- August 2013
- May 2013
- March 2013
- January 2013
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- January 2012
- August 2011
- July 2011
- March 2011
- October 2010
- June 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- September 2009
- July 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- August 2007
Andrus Anderson partner, Jennie Lee Anderson, has for the third consecutive year been selected as a Northern California Super Lawyer. Super Lawyers recognizes a small percentage of outstanding lawyers who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The selection process is multi-phased and includes independent research, peer nominations and peer evaluations. Visit Ms. Anderson’s Super Lawyer Profile for more information about Ms. Anderson’s practice areas and achievements.
Andrus Anderson LLP partner Jennie Lee Anderson was appointed Liaison Counsel for indirect purchaser plaintiffs in In re Lithium Ion Batteries Antitrust Litigation, on May 17, 2013. Andrus Anderson LLP represents consumers in this class action filed against Sony, Panasonic, Hitachi, LG Chem, Samsung, and Sanyo for allegedly conspiring to fix and raise the prices of lithium-ion rechargeable batteries in violation of U.S. antitrust law from 2002 to 2011. The case is pending in the Northern District of California before the Honorable Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. For more information about the case or other potential antitrust and unfair competition matters, please contact us.
On March 12, 2013, Andrus Anderson LLP partner Lori Andrus will participate in a panel discussion on summary judgment, along with two judges and other lawyers.
Ms. Andrus will be offering the plaintiffs’ perspective on defeating summary judgment in state court. Other participants include U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley and Marin County Superior Court Judge M. Lynn Duryee.
The panel discussion is being hosted by the San Francisco Trial Lawyers’ Association.
On March 5, 2013, Andrus Anderson LLP partner Lori Andrus spoke at the first annual Women En Mass retreat in Aspen, Colorado. Women En Mass is the only retreat designed for women plaintiffs’ lawyers practicing in the field of pharmaceutical and medical device mass tort litigation. Women En Mass provides an opportunity for women attorneys to talk about issues affecting them, at their firms and in the courtroom.
In her address, Ms. Andrus asked the attendees to consider how women lawyers can encourage federal and state judges to embrace the virtues of diversity and to work collectively to increase the number of women appointed to leadership positions in mass tort litigation.
Ms. Andrus also paid tribute to the two most important women in her development: her mother, Colleen Houston Andrus, and her former law partner, Elizabeth Cabraser. Commenting on these two women, Ms. Andrus said, “From a very young age, my mother taught me I could be anything I wanted to be. Later, as a lawyer, I was privileged to gain Elizabeth’s confidence, which, by itself, opened doors for me professionally.”
Andrus Anderson LLP partner Jennie Lee Anderson will speak at the American Association for Justice Winter Convention in Miami on February 12. Her presentation, “Class Action Update: Hot Topics Before the US Supreme Court”, will examine the potential impact of multiple class action cases currently pending before the high court. For more information about class actions or to speak to an attorney about a potential class action, click here.
Plaintiffs represented by Andrus Anderson LLP are seeking final approval of a nationwide class action settlement in the In re EasySaver Rewards Litigation pending in the Southern District of California. Plaintiffs allege among other things that, upon requesting a $15 off credit from Provide Commerce websites, including Proflowers.com, they were unwittingly enrolled in and charged for EasySaver Rewards program, but received no benefits. The settlement, which includes both merchandise credits and cash refunds, is valued at $38 million. For additional information click here to visit the settlement website. A fairness hearing regarding the settlement will be on January 28, 2013 at 2:00 p.m San Diego.
Andrus Anderson LLP represent indirect purchaser plaintiffs currently seeking final approval of settlements in a class action lawsuit regarding price-fixing of LCD screens used in TVs, monitors and laptops. The settlements total over $1 billion and will compensate consumers who plaintiffs contend were overcharged as a result of an international price-fixing cartel.
Lori Andrus and Jennie Lee Anderson have both been nominated for the Woman Consumer Advocate of the Year by Consumer Attorneys of California.
The award is given to a female lawyer who has made significant contributions to the civil justice system and consumers by significantly fundraising or contributing to help elect pro-civil justice candidates, or by working to establish new law or protect favorable law for consumers by testifying before the state or federal legislature, or by working on appellate issues that are important to plaintiffs.
Consumer Attorneys of California is a legal professional organization for attorneys who represent plaintiffs and consumers seeking responsibility from wrongdoers.
When asked about the nomination, Lori Andrus said, “We are both honored to be recognized by our peers. We will continue to fight for truth, justice and accountability on behalf of our clients.”
Judge Ernest Hiroshige, L.A. County Superior Court, ruled on October 16, 2012 that the fraud claims in a lawsuit brought by plaintiffs in a medical malpractice action against several doctors, can go forward. Plaintiffs sued the doctors and Cedars Sinai Medical Center, alleging that their gross negligence in the care and treatment of a young woman led to her death.
Plaintiffs have now been permitted to add claims for fraud, alleging that the doctors also misrepresented the health of the decedent, misrepresented their qualifications, and concealed certain material information regarding the care and treatment of decedent.
The significance of the Judge’s ruling allowing the fraud claims in to the suit is that the non-economic damages that flow from the alleged fraud (pain and suffering and loss of consortium) are not capped at $250,000, as fraud claims are not subject to Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975 (MICRA).
Andrus Anderson LLP, a nationally-recognized law firm representing clients who have been injured by defective pharmaceuticals and medical devices is investigating potential cases involving Stryker Rejuvenate / ABG hip implants systems. On July 6, 2012, Stryker voluntarily recalled the company’s Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck stems, components used in many of the company’s hip implant systems.
Stryker’s website cited the risks of “fretting and/or corrosion at or about the modular-neck junction, which may result in adverse local tissue reactions manifesting with pain and/or swelling” as the reason for the recall. The company decided to voluntarily recall the devices after discovering a potential trend in post-market surveillance data.
There have been at least 45 adverse events reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) regarding the Rejuvenate modular-neck stem since the beginning of 2012.
While the Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip stems can be used as a component of either metal or ceramic hip implants, the metal-on-metal modular junction can fret or corrode, which may cause toxic metal debris to loosen and enter the bloodstream. This can result in pain, inflammation, swelling, tissue damage, and even metallosis.
Medical experts in the United States and abroad have been studying the potential dangers of metal hip replacement systems. Most recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration convened a panel of experts to weigh in on the safety of metal-on-metal hip implants. Though they stopped short of recommending a recall of all metal-on-metal hip systems, they cautioned doctors against using the devices.
Those who experienced complications or side effects after receiving metal-on-metal hip implants may be able to file a Stryker Hip Recall lawsuit to seek compensation for their injuries, including medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Contact our lawyers today for a free case review.