Lawsuit Abuse – Fact or Fiction


Lawsuit abuse – fact or fiction.? The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would have you believe that lawsuit abuse is a fact and that is costing everyone thousands of dollars per year.? The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is running a TV ad alleging that “lawsuit abuse” is costing “your family” $3,500 a year.? The ad is false.?The figure is from a study that estimates the cost of all lawsuits, not just abusive ones.Even the author of the study cited by the chamber says its ad is “misleading.” The fact is his study makes no attempt to specify which lawsuits are legitimate and which can be considered abusive. Furthermore, the study specifically warns against drawing any conclusions about the costs and benefits of the judicial system and even acknowledges that the benefits could outweigh the costs. The chamber ignores this warning. It also fails to note that the same study estimates the cost of all lawsuits at the lowest level in 10 years.

Thr truth is that lawsuit abuse is not costing us thousands of dollars every year.? Furthermore, the benefits and savings received from legitimate lawsuits outweigh the costs.? For example, the tort system encourages drivers to be more careful when driving.? If a driver is negligent and causes a car accident which injures someone; it is the negligent driver that pays the injured person for his lost wages, medical bills and pain and suffering rather than the injured person turning to a government funded program (paid by U.S. tax dollars) for compensation.? Do not let this misleading ad deceive you into thinking that there is widespread lawsuit abuse and that it is costing America.? Get the real facts.

Share
Read More

True Man and Energy Max Dietary Supplements – Dangerous and Defective Products

True Man and Energy Max Dietary Supplements are dangerous and defective products.? The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is advising consumers not to purchase or use “True Man” or “Energy Max” products promoted and sold as dietary supplements throughout the United States. Both products — touted as sexual enhancement products and as treatments for erectile dysfunction (ED) — are illegal drug products that contain potentially harmful, undeclared ingredients.The products contain substances called analogs that have similar structures to active ingredients in approved prescription drugs.? FDA has not approved True Man and Energy Max; therefore the safety and effectiveness of these products are unknown. Both products are often advertised as “all natural” alternatives to approved ED drugs in advertisements appearing in newspapers, retail stores, and on the Internet.

“These products threaten the health of the people using them because they contain undeclared chemicals that are similar to the active ingredients used in FDA-approved prescription drug products,” said Steven Galson, M.D., MPH, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.”The risk is even more serious because consumers may not know that these ingredients can interact with medications and dangerously lower their blood pressure.”

The undeclared analog ingredients in True Man and Energy Max may interact with nitrates found in some prescription drugs such as nitroglycerin and may lower blood pressure to dangerous levels. Men with diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol or heart disease often take nitrates.

FDA chemical analysis revealed that Energy Max contains thione analog of sildenafil, a substance with a structure similar to sildenafil, the active ingredient in Viagra, an FDA-approved drug for ED.Substances like this are called analogs because they have a structure similar to another drug and may cause similar side effects and drug interactions.

True Man contains a thione analog of sildenafil or piperadino vardenafil, an analog of vardenafil, the active ingredient in Levitra, another FDA-approved prescription drug for ED. Neither the thione analog of sildenafil nor piperadino vardenafil are components of approved drug products.

Share
Read More

Slip and Falls and Qualified Municipal Immunity

Slip and fall lawsuits can be complex when the injury took place on municipal property. This lates case is an example of the hurdles the injured plaintiff faces when injured in a slip and fall on town or city property. In the case of Durant v. Hartford Board of Education, plaintiff slipped on a water in a stairwell while picking up her son from an after school day care program at a Hartford public school. She was injured and filed a personal injury suit against the Board of Education. The Superior Court held that plaintiff’s action was barred by General Statutes  52-557n, which gave the Board a qualified municipal immunity for discretionary acts. The Appellate Court reversed, holding that the plaintiff fell within the identifiable person-imminent harm exception in General Statutes Section 52-557n (a) (2) (B) because the puddle in the stairwell was limited in both its duration and location and because the potential for harm resulting from a fall in a stairwell was significant and foreseeable.  Durrant v. Board of Education, 96 Conn. App. 456 (2006) (Schaller, J. dissenting). The case is now before the Connecticut Supreme Court.

Share
Read More