Adler & Manson currently represents Kansas and Missouri clients who suffered strokes caused by a chiropractic spine manipulation.

If you or a loved one has suffered a stroke or other injury following a chiropractic adjustment to the neck or cervical region, we can help. Call us today at 816-216-6214 for a free evaluation.

Before you head out, be sure your vehicle is ready for the cold. Under the hood, you should have fresh antifreeze, a reliable battery and oil designed for cold weather.

Externally, keep an eye on tires, which can deflate in extreme temperatures. Be sure you have plenty of windshield wiper fluid and windshield wipers that are in good working order so you can maintain a clear view of the road.

Be sure you are equipped to handle a problem should it occur. From a flashlight, blankets and a small shovel to bottled water and snacks, taking a few minutes to prepare for being stranded can help protect your family. And of course, keep your mobile phone charged and your gas tank at least half full!

The Missouri Department of Transportation is an excellent source for winter driving tips.

This is a great day to start a habit that could save your life. When you get into a vehicle, buckle your safety belt. If you are driving, put the cellphone down and leave it there.

Only 9 states rank lower than Missouri in seat belt usage. MoDOT records show that, of the 683 vehicle drivers and passengers who died in crashes on Missouri roads in 2016, 63% were not wearing a seat belt.

Reported crashes involving cell phones in Missouri rose 17 percent in 2015. When a driver is texting and driving they are 23 times more likely to be in a critical incident. (source: VA Tech)

For more information about the challenge, visit the MoDOT site.

A 34 year-old model suffered a pinched nerve during a photo shoot and went to her chiropractor for relief. The neck adjustment allegedly tore her vertebral artery, causing a stroke. Days later, she was dead.

While chiropractic care has many benefits, medical research has confirmed the risk of vascular arterial dissection and strokes from chiropractic manipulations. Chiropractic manipulations that involve rapid turning or snapping of the neck to one side may over-stretch an artery that runs along the spine. This can tear the artery, blocking blood flow to the brain and resulting in a cerebrovascular accident (CVA) or stroke.

According to a 2011 study published by the National Institute of Health (NIH), “Chiropractic manipulation of the cervical spine can produce dissections involving the cervical and cranial segments of the vertebral and carotid arteries. These injuries can be severe, requiring endovascular stenting and cranial surgery.”

The American Heart Association warns of these stroke symptoms:

• Numbness or weakness of face, arm or leg, especially on one side of the body
• Confusion, trouble speaking or understanding speech
• Trouble seeing in one or both eyes
• Trouble walking, dizziness, loss of balance or coordination
• Severe headache with no known cause

Adler & Manson currently represents Kansas and Missouri clients who suffered strokes caused by a chiropractic spine manipulation.

If you or a loved one has suffered a stroke or other injury following a chiropractic adjustment to the neck or cervical region, we can help. Call us today at 816-216-6214 for a free evaluation.

When an insurer refuses to defend their insured or indicates that their policy will not cover damages, the law allows the defendant to drop their insurance-provided lawyer. In that case, a plaintiff may set a bench trial (in front of a judge but not a jury), with no lawyer representing the defense. The plaintiff must present their case as they would in any other trial, and the judge renders a decision. Obviously with no one there to represent the defendant, the amount awarded to the injured party can be quite large.

If the judge grants the plaintiff an award, the plaintiff must then start new litigation in order to collect the judgment—this time against the defendant’s insurance company. The injured party must prove the defendant’s insurance company is contractually bound to cover the judgment rendered against its insured.

In the past, once an insurer declined to represent its client, it lost its say in a case. The rationale was that, if the insurer gives up the chance to defend their insured and abandons them, it can’t complain about the outcome.

House Bill 339 gives insurers the right to intervene in a case in which they previously declined to represent their insured, as long as they give 30 days’ notice.

What it means to give insurers “the right to intervene” is still being debated, but this change clearly reduces the downside risk to the insurance company of denying coverage.

Adler & Manson is keeping up with these sweeping changes and we will be prepared to represent clients who are potentially impacted by them. Find out how your Missouri legislators voted on this bill here.

The ruling changes what is called the collateral source rule and allows claimants/plaintiffs to claim only the amount actually paid for medical care, rather than the full amount billed. This skews the calculation in favor of the responsible party.

Health insurance companies typically negotiate lower rates with healthcare providers. For injured Missourians with health insurance, the amount paid for their care is typically lower than the market rate, and will vary based on their health insurance provider.

Allowing injured Missourians to claim only the amount actually paid for their medical bills gives the defendant—the person or company that caused an accident—the benefit of the health insurance the injured party paid for. In essence, it treats those with insurance worse than those without it. Not only is this intrinsically unfair, it ignores a longstanding common law principle under which a defendant cannot reduce their liability by claiming that another entity has already paid for part or all of the injuries (“collateral source” rule).

The main problem is the defendant gets the benefit of the injured person’s foresight to obtain health insurance and, more to the point, the defendant receives the benefit of the injured person’s willingness to work, since people typically have health insurance through work as part of their pay package. Contrast that with the person who has no health insurance and gets charged retail. They get to use that entire charge for their case. If they choose not to work or otherwise choose not to have health insurance, they actually have an advantage with their claim. They are treated better than the person who has health insurance.

The next question is, why does one class of person (people with health insurance, which as a society we are trying to encourage) get treated differently (to their disadvantage) than the person who has no health insurance (which we as a society are trying to discourage)? This calls for a Constitutional Equal Protection argument challenging the constitutionality of the statute, as the government is taking something away from a certain class of injured people (those with insurance) and treating them differently than another class of injured people (people without insurance). Unfortunately, the Courts have traditionally upheld this type of legislation.

The new law may violate the Missouri Constitution in another way as well, as it allows Missouri to sidestep the collateral source rule and dictate the value of certain elements of an injured person’s damages instead of allowing a jury to decide that, thus interfering with the complete right to trial.

The State will argue they have a rational basis for doing this in order to the reduce plaintiff’s awards. But that seems to only line insurance company pockets at the expense of injured Missourians. When is the last time your insurance company reduced premiums?

This ruling has already been approved by the Missouri legislature and signed by Gov. Greitens. It will apply to injuries that occur on or after the effective date of Aug. 28, 2017, so our current clients are not impacted.

At this point, the only recourse Missourians have is to hire a law firm that understands and is prepared to attempt to either avoid or minimize the impact this law has upon your rights. And of course, remember this at the voting booth. See how your state representative and senator voted on Senate Bill 31 here.

According to a report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), more than 4,000 people were killed and 116,000 injured in crashes involving large trucks in 2015. This represents a 10% increase in the number of people injured in large truck crashes in a 10-year period.

The report found that, in 2015 alone, 106 Missouri residents lost their lives due to large truck accidents. In Kansas, large trucks were involved in 13.7% of all traffic deaths that year.

While NHTSA considers additional regulations, such as automatic emergency braking system (AEB) mandates, to help curb large truck accidents, the chances of Missouri residents being injured or killed in accidents caused by semi-trucks continues to rise.

At Adler & Manson, we’ve seen the impact of this growing trend first-hand, representing clients who have suffered serious injuries in trucking accidents. Whether caused by distracted driving, fatigue, roadway conditions, truck defects, weather conditions or even drivers under the influence of drugs or alcohol, the outcome can devastate families.

If you or a loved one have been injured in a large truck accident, call us at 816-216- 6214 for a free consultation.

Our Kansas City lawyers know how to get results. Contact us today for your free case evaluation.

A Known Danger

Vioxx, one of the most commercially successful painkillers in the late 1990’s, received FDA approval in May of 1999. Just four months earlier, however, Merck had launched a study called the “Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research” study, or VIGOR. Half the subjects received Vioxx, while the remaining half took naproxen, the active ingredient in brands like Aleve and Midol.

The study did exactly what Merck intended, showing a lower risk of gastrointestinal issues with Vioxx than naproxen. By November of 1999, however, it was becoming clear that Vioxx patients were nearly twice as likely to suffer severe heart problems, confirmed in a follow-up meeting in December.

Misleading Data

In May of 2000, Merck submitted the VIGOR results to the New England Journal of Medicine, but only includes information on 17 of the 20 heart attacks suffered by Vioxx patients in the study. Despite sending two sets of corrections to the NEJM, Merck didn’t tell anyone about the 3 additional heart attacks until October of 2000, nearly a year after VIGOR first revealed the danger of heart attacks. The drug was not pulled from the market until September of 2004.

WE FIGHT FOR JUSTICE

While huge, the $830 million settlement pales in comparison with the $4.85 billion settlement agreed to by Merck in the product liability lawsuits. This case serves as a reminder that major drug companies and other corporations sometimes put profits before the health and safety of others, but should also remind victims that it is very possible to hold these negligent parties accountable.

When you retain Adler & Manson, our Kansas City attorneys will work aggressively to get you the money you need and deserve. Our firm has represented the rights of injury victims and their families since 1995, earning numerous accolades which attest to our quality of counsel.

Hold negligent drug companies responsible for the injuries they cause. Call (816) 333-0400 learn how we can help.

They also believe the demand for royalties is retaliation for Apple cooperating with investigations into Qualcomm’s practices from the Federal Trade Commission, as well as testifying for investigators from Taiwanese, South Korean, and European government organizations. Notably, Qualcomm was fined $853 million by South Korea last month for violating their antitrust laws.

Apple perceives Qualcomm’s behavior as nothing short of extortion for Apple’s decision to cooperate with government entities. The lawsuit also alleges that Qualcomm has not made over $1 billion in schedule payments, which perhaps makes the lawsuit amount more understandable—though it is still an enormous sum.

WHY THIS LAWSUIT MATTERS FOR YOU

Now, Adler & Manson is not a commercial litigation firm. We fight for “the little guy,” the individual workers who have helped to make these corporations what they are. We won’t speak to the truth or veracity of Apple’s claims, but we will speak to the sort of assumptions Apple seems to be making with its lawsuit.

See, as Kansas City workers’ compensation and bodily injury attorneys, our firm is familiar with the tactics corporate America utilizes to protect themselves from lawsuits and large claims. The vast majority of injured people in this country aren’t looking for a massive payday—they just need money to pay for their medical bills, provide for their kids, and cover their living expenses while they recover. Those sums are large to everyday people, but to corporations and insurance companies, they’re relatively small.

Despite that fact, insurance companies and other corporations like to seek limits (caps) on the amount that they have to pay. This is called tort reform. They will fight for tort reforms that insulate them from paying large sums for their own negligence and mistakes, and they’ll leave families and individuals burdened with any amount over the cap. No matter how life-altering the injury, no matter how destructive the mistake, large businesses and insurance companies will fight to limit every penny that can be recovered against them in a lawsuit—even if it represents .1% of their monthly revenue.

But when those same companies have been wronged? They’ll ask for an amount equal to the GDP of a small country. All the talk about “limits” and “protecting businesses” goes right out the window.

Now, you tell us: who can afford liability caps? People with 3 kids and a mortgage who make less than $50,000 a year? Or a company that gets hit with $1 billion in missed payments and still has a successful quarter?

This isn’t an indictment of Apple—far from it. If their allegations are true, they have every right to sue Qualcomm for every withheld cent.

However, on the other side of that coin, we would expect Apple and other corporations like them to respond reasonably if any of their customers were entitled to a claim—most of which are worth less than a fraction of the $1 billion they’re demanding.

If you’re facing a corporate giant or insurance company, Adler & Manson has the Kansas City workers’ compensation and bodily injury attorneys you need to hold them accountable– just as they do to others. Call (816) 333-0400 today.

As FOX News reports, 69-year-old Diana Birch lost a kidney and must now use walking sticks to walk following her rectal surgery. She has filed suit against Britain’s National Health Services, which provided the surgery and ultimately can hold the doctor’s responsible accountable.

“Diana went to the hospital for corrective surgery and left with a life-changing injury from which she will never recover,” Birch’s lawyer told The Mirror. “As a result of her injury, her mobility has been significantly diminished and she had to sell her home as she could no longer cope with the stairs. She has been unable to return to work as director of a charity and as an expert witness in child abuse cases.”

“This Has Changed My Life Completely”

It’s been three years since the surgery and Birch, who counted travel, charity work, dancing, and judo among her hobbies, told the UK press that she is still is coming to grips with what has happened to her. “This has changed my life completely,” she told The Mirror, “and three years later I am still trying to come to terms with what has happened to me and what could have been done to prevent it or correct it before it was too late.”

Fortunately, it looks like the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust has little grounds to stand on to dispute Birch’s claims. An investigation into her procedure found that surgeons had done accidental damage to her femoral nerve after they entered the wrong part of her body. The Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust has already provided Birch some compensation for rehabilitation, but her new suit seeks damages that will address future treatment and expenses.

If you or a loved one has been hurt by a medical professional, then we invite you to contact us at Adler & Manson today. Our trusted team of Kansas City medical malpractice and personal injury attorneys not only have decades of experience but have also recovered more than $80 million for our clients.

No matter what the nature of your malpractice claim is, we’re here to help you review your options. Contact us today to speak with our team.