IWP Delivers Peace of Mind in Addition to Excellent Prescription Care

The below article is a guest blog post courtesy of IWP:

iwp logoAs THE Patient Advocate Pharmacy, IWP provides convenient home delivery prescription medications to those injured on the road, on the job and everywhere in between so they can return to a productive life. Our simple, hassle-free process is designed to give your clients the highest quality prescription care with little to no upfront cost. By delivering peace of mind to your clients, IWP allows you to keep your focus where it belongs – your firm.

We eliminate the headaches associated with obtaining prescription approvals and take the administrative hassles off your hands with a team that is well versed in the state-specific nuances and clinical needs of workers’ compensation, auto and personal injury claims. Our dedicated account team manages the claims process and monitors prescription shipments ensuring your clients are never without their medications. For you this means fewer calls from distressed patients, fewer interactions with the insurance carrier, and a lot less paperwork.

We are experts in not only providing quality care, but working on behalf of injured individuals and our business partners to ensure their rights are never compromised. Our Government Affairs team monitors pharmacy-related legislation and regulations and works closely with policymakers to benefit you and your firm. We take action so that any legislative reforms are favorable to attorneys, medical providers, and ultimately the interest of the patient.

IWP makes it our mission to deliver peace of mind in addition to prescription medications, so your clients can focus on what’s important – getting better. For more information about IWP and our services, please visit www.IWPharmacy.com.

Cancer Increases Among Ground Zero Workers

american flag in the wind

The New York Post reported over the weekend that 2,500 9/11 First Responders have gotten cancer and are seeking compensation for their illnesses. Many may remember the fight to have cancer recognized as part of the illnesses covered in the Zadroga Act. That fight led to 50 types of cancers being added to the list of illnesses covered.

According to the New York Post story, the World Trade Center Health Program tally is 1,655 responders with cancer. That number increases to over 2,500 among the firefighters, EMT, and NYPD officers who were at Ground Zero. While the Victim Compensation Fund is working through the thousands of applications, the process has still been too slow for the responders. Some who are gravely ill are hoping to get approved so their families can use the money. According to the story, 115 claimants with cancer have received over $50 million.

The way the VCF is structured, qualified applicants will receive only 10% of their award amount initially. The remaining larger portion will be distributed in late 2016, which can make it difficult for those who have expenses piling up. As a solution to this potential cash flow dilemma, RD Legal Funding is offering advances on the second payment. For more information, please contact Joseph Genovesi, President of RD Legal, at 201-568-9007, ext. 140. Or visit http://www.legalfunding.com/eligible-cases/zadroga-bill-settlement-funding/ for further details.

Photo Credit: ladybugbkt via Compfight cc


Written by Lulaine Compere

9/11 Victims Unaware of Tax Breaks

taxes road signThe New York Daily News reported over the weekend that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had not adequately informed 9/11 victims that their disability income was not taxable. Since that information was not disclosed, many of the victims were unable to claim tax breaks to which they were entitled.

According to the story, a law passed that designated disability income as not taxable. Because the IRS did not update their public guidance, clients of tax preparers, tax firms, and individual filers did not receive tax breaks since they failed to file within the three year window. In the story, several 9/11 victims were quoted stating that IRS agents were not helpful in assisting them find information about the breaks.

Senator Gillibrand, a strong advocate for the community, is pushing the IRS to update their guidance so victims and survivors can get the benefits of the tax break. It does not appear that victims who missed the window will have the opportunity to claw back and get what is owed to them.

Photo Credit: 401(K) 2013 via Compfight cc


Written by Lulaine Compere

Urethane Antitrust Litigation (04-md-1616)

golden gavel
Currently, Dow Chemical is appealing the $400 million verdict and judgment they were handed regarding their polyether products. There are estimations that the appeal will take years to resolve but in the interim, Dow was required to post a $400 million bond in exchange for putting the judgment on hold while the judgment is on appeal. No distribution will be made to class members until the appeal is resolved.

In 2013, The Dow Chemical Company lost a class action lawsuit against plaintiffs who accused them and other companies of fixing the prices of Polyether Polyol Products during the period of January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2004 in violation of the federal antitrust laws. The company was handed a $400 million dollar verdict by a jury and a court entered a final judgment against Dow of over $1 billion which includes the interest generated since the verdict was rendered.

Dow along with other companies like Bayer AG, BASF Corporation, and Huntsman International, LLC were defendants in the lawsuit. The plaintiffs reached settlements with all the other defendants except Dow, who took the case to trial and lost. According to the settlement website, the plaintiffs received two distributions of settlement funds.

Below are some additional sources of information that may be of interest:

http://www.ksd.uscourts.gov/urethane-antitrust-litigation/

http://polyetherpolyollitigation.com/

Photo Credit: walknboston via Compfight cc


Written by Lulaine Compere

NFL Settlement Cap Removed; Deal Better for Both Sides

nfl logo
The ongoing litigation involving former NFL players whose game-related head injuries have led to or may lead to cognitive and neurological damage has recently reached a tentative deal that makes concessions to both the former players and the NFL. This deal uncaps the damages fund allocated to former NFL players who will require future medical treatments, yet will allow the NFL more discretion in deciding which claims are deserving of attention.

Now that the cap is removed from the tentative settlement, at least $765 million will be set aside to cover future medical costs of the 20,000 retired NFL players who may be affected by game-related concussions and head traumas. The amount of money allocated to each player will be determined by a “compensation grid [, which] weighs a man’s age, cognitive condition and NFL experience. A young retiree with Lou Gehrig’s disease would receive $5 million, a 50-year-old with Alzheimer’s disease $1.6 million, and an 80-year-old with mild dementia $25,000. Those numbers are discounted for those who played fewer than five years.”

The concession fund is intended to exist as a potentially refillable account that will cover current and future NFL players who, under the allegations of this case, were not properly warned about the dangers of head traumas. Brett Romberg, who played center for Jacksonville, St. Louis and Atlanta between 2003 and 2011, claimed that the most protection players received was painkillers from the trainers.

According to New Jersey attorney Craig Nitnick, who represents approximately 1,400 of the players involved in the lawsuit, lifting the cap off of the settlement amount allows the fund to act as a sort of insurance policy for former players. “They’re protected,” he says of players whose symptoms have not developed fully, but who may see more serious diagnoses in the future. “They may not get financial recovery right now, but as soon as those symptoms get any worse…they will be financially compensated and medically treated.”

The tentative settlement now also includes terms that would allow plaintiffs to participate in suits involving other professional football associations for a failure to adequately warn players about the dangers of concussions and head traumas. This is significant, as there is currently a lawsuit against the National Federation of State High School Associations for this reason. Because of this, and because of the concessions granted to both the plaintiffs and the defendants, it seems more likely that Judge Anita Brody will sign off on the most recent terms of the settlement.

Photo Credit: Maxim34374 via Compfight cc


Written by Shayna Keyles

$1.3 Million UConn Sexual Assault Settlement

wooden gavel of justiceThe New York Daily News reported a $1.3 million settlement the University of Connecticut reached with plaintiffs over the mishandling of their sexual assaults that took place on campus. According to the article, the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit based on retaliation in violation of Title IX. They claimed their accusations were disregarded and the complaints were not dealt with.

Sexual assault on campus has been highlighted in recent years in the media and this case was closely watched by many. The University admitted no wrongdoing in the settlement. According to school President Susan Herbst, “This lawsuit may have been settled, but the issue of sexual assault on college campuses has not been.”

Photo Credit: StockMonkeys.com via Compfight cc


Written by Lulaine Compere

ClaimStat Claims Management Tool

george washington bridge
New York City’s Comptroller Scott Stringer is planning to roll out “ClaimStat”, a data-driven claims management tool that will help the city identify patterns and practices that lead to lawsuits against the City. The goal is to help protect citizens and save taxpayer dollars.

Comptroller Stringer was quoted in the media saying that legal claims against the city are out of control. According to the “ClaimStat” website, judgments and settlements against the New York City Police Department (NYPD) in 2013 totaled $137.2 million. In addition to the NYPD, “ClaimStat” tracks claims against other city agencies like the Department of Parks and Recreation, Health and Hospitals Corporation, Department of Environmental Protection, and the Department of Sanitation.

“ClaimStat” has an interactive tool on the website where users can zoom in and see where the greatest number of claims are coming from. They also segmented the types of claims from personal injury, tree-related claims, sanitation vehicle property damage claims, and sewer overflow claims. According to the Comptroller’s office, other cities like Portland, Oregon are using similar data-driven approaches to better deal with claims management.

Photo Credit: Captured By Ciara via Compfight cc


Written by Lulaine Compere

2014 GTLA Auto Torts Workshop

palm treeJoseph Genovesi, President of RD Legal Funding, will be attending the 2014 Georgia Trial Lawyers Association Auto Torts Workshop. The event is being held from Thursday, July 17th through Saturday, July 19th at the Omni Amelia Island Plantation in Amelia Island, Florida. Some events of interest include:

  • Motorcycle Injury Litigation
  • Trying Low Impact, Soft Tissue Cases Efficiently and Effectively
  • Repair Shop Liability and Other 3rd Party Sources of Liability in Auto Cases
  • Couch v. DOC: What Part of Contingency Fees Can Be Recovered Under 9-11-68
  • Law Firm Management and Marketing
  • Effective Use of Treating Physicians in Motor Vehicle Accident Cases

There will also be a golf tournament, family cookout, and beach party with an open bar and volleyball. To view the schedule in its entirety, please click here. You can expect to earn 9 hours of CLE credits, including 3 hours of trial and 1 hour of ethics.

If you happen to be in the area, please stop by the RD Legal Funding booth. We’d love to say hello and discuss how our innovative and affordable post-settlement funding solutions can benefit your law firm’s cash flow. Safe travels and we hope to see you there!

Lawsuit Loan: A Misnomer that Matters

The below is a guest blog post courtesy of Legal Funding Central:

lfc-logoAt Legal Funding Central, we’re on a mission to educate the world about legal funding, which is why we created LFC360, an information site rich with news, guides and resources for all the many types of legal funding out there. We dedicate a significant portion of the site’s real estate to dispelling myths, falsehoods, and misconceptions about legal funding, the worst being when people think legal funding is a loan or use the misnomer lawsuit loan.

In fact, legal funding is not a loan – it’s an investment in a person, small business, or attorney’s legal case. And like all investments, if a case loses, there’s no further recourse against the person or entity that took the money.

The popularity of the term “lawsuit loans,” despite being a wholly inaccurate way to describe legal funding, provides insight into the different interested parties battling over legal funding. It’s been said that to name something is to own it. And that’s what opponents of legal funding are attempting.

Opponents of legal funding use the term lawsuit loan as a pejorative in order to make people feel like they may go into debt by obtaining it (which is never true since you never owe more than you get from your case, whether you’re a litigant or an attorney). Opponents also know that loans are subject to usury laws, something legal funding isn’t since the government typically doesn’t interfere with the rate of a return an investor gets on its investment.

However, detractors of legal funding aren’t the only guilty party to use the phrase “lawsuit loan.” Because lawsuit loan is a simple way to express something that consumers already have familiarity with (i.e. loans), proponents regularly abuse it, too. Admittedly, “Lawsuit loan” does succeed at painting a broad picture of what you’re getting – money against your lawsuit, so the problem is systemic. In fact, according to Google, lawsuit loan is one of the most frequent terms used by people searching for legal funding.

Legal funding can go by many names – lawsuit funding, legal finance, third-party funding, and many other permutations therein. Of course, at Legal Funding Central, we are partial to the term legal funding, but in reality there is no perfect term. However, there definitively is a wrong term, and that’s any that refers to legal funding as a loan. It does a disservice to the industry, mischaracterizes what legal funding is, and most of all provides ammunition to the people who are financially interested in seeing it die. It may be easier to refer to legal funding as lawsuit loans or legal loans, but it’s more dangerous, too, and it must stop.


This guest blog post was written by Dylan Beynon, co-founder of Legal Funding Central.  Legal Funding Central helps litigants and attorneys find the best legal funding to fit their case and their needs. LFC also provides educational news, information, and resources through its standalone content portal LFC360.

Medical Misdiagnosis

blue caduceusMedical misdiagnosis is a serious issue which can result in a patient’s death. In general, medical misdiagnosis can lead to lawsuits against the doctor and the hospital from the affected family. It falls under medical malpractice. Village Voice published a story titled Type Miscast: An Elmhurst Doctor’s Type 2 Diabetes Misdiagnosis Results in the Death of a Six-Year Old Girl, where Claudialee Gomez-Nicanor died because her doctor misdiagnosed her diabetes.

Nicanor’s story includes issues her doctor (Dr. Arlene Mercado) had in regards to her record, the suffering Nicanor went through just before she died, and how Mercado’s fatal misdiagnosis led to Nicanor not receiving the treatment she needed. Nicanor’s family ended up suing Mercado and winning their lawsuit. According to the story, Nicanor’s family won $100,000 for economic loss, $400,000 for her daughter’s pain, and $7.5 million in punitive damages.

The judge still has to decide the total amount Mercado has to pay. The story ends with Mercado keeping her license and administering treatment to a room full of patients. Medical malpractice is extremely dangerous and should have consequences. People who have suffered because of malpractice should push for their rights and demand justice and compensation in civil court.


Written by Lulaine Compere