Kentucky Injury Lawyer Blog

The city of Henderson, Nevada has paid $42,500 to settle a lawsuit filed by a federal agent who alleged that 3 local police officers has assaulted him at a bar. "The city emphatically denies liability in this case," the Assistant City Attorney said. "This was strictly a business decision."

Brad Hare, 35, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court. The complaint requested a judgment of more than $1 million. The suit was finally settled with the assistance of U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert Johnston during a seven-hour settlement conference.

According to the lawsuit, three on-duty officers entered the bar around 1:30 a.m. and, without asking Hare or the bartender about the dispute, "violently lifted Mr. Hare off (the) ground and slammed Mr. Hare on the center of the pool table."

The officers were accused of dragging Hare out of the bar in a "pain-compliance arm-bar hold," throwing him on the hood of a vehicle, searching him and asking for his identification.
The city attorney assigned to the case has stated that the city decided to settle the case after considering the cost of further litigation and the “very small” risk that Hare would prevail at trial.

Mr. Hare had moved to the area in 2002, where he worked as a federal law enforcement officer. He declined to identify the federal agency that employs him, saying he often receives undercover assignments.

Johnson & Johnson has agreed to a $75 Million national settlement related to allegations that its subsidiary, Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals schemed to improperly market the drug Topamax for uses that were not approved by the Food & Drug Administration.

The Commonwealth of Kentucky’s share of the settlement is nearly $2 million.

The FDA and J&H Besta Corp have recalled the Joyful Slim Herb Supplement and the Slim-30 Herb Supplement due to traces of sibutramine, commonly known as Meridia, contained in the supplements.

Earlier this year the FDA issued a warning to patients about the use of sibutramine after their review suggested it was associated with an increase risk of stroke and heart attack amongst patients with cardiovascular disease, Medpage Today reports.

Although the company has yet to receive a report of an adverse event from taking the supplement, customers who have purchased the product should cease use and return it to the company for a refund.

When a company produces a defective product, such as unreasonably dangerous drugs, they can be liable for the damages caused from the products. This area of the law is known as products liability . Should you or someone you know be injured by a dangerous drug, such as the supplements mentioned above, you should consider contacting an attorney. The attorneys of Bahe Cook Cantley & Jones, PLC frequently handle these types of cases. To speak with Shawn Cantley about these issues: Shawn's Mail

Approximately 20,000 Tots in Mind portable tents will be recalled due to a risk of strangulation. The voluntary recall was announced by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) earlier this month.

The portable tents were sold nationwide from January 2005 to February 2010, UPI.com reports. They are dome-shaped and white with insect screening. Designed to fit over playards, the clips that attach the tent to the top of the playard can break or be removed. Should that happen a child could lift the tent and become trapped at the neck.

CPSC stated that a two-year old has already strangled to death in such a manner. For that reason, consumers have been advised to stop using the tents immediately and contact Tots in Mind to receive replacement clips to secure their tents.

Consumers were advised to stop using the tents immediately and contact Tots in Mind to receive replacement clips that are used to secure the base of the tent to the top rail of the crib.

If you or someone you know has a child that was injured by this or a similar product, you should consider contacting a products liability attorney. They can help you determine if you have a case and can also assist in the preservation of evidence. To consult with Shawn Cantley about these or other issues: Shawn's Mail.

Over a dozen lawsuits filed over defective brakes on the Toyota Prius may be consolidated before a single judge in multidistrict litigation (MDL).

The lawsuits seek to recover for economic damages, i.e. the loss in retail value of a car with working brakes versus defective brakes, and also allege that drivers experienced stopping or slowing down while traveling on rough or wet roads, Law.com reports.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has stated that it has received 124 complaints from consumers, including reports of four crashes potentially caused by the defects. There are currently about a dozen cases filed, including cases filed in Alabama, California, Kentucky, Maryland, New York, Ohio, and Texas. Because the cases are all similar an MDL proceeding is being considered.

Legal analysis by Shawn Cantley , Shawn's Mail:

An MDL is similar to a class action case in that cases are combined and heard before a single judge for the purposes of discovery and pretrial matters. The major difference is that once those matters have been concluded the cases return home to their original districts for trial or settlement. In other words, the cases are consolidated to make pre-trial preparation more efficient but each case ultimately stands on its own.

As always, we will keep you updated as the cases continue to develop. If you or someone you know may have problems with your Toyota Prius Hybrid brakes, consider speaking with a products liability attorney. They may be able to help you recover damages for any injuries you have suffered as well as compensation for the injured retail value of your vehicle. The attorneys of Bahe Cook Cantley & Jones, PLC are actively litigating Toyota cases and would be happy to speak with you.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) voted earlier this week to ban drop-side cribs as part of a larger overhaul of infant-bed safety regulations.

Citing 153 deaths in the past four years, the agency voted 5-0 to ban the cribs, Bloomberg Businessweek reports. The new regulations are the first new regulations that deal with infant beds in thirty years.

The regulations come after various company recalls led to the recall of over 9 million drop-side cribs in the last five years. In May, the Government warned parents to stop using the products because they posed suffocation and strangling risks. According to Bloomber, the new regulations not only ban the sale of new and used drop-side cribs but also prohibit their use in commercial places such as hotels and day-care centers.

Drop-side cribs are an example of potentially dangerous products. Those injured by these types of products might be able to recover for their injuries. This area of law is known as products liability.

If you believe you or someone you know may have been injured by a potentially dangerous product, or have any questions, feel free to contact Brian D. Cook or any of the other attorneys at Bahe Cook Cantley & Jones, PLC.

Tween Brands in conjunction with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) have agreed to a voluntary recall of 137,000 children's bracelets, necklaces, and earrings due to high levels of cadmium in the jewelry.

There are 19 different pieces of "Justice" jewelry being recalled and they all look somewhat like this:

Pictures of all 19 items are available at the CPSC website.

Cadmium is dangerous because it can inhibit brain development in young children as well as lead to bone softening and kidney failure in cases of long-term exposure. Parents should know that the cadmium won't absorb through the skin but the CPSC wanrs parents to stop using the products because it is dangerous if it is bitten on or sucked as small children often do.

The newest recall of the "Justice" jewelry is the second cadmium-related recall this summer. In May, Walmart, Claire's, and Dollar N More stores recalled their Miley Cyrus jewelry due to the presence of cadmium.

The attorneys of Bahe Cook Cantley & Jones represent individuals who have been injured by dangerous products such as the jewelry mentioned above. If you believe you or someone you know may have been injured by one of these products, or have any questions, feel free to contact Brian D. Cook or any of the other attorneys at Bahe Cook Cantley & Jones, PLC.

The ever increasing amount of damages sustained and customers disappointed by both BP and Toyota’s recent actions has reignited the debate on tort reform, with many saying that cases like these demonstrate reasons to oppose liability caps.

Scott Stroud, from the San Antonio Express, points out how citizens and lawmakers alike are taking a new look at tort reform in the wake of a $75 million cap on BP’s legal liability, even though $75 million won’t be near enough to pay for all the economic, let alone environmental, damage they have caused.

The American Association for Justice has an important and interesting report on the issue. Explaining that lax enforcement of our regulatory laws provided companies with little incentive to comply with our laws, the report demonstrates how trial lawyers and the civil justice system they are part of helped force corporate polluters to clean up their act. Corporate pollution isn’t the only place trial lawyers and our civil justice system have made a real difference in the lives of everyday Americans. In the wake of Toyota’s recent troubles, the American Association for Justice revisits how trial lawyers have used America’s courts to make our cars safer.

Our culture is full of references to people paying for their mistakes. Charles M. Silver, the McDonald Chair in Civil Procedure at the University of Texas at Austin, contends that personal responsibility is a pretty strong case against tort reform and asks us to remember that “if you do something that has risk, you need to be prepared to take responsibility for it.”

After all, saying sorry and cutting a check is all we as a society have ever really come up with to compensate another, as inadequate as our methods may be. There is no way to bring back a dead relative or undo the loss of a limb. We can’t uncry tears or unfeel pain. The environmental impact of the BP oil spill will linger for generations. No one really knows how much Toyota’s reputation for quality has been tarnished by their recent failures. Our civil justice system exists in order to ensure people take responsibility for their actions, shouldn't it be the same for companies as it is for people?

Toyota recently announced that about 270,000 cars, including some Lexus sedans, have potentially faulty engines that could stall while driving.

The engine problems affect multiple models, including the Lexus LS460 as we previously reported. Although current model year vehicles aren't affected, owners of IS 350, GS 350, GS 460, GS 450h, LS 460 and LS 600h L vehicles should check to see if their cars are covered by the recall.

On July 1st Ken Thomas of the Associated Press reported that a recall was forthcoming. According to David Schepp at Daily Finance, the recall began Monday, July 5th.

An engine stall while driving could lead to an accident or injury. In the case that such an accident or injury occurs, you should consider discussing your case with a products liability attorney. The attorneys of Bahe Cook Cantley & Jones are currently litigating cases regarding Toyota problems. To consult with Shawn Cantley about these issues: Shawn's Mail

Kentucky's new texting while driving law is being enforced and comes with legal implications. In addition to receiving a ticket, if a texting driver is involved in an accident the new law could be used against them in a civil lawsuit.

The law, which went into effect July 1st, is currently being enforced by the Kentucky State Police although they are under a grace period and are only giving warnings at the moment.

Police say that nearly 80% of crashes involve some form of distracted driving. WHAS reports that studies indicate those who text and drive often exhibit similar driving behaviors to those driving under the influence. Texting and driving, as well as other forms of distracted driving, is dangerous and puts people's lives in jeopardy.

The new law, in addition to permitting the police to give out tickets, will likely have an impact on civil lawsuits as well. Lawsuits are often brought after car accidents as one party seeks to be reimbursed from another for the damages they suffered from the accident. Those lawsuits are almost always founded on the alleged negligence of the other driver.

Legal analysis by: Shawn Cantley , Shawn's Mail

In negligence cases, the plaintiff must prove four elements: duty, breach, causation, and injury. In other words, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed them a duty, breached the duty they owed, and that the breach caused the plaintiff some degree of injury. In cases where someone violates a statute designed to protect a certain group of people, such as the plaintiff, the violation of the statute can be used to establish the duty and the breach. This is often referred to as negligence per se.

Since the texting while driving law is a safety statute designed to protect Kentucky drivers and pedestrians, violation of that law could be used as evidence of negligence per se and will likely lead to increased liability for distracted drivers.