Archive for the ‘Personal Injury Law’ Category

New Laws Take Effect in Illinois

Friday, January 6th, 2012

On January 1, 2012, 214 new laws went into effect in the state of Illinois. Most laws are highly industry-specific, and will have no bearing on real people or the way they live their lives. But a few govern each of us directly. Others will have a direct impact on our comfort and safety, even if they do not require us to change our lies or behaviors.

For example, one new law modifies Illinois’ seatbelt rules. Now, all passengers riding in the backseat of a car in Illinois are required to wear seatbelts. Our experienced Chicago car accident attorneys know firsthand the safety benefit to seatbelt usage, and are glad to see our lawmakers recognize this important safety measure.

Likewise affecting the daily life of ordinary citizens is the new law, HB S860, allowing motorcyclists to run red lights, if they have stopped and waited a “reasonable” period for the light to change. Although this law may increase convenience for riders, expect an increase in motorcycle accidents as a result. Governor Quinn unsuccessfully attempted to veto this questionable new law (his veto was overridden).

Other new laws which may affect you include:

• Bus Driver Drug and Alcohol Testing: Under HB 147/PA 97-0466, non-CDL holder school bus drivers can be given drug and alcohol testing if there is a reasonable suspicion of use. Other specific testing changes bring state law in line with federal law.

• Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) Medical Requirements: HB 1295/PA 97-0208 again brings Illinois in line with federal law, requiring a current medical certificate before a license is issued. Our trucking accident attorneys are pleased to see this important safety improvement.

• Financial Exploitation of Elders: Our Chicago elder abuse attorneys are pleased to report that HB 1689/PA 97-0482 makes the laws against financial exploitation of Illinois elders, and disabled persons, stricter, by lowering the financial value which will result in felony charges.

• Railroad First Aid Kits: HB 1573/PA 97-0374) requires all railroads to have first aid kits on hand when employees are on board, in the event of a train accident or other mishap.

• SIDS Training: HB 2099/PA 97-0083 mandates that all licensed child care facilities who care for infants and newborns must complete training, every 3 years, on SIDS, safe sleep, and SUID.

• Nursing Home Infectious Disease Control: HB 1096/PA 97-0107 puts procedures in place to prevent the spread of infections and disease in nursing homes.

• Medical Malpractice Information: HB 1476/PA 97-0449 provides greater public access to information about pending medical malpractice complaints or reports before the Illinois medical disciplinary board, and increases reporting requirements.

• Hotel Smoke Detectors: HB 1398/PA 97-0447 requires all hotels to place a smoke detector 15 feet or less from every room used for sleeping.

• Synthetic Cannabis: Our products liability attorneys have previously written about the dangers of synthetic cannabis, often marketed as “incense.” HB 2595/PA 97-0193 makes five different generically-defined classes of synthetic cannabinoids controlled substances.

• Truck Weight Restrictions: SB 1644/PA 97-0201 preempts local rules and makes truck weight and size limits entirely a matter of state law. Our trucking accident attorneys are disappointed to see the ability of local governments to keep roads safe from dangerous, oversized trucks removed.

If you have any questions about a serious personal injury or wrongful death matter, please give us a call us at 312-527-4500 or email us at info@passenlaw.com for a complimentary consultation. You can also learn more by following us on Twitter, reviewing our LinkedIn or Avvo.com pages, and by reviewing our website.

share save 171 16 New Laws Take Effect in Illinois

Secondary Victims of Train Accidents

Friday, December 2nd, 2011

train derailment Secondary Victims of Train AccidentsWhen most people think of train accidents, and their victims, they think of passengers and employees aboard the train, and pedestrians or motorists struck by moving trains. But there can be many other victims, as well – the ones that most people generally don’t think of. These can include surrounding landowners, residents, and others who happen to be located near the train at the time of the accident.

Last month’s catastrophic train derailment in Western Illinois is the perfect example. A freight train derailed near Ottawa – an already dangerous and potentially deadly occurrence. The train, which was 131 cars long, lost 26 of its cars in the derailment, a massive train crash by any standard.

But this time, the train which derailed was carrying ethanol in large quantities for Archer Daniels Midland, a corn processor based in Decatur (as well as other chemicals and materials). So, when the derailment occurred, several portions of the train exploded, and others caught on fire. At least six of the seven to nine ethanol-carrying tanker cars burned their entire store of ethanol.

The resulting disaster created massive orange flames and smoke plumes visible for miles around. The sounds of the explosions were also heard miles away. In fact, the situation was so dangerous that an entire town was evacuated as a result. Tiskilwa, a small town of 800 residents located 100 miles to the West of Chicago, was under a mandatory evacuation order, with residents relocated to a local high school.

Although the fire was contained, and those in the town escaped initial injuries, the situation could have ended far worse. In fact, some Tiskilwa residents lived within 500 feet of the derailment. The town and its residents – as well as the employees onboard the train – were lucky to escape from this train accident without serious injuries or deaths.

There is also the environmental impact of the accident to consider. Although the investigations are not complete, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency was at work to ensure that none of the chemicals spilled in the explosion made their way into local waterways or groundwater. If they did, the potential injuries from and costs of the derailment, both monetary and human, will skyrocket.

Nothing is yet known about the cause of the accident, and initial investigations were hampered by the results of the fire. But train derailments are often caused by negligent maintenance or inspection of the train, negligent assembly of the disparate train cars, or unsafe speeds and inadequate braking.

If you have any questions about a train injury claim, please give us a call us at 312-527-4500 or email us at info@passenlaw.com for a complimentary consultation. You can also learn more by following us on Twitter, reviewing our LinkedIn or Avvo.com pages, and by reviewing our website.

share save 171 16 Secondary Victims of Train Accidents

Avastin Breast Cancer Approval Withdrawn

Wednesday, November 30th, 2011

avastin 300x231 Avastin Breast Cancer Approval WithdrawnThis week, the federal Food and Drug Administration announced its withdrawal of approval for Avastin, a commonly-used breast cancer drug.

Avastin, the trade name for the drug bevacizumab, is one of a class of drugs known as “biological therapy.” The drug is a product of Genentech, a biotechnology company based in San Francisco, California.

Avastin is designed to inhibit or prevent the growth of blood vessels which feed cancerous tumors, thus inhibiting or even reversing the growth of the tumors themselves. The drug itself is an antibody, which binds to a specific protein known as vascular endothelial growth factor A. This protein is important in blood vessel growth and development in the human body.

The drug thus works through a process known as anti-angiongenesis. Cancerous tumors over-produce VEGF, which then works to form blood vessels connecting to the tumor, so that the tumor can receive nourishment and grow. The process was developed by Judah Folkman, a recently-deceased surgeon with Harvard Medical School.

Although the process took a long time to gain credence, there are now at least 10 drugs utilizing anti-angiongenesis sold in the United States, and industry reports reveal that roughly 50 more such drugs are in the development pipeline.

The FDA’s revocation does not extend to Avastin’s other approved uses. The drug is still approved for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, advanced non-small-cell lung cancers, gliobastoma which has spread even after prior treatments, and certain metastatic kidney cancers.

The FDA’s decision to revoke Avastin’s approval for breast-cancer treatment is based upon what is, to our drug injury attorneys, a particularly troubling combination: lack of effect and dangerous side effects.

First, the drug in fact has no effect on breast cancer. Despite some initial slowing of the growth of breast cancer tumors, patients treated with Avastin did not have an increased survival rate, or live longer, than patients not treated.

Second, the drug triggers a number of extremely serious side effects.

Indeed, roughly 1% of Avastin patients died not from breast cancer, but from side effects of Avastin. These side effects include (among others) heart attacks, strokes, and congestive heart failure.

Moreover, the company was hardly unaware of the concerns which triggered the removal of approval, even as it continued to market and sell the drug as a breast cancer treatment. Even from the early days of the drug’s approval, there were many questions concerning whether the drug had any meaningful effect on breast cancers. In fact, when the drug was approved, it was despite the 5-to-4 recommendation against approval by an advisory panel. Although the FDA considers the recommendations of its independent advisory panels, it is not bound to do so.

Studies since have simply confirmed what many researchers were already saying: Avastin does not improve patients’ chances of survival, or prolong patients’ lives.

The move to revoke the approval began in July of 2010, when a second advisory panel recommended withdrawal based on further studies showing no benefit. But it took until December of 2010 for the FDA to take any action to begin the withdrawal – action that was fiercely challenged by Genentech. Yet another advisory panel conferred, and took testimony on the matter for two days, eventually voting unanimously to revoke the approval – a vote which did not occur until June of this year.

Our personal injury attorneys are appalled that, even with the overwhelming evidence that Avastin was costing lives, not saving or prolonging them, the company continued to actively market and sell this drug, under the FDA’s approval. There is no excuse for a bureaucratic process lasting nearly a year and a half before this confirmed dangerous drug could be withdrawn.

If you have any questions about a possible serious injury or wrongful death claim, please give us a call us at 312-527-4500 or email us at info@passenlaw.com for a complimentary consultation. You can also learn more by following us on Twitter, reviewing our LinkedIn or Avvo.com pages, and by reviewing our website.

share save 171 16 Avastin Breast Cancer Approval Withdrawn