Oxycodon Claims

Insurance Policy Review

1. OxyCodon Claims 

There are allegations that Purdue Pharmaceutical marketed Oxycontin without sufficient warning of his dangers, causing patients to become addicted.
The Promotion and Marketing of OxyContin: Commercial Triumph, Public Health Tragedy

2. Purdue Pharma Bankruptcy and Opportunity to Present Claims 

Following revelations of wrongdoing, a verdict by a governmental entity, the company declared bankruptcy.

Purdue Pharma Claims

Our office is representing individuals who have addiction claims.  We provide a free consultation and will help prepare your claim on a contingency basis (no payment required.

If you  believe you have been injured by Purdue, or Purdue prescription opioids, like OxyContin® or other prescription opioids produced, marketed or sold by Purdue, you can file a claim for compensation. The Bankruptcy Court has set June 30, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. (Prevailing Eastern Time) (the “Bar Date”) as the deadline for each person, entity, governmental unit and Native American Tribe to file Proofs of Claim for claims that arose from an action taken by the Debtors prior to September 15, 2019 (but you may file a claim for damages suffered by any person or entity both prior to and after that date).

If you are interested in discussing your claim, call (973) 598-1980 for a free consultation.

Man in home office on telephone using computer smiling



Subaru Starlink System

1. Starlink System Problems.

Subaru owners have complained of problems with Starlink system. Vehicles experience a range of technical glitches that cause freezing, non-responsiveness or other malfunctions of the Starlink System. A class action settlement involves the 2017 Impreza, 2018 Impreza, 2018 Forester, 2018 Outback, 2018 Legacy, 2018 Crosstrek or a 2018 BRZ vehicle equipped with the Generation 3.0 head unit manufactured by Harman International Industries, Inc.

2. Class Action Notice.
Here is a notice from the class action.

A class action lawsuit was filed against Subaru of America, Inc. (“SOA”) and Subaru Corporation (“SBR,” and, collectively with SOA, the “Defendants”) alleging that the Settlement Class Vehicles experience a range of technical glitches that cause freezing, non-responsiveness or other malfunctions of the Starlink System. The lawsuit alleges that Defendants have violated certain consumer statutes and breached certain warranties, and it seeks certification of a nationwide class of present and former purchasers and lessees of Settlement Class Vehicles to pursue these claims.

Defendants deny these claims. SOA and SBR maintain that the Settlement Class Vehicles are not defective. Defendants maintain that the Settlement Class Vehicles function(ed) in a proper manner, were properly designed, manufactured, distributed, and that Defendants did not violate any warranties, statutes, or laws. In the instances in which such repairs have been necessary, Defendants maintain that they have provided warranty coverage where appropriate.

You are a Settlement Class Member if you are a current or past purchaser or lessee of a 2017 Impreza, 2018 Impreza, 2018 Forester, 2018 Outback, 2018 Legacy, 2018 Crosstrek or a 2018 BRZ vehicle equipped with the Generation 3.0 head unit manufactured by Harman International Industries, Inc. (“Settlement Class Vehicles”), and you purchased your vehicle in the continental United States, including Alaska and Hawaii.


SUBMIT A CLAIM FORMThe only way to get a reimbursement, but not necessary to get an extended warranty. See FAQ 8.April 1, 2020 (Submitted Online or Postmarked)
EXCLUDE YOURSELFGet no reimbursement or extended warranty. This is the only option that allows you to ever be part of any other lawsuit against Subaru about the legal claims in this case. See FAQ 12.February 17, 2020 (Submitted Online or Postmarked) PASSED
OBJECTWrite to the Court about why you don’t like the Settlement.
See FAQ 17.
February 13, 2020 (Postmarked) PASSED
GO TO A HEARINGAsk to speak in Court about the fairness of the Settlement.
See FAQ 19.
May 7, 2020
DO NOTHINGReceive extended warranty but no payment. 

Call for a free consultation about your rights,

The System Malfunctioned Again

Covid 19 Insurance Claims

There is a good deal of discussion about whether insurance will cover some of the substantial costs associated with the Covid virus.

1. Policy Terms

The first question will be what does the policy provide, and indeed, there are a range of policies.

2. Direct Physical Loss of Damage Requirement

Many policies require proof of “direct physical loss or damage.”

3. Other Cases

One court found that bacterial and mold contamination was not a “direct
physical loss” under a property insurance policy. Universal Image Products. v. Federal Insurance Co., 475 Fed. Appx. 569 (6th Cir. 2012). However, Gregory Packaging, Inc. v. Travelers Ins. (D.N.J. 2014), found such a loss from an ammonia leak in a building. See Businesses Scramble to Assess Insurance Coverage for COVID-19.

However, it would be hard to attribute a general downturn, or instruction to stop work as a incident of physical loss or damage.

4. Exclusions
Some insurers inserted exclusions of viruses in their policies.


Chevy Shake Class Action Lawsuit Continues For Florida Customers

A Chevy shake class action lawsuit will proceed, but not on a nationwide basis reports Carcomplaints.com. Owners who experience problems may be entitled to compensation.


The Florida plaintiff said his new 2015 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 suffered from the so-called Chevy shake that caused his truck to violently shake when it reached about 70 mph and shakes strongest in the range of 75-80 mph. The lawsuit alleges the plaintiff paid more than $2,000 to replace the brakes, rotors, tires and for re-rounding of the rims. The plaintiff says he also took the truck back to a Firestorm store for realignment and rebalancing of the tires, but the violent shaking allegedly continued.

According to the class action, defective driveshafts cause the following vehicles to violently shake while driving.

  • 2015 to present Cadillac Escalade
  • 2014 to present Chevrolet Silverado
  • 2015 to present Chevrolet Suburban
  • 2015 to present Chevrolet Tahoe
  • 2014 to present GMC Sierra
  • 2015 to present GMC Yukon/Yukon XL

    1. Shake/ vibration Problem

The shake is allegedly caused by aluminum driveshafts that eventually deteriorate and fail as the driveshafts drop to the ground. The plaintiff argues General Motors sent technical service bulletins (TSBs) to dealerships for 10 years concerning the Chevy shake but allegedly refuses to make permanent free repairs to the vehicles. According to the class action, victims of the Chevy shake continue to pay for repairs even when the vehicles are allegedly still covered by warranties.

Some suggest you can can get rid of the Chevy shake by replacing the aluminum driveshafts with custom-made steel driveshafts. But the cost of installing a steel driveshaft is thrown onto the customer because the automaker won’t recall the vehicles and won’t cover repair costs.

In addition, the plaintiff claims multiple GM models suffer the Chevy shake, yet the plaintiff doesn’t own any of those other models.

The automaker also argued the plaintiff apparently wants a limited warranty to last a lifetime because a GM dealer refused to pay for repairs after the Silverado warranty allegedly expired.

The judge ruled the lawsuit can proceed for Florida GM customers but there will be no nationwide class action lawsuit. According to the judge, the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act claim is the only federal claim asserted in the lawsuit, and the claim depends on Florida law.

The judge ruled the plaintiff doesn’t claim a legal injury in any state other than Florida and doesn’t allege an injury under the laws of any other state.

“Therefore, the Plaintiff lacks standing to assert claims on behalf of class members who purchased GM vehicles outside of Florida.” – District Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr.

Although the claim for nationwide class action certification was dismissed, the judge did allow the Florida class action to continue based on breach of express warranties, breach of implied warranties and violation of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

The Chevy shake class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami – Weiss, et al., v. General Motors LLC. CarComplaints.com has owner-reported complaints about the vehicles named in the GM class action.

CALL (973) 598 1980 to discuss your rights to compensation or replacement. Free Consultation.

GM Hydra Matic Transmission Problems

Man with broken down car flat tire in the middle of the street

A General Motors Hydra-Matic transmission lawsuit alleges multiple models shudder, jerk, have acceleration problems, fail to downshift and have trouble stopping even when using the brakes. The Hydra-Matic 8L90 and 8L45 class action lawsuit includes these vehicles.

  • 2015-2017 Cadillac Escalade
  • 2015-2017 Cadillac Escalade ESV
  • 2016-2019 Cadillac ATS
  • 2016-2019 Cadillac ATS-V
  • 2016-2019 Cadillac CTS
  • 2016-2019 Cadillac CT6
  • 2016-2019 Cadillac CTS-V
  • 2015-2019 Chevrolet Silverado
  • 2017-2019 Chevrolet Colorado
  • 2015-2019 Chevrolet Corvette
  • 2016-2019 Chevrolet Camaro
  • 2015-2019 GMC Sierra
  • 2015-2019 GMC Yukon
  • 2015-2019 GMC Yukon XL
  • 2017-2019 GMC Canyon
Problem with Your GM Vehicle, Call for a Free Consultation


Match.Com and Dating Fraud

  1. FTC Lawsuit

The Federal Trade Commission sued online dating service Match Group, Inc. (Match), the owner of Match.com, Tinder, OKCupid, PlentyOfFish, and other dating sites, alleging that the company used fake love interest advertisements to trick hundreds of thousands of consumers into purchasing paid subscriptions on Match.com.

The agency also alleges that Match has unfairly exposed consumers to the risk of fraud and engaged in other allegedly deceptive and unfair practices. For instance, the FTC alleges Match offered false promises of “guarantees,” failed to provide services to consumers who unsuccessfully disputed charges, and made it difficult for users to cancel their subscriptions.

The Legal Complaint (Docket 3:19-cv-02281-2) states,

” Since at least 2013, Defendant has maintained the following five deceptive or unfair practices to induce consumers to subscribe to Match.com and to keep them subscribed. (Case 3:19-cv-02281-2 First, until mid-2018,

(false dating communications)

Defendant sent consumers misleading advertisements that tout communications from persons Defendant identified as potentially fraudulent users of Match.com and led consumers to believe that the communications are from persons interested in establishing a dating relationship with them.

Second, until mid-2018, Defendant exposed consumers to the risk of fraud by providing recent subscribers access to communications that Defendant knew were likely to have been sent by persons engaging in fraud.

(Misleading guarantee)

Third, until mid-2019, Defendant guaranteed certain consumers a free six-month subscription renewal if they fail to “meet someone special” but failed to disclose the requirements of its “guarantee” adequately.

Cancellation problems

Fourth, Defendant has misled consumers with a confusing and cumbersome cancellation process that causes consumers to believe they have canceled their subscriptions when they have not. Fifth, until mid-2019, when consumers disputed charges relating to any of these practices and lose the dispute, Defendant denied consumers access to paid-for services.



Oxycodin Addiction and Class Action

man contemplating oxycottin addiction.

Were you a victim of Oxycondin addiction. Were you prescribed a drug in excessive amounts because of the manufacturer’s marketing and concealment of problems. Do you believe that the company should have disclosed relevant information to the prescribing physicians. Our office is reviewing claims for Oxycondin addiction.

“At least 30 states and 2,000 state, local and tribal governments have filed lawsuits claiming the pharmaceutical company is responsible for the nationwide opioid crisis. The lawsuits — which have also been filed by unions, hospitals, and lawyers representing babies who were born in opioid withdrawal — have been consolidated under a single federal judge in Cleveland.”



GM Colorado Hesitation

General Motors May Face Class-Action Lawsuit Over Defective 8-Speed Transmissions

Models affected include the Chevrolet Silverado and Colorado, as well as the GMC Sierra and Canyon

The filed class-action lawsuit affects the Chevrolet Silverado as well as the GMC Sierra. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit allege General Motors’ 8-speed transmissions are defective.

Certain Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC models built between 2015 and 2019 may have a defect in their 8-speed transmissions, according to a class-action lawsuit posted to ClassAction.org. GM Authority spotted the lawsuit, which says there are serious problems with GM’s Hydra-Matic 8L90 and 8L45 transmissions.

More specifically, the transmissions have a defect that cause vehicles to hesitate and jerk when accelerating or coming to a stop. The lawsuit reads, “These transmissions have a common defect…Drivers have reported that the shift is sometimes so violent, they feel as though they have been hit by another vehicle.”

It also mentions the case of an owner whose vehicle shifted from reverse to drive harshly enough that it nearly lurched through his garage door. The defect centers around the transmission itself or the torque converter. Over time, any shuddering, jerking or hestitation may cause internal issues, including metal shavings being circulated throughout the transmission.


1. Compensation and Remedies

If you experienced problems with your GM Colorado, you may be entitled to compensation, a new vehicle, or a refund. Call for a Free Consultation, (claims handled on contingency with no payment needed).

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑