Long Island

Mirena IUD Lawyers Accepting Mirena IUD Lawsuits Nationwide

Free Legal Shield  Mirena IUD Lawyers are accepting Mirena IUD cases where the device has migrated from position to the uterus, abdomen or a nearby organ. The device becomes embedded and causes a perforation and usually needs to be surgically removed.

Can you answer yes to any of these questions? If so, we need to hear from you today.

Were there any complications with the original insertion?
Do you have a perforation?
Has the device been surgically removed?

Symptoms to watch out for include:

    Lower abdominal pain
    Heavy vaginal bleeding
    Inability to locate the Mirena IUD string
    Bloating,and pain in the abdomen
    Nausea, Vomiting, Chills, Fever and Rapid heartbeat

Serious side effects that have been linked to Mirena include:

  •     Embedment in the uterus
  •     Embedment in the abdomen or a nearby organ
  •     Erosion of adjacent areas such as the vagina
  •     Intestinal perforations or obstruction
  •     Perforation of the uterus

Mirena IUD Lawsuits Alert

Mirena IUD lawyers are filing Mirena lawsuits for a implanted Mirena IUD needing to be  surgically removed because it migrated from its original position and perforated the uterine lining, You may have a potential Mirena lawsuit.

Legal Shield has launched an aggressive outreach campaign to locate all women who have had a perforation of the uterus or abdomen or another organ.

 

Lawyers for Airplane Accidents and Aviation Crash Injuries

Nationwide Airplane Crash Lawyers

Nationwide Lawyers for Airplane Accidents and Aviation Crash Injuries

An airplane disaster with loss of life can be devastating to a family and can cause severe emotional distress. If you or a loved one is a victim of an aircraft accident, control tower misconduct, or pilot negligence, not only do you need an aggressive airplane accident lawyer, but you also need emotional support. An airplane disaster can affect you for months, and live in your memory for years. Our experienced  airplane crash lawyers provide effective representation while understanding your emotional needs after such a traumatic experience.

When an airplane crash occurs, people try to make sense of what happened in order to deal with the anxiety and stress of the situation. Emotional and psychological trauma results from the extraordinarily stressful event.  This may shatter your sense of security, making you feel helpless and vulnerable in a dangerous world.  The emotional damage can linger long after the crisis is over and a permanent mark may be left on your psyche. Further, airplane accident lawsuits do not settle quickly or easily thus, adding to your overall stress. For this reason, your choice of an airplane accident law firm is extremely important. A law firm inexperienced with these disasters may not understand the extent of your emotional trauma. The aircraft disaster team at Injury Lawyers USA has over 15 years of experience, as they have served the needs of airplane crash victims since 1996.

After a disaster of this magnitude, you may begin to have some common psychological reactions such as:

– Disbelief, shock, and post traumatic stress
– Fear and anxiety about the present and the future
– Disorientation; difficulty making decisions or concentrating
– Apathy and emotional numbing
– Nightmares and reoccurring thoughts about the event
– Irritability, anger, and occasional outbursts
– Sadness and depression
– Feeling powerless
– Changes in eating patterns; loss of appetite or overeating
– Crying for “no apparent reason”
– Headaches, back pains, and stomach problems
– Difficulty sleeping or falling asleep; sleep deprivation symptoms
– Increased use of alcohol and drugs

Facts About Airplane Accident Law

Airplanes are considered common carriers. This means that aircraft employees are required to use the highest degree of care in transporting you to your destination. The airplane carrier is also required to inspect and maintain all equipment, and workers are required to have the skill to carry out their duties in order to protect your safety. When the airline fails to uphold these safety standards, accidents can occur. The airplane accident lawyers at Injury Lawyers USA will argue that the airline failed to satisfy its duty of the highest care to you.


If you or a loved one has been injured in an airplane accident, seek out a law office that will aggressively pursue your case while providing you with the care and concern you deserve.  As it may be difficult to make decisions during a time of such vulnerability, it is necessary to trust the airplane crash lawyer you retain. Injury Lawyers USA is here for you. Our lawyers are experienced in dealing with such issues are available to guide you and help you during this difficult time.

Airplane crashes and injuries can be caused by:

-Dangerous conditions inside the aircraft
-Careless handling of the aircraft
-Severe turbulence
-Negligent actions by incompetent flight staff
-Faulty maintenance of the aircraft and equipment
-Poor flight and airport traffic control
-Faulty equipment at the airport

Many federal, state, and international laws regulate standards for the maintenance, operation, and safety of airplanes. However, even though these laws help protect passengers of airlines, an accident may still happen. Aviation law covers personal injuries that occur aboard aircraft, including slip and fall accidents and wrongful deaths that may occur in the rare case that an airplane crashes. The laws are highly specialized, and the causes of airplane accidents may be difficult to determine.  Our lawyers are skilled litigators assisting crash victims and families nationwide and internationally. If you or a loved one has been injured in an airplane accident, your lawyer can review your case, protect your rights, and help you get the compensation you deserve. Our airplane accident lawyers at Injury Lawyers USA are supportive of your personal and emotional needs and fierce in their legal representation.

Contact us if you or a loved one has been a victim of:

U.S. airline accident lawyer,
Private aircraft accident lawyer,
International aviation accident lawyer,
Helicopter crash lawyer,
Sightseeing air tour accident,
Charter aircraft accident,
Medical aircraft crash,
Flight school accident,
Seaplane crash,
Air Balloon crash,

 

Fighting for the people…….Demanding truth, justice and accountability   Airplane Crash Wrongful Death

 

New York Personal Injury Lawyers, Accident and Injury Attorneys, NYC and Upstate New York

Do you have a New York Personal Injury lawsuit? Do you need an accident or injury  lawyer? Are you needing to file  a personal injury, negligence lawsuit. Auto accidents, Truck accidents,airport injury, tire blow outs, car seat malfunctions, airbag malfunction, seat belt malfunction, movie theater, fires, assaults, rape victims,  shopping mall, crossing the street, theme park injury, slip and fall, spine injury, head injury,  Bus accidents, subway injury,pedestrian accidents,18 wheel truck accidents, motorcycle accidents, cab driver accidents, injured children ans all accident, injury and wrongful death claims.

When you have been injured, it is critical that you are able to protect your rights and your best interests. You need the guidance of apersonal injury lawyers who have helped thousands of New York residents  through the same difficult type of circumstances.  We are your personal injury source. Here you will find the experience you need and office staff that is responsive to your pain a suffering.

New York city has some pretty dangerous highways. Here are the top 10:

1. Broadway (Manhattan), with 13 pedestrians killed from 2008-2010.
2. Broadway (The Bronx), 7 killed.
3. Kings Highway (Brooklyn), with 7 killed
4. Henry Hudson Parkway (Manhattan), 7 Killed
5. Atlantic Avenue (Brooklyn) 7 killed
6. Jamaica Avenue (Queens) 6 killed
7. Grand Concourse (Bronx), 6 killed
8. Brighton Beach Avenue (Brooklyn) 6
9. Amsterdam Avenue (Manhattan) 6
10. Union Turnpike (Queens) 6

Westchester and Rockland's commuter suburbs are home to some of the most treacherous and accident-prone roads in New York — with most crashes occurring during the evening rush hour, state records show. Finding a vehicle accident lawyer in Westchester is not difficult. But, if experience counts call our injury, accident helpline 24 hrs, 7 days..

New Jersey personal injury Lawyers and Accident Helpline lawyers are here to help you for NYC,  New York Injury lawyers.Albany, Binghamton,and the Bronx. Brooklyn, Buffalo, Catskills, Elmira, Finger Lakes,and Glens Falls lawyer, Hudson Valley, Long Island, Manhatten, Oneonta, Plattsburgh, Potsdam, Queens, Rochester, Staten Island, Syracuse, Twin Tiers, Utica, Watertown, Westchester, White Plains, Rockland County, Scenectady, Catskills, Utica,  Finger Lakes, Niagara Falls and the entire State of New York.

Hurricane Claims Lawyers, Storm Claims Lawyers

If you have a claim for a Hurricane You need an Experienced  Insurance Bad Faith lawyer Fihting for your rights. Our team of Insurance Claim lawyers are experienced in Florida windstorms, Hurricanes, and tornado damgae claims. You can count on us for Hurricane and windstorm as well as flood claims.Windstorms, Hurricanes Florida Hurricane Insurance Claim Attorneys and Florida Lawyers, helpling with Hurricane Damage claims and  Windstorm Damage Claims.

Windstorms, hurricanes and tornadoes can create massive destruction. When wind damage occurs, it can open the door to complicated ambiguities with insurance coverage during the adjustment process. In the aftermath of a disaster,  you will need help with

  •     Protecting your property.
  •     Getting your business or home back to normal.
  •     Securing adequate financial recovery.
     

As a home owner , business owners and property owners we are faced  with threat of property damage each year from windstorms, tropical storms and hurricanes. Hurricanes in 2004 and 2005 caused tremendous damage to residential and commercial properties in Florida. Property owners often faced insurance companies determined to deny claims or minimize claim payments. While most of these hurricane insurance claims have since been resolved, there is no doubt many victims of future storms will have problems with their insurers..

If you are an individual, business, condo association or homeowner’s association in the state of Florida and have suffered a property loss due to a windstorm or hurricane, we encourage you to contact the experienced insurance law attorneys at Tyler & Hamilton, P.A. To contact our Jacksonville law office, call 904.398.9999, or in Florida call us toll-free at 1.800.344.1122.
Lawyers Protecting Your Rights in Wind Damage Claims in Miami, Ft Lauderdale,Orlando, Jacksonville, Tampa, Ft Myers, Winter haven, ocala Sarasota, West Palm Beach and Throughout Florida. Expanded coverage for storm damage victims in NYC and New Jersey. We know storms. Your best bet is an experinced hurrican damage lawyer.

When a windstorm or hurricane causes your home or business property to sustain water damage, structural damage or other property damage, you have a right to receive the full benefits under your insurance policy. This could include cost of repairs, temporary/alternative residence costs, storage costs, transportation costs and other additional costs incurred due to the windstorm damage.

insurance companies have their own goals. They want to prevent you from receiving the full benefit of your homeowner’s, commercial or commercial, residential insurance policy.
Our Hurricane, Tornado, wind, storm and flood Lawyers will help you Receive  aggressive Representation for your hurricane and Tornado Claims,

The states with most Tornadeos are : Texas, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Missisppi

States with most hurricanes

 

  • Texas,
  • Louisiana,
  • Mississippi,
  • Alabama ,
  • Florida,, 
  • Georgia,
  • South Carolina,
  • North Carolina,

History of Breast Implants, Breast Implant Lawyers, Dow Corning breast Implant Claims

Breast Implant lawyers are still to this date helpling women resolve their Dow Corning Breast Implant Claims of the Breast Implant Class action of years ago. In light of this it is interesting to look at the history of Breast Implants, FDA has approved a New silicone breast Implant and despite the horrors women are still going for that well endowed look.

 

1940s
Japanese prostitutes have their breasts injected with substances such as paraffin, sponges and non-medical grade silicone to enlarge their breasts, believing that American servicemen favor women with large breasts.

1960s
The first silicone breast implants are developed by two plastic surgeons from Texas: Frank Gerow and Thomas Cronin.

1962
Timmie Jean Lindsey becomes the first woman to receive silicone breast implants.

1976
The Food and Drug Administration enacts the Medical Devices Amendment to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. FDA now has the authority to review and approve the safety and effectiveness data of new medical devices. But since silicone breast implants have been on the market for almost 15 years, they are "grandfathered." Manufacturers of the implants, when called to do so by the FDA, will be required to provide safety and effectiveness data.

1977
Richard Mithoff, a Houston attorney, wins the first lawsuit for a Cleveland woman who claims that her ruptured implants and subsequent operations had caused pain and suffering. She receives a $170,000 settlement from Dow Corning. Case receives little publicity.

1980s
Ralph Nader's Public Citizen Health Research Group, Washington, D.C. sends out warning signals that silicone breast implants cause cancer.

January 1982
FDA proposes to classify silicone breast implants into a Class III category which would require manufacturers to prove their safety in order to keep them on the market.

1984
Stern vs Dow Corning, San Francisco. Case wins on many internal Dow Corning documents that had been discovered in a Dow storage area by attorney Dan Bolton . Maria Stern's systemic autoimmune disease is found by a jury to be caused by her silicone breast implants. Bolton introduces the silicone-induced problems for the first time in court, with "experts" that theorize the silicone-immune system connection. After a monthlong trial, the jury awards Maria Stern $211,000 in compensatory damages and $1.5 million in punitive damages. The evidence is sealed by a court order.

June 1988
Six years after the 1982 proposal, FDA classifies the implants into Class III. Premarket Approval Applications from silicone breast implant manufacturers are due by July 1991. The PMA's must prove affirmatively, with valid scientific data evaluated by the FDA, that their devices are safe and effective. After the PMA's are submitted by the manufacturers, the FDA has 180 days to evaluate the safety data.

December 1990
Program on the dangers of silicone breast implants airs on "Face to Face with Connie Chung."

December 1990
Congressional hearing headed by Representative Ted Weiss deals with the safety of silicone breast implants. This hearing also discusses the fact that not all the information that the manufacturers have are available for public scrutiny due to a court order from the Stern verdict.

July 1991
Dow Corning releases 329 studies to FDA.

July 1991
Toole vs Baxter, Alabama. Jury decides against Baxter/Heyer-Shulte and awards the largest settlement so far, $5.4 million, to Brenda Toole. Toole, who shows only preliminary symptoms of systemic autoimmune problems, nevertheless had silicone in her lymphatic system according to plaintiffs' witnesses and thus an increased risk of developing an autoimmune disease.

September 1991
FDA concludes that the silicone breast implant manufacturers' safety data does not prove the devices are safe–or harmful. Manufacturers are told to submit further data.

November 1991
The FDA brings together its General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel to review all of the safety data from the manufacturers' PMA's. The purpose of the panel is to advise FDA as to what they could tell the public about the safety and effectiveness of the silicone breast implants based on the PMA's. The panel is composed of a broad range of experts, including representatives from the fields of plastic surgery, oncology, epidemiology, internal medicine, immunology, radiology, pathology, gynecology, toxicology, sociology, biomaterials and psychology, as well as industry and consumer groups. The panel hearing rejects the data from Dow Corning, Mentor, McGhan, and Bioplasty, concluding there is not sufficient data about the risks and benefits of the devices. The panel recommends the devices stay on the market temporarily and with limited access. The need for more safety data is stressed.

December 1991
Hopkins vs Dow Corning, San Francisco. The largest award yet, $7.3 million, is given to Mariann Hopkins whose mixed connective- tissue disease is linked to her ruptured silicone breast implants. The lawyer for the case, Dan Bolton, wins the suit with the help of internal memos and studies from the Stern lawsuit,     in addition to new studies he recently obtained from Dow. Mr. Bolton gives several of the internal documents to the FDA which has never seen the documents before.

December 1991
To date, 137 individual lawsuits have been filed against Dow Corning.

January 1992
FDA Commissioner, David Kessler, calls for a voluntary moratorium on the distribution or implantation of silicone breast implants until the FDA and the advisory panel have an opportunity to consider newly available information. The manufacturers agree.

February 1992
The class action lawsuit is filed in Cincinnati by Stan Chesley. The hope is to compensate women at a faster rate than filing individual lawsuits.

February 1992
Dow Corning CEO, Lawrence Reed, is replaced by Keith McKennon.

February 1992
The General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel reconvenes to review the new information regarding the safety of silicone breast implants. The panel recommends that the further use of implants be limited for reconstruction only and that women receiving the implants participate in scientific protocols and that epidemiologic studies be conducted to assess the risk of autoimmune disease. The panel concludes that no causal link has been established between autoimmune disease and silicone breast implants.

February 1992
Many of the Dow Corning internal memos are released to the public.

March 1992
Dow Corning leaves the silicone breast implant business as do Bristol-Myers Squibb and Bioplasty. McGhan and Mentor will still manufacture breast implants. Dow sets up a fund for further research into the safety of breast implants.

April 1992
Dr. Kessler lifts the moratorium on silicone breast implants. The only women allowed to receive implant surgery are those undergoing breast reconstruction. All of the implant recipients must become part of a scientific protocol.

May 1992
First woman gets implants under new rules.

December 1992    
Johnson vs Bristol-Myers Squibb, Houston. Pamela Jean Johnson wins $25 million, $5 million actual damages and $20 million punitive damages in a case argued by Texas attorney John O'Quinn. A jury finds Ms. Johnson's ruptured silicone implants were linked to her mixed connective tissue disease, auto-immune responses, chronic fatigue, muscle pain, joint pain, headaches, and dizziness. Expert witnesses and lawyers admit her symptoms amount to "a bad flu."

December 1992
To date 3,558 individual lawsuits have been filed against Dow Corning.

June 1993    
Dick Hazleton becomes CEO of Dow Corning.

December 1993
By year's end 12,359 individual lawsuits have been filed against Dow Corning.

March 1994
A Houston jury awards three women a total of $27.9 million against 3M, $15 million in punitive, $12 million in compensatory damages for illness. The lawyer arguing the case against 3M is John O'Quinn. The three women suffered from either atypical lupus, neurological impairment, and a "silicone induced" autoimmune problem.

March 1994
The class action suit is finalized by manufacturers with Dow Corning being the largest contributor. The other contributors include Baxter, Bristol-Myers Squibb/MEC, 3M. It is the largest class action settlement in history. Manufacturers claim there is no scientific evidence linking silicone breast implants with autoimmune diseases. There are set monetary amounts that will be awarded to women with specific medical conditions. No requirements are needed to prove implants are the cause of their ailments. Women will be allowed to drop out of the settlement. Companies can also opt out if too few women register claims.

April 1994
Preliminary approval to class action by Judge Pointer. Clears the way for women to start applying for claims in the settlement.

June 1994
The Mayo Clinic epidemiologic study is published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which finds no increased risk of connective-tissue disease and other disorders that were studied in women with silicone implants.

September 1994
Final approval of class action/global settlement from Judge Pointer.

December 1994
By this date 19,092 individual lawsuits have been filed against Dow Corning.

1995
The American College of Rheumatology issues a statement saying the evidence is "compelling" that implants did not cause systemic disease.

February 1995
Gladys Laas vs Dow Corning.

May 1995
Dow Corning files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Dow is facing 20,000 lawsuits, some with multiple plaintiffs and about 410,000 potential claims that have been filed in the global settlement. The bankruptcy essentially halts all litigation.

June 1995
About 440,000 women have registered in the global settlement. About 70,000 can be immediately compensated.

June 1995
The Harvard Nurses Epidemiologic Study is published in the New England Journal of Medicine. This finds no increased risk of connective-tissue disease or certain signs and symptoms     of connective-tissue disease in women with silicone implants.

October 1995
Mahlum vs Dow Chemical, Reno. This is the first case where Dow Chemical, the parent company of Dow Corning, is the sole defendant. Charlotte Mahlum is awarded $3.9 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages. About 13,000 breast implant lawsuits are pending against Dow Chemical.

November 1995
New global settlement is devised minus Dow Corning. Bristol-Myers Squibb, Baxter and 3M are the participants. The monetary awards are less than the previous settlement.

December 1995
By now 15 individual lawsuits against Dow Corning have gone to trial involving some 19 plaintiffs. Of these, Dow Corning have had 8 trial "wins" and 6 trial "losses," with one split decision.

December 1995    
By now more than 20 (non-case report) studies and abstracts have come out in the U.S. and internationally, all failing to support a causal relationship between silicone implants and a variety of auto-immune related illnesses.

April 1996
Two Federal judges in New York appoint an impartial, expert panel to review the scientific issues involved in breast implant lawsuits. This rare move will influence judges throughout the country.

September 1996
The California Court of Appeal upholds a decision dismissing Dow Chemical and Dow Corning from 1,800 breast-implant lawsuits.

December 1996
Oregon Federal Judge Robert E. Jones, after input from a panel of impartial scientists, rules that plaintiffs' lawyers cannot present evidence that silicone implants caused disease because it is scientifically invalid. He dismisses 70 claims, shocking the litigation community.
Sam C. Pointer, the Alabama judge overseeing all federal implant cases, appoints his own panel of scientific experts who are not connected to implant litigation.

January 1997
The American Academy of Neurology reviews existing silicone implant studies and reports that "existing research shows no link between silicone breast implants and neurological disorders."

March 1997
A judge in Michigan rules that the Dow Chemical Company is not liable for the medical problems of hundreds of women in the state. Thus far, some state appellate courts have upheld Dow Chemical's liability and others have not.

August 1997
The New York Times reports that implant manufacturers have been winning 80% of cases against them. Nevertheless, a state jury in the first class-action suit finds that Dow Chemical (which owns half of Dow Corning) knowingly deceived women by hiding safety information about the silicone in their implants.

September 1997
The Journal of the National Cancer Institute publishes a review of scores of medical studies that concludes breast implants do not cause breast cancer. The researchers described the evidence for linking implants to any other disease as "borderline."

December 1997
The first class-action lawsuit in an implant case is reduced to its original eight claimants when a Louisiana judge decides the 1,800 women have cases too dissimilar to group into one lawsuit.

April 1998
Two large Scandinavian studies fail to show that silicone implants are linked to neurological disease.

July 1998
Plaintiffs agree to Dow Corning's offer of $3.2 billion to settle tens of thousands of claims of injury from silicone breast implants. The agreement will let the plaintiffs receive money within a year and also enable Dow Corning to emerge from bankruptcy proceedings.
After being asked by the British minister of health to review the safety of silicone implants, a seven-member panel of scientists report no convincing evidence that they cause disease. (The U.K. has never removed silicone implants from the market.)

November 1998
Dow Corning files for bankruptcy reorganization, which includes the $3.2 billion previously agreed-to settlement and offers claimants several payout options. Those who want to cash-out immediately and not file a disease claim will be paid $2,000. This figure can also be combined with $5,000 for implant removal surgery and $20,000 for a ruptured implant. Those who have already filed a disease claim will receive between $10,000 and $250,000 plus any compensation claimed for removal or ruptures.

December 1998
After two years and $800,000, a panel of four independent experts appointed by Judge Sam C. Pointer, overseer of implant lawsuits in the Federal courts, concludes that scientific evidence so far has failed to show that silicone breast implants cause disease.
Nevada Supreme Court upholds a compensatory damage award of $41 million against Dow Chemical to Charlotte Mahlum for her multiple-sclerosis-like symptoms. Dow Chemical was earlier found liable for helping Dow Corning conceal evidence about the harmful effects of silicone. The court, however, overturns a $10 million punitive award.

 Breast Implant Class action, Breast Implant lawyers January 1999
A jury in a Washington Federal court awards $10 million in compensatory damages against Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. to an attorney who claimed her implants caused scleroderma.

Spring 1999 Silicone-gel-filled Breast implants
Silicone-gel-filled implants remain off the market in the U.S. pending manufacturer safety studies. They are available only to women who have had or will have breast surgery for a medical condition or have other complications from existing implants, and only if they agree to be part of a scientific protocol, or study. The latest status of silicone breast implants can be found at the FDA website.

June 1999
The Institute of Medicine releases a 400-page report prepared by an independent committee of 13 scientists. They conclude that although silicone breast implants may be responsible for localized problems such as hardening or scarring of breast tissue, implants do not cause any major diseases such as lupus or rheumatoid arthritis. The Institute of Medicine is part of the National Academy of Sciences, the nation's most prestigious scientific organization. Congress had asked the Institute to set up the committee. The committee did not conduct any original research; they examined past research and other materials, and conducted public hearings to hear all sides of the issue.

Mirena IUD Is It Safe? Mirena IUD Lawsuits, Mirena IUD Lawyers

The Mirena IUD has reported complications and lawsuits are being filed against the manufacturer.

What is it and what does it do?

An IUD (IUS, for the Brits) is a small, plastic, T-shaped device that your OB/GYN inserts into your uterus. The old-fashioned IUD’s (sans hormones) are famous for nasty side-effects, but the Mirena is often touted as getting around most of these due to the Levonorgestrel. This IUD works by preventing sperm from reaching the egg and fertilizing it. It also thins the lining of the uterus, which is what leads to reduced bleeding over time.

Why’s this better than other methods like The Pill which also contain this hormone?

Well, for starters, it contains far less of the Levonorgestrel hormone than you find in The Pill. And, it sends it directly to the uterus lining, as opposed to filling your circulatory system with it. Much safer, for obvious reasons. It’s also praised by some women for it’s effect on the menstrual cycle – it reduces bleeding, and, in some cases, eliminates menstruation altogether for the duration of its placement. Let’s see The Pill do that.

How long can it be in there for?

Up to 5 years – you can take it out sooner if you want to.

Who can use it?

It’s important to read the Mirena site carefully – they actually say this is intended for women who’ve already had a child. Pharmaceutical companies do not say things like that without a very good reason and that's definitely something to take note of. They also mention women who’ve had cancer should avoid Mirena because of the hormones. Other than that, it seems like anyone with a uterus can use it.

 

Mirena side effects have included:

    Ectopic Pregnancy
    Intrauterine Pregnancy (a pregnancy in the uterus with the IUD in place)
    Group A streptococcal sepsis
    Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID)
    Embedment of the device in the uterine wall
    Perforation of the uterine wall or cervix

Other common Mirena side effects include:

    Irregular Spotting or Bleeding
    Headaches
    Ovarian Cysts
    Vaginitis
    Painful Menstruation
    Pelvic Pain
    Breast Tenderness

Many women are experiencing complications and seeking legal advice. Call 1 877 522-2123
 

 

Whistle blower and Qui Tam Lawyers

 

Whistleblower and Qui Tam Lawyers,False Claims Act

When an employer is suspected of engaging in illegal actions and benefiting from these actions, an employee may take it upon him or herself to report this to the proper authorities. When this happens, the individual who did the reporting is called a whistleblower. Lawyers of Free Legal Shield have  experience helping employees with whistleblower representation for many years. We can protect the rights of employees who are acting as the whistleblower. Qui Tam and whistleblower cases can fall under the category of class action litigation.

Whistleblower

Many whistleblowers find themselves facing problems for the reporting of the suspected activities of their employer.  Qui Tam and Whistleblower lawyers assist employees with whistleblower cases and the potential for retaliation or actions  taken by the employer.

Qui Tam

Closely related to whistleblower actions, qui tam is a provision of the federal False Claims Act. Under this act, a qui tam action may be filed by a private citizen (usually the whistleblower) charging fraud against a government contractor or a business receiving government funds. The result of this lawsuit is that the citizen may share in the funds that are recovered by the government. Some Qui Tam cses can result in substantial compensation to the whistleblower. Protecting the public against fraud is the purchase of Qui Tam. It is a citizens responsibilty to protect all by reporting illegal theft of Government funds.

Qui Tam in the Health Care Industry

One area in which Qui Tam claims are growing is the health care industry. When an employee has knowledge of fraud involving Medicare, pharmaceutical misconduct or other activity involving government reimbursement or payment for health care, they should speak to a lawyer at our firm for assistance in determining if they may have uncovered a valid claim for wrongdoing and filing a qui tam lawsuit under the False Claims Act. If you report a government fraud or Qui Tam case you may be entitled to substantial compensation.

For more information about whistleblower and qui tam cases contact Free Legal Shield.