The pills are advertised as offering almost 100 percent protection against pregnancy, but this rate of success is dependent on the customer taking the pills in the proper order.

To Pfizer’s chagrin, a recent shipment of birth control pills contained pills that were placed in each package in the wrong order, a terrible mistake that led to the massive recall, according to a report from CBS News.

Typically, women take 21 birth control pills with active pregnancy-preventing ingredients that are intermixed with seven placebo pills. The pills are typically color-coded and women are instructed to not to mix the placebo pills with the active pills.

In theory, if the pills are out of order, the company’ manufacturing error could lead some consumers to take the birth control pills in the wrong order, thereby raising their risk of getting an unwanted pregnancy.

Users of Pfizer’s products, however, should not be too alarmed. According to sources, the only drug that was affected was Lo/Ovral-28 and its generic equivalent, and the company estimates that only 30 packets of the drug were flawed.

So, even though the company believes only a handful of drugs were flawed, Pfizer took extreme caution in recalling more than one million birth control pills.

And, in more good news for consumers, the recalled drug is not a particularly popular form of birth control, as it ranks 64th in the country in total sales. The generic version of the drug, though, is ranked in the top 30, according to CBS News.

People who use Lo/Ovral-28 should immediately contact their doctors to learn what steps they need to take to get back on reliable birth control pills.

In addition, users of Lo/Ovral-28 who are curious about whether they can file a defective drug lawsuit against Pfizer must recognize one important thing: for a customer to file a tort claim against the company, she must be able to prove that she suffered an actual injury.

Of course, the actual injury need not be a pregnancy—the fear of pregnancy could suffice, but such a clam would likely be a shot in the dark. The limited number of actually defective products will likely limit the number of personal injury claims that Pfizer will have to face.

Nevertheless, if you use Lo/Ovral-28 and are concerned about the potential consequences of the drug, contact a local injury attorney today for more information about your legal options.

The woman, Michelle Wells Fischer, developed a permanently disabling disorder—a condition known as “short gut syndrome,” which is as ghastly as it sounds—after doctors removed most of her intestines during emergency surgery in 2003, according to a report from the News and Tribune.

The emergency surgery was necessary because the woman’s surgeon, Dr. William H. Garner, had postponed her scheduled surgery based on new medical information.

Fischer had originally seen Dr. Garner in June of 2003, complaining of severe abdominal pain. At the time, Fischer was an otherwise healthy 21-year-old who was working as a special education teacher.

At her first appointment, which occurred on a Friday, Dr. Garner allegedly recognized the need for surgery, but decided to delay it until the following Monday.

This decision, however, proved costly, as Fischer was taken to the hospital two days later and had to have emergency surgery to remove most of our intestines due to her development of ischemic bowel disease, also known as dead bowel.

Most humans have roughly 22 feet of small intestine, but Fischer’s emergency surgery left her with only a few feet of working intestine, which causes her to experience constant hunger and bloating.

In her personal injury claim, Fischer contended that she would have been able to keep much more of her intestines if she had been able to receive surgery on the day after she was diagnosed with the life-threatening condition.

Apparently, the delay may have allowed her condition to progress to the point where it compromised most of her stomach.
A jury in Clark County, Indiana agreed with Fischer’s version of the story, and issued a $1.5 million verdict that is believed to be the second largest jury verdict in the history of Clark County.

Despite this lofty sum, Fischer will only be able to receive about $1.25 from Dr. Garner (or, more specifically, his insurance company) due to Indiana medical malpractice laws that place a cap on damages in such claims.

Still, the money will go a long way towards paying for Fischer’s pain and suffering, although she will likely be racked with large medical bills for the rest of her life as she struggles to live in her compromised condition.

According to a report in the Chicago Tribune, the settlement brings an end to years of legal wrangling over the personal injury lawsuit, and observes speculate that this settlement signals a potential end to a much larger dispute involving 800 other people arrested during the protest.

News of the settlement was announced this week by U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall, who had been prepared to preside over the large class action lawsuit at trial.

Instead of opting for trial, however, the city admitted defeat and agreed to settlement, which could potentially limit the losses the city may have suffered at trial.

Still, the city may have to pay a tidy sum to the plaintiffs, though the financial details of the settlement were not publicly released. Nevertheless, Chicago officials wanted to avoid the costly mistake of taking these disputes to trial, as other cities have recently learned.

In addition to the financial aspect of the wrongful arrest settlement, a member of Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s admitted that the case has changed the way the city’s police force handles large gatherings and protests.

The mayor’s staff cites the police department’s handling of the recent Occupy Chicago protests as evidence of its changed tactics. During the recent Occupy protests, Chicago police gave protestors a chance to leave the streets, and only arrested them if they wanted to make a political statement.

Some city officials, however, remain skeptical that the police force has sufficiently evolved to handle the inevitable large protests that will arrive in Chicago this May, when both G-8 and NATO summits hit the Windy City.

When the G-8 economic summits have taken place at other American, large protests always ensue, and there’s little reason to believe that Chicago will be an exception.

However, other city leaders are confident the police can handle the summits. According to Alderman Patrick O’Connor, “I think if you look at the way we’ve comported ourselves since then, obviously we haven’t had any large protest, but we took lessons from what happened the last time and I think they’ll be incorporated this time.”

At the very least, police will have to avoid the errors of the 2003 protests, when they allowed protestors to gather without a permit and then began indiscriminately arresting bystanders without giving them a warning that they were acting illegally.

Such strong-arm tactics proved costly for the city, and must be eliminated from the force’s repertoire before the city is inundated with an estimated 10,000 protestors this spring.

If things get frisky, Chicago police may have to add more payments to the $5.4 million they’ve had to shell out for police misconduct in the past six months.

The claim is in response to almost 200 car accident lawsuits filed by Toyota drivers who alleged that the company was responsible for selling shoddy equipment. Specifically, the lawsuits allege that several Toyota cars were designed in a manner that caused sudden, uncontrollable acceleration.

A filing this week by the Japanese car company in its first court battle revealed that the company plans to pin the blame for the accidents on its consumers, according to a recent report from the Huffington Post.

This first personal injury lawsuit, which was filed by the family of Paul Van Alfen, a Utah resident who died when his car veered off an interstate highway and plunged into a stone wall, alleges that Toyota is responsible for the accident.

The deceased man’s son and wife survived the accident, and reports indicate that they will testify that Van Alfen was unable to brake the car after it suddenly accelerated.

In its filing, however, Toyota contested this claim and alleged that the black box (a data recorder similar to the ones found in airplanes) of Van Alfen’s 2008 Toyota Camry revealed that the driver never attempted to push the brake.

This evidence, if deemed admissible by a judge, could prove fatal for the Van Alfen’s case, as it would prove Toyota’s claim that the accident was due to poor driving, not faulty brakes.

However, attorneys for the plaintiff contend that the black box of a car is not as reliable as its counterpart in airplanes, and should not be used to depict an accurate portrayal of the events leading up to the crash.

Specifically, the plaintiff’s attorneys claim that the black box only records a few seconds worth of data, and that this limitation prevents it from accurately depicting the events that led up to the crash.

As a result of this limitation, some experts on car accident cases warn that Toyota will have to cite other evidence to support their claim, such as skid marks, tire tracks, physical evidence on the vehicle, and eyewitness reports.

Of course, while Toyota claims it is not at fault, the plaintiffs will also be able to point to the company’s recall of roughly 8 million vehicles over fears of sudden acceleration.

While this may have simply represented extreme caution by the company, it does suggest that Toyota was afraid that some of its accelerators or brakes may have actually been faulty. Only time will tell whether Toyota’s prudence will come back to haunt it in court.

The trainer, 34-year-old Corey Hill, who lives in New York City and runs popular fitness dance classes, was injured in November when he pressed an elevator button to travel to his apartment building’s lobby and started free-falling to the lobby floor, according to a report from the New York Post.

After the accident, Hill told sources that it was “the scariest thing I’ve ever experienced in my life,” which was notable because Hill has also been sky-diving.

Apparently, the elevator eventually slammed to a halt before it reached the lobby floor, which has led to a dispute between Hill and the property manager.

According to the property manager, Hill spoke with the concierge after the accident and “did not need medical or police attention. By his own admission, Hill says that he thought he was going to be fine, and he did not request an ambulance.

The next morning, however, Hill could barely get out of bed, and he discovered that he had lost most of the feeling in his legs. Doctors diagnosed Hill with paresis, which prevents the brain from communicating with the legs.

After spending several weeks recovering at Beth Israel Hospital, Hill has become more mobile, but he still needs braces to get around town, and he may never regain his ability to walk without some sort of aid. In addition, he is so afraid of taking an elevator that he relies on burly friends to haul him up the stairs to his apartment on the 26th floor.

Due to his injuries, and the physical nature of his work, Hill has been unemployed since the accident and his landlord has started eviction proceedings because Hill is unable to pay his rent.

Because of his injuries and mental anguish, Hill is seeking a personal injury settlement from the manager of his apartment and two elevator companies, Century Vertical Systems and Transel Elevator.

Sources indicate that Transel Elevator also worked on an elevator just before a fatal accident involving an ad executive in New York last month, which suggests that the company probably has a large legal team prepared to fight the charges.

The case, however, will not be an automatic win for Hill, as the property manager appears ready to fight, as well. According to the manager, Hill’s lawsuit has no merit and the apartment building has video evidence that refutes Hill’s claim.

In addition, Transel Elevators claims that it has not done work on the elevators in the building since April 2010, although this claim does not necessarily excuse them from liability for the malfunctioning elevator.

In their lawsuit, which was filed at the end of the year, the two religious leaders claim that they were booted from the plane based solely on their appearance, according to a report from WREG News in Memphis.

The series of events that led to their dismissal from the plane were bizarre. First, according to the men, Masudar Rahman and Mohamed Zagloul, they passed through an initial security checkpoint with no trouble.

Then, the men, who were dressed in traditional religious garb, were subjected to a second search at the checkpoint, which they also passed with no incident.

However, shortly after the men boarded their flight, which was headed to Charlotte, the plane returned to the gate and the two religious leaders were asked to step off the flight.

After they left the plane, the men were subjected to a third search, which again did not reveal anything suspicious, and they were told they could re-enter the aircraft. The pilot, however, refused to let them on the plane, so the men missed their flight and a conference they were supposed to attend in Charlotte.

According to their lawsuit, Rahman and Zagloul claim that they were given no explanation for the pilot’s refusal to let them board the plane. The men believe that they were discriminated against based on their beards, their clothing, and their foreign appearance.

Since the incident, the two men have had no trouble flying (which they frequently do, as Rahman is a renowned professor at the University of Memphis), which adds even more mystery to their shunning by Delta Airlines.

When interviewed by local media, the men claim that they simply want to prevent similar discrimination from striking other people, and they do not suggest that they are only seeking monetary damages.

The airline, however, is staying quiet. In a brief statement, the company that owns Delta Airlines says that it cannot comment on a pending lawsuit, but it did claim that its employees always act in the best interest of passengers’ safety.

The issue of racial profiling at airports has drawn a considerable amount of attention in recent years, and many people with foreign attire or appearances have complained of discrimination at various American airports.

If you or a loved one has been the victim of such actions, consider contacting a local injury attorney to learn more about your legal rights. There is a fine line between protecting the safety of passengers and allowing reasonable freedom of movement for other citizens. Sometimes airlines have a hard time recognizing this distinction.

Hogan, whose real name is Terry Bollea, claims that his former wife, Linda Bollea, is guilty of defamation because she falsely accused him of abusing her and engaging in a gay affair, according to a recent report in the Tampa Bay Times.

In his lawsuit, which runs almost 20 pages in length, Hogan says that Bollea’s recently published book, “Wrestling the Hulk—My Life Against the Ropes,” contains false allegations that threaten Hogan’s career.

Hogan also claims that his former wife’s biography was published in an ill-fated attempt to revive her career, which hit a rough patch after the couple’s reality television show was canceled a few years ago.

For her part, Bollea, who divorced her famous husband in 2009, claims that the allegations in the book are true, and that Hogan is filing the lawsuit in an attempt to improve his public image and, if possible, regain money he lost in the divorce.

Sources indicate that Hogan was particularly upset by Bollea’s allegations that he repeatedly abused her by choking her and dragging her by the hair.

Bollea even supported these claims on several televised talk shows, where she claimed she was concerned about becoming a “statistic” and meeting the fate of Nicole Brown Simpson, who was famously killed in 2004, though her husband, former football star O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder charges.

When asked by reporters why she hadn’t contacted police after the incidents of domestic violence, Bollea claimed that she didn’t want the family’s “livelihood” to be harmed—this, presumably, means that she didn’t want to affect Hogan’s wrestling career.

In addition to the charges of abuse, Hogan is also seeking a personal injury settlement for his wife’s allegedly false accusation that he had an affair with another male wrestler.

Both the abuse and sex allegations, according to the lawsuit, are false, and they “harmed the reputation of Mr. Bollea, exposed him to distrust, hatred, contempt and ridicule,” and hurt his ability to make money in the future from his various business interests.

Hogan wants to pursue a jury trial and is also seeking an injunction that would prevent his former wife from making similar accusations in the future.

Critics of the lawsuit, though, are quick to note that Linda Bollea took more than 70 percent of the couple’s liquid assets in their divorce settlement, which may have infuriated Hogan more than the allegedly false accusations.

Nevertheless, the court will address the case on the merits of Hogan’s claims relating to the defamation of his character, regardless of his need for cash or revenge.

The latest clash between students and police was fostered by the introduction of a protest movement inspired by Occupy Wall Street, Manhattan-based protest against the current economic order that has capture the nation’s attention in recent months.

The Occupy Wall Street movement has spawned hundreds of similar protests across the country, with almost every major American university seeing at least a small group of dedicated protestors promoting their cause.

In the wake of this trend, it’s little surprise that students at UC-Berkeley, known for its students’ relatively liberal stances on social issues, created a robust Occupy movement on their own campus. It seems, however, that the protest has created serious tensions at the school.

According to a report from the San Jose Mercury News, a group of two dozen protestors recently filed a file a personal injury claim against UC-Berkeley for an alleged instance of police brutality directed against students who tried to establish an Occupy site on campus.

The lawsuit was filed this week in federal court, and the complaint alleges that, this November, 24 students and community members were subjected to jabbing, clubbing, and hair-pulling by police officers who were aggressively using their batons.

The unfortunate clash between the protestors and the police occurred after the students had attempted to set up tents on the campus next to Sproul Plaza.

Video footage that was allegedly taken of the incident was widely distributed on the Internet, which led to a public outcry and may provide key evidence during the police brutality case.

After the footage was released, the school’s chancellor issued a public apology on the University’s behalf, and the school launched several official investigations aimed at discovering exactly how the incident occurred.

Sources indicate that the school has not officially responded to the lawsuit, but a University spokeswoman reminded reporters that the school is still actively pursuing numerous investigations.

This incident and lawsuit, alas, are not the only turmoil striking a California school. A few weeks ago, students at UC-Davis made national headlines after they were pepper-sprayed by an allegedly overzealous campus police officer.

Protests over this incident culminated in a bizarre scene on the UC-Davis campus, when the school’s chancellor left a late-night meeting and walked to her car through two rows of completely silent students.

With Occupy protests continuing to gain steam on California campuses, and the state’s students facing skyrocketing tuition and fees due to the economic crisis, clashes between students and campus officials may grow in frequency. With any luck, though, both students and police will refrain from resorting to violent tactics.

In court papers filed last week, the accuser claims that Sandusky sexually abused him more than 100 times over a four-year period. In addition, the alleged victim says that Sandusky threatened to harm the boy’s family if he told others about the abuse.

The man who brought the lawsuit remains anonymous, though he is now 30 years old, according to a report in USA Today. The man claims that Sandusky began abusing him when he was 10 years old.

This week’s lawsuit represents the first civil action taken against Sandusky, whose alleged abuse of multiple children in Pennsylvania has captured national headlines and shattered the tranquility of the otherwise quiet Penn State campus.

Sandusky is already facing 40 criminal counts of sexual abuse towards at least different victims. The criminal charges are separate from the sexual abuse lawsuit filed by 30-year-old accuser last week.

The alleged victim was a participant in the Second Mile program, a charity created by Sandusky for at-risk children. Several other accusers of Sandusky have also had connections to the Second Mile charity.

Sources indicate that the lawsuit claims Sandusky abused the boy in several different locations, including a locker room at the university, inside Sandusky’s home, and during a trip to a football bowl game for Penn State.

Through a statement released by his personal injury attorney, the alleged victim said he was seeking a sexual abuse settlement because he didn’t want other kids to be “hurt and abused by Jerry Sandusky.”

The man also said, “I never told anybody what he did to me over 100 times at all kinds of places until the newspapers reported that he had abused other kids and the people at Penn State and The Second Mile didn’t do the things they should have to protect me and the other kids.”

The man became convinced to come forward after he felt “even more tormented” when he learned “of so many other kids” who were allegedly abused after him.

In his lawsuit, which was filed against Penn State, Second Mile, and Sandusky, the man is seeking at least $400,000 in damages.

The failure of both Penn State and Second Mile officials to detect and report Sandusky’s alleged activities has raised a national furor.

Columnists across the country have derided former Penn State head coach Joe Paterno for failing to take adequate measures to protect innocent children from the alleged abuse delivered by Sandusky.

Sources indicate that Penn State, Second Mile, and Paterno himself will almost certainly have to defend themselves in more civil lawsuits arising from the incident.

Finding beetles in baby formula, however, is not a widely reported problem. But concerns about contaminated baby food may soon grow after a recent grisly incident in Utah.

According to the Salt Lake Tribune, a couple from Sandy, Utah has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Abbott Laboratories and its subsidiaries after the company allegedly produced an infant formula that contained bits of dead beetles and beetle larvae.

The lawsuit says that the parents, Adam and Amanda Oettli, relied on the company’s assurances that its products were secure when they fed their child Similac baby formula for at least eight months beginning in March 2009.

In the lawsuit, the parents allege that they found small parts of beetles in the formula, and that these insect pieces caused their child to become very ill for a period of several months.

The couple alleges that their baby suffered from a wide range of ailments, including constipation, stomach discomfort, projectile vomiting, severe gas, extensive crying, loss of appetite, and intensive acid reflux.

Sources indicate that the lawsuit also alleges that the child continued to experience symptoms for months after it stopped using the formula. The defendants may use this information, though, to argue that the formula may not have directly caused the baby’s ailments.

Despite questions about the validity of the lawsuit, the parents’ case may be strengthened by Abbott’s prior admission that some of its products may have contained insect debris.

In September 2010, the company recalled its Similar powder products after an internal company review found that there was a “remote possibility” that a small beetle was present in “the product produced in one production area.”

Even though this statement appears to be drowning in cautious corporate jargon, it does serve as a startling admission that the company was aware of possible contamination by beetles in its signature baby formula product.

And, in further harmful evidence for the defendants, at least four different complaints were filed with the Food and Drug Administration about Similac products before the company announced the recall.

These facts, according to the couple’s lawsuit, suggest that Abbott was aware of the possible contamination while it was selling the product. The plaintiffs allege that Abbott only called for a recall after the public became aware of the beetle contamination.

This certainly wouldn’t be the first time that a corporation was reluctant to recall a popular product due to a small risk of contamination, but it should be noted that, if these allegations are true, Abbott could face a rude awakening in court.

In their lawsuit, the parents and their personal injury attorney are seeking an unspecified amount of damages.