safety. I am not so sure that the situation is greatly different today due to the fact that most times when our skilled Pennsylvania product liability lawyers resolve a claim, manufacturers still insist on confidentially and no publicity.

Continue reading "Product Recalls Represent Only The tip Of The Iceberg Of Defective Products On The Marketplace" »

The experienced defective product and catastrophic injury lawyers of the Beasley Reiff Law Group salute the United States government in their launch of a public database that allows people to report and search safety complaints on thousands of products from cribs to toys to power tools. The new site, , is overseen by the Consumer Product Safety Commission and went live as scheduled on Friday, March 11, 2011. The database allows individuals to file reports of injury or potential harm about household products, baby gear, and more. In the coming weeks, consumers will be able to file reports with the agency.

The Pennsylvania product defect lawyers of the Beasley Reiff Law Group have been representing catastrophically injured and wrongfully killed consumers since 1957. Our experienced product liability lawyers have been awarded in excess of $2 billion dollars and have recovered hundreds of verdicts, settlements, and awards in excess of $1 million dollars.

In the last month and a half, there have been nearly 20 recalls concerning potential manufacturing and product defects on automobiles. This is normally boring information to the ordinary news reader or consumer. As an experienced Philadelphia product liability and automotive defect lawyer who has successfully fought for the rights of injured consumers since 1979, I salute the integrity of manufacturers coming forth to recall a product once they are aware of a danger. Just a few years ago, it seemed to me that manufacturers would go to great lengths to cover up any and all defects putting profitability ahead of consumer safety.

Recently the Beasley Reiff Law Group was formed consisting of a nationally renowned experienced group of Pennsylvania product liability attorneys with more than a half a decade of record breaking success representing clients who have been catastrophically injured or wrongfully killed in Pennsylvania and throughout the United States as a result of using dangerous or defective products. To the uninitiated reader of recalls, it would seem that products are getting more dangerous. However, it is this experienced defective product attorney’s opinion that the vast majority of product recalls are due to defects in design and manufacturers now recognize that it is time to put safety above profitability in response to increased regulatory pressure from federal agencies and ultimately record shaking product liability and class action lawsuits and verdicts.

Manufacturers of defective products can no longer act with ignorance against the consumer or they will be punished. Most recalls stem around inadequacy of warning and instruction, manufacturing defects, and defective design. As an experienced product liability attorney who has played out many of these issues in our courtrooms, I feel that trial lawyers in conjunction with government authorities are finally driving the message home to manufacturers. Make a safer product or you will ultimately be punished.

Recently the product liability attorneys of Reiff & Bily teamed with the legendary Beasley Firm who have represented consumers injured or wrongfully killed by defective products since 1956. Our award winning defective product lawyers of The Beasley Reiff Law Group have collectively been awarded in excess of $2 billion dollars for over a half century and have recovered hundreds of awards, verdicts, and settlement exceeding $1 million dollars.
If you or a loved one has been injured or killed as a result of a defective product, contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free a 1-800-421-9595.

The driver of a 1998 Ford Winstar, Eric Polston, was paralyzed in December 2005 when his vehicle began to rollover. Although the driver was wearing a seat belt during the course of the a href="http://www.reiffandbily.com/lawyer-attorney-1325464.html">van rollover, he was ejected from the vehicle and sustained paralyzing injuries. A product liability claim was brought against the Ford Motor Company focusing on a defective design of the seat belt buckle and particularly the release button housed within the buckle of the restraint system. Plaintiff’s lawyers argued that the design utilized by Ford featured a protruding button. The top of the button was located above the top of the buckle permitting easier access to the button. The protrusion of the button renders the design of the buckle defective and unreasonably dangerous because it presents an unnecessary hazard for inadvertent release. By the late 1990's, the entire automobile industry including Ford moved away from the protruding buckle to a safer flush design.

If you or a loved one has sustained a catastrophic injury or wrongful death due to a defectively designed product, please feel free to contact one of the experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily. Effective January 1, 2011, the Pennsylvania product liability law of Reiff & Bily has joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm and collectively since 1958, both firms have been awarded in excess of $2 billion dollars representing the rights of catastrophically injured individuals throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and United States. For a free, no obligation consultation contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

Shortly following a Supreme Court ruling last week in Williams v. Mazda, which involved defective seat belts, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal car safety standards do not preempt state tort claims over injuries when federal regulations are aimed at setting minimal safety standards. The high court held that plaintiffs cannot be barred from seeking damages at a state level.

In a South Carolina case, plaintiff Mary Robin Priester (whose son James Priester was killed in a crash of a 1997 Ford F-150 in 2002 when he was ejected from the vehicle) alleged that the truck was defectively designed because side windows were made of tempered glass which shattered on impact rather than laminated glass which holds together on impact and is designed to prevent ejections.

NHTSA at one point considered barring laminated glass in the side windows of all vehicles but rejected the proposal in 2002 finding it would be too expensive for manufacturers. NHTSA has repeatedly cited the safety benefits of laminated glass and has said that requiring installation of the same in all vehicles would be too expensive for manufacturers.

As a Philadelphia product liability attorney who has worked on a number of vehicle ejection cases, I am very familiar with the argument and have litigated claims alleging the safety of laminated glass. As the result of the Supreme Court ruling, it is my hope that individuals and families of victims that were killed or catastrophically injured as a result of manufacturers defects in automobiles will not have their right to hearings denied in the state courts and that judges and juries will recognize that federal regulations are only aimed at setting minimum safety standards and do not preempt state tort claims for the unlucky victims who are catastrophically injured or killed as a result of a defective design.

Continue reading "U.S. Supreme Court Renders The Second Decision In Weeks Ruling That Federal Safety Standards Do No Preempt State Tort Claims Over Injuries Caused By Alleged Vehicle Defect" »

A recent news story published in The Philadelphia Inquirer on February 23, 2011 noted that PECO technicians found an illegal electrical hookup in a two story building at 503 West Dolphin Street which may have caused a fire.

As an experienced catastrophic injury and premises liability attorney who has represented victims and the families of victims injured or killed in fires, or have been burned due to illegal and improper electrical wiring, I am all too familiar with this scenario. Unfortunately, in a tightened economy, landlords and building owners try to take every shortcut they can take in order to save money. Our investigations in many cases has revealed that many times landlords or property owners retain the services of non-licensed electricians or contractors without giving a second thought to the safety of the residents. Believe it or not most fires are caused by improper (illegal) electrical connections or overloading. Pennsylvania, like most other states, has strict laws forbidding anyone from doing illegal electrical work. Most times electrical work in apartment houses or homes needs to be inspected, and a licensed and proper contractor is required to have insurance against damages caused by their work.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission estimates that there are over 50,000 residential home or apartment fires each year due to defective wiring resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths and thousands of catastrophic injuries, as well as a half billion dollars a year in property damage.

The defective product and catastrophic injury lawyers of Reiff & Bily have joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm on January 1, 2011 focusing on helping people with burn injuries caused by defective wiring, defective products, or defective or unsafe electrical systems. Since 1958, both The Beasley Firm and Reiff & Bily law firm have utilized extensive experience in handling catastrophic injury and death cases with the use of experts and investigators who are nationally recognized in fields of combustion and defective products.

If you or a loved one has been injured or killed as a result of a fire or defective product, it is important that you seek the services of an attorney familiar with the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and a track record of success. The lawyers of both Reiff & Bily and The Beasley Firm has a tremendous success record fighting large manufacturing corporations and pursuit of justice for clients who have been burned and those victims and their families who died due to fires caused by defective and recalled products. For more information, contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

In an attempt to protect consumers from dangerous or potentially dangerous products, Ford Motor Company recalled more than 31,000 vehicles on Wednesday, March 2, 2011 due to the risk of possible fuel leak and electrical issues according to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration website. Ford recalled 23,688 Ford Rangers stating that the protective layer of the engine line fuel line near the throttle body shield may not be properly installed. It was stated that this could eventually lead to a fuel leak but Ford stated it was not aware of any fires related to this problem.

In a separate recall notice, Ford stated it would recall 88,022 spanning 7 models from the model year 2011 because the electrical system may short and prompt fires. The models affected by the recall include Ford Edge Crossover, Lincoln MKX, and the F series line of pickup trucks F-150, F-250, F-350, F-450, and F-550. Consumers have the right to expect that the products they purchase are safe for use or consumption. Getting in a car accident is dangerous enough without having to worry about the possibility of your car being engulfed in flames due to a design defect. Fuel fed fires due to design or manufacturing defects are a real danger and often can do more harm than the actual crash.

The Pennsylvania fuel fed fire lawyers, automotive defect, and product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily have been researching and handling numerous automobile defect design cases since 1979. The National Fire Protection Association reported that during 2004 fire departments responded to an estimated 266,500 highway type vehicle fires which claimed 520 lives and cost almost a billion dollars in direct property damage. Ford hit the headlines originally with fuel fed fires with Ford Pinto litigation. The Ford Pinto defect was in the design of a strap on the gas tank that made it susceptible to leakage and fire in a low to moderate speed collisions. We salute Ford’s effort in recall the vehicles in the March 2nd notice. The best way to prevent a fuel fed fire is to make sure the vehicle is inspected. Some of the causes of fuel fed or crash fires are poorly placed gas tanks, unshielded fuel systems, faulty wiring such as ignition system wires and other electrical system wiring which can short out and spark, fluid leaks from damaged fuel lines, hoses, caps, and filters, or exhaust system fires resulting from improperly installed muffler and exhaust systems. A car crash is not always necessary to cause a fire and the majority of fuel fed fires by poor manufacturing or car and truck design defects. These defects include filter cap neck separation, fuel fire from an added fuel tank that is not protected, fuel line tearing or separation of the fuel line from the carburetor, fuel pump, or fuel tank, fuel tank placement over the trunk floor, lack of barrier or shield to prevent a fuel tank rupture, lack of a fuel cutoff tank, lack of anti-syphoning device to prevent continued gas flows after a collision, puncture of a fuel tank because of poor design, protruding screw or object, or seam weld failure in the fuel tank.

Continue reading "Electrical Issues, Fuel Leak Risks, And Possibility Of Fires Prompt Another Ford Recall-Experienced Product Liability Lawyer Salutes Ford" »

According to news sources, House Republicans are trying to block the launch of a new database which is aimed at protecting consumers by giving them access to product safety complaints within weeks of their submission to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability attorney who has represented individuals and families who have sustained catastrophic injuries and death as a result of using defective products, I find any attempt by lawmakers to kill the new public database to be outrageous. The purpose of the database was to help innocent consumers avoid the risks that follow the use of defective products based upon reports submitted from consumers, healthcare providers, death certificates, and media accounts. According to The Washington Post, language blocking funding for the database was added to a recent White House budget resolution by Rep. Mike Pompeo, a Kansas Republican. Pompeo claimed that the database would “drive jobs overseas”, increase the cost for manufacturers and consumers, and be a plaintiffs’ lawyers bar dream. I wonder if Rep. Pompeo or other advocates of the proposal to block funding for the database would feel the same way if they had lost their wife, child, or other loved one due to the rollover of a defectively designed vehicle that manufacturers knew was dangerous yet continued to market.

Unfortunately as a trial lawyer greedy for justice, I think it is time for lawmakers and manufacturers to recognize that safety should never be an option and that safety always triumphs profitability and the consumer’s safety should always come first. Lawmakers and manufacturers of defective products have a social and legal responsibility to the consuming public to manufacture safe products and to immediately inform them when a defect is noted. The blockage of such information to the public will lead to shocking stories of needless deaths and injuries caused by manufacturers and industries putting profits over people and avoids accountability.

Product liability lawyers and trial lawyers are the unsung heroes of society and many times the only voice for the vulnerable and powerless. We must do everything we can to insure that the consuming public is regularly kept informed of defective products within the market place when the knowledge becomes available.

If you or a loved one has sustained a catastrophic personal injury or wrongful death due to a defectively designed product, please feel free to contact one of the experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily. Effective January 1, 2011, the Pennsylvania product liability law of Reiff & Bily has joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm and collectively since 1958, both firms have been awarded in excess of $2 billion dollars representing the rights of catastrophically injured individuals throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and United States. For a free, no obligation consultation contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

When I was a teenager, I had a chin up bar attached to a door jamb by an inferior and defective holder. The fastener was properly installed according to supplied directions and pulled away from the wall causing me to fall down, split my skull open, sustain a minor closed head trauma, and a permanent scar. Recently a defective product recall was made by Perfect Fitness Corporation when the handles of thousands of its perfect pull up exercise were cracking and breaking causing bodily injuries, bruises, strains, sprains, or serious injuries. A staggering amount of these devices broke, namely almost one-third. The recall of this Chinese made exercise equipment also included plastic handles on the “perfect pull up” and adjustable height pull up bar that attached to doorways via screws and holders. Just reading about this brings back chills as a similar device caused my injuries and trauma over 30 years ago. I guess that manufacturers of these products still seem to put an emphasis on profitability and flashy advertisements and promotion rather than consumer safety.

The perfect pull up bar had been sold since January 2008 for about $90 in sporting stores nationwide including Dick’s Sporting Goods, Sports Authority, and on retailers such as Amazon.com.

The Philadelphia defective product and product liability law firm of Reiff & Bily has recently joined forces with the legendary Beasley product liability law firm and collectively has been awarded in excess of $2 billion dollars to victims injured or killed by defective products. If you have been seriously injured or killed by defective home exercise equipment or in an exercise program, please contact one of our experienced product liability lawyers and let us put our team of investigators and attorneys at work for you. For more information, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com. As always, we offer a no recovery, zero fee guarantee.

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability and automobile defect attorney who has litigated cases against major automobile manufacturers in Pennsylvania and throughout the United States, I applaud the unanimous decision of the United States Supreme Court whereupon it agreed to let a lawsuit go forward in the State Court of California despite claims and complaints from the automobile manufacturer that Federal regulators gave the manufacturer an option whether to install lap belts or lap and shoulder belts in the middle seats in the back of a van. Justice Breyer, writing for the majority, stated that the only way Mazda would be immune is if the “significant objective” of the Federal regulation was to give auto manufacturers a choice of which seat belts to install.

The Transportation Department gave no indication that its safety goals required the mixture of seat belt types that resulted from the manufacturer’s ability to chose different options said Justice Sonya Sotomayor in a concurrent argument. Added Justice Breyer, the more important reason why the Department of Transportation did not require lap and shoulder belts for rear inner seats was that the thought that this requirement would not be cost effective. The agency explained that it would be significantly be more expensive for manufacturers to install lap and shoulder belts in the rear middle and aisle seats than in seats next to car doors. But that fact - the fact that DOT made a negative judgement in cost effectiveness - cannot by itself show that the DOT sought to forbid Commonwealth torts in which the judge or jury might reach a different conclusion. Justice Breyer cited the Geier case often pulling in back into the preemption argument. In Geier, then the regulations history, the agency explanation and its consistently held interpretive use indicated that the regulations sought to maintain manfacturer’s choice in order to further significant regulatory objectives. Here are the same considerations indicate the contrary. We consequently conclude that even though state tort suit may restrict the manufacturer’s choice, it does not stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment that the full purpose is an objective of Federal law.

Ikea Home Furnishing is recalling 26,000 baby cribs due to the fact that the four screws provided with some of the cribs to secure the mattress are not long enough which can cause the mattress support to detach and collapse creating a risk of entrapment and suffocation to the child inside of the crib. The cribs are marketed by Ikea under the name Sniglar cribs. The USCPS stated that the recall is voluntary and the recall involves Sniglar non-drop side full size cribs with model number 60091931.

Over the last year, there have been a substantial number of recalls of infant and child products. For an up to date notification, I urge you to go to the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission homepage which lists the recalls by date of issue. Also of significance is that on February 11, 2010, Britax Child Safety announced the recall of approximately 14,000 Britax Blink umbrella strollers made in China due to the fact that the stroller’s hinge poses a fingertip amputation and laceration to children when the stroller is being unfolded or opened. Additionally on January 20, 2011 approximately 1.5 million strollers made by Graco Children’s Products were recalled after reports of children’s fingers were being cut when the canopy was opened or closed. These recalled strollers are Graco’s Passage, Alano, and Spree strollers and Travel Systems.

If you or your children has sustained a serious injury due to a defective product, the experienced Philadelphia product liability defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily have now joined forces with the legendary product liability lawyers of The Beasley Firm who have collectively been awarded in excess of $2 billion dollars since 1958 taking on some of the world’s largest manufacturers. In all of our defective product cases and child injury cases, we bring a team of experienced lawyers, investigators, and accident reconstructionists to assist you. As always, we offer a no recovery, zero fee guarantee. For more information contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

On February 17, 2011, Medtronic SynchroMed infusion pumps were recalled due to a design defect that led to refilling errors where doctors unknowingly missed the device and injected powerful drugs straight into patients bodies. That design defect led to hundreds of reported injuries from the Medtronic SynchroMed pump, including deaths.

In January, Medtronic, Inc. sent an “Urgent Medical Device Correction” letter to doctors, hospitals, and health care providers warning them that there was a problem with the pumps that allow a “pocket fill,” of medication that could cause serious injury or death due to drug overdose. In that letter, Medtronic indicated that there had been at least 351 reports of pocket fill problems. Due to the machine's design defect, eight people have died and 270 people required emergency care due to serious or life threatening injuries. Additionally, there were approximately 73 other incidents in which there were non-life threatening injuries or Medtronic did not know the outcome after the error.

Medtronic estimates that approximately 1 in every 10,000 SynchroMed drug refill attempts by doctors or health care professionals cause a pocket fill. However, the actual rate of occurrence could be much higher because many medical mistakes are not reported.

The Pennsylvania defective product and Medtronic Pump lawyers of Reiff & Bily together with the legendary Beasley Philadelphia product liability, wrongful death, and medical malpractice law firm has successfully represented the rights of injured consumers against some of the world's largest corporations and together have recovered awards on behalf of injured clients in excess of $2 billion dollars. If you or a loved one has sustained an injury and resulting damages as a result of a Medtronic Pump, please contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

On February 17, 2011, The FDA issued a warning that the drug Terbutaline, also known as brethine, Bricanyl, Brethaire, or Terbulin, that are given to mothers in preterm labor, can cause heart problems or even death.

Dr. Scott Monroe, M.D., who is the Director of the FDA’s Division of Reproductive and Urologic Products released a statement indicating that “Women should be aware that serious and sometimes fatal side effects have been reported after prolonged use of terbutaline in pregnant women.”

Terbutaline is a medication that is FDA-approved to help relax the breathing airways in patients with asthma, bronchitis, COPD, or emphysema. Terbutaline is also used to help stop premature labor or an over active uterus sometimes referred to as uterus hyperstimulation. However, there is no solid evidence that the use of Terbutaline during pregnancy improves the baby’s outcome.

According to the literature, there has been 16 maternal deaths associated with the use of Terbutaline, In addition, there has also been 12 documented cases of pregnant women who developed a myocardial infarction or heart attack, pulmonary edema, fast heart rates or tachycardia and cardiac arrhythmias or irregular heart beats after being given Terbutaline. These are just the documented cases of heart problems after a mother was given Terbutaline for premature or preterm labor. There could be many more cases that we just do not know about yet.

The Pennsylvania pharmaceutical lawyers and Philadelphia medical malpractice lawyers of Reiff & Bily together with the legendary Beasley Philadelphia product liability and wrongful death law firm has successfully represented the rights of injured consumers against some of the world’s largest drug companies and together have recovered awards on behalf of injured clients in excess of $2 billion dollars.

If you or a loved one developed heart problems as a result of a the drug Terbutaline, please contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

In recent weeks, a victim who had traveled across the pond from London to Philadelphia for cosmetic enhancement tragically died in a hotel room after having a buttock injection of silicone. Notably, it was the victim’s second trip to have an illegal cosmetic procedure for which she paid the sum of $1,800. Unfortunately, the situation surrounding the aspiring hip hop dancer who lost her life is not so uncommon. While this cosmetic procedure did not involve a physician, I find it quite curious that many salons, spas, and other storefronts are offering cosmetic enhancements and procedures without proper training or safeguards. Many times elective cosmetic procedures and treatments are performed by untrained and minimally regulated individuals without any worries of negative repercussions.

I was in Florida last weekend and as I walked around various neighborhoods, I saw storefronts and salons advertising laser hair removal, dream lifts, non-surgical face lifts, botox and dermal filler injections, laser procedures, body sculpting procedures, teeth brightening procedures, as well as many other items to chose from on the elective menu.

The question one must ask is who trained the person doing the procedures and what happens if and when something goes wrong. Many of the procedures are being done by minimally trained individuals or physicians looking to bolster declining incomes. Many times the people administering the treatment take a one day course and become practitioners in the field of cosmetic enhancement bolstered by “snake oil” type of advertising. This industry is minimally regulated and there seems to be a growing underground industry that will surely lead to catastrophic injuries and deaths as businesses and untrained individuals push the limits as to what procedures they will offer to an unsuspecting public unaware of risk. Cosmetic procedures if improperly done can lead to paralysis, strokes, and death. The qualifications necessary to administer botox or other injective therapies is minimal. The question you must ask yourself is what happens when the procedure goes wrong as was indicated recently in a Philadelphia hotel room.

Continue reading "Just How Safe Is That Cosmetic Procedure And Is The Reward Of Enhanced Beauty Worth The Risk" »

At exactly 8:13 yesterday morning, I received a frantic call from the wife of a client of ours, who was about to undergo surgery for removal of a defective DePuy hip implant. The sheer panic in her voice was alarming, but not as alarming as what she proceeded to tell me. Her husband was in the pre-operative area of the hospital and ready to be sedated for an immediate implant removal surgery when the orthopedic surgeon entered the room. The wife reminded the surgeon that she would like to have the removed hip implant, but the surgeon told her that a DePuy representative asked for the removed hip implant so they can perform "their own" testing on it. If the defective hip was taken away, so was the evidence. Thankfully, the wife called us and we were able to quickly intervene and stop the removed defective hip implant from leaving the hospital. If you have have suffered injuries as a result of a defective ASR De Puy hip implant, requiring surgical removal, it is imperative that the removed specimen be retained in a sterile container with a clear chain of custodial documentation for future forensic evaluation by your attorney and his or her team of medical and forensic experts.

DePuy is one of the largest manufacturers of replacement hips in the world with sales close to $5.4 billion dollars. We believe that DePuy exploited a loophole in the FDA regulations that allowed this product to reach the consumer without a single clinical test being performed. Dr. Sydney Wolfe, the Director of the Public Citizens Health Research Group has stated that DePuy "are basically testing these devices in an uncontrolled way on a large number of people". If you or anyone in your family has received a hip replacement after 2003 we strongly encourage you to call the surgeon who performed the operation and ask if the DePuy ASR was implanted. Please call a doctor immediately if you experience swelling, pain, or difficulty walking. An x-ray can reveal how the implant is performing and a blood test can determine if there are any metal particles in your system. Do not contact DePuy, Johnson and Johnson, or sign any documents without first contacting a law firm with the experience needed to handle your case.

The Pennsylvania defective product and DePuy hip implant defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily together with the legendary Beasley Philadelphia product liability and medical malpractice law firm has successfully represented the rights of injured consumers against some of the world's largest corporations and together have recovered awards on behalf of injured clients in excess o $2 billion dollars. Many of the clients that we are speaking to are scared, angry, frustrated, and do not know what to do. Not surprisingly, many of the physicians who installed these devices are also concerned, confused, and not sure how to proceed. Our lawyers have a group of leading orthopedic physician experts to review and investigate these cases at no cost to you.

If you or a loved one has sustained an injury and resulting damages as a result of a DePuy ASR hip implant, please contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

There is no better way to enjoy a fresh new snow fall than on a snowmobile. Sadly though, since the New Year began, there have been numerous catastrophic injuries and deaths due to snowmobile accidents. In just one week, there has been at least five snowmobile related deaths.

On Friday night, a 44-year-old Methuen man suffered massive internal injuries and was killed when his snowmobile fell on top of him as he was trying to ride up a 12-foot-embankment along the Merrimack River. The same day, in the Village of Nunda, Anna Masters suffered a traumatic brain injury after being thrown from her snowmobile, and 41-year-old Kelly Strohmeier was ejected from her snowmobile after it hit a rut, killing her.

Last weekend a 62-year-old Concord, New Hampshire man was killed in a snowmobile crash in Gilford. On Monday, Ryan D. Anderson, 32, of Hall Road, Cassadaga, hit a snow bank, causing his snowmobile to go airborne and throwing Anderson from the snowmobile into a tree.

Even the most experienced snowmobile drivers are not safe from catastrophic injuries or death. Many times, while on a snowmobile trail, the operator will encounter deadly obstacles if the trail was not properly maintained. Drivers can quickly come up on fallen tree branches, debris, gloves, hats, scarves and other items on the designated trails that cause the driver to have to quickly turn to avoid the debris or have the debris jam the snowmobile, causing a sudden stop, and ejecting the driver. If the trail was not properly maintained, the driver can hit a rut, causing a loss of control of the snowmobile and ejecting the driver causing serious injuries. Some drivers can be ejected into a nearby lake or stream causing hypothermia or drowning. Some snowmobile trails do not have a fence or barrier up to protect drivers that had to veer off the trail due to debris and the driver plunges down a mountain or steep hill causing catastrophic injuries or even death.

In addition to the obstacles on the snowmobile trails, experienced snowmobile drivers have also become victims of product defects or faulty equipment. Many injuries are due to defects in the helmet design, head lamp failures, glove failures, mechanical failures, break failures, power failures, goggle failures or product recalls. Despite wearing all of the appropriate protective gear, they still sustain traumatic brain injuries, spine fractures, paralysis, face injuries, broken necks, severe snow burns, hypothermia, and even death due to design defects.

Since 1979, the experienced Philadelphia wrongful death, product liability, premises liability, and negligence law firm of Reiff & Bily has aggressively represented clients and their families who have been injured or killed in snowmobile related accidents. Effective January 1, 2011 the Reiff & Bily law firm has joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm in Philadelphia who since 1958 has been awarded over $2 billion dollars on behalf of their clients and have hundreds of millions and multi-million dollar verdicts, settlements, and awards to their credit. Please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com for a free, no obligation consultation.

Philadelphia and the surrounding areas have been experiencing multiple large snow falls over the past few years. The percentage of people using snow blowers or snow throwers to remove the snow is on the rise. Obviously, snow blowers can make snow removal quicker and easier, but they can also cause catastrophic injury and even death.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), estimates that each year more than 5,700 patients are evaluated in emergency rooms for snow blower related accidents or injuries. Approximately 600 patients per year are seen for finger amputations and since 1992, there has been 19 deaths related to snow blower accidents. Snow blowers are the fourth leading cause of finger amputations.

Injuries from snow blowers can be caused by defects in the plastic rims of the tire, carburetor leaks, fuel tank joint and O-ring leaks, auger and discharge chute defects, clutch malfunctions and carbon monoxide poisoning. In addition, when a snow blower is turned off, there still may be enough torque built up to cause a devastating or deadly injury.

The Reiff & Bily law firm has now joined forces with the legendary Beasley product liability and design defect law firm and have successfully evaluated cases for clients who have suffered amputations, burns, lacerations, carbon monoxide poisoning, wrongful death, and other unfortunate incidents as a result of faulty or unsafe snow blowers. We believe that the manufacturers of the snow blowers should be held accountable for their mistakes. All of our product liability and design defect lawyers have been deemed as Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and have received the highest ratings by Martindale Hubbell. For a free, no obligation consultation, contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595. Always remember our no recovery, zero fee guarantee.

On December 19, 2009, a full Devil’s Head ski lift suddenly stopped, sparked, and then sent the seats screaming backwards at a high rate of speed. Riders, fearing for their lives, jumped from their seats, seriously injuring 14 of the riders.

On December 28, 2010, while workers were trying to realign a ski lift cable at Sugarloaf Resort, the cable jumped its track, causing riders to plummet 25 to 30 feet below and sustain serious injuries.

Although rare, ski lift accidents do occur and when they do, they can cause catastrophic injuries and even death.

Ski lift accidents can occur due to negligence or faulty equipment. Many times, we will see cases where the ski lift operator did not stop the lift after a person fell, causing the next rider to collide with the skier lying on the landing base. In those cases, the ski lift operator was negligent. Other injuries are caused by faulty or defective equipment. Faulty or defective equipment can lead to the cable dislodging from its track, break failure, bullwheel failure, gearbox failure, back up break malfunctioning, and anti-rollback device failure that cause skiers to become thrown from their seats or fall to the ground. Faulty and defective equipment can also be caused by improper instillation or maintenance.

Ski lift accidents can lead to traumatic brain or head injuries, skull fractures, spinal cord injuries or broken backs, punctured or collapsed lungs, multiple bone fractures, lacerations and other devastating injuries, including death.

Since 1979, the experienced Philadelphia product liability, wrongful death, and negligence law firm of Reiff & Bily has aggressively represented clients and their families who have been injured by a faulty ski lift or negligent ski lift operator. Effective January 1, 2011 the Reiff & Bily law firm has joined forces with the legendary Beasley Firm in Philadelphia who since 1958 has been awarded over $2 billion dollars on behalf of their clients and have hundreds of millions and multi-million dollar verdicts, settlements, and awards to their credit. Please contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com for a free, no obligation consultation.

While many experts and vehicle defect attorneys have focused on potential flaws in the electronic throttle control systems on Toyotas leading to sudden acceleration, there have been many concerns surrounding this issue as well as difficulty proving the existence of electronic defects. Sources indicate that Toyota settled at least one sudden acceleration case so far for $10 million to the families of four people killed when a Lexus ES accelerated out of control in California in 2009. While many other auto manufacturers including Nissan, Volkswagen, BMW, and Chrysler have been using brake override systems for years, Toyota has been lagging behind, and in fact, NHTSA investigators approached Toyota regarding the possibility of installing brake override systems as early as August 2007. The following year Toyota ordered a feasibility study of the technology. Recently a United States Federal Judge handling most of the federal cases against Toyota denied efforts by Toyota to dismiss many of the allegations against it and particularly noted “the absence of a brake override system.” Toyota has agreed to pay almost $50 million in fines for failing to properly notify regulators of defects and for delaying recalls.

It seems to this experienced auto defect and product lawyer that Toyota maintains a clear pattern of ignoring or downplaying important safety issues. Safety should never be an option and public accountability and safety should take precedence over profitability.

The experienced vehicle product liability law firm of Reiff & Bily has been taking on the big automakers, representing individuals who have sustained catastrophic injuries and wrongful deaths due to automotive product defects. We are currently involved with a number of Toyota sudden acceleration claims.

Over the past few months, our office has received inquiries from many individuals suffering extraordinary medical problems stemming from DePuy Orthopedic ASR hip implants. On August 26, 2010, DePuy Orthopedics, a unit of Johnson and Johnson announced a recall of its hip implants known as ASR XL Acetabular and AR Hip Resurfacing Systems. The DePuy ASR hip was implanted in over 93,000 patients worldwide and when it fails there are significant medical problems.

Due to a design flaw in the implant, many of the clients in cases we have investigated have been experiencing loosening and failure of the implant, as well as metallic poisoning. The ASR implant is a metal-on-metal implant. The friction of metal-on-metal causes microscopic shavings and debris to be released into the surrounding tissue and blood resulting in painful inflammatory reaction to tissue and high blood metal content leading to metallic poisoning. As we have comprehensively investigated these circumstances and have spoken to medical experts, it is apparent that replacement and additional surgeries often have less than optimum results, many times putting the patient in worse condition than prior to the original surgery. The secondary surgery often requires painful recovery and rehabilitation, leaving those in an infirm condition in a precarious state.

The experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers and DePuy hip implant recall lawyers of Reiff & Bily have taken an active role with the Beasley Law Firm and other national law firms to aggressively represent the interests of those who have sustained adverse consequences resulting in pain, suffering, and loss of compensatory damages as a result of a DePuy hip implant gone wrong.

For more information, please contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595. We have a successful track record in product liability cases for over 30 years.

As an experienced vehicle defect and product liability lawyer, I have fought hard over the last 32 years with many of my legal brethren across the United States to improve vehicle safety, maintaining that safety should never be an option and that automobile manufacturers ought to emphasize safety over profitability. 2010 is shaping up to be the largest year for recalls in the defective product arena. A Los Angeles Times article published on December 16th stated “The most comprehensive overhaul of motor vehicle safety laws in a decade which once seemed certain in the wake of Toyota’s sudden acceleration problems may never reach a vote from Congress.”

Proposed legislation S.3302 has 23 major provisions that would create new safety standards and increase fines against automakers for violating Federal rules and put an emphasis for the first time on safeguarding electronic systems now ubiquitous in motor vehicles. Legislation evolved as a result of investigations into the fatal accidents involving Toyota and Lexus vehicles that were the victim of sudden acceleration. It appears the main obstacle to passing the legislation according to auto safety advocates seems to be a Republican contingent which states there are higher priorities.

In this experienced product liability lawyer’s view, safety is and should be the number one priority. I have handled too many cases involving brain injuries, deaths, and catastrophic injuries which could have easily been prevented if this new proposed legislation was in place. The proposed bill would require vehicles to have a brake override system that cuts power if the driver applies the brake and the gas pedal is stuck. The bill would also increase civil penalties for violations of safety rules to a maximum of $300 million from $15 million now and for the first time establish standards for electronic systems that now operate vehicles.

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability and auto defect lawyer since 1979, I make it my business to study and understand the defective product recall landscape. There is almost never a day that goes by when there is not a new recall posted. If you or your family owns a car there is a chance greater than not that you have received a recall notice this year. At my house we purchased two new cars, and yet there were two recalls due to potential catastrophic causing defects. One of them involved a brand new BMW for its failure to accelerate properly. As a Pennsylvania vehicle defect lawyer who sees some of the worst case scenarios one can imagine including wrongful death, paraplegia, quadriplegia, as well as other catastrophic brain injuries, I can state one thing for sure – if you receive a recall notice or miss the recall notice, it’s a big mistake. As Louis Pasteur once said, “chance favors the prepared mind.” A product recall most likely can prevent you and your loved ones from being involved in an accident, perhaps catastrophically injuring or killing you. For safety’s sake, it is not a bad idea to check the NHTSA website at safercar.gov and click on defects investigation and search complaints. You can also contact your automobile dealer’s repair department for current recall information, and always remember that if your vehicle is recalled, the cost for the repair is on the dealer.

As an experienced product liability lawyer for the last 30 years who has successfully taken on some of America’s major corporations, I am very much concerned personally and as a professional by the results of the investigations and consequences of many clients suffering problems as a result of defective DePuy hip implants. Generally a hip implant should last at least 15 years, but many of the DePuy ASR hip implant replacement devices have lasted less than 5 years with multiple complications including but not limited to pain and stiffness, metallic poisoning, metal shavings released in the blood stream and long and painful rehabilitation processes and often have medical complications not to mention monetary losses due to inability to function or work.

The experienced product liability and medical malpractice lawyers of Reiff & Bily together with the Beasley Law Firm have successfully represented the rights of injured consumers against major corporations and together have recovered awards on behalf of clients in excess of $2 billion dollars. Many of the clients that we are speaking to are angry, frustrated, and do not know what to do. Not surprisingly, many of the physicians who installed these devices are also concerned and not sure how to proceed. Our lawyers have gathered a group of leading physicians to review and investigate these cases to determine eligibility at no cost to our client for their ability to prosecute a claim against DePuy for resulting damages. It is important to contact a DePuy hip implant lawyer now as thousands have already begun the process by submitting information necessary for investigative review. Time may be of the essence.

If you or a loved one has sustained an injury and resulting damages as a result of a DePuy ASR hip implant, please contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

As an experienced Pennsylvania defective product and product liability lawyer since 1979 who has handled thousands of cases involving catastrophic injury or wrongful death, I am most certain that if manufacturers focused more on consumer safety rather than maximizing profitability there would be many more people alive or walking around in a non-altered state. Most recently, after the BP Gulf oil disaster, a Presidentially ordered investigation revealed that the oil company as well as other companies working on the project made decisions that sacrificed safety to cut costs.

I have reviewed documents and evidence in many of the defective tire and automotive rollover cases and other vehicle product defect cases that we have investigated, and the evidence is fairly clear cut that the design or automotive manufacturing defects which could have been corrected for a small sum were knowingly allowed to exist posing a serious threat toward consumer safety. We have been able to prove that many automobile manufacturers were at fault by cutting corners in vehicle design and the manufacturing process in order to boost profitability to their shareholders.

Ford Motor Company knew in their initial testing that the Explorer was prone to rollovers. The issue was never addressed properly. Rather they resorted to lower air pressure in the tires as a quick and dirty fix. Additionally, when the Ford Firestone debacle began to surface, Firestone conducted an investigation that asserted tires had been abused or under-inflated. In a recent 15-passenger van rollover and component failure case that we handled, we were able to demonstrate that engineers working on the car warned executives and manufacturing agents that the vehicle was simply unsafe and the fix could be effectuated for less than $20. Instead thousands of people have died at the expense of corporate profitability. What is most interesting is that the government fails to take aggressive enough action to prevent this greedy practice and accidents will continue to occur killing innocent victims.

In the recent BP oil disaster, research has indicated numerous flaws in the installation and maintenance performed on the rig and critical pieces of equipment. Time after time, it appears that BP may have made decisions that increased the risk of a blow out to save the company time or expense. As consumers, we have the right to expect that the products we purchase are safe for use or consumption.

If you or a loved one has been catastrophically injured or killed by a faulty product, the experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily would offer a free, no obligation consultation and would be willing to investigate what caused your injuries and what parties are responsible under the law. We are greedy for justice and our Pennsylvania product liability lawyers may be able to recover compensation for your injuries, pain and suffering, medical expenses, and other related costs. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation and a no recovery, zero fee guarantee which means that we will advance all costs necessary to properly investigate your case and you will not owe us a dime unless you win. Our track record of success speaks for itself.

As a practicing Pennsylvania product liability lawyer since 1979, I have handled many product liability lawsuits involving defective ladders where someone has fallen or sustained a catastrophic injury or death. Recently I attempted to purchase what I considered to be a nice looking and somewhat fancy mahogany three step pantry ladder from a catalog. My wife insisted that this was the one she wanted for her walk-in closet and was told by the manufacturer that it had just been discontinued, and they stopped selling it due to a track record of serious injuries.

I pressed the sales agent and he told me that many people had sustained serious injuries and the company was being sued as a result. While I supported the owner of the catalog for failing to sell the product once he knew it was dangerous, my thoughts then jumped to the people who were not so lucky and had fallen and sustained serious injuries. As an experienced Pennsylvania products liability lawyer, I know that ladder injuries are quite frequent and when they happen the results are often devastating. Many ladders have been recalled and to sell a ladder with defects is the ultimate neglect of corporate responsibility.

The Consumer Product Safety Act requires that ladder manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers report to the CPSC within 24 hours of obtaining information that supports a conclusion that a ladder does not comply with safety rules or contains a serious defect which can create a substantial risk of injury to the public or presents an unreasonable risk of serious injury.

If you or a loved one has been injured due to a defective ladder, one that was not recalled properly, it is important that you contact an experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyer who has handled defective ladder cases. For a free, no obligation consultation contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com or toll free at 1-800-421-9595.

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyer who has handled a fair share of thermal burn cases involving unregulated temperatures on boilers, I have become well aware that thermal burns of a significant and permanent nature can be caused by the transfer of high energy heat to the body due to an unregulated or faulty boiler. A thermal burn or hot water burn can be quite serious and severe. Temperatures of 140 degrees for only one second can result in a second degree burn. If the temperature goes higher, the protein of the skin is denatured and a full thickness burn can occur. If one remains under the hot water for a longer period, increased damage occurs.

Last year, we successfully concluded a claim for tenants in an apartment house where the temperature regulator was faulty resulting in permanent scarring burns to the inhabitants. Surprisingly, scald burns can account for almost two-thirds of burn-related hospitalizations of young children. Hot water burns caused by defective boilers cause more deaths and hospitalizations then any other hot liquid burn.

It is important to supervise children and elderly persons closely in baths, showers, and kitchens, and it is important to minimize hot water hazards by setting your water heater temperatures as low as is acceptable for your washing needs. If you notice that your water is excessively hot, it is time to contact a plumber to check out the thermostat.

If you have suffered a burn injury or the loss of a loved one due to a burn injury, you may need the assistance of an experienced burn injury lawyer to fully investigate and evaluate your claim. For a free, no obligation consultation, contact the Pennsylvania burn attorneys of Reiff & Bily at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

When I was interviewed for membership to a posh and exclusive social club recently, one of the older and stalwart members on the Admissions Committee asked me why I would perform a job as distasteful as being a personal injury and product liability lawyer. Of course, what comes to mind is the shocking McDonald’s hot coffee case of many years ago and the many seemingly excessive verdicts that often are unrelated to the reality of the situation that seem to have tremendous shock value to the normal layperson. What the press and these individuals fail to recognize is that personal injury and product liability lawyers have a long history of protecting consumers from unsafe products. The threat of litigation and large verdicts serves as an insurance policy against the manufacturers when defective products are fixed or recalled from the market. While punitive damages often seem to make headlines, what many fail to recognize is that they are mostly later reduced substantially, sometimes by consent of the parties.

The recent Toyota situation indicates that when Toyota was still trying to blame floor mats for its runaway cars, the government and legal intervention by product liability lawyers put the issue under a microscope and exposed other potential fixes. Without the threat of litigation and the extensive discovery procedures that accompany the same, consumers would be left at the mercy of product manufacturers and auto manufacturers who would continue to produce red herrings indicating why their products were safe for normal use despite the multitude of catastrophic injuries and wrongful deaths.

Graco Children’s Products of Atlanta voluntarily recalled over 1.2 million of their highchairs due to alleged stability issues which will affect 65 different models of Graco’s Harmony highchair. The chairs, which are no longer produced by the manufacturer, would have been manufactured and sold between November 2003 and December 2009. The recall came after the manufacturer received over 464 reports of loose screws and falling brackets. The malfunction would cause a highchair to flip over if the user moved in the wrong direction. These Graco chairs originally sold for $120 and would have been found in a variety of department stores, including but not limited to Sears, Babies “R” Us, Target and WalMart.

If you or a loved one has a child that has sustained an injury as a result of this allegedly defective product, please feel free to contact one of our lawyers online for a free, no obligation consultation.

A recent story published in The New York Times on Friday, March 10, 2010 highlights a situation that often flies under the radar, namely the dangers of bed rails on beds used in nursing homes, assisted living facilities and hospitals. In 1995, the FDA put out a warning noting entrapment dangers posed by bed rails. Many states put out an alert regarding bed rail dangers earlier than that date.

Bed rails were designed to be safety devices analogous to seat belts in cars and meant to keep sick people who are drugged, confused, or restless from falling or climbing out of bed in hospitals or nursing homes. The Times reports that after reviewing cases of elderly people being injured or killed in bed rail accidents, the reality is different. Rails decrease the risk of falling by 10 to 15 percent but they increase the risk of injury by about 20% because they change the “geometry of the fall” according to expert geriatrician and bioethicist Steven Miles of the University of Minnesota.

Confused or demented patients who try to climb over the rails instead of falling from a lower level and landing on their knees or legs are apt to fall further and strike their heads, but the greatest danger is entrapment with patients getting stuck within the rails or between the rails and mattresses.

Last year, according to the Times story, the Food and Drug Administration tallied 480 deaths, 138 injuries, and 185 close calls involving hospital beds over a 24-year period. Dr. Miles believes that those statistics represent only a small fraction of all accidents, most of which go unreported.

According to a story published on March 4, 2010 in The New York Times, studies reveal that in some cases metal on metal hip implants can quickly begin to wear, generating metallic debris with deleterious effects. Some of the nation’s leading orthopedic surgeons have reduced or stopped the use of a popular category of artificial hips amid concerns that devices are causing severe tissue and bone damage in some patients, often requiring surgery within a year or two.

The device is known as a metal on metal implant and has been used in approximately one third of the 250,000 hip replacements performed annually in America. According to the study, the cause and scope of the problem is not clear but seems to indicate that in some cases the devices can quickly begin to wear, generating high volumes of metallic debris that is absorbed into the patient’s body which can touch off inflammatory reactions causing groin pain, death of tissue in the hip joint, and loss of surrounding bone. Many surgeons are concerned that they may only now be seeing the leading edge of a mounting problem.

The experienced Philadelphia medical malpractice and product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily are well versed in the investigation and prosecution of defective implant cases resulting in injury or death and will continue to monitor and investigate the concerning issues arising from metal on metal hip implants.

Recently I have noticed a dramatic increase in the number of inquiries to my website and telephone lines by individuals concerned about the safety of many cars, including Toyotas, that their family members drive. They tell me they are clueless about who to contact for an accurate and timely vehicle recall and ask me whether or not their car is safe to drive.

As an experienced Philadelphia product liability attorney who has been handling auto defect cases since 1979, I have normally received these calls after the fact when there has been a catastrophic injury or fatality as a result of a defectively designed automobile or product. I am flattered that my clients and their friends or relatives seek to call me with regard to my input as to the safety of their vehicle or what to do to prevent an accident. However, what this scenario does in fact seem to indicate is that the message is just not getting to the people and there is a fear factor that seems to be growing among concerned individuals looking to protect their family and precious cargo.

I’ll try to briefly address some suggestions I have on who to contact. With regard to toxic chemicals, product recalls and other problems, The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 1-800-232-4636.

Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) 1-800-638-2772, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (www.nhtsa.gov or www.recalls.gov), an online resource encompassing recalls for consumer products, motor vehicles, boats, foods, medicine, cosmetics, and environmental products.

Of course, you should contact the manufacturer’s website and their consumer relations website if you have more specific problems that are not addressed, and ultimately if your problems are not being addressed and you have sustained a catastrophic injury or wrongful death, please feel free to contact one of our catastrophic injury and wrongful death lawyers for a free no obligation consultation at 1-800-421-9595.

I my capacity as a Philadelphia product liability lawyer, I am concerned about the safety and design of a roofing product manufactured and sold by GAF-Elk. The system is a Tru Slate 2.0 roof system designed, manufactured, and sold by Elk Corporation and subsequently acquired by GAF. We recently filed a claim in Federal Court against GAF Materials Corp. d/b/a GAF-Elk. We have alleged that a Tru Slate 2.0 roofing system was installed in a coastal home subject to high winds. GAF-Elk advertises that the Tru Slate system was capable of withstanding high winds and stormy conditions. On repeated occasions, a number of the slate tiles became unfastened and blew off causing damage to neighboring properties. The slate tiles became detached and flew through the air in a “frisbee-like” fashion damaging neighboring properties and with the potential to catastrophically injure and even kill others in its path. The company made repeated efforts to remediate the problem, yet the problem still exists and the owner of the property is unable to find anyone in the local area willing to repair the roof due to the complexity of the system and fears of legal liability. When the company was repeatedly advised about the problem and potential for injury, they attempted to initially remediate a fix, but the system continues to fail sending tiles flying through the air. This situation presents a hazard to the innocent public passersby. We believe that this is another example of putting concern for profits ahead of consumer safety.

If you or a loved one has had a problem with a GAF-Elk Tru Slate Roof System or has been injured by flying shingles or debris or has sustained severe property damage due to defectiveness or alleged defective design of the system, please feel free to contact one of our experienced Philadelphia product liability lawyers for a free consultation and analysis of your case.

As an experienced automotive product liability lawyer, my legal brethren and myself who dedicate their practices to automotive product liability and consumer safety have been all too frustrated many times over the past few years when we attempt to download the black boxes from Toyotas and other Japanese auto manufacturers. More so than any other automakers that we litigate against, many of the Japanese automakers have placed roadblocks in our path in making data from black boxes accessible. Yoshimi Inaba, the President of Toyota North America, told a Senate Committee on Tuesday, March 2nd that the company would be delivering three data readers to the National Highway Safety Administration on Wednesday, March 3rd and that the company hoped to make the data more accessible to other systems by the middle of 2011.

Quite frankly as an experienced product liability lawyer who has had vast experience with the downloading of black boxes and the evaluation of data, I am curious why only three data readers are only being made available and why the consumer public and experts must wait until the middle of 2011 to receive more accessibility when citizens lives are knowingly in danger. Once again, it seems that profitability is being stressed over public safety in this game of hide and seek by Toyota. I have always believed that if you are confronted with a problem or safety issue, get the facts out there as soon as possible so other innocent victims are not killed or catastrophically injured.

I for one believe that Toyota is “hiding something” and for a company that prides itself on integrity, they are certainly not doing a great job putting their cards on the table as surveys now reveal that more than half of the people out there are less likely to buy a Toyota. On the positive side for major U.S. automobile manufacturers, sales are up but many analysts claim its at Toyota’s expense. By the way, it is important to note that the black box recording devices utilized on Toyotas are not so dissimilar from black boxes utilized on American cars as common safety features. However, one important aspect is that Toyotas can only be read by Toyota technicians with specialized readers which is not the case with black boxes manufactured by U.S. car companies. As I review the congressional hearings, there is a theatrical ring about it. The answer is quite simple, “... without integrity nothing stands.”

You can rest assured that the automotive product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily and many other fine lawyers committed to the cause around the United States of America will do their best to ferret out the truth in these matters.

In a letter from the United States Congress Committee on Oversight and Government Reform sent to Mr. Yoshimi Inaba as part of their investigation into Toyota’s handling of vehicle recalls arising from incidents of sudden acceleration, it was revealed that Toyota deliberately withheld relevant electronic records that it was legally required to produce in rollover litigation. Many of these documents concerned rollover cases where the plaintiff was injured or killed. The letter also goes on to note that Mr. Dimitrious Biller, who is managing counsel of the product liability group of Toyota Motor Sales and in a very senior position in which he lead the defense of some of the largest tort cases against Toyota, particularly rollover cases involving seriously injured victims, did not produce all of the requested documents during the litigation process. Biller was concerned with Toyota’s failure to produce electronic documents in litigation. The documents also indicate that Mr. Biller was concerned that Toyota’s interactions with NHTSA would be discovered. Finally the Biller documents shined light on Toyota’s handling of the sudden, unintended acceleration problem.

In summary, the Biller documents and Toyota documents indicate a systematic disregard for the law and a routine violation of court discovery orders in litigation. People injured in crashes involving Toyota vehicles may have been injured a second time when Toyota failed to produce relevant evidence to the court. This also raises very serious questions as to whether Toyota has withheld substantial relevant information from NHTSA.

As experienced product liability lawyers, we have been well aware of Toyota's posturing for many years and their refusal to play fair in the litigation process. We are currently investigating a number of Toyota airbag and sudden acceleration claims.

Since 1979, I have successfully represented injured consumers against major automobile manufacturers on behalf of clients who sustained catastrophic injuries or fatalities as a result of defectively designed cars. Unbelievably, there is not a single government group that has responsibility for assuring the public that cars and trucks are safe similar to the situation as it exists with the Food and Drug Administration or the FAA who extensively test products before they hit the market.

In the last month, Toyota has recalled in excess of 8.5 million cars and evidence reveals that Toyota was well aware of numerous defects in these vehicles for many years as was the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. As a matter of fact, State Farm Insurance Company noted that it warned the federal government about a disturbing trend of vehicle caused accidents involving Toyota Motor Corporation as far back as 2007. The insurer stated that it contacted the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in late 2007 and had been in touch with a regulator an unspecified number of times since then.

Last summer a former Toyota lawyer alleged that Toyota had concealed evidence from courts and from the government in a systematic and ruthless fashion. Toyota’s marketing experts were quite adept at portraying an image of integrity and social conscious with the Prius. Unfortunately, actions speak louder than words and perhaps once and for all the concerted efforts of trial lawyers and the outrage of consumers will be enough to generate support for true and realistic safety regulation in the automobile industry.

This experienced automobile defect lawyer who has fought for clients who have sustained catastrophic injuries or fatalities for many years would like to see a system where vehicles have to pass regular safety tests prior to entering the marketplace and have their designs examined by government regulators with teeth similar to the FDA prior to entry to the marketplace. The car is no different than a new drug being introduced to market for the safety of precious lives.

For many years the experienced automotive product liability lawyers at the Philadelphia-based law firm of Reiff & Bily have successfully investigated and litigated many cases against most of the world’s major automobile manufacturers. As an automotive product liability lawyer familiar with many of the defects in automobiles which cause catastrophic injuries and death, I am often consulted by clients and friends of clients requesting which is the safest car and which company has the most integrity. For years, the Prius was one of the benchmarks of “anti-status” automobile manufacturer integrity. When one thought of Prius, we thought of an automobile manufacturer with a conscious and who had integrity with regard to protecting the environment and an eye looking forward to the future. If one goes to Toyota’s website, it is noted “Toyota’s integrity, passion, and innovation extend beyond their vehicle manufacturing. We also believe in helping people improve the quality of their life and their communities.”

Recently Toyota has been on the offensive noting that the Los Angeles Times published an article that wrongly and unfairly attacks Toyota’s integrity and reputation. While everyone has been quick to point the finger at Toyota’s spiraling problems, trial lawyers, as well as U.S. regulators, have been aware of Toyota’s dragging its feet on safety issues as well as fixing defective gas pedals. While Toyota initially came out and stated that the acceleration problem was due to faulty safety mats, this experienced automotive safety product liability lawyer will state that it’s simply not just about the floor mats. Recently, in August of last year, a former managing counsel for Toyota filed a lawsuit against Toyota alleging that Toyota destroyed evidence in hundreds of automobile product liability lawsuits. The lawsuit claims that Toyota destroyed evidence in a ruthless conspiracy to keep the information secret. So much for integrity.

Reiff & Bily is currently investigating cases of sudden unintended acceleration affecting a large number of Toyota cases. Reiff & Bily investigators and attorneys clearly dispute the argument that this problem was entirely linked to floor mats. Last evening Toyota announced a recall of the Prius for alleged faulty braking issues. With all of the recent recalls and confusion owners of affected Toyotas must consider whether or not the manufacturer is really as trustworthy and full of integrity as they advertise and would like you to believe.

For the last 30 years, the experienced Philadelphia product liability attorneys of Reiff & Bily have been representing catastrophically injured or deceased clients who sustained their injuries as a result of a defectively designed product. Many times the smart manufacturer will issue a voluntary recall of the product. However, many times many corporations make a cost benefit analysis calculating that it is cheaper to litigate a wrongful death or personal injury claim than to recall an entire batch of product line.

As Americans, we would like to think that manufacturers and companies have a high level of responsibility and will communicate with the American public if there is a problem with a manufactured product. We also assume that products that are sold in the marketplace for personal use are safe and expect the company to be forthcoming if a problem is reported. There is not a week that goes by where we are not aware of a product recall and although some companies such as Johnson & Johnson or McNeil Labs have historically reacted quickly whenever there was need for a recall and have even in some cases overreacted by pulling products when they have not caused a problem.

Continue reading "Manufacturers of Defective Products Owe the Public an Obligation to Communicate a Product Recall According To Experienced Philadelphia Products Liability Lawyers" »

The holiday season is over and many of our readers have flocked to the gym and are quick to purchase nutrition supplements, bodybuilding products or over-the-counter weight loss products. In the year 2008, Americans spent $2.7 billion dollars on nutritional supplements, weight loss products, energy bars and muscle mass supplements that make many unsubstantiated promises. The majority of these products go untested by the Food and Drug Administration. Unfortunately there is little or no uniformity or regulation among these products and many times we learn of catastrophic or fatal consequences when it is too late.

As an experienced Pennsylvania product liability attorney who has dealt with some catastrophic side effects of these supplements, I join many doctors and legislatures calling for increased regulation of the fitness supplements.

If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or fatality as a result of using a fitness supplement or any other medication, please feel free to contact one of our experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers for a free no obligation consultation.

The government and window covering industry announced a massive recall involving more than 50 million roman style shades and roll-up blinds due to a high risk of strangulation by the cords. Since 2006, sixteen near strangulations from roman shades and up to three deaths connected to roll-up blinds have been reported.

Salutations to safety advocate Linda Keiser who tragically lost her daughter to a window blind cord and has been steadfast in her efforts to prevent further injuries and harm. Keiser claims that window treatment cords have killed 104 children since 2000 and she has been aggressively pushing to remove them from the market. It is simply not enough to allow a loop to fit over a child’s head with minimal effort resulting in a hanging or strangulation of a child. CPSC informs consumers to immediately stop using the recalled products and asks them to contact the window covering safety council for a free repair kit at 1-800-506-4636 or by visiting www.windowcoverings.org.

If you or a loved one has suffered an injury or fatality due to a defective product, please feel free to contact the experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily for a free no obligation consultation.

Obviously, as news reports indicate, obesity in an increasing problem with Americans today. Approximately 35 to 40 million Americans are estimated to be obese and you cannot watch television for more than an hour without seeing a commercial for one of the latest diet plans. As the diet and exercise business is growing, it is estimated that billions of dollars will be spent this year on diet food products. These diet plans are not for everyone and may present health problems for many. Although the commercials show amazing results and the product seems unbelievably perfect, many of the diets are not scientifically researched and can cause serious health consequences, including but not limited to cardiac dysfunction, changes in lipids and sometimes death. If you are on a diet plan, it is important that you contact your physician and get tested regularly to insure progress and safety.

If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or death as a result of a diet plan, you may want to contact one of our experienced Philadelphia personal injury lawyers for a free consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

As an experienced Philadelphia product liability attorney, I am constantly reading about the latest product recalls and am aware of numerous safety defects with children’s toys and other products that often result in catastrophic injuries and fatalities. When shopping for children’s toys, it is important to consider detachable parts or sharp objects which could harm a child. To determine if a toy or product is safe or has been recalled, one can always visit the Consumer Product Safety website at www.cpsc.gov. If you are using a product that you deem to be unsafe, it is important to report the product to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Recently there was an extensive recall of children’s metal pendants featuring animations of cartoons under the names of “Bleach,” “Death Note,” “Naruto” and “One Piece.” These were sold at toy shops nationwide from November 2008 though March 2009 for between $3 and $4. The items were manufactured in China and according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, they contain high levels of lead which is toxic if ingested by young children.

If you or a loved one has been injured by a defective and unsafe product, please feel free to contact one of the experienced defective product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily for a free no obligation consultation. Reiff & Bily is committed to promoting consumer safety.

The Consumer Product and Safety Commission issued a press release and announced the recall of 2.1 million potentially defective cribs on Monday, November 23, 2009. The Consumer Product Safety Commission indicated that parents should immediately stop using Stork Craft drop side cribs which are manufactured by Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc. of British Columbia. There are approximately 1.2 million of the cribs in distribution in the United States and 968,000 in Canada. The recall also includes 147,000 Stork Craft drop-side cribs with a Fisher-Price logo according to the CPSC. The cribs were sold at major retailers including Sears, Wal-Mart, Amazon.com and Target between January 1993 and October 2009.

According to the CPSC, the cribs’ drop-side is attached with plastic hardware which can detach unexpectedly creating a space between the crib wall and adjacent mattress causing infants and toddlers to become trapped and suffocate or fall to the floor. There have been 110 documented instances of drop-side detachment, including 67 in the U.S. and 43 in Canada, with 4 resulting in suffocation and 20 resulting in falls that caused injuries that range from concussions to bumps and bruises. Last January, the CPSC issued a recall of over 535,000 Stork Craft cribs due to safety concerns.

As an experienced Philadelphia product liability lawyer who has been fighting manufacturers of defective products since 1979, I join the call for stricter regulations and standards on companies manufacturing children’s products, including but not limited to such cribs. Since the beginning of 2007, more than 5 million cribs, bassinets and play yards have been recalled according to CPSC.

The experienced Philadelphia defective product liability lawyers call your attention to the fact that Maclaren USA Inc. has recalled approximately one million strollers sold in the United States over the past decade after receiving reports of children’s fingers being amputated when caught in the stroller’s hinges. Maclaren announced a voluntary recall with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission on Monday, November 9, 2009. CPSC said consumers should immediately stop using the strollers which were made in China unless otherwise instructed. The recall involves all Maclaren single and double umbrella strollers sold in the United States starting in 1999. Maclaren had received 15 reports that children were placing their fingers in the stroller’s hinge mechanism with 12 reported finger amputations in the United States. The incidents occurred while the strollers were being opened or closed and not while the children were seated in the strollers.

Models affected include Volo Triumph, Quest Sport, Quest Mod, Techno XT, Techno XLR, Twin Triump, Twin Techno and Easy Traveler. If you or a loved one has sustained an injury while using a Maclaren stroller or any other defective product, please feel free to contact the experienced defective product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily for a free no obligation consultation.

On September 30, 2009, Judge John T. Ward issued an Order putting a hold on any product liability claim against Toyota. A former Toyota attorney claimed in a lawsuit that Toyota withheld and destroyed evidence regarding rollover accidents. The ex-Toyota attorney noted this summer in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles that Toyota did not heed his urging to disclose all evidence useful for rollover suits or for the National Highway Trade Traffic Safety Administration regulations. Toyota forced him to resign. Judge John T. Ward issued a temporary restraining order against Toyota in the case captioned Lopez, et al. v. Toyota Motor Corporation, et al. The temporary restraining order reads as follows:

It is hereby ordered that defendants Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., Christopher Reynolds, Jane Howard Martin, Eric Taira, and Dian Ogilvie, together with their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and other persons who are in active concert or participation with them with knowledge of this order, shall: 1. Issue litigation holds on all documents in any form pertaining to any make, model or year platform vehicle; 2. Issue litigation holds on all documents in any form pertaining to any non-production vehicle evaluation pertaining to product liability or crashworthiness issues; 3. Issue litigation holds on all documents in any form pertaining to research projects that involve issues related to product liability or crashworthiness issues; 4. Issue litigation holds on all documents that are presently or will be subject to any type of document retention policy; 5. Issue litigation holds on all documentation and all communications sent to outside Counsel, outside experts, or outside contractors. The Court sets a hearing on this matter to show cause why this order should not be converted to a preliminary injunction, for October 7, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. This order shall expire on October 7, 2009 unless extended by the Court for good cause shown. The Court has considered the issue of bond and is persuaded that no bond should be required at this time. Signed by Judge T. John Ward on 9/30/09. (ehs, )

If you or a loved one has been injured as the result of a defective motor vehicle, please contact one of our experienced Philadelphia product liability lawyers for a free no obligation consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

The Pennsylvania defective product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily salute the Toys-R-Us trade in program which hopefully will raise awareness about unsafe children’s products. According to the Chairman of Toys-R-Us, “There have been many significant improvements in consumer product safety legislation in recent years but many of the products out there pre-exist current consumer product safety standards.”

For the last two years millions of baby cribs, toys and other items targeted for child use have been recalled for safety risks that included strangulation, suffocation and entrapment. Unfortunately, despite the recalls a safety advocacy group stated that consumers generally return less than 30% of defective items when a baby product is recalled. Many times they are not aware of the safety recall. Last year, for instance, the Consumer Product Safety Commission reissued an August 2008 recall for approximately 900,000 Simplicity Bassinets because two infants had died after becoming trapped between the product’s bars or in a pocket of fabric. The initial recall was prompted by the deaths of two other children.

The Pennsylvania product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily are advocates of consumer safety. Unfortunately there are many products in the stream of commerce that can affect the safety of your family. If you or a loved one has been seriously injured or killed from the use of a defective product, please contact one of our experienced product liability lawyers for a free no obligation consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

The Pennsylvania defective product lawyers at Reiff & Bily call your attention to a U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announcement involving a voluntary recall of the following consumer products: Maytag, Magic Chef, Performa by Maytag, and Crosely brand refrigerators. Approximately 456,000 additional units recalled. Please note in March 2009, 1.6 million units were recalled. The units are manufactured by the Magtag Corporation of Newton, Iowa and the hazard was noted to be an electrical failure in a relay, the component that turns on the refrigerator’s compressor which can cause overheating and pose a serious fire hazard. According to the US CPSC announcement, Magtag received 23 additional reports of fire relay ignition including four reports of property damage ranging from smoke damage to extensive kitchen damage. The units were sold by department appliance stores and by homebuilders nationwide from September 2000 through May 2004 in the price range of $350 to $1,600.

We recommend that consumers immediately contact Magtag to determine if their refrigerator is included on the recall and if so, to schedule a free in home repair. You can visit Magtag’s website at www.repair.magtag.com.

According to a report filed by The Consumer Product Safety Commission, more than 440 wrongful death and personal injury lawsuits are pending against Yamaha. They further report that Yamaha has settled many other cases. Most of the Yamaha Rhino rollover stem from rollovers in which drivers or passengers were flung through the open door space to the ground and smashed by an 11,000 pound vehicle.

On March 31, 2009. under pressure from The Consumer Products Safety Commission, Yamaha announced a “free repair program” to improve the Rhino’s handling and stability - seemingly a recall in everything but name. Reports revealed that Yamaha began investigating the use of leg protection on the Rhino by early 2006 but did not offer the half doors until August 2007 and a retrofit offer covered 2004 to 2007 Rhinos. Doors are now standard on the 2008 model. In deposition testimony, senior Yamaha engineers stated that they had considered using doors in the first place - then gave a surprising explanation for deciding not to. Doors would create such a feeling of safety, they said, that riders might not wear helmets or seat belts. In a deposition in May 2008, Takanori Suzuki, formerly a project leader for the Rhino, stated even now the only reason to include doors is that “occupants are intentionally sticking their legs out in situations involving aggressive driving and abrupt maneuvers”.

Continue reading "Yamaha Rhino Rollovers Continue to Kill Many Innocent Riders " »

The Pennsylvania product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily salute the FDA’s warning to consumers on Tuesday not to use bodybuilding products that are sold as nutritional supplements as they may contain steroids or steroid-like substances. The FDA cited reports of acute liver injury and kidney failure.

There have been increased reports of medical problems in men who have used such bodybuilding supplements and the FDA alert named 8 specific supplements sold by a single company. However, it did not provide clear guidance to consumers on what other products to avoid. The FDA noted that buyers of these products should be aware of bodybuilding products that claim to enhance or diminish the effects of hormones such as testosterone, estrogen or progestin. The FDA cited 8 popular products from American Cellular Labs, including Mass Xtreme and Tren Xtreme. The agency found them to contain hidden and potentially hazardous steroids.

According to news sources last week federal agents in San Francisco executed search warrants on the company’s San Francisco outlet of Max Muscle, a chain of sports nutrition stores, some of which sold the products cited by the FDA.

If you or a loved one has sustained injuries as a result of consuming nutritional supplements, please feel free to contact the experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily for a no obligation consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

On June 16, 2009, the Food and Drug Administration told the manufacturers of one of the country’s most popular cold medications, Zicam, to stop selling its nasal spray and swabs. In the last 10 years, approximately 130 consumers have filed complaints stating that they permanently lost their sense of smell after using Zicam.

The manufacturers of Zicam, Matrixx Initiatives, has suspended shipments of the products and they claim that the warning is not supported by scientific evidence and is asking the FDA for review. According to the New York Times, the company paid $12 million dollars to settle 340 lawsuits from Zicam users who claim that their product destroyed their sense of smell in 2006 and hundreds more lawsuits have been filed.

The Los Angeles Times reported that the company will be required to receive FDA approval if it wants to market the products in the future. The L.A. Times also reported that the company may have received 800 reports “of anosmia... associated with the use of the products from doctors and consumers, but has failed to report such reports to the FDA.

If you or a loved one has been using Zicam and have experienced any medical problems or have lost your sense of smell, you would be well advised to seek the services of an experienced medical malpractice or products liability lawyer to evaluate your condition and explore your legal options. Reiff & Bily are experienced product liability lawyers who are committed to promoting consumer safety. For a free no obligation consultation, contact us toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

The Pennsylvania product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily are pleased to share breaking news regarding a landmark achievement announced in Washington, D.C. on May 20, 2009. From now on, regulatory preemption of state common law will be strictly limited. Even regulations issued within the past 10 years will have to be reviewed. This represents a major victory for the rights of all Americans under state law and is the culmination of years of tireless and dedicated efforts by the American Association for Justice.

President Obama issued a directive to the heads of all Executive branch departments and agencies stating it is the policy of his Administration that “preemption of state law by Executive departments and agencies should be undertaken only with full consideration of legitimate prerogatives of the states with a sufficient legal basis for preemption.” Preemption of state common law will no longer be presumed or asserted by regulatory agencies absent “explicit preemption by Congress or as otherwise sufficient basis under applicable legal principles.” This is an enormous victory for consumers and injured plaintiffs. Les Weisbrod, President of The American Association of Justice, stated “This victory reflects what we believe the law in reality has always been and how it should always have been applied. This corrects a decade of abuse of the regulatory process and signifies a triumph for states rights and for the legal rights of Americans and their families.”

The experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily thank many of our readers and citizens that have been fighting the preemption fight day in and day out in courtrooms and by writing to their legislators throughout America. It is a great day for the American justice system when the rights of injured consumers are fully recognized and not legislated away in an unconstitutional fashion.

Reiff & Bily are product liability lawyers committed to representing the rights of clients in Pennsylvania and throughout the United States with an association with prominent counsel of clients who were harmed by dangerous or defective products. Consumers have the right to expect that the products they purchase are safe for use or consumption and that their rights to the courtrooms and justice shall not be blocked by the government or corporations. Our experienced product liability attorneys have been able to successfully recover compensation for injuries, pain and suffering, medical expenses and other costs related to a dangerous or defective product. Please contact us at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com to schedule a free consultation with one of our experienced dangerous or defective product lawyers.

The Philadelphia personal injury and insurance claim lawyers at Reiff & Bily call your attention to a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Ace American Insurance Company v. Underwriters at Lloyds and Companies which upheld the importance of enforcing the plain and clear meaning of insurance contract language.

In the case at hand, Ace purchased a claims made and reported policy with Lloyds and the terms specifically stated that Ace must file a report or it must report a claim as soon as practicable and in no event no later than 90 days after the expiration date of the policy. The insurance company denied payment claiming that Ace failed to timely comply with the errors and omissions policy’s specific notice of claim requirements. Ace argued that the insurance company could not be denied a claim based upon late notice unless it could show harm or prejudice.

Claims made insurance policies provide an insurer a clear and certain cutoff date for coverage. In return, the insured typically pays a lower premium. Based on actual data, a claims made policy can be as much as 32% cheaper than an occurrence policy premium according to public records.

Continue reading "The Pennsylvania Supreme Court Renders Important Decision Upholding Denial Of Coverage For Late Notice" »

Philadelphia product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily inform our clients and readers that the U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission reported on May 5, 2009 that Jardine Enterprises is recalling cribs. The cribs are being recalled due to a potential strangulation hazard. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission provided “The wooden slats can break, creating a gap, which can pose an entrapment and strangulation hazard to infants and toddlers”.

This is the third recall that Jardine Enterprises has announced for its wooden cribs. The second recall came early this year in January of 2009 in which three potential models of the crib were cited as being a child safety hazard due the potential for strangulation. The U.S. Consumer and Product Safety Commission has requested that consumers stop using the cribs immediately and contact Jardine Enterprises to obtain instructions on how to receive full credit towards the purchase of a new crib.

The Philadelphia product liability law firm of Reiff & Bily has been representing clients in Pennsylvania who were harmed by defective products. Consumers have the right to expect that the products they purchase are safe for use or consumption. Faulty or dangerous products such as those recalled can cause serious injuries or kill innocent victims.

If you or a loved one was injured by a defective product, Reiff & Bily can investigate what caused your injuries and which parties were responsible under Pennsylvania law. Call the experienced product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily at 1-800-421-9595 or contact us online at www.reiffandbily.com to schedule a free consultation with one of our experienced defective product lawyers.

As many of you may or may not be aware, on May 1, 2009 the Food and Drug Administration advised people to immediately stop using the dietary supplement Hydroxycut which is linked to serious liver injuries and death. In its warning, the FDA identified 23 reports of Hydroxycut causing liver damage. The maker of Hydroxycut has also agreed to recall all Hydroxycut products. FDA recall notice.

Hydroxycut products are manufactured by Iovate Health Sciences Inc. of Ontario, Canada and distributed in the U.S. by Iovate Health Sciences USA near Buffalo, NY and is used by people trying to lose weight, as well as by bodybuilders looking to tone muscles. Because Hydroxycut is a dietary supplement it can be purchased in most grocery stores, health food stores and pharmacies. Hydroxycut products are heavily used as reports indicate that there were 9 million units sold in the United States in the last year.

We are investigating all Hydroxycut claims and reviewing cases where there has been liver failure, liver transplant or death from liver failure. Please feel free to contact the Reiff & Bily with any questions or concerns at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

The Philadelphia catastrophic personal injury law firm of Reiff & Bily is pleased to announce that Andrew A. Solomon has recently joined our firm. Mr. Solomon has extensive experience representing plaintiffs in complex medical/professional negligence, products liability, civil rights and complex personal injury matters throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania since 1976. His practice has associated him with Marshall Bernstein, Esquire, Lawrence Evans Grant, Esquire, Thomas B. Rutter, Esquire, Andrew E. DiPiero, Esquire, John Dodig, Past President of The Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Association.

Mr. Solomon has tried numerous complex personal injury cases to significant verdict.

The Philadelphia SUV rollover and 15-passenger van rollover lawyers of Reiff & Bily have been blogging for months about the unsafe qualities of the Yamaha Rhino. The Yamaha Rhino has been prone to rollover from the first day it was sold.

We have learned today that the Consumer Product Safety Commission and Yamaha has finally issued a recall for thousands of Rhino 450 and 660 off-road vehicles. Yamaha has stopped selling the vehicles until they can repair them and has officially informed owners that they should stop using them until they can be repaired. The CPSC has investigated more than 50 incidents, including 46 deaths, involving the two models in rollover unbelted incidents. We have consistently stated that the Yamaha Rhino is one of the most dangerous vehicles manufactured and in use. We are grateful that the probe by the Consumer Products Safety Commission resulted in this definitive action which will hopefully save many more lives and avoid many more catastrophic injuries. We are well aware of many accidents which indicated that the design of the Yamaha Rhino poses a substantial risk of injury and death to unknowing consumers. According to many complaints filed and expert opinions, the Yamaha Rhino is prone to rollover even while operating on slow speeds and flat surfaces due to its high center of gravity and narrow wheel base combined with powerful engine and small turning radius.

The Philadelphia product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily has achieved a national reputation in the area of product liability and rollover accidents and in recognition of their accomplishments, Jeffrey Reiff and Raymond Bily have been named Superlawyers for six consecutive years by Law and Politics Magazine and Philadelphia Magazine. If you have any questions or concerns regarding a Yamaha Rhino rollover, you can contact an experienced Philadelphia rollover attorney at Reiff & Bily by calling toll free at 1-800-421-9595 or by submitting the firm’s online free case consultation form at www.reiffandbily.com.

A recent recall notes that approximately 29,000 baby necessities pacifiers manufactured in China and imported by OKK Trading of Los Angeles, California has been recalled because they failed Federal safety tests. The nipples can separate from the base and pose a choking hazard to infants. Although no incidents have been reported, these pacifiers which sold at dollar and discount stores around the United States between August 2007 and January 2009. More details are available by phone at 877-655-8697 and on the web at http://www.okktrading.com or http://www.cpsc.gov.

If you or a loved one has been injured due to a defective product, please contact the Philadelphia product liability lawyers at the law firm of Reiff & Bily at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

The Pennsylvania product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily alert you in conjunction with the United States Consumer Products Safety Commission in cooperation with Fisher-Price that a voluntary recall has been made of 3-in-1 high chairs manufactured by Fisher-Price. The product is 3-in-1 highchairs. Approximately 24,000 units are involved in the recall. The importer is Fisher-Price of East Aurora, New York. The noted hazard is that the seat can fall backwards from the highchair frame if the booster seat release is unlatched while the child is in the product. Also, the seat back can detach if not fully snapped in place posing a fall hazard and risk to young children. Reports of seat back detachment and child falling out resulted in a skull fracture according to sources. This product was sold exclusively at Target department stores nationwide from December 8, 2008 through March, 2009 for approximately $100. Consumers should stop using the recalled high chairs immediately and contact Fisher-Price for instructions and a free repair kit at 1-800-432-5437 anytime or visit the firm’s Web site at http://service.mattel.com/us.

If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of a defective product, please contact one of our Philadelphia product liability lawyers at the law firm of Reiff & Bily for a free evaluation of your case at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

A trailer carrying a thoroughbred race horse named Top Glory cruised out of control on Interstate 75 the other day, crashing through signs and tipping on its side with a thoroughbred horse named Top Glory inside. Just like many other similar defective trailer accidents, this horse trailer came unhinged from the vehicle towing it and brought the horse along for the ride.

As this Philadelphia defective trailer attorney has previously written, many state codes are overtly silent as to the design or construction specifications for trailers or for towing chains and hitches under 3,000 lbs. In fact, trailers just under 3,000 lbs. are not regulated in most states. The utility trailer industry and their prideful lobby has continued to stop any attempts to improve this class of trailer in all 50 states and has prevented the enactment of a federal standard on trailer hitches. Many of us have seen that trailers have a sway phenomenon when excessive speed is used on highways. Quite simply, many of these trailers are just accidents waiting to happen. On a regular basis, we are aware of trailer accidents where individuals are catastrophically injured or killed.

If you or a loved one has been involved in an accident involving a disconnected or defective trailer, or for that matter, a trailer being towed, please contact the defective trailer lawyers at the Philadelphia defective trailer law firm of Reiff & Bily at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

A Missouri woman who sustained serious head injuries when a towing coupler came apart from a large homemade house trailer that crashed head on into her car successfully won $8.6 million dollars against the manufacturer of the towing coupler. The jury determined that the Dutton-Lainson Company of Hastings, Nebraska knew about the defect in the coupler but did not correct it or issue a warning about it. The victim sustained serious head injuries when the coupler came apart on Illinois Route 143 in April 1997. The significant $8.6 million dollar damage verdict was broken down as $5 million dollars in punitive damages against Dutton-Lainson, $3.6 million dollars in natural damages against the companies and firm whose employees were towing the trailer. Dutton-Lainson’s attorney stated that the company will make all attempts to reverse the verdict.

The defective trailer lawyers at the Philadelphia defective trailer accident law firm of Reiff & Bily have long warned that in many states, including the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, very minimal regulation exists with regard to trailers and their coupling devices. Many state laws, including Pennsylvania, are silent as to design or construction specifications for towed vehicles or for towing chains or hitches. All too often there are many safety violations and product defects that ultimately lead to catastrophic injuries and fatalities. There is no Federal law, national agency, or Pennsylvania law that requires reporting or regulation of defective trailer coupler accidents.

Continue reading "Jury Awards Woman $8.6 Million Dollars Against The Manufacturer Of An Allegedly Defective Towing Coupler Manufactured By Dutton-Lainson Company of Hastings, Nebraska" »

The Philadelphia Product Liability law firm of Reiff & Bily wishes to inform you that the Consumer Product Safety Commission Office of Information and Public Affairs has recalled 56,450 Jardine cribs manufactured in China by Jardine Enterprises of Taipei, Taiwan due to the fact that wooden slats can break and create a gap that can entrap or strangle a child. This is an expansion of a previous recall of Jardine Enterprise cribs where it was noted that wooden slats and spindles would break, trap, and strangle infants. Owners of Jardine cribs should check both the first and second recall notices to see if their crib is affected by the recall. The cribs were sold at Kids World, Geoffrey Stores, Toy R Us, Babies R Us and other stores nationwide. Jardine is recalling the Berkley, Capri, Hilton, Olympia, Positano, Spindle and Windsor cribs. These potentially unsafe cribs were sold nationwide from January 2002 through January 2009 for between $220 and $330.

There has been a rash of recent recalls of products manufactured in China posing the ethical question - Are we placing the health, well being and safety of our children to save a few dollars and maximize profits by manufacturers? The recent recall seems to indicate that products manufactured in China are not being manufactured with the same quality standards as those manufactured in the United States even though the average purchaser would assume they had the same standards.

Recently, another recall of over 19 million of Mattel Corporation toys that were imported from China and contained excessive amounts of lead paint causing potential catastrophic injuries and fatalities to young children.

While we would like to think that most of the products manufactured for children in this country as well as abroad are safe, many are not as evidenced by the numerous CPSC recalls.

If you or someone you care about has been injured or killed by a defective or unsafe product, toy, or crib, please contact the product liability lawyers of Reiff & Bily today at 1-800-421-9595 for a free evaluation of your case. Since 1979 we have committed our efforts to protecting injured consumers and promoting consumer safety. For more information, please feel free to browse our website at www.reiffandbily.com.

The Philadelphia product liability lawyers at Reiff & Bily advise you that a voluntary and precautionary recall program has been launched by the United States Consumer Products Safety Commission in cooperation with Atomic Skis GMBH of Austria for Atomic ski bindings that were produced between the years 1998 and 2002. Atomic has noted on its own website that the heel housing component of these bindings could crack, possibly causing the binding to release early posing a falling risk to the skier. Therefore, these bindings must no longer be used.

The models affected include Atomic Race, Xentrix, Device, Centro, and Dynamic. These models were sold by Atomic dealers from 1998 through 2005 for between $150 and $350. It is important to note that skiers are advised by OHS and Atomic to stop using these bindings immediately and return them to an authorized Atomic dealer. The dealer will inspect your bindings for free and will replace the heel component if necessary.

If you or a loved has been injured because of a defective product, please call the Philadelphia product liability law firm of Reiff & Bily for a free consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

On December 18, 2008 Evenflo, a manufacturer of infant products including highchairs, recalled approximately 95,000 Majestic highchairs due to fall and choking hazards. According to the recall notice, Evenflo Company of Miamisburg, Ohio noted that plastic caps and metal screws on both sides of the highchair could loosen and fall out causing fall and choking hazards for children. Plastic caps and screws that become loose and fall out can cause a seatback to suddenly fall back or detach from the highchair. Children can fall out or collide with objects and suffer broken bones, abrasions, cuts and bruises. The detached plastic components also pose a choking hazard to children. Evenflo received approximately 140 reports of seatbacks reclining, falling back or detaching unexpectedly and also received over more than 1,000 reports of plastic caps and screws falling out of the highchairs, including seven incidents in which caps and screws were found in children’s hands or mouth but were removed before choking.

Continue reading "Is Your Baby’s Highchair Safe?" »

The year 2007 was a banner year for defective toys and children’s objects, which unfortunately caused catastrophic injuries and death to many unsuspecting recipients. Although millions of toys were pulled from store shelves, it was too late to prevent catastrophic injuries to many children.

Continue reading "‘Tis The Season To Watch For Dangerous Toys and Gifts" »

I have been a practicing personal injury and product liability attorney at Reiff & Bily since 1979. The tenure of President George Bush will be remembered for a extremely conservative and far right movement of the Judiciary. The Judicial system saw appointments of judges with interests broadly sympathetic to financial institutions, pharmaceutical companies and the oil industry narrowly interpreting federally mandated guidelines. The rights of consumers and individuals took a back seat to greedy corporate interests. Injured consumer’s pathways to the courts were blocked at every juncture by federal challenges overriding state laws and individuals rights. Corporate rights and profits superceded individual rights and safety. The landslide victory for President-elect Obama recognizes that voters have had enough and believe that Obama will make the judiciary a high priority because he taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago and his running mate, Senator Joe Biden formerly chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Continue reading "Philadelphia Product Liability Lawyer Hopes and Has Reason to Believe That President-elect Obama Will Reshape Federal Judiciary" »

For many years, the 15-passenger van accident and SUV rollover lawyers at Reiff & Bily have been representing passengers that have been catastrophically injured or killed while being transported in 15 passenger vans that have flipped over. The rollover risk posed by 15 passenger vans, including those predominantly used by church groups, school groups and other unsuspecting individuals, is the most dangerous on the road today. 15 passenger vans started out as cargo utility vehicles in the early 1970's and is still essentially a cargo van with modifications made to accommodate passengers. If a 15 passenger van is fully loaded it is 6 to 7 times more likely to flip over than a van containing only a driver. As a matter of fact, NHTSA has noted that fully loaded 15 passenger vans are more likely to rollover than any other passenger type of vehicle, including cars, mini vans, SUVs and pickup trucks.

Internal documents by the major automotive manufacturers, including but not limited to Ford, Chrysler and GM, revealed that the companies were and still are well aware of safety and deficiencies with the 15-passenger van. However, the manufacturing of these passenger vehicles and the transition from cargo to passenger vans became too profitable and the automobile manufacturers have made a consistent effort to place profitability over consumer safety. Documentation of testing data indicates that the engineers who designed these cars knew they were unsafe and suggested necessary fixes to protect innocent and unsuspecting consumers. Initially in April 2001, NHTSA issued a report on the rollover propensity of 15-passenger vans. It is significant that NHTSA had never done this for any other vehicle and during that time period there had been approximately 800 fatalities.

Continue reading "The Vehicle Most Likely to Rollover, Injure And Kill Innocent Children and Churchgoers Is The 15-Passenger Van - 15- Passenger Van Lawyer Warns Consumers" »

Government Investigates "Rhino Rollover” Virus

Yamaha promises its Rhino goes "almost anywhere" referring to its new breed of Utility Terrain Vehicle or U.T.V.'s. What the ad fails to mention is that federal safety regulators are investigating the safety of this vehicle following reports of approximately 30 deaths including two young girls last month. Yamaha Rhino Rollovers

According to a recently published article in The Wall Street Journal on November 4, 2008 Yamaha currently faces more than 200 lawsuits in State and Federal courts alleging that Rhino design is unsafe. (Wall Street Journal article)

Due to their unique design, Rhinos are not subject to the safety standards of all terrain vehicle (ATV's) or even more stringent car safety standards. The Yamaha Rhino ATV is alleged to be unstable during normal operating maneuvers at low to moderate speeds and turning on level ground.

Characteristically, low speed turns lead to sudden rollovers causing the occupants' arms and legs to be crushed by the roll cage as the vehicle slams to the ground.

The Philadelphia SUV rollover firm of Reiff & Bily has represented individuals across the United States who have suffered injuries in SUV and ATV rollovers. If you or anyone you know has been injured in a Yamaha Rhino accident, please contact the ATV and SUV rollover firm of Reiff & Bily for a free consultation at 1- 800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com and we will promptly review your case and assist you in recovering damages for pain and suffering along with both future and past medical expenses without fee or obligation to you.

Philadelphia Amusement and Hayride Accident Lawyers of Reiff & Bily Salute Ron Melancon and dangeroustrailers.org

Ron has been a step ahead of government officials and many lawyers. Ron has recognized that many trailers used for hayrides and other utilities are under 3,000 lbs. and fall below federal guidelines. These trailers do not need to be inspected. You can build one on your own and use it yourself or sell it. As Ron has recognized, there is very little regulation addressed with trailers under 3,000 lbs. Most state laws are silent regarding design or construction specification for utility trailers used in hayrides or for towing hitches. Obviously, a potentially dangerous situation exists using these trailers for hayrides or even on the roads of the Commonwealth. In many cases, we find trailers have obvious violations of safety codes that related to lighting, braking and inspection requirements.

The unregulation of the hayride and trailer obviously allows profit hungry operators to cut corners on safety, often leading to preventable catastrophic injuries of innocent children.

We urge you to link to Ron’s website at www.dangeroustrailers.org. We salute Ron’s efforts to become a crusader for public safety and in his attempts to keep the public informed of the dangerous situations of unregulated trailers and hayrides in the United States and abroad. Consumer advocacy is what change in laws and regulations is all about.

Continue reading "The Dangerous Trailer and Hayride Injury Lawyers of Reiff & Bily Proudly Salute the Efforts of Ron J. Melancon of Richmond, Virginia" »

Jeffrey Reiff, a Pennsylvania Product Liability Attorney, expresses concern that federal agencies are blocking the roadway to justice.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA), The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and The Transportation Safety Authority (TSA) have all broken with long-standing agency precedents, claiming authority to provide immunity from state laws. Many members of Congress, and this Philadelphia personal injury lawyer, believe that the agencies have overstepped their constitutional bounds.

A recent report issued by The American Association of Justice entitled “Get Out of Jail Free: How the Bush Administration Helps Corporations Escape Accountability” spotlights efforts by the Bush administration and several federal agencies headed by political appointees to negate the effect of state laws that protect consumers and injured workers, in effect granting immunity to irresponsible corporations. Since the Bush administration first came into power, there has been an unprecedented attack on trial lawyers and those who protect the rights of injured consumers. By pushing to allow complete immunity from lawsuits for corporations, whether through legislation or agency rule, the American public pays. Injured persons will not receive restitution from greedy corporations who sold unsafe products or the federal agencies that cut off their rights. Ultimately, industry will get immunity from state tort claims and the states and their taxpayers will be forced to pick up the hundreds of millions, or billions, of dollars a year in costs to support those who become permanently disabled and no longer have recourse via the courts to recoup their expenses.

Continue reading "Pennsylvania Defective Product Laws Jeopardized By Federal Agencies" »

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 " »

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" »

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)" »

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" »

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 & 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.

Approximately three weeks ago, I was contacted by clients who allegedly sustained catastrophic injuries. When I initially went to meet the clients, he and his wife provided me with convincingly and tearful recollections of a catastrophic accident in which they were allegedly passengers in a commercial transportation vehicle operated by another commercial vendor that was allegedly struck broadside, rolled over, and ejected the passengers, the result being multiple internal injuries, broken bones, scarring and extensive hospitalization. The initial meeting was quite emotional as the alleged clients were tearful, with other family members attempting to calm them down. The next day I went to my office and met with our staff and investigators and over the process of the next 24 hours learned that these clients were, in fact, imposters attempting to secure financial benefits for themselves by attempting to defraud our office, financial institutions, and potentially an insurance carrier. As we continued to investigate the matter, we also learned that these individuals had contacted other law firms in the same manner.

At the Philadelphia personal injury law firm of Reiff & Bily, we are committed to representing honest clients and cautiously practice law with the motto that today’s best client can be tomorrow’s worst enemy. The dangers posed to lawyers and law firms representing dishonest clients are clear. Often, we read news reports or allegations whereupon law firms are cited for aiding and abetting the dishonest clients’ fraud or misconduct therefore harming other innocent third parties. Not surprisingly, the Insurance Information Institute has estimated that insurance fraud accounts for 10% of property/casualty insurance industry’s incurred loss and loss adjustment expenses of about $30 billion dollars a year. Common frauds include padding or inflating actual claims, misrepresenting facts on insurance applications, submitting claims for injuries or damages that never occurred, and staging accidents.

The National Insurance Crime Bureau has identified ten cities with the highest numbers of staged auto accidents. One of the many types of staged accidents involves a vehicle that is positioned in front of an unsuspecting motorist with a sudden application of brakes causing a rear-end crash.

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is the number 5 city in the United States with the highest rate of automobile insurance fraud. Just as many alleged clients attempt to commit fraud, unfortunately, so too is the case with many lawyers or healthcare providers. In any profession, there is occasionally a member who is dishonest. Although not all professions or industries protect victims of their dishonest members, the legal profession has generally offered financial protection to members of the public whose money has been stolen by their lawyer or whose lawyer has committed a fraud.

Continue reading "THE DISHONEST CLIENT - A LAWYER’S BIGGEST NIGHTMARE" »

PHILADELPHIA INSURANCE CLAIMS LAWYER, JEFFREY REIFF, SPEAKS OUT

Over the past few weeks, many Americans learned about the AIG insurance crisis and the lawyers and staff at the Pennsylvania insurance claims law firm of Reiff & Bily received many phone calls from insurance agents, clients and other concerned Pennsylvania citizens. It appears that there is more trouble on the horizon for the beleaguered insurance industry and potentially a number of Pennsylvania citizens may be affected. According to a recent article in Investment News, the benefits of 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. Conseco, an Indiana-based insurance company, without notice to policyholders decided to move 144,000 long term care policies in a trust that may have devastating consequences for senior care citizens. Earlier this year, the Pennsylvania Insurance Department found that Conseco had violated insurance claims handling practices and fined the company $32.3 million dollars. Acting Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner, Joel Ario, defined the bulk of the fines as “restitution to consumers who were harmed”. Conseco reported a second quarter loss of $487.1 million dollars or $2.64 at diluted share. Conseco also disclosed recently that it held $103 million in securities with American International Group and Lehman Brothers Holdings, both in New York and Washington Mutual in Seattle. (Investment News article)

Bensalem, Pennsylvania-based Conseco Senior is a subsidiary of Conseco Inc. of Carmel, Indiana and according to industry critics is a victim of its own underwriting, signing on more policyholders than it could afford, leading to the creation of the trust. According to the Investment News article written by Darla Mercado, Frank Darras, managing partner of Shernoff Bidart Darras & Echeverria LLP of Claremont, California, stated “This product is oversold, underpriced and poorly performing because they underwrote everybody. These policyholders will either lapse on their payments or the unhealthy people will be so ill that there won’t be enough premiums to keep the trust going.” A spike in premium rates could force healthy policyholders to terminate their LTC insurance with Conseco Senior leaving the unhealthy with coverage that is so costly that the premiums approach the cost of the claim for each contract, according to Philip J. Bieluch an Avon, Connecticut insurance consultant at Insurance Strategies Consulting LLC.

Continue reading "YET ANOTHER TROUBLED INSURANCE CARRIER IS PLANNING TO MOVE ITS POLICIES INTO AN INDEPENDENT TRUST - HOW THIS WILL AFFECT PENNSYLVANIA POLICYHOLDERS" »

The Virginia based Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute determined that 13 booster seats failed to properly position and protect children during a crash.

The Institute which conducts crash studies of new vehicles did not recommend the following seats:

Compass B505
Compass B510
Cosco/Dorel Traveler
Evenflo Big Kid Confidence
Safety Angel Ride Ryte
Cosco/Dorel Alpha Omega
Cosco/Dorel (Eddie Bauer) Summit
Cosco Highback Booster
Dorel/Safety 1st (Eddie Bauer) Prospect
Evenflo Chase Comfort Touch
Evenflo Generations
Graco CarGo Zephyr
Safety 1st/Dorel Intera

IIHS President, Adrian Lund, said that the 13 boosters “may increase restraint use by making children more comfortable but they don’t position belts for optimal protection”. Evenflo released a statement stating that it conducts extensive tests and that IIHS study was “misleading as it fails to consider the real world use and performance of seats tested”. Evenflo further remarked that they had sold more than 4 million units of the seats studied by the Institute and “we are not aware of a single incident in which a child was injured as the result of improper fit”. Other child seat manufacturers noted that their products meet or exceeded Federal regulations. Dorel Juvenile Group stated “it welcomes the opportunity to review the evaluation conducted by the IIHS”. Graco Children’s Products stated in a statement that “safety is always a top priority and nothing is more important than the well being of the children that use their products”.

Continue reading "13 CHILD BOOSTER SEATS RECEIVE A POOR RATING ACCORDING TO REVIEW BY THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY AND RESEARCHERS - PHILADELPHIA DEFECTIVE CHILD SEAT ATTORNEY, JEFFREY REIFF, WEIGHS IN" »

Physically unharmed plaintiffs may still collect emotional distress damages in strict product liability cases the Pennsylvania Superior has ruled in a case of first impression. A three judge panel voted 2 to 1, with Judge Orie Melvin concurring and dissenting, to uphold a $4.5 million dollar jury verdict in favor of two people, one of whom was killed and the other was seriously injured by a flying fire hose and to three close relatives who witnessed the accident but sustained no physical injury. Defendants argued that Pennsylvania law does not recognize awards for emotional distress under a theory of strict liability and also argued that under Pennsylvania law negligent concepts are “distinct from the product liability doctrine”.

A majority in Schmidt v. Boardman, led by Judge Cheryl Allan, called those arguments meritless. “We conclude that in Pennsylvania, a bystander-plaintiff who witnesses injury to a close relative can recover emotional distress damages when the injured person’s underlying cause of action is based on strict product liability rather than negligence” wrote Judge Cheryl Allan. Judge Allan was joined by John T. Bender. Attorney Arnd N. von Waldow of Reed, Smith in Pittsburgh, who was handling the appeal for defendant-manufacturer, said that he and his clients were planning to appeal the ruling and that this decision will not be the last word. For information on this case and the ruling, please see Schmidt v. Boardman Company, 2008 PA Super 203 (Pa.Super.CT. 9/2/2008). (opinion)

Continue reading "EMOTIONAL DISTRESS DAMAGES OKAYED IN PRODUCTS LIABILITY CASES SAYS THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE SUPERIOR COURT IN A CASE OF FIRST IMPRESSION" »

According the Wall Street Journal, Federal Regulators have turned to retailers to conduct two huge recalls of potentially dangerous cribs and bassinets. This is an unusual request highlighting gaps in a recall system based on voluntary action by manufacturers and has lead all marked stores and other retailers to get tough with a Reading, Pennsylvania company. According the Wall Street Journal, recalls of the Simplicity brand of children products from last month of 900,000 convertible bassinets and another on Wednesday of 600,000 cribs have saddled retailers with headaches and expenses and halting product sales and issuing customer refunds. Many retailers are seeking compensation from the new owner of the Simplicity brand, SFCA, Inc. of Reading, PA, which bought the assets and brand of Simplicity Inc. at a public auction in April, after the company went out of business the month before. SFCA says it is not liable for products made before the acquisition and has refused to conduct a recall of the defective goods which have been linked to several infant deaths. SFCA still argues that although it is not liable for the recalled products, it says “it values its good relationship with its retail customers” and is “working in close cooperation with retailers to help facilitate all aspects of the recall”. Initially after removing all Simplicity bassinets from its 3,500 stores and its website, WalMart said it has returned to its store shelves the models deemed safe and still carries Simplicity products that are made by the defunct manufacturer. For more information on this story, please link to the Wall Street Journal article. (Wall Street Journal article)

Continue reading "FEDERAL REGULATORS HAVE TURNED TO RETAILERS TO CONDUCT TWO HUGE RECALLS OF POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS CRIBS AND BASSINETS - RETAILERS ARE SEEKING COMPENSATION FROM A READING, PA COMPANY - PHILADELPHIA PRODUCTS LIABILITY LAWYER, JEFFREY REIFF, EXPLORES LOOPHOLE" »

PHILADELPHIA DEFECTIVE CHILD SEAT ATTORNEY ADVISES PARENTS ON OTHER POTENTIAL SEAT DEFECTS AND HOW TO FURTHER PROTECT YOUR CHILD.

Over an 8 year period from 1999 to 2007 researchers noted that overall child restraint use increased from 51% to 81% in children younger than 9. During the same period, age appropriate restraint use, including booster seats among children 4 to 8 years old quadrupled from 15% in 1999 to 63% in 2007. Research indicates that for 4 to 8 year-olds booster seat and proper child seat usage reduces the risk of injury in a crash by 59%. Booster seats elevate a child’s small body to insure proper seat belt fit, better protecting them in the case of a crash. Kristy Arbogast, Ph.D., the Director of Engineering at The CHOP Center for Injury Research and Prevention where a long-term study was conducted stated “Along with the increase we see in the number of kids riding in child restraints, we can also see changes in the types of restraints they are using now versus 10 years ago. More 4 and 5-year olds are riding in booster seats now, rather than car seats with built in harnesses, with slightly more of them in high back booster seats than backless. But among the 6 through 8 year olds, backless booster seats are far more prevalent than high back booster seats”.

When you place your child or infant in a safety seat, you expect and trust the manufacturer has designed a safe seat that will protect your child in the case of an accident. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Once again, often we find that many manufacturers place profits over safety and design child safety seats according to Federal standards, which are really minimum standards. Often there are design defects that are not revealed during testing and many times, testing is not done or when it is done is done under real world conditions testing of the seats. Effectively designed child seats have lead to many injuries and deaths which were easily preventable. When the child’s seat does not operate properly, its ineffectiveness can be more dangerous than failing to use the seat itself in that it can cause additional injuries for the child or fail to protect the child from serious harm or death.

Continue reading "CHILD BOOSTER SEAT AND RESTRAINT USE IN THE UNITED STATES IS HIGHER THAN EVER ACCORDING TO A REPORT RELEASED ON SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 BY CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA (CHOP) AND THE ASSOCIATION FOR AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS (AIAM)" »

Pennsylvania Product Liability Lawyer Filing Lawsuits Against Foreign Manufacturers Whose Products Injure Local People
by Raymond M. Bily, Esquire

Foreign manufacturers of defective products can be sued in state or federal courts but doing so sometimes presents special challenges. Foreign auto makers, industrial product manufacturers, and consumer product makers and their intermediaries are not beyond the reach of U.S. courts if they put defective products into the stream of commerce. A manufacturer who has offices or advertises in a state generally has sufficient contact to be sued in state courts. Less clear is when a product is manufactured overseas and comes into a state indirectly. Courts generally inquire whether the manufacturer had some knowledge or expectation that the product would be purchased by consumers in the particular state.

Assuming jurisdiction is proper, a more difficult problem can involve service of process. Foreign corporations are savvy litigants. They understand that mere distance alone can be used to create the perception that injured consumers will have a very difficult time pursuing them in U.S. courts.

Continue reading "Filing Lawsuits Against Foreign Manufacturers" »

The dictionary defines "hope" as the belief in a positive outcome relating to the events and circumstances in one's life. Hope implies a certain amount of despair; wanting, wishing, suffering or perseverance, believing that a better or positive outcome is possible even when there is some evidence leading to the contrary.

The term "false hope" refers to hope highly based on fantasy or an extremely unlikely outcome.

At the law firm of Reiff & Bily, our lawyers understand and respect the value of hope. It is our job to communicate the plaintiffs dreams and hopes to the insurance companies and ultimately to the juries who hear our cases. It is our job to prove that what the plaintiff is capable of doing or was capable of doing prior to an incident and identify the compensation necessary for the plaintiff to recognize the fulfillment of his dreams and goals. The lawyers of Reiff & Bily are not afraid to ask the insurance companies or juries to fully compensate plaintiffs for the loss of their dreams and hopes.

Hope was personified in Greek mythology as "Elpis". When Pandora opened Pandora's box, she let out all of the evils except one known as hope.

In law, damages refer to the money awarded to a claimant, also known as a plaintiff, following a successful claim in a civil action. Damages in personal injury or tort affairs are generally awarded to place the plaintiff in a position that he or she would not have been in had the tort or action not have taken place which put the person in the situation. Compensatory damages compensates the plaintiff for pain and suffering and loss of amenities and losses of hope. Examples of this include physical or emotional pain and suffering, loss of companionship, loss of consortium, disfigurement, loss of reputation, loss or impairment of mental or physical capacity, loss of life's pleasures, frustration, humiliation, degradation, and a non-inclusive list of other factors. This is not easily quantifiable and depends on the individual circumstances. We refer to it as, what is the value of hope? What is the value of the loss of a plaintiff’s loss of dreams and hopes that he had prior to the incident? We seek to recover full compensatory damages generally to place the plaintiff in a position in which he would have been had the offense or tort not taken place.

Continue reading "My Pennsylvania Personal Injury Attorney Reinforced the Value of Hope" »

On January 19, 2002, Benetta Buell-Wilson of San Diego, California was driving her 1997 Ford Explorer on an interstate highway when she swerved to avoid a metal object in the road and the SUV went out of control. The vehicle skidded across the highway and rolled more than 4 ½ times when the Explorer came to rest on its roof. The accident left the 49 year old woman crushed and paralyzed. A California jury awarded Buell-Wilson and her husband $369,000,000, including $246,000,000 in punitive damages. The state courts of California reduced the amount of the verdict. However, the California Court of Appeals approved an $82.6 million dollar settlement, including $55 million in punitive damages.

The experienced Philadelphia motor vehicle accident and personal injury lawyers at the law firm of Reiff & Bily have been handling SUV Explorer rollover and 15 passenger van rollover cases in Pennsylvania and other states in the nation with a successful track record. The Explorer and other SUV’s are flawed because they have a higher center of gravity and are prone to rollover. Also, research indicates that the Explorer roofs are inadequate to protect occupants in a rollover accident and Ford was aware of knowledge of these designs flaws but failed to fix them. Ford has consistently argued that the verdicts against them are unjust because the design of the vehicles meets minimal federal safety standards.

On February 8, 2008, the Ford Motor Company paid $6.5 million dollars to a 41 year old man left brain damaged in a 2004 rollover accident involving an Explorer sport utility vehicle that a Texas jury ordered them to pay. In that claim, Ruben Camora lost control of his 1993 Explorer when a tire lost its tread and he was ejected from the vehicle as it rolled over. His mother, who sued on his behalf, noted that the tread separation set off vibrations on the rear of the vehicle that caused it to skate sideways because of a defect in the SUV’s suspension.

Continue reading "PENNSYLVANIA SUV ROLLOVER LAWYER WEIGHS IN ON DESIGN DEFECTS INHERENT TO SUVs AND I5 PASSENGER VANS IN PENNSYLVANIA AND THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES" »

The high cost of litigation is ever increasing and these hired guns are out of control. Are they worth the money?

The costs associated with personal injury lawsuits are quite significant and rising every day. Many state that the overhead costs of malpractice and product liability lawyer litigation are exorbitant. Many Americans hear that lawsuits are rampant and frivolous, clogging the courts and depriving taxpayers of their funds. On the other hand, honest plaintiff attorneys maintain that they are the policemen of society and that frivolous lawsuits are an exception. Obviously, an experienced personal injury or product liability lawyer would have to be crazy to take a meritless claim which would result in a huge expenditure if the same attorney is working on a contingent fee basis.

The purpose of the tort system is to fairly compensate victims and make them whole by virtue of compensatory damages. Obviously, there are some lawyers who will take just about any case that walks into the door and hope that writing a few threatening letters or taking minimal action will scare their opponents into a quick and “easy A” settlement These are the types of lawyers the educated consumer should avoid. It is important, however, when seeking a lawyer to represent your interests, to remember that you get one bite at the apple and your lawyer should be qualified, insured, in good standing with the bar association, interested in your claim, screened for suitability and experience handling legal matters such as yours. The lawyers at the Pennsylvania personal injury firm of Reiff & Bily have 30 years experience handling thousands of carefully screened car accident, medical malpractice and defective products cases. They will carefully screen your case, investigate comprehensively and decide if it is worthwhile to pursue without wasting your time or their resources - as a result of such careful screening. They only accept approximately 30-40 percent of the clients that contact them. These distinguished Pennsylvania car accident attorneys have recovered in excess of 150 million dollars for their clients solely on a contingent basis.

Continue reading "Pennsylvania Personal Injury Attorney Weighs in on Expert Witnesses" »

There could be danger lurking in your own home or backyard. Injuries to children can occur anywhere. They can happen in your house, backyard, school, day care facility, or even in a public park. While it is seemingly impossible to keep a child protected all times, it is important for parents and children to become aware of the dangers that lurk in play grounds and toys. The Pennsylvania personal injury and play-ground accident lawyers at the Philadelphia products liability law firm of Reiff & Bily have been researching and handling thousands of personal injury cases since 1979. Our Pennsylvania defective product attorneys have had extensive experience in the area of defective toys (products liability claims) and play-ground or amusement injuries.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that in 2001 approximately 45% of playground-related injuries are severe (fractures, internal injuries, concussions, dislocations, and amputations) and about 75% of nonfatal injuries were related to playground equipment failure, misoperation or malfunction.

Between 1990 and 2000, 147 children ages 14 and younger died from playground-related injuries. 82 of these injuries (56%) died from strangulation and 31 of these injuries (20%) died from falls to the playground surface. Most of these fatalities (70%) occurred on home playgrounds. Public playground climbers resulted in the most common cause of an injury as compared to any other equipment. At home playgrounds, swings were responsible for most injuries.

Continue reading "Toys And Playgrounds Might Not Be As Safe As One Would Presume" »

THE RISE IN PENNSYLVANIA AND THE UNITED STATES

There are approximately 180,000 lawnmower accidents per year. Recently, featured on the CBS early morning news, was the case of Betty Forsythe, whose grandson suffered catastrophic injuries in Pennsylvania in a lawnmower accident. In the interview, Ms. Forsythe, of Duncannon, PA, noted that her grandson, Dylan, lost three fingers and one of his feet and stated “Children are fast, children are quick. If you are the parents or grandparents, if you are watching children, just don’t allow them to be in the same area where mowing is done”. In the same story, Dr. Scott Cozen of Shriner’s Hospital for Children, a specialist in pediatric and hand and foot surgery, indicated that he has treated dozens of children injured by lawnmowers and stated that lawnmower accidents are the number one cause of foot amputations in children nationwide. He noted that “either the child is riding on the mower with Grandpop or Dad and subsequently falls off and has a devastating injury while playing in the yard and the child is inadvertently run over. He further noted that the majority of the kids injured by lawnmowers are teenagers. Many teenagers are cutting the lawn for allowance, at which point the lawnmower gets stuck and they do something stupid such as putting their foot in, reaching their hand in and resulting in an amputation.

A lawnmower can be a dangerous machine causing catastrophic injuries and death if not used properly. Most lawnmower accidents are catastrophic with over half requiring amputations of toes, feet, legs or fingers. It is noted that the summertime is the most dangerous time for kids and lawnmowers. Apparently, children do not have an appropriate fear of power lawnmowers and with a parent mowing, they cannot hear the child running up so that even with backing up or going forward, the child can often end up under the mower.

Recently on the ABC “Good Morning America” show, the case of Henry Burmester, a 4 year old, was noted. Unfortunately, Henry Burmester‘s father accidently ran over Henry’s foot with the lawnmower. His Dad, Donald, was backing up the mower and never saw his son coming as the spinning blade hit the boy’s leg and foot. According to the report, the Burmesters began a campaign and non-profit organization called “Know Before You Mow” to alert parents and kids to the dangers of lawnmowers. It includes chilling public service announcements that demonstrate how quickly a child can run into trouble with a lawnmower.

The Pennsylvania personal injury attorneys of Reiff & Bily, we have been researching and handling product liability matters for approximately 30 years. Product liability law mandates that manufacturers have a responsibility and a legal obligation to produce safe products. Nowhere is this more important than in the manufacturing of both regular and riding lawnmowers.

Continue reading "PREVENTABLE LAWNMOWER ACCIDENTS ARE ON " »

THE INCREASING NUMBER OF DEATHS AND CATASTROPHIC INJURY

It’s summertime and more and more, emergency officials are responding to jet ski accidents throughout the United States. On July 13, 2008, emergency officials from Louisville and Howard’s Creek, Ohio responded to an accident involving at least one jet ski on the Ohio river.

On June 15, 2008, another teenager was killed on the Colorado River in Colorado when her jet ski collided with another personal water craft on the river. Over the last ten years, usage of jet skis have enjoyed a surge of popularity, adding to a growing danger on our nation's waterways. Today there are over 1 million personal water craft vessels in use in America and on average approximately 5,000 jet ski accidents occur each year resulting in 2,600 injuries in over 72 deaths. The laws relating to the operation of jet skis and the manufacture of jet skis are exceedingly complex and require an intensive knowledge of products liability, state and federal laws governing boating accidents, as well as maritime and international waterway laws.

The personal injury attorneys in Pennsylvania at the law firm of Reiff & Bily help victims recover compensation for injuries suffered in boating and jet ski accidents. At the Reiff & Bily law firm, our experience with the investigation and litigation of recreational boating and jet ski claims can give you an advantage in establishing liability against the responsible party. Common injuries associated with jet ski accidents include but are not limited to head and brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, burn injuries, hyperthermia and of course, drowning. Unfortunately, it is a fact that many inexperienced boaters are allowed to operate jet skis and personal water craft in U.S. waterways. Just think how easy it is for you to go and rent a jet ski by just presenting your credit card. The usage of the jet ski by inexperienced boaters places the lives of themselves as well as countless other people in jeopardy by reckless conduct. Along with this risk comes a host of problems related to intoxicated boaters and drunk driving accidents, collisions with other boats, water intrusion injuries, collisions with docks, piers, shorelines and swimmers and other serious injuries.

Continue reading "JET SKI ACCIDENTS ON THE RISE - WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?" »

Flammable clothing and bedding are very dangerous and often times cause death and disfigurement to unsuspecting consumers due to serious burn injuries. If your clothing catches fire, flames may spread quickly through the clothing, sometimes causing the material to melt onto your skin, and create severe and disfiguring burns all over your body. If you bedding catches fire, especially if you’re sleeping, your temple of relaxation could become a death trap. Depending on the type of fabric, textile construction, weaves, weight, and finish, as well as looseness of fit, certain materials, when ignited accidentally, can pose a serious risk of a burn injury or even death. The Pennsylvania burn injury and product liability lawyers at the Philadelphia law firm of Reiff & Bily have been researching and handling flammable clothing and bedding claims since 1979.

The one of the consumer product laws passed in 1953 was the Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA) to regulate the manufacture of highly flammable clothing due to an epidemic of burns from flammable children’s clothing in the 1940s. In 1967, Congress amended the FFA to expand coverage to include interior furnishings as well as paper, plastic, foam, and other materials used in wearing apparel and interior furnishings. Responsibility for administering the FFA was transferred to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) when it was created in 1972. Under the FFA, the CPSC can issue mandatory flammability standards for manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers of fabric and garments. After standards for sleepwear were loosened in 1996, an increase in clothing burns among young children wearing loose sleep garments was observed. Despite efforts by the CPSC, injuries resulting from flammable clothing and fabric still remain a danger.

Continue reading "Flammable Clothing and Bedding Material – Are You Wearing Or Sleeping On A Dangerous Material? " »

Everyone needs to get from one place to another and many people drive a car. When you’re driving and transporting children, wouldn’t you consider child car seat safety? Parents rely on child safety seats to protect their children, but it is not unusual that there could be a defect in the seat making it extremely hazardous. The Pennsylvania product liability lawyers at the Philadelphia law firm of Reiff & Bily have been researching and handling numerous defective car seat cases since 1979.

In March of 2008, Evenflo Discovery seats were being recalled due to a flaw that the child seat would fail during a side-impact crash. During testing, a ram struck the vehicle’s side at 38.5 miles an hour. The portion of the seat in which a child would be strapped in broke free of the base. The base anchors the seat to the car and the seat was thrown around the interior of the car. This was not the first time a child safety seat was recalled. In 2007, there was 11 recalls of child seats, totaling about 3.35 million seats as reported by The New York Times.

Continue reading "Protect Your Precious Cargo – Keep Your Children Safely Secured In Your Vehicle " »

Amusement parks are meant to be a place where families could and should have fun out doors, playing games and riding on roller coasters. Most of the time when we think about amusement parks we think of “KODAK” moments of smiles and laughs with our family. Roller coasters and other rides are typically safe to ride, but that does not mean they are free from disasters. The Pennsylvania catastrophic injury lawyers at the Philadelphia law firm of Reiff & Bily have been researching and handling many amusement park accident injury and death claims since 1979.

Amusement parks are supposed to inspect their rides daily, but accidents can still occur. Sometimes the rides are outdated or in need of repair. Other times it’s a ride that is not inherently safe or becomes unsafe due to worker negligence or improper maintenance. In July of 2008, 4 people were injured in Denmark due to their roller coaster’s car came of the tracks and fell onto the cement ground below the ride. The roller coaster opened only a month prior to the accident. Even the newest of rides might cause a serious injury if improperly designed, installed, or maintained.

Continue reading "Amusement Parks Are Not So Amusing When Rides Cause Injury Or Death" »

Getting in a car accident is dangerous enough without having to worry about the possibility of your car being engulfed in flames due to a design defect. Fuel-fed car fires are a real danger and often do more harm than the actual crash. The Pennsylvania fuel-fed fire lawyers at the Philadelphia law firm of Reiff & Bily have been researching and handling numerous automobile related injury cases since 1979.

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) reports that during 2004, fire departments responded to an estimated 266,500 highway-type vehicle fires. These fires claimed 520 lives and caused $969 million in direct property damage.

The Ford Pinto is a prime example of how a defect can result in fatalities. The defect was in the design of the strap on gas tank that made it susceptible to leakage and fire in low to moderate speed collisions. Not only did Ford know of the defect and the possibility of a fuel-fed fire, but they continued to market the Pinto. Innocent lives were lost because Ford marketed a dangerous design. Ford ended up recalling the Pintos and tried to make them safer. Additional information on the Pinto recall is available.

Continue reading "Fuel-Fed Auto Fires" »

On May 2, 2008, the Toyota Motor Company recalled 90,000 Highlander Sport Utility vehicles in the United States for seatbelt defects. This involves vehicles built between last May and March of 2008 to repair problems with the seatbelt that could leave rear-facing child seats unsecured. The Toyota Company ordered a “stop sale” of all 2008 Highlander SUVs and Hybrid versions with third row seats to retrofit changes to the seatbelt.

The Philadelphia personal injury law firm of Law Firm of Reiff & Bily. has long investigated complaints by owners of Chrysler, Dodge, Ford, Toyota and Nissan motor vehicles and 15-passenger vans concerning defective seatbelt latch plates and defective seat and child seat design. These latch plates are designed to keep child safety seats securely in place by keeping a lapbelt tight around the safety seat. Often times, the latch plates do not connect firmly or loosen, no longer keeping the child seat firmly in place. This defect creates a safety hazard for children in the child seat because a loose seatbelt may permit the seat to move forward or to the side during a sudden stop or an accident. This hazard is usually hidden because the latch plate breaks and the spot is not visible unless the plate is turned over and inspected, and/or because it is difficult to tell that the latch plate broke in such a manner. In a proper crash worthy designed vehicle, seatbelts and other safety systems are supposed to minimize the destructive effect of forces by distributing these forces over the greatest period of time possible and over the largest surface area possible to the parts of the body that are most capable of withstanding the forces.

Continue reading "Recall for Seatbelt Defects" »

Pennsylvania Product Liability Lawyer Filing Lawsuits Against Foreign Manufacturers Whose Products Injure Local People
by Raymond M. Bily, Esquire

Foreign manufacturers of defective products can be sued in state or federal courts but doing so sometimes presents special challenges. Foreign auto makers, industrial product manufacturers and consumer product makers and their intermediaries are not beyond the reach of U.S. courts if they put defective products into the stream of commerce. A manufacturer who has offices or advertises in a state generally has sufficient contact to be sued in state courts. Less clear is when a product is manufactured overseas and comes into a state indirectly. Courts generally inquire whether the manufacturer had some knowledge or expectation that the product would be purchased by consumers in the particular state.

Assuming jurisdiction is proper, a more difficult problem can involve service of process. Foreign corporations are savvy litigants. They understand that mere distance alone can be used to create the perception that injured consumers will have a very difficult time pursuing them in U.S. courts.

The perception begins when the corporation insists on having service of process in accordance with the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra Judicial Documents in Civil or Criminal Matters. The most common method of service of process recognized by the Hague is for the initiating process to be transcribed in the foreign corporations native language then served upon a receiving central authority. A recent case filed by our firm against a Japanese auto maker was several times the costs of suing a U.S. corporate defendant. Language barriers can present themselves through out the process of litigation, including depositions and interrogatories. At deposition it is often necessary to have interpreters who are highly skilled and adept, sometimes in local dialects.

Continue reading "Filing Lawsuits Against Foreign Manufacturers" »

Always tell the truth and admit when you are wrong! Sounds like a simple and easy enough rule to follow. Most of us learn this when we are children through our parents, grandparents, teachers and clergy, but how many people actually practice their lives according to this standard?

I grew up in a family business where this was the mantra of my grandfather, a hardworking immigrant to America.

Trials in American justice have been the ultimate means to resolve disputes in American society from colonial times to the present as lawyers skillfully prepare their cases, examine and cross-examine witnesses to reveal the truth.

Continue reading "Philadelphia Product Liability Lawyer Demands That Manufacturers and Insurance Companies Always Tell The Truth and Admit When They Are Wrong" »