If you missed the recent Pennsylvania Superior Court decision regarding the use of debit cards by some McDonalds franchises to pay employees, you can catch up on it in these recent news articles.David Senoff helped lead the team that secured the unanimous appellate court victory.
Topics: Payroll Debit Cards
In a unanimous decision, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania has upheld the decision of a Common Pleas Court, ruling that 16 McDonalds restaurants violated the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law (WPCL) by requiring their employees to accept debit cards as their form of payment.
Such use of debit cards for payroll purposes stood in direct opposition to Pennsylvania law that states that “wages shall be paid in lawful money of the United States or check.”
Plaintiffs in the case, represented by Anapol Weiss attorney David Senoff, were subject to fees for nearly every transaction in order to access their wages using their payroll debit cards.
“As a result of the court’s decision, employees who were defrauded by their employers at McDonalds are now one step closer to obtaining justice,” Senoff said. “I’m pleased that both the Common Pleas Court the Superior Court recognized that these employees deserve to get paid as the law requires.”
The Superior Court was unpersuaded by both the defendants’ argument that a debit card is the “functional equivalent” of a check or lawful money and the amicus argument put forth by the American Payroll Association (APA) that an employer may satisfy the requirements of the WPCL when “lawful money or a check is not involved by depositing an employee’s wages into an account at a financial institution.”
The full Superior Court ruling can be found here: Superior Court Ruling in McDonalds Payroll Case.pdf
Topics: Payroll Debit Cards
According to recent reports, women are increasingly limiting their use of talcum powder products such as Johnson and Johnson Baby Powder and Shower to Shower after a connection was found between the products and ovarian cancer. An increasing number of women are pursuing legal action against the manufacturers.
Research dating back to 1971 found traces of talc in ovarian and cervical tumors. And, since then, according to the New York Times, “numerous studies have linked genital talc use to ovarian cancer, including a report earlier this month that among African-American women, genital use of powder is linked with a 44 percent increased risk for invasive epithelial ovarian cancer.”
Juries have already sided with plaintiffs suing talcum powder manufacturers on two occasions, resulting in multi-million dollar damages being awarded.
The Anapol Weiss Unsafe Drugs team believes that drug companies must be held accountable when they fail to caution the public about dangerous side effects like ovarian cancer. No patient should ever be blindsided by a life-threatening illness or disability caused by an over-the-counter product.
If you have any questions or concerns relating to talcum powder and potential links to ovarian cancer, please do not hesitate to contact Anapol Weiss Shareholder Greg Spizer who is one of the leaders on our Unsafe Drugs team.
Xarelto (rivaroxaban), is a popular blood thinner prescribed to patients for atrial fibrillation and to prevent blood clots. Unfortunately, many patients experience side effects including excessive bleeding, stomach pain, and blood in their urine, among other negative reactions.
Making Xarelto even more dangerous is the fact that no antidote exists to stem potentially fatal excessive bleeding. Without an antidote, additional severe side effects of excessive bleeding from Xarelto include cerebral hemorrhaging, strokes caused by bleeding in the brain, and gastrointestinal bleeding.
Anapol Weiss’ Unsafe Drug Team, which is co-led by Shareholder Greg Spizer, has been at the forefront of efforts to hold drug makers accountable for injuries caused by Xarelto. Greg’s team believes that no patient should ever be blindsided by a life-threatening illness or disability caused by a prescription medication.
If you or someone you know has taken Xarelto and you have questions relating to the potential risks, please contact Greg Spizer today.
Have you ever heard of Pennsylvania’s “Steer Clear” law? This important piece of the PA vehicle code requires drivers to move over at least one lane or slow down when they encounter an emergency scene, traffic stop, or disabled vehicle where emergency responders such as law enforcement, tow truck operators, and/or PennDOT personnel and vehicles are present.
The law is intended to prevent injuries and save lives, but it only works if drivers are aware of it and too often they’re not. According to this story in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation reports that there were 76 crashes involving parked vehicles in the state in 2014 and 82 in 2015. An annual average of 90 crashes a year were recorded from 2000-06 before the “Steer Clear” law. That average fell just below 85 in the years since the law passed.
Anapol Weiss attorney Christopher Marzzacco has worked on numerous cases where accidents involving responders could have been avoided had drivers been more familiar with the “Steer Clear” law.
If you have questions about the “Steer Clear” law, or if you or someone you know was injured by a driver who violated the law, contact Christopher.
In a recent piece in The Legal Intelligencer, Ryan Hurd and Jim Ronca of Anapol Weiss contend that despite technology and time constraints, there is no substitute for a physical visit to the scene of an accident in assuring due diligence on behalf of car accident victims and other plaintiffs. Citing examples ranging from a fatal car accident to a slip and fall at work, the top PA personal injury attorneys describe instances in which crucial evidence and testimony was discovered even after an official car accident report and defense investigation. They further demonstrate the inherent value of firsthand knowledge of the accident scene for evaluating whether or not to accept a case or preparing an attorney to place testimony and evidence in context.
In his advocacy for victims of distracted driving, Joel Feldman of Anapol Weiss, also advocates a paradigm shift in how personal injury lawyers conceive and respond to families’ grief.
Mr. Feldman described in a contribution to the Legal Intelligencer how his own tragic loss inspired deeper insight into the grieving process of his clients and their need for information in wrongful death settlements. He explains that, with the best intentions, wrongful death attorneys often pursue swift settlements when auto insurers approve the maximum claim. They assume, as Mr. Feldman once did, that this is the best “closure” that they can provide a grieving family, however he advises that for a grieving family, "closure" is both elusive and frequently undesired—tantamount to forgetting their loved one.
Mr. Feldman advocates a shift in both procedure and attitude in wrongful death cases. First, he explains how his experience taught him the value of detailed information in comprehending loss and that he now makes a specific effort to obtain a written statement from the defendant addressing his client’s need for as much detailed information as possible. Secondly, he advises attorneys that in responding to their client’s grief, they must avoid suggestions of “closure” that may feel disrespectful to their loved ones’ significance and proscribes a deeper understanding of the grieving process that suggests seeking meaning through loss, a distinction that appreciates that a family can not close-the-book on their loved one, but can, in their post-trauma, open a new chapter that honors their memory.
In his recent contribution to the Legal Intelligencer, Christopher Marzzacco of Anapol Weiss cites the alarming statistic that distracted driving caused 15,000 crashes in 2015 in Pennsylvania and warns that this figure is not likely to reduce until, like drunk driving, distracted driving becomes socially unacceptable. Mr. Marzzacco persuades us that stronger legal consequences will help facilitate this social change by demanding the public more deeply consider the personal consequences of distracted driving.
A number of recent and upcoming bills in both Pennsylvania and surrounding states contribute in unique ways towards a reconsideration of what constitutes distracted driving and why we do it. In Pennsylvania, it is currently illegal to text and drive, but not talk and drive. A new bill aims to ban all cell phone use while driving and allow PA to catch up with other states in its recognition of cell phone use as inherently dangerous. Another bill strengthens judicial sentencing authority while allowing victims and their families to seek punitive damages from texting and driving accidents.
The boldest idea highlighting the dangers of texting and driving extends liability to a person who knowingly texts a driver behind the wheel. While a controversial issue, it sends a clear message that texting while driving is a deadly problem and that safe driving is a shared responsibility.
The Legal Intelligencer interviewed newly elected president of the Pennsylvania Association for Justice,
Tom Anapol of Anapol Weiss, who shared his perspective on the organization’s mission as a voice for victims and employees to the broader legal community.
Mr. Anapol spoke with the Legal Intelligencer regarding the importance of strengthening membership through the promotion of diversity. He also reiterated the association’s core values of championing the rights of individuals and workers, and shared his perspective on forthcoming legislative issues that may bolster or undermine existing protections. Mr. Anapol also cited the importance of assuring continuity of victim and worker rights as technologies evolve, particularly in the case of autonomous vehicles.
The FDA is continuing to investigate the risks associated with heater-cooler devices used in major surgeries, particularly cardiothoracic procedures.
The heater-cooler devices have been associated with potentially fatal infections, such as Nontuberculous Mycobacterium (NTM), and the FDA issued a safety alert on these devices in June.
At issue is the failure by manufacturers to provide adequate cleaning instructions for their heater-cooler devices, and, until recently, to advise those operating the devices on safe placement during surgeries. The FDA is also examining the connection between the infections and the basic design of heater-cooler devices.
Anapol Weiss has played a crucial role in the successful resolution of thousands of cases where unsafe medical devices have caused injury and resulted in mounting medical expenses.
Anapol Weiss Shareholder Sol Weiss specializes in unsafe medical device cases and is a great resource if you have questions or concerns regarding an experience with heater-cooler devices or other poorly designed medical devices.