Blog

Spring has officially arrived. For me, that means “spring cleaning” will take place in my home. As I gather products into my Grove account I will admit, I get pretty excited. It’s a time to wipe away remnants of cold and flu season and get rid of all unwanted items that have been stored for a day that will probably never come. I know there are others like me, who love the beginning of warm days, opening windows and airing out our homes. As a matter of fact, according to Offer Up’s survey of 2000 adults; 70% of Americans say tidying their home offers them a feeling of accomplishment, 61% say it makes them feel “destressed” and 54% say they experience a sense of “relaxation”. This doesn’t at all surprise me as there has also been a small study published in the journal Mindfulness that found participants who actually took a moment to inhale the scent of the soap and allowed the warm water absorb their skin – reported a 27% reduction in nervousness along with a 25% improvement in “mental inspiration”. Apparently, I am in the group of people who feel a sense of empowerment by getting rid of needless objects cluttering up my home. So I will just sit back patiently wait for my box of lavender cleaning products to hit my front porch.

As most of us know, we live in a world where people have become dependent on Uber or Lyft to get us from one place to another. However, the question then arises – what happens if I am in an accident while riding in an uber or lyft. Many people are unsure what to do if they are in an accident while placed in this type of situation. However, the preliminary steps as to what to do after an accident of this type are generally the same as if you were in an accident while in your own vehicle. The below is an overview of the various steps you may want to take if involved in an accident while a passenger in an uber or lyft: Make sure you and everyone else involved in the accident are ok; Call 911 so that an accident report may be completed and further, if there are serious injuries, so that emergency responders can quickly get to the scene of the accident; Take pictures of the accident and the vehicles involved, even if the vehicle does not belong to you; Obtain all of the relevant information of the individuals involved. Although the app you are using will likely give you general information about your driver – it is important to get their contact information and personal auto insurance information as well; Contact your insurance company to inform them of the accident if you are injured and to make a claim to determine what benefits, if any, are available to you. Most importantly, you want to determine whether you have medical payment coverages under your own policy. Medical payment coverage generally will pay for medical costs up to a certain amount after you are injured in a car accident regardless of who is found at fault for the accident; File a claim with the other driver’s insurance company if that party is at fault for the accident; File a claim with your Uber or Lyft driver’s personal auto insurance company to determine if any insurance coverage is available to you under this policy; File a claim with Uber or Lyft as your driver’s personal automobile insurance policy may not provide coverage for the accident. According to recent news articles, both Uber and Lyft carry $1,000,000.00 in both liability insurance coverage and in underinsured/uninsured coverage. In sum, the general steps you want to take if you are involved in an accident while a passenger in an uber or lyft are not terribly drastic from the steps you would take if you were involved in an accident while driving your own personal vehicle. Make sure to remain calm and to seek out an attorney if you have any questions or need help with representation when dealing with the various insurance companies involved.

The 26 th Annual Wheeling Health Right Chefs’ Auction is coming up on Friday, May 3. The event will take place at Wesbanco Arena, and will begin at 5:30pm with cocktails and a silent auction. At 7:00pm, dinner will be served, and at 8:00pm, the live auction will begin. The event features a variety of great food from the very best of Wheeling’s food and restaurant scene, and an auction with many exciting prizes. The proceeds of the event help benefit Wheeling Health Right, and this event is the organization’s major fundraiser each year. The them of this year’s Chef’s Auction is “Friday Night Fever.” Tickets can be purchased by going to http://wheelinghealthright.home.qtego.net. Tickets are $160 per couple, which includes two free drink tickets, and $85 a piece, with one free drink ticket included. The organization hopes to set a new record for its fundraising from the Chefs’ Auction this year, and welcomes contributions of any amount. Wheeling Health Right is a nonprofit organization that provides healthcare to the uninsured and underinsured populations in the Wheeling and Ohio Valley area. The clinic opened in 1985, and has been recognized as one of the best free clinics in the United States. The staff and board members work tirelessly to obtain funding from many different sources, including government grants and donors. The clinic has expanded over the years to include a pharmacy and dental clinic, and provides an opportunity for resident physicians and dental students to gain valuable experience treating patients in a hands-on setting, while providing much needed care for those who otherwise may not have access to it. With ongoing changes in the political and government climate, it remains a challenge to generate money to sufficiently fund everything that Health Right does, and the clinic relies upon the generous donations of other organizations and individuals to continue to provide healthcare assistance to our community. In addition to the Chefs’ Auction, which is a wonderful event, there are many other ways that you can contribute to Wheeling Health Right and the work that they do. Please consider checking out their website for more information about the organization, the Chefs’ Auction, and other ways to get involved. ( http://www.wheelinghealthright.com/) Bordas & Bordas has been proud to be a supporter of Wheeling Health Right, and many of our attorneys and staff members have been involved in Wheeling Health Right in a variety of ways for many years, including as board and executive committee members. We look forward to seeing you at another successful Chefs’ Auction this year!

To many people, the thought of hiring a lawyer is an intimidating idea they would like to avoid. Many people are of the opinion that they can resolve an issue or work out a problem on their own without legal assistance. In some situations, this may in fact be true. However, there are many situations as outlined below in which obtaining legal representation is your best option: When the laws that you are dealing with are complicated. For example, if you are running your own business and needing legal assistance with contracts, HR issues, tax dilemmas, and/or other areas that require specific expertise – it is helpful to retain an attorney who is familiar with the area of law at hand who can help you navigate any nuances so as to ensure you are in full compliance with constantly changing laws and to avoid other issues that may arise rather than to incur the costs of doing this research and work on your own; When you are dealing with individuals who have an upper hand in the situation. This type of scenario is often at play when a person is dealing with insurance companies - whether that be in regard to a property damage claim, an automobile accident, a claim for life insurance benefits, etc. In these situations, the insurance companies who hold the money or benefits you are requesting will often try to control the situation or do what they can to avoid having to pay you what you deserve. Having an attorney who handles these situations and who can negotiate on your behalf is beneficial as you will likely make out better in the end than if you had dealt with the situation on your own. When you are dealing with complicated procedural requirements. Whether you are involved with a criminal matter, disputing an issue with the DMV, or some other type of board or appeal panel– it is often helpful to retain an attorney who can gather evidence, call witnesses, and ensure certain procedural requirements are met so that your interests are well represented and a procedural mistake is not made on your part which can prove fatal to the interest or right that you are trying to protect. When you are partaking in estate planning or trying to work out child custody issues. Matters that involve these two areas of the law are very personal and often emotional. Hiring an attorney to assist you with estate planning type matters and child custody issues is often in your best interest as attorneys can think in a level headed manner and can see the overall picture at hand which can then enable them to assist you in preparing for the future or working out an issue with a relative that you could otherwise not do so on your own. If you know you are going to be sued or are planning to take legal action. It is never a bad idea to consult with an attorney when you know that you are soon going to be involved in legal action. The legal system can be complicated and handling a legal matter on your own can be time consuming as well as frustrating without having the experience of an attorney to assist you with your legal matter. In sum, contacting an attorney who is well experienced in the area of law in which you are dealing is never a bad idea so as to ensure that your interests and rights are protected.

This past Wednesday, a jury delivered a verdict of over $80 million in damages against Bayer, formerly Monsanto, to a California man who alleged that his exposure to Roundup weed killer, that he used on a large swath of land in Sonoma County, caused his development of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cancer. The jury valued the man’s injuries and damages at over $5 million and assessed an additional $75 million in punitive damages against Bayer, in part on the basis of internal documents that Monsanto has known about the risks of glyphosate in its Roundup product for decades and chose not to divulge the information about the dangers of its product to American consumers. While Bayer continues to hold fast to the company line that glyphosate is not carcinogenic, Wednesday’s verdict is the second in as many cases to go to verdict to result in a multi-million dollar verdict for the injured parties, lending additional weight to the science demonstrating a causal link between exposure to glyphosate and the development of cancer. Several national and international agencies, , including the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment., have concluded that the evidence is sufficient to classify Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, as a probable cause of cancer in humans. alt="" width="1200" height="628" />On the heels of this decision, another Roundup trial began this week in California. On Thursday a jury heard opening statements alleging that decades of spraying the weed killer caused a married couple's aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the third Roundup case to go to trial. And hundreds more cases are pending throughout the country, with more than 600 cases pending in California alone. While Bayer and Monsanto may continue to dispute the science, thus far, the American public has spoken loudly and clearly on their thoughts about whether exposure to glyphosate causes cancer. If you believe you have contracted cancer from exposure to Roundup or glyphosate, you should contact an experienced attorney to explore a potential claim.

Kiosks are everywhere for many different reasons supposedly to make things move much quicker all the while efficient and saving costs for many businesses. We use them anywhere from banking, to groceries, to theme parks, you name it. I’ve always been a fan, but every time I wonder is it going to work or will something go wrong? I now can say I unequivocally am a fan. The convenience of a kiosk has a thumbs up from me. I am not talking about just any kiosk. I am talking about the best kiosk ever, the WV Department of Motor Vehicles kiosk. In 2017, West Virginia opened a handful of kiosks across the State, one of which was placed here in Wheeling. With the kiosk, you are supposed to be able to renew vehicle registrations and driver’s licenses providing no changes were necessary to the already existing documents. Recently, I celebrated a birthday and with that, came the time to renew my driver’s license. I dreaded the thought of spending half a day at the DMV. Just wasn’t on my wish list of things to do. Then, my friend reminded me of the kiosk. I mulled over the idea and thought there is no way will this work. Just too good to be true. Seriously, a half day’s adventure to the DMV now reduced to a three-minute painless transaction? Surely something would go wrong. Desperate though, I went to give it a shot. I approached this kiosk almost grimacing. I was confident that I should run other errands on this visit to the local kiosk because aftercall, I did not want this to be pointless given all had had on my plate. And, there I was. The face off. Me versus the kiosk. I entered my information and a few screens later with the swipe of a credit card, the renewal transaction was complete with receipt in hand. Where were the kids? My goodness still in line awaiting their favorite item off the menu? I glanced at my watch and the entire process of renewal took less than three minutes. Yep, too good to be true. Had the kiosk won this face off? Here I was left standing with the receipt in hand and a promise that the hard copy of my license would be delivered to my home within two weeks started worrying me. Just watch I thought, I will end up with an expired license because surely somehow this effortless, rapid process would fail me. I was not yet quite ready to concede to the seamless process still. As the two-week mark approached with my birthday just four days away, the anxiety grew as I convinced myself that come Monday, I would certainly have to make that dreaded trip to the DMV. Two-weeks to the day there it was. Arrived just as promised. No errors. I delightfully found myself actually smiling thinking about how skeptical I had been. I have conceded, the kiosk is the champion. I am a believer. Less than three minutes is all it took. Thank you West Virginia for choosing Wheeling to place one of these kiosks, it truly makes for a delightful, painless, experience.

Recently, in the case of Buck v. GEICO, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, granted GEICO’s Motion to dismiss Mr. Buck’s insurance bad faith claim for failing to allege a denial of benefits in accordance with 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8371. Mr. Buck was involved in a motor vehicle accident wherein his vehicle collided with a parking bollard. Mr. Buck claimed that the accident was caused by a non-party security officer. He reported the collision to his insurance company, GEICO, and in accordance with the policy, he “provided a full and accurate description of the accident.” Despite Mr. Buck’s claim, and without any further investigation, GEICO determined that the collision was Mr. Buck’s fault.”  Thereafter, GEICO significantly increased Mr. Buck’s insurance premiums. Consequently, Mr. Buck was forced to seek insurance from another company in an attempt to offset the increased premium. Months later, Mr. Buck provided GEICO with surveillance video that showed the collision happened exactly as Mr. Buck initially described it. GEICO acknowledged its receipt and review of the video, but nonetheless determined that it’s liability position regarding the loss would not change. Later, GEICO informed Mr. Buck that it had changed its liability decision and determined that Mr. Buck was not solely responsible for the accident, but was comparatively negligent. Mr. Buck filed an underinsured motorists (UIM) claim against GEICO, and GEICO filed a motion to dismiss the claim on the basis that Mr. Buck did not assert that GEICO denied benefits under an insurance policy as required by Pennsylvania’s insurance bad faith statute, 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8371. In response, Mr. Buck argued that he does not need to allege a denial of benefits to state a cause of action for insurance bad faith under § 8371 and claimed that GEICO’s investigative practices and faulty conclusions based on egregious investigative inaction provided a cause of action under § 8371. Mr. Buck relied on O’Donnell ex rel. Mitro v. Allstate Ins. Co, which states that “ection 8371 is not restricted to an insurer’s bad faith in denying a claim. An action for bad faith may also extend to the insurer’s investigative practices.” 734 A.2d 901, 904 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1999). However, in UPMC Health Sys. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 391 F.3d 497, 506 (3d Cir. 2004), the Court explained, that O’Donnell merely clarified that “the alleged bad faith need not be limited to the literal act of denying a claim,” but “the essence of a bad faith claim must be the unreasonable and intentional (or reckless) denial of benefits.” Id. Thus, the Court determined that Mr. Buck must allege the denial of benefits to state a claim under § 8371. In response, Mr. Buck argued that GEICO’s investigative practices and faulty conclusions based on egregious investigative inaction effectively denied him the benefits of (1) fair and reasonable treatment upon submission of a claim; (2) the wisdom and experience of a multi-billion-dollar organization standing behind you in your moment of need; and (3) an insurance carrier to pursue your deductible from the actual party at fault. Nonetheless, the Court noted that Mr. Buck did not allege in his Complaint that any of these benefits arose from his insurance policy, or that he was denied those benefits. Accordingly, the Court could not consider Mr. Buck’s assertions in resolving GEICO’s motion to dismiss. The Court explained that even assuming that the bad faith denial of the benefits claimed by Mr. Buck was properly alleged in the Complaint, Mr. Buck’s argument fails because he does not allege the denial of any benefits within the meaning of the statute. “‘ad faith’ as it concern allegations made by an insured against his insurer ha acquired a particular meaning in the law.” Toy v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 928 A.2d 186, 199 (Pa. 2007). Courts in Pennsylvania and the Third Circuit have consistently held that “ plaintiff bringing a claim under must demonstrate that an insurer has acted in bad faith toward the insured through ‘any frivolous or unfounded refusal to pay proceeds of a policy.’” Wise v. Am. Gen. Life Ins. Co., 459 F.3d 443, 452 (3d Cir. 2006). None of the “benefits” that GEICO allegedly denied Mr. Buck concern the refusal to pay proceeds under an insurance policy. Therefore, the Court concluded that because Mr. Buck did not allege a “denial of benefits” within the meaning of § 8371, GEICO’s motion to dismiss was granted. However, Mr. Buck was given the opportunity to file an Amended Complaint.

I must begin by admitting that I was born and raised in Massachusetts, and I grew up cheering for the New England Patriots. I am not old enough to have cheered for the Boston Patriots, but I would have had I been old enough. I grew up a die-hard fan of all sports teams in Massachusetts. I truly enjoyed watching the Super Bowl this month, especially because the New England Patriots won their 6th Super Bowl. Now with those admissions out of the way, I want to tell a story about my trip to the 2002 Super Bowl and how I saw something that showed me even then that Tom Brady was special. I won’t go as far as to say I knew he would be would someday be known as the “GOAT” (Greatest of all Time), but it was clear he was going to be special. I was fortunate enough to have attended the February of 2002 Super Bowl in which the Patriots, led by Tom Brady, defeated the St Louis Rams 20-17, with a last second field goal. The Rams were heavily favored to win the game and were known as “The Greatest Show on Turf.” The trip to New Orleans was magical for many reasons outside of seeing first hand that Tom Brady was something to admire as a football player. This was my first Super Bowl. I went without tickets and just to enjoy the festivities of a Super Bowl.  I expected it would be my only Super Bowl, so I wanted to go to the game at all costs. I was told that I should expect to pay a thousand dollars or so over the face value. As luck would have it, the Rams were heavily favored by more than two touchdowns. This factor drove the price of the tickets down and I was able to snag one at face value. However, the magic started long before I got my ticket. That season, Tom started as the back up to an All Pro quarterback, Drew Bledsoe. Bledsoe was injured after a number of games, but when he came back, Brady kept the starting position. Ultimately, Brady led the Patriots to the Super Bowl. The most astonishing aspect of the Super Bowl is what happened at the closing drive but was not seen by anybody other than the crowd that was at the game. As the Patriots started that winning drive, there was a TV timeout. As the Patriots offense was huddled on the field waiting for the time out to end, you could see a number of the players nervously rocking back and forth or pacing. The players were full of nervous energy because they were being watched by over 100 million people, who were watching what was likely the most crucial part of their football careers. They were living and creating history - and they knew it. And depending on the result, it could be the absolute worst or the absolute best time of, not only their football lives, but possibly of their entire lives. On the sidelines, the coaches were frantically reviewing their play books and the other players were pacing backing and forth, were on their knees praying and/or shouting words of encouragement to their team players on the field. Among all the chaos and fervor of the closing minutes of a tied score Super Bowl, there was one person who appeared to remain calm under all the pressure, Tom Brady. He walked from the sideline and into the huddle with a cool and composed appearance. When he got into the huddle, you could see him motioning with his hands to all the players to calm down. They proceeded to drive the down field for the winning field goal. Now, many players have exhibited heroic actions to win a Super Bowl with the same coolness. For example, there is the story of Joe Montana pointing out John Candy in the stands to the rest of the offense, which as the story goes, relaxed all the players before driving for a winning score. However, never has a quarterback with little experience or fanfare calm a whole team down and lead them to the winning score in a Super Bowl. Brady was famously a 6th round draft choice, who had never started a game until that season, and had thrown for a total of 6 yards the season before, his first in the NFL. That one scenario speaks volumes about Brady’s unmatched swagger, confidence and leadership. I could cite countless football statistics that show Brady is the best of all time. However, the only stat I need is 6 Super Bowl wins out of nine appearances. This stat has so many ramifications. First this was over an 18 year career to date, with the first Super Bowl being his first full season in 2001 and the last being the last NFL season of 2018. This is more Super Bowl appearances than every other TEAM over the NFL history and is more appearances than 11 teams COMBINED over their NFL history. He has won 6 Super Bowls to date. This is more than any other TEAM in NFL History, except the Pittsburgh Steelers who also won 6 Super Bowls. However, this was done with completely different teams years apart and a number of quarterbacks. Now I have argued over my lifetime that other Boston sports heroes were one of the greatest of all time or others that were, arguably, the greatest of all time. The key word is “argued.” Never before Tom Brady did I unequivocally believe the respective Boston sports hero was the best or one of the best of all time, whether it was Bobby Orr, Bill Russell, Larry Bird, Ted Williams etc. With Tom Brady, it is a fact. He is a GOAT, Greatest Of All Time. End of story. Image courtesy of USA Today.

In 2019, it seems like arbitration is everywhere you look. If you take a new job, rent a truck, or buy a new cell phone, it’s almost certain there’s an arbitration clause lurking in the shadows. But that may be changing. Like many employers, Google required its employees to resolve any work-related disputes through arbitration. Recently, however, Google was rocked by allegations that some of its executives had been guilty of sexual harassment. Victims couldn’t sue for recovery, and the private nature of the arbitration process kept these allegations out of the spotlight. When 20,000 Google employees walked out in protest, the issue of sexual harassment came to the forefront--and, with it, the issue of forcing victims into arbitration. Google responded by repealing its arbitration policy for sexual harassment cases. Not long after, Google went a step further by repealing the policy for all disputes involving its full-time employees. Google is not the first company to roll back forced arbitration. Other large companies, like Microsoft, Uber, Adobe and Intuit, have done the same thing. Could this be a trend? Will other companies see the wisdom of repealing a policy widely considered unfair and oppressive? Only time will tell. But we may not have to wait. On February 28, the organizers behind the Google walkout appeared with Democratic lawmakers as they introduced a new bill to impose a nationwide ban on forced arbitration in the workplace. Senator Richard Blumenthal, one of the bill’s sponsors, acknowledged what Google had done voluntarily, but added: “We’re not willing to wait for corporate America to do the right thing. This kind of injustice has to end for the sake of everyone in the workplace, men and women.” Hopefully, the momentum we’ve already seen in the private sector will spur Congress to act. Forced arbitration deprives honest, hard working Americans of their full legal remedies. It’s especially harmful in the employment setting, where an employee’s livelihood and future may be hanging in the balance. Congress should move this bill quickly and end workplace arbitration once and for all.

The American Inns of Court publishes a magazine called The Bencher, and the recent March/April 2019 edition had an article titled “Professionalism Benefits Attorneys, Their Clients, and the Legal Community.” The article touched on several important aspects of professionalism in the legal community and the vast benefits that attorneys and their clients reap when they choose to conduct themselves with the highest standards of conduct. The article addressed the difference between ethics and professionalism, which is a distinction that often gets overlooked, but an important one nonetheless. All attorneys are bound to a code of ethics through their state’s Rules of Professional Conduct, which require attorneys to do a number of things in their practice, including protecting confidentiality of communications with clients, exhibiting honesty and candor to the court, and ensuring that they are not engaged in any conflicting relationships through their representation. While there are many other requirements imposed upon lawyers by the codes of legal ethics, and while many of those rules would naturally give rise to a lawyer behaving well, it is also possible for lawyers to be both ethical and unprofessional. Professionalism centers around how a lawyer acts while performing all of his duties, and even more importantly, how the lawyer treats others he encounters while engaging in the practice of law. Unfortunately, some expectations and misunderstandings of what legal professionalism means have led to a belief that a lawyer who is acting unprofessionally is actually doing a better job of fighting hard for his client. For example, lawyers who present their arguments in an aggressive or intimidating style are often touted as bulldogs who are advocating as hard as they can for their client’s case, while lawyers who deliver their arguments in a more even-tempered manner may be seen as not fighting hard enough to win. Lawyers who are agreeable to extensions of deadlines or rescheduling case events due to another lawyer’s schedule may be viewed as pushovers or giving up control on the issue. Clients may mistake a friendly attorney who shakes everyone’s hand and asks how opposing counsel’s children are doing during a break in a deposition for being “on their side” rather than the client’s. Much of this is a misconception, and there are a lot of ways that a lawyer’s calm or pleasant behavior can benefit the client much more than raised voices or pounding fists. The Bencher article referred back to “the Golden Rule” of treating others as we would like to be treated as the foundation of professionalism, and suggested that the three main characteristics of a lawyer who behaves professionally are civility, integrity, and dignity. Each of these traits is rooted most solidly in respect – for others, for the law and justice, and for oneself. When you can view situations that arise during litigation through this lens, it is easier to see how behaving professionally produces benefits all around. A lawyer who has agreed to a request by opposing counsel to extend a deadline or reschedule a deposition is more likely to receive the same courtesy when it is his client who needs more time to answer discovery or had an unexpected scheduling conflict. A lawyer who is polite and reasonable when presenting his arguments to the court, and explains the reasons why the court should accept his position over the other side’s, is more likely to be taken seriously each time he appears before that court. An attorney who is civil and pleasant to everyone he encounters, including opposing counsel and opposing parties, is more likely to be able to work out litigation disputes without resorting to court intervention, saving clients time and money in their case. Finally, the article discussed a benefit of professionalism that is probably most overlooked by lawyers themselves – the increased positivity of the practice of law when you and your colleagues behave professionally. Situations are much less stressful when no one is screaming, making threats, or refusing to cooperate on minor issues. Lawyers are able to advocate much better for clients when they can approach situations with a clear head and reduced anxiety. Networking and interactions within the legal community are also more enjoyable when lawyers treat one another with respect both in and out of the courtroom, and this can produce benefits to a lawyer’s practice such as co-counsel or referral relationships, receiving advice from colleagues with varied experience, and learning of new opportunities for involvement in legal community organizations. So the next time you see lawyers shaking hands after just having sat on opposite sides of the table during a mediation, or presenting an argument to the court without raising voices, keep in mind that those lawyers are still advocating hard for their clients, they are just also advocating for professionalism in the practice of law.

Gout is a common type of arthritis that causes intense pain, swelling, and stiffness in a joint. It usually affects the joint in the big toe. It is the most common form of inflammatory arthritis in men, and although it is more likely to affect men, women become more susceptible to it after menopause. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report that 8.3 million were affected by gout between 2007 to 2008. The number of medicines to treat gout is limited. Uloric (Febuxostat) is a prescription medicine, offered in the United States under license by Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc., used to lower blood uric acid levels in adult patients with gout. On February 21, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), after a months-long investigation into the mortality risk associated with taking Uloric, has now mandated that Takeda update its prescribing information to contain a “Black-Box Warning” for increased risks of heart-related deaths and cardiovascular side effects. Studies showed that “in patients treated with Uloric, 15 deaths from heart-related causes were observed for every 1,000 patients treated for a year compared to 11 deaths from heart-related causes per 1,000 patients treated with allopurinol for a year.” The FDA has also limited the approved use of Uloric as a second line drug. This means that it may now only be prescribed after allopurinol (Zyloprim), another gout medicine, either proves ineffective or the patient experiences severe side effects (usually a serious skin reaction). A “Black-Box Warning” is the strictest warning put in the labeling of prescription drugs or drug products by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) when there is reasonable evidence of an association of a serious hazard with the drug. It is basically a warning with a black box around it, hence the name. It is intended to make sure that users see and understand that a drug can be dangerous. Patients should seek emergency medical attention right away if they experience the following symptoms while taking Uloric: chest pain; shortness of breath; rapid or irregular heartbeat; numbness or weakness on one side of the body; dizziness; trouble talking, or sudden severe headache. If you or someone you know is currently taking Uloric you should discuss your continued use of Uloric with your health care professional. Do not stop taking Uloric without first talking to your health care professional. If you or someone you knows has suffered any side effects involving Uloric, or any other medicine, you should also report those to the FDA MedWatch program. Finally, if you or someone you know has taken Uloric and suffered a heart attack or stroke you may be entitled to compensation and should contact a lawyer. https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm631182.htm.

50 years after the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) was adopted, the credit reporting system is still broken, as evidenced by the more than a quarter-million complaints about the three largest credit bureaus submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). The credit bureaus and the companies that supply them with information still have serious problems in ensuring the accuracy of credit reports and the dispute process meant to fix the reports remains arbitrary and ineffective. “A key reason in the structure of the system is that consumers are the commodity, not the customer of the credit bureaus. When Equifax, TransUnion, or Experian fails to respond to consumers’ problems, we can’t vote with our feet to leave,” said National Consumer Law Center attorney Chi Chi Wu. Americans frequently suffer from credit reporting abuses, such as having their credit files “mixed” with the wrong person, negative information that remains even after court judgments or legal settlements declare that a consumer doesn’t owe a debt, the after-effects of identity theft when credit bureaus and creditors don’t believe the victim, and being labeled as dead when they are alive and breathing. According to a Federal Trade Commission study, out of an estimated 208 million Americans with credit reports, about 42 million consumers have errors on their credit reports, and 10 million have errors that can be life-altering. To make matters worse, the widespread inaccuracies are rarely remedied through the dispute process that Congress required the credit bureaus offer to consumers. Some “furnishers” (creditors or other companies that supply information to the credit bureaus) still conduct antiquated, perfunctory investigations into credit reporting disputes and ignore CFPB guidance on how information provided by the consumer is to be considered. Making matters worse, the credit bureaus still fail to conduct their own independent investigations. They thoughtlessly accept what a furnisher tells them, even when what they are told is contrary to established evidence such as court judgments. So, what are aggrieved consumers to do? When you are the victim of a FCRA violation, you can sue in court. But first, you must go through the formal dispute process with the credit reporting agencies. A call or letter directly to your creditor will not do the trick. While there are options on how to file a dispute, including online, we recommend that you send a letter by certified mail to each offending credit bureau that describes the inaccurate information being reported and encloses all of your supporting documents. Of course, make a copy of exactly what you submit. If the inaccurate information is not fixed during the dispute process, you are then free to file a lawsuit in federal or state court against the credit bureau(s) and/or the furnisher of the false information. The remedies recoverable under the FCRA include all actual damages. For example, inaccurate information in your report could lead a creditor to deny you a car loan or credit card, an employer to refuse to hire you, or a landlord to decide not to rent to you. Actual damages include both economic damages and general damages, including an award for emotional distress type harm when proven. If the violation is determined to be willful on the part of the defendant, punitive damages may also be awarded. Finally, a credit bureau and/or furnisher that violates the statute by reporting false information and failing to acknowledge the merits of your dispute may be ordered to pay your attorneys’ fees. If after filing a good faith dispute with a credit bureau inaccurate information remains on your credit report and continues to cause you harm, please feel free to contact Bordas & Bordas for a free consultation.