2nd Nature Built To Grow Cribs Recalled Due To Entrapment Hazard

The Consumer Product Safety Commission (in conjunction with Stanley Furniture) has issued a recall for 2nd Nature Built To Grow cribs due to a potential entrapment hazard.  Consumers have been asked to stop using this product immediately, as infants may get stuck in a gap between the crib and the mattress when used on the medium setting.

The cribs subject to this recall were sold in furniture and department stores between March 2006 and December 2007 for approximately $1100.  The specific model and serial numbers covered by the recall include:

353-14-220-L-01, 353-14-220-L-02, 353-14-220-L-03, 353-14-220-L-04, 353-14-220-L-05, 353-14-     220-L-06, 353-14-220-L-07, 353-14-220-L-08, 353-14-220-L-101, and 353-14-220-L-103.

These serial numbers are located on the headboard of the crib.  Please note that the recall does not include cribs sold after December 2007.

Stanley furniture is offering a free headboard replacement for any crib subject to the recall.  For additional information, contact Stanley Furniture toll-free at (888) 839-6822 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, or visit the company’s web site at www.youngamerica.com

Related Information:

Contact a defective product attorney in New Jersey

New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act

The laws surrounding whistleblower protection can be confusing.  One aspect of whistleblower protection is covered by the NJ False Claims Act, which allows residents in New Jersey to bring an action, against anyone, who intentionally causes the State to pay a false claim.

With regard to retaliation in the workplace for reporting illegal activities, etc., a NJ resident would be protected under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Act.  The act states as follows:

New Jersey law prohibits an employer from taking any retaliatory action against an employee because the employee does any of the following:

  1. Discloses, or threatens to disclose, to a supervisor or to a public body an activity, policy, or practice of the employer or another employer, with whom there is a business relationship, that the employee reasonably believes is in violation of a law, or a rule or regulation issued under the law, or, in the case of an employee who is a licensed or certified health care professional, reasonably believes constitutes improper quality of patient care;
  2. Provides information to, or testifies before, any public body conducting an investigation, hearing or inquiry into any violation of law, or a rule or regulation issued under the law by the employer or another employer, with whom there is a business relationship, or, in the case of an employee who is a licensed or certified health care professional, provides information to, or testifies before, any public body conducting an investigation, hearing or inquiry into quality of patient care; or
  3. Objects to, or refuses to participate in, any activity, policy or practice which the employee reasonably believes:
    • is in violation of a law, or a rule or regulation issued under the law, or, if the employee is a licensed or certified health care professional, constitutes improper quality of patient care;
    • is fraudulent or criminal; or
    • is incompatible with a clear mandate of public policy concerning the public health, safety or welfare or protection of the environment. N.J.S.A. 34:19-3
Employees who “blow the whistle” on the above mentioned activity in the state of New Jersey are afforded protection under this particular law and may be entitled to sue for damages as a result of retaliation, demotion or termination.

If you believe you qualify for protection under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Act for exposing corporate wrongdoing, contact our NJ office at (856) 833-0600 or fill out the case evaluation form on the left side of the page.  Our intake process is private and confidential and legal action will not be taken without your explicit permission.

Related Links:
Whistleblower Protection

Businesses one-step closer to legal immunity for defective or deadly products

The current war against the American consumer by Big Business and the Bush Administration has gotten a bit nastier.  Apparently, this team of powerful executives and government officials have circumvented an unfavorable Congress and are now using agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration to create rules that make it virtually impossible to sue a business for a defective or dangerous product.  With these rules in place, large corporations can continue to sell toxic dog food, toothpaste, lead paint toys, contaminated heparin and dangerous drugs such as Vioxx and Trasylol, while making millions at the expense of injured consumers.

To divert attention from their wrongdoing and avoid legal responsibility, these companies and sympathetic government officials have demonized trial lawyers and families who file suit to recover the costs of medical bills and lost wages.  If these people could spend one day in my shoes as a trial lawyer, they would be forced to face the fact that real lives are ruined by their greedy desire to make a buck.  These CEO’s have never sat across the room from an inconsolable family, (the way I do on a daily basis), trying to cope with the loss of their loved one who died after using drug that the manufacturer knew was dangerous, but released it anyway.  They have never met one-on-one with a hardworking father who is now unable to provide for his children after using a defective product on the job that took his limb.

Despite these hardships faced by unsuspecting consumers, billion dollar corporations and governmental agencies are trying very hard to paint themselves as the victims of meritless lawsuits.  Meanwhile, the real victims—namely American consumers—are losing their homes, steady paychecks and quality of life because of someone else’s negligence.

Bearing the responsibility for negligence is just a fact of life.  If a drunk driver negligently gets behind the wheel of car and hurts someone, that person is entitled to sue for his or her medical bills, etc.  If someone slips on my sidewalk because I negligently decide not to shovel my snow, that person has every right to sue my homeowners insurance for his or her injuries.  Why, then, should a large corporation be held to a different standard for releasing a dangerous or defective product on the market?

The bottom line is that these companies should be held responsible for their actions.  Whether it’s a fine for releasing harmful chemicals into the environment or paying medical bills and lost wages of consumers that were injured by their products, corporations should be held to the same standard as everyone else in this country.  If Big Business and the Bush Administration truly want to “curb lawsuits,” then I suggest they step it up a notch and produce better and safer products that are tested and tried before their release to the American public.  Safe and happy consumers have no reason to file a lawsuit.  It’s really just that simple.

Free Legal Advice: Defective Products

DEFECTIVE PARTS PROMPT PLAYWORLD SYSTEMS TO RECALL SWING SETS

Playground Swing Sets by Playworld Systems Inc., of Lewisburg, PA have been voluntarily recalled in cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Consumers should stop using the product immediately unless otherwise instructed. These defective products have been distributed throughout the United States.

The clevis bearing on the swing set can wear, causing the swing to detach and the user to fall. Authorized dealers sold the swing sets to day care centers and children’s learning centers nationwide from January 2007 through February 2008 for $770 and $3,100.  So far, only minor injuries have been reported; however, the defect has the potential to cause serious injuries.  Click here for further information on the recall.

For further information, click on the following links:

NJ personal injury lawyer and lawsuit information

ATV Recall Alert: 2008 Honda TRX500

The Consumer Product Safety Commission reports that American Honda Motor Co. has recalled it’s 2008 Honda TRX500 due to steering control problems. The electric power steering shaft, (also known as Honda FourTrax Foreman 4×4), may break unexpectedly and cause the driver to lose control of the ATV. The recalled ATV’s were sold at Honda dealerships between October 2007 and March 2008.

The CPSC has asked that consumers stop using the product immediately. Registered owners are advised to contact Honda for a free repair of the power steering shaft. Consumers can contact Honda toll-free at (866) 784-1870 between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. PT Monday through Friday, or visit the company’s website at this link.

To file a defective product suit following an ATV accident, click on the following links:

ATV Accident Lawyer

Expectant Mothers Beware– New Studies Show Premature Births Linked to Increased Childhood Death Rates and Barrenness

The Journal of the American Medical Association released a study which found that premature children have higher death rates during childhood, and these risks continue to increase with age. In addition, the study showed that these preemies were more likely to be childless in adulthood.

The study followed 1.2 million Norwegian’s births over many decades. More than 60,000 of these Norwegian children were born premature. These findings emphasize the importance in preventing premature birth. Dr. Alan Fleishman of the March of Dimes states that “in the United States, there is an epidemic of pre-term birth, and prevention is absolutely critical. ” Research shows that the prevention of premature birth includes hormone treatment for women with a history of premature delivery, prenatal care and nutrition, and careful OB/GYN monitoring of patients. In addition, doctors should avoid the inducing of labor unless medically necessary. Finally, the reduction of In Vitro pregnancies will also reduce the risk of premature birth.

Expectant mothers should also be proactive before and during pregnancy to protect their unborn babies. Recent studies show folic acid reduces the chances of pre-term labor. Pregnant women are encouraged to take pre-natal vitamins that include folic acid and eat foods such as cereal and whole-grain products. In addition, expectant mothers should avoid recreation, as well as unapproved prescription drugs during pregnancy. Finally, it is important for all expectant mothers to keep regular appointments with an OB/GYN during pregnancy. In most cases, regular visits to a doctor will allow for early detection of medical problems or complications that could contribute to premature birth.

Free Legal Advice: Birth Defects or Injuries

More Defective Products From China Being Recalled

On St. Patricks’day, 2008, Mega Brands Inc. recalled about 2.4 million Chinese-made defective product/toys, because small magnets could fall out and cause personal injury such as internal damage. A week later, the same defective product manufacturer recalled 1 million Magtastik and Magnetix Jr. preschool toys. These toys also contained magnets in the small flexible parts of the animals, vehicles and building sets can detach. Since magnets attract, if more than one magnet is swallowed, the magnets can attach to one another and cause personal injury such as additional intestinal perforations or blockages, which can be fatal. The Consumer Product Safety Commission has received 19 reports of magnets falling out of these toys. In one case a 3-year-old boy needed medical treatment to remove a magnet from his nasal cavity.

Click here for the complete list of defective product recalls.
In order to prevent other defective product personal injuries go to our defective products website.

John R. Mininno, Esq. is a New Jersey and Pennsylvania trial lawyer representing clients in medical malpractice, defective products and other serious injury claims. He also writes about issues concerning children’s safety. His offices are in Collingswood, NJ and Philadelphia, PA.

Should Parents Decide Whether Their Infant Is Screened For Treatable Diseases?

LiveScience.com ran a story last week about a Nebraskan couple who did not want any health screenings for their newborn. The couple was appealing mandatory testing laws that exist in every state, claiming that it was a violation of their freedom of religion. The couple practices Scientology. The mandatory health screening consists of nothing more than drawing blood from the baby’s foot and then testing it for rare health diseases that can be cured. Some of these diseases can lead to brain damage and even early death.

The parent intentions are honorable. They claim that their religous practices prohibit such testing. However, the religous textbook cited in the article does not state in bold letters. “Do not use this test.” If it did, then maybe, just maybe this rule violates their freedom of religion. Their cited text makes only vague references to medicine and they have extrapolated their own interpretation to determine that test their child would be in violation of their tenets. However, it is not convincing to me that anyone – the baby in question for example – would consciously choose retardation or death and scientology over good health and some other subsequently remaining belief system. The real question in this case is whether or not parents can control the religion that their children will practice, by way of risking said child’s health at birth.

How do we answer such a question? Perhaps, just as this family is appealing their claim under the constitution, and the first amendment from the bill of rights, the framer’s can shed some light on this topic. The Declaration of Independence, the founding document of this nation, declares that all men have certain unalienable rights, such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These certain unalienable rights apply today, and were the founding concept of this nation. They unquestionably mean that everyone has a choice in their own path. We must consider these rights as applying to an infant child, and further, assume that they are the three things that would be most important to this child, just as they’re the most important rights upon which this country was founded. It seems evident that good health would fall under these rights. However, this is a difficult question which will be debated for some time.

If you have a question regarding a birth injury or other medical malpractice,please go to our birth injury webpage.

John R. Mininno, Esq. is a New Jersey and Pennsylvania trial lawyer representing clients in medical malpractice, defective products and other serious injury claims. He also writes about issues concerning patient safety. His offices are in Collingswood, NJ and Philadelphia, PA.

Heart Risk Falls When Patients Stop Taking Vioxx

There’s good news for Vioxx patients. It seems that cardiovascular risks decline when patients stop taking the drug.

Merck continued its 3 year Vioxx study for a 4th year.

Those fourth-year results, as analyzed by Merck and released yesterday, showed that former Vioxx and placebo users reported a nearly similar rate of cardiovascular events. Among 2,178 patients, 28 formerly on Vioxx and 16 formerly on placebo suffered confirmed thrombotic cardiovascular events. An undisclosed number died.

Peter S. Kim, head of West Point-based Merck Research Laboratories, said the 28-to-16 difference is not statistically significant and might be due as much to chance as to the drug itself.

Merck recalled the drug on 9/30/2004 after study data suggested that Vioxx increased risk of heart attack and stroke in people taking it longer than 18 months.

Merck faces at least 11,500 personal injury lawsuits and 190 class action lawsuits. The company is now 50/50, having won 3 and lost 3 trials.

Source: Philly.com (Subscription required)

Related Information: Medical Malpractice