Publication honors law firm’s Michael Angelides

Brian Sanchez

ALTON — Simmons Hanly Conroy, one of the nation’s largest mass torts firms, announced Missouri Lawyers Weekly has named Michael J. Angelides, the firm’s managing shareholder, as one of its 2018 Law Firm Leader award recipients.

The Law Firm Leader award is part of Missouri Lawyer Weekly’s annual Missouri Lawyers Awards, which recognize lawyers in the state who have made an impact during the previous year. The Law Firm Leader Award honors chairpersons, managing partners or other law firm executives who demonstrated extraordinary vision, innovation and leadership.

“The firm congratulates Mike on this recognition by Missouri Lawyers Weekly as one of the area’s top Law Firm Leaders of 2018,” Simmons Hanly Conroy Chairman John Simmons said. “In addition to his many years in practice as a top asbestos lawyer and passionate advocate for worker and consumer rights, Mike has been instrumental in our firm’s growth and success as a national litigation leader on behalf of our plaintiff clients.”

Angelides led the firm, which is on the front lines of some of the most high-profile litigation in the country, to secure significant results for its clients in 2017. Major litigation successes and highlights involving the firm from the past year include:

– Three consecutive multi-million-dollar jury verdicts, including a $1.041 billion finding for plaintiffs, in bellwether trials for the DePuy Pinnacle (Johnson & Johnson) Hip Implant multidistrict litigation (MDL);

– $16 billion in global settlements for owners of Volkswagen vehicles impacted by the clean diesel emissions scandal;

– $1.5 billion global settlement for Midwest corn producers in the Syngenta AG MIR162 Corn MDL;

– A $6 million settlement for the village of Roxana and surrounding properties against the Wood River Refinery and Shell Oil for contaminated groundwater emanating from the refinery;

– $7.8 million jury verdict for a New York welder injured by asbestos exposure, as well as millions more in settlements for hundreds of families around the country harmed by asbestos;

– Hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements for women in Missouri and nationwide suffering from injuries caused by transvaginal mesh (TVM) in the TVM MDL; and

– Nearly 100 cases filed against opioid manufacturers for their fraudulent marketing campaigns on behalf of counties and cities in numerous states harmed by the opioid epidemic.

Under Angelides’ leadership, Simmons Hanly Conroy has continued to grow as a national leader in asbestos litigation, representing victims of mesothelioma against some of the largest companies in the nation. Simmons Hanly Conroy represents more families affected by mesothelioma and files more mesothelioma cases every year than any other law firm in the country.

In addition to its asbestos practice, Angelides oversees Simmons Hanly Conroy’s pharmaceutical injury, prescription opioid, environmental, personal injury and other mass tort and class action practices. The firm’s complex litigation attorneys have recovered millions of dollars on behalf of consumers throughout the country who were injured due to corporate wrongdoing.

Angelides joined Simmons Hanly Conroy in 2001 and became the firm’s managing shareholder in 2008. He earned his law degree from Saint Louis University School of Law and his bachelor of arts from Kenyon College.

About Simmons Hanly Conroy LLC

Simmons Hanly Conroy is one of the nation’s largest mass tort law firms. Primary areas of litigation include asbestos and mesothelioma, pharmaceutical, consumer protection, environmental and personal injury. The firm’s attorneys have been appointed to leadership in numerous national multidistrict litigations, including Vioxx, Toyota Unintended Acceleration, BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, DePuy Pinnacle and the Volkswagen Emission Scandal.  The firm also represents small and mid-size corporations, inventors and entrepreneurs in matters involving business litigation. Offices are located in Alton, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco and St. Louis. Read more at simmonsfirm.com.

Follow AdVantage News on Facebook and Twitter

Go to Source

DOE warns oil firms excise taxes not license for profiteering

Brian Sanchez

MANILA (Updated) — The Department of Energy (DOE) warned industry players against using the new excise tax on oil under the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (Train) law to jack up prices.

The department said the implementation of the new law would not automatically raise oil prices in the first month of the year.

Energy Secretary Alfonso Cusi assured the public in a statement on Wednesday that the DOE is keeping a close watch over oil firms to prevent possible profiteering over the implementation of the Train law.

The DOE explained that no oil excise taxes should be collected within the first fifteen days of the year and no excise tax should be collected on liquefied petroleum gas within the first seven days.

Meanwhile, no coal excise tax should also be collected based on existing 2017 stockpiles and therefore, this should not result in an increase in electricity costs within 30 days.

Cusi has invited the oil companies to meet with his department on Wednesday to clarify the mechanisms in the implementation of the new tax law.

Cusi stressed that the additional excise tax on fuel under Train should not affect the prices of old stocks of oil firms, including their stocks under the 15-day Minimum Inventory Requirement.

“As directed by President Duterte, the government taxes should not profit the companies, because these are all intended for the services of the government to the public and the public alone,” the energy chief said.

In a press conference at the DOE in Taguig on Wednesday, Energy Undersecretary Felix William Fuentebella explained that under the Train law, the excise tax will be collected on a per liter basis for gasoline, diesel, kerosene, and fuel oils, while the excise tax for LPG will be collected per kilogram.

Cusi said the oil companies had willingly agreed to submit their stock inventories as of the cut-off date of December 31, 2017 under a notarized document to the DOE.

The oil companies also concurred to share their data on their sales to the dealers/retailers to determine which stocks will be affected by the excise tax.

“We have to make an effort to make sure that the declared stockpiles are accurate and the DOE will come up with public advisories to let the public know that an increase is imminent,” Fuentebella explained.

Assistant Secretary Bodie Pulido of the Oil Industry and Management Bureau said: “It would have been simpler if we just issued a date but it would prejudice the consuming public and the government because the oil companies are like collecting agencies. If we don’t take the time to find out the actual stock inventory of oil companies, we might end up in a situation, where some companies might incur losses while some make a profit.”

For further transparency, the oil companies will also require their retailers to post what the products will be charged with excise tax and when it will be implemented.

Cusi said the DOE and other concerned government agencies would conduct random audit and monitoring activities on the compliance with Train, both in the depot/refinery and the retail level or gasoline stations.

The DOE calls on the public to be vigilant and to report any violation to info@doe.gov.ph or to Consumer Welfare and Promotion Office at tel. no. 479-2900 loc. 329. (PNA with SDR/SunStar Philippines)

Go to Source

New Mexico: No state law violations in fetal tissue case

Brian Sanchez

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — No state laws were broken by the transfer of fetal tissue between an Albuquerque abortion clinic and researchers at the University of New Mexico, according to findings outlined Thursday by the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office.

The state’s top prosecutors detailed their findings in a letter to members of a special U.S. congressional committee created in 2015 to investigate Planned Parenthood and the world of fetal tissue research.

The committee, in a lengthy report issued nearly a year ago, accused the group of violating U.S. laws by altering abortion procedures to obtain fetal tissue, disclosing patients’ private information to firms that procure the tissue and “a general disinterest in clinical integrity.”

Planned Parenthood has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, and Democratic congressional representatives have said the GOP-led probe unearthed no wrongdoing and wasted taxpayers’ money.

As part of its work, the panel also examined tissue procurement firms and research entities including the University of New Mexico. The report cited 15 instances in which the committee provided information to U.S. and state authorities of possible violations of federal and state laws.

The allegations were first forwarded to Attorney General Hector Balderas’ office in 2016, and similar claims were made by the anti-abortion group New Mexico Alliance for Life.

Balderas, a Democrat, ordered civil and criminal reviews but his office said there was insufficient evidence to indicate state violations. The inquiries were limited to state laws because Balderas has no jurisdiction over federal law.

“We consider this matter closed,” the attorney general’s office said in its letter to the New Mexico group.

But it’s possible the long-running controversy surrounding the use of fetus tissue in medical research is not over because U.S. Justice Department officials in December confirmed the FBI was considering criminal investigations.

U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce, R-New Mexico, renewed his request for an investigation in September. He cited the allegations uncovered by the congressional committee and raised questions that women electing to receive abortions at the Albuquerque clinic — Southwestern Women’s Options — did not have enough information to consent to the procedure.

That consent is also the focus of a lawsuit pending in state district court that was filed by women who were treated at Southwestern Women’s Options. Their attorney, Michael Seibel, said the attorney general’s office did not contact any of the victims as part of the inquiries.

Seibel and New Mexico Alliance for Life accused the attorney general’s office of protecting political special interests.

James Hallinan, a spokesman for Balderas, denied the claim and said Balderas’ office conducted a thorough investigation that included interviews.

Southwestern Women’s Options, one of the nation’s few providers of late-term abortions, has in the past provided the UNM Health Sciences Center with tissue from aborted fetuses for medical research. The clinic and health center officials have repeatedly said the fetal tissue transfer is legal.

Planned Parenthood spokesman Benjamin Halle said Thursday that in addition to the New Mexico attorney general’s findings, investigations by 13 other states, a grand jury in Texas and other congressional committees have found no wrongdoing on the part of his organization.

At issue in New Mexico were state statutes that cover anatomical donations and clinical research activities involving fetuses.

State prosecutors say the arrangement between the abortion clinic and the university may have resulted in benefits for each entity but that the donation of the fetal tissue did not amount to an illegal “purchase” or “sale” under the statute. They also found that the tissue was not used for transplantation or therapy, which would violate state law.

As for the state law that governs research related to fetuses, the attorney general’s office said it was never intended to regulate fetal tissue resulting from an abortion given the definitions in the statute.

Go to Source

No state law violations in fetal tissue case

Brian Sanchez

No state laws were broken by the transfer of fetal tissue between an Albuquerque abortion clinic and researchers at the University of New Mexico, according to findings outlined Thursday by the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office.

The state’s top prosecutors detailed their findings in a letter to members of a special U.S. congressional committee created in 2015 to investigate Planned Parenthood and the world of fetal tissue research.

The committee, in a lengthy report issued nearly a year ago, accused the group of violating U.S. laws by altering abortion procedures to obtain fetal tissue, disclosing patients’ private information to firms that procure the tissue and “a general disinterest in clinical integrity.”

Planned Parenthood has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, and Democratic congressional representatives have said the GOP-led probe unearthed no wrongdoing and wasted taxpayers’ money.

As part of its work, the panel also examined tissue procurement firms and research entities including the University of New Mexico. The report cited 15 instances in which the committee provided information to U.S. and state authorities of possible violations of federal and state laws.

The allegations were first forwarded to Attorney General Hector Balderas’ office in 2016, and similar claims were made by the anti-abortion group New Mexico Alliance for Life.

Balderas, a Democrat, ordered civil and criminal reviews but his office said there was insufficient evidence to indicate state violations. The inquiries were limited to state laws because Balderas has no jurisdiction over federal law.

“We consider this matter closed,” the attorney general’s office said in its letter to the New Mexico group.

But it’s possible the long-running controversy surrounding the use of fetus tissue in medical research is not over because U.S. Justice Department officials in December confirmed the FBI was considering criminal investigations.

U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce, R-New Mexico, renewed his request for an investigation in September. He cited the allegations uncovered by the congressional committee and raised questions that women electing to receive abortions at the Albuquerque clinic — Southwestern Women’s Options — did not have enough information to consent to the procedure.

That consent is also the focus of a lawsuit pending in state district court that was filed by women who were treated at Southwestern Women’s Options. Their attorney, Michael Seibel, said the attorney general’s office did not contact any of the victims as part of the inquiries.

Seibel and New Mexico Alliance for Life accused the attorney general’s office of protecting political special interests.

James Hallinan, a spokesman for Balderas, denied the claim and said Balderas’ office conducted a thorough investigation that included interviews.

Southwestern Women’s Options, one of the nation’s few providers of late-term abortions, has in the past provided the UNM Health Sciences Center with tissue from aborted fetuses for medical research. The clinic and health center officials have repeatedly said the fetal tissue transfer is legal.

Planned Parenthood spokesman Benjamin Halle said Thursday that in addition to the New Mexico attorney general’s findings, investigations by 13 other states, a grand jury in Texas and other congressional committees have found no wrongdoing on the part of his organization.

At issue in New Mexico were state statutes that cover anatomical donations and clinical research activities involving fetuses.

State prosecutors say the arrangement between the abortion clinic and the university may have resulted in benefits for each entity but that the donation of the fetal tissue did not amount to an illegal “purchase” or “sale” under the statute. They also found that the tissue was not used for transplantation or therapy, which would violate state law.

As for the state law that governs research related to fetuses, the attorney general’s office said it was never intended to regulate fetal tissue resulting from an abortion given the definitions in the statute.

Go to Source

No state law violations in fetal tissue case

Brian Sanchez

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) – No state laws were broken by the transfer of fetal tissue between an Albuquerque abortion clinic and researchers at the University of New Mexico, according to findings outlined Thursday by the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office.

The state’s top prosecutors detailed their findings in a letter to members of a special U.S. congressional committee created in 2015 to investigate Planned Parenthood and the world of fetal tissue research.

The committee, in a lengthy report issued nearly a year ago, accused the group of violating U.S. laws by altering abortion procedures to obtain fetal tissue, disclosing patients’ private information to firms that procure the tissue and “a general disinterest in clinical integrity.”

Planned Parenthood has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, and Democratic congressional representatives have said the GOP-led probe unearthed no wrongdoing and wasted taxpayers’ money.

As part of its work, the panel also examined tissue procurement firms and research entities including the University of New Mexico. The report cited 15 instances in which the committee provided information to U.S. and state authorities of possible violations of federal and state laws.

The allegations were first forwarded to Attorney General Hector Balderas’ office in 2016, and similar claims were made by the anti-abortion group New Mexico Alliance for Life.

Balderas, a Democrat, ordered civil and criminal reviews but his office said there was insufficient evidence to indicate state violations. The inquiries were limited to state laws because Balderas has no jurisdiction over federal law.

“We consider this matter closed,” the attorney general’s office said in its letter to the New Mexico group.

But it’s possible the long-running controversy surrounding the use of fetus tissue in medical research is not over because U.S. Justice Department officials in December confirmed the FBI was considering criminal investigations.

U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce, R-New Mexico, renewed his request for an investigation in September. He cited the allegations uncovered by the congressional committee and raised questions that women electing to receive abortions at the Albuquerque clinic – Southwestern Women’s Options – did not have enough information to consent to the procedure.

That consent is also the focus of a lawsuit pending in state district court that was filed by women who were treated at Southwestern Women’s Options. Their attorney, Michael Seibel, said the attorney general’s office did not contact any of the victims as part of the inquiries.

Seibel and New Mexico Alliance for Life accused the attorney general’s office of protecting political special interests.

James Hallinan, a spokesman for Balderas, denied the claim and said Balderas’ office conducted a thorough investigation that included interviews.

Southwestern Women’s Options, one of the nation’s few providers of late-term abortions, has in the past provided the UNM Health Sciences Center with tissue from aborted fetuses for medical research. The clinic and health center officials have repeatedly said the fetal tissue transfer is legal.

Planned Parenthood spokesman Benjamin Halle said Thursday that in addition to the New Mexico attorney general’s findings, investigations by 13 other states, a grand jury in Texas and other congressional committees have found no wrongdoing on the part of his organization.

At issue in New Mexico were state statutes that cover anatomical donations and clinical research activities involving fetuses.

State prosecutors say the arrangement between the abortion clinic and the
Go to Source

Top German Newspaper Harshly Criticizes New Anti-Free Speech Law

Brian Sanchez

The editor in chief of Bild, one of the top newspapers in Germany, harshly criticized a very new law Thursday that aims to significantly reduce online hate speech, while still protecting other forms of expression.

The law, which came into effect at the start of the new year, was used almost immediately, with authorities in the country already launching an investigation into Breatrix von Storch, deputy leader of the country’s far-right party Alternative for Germany (AfD). The politician is suspected of violating the new rules by equating many Muslims to “barbarians” in posts published on Facebook and Twitter.

“Please spare us the thought police!” a headline in Bild’s Wednesday edition read.

“The law against online hate speech failed on its very first day. It should be abolished immediately,” said Julian Reichelt, the editor in chief of Bild, according to Reuters, adding that AfD politicians are being regarded as “opinion martyrs” because of the law.

Aside from the barbaric remark, von Storch criticized police for tweeting in Arabic in a so-called sign of solidarity with the Muslims in the country, and also reportedly called followers of the religion “rapist hordes of men.” (RELATED: Germany’s New Hate Speech Law Has Already Triggered Investigations)

Known as the Network Enforcement Act, or NetzDG, the law applies to tech firms like Twitter, Facebook, Google, Snapchat, and YouTube, among some others. It reportedly does not apply to WhatsApp and LinkedIn. If sites fail to remove hate speech from the platform within a 24-hour-period (or 7 days in certain instances decided with dubious criteria), then they could face a 50 million euro ($60 million USD) fine.

When reports of the law — then preliminary or pending — first arose, Facebook denounced it, arguing such government endeavors are dangerous for not only changing how such companies operate, but fundamentally altering free speech protections promised in several countries’ respective constitutions.

“The draft law provides an incentive to delete content that is not clearly illegal when social networks face such a disproportionate threat of fines,” Facebook said in an official statement months ago, according to Business Insider. “It would have the effect of transferring responsibility for complex legal decisions from public authorities to private companies. And several legal experts have assessed the draft law as being against the German constitution and non-compliant with EU [European Union] law.”

Overall, as the Bild shows, the law has only been in place for hours, and it has already garnered a lot of condemnation from many different parts of society and both ends of the general political spectrum.

Also WATCH:

Follow Eric on Twitter

Send tips to [email protected].

The Daily Caller News Foundation is working hard to balance out the biased American media. For as little as $3, you can help us. Freedom of speech isn’t free. Make a one-time donation to support the quality, independent journalism of TheDCNF. We’re not dependent on commercial or political support and we do not accept any government funding.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

Go to Source

First Lawsuit Filed Among Motor Vehicle Victims of Amtrak Train Derailment, According to Attorneys Clifford Law and Luvera Law Firm

Brian Sanchez

SEATTLE, Jan 04, 2018 (BUSINESS WIRE) —
An individual seriously injured when the motor vehicle he was riding in
was crushed by the Amtrak derailment on Interstate 5 has filed suit, the
first among victims not riding on the train, according to attorneys Clifford
Law Offices, a nationally recognized personal injury and wrongful
death law firm based in Chicago, and the Luvera
Law Firm, plaintiff’s attorneys in Seattle.

This press release features multimedia. View the full release here:
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180104006484/en/

Clifford Law Offices and the Luvera Law Firm yesterday filed the first
passenger lawsuit on behalf of a victim injured in the rail car that was
dangling over Interstate 5 following the derailment. The firms have
currently been retained by 10 individuals who were injured in the Dec.
18 derailment. Today’s lawsuit was filed in Washington state court, King
County, on behalf of Blaine Wilmotte, who was seated in the front seat
as a passenger in a vehicle below as he headed to a job site in the
Seattle area. The 24-year-old suffered multiple traumatic fractures of
his limbs as well as emotional injuries that are ongoing. Also named in
today’s lawsuit is Wilmotte’s wife, Madison.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is investigating the
probable cause of the crash that initially reported the passenger train
was traveling at 80 miles per hour around a curve that called for a
maximum speed of 30 miles per hour.

Michael S. Krzak, partner at Clifford Law Offices handling the matter,
reiterated that several people who were injured or the families of those
who lost loved ones have contacted the firm because of Amtrak
representatives reaching out to them in the hospital with paperwork to
sign without a complete explanation of what their rights are following
such a tragic incident.

“Our clients cannot fathom how Amtrak 501 entered a curve at almost
three times the posted speed limit according to information the NTSB has
released,” Krzak said. “As a common carrier for hire, Amtrak owes a duty
of the highest care to the individuals it is transporting. Amtrak
utterly failed in its duties and responsibilities to the victims on the
train as well as those who were in the unfortunate path of the train as
it left the tracks and crushed numerous vehicles on Interstate 5.

“The filing of these civil lawsuits is the first step in giving the
victims and their families the answers that they need as to what led to
this derailment. The hope is that one day lawsuits like these will raise
awareness and make rail travel safer,” Krzak said.

Robert Gellatly of Luvera Law Firm added, “Drivers should be focused on
the safety of other drivers, not on trains crashing on top of them.”

“Amtrak chooses to run its trains too fast while slow-walking common
sense safety changes,” Gellatly said. “Despite repeated mass tragedies,
Amtrak continues to endanger the public while hiding behind special
federal protection that won’t help them here. We’re sorry this had to
happen again, but are very proud of our clients for standing up to stop
Amtrak from blindly racing toward another senseless tragedy.”

View source version on businesswire.com: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180104006484/en/

SOURCE: Luvera Law Firm

Clifford Law Offices
Pam Menaker, 847-721-0909
pammenaker@aol.com
or
For
Luvera Law Firm
Annie Alley, 206-913-8663
annie@firmani.com

Copyright Business Wire 2018

Go to Source