In July, a husband and wife were driving home from a dinner party in their Honda Civic when they were hit by a driver that ran a red light. The at-fault driver had no insurance and had been repeatedly ticketed in the past for driving without insurance. The at-fault driver was the owner of the car and had no assets – there was nothing to recover from him, he had nothing to lose. Approximately 25% of Miami’s drivers similarly have no insurance and no assets. If you are hit by this kind of driver you could be in a dire situation and have to pay for thousands of dollars of medical care.
Fortunately, the married couple had purchased uninsured motorist insurance with their automobile insurance carrier. Uninsured/underinsured motorist insurance protects you in the event that you are hit by an uninsured/underinsured driver, as was the case here. Within a few short months of the collision, I recovered the full amount of their uninsured motorist coverage ($100,000.00) for them from their insurance carrier to compensate for their past and future pain and suffering and medical expenses. If this family had not purchased uninsured motorist coverage, then there would not have been any money to compensate them for their losses.
When you are considering buying an automobile insurance policy, you should always purchase as much uninsured motorist coverage as possible. In Miami-Dade County approximately one-out-of-four drivers have no insurance. Be smart, and be safe, purchase uninsured motorist coverage – it’s worth it.
After writing my first post about the possible harmful effects of cell phone radiation, I came across additional information tending to show a link between cell phone use and cancer.
In 2011, the World Health Organization reclassified cell phones as possible carcinogens – which means that they may cause cancer. In addition, an Italian Court has ruled that there is a link between cell phone use, meaning exposure to cell phone radiation, and brain cancer in a recent case involving a man who heavily used a cell phone and developed brain cancer.
A local South Florida community, Pembroke Pines, appears to be leading the way in warning people about the dangers of cell phone radiation. Unfortunately, the warning comes in response to a Pembroke Pines resident being diagnosed with cancer in rare places – his hand and ear.
Pembroke Pines’ cell phone radiation warning was inspired by Jimmy Gonzalez, who had a cancerous brain tumor removed from the area above his left ear in August 2011. According to the Sun Sentinel, Gonzalez underwent surgery to remove the brain tumor less than a year after he had a tumor removed from his left hand. He believes that his cell phone use led to his cancer, and urged the Commissioners to pass the resolution. – See more at: http://www.consumerinjurylawyers.com/Cell-Phone-Radiation-Resolution-Florida#sthash.BX5FwNHM.dpuf.
It makes sense, your hand and ear come into direct contact with your phone for the entire duration of every phone call you make and your phone emits the most radiation when in-use, therefore your brain, ear, and hand are exposed to the most radiation.
As the link between cell phone use and cancer gets stronger, the likelihood of massive litigation increases. Surely, if there is such a link, we will see an increase in cancer of the brain, salivary gland, and hands. I sincerely hope that there is no link here because the potential damage to Americans is tremendous. I will continue to update and revisit this topic as more scientific and legal information becomes available.
Have you ever had a conversation on your cellphone for about 20+ minutes and noticed that your ear and face get hot? Have you ever wondered why? When I first heard the answer I was pretty surprised. Your ear and face get hot because they are absorbing radiation from your phone – the same type of radiation that your microwave uses to cook and heat food.
That doesn’t sound healthy, does it? Apparently, there are two types of radiation, ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Ionized radiation is bad news and has been clearly demonstrated to caused cancer. Non-ionizing radiation appears to be far less dangerous and is emitted by cellphones and microwaves.
Currently, it appears that science has not drawn a clear link between disease and exposure to non-ionizing radiation – some studies show a link, some do not. Nevertheless, in order to be sold in the United States a cell phone cannot have an SAR of greater than 1.6. SAR stands for Specific Absorption Rate, meaning the rate that the phone’s radiation is absorbed by the body. Despite the current lack of a definitive link, it is probably good to limit exposure to any kind of radiation. Authorities suggest that the real danger with cell phone radiation, if any, is the proximity of the source of the radiation to the body, and its location. When making a phone call, you hold the source of radiation directly against your ear and face, and less than an inch from your brain. By making phone calls and not using a handsfree device, a caller exposes their brain to significantly greater radiation than when using a handsfree device. In addition, based on the current science it appears that contrary to popular belief, smartphones emit much greater levels of radiation because they process significantly more data and can connect to high speed internet.
With millions of cellphone users it certainly seems like this is an issue of great public importance. It will be interesting to see where the science goes on this topic and whether radiation levels can be dramatically reduced if this issue gets more attention. For more reading on this topic, see below.
The Bimini SuperFast has had a rough start. During the first few weeks of operation the Bimini SuperFast had problems successfully making it from Miami, to Bimini, and back. Moreover, a quick review of Yelp! for the SuperFast indicates that it has received, at best, mixed reviews.
Based on the reviews it seems that the Bimini SuperFast is destined to be the subject of significant maritime litigation. The Superfast’s homepage purports to show a somewhat luxury half-day or evening cruise, however, based upon reviews it appears the Superfast is anything but a luxury cruise. Passengers have complained of flooded bathrooms, dangerous conditions, and an out of control party atmosphere which appears to be condoned by the crew.
Worst of all it has been shut down by the U.S. Coast Guard at least once for being unsafe and for its crew lacking basic and acceptable proficiency in handling emergency situations.
If you have been injured on the Bimini Superfast, contact a maritime personal injury lawyer to represent you and make sure that you obtain the justice and compensation that you deserve.
Recently, my family was hit hard by a defective drug called Avandia. My grandmother took Avandia to help control her diabetes. At her first grandchild’s wedding, after walking off the dance floor, my previously healthy grandmother suffered a severe stroke as a result of using Avandia.
For the remaining months of her life, my grandmother, who loved to paint, draw, and dance, was confined to a hospital bed. She was paralyzed on the left side of her body. She couldn’t speak full sentences but she appeared to be completely aware of what she was going through.
I remember the phone call that I got from my father telling me what happened. I remember feeling helpless, not knowing what to do, and not know what we could do. On July 4, 2012, my grandmother, Nancy Sidorski, died from catastrophic brain hemorrhaging caused by Avandia.
Avandia is manufactured by GlaxoSmithKlein, (GSK), the same company that makes the toothpaste I use everyday – and many common products that you probably use as well. If you visit their homepage, you’ll see that GSK’s slogan is “Do More, Feel Better, Live Longer.” They pride themselves on helping Americans live longer, better lives with GSK’s medication.
In July of 2012, shortly after my grandmother’s death, GSK was criminally prosecuted by the Federal government for fraudulently marketing and selling a medication that GSK knew was dangerous without disclosing its dangers. That medication was Avandia. In a landmark case, GSK PLEAD GUILTY and paid $3 BILLION to resolve the case against it for fraud in reporting safety data relating to Avandia. In plain English, GSK knew that they sold a product (Avandia) that killed its users and continued to sell the product, conceal the evidence that it killed people, and tried to continue to profit off sales until the Federal government conducted a criminal investigation.
In preparing our cases against cigarette manufacturers for trial, I’ve seen a clear parallel between what the tobacco industry did to its users in the 1950’s, 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s,and what pharmaceutical companies are doing today. The similarities are astounding and frightening.
First, we all know big tobacco sold a deadly product – but five decades ago, users didn’t know that. In order to push their product, big tobacco spent millions in advertising – they sponsored TV shows, movies, magazines, everything. They convinced us that we would be better in every way if we just smoked their brand of cigarette. We would be more manly, or femine, sexier, funnier, better-looking, you are just better with a cigarette. As a result, millions of people smoked packs of cigarettes every day. All the while, big tobacco knew that they were killing their customers.
Consider big pharma today. Look at television and watch the commercials. How many commercials are there for: Cialis, levitra, viagra, nuva ring, tylenol, zantac, and others? In the respective ads, for example Cialis, the character is more competent, experienced, capable, and “prepared when the moment is right.” He is better because he takes the drug. Then there is the quick voice notifying us of all the side-effects of taking this drug, and then its back to living better with Cialis.
Does anyone remember the Avandia commercials? If not, take a look.
See any similarities? It’s a pretty amazing commercial to watch considering that GSK knew that they were selling a defective drug to millions of hard-working Americans.
How about this cigarette commercial?
I am proud to represent the families of good, hard-working American who were killed by big tobacco’s lies and their deadly product. I am also proud to have obtained justice in my family’s case against GSK.
It is frightening to think of all the harm that could be caused to people by defective drugs when the side-effects are concealed from users. I see no greater opportunity, as a lawyer, to fight for justice than to represent people who have been victim to pharmaceutical company greed, lies, and dangerous products. If you have been harmed by a defective drug you should consider hiring an attorney to help you obtain justice. There is nothing more American than accountability and responsibility. Companies like GSK must be held accountable for the harms that they are responsible for causing.
Below are links to local new coverage about a case handled by firm, Goldberg & Rosen, P.A. A great result for a truly great family that sought nothing more than to bring greater awareness to the epidemic of drunk driving in Miami-Dade County. I doubt I will ever forget watching Stephen and Jennifer Kirkpatrick testify about the loss of their parents.
Please consider donating to Mothers Against Drunk Driving in memory of Robert and Paulette Kirkpatrick or anyone that you may know who has been a victim of drunk driving. It’s my hope that this jury verdict, $30 Million compensatory and $5 Million in punitive damages, will serve as another deterrent for anyone considering drinking and driving. In my career I have already seen too many cases involving drunk drivers. Miami needs to put an end to the epidemic of drunk driving on our streets. Stephen and Jennifer Kirkpatrick have done their part – have you done yours?
Recently, another case came across my desk involving a young woman who slipped and fell on the dangerous surface of the Lido Deck on a Carnival ship. Unfortunately, no one warned this young woman that hundreds of people have slipped and fallen on the Lido Deck because of the slippery surface of some of the flooring. Carnival also allowed large puddles of water to accumulate on the surface of the Lido Deck. Carnival knew that areas of the floor were dangerous, they knew that people had fallen on the Lido Deck before, they knew that they should warn people about the slippery surface and the puddles – but they didn’t. Instead, this young woman walked across the Lido Deck, slipped, fell, and fractured her elbow. Carnival’s negligence resulted this young woman owing thousands of dollars in medical bills, permanent injury to her arm, permanent disability, and a ruined cruise.
The Lido Deck on the Carnival Paradise
Carnival actively participated in the design of several of its ships. During the design Carnival entered into agreements with several contractors to design and construct nearly all facets of its ships. In addition, Carnival approved the designs and materials that the contractors selected.
When will Carnival take the appropriate steps to fix the dangerous condition of the Lido Deck? If they do not change the slippery surfaces of on Lido Decks of their ships, they will continue to injure their customers and continue to add to their already bad reputation.
The 11th Circuit’s opinion about the proper jurisdiction for the class claims brought by Costa Concordia passengers has sent the cases from Federal Court to Miami-Dade County Circuit Court.
.
In the subject cases, the Costa removed the class actions filed by the plaintiffs pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”). CAFA is a federal statute which is intended to extend Federal Jurisdiction to “mass actions.” According to the opinion, cases involving under 100 plaintiffs are generally not considered “mass actions” and are therefore not subject to CAFA. The plaintiffs’ attorneys in these cases wisely divided the cases into two class actions, both consisting of under 100 plaintiffs. Thus, these plaintiffs were able to keep their cases out of Federal court.
Generally, plaintiffs and their attorneys tend to prefer to bring their cases in State courts where they generally have more control over scheduling and have a more favorable summary judgment standard. On the other hand, defense attorneys tend to prefer litigating in Federal Court as it is vastly more time consuming, requires significantly more legal writing, and where summary judgment is more frequently granted in favor of the defendant.
Remanding these cases to Miami-Dade Circuit Court is a win for the Plaintiffs’ attorneys in this case. However, the jurisdiction and venue battle may not be over yet. Carnival has filed motions to dismiss the cases, which were originally filed in Miami, based on forum non-convienes. Basically, Carnival asserts that the passengers, even though they may live in the U.S., should bring their claims in Italy because that is where the incident happened and where most of the evidence is located.
It will be interesting to see which Miami-Dade Circuit Judge is assigned to this case and how he or she rules on the motions to dismiss.
If you live in Miami, as I do, you know that other drivers often bend or ignore the rules of the road. To make matters worse, many drivers also do not carry any insurance. This is a chronic problem in South Florida. The Insurance Research Council recently released statistics indicating that as many as 24% of Florida drivers do not have insurance.
What does this mean for you? Well, if you don’t have uninsured/underinsured motorist insurance, you may be facing a difficult situation.
The following is a summary of the circumstances facing a former client of mine:
You are driving on I-95. Traffic in front of you slows down significantly. You press your brakes and begin to slow down with traffic. The driver behind you, the Defendant, is not paying attention and crashes into the rear of your car at over 40 miles per hour. Your car spins out of control on I-95 and into other lanes of traffic. You are taken from the scene of the collision by Fire Rescue. You have significant, permanent injuries which may require spine surgery. You cannot afford the surgery and want seek to monetary damages from the Defendant for the injuries that he has caused you, but you learn that the Defendant has no insurance of any kind to pay for your injuries.
Who is going to pay for your pain and suffering and medical treatment?
If you elected not to pay for Uninsured/Underinsured motorist coverage when you purchased auto insurance, then you will likely have to pay for a significant portion of your own medical treatment and cannot receive any compensation for your pain, suffering, lost wages, etc. You are, basically, on your own.
Fortunately for my client, she had purchased uninsured motorist coverage and we recovered a successful settlement of the full policy limits of her uninsured motorist insurance for her.That being said, I have seen far too many people who were seriously injured by uninsured drivers and have no uninsured motorist coverage. In many cases, the injured person does not know that they do not have uninsured motorist coverage – they believe that they have “full coverage” a misleading term that many times means just the minimum insurnace required by law. Under these circumstances – without UM coverage – there may be no other legal action that can provide the injured person with an adequate remedy.
The best way to protect yourself from this situation is to make sure that you purchase uninsured motorist coverage from your auto insurance carrier. You simply cannot trust that other drivers are carrying bodily injury insurance. Protect yourself and purchase UM.
Florida-Justice 