Recent Blog Posts

$38.4 Million Paid by Mortgage Accelerator Firm for Deceptive Advertisements

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:40:00 GMT

Once again, a company is being fined millions of dollars for deceptive advertising practices. You may have seen ads which claim to save you thousands of dollars in interest if you pay off your mortgage early. While the concept is sound, companies who charge big fees or make deceptive promises are not above-board. Paymap, a Colorado-based company and LoanCare, a Virginia-based company were both targeted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. LoanCare was slapped with a $100,000 civil penalty, while PayMap will pay a $5 million civil penalty and must return $33.4 million in fees to affected consumers.

Paymap and LoanCare both engaged in consumer advertising, which promised those who enrolled in their Equity Accelerator Program would garner significant savings in interest payments. Consumers were set up with a new, biweekly payoff schedule, paying an enrollment fee of $295 and a biweekly transaction fee of $2.50. These fees amounted to approximately $33.4 million from more than 125,000 customers. CFPB Director, Richard Cordray, noted “Deceptive advertising has no place in the financial marketplace.” Those who want to pay off their mortgage early can save on interest simply by making additional principal payments to the bank or mortgage servicer—with no fees or middlemen.

When a consumer “buys” an accelerated biweekly payment plan from a mortgage service company, they are basically asking the company to make them pay off their mortgage early. The company collects biweekly checks from the consumer, fining them if one of the payments is missed. The companies justify their setup fees, maintenance fees and penalties by assuring the consumer it is well worth it to save tens of thousands of dollars on a mortgage. Some companies charge even more than Paymap or LoanCare, with startup fees as high as $350 and biweekly processing fees as high as $10. Some also charge a monthly and/or annual maintenance fee. As an example, if you pay a $250 initial startup fee and $10 per month in processing fees you will pay $2,650 over 20 years, plus late fees and penalties for not paying on time.

Paymap Inc., is part of Western Union, and LoanCare is a sub-servicer for ServiceLink which is mostly controlled by Fidelity National Financial. Both Paymap and LoanCare promised “tens of thousands of dollars in interest savings,” to consumers who signed up with the companies and agreed to make biweekly mortgage payment. LoanCare partnered with Paymap to market the Equity Accelerator Program, then the fees charged by Paymap were shared with LoanCare. While both companies agreed to the order to pay fines and refund millions to consumers, they neither confirmed nor denied the underlying allegations.

Paymap and LoanCare are not alone in the services they offer to consumers, however these two companies held customer’s payments until they were due within the typical monthly period, then charged a transaction fee. In other words, the companies were collecting interest on consumers’ money—and charging them to do so. Paymap frequently advertised huge savings on interest costs with no supporting evidence to back up those claims. The CFPB said only a tiny fraction of Paymap and LoanCare’s customers reached the level of savings on interest the company’s advertised. Paymap has been banned from advertising the benefits of its payment program until credible evidence to back up those claims is produced. LoanCare received similar advertising prohibitions.

Consumers who want to create their own mortgage accelerator program can simply divide one regular mortgage payment by 12 and add that amount to the normal monthly payment. The principal amount of the mortgage will be reduced quicker than it would normally be, with no resulting fees and penalties.

Contact Our Experienced National Deceptive Advertising Lawyers

If you believe that your bank or mortgage company has engaged in deceptive advertising and you have been harmed by their deception, we can help. Our experienced national consumer law attorneys will explain your legal rights and determine the best course of action for your situation.

For a free review of your case, call the Pennsylvania class action lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at (215) 278-4449 or fill out our confidential contact form.

The class action lawyers at Golomb & Honik have successfully represented individuals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and throughout the United States.

Deep Joint Infection Caused by Bair Hugger Forced-Air Warming Blanket

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:23:00 GMT

Keeping patients at a stable temperature during surgery can not only shorten recovery times, but reduce bleeding. This is why Dr. Scott Augustine developed the Bair Hugger forced-air warming blanket in 1988. This blanket surrounds the patient with warm air through an attached heater, a flexible hose, and small perforations in the blanket. More than 90% of all forced-air warming blankets in the U.S. are Bair Hugger devices.

Developer of the Bair Hugger Cautions Against Its Use

Several years ago, the very doctor who developed the Bair Hugger forced-air warming blanket warned surgeons about the risks of using this device. In fact, he told them to stop using it altogether. According to Dr. Augustine, his research indicates that the forced-air warming blanket can spread bacteria throughout the operating room, leaving the patient susceptible to an array of infections.

A study published in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery also warned that air circulated by the Bair Hugger device contained 2,000 times more contaminants than warmers that don’t use forced air. When two orthopedic surgeons researched the issue further, they discovered that there was a 74% decrease in deep joint infections when the Bair Hugger warming device was not used during surgery.

Deep Joint Infection and Amputation: Possible Risks

One of the most significant issues associated with the Bair Hugger device is deep joint infection. When a patient develops a deep joint infection, it is likely that they will face an extremely long and difficult recovery. Many will undergo multiple hospitalizations, additional surgeries, weeks of IV antibiotic therapy, removal or revision of the original implant, and even extended physical therapy.

In extreme cases, the patient may even face the loss of their limb. Infection in the artificial joint can also result in chronic pain, inflammation, redness around the wound, fever, chills, fatigue and night sweats. Even if the infection does not lead to amputation, the patient will still need to have the artificial joint re-implanted. In many cases, the overall cost of a deep bone infection can total $100,000 or more.

Bair Hugger Lawsuits

Currently, lawsuits are pending against 3M for injuries caused by the Bair Hugger forced-air warming device. Two plaintiffs developed MRSA after undergoing joint surgery, and two plaintiffs lost limbs as a result of deep bone infections. One patient, Rosie Bartel, explains that she was infected with MRSA as a result of the Bair Hugger, causing her to undergo 27 surgeries. She also lost her leg to the hip.

Contact Our National Defective Medical Device Attorneys

If you or someone you love has developed a deep joint infection after the Bair Hugger forced-air warming blanket was used during surgery, you should speak to the Philadelphia defective medical device lawyers at Golomb & Honik, P.C. right away. We hold negligent pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturing companies accountable for their actions. Call now at (215) 278-4449!

Man Files Lawsuit Against Sunoco Inc. for Deceptive Benefits of Credit Card Rewards

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Thu, 10 Sep 2015 23:41:00 GMT

On August 14, a Florida man filed a lawsuit against Sunoco Inc. of Philadelphia in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania for false and deceptive representations of benefits advertised for the Sunoco rewards credit card.

Sunoco Inc. claims that cardholders receive a 5-cent discount on every gallon of fuel purchased at a Sunoco location. As of now, Sunoco is said to have motor fuel markets in 26 states, including Florida. The man claims that in January, he visited a Sunoco location to pump gas. However, the discount was not applied at the pump. When he called, a representative told him that the discount would be applied on his following statement, so he waited.

Upon seeing his statement for the following month, the man noticed that the discount was not applied. He called Sunoco, again, on February 26. This time, the representative told him that not all Sunoco locations honor the discount advertised.

Currently, the man is represented by the class-action lawyers of Golomb &Honik, P.C. including Richard M. Golomb, Ruben Honik, Kenneth J. Grunfeld, and David J. Stanoch.

For the full article, read here.

Testosterone Gel Lawsuits on Fast Track Trial

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 20:55:00 GMT

Nearly 2,000 federal testosterone injury lawsuits have been filed after a significant number of men suffered serious harm following the use of a low testosterone drug such as Axiron, Testim and AndroGel. After an MDL was established in the Northern District of Illinois in June 2014 to centralize the cases, more and more men have come forward to join that MDL. This type of consolidation and centralization is common among prescription drug and medical device litigation in which the facts of the cases are likely to be very similar from one plaintiff to the next.

AbbVie the Major Defendant in Testosterone Lawsuits

The vast majority of the testosterone lawsuits have been brought against AbbVie, the manufacturer of AndroGel which has been, by far, the top-selling testosterone replacement therapy. In 2012 alone, AndroGel generated more than $1 billion in sales. Sales of the drug skyrocketed following an $80 million dollar aggressive marketing campaign by AbbVie. Anyone who watches television saw one of the commercials which informed men who suffered from low libido, a decline in physical strength and muscle mass, an increase in belly fat or the need for an occasional nap they must be suffering from “Low T.” Despite the fact that these “symptoms” are considered the normal effects of aging, and not the intended use of those drugs, men flocked to their doctors for a testosterone prescription.

Risks Associated with Testosterone Supplements

Unfortunately, there are significant risks associated with testosterone therapy, such as heart attack, stroke, and even death. The FDA ordered manufacturers of testosterone drugs to add warnings regarding the link between testosterone replacement therapy and blood clots, deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. In June 2014, the FDA required additional information regarding the risk of blood clots for those taking testosterone supplements also be added. Blood clots which occur in the veins are known as venous thromboembolisms, while blood clots which occur in the legs are known as deep vein thromboses. Should a blood clot break off and move to the heart and lungs, a pulmonary embolism can result.

Inadequate Warnings for Men Taking Testosterone

The plaintiffs in the testosterone cases are alleging inadequate warnings regarding the risks of heart attack, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or stroke for those taking testosterone drugs. The lawsuits also claim testosterone drugs were marketed in a reckless manner to men who did not require medical treatment for normal, age-related decreases in testosterone.

AndroGel Bellwether Trials Set

Six AndroGel trials have been scheduled in 2016 and 2017. These trials are called bellwether trials, and represent issues which are common in all the cases. A bellwether trial provides both plaintiffs and defendants a good idea of how future trials will be decided, and whether at least some of the cases should be settled. The bellwether trials will be divided among those men who suffered blood clots and those who suffered heart attacks after taking AndroGel. A second group of bellwether trials involving other testosterone manufacturers are not expected to begin until the second part of 2017.

Contact Our Experienced Dangerous Drugs Lawyers

If you have suffered a heart attack or cardiac complication from AndroGel or other testosterone supplement, it can be very beneficial to speak to an experienced Philadelphia class action lawyer to determine what options are available to you. Drug companies who routinely put profits before people should pay for their negligence—and their unscrupulous behavior. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia product liability lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at (215) 278-4449 or fill out our confidential contact form.

The national dangerous drug lawyers at Golomb & Honik have successfully represented individuals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and throughout the United States.

GAO Asked to Investigate FDA Over Morcellator Claims

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 20:53:00 GMT

The U.S. Government Accountability Office has been asked by twelve members of Congress to investigate claims relating to power morcellators. The GAO investigates how American tax dollars are spent and is often known as the “congressional watchdog.” Specifically, the GAO has been charged with determining why the devices were marketed for two decades prior to safety warnings being issued by the FDA.

What is a Power Morcellator?

The power morcellator is a small electrical instrument with sharp, rotating blades. The morcellator breaks large tissue masses apart during a hysterectomy, myomectomy or during the removal of fibroid tumors. Once those tissues are shredded, they are vacuumed out of the woman’s body. In theory, the morcellator allows surgeons to perform the procedure with a much smaller incision, avoiding large cuts into the surrounding stomach muscles. The smaller incision allows patients to heal much more quickly, with fewer complications. Unfortunately, as the tissue shreds are removed from the body, they can be deposited into other areas. If a woman had undetected uterine cancer, the use of a power morcellator can inadvertently scatter cancerous tissue, leading to serious or even deadly consequences.

Two Doctors Campaign for a Ban on Power Morcellators

Anesthesiologist Amy Reed underwent a hysterectomy using a power morcellator in October 2013. Soon after, Reed was diagnosed with leiomyosarcoma, a rare, very aggressive uterine cancer. Reed’s husband, Hooman Noorchashm, a heart surgeon, joined with Reed following her diagnosis, to launch a campaign which would have banned the use of power morcellators. After about a year in apparent remission, Reed recently suffered a recurrence of the cancer following a move by Reed, Noorchashm and their six children to Philadelphia.

The campaign spearheaded by the two doctors did result in an FDA review as well as a sharp decline in the use of power morcellators. According to the FDA, one in 350 women who undergo a procedure such as a hysterectomy, myomectomy or fibroid removal could have a hidden cancer which the morcellator could spread. When the power morcellator was first marketed in 1993, gynecologists placed that risk at one in 10,000. The letter sent by the twelve Congress members asks the question “How did they get it wrong for so long?”

Lead signer, Representative Mike Fitzpatrick, is pushing for sweeping changes in the FDA’s approval process for medical devices. Spokesman for the Government Accountability Organization, Chuck Young, stated a variety of factors would be considered in in their determination of whether an investigation is warranted. Those factors include the level of available data as well as potential legal obstacles involved.

FDA Considers it “Premature” to Discuss Potential Actions for Power Morcellators

Following the safety advisory issued by the FDA regarding the use of power morcellators, Johnson & Johnson suspended worldwide sales of its own power morcellator. At the time the safety advisory was issued, the FDA deemed it premature to discuss potential actions associated with power morcellator use. Noorchashm disagrees with this assessment passionately. Leiomyosarcoma, the type of cancer his wife developed following a procedure using a power morcellator, is very aggressive. Spreading it throughout the body can make a less-than-positive prognosis even bleaker.

Noorchashm believes the FDA is well within its purview to ban the use of power morcellators. Two key groups—the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the AAGL—disagree, saying power morcellators have a valuable role in patient care. Of the more than 400,000 hysterectomies performed each year across the nation, nearly 12 percent use a power morcellator. This means approximately 46,000 women who could have an undetected uterine cancer could be subjected to having that aggressive cancer spread throughout their body. Both groups advocate using the power morcellator with an isolation bag which contains uterine tissues—but brings certain technical problems.

While the FDA has the power to ban a device which offers significant risks of illness or injury, the agency rarely exercises that power. Until the GAO determines whether the issue warrants investigation, patients undergoing hysterectomies, myomectomies or fibroid removal should ask their doctor whether a power morcellator will be used, and should discuss the risks associated with morcellators thoroughly.

National Dangerous Drug Lawyers

If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with advanced stage uterine cancer after your physician used a morcellator during your hysterectomy, you may be able to file a lawsuit. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia product liability lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at 215-278-4449 or fill out our confidential contact form.

The national product liability lawyers at Golomb & Honik have successfully represented individuals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and throughout the United States.

Big Damages Possible in Power Morcellator MDL Lawsuits

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Thu, 20 Aug 2015 16:45:00 GMT

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has recently been asked to consolidate 21 federal lawsuits against the manufacturers of power morcellator devices. While the number of cases is not particularly large at this juncture, lawyers involved in the litigation predict that number will grow particularly given the severity of injury in these cases. The plaintiffs in power morcellator cases typically have substantial medical bills and most of the plaintiffs are within their peak earning years of 40-60. The damages may be even greater if it turns out Johnson & Johnson and other manufacturers of the power morcellator were aware of the risks of the device, yet failed to issue warnings to doctors, hospitals and consumers.

FBI Investigates Whether Power Morcellator Manufacturers Knew of Dangers

According to the husband of one alleged power morcellator victim, the FBI is investigating the issue. Hooman Noorchashm says FBI agents interviewed his wife and spoke to a retired pathologist regarding the risk of uterine cancer caused by power morcellators. Dr. Robert Lamparter began looking at morcellated uterine samples in 2005; by 2006 the doctor says he alerted Johnson & Johnson’s subsidiary, Ethicon regarding potential problems associated with the morcellator. In fact, Lamparter told J & J that “If morcellation is done, the patient’s survival is jeopardized.” Noorchashm says the FBI’s involvement centers around why Johnson & Johnson and other power morcellator manufacturers did not report the alert from Dr. Lamparter to the FDA as required by law.

FDA Weighs In on Power Morcellators

In April 2014 the FDA warned that patients with undiagnosed uterine cancer who underwent a hysterectomy or removal of fibroids using a power morcellator risked the spread of cancerous cells within the abdomen and pelvis. When a power morcellator is used in these surgical procedures, the chances of long-term survival are greatly reduced. By November 2014 the FDA issued requirements for stronger warnings regarding the risks of power morcellators to the manufacturers of the devices. Johnson & Johnson issued a voluntary recall of their power morcellator devices in July 2014, yet many power morcellator devices are still being used in hospitals across the nation.

One Power Morcellator Case Settled to Date

The 21 plaintiffs who will be included in the MDL are suing four power morcellator manufacturers, with sixteen of the cases tied to Johnson & Johnson and their subsidiary, Ethicon. One of the cases additionally includes medical malpractice claims against three physicians and a hospital as well as a product liability claim. There are roughly a dozen additional power morcellator cases pending in state courts across the country. There have been no power morcellator cases which have made it to trial as yet, however a case filed in March 2014 was settled in June 2015 (Burkhardt v. Lina Medical U.S.).

The Risks Associated with Power Morcellators

A power morcellator device has small spinning blades which grind up tissue, removing it through a small abdominal incision. Unfortunately, at least one in every 350 women has uterine sarcoma, a form of cancer which cannot be reliably detected prior to surgery. The morcellator can release this cancerous tissue into the abdominal cavity, quickly taking a localized stage one cancer to a metastatic stage four cancer.

Johnson & Johnson Opposes Motion to Consolidate

Johnson & Johnson has asked that the motion to consolidate the 21 power morcellator cases into an MDL be denied, claiming wide variation in the medical circumstances of the plaintiffs as well as too small a number of cases. One attorney involved in the power morcellator lawsuits claims the number of women harmed by a power morcellator is likely in the hundreds, but that the cases are difficult to locate as the women affected could currently be in a battle for their life. A New York lawyer involved in the power morcellator cases says the calculation of risks associated with the morcellators could be a major issue in the case. In the end, the issue of whether the manufacturers were aware—or should have been aware—of the potential risks to women may be a significant factor in the lawsuits.

National Dangerous Drug Lawyers

If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with advanced stage uterine cancer after your physician used a morcellator during your hysterectomy, you may be able to file a lawsuit. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia class action lawyers at Golomb & Honik, P.C. today at 215-278-4449 or fill out our confidential contact form.

Potential Dangers of Invokana

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Wed, 19 Aug 2015 21:05:00 GMT

What is Invokana?

Invokana is in a new class of medication called SGLT2 inhibitors used to treat Type II diabetes. Phase III clinical trials of the drug showed patients taking Invokana reduced their overall body weight and systolic blood pressure and improved their blood glucose control. Invokana reduces blood glucose via the kidneys, increasing glucose loss in the urine. Normally when glucose is filtered out through the kidneys, it is reabsorbed back into the bloodstream; however, Invokana blocks this response and can trigger dangerous levels of blood acids which can lead to coma and even death. After reviewing adverse events reports, the FDA issued a warning regarding all of the drugs in this class.

Heart Attack and Stroke Related to Invokana

In one Invokana trial conducted by Janssen Pharmaceutical Company (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson) there was an increase in heart attack and stroke among those taking the drug. The risk occurred within the first thirty days the patient took Invokana. Thirteen patients who took Invokana in the trial suffered a major cardiovascular event within the first thirty days, compared with one patient taking a placebo. While the risk of a major cardiovascular event reversed after the first thirty days, a significant increase in LDL cholesterol was seen among those taking Invokana. Despite the results of this trial, the FDA did not require warnings on the labeling of Invokana warning about potential heart attack and stroke risks.

Potential Risks of Kidney Failure and Bladder Cancer among Those Taking Invokana

Another health concern regarding Invokana is the risk of kidney failure and bladder cancer. Many of those who suffer from Type II diabetes already have some level of kidney disease. Some research pointed to a worsening of kidney disorders among those taking Invokana. The labeling on Invokana does state that Invokana can increase serum creatinine and decrease eGFR in the body. Studies show that those over the age of 75 are the most likely to suffer a severe kidney disorder while taking Invokana. While no clinical trials done by Janssen pointed to an increased risk of bladder cancer, some other studies noticed a tendency of the drug to lead to infections which could then be “causal of new cancers.”

FDA Drug Safety Announcement Regarding Serious Health Risks of Ketoacidosis

As recent as May 2015, the FDA warned that medications such as Invokana could put patients at risk for a serious health condition known as ketoacidosis. Ketoacidosis develops when the patient is unable to produce sufficient insulin. Insulin allows sugar (glucose) to ender the body’s cells, providing needed energy to tissues and muscles. When the body lacks insulin, it breaks down fat to provide energy, producing a buildup of toxic acids in the bloodstream.

Ketoacidosis can lead to coma and even death. The American Diabetes Association describes ketoacidosis as a condition which causes the body to produce excessive levels of blood acids or ketones. The FDA warning came after the agency reviewed twenty adverse event reports from patients who ended up seriously injured or hospitalized after taking Invokana and suffering ketoacidosis. Symptoms of ketoacidosis include trouble breathing, abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting, unusual sleepiness, unusual fatigue and mental confusion.

The following factors can increase your likelihood of having medical problems while taking Invokana: high cholesterol, a low-salt diet, heart disease, liver disease, kidney disease, high blood pressure, low blood pressure, electrolyte imbalance or the use of insulin or oral diabetic medications. If you have suffered, serious, adverse symptoms related to Invokana, it could be beneficial to speak to a personal injury attorney who is familiar with Invokana and the current lawsuits against the manufacturer. You could be entitled to recover compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering and loss of income.

Contact Our National Dangerous Drug Lawyers

At Golomb & Honik, P.C., our dangerous drug lawyers have considerable experience and success representing patients and families that have been injured by a negligent drug manufacturer. If you or someone you love has suffered injury after taking the dangerous drug Invokana, we can help.

To learn more about your rights and legal options, call the Philadelphia defective drug lawyers at Golomb & Honik, P.C. today at 1-800-355-3300 or 1-215-985-9177 or fill out our confidential Contact Form.

Fatal Amtrak Accident in Philadelphia Stirs Positive Train Control Debate

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 21:55:00 GMT

On Tuesday, May 12^th, Amtrak Regional 188 derailed in the Port Richmond section of Philadelphia. The horrific train crash killed 8 people and injured over 200 and has been called one of the worst train accidents in recent history. Black box data has since revealed that the train was traveling in speeds of over 100 mph when it entered a dangerous curve. The speed limit on that section of track was just 50 mph. Even more puzzling is that surveillance video indicated that the engineer actually sped up in the minutes prior to the fatal crash.

This recent train accident has begun to stir the debate over positive train control. Proponents of this technology believe it would have prevented this accident from ever occurring. The technology uses a combination of GPS, wireless radio, and computers to stop trains from colliding and derailing. If they detect that a train is going too fast, it will slow the train down or stop it all together.

The National Safety Transportation Board believes that if this technology had been in use since 2004, at least 25 accidents, 1,100 injuries, and 65 deaths could've been prevented.

Congress seems to agree as well. After a deadly Los Angeles train accident resulted in 25 deaths, Congress ordered all railroads to have this technology installed by December 2015. Yet, the majority of railroads are far from meeting this directive. Many believe that because of the cost involved, it will be 2020 before all railroads achieve complete reliance on Positive Train Control technology.

Things You Might Not Know About Amtrak

Amtrak ridership has steadily increased over the past few years, with more than 30.9 million passengers riding the Amtrak rails in 2014. Ticket revenues reached $2.189 billion in 2014, up 4 percent from 2013. Despite federal funding Amtrak receives to keep the trains running, the company still reports an average loss of $5-6 million. In fact, Amtrak has not reported a profitable year since beginning its operations in 1971. Author of “Waiting on a Train: The Embattled Future of Passenger Rail Service, James McCommons, estimates Amtrak is involved in a collision nearly every day—obviously the majority of those would be considered too minor to warrant a mention in the news. The Amtrak fleet is not young; the average Amtrak passenger coach in service is 26 years old, with the oldest being 63. Amtrak’s last major equipment update was in the 1980’s.

Train Derailment at the Same Location Nearly Three Quarters of a Century Ago

Another deadly train derailment occurred at almost the exact spot more than seven decades ago. A Congressional Limited train derailed with 541 passengers on board on September 6, 1943. Seventy nine passengers were killed and 117 injured, many of them service members on leave. It was determined a fire leading to a failed axle was responsible for the seventh car jumping the tracks and hitting a steel pole. Six other cars behind the seventh car subsequently derailed.

Contact Our Philadelphia Personal Injury Lawyers

At Golomb & Honik, our Philadelphia personal injury lawyers are devastated by the recent tragic accident that has occurred in our community. We understand how catastrophic these accidents can be and we are committed to serving all injured accident victims in Philadelphia and throughout the state of Pennsylvania. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia personal injury lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at 1-800-355-3300 or 1-215-985-9177 or fill out our confidential Contact Form.

The personal injury lawyers at Golomb & Honik have successfully represented individuals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and throughout the United States.

10 Things to Know about Xarelto Lawsuits

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:57:00 GMT

Xarelto was approved by the FDA in 2009 for the prevention of blood clots in those undergoing knee or hip surgery. In 2011, Xarelto gained approval to treat those with atrial fibrillation and for stroke prevention in patients. Xarelto has also been approved to treat and reduce recurring blood clots. Johnson & Johnson, the maker of Xarelto, has spent millions of dollars touting the benefits of Xarelto while denouncing the benefits of Warfarin and Coumadin. Unfortunately, Xarelto has been tied to uncontrolled bleeding events, which can lead to hospitalization, serious injury, and even death.

There are currently more than 400 Xarelto lawsuits filed under a federal MDL, and more are expected in the coming months. If you have suffered injury after being prescribed Xarelto, and are considering filing a lawsuit, the following points could be useful:

Xarelto inhibits the Xa direct factor which interferes with the normal blood clotting abilities of the body. Some people experience an overabundance of clotting including patients with atrial fibrillation, characterized by blood pooling in the heart and clotting. Blood clots which develop in the legs or the lungs can lead to serious complications if not treated promptly.
The manufacturers of Xarelto are Bayer AG, Janssen and Johnson & Johnson. More than seven million people across the globe have been prescribed Xarelto.
Unlike older blood thinners such as Warfarin and Coumadin, there is no known antidote to uncontrolled bleeding events triggered by Xarelto. If a patient experiences uncontrolled bleeding while taking Warfarin or Coumadin, Vitamin K can be administered, which will restore the body’s blood clotting. Doctors can do nothing for patients taking Xarelto who experience uncontrolled bleeding.
Many doctors prescribe Xarelto rather than Warfarin because Xarelto does not require frequent blood testing and, according to the manufacturers, there are no known drug or food interactions.
There are reports that another company has developed a reversal agent for Xarelto and drugs like it, however there has been no approval of the agent.
One Xarelto study found that more than 73% of the subjects in the study developed at least one adverse side effect.
In 2013, sales of Xarelto topped $1.4 billion, making the drug a resounding financial success for Bayer, Janssen and J & J.
Among the lawsuits currently filed, the injuries include gastrointestinal bleeding, rectal and vaginal bleeding, brain hemorrhage, stroke, heart attack, pulmonary embolism and epidural hematoma.
Many of these lawsuits allege the manufacturers concealed important safety information and failed to conduct adequate testing of Xarelto prior to marketing.
There are two black box warnings on Xarelto; the first warns patients undergoing spinal procedures or receiving spinal anesthesia of the risk of paralysis and the second informs those with non-valvularatrial fibrillation that when Xarelto is abruptly discontinued, an increased risk of blood clots or stroke exists.

Xarelto Adverse Events

More than 1,800 adverse event reports have been associated with Xarelto since its release, with the most frequent issues being gastrointestinal bleeding, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolisms and an increase in hematomas. During the first eight months of 2013 alone, there were 72 reports of Xarelto deaths. Despite claims to the contrary, Xarelto has been found to react adversely with anti-inflammatory medications, some herbal remedies, antivirals and antibiotics.

A report from the Institute for Safe Medication Practices identified 356 reports of serious, disabling or fatal injury associated with Xarelto. Patients who are taking Xarelto while undergoing spinal or epidural anesthesia may potentially experience paralysis. While the FDA has not require uncontrolled bleeding to be a black box warning on Xarelto, it is listed under the adverse reactions section. Those who have experienced injury after taking Xarelto should speak to an experienced Xarelto attorney to determine whether they could be eligible for compensation.

Contact Our National Dangerous Drug Lawyers

If you have suffered medical complications, pain, or excessive bleeding after using Xarelto, your injuries may be the result of a drug manufacturer's negligence. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia class action lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at 215-985-9177 or fill out our confidential contact form.

FDA Orders Heart Attack Warning for Low Testosterone Supplements

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 21:35:00 GMT

In March, 2015, the FDA issued new labeling requirements to manufacturers of prescription testosterone supplements. This new labeling details the potential risks of heart attack and stroke among patients taking these supplements. The FDA also required the labeling to caution men against using testosterone supplements for any reason other than the approved use—for men with diagnosed hypogonadism. Despite the fact testosterone supplements gained FDA approval only for use in men with hypogonadism, it is estimated that less than half of all men using testosterone supplements have such a diagnosis. It is also believed that twenty-five percent or more of all men using a testosterone supplement have not even had their testosterone levels measured.

The FDA Considers Testosterone Dangers

More than a year ago, after receiving reports regarding the questionable safety of testosterone supplements, the FDA vowed to take a “hard look” at this class of drugs. Once the FDA’s investigation was completed—and the agency met with the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory and the Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Drugs Advisory committees to discuss the drugs—the decision was made to increase warnings on testosterone labeling. In June 2014 the FDA warned doctors prescribing testosterone and patients taking the supplement of an increased risk of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism and venous thromboembolism.

Testosterone Observational Studies and Meta-Analyses

In order to reach a decision regarding new labeling advice, the FDA reviewed five observational studies and two meta-analyses of placebo-controlled trials. The goal was to determine the risk of cardiovascular events associated with testosterone supplements. Two of the observational studies determined there was statistically significant cardiovascular injury associated with testosterone supplements, two found a mortality benefit with the supplements and one study was inconclusive. The XU meta-analysis included twenty-seven published placebo-controlled trials with mostly middle age and older subjects. Of 1,773 patients treated with testosterone, 180 suffered an adverse cardiovascular event. The Corona meta-analysis included 26 similar trials; of 1,895 men treated with testosterone, 51 major, adverse cardiovascular events were reported.

Heart Attack and Stroke Added to Labeling as Significant Risk Factors of Testosterone

The newest labeling requirements which add heart attack and stroke as risks associated with testosterone supplements will help those who have already filed lawsuits against testosterone manufacturers. Since 2001, the market for prescription testosterone supplements has grown by leaps and bounds. Testosterone manufacturers coined the marketing phrase “Low T,” urging men who suffered from fatigue, low libido, loss of muscle mass, increases in belly fat, and loss of bone density to ask their doctors for a prescription. In 2013, revenues for testosterone supplements exceeded $2.4 billion. AbbVie, the manufacturer of AndroGel, has more than half the testosterone market, therefore had more than $1 billion in sales in 2013. Other manufacturers of testosterone supplements include Eli Lilly (Axiron), Auxilium Pharmaceuticals (Testim, Testopel and Striant), Endo Pharmaceuticals (Fortesta), Pfizer (Depo-Testosterone) and Actavis (Androderm).

Symptoms Which Can Signal an Adverse Cardiovascular Event or Stroke

One study published in the Journal of American Medical Association in November 2013, put the risk of having an adverse cardiovascular event at 29 percent higher for men using a testosterone supplement than for those not using testosterone. Another study published in August 2013, detailed the potential risks of blood clots for men taking testosterone supplements. Testosterone supplements can cost from $400-$500 per month, with some insurance companies covering the cost. Patients using any brand of testosterone supplement are urged to seek immediate medical attention if they experience chest pain, slurred speech, weakness in one area or one side of the body or difficulty breathing. If you feel you have suffered injury related to a testosterone supplement, it is important to speak to a knowledgeable attorney as soon as possible to determine whether filing a testosterone lawsuit is right for you.

National Dangerous Drug Lawyers

You have a right to seek justice if you or someone you love has sustained a heart attack or cardiac complication after using a low testosterone drug. Drug companies who routinely put profits before people should pay for their negligence—and their unscrupulous behavior. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia product liability lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at 1-800-355-3300 or 1-215-985-9177 or fill out our confidential Contact Form.

The national dangerous drug lawyers at Golomb & Honik have successfully represented individuals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and throughout the United States.

More than 1,300 Testosterone Lawsuits Filed & Growing

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Wed, 12 Aug 2015 15:55:00 GMT

There are more than 1,300 testosterone lawsuits filed in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Illinois. These men – the plaintiffs - have suffered serious health complications, such as heart attacks and strokes, after taking testosterone replacement therapy.

Allegations include:

The manufacturers engaged in an aggressive advertising campaign to convince men they might be suffering from low testosterone.
The drug manufacturers misrepresented the supplements as safe and effective, when in fact they could be responsible for numerous cardiac events.

According to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation documents, there are currently 1,382 lawsuits consolidated in MDL 2545. This is a significant growth from just two months prior, when there were only 1,172 lawsuits filed. More lawsuits are expected to be filed in the next several months as men learn about the serious complications associated with using low-testosterone drugs and the deceptive marketing that testosterone manufacturers used to rake in billions.

Who are the defendants?

Who are the defendants in this national testosterone class action lawsuit?

The defendants named in the MDL include:

AbbVie, Inc
Auxilium Pharmaceuticals, Inc
Actavis, Inc
Endo Pharmaceuticals
GlaxoSmithKline

Should Testosterone Supplements Include a Black Box Warning?

In February 2014, Public Citizen, a consumer watchdog, asked the FDA to add a black box warning to testosterone supplement labeling. The FDA denied that petition, claiming it would continue to assess potential cardiovascular risks and that there was insufficient data at the time to warrant a black box warning. AbbVie representatives claim there is no evidence to suggest a causal relationship between testosterone supplements and cardiovascular problems.

The FDA Answers Concerns

On March 3, 2015, the FDA addressed concerns over testosterone replacement therapy and the significant medical risks associated with using these products. They noted that manufacturers of prescription testosterone products must change their labels to show the approved uses of testosterone drugs ONLY. The label must also warn about the increased risk of heart attacks and strokes.

This warning comes after several studies raised concerns about low-T drugs, such as Testim and Androgel. In particular, a 2014 study found that men younger than 65 years old with a preexisting heart condition were 2x more likely to experience a heart attack than those men not taking low-T drugs. This study involved 55,000 men in the United States and they found that in the first 90 days after beginning hormone therapy, 1 in 167 men aged 65 or older suffered a heart attach. In contrast, 1 in 100 men under the age of 65 with pre-existing heart disease suffered a heart attack.

Contact Our National Low Testosterone Drug Lawyers

If you or someone you love suffered serious health complications (such as a stroke or heart attack) after taking a testosterone supplement, contact the Philadelphia class action lawyers from Golomb & Honik, P.C. today. We’re ready to stand up and fight for your rights and the money you need and deserve.

Manufacturer of Benicar Pays $39 Million to Settle Kickback Allegations

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Tue, 11 Aug 2015 21:30:00 GMT

Global pharmaceutical company Daiichi Sankyo, Inc., agreed in January 2015 to pay a whopping $39 million to state Medicaid programs and the United States. Headquartered in New Jersey, Daiichi Sankyo’s payment will resolve allegations that the company violated the U.S. False Claims Act. Daiichi is accused of paying kickbacks to physicians to persuade them to prescribe their drugs, including Benicar, Azor, Tribenzor and Welchol. U.S. laws prohibit any payment to a physician which seeks to influence a doctor’s prescribing decisions. The Department of Justice, believing those decisions should be objective and independent, works hard to ensure the medical judgment of a physician is never compromised by improper gifts or payments.

Anti-Kickback Statute Violated

The Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits representatives of companies—or anyone, for that matter—from offering or paying money to induce doctors to prescribe drugs covered by federal health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Wall Street Journal reported speaking fees were paid to physicians even when they “spoke” only to their own spouse or office staff about the benefits of one or more of the company’s drugs. Daiichi also agreed to enter into a corporate integrity agreement with the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

How Benicar Works

Between 2002 and 2008, Daiichi Sankyo spent nearly $1 billion to promote Benicar, claiming the drug was superior to all other drugs in its class for safety and effectiveness. Benicar is used to treat high blood pressure, gaining FDA approval in 2002. Over the past few years, more than eleven million prescriptions per year have been written for Benicar which works by keeping blood vessels open. Benicar contains the ingredient Olmesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker. Angiotensin II naturally increases blood pressure by narrowing the blood vessels, and Olmesartan inhibits that action.

Dangers Associated With Benicar

Benicar has been found to cause severe intestinal issues, including a disease known as sprue-like enteropathy which causes severe, chronic diarrhea and substantial weight loss. With this disorder, the lining of the intestines can lose its natural texture, making it extremely difficult for the body to absorb nutrients. Malnutrition and other digestive issues can result. Daiichi and the FDA did not issue a warning to doctors until July 2013 regarding these potential digestive risks.

Benicar Lawsuits

Many people injured by Benicar filed lawsuits soon after the FDA warning was released and patients became aware of where the problems came from.

To date, nearly 1000 lawsuits have been filed in New Jersey State and Federal Courts claiming consumers of the various Benicar drugs have suffered severe gastrointestinal problems.

Additional Benicar Side Effects

In addition to the gastrointestinal disorders caused by Benicar, other side effects include an irregular heartbeat, skin rashes, abdominal and chest pain, chronic vomiting, renal and liver disorders, arthritis symptoms and rapid swelling of the skin. Benicar currently contains a black box warning for fetal toxicity, meaning pregnant women should never take the drug. Although the FDA required Daiichi to add warnings regarding gastrointestinal disorders, the drug has not been recalled. If you have suffered injury due to taking Benicar, it could be beneficial to contact an experienced Philadelphia class action attorney to weigh the facts of your case and lay out your options.

Contact Our National Benicar Lawsuit Attorneys

If you have been diagnosed with sprue-like enteropathy or GI complications after using Benicar, your injuries may be the result of a drug manufacturer's negligence. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia class action lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at 1-800-355-3300 or 1-215-985-9177 or fill out our confidential Contact Form.

The national dangerous drug lawyers at Golomb & Honik have successfully represented individuals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and throughout the United States.

Johnson & Johnson Seeking to Consolidate All 103 Talcum Powder Lawsuits in New Jersey

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Mon, 10 Aug 2015 22:33:00 GMT

Multinational medical, pharmaceutical, and consumer packaged goods manufacturer Johnson & Johnson is currently facing large-scale litigation in New Jersey. Over 103 lawsuits against the company allege that their baby powder and other talcum powder products caused ovarian cancer when used in the perineal region. The cases are spread across two counties, with the majority in Atlantic County.

For practical purposes, the company is bidding to consolidate the cases by transferring them all to the Atlantic County Superior Court, arguing that the similar allegations, geographic dispersement, and large number of parties involved makes this a sensible course of action.

Johnson & Johnson “vigorously disputes general causation in this litigation,” maintaining that scientific studies refute the plaintiffs’ claims and denying there is any proven link between their product and ovarian cancer.

Golomb & Honik is representing some of the plaintiffs who are filing suit against Johnson & Johnson. For more information about this story, click here to view the original news article.

Doctor with Cancer Raises Alarm about Morcellators

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Mon, 10 Aug 2015 21:50:00 GMT

Patients who have suffered serious harm due to a defective medical device or dangerous drug surely wonder whether the FDA is really going the extra mile to safeguard consumers from potentially harmful devices and drugs. Two doctors in Philadelphia believe the FDA is absolutely not protecting consumers. The couple is literally in the fight of their life to try and prevent others from dealing with the same type of medical nightmare they have faced.

Anesthesiologist, Dr. Amy Reed and her husband, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm have been on a campaign for more than a year to ban a specific procedure they feel is responsible for Amy’s diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Reed underwent surgery to remove fibroids in her uterus. During this procedure, the fibroids are shredded, then removed through small incisions via a device known as a power morcellator. Unfortunately, among women who have leiomyosarcoma cancer hidden in those fibroids, ground-up pieces of the cancer can be left inside the body, spreading the virulent cancer throughout the body.

The Fight to Ban Power Morcellators

Reed’s cancerous cells spread to her abdomen, leading the couple to start a petition to convince the FDA to ban the use of power morcellators when used to remove uterine fibroids. Massachusetts General and Brigham and Women’s Hospital reviewed the procedure, and made the decision to limit occasions when the procedure would be used. After Noorchashm and Reed began their petition, articles were published in the JAMA which questioned the safety of the procedure.

As the couple continued their fight, one German company which manufactures power morcellators threated legal action against Noorchashm, claiming the campaign against power morcellators defames the manufacturer. One letter to Noorchashm from Storz said the company would not tolerate the Noorchashm’s allegations. Noorchashm refused to back down, claiming the company’s Storz morcellator was used by a Boston surgeon, causing his wife’s undetected cancer to spread throughout her abdominal cavity.

No Recall of Power Morcellators by the FDA

Nationwide, approximately 60,000 surgical procedures are performed each year in the United States using a power morcellator. The FDA estimates one in 350 women may develop a deadly form of cancer when they undergo procedures using a morcellator. Although the FDA did alert doctors regarding the risks related to power morcellators, the agency does not believe there is sufficient evidence to recall morcellators. Storz is one of many morcellator manufacturers. Johnson & Johnson is also facing lawsuits related to power morcellators.

Fighting Recurrence of Uterine Cancer Caused by Power Morcellator

Dr. Reed claims she was never warned of any potential risks associated with power morcellators. Reed and Noorchashm have six children under the age of 12. After a year in apparent remission, Reed is now fighting a recurrence of her uterine cancer. In March, 2015, Reed underwent surgery to remove a tumor in her spinal column and was set to follow up with radiation. The couple and their children moved back to the Philadelphia area where they have extended family. Nonetheless, the couple vows to continue to fight against the use of power morcellators and believe the FDA should have increased their efforts to protect consumers.

Lawsuits Against Morcellator Manufacturers Increase

Reed and Noorchashm have even spoken to FBI investigators, believing the use of morcellators is a violation of federal law which has led to the loss of life for many women. A wrongful death lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania claims a 53-year old wife and mother died from uterine cancer less than a year following a hysterectomy using a power morcellator. A power morcellator lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New York claims a robot-assisted hysterectomy using a power morcellator was responsible for a diagnosis of uterine cancer. It is expected that many more morcellator lawsuits will be filed as time passes.

National Dangerous Drug Lawyers

If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with advanced stage uterine cancer after your physician used a morcellator during your hysterectomy, you may be able to file a lawsuit. To learn more about your legal options or to schedule a free consultation call the Philadelphia class action lawyers at Golomb & Honik today at 1-800-355-3300 or 1-215-985-9177 or fill out our confidential Contact Form.

The national product liability lawyers at Golomb & Honik have successfully represented individuals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and throughout the United States.

Federal Judge Upholds Suit Against Angie's List

Golomb & Honik, P.C. — Mon, 10 Aug 2015 14:17:00 GMT

A federal judge upheld one woman’s standing to sue Angie’s List, a consumer-review site, for unfair business practices and breach of contract. According to the judge, the woman brought a fair argument for a potential class action lawsuit.

Janell Moore claims that Angie’s list failed to disclose information about its advertising policies, specifically policies that allow customers to influence the sites ratings by paying more.

According to Moore’s suit, Angie’s List entices local consumers to pay for allegedly unfiltered business reviews. In reality, Moore alleged, Angie’s List profits from influencing this information.

Moore began paying for Angie’s List services three years ago. Since then, Angie’s List allegedly misled her with skewed rankings and violated Federal Trade Commission specifications and Pennsylvania consumer laws.

In the suit, Moore points out that Angie’s List claims to be a “passive conduit” for consumer reviews; its membership agreement even says rankings are based on actual consumer experiences. In reality, service providers can influence rankings by paying fees.

To read more about the suit, click here.

Richard M. Golomb, Ruben Honik, David J. Stanoch, and Kenneth J. Grunfeld of Golomb & Honik PC. represent Moore.