VERDICT IN FIRST WRIGHT HIP TRIAL
JURY AWARDS 11 MILLION DOLLARS
In the first trial against Wright Medical regarding the company’s metal-on-metal Conserve Hip devices, the federal jury in Atlanta, Georgia awarded $1 million in compensatory damages and $10 in punitive damages to Robyn Christiansen. The jury unanimously found that Wright defectively designed the Conserve model hip device and negligently misrepresented the design features, resulting in Ms. Christiansen’s harm. Congratulations to Kiesel Law’s own Helen Zukin and Cherisse Cleofe, as well as Ray Boucher, Michael McGlamry and Kirk Pope for their excellent and hard work during the two week trial. This is a great victory for the thousands of people affected by Wright’s metal-on-metal hip devices.
Wright Conserve Hip Implant Litigation
Kiesel Law LLP represents consumers who have suffered as a result of the failure of the Wright Conserve Hip Implants.
Several studies have determined that the Wright Conserve hip implants have been failing for various reasons such as cup loosening, metallosis and high levels of cobalt-chromium ions in a patient’s body. New data presented at the British Hip Society Annual Conference in March 2011 revealed a failure rate of 21% at 4 years and 49% at 6 years! This means a patient with a Wright Conserve hip implant device has an almost 50% chance of needing a revision surgery to replace it after only 6 years.
The Wright Conserve® Hip Implant System is a metal-on-metal design, which consists of cast cobalt chromium molybdenum that provides the receptacle for the cobalt chromium molybdenum femoral head. The metal femoral head rotates within the metal monoblock Conserve® Cup, without a liner, resulting in the release of metal particles that can cause metal toxicity in the blood, soft tissue and bone. This can result in metallosis, tissue necrosis, pseudotumors and other serious health problems.
Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorneys
Kiesel Law LLP is a nationally recognized consumer litigation firm specializing in complex litigation, class action, catastrophic injury, consumer fraud, pharmaceutical and medical device injury, unfair business practices, construction defect, truck accident and environmental litigation.
Proposed Settlement Deal In Class-Action Suit Against LADWP
Paul Kiesel, City of L.A. Special Counsel
Overcharged ratepayers are one step closer to getting their money back. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle requested that certain revisions to the settlement agreement be made before approving the deal. “If you’ve been over-billed and there will be an independent monitor to determine if that’s happened, you will get a credit on your bill. And if you’re no longer a Department of Water and Power customer, you’ll get a check in the mail. You don’t need to do anything else,” said Paul Kiesel, City of L.A. Special Counsel. Kiesel said “The settlement will provide for 100 percent refunds for every ratepayer, who has been over-billed improperly.” Thousands of DWP customers were issued faulty bills following an upgrade of the utility’s billing system. For more details, see following story.
City of Los Angeles Files Lawsuit Against PricewaterhouseCoopers
PricewaterhouseCoopers fraudulently misrepresented its ability to implement a new billing system for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power in order to secure a $70-million municipal contract and subsequently failed to deliver, according to a civil lawsuit filed Friday by the city attorney’s office. According to the city attorney’s complaint, PricewaterhouseCoopers “overstated its knowledge, expertise and skills necessary to convert” the existing system and launch a new software platform.
The alleged misrepresentation began after the L.A. utility issued a request for proposals in an effort to modernize its nearly 40 years old customer care and billing system. As a result of PricewaterhouseCoopers’s lack of skills and experience to perform the work stipulated in the contract, the LADWP’s system was unable to properly tally service bills for tens of thousands of customers.
Kiesel Law LLP is acting as special counsel for the City of Los Angeles.
FedEx Truck/Bus Tragedy
A Simple Safety Briefing Might Have Saved Lives
Paul R. Kiesel of Kiesel Law LLP was interviewed by NBC News as part of an investigation into how the injuries and deaths that resulted from the crash could have been minimized. “Had these children been provided a pre-trip safety briefing, the deaths and injuries would have likely been far less because they would have known how to get out of that bus,” said Paul Kiesel. Click above to see the entire NBC news report.
Paul Kiesel Installed as President of the L.A. County Bar Association
The Daily Journal conducted the first interview of Paul Kiesel since becoming president of the L.A. County Bar, covering a wide range of subjects including advocating for access to justice through the Open Courts Coalition.
Kiesel Wants to Use Bar Clout to Get Dollars for State Courts
By Don J. DeBenedictis
BEVERLY HILLS – New presidents of bar associations often hope to spend their terms increasing their groups’ membership and power. Paul R. Kiesel, the new president of the Los Angeles County Bar Association, wants that, too, but not just because more is better.
He sees growing the association as a way to further boost its clout in Sacramento on the issue of funding for the courts. His goal, he said, is to “build up the throw weight of the county bar in the access to justice discussion.”
With about 20,000 members, the Los Angeles County association is already the largest metropolitan bar group in the nation, according to an official.
By bringing in more members – and more lawyer associations as affiliated organizations – Kiesel believes the county bar can command even more attention from legislators and the governor’s office in arguing for keeping the courts open and functioning.
“Access to justice is so important,” he said. “My No. 1 priority as Los Angeles County Bar Association president is for all of us to come together to advocate for access to justice.”
Paul Kiesel Interviewed by New York Times Regarding Amtrak Train Crash
The New York Times reached out to Mr. Kiesel as part of its continuing news coverage of the tragic Amtrak train crash. Mr. Kiesel, who was liaison counsel for the litigation that arose from the 2008 Metrolink train crash in Chatsworth, spoke about both the Congressionally imposed cap on damages and the technology that could have prevented the crash. The most recent article stated:
With eight people killed and scores injured, the claims could easily exceed $200 million. Paul R. Kiesel, a lawyer who represented victims in the 2008 Metrolink crash in California, said the money would not go far enough to compensate victims whose lives will never be the same.
“The cap will without question come into play, and those who were injured will undoubtedly receive a fraction of their actual damages — economic, medical, lost wages and otherwise,” he said.
In a previous article, Mr. Kiesel stated:
“The positive train control system would have prevented the deaths,” said Kiesel . “It would have slowed the train down and taken the human element out of it.” The system automatically overrides errors made by human rail employees.
Kiesel says that railroads should have long ago installed positive train control technology. With it, there is no question the accident would not have occurred.
Helen Zukin Selected 2015 Top 100 Women Lawyers in California
Kiesel Law LLP is proud to announce that the Daily Journal has selected partner Helen Zukin as one of the top 100 Women Lawyers in California for 2015. This award is presented to Helen to honor her victories in the courtroom and her advocacy for the advancement of women in law.
Paul Kiesel and the entire firm congratulate Helen on receiving this award.
Los Angeles Archdiocese Releases Last Group of Confidential Files
Level of Cover-up Far Surpasses Worst Fears
After eleven years of litigation and a six year battle over the release of files, the more than 600 victims of clergy sexual abuse have secured for publication, additional confidential files which reveal a painful history of cover-up and betrayal by the Catholic Church. The confidential files were turned over to the victims as part of global settlement with the Archdiocese by the Benedictine Fathers of Sacred Heart Mission, Inc. aka St. Gregory’s Abbey, the Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus aka The Cabrini Sisters, the U.S Province of the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate, Inc., the Oblate Fathers Western Province, Inc., the Marianist Province of the United States and the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet. “In the six years since the historic settlement was reached, our firm never wavered in our commitment to see that these secret files would be released to the public” said attorney Paul Kiesel.
Multi-Million Dollar Settlement Reached
After Ground Breaking Trial
A multi-million dollar settlement has been obtained by Paul Kiesel on behalf of clients Nathaniel T. and Gary R. after a jury verdict shattered a decade’s old practice of magazine clearing houses classifying salespeople as independent contractors in order to escape liability. The 12 person jury unanimously decided that the magazine clearing house, Atlantic Circulation Inc., was the employer of Nathaniel and Gary, who traveled from town to town knocking on doors selling magazines for the exclusive benefit of the magazine clearing house. Prior to this trial, magazine clearing houses in California and across the country enjoyed the benefits of the employee/employer relationship without any of the responsibilities of the relationship. These magazine clearing houses employ thousands of young men and women working up to 12 hours a day exclusively selling magazine subscriptions on behalf of the clearing houses. In the case of Atlantic Circulation, Inc., the company exhibited total control over the plaintiffs including: where they could sell, which magazines they could sell and which sales pitch would be used.
Riverside Superior Court, location of trial
Atlantic Circulation Inc. greatly benefited from this employer/employee relationship, but when Nathaniel and Gary were seriously injured during their work for Atlantic Circulation, the company refused to provide any benefits, medical or otherwise, to them. Instead, Atlantic Circulation insisted that the young men were, at most, independent contractors who were not entitled to any compensation at all.
“Thanks to the outstanding decision reached by this jury, magazine clearing house corporations will be held accountable when young men and women are injured during the course and scope of their employment for that company”, according to Paul Kiesel. “This is not only a big, life altering verdict for our two brave clients, who were so seriously injured, but is a victory for all people who were, until now, in a relationship with corporations where the company held all the control and benefits, without any of the potential liability to those who worked for them”.
Zoom and the Court System: Q&A with Attorney Paul Kiesel
In the past few years, Zoom has seen truly explosive growth, reaching over 40 million participants, collectively communicating for over one billion minutes. We have made the world a little smaller, helped reduce the worldwide emissions footprint, and served a continually-growing customer base in education, technology, medicine, and a variety of other areas. Among those customers, we find Paul Kiesel, attorney at law, founder of Kiesel Law LLP, and President Elect of the Los Angeles Bar Association.
We’ve recently run a case study on Mr. Kiesel, and that is when we learned of an untapped part of the market that could certainly make use of video to fulfill its purpose more efficiently: the court system. We decided to speak with Paul Kiesel in-depth about the prospective use of video in the courtroom — and even discussed previous attempts to use it — to understand how Zoom can play a role in a system that, at the very least, appears to require a push forward with proper and versatile video technology. Here’s our interview:
Zoom: What are your personal views on video communications tools being used in the courtroom?
Paul Kiesel: Video communication in the courtroom is the natural extension of technology and it assists our judicial system in finding a way to create better connectivity and improve environmental costs associated with travel, time, and space. To me, it is the natural progression from the written word to telephones, and now, to using video as a way to interact with people.
Paul Kiesel Named to the Daily Journal’s 2015-2016 Top 25 List
The Daily Journal has recognized Paul Kiesel for his outstanding work both in the courtroom and on behalf of the courts by selecting him as one of the Top 25 Lawyers in California. The Journal lauded Paul’s efforts as one of the leaders of the consolidated litigation against Fedex Corporation. This litigation stems from the tragic crash that took the lives of five students and 3 adults when a Fedex tractor-trailer crashed into a bus full of students on their way to a college tour.
Paul has also been singled out for his work as Co-Chair of the Open Courts Collation, a bipartisan committee of attorneys and other stakeholders throughout California, including the Chamber of Commerce, who are advocating for greater funding of the civil justice system.
Paul Kiesel said, “I am honored to be selected as one of the top 25 lawyers in the state of California, where there are over 225,000 practicing attorneys.”
Federal Express Bus Crash Lawsuit Filed
A wrongful death action has been filed by Kiesel Law LLP against Federal Express on behalf of the family of Ismael Jimenez.
Paul Kiesel stated at the May 20, 2014, news conference that the lawsuit is on behalf of Ismael Jimenez, 18, an aspiring college student and artist. Ismael and other high school seniors were headed north for a tour of Humboldt State University when the bus was struck head-on by the FedEx truck. “Ismael sacrificed his life to save the lives of other students on the bus,” noted Kiesel. “This was the Bus Full of Dreams, because these were disadvantaged children who had excelled in school and were the first in their families to attend college.” “Liability rests first and foremost with Federal Express. Federal Express owned, maintained and ran that tractor unit,” said Kiesel. “By bringing this claim now, it gives the family the legal right to determine why this tragic crash happened.” Ismael Jimenez rushed to the front of the bus as it was filling with smoke, broke out a window and helped lift others to safety. Evelin Jimenez, Ismael’s sister, said, “He could have saved his own life, but he put the lives of others first. He is a Hero.”
$4,014,069.00 Verdict on Behalf of Tractor-Trailer Collision Victim
“And now you know why we are here” were the words that attorney Paul R. Kiesel used in rebuttal at the close of a ten day trial in Santa Rosa. Paul was reminding the jury of the defense lawyer’s opening statement two weeks earlier when the Defendant trucking company admitted full responsibility for the crash and it’s lawyer said “We want to make it right”. This personal injury trial focused on injuries that the Plaintiff sustained when his stopped pickup truck was rear-ended by the Defendant’s 45,000 pound Tractor-Trailer that was traveling at 45 miles per hour at the time of the impact. The driver of the pickup truck, who was 22 years of age at the time of the crash, suffered Compression Fractures of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Thoracic vertebrae, was confined to a body cast for 9 months, has undergone (and continues to need) post-accident medical care and treatment and he has and – for the rest of his life – will continue to experience a lifetime of daily constant pain. However, as the trial progressed, it became apparent to the jury that there was a sizeable gap between defense lawyer’s words and their true intentions. Not only did the defense lawyer disagree with the Victim’s expert witnesses during the trial, which included treating physicians from the Mayo Clinic and St. Jude’s Medical Center, the defense attorney ended up greatly disagreeing with the defense’s very own expert witnesses as to the costs of that lifetime of future medical care and the lost earning capacity that this young man sustained due to the Defendant’s own (admitted) negligence. Rather than “making it right” it became obvious to the jury that the defense was only attempting to minimize, reduce and avoid financial responsibility for the crippling injuries that its driver’s negligent operation of the Big-Rig caused. Because the defense lawyer and the defense of the case didn’t do so, it was left to the jury to “make it right,” and they did by returning this sizeable verdict on the Victim’s behalf.