Tennessee Injury Lawyer Blog

The state of Tennessee is required to investigate reports of abuse on site within forty-eight hours if there is a risk of “immediate jeopardy”. However, according to an audit that was conducted, some investigations to up to one hundred and forty-six days to start. The Tennessee Board for Licensing Health Care Facilities which is supposed to oversee investigations of abuse has also taken too long to put abusive health care workers on an online registry intended to prevent employers from hiring them to work with patients again. One just one case, it took the board ten months to put someone on the state’s abuse registry.  This is clearly putting our most vulnerable citizens at risk.

According to the report issued by the comptroller during the audit, there are serious s in the oversight of hundreds of Tennessee’s nursing homes, assisted living facilities, hospitals and 24-hour care facilities for people with intellectual disabilities. The board has also allowed unlicensed staff to administer medications in assisted living facilities because its rules haven’t been clear on who is allowed to dispense them. Additionally, auditors found that fines are so low for breaking rules that some assisted care facilities “preferred to pay the fines instead of hiring higher paid licensed staff” to administer medication. The audit also discovered that the board is not ensuring that nursing homes meet fire sprinkler regulations. Many of the findings “jeopardize the safety and welfare of persons” in Tennessee’s licensed health care facilities.

The audit cited a large increase in the number of complaints for creating a backlog for existing staff to investigate. Since 2011, there has been a fifty percent increase in complaints filed against health care facilities. Between July 2014 and September 2015, there were 2,292 complaints. Of these, seven hundred and ninety-two still await investigations and two hundred and sixty-three of cases involve nursing homes.

In response to the audit, the Office of Health Care Facilities noted it had caught up with the backlog of annual health surveys in July. They have also filled six of twelve staff vacancies. Officials plan to roll out an electronic planning system to “enhance efficiency.” The Office of Health Care Facilities also is “in the process of promulgating regulations for the Registry of Persons Who Have Abused, Neglected, Misappropriated or Exploited the Property of Vulnerable Individuals” that will create new procedures for timely reporting to the abuse registry. Finally,the Board for Licensing Health Care Facilities has formed a standing subcommittee to examine rules for who can administer medication. The was no response regarding the board’s failure to ensure fire sprinkler rules are being followed.

If you suspect that a loved one has suffered from nursing home abuse or neglect, you should contact one of our experienced and caring nursing home abuse lawyers with the Higgins Firm. We understand how difficult this must be for you. We will review your case, help you collect any evidence that may be needed for your case and make sure that you receive any compensation you may be entitled to for what you have suffered.

Please contact us today online or by calling 800.705.2121 to discuss your legal options.

In December of 2008, the Food and Drug Administration made requirements for drug companies and manufacturers to conduct studies to show that new diabetes drugs do not increase cardiovascular risk compared with current treatments. The guidance was developed amid growing concern about the safety of many diabetes drugs. AstraZeneca sponsored a trial of over sixteen thousand patients known as SAVOR previously showed patients taking Onglyza, also known as saxagliptin, had an increased risk of hospitalization due to heart failure. The company claims that it conducted the SAVOR study in accordance with the 2008 guidance and that the results met the objective of showing that patients taking Onglyza were not at greater risk as measured by a composite benchmark comprising cardiovascular death, non-fatal heart attack and non-fatal ischemic stroke.
The Food and Drug Administration’s analysis revealed that the heart failure was valid. It also showed a possible increased risk of death from all causes. The Food and Drug Administration’s review stated that, “The overall trial results did not reveal a higher death risk, but a more detailed analysis examining only patients who took the drug suggests a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality.” The agency stated that the causes of death were often multifactorial and some patients may have had several serious medical conditions in the days and weeks prior to death. The agency state that it is not reassured by the risk, however, and does not necessarily view this pattern of variable causes as evidence the mortality signal is due to chance.
An analyst for Leerink stated that the Food and Drug Administration’s concerns over all-cause mortality were unexpected and could lead to a cut of up to 50 percent in his $1.8 billion peak annual sales estimate, if Merck & Co’s rival drug Januvia does not show similar problems.
The company that AstraZeneca is committed to ensuring patient safety and will continue to work closely with the FDA to support further review of the data.  According to a preliminary review of data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Onglyza produced by AstraZeneca, may be linked to an increased death rate. Onglyza was approved in 2009.
If you or someone you love has experienced heart failure, other problems, or even died after taking Onglyza, it is advised that you contact one of our caring and knowledgeable Onglyza and dangerous drug attorneys at the Higgins Firm. We understand how hard this must be for you and your family. We help to make the process as smoothly as possible. Currently we are working with other firms across the country to investigate these claims. Along with these other firms, we will review your case, gather any necessary evidence, and fight for you to see to it that you receive any compensation that is rightfully yours for what you have been through.

It should be noted that if you are currently taking Ongylza, you should speak with your doctor before changing or altering your medications.  Your doctor should be able to discuss the merits of these studies and determine what is best for you.

 

According to the ruling, the Tennessee Supreme Court decided to set aside the decision made last March by  Hamilton County Judge, Neil Thomas, who ruled a 2011 state law, which was a “tort reform” initiative of Republican Gov. Bill Haslam, capping certain personal injury damages at $750,000 is unconstitutional. Judge Thomas had issued a well reasoned decision explaining how the law violates Tennessee’s Constitutional Right to have a jury decided all issues at trial. Regardless, the Supreme Court set the decision aside because they stated that the case did not proceed far enough yet to warrant such a ruling. A move that will simply delay a ruling that will have to be decided at some point.


The case in which the first decision was made involved ruling by Circuit Judge W. Neil Thomas III on a $25 million-plus negligence lawsuit filed by Donald and Beverly Clark against several divisions of AT&T and one of its employees, Aimee Cain. The suit also named then-Tennessee Attorney General Robert Cooper because of the constitutional issues being raised. The couple filed a lawsuit against AT&T because of an automobile accident that injured Clark. The lawsuit sought a ruling on the constitutionality of the state law that caps non-economic damages at $750,000 for certain personal injury cases. Non-economic damages are applicable when pain and suffering is involved or there is a physical impairment or other similar injury.

The defendant filed a motion for partial summary judgment and the judge ruled that the cap was unconstitutional even though no decision had been made yet by the jury about the liability or the amount of damages that would be awarded. In his ruling, Judge Thomas reasoned that the state doesn’t have a constitutional right to cap non-economic damages, which he stated should be called “pain and suffering damages,” that are paid to plaintiffs. In a rebuke of the law, Thomas called it an affront to juries, which he stated should be able to award damages as they see fit.
The justices noted that they had dealt with a similar issue of “justiciability and ripeness” last summer in a criminal case. “Ripeness” refers to a court questioning whether or not a case or dispute has proceeded far enough that a judicial decision is needed. The justices stated that, “Ripeness is peculiarly a question of timing. Its basic rationale is to prevent the courts, through avoidance of premature adjudication, from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements.”
Justices vacated Thomas’ ruling and remanded the case back to the trial court.
If you or someone you care about has been injured in an automobile or another type of accident and you are concerned about how this decision could affect the amount of damages that you could receive or if you want to know if you are eligible for compensation, you should contact one of our compassionate and experienced personal injury lawyers at the Higgins Firm. We will help you determine how this may affect your case. We will also help you to get any compensation that may be rightfully yours for what you and your loved ones have been through.

Please contact us today online or by calling 800.705.2121 to discuss your legal options.

When we go to the hospital for surgery or any other type of care we expect that we will be well taken care of and at least healthier when we leave. Unfortunately, some medical devices that are used during surgery to keep patients’ body temperatures normal are also leading to some serious and life-threatening infections. If you or someone you know has developed a serious infection or other dangerous medical condition after having a surgical procedure in the hospital, you should speak to a dangerous medical device and Bair Hugger injury lawyer at the Higgins Firm. We will listen to your case and help you to receive the compensation you need for what you have been through.

According to this case, Rosie Bartel went into the hospital for knee replacement surgery years ago and left the hospital with a MRSA infection which led to the need for twenty-seven more surgeries and the amputation of right leg just below the hip. She blamed the use of a Bair Hugger forced-air patient warming system during her surgery, eventually filed a Bair Hugger lawsuit. In her lawsuit, she claimed that the MRSA infection took more than her leg. It also led to the loss of her job and eventually her home. Bartel has now become an advocate against the forced-air surgical warming systems that were employed during no fewer than twenty-two million surgical procedures in 2012 alone.
The Bair Hugger warming blanket was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1988 . A blanket dotted with a myriad of tiny holes connects to a forced-air heating unit that rests on the floor near the operating table. The unit carries heat via forced air to the blanket, with the warm air transferred to the patient through the blanket. While the heat and air unit remained a constant, single-use blankets meant a revenue source for the manufacturer. After several years in use, infections were becoming a problem, and especially for joint replacement surgery where a single germ could have devastating consequences.

A report that published in November of 2014 in the Journal of Hospital Infection sited at least ten peer-reviewed studies that suggested use of forced-air warming systems such as the Bair Hugger succeeded in the introduction of contamination to the operating field. The problem appears to occur when heat from the floor situated blower is engaged. Introducing heat causes contaminated air from the floor to rise in the room. Various demonstrations with smoke and/or bubbles and a laser light source appear reveal this. The warm air rises and collects above the operating field, before it cools and falls into the operating field, bringing whatever contamination it originally brought from the floor, down with it.

People who support the use of Bair Hugger claim that potential contamination have not been proven. It is true that researchers state that more studies need to be done. There is no data that suggests causation beyond mere association. They state however that, “forced air warming does contaminate ultra-clean air ventilation; however, there appears to be no definite link to an increased risk of surgical site infection based on current research. Nevertheless, whereas this remains unproven, we recommend that surgeons should at least consider alternative patient-warming systems in areas where contamination of the operative field may be critical.”

It should be taken into consideration that the e co-founder of the Bair Hugger and an early proponent of patient warming is no longer associated with the Bair Hugger device and is speaking out against its continued use, citing potential surgical site infection and contamination.
If you or someone you care about has developed a serious infection after surgery and you suspect that a Bair Hugger warming blanket may have been used, then you should contact one of our compassionate and knowledgeable dangerous medical device and Bair Hugger injury lawyers with the Higgins Firm. We care about our clients and will see to it that you get the compensation that is rightfully yours for your injuries.

You can contact us online or by calling 800.705.2121 to discuss your case and any questions you might have.

When we hand over the care of our loved ones to a nursing home, we expect them to be well taken care and looked after. Unfortunately sometimes nursing home are understaffed and overworked and this can lead to health concerns for many of the nursing home patients. The misuse of antibiotics making elderly residents more likely to get serious medical conditions is one of these concerns. According to Centers for Disease Control, nursing home residents are prescribed antibiotics incorrectly up to seventy-five percent of the time. If you feel that someone you care about may be at risk due to the misuse of antibiotics, then you should speak to a nursing home abuse and neglect lawyer right away. We will listen to your case and help make sure you get the compensation you need for what your loved one has suffered.
The Centers for Disease Control recently advised all nursing homes to do more to help protect over four million nursing home residents from hard to treat super bugs that are increasing becoming resistant to many antibiotics. Elderly people in nursing homes are at a higher risk of these infections because their bodies do not fight off infections well. The Centers for Disease Control counts 18 top antibiotic-resistant infections that sicken more than two million people per year and kill twenty-three thousand. Those infections contribute to deaths in many more cases.
The worry is that every time someone takes antibiotics, sensitive bacteria get killed but resistant bacteria multiples and grows and this makes them easier to spread to other people. If antibiotics are used repeatedly it can make this resistant bacteria continue to grow. Also, taking antibiotics for things such as a cold or the flu when they are not intended for these illnesses leads to more resistance of antibiotics. Antibiotics can also eliminate good bacteria while also eliminating the bad. This can cause serious infections to spread and hospitalize thousands of people. It is important that measures be taken to prevent these infections from spreading in hospitals and nursing homes.
The Centers for Disease Control suggest that nursing homes keep better records of the antibiotics they prescribe each month and to also record how the resident did with medicine. It is important to make sure the antibiotics do not interfere with their other medications or cause bad side effects. They also suggest having a pharmacist or doctor be in charge of policies concerning antibiotics and provide training for staff in how to follow these policies. These suggestions may make nursing homes concerned because they worry about not treating a resident properly or because one of their loved ones feels that a resident may need antibiotics. It is important to remember though that giving too many antibiotics can be just as harmful as not giving any.
If you have concerns that a loved one in a nursing home may be at higher risk of serious medical conditions due to antibiotic misuse, then you should first speak to the nursing home and see it can be worked out. If this does not work, you can contact the state health department about your concerns. You can also contact one of our caring and knowledgeable nursing home abuse and neglect lawyers at the Higgins Firm. We understand how difficult this may be and we will answer any questions you may have, review your claim and help you get the compensation you may be entitled to by law for what you and your family have been through.
Please contact us today online or by calling 800.705.2121 to discuss your legal options.

Deane Berg’s doctor called her the day after Christmas in 2006 to tell her the news of her cancer diagnosis. She had her ovaries removed and the results came back Deane Berg had stage three ovarian cancer and her prognosis was poor. She had twenty-five years of experience has a physician’s assistant but knew almost nothing about ovarian cancer. When she looked up the risks, she had only one; regular use of talcum powder for feminine hygiene.

Berg learned that since the early 1980s, several studies had discovered that women who regularly used talc powder for feminine hygiene had higher than average rates of ovarian cancer. Yet the evidence which fell short of proving that it caused the cancer, was mostly confined to medical journals and had barely been made known to the public. For millions of women including Berg using powder on the the genitals or underwear was a daily ritual, like brushing teeth. Since her teens, Berg had used Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, another Johnson & Johnson powder marketed to women. “A sprinkle a day keeps odor away,” the ads stated. “Your body perspires in more places than just under your arms.”

After a painful time with chemotherapy Berg filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against Johnson and Johnson in federal court. A verdict in October of 2013, allowed both sides to declare a victory. The jury found Johnson & Johnson Consumer Cos., guilty of negligence for failing to warn of the risk of ovarian cancer, but awarded zero damages to Berg. The case brought controversy. Lawyers found liability and since then there has been seven hundred claims from ovarian cancer victims or their survivors blaming the illness on exposure to talc powder. Lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson contend that women contracted ovarian cancer from using its talc powders for feminine hygiene. The company says there is no causal connection.

Berg stated that, “This is an ugly disease, I sure would have appreciated being given the chance to say this is worth the risk or it isn’t.”

Johnson and Johnson refused interview requests, but released a statement: “We have no higher responsibility than the health and safety of consumers who rely on our products. It is important for consumers to know that the safety of cosmetic talc is supported by decades of scientific evidence and independent peer-reviewed studies.” The companies including Johnson and Johnson that produce talcum powder claim that statistical associations between talc use and ovarian cancer are weak, and may result from bias in the study methods. A causal link is not biologically plausible, they say, since there is no proof that talc particles can pass through the genital tract to the ovaries or that, once there, they could cause malignant growths. There is no causal link, they argue, so warnings were unnecessary.

The first trials for these lawsuits are scheduled for early 2016.

If you or someone you know has been diagnosed with ovarian cancer or another illness after using talcum powder, then we suggest you contact one of knowledgeable and caring talcum powder ovarian cancer lawyers with the Higgins Firm. We will help you determine if you may be eligible for any compensation for what you have suffered.

You can contact us online or by calling 800.705.2121 to discuss your case and any questions you might have.

According to this case, Doris Racher and her two sisters installed cameras into their mother, Eryetha Mayberry’s room at the Quail Creek Nursing Home and Rehabilitation Center after they suspected someone at the nursing home of stealing from her. The video revealed that nursing home employees Lucy Waithira Gakunga and Caroline Kaseke forced Mayberry to lie down by pushing on her head and preventing her breathing. Gakunga was also shown shoving latex gloves into Mayberry’s mouth while Kaseke watched.
A lawsuit was filed against Quail Creek Nursing Home and Rehabilitation Center for the abuse and the case went to federal court and the judge announced the verdict on February 13. Mayberry passed away in July 2012, a few months after the video was released. Gakunga and Kaseke were fired and now face criminal charges. The jury found the nursing home guilty of negligence and abuse. The family stated that, “All in the memory of our mother. All of us fought hard and are just happy that now we can relax a little bit, and mother’s probably smiling. I’m so grateful for the outcome, because we told the truth and the truth always prevails.”

Cases just like this one occur all too often in nursing homes all across the United States and even right here in Tennessee. It is crucial that if you have a loved one or someone you care about in a nursing home that you visit them as often as possible. If you notice that your loved one has bruises, cuts, marks, or any other injuries you should notify the nursing home staff right away. It is also recommended that you talk with the staff or the director of the nursing home about their training procedures and what they do to prevent injuries or neglect. These are simple things you can do to help prevent abuse or neglect.

When Tennessee residents and people all across the country have to make the difficult decision to place their loved ones in the care of a nursing home, they want to be sure that their loved one will be properly cared for and looked after. Unfortunately, many nursing homes are understaffed and do not offer what staff they do have proper training. This leads to nursing home residents being abused or neglected. If you have seen bruises or injuries on your elderly loved one or suspect that abuse or neglect has occurred, it is important that you speak to a Tennessee nursing home abuse and neglect lawyer as soon as possible. They will listen to your case and work with you to make sure you get the compensation you deserve for what you and your family have been through.

If you think that your loved one has been the victim of abuse or neglect and you have reported it to the nursing home and nothing has been done, then you should contact one of our caring and knowledgeable Tennessee nursing home abuse and neglect attorneys with the Higgins Firm. We care about our clients and will listen to your case. We will work on your behalf to see to it that you get the compensation you are entitled to for what you and your loved ones have suffered.
Contact us online or call 800.705.2121 for your free consultation to discuss your legal needs and options.

Many people by now have probably heard that Volkswagen put software on their vehicles that would help them pass emissions tests but when the vehicle is out on the road it actually releases a high amount of nitrogen oxide into the air. The company plans to fix the problem, but right now it is unclear when or how this will happen. If you are a Volkswagen owner then you may be confused as to what you should do now. Here are some things for you to consider while you wait for the company’s solution to the problem. If you have questions or concerns, you should speak to a Volkswagen emissions fraud lawyer with the Higgins Firm about your case. We will help to answer any questions you may have and discuss any legal options you may have.

The Volkswagen company has not yet stated how they will fix the problem. Many owners are worried that any repairs will lower the fuel economy and performance which are the reasons many people purchased the vehicles to begin with. The Environmental Protection Agency has told Volkswagen to correct the problem and to follow pollution regulations, but so far there is no news on how or when the problem will be fixed. So what should owners do now?

Many owners fearing that their vehicles are losing value may want to sell them as soon as possible. However, Eric Ibadan, senior analyst for Kelley Blue Book, is recommending that owners wait to sell until the company offers a solution to correct the problem. He also states that, VW diesels traditionally have higher resale values than gasoline counterparts, but the scandal might erode that premium, especially if the fix cuts mileage or impacts their sporty performance. If repairs are made, the value may not be affected in the long-run as history has shown with Toyota’s car values returned to normal within a year of an unintended acceleration crisis.

Should owners consider taking legal action against Volkswagen? This may be an option but it could take a while to see any results. However, owners may get the compensation they want based on the history of the Toyota agreeing to pay over one billion dollars for hundreds of lawsuits filed by owners who said their vehicles lost value after the company’s acceleration problems. Some of the vehicle owners are also considering other options such as wanting Volkswagen to take back their vehicles and give them credit which they can use for a new car. Politicians also are calling on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate because VW often advertised the cleanliness of the vehicles. The Federal Trade Commission may be able to seek remedies for all of the vehicle owners.

Don Marion, one Volkswagen owner stated that, “I’m going to wait and see what they do, but I’m not going to do nothing. It’s just dumb that they did this. How could they think that it wasn’t going to be discovered? What arrogance, what bad judgment.”

This is a confusing and difficult time for many Volkswagen owners as they try to decide what to do. If you are considering legal action and would like to discuss your options, then you should contact one of our knowledgeable and experienced automobile and Volkswagen emissions fraud lawyers at the Higgins Firm. We will hear your case and discuss any legal options you may have. We will also discuss any compensation you may be entitled to for any loss you may have suffered.

You can contact us online or by calling 800.705.2121 to discuss your case and any questions you might have.

Many people as we age might need special devices to help improve our quality of life. One of these devices might include a hip implant. When we go to the doctor to have these kinds of procedures done, we expect that these devices are safe and will help improve our lives and help to make our pain and problems greatly decrease. Unfortunately, many hip implants have defects and problems that can lead to additional injuries and the need for revision surgery to fix the problem. If you or someone you know has had a hip implant and then experienced severe pain or needed more surgery to correct the problem, then you should talk to one of our experienced defective hip implant lawyers with the Higgins Firm. We will review your case and help you to get the compensation you need for what you have suffered.
According to this case, the Profemur R used in Alan Warner snapped in 2010 while he stood in his kitchen due to a laser orientation mark that was burned too deeply into the device. The lawsuit argued that laser engravings deeper than 35 microns can cause the titanium in metal implants to become brittle, and that the crack in the Profemur R emanated from a laser mark over 100 microns deep. After only almost three years of having the Profemur R implanted it broke and the fracture caused Warner to have to have fourteen major surgeries after experiencing a number of dislocations and prolonged infections.

The Wright Company argued during the trial that the Profemur R snapped because the top of of the implant wasn’t properly affixed to Warner’s existing bone, and that the device shouldn’t have been used in patients like Warner whose bone structure was compromised. They also said Warner’s surgeon, Brad Penenberg, selected a stem piece that was too narrow. As the top of the implant shifted it placed stress on the narrow stem piece and caused it to break. Wright Company’s own findings initially showed the crack in Warner’s implant emanated from a laser guidance mark, but that once they were faced with a lawsuit, the company began using the argument that the Profemur R wasn’t meant for use in patients like Warner who had degraded bone structures, despite distributing marketing materials that indicated otherwise.

The first defective product lawsuit to go to trial out of nearly 1,200 pending cases involving Wright Medical Technology Inc.’s metal hip implants resulted in a $4.5 million plaintiffs’ verdict. The majority of other lawsuits over allegedly defective Wright hip implants claim metal components in the devices ground together and released toxins into patients’ blood, plaintiff Alan Warner’s case is the first time Wright has defended its metal hip implants before a jury in any capacity. Although the jurors said Wright’s design of the Profemur R device was not at fault, they found that the implant used in Warner was defectively manufactured and caused him injury.

Wright spokeswoman Julie Tracy stated that the company expects to appeal the jury’s decision, and that the verdict’s impact on other pending hip implant cases is negligible.

There are other Wright hip implant device cases pending and the verdict in this case will be have a very significant impact on the verdicts for the other cases. If you or someone you care about has had one of this hips implanted and then suffered pain from injuries or required more surgery to fix or replace the implant, then you should contact one of our knowledgeable defective hip implant lawyers at our firm. We will review your case, answer any questions you may have and help you get the compensation that is rightfully yours for your pain and suffering.
Contact us online or call 800.705.2121 for your free consultation.

Many of you may have heard about a superbug going around that is resistant to antibiotics. What you may not know about it has been linked to medical scopes known as duodenoscopes. According to this case, 500,000 Americans undergo a procedure known as Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography or ERCP every year using these medical scopes and this procedure has been linked to the superbug outbreak also known as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae or CRE.

Earlier this week, Carla Warner provided emotional testimony to a U.S. Food and Drug Administration Advisory Panel about the devastating impact that as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae or CRE had on her husband, Willie “Bill” Warner. He developed CRE after having an Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography procedure. Warner’s procedure used a widely sold TJF-Q180V duodenoscope, which was produced and sold by Olympus America, Inc. Carla Warner’s testimony about the death of her husband due to CRE was highlighted on the panel.

Beginning in 2010, Olympus redesigned and replaced its TJF-Q160V duodenoscope with the TJF-Q180V duodenoscope. The new 180V model had a sealed section on the device known as the “elevator wire channel.” In lawsuits that have been brought against the Olympus America Corporation after family members have died from infections using the TJF-Q180V duodenoscope, it was complained that bacteria can become trapped in the device’s sealed elevator wire channel. The elevator wire channel on the device is not easily accessed for proper cleaning so it becomes the source for the outbreak of the deadly superbug CRE infections that patients are developing.

When Olympus began to sell the 180V scopes in 2010, the modifications they made had clear safety concerns but the company did not seek approval from the Food and Drug Administration until 2013 and 2014. The Olympus Company must have been aware of these safety concerns however, because in 2012 they warned European safety regulators of contamination and infection risks posed by the 180V scopes.

Carla Warner and other people who have been impacted by CRE are taking legal action against Olympus, who according to this case had an obligation to develop, test, and check the safety of their products before selling them. If they had performed these proper testing procedures, they most likely would have known about the bacteria in its scopes and how it could lead to an outbreak of CRE.

If you or someone you know has developed the superbug after a medical procedure and you suspect that one of these scopes was used, then the first thing you should do is to speak with your medical professional and see what treatment you may need or if in fact one of these scopes was used in your procedure. Then, it is important that you contact our personal injury attorneys with the Higgins Firm. We care about our clients and will take the time to answer any questions you may and to help you get the compensation you deserve for what you have suffered.

Please contact us today online or by calling 800.705.2121 to discuss your legal options.

Contact Information