Indiana Injury Lawyers Blog

Indianapolis in particular, nicknamed the "Crossroads of America", is a major hub for cross-country freeway traffic, with trucks heading north, south, east, west and all points of the compass on Interstates 65, 69, 70 and 74. In 2006 there were well over 1,600 injuries caused by truck crashes in Indiana, including 140 fatalities.

Injuries and the subsequent recovery periods from truck accidents involving small vehicles can also be far more serious than small vehicle accidents for a number of reasons, primarily from the fact that a loaded semi can weigh up to 40 tons. Also, such accidents often occur at a high rate of speed, trucks and semi tractor-trailers are harder to control in bad weather and they have large blind spots. Any and all of these factors can lead to serious accidents.

Kodi Pipes had recently blacked out during practice and was not cleared by the doctor to participate. Kodi later participated in a running drill in which he collapsed and died. The family filed suit against Clay City schools alleging that the school was negligent under the Indiana Child Wrongful Death statute.

The trial court's verdict found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded the Pipes family damages. The Indiana Court of Appeals later reversed the trial court's ruling in the case and ordered a new trial, ruling that the trial court had erred by instructing the jury that Indiana law recognized a rebuttable presumption of law for 7- to 14-year olds. The rebuttable presumption in this case was that a minor between the ages of 7 to 14 years old cannot legally be held accountable for negligence, though this presumption can be challenged under certain circumstances. Had the jury found the boy negligent, the affirmative defense of contributory negligence would have barred any chance for recovery. In this case it is fortunate that the Indiana Supreme Court reaffirmed that Indiana does indeed recognize a rebuttable presumption for minors of this age and reversed the appellate court's ruling.

The FDA sent a warning letter to Bayer in August 2008 demanding a campaign to correct misleading direct to consumer marketing which had been promoting the use of YAZ for conditions other than those for which it had obtained FDA approval. YAZ had been approved for birth control, for women who suffered from premenstrual dysphoric disorder PMDD (a markedly depressed mood, anxiety or tension affective lability and persistent anger or irritability) and for the treatment of moderate acne vulgaris in women who also desire pregnancy prevention. The advertising in question seemed to give the message that YAZ was indicated for PMS ( a much milder constellation of symptoms than PMDD) and all severities of acne rather than the specific approved indications. The FDA also sent a warning letter to correct misleading advertising to Berlex labs, the original producer of Yasmin in 2003. Bayer acquired the rights to market Yasmin in 2006. In February of 2009 Bayer settled with the FDA and the attorneys general of 27 states to mount a $20,000,000 campaign to correct the misconceptions it had created. The corrective ads ran from February through late July 0f 2009. During the period of ads labeled misleading by the FDA, YAZ sales nearly tripled from the 262 million in 2007 sales.

Continue reading "Birth control drugs Yasmin, Yaz and Ocella associated with serious side effects including death" »