Massachusetts Injury Lawyer Blog

Massachusetts has reached a final settlement in the Big Dig tunnel ceiling collapse case that caused the wrongful death of Boston resident Milena Del Valle and the injury of her husband.

Gannett Fleming, the company which designed the ceiling, will pay $50,000 to the city of Boston and $1.5 million for maintaining the Big Dig tunnels. Additionally, they will forfeit $150,000 in payments from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.

Sika Corp., which made the epoxy glue that held the ceiling in place, has agreed to pay $200,000. This money will go directly into a trust fund that has been designed to fund the upkeep of the Boston tunnel complex.

Two claims were dismissed: those against Sigma Engineering International Inc., a structural engineering company, and Conam Inc., a materials inspection company.
Both were determined to have no liability for the ceiling collapse.

After the tragic accident, resulting from the negligent design and construction of the tunnel, Massachusetts undertook a thorough examination of the tunnel system. The resulting settlements have provided funds that will assist in proper upkeep and maintenance in years ahead.

More Information

AG settles with final two firms in fatal collapse of Big Dig tunnel, Boston Globe, March 27, 2009

Continue reading "Massachusetts Reaches Final Settlement in Big Dig Tunnell Ceiling Collapse" »

This week, two very important studies regarding prostate cancer screening were published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The studies concluded, essentially, that screening and early detection of prostate cancer with the PSA test does not reduce morbidity or mortality in men.

The studies are an unusual contrast to the notion that early detection and treatment benefit one's health. Ordinarily, a delay in cancer diagnosis has a serious impact, and can result in claims for medical malpractice, personal injury, and wrongful death. This may not always be the case with current prostate cancer screening tests.

There is no doubt that in some cases, the PSA test detects aggressive forms of cancer at an early stage, allowing men to undergo timely and lifesaving treatments. However, the majority of prostate cancers are slow growing and do not adversely affect a man's health or lifestyle, particularly in elderly men.

Unfortunately, treatment for prostate cancer is invasive and includes biopsies, surgeries, and other treatments, which may result in urinary incontinence and/or erectile dysfunction. Radiation treatments can cause additional complications. The question then, based on the results of the recent studies, is whether the benefit treating a prostate cancer (removing a potentially harmless cancer) outweighs the risk of the treatment itself (incontinence, erectile dysfunction). The treatment may actually be unneeded, and a cause of unnecessary injury.

The studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine seem to indicate that for most men, there is no proof that biopsies, surgeries, and other treatments actually extend the man's life. In fact, the evidence proving that the benefits of prostate cancer screening outweigh the risks is lacking.

It is currently recommended that men between the ages of 40 and 75 undergo PSA testing. However, the results of these studies call into question the usefulness of the screening. Many urologists are now recommending the decision to undergo PSA testing and/or prostate cancer treatment be made on an individual basis until more is know regarding the risks and benefits of PSA screening.

For More Information:

Perspective Roundtable: Screening for Prostate Cancer, video discussoin, March 19, 2009

Perspective Roundable: Screening for Prostate Cancer, New England Journal of Medicine, March 19, 2009 (transcript)

 

Continue reading "Effectiveness of Prostate Test Questioned in Helping Cancer Patients" »

Massachusetts drivers now have another law to obey: Drivers need to slow down and move over when approaching stationary police, emergency response, and construction vehicles that have their lights flashing. The penalty: $100, and your insurance rates will probably also go up.

This well intentioned bill was enacted to prevent injuries caused by car accidents. First responders to accident scenes and work crews have suffered serious injuries as the result of negligent drivers who fail to slow and move over, and the legislation is designed to make their work safer.

But can you legislate this kind of safety? The bill itself is quite vague. A driver is required to change lanes "if practicable." A driver is required to reduce his or her speed to a "reasonable and safe speed for road conditions." How will that be judged?  And will emergency vehicles leave the scene to chase down violators of this new law?

Saving lives and preventing injuries are, of course, important goals. But real safety comes from a broader awareness of our duty to ensure the safety of emergency and construction personnel, and that awareness begins with proper driving training. It also begins with simple common sense and courtesy.

 

 

 

Continue reading "Massachusetts Car and Truck Drivers: Slow Down and Move Over to Prevent Accidents--It's the Law!" »

When your kids take to the field for a game of soccer, you expect the field and the equipment to be safe, and if not, then you should expect to be able to bring claims on behalf of your injured child. But in Massachusetts, personal injury caused by a falling soccer goal on a field maintained by a youth soccer association does not result in any liability at all.

The facts are straightforward: The plaintiff was 12 years old, playing in a program run by Sudbury Youth Soccer Association, Inc. on a field owned by the association. The goal posts were not properly anchored, and there was no warning that the posts could tip over. The goal did tip over, causing serious injury to the plaintiff. Claims were brought on his behalf.

The soccer association denied liability, claiming the immunity that is provided by Massachusetts General Laws c. 231, Sec. 85V. That statute protects nonprofit sports programs from liability caused by neglience in the conduct of the programs. Liability is limited under the statute to injuries arising from the failure to maintian the real estate. The soccer goals were found by the court to not be part of the real estate owned by the association.

The statute governing the case is just one of many protections in place for volunteer, non-profit associations, and others. Some may argue that programs would be limited if liability were not lmited. The unfortunate victims are often innocent children who have suffered serious injuries.  

The case is Welch v. Sudbury Youth Soccer Association, Inc., 453 Mass. 352 (2009).

On March 10, 2009, 1.6 million Maytag refrigerator units (also sold under other brand names) were voluntarily recalled due to several reported fire hazard incidents. Due to an electrical failure in the relay, the component that turns on the refrigerator's compressor, units can become overheated and pose a serious fire and injury hazard.

Before initiating the recall, Maytag had reports of 41 related relay malfunctions. Sixteen of those reports included information about property damage, ranging from smoke to serious kitchen fires. Though there have been no reports of personal injury or wrongful death, the serious repercussions of this defect place many Massachusetts consumers in harm's way.

The refrigerators in this recall were sold between January 2001 and January 2004; some were sold in Massachusetts. A number of refrigerator brands are included in this recall: Maytag, Jenn-Air, Amana, Admiral, Magic Chef, Performa by Maytag, and Crosley.

Continue reading "Defective Refrigerator Recall Affects Massachusetts Consumers; Threat of Fire and Serious Injury or Death" »

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Wyeth v. Levine on March 4, 2009, represents a resounding triumph for all Americans who take prescription drugs. In short, the Court found by a 6-3 margin that the federal regulations of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) do not prevent a consumer from bringing a state court product liability claim against a pharmaceutical company that negligently manufactures, distributes or labels a prescription drug. The case preserves the rights of Massachusetts consumers to obtain compensation for personal injuries resulting from defective drug products.

Details of the Case

Diane Levine brought suit against Wyeth Pharmaceuticals after being forced to amputate her right forearm nearly nine years ago. A professional musician, Deborah had suffered from persistent migraine headaches and visited a local clinic for treatment. She was prescribed Phenergan, an antihistamine used to treat nausea. A physician assistant administered the drug by "IV-push," which caused the drug to come into contact with arterial blood. As a result, she developed gangrene, leaving her no choice but to amputate half of her right arm.

Levine sued Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, claiming that Wyeth failed to adequately warn medical professionals and consumers of the risks of IV administration. At trial, evidence indicated that since the approval of the drug in 1955, more than 20 other patients had suffered from similar amputations. A Vermont jury concluded that Phenergan was a defective product, and awarded Levine $6.7 million to compensate for her devastating injury.

Wyeth appealed the verdict, and argued that because the drug's label had been approved by the FDA - a federal agency - a consumer such as Deborah could not sue the company in state court. The Supreme Court rejected Wyeth's argument, and ruled that a drug manufacturer ultimately "bears responsibility for the content of its label at all times." The FDA's purpose is to regulate, not to compensate consumers for injuries caused by drugs. "State law remedies further consumer protection," Justice Stevens wrote, "by motivating manufacturers to produce safe and effective drugs and to give adequate warnings."

What does this mean for Massachusetts consumers?

The Wyeth decision will make it much harder for drug manufacturers to hide behind a shield of compliance with federal regulations. FDA approval will not provide immunity for a drug company with a defective product. If you are injured by a negligently produced prescription drug, your right to bring a product liability action in state court against the drug company is preserved, and drug companies cannot hide behind a wall of federal preemption.

Another important effect of the decision is that pharmaceutical companies will likely pay closer attention to their labels and instructions, therefore improving consumer protection and safety in the prescription drug marketplace.

More Information

To read the entire decision, click here: Wyeth v. Levine

Continue reading "Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case Marks Victory for Massachusetts Consumers; Affirms Accountability for Drug Companies" »

Information uncovered by news teams investigating the fatal gas explosion in Somerset, Massachusetts on February 19, 2009, indicates that damage to a gas main, perhaps from construction activity, may have been a cause of the terrible accident.

Residents in the vicinity of the explosion had reported the smell of gas, and the New England Gas Company was in the area investigating, knocking on doors in the neighborhood. However, within twenty minutes of the arrival of gas company crews, the home of 62-year old Rose Marie Rebello exploded, then erupted in flames. Ms. Rebello and her dog both died, and a firefighter and a utility worker were injured. Homes in the area suffered damage, and hundreds of residents were forced to evacuate. Six homes were rendered uninhabitable, and dozens of others were damaged.

Investigators discovered that a 200-foot long section of the gas main, which was installed over 40 years ago, was "damaged and breached," possibly by later construction activities. The damage may have been done during the installation of a sewer main and the tie-ins in the neighborhood, though that work was done in the 1970s.

It was the third Massachusetts explosion in three months. One man died in Scituate in December, and another man was seriously injured in January in Gloucester.  This is a sharp increase in the accident rate in Massachusetts compared to the previous ten years. Another man was killed in a gas explosion in his home in Manchester, NH, on February 24, 2009. Aging infrastructure and the need for greater maintenance are probably significant factors in gas explosions.

 

Continue reading "New Information in Fatal Gas Explosion in Somerset, Massachusetts" »