|
 |
 |
| September 01, 2011 |
| California Actos Class Action? |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
 |
There is No California Actos Class Action
Be Skeptical of An Attorney Who Says OtherwiseSome law firms claiming to represent people who have developed bladder cancer from Actos tell prospective clients they can take part in an Actos class action in California or elsewhere. Any lawyer that advocates this for bladder cancer from Actos likely has little or no experience with pharmaceutical litigation.
A Class Action is Not Appropriate for a Serious Injury Like Bladder CancerThere is no Actos class action because bladder cancer is an extremely serious injury and class actions are only for people with very small injuries.
A class action should only be used when an injury is so small that it is impractical for a person to retain his or her own lawyer. The theory is that a class action allows people to recover for their small injuries by joining them together in a "class," when they otherwise would not bother to seek legal relief on their own. Frequently this is the case when a large number of consumers were slightly overcharged for a product or service.
But someone who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos has been inflicted with an extremely serious injury that does justify his or her own lawsuit. Although Actos lawsuits may ultimately be consolidated in some jurisdictions for pretrial matters, and may be described as mass torts, this is different from a class action because each person must prove he or she has been diagnosed with bladder cancer after using Actos. Just having used Actos is not enough to support a lawsuit against Takeda Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of Actos.
In short, a class action would never be appropriate for as serious an injury as bladder cancer. View a lawyer talking about using a class action for Actos as a red flag. It likely means he or she has no familiarity with pharmaceutical litigation.
California Actos Lawyers at DeCarli LawThe California Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law are actively investigating cases where people have developed bladder cancer after using Actos. Residents of California and adjacent states may have the option of having an Actos lawsuit filed in California state court, a more favorable venue than federal court or many courts in other states. For that reason, contact DeCarli Law first to discuss your potential Actos lawsuit. You can speak with an attorney at no charge, and you are under no obligation to move forward. Call toll free or use the contact form on this page to schedule a free, no obligation consultation, that is completely confidential.
|
|
| Continue reading "California Actos Class Action?" » |
|
Permalink  |
| |
| August 29, 2011 |
| Wyoming Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
 A Wyoming Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Wyoming law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Wyoming Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsWyoming law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and their length depends on the type of legal theory that applies to the case.
As a product liability claim, an Actos lawsuit under Wyoming law typically would be based on theories of negligence and strict liability. For these causes of action, the Wyoming statute of limitations is four years after the cause of action accrues. The statute of limitations begins to run "when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know the existence of the cause of action."
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Actos claim under Wyoming law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Wyoming Statute:
Wyo. Stat. § 1-3-105(a)(iv)(C).
TITLE 1 - CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 3 - LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
1-3-105. Actions other than recovery of real property.
(a) Civil actions other than for the recovery of real property can only be brought within the following periods after the cause of action accrues:
* * *
(iv) Within four (4) years, an action for:
* * *
(C) An injury to the rights of the plaintiff, not arising on contract and not herein enumerated; . . . .
|
|
| Continue reading "Wyoming Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 29, 2011 |
| Wisconsin Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
 A Wisconsin Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Wisconsin law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Wisconsin Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsWisconsin law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. Under Wisconsin law, causes of action for personal injury must be brought within three years after the cause of action accrues.
Wisconsin uses the "discovery rule" to determine when a cause of action accrues. Under the discovery rule, a claim accrues on the date the injury is discovered, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered. This means that to be safe, a claim should be filed within three years of a diagnosis of bladder cancer or urethral cancer after long-term use of Actos.
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Actos claim under Wisconsin law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Wisconsin Statute:
Wis. Stat. § 893.54.
893.54 Injury to the person. The following actions shall be commenced within 3 years or be barred:
(1) An action to recover damages for injuries to the person.
|
|
| Continue reading "Wisconsin Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 29, 2011 |
| Vermont Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Vermont Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Vermont law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Vermont Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsVermont law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and their length depends on the type of legal theory that applies to the case.
A Vermont Actos lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim. Under Vermont law, when a product liability lawsuit is for an "injury to the person suffered by the act or default of another," the claim must be brought three years after the cause of action accrues. This limitation period applies to an Actos claim because bladder cancer and urethral cancer are injuries to the person. Importantly, "the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue as of the date of the discovery of the injury."
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Actos claim under Vermont law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Vermont Statutes:
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 12, § 512(4) (2002).
Title 12: Court Procedure
Chapter 23: LIMITATION OF TIME FOR COMMENCEMENT OF ACTIONS
§ 512. Assault and battery; false imprisonment; slander and libel; injuries to person or property
Actions for the following causes shall be commenced within three years after the cause of action accrues, and not after:
(1) Assault and battery;
(2) False imprisonment;
(3) Slander and libel;
(4) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, injuries to the person suffered by the act or default of another person, provided that the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue as of the date of the discovery of the injury;
(5) Damage to personal property suffered by the act or default of another.
|
|
| Continue reading "Vermont Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 29, 2011 |
| South Carolina Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A South Carolina Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, South Carolina law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for South Carolina Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsSouth Carolina law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations.
An Actos lawsuit is a personal injury claim. Under South Carolina law, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims is three years. South Carolina also recognizes the "discovery rule."
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Actos claim under South Carolina law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Selected South Carolina Statutes:
South Carolina Code of Laws
Title 15 - Civil Remedies and Procedures
CHAPTER 3. LIMITATION OF CIVIL ACTIONS
ARTICLE 5. ACTIONS OTHER THAN FOR RECOVERY OF REAL PROPERTY
SECTION 15-3-510. General rule.
The periods for the commencement of actions other than for the recovery of real property shall be as prescribed in the following sections.
SECTION 15-3-530. Three years.
Within three years:
(1) an action upon a contract, obligation, or liability, express or implied, excepting those provided for in Section 15-3-520;
(2) an action upon a liability created by statute other than a penalty or forfeiture;
(3) an action for trespass upon or damage to real property;
(4) an action for taking, detaining, or injuring any goods or chattels including an action for the specific recovery of personal property;
(5) an action for assault, battery, or any injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract and not enumerated by law, and those provided for in Section 15-3-545;
(6) an action under Sections 15-51-10 to 15-51-60 for death by wrongful act, the period to begin to run upon the death of the person on account of whose death the action is brought;
(7) any action for relief on the ground of fraud in cases which prior to the adoption of the Code of Civil Procedure in 1870 were solely cognizable by the court of chancery, the cause of action in the case not considered to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud;
(8) an action on any policy of insurance, either fire or life, whereby any person or property, resident or situate in this State, may be or may have been insured, or for or on account of any loss arising under the policy, any clause, condition, or limitation contained in the policy to the contrary notwithstanding; and
(9) an action against directors or stockholders of a monied corporation or a banking association to recover a penalty or forfeiture imposed or to enforce a liability created by law, the cause of action in the case not considered to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts upon which the penalty or forfeiture attached or the liability was created, unless otherwise provided in the law under which the corporation is organized.
SECTION 15-3-535. Limitation on actions commenced under Section 15-3-530(5).
Except as to actions initiated under Section 15-3-545, all actions initiated under Section 15-3-530(5) must be commenced within three years after the person knew or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known that he had a cause of action.
|
|
| Continue reading "South Carolina Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 28, 2011 |
| Rhode Island Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Rhode Island Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Rhode Island law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Rhode Island Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsRhode Island law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations.
Under Rhode Island law, claims for personal injury based on strict liability, negligence, or breach of warranty, are subject to a three-year statute of limitations. Rhode Island courts also apply the "discovery rule" to pharmaceutical cases. Under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the injured person discovers or reasonably should have discovered the injury upon which the lawsuit is based. A claim made by a person who has developed bladder cancer or urethral cancer from Actos is considered a pharmaceutical case.
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Actos claim under Rhode Island law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Rhode Island Statutes:
TITLE 9 Courts and Civil Procedure/Procedure Generally
CHAPTER 9-1 Causes of Action
§ 9-1-14 Limitation of actions for words spoken or personal injuries. - (a) Actions for words spoken shall be commenced and sued within one year next after the words spoken, and not after.
(b) Actions for injuries to the person shall be commenced and sued within three (3) years next after the cause of action shall accrue, and not after, except as provided for otherwise in subsection (c) herein.
(c) As to an action for personal injuries wherein an injured party is entitled to proceed against an insurer pursuant to § 27-7-2, where an action is otherwise properly filed against an insured within the time limitations provided for by this section, and process against the insured tortfeasor has been returned "non estinventus" and filed with the court, then the statutory limitation for filing an action under § 27-7-2 directly against an insurer shall be extended an additional one hundred twenty (120) days after the expiration of the time limitation provided for in subsection (b) herein.
§ 9-1-14.1 Limitation on malpractice actions. - Notwithstanding the provisions of §§ 9-1-13 and 9-1-14, an action for medical, veterinarian, accounting, or insurance or real estate agent or broker malpractice shall be commenced within three (3) years from the time of the occurrence of the incident which gave rise to the action; provided, however, that:
(1) One who is under disability by reason of age, mental incompetence, or otherwise, and on whose behalf no action is brought within the period of three (3) years from the time of the occurrence of the incident, shall bring the action within three (3) years from the removal of the disability.
(2) In respect to those injuries or damages due to acts of medical, veterinarian, accounting, or insurance or real estate agent or broker malpractice which could not in the exercise of reasonable diligence be discoverable at the time of the occurrence of the incident which gave rise to the action, suit shall be commenced within three (3) years of the time that the act or acts of the malpractice should, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, have been discovered.
|
|
| Continue reading "Rhode Island Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 28, 2011 |
| Pennsylvania Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
 A Pennsylvania Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Pennsylvania law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Pennsylvania Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsPennsylvania law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and their length depends on the type of legal theory that applies to the case.
A Pennsylvania Actos claim is brought as a product liability lawsuit. Pennsylvania product liability lawsuits commonly include causes of action for strict liability, negligence and breach of warranty. As a claim for personal injury, a Pennsylvania Actos claim must be brought within two years of the injury. However, Pennsylvania also recognizes the discovery rule.
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Actos claim under Pennsylvania law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
DeCarli Law Actos Attorneys
If you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Pennsylvania Statute, 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5524:
§ 5524. Two year limitation.
The following actions and proceedings must be commenced within two years:
(1) An action for assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution or malicious abuse of process.
(2) An action to recover damages for injuries to the person or for the death of an individual caused by the wrongful act or neglect or unlawful violence or negligence of another.
(3) An action for taking, detaining or injuring personal property, including actions for specific recovery thereof.
(4) An action for waste or trespass of real property.
(5) An action upon a statute for a civil penalty or forfeiture.
(6) An action against any officer of any government unit for the nonpayment of money or the nondelivery of property collected upon on execution or otherwise in his possession.
(7) Any other action or proceeding to recover damages for injury to person or property which is founded on negligent, intentional, or otherwise tortious conduct or any other action or proceeding sounding in trespass, including deceit or fraud, except an action or proceeding subject to another limitation specified in this subchapter.
(8) (Deleted by amendment).
|
|
| Continue reading "Pennsylvania Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 28, 2011 |
| New Hampshire Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A New Hampshire Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, New Hampshire law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for New Hampshire Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsNew Hampshire law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and their length depends on the type of legal theory that applies to the case.
A New Hampshire Actos lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Actos's manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, provided an inadequate warning of the risk of bladder cancer and urethral cancer. People who have developed bladder cancer or urethral cancer after using Actos for a prolonged period of time may file a product liability lawsuit that alleges negligence, strict tort liability, and breach of warranty.
Under New Hampshire law, the statute of limitations for negligence and strict liability in tort is three years. By way of comparison, in most other states, the statute of limitations is only two years. A claim based on breach of warranty must be brought within four years from the date of the sale of the defective product, in this case Actos. New Hampshire courts apply the discovery rule to determine when the statute of limitations began to run
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Actos claim under New Hampshire law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant New Hampshire Statute:
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 508:4(I) (1997).
TITLE LII
ACTIONS, PROCESS, AND SERVICE OF PROCESS
CHAPTER 508
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
508:4 Personal Actions. -
I. Except as otherwise provided by law, all personal actions, except actions for slander or libel, may be brought only within 3 years of the act or omission complained of, except that when the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission were not discovered and could not reasonably have been discovered at the time of the act or omission, the action shall be commenced within 3 years of the time the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission complained of.
II. Personal actions for slander or libel, unless otherwise provided by law, may be brought only within 3 years of the time the cause of action accrued.
|
|
| Continue reading "New Hampshire Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 27, 2011 |
| Montana Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Montana Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Montana law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Montana Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsMontana law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. The statute of limitations for personal injury claims in Montana is three years.
Montana law also recognizes the discovery doctrine, which means the statute of limitations does not begin to run until a person has discovered the facts constituting his claim. How this doctrine applies to an individual case can be a complicated legal issue, so Montana men who suspect they have developed bladder cancer or urethral cancer from Actos should not delay in consulting with an attorney regarding a potential claim.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Montana Statutes:
Montana Code Annotated 2009
Title 27. Civil Liability, Remedies, and Limitations
Chapter 2. Statutes of Limitations
Part 1. General Provisions
27-2-102. When action commenced. (1) For the purposes of statutes relating to the time within which an action must be commenced:
(a) a claim or cause of action accrues when all elements of the claim or cause exist or have occurred, the right to maintain an action on the claim or cause is complete, and a court or other agency is authorized to accept jurisdiction of the action;
(b) an action is commenced when the complaint is filed.
(2) Unless otherwise provided by statute, the period of limitation begins when the claim or cause of action accrues. Lack of knowledge of the claim or cause of action, or of its accrual, by the party to whom it has accrued does not postpone the beginning of the period of limitation.
(3) The period of limitation does not begin on any claim or cause of action for an injury to person or property until the facts constituting the claim have been discovered or, in the exercise of due diligence, should have been discovered by the injured party if:
(a) the facts constituting the claim are by their nature concealed or self-concealing; or
(b) before, during, or after the act causing the injury, the defendant has taken action which prevents the injured party from discovering the injury or its cause.
(4) Subsection (3) does not apply to actions involving the limitations contained in 27-2-205.
Part 2. Time Limits on Specific Kinds of Actions
27-2-204. Tort actions -- general and personal injury. (1) Except as provided in 27-2-216 [childhood sexual abuse] and 27-2-217 [ritual abuse of minor], the period prescribed for the commencement of an action upon a liability not founded upon an instrument in writing is within 3 years.
(2) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action to recover damages for the death of one caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another is within 3 years, except when the wrongful death is the result of a homicide, in which case the period is within 10 years.
(3) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action for libel, slander, assault, battery, false imprisonment, or seduction is within 2 years.
|
|
| Continue reading "Montana Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 27, 2011 |
| Minnesota Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Minnesota Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Minnesota law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Minnesota Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsMinnesota law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. Minnesota residents are fortunate because the Minnesota statutes of limitations that apply to Actos lawsuits are significantly longer than those of most other states. However, Minnesota law does not delay commencement of the running of the limitations period when the person is unaware of their claim.
A Minnesota Actos lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because, having failed to come with an adequate warning of the risks of bladder cancer and urethral cancer, Actos is a defective product. Minnesota product liability lawsuits can be brought under the following legal theories: strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.
Under Minnesota law, the statute of limitations for a negligence claim resulting in personal injury is six years from when the cause of action accrues. A strict liability claim and a breach-of-warranty claim both have a four-year statute of limitations in Minnesota. A wrongful death claim has a three-year statute of limitations.
The statute of limitations in Minnesota begins to run when a person sustains just "some" damages. This means that the deadline for filing a lawsuit can begin running even if a person is not aware of their damages or even that they have a claim. Thus, Minnesota residents should never delay seeking legal counsel if they believe they have been injured.
PLEASE NOTE: When the applicable Minnesota statutes of limitations begin to run for an individual's right to bring a claim for Actos side effects varies depending on the unique facts of that person's case.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved developed bladder cancer or urethral cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
|
|
| Continue reading "Minnesota Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 27, 2011 |
| Maryland Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Maryland Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Maryland law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Maryland Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits Maryland law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. Because a Maryland Actos lawsuit is bought as a products liability claim, it is subject to a three-year statute of limitations. Maryland also recognizes the "discovery rule." This means that the statute of limitations begins running once a plaintiff knows or should know he or she has been wronged.
A Maryland Actos lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Actos had an inadequate warning of the greatly increased risk of bladder cancer after prolonged use. Maryland product liability lawsuits usually include claims for negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Maryland law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
DeCarli Law Actos Attorneys If you or a loved developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Maryland Statute:
Md. Code Ann., Cts. Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Three-year limitation in general.
A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.
|
|
| Continue reading "Maryland Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 26, 2011 |
| Maine Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Maine Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer to recover money damages from the manufacturer of Actos. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Arizona law allows you to sue its manufacturer.
More HERE on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Maine Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsUnder the law of Maine, there are deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and they vary by the type of claim.
A Maine Actos bladder cancer lawsuit is a product liability claim because Actos is a defective product: the warning was inadequate because it did not warn of the risk of bladder cancer. Maine product liability lawsuits include claims based on strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.
Under Maine law, claims for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty where there has been an injury to the person must be brought within six years of when the cause of action "accrues." In most other states, the statute of limitations is only two years.
Maine courts have held that a cause of action accrues when "there has been a manifestation of physical injury to a person, sufficient to cause him actual loss, damage or suffering from a defective, unreasonably dangerous product."
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Maine law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
DeCarli Law Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or one of the other drugs containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the lower left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Maine Statutes Establishing Limitation Periods:
Title 14: COURT PROCEDURE -- CIVIL
Part 2: PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TRIAL
Chapter 205: LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
Subchapter 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS
§752. Six years.
All civil actions shall be commenced within 6 years after the cause of action accrues and not afterwards, except actions on a judgment or decree of any court of record of the United States, or of any state, or of a justice of the peace in this State, and except as otherwise specially provided.
Title 18-A: PROBATE CODE
Article 2: INTESTATE SUCCESSION AND WILLS
Part 8: GENERAL PROVISIONS
§2-804. Actions for wrongful death
(a). Whenever the death of a person shall be caused by a wrongful act, neglect or default, and the act, neglect or default is such as would, if death had not ensued, have entitled the party injured to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, then the person or the corporation that would have been liable if death had not ensued shall be liable for damages as provided in this section, notwithstanding the death of the person injured and although the death shall have been caused under such circumstances as shall amount to a felony.
(b). Every wrongful death action must be brought by and in the name of the personal representative of the deceased person. The amount recovered in every wrongful death action, except as otherwise provided, is for the exclusive benefit of the surviving spouse if no minor children, of the children if no surviving spouse, one-half for the exclusive benefit of the surviving spouse and one-half for the exclusive benefit of the minor children to be divided equally among them if there are both surviving spouse and minor children and to the deceased's heirs to be distributed as provided in section 2-106 if there is neither surviving spouse nor minor children. The jury may give damages as it determines a fair and just compensation with reference to the pecuniary injuries resulting from the death and in addition shall give such damages that will compensate the estate of the deceased person for reasonable expenses of medical, surgical and hospital care and treatment and for reasonable funeral expenses. In addition, the jury may give damages not exceeding $500,000 for the loss of comfort, society and companionship of the deceased, including any damages for emotional distress arising from the same facts as those constituting the underlying claim, to the persons for whose benefit the action is brought. The jury may also give punitive damages not exceeding $250,000. An action under this section must be commenced within 2 years after the decedent's death. If a claim under this section is settled without an action having been commenced, the amount paid in settlement must be distributed as provided in this subsection. A settlement on behalf of minor children is not valid unless approved by the court, as provided in Title 14, section 1605.
(c). Whenever death ensues following a period of conscious suffering, as a result of personal injuries due to the wrongful act, neglect or default of any person, the person who caused the personal injuries resulting in such conscious suffering and death shall, in addition to the action at common law and damages recoverable therein, be liable in damages in a separate count in the same action for such death, brought, commenced and determined and subject to the same limitation as to the amount recoverable for such death and exclusively for the beneficiaries in the manner set forth in subsection (b), separately found, but in such cases there shall be only one recovery for the same injury.
(d). Any action under this section brought against a governmental entity under Title 14, sections 8101 to 8118, shall be limited as provided in those sections.
|
|
| Continue reading "Maine Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 26, 2011 |
| Arkansas Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
An Arkansas Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Arkansas law allows you to sue, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of Actos.
More HERE on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Arkansas Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsArkansas law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations.
Under Arkansas law, the statute of limitations for negligence and strict liability actions is three years, which means that a lawsuit must be filed within three years after any injury or death caused by a defective product. By way of comparison, in most other states, the statute of limitations is only two years. Arkansas also applies the "discovery rule" to product liability claims, which means the statute of limitations does not begin to run until a person knows or by exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered the causal connection between bladder cancer and Actos.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Arkansas law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the lower left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
|
|
| Continue reading "Arkansas Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 26, 2011 |
| Ohio Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
An Ohio Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Ohio law permits lawsuits against the manufacturer of Actos.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Ohio Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsOhio, like other states, sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations.
An Ohio Actos bladder cancer lawsuit is subject to a two-year statute of limitations. Also, a legal doctrine called the discovery rule applies because the claim is for an injury caused by a drug. The two-year statute of limitations begins to run when the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority, or when he should have known, that the injury s related to the drug, in this case Actos.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Ohio law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case, in particular the contents of their medical records.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Ohio Statutes, Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.10(A) & (B):
2305.10 Bodily injury or injury to personal property.
(A) Except as provided in division (C) or (E) of this section, an action based on a product liability claim and an action for bodily injury or injuring personal property shall be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues. Except as provided in divisions (B)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of this section, a cause of action accrues under this division when the injury or loss to person or property occurs.
(B)(1) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury that is not described in division (B)(2), (3), (4), or (5) of this section and that is caused by exposure to hazardous or toxic chemicals, ethical drugs, or ethical medical devices accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(2) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury caused by exposure to chromium in any of its chemical forms accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(3) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury incurred by a veteran through exposure to chemical defoliants or herbicides or other causative agents, including agent orange, accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(4) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury caused by exposure to diethylstilbestrol or other nonsteroidal synthetic estrogens, including exposure before birth, accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(5) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury caused by exposure to asbestos accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
* * *
|
|
| Continue reading "Ohio Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 25, 2011 |
| Massachusetts Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Massachusetts Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Massachusetts law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Massachusetts Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsMassachusetts law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and their length depends upon the type of injury and legal theory applicable to that injury.
A Massachusetts lawsuit for having developed bladder cancer from Actos is a product liability claim because, having caused a side effect for which there was no adequate warning, Actos is a defective product. The causes of action most frequently asserted in Massachusetts product liability lawsuits are negligence, breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices that violate Chapter 93A of the Massachusetts General Laws.
Under Massachusetts law, the statute of limitations for a negligence action and "tort-based" warranty actions is three years from the date the cause of action "accrues." A cause of action "accrues" on the occurrence of some appreciable injury. However, when an injury is latent or "inherently unknowable," the discovery rule applies and the action does not accrue until a person knows or reasonably should have known that he or she has been injured. For Chapter 93A unfair or deceptive acts or practices claims, the statute of limitations is four years.
Please note: exactly when an Actos cause of action accrues under Massachusetts law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a no-obligation telephone consultation. We always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Selected Massachusetts Statutes:
CHAPTER 260. LIMITATIONS OF ACTION
Section 2A. Tort, contract to recover for personal injuries, and replevin actions.
Except as otherwise provided, actions of tort, actions of contract to recover for personal injuries, and actions of replevin, shall be commenced only within three years next after the cause of action accrues.
Section 4. Certain tort or contract actions for malpractice, error or mistake
Actions of contract or tort for malpractice, error or mistake against attorneys, certified public accountants and public accountants, actions for assault and battery, false imprisonment, slander, libel, actions against sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, constables or assignees in insolvency for the taking or conversion of personal property, actions of tort for injuries to the person against counties, cities and towns, and actions of contract or tort for malpractice, error or mistake against hairdressers, operators and shops registered under sections eighty-seven T to eighty-seven JJ, inclusive of chapter one hundred and twelve, actions of tort for bodily injuries or for death the payment of judgments in which is required to be secured by chapter ninety and also actions of tort for bodily injuries or for death or for damage to property against officers and employees of the commonwealth, and of any county, city or town, arising out of the operation of motor or other vehicles owned by the commonwealth, including those under the control of said commission, or by any such county, city or town, suits by judgment creditors in such actions of tort under section one hundred and thirteen of chapter one hundred and seventy-five and clause (9) of section three of chapter two hundred and fourteen and suits on motor vehicle liability bonds under section thirty-four G of said chapter ninety shall be commenced only within three years next after the cause of action accrues.
Actions of contract or tort for malpractice, error or mistake against physicians, surgeons, dentists, optometrists, hospitals and sanitoria shall be commenced only within three years after the cause of action accrues, but in no event shall any such action be commenced more than seven years after occurrence of the act or omission which is the alleged cause of the injury upon which such action is based except where the action is based upon the leaving of a foreign object in the body.
For the purposes only of this section, an officer or soldier of the military forces of the commonwealth, as defined in chapter thirty-three, shall while performing any lawfully ordered military duty be deemed to be an officer or employee of the commonwealth.
|
|
| Continue reading "Massachusetts Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 25, 2011 |
| New Mexico Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A New Mexico Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to recover money damages for their injury. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, New Mexico law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for New Mexico Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsNew Mexico law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. The primary statute of limitations for a New Mexico Actos bladder cancer lawsuit is three years, and governs personal injury claims for negligence and strict liability. New Mexico also applies the "discovery rule," which means the statute of limitations begins to run only when a person knows, or by exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, both that the person has been injured and the cause of the injury.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under New Mexico law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. We always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the lower left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant New Mexico Statutes:
N.M. Stat. Ann. 1978, § 37-1-8 (1976).
37-1-8. Actions against sureties on fiduciary bonds; injuries to person or reputation.
Actions must be brought against sureties on official bonds and on bonds of guardians, conservators, personal representatives and persons acting in a fiduciary capacity, within two years after the liability of the principal or the person from whom they are sureties is finally established or determined by a judgment or decree of the court, and for an injury to the person or reputation of any person, within three years.
|
|
| Continue reading "New Mexico Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 25, 2011 |
| Utah Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Utah Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to recover money damages for their injury. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Utah law allows you to sue the manufacturer of the drug, which in this case is Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Utah Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsUtah law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. A Utah Actos lawsuit is considered a product liability claim.
All claims under the Utah Product Liability Act, including those for personal injury, must be brought within two years of the time the claimant discovered or should have discovered both the harm and the cause. The running of the statute of limitations is tolled until the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of due diligence should have discovered: (1) that he was injured; (2) that the product has a causal relationship to the plaintiff's injury, and (3) the identity of the manufacturer.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Utah, and therefore the deadline for filing an Actos lawsuit, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
Utah Actos LawyersIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Selected Utah Statute:
Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-706. Statute of limitations.
A civil action under this part shall be brought within two years from the time the individual who would be the claimant in the action discovered, or in the exercise of due diligence should have discovered, both the harm and its cause.
|
|
| Continue reading "Utah Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 24, 2011 |
| Illinois Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
 An Illinois Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Illinois law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Illinois Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsIllinois law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and depend on the type of claim that is being made.
An Illinois Actos bladder cancer lawsuit is a personal injury claim, and generally must be brought within two years of its accrual. The limitations period starts to run when the plaintiff knows, or reasonably should know, (1) that he has suffered an injury, and (2) that the injury was wrongfully caused.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Illinois law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the lower left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Illinois Statute, 735 ILCS 5/13‑202:
Sec. 13‑202. Personal injury ‑ Penalty. Actions for damages for an injury to the person, or for false imprisonment, or malicious prosecution, or for a statutory penalty, or for abduction, or for seduction, or for criminal conversation, except damages resulting from first degree murder or the commission of a Class X felony and the perpetrator thereof is convicted of such crime, shall be commenced within 2 years next after the cause of action accrued but such an action against a defendant arising from a crime committed by the defendant in whose name an escrow account was established under the "Criminal Victims' Escrow Account Act" shall be commenced within 2 years after the establishment of such account. If the compelling of a confession or information by imminent bodily harm or threat of imminent bodily harm results in whole or in part in a criminal prosecution of the plaintiff, the 2‑year period set out in this Section shall be tolled during the time in which the plaintiff is incarcerated, or until criminal prosecution has been finally adjudicated in favor of the above referred plaintiff, whichever is later. However, this provision relating to the compelling of a confession or information shall not apply to units of local government subject to the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act.
|
|
| Continue reading "Illinois Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 24, 2011 |
| Oregon Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
 An Oregon Actos bladder cancer lawsuit is a legal remedy for a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Oregon law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Oregon Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsOregon, like other states, sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. An Oregon Actos lawsuit is considered a product liability claim, and as such, must be filed no later than two years from the date the injury or damage is first discovered or should have been discovered, whichever comes first.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Oregon law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the lower left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Oregon Statute, Or. Rev. Stat. § 30.905:
30.905 Time limitation for commencement of action. (1) Subject to the limitation imposed by subsection (2) of this section, a product liability civil action for personal injury or property damage must be commenced not later than two years after the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the personal injury or property damage and the causal relationship between the injury or damage and the product, or the causal relationship between the injury or damage and the conduct of the defendant.
(2) A product liability civil action for personal injury or property damage must be commenced before the later of:
(a) Ten years after the date on which the product was first purchased for use or consumption; or
(b) The expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state in which the product was manufactured, or, if the product was manufactured in a foreign country, the expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state into which the product was imported.
(3) Subject to the limitation imposed by subsection (4) of this section, a product liability civil action for death must be commenced not later than three years after the decedent, the personal representative for the decedent or a person for whose benefit an action could be brought under ORS 30.020 discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the causal relationship between the death and the product, or the causal relationship between the death and the conduct of the defendant.
(4) A product liability civil action for death must be commenced before the earlier of:
(a) Three years after the death of the decedent;
(b) Ten years after the date on which the product was first purchased for use or consumption; or
(c) The expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state in which the product was manufactured, or, if the product was manufactured in a foreign country, the expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state into which the product was imported.
(5) This section does not apply to a civil action brought against a manufacturer, distributor, seller or lessor of a manufactured dwelling, as defined in ORS 446.003, or of a prefabricated structure, as defined in ORS 455.010. Actions described in this subsection are subject to the statute of limitations provided by ORS 12.135.
|
|
| Continue reading "Oregon Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 24, 2011 |
| Washington Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A Washington Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Washington law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Washington Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsWashington law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. A Washington Actos lawsuit has a three-year statute of limitations. A Washington Actos lawsuit is brought under the Washington Product Liability Act (WPLA). A Washington Actos claim is considered a "product liability claim" under the WPLA, which encompasses common law theories such as negligence, strict liability in tort, and breach of warranty.
Under the WPLA, the statute of limitations for a Washington product liability claim begin to run from the time the claimant discovers "the harm and its cause." The three-year period begins running when a person "discovered, or . . . should have discovered, a factual causal relationship of the product to the harm." This three-year period is a bit longer than the statutes of limitations that apply to Actos bladder cancer claims in other states, many of which are only two years.
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for an Actos claim under Washington law will depend on the specific facts of each person's case.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient, such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Relevant Washington Statute:
Revised Code of Washington
Title 4
Civil procedure
Chapter 4.16
Limitation of actions
RCW 4.16.080 Actions limited to three years.
The following actions shall be commenced within three years:
(1) An action for waste or trespass upon real property;
(2) An action for taking, detaining, or injuring personal property, including an action for the specific recovery thereof, or for any other injury to the person or rights of another not hereinafter enumerated;
(3) Except as provided in RCW 4.16.040(2), an action upon a contract or liability, express or implied, which is not in writing, and does not arise out of any written instrument;
(4) An action for relief upon the ground of fraud, the cause of action in such case not to be deemed to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud;
(5) An action against a sheriff, coroner, or constable upon a liability incurred by the doing of an act in his official capacity and by virtue of his office, or by the omission of an official duty, including the nonpayment of money collected upon an execution; but this subdivision shall not apply to action for an escape;
(6) An action against an officer charged with misappropriation or a failure to properly account for public funds intrusted to his custody; an action upon a statute for penalty or forfeiture, where an action is given to the party aggrieved, or to such party and the state, except when the statute imposing it prescribed a different limitation: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, The cause of action for such misappropriation, penalty or forfeiture, whether for acts heretofore or hereafter done, and regardless of lapse of time or existing statutes of limitations, or the bar thereof, even though complete, shall not be deemed to accrue or to have accrued until discovery by the aggrieved party of the act or acts from which such liability has arisen or shall arise, and such liability, whether for acts heretofore or hereafter done, and regardless of lapse of time or existing statute of limitation, or the bar thereof, even though complete, shall exist and be enforceable for three years after discovery by aggrieved party of the act or acts from which such liability has arisen or shall arise.
|
|
| Continue reading "Washington Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 23, 2011 |
| Arizona Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
An Arizona Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, Arizona law allows you to sue its manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for Arizona Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsArizona law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations.
An Arizona Actos lawsuit is a product liability claim. The Arizona statute of limitations governing product liability claims is relatively short: an Actos claim in Arizona must be brought within two years after the cause of action "accrues." A cause of action in Arizona "accrues" on the date a person discovers their injury, or on the date that they would have discovered their injury if they had exercised "reasonable diligence."
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Arizona law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed bladder cancer as an Actos side effect, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
Actos AttorneysIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the Actos attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout the United States and always offer free consultations to prospective clients.
Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Selected Arizona Statutes:
Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12-542. Injury to person; injury when death ensues; injury to property; conversion of property; forcible entry and forcible detainer; two year limitation.
Except as provided in section 12-551 there shall be commenced and prosecuted within two years after the cause of action accrues, and not afterward, the following actions:
1. For injuries done to the person of another including causes of action for medical malpractice as defined in section 12-561.
2. For injuries done to the person of another when death ensues from such injuries, which action shall be considered as accruing at the death of the party injured.
3. For trespass for injury done to the estate or the property of another.
4. For taking or carrying away the goods and chattels of another.
5. For detaining the personal property of another and for converting such property to one's own use.
6. For forcible entry or forcible detainer, which action shall be considered as accruing at the commencement of the forcible entry or detainer.
Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12-551. Product liability.
A product liability action as defined in section 12-681 shall be commenced and prosecuted within the period prescribed in section 12-542, except that no product liability action may be commenced and prosecuted if the cause of action accrues more than twelve years after the product was first sold for use or consumption, unless the cause of action is based upon the negligence of the manufacturer or seller or a breach of an express warranty provided by the manufacturer or seller.
|
|
| Continue reading "Arizona Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 23, 2011 |
| California Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A California Actos bladder cancer lawsuit allows a person who has developed bladder cancer after using Actos to seek justice. Bladder cancer is a side effect of Actos, and if it can be shown that you developed bladder cancer as a result of using Actos, California law allows you to sue the manufacturer of the drug, which in this case is Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
More HERE
on
Actos and Bladder Cancer
Deadlines for California Actos Bladder Cancer LawsuitsCalifornia law sets deadlines for when lawsuits must be filed. These deadlines are called statutes of limitations. The statute of limitations for product liability claims in California is relatively short: two years. This means a California Actos lawsuit must be filed within two years after the cause of action "accrues." However, California also recognizes the "discovery rule." This means a cause of action accrues when a plaintiff has knowledge of the injury, and knowledge of facts creating, or which in a reasonable person would create, a suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of someone, even if the plaintiff is unable to identify the wrongdoer.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under California law, and therefore the deadline for filing an Actos lawsuit, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
California Actos LawyersIf you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actos, or another drug containing the same active ingredient such as Duetact, ActoPlus Met, or ActoPlus Met RX, contact the California Actos lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco, but we assist clients throughout California and the United States. Use the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page to reach us, or use the toll free number to call us. We represent our clients on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless and until we recover money for you. If we recover nothing for you, you will not be charged anything.
Selected California Statutes:
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335
The periods prescribed for the commencement of actions other than for the recovery of real property, are as follows:
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1
Within two years: An action for assault, battery, or injury to, or for the death of, an individual caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another.
|
|
| Continue reading "California Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 19, 2011 |
| Actoplus Met Bladder Cancer Risk |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The FDA has warned that long-term use of the diabetes drug Actoplus Met and its extended release form, Actoplus Met XR, comes with an increased risk of bladder cancer. Although most of the coverage in the news and on the internet has focused on Actos, the FDA has also warned that the use of Actoplus Met and Actoplus Met XR increases the risk of bladder cancer.
Actoplus Met and Actoplus Met XR are the brand names for tablets that combine Actos (pioglitazone) with the more common diabetes drug, metformin hydrocholride. Actoplus Met was approved for sale in the United States in 2005. Actoplus Met XR was approved in 2009. Like
Actos, Actoplus Met and Actoplus Met XR are manufactured by a Japanese pharmaceutical company, Takeda Pharmaceuticals. Also like
Actos, studies have shown that long-term use of Actoplus Met and its extended release form increase the risk of developing bladder cancer.
If you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Actoplus Met or Actoplus Met XR for more than one year, there is a possibility the cancer was caused by Actoplus Met or Actoplus Met XR. Because Takeda Pharmaceuticals did not warn that using these drugs might cause bladder cancer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals may be legally liable for the injury.
Learn more about the risks of Actoplus Met and Actoplus Met XR HERE.
|
|
| Continue reading "Actoplus Met Bladder Cancer Risk" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 18, 2011 |
| Duetact Bladder Cancer Side Effect |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The FDA has warned that long-term use of the diabetes drug Duetact comes with an increased risk of bladder cancer. Although most of the coverage in the news and on the internet has focused on Actos, Duetact has the same bladder cancer side effect potential, and was included in the FDA's warning.
Duetact is the brand name for Actos (pioglitazone) when combined with another diabetes drug called glimepiride. Duetact was approved for sale in the United States in 2006. Like
Actos, Duetact is manufactured by a Japanese company called Takeda Pharmaceuticals. Also like
Actos, studies have shown that long-term use of Duetact increases the risk of developing bladder cancer.
If you or a loved one developed bladder cancer after using Duetact for more than one year, there is a possibility that Duetact was the cause. Because Duetact contained no warning that using it might cause bladder cancer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals may be legally liable for the injury.
Learn more about the risks of Duetact and Actos HERE.
|
|
| Continue reading "Duetact Bladder Cancer Side Effect" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 09, 2011 |
| FDA: Actos Must Warn of Bladder Cancer Risk |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now requires diabetes drug Actos, generic name pioglitazone, to warn that using it can cause bladder cancer. Unfortunately, the FDA declined to go as far as several European countries that have outright banned
Actos.
On August 4, 2011, the FDA announced drugs containing pioglitazone, such as Actos, will have new labels warning that the use of pioglitazone for more than one year is associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer.
The updated drug labels recommend that healthcare professionals should:
- Not use pioglitazone in patients with active bladder cancer.
- Use pioglitazone with caution in patients with a prior history of bladder cancer.
Further, the label recommends that patients:
- Contact their healthcare professional if they experience any sign of blood in the urine or a red color in the urine or other symptoms such as new or worsening urinary urgency or pain on urination since starting pioglitazone, as these may be due to bladder cancer.
This new warning label falls short of the actions taken by European countries to protect their citizens from developing bladder cancer from
Actos. First
France, then
Germany, banned Actos because of the heightened risk for bladder cancer.
If you are taking Actos, and notice blood in your urine, worsening urges to urinate, or pain while urinating, contact your doctor immediately. These could be signs of bladder cancer. Other drugs containing
Actos include Actoplus Met, Actoplus Met XR and Duetact.
|
|
| Continue reading "FDA: Actos Must Warn of Bladder Cancer Risk" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| July 14, 2011 |
| Californians Injured on Florida Cruise Ships Subject to Short Deadlines for Making Their Claims |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Each year, hundreds of thousands of Californians fly to Florida to take luxury cruises. Very few know that when they purchase their tickets, they give up significant legal rights. If they are injured on the cruise, they have a very short time period in which to assert a legal claim for their injuries, and then can only file suit in federal court in Florida, not a California state court near their home. Although we limit our practice to injuries caused by drug and medical devices, we were surprised to learn this, and want to get this information out there.
If you are injured on a Florida-based cruise, you should seek legal help immediately. Why? Because an injured person must notify the cruise company of their injury within six months. If they don't, they forfeit their right to file suit to recover for their injuries. This notice must meet certain legal requirements to preserve the claim, and ideally should be prepared by a knowledgeable attorney.
Even after sending an appropriate notice letter, the period in which a California cruise ship injury victim may file a lawsuit is extremely short. While the statute of limitations -- the legal deadline for filing a lawsuit -- is two years in California for a personal injury, a person injured on a Florida-based cruise ship must file suit within one year of being injured. Then, even if the person has lived in California their entire life, and only set foot in Florida to board the cruise ship, there is usually only one place they can file their lawsuit: federal court Miami, Florida.
How can a Florida-based cruise line limit the rights of people who live in other states? The reason is that injuries on cruise ships are governed not by the law of Florida or any other state, but by maritime law. Maritime law allows the cruise companies to restrict passengers' legal rights based on the fine print of the cruise ticket.
So if you, a family member, or a friend is injured on a Florida-based cruise, DO NOT DELAY. Contact an attorney for help as soon as possible. Although the attorneys at DeCarli Law are not maritime law specialists, we are happy to assist people injured on cruise ships in locating an attorney who can help them. |
|
| Continue reading "Californians Injured on Florida Cruise Ships Subject to Short Deadlines for Making Their Claims" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| July 06, 2011 |
| Walnut Creek California Propecia Side Effects Lawyers |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Walnut Creek and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by
Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Walnut Creek Propecia LawsuitsA man who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Walnut Creek physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
Donald T. Hay, MD
100 N Wiget Ln #290
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 937-7740
Brian D. Hopkins, MD
100 N Wiget Ln #290
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2952
(925) 937-7740
Parminder S. Sethi, MD
100 N Wiget Ln #290
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 937-7740
Internal Medicine Specialists:
Devorah E. Ben-Zeev, MD
2255 Ygnacio Vly Rd #N
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-3347
(925) 937-4307
Jorge R. Bernett, MD
365 Lennon Ln #200
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 947-2334
Peter D. Binstock, MD
365 Lennon Ln #200
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 947-2334
Timothy A. Carlton, MD
365 Lennon Ln #210
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 944-1100
Nancy Y. Chang, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
Ka Ling Cheung, MD
130 La Casa Via #2-208
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-3045
(925) 944-0166
Mei Y. Chow-Kwan, MD
1777 Oakland Blvd #103
Walnut Creek, CA 94596-4096
(925) 932-3798
Thomas E. Connolly, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2419
(925) 906-2546
Lisa O. Craig, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(916) 688-2000
Carol R. Diraimondo, MD
112 La Casa Via #210
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-3011
(925) 944-0351
Rashmi Dixit, MD, PhD
120 La Casa Via #204
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 210-1050
Ming Fang, MD
112 La Casa Via #130
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(707) 651-1000
Jaya J. Francis, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 906-2555
Jonathan D. Frank, MD
1210 Rossmoor Pkwy
Walnut Creek, CA 94595-2501
(925) 933-1210
Mark A. Hlavac, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2419
(925) 295-4000
Paul C. Korn, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2419
(925) 906-2376
Henry I. Kung, MD
120 La Casa Via #107
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-3092
(925) 945-6070
Edgar Y. Kwan, MD
1210 Rossmoor Pkwy
Walnut Creek, CA 94595-2501
(925) 933-1210
David H. Levy, MD
1450 Maria Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5398
(925) 295-7645
Keyvan J. Nouri, MD
175 Lennon Lane Ste 100
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 296-7150
Joshua D. Perlroth, MD
365 Lennon Ln #200
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 947-2334
Elizabeth C. Seet, MD
1210 Rossmoor Pkwy
Walnut Creek, CA 94595-2501
(925) 933-1210
Richard D. Smith, MD
675 Ygnacio Vly Rd #A-102
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
(925) 977-4335
Robert J. Sosa, MD
1515 Newell Ave
Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5120
(925) 295-4070
Felix A. Vergara, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 295-4000
Albrecht W. Waibel, MD
1515 Newell Ave
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
(925) 295-4682
Ralph J. Weinstein, MD
365 Lennon Ln #200
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(925) 947-2334
Melissa Welch, MD
2625 Shadelands Dr
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2512
(925) 948-4280
Lisa A. Woll, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2419
(925) 906-2040
Ronald H. Yang, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2419
(925) 295-4000
Chousheng Zhang, MD
320 Lennon Ln
Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2419
(925) 817-5619
|
|
| Continue reading "Walnut Creek California Propecia Side Effects Lawyers" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| July 05, 2011 |
| Mission Viejo California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Mission Viejo and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by
Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by
Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Mission Viejo Propecia LawsuitsA man who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Mission Viejo physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
Theodore V. Benderev, MD
26732 Crown Valley Pkwy Ste 327
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 364-4400
Internal Medicine Specialists:
Kenneth L. Rexinger, MD
27800 Medical Center Rd #461
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 364-5600
Steven M. Sorenson, MD
27281 Las Ramblas Ste 200
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 420-3148
Family Medicine Physicians in Mission Viejo:
Phillip N. Cecchini, MD
23962 Alicia Pkwy Ste I-1
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 452-7699
James P. Decock, MD
23962 Alicia Pkwy Suite I-1
Mission Viejo , CA 92691
(949) 452-7699
Gloria L. Martinez, MD
23781 Maquina Ave
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 455-4328
James W. Mayo, MD
23781 Maquina Ave
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(562) 622-4300
Khang A. Nguyen, MD
23781 Maquina Ave
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(888) 988-2800
S Dan Nordman, MD
23781 Maquina Ave
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 455-4320
Elwyn L. Rexinger, MD
27800 Medical Center Rd #461
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 364-5600
Gail V. Silver, MD
23962 Alicia Pkwy Suite I-1
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 452-7699
Michael D. Stouder, MD
23962 Alicia Pkwy # I-1
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
(949) 452-7699
|
|
| Continue reading "Mission Viejo California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| July 01, 2011 |
| Fullerton California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Fullerton and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by
Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by
Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Fullerton Propecia LawsuitsA man who used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Fullerton physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
Stuart L. Feldman, MD
1950 Sunny Crest Dr Ste 3400
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 879-2410
Charles C. Streit, MD
301 W Bastanchury Rd #180
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 870-5970
Alan C. Weinberg, MD
301 W Bastanchury Rd #180
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 870-5970
Internal Medicine Specialists:
William E. Batty, MD
2141 N Harbor Blvd #25000
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 626-8609
Andrew L. Concoff, MD
2141 N Harbor Blvd # 35000
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 626-8630
Friedhelm H. Cordes, MD
2141 N Harbor Blvd # 25000
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 626-8616
Jeffrey R. Dell, MD
100 E Valencia Mesa Dr #206
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 446-5405
Leo S. Garcia Jr., MD
2141 N Harbor Blvd # 25000
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 626-8609
Jay B. Han, MD
100 E Valencia Mesa Dr # 206
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 446-5416
Edward M. Lee, MD
100 E Valencia Mesa Dr, Ste 206
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 446-5050
Sajen J. Mathews, MD
1847 Sunnycrest Dr
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 446-5831
David A. Ruckman, MD
2141 N Harbor Blvd # 25000
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 626-8613
Scott P. Sainburg, MD
1847 Sunnycrest Dr #6
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 446-7800
Jon R. Sherman, MD
1400 N Harbor Blvd #100
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 578-0533
Karen R. Simpson, MD
2720 N Harbor Blvd # 210
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 626-6310
Y H C. Suh, MD
100 E Valencia Mesa Dr #206
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 446-7875
Andy D. Tran, MD
101 Valencia Mesa Dr-Pulmonary Dept
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 992-3965
David M. Weinberg, MD
2240 N Harbor Blvd Ste 200
Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 870-4665
|
|
| Continue reading "Fullerton California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 30, 2011 |
| Orange California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Orange and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by
Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by
Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Orange Propecia LawsuitsA man who used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Orange physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
Thomas E. Ahlering, MD
333 City Blvd West, #2100, Rt 81 - URO
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 456-6068
Ralph V. Clayman, MD
333 City Blvd West # 2100
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 456-3330
Ashok J. Kar, MD
1310 W Stewart Dr Ste 402
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 628-1341
Fred Khonsari, MD
1140 W La Veta Ave #605
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 547-7457
Luis I. Kobashi, MD
1140 W La Veta Ave #750
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 547-5741
Martin J. Weissman, MD
1140 W La Veta Ave #840
Orange, CA 92868-4223
(714) 543-3300
Internal Medicine Specialists:
Shashidhar B. Acharya, MD
1240 E Chapman Ave
Orange, CA 92866
(714) 771-2800
Steven A. Armentrout, MD
1010 W La Veta Ave #200
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 835-1800
Bill S. Bhaskar, MD
1010 W La Veta Ave, Ste 250
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 541-6622
Glenn Chiang, MD
1310 W Stewart Dr Ste 607
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 639-4901
George H. Garcia, MD
1031 W Chapman Ave, Ste 204
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 997-7000
Roy L. Herndon II, MD
1010 W La Veta Ave, Ste 750
Orange, CA 92868-4226
(714) 835-6042
Thomas A. Hryniewicki, MD
845 E Chapman Ave
Orange, CA 92866
(714) 997-2899
Amer E. Jabara, MD
1310 W Stewart Dr Ste 607
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 639-4901
Jay H. Lee, MD
1140 W La Veta Ave #640
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 564-3300
Tiberio F. Lindgren, MD
1010 W La Veta Ave #200
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 835-1800
Ivy-joan E. Madu, MD
1234 W Chapman Ave Ste 205
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 639-1815
Tariq Mahmood, MD
1010 W La Veta Ave, Ste 430
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 541-6622
Pravin V. Sharma, MD
1240 E Chapman Ave
Orange, CA 92866
(714) 771-2800
Melvyn L. Sterling, MD
1310 W Stewart Dr Ste 608
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 997-7431
Jeremiah G. Tilles, MD
101 The City Dr-Rte 81
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 456-5915
Kelly J. Tucker, MD
1140 W La Veta Ave #640
Orange, CA 92868
(714) 564-3300
|
|
| Continue reading "Orange California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 29, 2011 |
| Escondido California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Escondido and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by
Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Escondido Propecia LawsuitsA man who used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Escondido physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
George N. Riffle II, MD
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 745-7079
Internal Medicine Specialists:
Larry C. Chiang, MD
215 S. Hickory St., Suite 118
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 432-6644
Family Medicine Physicians in Escondido:
Kenneth A. Altschuler, MD
488 E. Valley Pkwy., Suite 411
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 745-2000
David A. Borecky, MD
225 E. Second Ave., Suite 210
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 291-6700
Russel Buzard, DO
488 E. Valley Pkwy., Suite 411
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 745-2000
Raymond Dann, MD
160 N. Date St.
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 746-2860
Robin S. Daus, MD
732 N. Broadway
Escondido, CA 92025
(800) 290-5000
Mark D. Hubbard, MD
488 E. Valley Pkwy., Suite 411
Escondido, CA 92025
Andrew T. Kuninobu, MD
732 N. Broadway, Dept. Family Medicine
Escondido, CA 92025
(800) 290-5000
Thomas J. Naegeli, MD
488 E. Valley Pkwy., Suite 411
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 745-2000
Richard E. Pantarotto, MD
732 N. Broadway, Dept. Family Medicine
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 489-3823
Veena A. Prabhakar, DO
488 E. Valley Pkwy., Suite 411
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 745-2000
Richard R. Ricci, MD
488 E. Valley Pkwy., Suite 411
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 745-2000
James H. Schultz Jr., MD
460 N. Elm St.
Escondido, CA 92025
(760) 520-8128
|
|
| Continue reading "Escondido California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 28, 2011 |
| Santa Cruz California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Santa Cruz and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by
Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Santa Cruz Propecia LawsuitsA man who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Santa Cruz physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
Carlos G. Arcangeli, MD
1595 Soquel Dr Ste 110
Santa Cruz, CA 95065-1720
(831) 475-6500
Joseph H. Franks, MD
2911 Chanticleer Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95065
(831) 477-2350
Elizabeth A. Newsom, MD
2911 Chanticleer Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95065
(831) 477-2350
Mark A. Rosen, MD
1595 Soquel Dr #110
Santa Cruz, CA 95065
(831) 475-6500
Internal Medicine Specialists:
Timothy W. Allari, MD
2025 Soquel Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
(831) 458-5610
Satish Chandra, MD
1595 Soquel Dr Ste 400
Santa Cruz, CA 95065-1717
(831) 475-1111
Kenneth M. Conroy, MD
2025 Sequel Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95062-1386
(831) 458-5610
Laura Garvin, MD
2025 Soquel Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
(831) 458-5610
Robert B. Keet, MD
1595 Soquel Dr #400
Santa Cruz, CA 95065
(831) 475-1111
Beata Mach, MD
2025 Soquel Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
(831) 458-5610
Marin S. Muller, MD
2025 Soquel Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
(831) 458-5610
Mary K. Patz, MD
2025 Soquel Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
(831) 458-5610
Michael L. Shorenstein, MD
700 Frederick St #103
Santa Cruz, CA 95062-2239
(831) 458-1002
Rosalind G. Shorenstein, MD
700 Frederick St #103
Santa Cruz, CA 95062-2239
(831) 458-1002
Sharon R. Tapper, MD
2025 Soquel Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
(831) 458-5610
|
|
| Continue reading "Santa Cruz California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 27, 2011 |
| San Bernardino California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in San Bernardino and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
San Bernardino Propecia LawsuitsA man who used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of San Bernardino physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists in San Bernardino:
Franklin M. Chu, MD
489 E 21st St
San Bernardino, CA 92404-4816
(909) 882-2973
Internal Medicine Specialists in San Bernardino:
Samir V. Kubba, MD
401 E Highland Ave Ste C
San Bernardino, CA 92404-3834
(909) 886-6806
Ernest C. Levister Jr., MD
1738 N Waterman Ave Ste 1
San Bernardino, CA 92404-5131
(909) 883-8683
Jason Y. Lin, MD
1700 N Waterman Ave
San Bernardino, CA 92404-5115
(909) 883-8611
General Practice Physician in San Bernardino:
Thach N. Truong, MD
385 E Mill St Ste 13
San Bernardino, CA 92408-1545
(909) 383-0594
|
|
| Continue reading "San Bernardino California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 24, 2011 |
| Riverside California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Riverside and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Riverside Propecia LawsuitsA man who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Riverside physicians who may be able to diagnose your
Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
Alex G. Batta, MD
3660 Arlington Ave
Riverside, CA 92506
(951) 782-3671
Eric J. Forneret, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4806
Paul Y. Gweon, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(909) 353-4692
Ralph A. Highshaw, MD
10683 Magnolia Ave Ste B
Riverside, CA 92505-1893
(951) 734-2900
Ivan S. Lee, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505-3043
(951) 353-3674
Lincoln J. Maynes, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-3230
Winston H. Richards, MD
7117 Brockton Ave
Riverside, CA 92506
Mario A. Robinson, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4797
Internal Medicine Specialists:
Karen E. Aarestad, MD
3660 Arlington Ave
Riverside, CA 92506
(951) 782-3646
Mark D. Allison, MD
4646 Brockton Ave
Riverside, CA 92506
(909) 774-2878
Long T. Bach, MD
10800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4487
Sammy R. Badawi, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505-3043
(951) 353-3594
Verna J. Boykin, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4862
Sarah Chae, MD
6405 Day St
Riverside, CA 92507
(951) 697-5420
Thomas J. Chen, MD
7117 Brockton Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506
(951) 683-6370
Richard Cheng, DO
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505-3043
Roger T. Cheng, MD
3975 Jackson Street #106
Riverside, CA 92503
(909) 359-0660
Rachel J. Chiang, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(909) 798-5466
Stephen R. Colucci, MD
3660 Arlington Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506
(909) 782-3622
Andrew P. Corr, MD
3660 Arlington Ave
Riverside, CA 92506
(909) 782-3613
Susan K. Diethelm, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(323) 667-3825
Kathleen M. Fanning, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4852
Fawaz Gailani, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(909) 353-4861
Elissa Gropen, MD
6900 Brockton Ave Ste 103
Riverside, CA 92506
(909) 684-8397
Warren C. Howard, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-5142
Izabella S. Isaac, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4773
Ramesh Karody, MD
6860 Brockton Ave #11
Riverside, CA 92506-3816
(909) 686-8580
Tony S. Kwon, MD
3660 Arlington
Riverside, CA 92506
(909) 352-5409
Catherine A. Larson, MD
3660 Arlington Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506-3936
(909) 782-3617
Albert Y. Li, MD
3660 Arlington Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506
(909) 697-5400
Ricardo S. Lim, MD
10800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92505
Richard K. Liu, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(909) 353-4388
Melanchton A. Mangoba, MD
3838 Sherman Dr Ste 201
Riverside, CA 92503
(951) 688-1071
Angela D. Martin, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4377
James S. McDonald, MD
6969 Brockton Ave Ste B
Riverside, CA 92506-3813
Michael J. Mendoza, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-5506
Patrick J. Merrill, MD
10800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4831
Steven D. Meyering, MD
3975 Jackson St Ste 100
Riverside, CA 92503-3938
(909) 785-7474
Mina N. Mikhail, MD
4100 Central Ave Suite 106
Riverside, CA 92506
(951)750-1090
Bates D. Moses, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
Chau Nguyen-Thio, MD
3660 Arlington Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506
(951) 782-3612
Virgil J. Nielsen, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92503
Iwan S. Ong, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-5808
Tushar Patel, MD
10800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92505
(909) 353-2000
Somchit T. Poommipanit, MD
16293 Regency Ranch Road
Riverside, CA 92504
John W. Pyne, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4993
G M. Riewe, MD
3660 Arlington Ave
Riverside, CA 92506-3936
(909) 782-3689
Peter W. Sanders, DO
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-3790
Nikhil D. Shah, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
Terence H. Shum, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(909) 353-4816
David C. Stanford, MD
6567 Sunbeam Dr
Riverside, CA 92506-4660
(909) 301-7611
Susan Sun, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4371
Randall L. Tan, MD
10800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4814
David Thio, MD
3660 Arlington Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506
(951) 782-3619
Shelly C. Thio, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(909) 353-5130
Mydiem Tong, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4982
Phuong M. Tran, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505-3043
(951) 353-3342
Luan K. Truong, MD
10800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4919
Kevin Vu, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4427
Joe A. Wohlmuth, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-5070
Carl Wolnisty, MD
3838 Sherman Dr Ste 7
Riverside, CA 92503-4001
(951) 688-5122
Andrew J. Yang, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4316
Daniel C. Yau, MD
10800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside, CA 92505
(951) 353-4187
Sam S. Yeh, MD
10800 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, CA 92505-3043
(951) 353-5392
|
|
| Continue reading "Riverside California Propecia Side Effects Lawyer" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 23, 2011 |
| Fremont Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Fremont and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. All men injured by Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that
Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Fremont Propecia Lawsuits
A man who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Fremont physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Urologists:
Albert V. Assali, MD
38719 Stivers St
Fremont, CA 94536
(510) 797-3234
Mark R. Avon, MD
1999 Mowry Ave #2M
Fremont, CA 94538-1706
(510) 793-3505
John P. Heine, MD
1999 Mowry Ave #2M
Fremont, CA 94538-1706
(510) 793-3505
Bhuvaneshwar R. Sunkavally, MD
1999 Mowry Ave #2D
Fremont, CA 94538-1706
(510) 790-9025
Internal Medicine Specialists:
Zulfiqar Ali, MD
1900 Mowry Ave #105
Fremont, CA 94538-1722
(510) 790-2422
Anita Bhandia, MD
3200 Kearney St
Fremont, CA 94538-2299
(510) 490-1222
C J. Carlson, MD
2333 Mowry Ave #220
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 792-2012
Gloria Carreon, MD
1900 Mowry Ave #202
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 797-1554
David S. Cheng, MD
39275 Mission Blvd #203
Fremont, CA 94539-3061
(510) 791-1115
Helen W. Ho, MD
3200 Kearney St
Fremont, CA 94538-2299
(510) 490-1222
Shakir A. Hyder, MD
2333 Mowry Ave #300
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 796-0222
Kenneth A. Kelsen, MD
734 Mowry Ave
Fremont, CA 94536
(510) 793-3033
Amanda N. Le, MD
3200 Kearney St
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 490-1222
Richard K. Lee, MD
3200 Kearney St
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 490-1222
Amy C. Lin, MD
3200 Kearney St
Fremont, CA 94538-2299
(510) 490-1222
Jiin-Tarng Lin, MD
39271 Mission Blvd #205
Fremont, CA 94539-3039
(510) 792-7875
Anmol S. Mahal, MD
39225 State St
Fremont, CA 94538-1437
(510) 794-1990
Dianne C. Martin, MD
2191 Mowry Ave #500C
Fremont, CA 94538-1725
(510) 790-1045
Kishore B. Narra, MD
716 Mowry Ave
Fremont, CA 94536-4115
(510) 792-1390
Michael W. Parmley, MD
2557 Mowry Ave #12
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 793-3722
Kashmira Ragi-Singh, MD
740 Mowry Ave #102
Fremont, CA 94536-4117
(510) 790-0530
Ahmed K. Sadiq, MD
1900 Mowry Ave #408
Fremont, CA 94538-1722
(510) 795-0880
Ajit P. Sandhu, MD
740 Mowry Ave #101
Fremont, CA 94536-4117
(510) 790-1511
Sukhwinder S. Sandhu, MD
734 Mowry Ave
Fremont, CA 94536-4115
(510) 793-3033
Rohit Sehgal, MD
734 Mowry Ave
Fremont, CA 94536-4115
(510) 793-3033
Robert P. Silva, MD
3200 Kearney St
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 490-1222
Rajesh S. Suri, MD
1900 Mowry Ave #201
Fremont, CA 94538-1722
(510) 790-2202
Benito O. Valencia Jr., MD
680 Mowry Ave
Fremont, CA 94536-4113
(510) 792-1977
Albert Y. Wang, MD
3200 Kearney St
Fremont, CA 94538-2299
(510) 490-1222
Edward J. Whalen, MD
734 Mowry Ave
Fremont, CA 94536-4115
(510) 793-3033
Vanessa V. Wilson, MD
680 Mowry Ave
Fremont, CA 94536-4113
(510) 792-1977
|
|
| Continue reading "Fremont Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 22, 2011 |
| Hayward Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Propecia has caused men in Hayward and elsewhere to develop permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction side effects. It has also caused men to suffer from depression, anxiety and short-term memory loss. All men injured by Propecia potentially have a legal claim against the drug's manufacturer because Propecia's warnings were inadequate: men were not warned that Propecia side effects could be permanent. The California law firm of DeCarli Law represents men in California and throughout the United States injured by Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Hayward Propecia LawsuitsA man who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, likely has a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult a physician. For informational purposes, we have provided for your assistance a directory of Hayward physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Hayward Internal Medicine Specialists:
Francis E. Garriott, MD
20406 Redwood Rd #E
Castro Valley, CA 94546-4317
(510) 537-8232
Frank S. Hsu, MD
21297 Foothill Blvd #102
Hayward, CA 94541-1554
(510) 538-4870
Wei-Fang Ko, MD
27206 Calaroga Ave #212
Hayward, CA 94545-4300
(510) 887-1777
Generoso P. Porciuncula, MD
1251 W Tennyson Rd #4
Hayward, CA 94544-4400
(510) 887-6956
Maina R. Shetty, MD
27206 Calaroga Ave #203
Hayward, CA 94545-4300
(510) 782-7111
|
|
| Continue reading "Hayward Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 17, 2011 |
| Wyoming Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Wyoming Propecia Lawsuit, Wyoming law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Wyoming law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in WyomingA Wyoming
Propecia lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Propecia's manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction and other side effects. A product liability claim brought under Wyoming law can be based on any or all of the following legal theories: negligence, breach of express or implied warranty, and strict liability.
For negligence and strict liability, the Wyoming statute of limitations is four years after the cause of action accrues. The statute of limitations begins to run "when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know the existence of the cause of action." In most other states, there is a two-year statute of limitations.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Wyoming law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
Propecia Attorneys If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Wyoming Statute:
Wyo. Stat. § 1-3-105(a)(iv)(C).
TITLE 1 - CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 3 - LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
1-3-105. Actions other than recovery of real property.
(a) Civil actions other than for the recovery of real property can only be brought within the following periods after the cause of action accrues:
* * *
(iv) Within four (4) years, an action for:
* * *
(C) An injury to the rights of the plaintiff, not arising on contract and not herein enumerated; . . . .
The DeCarli Law
Propecia attorneys will provide telephone consultations and investigate
Propecia side effect claims for residents of all Wyoming cities and towns, including Cheyenne, Casper, Laramie, Jackson, Afton, Arapahoe, Buffalo, Cody, Douglas, Evanston, Evansville, Fox Farm-College, Gillette, Glenrock, Green River, Greybull, Kemmerer, Lander, Lovell, Lyman, Mills, Newcastle, North Rock Springs, Powell, Ranchettes, Rawlins, Riverton, Rock Springs, Saratoga, Sheridan, South Greeley, Thermopolis, Torrington, Warren Air Force Base, Wheatland, Worland, Antelope, Valley-Crestview, Fort Washakie, Ethete, Hoback, Lusk, Moose Wilson Road, Pinedale, Wright, Wilson, Basin, Sleepy Hollow, Sundance, Mountain View, and Pine Bluffs.
|
|
| Continue reading "Wyoming Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 16, 2011 |
| Washington Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Washington Propecia Lawsuit, Washington law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Washington law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in WashingtonIn 1981, the Washington legislature passed the Washington Product Liability Act (WPLA). The WPLA creates a single product liability action, called a "product liability claim." This claim consolidates common law theories that were previously used to bring product liability actions, including negligence, strict liability in tort, and breach of warranty. This encompasses the theories for holding the manufacturers of Propecia liable for men who suffer from
Propecia side effects.
Under the WPLA, the statute of limitations for a Washington product liability claim is three years from the time the claimant discovers "the harm and its cause." The three-year period begins running when a person "discovered, or . . . should have discovered, a factual causal relationship of the product to the harm." This three-year period is a bit longer than the statutes of limitations that apply to Propecia claims in other states, many of which are only two years.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Washington law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Washington Statutes:
Revised Code of Washington
Title 4
Civil procedure
Chapter 4.16
Limitation of actions
RCW 4.16.080 Actions limited to three years.
The following actions shall be commenced within three years:
(1) An action for waste or trespass upon real property;
(2) An action for taking, detaining, or injuring personal property, including an action for the specific recovery thereof, or for any other injury to the person or rights of another not hereinafter enumerated;
(3) Except as provided in RCW 4.16.040(2), an action upon a contract or liability, express or implied, which is not in writing, and does not arise out of any written instrument;
(4) An action for relief upon the ground of fraud, the cause of action in such case not to be deemed to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud;
(5) An action against a sheriff, coroner, or constable upon a liability incurred by the doing of an act in his official capacity and by virtue of his office, or by the omission of an official duty, including the nonpayment of money collected upon an execution; but this subdivision shall not apply to action for an escape;
(6) An action against an officer charged with misappropriation or a failure to properly account for public funds intrusted to his custody; an action upon a statute for penalty or forfeiture, where an action is given to the party aggrieved, or to such party and the state, except when the statute imposing it prescribed a different limitation: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, The cause of action for such misappropriation, penalty or forfeiture, whether for acts heretofore or hereafter done, and regardless of lapse of time or existing statutes of limitations, or the bar thereof, even though complete, shall not be deemed to accrue or to have accrued until discovery by the aggrieved party of the act or acts from which such liability has arisen or shall arise, and such liability, whether for acts heretofore or hereafter done, and regardless of lapse of time or existing statute of limitation, or the bar thereof, even though complete, shall exist and be enforceable for three years after discovery by aggrieved party of the act or acts from which such liability has arisen or shall arise.
The DeCarli Law
Propecia attorneys will provide telephone consultations and investigate Propecia side effect claims for residents of all Washington cities and towns, including Seattle, Spokane, Tacoma, Vancouver, Bellevue, Everett, Federal Way, Kent, Yakima, Bellingham, Lakewood, Kennewick, Shoreline, Renton, Redmond, Kirkland, Olympia, Auburn, Edmonds, Richland, Bremerton, Seattle Hill-Silver Firs, Longview, Cascade-Fairwood, Sammamish, Lynnwood, Puyallup, Pasco, Burien, South Hill, Lacey, Bothell, University Place, Walla Walla, East Hill-Meridian, Des Moines, Wenatchee, Mount Vernon, North Creek, SeaTac, Marysville, Opportunity, Pullman, Paine Field-Lake Stickney, Cottage Lake, Parkland, Picnic Point-North Lynnwood, Inglewood-Finn Hill, Mercer Island, and Spanaway.
|
|
| Continue reading "Washington Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 16, 2011 |
| Diabetes Drug Actos Increases Risk of Bladder Cancer After Long-Term Use |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The FDA announced yesterday that use of the diabetes medication Actos (generic name pioglitazone) for more than one year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer. The warning label for drugs containing pioglitazone will be updated to disclose this risk, and the patient Medication Guide for these medicines will also be revised to include information on the risk of bladder cancer. Other drugs containing
Actos include Actoplus Met, Actoplus Met XR and Duetact.
The new warnings are based on the FDA's five-year interim review of the results of an ongoing ten-year epidemiological study. The interim results showed that although there was no overall increased risk of bladder cancer with pioglitazone use, an increased risk of bladder cancer was noted among patients with the longest exposure to pioglitazone, and in those exposed to the highest cumulative dose of pioglitazone.
Go HERE
to read the complete announcement from the FDA.
|
|
| Continue reading "Diabetes Drug Actos Increases Risk of Bladder Cancer After Long-Term Use" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 15, 2011 |
| Vermont Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Vermont Propecia Lawsuit, Vermont law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Vermont law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in VermontA Vermont
Propecia lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Propecia's manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction and other side effects. Product liability lawsuits in Vermont can be brought under theories of strict liability, negligence, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and breach of suitability for a particular purpose.
Under Vermont law, when a product liability lawsuit is for an "injury to the person suffered by the act or default of another," the claim must be brought three years after the cause of action accrues. This limitation period applies to a Propecia claim because
Propecia side effects are injuries to the person. According to the Vermont statute, "the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue as of the date of the discovery of the injury."
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Vermont law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Vermont Statutes:
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 12, § 512(4) (2002).
Title 12: Court Procedure
Chapter 23: LIMITATION OF TIME FOR COMMENCEMENT OF ACTIONS
§ 512. Assault and battery; false imprisonment; slander and libel; injuries to person or property
Actions for the following causes shall be commenced within three years after the cause of action accrues, and not after:
(1) Assault and battery;
(2) False imprisonment;
(3) Slander and libel;
(4) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, injuries to the person suffered by the act or default of another person, provided that the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue as of the date of the discovery of the injury;
(5) Damage to personal property suffered by the act or default of another.
The DeCarli Law Propecia attorneys will provide telephone consultations and investigate Propecia side effect claims for residents of all Vermont cities and towns, including Burlington, Rutland, South Burlington, Barre, Bennington, Essex Junction, Brattleboro, Montpelier, St. Albans, Winooski, St. Johnsbury, Middlebury, Newport, Springfield, West Brattleboro, Northfield, Bellows Falls, Vergennes, White River Junction, Swanton, Fair Haven, West Rutland, Graniteville-East Barre, Manchester Center, and Morrisville.
|
|
| Continue reading "Vermont Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 14, 2011 |
| Rhode Island Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Rhode Island Propecia Lawsuit, Rhode Island law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Rhode Island law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in Rhode IslandA Rhode Island
Propecia lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Propecia's manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction and other side effects. Rhode Island law permits product liability suits based on strict liability, negligence, and breach of the Uniform Commercial Code warranties of merchantability and fitness.
Under Rhode Island law, claims for personal injury based on strict liability, negligence, or breach of warranty, are subject to a three-year statute of limitations. Many other states have only a two-year period or less. Rhode Island courts also apply the "discovery rule" to pharmaceutical cases. Under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the injured person discovers or reasonably should have discovered the injury upon which the lawsuit is based. A claim made by a man who has suffered Propecia side effects is considered a pharmaceutical case.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Rhode Island law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Rhode Island Statutes:
TITLE 9 Courts and Civil Procedure/Procedure Generally
CHAPTER 9-1 Causes of Action
§ 9-1-14 Limitation of actions for words spoken or personal injuries. - (a) Actions for words spoken shall be commenced and sued within one year next after the words spoken, and not after.
(b) Actions for injuries to the person shall be commenced and sued within three (3) years next after the cause of action shall accrue, and not after, except as provided for otherwise in subsection (c) herein.
(c) As to an action for personal injuries wherein an injured party is entitled to proceed against an insurer pursuant to § 27-7-2, where an action is otherwise properly filed against an insured within the time limitations provided for by this section, and process against the insured tortfeasor has been returned "non estinventus" and filed with the court, then the statutory limitation for filing an action under § 27-7-2 directly against an insurer shall be extended an additional one hundred twenty (120) days after the expiration of the time limitation provided for in subsection (b) herein.
§ 9-1-14.1 Limitation on malpractice actions. - Notwithstanding the provisions of §§ 9-1-13 and 9-1-14, an action for medical, veterinarian, accounting, or insurance or real estate agent or broker malpractice shall be commenced within three (3) years from the time of the occurrence of the incident which gave rise to the action; provided, however, that:
(1) One who is under disability by reason of age, mental incompetence, or otherwise, and on whose behalf no action is brought within the period of three (3) years from the time of the occurrence of the incident, shall bring the action within three (3) years from the removal of the disability.
(2) In respect to those injuries or damages due to acts of medical, veterinarian, accounting, or insurance or real estate agent or broker malpractice which could not in the exercise of reasonable diligence be discoverable at the time of the occurrence of the incident which gave rise to the action, suit shall be commenced within three (3) years of the time that the act or acts of the malpractice should, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, have been discovered.
The DeCarli Law
Propecia attorneys will provide telephone consultations and investigate
Propecia side effect claims for residents of all Rhode Island cities and towns, including Providence, Warwick, Cranston, Pawtucket, East Providence, Woonsocket, Coventry, North Providence, Cumberland, West Warwick, Johnston, South Kingstown, Newport, North Kingstown, Westerly, Bristol, Lincoln, Smithfield, Central Falls, Westerly, Middletown, Portsmouth, Barrington, Narragansett, Burrillville, Tiverton, East Greenwich, Valley Falls, Newport East, Warren, North Smithfield, Scituate, and Glocester. |
|
| Continue reading "Rhode Island Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 13, 2011 |
| New Mexico Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a New Mexico Propecia Lawsuit, New Mexico law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because New Mexico law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in New MexicoA New Mexico
Propecia lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Propecia's manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction and other side effects. New Mexico product liability lawsuits generally include claims for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.
Under New Mexico law, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims is three years, which includes negligence and strict liability. A four-year statute of limitations applies to a personal injury claim based on breach of an implied warranty. By way of comparison, most other states have two-year statutes of limitations. New Mexico also applies the "discovery rule," which means the statute of limitations begins to run only when a person knows, or by exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, both that the person has been injured and the cause of the injury.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under New Mexico law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at
DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant New Mexico Statutes:
N.M. Stat. Ann. 1978, § 37-1-8 (1976).
37-1-8. Actions against sureties on fiduciary bonds; injuries to person or reputation.
Actions must be brought against sureties on official bonds and on bonds of guardians, conservators, personal representatives and persons acting in a fiduciary capacity, within two years after the liability of the principal or the person from whom they are sureties is finally established or determined by a judgment or decree of the court, and for an injury to the person or reputation of any person, within three years.
The DeCarli Law Propecia attorneys will provide telephone consultations and investigate Propecia side effect claims for residents of all New Mexico cities and towns, including Albuquerque, Las Cruces, Santa Fe, Clovis, Hobbs, Rio Rancho, Roswell, South Valley, Farmington, Alamogordo, Anthony, Artesia, Aztec, Belen, Bernalillo, Bloomfield, Bosque Farms, Carlsbad, Chaparral, Corrales, Deming, El Cerro-Monterey Park, Eldorado at Santa Fe, Espanola, Gallup, Grants, Kirtland, Las Vegas, Los Alamos, Los Chaves, Los Lunas, Los Ranchos de Albuquerque, Lovington, Meadow Lake, North Valley, Peralta, Portales, Raton, Rio Communities, Ruidoso, Shiprock, Silver City, Socorro, Sunland Park, Taos, Truth or Consequences, Tucumcari, Valencia, White Rock, and Zuni Pueblo.
|
|
| Continue reading "New Mexico Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 12, 2011 |
| New Hampshire Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a New Hampshire Propecia Lawsuit, New Hampshire law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because New Hampshire law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in New HampshireA New Hampshire
Propecia lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Propecia's manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction and other side effects. New Hampshire men suffering from
Propecia side effects potentially may file a product liability lawsuit that alleges negligence, strict tort liability, and breach of warranty.
Under New Hampshire law, the statute of limitations for negligence and strict liability in tort is three years. By way of comparison, in most other states, the statute of limitations is only two years. A claim based on breach of warranty must be brought within four years from the date of the sale of the defective product, in this case Propecia. New Hampshire courts apply the discovery rule to determine when the statute of limitations began to run.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under New Hampshire law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant New Hampshire Statute:
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 508:4(I) (1997).
TITLE LII
ACTIONS, PROCESS, AND SERVICE OF PROCESS
CHAPTER 508
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
508:4 Personal Actions. -
I. Except as otherwise provided by law, all personal actions, except actions for slander or libel, may be brought only within 3 years of the act or omission complained of, except that when the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission were not discovered and could not reasonably have been discovered at the time of the act or omission, the action shall be commenced within 3 years of the time the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission complained of.
II. Personal actions for slander or libel, unless otherwise provided by law, may be brought only within 3 years of the time the cause of action accrued.
The DeCarli Law
Propecia attorneys will provide telephone consultations and investigate Propecia side effect claims for residents of all New Hampshire cities and towns, including Manchester, Nashua, Concord, Rochester, Dover, Derry, Keene, Portsmouth, Laconia, Claremont, Lebanon, Somersworth, Londonderry, Berlin, Exeter, Hampton, Durham, Franklin, Milford, Hanover, Hudson, Pinardville, Suncook, South Hooksett, Newmarket, Littleton, and Newport. |
|
| Continue reading "New Hampshire Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 11, 2011 |
| Montana Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Montana Propecia Lawsuit, Montana law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Montana law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in MontanaA Montana
Propecia lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Propecia's manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction and other side effects. Most Montana product liability lawsuits include causes of action for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.
The statute of limitations for personal injury claims in Montana is three years. A Propecia side effect is a personal injury, therefore this three-year statute applies to a Montana Propecia claim. Montana law also recognizes the discovery doctrine, which means that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until a man has discovered the facts constituting his claim. How this doctrine applies to an individual case can be a complicated legal issue, so Montana men who suspect they have developed erectile dysfunction (ED) or other side effect from Propecia should not delay in consulting with an attorney regarding a potential claim.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Montana law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Montana Statutes:
Montana Code Annotated 2009
Title 27. Civil Liability, Remedies, and Limitations
Chapter 2. Statutes of Limitations
Part 1. General Provisions
27-2-102. When action commenced. (1) For the purposes of statutes relating to the time within which an action must be commenced:
(a) a claim or cause of action accrues when all elements of the claim or cause exist or have occurred, the right to maintain an action on the claim or cause is complete, and a court or other agency is authorized to accept jurisdiction of the action;
(b) an action is commenced when the complaint is filed.
(2) Unless otherwise provided by statute, the period of limitation begins when the claim or cause of action accrues. Lack of knowledge of the claim or cause of action, or of its accrual, by the party to whom it has accrued does not postpone the beginning of the period of limitation.
(3) The period of limitation does not begin on any claim or cause of action for an injury to person or property until the facts constituting the claim have been discovered or, in the exercise of due diligence, should have been discovered by the injured party if:
(a) the facts constituting the claim are by their nature concealed or self-concealing; or
(b) before, during, or after the act causing the injury, the defendant has taken action which prevents the injured party from discovering the injury or its cause.
(4) Subsection (3) does not apply to actions involving the limitations contained in 27-2-205.
Part 2. Time Limits on Specific Kinds of Actions
27-2-204. Tort actions -- general and personal injury. (1) Except as provided in 27-2-216 [childhood sexual abuse] and 27-2-217 [ritual abuse of minor], the period prescribed for the commencement of an action upon a liability not founded upon an instrument in writing is within 3 years.
(2) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action to recover damages for the death of one caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another is within 3 years, except when the wrongful death is the result of a homicide, in which case the period is within 10 years.
(3) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action for libel, slander, assault, battery, false imprisonment, or seduction is within 2 years. |
|
| Continue reading "Montana Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 10, 2011 |
| Maryland Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Maryland Propecia Lawsuit, Maryland law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Maryland law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in MarylandA Maryland
Propecia lawsuit is brought as a product liability claim because Propecia's manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of the risk of permanent erectile dysfunction and other side effects. Maryland product liability lawsuits usually include claims for negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability.
Maryland has a three-year statute of limitations for all negligence actions and tort-based claims, including those founded in strict liability. In most other states, there is a two-year statute of limitations. Maryland also recognizes the "discovery rule." This means that the statute of limitations begins running once a plaintiff knows or should know he or she has been wronged.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Maryland law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Maryland Statute:
Md. Code Ann., Cts. Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Three-year limitation in general.
A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.
The DeCarli Law Propecia attorneys will provide telephone consultations and investigate Propecia side effect claims for residents of all Maryland cities and towns, including Annapolis, Arnold, Aspen Hill, Baltimore, Bel Air North, Bel Air South, Bethesda, Bowie, Carney, Catonsville, Chillum, Clinton, College Park, Columbia, Dundalk, Edgewood, Eldersburg, Ellicott City, Essex, Fort Washington, Frederick, Gaithersburg, Germantown, Glen Burnie, Greater Landover, Hagerstown, Lochearn, Middle River, Milford Mill, Montgomery Village, North Bethesda, North Potomac, Olney, Oxon Hill-Glassmanor, Parkville, Perry Hall, Pikesville, Potomac, Randallstown, Rockville, Salisbury, Severn, Severna Park, Silver Spring, South Gate, St. Charles, Suitland-Silver Hill, Towson, Wheaton-Glenmont, and Woodlawn. |
|
| Continue reading "Maryland Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 09, 2011 |
| Maine Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Maine Propecia Lawsuit, Maine law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Maine law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in MaineA Maine
Propecia lawsuit is a product liability claim because
Propecia is a defective product: the warning of the risks of erectile dysfunction and other side effects was inadequate. Maine product liability lawsuits include claims based on strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.
Under Maine law, claims for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty where there has been an injury to the person must be brought within six years of when the cause of action "accrues." In most other states, the statute of limitations is only two years.
Maine courts have held that a cause of action accrues when "there has been a manifestation of physical injury to a person, sufficient to cause him actual loss, damage or suffering from a defective, unreasonably dangerous product."
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Maine law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Maine Statutes Establishing Limitation Periods:
Title 14: COURT PROCEDURE -- CIVIL
Part 2: PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TRIAL
Chapter 205: LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
Subchapter 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS
§752. Six years.
All civil actions shall be commenced within 6 years after the cause of action accrues and not afterwards, except actions on a judgment or decree of any court of record of the United States, or of any state, or of a justice of the peace in this State, and except as otherwise specially provided.
Title 18-A: PROBATE CODE
Article 2: INTESTATE SUCCESSION AND WILLS
Part 8: GENERAL PROVISIONS
§2-804. Actions for wrongful death
(a). Whenever the death of a person shall be caused by a wrongful act, neglect or default, and the act, neglect or default is such as would, if death had not ensued, have entitled the party injured to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, then the person or the corporation that would have been liable if death had not ensued shall be liable for damages as provided in this section, notwithstanding the death of the person injured and although the death shall have been caused under such circumstances as shall amount to a felony.
(b). Every wrongful death action must be brought by and in the name of the personal representative of the deceased person. The amount recovered in every wrongful death action, except as otherwise provided, is for the exclusive benefit of the surviving spouse if no minor children, of the children if no surviving spouse, one-half for the exclusive benefit of the surviving spouse and one-half for the exclusive benefit of the minor children to be divided equally among them if there are both surviving spouse and minor children and to the deceased's heirs to be distributed as provided in section 2-106 if there is neither surviving spouse nor minor children. The jury may give damages as it determines a fair and just compensation with reference to the pecuniary injuries resulting from the death and in addition shall give such damages that will compensate the estate of the deceased person for reasonable expenses of medical, surgical and hospital care and treatment and for reasonable funeral expenses. In addition, the jury may give damages not exceeding $500,000 for the loss of comfort, society and companionship of the deceased, including any damages for emotional distress arising from the same facts as those constituting the underlying claim, to the persons for whose benefit the action is brought. The jury may also give punitive damages not exceeding $250,000. An action under this section must be commenced within 2 years after the decedent's death. If a claim under this section is settled without an action having been commenced, the amount paid in settlement must be distributed as provided in this subsection. A settlement on behalf of minor children is not valid unless approved by the court, as provided in Title 14, section 1605.
(c). Whenever death ensues following a period of conscious suffering, as a result of personal injuries due to the wrongful act, neglect or default of any person, the person who caused the personal injuries resulting in such conscious suffering and death shall, in addition to the action at common law and damages recoverable therein, be liable in damages in a separate count in the same action for such death, brought, commenced and determined and subject to the same limitation as to the amount recoverable for such death and exclusively for the beneficiaries in the manner set forth in subsection (b), separately found, but in such cases there shall be only one recovery for the same injury.
(d). Any action under this section brought against a governmental entity under Title 14, sections 8101 to 8118, shall be limited as provided in those sections.
|
|
| Continue reading "Maine Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 08, 2011 |
| Berkeley Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Berkeley Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Berkeley physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Berkeley Urologists:
Chi K. Lee, MD
2999 Regent St #612
Berkeley, CA 94705-2121
(510) 848-1727
Andrew J. Pienkny, MD
2999 Regent St #612
Berkeley, CA 94705-2121
(510) 848-1727
Joel A. Piser, MD
2999 Regent St #612
Berkeley, CA 94705-2121
(510) 848-1727
Jeffrey A. Wieder, MD
2999 Regent St #612
Berkeley, CA 94705-2121
(510) 848-1727
Berkeley Internal Medicine Specialists:
Donald E. Golden, MD
907 Keeler Ave
Berkeley, CA 94708
(510) 843-0477
Bernard D. Herring, MD
2960 Sacramento St
Berkeley, CA 94702-2510
(510) 549-3166
Jonathan A. Hollander, MD
3000 Colby St #203
Berkeley, CA 94705-2058
(510) 849-2636
Mildred Michiyo Kawachi, MD
2006 Dwight Way #107
Berkeley, CA 94704-2633
(510) 540-8777
Samuel Wang, MD
2855 Telegraph Ave #204
Berkeley, CA 94705
|
|
| Continue reading "Berkeley Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 07, 2011 |
| San Mateo Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
San Mateo Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of San Mateo physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
San Mateo Urologists:
David J. Caro, MD
101 So San Mateo Dr Ste 205
San Mateo, CA 94401-3819
(650) 348-7770
Robert Q. Hoang, MD
101 S. San Mateo Drive, Suite 205
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 348-7770
San Mateo Internal Medicine Specialists:
Kent M. Adler, MD
218 De Anza Blvd
San Mateo, CA 94402-3913
(415) 591-5547
Stephen J. Carney, MD
50 South San Mateo Dr Ste 330
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 343-6399
John C. Chow, MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste 370
San Mateo, CA 94401-3833
(650) 347-0063
Amy S. Daniher, MD
100 South San Mateo Drive Ste 424
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 696-4440
Gopi D. Desai, MD
50 S. San Mateo Drive, Suite 150
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 696-9770
Andrew C. Engler, MD
290 Baldwin Ave
San Mateo, CA 94401-3915
(650) 343-4597
Peter L. Grossman, MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste 370
San Mateo, CA 94401-3833
(650) 583-5352
Benjamin B. Hu, MD
P O Box 1927
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 378-8038
Paul Jemelian Jr., MD
50 South San Mateo Drive Ste 330
San Mateo, CA 94401-3861
(650) 342-5960
Richard T. Jordan, MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste330
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 340-1631
Steven M. Kurtzman, MD
100 S. San Mateo Drive
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 696-5509
Preston G. Neumayr, MD
100 S San Mateo Dr
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 342-7474
Barry J. Oberstein, MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste 270
San Mateo, CA 94401-3859
(650) 340-9981
Linda L. Oberstein, MD
50 S San Mateo Drive Ste 270
San Mateo, CA 94402
(415) 340-9977
Timothy Q. Offensend, MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste 370
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 342-5211
James D. Palmer, MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste 125
San Mateo, CA 94401
(408) 272-7480
Beatty H. Ramsay Jr., MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste 370
San Mateo, CA 94401-3833
(650) 347-0063
Dale J. Ritzo, MD
101 S San Mateo Dr Ste 206
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 343-4003
Hema A. Shah, MD
50 S San Mateo Dr Ste 370
San Mateo, CA 94401
Ulrike D. Sujansky, MD
100 S San Mateo Dr Ste 424
San Mateo, CA 94401-3805
(650) 342-5211
|
|
| Continue reading "San Mateo Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 06, 2011 |
| San Rafael Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
San Rafael Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of San Rafael physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
San Rafael Internal Medicine Specialist:
Danny D. Kao, MD
1350 S. Eliseo Dr. #130
Greenbrae, CA 94904
(415) 925-6900
|
|
| Continue reading "San Rafael Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 05, 2011 |
| Santa Barbara Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Santa Barbara Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Santa Barbara physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Santa Barbara Urologists:
James A. Cavins, MD
504 W Pueblo St Ste 102
Santa Barbara, CA 93105-6211
(805) 687-7719
Julie A. Chacko, MD
504 W Pueblo St Ste 102
Santa Barbara, CA 93105-6211
(808) 687-7719
David M. Cumes, MD
334 S Patterson Ave #204
Santa Barbara, CA 93111
(805) 964-6771
Daniel J. Curhan, MD
317 Pueblo
Santa Barbara, CA 93105
(805) 682-2621
David J. Laub, MD
2320 Bath St Ste 300
Santa Barbara, CA 93105-4382
(805) 569-2462
Donald B. Rhodes, MD
215 Pesetas Lane
Santa Barbara, CA 93110
(805) 681-7500
Lewis Rubin, MD
2320 Bath St Ste 309
Santa Barbara, CA 93105-5300
(805) 682-7661
Alex Weinstein, MD
504 W Pueblo St Ste 102
Santa Barbara, CA 93105-6211
(805) 687-7719
|
|
| Continue reading "Santa Barbara Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 04, 2011 |
| Pleasanton Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Pleasanton Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Pleasanton physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Pleasanton Urologist:
Bernd W. Schmidt, MD
5565 W Las Positas Blvd #210
Pleasanton, CA 94588-5806
(925) 460-0312
Pleasanton Internal Medicine Specialists:
Badeia A. Morsy, MD
4460 Black Ave #G
Pleasanton, CA 94566-6139
(925) 846-1123
Baijnath Saw, MD
5565 W Las Positas Blvd #300
Pleasanton, CA 94588-5808
(925) 734-0712
Bill N. Wong, MD
5575 W Las Positas Blvd #130
Pleasanton, CA 94588-5800
(925) 463-0590
Peter P. Wong, MD
5725 W Las Positas Blvd #100
Pleasanton, CA 94588
(925) 734-8130
|
|
| Continue reading "Pleasanton Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 03, 2011 |
| Modesto Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Modesto Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Modesto physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Modesto Urologists:
Victor M. Arroyo, MD
600 Coffee Rd
Modesto, CA 95355
(209) 524-1211
Phillip H. Beck, MD
1541 Florida Ave Ste 100
Modesto, CA 95350-4439
(209) 521-0870
Curtis R. Dewar, MD
1541 Florida Ave Ste 100
Modesto, CA 95350
(209) 521-0870
Robert E. LeFevre, MD
1021 Yale Ave
Modesto, CA 95350
(209) 735-3250
Alexander H. Liu, MD
1541 Florida Ave #100
Modesto, CA 95350
(209) 577-3388
Brian T. Mccaffrey, MD
2617 Marblehead Circle
Modesto, CA 95355
(209) 521-0870
Walter J. Schimon, MD
600 Coffee Road
Modesto, CA 95355
(209) 524-1211
Uzay Yasar, MD
1541 Florida Ave #100
Modesto, CA 95350
(209) 577-3388
|
|
| Continue reading "Modesto Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 02, 2011 |
| Irvine Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Irvine Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Irvine physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Irvine Urologist:
Richard J. Szabo, MD
6670 Alton Pkwy
Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 932-5080
Irvine Internal Medicine Specialists:
Maryam Attar-Seyedi, MD
62 Corporate Park # 115
Irvine, CA 92606
(949) 943-9976
Alan H. Kanter, MD
250 E Yale Loop Ste D
Irvine, CA 92604-4697
(949) 551-8855
Bijan Movafegh-Jooryabi, DO
62 Corporate Park # 115
Irvine, CA 92606
(949) 943-9976
James J. Strebig, MD, JD
4050 Barranca Pkwy Suite 250
Irvine, CA 92604
(949) 654-5344
Samy A. Younis, MD
4050 Barranca Pkwy, Ste 240
Irvine, CA 92604
(949) 451-9292
|
|
| Continue reading "Irvine Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 01, 2011 |
| Stockton Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Stockton Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Stockton physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Stockton Urologists:
Ronald C. Allison, MD
415 E Harding Way, Ste H
Stockton, CA 95204
(209) 943-2107
Peter J. Garbeff, MD
2545 W Hammer Lane
Stockton, CA 95209
(209) 941-0371
Andrew D. Giem, MD
2545 W Hammer Lane
Stockton, CA 95209
(209) 941-0371
Kurt R. Roemer, MD
2545 W Hammer Lane
Stockton, CA 95209
(209) 941-0371
Wei Zheng, MD
3132 W March Lane, Ste 5
Stockton, CA 95219
(209) 475-5500
|
|
| Continue reading "Stockton Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 31, 2011 |
| Bakersfield Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Bakersfield Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Bakersfield physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Bakersfield Urologists:
Hau H. Chang, MD
2120 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301-3703
(661) 327-3638
Bruce J. Joseph, MD
6001-B Truxtun Avenue Ste 220
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0675
(661) 323-6660
Shabbir A. Shakir, MD
2808 F Street Ste E
Bakersfield, CA 93301-1833
(661) 395-0688
Bakersfield Internal Medicine Specialists:
Jennifer J. Abraham, MD
3838 San Dimas Street Ste A100
Bakersfield, CA 93301-2284
(661) 324-4963
Eric J. Boren, MD
2121 17th Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301-3704
(661) 327-9693
Tabassum A. Chowdhury, MD
5959 Truxtun Ave Ste 200
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0437
(661) 324-1203
T A. Don Michael, MD
5343 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0641
(661) 861-7933
Franco A. Felizarta, MD
3535 San Dimas Street Ste 24
Bakersfield, CA 93301-1688
(661) 324-3128
Mariana D. Grozdeva, MD
3501 Stockdale Hwy.
Bakersfield, CA 93309-2150
(661) 328-9831
Ramesh C. Gupta, MD
1408 Commercial Way
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0407
(661) 327-4455
J M. Hewitt, MD
1701 26th Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301-2803
(661) 327-2208
Aung K. Htoo, MD
4000 Physicians Plaza
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 328-9831
David E. Kanamori, MD
6501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0633
(661) 322-2206
Vinod Kumar, MD
5020 Commerce Drive
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0631
(661) 324-4100
Naing T. Kyaw, MD
5030 Office Park Dr Ste A
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0612
(661) 323-2847
Ju H. Lee, MD
4580 California Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93309-1104
(661) 327-4411
Robin A. Matuk, MD
5959 Truxtun Ave Ste 200
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0437
(661) 324-1203
Mihaela Mihaluta-Pasaboc, MD
3857 Stockdale Hwy
Bakersfield, CA 93309-2187
(661) 832-1667
Elva M. Miranda, MD
5055 California Ave. Ste 215
Bakersfield, CA 93309
(661) 328-9831
Kim T. Ng, MD
6501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0633
(661) 322-2206
Albert J. Peinado, MD
2701 Chester Ave Ste 201
Bakersfield, CA 93301-2016
(661) 716-1070
James R. Penrose, DO
5055 California Ave Ste 215
Bakersfield, CA 93309
(661) 328-9831
Randolph D. Senining, MD
6501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93309-0633
(661) 391-6305
June Somsin, DO
2701 Chester Ave Ste 202
Bakersfield, CA 93301-2016
(661) 716-9410
Kyaw K. Tun, MD
3733 San Dimas Street Ste 101
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 328-9831
Thu Yein, MD
4000 Physicians Plaza
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 328-9831
|
|
| Continue reading "Bakersfield Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 30, 2011 |
| Anaheim Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Anaheim Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Anaheim physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Anaheim Urologist:
Alfred A. Sidhom, MD
1211 W La Palma Ave #502
Anaheim, CA 92801-2812
(714) 776-7090
Anaheim Internal Medicine Specialists:
Amirtha Ajit, MD
1751 W Romneya Dr Ste F
Anaheim, CA 92801
(714) 776-3180
Rakesh K. Bhola, MD
1781 W Romneya Dr # C
Anaheim, CA 92801
(714) 776-2700
Samuel S. Cho, MD
1188 Euclid St
Anaheim, CA 92801
(714) 254-2747
Franklin A. Hanauer, MD
515 S Beach Blvd, Ste G
Anaheim, CA 92804
(714) 827-4240
Krishan S. Krishna, MD
3356 W Ball Rd No 210
Anaheim, CA 92804
(714) 826-0910
Jorge M. Mandelbaum, MD
1801 W Romneya Dr Ste 207
Anaheim, CA 92801
(714) 956-5200
David R. Simon, MD
3010 W Orange Ave #302
Anaheim, CA 92804-5904
(714) 826-1200
Bookinakere S. Subhas, MD
1751 W Romneya Dr Ste J
Anaheim, CA 92801
(714) 776-3566
|
|
| Continue reading "Anaheim Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 29, 2011 |
| Santa Ana Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Santa Ana Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Santa Ana physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Santa Ana Urologists:
Lamia L. Gabal-Shehab, MD
720 N Tustin Ave, Ste 101
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 973-4600
Matthew L. Greenberger, MD
1801 N Broadway
Santa Ana, CA 92706
(714) 639-1915
Jeffrey E. Kaufman, MD
720 N Tustin Ave #101
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 973-4600
August J. Maggio Jr., MD
1125 E 17th St Suite W-240
Santa Ana, CA 92701
(714) 542-3563
Garo M. Tertzakian, MD
1801 N Broadway
Santa Ana, CA 92706
(714) 639-1915 x634
Santa Ana Internal Medicine Specialists:
Frank Badin, MD
999 N Tustin Ave #103
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 972-8818
Jane D. Curtis, MD
2212 E Fourth St # 304
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 541-3001
Michael W. Fitzgibbons, MD
1913 E 17th St #102
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 541-3744
Nguyen Huu, MD
1220 W Hemlock Way Ste 102
Santa Ana, CA 92707
(714) 957-0040
James G. Lozano, MD
1900 E 4th St
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 967-4591
Carlos Saad, MD
1401 N Tustin Ave Ste 350
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 558-8133
Leon I. Steinberg, MD
801 N Tustin Ave, Ste 205
Santa Ana, CA 92705-3600
(714) 558-6881
Timothy You, MD
1200 N Tustin Ave Ste 140
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 972-8432
|
|
| Continue reading "Santa Ana Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 28, 2011 |
| Oakland Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Oakland Propecia LawsuitsIf you used
Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Oakland physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Oakland Urologists:
James B. Karol, MD
3300 Webster St #710
Oakland, CA 94609-3122
(510) 465-5800
Robert W. Kindrachuk, MD
3300 Webster St #710
Oakland, CA 94609-3122
(510) 465-5800
Robert S. Klein, MD
1950 Franklin St
Oakland, CA 94612-5103
(510) 987-4774
Phillip L. Ross, MD
350 30th St #100
Oakland, CA 94609
(510) 204-8290
C. C. Wen, MD
3300 Webster St #710
Oakland, CA 94609-3122
(510) 465-5800
Qingwei R. Yan, MD
3100 Telegraph Ave #3000
Oakland, CA 94609-3210
(510) 238-1238
|
|
| Continue reading "Oakland Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 27, 2011 |
| Sacramento Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Sacramento Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
Sacramento Propecia LawyersIf you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Sacramento physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Sacramento Area Urologists:
Leonard E. Crawford Jr., MD
2800 L Street #200
Sacramento, CA 95816-5616
(916) 453-5700
Ralph W. DeVere White, MD
4860 Y St #3500
Sacramento, CA 95817
(916) 734-5154
Jonathan A. Eandi, MD
2725 Capitol Ave #300
Sacramento, CA 95816
(916) 262-9370
Michael F. Eyolfson, MD
6600 Bruceville Rd
Sacramento, CA 95823
(916) 688-2081
Suzanne E. Generao, MD
2725 Capitol Ave #300
Sacramento, CA 95816
(916) 262-9370
Louis J. Giorgi Jr., MD
2725 Capitol Ave #300
Sacramento, CA 95816
(916) 262-9370
Kiumars R. Hekmat, MD
500 University Ave #200
Sacramento, CA 95825
(916) 921-1615
James M. Little, MD
6600 Bruceville Rd
Sacramento, CA 95823-4671
(916) 688-2279
Roger K. Low, MD
4860 Y St #2200
Sacramento, CA 95817
(916) 734-2893
David P. Magnus, MD
500 University Ave #200
Sacramento, CA 95825
(916) 921-1615
|
|
| Continue reading "Sacramento Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 26, 2011 |
| Long Beach Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Long Beach Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Long Beach physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Long Beach Urologists:
John E. Ingram, MD
2888 Long Beach Blvd Ste 340
Long Beach, CA 90806-1530
(562) 595-6891
Michael Norris, MD
2888 Long Beach Blvd Ste 340
Long Beach, CA 90806-1530
(562) 595-6891
Long Beach Internal Medicine Specialists:
Rafael A. Amaro, MD
200 Oceangate Ste 100
Long Beach, CA 90802
(310) 973-2161
Ronald A. Bitter, MD
2650 Elm Ave Ste 309
Long Beach, CA 90806-1600
(562) 595-8549
Richard L. Bock, MD
200 Oceangate Ste 100
Long Beach, CA 90802
(562) 435-3666
Deanna G. Cheung, MD
2865 Atlantic Ave Ste 227
Long Beach, CA 90806-7427
(562) 595-9366
Chester Choi, MD
1050 Linden Ave
Long Beach, CA 90813-3321
(562) 491-9352
Michael Freund, MD
3650 E South St Ste 110
Lakewood, CA 90712-1502
(562) 531-6140
Stanley A. Golanty, MD
2777 Pacific Ave Ste E
Long Beach, CA 90806-2625
(562) 426-6571
Stephen W. Hryniewicki, MD
2650 Elm Ave Ste 309
Long Beach, CA 90806
(562) 595-8549
Peter Y. Kaneshige, MD
2650 Elm Ave Ste 309
Long Beach, CA 90806
(562) 595-8549
Patricia A. Maciog, MD
6226 E Spring St Ste 240
Long Beach, CA 90815-1423
(562) 938-7129
Laurie A. Mortara, MD
2880 Atlantic Ave Ste 170
Long Beach, CA 90806-1715
(562) 595-7164
Kenneth E. Smith, MD
6475 E Pacific Coast Hwy, Ste 197
Long Beach, CA 90803
(562) 491-7006
Howard L. Worcester, MD
2650 Elm Ave Ste 309
Long Beach, CA 90806
(562) 595-8549
|
|
| Continue reading "Long Beach Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 25, 2011 |
| Fresno Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Fresno Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. Other side effects include depression and short term memory loss. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Fresno physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Fresno Urologists:
Narayana S. Ambati, MD
7014 N Whitney
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 322-2800
Kuldip J. Behniwal, MD
7014 N Whitney
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 321-2800
Jatinder P. Grewall, MD
7014 N. Whitney
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 321-2800
John C. Julian, MD
7014 N Whitney
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 322-2600
Yuk-yuen M. Leung, MD
7014 N Whitney Ave
Fresno, CA 93720-0155
(559) 321-2800
Thomas X. Minor, MD
6113 N. Fresno #101
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 438-2777
Nadeem U. Rahman, MD
6113 N. Fresno
Fresno, CO 93710
(559) 438-2777
H. G. Rainwater, MD
6113 N. Fresno #101
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 438-2777
William M. Schiff, MD
7014 N Whitney
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 321-2800
|
|
| Continue reading "Fresno Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 24, 2011 |
| Drug Humira Can Cause Permanent Damage to Optic Nerves |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Lawsuits have been filed throughout the country by people whose optic nerves were permanently damaged by Humira, generic name Adalimumab. While similar drugs have a specific warning about the risks of optic nerve damage, Humira does not.
Humira, manufactured by Abbott Laboratories, is one of the most lucrative drugs on the market, with 2010 worldwide sales of $6.5 billion. Humira was originally approved in 2003 as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. The FDA has since approved it for treatment of five additional autoimmune diseases: psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, Crohn's disease, moderate to severe chronic psoriasis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
In addition to permanent damage to the optic nerve, lawsuits have also been filed by people who allege their use of Humira caused cancer and peripheral nerve damage. |
|
| Continue reading "Drug Humira Can Cause Permanent Damage to Optic Nerves" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 24, 2011 |
| San Francisco Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
San Francisco Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of San Francisco physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
San Francisco Area Urologist:
Josh T. Hsu, MD
50 So San Mateo Dr Ste 120
San Francisco, CA 94401
(650) 348-7770
San Francisco Internal Medicine Specialists:
James E. Allison, MD
1001 Potrero Ave
San Francisco, CA 94110-3518
(415) 206-8709
William S. Andereck, MD
2100 Webster St Ste 418
San Francisco, CA 94115-2379
(415) 923-3025
Wade M. Aubry, MD
909 Hyde St Ste 125
San Francisco, CA 94109-4832
(415) 771-4366
Larry D. Bryson, MD
450 Sutter St Rm 1723
San Francisco, CA 94108-4101
(415) 362-7177
Richard L. Caplin, MD
2186 Geary Blvd Ste 314
San Francisco, CA 94115-3457
(415) 921-5300
Gary L. Chan, MD
909 Hyde St., Ste. 210
San Francisco, CA 94109-4845
(415) 474-7900
Ofer Eibschutz, MD
601 Van Ness Ave Ste 2008
San Francisco, CA 94102-6310
(415) 674-7000
John C. Fletcher, MD
3838 California St
San Francisco, CA 94118-1522
(415) 387-8805
Mark E. Higgins, MD
45 Castro St Ste 423
San Francisco, CA 94114
(415) 551-9758
Milton H. Louie, MD
450 Stanyan Street
San Francisco, CA 94117-1019
(415) 750-5561
Randall Low, MD
728 Pacific Ave Ste 501
San Francisco, CA 94133-4449
(415) 956-8339
Frank R. Malin, MD
909 Hyde St Ste 125
San Francisco, CA 94109-4832
(415) 771-4366
Kevin M. Man, MD
450 Sutter St Rm 1203
San Francisco, CA 94108-4001
(415) 362-3336
Robert J. Margolin, MD
2001 Union St, Ste 570
San Francisco, CA 94123-4127
(415) 694-7500
Robert E. Marshall, MD
3609 21st St
San Francisco, CA 94114-2912
(415) 695-0876
Philip J. O'Keefe, MD
45 Castro St Ste 138
San Francisco, CA 94114-1029
(415) 558-8200
Mark Oscherwitz, MD
1375 Sutter St, Suite 222
San Francisco, CA 94109
(415) 673-7600
William F. Owen Jr., MD
45 Castro St Ste 402
San Francisco, CA 94114-1027
(415) 861-2400
|
|
| Continue reading "San Francisco Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 23, 2011 |
| San Jose Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
San Jose Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of San Jose physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
San Jose Urologists:
Robert W. Andonian, MD
123 Di Salvo Ave Ste D
San Jose, CA 95128
(408) 279-0742
Mheir Doursounian, MD
4622 Hill Top View Ln
San Jose, CA 95138-2706
Shahram S. Gholami, MD
2581 Samaritan Dr Ste 200
San Jose, CA 95124
(408) 358-2030
Hossein Habibi, MD
175 N Jackson Ave Ste 206
San Jose, CA 95116
(408) 259-7282
Yu Hwong, MD
25 N 14th St Ste 900
San Jose, CA 95112
(408) 998-1877
Dale Y. Kunihira, MD
1884 Mc Daniel Ave
San Jose, CA 95126-1924
(408) 261-0316
David W. Noller, MD
5936 Kyburz Pl
San Jose, CA 95120-1711
(408) 268-9858
Robert P. Panvini, MD
2581 Samaritan Dr Ste 200
San Jose, CA 95124
(408) 358-2030
Timothy H. Tsang, MD
260 International Cir
San Jose, CA 95119
(408) 972-6095
Patrick E. Wherry, MD
2505 Samaritan Dr Ste 201
San Jose, CA 95124
(408) 356-7089
|
|
| Continue reading "San Jose Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 22, 2011 |
| San Diego Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
San Diego Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing
Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of San Diego physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
San Diego Urologists:
Mohamed Bidair, MD
5555 Reservoir Dr., Suite 203
San Diego, CA 92120
(619) 229-2626
Stephen S. Bridge, MD
4060 Fourth Ave., Suite 310
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 297-4707
Vincent J. Flynn, MD
4647 Zion Ave.
San Diego, CA 92120
(619) 528-5000
Jeffrey S. Gaines, MD
4405 Vandever Ave.
San Diego, CA 92120
(619) 516-6366
Irwin Goldstein, MD
6719 Alvarado Rd., Suite 108
San Diego, CA 92120
(619) 265-8865
Nicholas M. Holmes, MD
7930 Frost St., Suite 300
San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 279-8527
Christopher J. Kane, MD
200 W. Arbor Dr., MC 8897
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 543-2626
George W. Kaplan, MD
7930 Frost St., Suite 300
San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 279-8527
Danny L. Keiller, MD
4033 Third Ave., Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 299-0670
Ronald C. MacIntyre, MD
2929 Health Center Dr.
San Diego, CA 92123
(619) 234-6261
William G. Moseley, MD
3969 Fourth Ave., Suite 202
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 260-0060
Peter B. Nanigian, MD
4405 Vandever Ave., Dept. Urology
San Diego, CA 92120
(619) 516-6336
Kenneth Nitahara, MD
4647 Zion Ave.
San Diego, CA 92120
(619) 528-5000
Eugene Y. Rhee, MD
4650 Palm Ave., 3rd Floor
San Diego, CA 92154
(619) 662-5468
James L. Roberts, MD
4033 Third Ave., Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 299-0670
Marianne G. Rochester, MD
3969 Fourth Ave., Suite 202
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 260-0060
Carol E. Salem, MD
4060 Fourth Ave., Suite 310
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 297-4707
Joseph D. Schmidt, MD
200 W. Arbor Dr., MC 8897
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 543-5904
Roger L. Sur, MD
200 W. Arbor Dr., MC 8654
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 543-3572
George P. Szollar, MD
4647 Zion Ave.
San Diego, CA 92120
(619) 528-2575
Evan M. Vapnek, MD
4033 Third Ave., Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92103
(619) 299-0670
|
|
| Continue reading "San Diego Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 21, 2011 |
| Los Angeles Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Men who used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) and other sexual dysfunction have filed lawsuits arguing that Propecia's warnings are inadequate. Our law firm is investigating
Propecia side effects cases throughout California.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Propecia LawsuitsIf you used Propecia, then developed permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), loss of libido, or impotence, you may have a legal claim against Propecia's manufacturer, Merck & Co., Inc. A Propecia lawsuit is the only way to hold Merck accountable for the injuries caused by its product.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
If you or a loved one is experiencing Propecia side effects, contact us today for a free, confidential, no-obligation consultation. You may use the contact form on the left, or call us toll free at 1-800-401-4720.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
The strength of your claim will depend on the medical records documenting your Propecia side effects. If you believe Propecia has caused permanent ED, loss of libido, or impotence, consult with a physician. We have provided a directory for your assistance of Los Angeles physicians who may be able to diagnose your Propecia side effects:
Los Angeles Urologists:
Thomas P. Bogaard, MD
1245 Wilshire Blvd Ste 306
Los Angeles, CA 90017
(213) 483-7707
David A. Ginsberg, MD
1441 Eastlake Ave Ste 7416
Los Angeles, CA 90089
(310) 478-3334
Grady E. Harp, MD
1711 W Temple St
Los Angeles, CA 90026-5446
(626) 791-8123
Samuel K. Lee, MD
201 S Alvarado St Ste 622
Los Angeles, CA 90057
(213) 413-2622
Medhat N. Mansour, MD
2105 Beverly Blvd Ste 207
Los Angeles, CA 90057-2216
(213) 483-1007
Miguel A. Martinez, MD
1701 Cesar Chavez Ave Ste 500
Los Angeles, CA 90033-2464
(323) 261-0108
Rafael G. Mendez, MD
1245 Wilshire Blvd Ste 306
Los Angeles, CA 90017
(213) 483-6830
Charles E. Shapiro, MD
4900 Sunset Blvd 2nd Flr
Los Angeles, CA 90027-5814
(323) 667-5500
John J. Summers, MD
1300 N Vermont Ave Ste 1009
Los Angeles, CA 90027-6005
(323) 666-6210
Barton Tanenbaum, MD
201 South Alvarado Ste 215
Los Angeles, CA 90057
(213) 484-9900
|
|
| Continue reading "Los Angeles Propecia Lawyer California Attorneys" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 21, 2011 |
| Ohio Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For an Ohio Propecia Lawsuit, Ohio law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Ohio law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in OhioAn Ohio
Propecia lawsuit is subject to a two-year statute of limitations. Also, the discovery rule applies because the claim is for an injury caused by a drug. The running of the two-year statute of limitations is triggered when the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority, or when he should have known, that the injury s related to the drug, in this case Propecia.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations is triggered for a man's Propecia claim under Ohio law will depend on the specific facts his case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Ohio Statutes, Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.10(A) & (B):
2305.10 Bodily injury or injury to personal property.
(A) Except as provided in division (C) or (E) of this section, an action based on a product liability claim and an action for bodily injury or injuring personal property shall be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues. Except as provided in divisions (B)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of this section, a cause of action accrues under this division when the injury or loss to person or property occurs.
(B)(1) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury that is not described in division (B)(2), (3), (4), or (5) of this section and that is caused by exposure to hazardous or toxic chemicals, ethical drugs, or ethical medical devices accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(2) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury caused by exposure to chromium in any of its chemical forms accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(3) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury incurred by a veteran through exposure to chemical defoliants or herbicides or other causative agents, including agent orange, accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(4) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury caused by exposure to diethylstilbestrol or other nonsteroidal synthetic estrogens, including exposure before birth, accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
(5) For purposes of division (A) of this section, a cause of action for bodily injury caused by exposure to asbestos accrues upon the date on which the plaintiff is informed by competent medical authority that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, or upon the date on which by the exercise of reasonable diligence the plaintiff should have known that the plaintiff has an injury that is related to the exposure, whichever date occurs first.
* * *
|
|
| Continue reading "Ohio Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 20, 2011 |
| Pennsylvania Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Pennsylvania Propecia Lawsuit, Pennsylvania law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Pennsylvania law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in PennsylvaniaA Pennsylvania
Propecia claim is brought as a product liability lawsuit. Pennsylvania product liability lawsuits commonly include causes of action for strict liability, negligence and breach of warranty. As a claim for personal injury, a Pennsylvania Propecia claim must be brought within two years of the injury. However, Pennsylvania also recognizes the discovery rule.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: Exactly when the statute of limitations for a Propecia claim begins running under Pennsylvania law varies depending on the specific facts of each man's case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Pennsylvania Statute, 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5524:
§ 5524. Two year limitation.
The following actions and proceedings must be commenced within two years:
(1) An action for assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution or malicious abuse of process.
(2) An action to recover damages for injuries to the person or for the death of an individual caused by the wrongful act or neglect or unlawful violence or negligence of another.
(3) An action for taking, detaining or injuring personal property, including actions for specific recovery thereof.
(4) An action for waste or trespass of real property.
(5) An action upon a statute for a civil penalty or forfeiture.
(6) An action against any officer of any government unit for the nonpayment of money or the nondelivery of property collected upon on execution or otherwise in his possession.
(7) Any other action or proceeding to recover damages for injury to person or property which is founded on negligent, intentional, or otherwise tortious conduct or any other action or proceeding sounding in trespass, including deceit or fraud, except an action or proceeding subject to another limitation specified in this subchapter.
(8) (Deleted by amendment).
|
|
| Continue reading "Pennsylvania Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 20, 2011 |
| Illinois Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Illinois Propecia Lawsuit, Illinois law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Illinois law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in IllinoisAn Illinois Propecia lawsuit is a product liability claim. Illinois product liability lawsuits usually include causes of action for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. Generally, a cause of action for personal injuries must be brought within two years of its accrual. The limitations period starts to run when the plaintiff knows, or reasonably should know, (1) that he has suffered an injury, and (2) that the injury was wrongfully caused.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Illinois law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed Propecia side effects, varies based on the specific facts of each man's case, including the medical records documenting his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Illinois Statute, 735 ILCS 5/13‑202:
Sec. 13‑202. Personal injury ‑ Penalty. Actions for damages for an injury to the person, or for false imprisonment, or malicious prosecution, or for a statutory penalty, or for abduction, or for seduction, or for criminal conversation, except damages resulting from first degree murder or the commission of a Class X felony and the perpetrator thereof is convicted of such crime, shall be commenced within 2 years next after the cause of action accrued but such an action against a defendant arising from a crime committed by the defendant in whose name an escrow account was established under the "Criminal Victims' Escrow Account Act" shall be commenced within 2 years after the establishment of such account. If the compelling of a confession or information by imminent bodily harm or threat of imminent bodily harm results in whole or in part in a criminal prosecution of the plaintiff, the 2‑year period set out in this Section shall be tolled during the time in which the plaintiff is incarcerated, or until criminal prosecution has been finally adjudicated in favor of the above referred plaintiff, whichever is later. However, this provision relating to the compelling of a confession or information shall not apply to units of local government subject to the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act. |
|
| Continue reading "Illinois Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 19, 2011 |
| Utah Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Utah Propecia Lawsuit, Utah law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Utah law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in UtahA Utah Propecia lawsuit is a product liability action because
Propecia is viewed as a defective product, because its manufacturer provided an inadequate warning of Propecia's side effects. Utah product liability lawsuits may include claims based on strict liability, negligence, and breach of express or implied warranties. The length of the statute of limitations depends on the type of claim, and because of this, a man who believes he may have suffered a Propecia side effect should not delay seeking legal advice.
Claims for negligence resulting in personal injury must be brought within four years of the injury. The discovery rule may toll the limitations period if the plaintiff makes an initial showing that he did not know and could not reasonably have known of the facts giving rise to the cause of action in time to file a timely claim, and either (a) the defendant concealed the facts or misled the plaintiff, or (b) exceptional circumstances exist that would make barring the claim irrational or unjust, where the hardship to the plaintiff, by applying the statute of limitations, outweighs the prejudice to the defendant from the passage of time. However, the discovery rule does not apply to a plaintiff who becomes aware of his injuries and a possible cause of action before the limitations period expires.
All claims under the Utah Product Liability Act, including those for personal injury, must be brought within two years of the time the claimant discovered or should have discovered both the harm and the cause. The running of the statute of limitations is tolled until the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of due diligence should have discovered: (1) that he was injured; (2) that the product has a causal relationship to the plaintiff's injury, and (3) the identity of the manufacturer.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Utah law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed Propecia side effects, varies based on the specific facts of each man's case, including the nature of his injuries and their documentation in his medical records.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Selected Utah Statutes:
Utah Code Ann. § 78B-2-307. Within four years.
An action may be brought within four years:
(1) after the last charge is made or the last payment is received:
(a) upon a contract, obligation, or liability not founded upon an instrument in writing;
(b) on an open store account for any goods, wares, or merchandise; or
(c) on an open account for work, labor or services rendered, or materials furnished;
(2) for a claim for relief or a cause of action under the following sections of Title 25, Chapter 6, Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act:
(a) Subsection 25-6-5(1)(a), which in specific situations limits the time for action to one year, under Section 25-6-10;
(b) Subsection 25-6-5(1)(b); or
(c) Subsection 25-6-6(1); and
(3) for relief not otherwise provided for by law.
Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6-706. Statute of limitations.
A civil action under this part shall be brought within two years from the time the individual who would be the claimant in the action discovered, or in the exercise of due diligence should have discovered, both the harm and its cause. |
|
| Continue reading "Utah Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 19, 2011 |
| Avandia No Longer To Be Sold in Retail Pharmacies |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced on May 18, 2011, new and strict restrictions on the prescribing and use of Avandia and other rosiglitazone-containing medicines. After November 18, 2011, the drugs will no longer be available in retail pharmacies. Instead, both healthcare providers and patients must enroll in a special program in order to prescribe and receive these drugs.
Rosiglitazone-containing medicines include Avandia, Avandamet, and Avandaryl, and are used to treat type II diabetes. The FDA is imposing these restrictions because of data suggesting an elevated risk of heart attacks among users of Avandia and its generic forms. The restrictions are an implementation of the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), an FDA program to manage serious risks of marketed drugs.
The complete FDA Drug Safety Communication on the new restrictions, and additional information from the FDA, may be found HERE.
|
|
| Continue reading "Avandia No Longer To Be Sold in Retail Pharmacies" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 19, 2011 |
| Oregon Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For an Oregon Propecia Lawsuit, Oregon law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Oregon law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in OregonAn Oregon Propecia lawsuit is a product liability action because it is based on the Propecia manufacturer failing to adequately warn of the erectile dysfunction, or warn that ED and other sexual dysfunction side effects can be permanent. An Oregon product liability action must be filed no later than two years from the date the injury or damage is first discovered or should have been discovered, whichever comes first.
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
PLEASE NOTE: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Oregon law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed Propecia side effects, varies based on the facts of each man's case, including the specific nature of his injuries.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Relevant Oregon Statute, Or. Rev. Stat. § 30.905:
30.905 Time limitation for commencement of action. (1) Subject to the limitation imposed by subsection (2) of this section, a product liability civil action for personal injury or property damage must be commenced not later than two years after the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the personal injury or property damage and the causal relationship between the injury or damage and the product, or the causal relationship between the injury or damage and the conduct of the defendant.
(2) A product liability civil action for personal injury or property damage must be commenced before the later of:
(a) Ten years after the date on which the product was first purchased for use or consumption; or
(b) The expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state in which the product was manufactured, or, if the product was manufactured in a foreign country, the expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state into which the product was imported.
(3) Subject to the limitation imposed by subsection (4) of this section, a product liability civil action for death must be commenced not later than three years after the decedent, the personal representative for the decedent or a person for whose benefit an action could be brought under ORS 30.020 discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the causal relationship between the death and the product, or the causal relationship between the death and the conduct of the defendant.
(4) A product liability civil action for death must be commenced before the earlier of:
(a) Three years after the death of the decedent;
(b) Ten years after the date on which the product was first purchased for use or consumption; or
(c) The expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state in which the product was manufactured, or, if the product was manufactured in a foreign country, the expiration of any statute of repose for an equivalent civil action in the state into which the product was imported.
(5) This section does not apply to a civil action brought against a manufacturer, distributor, seller or lessor of a manufactured dwelling, as defined in ORS 446.003, or of a prefabricated structure, as defined in ORS 455.010. Actions described in this subsection are subject to the statute of limitations provided by ORS 12.135. |
|
| Continue reading "Oregon Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 18, 2011 |
| South Carolina Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a South Carolina Propecia Lawsuit, South Carolina law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because South Carolina law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks HERE
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects HERE
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in South CarolinaA Propecia lawsuit is a personal injury claim. Under South Carolina law, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims is three years. South Carolina also recognizes the "discovery rule."
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the
Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Selected South Carolina Statutes:
South Carolina Code of Laws
Title 15 - Civil Remedies and Procedures
CHAPTER 3. LIMITATION OF CIVIL ACTIONS
ARTICLE 5. ACTIONS OTHER THAN FOR RECOVERY OF REAL PROPERTY
SECTION 15-3-510. General rule.
The periods for the commencement of actions other than for the recovery of real property shall be as prescribed in the following sections.
SECTION 15-3-530. Three years.
Within three years:
(1) an action upon a contract, obligation, or liability, express or implied, excepting those provided for in Section 15-3-520;
(2) an action upon a liability created by statute other than a penalty or forfeiture;
(3) an action for trespass upon or damage to real property;
(4) an action for taking, detaining, or injuring any goods or chattels including an action for the specific recovery of personal property;
(5) an action for assault, battery, or any injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract and not enumerated by law, and those provided for in Section 15-3-545;
(6) an action under Sections 15-51-10 to 15-51-60 for death by wrongful act, the period to begin to run upon the death of the person on account of whose death the action is brought;
(7) any action for relief on the ground of fraud in cases which prior to the adoption of the Code of Civil Procedure in 1870 were solely cognizable by the court of chancery, the cause of action in the case not considered to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud;
(8) an action on any policy of insurance, either fire or life, whereby any person or property, resident or situate in this State, may be or may have been insured, or for or on account of any loss arising under the policy, any clause, condition, or limitation contained in the policy to the contrary notwithstanding; and
(9) an action against directors or stockholders of a monied corporation or a banking association to recover a penalty or forfeiture imposed or to enforce a liability created by law, the cause of action in the case not considered to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts upon which the penalty or forfeiture attached or the liability was created, unless otherwise provided in the law under which the corporation is organized.
SECTION 15-3-535. Limitation on actions commenced under Section 15-3-530(5).
Except as to actions initiated under Section 15-3-545, all actions initiated under Section 15-3-530(5) must be commenced within three years after the person knew or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known that he had a cause of action.
|
|
| Continue reading "South Carolina Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 17, 2011 |
| Minnesota Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Minnesota Propecia Lawsuit, Minnesota law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Minnesota law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks HERE
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects HERE
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in MinnesotaA Minnesota Propecia lawsuit is brought against Propecia's manufacturer. It is a product liability claim because, having failed to come with an adequate warning of the risks of permanent ED and other sexual dysfunction side effects,
Propecia is a defective product. Minnesota product liability lawsuits can be brought under the following legal theories: strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.
Minnesota residents are particularly fortunate because several of the Minnesota statutes of limitations that apply to product liability claims are significantly longer than those of other states. However, Minnesota law does not delay commencement of the running of the limitations period when the person is unaware of their claim.
Under Minnesota law, the statute of limitations for a negligence claim resulting in personal injury is six years from when the cause of action accrues. A strict liability claim and a breach-of-warranty claim both have a four-year statute of limitations in Minnesota. A wrongful death claim has a three-year statute of limitations.
The statute of limitations in Minnesota begins to run when a person sustains just "some" damages. This means that the deadline for filing a lawsuit can begin running even if a person is not aware of their damages or even that they have a claim. Thus, Minnesota residents should never delay seeking legal counsel if they believe they have been injured.
PLEASE NOTE: When the applicable Minnesota statutes of limitations begin to run for an individual man's right to bring a claim for Propecia side effects varies depending on the unique facts of that man's case.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
The DeCarli Law Propecia lawyers will provide telephone consultations and investigate MRI side effect claims for residents of all Minnesota cities and towns, including Minneapolis, St. Paul, Rochester, Duluth, Bloomington, Plymouth, Brooklyn Park, St. Cloud, Eagan, Coon Rapids, Maple Grove, Eden Prairie, Burnsville, Woodbury, Blaine,
Lakeville, Minnetonka, and Apple Valley.
|
|
| Continue reading "Minnesota Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 16, 2011 |
| Massachusetts Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Massachusetts Propecia Lawsuit, Massachusetts law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Massachusetts law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks HERE
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects HERE
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in MassachusettsA Massachusetts lawsuit for Propecia side effects is brought against Propecia's manufacturer. This is a product liability claim because, having caused a side effect for which there was no adequate warning, Propecia is a defective product. The causes of action most frequently asserted in Massachusetts product liability lawsuits are negligence, breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices that violate Chapter 93A of the Massachusetts General Laws.
Under Massachusetts law, the statute of limitations for a negligence action and "tort-based" warranty actions is three years from the date the cause of action "accrues." A cause of action "accrues" on the occurrence of some appreciable injury. However, when an injury is latent or "inherently unknowable," the discovery rule applies and the action does not accrue until a person knows or reasonably should have known that he or she has been injured. For Chapter 93A unfair or deceptive acts or practices claims, the statute of limitations is four years.
PLEASE NOTE: When the Massachusetts statutes of limitations begin to run for an individual man's right to bring a claim for Propecia side effects varies depending on the unique facts of that man's case.
Propecia AttorneysIf you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Selected Massachusetts Statutes:
CHAPTER 260. LIMITATIONS OF ACTION
Section 2A. Tort, contract to recover for personal injuries, and replevin actions.
Except as otherwise provided, actions of tort, actions of contract to recover for personal injuries, and actions of replevin, shall be commenced only within three years next after the cause of action accrues.
Section 4. Certain tort or contract actions for malpractice, error or mistake
Actions of contract or tort for malpractice, error or mistake against attorneys, certified public accountants and public accountants, actions for assault and battery, false imprisonment, slander, libel, actions against sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, constables or assignees in insolvency for the taking or conversion of personal property, actions of tort for injuries to the person against counties, cities and towns, and actions of contract or tort for malpractice, error or mistake against hairdressers, operators and shops registered under sections eighty-seven T to eighty-seven JJ, inclusive of chapter one hundred and twelve, actions of tort for bodily injuries or for death the payment of judgments in which is required to be secured by chapter ninety and also actions of tort for bodily injuries or for death or for damage to property against officers and employees of the commonwealth, and of any county, city or town, arising out of the operation of motor or other vehicles owned by the commonwealth, including those under the control of said commission, or by any such county, city or town, suits by judgment creditors in such actions of tort under section one hundred and thirteen of chapter one hundred and seventy-five and clause (9) of section three of chapter two hundred and fourteen and suits on motor vehicle liability bonds under section thirty-four G of said chapter ninety shall be commenced only within three years next after the cause of action accrues.
Actions of contract or tort for malpractice, error or mistake against physicians, surgeons, dentists, optometrists, hospitals and sanitoria shall be commenced only within three years after the cause of action accrues, but in no event shall any such action be commenced more than seven years after occurrence of the act or omission which is the alleged cause of the injury upon which such action is based except where the action is based upon the leaving of a foreign object in the body.
For the purposes only of this section, an officer or soldier of the military forces of the commonwealth, as defined in chapter thirty-three, shall while performing any lawfully ordered military duty be deemed to be an officer or employee of the commonwealth.
|
|
| Continue reading "Massachusetts Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 15, 2011 |
| Wisconsin Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a Wisconsin Propecia Lawsuit, Wisconsin law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Wisconsin law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks HERE
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects HERE
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in WisconsinA Wisconsin propecia side effect lawsuit is brought against Propecia's manufacturer. It is filed as a product liability claim because Propecia is considered a defective product. In Wisconsin, strict liability and negligence are two alternative theories of recovery for product liability claims.
Under Wisconsin law, causes of action for personal injury must be brought within three years after the cause of action accrues. By way of comparison, many other states only have a two-year limitation period. Wisconsin uses the "discovery rule" to determine when a cause of action accrues. Under the discovery rule, a claim accrues on the date the injury is discovered, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered, which means that is the date the two-year period begins to run.
PLEASE NOTE: When the statute of limitations begins to run for an individual man's right to bring a claim for Propecia side effects varies depending on the unique facts of that man's case.
Propecia AttorneysIf you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Relevant Wisconsin Statute:
Wis. Stat. § 893.54.
893.54 Injury to the person. The following actions shall be commenced within 3 years or be barred:
(1) An action to recover damages for injuries to the person.
|
|
| Continue reading "Wisconsin Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 14, 2011 |
| Arizona Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For an Arizona Propecia Lawsuit, Arizona law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Arizona law creates a deadline for filing a Propecia claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in ArizonaAn Arizona Propecia lawsuit is a product liability claim. In Arizona, a product liability action can be brought using negligence, strict liability, and breach of warranty theories.
The Arizona statute of limitations governing product liability claims is relatively short. This means a Propecia claim in Arizona must be brought within two years after the cause of action "accrues." A cause of action in Arizona "accrues" on the date a person discovers their injury, or on the date that they would have discovered their injury if they had exercised "reasonable diligence."
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under Arizona law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed Propecia side effects, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Selected Arizona Statutes:
Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12-542. Injury to person; injury when death ensues; injury to property; conversion of property; forcible entry and forcible detainer; two year limitation.
Except as provided in section 12-551 there shall be commenced and prosecuted within two years after the cause of action accrues, and not afterward, the following actions:
1. For injuries done to the person of another including causes of action for medical malpractice as defined in section 12-561.
2. For injuries done to the person of another when death ensues from such injuries, which action shall be considered as accruing at the death of the party injured.
3. For trespass for injury done to the estate or the property of another.
4. For taking or carrying away the goods and chattels of another.
5. For detaining the personal property of another and for converting such property to one's own use.
6. For forcible entry or forcible detainer, which action shall be considered as accruing at the commencement of the forcible entry or detainer.
Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12-551. Product liability.
A product liability action as defined in section 12-681 shall be commenced and prosecuted within the period prescribed in section 12-542, except that no product liability action may be commenced and prosecuted if the cause of action accrues more than twelve years after the product was first sold for use or consumption, unless the cause of action is based upon the negligence of the manufacturer or seller or a breach of an express warranty provided by the manufacturer or seller. |
|
| Continue reading "Arizona Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 13, 2011 |
| Arkansas Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For an Arkansas Propecia Lawsuit, Arkansas law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because Arkansas law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction (ED), impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in ArkansasAn Arkansas Propecia lawsuit is a product liability action. Under Arkansas law, a product liability action includes all actions brought for or on account of personal injury, death, or property damaged caused by, or resulting from, the manufacture, construction, design, formula, preparation, assembly, testing, service, warning, instruction, marketing, packaging, or labeling of any product.
Under Arkansas law, the statute of limitations for negligence and strict liability actions is three years, which means that a lawsuit must be filed within three years after any injury or death caused by a defective product. By way of comparison, in most other states, the statute of limitations is only two years. Arkansas also applies the "discovery rule" to product liability claims, which means the statute of limitations does not begin to run until a person knows or by exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered the causal connection between erectile dysfunction (ED) and other side effects, and their taking Propecia.
PLEASE NOTE: When the statute of limitations begins to run for an individual person's right to bring a claim for Propecia side effects varies depending on the specific facts of each person's case. For this reason, if you believe you might have NSF, please contact DeCarli Law immediately.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
|
|
| Continue reading "Arkansas Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 13, 2011 |
| California Propecia Lawsuit |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
For a California Propecia Lawsuit, California law establishes a limited amount of time for when a claim can be filed. This period of time is called a "statute of limitations." Because California law creates a deadline for filing a claim, a man who believes he may be suffering from
Propecia side effects such as permanent erectile dysfunction, impotence, or loss of libido, should consult with an attorney as soon as possible.
Learn More About Propecia and its Risks
HERE
Learn More About Propecia Side Effects
HERE
Learn More About Propecia Lawsuits
HERE
Statute of Limitations for Propecia Lawsuits in CaliforniaA California Propecia lawsuit is a product liability claim. In California, product liability lawsuits commonly include causes of action for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.
The California statute of limitations governing product liability claims is relatively short: two years. This means a Propecia claim in California must be brought within two years after the cause of action "accrues." However, California also recognizes the "discovery rule." That means that a cause of action accrues when a plaintiff has knowledge of the injury, and knowledge of facts creating, or which in any reasonable person would create, a suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of someone, even if the plaintiff is unable to identify the wrongdoer.
Please note: exactly when a cause of action accrues under California law, and therefore also the deadline for bringing a claim for having developed Propecia side effects, varies based on the specific facts of each person's case.
If you or a loved one suffers from permanent erectile dysfunction (ED) or other
Propecia side effects, contact the Propecia lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. Our main office is in San Francisco but we assist clients throughout California and the United States. You may reach us by telephone, or by using the "Contact Us" form on the left side of the page. All inquiries will be completely confidential.
Selected California Statutes:
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335
The periods prescribed for the commencement of actions other than for the recovery of real property, are as follows:
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1
Within two years: An action for assault, battery, or injury to, or for the death of, an individual caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another.
|
|
| Continue reading "California Propecia Lawsuit" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 10, 2011 |
| Propecia Class Action Information |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Although there is a Propecia class action in Canada, there is no such litigation in the United States, and that's a good thing. In the United States, a man who has suffered a
Propecia side effect files his own lawsuit because the injury is severe enough to justify his own, individual claim.
To learn more about why the class action mechanism is inappropriate for a serious bodily injury like a Propecia side effect, read
HERE. Also, to learn more about the potentially dangerous side effects from Propecia, read
HERE.
|
|
| Continue reading "Propecia Class Action Information" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| March 10, 2011 |
| Lawsuit alleges CVS Pharmacy Used Patient Data to Promote Products for Pharmaceutical Companies |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Bloomberg News reported today that CVS Caremark Corp. “was sued over claims it used confidential prescription information to push products on behalf of pharmaceutical makers.”
A complaint filed on March 7 in Philadelphia state court alleges that the company violated the “privacy and rights of consumers by sending letters to customers’ physicians that promoted specific medications.” CVS allegedly identified consumers “by name, date of birth and medications taken, drawing on information obtained through CVS pharmacy services.” The complaint also alleges that CVS was “paid for the promotion of competing drugs” by Merck & Co., AstraZeneca Plc and Bayer AG.
The complete Bloomberg News article may be found HERE
. |
|
| Continue reading "Lawsuit alleges CVS Pharmacy Used Patient Data to Promote Products for Pharmaceutical Companies" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| February 28, 2011 |
| Long-Term Fosamax Use More Than Doubles the Risk of Femur Fractures Among Older Women |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
An article in the latest issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association reports that long-term use of Fosamax and other bisphosphonate drugs by older women more than doubles their chance of suffering
femur fractures. This side effect is particularly disturbing in light of the fact that
Fosamax and similar drugs are prescribed to strengthen the bones of women with osteoporosis.
The article summarizes a study of Canadian women aged 68 years and older who had taken oral bisphosphonates like Fosamax for five years or more. The study found that women who had taken
Fosamax and related drugs for five years or longer were 2.74 times more likely to suffer a
femur fracture than women who had taken the drug for only 100 days or less. In fact, the study concluded that more than half of the
femur fractures among women who had taken bisphosphonates for five years or more were attributable to their use of bisphosphonates.
The article, titled “Bisphosphonate Use and the Risk of Subtrochanteric or Femoral Shaft Fractures in Older Women,” appears in the current issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. A complete copy of the article can be found HERE
.
If you or a family member has suffered a femur fracture after taking
Fosamax or other bisphosphonate for more than five years, you or your family member may have a legal claim for your injury against the drug manufacturer. You may email or call DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation consultation with one of our attorneys to learn more about your legal rights.
|
|
| Continue reading "Long-Term Fosamax Use More Than Doubles the Risk of Femur Fractures Among Older Women" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| January 24, 2011 |
| General Electric Settles NSF Case on the Eve of Trial |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
At the last minute, General Electric settled a case brought by a plaintiff suffering from Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF). Trial was scheduled to begin today in U.S. District Court in Cleveland, Ohio, and would have been the first
NSF case to go to trial. A settlement was reached late Sunday night.
The plaintiff developed NSF in 2005, after receiving several scans during the previous two years using
Omniscan, GE’s brand of
gadolinium-based contrast agent.
Omniscan has caused more people to develop NSF than any other
gadolinium-based contrast agent.
NSF, also known as
nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD), is an incurable disease characterized by hardening of the skin and other body tissues. The only known cause of NSF/NFD is the use of
gadolinium-based contrast agents in medical procedures such as MRI, MRA and CT scans (CAT scans).
|
|
| Continue reading "General Electric Settles NSF Case on the Eve of Trial" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| January 12, 2011 |
| Drug Companies Hide Side Effects From Investors As Well As Consumers |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
From our work representing people injured by dangerous drugs, we’ve learned the hard way that drug companies often conceal drug side effects from consumers. According to a lawsuit now on appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, they also sometimes hide them from their own investors, which underscores the importance of reporting drug side effects to the FDA.
A posting on the Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog reports on a lawsuit filed by investors against Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., whose wholly-owned subsidiary manufacturers Zicam. Investors brought a securities-fraud class-action lawsuit against Matrixx. The lawsuit alleges the company failed to disclose reports from consumers that they lost their sense of smell after using Zicam Cold Remedy nasal gel and swabs. Matrixx received at least a dozen reports between 1999 and 2003, but did not disclose this to potential investors.
The fact that pharmaceutical companies do not disclose reports of drug side effects to their own investors, as well as to the consumers who use their products, reinforces the importance of reporting injuries to the FDA. If you experience a side effect after using a prescription or over-the-counter drug, you should immediately report it to your physician and to the drug manufacturer, but ALSO report it to the FDA. You can easily do this online HERE.
|
|
| Continue reading "Drug Companies Hide Side Effects From Investors As Well As Consumers" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| September 15, 2010 |
| Experts Recognize Possible Link Between Thigh-Bone Fractures and Long-Term Fosamax Use |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
An expert panel announced yesterday that long-term use of Fosamax and other osteoporosis drugs may be related to serious fractures of the thigh bone. Fosamax is one of a class of drugs called bisphosphonates.
The expert task force was convened by the American Society of Bone and Mineral Research, the leading scientific organization on bone science, to investigate the link between bisphosphonates and unusual femur fractures. Of 310 cases of “atypical femur factures,” 94% had taken bisphosphonates for more than five years.
The task force’s report called for better product labeling, along with further research to confirm whether and how bisphosphonates cause femur fractures. In addition to Fosamax, bisphosphonates include Aclasta, Actonel, Aredia, Bondronat, Boniva, Didronel, Fosavance, Reclast, Skelid, and Zometa.
Importantly, the report states that there are often warning signs before the fractures occur. More than half of the patients with fractures reported groin or thigh pain for weeks or months before the facture.
If you or someone you love is a long-term user of Fosamax or another type of bisphosphonate and are experiencing groin or thigh pain, contact your physician immediately.
The task force press release may be found HERE.
The task force’s complete report, “Atypical Subtrochanteric and Diaphyseal Femoral Fractures: Report of a Task Force of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research,” may be found HERE. |
|
| Continue reading "Experts Recognize Possible Link Between Thigh-Bone Fractures and Long-Term Fosamax Use" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| September 13, 2010 |
| Recalled Diet Drug Solo Slim Contains Synephrine |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The FDA recently ordered the recall of diet drug Solo Slim because it contains an undeclared drug ingredient, Didesmethyl Sibutramine, a risk for people with a history of heart disease. However, Solo Slim also contains Synephrine, another potentially dangerous drug that can cause heart attacks, heart palpitations, strokes, and even death.
Synephrine (or oxydrine) has a chemical structure similar to ephedrine. Because of its similarity to ephedrine, Synephrine can cause similar side effects. Based on the potential for cardiovascular toxicity of Synephrine, Health Canada in January 2010 issued guidelines limiting the maximum dose of Synephrine, and prohibiting the sale of health products containing both Synephrine and caffeine without prior submission of clinical evidence of the product’s safety.
Thus, Solo Slim contains two different drugs that can cause heart attacks and strokes. Further, Solo Slim also contains caffeine, which in combination with Synephrine was regarded as potentially dangerous in itself by the Canadian health agency. This chemical makeup makes Solo Slim particularly dangerous for people with a history of coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, arrhythmias or stroke.
As we reported in an earlier post, consumers should return Solo Slim immediately to the place of purchase for a full refund, and contact their physician if they experience any side effects as a result of taking the product. |
|
| Continue reading "Recalled Diet Drug Solo Slim Contains Synephrine" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| September 09, 2010 |
| FDA Orders Label Changes for Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced today that it will require significant label changes for gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) in order to reduce the risk of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF).
The most significant label change is the recommendation that Omniscan, Magnevist and Optimark NOT be used on people with chronic, severe kidney disease, such as dialysis patients, or those with acute kidney injury (AKI). This follows the determination by FDA staff last fall that Omniscan, Magnevist and Optimark are the gadolinium-based contrast agents most likely to cause NSF.
The new labeling also recommends that healthcare professionals:
-
Screen patients prior to administration of a GBCA to identify those with AKI or chronic, severe, kidney disease. These patients appear to be at highest risk for NSF.
- Use the clinical history to screen patients for features of AKI or risk factors for chronically reduced kidney function.
- Avoid use of GBCAs in patients suspected or known to have impaired drug elimination unless the need for the diagnostic information is essential and not available with non-contrasted MRI or other alternative imaging modalities.
-
Monitor for signs and symptoms of NSF after a GBCA is administered to a patient suspected or known to have impaired elimination of the drug.
- Not repeat administration of any GBCA during a single imaging session.
The complete text of the FDA's Safety Announcement may be found HERE.
Unfortunately, this label change comes too late for some people with kidney disease or AKI who were injected with Omniscan, Magnevist and Optimark and as a result, developed NSF. Symptoms of NSF include scaling, hardening and tightening of the skin; red or dark patches on the skin; and joint stiffness. NSF can also cause fibrosis of internal organs that may lead to death. There is no effective treatment for NSF.
If you or a loved one developed any of the NSF symptoms listed above after treatment with a gadolinium-based contrast agent, you may have a legal claim. However, these and all personal injury claims are subject to statutes of limitations -- laws that place deadlines on when a claim may be made. Call the NSF lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation to learn your legal options. We are experienced helping people stricken with NSF, and can provide you with additional information about NSF and your legal rights. |
|
| Continue reading "FDA Orders Label Changes for Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| September 09, 2010 |
| Zarah, a New Generic Form of Yasmin, to Be Sold in the U.S. |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Bad news for women’s health: yet another generic form of the oral contraceptive Yasmin will be sold in the United States. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. announced on Tuesday that it has received approval from the F.D.A. to sell Zarah, a generic version of
Yasmin.
Watson Pharmaceuticals obtained permission to market Zarah in the U.S. by using a procedure called an Abbreviated New Drug Application. This procedure is used to secure approval for generic drugs, and generally does not include any animal or human data to establish the drug’s safety and effectiveness.
Yasmin was previously available in generic form under the name Ocella. Yasmin, Ocella and now
Zarah contain
drospirenone and ethinyl estradiol.
Drospirenone is a synthetic progestin that acts as a potassium-sparing diuretic. This means that women using Yasmin, Ocella and
Zarah run the risk of developing abnormally high potassium levels in their bodies, which can lead to
gallbladder disease,
pulmonary embolism (PE),
deep vein thrombosis (DVT), stroke, heart attacks, and even death. Another similar birth control formulation that also comes with these risks is
YAZ, manufactured by Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals.
Read HERE
to learn more about
Zarah and its risks.
Thousands of women have been injured by YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella side effects, and unfortunately, more women will now be at risk from
Zarah. If you or a loved one has suffered from any of the above side effects after using
Zarah, Yasmin, Ocella or YAZ, contact the Zarah lawyers and YAZ attorneys at DeCarli Law to learn your legal options. We provide free, no-obligation telephone consultations. You will be able to speak to an attorney, not a legal assistant or other support staff member. If we take your case, you will have no obligation to pay us fees unless we obtain a recover for you.
|
|
| Continue reading "Zarah, a New Generic Form of Yasmin, to Be Sold in the U.S." » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 12, 2010 |
| After Years of Delay, Bayer Asks the FDA for Approval of Gadovist, its Safer Gadolinium-Based Contrast Long Available in Europe |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The FDA has just accepted Bayer Schering Pharma's New Drug Application for Gadovist, a gadolinium-based contrast agent currently sold in Europe and other parts of the world, but not in the United States. A New Drug Application is the procedure a drug company uses to formally request the FDA to allow it to sell a drug in the United States.
Although Bayer's application for Gadovist is new, Gadovist itself is not. Gadovist has been approved for sale in the European Union since 1998. However, until recently, Bayer has not sought approval for selling it in the United States. This decision -- whatever its basis -- has put Americans at risk.
Gadovist has a macrocyclic molecular structure, which means the gadolinium ion is surrounded by an organic chelate. In contrast, Magnevist, the Bayer contrast agent sold in the United States, has a linear ionic molecular structure. Magnevist's molecular structure is less stable than Gadovist's macrocyclic structure. As a result, European regulatory agencies recognize than Magnevist is less safe than Gadovist. The EU equivalent of the FDA requires the Magnevist label to state that it is contraindicated (not recommended) for use on people with severe renal impairment. Gadovist does not have this restriction.
A gadolinium-based contrast agent's molecular stability has dire health consequences, especially for people with impaired renal function, like those on dialysis. If a gadolinium-based contrast agent breaks down within the human body, the person is at risk of developing nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF). NSF, also known as nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD), is an incurable disease characterized by hardening of the skin and other body tissues. The only known cause of NSF/NFD is the use of gadolinium-based contrast agents in medical procedures such as MRI, MRA and CT scans (CAT scans).
|
|
| Continue reading "After Years of Delay, Bayer Asks the FDA for Approval of Gadovist, its Safer Gadolinium-Based Contrast Long Available in Europe" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 09, 2010 |
| Recall of Appetite Suppressant “Solo Slim” |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The FDA announced today the recall of appetite suppressants “Solo Slim” and “Solo Slim Extra Strength.” FDA lab analysis revealed that Solo Slim contains an undeclared drug ingredient, Didesmethyl Sibutramine. Sibutramine is an FDA-approved drug used as an appetite suppressant for weight loss. Sibutramine is known to substantially increase blood pressure and/or pulse rate in some patients, and may present a significant risk for patients with a history of coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, arrhythmias or stroke.
Solo Slim Extra Strength is packaged in a white plastic bottle with a blue screw-on cap, as pictured to the left. Each bottle contains 30 capsules, and bears UPC 8 35470 00220 5. All lots of these products with expiration dates including and prior to August 2013 currently available on the market are being recalled. The products were sold to distributors and retail stores nationwide, and on the internet.
Consumers should return the product immediately to the place of purchase for a full refund, and contact their physician if they have experienced any side effects as a result of taking the product.
|
|
| Continue reading "Recall of Appetite Suppressant “Solo Slim”" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| August 02, 2010 |
| DeCarli Law No Longer Accepting Fleet Cases |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
DeCarli Law is no longer taking new clients injured by Fleet Phospho-Soda or Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System.
However, DeCarli Law will continue to investigate claims for kidney injuries resulting from the oral sodium phosphate products Visicol and OsmoPrep. Visicol and OsmoPrep are prescription products used for bowel cleansing before a colonoscopy. On December 11, 2008, the FDA issued a safety alert that they can cause kidney damage, including acute phosphate nephropathy and kidney failure, and in the worst cases, requiring dialysis.
|
|
| Continue reading "DeCarli Law No Longer Accepting Fleet Cases" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 21, 2010 |
| Federal Judge in NSF Litigation Stands By Previous Order on Expert Testimony |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Another favorable ruling was issued in the federal multi-district litigation (MDL), where the claims of some people suffering from nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) are being adjudicated. On Friday, June 18, 2010, Judge Aaron Polster declined to change his earlier ruling on the admission of expert testimony, with one small exception. We reported the earlier ruling in a previous blog entry.
Defendant GE Healthcare filed a motion asking the Court to reconsider its ruling on expert testimony issued on May 4, 2010. GE Healthcare is the manufacturer of Omniscan, one of the most popular and dangerous brands of gadolinium-based contrast agents. As Judge Polster explained in his order, GE Healthcare's motion for reconsideration challenged "every ruling by this Court that resulted in the partial or wholesale exclusion of the testimony or opinions of [GE Healthcare]'s expert witnesses."
Judge Polster declined to change his earlier ruling, with one narrow exception. The previous order excluded in its entirety the testimony of Dr. Waymack, GE Healthcare's lone regulatory expert. However, the plaintiffs had only sought to exclude a portion of his testimony. The Court therefore modified its order to permit Dr. Waymack to testify on matters other than those that the plaintiffs asked to exclude.
Significantly, the Court observed that "the association between gadolinium-based contrast agents, severe renal impairment and NSF is virtually inescapable." NSF, also known as Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy (NFD), is an incurable disease characterized by hardening of the skin and other body tissues. Gadolinium-based contrast agents are used in various medical procedures, including MRI, MRA, and CT scans (CAT scans). As the Court's order observed, diabetics and others with severe kidney impairment are most at risk of developing NSF.
The attorneys at DeCarli Law are familiar with NSF, and represent people who suffer from NSF in state and federal court. If you believe you or a loved has NSF, you may contact the gadolinium lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation. You may also contact them online using the contact form on the lower left portion of this screen.
|
|
| Continue reading "Federal Judge in NSF Litigation Stands By Previous Order on Expert Testimony" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| June 08, 2010 |
| The Cleveland Plain Dealer Reports Fleet Settlement Coming Soon |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The Cleveland Plain Dealer has reported that C.B. Fleet Co. is "close to reaching a final settlement" with people across the country who say their kidneys were harmed by Fleet's over-the-counter laxatives. See Diana Suchetka, "Settlement Coming in Suit Concerning Oral Laxatives," The Plain Dealer, May 19, 2010. C.B. Fleet Co. was the manufacturer of Fleet Phospho-Soda and Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing system.
The article attributed the following statements to C.B. Fleet: "While we are encouraged by the progress made to date on the global settlement, there are several matters remaining to be resolved." "Fleet hopes that a conclusion can be reached soon that serves as a positive outcome for all concerned."
Fleet Phospho-Soda and Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System were over-the-counter products used for bowel cleansing to prepare for a colonoscopy. These products were recalled from the market after the FDA issued a safety alert on December 11, 2008, warning that they can cause kidney failure (renal failure). Side effects include dialysis and the need for a kidney transplant.
You may have a strong legal claim if you or a loved one used one of these products before a colonoscopy, suffered kidney damage or a kidney injury shortly after the colonoscopy, including later requiring dialysis or a kidney transplant. Contact the Fleet injury attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no obligation consultation. As is often the case with legal claims, a short deadline may apply to your claim, so please contact us as soon as possible if you believe you suffered a Fleet kidney injury or Fleet kidney damage.
UPDATE: As of August 1, 2010, DeCarli Law is no longer accepting new cases for people injured by Fleet Phospho-Soda or Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System.
|
|
| Continue reading "The Cleveland Plain Dealer Reports Fleet Settlement Coming Soon" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| May 10, 2010 |
| Federal Judge Rejects GE Healthcare Arguments to Exclude Expert Testimony on Cause of NSF |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A recent court ruling has strengthened the legal position in federal court of those suffering from Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF). A federal judge rejected the arguments of defendant GE Healthcare that plaintiffs should not be allowed to present expert testimony on how GE Healthcare’s brand of gadolinium-based contrast agent, Omniscan, causes NSF.
Some NSF victims have filed their claims in federal court, and their claims have been consolidated using a procedure known as multi-district litigation (MDL). The NSF MDL is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. In federal court, scientific evidence must be sufficiently reliable in order for it to be presented to a jury. General Electric Healthcare claimed that the evidence presented by NSF victims on how Omniscan causes NSF was not sufficiently reliable for the jury to hear the evidence.
The federal court rejected GE Healthcare’s argument, and ruled that evidence supporting the “free gadolinium” theory could be presented to the jury. In rejecting GE Healthcare’s request, the Court noted that GE’s own experts acknowledge that it is “the prevailing theory in the scientific community.” To read the entire order, go HERE
. To learn more about how Omniscan and other gadolinium-based contrast agents cause NSF, go HERE
.
Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF), also known as Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy (NFD), is an incurable disease characterized by hardening of the skin and other body tissues. The only known cause of NSF/NFD are the gadolinium-based contrast agents used in a medical procedure such as an MRI, MRA, angiogram/angioplasty, and CT scan (CAT scan), among others. Diabetics and others with severe kidney impairment are most at risk of developing NSF. The attorneys at DeCarli Law are familiar with NSF, and help people who suffer from NSF assert their legal rights. If you believe you or a loved has NSF, feel free to contact the gadolinium lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation telephone consultation.
|
|
| Continue reading "Federal Judge Rejects GE Healthcare Arguments to Exclude Expert Testimony on Cause of NSF" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| April 27, 2010 |
| California NSF Cases Are Consolidated in San Francisco Superior Court |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Important news for Californians suffering from nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF): California NSF lawsuits have been consolidated in Department 304 of the San Francisco Superior Court, with the Honorable Richard A. Kramer presiding. This means if a case is filed anywhere in a California state court, and is not removed to federal court by the defendants, the case will be overseen by Judge Kramer. You can learn more about California NSF Lawsuits
HERE
.
NSF is a progressive, debilitating disease caused by gadolinium-based contrast agents used in MRIs, MRAs, and other medical scans. The people most likely to develop NSF are those on dialysis or with renal impairment, past kidney transplant recipients, or past liver transplant recipients. Symptoms of NSF include:
- Swelling, thickening and tightening of the skin, especially on the legs or arms;
- Skin is hard, and feels "woody" or "leathery";
- The skin has an "orange peel" appearance;
- Hair loss on the affected area of the skin;
- Joints contract and become inflexible, especially the hands, wrists, elbows or feet, ankles, knees;
- Yellow papules in the whites of the eyes;
- Severely affected people may be unable to walk or close their hands.
If you or a loved one developed NSF symptoms after receiving a medical scan with a gadolinium-based contrast agent, you may receive a free telephone consultation from DeCarli Law. There is no obligation, and a MRI side effect lawyer will speak with you personally. |
|
| Continue reading "California NSF Cases Are Consolidated in San Francisco Superior Court" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| April 09, 2010 |
| New Warning of Blood Clot Risk for YAZ and Yasmin |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The Associated Press is reporting that Bayer HealthCare, "[i]n cooperation with the Food and Drug Administration," has added new warnings about the risk of blood clots that come with using YAZ and Yasmin oral contraceptives. At present, the exact wording of the new warnings has not been reported. In all likelihood, Bayer's warning change was made out of concern that the FDA would order a label change if Bayer did not do so on its own.
YAZ, Yasmin, and Ocella (the generic form of Yasmin) are birth control pills that contain a synthetic progestin called drospirenone, which some studies indicate has double the risk of blood clots compared to other birth control pills. Numerous women have suffered from YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella side effects, including pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), strokes, and gallbladder disease.
The YAZ lawyers and YAZ attorneys at DeCarli Law are evaluating and investigating YAZ side effect lawsuits, Yasmin side effect lawsuits, and Ocella side effect lawsuits. Contact DeCarli Law for a free consultation if you or a loved one may have experienced a side effect of YAZ, Yasmin or a Ocella.
|
|
| Continue reading "New Warning of Blood Clot Risk for YAZ and Yasmin" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| February 09, 2010 |
| Rapamycin a Possible Treatment for Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The immunosuppressant drug
rapamycin, also known as
sirolimus, may help improve the symptoms of
nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF), according to a Case Report published in the February 2010 Journal of the
American Academy of Dermatology.
NSF is a fibrosing disorder caused by the use of
gadolinium-based contrast agents on patients with impaired kidney (renal) function. Some
NSF patients have seen a slowing of the progression of the disease, or even improvement, after kidney transplants. The Case Report indicates that the improvement may result from the immunosuppressant drugs used as part of the transplant procedure.
The Case Report notes that rapamycin targets a protein related to another protein found in the fibrocytes associated with
NSF. An
NSF patient was treated with rapamycin, and after three weeks, experienced a “dramatic” decrease of the swelling, hardening and pain in his lower legs. A complete copy of the Case Report may be obtained
HERE
.
Because there is still no cure for
NSF, another possible treatment is welcome news, complementing other
NSF treatment options. NSF treatments are still experimental and expensive. If you or someone you know has
NSF, you may have a legal claim. Contact the NSF attorneys/MRI lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation consultation, to learn more about your legal rights and the possibility of receiving compensation for your injury.
|
|
| Continue reading "Rapamycin a Possible Treatment for Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF)" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| January 08, 2010 |
| Dialysis or Kidney Transplant After Colonoscopy |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
If you began having serious kidney problems just weeks after a colonoscopy, the cause may have been the Fleet Phospho-Soda or Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System you used before your colonoscopy.
Fleet Phospho-Soda and Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System were over-the-counter products recommended to cleanse the bowels before a colonoscopy. They are a type of oral sodium phosphate or “OSP.” The FDA issued a safety alert on December 11, 2008, warning that OSPs can cause kidney failure (renal failure), and the Fleet products were recalled from the market. Side effects include dialysis and the need for a kidney transplant.
If you or a loved one used one of these products before a colonoscopy, and are now on dialysis or were forced to have a kidney transplant, you may have a strong legal claim. Contact the attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no obligation consultation. As is often the case with legal claims, a short deadline may apply to your claim, so please contact us as soon as possible if you believe you were injured by Fleet Phospho-Soda or Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System.
UPDATE: As of August 1, 2010, DeCarli Law is no longer accepting new cases for people injured by Fleet Phospho-Soda or Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System.
|
|
| Continue reading "Dialysis or Kidney Transplant After Colonoscopy" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| January 08, 2010 |
| 8th Circuit Removes Roadblock for Ocella Injury Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A recent decision from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has removed a barrier to women filing lawsuits for side effects from Ocella birth control.
Ocella is the generic version of the oral contraceptive Yasmin. Drug manufacturers have taken the position that injured people cannot sue them when their generic drug labels fail to adequately warn of dangerous side effects. The manufacturers claim that federal law requires them to have the same warning label on the generic version of their drugs that originally appeared on the name-brand version, and they cannot add additional warnings. The manufacturers rely on a legal doctrine called “preemption,” arguing that because their warning label has been approved by the FDA, federal law bars lawsuits against them for not warning of side effects not listed on the label.
A recent 8th Circuit Court of Appeals decision rejected this argument. Mensing v. Wyeth (2009). The plaintiff, Gladys Mensing, had developed tardive dyskinesia after taking metoclopramide, the generic form of Reglan. The generic drug manufacturers succeeded in convincing the district court to dismiss Ms. Mensing’s claims against them, but the 8th Circuit reversed. “If Mensing's injuries resulted from their failure to take steps to warn their customers sufficiently of the risks from taking their drugs, they may be held liable,” the Court of Appeals wrote. You can read the entire decision HERE.
Because Ocella is a generic drug like metoclopramide, this decision forecloses manufacturers from making the preemption argument in cases brought by women injured by Ocella. The 8th Circuit is the federal appellate court that hears appeals from federal district courts located in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. This means that when failure-to-warn claims arising from Ocella are filed in federal courts in these states, the manufacturers will not be able to argue that they are prohibited by federal law.
Ocella, Yasmin and YAZ are oral birth control pills that have a heightened risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), stroke, heart attack, gallbladder disease, and even death. If you or someone you know has suffered one or more of these side effects, please consider calling the attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free, no obligation telephone consultation. You can learn more about the dangers of YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella HERE. |
|
| Continue reading "8th Circuit Removes Roadblock for Ocella Injury Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| January 06, 2010 |
| Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Speed Multiple Myeloma Cell Growth |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A paper presented at the recent annual convention of the American Society of Hematology reported that exposure to the gadolinium-based contrast agent Omniscan, manufactured by GE Healthcare, speeds the growth of multiple myeloma cells.
Multiple myeloma is a cancer of the white blood cells. MRIs enhanced with gadolinium-based contrast agents are frequently used to image bone marrow, where white blood cells are produced. The researchers found that multiple myeloma cell growth rates were 8-20 times greater after exposure to Ominiscan, depending on the size and frequency of Omniscan exposure.
Significantly, autopsies of eight multiple myeloma patients who had repeated exposures to Omniscan revealed “massive quantities of gadolinium accumulation in tissues” regardless of renal function. This is particularly troubling. The current understanding is that people with impaired renal function are at the greatest risk of the gadolinium ion breaking free from the contrast agent and depositing in their bodies because their kidneys are unable to remove the agent from their bodies before it begins breaking down. These findings indicate that large amounts of gadolinium can be deposited in the body even if a person’s kidneys are functioning normally.
Gadolinium is a rare earth element long known to be toxic to human tissue. Gadolinium-based contrast agents, used for medical scans such as MRI and MRA, cause Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (“NSF”). NSF is a progressive, incurable disease characterized by hardening of the skin and other body tissues. Dialysis patients are most at risk of developing NSF. If you or someone you know has NSF, you may have a legal claim against the manufacturer of the gadolinium-based contrast agent that caused the disease. Contract the NSF lawyers/MRI attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free consultation. |
|
| Continue reading "Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Speed Multiple Myeloma Cell Growth" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| November 20, 2009 |
| European Health Agency to Label Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents as High-, Medium-, or Low-Risk for Causing NSF |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The European Medicines Agency (EMEA) issued a press release today, stating that it would begin classifying gadolinium-based contrast agents into three risk categories based on their likelihood of causing Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF). Of the brands labeled as high risk for NSF, three are sold in the United States. These are Omniscan, Magnevist and OptiMARK.
The EMEA is the European agency responsible for evaluating medicinal products. The EMEA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) reviewed all gadolinium-based contrast agents because of their association with NSF, the serious and sometimes life-threatening condition characterized by the hardening of skin, joint, muscle and organ tissues. Because of the risk for people with kidney problems, the CHMP concluded that all gadolinium-based contrast agents should be classified as either high risk, medium risk, or low risk of causing NSF.
For high-risk contrast agents such as Omniscan, Magnevist and OptiMARK, the CHMP recommends contraindications in patients with severe kidney problems, in patients who are scheduled for or have recently received a liver transplant, and in newborn babies up to four weeks of age. For medium- and low-risk contrast agents, the CHMP recommends adding new warnings for use in patients with kidney problems and those awaiting a liver transplant. Vasovist and MultiHance are the contrast agents labeled by the EMEA as having a medium-risk of causing NSF that are sold in the United States. The only low-risk contrast agent sold in the United States is ProHance.
The EMEA’s categorization of gadolinium contrast agents is similar to the recent conclusions by FDA staff members that Omniscan, Magnevist and OptiMARK are the contrast agents with the greatest risk of causing NSF, which was reported in our previous blog post. However, the European health agency has gone further than the FDA will likely go. The CHMP recommends that laboratory tests be conducted before administration of any gadolinium-based contrast agents in order to screen people for kidney problems. Further, the CHMP recommends the following information for all gadolinium-based contrast agents:
- A warning that the elderly may be at particular risk of NSF due to impaired ability of their kidneys to clear gadolinium from the body.
- A statement that there is no evidence to support the initiation of hemodialysis to prevent or treat NSF in patients not already undergoing hemodialysis.
- A statement that the type and dose of contrast agent used should be recorded.
Hopefully, when the FDA holds its own committee meeting on December 8, 2009 to discuss warning labels for gadolinium-based contrast agents, it will follow the lead of the European health agency. A complete copy of today’s EMEA press release can be found HERE.
Before late 2007, although the manufacturers knew of the NSF risk, they did not inform doctors and patients in the United States that gadolinium-based contrast agents could cause Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) when used on people with kidney problems, especially those undergoing dialysis. If you or a loved one had kidney problems and underwent a medical scan with a gadolinium-based contrast agent, you were at risk of developing NSF. Contact the MRI lawyers/NSF attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free consultation to learn more about your legal options if you think you may have NSF.
|
|
| Continue reading "European Health Agency to Label Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents as High-, Medium-, or Low-Risk for Causing NSF" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| November 17, 2009 |
| FDA Staff: Omniscan, Magnevist and OptiMARK Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Most Likely to Cause NSF |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
In a recently-prepared FDA document, staff members conclude that Omniscan, Magnevist, and OptiMARK are the gadolinium-based contrast agents with the highest risk of causing Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF). A much lower NSF risk is associated with Prohance and Multihance. These conclusions are contained in a briefing document prepared for an upcoming FDA committee meeting that will consider changing the warning labels to reflect these differing risks.
The briefing document was prepared for an Advisory Committee meeting to be held on December 8, 2009, which will re-evaluate the current warnings required for gadolinium-based contrast agents. Currently, all gadolinium-based contrast agents must have the same warning, regardless of brand. This decision was made in 2007, based on the information available at that time about NSF. However, the warning labels may change if the recommendations of FDA staff members are adopted.
Various FDA staff reports contained in the briefing document recommend heightened warning labels for the three more dangerous contrast agents: Omniscan, Magnevist, and OptiMARK. A lesser warning would be required for Prohance and Multihance, which are associated with fewer cases of NSF. In fact, the makers of Optimark have already changed their warning label on their own, as reported in a previous blog post, contraindicating use of their product for patients with severe renal disease and those awaiting a liver transplant.
The FDA documents provide further support for what has already become apparent in NSF lawsuits: most people develop NSF after exposure to Omniscan, Magnevist, and OptiMARK.
If you or someone you know has developed Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) after exposure to gadolinium-based contrast agents during an MRI or other medical procedure, consider contacting the MRI lawyers at DeCarli Law for a free, no obligation consultation.
|
|
| Continue reading "FDA Staff: Omniscan, Magnevist and OptiMARK Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Most Likely to Cause NSF" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| November 12, 2009 |
| Insurance Coverage for Fleet Phospho-Soda Injuries |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A recent settlement likely means more money to pay claims made by people whose kidneys failed after using Fleet Phospho-Soda and Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System.
Hundreds of people had sued C.B. Fleet Inc., the manufacturer of Fleet Phospho-Soda and Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System, after use of these products caused their kidneys to fail. C.B. Fleet submitted the claims to its insurance carriers, but an excess carrier, Axis Surplus Insurance Co., refused to pay the claims. C.B. Fleet has a $10 million excess insurance policy from Axis.
C.B. Fleet and Axis were litigating their coverage dispute in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. Following a settlement, the federal court dismissed the lawsuit on Tuesday, November 10, 2009.
With the insurance coverage dispute resolved, C.B. Fleet now likely has more financial resources to compensate people injured by its products. Fleet Phospho-Soda and Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System were over-the counter oral sodium phosphate (OSP) products that people used before undergoing a colonoscopy. Both products were recalled from the market when it was revealed they caused kidney failure. Other OSP products used before a colonoscopy are Visicol and OsmoPrep, available only by prescription.
If you or a loved one suffered kidney failure (renal failure) within 30 days after using either of these Fleet products, you may have a legal claim for this injury. Importantly, a Fleet lawsuit or OSP lawsuit should be filed sooner rather than later, since C.B. Fleet may have limited financial resources to pay for people’s injuries. Contact a Fleet Phospho attorney or OSP lawyer at DeCarli Law for a free telephone consultation.
UPDATE: As of August 1, 2010, DeCarli Law is no longer accepting new cases for people injured by Fleet Phospho-Soda or Fleet Phospho soda EZ Prep Bowel Cleansing System.
|
|
| Continue reading "Insurance Coverage for Fleet Phospho-Soda Injuries" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| November 10, 2009 |
| Movement Toward Consolidation of New Jersey YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella Side Effect Lawsuits |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The New Jersey Law Journal has reported that New Jersey YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella lawsuits may be consolidated before a single judge. The New Jersey judiciary is considering a request from Judge Donald Volkert Jr. of Prossaic County, New Jersey, that YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella lawsuits be given mass tort status.
13 lawsuits for injuries from YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella birth control pills are pending in Prossaic County, and 26 lawsuits are pending in other New Jersey counties. Judge Volkert wrote the Acting Administrative Director of the Courts in New Jersey on October 22, 2009, requesting mass tort status. The Administrative Office of the Courts has since issued a notice that it will accept public comments on Judge Volkert’s proposal through the end of this year.
If mass tort status is granted, the cases will be consolidated in one of three New Jersey counties where mass torts are heard: Atlantic County, Bergen County, or Middlesex County. Selection of a specific county and judge can have a significant impact on claims made by women injured by YAZ, Yasmin or Ocella. Injured women may have other options, such as filing their claims in federal court, or in the courts of other states such as California.
YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella birth control pills can cause pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), stroke, heart attacks, hyperkalemia, gallbladder disease, and even death. The risk of blood clots (thrombosis) is twice as great with YAZ/Yasmin/Ocella as it is with older birth control pills. Likewise, unlike YAZ/Yasmin/Ocella, older forms of birth control pills have virtually no risk of gallbladder disease or hyperkalemia. You can learn more about the side effects of YAZ/Yasmin/Ocella, and about YAZ lawsuits, HERE.
If you or a loved one has died, suffered a stroke, blood clot, heart attack, arrhythmia or had their gallbladder removed after using YAZ, Yasmin or Ocella oral contraceptives, contact the YAZ lawyers of DeCarli Law for a free consultation.
|
|
| Continue reading "Movement Toward Consolidation of New Jersey YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella Side Effect Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| November 10, 2009 |
| New OptiMARK Label Warns Against Any Use on Patients with Severe Renal Failure |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Mallinkrodt Inc., the manufacturer of gadolinium-based contrast agent OptiMARK, announced yesterday that it has submitted a label change that warns against any use of OptiMARK on patients with severe renal impairment due to the risk of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF). OptiMARK’s revised label contraindicates the product’s use in patients with acute or chronic severe renal insufficiency (kidney failure), as well as patients with acute renal insufficiency of any severity due to hepato-renal syndrome or in the perioperative liver transplant period.
This is a major change from OptiMARK’s prior warning, which was significantly weaker. The prior warning, which all other gadolinium-based contrast agents sold in the United States also have, only cautions against use of OptiMARK on patients with severe renal failure. It says that OptiMARK and the other gadolinium-based contrast agents can properly be used if “the diagnostic information is essential and not available with non-contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).” The new label will warn against any use of OptiMARK on patients with kidney failure.
Although OptiMARK’s maufacturer describes this label change as voluntary, there is likely more going on behind the scenes. On December 8, 2009, the Food and Drug Administration’s Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee will meet to review the current warnings required for gadolinium-based contrast agents. It may be that Mallinckrodt was worried the FDA would order a warning change, so it decided to make the change itself in order to claim the move was voluntary.
This label change is important for the ongoing MRI side effect lawsuits brought by people suffering from Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF), especially for people who contracted NSF after using the GE product Omniscan. OptiMARK’s chemical structure is similar to the structure of Omniscan. Both have a linear structure, which may contribute to why OptiMARK and Omniscan have an approximately 30% lower thermodynamic stability than their competitors Magnevist, Multihance, and Prohance. Also, a disproportionately greater number of people have developed NSF after use of Omniscan and OptiMARK relative to the market share of these products. It will be interesting if GE makes a similar label change for Omniscan -- or if the FDA orders GE to do so.
Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) is a debilitating and sometimes fatal disease characterized by the hardening of the skin, muscle and internal organs. If you or a loved one developed NSF after treatment with a gadolinium-based contrast agent during an MRI or other medical scan, contact the MRI side effect lawyers/NSF attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free consultation to learn about your legal options.
|
|
| Continue reading "New OptiMARK Label Warns Against Any Use on Patients with Severe Renal Failure" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| November 04, 2009 |
| UV-A1 Therapy Promising for Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A recent study indicates that UV-A1 phototherapy has promise for reducing symptoms of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF). Four patients with NSF were treated with UV-A1. The skin on all four softened, and for two, their hand and leg mobility improved.
The study was conducted by the Dermatology Department of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, in Dallas. All four patients had NSF and were undergoing hemodialysis. They were treated with a UV-A1 bed with varying levels of radiation depending on their complexion. UVA radiation has a long wavelength that enables it to reach the subcutis (the connective tissue beneath the skin).
After treatment, the effected areas of the skin on all four of the patients became less hard, and had decreased pain and itching. Two had increased joint mobility, resulting in an enhanced quality of life. Significantly, their improvements appeared to last. The patients were tracked for varying lengths of time after treatment (six months to one year), and their improved skin condition and mobility lasted during those periods. This is very promising, since the improvements from other experimental treatments appear far more temporary.
You may obtain a complete copy of this study HERE. Tran, et al., “UV-A1 Therapy for Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis,” Archives of Dermatology, Vol. 145, No. 10, Oct. 2009, pp. 1170-1182.
Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) is a disease characterized by hardening of the skin and other tissue caused by exposure to a gadolinium-based contrast agent. Dialysis patients and others with renal failure (kidney failure) are at greatest risk for this MRI side effect. If you have been diagnosed with NSF or are experiencing symptoms of NSF (hardening of the skin, joint pain), you may have a legal claim against the manufacturer of the contrast agent used in your treatment. Contact the MRI lawyers/NSF attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free consultation.
|
|
| Continue reading "UV-A1 Therapy Promising for Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF)" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| October 27, 2009 |
| Larger Doses and Repeated Use of Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Increase Risk of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
A recently-published study concludes that larger and more frequent use of gadolinium-based contrast agents increases the risk of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF). Patients who received higher cumulative and total doses of gadolinium-based contrast agents had a higher risk of developing NSF than those who received lower doses. Abujudeh, et al., “Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis after Gadopentetate Dimeglumine Exposure: Case Series of 36 Patients,” Radiology, Oct. 2009.
The study focused exclusively on the risk of NSF from Magnevist (gadopentetate dimeglumine), Bayer Healthcare’s brand of gadolinium-based contrast agent. The study looked at 36 people who had been patients at Massachusetts General Hospital between 1998 and 2007 who had been injected with Magnevist, and no other brand of contrast agent. They were between 30 and 83 years old. All had stage 5 chronic kidney disease, with all but one on dialysis.
The study found that there was a 1.2 times increased risk of developing NSF with each 40-mL increase in cumulative Magnevist exposure. Further, as the cumulative exposure to Magnevist increased, there was a shorter time period between when they developed NSF and their last exposure to Magnevist. In short, your risk of getting NSF increases with each exposure to Magnevist. The authors of the study observed that their findings were consistent with similar findings for Omniscan, the brand of gadolinium-based contrast agent manufactured by GE Healthcare.
You may obtain a copy of the entire study HERE.
If you believe you or a loved one may have developed nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) after exposure to a gadolinium-based contrast agent, contact the NSF lawyers/NSF attorneys are DeCarli Law for a free consultation. If you have been diagnosed with NSF, you may be able to bring an MRI side effect lawsuit/gadolinium lawsuit.
|
|
| Continue reading "Larger Doses and Repeated Use of Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Increase Risk of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF)" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| October 21, 2009 |
| FDA Considered Recommending that GE Gadolinium Contrast Agent Omniscan Never Be Used on Patients with Renal Failure |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
In May 2007, the FDA ordered all manufacturers of gadolinium-based contrast agents to warn of the risk of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) for people with kidney disease. However, the FDA considered specifically targeting General Electric product Omniscan and recommending that it never be used on people with kidney failure.
The current warning required for gadolinium-based contrast agents applies to all brands of gadolinium-based contrast agents. The warning does not state that gadolinium-based contrast agents should never be used for patients with renal failure, just that they only should be used if the diagnostic benefits outweigh the risk of developing NSF.
However, one FDA staff member recommended more. In a recently released FDA document, FDA staff member Dr. Louis Marzella stated that “a contraindication for Omniscan is warranted in patients with severe renal insufficiency.” The term “contraindication” means a recommendation against using a specific medical treatment under certain circumstances.
In the United States, GE’s product Omniscan has an approximately 30% market share of gadolinium-based contrast agents. Bayer HealthCare’s product, Magnevist, is the market leader, with a 50% market share. But despite Omniscan’s smaller market share, in the data reviewed by the FDA in 2007, there were nearly twice as many incidents of NSF among people treated with Omniscan as there were for people treated with Magnevist.
A recent ProPublica article details how the FDA decided not to single out Omniscan, and also discusses strong-arm tactics used by GE to force hospitals to use their product instead of safer alternatives. See Jeff Gerth, “Specter of MRI Disease Haunts GE,” ProPublica, Oct. 15, 2009.
|
|
| Continue reading "FDA Considered Recommending that GE Gadolinium Contrast Agent Omniscan Never Be Used on Patients with Renal Failure" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| October 20, 2009 |
| FDA to Take a Second Look at Warnings on MRI Drugs |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
Federal regulators plan to meet in December to review a 2007 decision to issue a blanket warning about the risks of special imaging drugs that are injected as part of MRI scans.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s determination went against the urging of two reviews that year by FDA doctors who found that an imaging agent made by General Electric presented a greater risk in patients with severely impaired kidneys.
As we reported yesterday, hundreds of MRI patients who had serious kidney problems have contracted a rare, debilitating and sometimes fatal disease called nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NFS) after being injected with contrast agents that contain the toxic metal gadolinium.
GE and other manufacturers of the agents all deny liability. As a result of the FDA action in 2007, they have all placed a "black box" warning on the drugs’ labels to caution doctors who are weighing whether to use them in patients with kidney disease.
Dr. John Jenkins, director of the FDA’s office of new drugs, said in an interview that the agency’s advisory committee on drug safety will revisit the decision on warnings and "see if we need to make any changes" addressing the relative risk of different agents.
Regulators in Europe, as well as the American College of Radiology, have issued stronger warnings than the FDA about GE’s drug, called Omniscan, saying it appeared to be associated with a larger number of NSF cases than its market share would suggest.
GE says there is no evidence that its drug causes NSF but has cautioned against using it with patients who have severe kidney problems. The company’s position paper on Omniscan and NSF is here.
The FDA’s medical review of NSF concluded there was an "undeniable and strong association" between the gadolinium-based agents and the disease. Although its own reviewers said the risks of Omniscan appeared greater, the agency decided that all five such agents marketed in the U.S. should have black box warnings.
A key reason for the agency’s decision to treat the agents as a class was the lack of data, according to R. Dwayne Rieves, the head of the division responsible for the decision.
But since the 2007 action, a detailed database on NSF cases and MRI scans has been jointly developed by the manufacturers and lawyers for plaintiffs who are litigating several hundred lawsuits in federal court.
Next week, Dr. Rieves has agreed to hear about newly developed NSF information from Dr. Emanuel Kanal, a leading radiologist and critic of the FDA’s stance.
***The above article is by Jeff Gerth, of ProPublica, and was first published on October 16, 2009.
|
|
| Continue reading "FDA to Take a Second Look at Warnings on MRI Drugs" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| October 19, 2009 |
| Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) Court Created for YAZ Birth Control Lawsuits |
| Posted By Bob DeCarli |
|
On October 1, 2009, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued an order consolidating lawsuits involving YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella birth control pills. The YAZ multidistrict litigation, or “MDL,” is assigned to the Honorable David R. Herndon, Chief Judge of the Southern District of Illinois.
All personal injury cases filed by women hurt by YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella in federal courts throughout the country will now be transferred to the Southern District of Illinois for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings before Chief Judge Herndon. This includes lawsuits brought by women who have suffered heart attacks, strokes, pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), gallbladder disease, and death. The YAZ MDL will also include a putative class action based on the advertising and marketing of YAZ.
An MDL is a special legal procedure used in United States Federal Courts. It is designed to speed up the process of handling complex cases, including pharmaceutical litigation arising from dangerous drugs. Cases included in an MDL are sent to a single federal court for pre-trial proceedings, but then sent back for trial to the courts in which they were filed. For the many women injured by YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella side effects, this is a positive development, because it allows them and their attorneys to pool their resources against corporate giant Bayer, which manufactures YAZ and Yasmin.
If you or a loved one has suffered from a YAZ side effect, Yasmin side effect, or Ocella side effect, you may contact the YAZ lawyers and YAZ attorneys at DeCarli Law for a free consultation to learn about your legal rights.
|
|
| Continue reading "Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) Court Created for YAZ Birth Control Lawsuits" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| October 18, 2009 |
| Users of Generic Drugs May Have Less Rights When Injured |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
We often hear that generic drugs are the same as name brand drugs, only they cost less. But not according to drug manufacturers. Drug companies are currently arguing to courts around the country that they have less of an obligation to warn of dangerous side effects for the generic versions of their drugs. This means if you’ve been injured after taking a generic drug, you may have less rights than if you were injured after taking the brand name version of the same drug.
Earlier, drug manufacturers claimed that once the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a brand name drug’s label, including its warning, a person injured by a drug side effect could not sue the manufacturer for failing to warn of the side effect. The Supreme Court of the United States rejected this argument in a decision issued earlier this year. Wyeth v. Levine, 129 S. Ct. 1187 (2009).
Despite this Supreme Court decision, drug manufacturers are now asking courts to bar similar claims brought by persons injured by generic drugs. The drug companies argue that because the FDA has approved their generic versions of the drugs with labels that are the same as the labels first approved for the brand name version of the drug, they cannot change their labels without violating federal law. They make this argument despite the fact that manufacturers of the brand name drug must keep their warnings up to date, and can still be sued when their warnings are inadequate and cause an injury.
At the moment, California residents are safe from this absurd argument. Last September, a California Court of Appeal rejected the preemption argument made by a manufacturer of metoclopramide, the generic version of Reglan. McKenney v. Purepac Pharmaceutical Company, No. F052606 (Sept. 25, 2008). Ms. McKenney developed tardive dyskinesia from taking metoclopramide, after the risk of this side effect was downplayed in Purepac’s warning label.
Unfortunately, generic drug manufacturers are continuing their fight to take away the rights of consumers injured by generic drugs. While federal courts in New Hampshire, Illinois, Oklahoma and Louisiana have ruled against the drug manufacturers, they have appealed, and the issue is now pending before federal appellate courts in the 5th, 6th and 8th Circuits. Also, Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) has filed an amendment to the health care reform bill that would make the generic drug manufacturers’ argument federal law.
Check back here regularly to keep track of the latest in this ongoing battle to take away your rights. And if you do not like the idea of the health care reform bill protecting generic drug manufacturers at your expense, contact your representatives in the House and Senate and tell them so
|
|
| Continue reading "Users of Generic Drugs May Have Less Rights When Injured" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| October 07, 2009 |
| Mayo Clinic Study Ignores Risk of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) From Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents |
| Posted By DeCarli Law |
|
The optimistic sounding conclusion of a recent study on the safety of gadolinium-based contrast agents is misleading to the extent it fails to address the risk of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF), also known as Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy (NFD). The study, published by members of the Department of Radiology at the Mayo Clinic, concludes that “gadolinium contrast agents are associated with a very low rate of adverse effects.” Hunt, et al., Frequency and Severity of Adverse Effects of Iodinated and Gadolinium Contrast Materials: Retrospective Review of 456,930 Doses, AJR: 193, October 2009.
This conclusion masks the fact that occurrences of NSF were not counted as part of the study. Incidents of NSF were not counted because the study defined “adverse effects” to only include side effects that occurred during or immediately after administration of the gadolinium-based contrast agent.
The study reports that of 158,439 doses of gadolinium contrast agents between 2002 and 2006, there were only 64 “cases of adverse effects” for gadolinium. But the devil is in the details, in this case the study’s definition of “adverse effect”: “Adverse effect was defined as a reaction occurring in the radiology suite during contrast administration or within 30 minutes of administration.” (Emphasis added)
This definition means that cases of NFS were not even considered in the study. Why? Because the symptoms of NSF appear later than 30 minutes after the administration of the gadolinium-based contrast agent. Generally, NSF symptoms appear between several days and several months after injection of a gadolinium-based contrast agent. Indeed, symptoms have been documented as appearing as long as 18 months later.
Even the cause of NSF does not occur within 30 minutes after administration of the gadolinium-based contrast agent. This is because for a person with normal functioning kidneys, the contrast agent flushes out in approximately 90 minutes. On the other hand, the people who contract NSF are those who still have the contrast agent in their system several hours later, when the gadolinium-based contrast agent begins breaking down. It is only at this point, well after the 30 minute post-administration period considered in the study, that the toxic gadolinium is dispersed throughout the body.
So if someone tells you gadolinium-based contrast agents are safe based on this Mayo Clinic study, you are now warned of the weak basis for such a claim. The study, by its own terms, did not address incidents of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) and other serious long-term side effects related to gadolinium-based contrast agents.
To learn more about Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF), and your legal rights if you have contracted this disease, click HERE. You also may contact the MRI lawyers (gadolinium lawyers) at DeCarli Law for a free, no-obligation consultation.
|
|
| Continue reading "Mayo Clinic Study Ignores Risk of Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) From Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents" » |
|
| Permalink |
| |
| October 01, 2009 |
| The Term "MRI Lawsuit" is Misleading |
| Posted By Bob DeCarli |
|
An internet search for the phrase “MRI lawsuit” will pull up various law-firm and attorney-sponsored websites. The term “MRI lawsuit,” however, is misleading. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) itself does not cause nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF), also known as nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD).
The real culprits are gadolinium-based contrast agents. An injection of a gadolinium-based contrast agent -- even just one -- can cause NSF/NFD. These contrast agents are used in some, but not all, MRIs. If nothing was injected into you for your MRI, you did not receive a gadolinium-based contrast agent and therefore are not at risk of developing NSF. Further, gadolinium-based contrast agents are also used in medical scans other than MRIs, despite the fact that the FDA has not approved their use in these treatments. These unapproved uses include the following: MRA, angiogram/angioplasty, CT scan (CAT scan), fistulogram, and venogram.
So you cannot bring a lawsuit merely because you had an MRI. You may, however, have a strong legal claim if you have developed nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) after receiving an injection of a gadolinium-based contrast agent for an MRI or other medical scan. No matter what you call them -- MRI lawsuits, NSF lawsuits, or gadolinium lawsuits -- the attorneys at DeCarli Law can handle them. Call for a free consultation.
|
|
| Continue reading "The Term "MRI Lawsuit" is Misleading" » |
|
| Permalink |
| | |
|
 |