Monday, 24 January 2011

Lehman Brothers Is Still Struggling to Exit Bankruptcy

It was the biggest bankruptcy that California bankruptcy lawyers had seen in the history of the country, and 28 months later, there is no indication that those files will be closed anytime soon. Lehman Brothers has announced that it doesn't expect its bankruptcy plans to be approved soon. The company expects to have to pay out $60.1 billion to settle debts with creditors. It's a small amount, considering that creditors are owed about six times that.

According to bankruptcy lawyers for the company, Lehman Brothers expects to have a final bankruptcy plan in place before the end of 2011. Creditors, who have been waiting in line for the payouts, will now have to wait until the bankruptcy plan is approved. Until a bankruptcy court approves of the plan, no payout can be made to creditors.

The complex mess that Lehman Brothers has found itself in has meant more delays as the company tries to close the door on its bankruptcy, which some believe was one of the triggers for the current recession. Many creditors oppose the plan. They include a group formed by billionaire John Paulson, which in December offered a rival liquidation plan for Lehman Brothers to emerge from bankruptcy. According to John Paulson, the bankruptcy plan at Lehman Brothers offers no advantages to bigger creditors than others.

There are approximately $369 billion worth of creditor claims against Lehman Brothers. A federal judge is likely to allow creditors to pursue $322 billion worth of these claims. Besides, there are civil claims that are still unresolved.

Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy on September 15, 2008. It was once the fourth-largest investment bank in the U.S., and the bankruptcy filing was the biggest in U.S. history. The company is currently suing J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Barclays and others in order to recover tens of billions of dollars with which it hopes to pay creditors.

Thursday, 20 January 2011

Study Shows Occupants of Badly Rated Vehicles More Likely to Die in Accident

A new study proves to Los Angeles car accident lawyers that you may have a better chance of surviving a side impact crash if you buy a vehicle that has a "Good" rating by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. A study by the Insurance Institute indicates that drivers of vehicles that received a poor safety rating from the agency had a much higher risk of being killed in a real-world accident than drivers of those vehicles who were given a better rating.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety analyzed side impact crashes, and found that a person's odds of dying in an accident, in which a car collides with the driver’s side, are lowered by 70% when the person is driving a car that has been rated "Good" than "Poor." The occupant of a car rated "Acceptable" by the agency is 64% less likely to die in an accident, while the driver of a vehicle that has been rated "Marginal" is 49% less likely to die in an accident than a vehicle rated "Poor."

The Insurance Institute's analysis controlled for the age of the driver, gender, vehicle type and weight. This is the agency’s first look at how its ratings correspond with actual accident data in the real world. Side-impact accidents are some of the deadliest accidents, accounting for 27% of vehicle occupant deaths in the country in 2009. These accidents are much deadlier than front impact accidents, because occupants have very little protection shielding them from fatal injuries during impact. Typical thinking has held that injuries in side-impact accidents can be avoided through the use of side airbags. However, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety analyzed how the structure of the vehicle protects occupants during a side-impact accident.

The analysis shows that vehicles that have a higher rating from the agency do a much better job protecting occupants from serious injuries in an accident than those who have a poor rating.

Wednesday, 19 January 2011

Minnesota Women's Golf Coach Accuses University of Sexual Orientation-based Discrimination

As the debate on gay rights and gay marriages heats up across the country, California discrimination lawyers are also coming across more instances of homosexual men and women coming forward to sue institutions they believe adopt discriminatory practices against them based on their sexual orientation. In the latest such instance, Katie Brenny, the former associate women's golf coach at the University of Minnesota has filed a lawsuit against the university, saying that she was discriminated against because she was a lesbian. Her lawsuit which has been filed in Minneapolis seeks in excess of $50,000.

The lawsuit specifically mentions the director of golf at the university, John Harris. According to Brenny, the discrimination began as soon as she arrived at the university to take up a position as an associate golf coach. She says that, right from the moment she landed, she was not allowed to begin her duties, and was not given an opportunity to coach the team. She was not allowed to travel with the team to the tournaments that had been scheduled that fall. She was restricted to a maximum of one e-mail a day to her team members, and was forbidden from helping golfers with their swing practice.

She claims the working environment became increasingly hostile toward her, to the extent that she could not perform them in the limited duties that were assigned to her. It was only later that she found out that she was being discriminated against because of her sexual orientation. Soon after the discrimination started, Brenny was handed over a renewed job description that would now have her becoming a “coordinator” with the team. Under the new job description, her responsibilities would now include updating the team's Facebook page and website. Needless to say, it was a far cry from the assistant coaching job that she had signed up for.

Tuesday, 4 January 2011

Prevent Injuries Due to Hospital Medical Errors

Being admitted into a hospital is never a pleasant experience, especially when you hear of the high rates of medical errors in American hospitals. Preventable medical errors kill approximately 98,000 American patients every year. However, Arizona medical malpractice attorneys have sometimes found that patients who take a proactive role in their own hospital experience may have a lower risk of suffering the devastating impact of medical errors.

So, what can you possibly do to reduce the chances of becoming the victim of a medical error in a hospital? First and foremost, you must make sure your doctor has plenty of experience performing the exact kind of procedure that is due to be performed on you. Don't be impressed by qualifications and experience on paper. Ask for the numbers of such procedures he has performed at the same facility and on patients with the same health condition as yours.

It helps to become involved in your hospitalization experience. If you're being admitted to hospital in a condition that prevents you from being unable to communicate with doctors and nurses, then take along a patient safety advocate who can deal with medical health professionals on your behalf. It could be a relative or friend. The safety advocate will talk to the doctors about your condition, make sure that you're taking the right medications and in the right doses, and perform other essential duties on your behalf.

Many medical errors occur during shift changes. Ask your nurses about the shift change timings, and be especially alert during these times. Learn how to study your own medical chart. Make sure that you take a list of all the medications you are currently taking before you check in at the hospital. Before nurses and doctors approach you, make sure they are using gloves. Many hospital infections can be traced to a simple lack of hand hygiene.

Some studies point to an increased risk of medical errors in the month of July, when large numbers of new medical residents join hospitals. Other studies show that there is a greater risk of a fatal medical error on a Friday, compared to other days of the week.

Monday, 3 January 2011

FDA Focuses on Health Risks from Male Sexual Enhancement Drugs

An increasing number of recalls and warnings related to a number of sexual enhancement dietary supplements prove to California personal injury lawyers the need to set strong regulations for this burgeoning industry. The nutritional supplement industry in the US is a massive one and a large portion of the profits from this industry are derived from male sexual enhancement products. Last week, the Food and Drug Administration took action against two different types of sexual enhancement products.

The FDA has issued a warning, cautioning consumers not to use Rock Hard Extreme and Passion Coffee sexual supplements, because of the risk that these contain an ingredient that is similar to one that is found in Viagra. Lab tests have confirmed that these so-called dietary supplements contain an ingredient called sulfoaildenafil, a chemical compound which is chemically similar to the sildenafil that is present in Viagra.

The sildenafil in Viagra can interact with nitrate-containing medications prescribed for persons suffering from diabetes, hypertension and cardiac diseases, and can dramatically lower blood pressure. This is the reason why the use of Viagra is not recommended for men who suffer from diabetes, hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases. If a person taking Rock Hard Extreme and Passion Coffee also takes these nitrate-containing medications, then he could be at a high risk of his blood pressure dropping to dangerously low levels.

Earlier in December, the FDA also warned about erectile dysfunction pills called Man Up Now, asking men to stop using them immediately. This warning is also related to the presence of sulfoaildenafil in the pills. According to the FDA, it has not received reports of any adverse events arising from the use of these pills, and the warning is a cautionary measure. However, California pharmaceutical liability attorneys would advise anyone using these male sexual enhancement products to consult with their doctor, especially anyone who is on nitroglycerin in the form of pills, gels and sprays.

Sunday, 2 January 2011

Alabama Allows Sex Offender Alerts via E-Mail

A number of states, including Alabama, are experimenting with e-mail systems that allow local law enforcement agencies to alert residents to a sex offender moving into the neighborhood. Residents may be alerted via e e-mail. Earlier, it was up to residents to find out if there was a sex offender moving into their neighborhood. Now, with this e-mail system, people can simply sign up to receive alerts when a sex offender is released from prison, and is moving into their neighborhood.

All a person has to do to receive an alert is to provide his address and e-mail address. He will receive an e-mail alert when a sex offender registers a local home address, or begins employment at an address close to his. Residents can also get alerts when a sex offender begins school in their area. People don't have to submit only their home addresses to receive an alert. They can also submit school and day care center addresses, to be alerted when a sex offender released from prison moves into these areas. Users can also set the radius within which these alert systems will be triggered, and these can range from 500 feet to 5 miles.

Any Alabama sex crimes lawyer would wonder why sex offenders who have served their sentence are subjected to such special treatment. This is just another example of the extreme and life-long punishment that the justice system in Alabama metes out to anyone accused of sex crimes.