Lori Andrus Elected Secretary of the Women Trial Lawyers’ Caucus, American Association for Justice

July 28, 2009 -

Attorney Lori Andrus was elected Secretary of the American Association for Justice’s Women Trial Lawyers’ Caucus.  In this position, Ms. Andrus will continue to pave the way for female law students to join the ranks of the plaintiffs’ bar.  Ms. Andrus and the leadership of the Women’s Caucus are also committed to their continued fundraising efforts for the Women for Justice Education Fund, which Ms. Andrus helped found in 2008.

This year, the Women’s Caucus awarded two scholarships from the Women for Justice Education Fund, named after a primary benefactor, Mike Eidson.  Each year, the Mike Eidson Scholarship is awarded to a third-year female law student who commits to plaintiffs’ practice.  This year’s recipients, Samika Boyd and Christine Dunphy, both women of color, boast impressive academic acheivements, particularly in light of the obstacles they each faced growing up in poverty.  Ms. Andrus is pleased to support Ms. Boyd and Ms. Dunphy in their academic endeavors and as they enter the world of public service and trial law.

The mission of the American Association for Justice (formerly ATLA) is to promote a fair and effective justice system—and to support the work of attorneys in their efforts to ensure that any person who is injured by the misconduct or negligence of others can obtain justice in America’s courtrooms, even when taking on the most powerful interests.

Cal State ESL Teachers Represented by Andrus Anderson LLP

Andrus Anderson represents California State University-East Bay (Cal State) English as a second language (ESL) teachers in a class action in Alameda County Superior Court.  The lawsuit, Nelson et al., v. California State University, East Bay Foundation, Inc., was filed on March 23, 2009 (Case No. RG09442869).

ESL Teachers Allege Violations of Labor Laws, Back Pay Owed

In their complaint, current and former ESL teachers allege that Cal State has not paid them for all hours worked, as required under California’s labor laws.  Specifically, the teachers claim that Cal State’s refusal to pay for all time worked outside of the classroom (including preparation time, grading time and time spent meeting with students), violates California Wage Order 4-2001 and California’s Business & Professions Code § 17200.  Additionally, the lawsuit alleges breach of contract, failure to pay waiting time penalties to former teachers, and failure to maintain accurate time keeping records.

The ESL teachers seek certification of a class of ESL teachers who have not been paid for all hours worked since March 23, 2005, and, among other things, seek back pay with interest, restitution, and civil penalties.

Contact Andrus Anderson

If you are an ESL teacher and have been denied pay for time spent outside of the classroom, we would like to learn more about your experience as part of our investigation.  Please click here to submit your complaint.

Andrus Anderson Investigating Hydroxycut Injuries

Andrus Anderson LLP is investigating potential cases involving users of Hydroxycut® products who have experienced health problems that may include Rhabdomyolysis (muscle damage that can lead to kidney failure and other health problems), death, cardiovascular symptoms, hypertension, elevated liver enzymes (that can indicate liver failure), kidney failure and seizures.

If you would like to discuss Hydroxycut® cases, associate with us or refer cases to us, please contact attorney Lori Andrus at lori@andrusanderson.com.

Supplement Recall

On May 1, 2009, the FDA issued a consumer advisory that warned consumers to stop using Hydroxycut® products immediately, citing 23 reports of serious health problems and one reported death associated with use of Hydroxycut® products.  Reports of liver damage involved individuals taking the label’s recommended dosage.  Hydroxycut® products are distributed by Iovate Health Sciences USA Inc.  Iovate initiated a voluntary recall when it became aware that the FDA’s safety assessment differed from its own analysis.

Although the reports of serious health problems do not apply to all Hydroxycut® products, Iovate has issued a recall for the following 14 items:

*    Hydroxycut Regular Rapid Release Caplets
*    Hydroxycut Caffeine-Free Rapid Release Caplets
*    Hydroxycut Hardcore Liquid Caplets
*    Hydroxycut Max Liquid Caplets
*    Hydroxycut Regular Drink Packets
*    Hydroxycut Caffeine-Free Drink Packets
*    Hydroxycut Hardcore Drink Packets (Ignition Stix)
*    Hydroxycut Max Drink Packets
*    Hydroxycut Liquid Shots
*    Hydroxycut Hardcore RTDs (Ready-to-Drink)
*    Hydroxycut Max Aqua Shed
*    Hydroxycut 24
*    Hydroxycut Carb Control
*    Hydroxycut Natural

Supplement History

Hydroxycut® products are heavily advertised dietary supplements, energy enhancers and fat burners that are widely distributed and, according to the FDA, sold more than 9 million items in 2008.  Although Hydroxycut® products contain a variety of ingredients and herbal extracts, the FDA has not identified the ingredients, dosages or other health-related factors that may be associated with an increased risk of liver damage and other health problems.

Related Injuries

Symptoms of liver damage and other health problems associated with Hydroxycut® use may include:

*    Jaundice (yellowing of skin or whites of the eyes)
*    Brown urine
*    Light-colored stools
*    Nausea or vomiting
*    Excessive fatigue and weakness
*    Stomach or abdominal pain
*    Itching
*    Loss of appetite

As the manufacturer of dietary supplements, Iovate is required by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 to ensure product safety before placing it on the market, but the product does not undergo FDA approval.  Once a product is on the market, the manufacturer must report adverse events to the FDA within 15 days.

F.D.A. Urges Consumers To Immediately Stop Using Hydroxycut

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warning consumers to immediately stop using Hydroxycut products by Iovate Health Sciences, Inc., of Oakville, Ontario and distributed by Iovate Health Sciences U.S.A., Inc. of Blasdell, NY.  Hydroxycut products are associated with a number of serious liver injuries.  To see the FDA’s statement on Hydroxycut click here.

The FDA has received 23 reports of serious health problems ranging from jaundice and elevated liver enzymes, an indicator of potential liver injury, to liver damage requiring liver transplants.  One death due to liver failure has been reported to FDA.  Other health problems reported include seizures; cardiovascular disorders; and rhabdomyolysis, a type of muscle damage that can lead to other serious health problems such as kidney failure.

Genentech Pulls Psoriasis Drug Raptiva Due To Risk of Fatal Brain Infection

Today, Genentech and the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) announced a voluntary withdrawal of the drug Raptiva (efalizumab).  According to the statement issued by the FDA, “The company is taking this action because of a potential risk to patients of developing progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML), a rare, serious, progressive neurologic disease caused by a virus that affects the central nervous system.”

Prescribers are being asked not to initiate Raptiva treatment for any new patients.

The risk that an individual patient taking Raptiva will develop PML is rare and is generally associated with long-term use. Generally, PML occurs in people whose immune systems have been severely weakened and often leads to an irreversible decline in neurologic function and death. There is no known effective treatment for PML.

Raptiva was approved by the FDA in 2003. It is a once-weekly injection for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, a skin condition characterized by red, scaly patches of skin. On Oct. 16, 2008, the FDA updated the labeling for Raptiva to warn of the risk of life-threatening infections, including PML. Then, on Feb. 19, 2009, the FDA issued a Public Health Advisory informing patients and prescribers of the risk of PML in patients taking Raptiva, after receiving reports of four patients with PML, three of whom died. On March 13, 2009, the FDA approved a Medication Guide for Raptiva and included additional information in Raptiva’s labeling regarding PML.

Supreme Court Rules In favor Of Diana Levine

The U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision upheld a Vermont’s jury decision that Diana Levine, the plaintiff in the case Wyeth v. Levine could hold the drug manufacturer accountable for the injuries she suffered — which included the loss of her arm — after taking one of Wyeth’s medicines.

Writing the Supreme Court’s majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said Food & Drug Administration oversight of drug labeling doesn’t prevent the filing of state-level consumer liability lawsuits against drug companies.  Joining Stevens in the majority were Supreme Court Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Clarence Thomas.

The following is a statement from American Association for Justice President Les Weisbrod:

“The Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that state lawsuits perform a valuable and important function in ensuring accountability in uncovering drug hazards.  Also, the Supreme Court rejected the FDA’s attempts to use the preamble in drug regulations to provide complete immunity to drug manufacturers.

It is clear consumers retained their remedy under law when drug companies have failed to provide adequate warnings for the safe use of their drugs.

Today’s decision in favor of Diana Levine proved that even if you are just one person, you can fight for justice and hold your wrongdoer accountable.”

Andrus Anderson Partners Help Build Homes in New Orleans

On a beautiful day in February, Andrus Anderson LLP partners Lori Andrus and Jennie Anderson volunteered building homes in New Orleans, Louisiana, along with dozens of other attorneys affiliated with the American Association for Justice.  Led by the dedicated staff at the New Orleans Area Habitat for Humanity, Lori and Jennie framed walls, prepared cross beams and hammered an endless number of nails.  Lori grew up in Louisiana and Jennie has traveled there numerous times, so they both very much enjoyed the opportunity to give something back to the New Orleans community.  Three years after Hurricane Katrina, there is still much work to do.  Lori and Jennie extend their gratitude to Habitat for Humanity for all that they are doing to get the hard working people of New Orleans back home.

AA LLP’s Jennie Lee Anderson Highlights Women Investigators In The Women’s Caucus Newsletter

For the Winter 2008-2009 issue of the American Association for Justice Women’s Caucus Newsletter, AA LLP partner Jennie Lee Anderson recently interviewed Kimberly C. Epstein, co-founder of the women-owned investigation firm, Epstein & Lewis Litigation Support, LLC,  “As women trial attorneys, we are always interested in supporting the expanding role women play throughout the civil justice process,” Ms. Anderson said.  “Case investigation is an important part of the legal services we provide to our clients, and we appreciate the special skills women investigators bring to the fact-finding table,” she added.  To view a copy of the interview click here.

FDA Warns Of Risk Of Complications From Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh

If you or a loved one was treated for stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse with surgery that involved the transvaginal placement of surgical mesh, you may be at risk of developing serious medical complications. An estimated 1,000 women in the United States have suffered serious injuries and complications following the surgical procedures in recent years, prompting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to issue a public advisory about nine brands of surgical mesh.

Women who were injured by the use of transvaginal placement surgical mesh in surgeries to repair damage done by stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse may have rights to financial compensation. Complications commonly associated with this type of surgical product include infection, pain, and perforation of the bowel, bladder, and blood vessels. The experienced attorneys at Andrus Anderson LLP are dedicated to fighting for victims of surgical mesh to receive the financial compensation to which they are entitled.

FDA Warning

In October 2008, the FDA issued a public health warning to warn consumers about the risks of complication from the transvaginal placement of surgical mesh. Although rare, the complications pose serious health risks to women. The FDA recommended that physicians receive additional training in the use of the products and give more information to patients about the mesh in an effort to reduce injuries and complications.

When is the Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh Used?

The transvaginal placement of surgical mesh is most commonly used in surgical mesh used to treat stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. The mesh is placed along the vaginal wall to protect the area and is designed to be left permanently inside the body.

Vaginal Mesh Injuries

Women injured by the transvaginal placement of surgical mesh may suffer a wide range of injuries, including infection, bladder pain, urinary problems, and a recurrence of the condition for which the surgery was done. There have also been reports of bowel, bladder, and blood vessel perforation during insertion of the mesh and of vaginal scarring and mesh erosion.

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Consumers’ Rights In State Courts

Andrus Anderson LLP lauds a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Altria v. Good to deny immunity for cigarette manufacturers who violate state consumer protection laws with false claims of lowered tar and nicotine.

Partner Lori Andrus agrees with the statement issued by the America Association for Justice (www.justice.org): “Today’s decision is a victory for consumers and affirms that cigarette manufacturers cannot claim immunity from consumer fraud when they claim their products have lowered tar and nicotine levels, even though they do not. State laws have an important role to play in helping the federal government police false claims, and today’s decision supports that role.”

“We hope that the court continues to look at claims of corporate immunity from the perspective of consumer health and safety and continues to support the rights of consumers to get justice through the courts.”

To view the full Supreme Court opinion, click here.