New Jersey Personal Injury Blog

Citalopram and Finasteride Drugs with Lot Number FI0510058-A Recalled for Potential Mislabeling

A voluntary recall was launched on March 26, 2011, by Pfizer Inc. owned Greenstone LLC for medications Citalopram 10mg Tablets (100-count bottle) and Finasteride 5mg Tablets (90-count bottle) with lot number FI0510058-A on the label. According to the FDA press release, the drugs are being recalled because of potential incorrect labels on the bottles that were added by a third-party manufacturer. There is a chance that bottles labeled as Citalopram Lot # FI0510058-A may have Finasteride inside of them. Citalopram is prescribed to patients to treat depression and Finasteride is prescribed to patients to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia. Citalopram and Finasteride with lot number FI0510058-A should be returned to a patient’s pharmacist.

Patients who think they may have taken the wrong mediation due to the mislabeled drugs should get in touch with their healthcare professional as soon as possible.

One of the potential risks involved with the drug mislabeling could affect women who are or may become pregnant. These patients should not ingest or handle Finasteride because of the possible danger of developing male fetuses suffering abnormalities to the external genitalia. In addition, patients taking monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) or primozide could experience adverse reactions from unknowingly taking Citalopram. Patients with hypersensitivity to Citalopram or any of the inactive ingredients in the tablet could also suffer serious side effects.

Another potentially serious issue posed by the incorrect drug labeling is that patients who stop taking Citalopram suddenly may encounter discontinuation symptoms and/or exacerbation of depression.

Experiencing health problems or serious side effects as a result of taking mislabeled versions of either Citalopram or Finasteride can give rise to a potential claim for injuries and damages. At Blume Goldfaden, our New Jersey product liability lawyers are dedicated to protecting the rights of those harmed by manufacturer neglect or oversight. For a no-cost consultation about the merits of your potential claim, call 973-635-5400.

Small Airplane Accident near Lincoln Park Airport Critically Injures Pilot

NJ.com reported that a small New Jersey plane crash occurred near Lincoln Park Airport in February 2011.

The pilot departed from the Morristown Airport and was attempting to land a single-engine Cessna 182 when the aircraft lost power and its engine failed. The plane crashed into a parking lot approximately two-tenths of a mile from the Lincoln Park airport, skidding several feet before coming to a stop after colliding with a tree.

Emergency personnel stated that the pilot suffered multiple leg fractures as well as facial and internal injuries, requiring him to be airlifted to a local hospital for treatment.

According to the article, the New Jersey aviation accident appears to have been caused by mechanical failure. However, other accidents occur due to shortcomings in airport and runway design and maintenance. Lincoln Park Airport received $100,000 last year to address “runway safety issues.” In 2005, a small aircraft was significantly damaged after it crashed onto a nearby road when attempting to land on the airport’s runway. In 2008, a student pilot overshot the runway and collided into a guardrail.

Airplane crashes, by their very nature, often cause those involved to suffer serious injuries and fatalities. When a pilot or passenger survives a small aircraft accident, their life may be profoundly affected by ongoing rehabilitation and residual problems stemming from their accident injuries. At Blume Goldfaden, our New Jersey airplane accident lawyers have years of experience litigating plane accident cases in New Jersey. For a no-cost consultation regarding your potential aviation accident case, call us at 973-635-5400.

Over 44,000 Cadillac CTS Models Recalled due to Rear-Suspension Problem

According to The New York Times, General Motors Inc. has recalled about 44,000 model year 2009-2010 Cadillac CTS sedans.

The recall was prompted after it was discovered that the wax coating on the vehicle’s rear suspension toe link jam nuts may allow the nuts to loosen. If this occurred, it would cause a clanging sound; which if ignored or unnoticed could allow the vehicle’s rear wheel to turn either in or out. This could potentially cause a motorist to lose control when operating the vehicle and potentially cause an accident.

Owners of the recalled vehicles are advised to take the vehicle into a dealership, where the wax will be cleaned off of the rear suspension toe link. Two new jam nuts will also be installed to prohibit loosening, and if needed, the entire toe link will be replaced. To learn more about the recall, consumers are directed to contact GMC at 1-866-996-9463 or visit http://www.gmcownercenter.com.

Car manufacturers have a legal duty to design and construct vehicles that are safe for consumer use. When this responsibility is overlooked, whether intentionally or inadvertently, and a vehicle or vehicle part is defective or otherwise not fit for the purpose intended, the risk for serious injury to users escalates significantly.

Auto product liability litigation is complex, requiring attorneys with years of experience in establishing cases against automotive manufacturers and their subcontractors. If you have suffered an injury due to an auto design defect, contact the New Jersey auto product liability attorneys at Blume Goldfaden. We can help you in determining whether or not you may have a valid claim. Call 973-635-5400 to schedule a no-cost consultation.

FDA Failed to Properly Test Medical Devices before Approval

CNN recently reported that a review of recall data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that the majority of the 113 Class III medical devices that were recalled between 2005 and 2009 for serious, life-threatening dangers, did not undergo the FDA’s more rigorous pre-market approval process, also referred to as “PMA.” Instead, the agency cleared the devices using a less stringent process known as the 510(k) process, under which clinical testing is not required. This discovery brings to light that many medical products that were given clearance, such as automated external defibrillators (AEDs), artificial hip joints, and heart valves, were marketed to and used on consumers without undergoing clinical testing in advance.

Under FDA policy, all Class III devices are required to undergo the PMA premarket approval process, including clinical testing, in order to determine if “sufficient valid scientific evidence” is found that the medical device is safe for its intended use.

However, a report from the Government Accountability Office in 2009 discovered that approximately 66 percent of all Class III devices were approved using the less demanding 510(k) process instead of the PMA because it was “less burdensome”. An additional study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association’s Archives of Internal Medicine, found that approximately 71 percent of the 113 medical devices recalled between 2005 and 2009 were given approval through the 510(k) process.

Many believe the reasons for the shortcomings in testing are because the agency does not have the necessary funding and staff to conduct a clinical study for all medical devices requiring same. While a medical device’s manufacturer does pay for a fraction of the expenses related to a PMA approval, the majority of the cost falls to the FDA, which is under-funded. Choosing to approve a medical device under the 510(k) process is much less expensive.

The FDA has admitted that the 510(k) approval process needs to be toughened, and has stated it intends to take action to improve the process in 2011. Additionally, the FDA has stated it will evaluate all remaining Class III devices slated for the 510(k) process to determine if the device should undergo the PMA process. As a result, there may be dangerous medical devices on the market that have not received proper government approval.

If you believe that a defectively designed or manufactured medical device may have seriously affected your health or the health of a loved one, contact a New Jersey product liability attorney at Blume Goldfaden. Call 973-635-5400 to schedule a no-cost consultation with one of our lawyers.

Child Restraint Systems Recall Initiated by Dorel Juvenile Group

A National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) safety recall has been announced regarding certain infant, convertible and booster child restraint systems manufactured by Dorel Juvenile Group (DJG). The recall includes products which were manufactured from May 1, 2008 through April 30, 2009 and were sold both as standalone car seats and as part of a travel system (combined with a stroller). For a complete list of child restraint systems included in the recall, please refer to the NHTSA safety recall alert.

The DJG car seats are being recalled because the harness locking and release button does not consistently return to its locked position. If the button is not in the locked position, the harness can become loose, especially if the harness adjustment strap slips back through the adjuster as a child moves around in the seat. As a consequence of the child car seat failure, a child may not be properly protected in the event of a motor vehicle accident and can potentially suffer serious injury or death.

Registered owners of the defective car seats are expected to receive a free remedy kit, instructions, and a label to specify that the repair has taken place. Non-registered owners of the recalled child restraint systems can contact DJG at 1-866-623-3139 or by e-mail at harnessadjustment@djgusa.com. Owners can also contact the NHTSA’s vehicle safety hotline at 1-888-327-4236 or visit www.safecar.gov for more information.

Car seat and child restraint system manufacturers are responsible for properly designing, testing, labeling and providing clear instructions for products which are safe, fit for the purpose intended and will not cause harm to consumers. If a manufacturer fails to fulfill these obligations and a consumer suffers injury or death as a result, the injured individual or the family members of the person killed may be able to seek compensation by pursuing a product liability action.

While safety recalls are initiated to help prevent injury or death, some product defects are discovered too late. Sometimes adequate notice of defective products are not timely provided to consumers. If you have been injured or lost a loved one due to a defective product, the New Jersey product defect attorneys at Blume Goldfaden can help. Our law firm is committed to helping those with meritorious product liability claims. Call us at 973-635-5400 for a no-cost consultation.

Ford Recalls 365,000 F-150 Trucks Due to Faulty Door Handles

Ford Motor Co. has issued a recall on 365,000 F-150 model pickup trucks in the United States, Canada, and Mexico due to faulty door handles, according to Auto-Types.com. The recall affects at least 281,000 2009 and 2010 model trucks in the U.S. that were manufactured between January 2008 and November 2009.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that the door handles of the trucks may not perform properly in the event of a crash. Should impact occur, the door handles have a high likelihood of spring failure, which could cause the door to open. At the time the report was published, there had not been reports of accidents or injuries occurring due to the faulty door handles.

Replacement of the door handles will begin once replacement parts have arrived and will be done at no cost to the consumer. Ford is requesting that owners of F-150 model trucks, especially years 2009 and 2010, proceed to Ford or Lincoln dealership centers to have their vehicles assessed for the faulty door handles.

Vehicle manufacturers have a responsibility to the public to produce and sell cars and trucks that are safe for consumers and free of defects. However, when auto makers place profit over safety consumers are subject to hazards which may expose them to the risk of personal injury. Falling out, or being ejected from, a door that should not open in a crash is just an example. If you have been injured because of a defective auto part or a recalled vehicle, you may be able to pursue a New Jersey auto product liability claim.

At Blume Goldfaden, our New Jersey automotive product defect attorneys have the resources and experience to investigate potential claims surrounding automotive product defects. Contact us for a no-cost consultation at 973-635-5400.