Archive for September, 2010

More Than 90,000 Could Be Affected By Hip Replacement Device Recall

Thursday, September 16th, 2010

Hip replacement devices could be linked to frequent surgeries after a recall of 90,000 systems manufactured by DePuy Orthopaedic Devices. The recall was announced by DePuy due to concerns from the Food and Drug Administration. Personal injury attorneys from the Sarasota-based law firm Kirk Pinkerton will be available for consultations regarding the recall, including William E. Robertson, head of the firm’s personal injury department.

The two systems involved in the recall include:

1. ASR XL Acetabular System which is a hip socket and

2. ASR Hip Resurfacing Platform, which is a partial hip replacement device.

Components in both systems were the subject of a voluntary recall which began on August 26, 2010.  The company has already stopped selling both products in the United States. Reports from the FDA cited by the New York Times and other media outlets indicate that the agency had concerns the implants would require repeat surgery in approximately 10-12% of all patients.

DePuy itself says that all 93,000 patients who received the devices would need to have their surgeons monitor their progress on a yearly basis, a step not initially required in the product literature. The company also noted that the revision rate, or percentage of patients needing additional surgeries, was higher than that of other hip replacement devices in its class.

Bloomberg wire services note that similar product recalls have led to medical device liability cases throughout the world in the wake of the recall. However, there is no indication in a court of law that similar lawsuits will yet bring damages to clients.

If you would like to consult a personal injury attorney regarding the DePuy hip replacement recall or other medical devices, call Bill Robertson at Kirk Pinkerton toll-free: 1-800-439-8911.

DISCLAIMER:

The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the matters in which results and testimonials have been provided. All results of cases handled by Kirk-Pinkerton are not provided and not all clients have given testimonials. The results and testimonials provided are not necessarily representative of results obtained by Kirk-Pinkerton or of the experience of all clients or others with Kirk-Pinkerton. Every case is different, and each client’s case must be evaluated and handled on its own merits.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Hip Recall Information, Legal | Comments Off

When It Comes To Employees, An Ounce Of Prevention Is Worth A Pound Of Cure

Tuesday, September 14th, 2010

Written by, Kurt E. Lee, Board Certified Business Litigation Lawyer

I generally have the benefit of seeing things with hindsight. As a trial attorney, I am often called by businesses after they encounter a problem with another business, experience problems among their partners or shareholders, or discover that a former employee is wooing their customers or using their trade secrets. Because a rogue former employee can do significant harm to a business, businesses should consider having employees sign a non-compete and confidentiality agreement as a condition of their employment.

Non-Compete Agreement

A “non-compete agreement” (or, sometimes, a “restrictive covenant”) is exactly what it sounds like: it is a stand alone contract or a provision in a larger employment contract that seeks to prevent an employee from competing with his employer after his employment terminates. Generally speaking, employees agree, for a certain length of time following the termination of their employment, to not work in a similar business within the geographic areas where the current employer does business.

A non-compete agreement does not impose any extra burdens upon an employer. In Florida, an employee can be a party to a non-compete agreement without obligating the employer to employ such employee for any specific period of time. Non-compete agreements might be written so that an employee might still be terminated “at will.”

In Florida, a non-compete agreement does not need any special consideration. In other words, employers do not need to pay employees a bonus or something “extra” to compensate them for agreeing to the terms of the non-compete agreement. The fact that an employer continues to employ the employee is sufficient consideration for a non-compete agreement.

The ease by which an employee might be prevented from becoming a direct competitor of an employer is, however, tempered a bit by Florida law. For example, an employer cannot permanently prevent a person from competing. An employer who only does business in Bradenton, Florida, cannot restrict a former employee from working in Alaska. An employer also cannot prevent a former employee from working in an area or field in which the former employer does not do business. In brief, non-compete agreements must reasonably protect legitimate business interests and Florida Statute, s. 542.335, and the cases interpreting this statute provide direction in this regard.

Confidentiality Agreement

A “confidentiality agreement” (or, sometimes, a “nondisclosure agreement”) is also what it sounds like: it is a stand alone contract or a provision in a larger employment contract that seeks to prevent an employee from disclosing the employer’s confidential, non-public, and proprietary information.

A confidentiality agreement is helpful to employers even though Florida law already prohibits an employee from taking an employer’s “trade secrets.” “Trade secrets” are information which an employer attempts to keep confidential and which has independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to and not being readily ascertainable by others.

A confidentiality agreement can supplement Florida law by more specifically or more broadly defining what information is not to be disclosed to subsequent employers. Customer lists and “leads” from the former employer might be specifically identified as being information which the former employee cannot disclose to his new employer. A confidentiality agreement might describe how certain information is to be carefully handled and require an employee to return confidential information to the employer upon termination of employment. A confidentiality agreement might also permit the former employer to enforce its provisions through an injunction.

Conclusion

Businesses should take the relatively simple action of requiring that employees sign and agree to non-compete and confidentiality agreements now to prevent a terminated employee from significantly disrupting its business later. When it comes to employees, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Posted in Legal | Comments Off