Legal News

Last week, state lawmakers announced they will be pushing for new legislation to try to end predatory business practices that result in accident victims selling their settlements at huge discounts.

This move comes after a Minnesota Star Tribune investigation that revealed hundreds of accident victims sold a significant portion of their settlements for upfront cash payments. However, many gave up their settlements for pennies on the dollar.

In many cases, victims who agreed to sell their settlements had suffered long-term injuries, such as traumatic brain injuries. One of every eight of these transactions in Minnesota involved an injury victim with documented mental health problems.

“The stories behind this investigation are heartbreaking, and any exploitation of Minnesotans’ pain or injury is unacceptable,” said Governor Tim Walz.

One of our state’s U.S. senators, Tina Smith, is calling for an investigation of the situation by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The Star Tribune’s investigation revealed settlement purchasing companies buy approximately $1 a billion in future settlement payments. The investigation also found these companies keep about 60 percent of the money, on average. (The Star Tribune looked at more than 2,400 deals in seven states between 2000 and 2020.

In some of the largest transactions, victims were paid less than 20 percent of the current value of their money.

Some legislators are calling for the state to set a minimum threshold for these deals requiring victims to get back nearly 100 percent of the current value of the settlement.

However, some lawmakers say they should not set such strict requirements, as some victims end up in financial trouble and need to sell future payments. Executives at companies that buy settlements have argued people should be free to make their own financial decisions. They also point out judges have the power to protect settlement recipients from unscrupulous companies.

Some lawmakers have pointed out New Mexico as a model for more closely scrutinizing these deals. Minnesota could require courts to appoint a guardian to investigate proposed deals and make recommendations, which would be similar to what happens in New Mexico. In fact, a trade group for companies that buy settlement payments is strongly in support of judges appointing guardians. Currently, Minnesota law does not have these kinds of safeguards in place.

However, judges have said they need clarification on their authority to reject deals for compelling reasons. They have cited a state Court of Appeals decision from 2002 that they say limits their authority in these matters.

Nursing home residents are at high risk for suffering fatal complications if they contract COVID-19, which is why more than 12,000 residents have died after contracting the virus.

Part of the reason for the spread of the virus in these facilities could be nursing home negligence, which is why the industry has been pushing for immunity from lawsuits. So far, several states have granted nursing homes explicit immunity from COVID-19 lawsuits. Several other states have also granted some level of immunity for health care providers, which may include nursing home workers.

States where nursing homes could be immune from lawsuits over COVID-19 negligence include:

Massachusetts and New York passed laws that specifically give immunity to nursing homes. Meanwhile, the governors of Connecticut, Georgia, Michigan and New Jersey issued executive orders providing immunity. The governors of Illinois and Arizona signed executive orders providing broad immunity to health care providers. Laws were passed in Louisiana, Kentucky and Wisconsin providing immunity for health care providers.

The definition of the term health care provider is crucial in states that provided immunity to these professionals. Victims and their lawyers will likely challenge these laws and executive orders based on the definition of a health care provider.

The American Health Care Association (AHCA) is leading the national lobbying effort for immunity for nursing homes. The AHCA has spent $23 million on lobbying efforts over the past six years.

Immunity could allow nursing homes to avoid liability for extreme negligence that allowed the spread of the virus. Federal records show almost 62 percent of nursing homes were cited for infection prevention and control lapses in 2019.

The daughter of one nursing home resident in New Jersey was not informed about her mother’s COVID-19 diagnosis. The daughter had to demand her mother be transferred to a hospital, where she was placed in intensive care. The nursing home in question is now under investigation by the New Jersey attorney general.

Most nursing homes are closed to the public and have strict limitations on visitors during this pandemic. The lack of ombudsmen, surveyors and enforcement of rules, along with immunity could be a very dangerous combination, according to the Center for Medicare Advocacy.

Nearly 70 percent of the more than 15,000 nursing homes in the U.S. are run by for-profit companies, and more than half are run by chains.

Has Your Loved One Been a Victim of Nursing Home Negligence?

Our Bloomington nursing home abuse lawyers offer a free legal consultation to discuss the situation. There is no obligation on you to take legal action. Our attorneys are not paid unless you receive compensation at the end of the legal process.

We are also able to handle your case in the way that is most convenient for you, which means there is no need for a face-to-face meeting. We are committed to protecting our community and sticking to social distancing guidelines to prevent the spread of the virus.

Call us anytime to schedule your free legal consultation. Phone: (612) TSR-TIME.

On Thursday, Illinois attorney general Kwame Raoul filed a lawsuit against JUUL Labs, Inc., which is the largest manufacturer of e-cigarettes in the U.S.

The lawsuit claims the company marketed its vaping products to minors and made false claims about the dangers of these products and using them to help with quitting smoking.

The lawsuit says JUUL intentionally targeted young people by creating a product with a sleek design and flavors to mask the taste of nicotine. JUUL also engaged in social media marketing with bright colors and celebrities.

At a press conference announcing the lawsuit, Raoul pointed out that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration did not approve JUUL vaping products to help people quit smoking. The company still markets its products that way.

Another allegation in the lawsuit concerns the nicotine blend in the vape devices. The blend has more nicotine than cigarettes and other tobacco products.

This is the third lawsuit to be filed by a state attorney general this year. Last month, New York’s attorney general filed a similar lawsuit making a lot of the same allegations. Her lawsuit says JUUL used strategies often used by Big Tobacco.

In May, North Carolina’s attorney general filed a lawsuit, making North Carolina the first state to file a lawsuit against the popular e-cigarette maker.

Vaping Injuries in Minnesota

Vaping is an issue affecting children, teenagers and adults all over the nation, with JUUL dominating the market – sales of JUUL e-cigarettes increased 641 percent from 2016 to 2017. A 2019 Minnesota Student Survey found one in four 11th-graders in the state said they had used an e-cigarette within the past 30 days.

As of October 2019, there have been 73 patients in Minnesota who had confirmed or probable cases of lung injury from vaping. The Minnesota Department of Health is also reviewing another 32 cases of potential lung injury associated with vaping.

The first vaping-related death in the state happened on Sept. 6. Two more deaths occurred within the next month.

Have You or a Loved One Been Injured by a JUUL Product?

If you or your child or a loved one has suffered severe lung injuries after using a JUUL vaping device, or have become addicted to nicotine, you may be able to file a JUUL lawsuit.

TSR Injury Law is investigating these types of claims. Our Bloomington defective product lawyers offer a free legal consultation so victims can discuss their situation and ask their legal questions.

We do not get paid unless we obtain compensation on behalf of our clients.

Call TSR Injury Law today at (612) TSR-TIME

The victory by a plaintiff in his Levaquin lawsuit against the manufacturer has brought about some very interesting details regarding the prescribing of the drug.

John Schedin was awarded over $1 million by a jury after he had experienced two ruptured Achilles tendons days after he started taking Levaquin with a steroid. The doctor who wrote the prescriptions to the man, then 76, stated that he was aware of the potential tendon issues with Levaquin, but he was not aware that there was an increased risk to the elderly population when the drug was taken in combination with a steroid.

Now Schedin has to crawl up his stairs at night in order to go bed. As for the doctor, he is mortified because of the role he played in Schedin’s disability.

The trial consisted of a lot of back-and-forth arguing as to what was known about the drug and what wasn’t. The manufacturer claimed that all of the pertinent information was made available to doctors and patients in the form of a medication guide that comes with the drug. Schedin countered that the information was so buried within the document that not many patients are going to read it, let alone doctors that are extremely busy on a daily basis.

The doctor said in his testimony that he did not remember the Levaquin representative ever mentioning tendon problems when she visited his office. The sales rep did testify that she included an information packet with the basket of free samples that she provided the doctor. She did not, however, recall whether or not she had verbally referenced the tendon issue with Levaquin.

The rep further stated that she may not have had time to mention the tendon issue to the doctor. She said that with doctors having such high caseloads, she is lucky if she is able to speak to a doctor for 30 seconds. She said speaking to a doctor that long would make her feel “lucky.”

If you have suffered serious side effects after taking the drug “Levaquin”, contact a personal injury lawyer in Bloomington, MN at TSR Injury Law for your free consultation. Ph: (612) TSR-TIME.

Partners Steve Terry and Chuck Slane have been recognized by the Minnesota State Bar Association for their contributions to the advancement of the legal profession by being part of the pro bono consortium of attorneys versus the state of Minnesota. Steve and Chuck represented six victims of the 35W bridge collapse.

Last fall Chaska became the first city in Minnesota to pass a social host ordinance. It was passed unanimously. The ordinance makes it illegal to knowingly permit consumption of alcohol on the premises by underage persons. This is a clear message to parents that they are responsible for what happens in their home. Violators will be charged with a misdemeanor.

TSR Injury Law is a proud sponsor of the MADD mission and is the recipient of the MADD Choice Award. Steve Terry, founding partner, was the guest speaker at the Minnesota Statewide Recognition Ceremony. We are passionate about this issue and our Minneapolis auto accident lawyers would like the opportunity to help you if you have been the victim of a drunk driving accident. Call (612) TSR-TIME or submit our free consultation form.

A man has been awarded nearly $600,000 by a jury after a prison nurse failed to diagnose and treat a tuberculosis infection that he had contracted.

In 2008, Marchello McCaster was in jail for 56 days due to an assault conviction. During his time in jail, he lost 44 pounds. He also had difficulty walking and was constantly wrapped up in a blanket from being cold. He was also very shaky, according to one of the corrections officers that witnessed McCaster’s condition.

The nurse at the prison had treated him for foot pain not long after treating him for an abscessed tooth, but she did not recognize that he was experiencing nerve damage or that he was displaying the symptoms of tuberculosis.

By the time McCaster was able to go to the hospital; he had a fever of nearly 103 and had come down with pneumonia on top of the tuberculosis. This resulted in a 3 ½ month hospital stay due to liver lesions, heart damage, and nerve damage that had resulted from the infection. The nerve damage had caused other ailments and affected his ability to walk.

The nurse and other nurses working at the facility said they did not spend a significant amount of time with McCaster, which is why they did not notice how sick he really was. The jury felt that the nurse was “deliberately indifferent” about the condition of the inmate.

Because McCaster’s condition was not immediately noticed, 108 inmates and 42 guards were exposed to the infection, which increased their risk of contracting it themselves. Since it was found that McCaster was sick, all of them have been treated for either latent or active infections. An active infection occurs when the bacteria is present and causing symptoms, while a latent infection is one where the bacteria is present but not active because the immune system is fighting it.

If you or someone you care for suffers a serious injury due to the negligence of another individual, there may be grounds to file a damages claim. Contact a Bloomington personal injury lawyer at TSR Injury Law today for a free consultation. Ph: (612) TSR-TIME.

The latest lawsuit filed against the manufacturer of Actos, a type II diabetes drug that is allegedly dangerously defective, comes from a Minnesota couple.

William Blumenstine and Kathy Jo Williams filed their product liability lawsuit against Actos manufacturer Takeda on May 14, 2012 in United States’ District Court for the District of Minnesota. The lawsuit states that Mr. Blumenstine began taking the medication in 2004 to improve blood sugar that was high due to type II diabetes. He continued his use of Actos in 2008, but discontinued use shortly after experiencing hematuria and urinary retention. After having a cystoscopy performed, it was found that he had bladder cancer as identified by a tumor in his bladder. He had to undergo treatment and surgery to deal with his bladder cancer that is believed to have been caused by Actos.

There are many plaintiffs involved in lawsuits surrounding Actos and Takeda with claims that Takeda did not issue the proper warnings about the serious side effects. One of the side effects not warned about includes bladder cancer.

Actos was one of the 10 best selling medications in the U.S. in 2008. Worldwide sales total in the a billions of dollars. While the drug is very effective in treating diabetes, it has been established that patients that use it for more than 12 months have an increased risk of developing bladder cancer. Germany and France have suspended the sale of Actos, but Takeda continues to sell the medication in the U.S.

Actos’s popularity is due to its ability to improve blood sugar control in patients with type II diabetes. Due to the condition affecting millions of individuals in the U.S., Actos is the most popular medication manufactured by Takeda. Thus far, a number of patients have been affected by the serious side effects and have taken legal action. If you have suffered serious side effects after taking the drug, contact a Minneapolis personal injury lawyer from TSR Injury Law – you may be eligible to file a damages lawsuit.

Free consultation. Ph: (612) TSR-TIME.