Former Players Say NFL is Stalling on Settlement Payments

by Staff Blogger | November 21st, 2017

Research shows that repeated blows to the head and resulting brain injuries may be linked to the development of brain deterioration and conditions like ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease), Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and dementia.

20,000 former NFL players filed a class-action lawsuit against the league claiming that it hid the damages and potential complications associated with repeated brain injuries and concussions from players.

In 2015, the league and former players reached a $1 billion settlement that would cover nearly every former player for the next 65 years. However, families of former players and their lawyers say that the NFL has put up many roadblocks to prevent them from getting payments. In fact, only 140 out of 1,400 claims have been approved. The other 90 percent of pending claims are still being evaluated or have been sent back to players and their attorneys for amendments before they can be further processed.

Players and their families are accusing the league of using stalling tactics to get them to accept smaller payments or no payments at all.

At Ferrer, Poirot & Wansbrough, we know how serious sports-related concussions and brain damage are. Victims can suffer profound disabilities and difficulties with daily life and living independently, and symptoms often worsen over time.

If you or someone you love was injured while playing in the NFL and needs representation for concussion-related complications, our NFL concussion settlement lawyers are here to help. Call our office today for a free consultation.

Stop the Bleeding – FDA Approves Praxbind® – Reversal Agent for Pradaxa®

by John Kirtley, III | April 7th, 2016

pradaxa bleeding injuriesPradaxa® is an anticoagulant drug used for the prevention of stroke, blood clots in patients who undergo total hip replacement surgery or total knee replacement surgery, treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolisms, and the prevention of recurrence of such events in adults. Clinical use of Pradaxa equates to over four million patient-years in all licensed indications worldwide. Pradaxa has been on the market for more than 6 years and is approved in over 100 countries.

Lawsuits are mounting concerning the use of Pradaxa. Until recently, if a patient’s blood became too thin while taking Pradaxa, they had a significant risk of bleeding to death because, unlike the older blood thinner Warfarin, nothing could stop the bleeding.

Now, there is some hope for patients taking Pradaxa. The first FDA approval of a specific reversal agent. Praxbind® immediately reverses the anticoagulant action of Pradaxa in situations involving emergency surgery/urgent procedures or in life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding.

Some studies indicate that the reversal effects of Praxbind were evident immediately, within minutes after administration of 5 grams of Praxbind. Perhaps if Praxbind had existed when Pradaxa was approved by the FDA, many lives could have been saved.

Unsure About Essure®

by Christina Feller | March 31st, 2016

iStock_000065567545_SmallOn February 29, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced it would require the permanent, implantable contraceptive device Essure® to carry a black box warning regarding some of the serious risks associated with its use. While we appreciate the FDA finally taking action, the product has been on the market since 2002, and thousands of women have reported Essure side effects and life-altering complications since its approval 14 years ago.

The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring drugs and medical devices intended for human use are safe and effective. Many envision FDA doctors in white lab coats testing the safety of drugs and devices before they are approved and put on the market, but that is not how it works. Before a drug or device is approved, the FDA reviews data that drug and medical device companies provide from their own testing. These limited tests are not run by the FDA and as we see in many drug and medical device trials, companies pushing to get their drugs and products onto the market quickly often provide incomplete, inaccurate, or even fraudulent data.

In 2002, when the FDA approved Essure, they were concerned that test subjects had only been monitored a year or two and asked that trial participants be monitored for four more years. Essure side effects reported during this trial and subsequent trials were recurrent pain, perforation of the fallopian tube, migration, painful intercourse and menstrual periods, hysterectomies, and other surgeries to remove misplaced coils.

So how can you help ensure that the FDA will be more sure about product safety before putting products like Essure on the market? You can become more aware about the FDA’s role in approving medical devices by visiting the FDA website on medical devices. You should also report any side effects you experience from a drug or product to MedWatch, the FDA safety information and adverse event reporting program. If you do suffer from Essure side effects and are interested in an Essure lawsuit, please call our office at (800) 521-4492 or contact us online to speak with our experienced staff who can connect you to an Essure attorney.

Something to Talc About

by Christina Feller | March 24th, 2016


Every day we hear news of another drug or device causing injuries and often women are the victims. Women are more likely to use prescription drug medications than men by a large margin, 53.5 percent to 43.2 percent, and prescription drug use is rising steadily.[1] Drug companies are targeting women in every natural phase of their lives with misleading advertisements and manufactured diseases. Frequently the products they advertise are later proven to be ineffective, unnecessary, and sometimes deadly.

Without touching on any stereotypes, it is safe to say that women differ from men anatomically and physiologically. Drugs and medical devices respond differently in women and men, yet historically, women have been underrepresented in drug and medical device trials. The FDA actually recommended excluding women of child bearing age from studies fearing fetal harm. In the 1990s, the FDA changed course and began advocating the inclusion of women in clinical studies and in 2011 submitted draft guidance for the evaluation of sex differences in medical device clinical studies.[2] These guidelines are a step in the right direction, but progress has been slow and more transparency is needed.

Talcum powder is a great example of product marketing that played on female insecurities and resulted in unnecessary harm. Talcum powder has been used cosmetically for decades and was advertised as a safe product to mask genital odor with slogans like “a sprinkle a day keeps the odor away” and “your body perspires in more places than just under your arms.” It seems like a harmless product, often used on babies, so it must be safe, right?  Wrong.  Studies have shown that when used in the perineal area, particles travel up through the vagina, uterus, and fallopian tubes, into the ovaries, where they settle and can cause ovarian cancer, one of the deadliest cancers that affect the female reproductive system.[3]

For decades, the dangers of talcum powder were reported, but no action was taken. The first report linking talcum powder to ovarian cancer came as early as 1971, and numerous studies and publications followed showing the same causal link. In 2003, the journal Anticancer Research published a review of the previous studies which indicated a 33 percent increased risk of ovarian cancer in women who used talcum powder regularly. According to a recent Harvard study, that number could be as high as 42 percent. Two Citizen Petitions have been submitted to the FDA requesting a warning of the risk of developing ovarian cancer, but both were denied. The FDA still has not ruled on whether talc is toxic or safe and the product continues to be unregulated by the federal government.[4]

The first talcum powder case was tried against Johnson & Johnson in October 2013 in South Dakota. The plaintiff used talcum powder regularly for over 30 years and developed ovarian cancer. Talcum powder particles were found in her cancerous tissue.  The jury ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, holding that Johnson & Johnson failed to warn the plaintiff of the risks of developing ovarian cancer after using their product. One of the doctors testifying in this case stated talcum powder could be responsible for over 10,000 ovarian cancer cases per year. The Mississippi Attorney General’s office has also launched an investigation and subpoenaed information on Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder promotions.

In February 2016, a jury awarded a woman’s family $72 million dollars for her injuries caused by Johnson & Johnson. This verdict included $62 million dollars in punitive damages, showing just how upset the jury became after hearing evidence regarding Johnson & Johnson’s efforts to hide the connection between talcum powder and ovarian cancer.

At Ferrer, Poirot, Wansbrough, Feller, Daniel, Abney & Linville, we are committed to helping victims of harmful products and devices. Russ Abney, a partner with our firm, was heavily involved in developing and deposing experts for the talcum powder trial that resulted in the recent $72 million dollar verdict. It is our hope that increased awareness, more involvement from the FDA and verdicts like the most recent talcum powder award will encourage large corporations to value human life more than big profits. If you or a loved one suffered from talcum powder side effects and are interested in a talcum powder lawsuit, please call our office at 1-800-521-4492 to speak with our experienced staff who can connect you to a talcum powder attorney.


[1] Gu, Q., Dillon, C. and Burt, V. 2010.  “Prescription Drug Use Continues to Increase: U.S. Prescription Drug Data for 2007-2008.”   NCHS Data Brief, no 42.  Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.  September 2010.  Web. 19 February 2014.

[2] Diaz, Robyn and Steuer, Katherine.  Reforming Women’s Health Research: A Renewed Focus on Sex Differences in Clinical Trials.”  ABA Health Esource.  Vol. 8 Num. 7.  19 March 2012.  Web. 19 February 2014.

[3] U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. “United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2010 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report.” Atlanta (GA): Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute.   2013.  Web. 20 February 2014.

[4]  Epstein, Samuel. “Talcum Powder: The Hidden Dangers.”  The Huffington Post.  21 September 2009.  Web. 21 February 2014.

Can I Switch Lawyers Mid-Case?

by Staff Blogger | January 26th, 2016

You might think that once you sign with a law firm, you have to see the case through with them, even if you’re dissatisfied with their work. That’s actually not the case. You can switch law firms at any time throughout the course of your personal injury lawsuit. However, there are a couple of factors that you should be aware of.

First, your original law firm will still get paid for the work they’ve done. That doesn’t mean you have to pay any higher percentage than you initially contracted for. The new law firm will pay out a portion of its fee to the original law firm at the conclusion of your case, negotiated by the two law firms before making the switch.

Second, the original law firm will still be involved in the case. Over the years, clients have come to us from other law firms, and in most situations, we’ve worked with the previous law firm to make the transition seamless. It’s important that we know exactly what work has already been done and what still needs to be considered. Most law firms are agreeable to this type of collaboration, as our success in your case determines what they will ultimately make from the settlement.

If you feel your case isn’t being handled to your satisfaction, give our Dallas personal injury lawyers a call. We’ll be happy to evaluate your case for free.

Lawyers Can Help Maximize Your Compensation

by Staff Blogger | January 5th, 2016

For most personal injury victims in Dallas, getting the insurance company to pay isn’t the issue. The real challenge is getting them to pay you what you deserve.

After an accident, you’ll probably receive a call from the insurance company within a few days. They’ll go over the specifics of the accident and inform you of what they are willing to pay. Many victims assume this figure is as good as it’s going to get, so they take it, completely unaware that doing so may put them in a serious financial situation.

The truth is you can’t make a determination of how much your case is worth after only a few days. You don’t know how much your medical costs, lost wages, and other expenses are going to be long term. The amount it’s going to take to get you back on your feet isn’t a number you want to guess at, because as soon as you sign with the insurance company, you are on your own. All future medical expenses are your responsibility. That can add up to tens of thousands of dollars, far more than the insurance company initially offered to pay.

So what’s the solution? Call a lawyer before you sign anything from the insurance company. According to the Insurance Research Council, accident victims get significantly more money with a lawyer than without. An experienced law firm will stand between you and the insurance company to fight for the maximum value for your claim.

Letter to the FDA Addresses Risks of Power Morcellator Cancer

by Staff Blogger | December 29th, 2015

Controversy continues to swirl around the use of a device known as the power morcellator to remove uterine fibroids from the bodies of women.

In 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ordered doctors and surgeons to discontinue the use of the power morcellator when performing procedures like hysterectomies due to an increased risk of the patient developing cancer. Research linked the disease to the device after it was discovered that dormant cancerous cells could be released into the body by the device, which led to several power morcellator cancer lawsuits being filed.

Doctors are now contesting these claims, saying the FDA relied on flawed research when issuing the ruling. An article from Reuters explains the medical professionals say the studies that were used during the FDA’s decision-making process were flawed and lacked credibility. For instance, the studies included three cases where the patient developed leiomyoma, which doesn’t meet the current standards and definitions for cancer.

The doctors go on to claim that making women undergo more invasive procedures than the use of the power morcellator increases the risks for hospital-acquired infections and other surgical complications, including death.

The legal staff at Ferrer, Poirot & Wansbrough recognize the dangers the use of a defective medical product can pose to patients and our team is anxiously awaiting the FDA’s response to the claims that have recently been made regarding the use of the power morcellator during surgery.

Officials Warning Consumers of Workout Supplement Health Risks

by Staff Blogger | October 27th, 2015

Workout supplements can be an effective way to enhance your athletic performance. However, consuming these types of products can also present serious health risks.

For instance, products containing a substance called dimethylamylamine (DMAA), otherwise known geranium extract, can present users with workout supplement health risks, such as adverse cardiac events and organ failure. Use of products containing DMAA has been linked to at least two deaths and several other serious injuries.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration ordered products containing DMAA off the market several years ago, but new research shows this dangerous chemical is still found in many workout supplements available online today.

According to USA Today, investigators with the Defense Department’s Human Performance Resource Center found nearly 40 supplements containing DMAA that could be purchased online by Americans. A company based in Georgia, Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, made roughly 25 percent of those products.

Officials are warning consumers of workout supplements to thoroughly check the labels on products to ensure they are safe and free of DMAA.

Protecting the health and safety of all citizens is just one of the goals at Ferrer, Poirot & Wansbrough. That’s why our drug injury lawyers are here to help if you’ve been seriously harmed as the result of using a workout supplement that contained DMAA. We’re available to speak with you about your questions and case anytime by calling (800) 210-8503.


Power Morcellator Cancer Lawsuits Consolidated Into Multidistrict Litigation

by Staff Blogger | October 20th, 2015

Power morcellators are medical devices that can perform hysterectomies and other medical procedures in a less invasive manner than traditional surgical methods. However, the device lost credibility when it was discovered it can significantly increase the chances of developing cancer in some women.

Researchers found that when the morcellator is used, dormant cancerous cells can be released into the body, where they can later metastasize into tumors. Data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration shows at least 1-in-350 women are at an increased risk of developing power morcellator cancer when the devices are used.

These discoveries have led to hundreds of lawsuits being filed against the makers of the devices, claiming victims were not warned of the risks before undergoing a power morcellator surgery. Now, these cases are being consolidated into multidistrict litigation.

According to KCUR 98.3 Radio, more than two dozen power morcellator cancer lawsuits—a majority of which are filed against device manufacturer Ethicon— have been moved to a Kansas City, Kansas, federal court to be heard. U.S. District Judge, Kathryn H. Vratil, has been assigned to preside over the case.

The legal staff at Ferrer, Poirot & Wansbrough believe in holding companies accountable for the safety of the products they make. That’s why our defective medical device lawyers are hopeful a decision in the cases will bring a sense of closure to individuals harmed by morcellators.

Testosterone Therapy Heart Attack Cases Now Being Heard in Chicago

by Staff Blogger | October 13th, 2015

A man’s sex drive, muscle mass, and energy can decrease as he ages due to a decrease in a hormone called testosterone. Many men undergo hormone replacement therapy to ward off these symptoms of aging. However, the drug injury attorneys at Ferrer, Poirot & Wansbrough explain that such treatments can put men at an increased risk of suffering adverse cardiac events.

Testosterone therapy heart attacks came to light when reports began to surface that men were suffering cardiac events after beginning testosterone therapy drugs. These reports prompted a team of researchers from Harvard Medical School to study the potential risks. They found the chances of an older male having a heart attack or stroke while undergoing testosterone therapy can be as much as 30 times higher than that of a man not taking these medications. This is because testosterone can cause an overproduction of red blood cells, which can lead to the development of blood clots.

These findings have led to a number of lawsuits against the makers of testosterone replacement medications. Now, according to CBS News, a large number of those cases will soon be heard in Chicago.

At Ferrer, Poirot & Wansbrough, we recognize the struggles many men undergoing testosterone therapy have faced along their journey to recovery. That’s why our drug injury attorneys are hopeful a decision in these cases will help bring a sense of closure to the victims in these matters.