Personal Injury News: Pick Of Last Month: December-2024
US Agrees $116M Settlement for Abuse Cases at CA Prison
The U.S. government will pay approximately $116 million to resolve lawsuits filed by over 100 women who endured abuse and mistreatment at a now-closed federal prison in California, infamous for rampant staff-on-inmate sexual misconduct.
Dubbed the "rape club," the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) in Dublin became a focal point of scandal and reform.
$1.1 million to each plaintiff
The settlements allocate an average payment of $1.1 million to each of the 103 women who sued the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) over their treatment. Concurrently, a federal judge granted preliminary approval to a settlement in a separate class-action lawsuit, mandating the BOP to implement reforms, including external monitoring and public acknowledgment of the abuse at FCI Dublin.
One of the plaintiff's testimony
“We were sentenced to prison, not to be assaulted and abused,” said one plaintiff and former prisoner. While she expressed hope the settlement would aid survivors in their recovery, she emphasized that monetary compensation cannot undo the harm, free survivors still incarcerated, or reunite families separated by deportation.
Bureau of Prisons' statement
In a statement, the Bureau of Prisons condemned all forms of sexual abuse, reiterating its commitment to safeguarding inmates, staff, and the community. The settlements address the first wave of lawsuits stemming from FCI Dublin’s abuse scandals, but additional cases remain unresolved. Individual settlement amounts were determined through an independent process that included comprehensive interviews with each woman.
Investigations
Investigations exposed a deep-seated culture of abuse and cover-ups at FCI Dublin, persisting for years. This revelation triggered congressional scrutiny and promises of cultural and systemic changes from the BOP. Plaintiffs described the environment as a "pervasive culture of sexual misconduct and retaliation," alleging that the BOP ignored clear warning signs and reports of abuse at the low-security prison located 21 miles east of Oakland.
Organizations supporting the lawsuits
The lawsuits were supported by organizations including the California Coalition for Women Prisoners, Dublin Prison Solidarity Coalition, and Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund.
Transgender plaintiff's testimony
Among the plaintiffs were individuals who shared harrowing accounts of abuse by prison staff. One transgender former inmate alleged that the warden molested him and coerced him into touching his genitals in a recreation area deliberately out of surveillance camera view. The warden allegedly attempted to silence him by providing drugs.
Another plaintiff's testimony
Another woman claimed her supervisor on the prison’s recycling crew engaged in sexual acts with her in a storage container and continued the abuse through unauthorized communications after her release to a halfway house. A third plaintiff recounted being assaulted by a safety administrator, who trapped her in his office. When she reported the incident, the investigator dismissed her complaint, saying, “If it’s not on camera, then you’re beat.”
More employees face charges
Since 2021, at least eight FCI Dublin employees have faced charges of sexually abusing inmates. Five pleaded guilty, two were convicted at trial, and one case remains pending. The former warden, convicted in 2022 for abusing three inmates, is serving a 70-month prison sentence. Other convicted staff members received sentences ranging from supervised release to several years in prison.
What did the plaintiffs' attorneys said?
Plaintiffs’ attorneys highlighted the trauma survivors endured, describing FCI Dublin as an environment where no one felt safe, even those who were not directly assaulted. Lawyers also noted that similar misconduct persists at other federal facilities, underscoring systemic issues within the prison system.
“This settlement represents a searing indictment of our prison system’s failure to address its abuse crisis,” said a plaintiffs’ attorney. She called on policymakers to enact reforms to prevent such atrocities from recurring.
President Joe Biden addressed these systemic failures by signing legislation in July to strengthen oversight of the Bureau of Prisons. As part of the class-action settlement, the BOP will introduce reforms, including assigning a monitor to oversee the treatment of nearly 500 former FCI Dublin inmates now housed in federal facilities nationwide. The agreement also requires the BOP director to issue a public acknowledgment to the victims of staff abuse.
In December, the Bureau of Prisons announced the permanent closure of FCI Dublin following a security and infrastructure assessment after its temporary shutdown in April. The agency stated that the decision to close the facility was not directly related to the settlement but reaffirmed its commitment to addressing and preventing abuse.
The closure of FCI Dublin and the settlements signal a critical step toward accountability and justice but advocates stress the importance of ensuring lasting reform across the federal prison system.
Santa Cruz Schools Agree to $4.5M Settlement in Abuse Case
Santa Cruz City Schools (SCCS) has agreed to a $4.5 million settlement in a lawsuit filed by a law firm representing two former students who alleged sexual abuse by a former SCCS teacher between 1987 and 1991.
$2.25 million for each plaintiff
Each of the 49-year-old plaintiffs will receive $2.25 million for the abuse they endured during their middle and high school years.
Who is the teacher?
The teacher in question was hired by SCCS in 1981 as Principal at Branciforte Junior High in Santa Cruz. Before joining SCCS, he taught at Crittenden Middle School in Mountain View and founded "The Traveling School Summer Program," a mobile education initiative. Once he joined SCCS, the program was integrated into the district's curriculum. Both plaintiffs participated in the program and reported enduring sexual abuse during their time in it. One attended from 1988 to 1990, while the other was involved from 1988 to 1991.
The plaintiff's testimony
The first plaintiff expressed hope that the teacher would never be allowed to teach again and that he would face full legal consequences. He criticized SCCS for failing to implement safety measures and oversight, stating, "This lawsuit could have been easily avoided. Several young boys, now men, could have had much different lives if Santa Cruz City Schools had protections in place. I hope cases like this coming to light will safeguard future children from abuse."
Other plaintiff's testimony
The second plaintiff shared how the abuse deeply affected his ability to maintain healthy relationships and set boundaries. He described how being coerced into secrecy led to decades of anxiety, panic, and substance abuse as coping mechanisms. "The good news is that when secrets are told, they lose their power, creating an opportunity for healing and closure," he said.
What did the plaintiffs' attorney say?
The plaintiffs' attorney emphasized the long-term impact on the victims, stating, "These men were abused decades ago and have lived with shame and guilt all this time. The goal is to bring them a sense of closure and validation to help them move forward."
Troubling details of the lawsuit
The lawsuit revealed troubling details about the Traveling School program, which was designed for students with behavioral and academic challenges, often from broken homes. Massage was incorporated into the curriculum, but only boys were given massages, often shirtless, and were also required to massage the teacher in class. On "Body Theme Day," students wore minimal clothing, with boys instructed to wear Speedos, as did the teacher.
Witnesses testified to the lack of oversight and policies regarding the program. Leaders admitted there were no rules or training on appropriateness, and no SCCS personnel monitored trips. The teacher exploited this absence of oversight to abuse students over several years. One leader acknowledged that no SCCS staff ever joined or supervised Traveling School trips.
The attorney also represents two former students from Crittenden Middle School who allege they were sexually abused by the teacher in the 1970s when the Traveling School program was still independent. That case is scheduled for trial this summer.
Parents of Teen Killed in Orlando Ride Awarded $310 Million
The parents of a 14-year-old Missouri boy who tragically fell to his death from an Orlando amusement park ride in 2022 have won a $310 million verdict against the ride's Austrian manufacturer, Funtime.
$155 million for the parents
An Orange County jury awarded $155 million to each parent of the boy, who died on March 24, 2022, after plummeting 70 feet from the Orlando Free Fall ride at Icon Park. The trial lasted only one day, as Funtime did not appear in court to defend itself. Icon Park had previously settled with the family for an undisclosed amount.
Family's attorneys' statement
In a statement, the family's attorneys said the jury’s decision validates their claim that the boy's death was caused by "blatant negligence" and prioritization of profits over passenger safety. The parents will now need to pursue enforcement of the damages through Austrian courts.
Lack of safety on the rides
Funtime, known for manufacturing high-adrenaline rides such as the Vomatron, Sling Shot, and Chaos Pendle, did not respond to the lawsuit. Their ride, Orlando Free Fall, seated 30 passengers in harnesses attached to a 430-foot tower. Unlike similar attractions, it lacked seat belts as a secondary safety measure.
The accident
The boy, a 6-foot-2, 380-pound football player visiting Orlando during spring break, was ejected from his seat when the ride braked 70 feet from the ground. Due to his size, his harness didn’t lock properly. His parents argued that both Icon Park and Funtime failed to warn riders of size restrictions and neglected to implement sufficient safety features. They noted that adding seat belts would have cost only $660.
The tragedy led to the permanent closure and demolition of the Orlando Free Fall ride. The family's lawyers emphasized that this verdict holds the manufacturer accountable for its failures and ensures such negligence has consequences.
Dakota County Settles Wrongful Death Case for $2.25 Million
Dakota County has agreed to a $2.25 million settlement in a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the father of 6-year-old, who was tragically killed in May 2022.
The mother killed the kid
The boy was found fatally shot in the trunk of a car driven by his mother, who was later convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole.
The father fought for the kid's custody
In August 2022, the kid's father filed a federal lawsuit against Dakota County and two county employees, alleging negligence by the county's social services. The father, who had been fighting for custody before the boy's death, claimed the county failed to protect the boy despite concerns over his mother’s drug addiction and mental health issues. He argued that, despite repeated warnings, full custody was awarded to the mother.
The lawsuit initially sought damages exceeding $75,000. However, court records dated Dec. 3, 2024, confirm the $2.25 million settlement with Dakota County, marking a resolution in the heartbreaking case.
Activist Injured by Rubber Bullet Wins $2m Settlement
A Fort Lauderdale activist injured by a police officer's rubber bullet during a 2020 protest has reached a nearly $2 million settlement with the city.
The incident occurred on May 31, 2020
The incident occurred on May 31, 2020, during nationwide protests against police brutality following George Floyd's death in Minneapolis. The rubber bullet struck the activist in the face, causing a fractured eye socket and lasting trauma.
The plaintiff's testimony
“My life has dramatically changed since the protest,” the plaintiff said in a statement following the settlement’s approval. “What I once considered normal is now replaced with ongoing trauma and disability. Despite moments when I felt ready to give up, I focused on the importance of this case—not just for me, but for everyone seeking to use their voice to create meaningful change.”
$1,975,000 settlement
The $1,975,000 settlement, which includes attorneys' fees, was approved by the Fort Lauderdale City Commission. Mayor Dean Trantalis commended the city’s legal team and expressed hope that the agreement would bring closure. However, the city still faces another potential legal challenge. In May 2024, the plaintiff's attorneys filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court seeking broader accountability.
The plaintiff's attorney's statement
During the commission meeting, one of the plaintiff’s attorneys highlighted the importance of the settlement. “This is a fair resolution for the city, the public, and our client. It underscores the need for the police department to adopt practices that safeguard the rights of citizens while preserving peaceful First Amendment activities.”
Prevention methods
As part of the agreement, the city will implement SWAT, tactical, and training policies aligned with standards from the National Tactical Officers Association and the International Association of Chiefs of Police. These policies aim to ensure proper crowd management and control, preventing similar incidents in the future.
“For over four years, I’ve advocated for meaningful changes within the Fort Lauderdale Police Department,” the plaintiff stated. “This settlement is a step forward. While I have no doubt that a jury could have awarded more, my motivation was never monetary. What happened to me must never happen to anyone else.”
The plaintiff hopes the settlement will lead to improved practices and lasting reform within the police department while serving as a reminder of the importance of protecting peaceful protestors.
Lawsuit Filed Over Defective Biomet M2A Metal Hip Implants
An Arizona couple has filed a product liability lawsuit against Biomet and its related entities, claiming the defective design of Biomet’s metal-on-metal hip implants caused the husband to suffer severe complications, including metal poisoning, necessitating revision surgery.
Defendants in the lawsuit
The lawsuit, filed on December 12 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, names Biomet, Inc., Biomet Orthopedics LLC, Biomet Manufacturing LLC, Biomet US Reconstruction LLC, and Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. as defendants. The couple alleges that Biomet’s M2a metal-on-metal hip implant is dangerously defective and that the manufacturer failed to adequately warn of the device's risks.
The device received FDA clearance in 2004
The M2a hip implant, used in total hip replacement surgeries, features a metal femoral head and metal acetabular cup, which were marketed as more durable and resistant to wear than traditional materials. The device received U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance in 2004 through the 510(k) premarket notification process, allowing it to enter the market based on similarities to existing devices without extensive premarket clinical testing.
Devices were under scrutiny
However, metal-on-metal hip implants, including the M2a, have come under scrutiny for high failure rates and serious complications. As the metal components rub together, debris can be released, causing tissue damage, loosening of the implant, and metal ion toxicity.
Plaintiff's injuries
The complaint states that the plaintiff was implanted with a Biomet M2a hip in December 2001. Over the following years, he suffered complications, including significantly elevated chromium and cobalt levels, chronic inflammation, tissue reactions, and systemic health problems due to metal toxicity. In December 2022, he underwent revision surgery to replace the failed implant.
Couple's allegations
The couple alleges that Biomet was aware of reports of M2a failures before the device was implanted, indicating the company knew or should have known about the dangers of the design. The lawsuit also claims Biomet misrepresented the safety of the M2a system, asserting it was superior to safer alternatives on the market.
“Relying on Biomet’s representations, plaintiff’s orthopedic surgeon decided to use the M2a MoM Hip System,” the lawsuit states. “But for Biomet’s misrepresentations, Plaintiff’s orthopedic doctor would not have used the M2a MoM Hip System for Plaintiff’s hip replacement surgery.”
The complaint includes claims of strict product liability for design and manufacturing defects, failure to warn, and negligence. Additionally, the plaintiff’s wife has filed a claim for loss of consortium, citing the impact of her husband’s injuries on their relationship.
Similar issues reported about the devices
Metal-on-metal hip implants have faced widespread legal and regulatory challenges in recent decades due to similar issues. Reports of tissue damage, implant loosening, and metal toxicity have led to multiple lawsuits and recalls. Concerns have also been raised about potential risks of tumor development and cancer linked to the design.
Comparable lawsuits have been filed over other metal-on-metal designs, including nearly 12,000 claims involving DePuy ASR hips, which Johnson & Johnson recalled in 2010. That litigation was settled for over $2.4 billion. Other lawsuits have targeted devices such as the DePuy Pinnacle and Biomet Magnum systems. The Arizona case adds to the ongoing scrutiny of these devices and their manufacturers.
Big Toe Surgery Patients Report Cartiva Implant Failures
The Cartiva implant, promoted as a groundbreaking alternative to big toe fusion surgery, was designed to provide pain relief for individuals with degraded cartilage in the big toe joint.
What is Cartiva implant?
Marketed as a revolutionary solution, the implant quickly gained attention as a minimally invasive option that preserved joint movement. However, numerous reports of failures have raised serious concerns about the device's safety and reliability.
Cartiva failure symptoms
Patients began reporting Cartiva failure symptoms just a few years after the implant's introduction. Common issues include severe toe pain, loosening of the implant, fractures, and subsidence, where the device sinks into the bone. These complications often lead to debilitating pain, reduced mobility, and the need for additional surgeries. Many affected individuals have shared their experiences on online forums and social media, describing the severe and life-altering side effects of Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implants (SCI).
Increasing number of lawsuits against the implant
Now, an increasing number of patients are filing lawsuits against the device manufacturer, alleging that the implant's defective design makes it prone to failure. These lawsuits claim the manufacturer withheld crucial information about the risks from both patients and the medical community, preventing users from taking necessary precautions to avoid permanent physical impairment.
One of the lawsuits against the implant
One high-profile case involves a firefighter and emergency medical technician who filed a Cartiva implant lawsuit in August 2023. She reported experiencing painful deformity and bone loss in her big toe following the implant's failure.
What happened with the plaintiff?
Initially placed to alleviate cartilage degradation, the implant caused intense swelling, severe pain, and significant dysfunction. By August 2021, doctors determined the implant had failed, necessitating removal and a subsequent fusion surgery. This corrective procedure left her toe permanently deformed and resulted in significant bone loss, severely restricting its mobility. She now faces advanced arthritis and anticipates additional surgeries in the future.
Another lawsuit
Another plaintiff, who filed a lawsuit in November 2023, described similar debilitating effects. The failed implant left him with severely limited toe mobility, causing stress on adjacent joints and accelerating deterioration in other parts of his foot and leg. These complications required adjustments to his footwear and curtailed his active lifestyle. In February 2023, the implant was surgically removed, leading to substantial medical bills, loss of income, and ongoing rehabilitation. Despite these interventions, he continues to suffer from chronic pain and the financial and emotional toll of the implant's failure.
As these cases proceed, they highlight the long-term consequences of Cartiva implant failures. Many patients now face permanent disabilities, chronic pain, and significant financial burdens, underscoring the importance of holding manufacturers accountable for the safety of their medical devices.
FDA Issues Alert on Mini PCNL Sheath Safety Risks
Healthcare providers are being cautioned against using Trokamed Nephroscope Mini PCNL Sheaths for specific procedures due to risks of severe patient injuries, including kidney ruptures and at least one reported death.
FDA's early alert
On December 20, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an early alert about the devices following multiple adverse event reports. These sheaths are part of nephroscope sets used in minimally invasive kidney procedures, such as removing kidney stones or blockages. They facilitate the introduction of surgical tools, telescopes, and fluids to the site. However, misuse or design flaws can result in critical complications.
The FDA’s early alert is part of a new pilot program aimed at warning the public about potentially hazardous medical devices before an official recall is initiated. This proactive measure is intended to reduce the risk of injuries and fatalities.
Urgent Field Safety Notice
The alert follows a November 26 Urgent Field Safety Notice from Trokamed, which identified safety concerns with specific endoscope sheaths. The notice clarified that the devices should not be used for suction or irrigation procedures, a point not clearly stated in earlier guidelines. Using the sheaths for such purposes can lead to blockages caused by blood, tissue, or kidney stone fragments, reducing outflow and causing dangerous pressure buildup in the kidney. This pressure can lead to kidney rupture, which has already resulted in one reported fatality.
Removal of nephroscope from the sheath
To mitigate risks, Trokamed recommends that healthcare providers periodically remove the nephroscope from the sheath to clear obstructions and flush out fragments, thereby preventing pressure buildup. Updated usage instructions have been issued, dated November 27, 2024.
List of affected products
Affected products include the Sheath 20 Fr (130 mm and 160 mm) and Sheath 18 Fr (130 mm and 160 mm) with Trokamed reference numbers WA2PS20S, WA2PS20L, WA2PS18S, and WA2PS18L.
The FDA is currently investigating these high-risk devices and will provide further updates as additional information becomes available or if a formal recall is initiated. In the meantime, healthcare professionals are urged to exercise caution and adhere strictly to the revised guidelines to protect patient safety.
Mistrial Declared in Latest Roundup Weed Killer Lawsuit
A judge in the latest Roundup trial declared a mistrial following remarks made by the defendant’s legal team, highlighting the ongoing variability in Roundup case outcomes.
Motion for mistrial
During cross-examination, a Monsanto attorney referenced an alcohol-related criminal charge against the plaintiff, which the judge deemed serious misconduct. The plaintiff’s legal team promptly filed a motion for a mistrial, which the judge granted the same day.
Bayer's denial
Bayer, Monsanto’s parent company since 2018, defended the attorney’s actions, stating that the line of questioning about injury risk factors was appropriate. The company also described the plaintiff’s decision to seek a mistrial as “unusual and telling.” Bayer reiterated its confidence in the safety of Roundup, citing extensive scientific research and regulatory findings, and denied the product’s link to the plaintiff’s injury.
Third outcome in recent lawsuits
This mistrial is the third distinct outcome in recent Roundup trials. Earlier cases have centered on claims that Monsanto failed to warn consumers about the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma associated with glyphosate, Roundup's active ingredient. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies glyphosate as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”
$78 million to a plaintiff who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Recent verdicts have varied widely. In October, a Philadelphia jury awarded $78 million to a plaintiff who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after decades of Roundup use. However, in November, another Philadelphia jury sided with Monsanto in a similar case.
With over 4,000 Roundup lawsuits pending, Bayer has announced plans to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review a Roundup case, potentially bringing resolution during the 2025-26 session.