Jun 4, 2015

Posted by | 0 Comments

Zofran and Cleft Palate

An infant’s palate, or the roof of their mouth, is fully formed by the tenth week of pregnancy. Palates form from the edges first then fuse in the center to form a solid roof. When this fusion process is disrupted, a hole is left behind and a cleft palate is formed. Typically the cause is never found. Genetic factors are usually considered, but environmental factors can be a cause as well. Environmental factors can include smoking, drinking, and being excessively overweight during pregnancy, but increasingly is taking unsafe medication.

Zofran is a drug that can be prescribed to women who are experiencing excessive and/or violent morning sickness. It was originally designed for cancer patients who were undergoing treatments and works by suppressing the chemicals that are responsible for nausea and vomiting. Recently, however, there have been connections between the taking of Zofran during pregnancy and the development of certain birth defects, including cleft palates. Inadequate research was done prior to prescribing it to expectant mothers. The FDA has since released a warning against its use by pregnant women, but many doctors prescribe it to their patients anyway.

The direct connection between taking Zofran and the development of cleft palates is still unclear, but Zofran lawyers are looking into the issue. Cleft palates can cause undue suffering to both the child and their caretakers. Infants with cleft palates are typically unable to breast feed since the hole in their mouths can fill with milk and cause them to aspirate or milk to come out of their nose. Older children will have a difficult time speaking since the roof of your mouth is necessary for making speech sounds. Surgery is the only solution and sometimes multiple surgeries are required. The effects of taking Zofran during pregnancy are still unclear, but it is important to know the risks involved.

Read More
Mar 26, 2015

Posted by | 0 Comments

Considerations for Selling your Mineral Rights

There are some circumstances when selling your mineral rights is the better option than leasing. True, when you sell your mineral rights you can no longer benefit from the yields when there are any. This can be truly frustrating, but mineral rights are highly speculative at best, and most often do not even pan out. Leasing keeps your finger in the pie just in case there are minerals in commercially viable quantities, and you still own the rights.

On the other hand, if you only own part of the property that has mineral rights, a lease can make it very complicated for you and your co-owners. For one thing, negotiating a lease will involve more people. For another, even if you get a lease contract that everyone can live with, the paperwork and administrative burden to make sure that everybody has a fair share of the proceeds and royalties may be too heavy for the money you eventually get for your share. This is especially true when the property is not yielding a lot yet, so the royalties may be next to nothing. As an article on The Mineral Auction website puts it, it may be more trouble than it is worth.

Another scenario where selling your mineral rights makes more sense than leasing it out is when you need a significant amount of cash at once. It could be to buy into a business, buy new property, pay for college, or pay off debts. You only get money from a lease on a piecemeal basis, and it is obviously going to be much less than a purchase, so selling your mineral rights is the best option for you.

If you do decide to sell your mineral rights, you have to be sure that you are getting the right price for it. You should consult with an oil and gas attorney if you get an offer to purchase and discuss why the price is right or not. It is easy for an amateur to get confused over the whole thing, so you may want to leave the selling to the professionals. There are companies that specialize in putting mineral rights up for auction and getting the best deals for both sellers and buyers.

Read More
Mar 24, 2015

Posted by | 0 Comments

Wet Reckless in Plea Arrangements

You are charged with driving under the influence (DUI) in and it seems that there is a wall of evidence against you. Your lawyer is advising you to make a “wet reckless” plea. What is that?

A wet reckless plea is admitting that you were driving after having had a few drinks. The formal description for this plea is “reckless driving with alcohol involved.” The conditions for a typical wet reckless plea is that the blood alcohol content (BAC) level was just at or slightly lower than the legal limit, the driver had no prior DUI charges or convictions, and there was no accident. A wet reckless plea is a lesser offense than a DUI and usually results in lower fines, no prison time, and no criminal record.

Some states are neutral about wet reckless pleas. There are no laws pertaining to such pleas, which mean that a good DUI lawyer can make a case for you. However, it can be hard to pull it off if your lawyer is not experienced in criminal defense. There is a lot of pressure on prosecutors to crack down on DUI, so they will not be willing to agree to a lesser charge unless the lawyer is very convincing.

In Texas, the situation is different. About a dozen states specifically prohibit against a wet reckless plea, and Texas is one of them. A driver charged with driving while intoxicated (DWI) in Texas faces particularly harsh punishment. However, according to the website of Brent Horst, Attorney at Law, a savvy criminal defense lawyer can still work out a way to reduce penalties for a DWI, such as probation.

It would be better to avoid a conviction, of course, but you will usually need a good lawyer to do that. Because of the potentially damaging and long-term consequences of a DUI or DWI conviction, drunk driving defense should be a priority for you.

Read More
Mar 21, 2015

Posted by | 0 Comments

Distracted Driving is Deadly

Many car accidents happen for the most innocent of reasons. There has been such grim attention paid to drunk driving that people tend to be relaxed about texting, talking on their mobile phones, eating, applying makeup, or even changing the radio station. However, any kind of distracted driving can lead to an accident. It only requires a few seconds of inattention for it to happen.

The thing is, there are laws against drunk driving but not for the above causes of distracted driving. This may be because it is possible to get physical evidence of driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence. There are field sobriety tests, breathalyzer, and blood tests to confirm if a driver is unfit to drive. What kind of evidence can you get for changing a CD at the time of an accident?

This makes it harder for a Des Moines car accident lawyer to prove a case of negligence against a defendant who was texting, for example, at the time of an incident in Iowa. Unless the defendant admits to it, or allows the lawyer access to phone records, then that is pretty much it for the easy route. According to the website of Spiros Law, P.C., at the most, the victim of distracted driving will be able to get some compensation for medical expenses, but this will still depend on the circumstances.

It seems unfair but that is how the system works. A layperson with no legal background will have practically no hope of getting compensation without good legal representation. If you are in this situation, your best move is to consult with a car accident lawyer in your state.

Read More
Mar 19, 2015

Posted by | 0 Comments

Statistics on Accidental Injuries and Deaths in the US

People have accidents all the time, and in many cases they result in serious injury or death. The numbers amply attests to this. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regularly publish statistics on accidental injuries and deaths in the US. It is based on data from the US Census Bureau, and the latest data available is for 2013.

According to the CDC, there were 31 million people admitted for emergency medical treatment for accidental injuries in 2013. There were 130,557 deaths resulting from accidental injuries broken down into 30,208 for unintentional falls, 38,851 from unintentional poisoning, 33,804 from motor vehicle accidents, and 27,694 from other causes. Death due to accidental causes ranks 4th as the leading cause of death in the US.

Many of those who sustain injury in an accident and survive may be facing extended medical treatment, temporary disability, and perhaps permanent medical problems as well. The repercussions can be life changing. In most cases, health insurance covers most of the medical bills, but not all, and those that are not covered by any insurance at all suffer the most. It adds insult to injury when the incident is completely preventable, and occurred solely because of the recklessness of another party.

Fortunately, US law protects victims of negligent behavior. However, as Madison, Wisconsin personal injury attorneys are well aware, proving that another party is liable for one’s injuries is not an easy task. It requires extensive legal knowledge and extensive experience to present a personal injury suit effectively.

If you sustain serious injuries because of a negligent accident, you do not have to suffer it in silence. Find an experienced personal injury lawyer in your area and get compensation for the damages you sustained.

Read More
Mar 18, 2015

Posted by | 0 Comments

Executors under Probate Law

The role of the executor of an estate is to make carry out the will of the deceased when it comes to the disposition of possessions and property. In most instances, the executor is someone with legal or financial expertise because the administration of an estate entails many legal and financial tasks, although law does not require it. Because it can take a lot of time to execute a will, the executor is typically entitled to a commensurate fee, and executors are authorized to spend money to pay for debts, taxes, funeral expenses, insurance premiums, operational costs of the estate, and other financial obligations the deceased may have left behind. They are also authorized to sell assets that have not been specifically willed to someone. This access is in place until such time as probate ends. However, they have no authority to appropriate any property or cash for their personal benefit.

Unfortunately, it is very easy for an executor to abuse their position of trust, and this is a breach of their fiduciary duty. The only way to determine if this has happened is to have a regular accounting of all proceeds and expenses made in a given period. Concerned parties may also request the probate court to demand an accounting from the executor if they suspect the executor of wrongdoing. The court will then investigate, and if it finds the executor to be in breach of fiduciary duty, the court will revoke the access and assign someone else to be the executor.

But what of the money that has already been stolen?

This is where a Chicago probate lawyer can come in handy. The probate court will not be get involved in this but beneficiaries of the estate can file a separate lawsuit in civil court against the executor for breach of fiduciary duty. To get their money back as well as court expenses, the plaintiffs will have to prove that the executor had betrayed knowingly and willfully the beneficiaries’ trust. However, there is a statute of limitations for bringing a civil action for breach of fiduciary duty, so it is important to file a case as soon as possible. Consult a probate lawyer in your area to find out what you need to do.

Read More
Mar 16, 2015

Posted by | 0 Comments

Take Your Pick: Blood Clots or Gallbladder Disease

Women who take oral contraceptives largely do so to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and there are many options out there. They certainly did not sign up to risk potentially serious blood clots or gallbladder disease when they decided to take Yaz, Yasmin, or Ocella.

It is widely accepted that some drugs have serious adverse side effects. According to the website of Williams Kherkher, drug manufacturers are supposed to make thorough clinical trials of these drugs to find out everything they can about it before marketing it to the public. The doctors then discuss this with their patients prior to implementing treatment. If the benefits outweigh the dangers, and there are no alternatives, or the alternatives are not as effective, then it becomes an acceptable risk.

However, when the drug company fails to test their products adequately, or suppresses information about negative results, they can be held liable for any adverse side effects that may occur once a drug is already available to the public. This is what happened with the birth-control pills containing drospirenone. It included Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella, all of which significantly increased their risk for forming serious blood clots (leading to deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism). Drug manufacturer Bayer failed to give adequate warning about these risks, which led to the filing of numerous personal injury lawsuits. However, blood clots is not the only problem for these women.

A 2011 study that came out in the Canadian Medical Association Journal indicated that contraceptive pills containing drospirenone was associated with a higher risk (20%) of developing gallbladder disease compared to those containing levonorgestrel and other birth control pills. The conclusion was based on the results of an analysis of the medical records of 3 million women who took birth-control pills for at least 6 months. The risk increased to 30% for women who took drospirenone for a minimum of two years.

Read More