Law Offices of Brian Turner LLC

Archive for September, 2010|Monthly archive page


Mortgage Foreclosures Called Into Doubt

In Legal News on September 27, 2010 at 1:56 pm

Articles today in Bloomberg (9/27 Woellert, Campbell ) and USA Today (9/27 Armour) report disturbing practices by major home mortgage lenders in processing foreclosures.  Litigation against JP Morgan Chase & Co., and Ally Financial Incorported’s GMAC Mortgage has uncovered managers who signed off on thousands of mortgage foreclosures without reviewing the documents – despite representations to the courts handling the foreclosures that those documents had been reviewed by the managers before being signed.  One manager for GMAC Mortgage admitted to signing off on 10,000 documents per month, while a manager at JP Morgan Chase testified a group of eight managers signed off on over 18,000 foreclosures per month – and only reviewed them if an employee asked a specific question or raised a concern. 

The shoddy practices of these lending giants call into question many thousands of foreclosures, evictions, sales and titles.  Attorneys general across the country are beginning investigations into the practices of GMAC Mortgage, which had halted foreclosure proceedings in 23 states after their employees’ practices were brought to light.  Lawsuits brought by homeowners who were wrongfully foreclosed upon by these lenders are pending in several states. 

If you have questions about a foreclosure proceeding, please go to our “about us” page and contact The Law Offices of Brian Turner, LLC.

Contaminated Baby Formula Recalled for Beetle Infestation

In Legal News on September 24, 2010 at 10:35 am

Abbott Laboratories and the Food and Drug Administration have announced a recall of certain lots of Abbott’s popular Similac powdered infant formula.  This recall involves formula produced at the company’s Chicago, Illinois manufacturing plant.  Under routine examination, a beetle infestation was discovered in the plant.  The FDA has determined that while the formula containing these beetles poses no immediate health risk, there is a possibility that infants who consume formula containing the beetles or their larvae could experience symptoms of gastrointestinal discomfort and refusal to eat as a result of small insect parts irritating the GI tract.  The recalled products include powdered formula sold in the 8 ounce, 12.4 ounce, or 12.9 ounce cans. To determine if a specific product or container is affected parents or caregivers should contact Abbott’s consumer hotline, (800) 986-8850, 24 hours a day, seven days a week or check the website at www.similac.com/recall/lookup


Initial BP Spill Report Points Fingers at Others

In Legal News on September 9, 2010 at 9:36 am

On September 8, 2010, BP released a 193 page report of its initial findings related to the Deepwater Horizon explosion and spill (http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9034902&contentId=7064891).  In what many media outlets are calling a preview of how BP intends to defend legal claims brought against the oil giant, the report lays primary blame for the explosion at the feet of Transocean and Halliburton.  Not surprisingly, those companies are crying foul. 

The report focuses on eight findings of fault that lead to the explosion.  BP shares the blame in only one of those findings.  The reason for this is not surprising – as The New York Times reported today, “Central to BP’s legal strategy will be the need to rebuff claims that the company acted with gross negligence. The difference between gross negligence and negligence for BP, in this case, may be more than $15 billion in additional civil penalties under the Clean Water Act.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/us/09spill.html?_r=2&hp) The Times article includes an informative graphic summarizing the defensive position outlined by BP in the report. ttp://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/09/09/us/20100909-oil-spill-blame.html?ref=us

As the report was being made public, Alabama’s Attorney General, Troy King, was meeting with lawyers for BP in what he called an “introductory meeting” to begin discussions regarding the suit Mr. King has filed against BP for tax revenues lost by the State since the oil spill occurred.  As quoted in today’s Birmingham News, Mr. King stated, “Some will, no doubt, sound the alarm that the lawsuit is premature. As Alabama’s lawyer, I say that if, anything, based on BP’s broken promises, their history of saying one thing and doing another, and now, new information that they have been secretly working to gain a legal advantage, further delay can only further damage our people.”  (http://blog.al.com/live/2010/09/troy_king_bp_alabama_oil_spill.html#incart_hbx)

The report leaves many questions unanswered, and no doubt will lead to the release of conflicting reports from the other involved companies and investigative bodies.  What is clear is that BP is digging in for a long fight – one that will have long lasting effects for the State of Alabama and the rest of the Gulf Coast.


The Danger of “Fracking”

In Legal News on September 3, 2010 at 9:02 am

As the Gulf Coast continues to struggle with the impending environmental consequences of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil leak, another energy harvesting technique that could have potentially devastating effects on Alabama’s ecology is beginning to draw attention, thanks in part to the recent HBO documentary, “GasLand.” 

“Fracking” – or more precisely hydraulic fracturing – is a method of drilling for natural gas developed by Halliburton that involves pumping extreme volumes of water, sand and a host of chemicals at high pressure into the ground, fracturing the rock structures below to allow easier access to natural gas deposits.  It is a process that has been used in Alabama for a long time – and contaminated streams and wells have been reported in areas near fracking operations since the 1990s, though the Alabama Oil and Gas Board claims that there have been no confirmed findings of contaminated groundwater. 

A recent article in the Birmingham News spells out the extent of fracking is taking place in Alabama.  (http://blog.al.com/businessnews/2010/07/hydraulic_fracturing_scheduled.html)  The article notes, “Energen, which also owns the Alagasco utility, has a lot resting on unconventional gas wells which require fracking. The company has spent about $40 million leasing 400,000 acres around the state from landowners whose property sits above natural gas shale formations. Most of the attention in recent years on Alabama shale gas has been in Tuscaloosa, Bibb, St. Clair, Cullman and Etowah counties.”  

With the increased practice of fracking comes the increased risk of contamination of the fresh water aquifer in areas where the practice is employed.  Around the United States, reports of water contamination have followed in fracking’s path.  Contaminated drinking wells, including wells where the water is so contaminated it has become flammable, have been reported in areas where fracking has been employed.  Chemicals commonly used in the fracking process include diesel fuel, benzene, methanol, formaldehyde and hydrochloric acid.  The Environmental Protection Agency is looking at this dangerous practice which, as of today, is exempt from federal regulation. 

If you believe that you have been exposed to a toxic substance, or want more information about toxic exposure, please go to our “about us” page and contact The Law Offices of Brian Turner, LLC.


Bad News for Diabetes and Diet Drugs Continues

In Legal News on September 2, 2010 at 10:15 am

It has been a busy summer for the manufacturers of two highly prescribed drugs – Avandia and Meridia – and not in a way those pharmaceutical companies would like. 

Avandia, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKine, is a top-selling diabetes drug that has been in the news for quite some time.  This summer, Glaxo announced it was going to resolve over 10,000 lawsuits claiming the drug caused heart attacks or strokes in users.  The settlements to date will cost the company $460 million.  And the case against Avandia continues to grow.  A recent advisory panel of the FDA voted to allow Avandia to stay on the market with more warnings about its risks; however, that same panel found overwhelmingly that the drug increases the risk of heart attack compared to other diabetes drugs.  At the same time as the panel was considering the possible recall, information was made public that Glaxo had known for several years that study data confirmed the increased risk for heart attacks and strokes in patients using the drug.  A recent article in TIME (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2010028,00.html) outlines the history of this dangerous drug and the steps taken by its manufacturer to keep it on the market as it made billions of dollars per year from its sale.  As lawsuits continue to be filed by patients who have suffered strokes or heart attacks while on Avandia, the FDA has not made its final decision on whether it will follow the recommendation of the advisory panel to keep Avandia on the market or whether it will be recalled.  A final decision is expected soon. 

The diet drug Meridia faces similar questions over its link to increased risks for heart attacks and strokes in patients.  Meridia is manufactured by Abbott Laboratories and was first approved for use in 1997.  The drug works by altering brain chemicals to suppress appetite.  On September 1, 2010, an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe1007993) called for the recall of Meridia due to its risk profile.  An FDA panel is scheduled to meet on September 15, 2010, to begin a review of Meridia.  As posed by Dr. Rudolph L. Leibel of Columbia University in a recent New York Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/02/health/research/02diet.html), the issue is that, “A small number of patients lose considerable weight while taking Meridia and therefore benefit enormously from the drug…but a far larger number of people get no benefit from the drug, and some of these patients may suffer heart attacks and strokes as a result of taking it. The question is do you withdraw the drug to protect the large number of individuals who have no benefit and could have a bad response and thereby eliminate the opportunity for that small number of people who respond well?”  The article also notes that at least one drug safety official at FDA thinks a prior decision by the agency to allow continued marketing of Meridia was misplaced.  

If you or someone you know has been injured by a defective drug and are seeking more information, please go to our “about us” page and contact The Law Offices of Brian Turner, LLC.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.