As the Camp Lejeune litigation progresses, the deadline to file looms- August 10, 2024. This means there are less than four months remaining to file administrative claims.

Lawyers at our firm are working tirelessly for our clients. The number of cases being handled by the firm now exceeds 10,000. Camp Lejeune litigation is complex, and it is important to stay up to date.

Camp Lejeune Status Conference Highlights

In March 2024, there were two status conferences. Some key takeaways include:

Track One plaintiff depositions have been taken, and those not taken have been set.

Depositions of fact witnesses and family members of Track One plaintiffs are occurring, with depositions of treating physicians to follow.

Plaintiffs’ leadership has filed a Motion to Compel Production of the ATSDR Water Modeling Project file, and a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.

Camp Lejeune Justice Act – Case Progression

The Camp Lejeune Justice Act allows anyone who lived or worked at the base for thirty days or more from the time period Aug. 1, 1953, to Dec. 31, 1987, and was exposed to the contaminated water on base and subsequently suffered injuries to file a claim against the U.S. government.

Claims made under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act will be handled in a two-part process.

• Step 1: Administrative claim filed with the Department of Navy
• Step 2: After the Administrative claim, the client will file either a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit against the government in the Eastern District of North Carolina – federal court.

Co-Counsel Deadlines

• May 10, 2024 – Tentative incoming referral cutoff
  • Incoming referrals will still be accepted subject to the approval of a Beasley Allen CLJA attorney.
• CLJA Cases with a Decedent
  • Probate Estate MUST be opened for Beasley Allen to accept the referral.

We take our responsibility to represent veterans and their families very seriously. We are here for YOU! Contact us today, before time runs out.

The post Countdown Continues, Camp Lejeune Litigation Updates appeared first on Beasley Allen.

After two years of unnecessary delays, and two failed bankruptcy attempts- women harmed by talcum powder are once again able to have jurors of their peers consider the damage, trauma, and pain they have suffered.

The battle against Johnson &Johnson (J&J) Continues.

The multidistrict litigation (MDL) is working towards initial trials, which are anticipated to begin later this year. Additionally, Beasley Allen lawyers are working to get a number of cases pending in various state courts across the country back on their respective trial calendars.

What is Talcum Powder?

Talc is a mineral made up of various elements including magnesium, silicon and oxygen. It is mined from the earth and then ground into a fine powder to be used as the principal ingredient in Baby Powder.

Why Is Talc Dangerous?

• Talc is mined from rock and soil, often in the same proximity and manner as asbestos and fibrous talc.
• Both fibrous talc and asbestos are known carcinogens and found in most bottles of Baby Powder.
• Exposure to fibrous talc or asbestos can lead to serious health issues, including ovarian cancer.
• In recent years, asbestos has been banned in more than 60 countries.

For more than a century, J&J marketed its Johnson’s Baby Powder, Shower to Shower body powder, and other talcum powder products as safe, even for infants. They did not tell women they were aware of studies from as early as the 1960s that were drawing a concerning link between talcum powder and ovarian cancer.

Now, they are trying to bully their way out of this battle by attacking the very people fighting to hold them accountable.

We are asking other law firms representing J&J victims to stand with us in this battle. J&J may want to persuade lawyers that the litigation is all but over, but we know better. And we know that together, we can make a difference.

The post Breaking Barriers: The Fight for Justice, & Against J&J, Continues appeared first on Beasley Allen.

Beasley Allen lawyers Dee Miles, Clay Barnett, Mitch Williams, and Dylan Martin filed a class action lawsuit against FCA US LLC – the maker of Ram trucks – after a serious safety defect in vehicles equipped with eTorque came to light.

The lawsuit alleges there is a defect with the eTorque system that causes the vehicles to stall suddenly, automatically shift to park, and automatically engage the emergency brake, without any warning to the driver.

These stalling events have been reported in all driving conditions, including on busy highways and rush hour traffic, placing the driver and others on the road at an increased risk of injury.

What is eTorque?

Simply put, eTorque is FCA’s hybrid technology. The technology is used in Jeep and Ram vehicles. It is supposed to enhance performance, efficiency, and smoothness with the following:

• Stop-Start Functionality
• eRoll Assist
• Upshift Rev Matching
• Electronic System Power
• Downshift Rev Matching
• Regenerative Braking

What Vehicles Are Affected

The following vehicles from 2019-2023 are a part of the class action lawsuit.

• Ram 1500
• Jeep Wrangler
• Jeep Wagoneer

Lawsuit At-A-Glance

• In February 2023, Beasley Allen filed the lawsuit, alleging the vehicles were defective and unsafe and that FCA knew about the dangerous defect before consumers purchased their vehicles but did not disclose it.
• In April 2023, FCA issued a recall for the 2021 model year Ram 1500 trucks with eTorque but excluded all other models and model years.
• FCA’s recall claimed the cause of the stalling events was a rich fuel condition, and they would issue a software update to adjust the air-fuel ratio.
• In response to FCA’s recall, plaintiffs worked with an independent automotive consultant to test whether a rich fuel condition was causing the stalling events. Testing indicated that it was not the cause.
• On July 21, 2023, FCA moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint, arguing in part that the claims were moot in light of FCA’s voluntary recall.
• On January 17, 2024, Judge Mathew Leitman denied FCA’s motion to dismiss.

Following Judge Leitman’s order, the parties are now beginning the early stages of discovery. We will keep you updated on the litigation as it progresses to trial.

The case is Fisher, et al., v. FCA US LLC, 23-cv-10426, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

The post Class Action Filed, FCA’s Serious Safety Defect appeared first on Beasley Allen.

Evan Allen, a lawyer in our office in Mobile, is investigating a case where a driver was paralyzed from the neck down in a rollover accident.

The 2004 Chevrolet Trailblazer that our client was driving had a problem-the roof wasn’t strong enough. This issue became very clear during a crash when the car flipped over, and the roof collapsed.

Rollover accidents are some of the deadliest and understanding their dynamics is crucial for safety. Let’s explore the link between rollovers and roof crush:

Rollover Accidents:

• A rollover occurs when a vehicle tips onto its side or roof during a crash.
• There are several causes, including tripping (when a tire strikes an obstacle), multi-vehicle collisions, and defective tires.
• Taller and larger vehicles, such as trucks, are more prone to rollovers.
• Rollovers account for only two percent of all traffic accidents but contribute to 24 percent of fatalities.

Roof Crush:

• During a rollover, the strength of a vehicle’s roof is critical for occupants’ survival.
• If the roof collapses, occupants face very serious injuries, including damage to the brain and spine.
• Roof crush occurs due to structural integrity issues with the car:
  • Defective Design: Some vehicles have weak roofs that deform and collapse upon impact.
  • Cheap Manufacturing: Poorly constructed roofs fail to withstand the force of collision and vehicle weight.
  • Improper Installations: Faulty roof installations contribute to roof crush injuries.
• When the roof collapses, the limited survival space puts occupants at risk.
• Weak roofs also increase the risk of ejection during a rollover.

The need for substantial roof structures is nothing new.  As early as the 1970’s, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration began undertaking measures to set requirements for roof strength.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 216 aimed to address the need and set a benchmark for roof strength. They established roof strength requirements using a strength-to-weight ratio (SWR).  In 2009, they increased the SWR from 1.5 to 3. Despite the increase, thousands of motorists are severely injured and killed each year due to roof crush.

With the technology and materials we have today, there’s no reason for a car’s roof not to hold up in a rollover crash.

The post No Excuse, The Quest for Stronger Car Roofs appeared first on Beasley Allen.

Ben Keen worked diligently to secure a $1.5 million settlement for our client who was injured due to the negligence of a tractor-trailer driver.

This incident could have been avoided altogether if the tractor-trailer driver had waited for the traffic signal to turn green. Instead, he hit a pedestrian.

Setting the Scene

The traffic signal at the intersection provided a walk signal for pedestrians, and the tractor-trailer driver was faced with a red light.

• While approaching the intersection, the driver observed the plaintiff on the sidewalk near the crosswalk.
• After the plaintiff entered the crosswalk, the driver began navigating a right turn on red.
• As the plaintiff tried to avoid being run over, she fell to the ground and incurred a tibial plateau fracture.
• The driver observed the plaintiff on the ground in his side mirrors as he checked the swing of his trailer and stopped.

Focusing on the Facts

The defendant, a tractor-trailer operator, initially denied any wrongdoing, setting the stage for a legal battle. Ben made sure that he held the responsible parties accountable.

• The driver saw the pedestrian and chose to ignore her. He was aware that she was close to the crosswalk and had the right of way, but he ignored her and focused on the vehicles approaching the direction he intended to travel.
• He did this because he had a red light and knew he needed to make a turn that would result in him blocking lanes of oncoming traffic.
• He made the decision to turn right, which meant putting the pedestrian at risk.

Commitment to Justice

This is just one example of our firm’s commitment to achieving justice for our clients. We have a dedicated team of attorneys, like Ben Keen, who make it their mission to right those wronged by others’ negligence, ensuring that justice is not just a concept, but a reality.

The post $1.5 Million Settlement Secured In Negligent Tractor-Trailer Accident appeared first on Beasley Allen.

In the last year, our Atlanta Office has dominated the areas of product safety and personal injury. We’re proud to say we secured over $215 million for our clients! Our goal- to help those who need it most.

Digging Deep for Justice

One of the challenges our team faced was a trucking broker liability case. These cases are hard to win because the brokers who pick the trucking companies usually don’t get blamed for accidents. But we refused to give up. We found evidence that no one had seen in court before. This evidence showed that the broker didn’t listen to the safety advice they were supposed to. Our persistence paid off, and we won a significant amount for our client.

Expert Opinions Matter

We know how important it is to back up our cases with strong evidence. That’s why we work with expert professionals who help us understand even the smallest of details. For example, we won a $15 million settlement for a family involved in a tragic trucking accident. We proved that the trucking company knew about their driver’s dangerous habits but did nothing. Our expert’s insights were key to winning this case.

A Winning Strategy

A smart strategy is key for success in court. We try to stay one step ahead and figure out the best way to tell our clients’ stories. This means also anticipating what the opposition might say and preparing our evidence first. This approach helps us make our cases compelling and clear.

Fighting for Families

We had a difficult case involving a young boy who tragically lost his life in a car accident due to the unsafe condition of the back seat where he was sitting. We took on the car manufacturer and successfully demonstrated their negligence. Our thorough preparation and presentation of evidence left no room for excuses, ultimately leading to victory for the family of the boy.

Importance of Client Dedication

Beasley Allen Law Firm is known for delivering results. We listen to what our clients need and tailor our strategies to their unique situations. Our commitment to excellence and hard work sets us apart.

In addition to these efforts, we’re constantly evolving our approach to meet the demands of complex legal challenges. We utilize the latest technology and legal resources to ensure we’re always at the forefront of legal advocacy. This commitment to innovation only helps us get our clients the justice they deserve.

Community involvement is also an important part of our practice. We believe in giving back and actively participating in community service and legal education programs. This helps strengthen our community ties while also providing us with a deeper understanding of the challenges people face. This, in turn, informs our legal practice.

For those interested in learning more about how Beasley Allen’s Atlanta Office can assist you or your loved ones, we encourage you to reach out. We’re happy to provide further information or arrange a consultation with one of our experienced attorneys.

The post Atlanta Office Secures Over $215 Million for Clients appeared first on Beasley Allen.

The Municipal Utilities Board of Albertville (Albertville MUB) has initiated legal action against several prominent corporations, including 3M Company, DuPont, and Corteva, over the contamination of the Tennessee River Basin with PFAS chemicals. These substances, known for their persistence in the environment and adverse health effects, have compromised the primary water source for Albertville MUB, impacting the community’s health and the utility’s operations.

PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are resistant to degradation, making them a persistent issue in drinking water. Linked to various health issues such as cancer and reduced birth weight, these chemicals are challenging to eliminate using standard water treatment technologies.

The lawsuit filed by Albertville MUB aims to address the financial burdens imposed by the contamination, including the costs associated with installing advanced filtration systems, property remediation, and ongoing monitoring for PFAS presence. The legal action underscores the broader implications of PFAS contamination, highlighting concerns over public health and environmental integrity.

“This is a matter of public health and environmental stewardship,” said Beasley Allen attorney Rhon Jones.

The EPA’s stringent health advisories for PFAS concentrations in drinking water emphasize the severity of the issue, advocating for virtually zero presence of these chemicals.

Represented by Beasley Allen attorneys Rhon Jones, Matt Griffith, David Diab, Elliot Bienenfeld, Gavin King, Jeff Price and Elizabeth Weyerman, Albertville MUB is advocating for justice and responsibility, highlighting the significance of protecting the environment and ensuring the safety of the community amidst extensive pollution.

The post North Alabama Utilities Board Files Suit Over PFAS Contamination appeared first on Beasley Allen.

Two Florida property owners have taken legal steps against their neighbors after sustaining significant damage to their homes due to the neighboring property’s instability.

Beasley Allen represents William B. Lawrence III and Gene P. Stienecker in this lawsuit against James Sturgeon and Yik Chun Wu, co-owners of the problematic three-story home located at 5101 Gulf Drive D in Panama City.

The case has caught public attention and involves a property widely referred to as “The Tilted House” due to its precarious condition.

The action stems from a sequence of events initiated on January 9, 2024, when a weather event, marked by tornadoes, struck the Florida panhandle. During this weather event the Sturgeon-Wu Property collapsed onto the plaintiffs’ homes. The ensuing and ongoing damage includes cracks in walls, foundation damage, and other structural issues.

The situation has escalated due to the property’s continued deterioration, with several news reports and social media posts referring to the structure as “The Tilted House.” Photographic evidence in the lawsuit highlights the progression of damage since the initial impact and underscores the direct effect on Lawrence and Stienecker’s properties. Further complicating the matter, the Bay County Building Department has deemed all affected properties uninhabitable, citing ongoing risks from the unstable structure.

Efforts to address the situation have been met with challenges. Despite Bay County’s issuance and subsequent re-issuance of a demolition permit for the Sturgeon-Wu Property, progress has been hindered. The defendants have reportedly demanded that the plaintiffs waive all liability related to the demolition work – a condition the plaintiffs find unacceptable. As a result, the damaged and dangerous structure remains, exacerbating the risk and stress for the affected homeowners.

This is not the first instance of damage caused by the Sturgeon-Wu Property. The lawsuit notes that in 2018, during Hurricane Michael, the plaintiffs’ properties were similarly damaged due to the collapse of the same neighboring property.

“Our clients have suffered significant damage to their properties due to the defendants’ negligence and failure to address the unstable and hazardous condition of their property,” Beasley Allen Attorney Rebecca Gilliland said. “They deserve a resolution that prioritizes their safety and restores their properties to their pre-loss condition. We will pursue all available legal remedies to ensure our clients receive the compensation and relief they are entitled to.”

The lawsuit seeks a resolution prioritizing safety and the restoration of the plaintiffs’ properties. It calls for the defendants to proceed with the demolition without imposing conditions that delay recovery and resolution. Furthermore, the plaintiffs seek compensation for the considerable damage and encroachment caused by the Sturgeon-Wu Property onto their homes, highlighting a broader issue of property management and neighborly responsibility.

The post Neighbors at odds: Suit Filed over damage caused by Florida ‘Tilted’ Property  appeared first on Beasley Allen.

Two Alabama counties are moving forward with a lawsuit against chemical companies, including 3M, for contaminating the Coosa River with toxic chemicals, causing substantial economic and consequential damage.

Talladega and Shelby Counties’ lawsuit against several chemical companies it contends contaminated its Coosa River water supply with toxic chemicals, including PFAS, is moving forward after a brief stay.

According to the EPA, PFAS are widely used, long-lasting chemicals whose components break down very slowly over time.  PFAS chemicals are linked to negative health effects, including cancer and decreased birth weight. PFAS cannot be removed from drinking water using conventional technology in the water treatment process.

The lawsuit names 3M, DuPont, Daikin America and other PFAS manufacturers who sold PFAS to carpet manufacturers (also defendants) in Alabama and Georgia.  Industrial wastewater produced by these customers contains high levels of PFAS, which resist degradation and migrate into the Coosa River, the source of Talladega and Shelby Counties’ drinking water.

The Talladega-Shelby water treatment plants provide drinking water directly to residential and commercial customers in Talladega and Shelby Counties, an area of the State that is experiencing rapid growth in population and industry. The plants utilize the Coosa River as its raw water source.

As a direct result of the contamination, the counties allege they have suffered substantial economic and consequential damage, including expenses associated with the future installation and operation of a filtration system capable of removing PFAS from the water, expenses associated with the removal or remediation of contaminated property, and expenses incurred to monitor PFAS contamination.

Due to a proposed MDL settlement aimed at resolving claims for PFAS contamination in U.S. Public Water Systems, this litigation was briefly stayed. The MDL settlement was approved by Judge Richard Gergel of the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in February, which cleared the way for it to proceed.

“I am pleased that we can move forward with our lawsuit against these defendants who we believe have created a significant expense for our clients,” said Beasley Allen attorney Rhon Jones. “It is important that those responsible for this contamination are held accountable for their actions.”

Currently, the EPA has issued a lifetime health advisory recommending that drinking water should contain less than 0.004 parts per trillion (ppt) PFOA and 0.02 ppt PFOS, which essentially means zero.

Along with Jones, the plaintiffs are represented by Matt Griffith, David Diab, Elliot Bienenfeld, Gavin King, Jeff Price, and Elizabeth Weyerman of Beasley, Allen, Methvin, Portis & Miles, PC, as well as Frank “Butch” Ellis and Bent Owens of Ellis, Head, Owens, Justice, Arnold & Graham and Brad Proctor of Proctor and Vaughn.

The post Shelby, Talladega Counties’ Suit Against 3M, Others to Proceed appeared first on Beasley Allen.