| Follow Us: |  |  |  |
|  |
Blog Topics
- Accident Statistics
- Brain Injury Litigation
- Bus Accidents in New York
- Car Accidents in New York
- Cruise Ship Accidents in Newyork
- Dangerous Medications
- Dangerous Premises Accidents in New York
- Dangerous Products
- Differences in NY and NJ Laws
- Gersowitz Libo and Korek Events
- Gross Negligence Cases
- Medical Malpractice
- New Laws/Statutes
- New York Truck Accidents
- News
- Successful Injury Case Strategies
- Topics
- Uncategorized
- Wrongful Death
TORT REFORM
Threatening the Rights of Medical Malpractice Victims
In recent years, proponents of tort reform have lobbied to enact laws which limit the rights of individuals to seek redress in our courts. Such legislation has often been geared towards the area of medical malpractice litigation. Tort reform advocates claim that frivolous lawsuits and out of control jury verdicts are overwhelming our courts. Proponents further argue that medical malpractice suits are responsible for driving up doctor’s insurance rates and driving doctors out of business. In response to these claims, states across the country have enacted laws which limit the rights of individuals in their personal injury lawsuits. Tort reform measures include placing caps on the amount of non-economic damages an individual can recover and enacting procedural barriers for plaintiffs attempting to commence a lawsuit.
While tort reform advocates argue that these limitations something enough times doesn’t make it true. In fact, in a 2006 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health concluded that [P]ortraits of a malpractice system that is stricken with frivolous litigation are overblown. Additionally, a study by the Congressional Budget less than 2% of healthcare spending. At Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C., we believe that limiting individuals rights through tort reform is not the answer. Personal Injury lawsuits compensate individuals for real losses, including medical expenses and lost wages as well as for pain and suffering. In a country with rapidly rising health care costs, being compensated through a personal injury lawsuit should not be equated with winning the lottery. Legislation should not be health care providers at the expense of patients and consumers. Anyone can be a victim of medical malpractice or someone else’s negligence. If you think you or a loved one has been the victim of medical malpractice please contact Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C. at (212)385-4410 or visit us online at www.lawyertime.com.
CRUISE SHIP LITIGATION
Avoiding The Pitfalls
It is estimated that more than 9 million passengers travel on cruises departing North American ports each year. Cruise ships are not merely common carriers, they are virtual floating cities, and like any city, injuries and deaths occur due to negligence. The litigation of cases involving the cruise lines is replete with procedural and substantive pitfalls that can trap all but the most seasoned cruise ship litigators.
Special consideration must be given to a shortened statute of limitations and forum selection clauses. For injuries or deaths stemming from negligence associated with cruise ships, the contract, which is usually contained in the passenger ticket package, typically provides that a passenger must provide notice of a claim to the cruise line within six months of the date of the within one year. In addition, the passenger ticket package typically contains a forum selection clause dictating where a claim must be made. It does not matter where the passenger resides, where the cruise ship departed, or where the injury occurred; the forum selection clause controls.
In addition to these procedural requirements, limitations on liability and damages often act to bar or limit claims. As it relates to medical malpractice committed by ship board physicians, the majority rule across the circuit courts is that a cruise line that otherwise employs a competent medical professional, is not liable for the negligence of the doctor. Pursuing these doctors individually is very nations and carry no insurance. Passenger deaths present their own as the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA), severely limit the ability to recover compensation. The DOHSA provides a wrongful death remedy limited to pecuniary damages for fatalities on the high seas. There is no recovery for pain and suffering.
For these reasons and many more, special consideration must be given to cases involving injury or death stemming from cruises. Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C. welcomes all inquiries concerning incidents involving cruise ships.
TERROR ON LONG ISLAND
Family Mourning Loss Hires GLK for Justice
On the day after Thanksgiving 2008, tragedy struck a Walmart department store in Valley Stream, New York. A horde of shoppers trampled Walmart employee Jdimytai Damour in their eagerness to get to the store’s Black Friday sales.
Jdimytai, 34, was hired as a temporary maintenance worker at the Walmart in Green Acres Mall during the holiday season. In the early morning of November 28, Jdimytai was pulled away from his duties in order to control the crowd that had gathered in anticipation of the store’s post-Thanksgiving bargains. Managers chose Jdimytai to guard the doors because of his imposing frame, even though he had never received any security training.
When Jdimytai opened the doors at 5am, the crowd of eager shoppers began to force their way in, pushing past Jdimytai and into the store. Alone facing the mob, Jdimytai fell to the ground and was trampled to death while trying to protect a woman who was 8-months pregnant from the crush of the crowd. Four other shoppers suffered injuries during the mob scene, including the 28-year-old pregnant woman, who was hospitalized with minor injuries, and might have died had it not been for Jdimytai’s determination to keep her safe.
Marie Telismond, Jdimytai’s mother, reached out to Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C. to help her family navigate the legal waters in the aftermath of her son’s death. The Walmart store in which this tragedy occurred had no policies in place concerning crowd control, even during large sales events such as the one on Black Friday.
The store’s inadequate security measures and safety protocols, coupled with their lack of regard for Jdimytai’s inexperience in dealing with crowds, led to the untimely death of the young man. This tragic story was immediately picked up by news media around the country.
Ms. Telismond and the rest of Jdimytai’s family were hounded for interviews by major broadcast companies who were interested in a headline that involved the nation’s largest retailer.
In response to the tragedy, New York City Council Member Jim Gennaro and Nassau County Legislator Joseph Scannell introduced legislation to prevent stores from putting workers in the position Jdimytai found himself the only barrier between an angry mob and the gadgets they desired. These bills impose safety precautions on stores that hold door buster sales like the one that ended in tragedy at the Valley Stream Walmart.
Hopefully, with Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C. on the case and legislation at the city and county level, the story of Jdimytai’s wrongful death will change the negligent culture of companies who have these kinds of sales and prevent a similar tragedy from happening again.
Spotlight on Potentially Dangerous Prescription Drugs – Avandia
Prescription drugs with unhealthy, dangerous, and potentially deadly side-effects are a persistent cause of debilitating injury to Americans. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the lead governmental agency tasked with overseeing issues of drug safety, and in instances of immediate danger it is empowered to issue recall orders for products deemed harmful. In February 2010, following years of scientific studies, the FDA was formally petitioned for a ban and recall of the prescription drug Avandia.
Avandia by GlaxoSmithKline
Avandia is a commonly prescribed drug that is intended to assist those with Type-2 Diabetes gain control of their blood glucose levels. It was first released by GlaxoSmithKline in 1999, and is known generically as thiazoliodinedione. Initial data regarding side-effects from the use of Avandia noted the potential for the following fatal side-effects:
- Heart attack [interruption of blood supply to the heart]
- Congestive heart failure [insufficient or failed cardiac output]
- Stroke [interruption of blood supply to the brain]
- Pulmonary embolism [blood clotting within the lungs]
Additional side-effects, of an immediately non-fatal though damaging nature, are:
- Bone fractures, particularly in the extremities
- Pulmonary hypertension [excessive blood pressure within the lungs]
Several patient factors were found to contribute to elevated risk, including history of heart attack, heart disease, liver disorders, stroke, congestive heart failure, diabetes-related vision problems, and/or high blood pressure/hypertension. Increased incidence of hypoglycemia (dangerously low blood sugar) was noted in Avandia patients that were also taking birth control pills, diuretics, asthma medications, steroids, anti-convulsant drugs, and/or thyroid medications.
Historic FDA Warnings Regarding Avandia
Reports of these side-effects have provoked numerous lawsuits, as well as action by the FDA to warn consumers of the potential for harm resulting from the use of Avandia. In 2007, the FDA issued a national alert to health professionals and the public at large warning of these side-effects. The FDA also required GlaxoSmithKline to include so-called ‘black box’ warnings on Avandia labels. Black box warnings are the most serious advisories required by the FDA, and are reserved for warnings about the potential for immediately fatal drug side-effects.
Clinical Evidence of Fatal Side-Effects Resulting from the Use of Avandia
In September 2007, the Cleveland Clinic released the long-awaited results of their study of the side-effects of Avandia, which noted the following conclusions regarding Avandia patients:
- 43% increased likelihood of heart attack
- 50% increased likelihood of congestive heart failure
- 64% increased likelihood of sudden cardiac death
Compensation for Patients Who Have Suffered from Avandia Side-Effects and Complications
Avandia is currently under review by the FDA for a potential recall announcement. Despite the fact that a recall has not yet been announced, the evidence for both fatal and non-fatal side-effects resulting from the use of Avandia is abundant.
If you or your loved ones have been injured as a result of taking Avandia, you may be entitled to compensation. Contact Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C. for a free consultation in order to explore your full legal rights. We are experienced litigators in the field of drug injury & liability, and our team of skilled attorneys has the experience, knowledge, and determination to ensure that you receive the full recompense that you are legally entitled to.

Widespread Liability Exposure Resulting from the Toyota Recall
In recent years, there have been persistent complaints with several models of Toyota vehicles with regard to episodes of uncontrollable acceleration. Consumers have complained of instances in which their Toyota vehicle was unresponsive to efforts to slow down or stop, resulting in essentially a runaway vehicle. Collisions, crashes, damage & destruction of vehicles and property, and injury & death have all resulted from these instances of uncontrolled acceleration.
As these complaints mounted, Toyota assured the public that all was well with their vehicles, and that a dangerous or defective vehicle was not to blame. As a result, in cases of crashes, liability was often assigned to the driver (based upon negligence) and the role of the vehicle in potentially causing the collision was overlooked.
In the past few months, evidence contradicting Toyota’s claims that their vehicles were not at fault became impossible to ignore. Following widespread media attention and the threat of both legal action and governmental intervention, in February, 2010 Toyota finally responded with a recall of a large number of their most popular models, citing two problems (existing individually or in combination) that they have termed Floor Mat Pedal Entrapment and Sticking Accelerator Pedal as the cause of the complaints. The affected models include the following:
Toyota
- 2005-2010 Avalon
- 2007-2010 Camry
- 2009-2010 Corolla
- 2008-2010 Highlander
- 2009-2010 Matrix
- 2004-2009 Prius
- 2010 Prius
- 2009-2010 RAV4
- 2008-2010 Sequoia
- 2005-2010 Tacoma
- 2007-2010 Tundra
- 2009-2010 Venza
Lexus
- 2006-2010 IS 250
- 2006-2010 IS 350
- 2007-2010 ES 350
Floor Mat Pedal Entrapment and Sticking Accelerator Pedal are two different problems that both may result in difficulty/inability to control or slow your vehicle; the first involves the potential of the floor mat to trap the accelerator pedal in the wide-open position, and the second involves the likelihood that normal wear & tear on a portion of the pedal assembly may result in friction that has the potential to leave the throttle partially open, or delay its return to a closed position.
Ensure Your Legal Rights in the Toyota Recall
Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C. is eager to assist consumers in cases of property damage, loss or destruction, or personal injury or death, as a result of manufacturing defects contained within these recalled vehicles. Those impacted include not only the owners of these cars, but any individuals who have been involved in accidents with these vehicles. Additionally, prior liability judgments are being reviewed in the wake of this new recall information, and in one celebrated case a man that has been jailed for several years may be set free: http://www.today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35589163/.
If you own one of these models, or have been involved in an accident with one, you may be entitled to additional compensation. Contact Gersowitz Libo & Korek, P.C. for a free consultation in order to explore your full legal rights. We specialize in both automobile accidents and product liability, and our team of skilled attorneys has the experience, knowledge, and determination to ensure that you receive the full recompense that you are legally entitled to.