Rollover accidents are the greatest risks that sports utility vehicles face. Rollover accidents can lead to devastating injuries and damages not only for the driver and passengers inside the vehicles, but also for those who are involved in the accident. Because of the rising number of lawsuits and fatalities that SUV rollover accidents had, car manufacturers have devised various ways to help lessen the risks of such accidents and protect their consumers.
One such improvement is the installation of side-impact airbags (SAB). These are inflatable devices made to protect the head, chest, and generally the body, of the driver and passengers during a serious collision that may occur on the side of the vehicle. These airbags are meant to protect the most important parts of the body: the head and the torso. When buying an SUV, it would be best to find one that has the combination of two airbags, the combo SAB.
Chest SABs are meant to protect the torso or chest area in side-impact collisions, while head SABs mounted inside the roof rail are designed to shield the head and can protect in events of ejection during a rollover accident. A combination SAB, mounted generally on the side of the seat, can be larger in size and provides protection for both the head and the torso. These SABs inflate through the help of sensors that detects the severity of the crash, and they inflate within a fraction of a second.
Because automotive defects have been blamed for the great number of injuries and fatalities caused by SUV rollover accidents, the installation of these various types of SABs have helps in protecting the driver and passengers inside the vehicle. Although these are not mandated by the Federal government, they can still be installed to help increase driver and passenger protection. Make sure to install one that inflates during a rollover, since occupant ejection is one of the leading causes of death in rollover accidents and SAB help prevent such ejections.
The idea that talcum powder may have a direct causative link for ovarian cancer has gained ground in recent years as study after study supports this, which is what researchers in 1971 had been saying. However, because the link is indicated rather than confirmed, talcum powder manufacturers, particularly the original one, Johnson & Johnson (J&J), have staunchly denied that talcum powder does anything other than keep you feeling dry and smelling fresh. However, a legal precedent has recently been set which has changed the whole ballgame.
The first case brought against J&J for its talcum powder products was by Deane Berg, who found out in 2006 that she had ovarian cancer. When it became suspected that it had been caused by her 30-year-long habit of using J&J’s after shower talc-based product for feminine hygiene, she filed suit against the company in 2009 in South Dakota. The jury found J&J negligent for failing to warn consumers about the potential for risk in genital use of the talc-based products in 2014, which paved the way for other people to make their own claims.
The South Dakota jury found for the plaintiff for negligence but not for strict liability and did not award any damages, a decision which Berg is currently appealing. Finding a defendant negligent but awarding zero damages is allowed in South Dakota, but this is not true for all states. Because the Berg case was the first, there are a lot of issues that will have to be resolved that one jury may not be able to address.
It may seem puzzling that a defendant would be found negligent but not liable for any damages, considering that a finding of negligence means that the jury believed there was an element of causation, as suggested in an article found in http://www.williamskherkher.com/practice-areas/talcum-powder-lawsuit/. A personal injury case is not always easy to understand, and it takes a competent lawyer to present the facts so that a jury fully understands the responsibility of the defendant to the plaintiff.
If you have sustained serious injury caused by talcum powder, you may be eligible to file a product liability case against the manufacturer. Consult with a talcum powder lawyer in your area to find out your legal options.
Eli Lilly and Company was the progenitor of what would become the first of a whole class of antidepressants that would be gobbled up by the public. It was in 1974 that researchers documented the drug fluoxetine, which would later be presented to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class antidepressant under the brand name Prozac. It was approved in 1987 and today it remains one of the most prescribed antidepressants in the US and the UK, making several truckloads of money for Eli Lilly.
However, it hasn’t all been a bed of roses for the drug maker. Eli Lilly was almost immediately plagued by lawsuits for failing to warn physicians and patients about the serious side effects that may result from the use of Prozac. Chief among these early complaints was the increased risk of suicide among young adults and children. It should be noted that Eli Lilly applied for the drug’s approval for both adult and pediatric use as a treatment for major depression.
While the first cases brought before the civil court wound up being dismissed for lack of scientific evidence that the suicides and violent behavior was Prozac-induced, it soon became apparent that the drug is most likely to be the causative factor in many of the cases. Indeed, the FDA has mandated that the drug be provide with a black box warning about increasing the risk of suicide for patients under the age of 25. To date, it is estimated that Eli Lilly has paid out in excess of $50 million in lawsuit settlements.
Aside from increasing suicidality, Prozas has also been cited for causing birth problems and defects in children of women prescribed with the drug for a variety of reasons: obsessive compulsive disorder, panic disorder, catalepsy, bulimia nervosa, and so on. The claim is the same: the company failed to warn the public that it had teratogenic effects.
Prozac is associated with a multiplicity of adverse reactions, the impact on patients of which have yet to be fully explored. While Prozac lawsuits are on the wane, other SSRI drugs have recently come under the hammer, and it is possible that even more actionable problems with Prozac will come to light. For patients who have been prescribed with Prozac and this caused injury or death, there may still be legal options open to them. Consult with a dangerous drugs attorney in the relevant state and learn more about current developments in Prozac lawsuits.
The process of divorce can be long and complicated; but for individuals that are applying for US citizenship, it may serve as a serious concern as it may affect their immigrant status. Before taking action, contacting a Cedar Rapids divorce lawyer and an immigration lawyer may be advisable.
As a spouse of an American citizen, one of the advantages you will have with regard to your green card application is its faster processing. This is because as a spouse you are classified as an immediate relative in Immigration laws. However, if divorce precedes your citizenship grant, will that mean invalidation of your application?
One of those required of immigrants applying for citizenship is to have a sponsor who is a US citizen. Without a sponsor an applicant’s application may be issued a denial or, worse, the applicant him/her self may even be deported. However, by filing a waiver of termination instead of opting to withdraw the application for citizenship, the applicant, who is a foreign spouse, may be awarded conditional permanent residence even while going through the process of divorce.
To gain the privilege of filing a waiver of termination, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has imposed requirements which need to be met. Submission of one or more of these requirements, along with the waiver, will prove that the marriage of the applicant with the US citizen was valid and not just a means to gain a citizenship status. The requirements include proofs of the:
On its website, the Law Office of William Jang, PLLC, tells of the complexities involved in filling-out documents, filing these and in keeping up with the updates or changes affecting immigration policies. For the foreign spouse, especially, understanding the contents of the Immigration law may be an added burden. Thus, in any procedure and concern, the best assistance a foreign-spouse will have can only come from an immigration lawyer, who knows and understands the Immigration law and who is commited to serving his/her clients.
Recently, there has been a rise in the number of people wanting to have their garage doors insulated. More and more people are choosing this option because they believe it is a great investment, and insulating your garage doors pay off quickly. Because many people view their garage as an extension of their workplace or as a social gathering spot, having proper insulation is just reasonable, but is it really that necessary?
First off, a properly insulated garage door can lower your energy bills by a certain amount. Proper insulation can make you less likely to require air conditioning, therefore keeping costs at minimum. You don’t need to have manually heat or cool it. Another thing is that garage insulation can reduce noise. Whether it is from outside or inside, noise from any direction is blocked out. With little noise, you don’t have to worry about disturbing your neighbors when you are working loudly in your garage; likewise you are not bothered with the outside noise when you prefer to have silence in your garage.
It may seem unnecessary, but having your garage insulated can actually increase your home’s value if your plan to have it resold. Garage insulation is a much-sought after feature because of its noise-reduction features and energy efficiency factors. Accordingly, durability is also a factor for insulated garage. These insulated garage doors are stronger against pets and other animals, therefore making it a sturdier investment than non-insulated ones.
Comfort is one last thing that an insulated garage door can provide. With proper insulation, temperatures are kept in an even temperature, making it more effective in preventing things inside the garage protected from weather-related damages. There are also cars that can have a hard time to start when they are kept cold for a significant amount of time, so you can protect your car’s engine with an insulated garage.
Many people believe that a home’s central point is the garage. Other than having the right design and style for your garage door, choose to have more eco-friendly and comfortable garage door by choosing to have it insulated.
Many American families believe that the benefits of having a pool in their backyard surpass the cost required to have one. Changes in their financial situation, however, plus the amount of bills to pay and the inconvenience that the pool construction and installation will require render such belief far from being made into reality.
Such scenario can be true, but only if the kind of pool you have in mind is the usual in-ground pool that is built after digging a few feet into the ground of your backyard; in the case of above ground pools, however, it’s a totally different thing.
Above-ground pools are the easiest kinds of pools to build; these are the cheapest too when talking about construction cost. The pool is made using prefabricated kits that even customers will find quite easy to assemble and since it is not permanently embedded where it is constructed, it can easily be disassembled when you want to move it to another place or if you plan to move to another residence.
Like any other pool, an above-ground pool can be very tempting to go to, especially for children (including neighbor’s children), if it’s within their sight. But this can be very dangerous to children since getting in and out of this type of pool isn’t quite easy; it requires going up and down steel steps which can be very slippery when wet.
The problem is, sometimes, even adults are tempted to take a dip, especially at night when the owners are already asleep or when there’s nobody at home. People who do this are either not aware of, or are ignoring the privacy and exclusivity of the property and whatever is within it. Now, it is common knowledge that entering a private property, without the owner’s consent, is trespassing – a criminal offense that is punishable by imprisonment, a fine or both. Entering property without consent is a criminal act and could get a person in trouble, even if the intent was not malicious.
An online article published in the website of Ritter & Associates talks about the dangers of, and the accidents, linked to above ground pools. Now, if a trespasser actually sustains an accident while using your pool illegally, will you, as owner, be held liable for the injuries he or she sustains?
Based on what the law says, if the trespasser who got injured was a child, then the owner may be held accountable for that child’s injuries. This is not the case with regard to adult trespassers, though, unless it can be shown that the owner maliciously or intentionally did something that will harm the trespasser. The only thing that he or she is sure to receive is the title, “injured trespasser,” nothing more, for adult trespassers are generally never legally entitled to receive compensation for the injuries they have sustained.
Kidneys are among the most important organs in the human body since these are the ones responsible in cleansing the blood of waste, as well as in converting to urine any extra fluid that the body has no more use for. Thus, it is very important that people keep their kidneys healthy for these to be able to function well.
When kidneys start to fail in performing such tasks, however, dialysis will have to be resorted to. Dialysis is a procedure that removes unwanted fluid and wastes to keep the blood clean. Using a dialysis machine, blood, which is drawn from the patient, is processed through the removal of damaging elements, like creatinine and urea. To remove these harmful elements, as well as keep helpful chemicals in the bloodstream effectively, a drug called Granuflo is used.
GranuFlo, a product of Fresenius Medical Care, was specifically manufactured for people suffering from kidney failure. It is actually a dry acid product that effectively cleanses the bloodstream of acids and other harmful elements during kidney dialysis; it also ensures the correct balance of electrolytes in the bloodstream.
Despite its effectivity, however, the drug has been discovered to cause severe adverse effects that do great harm in people who use it. These severe effects include metabolic alkalosis, low blood pressure, cardiac arrest, heart arrhythmias, heart attack and sudden death. In 2010 alone, 941 cardiac arrest cases due to Granuflo were recorded, not including other equally severe cases yet.
Despite the severity of the adverse cases, Fresenius Medical Care sent information about the dangers caused by the drug only to clinics owned and managed by it. Other dialysis clinics in the US were never informed about the findings, resulting to the continuous use of Granuflo, which led to accusations of medical malpractice despite their absence of knowledge.
The dangers presented by Granuflo and Fresenius’ failure to inform all health providers of the drug’s deadly effects were enough to make the U.S. Food and Drug Administration decide on issuing a Class 1 recall of Granuflo (Class 1 recall is the most serious form of recall that the DFA issues); this recall was issued on March 29, 2012.
On its wesite, the Law Offices of Vic Feazell, P.C., identifies car accidents as one of the major causes of severe injuries and untimely death for millions of people in the US. This is because there are about five million car accidents that are reported in the US annually and, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the top three factors that wreak the greatest harm and damages are speeding, drunk-driving and reckless driving.
If all of the three factors mentioned above can cause so great a damage to vehicles and certain still objects, just imagine their effect if the accident would involve a pedestrian.
Statistical records show that there are about 70, 000 pedestrians, most commonly individuals who are alcohol-impaired, senior citizens and children, who end up as car accident victims in the US every year; roughly about 4, 500 of those victims die on the spot or some days after the accident. Hopefully, the latest car safety standards required by the NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), such as the electronic stability control, the forward collision warning and automatic braking systems, would do the job these were designed for.
Another safety feature which technology is giving cars of today is the Pedestrian and Cyclist Detection System, coupled with Full Auto Brake. One famous car manufacturer is expected to incorporate these as standard devices in its line of cars in 2014.
The US government, which is doing all it can to ensure the safety of everyone and other motorists on the road, ought to think about requiring this special features in every car to reduce the number of pedestrian injuries and deaths to more than 50% annually.
Concerned groups, however, say that all car safety features may probably be good only depending on the driver who still has control of the vehicle. This argument only makes the challenge to car manufacturers stronger, urging them to boost the performance of these features so that their effectivity will no longer depend greatly on the driver.
The working group is one of the very important factors that continue to make America a major economic force around the world. That is why, to take care of the working group, the federal government passed and implemented laws that would ensure the welfare its members, especially if someone among them suffers disability.
One of those laws is the Social Security Act, which was signed on August 14, 1935. One of the largest programs that the Social Security has enforced since the mid of 1956 is the Social Security Disability Insurance or SSDI. This program is meant to provide financial assistance to members with disabilities. Members, because the SSDI gets its funds from the SS taxes that employed individuals pay.
The totally disabled are the intended beneficiaries of Social Security disability benefits. And, when referring to disabled, Social Security means:
This means that people whose disability is partial or short-term are not covered by SSDI. They can, instead, avail of the workers’ compensation for the disability that they have sustained. To help SSDI applicants know if they are qualified to avail of the benefit, Social Security has made a list of severe medical conditions; if your condition falls in that list then you definitely qualify for the benefits SS offers.
The benefits paid by SSDI also include some of your family members; but to make sure that you can avail of the benefits, besides the disability you are suffering from, you ought to have been employed long enough and have paid Social Security taxes (employees’ pay slips usually identify SS tax payments as “FICA,” that is, Federal Insurance Contributions Act).
Yet another racial controversy rocked the University of Texas last week.
The Young Conservatives of Texas group was planning on having some of its members wear signs that say “illegal immigrant”. Volunteers who returned them to the YCT booth would receive a $25 gift card.
The goal of the game was to call attention to the issue of illegal immigration, according to the group.
This proposal met such outrage from the UT community that it was canceled a few days after its announcement. UT administration publicly stated that the game was completely against the school’s values.
It’s incredible that a group of 18-to-22 year olds collectively decided that this was a good idea to attract attention to their organization and its values. Was there not one single student sitting in the meeting who thought to call his peers’ attention to the fact that many UT students are illegal immigrants?
The group certainly overachieved if its goal was to “create a discussion,” but it failed to spark a productive one. Stunts like this make it nearly impossible for opposing viewpoints to take the group seriously.
A reasonable, well-thought-out argument against the acceptance of undocumented workers may have helped others understand that (highly controversial) point of view. Publicly making a mockery of their fellow peers who may be undocumented, however, only serves to completely discredit the group.