You mean they didn’t do that already?

Hip joints are important.  Not just to be seen at on the weekends with all the cool kids, but more importantly, to help in walking and stability.  (See what I did there?)

Artificial hip maker Johnson & Johnson knew 40% of its hip implants would fail within in five years.  These are hip joints where metal contacts with metal, causing pain and metal ions to be shaved off into the blood stream.  Even though it knew this, the corporation continued to sell the defective hips to consumers.


Under a new proposal, makers of artificial hips would now have to prove they were safe BEFORE they could selling existing hips or obtain approval for new all-metal designs.  Darn regulations!

What does this mean to you:

Insurance companies and corporations like Johnson & Johnson hide evidence and information that makes them look bad.  (Read: causes them to actually be accountable for the injuries they cause.)  Talk to a lawyer before ever attempting to communicate or negotiate with one of these companies.


Think inside the (jury) box


While not all jury deliberations are watched by hordes of people in underground bunkers with wiretapping equipment and video monitors like those in movie The Runaway Jury, they are serious nonetheless – and meant to be secret.  But in the age of Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites, jurors posts or internet research about a case can have dire consequences.

I cannot believe it. An iPhone 4?!?

Judges around the country are concerned.  In one case, a juror’s Tweets may have even let a murder off of death row.  Some states have outlawed the practice.  There are proposals online for jury instructions to help steer jurors in the right direction.

What does this mean to you:

Our civil justice system depends on fair and impartial jurors deciding cases based on the facts presented.  Trial lawyers should keep abreast of these constantly evolving technologies to best represent their clients.


Peel back the layers of the union

Union membership has dropped off dramatically, both in Ohio and around the country.  But, a recent piece in the TImes suggests, not only that middle-class prosperity is directly tied to union membership, but also that there should be a constitutional right to unionize.  After all, fictitious persons called corporations band together all the time to advance their own interests.  Shouldn’t actual people be able to do the same?

Fight the power.

Contrast this view with the so-called “right to work” movement in Ohio, or as some have referred to it, and as it will heretofore be known as on FSBD, the “right to work for nothing.”

But, “geez,” you say (because that is how you talk).  “It’s the RIGHT to work.  They’re giving you a right – they’re not taking anything away!  How could anyone be against the right to work?  I want to have the right to work.”  First of all, as we’ve already established, it’s the right to work for nothing.  Let’s get that straight.  Second, this is nothing more than framing an issue at its finest.  In political framing, black is white, cats are dogs, and the right to work for nothing counts as a right to work.

What does this mean to you:

Like SB5 before it, “right to work for nothing” is a transparent attempt to strip union membership even further and de-fund the labor movement.  Union members and union supporters should have a short memory when this issue eventually surfaces in Ohio.

And the winner is…

While FSBD primarily will focus on topics related to product liability and dangerous products, we will also delve into issues of good lawyering, trial techniques, and litigation trends.  The Wall Street Journal blog has an interesting piece on predicting the value of a particular case when it goes to trial.  The study concludes that experienced trial lawyers are generally fairly accurate at gauging a case’s value in front of a jury.  For the full story, click here.

You know they are just checking Facebook on those screens.