- Class Actions
- Commercial Litigation
- Defective Products
- Drug Injury
- Personal Injury
- Securities Fraud
- Toxic Exposure
- Whistleblower Claims
- Ocella, Yasmin, Yaz
- Sleeping Pills
- Aquafin Inc. Pool Solution
- Aveeno Lawsuit
- Atlas Roofing Lawsuit
- Avon/Clarins Products
- AZEK Decking
- BMW Alloy Wheels
- Carrier Air Conditioners
- Chinese Drywall
- Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing
- Electrolux Lawsuit
- Energy Drink Lawsuit
- Flushmate Systems
- Ford & Mercury Transmissions
- GAF Decking
- Goodman Air Conditioners
- GM Ignition Switch Defect
- Lennox Evaporator Coils
- LP/ABTCO TrimBoard
- Marvel Ice Machines
- Maytag Washing Machines
- Norcold Lawsuit
- Pella Designer & Architect Windows
- Pozzi and Jeld-Wen
- Premium Composites
- Rheem Evaporator Coils
- Seamless Steel Siding
- TimberTech Decking
- Triangle Tube Prestige Boiler
- Toyota Prius Tripling Windshield
- Yamaha Boating Motors
- York, Luxaire, Coleman AC
Category : Class Actions
Seeger Weiss is pleased to announce that founding partner Christopher A. Seeger has recently been appointed as Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel in the litigation pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The litigation, styled as In Re: National Football League Players’ Concussion Injury Litigation, MDL No. 2323, is pending before the Honorable Anita B. Brody. This appointment comes as thousands of former football players have filed suit against the National Football League focusing on the negligence of the NFL in not providing adequate warnings of the risks associated with concussions and related head trauma injuries.
In making the appointment during the initial MDL status conference, Judge Brody stated, “I want lead counsel. I have done my homework on that too. And I would very much like one of co-lead counsel to be Mr. Seeger, Chris Seeger. I have to tell you, the ratings of people who have had MDLs with you involved have been very, very high, your law firm.”
If you or someone you know has had a sports related injury, contact us today. An experienced attorney with Seeger Weiss LLP will assist you in evaluating your claim. Attorney consultations incur no obligation on your part and all initial consultations are free of charge. Seeger Weiss LLP has office locations in New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia and California.
The lawyers of the drug injury practice of Seeger Weiss LLP announced a new investigation this week into a potential lawsuit against the manufacturers of several different sleeping pills. Dozens of recent studies of sleeping pills have indicated that popular sleeping pills like Ambien, Benadryl and Barbiturates carry high mortality risks that put the patients who use them to get to sleep in danger of never waking up. Among other disturbing figures, these sleep studies have uncovered the fact that patients who take sleeping pills die 4.6 times as often within 2.5 years as those who don’t. Additional data has demonstrated that sleeping pills are associated with several types of cancer. In fact, people who take over 132 sleeping pills per year have a 35% increased risk of developing cancer within the next 2.5 years.
Examples of Commonly Prescribed Sleeping Pills with Risks of Cancer and Death:
- Zolpidem (Ambien, Stilnox)
- Temazepam (Restoril)
- Eszopiclone (Lunesta)
- Zaleplon (Sonata)
- Triazolam (Halcion)
- Flurazepam (Dalmane, Dalmadorm)
- Estazolam (ProSom)
- Quazepam (Doral)
- Barbiturates (especially Luminal)
- Antihistamines, mainly diphenhydramine (Benadryl)
Seeger Weiss LLP, an award-winning, national plantiffs’ firm, is offering to review the case of anyone who has been harmed by a prescription sleeping pill. Visit their investigation page for more information.
A “bounty scandal” within team leadership on the New Orleans Saints has exposed yet another major flaw regarding the safety of National Football League players. Saints coach Sean Payton and former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams were both formally reprimanded by the League for their involvement in a program that awarded money to players for injuring formidable opponents. The bounties all but openly encouraged members of the team to “fight dirty,” putting themselves and other players at risk. Yesterday, the NFL suspended Williams indefinitely and suspended Payton for one year.
While the NFL’s public rebuke is a step in the right direction, the entire affair adds to the ever increasing number of concerns about player safety. Late last year, Seeger Weiss LLP brought to light the League’s misuse of a dangerous drug called Toradol through a lawsuit that claims victims suffered brain damage at the hands of team medics. The personal injury attorneys of Seeger Weiss will review the claims of anyone who has been harmed by a sports related injury for free. To learn more, click here.
The new Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011 took effect on January 6, 2012. It makes some significant changes to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (the diversity citizenship statute), §§ 1441 & 1446 (the removal and removal procedure statutes), and § 1391 (the general venue statute). It both resolves certain splits among the federal circuit courts as to the interpretation of those statutes and enacts new substantive provisions regarding diversity jurisdiction, venue, and removal. Read the new Act in full here.
The most significant changes are:
- where an action involves multiple defendants, each defendant now gets its own 30-day clock from when it’s served in order to remove the action to federal court.
- where all parties consent, a district court may now transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404 to a district even where the action could not have been brought originally in that district.
- for venue purposes, if a state which has more than one federal judicial district, a corporate defendant is now deemed to reside in any district in that state in which its contacts would be sufficient to subject it to personal jurisdiction if that district were a separate state; if there’s no such single district, the corporation is to be deemed to reside in the district in which it has the most significant contacts.
- for removal purposes and, specifically, for purposes of determining the amount in controversy of cases removed on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, a federal court may now look to the notice of removal for the amount in controversy if the plaintiff is seeking non-monetary relief, or if the plaintiff is seeking a money judgment but the law of the state doesn’t permit a demand for a sum certain or allows recovery for amounts in excess of what’s prayed for.
- discovery responses in state litigation that provide information allowing the defendant to ascertain for the first time the amount in controversy are now considered an “other paper” whose service can trigger the 30-day clock for removal.
- adoption of a bad faith exception to the 1-year time limit on removals of diversity cases – meaning that the action may removed even after the passage of one year from commencement of the action if the plaintiff “deliberately failed to disclose” the amount in controversy in order to prevent removal.
- in removed actions, mandatory severance and remand of claims that aren’t within the district court’s original or supplemental jurisdiction.
The Honorable Judge Eldon E. Fallon of the U.S. Eastern District Court, New Orleans, Louisiana, announced on Friday that Seeger Weiss LLP and the other members of the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, along with defendant Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin (KPT) had proposed a settlement in the toxic Chinese drywall case affecting thousands of American families. The victims in the case, who own close to 5,000 properties, alleged that German manufacturer Knauf sold defective drywall that was installed in their homes. The toxic ingredients in the faulty imported products caused the plaintiffs a host of problems, ranging from the corrosion of plumbing and electrical systems to respiratory problems and other physical injuries. The final settlement, which will cover remediation of the affected properties and claims of personal injury and equity loss, is expected to be between $800 million and $1 billion. Read more about the groundbreaking settlement.
For Seeger Weiss LLP, the victory is one of many in a long and complicated battle against Knauf on behalf of several homeowners who have fallen victim to the manufacturer’s defective product. In 2009, founding partner Christopher Seeger along with Stephen J. Herman of Herman, Herman, Katz & Cotlar became the first to take KPT, a division of Knauf, to trial. In the bellwether verdict, the plaintiffs were awarded $164,049. Since then, Mr. Seeger has gone on to win close to $3 million for other victims of the toxic drywall.
Seeger Weiss continues to investigate toxic Chinese drywall claims. Our defective products practice has the expertise and the track record you need to settle your claims. Learn more about our Chinese drywall investigation here.
A major report published by Bloomberg Businessweek today found that Takeda Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturers of the drug Actos, could face as many as 10,000 drug injury lawsuits in the United States. The claimants allege that the diabetes medication caused them to develop bladder cancer. In fact, the number of drug injury suits involving Actos being brought to court has become so massive that a group of judges is being polled to decide whether or not to consolidate the litigation. Learn more about the link between Actos and bladder cancer.
In a legal environment like this one, victims of Actos drug injury need an experienced and dedicated law firm in their corners in order to ensure their claims receive the attention they deserve. If you or someone you know has suffered complications as a result of taking Actos, contact Seeger Weiss LLP today. An attorney with our award-winning drug injury class action practice will assist you in evaluating your claim. Attorney consultations incur no obligation on your part and all initial consultations are free of charge. Seeger Weiss LLP has office locations in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and California.
Vonage Holdings Corp. has agreed to pay $4.75 million to settle a class action lawsuit that was filed in 2008 over the company’s marketing and sales practices.
The settlement is expected to pay “dollar for dollar” to consumers, including those who were charged for service despite an introductory offer for one free month of service, according to Seeger Weiss, a Philadelphia law firm.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in New Jersey in 2008, accused Vonage of engaging in “deceptive advertising.”
The settlement “gives them the dollars they lost,” said Scott Alan George, a lawyer with Seeger Weiss.