Here is a wonderful brief by two CPAs.    Lost wages recovered in personal injury settlements are not taxable is the conclusion reached and well supported by the CPAs in this brief.

CPA Journal May 1998

Taxability of Damages
By Randall K. Hanson and James K. SmithThe exclusion for personal injury is In Brief
New Limits on the Exclusion from Taxability
Damages may be recovered under either breach of contract or tort claims. Tort claims have given rise to
the largest and most publicized judgments. Such claims may arise out of theories of intentional torts,
negligence, or strict liability. Both intentional torts and strict liability claims may give rise to punitive
damages.
Prior to amendment, IRC section 104(a)(2) allowed exclusion from taxability for any damages received on
account of personal injury or sickness. The Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 amended this section
to limit this exclusion to those damages received for personal injury or physical sickness. A second change
requires punitive damages to always be taxable. These changes are effective for all damages received
after August 20, 1996.
The taxability of damages received prior to that date are affected by two Supreme Court decisions. In one
case involving age discrimination, the court held that all damages received were taxable because they
were not received because of personal injury or sickness nor was the case based on tort or tort type rights.
In a second case, the court held that punitive damages were taxable because they were not received on
account of personal injuries or sickness.
Within the last two years there have been major changes to the way proceeds of lawsuits are taxed. The
Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 amended IRC Sec. 104(a)(2) and the United States Supreme
Court rendered two decisions clarifying how the proceeds of lawsuits are taxed. The most recent decision
was decided in December 1996. Since the amended IRC Sec. 104(a)(2) and the Supreme Court decisions
make more damages taxable, there will be increased pressure on attorneys and accountants to find ways
to structure settlements so as to minimize the tax effect of successful claims.
The most common theories asserted in seeking to recover civil money judgments are breach of contract
claims and tort claims. Of these two theories, it is tort law that is most commonly criticized and is also
the theory that has given rise to the largest and most publicized judgments. Recent tort cases that have
received extensive media exposure are the McDonald’s spilt coffee case and the General Motors pickups
with their exploding gas tanks. Cases such as these have accelerated the call for tort reform to rein in
what are viewed as outrageous decisions. Legal reform is slow to develop, and, in the meantime, there are
huge numbers of tort claims being commenced, litigated, and settled every day.
To fully understand and appreciate the tax rules relating to damage awards, it is important to have a
working understanding of the common tort law theories and the damages commonly received for these
theories. Understanding tort law concepts is also important because Treasury regulations exclude from
gross income payments received as a result of tort or torttype
claims. After examining the various tort
theories, we will review the taxation of these tort claim proceeds in light of the recent Supreme Court
decisions. Finally we will explore settlement structure strategies.
Tort Theories and Common Damages
Torts can be defined as “civil wrongs against individuals which are not based on breach of contract claims.”
The basic premise is that individual rights should be protected from harm. There are three categories of
tort theories that are recognized in almost every state. They are intentional torts, negligence, and strict
liability. Each of these theories will be briefly examined and contrasted.
Intentional Torts. Intentional torts include a broad group of wrongs that are the result of intentional bad
acts. The common theme consistent in all intentional torts is the intent to harm another person. Common
examples include assault and battery, false imprisonment, defamation, trespass, malicious prosecution,
invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, intentional interference with contract rights,
and fraud.
To compensate a victim for suffering an intentional tort, various damages are recoverable. For example,
assume a person intentionally strikes another with their fist. The victim’s jaw is fractured and has to be
surgically pinned backed together. The victim is hospitalized overnight and is bedridden for two weeks. The
victim will commence a civil tort lawsuit against the aggressor, asserting the tort claims of assault and
battery. The victim will seek to recover compensatory damages for personal injuries, medical bills, lost
wages, pain and suffering, and any other incidental costs incurred, such as renting a neck and jaw brace.
In addition, punitive damages are generally recoverable for victims of intentional torts. Since the aggressor
acted with intent to harm, the legal system has determined it is appropriate to punish the wrongdoer for
the improper behavior. The legal system is sending a message to the wrongdoer and the community that
those actions will not be tolerated. Often punitive damages can far exceed the actual or compensatory
damages awarded. (The O.J. Simpson judgment is a good example.)
Negligence. The second tort theory is negligence. A negligence claim can easily be contrasted with
battery. The victim will seek to recover compensatory damages for personal injuries, medical bills, lost
wages, pain and suffering, and any other incidental costs incurred, such as renting a neck and jaw brace.
In addition, punitive damages are generally recoverable for victims of intentional torts. Since the aggressor
acted with intent to harm, the legal system has determined it is appropriate to punish the wrongdoer for
the improper behavior. The legal system is sending a message to the wrongdoer and the community that
those actions will not be tolerated. Often punitive damages can far exceed the actual or compensatory
damages awarded. (The O.J. Simpson judgment is a good example.)
Negligence. The second tort theory is negligence. A negligence claim can easily be contrasted with
intentional torts in that a negligence claim does not involve an intentional wrongful act. An act of
negligence basically involves failure to use reasonable care under the circumstances with someone or
something being injured or damaged. If a driver loses control of his vehicle and strikes a pedestrian, the
driver can be held liable for injuries under negligence even though the driver did not intend to harm the
victim.
Four elements must be established if a party is to receive a judgment based on a negligence claim. The
four elements of a negligence claim are as follows: a legal duty exists, a failure to meet the applicable
duty of care, causation, and damages. The first element is almost always present. If a person is going to
interact in society, that person has a legal duty to respect the interests of others. The second elementthat
there be a breach of the applicable standard of carerequires
all persons must act reasonably under
the circumstances. If you are driving a car, you must act as a reasonable driver; if you are an accountant,
you must act as a reasonably prudent professional would act under the circumstances. If you fail to act
reasonably, this element is established.
Causation requires there be a reasonably foreseeable connection between the negligent act of the
wrongdoer and the injuries suffered by the victim. If the resulting injuries are too remote, the negligent
party is not liable. If there is an unlikely chain of events that takes place after a negligent act occurs and
the results were not foreseeable, there can be no recovery. For example, if I negligently prepare a tax
return for a client and the client, in a fit of anger and frustration, commits suicide, this consequence is not
foreseeable, and I will not be liable for the unforeseen consequence. Proximate cause would not be
present.
The final element of a negligence claim is proof of damages. Victims have the obligation of establishing
the extent of the damages suffered.
If I negligently lose control of my vehicle striking a pedestrian, the pedestrian will likely seek to recover
damages for personal injuries, lost wages, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other incidental
costs. Note that punitive damages are generally not recoverable for negligence claims. The negligent party
did not intend to cause any harm; there is no need to punish this wrongdoer.
The beauty of negligence from a victim’s perspective is that the actions of all persons are measured
against that of a reasonable person under the circumstances. Almost anytime a person is injured, it can be
argued someone else caused the injuries by not acting reasonably. The tort of negligence can reach each
of us in our daily activities, making this a powerful theory in the hands of a skilled attorney.
Strict Liability. The third tort theory arose because the legal system found victims with significant
damages or injuries, but they were unable to recover under an intentional tort or negligence theory. Strict
liability is a liability “without fault” approach. Strict liability was initially reserved for situations deemed to
be inherently dangerous or deemed to be an ultrahazardous activity. Examples were demolition by
blasting, keeping wild animals, or putting on fireworks displays. For example, if a company is going to
destroy a building by strategically placing dynamite in different locations and a person is harmed during
the demolition, they can recover for their injuries even if the demolition company used reasonable care in
planning the demolition. The same logic applies to those who insist on keeping wild animals as pets. If a
pet cougar harms a victim, the victim can recover from the pet owner even if the pet owner was acting
reasonably.
The most important strict liability theory today is when strict liability is applied to defective or
malfunctioning products. If a manufacturer puts out a product deemed defective and unreasonably
dangerous, injured parties are granted a recovery. The victim need not show the manufacturer was
negligentonly
that the product was defective. In most states there are precise ways in which a victim
may show the product was defective. The most common methods of showing a product is defective is to
show it was designed in an improper way, or was put together improperly, or was packaged in an improper
way, or the instructions were incomplete or improper. Once a product is shown to be defective, it is
irrelevant that the victim used the product in a careless way since judgments are typically not reduced
because of the victim’s contributory negligence. The philosophy is that the manufacturer should not have
placed a defective product on the market in the first place, and, since it did, there is no defense that the
victim could have been more careful. An example of a strict liability claim would be if a company
manufactures and sells a threewheel
all terrain vehicle. These products tend to tip over easily causing
serious injuries. If the design is shown to be defective, it is irrelevant in most states that the victimoperator
was speeding at the time of the injury.
Punitive damages are recoverable for strict liability claims especially in the case of defective products that
cause personal injuries. Punitive damages would be recovered in addition to damages for personal injuries,
property damages, medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other incidental costs.
The Taxability of Damage Recoveries
When a person is harmed by another, the victim generally seeks to recover compensatory damages. The
taxability of the damages received depends on the type of harm suffered by the taxpayer. Categories of
compensatory damages generally include*
loss of income,
* expenses incurred,
When a person is harmed by another, the victim generally seeks to recover compensatory damages. The
taxability of the damages received depends on the type of harm suffered by the taxpayer. Categories of
compensatory damages generally include*
loss of income,
* expenses incurred,
* property destruction, and
* personal injuries.
All damages are taxable, unless the IRC permits the exclusion of settlement proceeds. The primary section
permitting exclusion is IRC Sec. 104(a)(2), which was amended by the Small Business Job Protection Act of
1996.
IRC Sec. 104(a)(2). Prior to amendment, this code section allowed exclusion for any damages received on
account of personal injuries or sickness. Personal injuries or sickness were interpreted broadly to include
many nonphysical injuries, such as personal embarrassment, mental pain and suffering, breach of contract
to marry, injury to reputation, emotional distress, and violations of civil rights. Despite the broad
interpretation of this code section, the IRS successfully challenged the rule’s interpretation in several court
cases.
The Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 severely limited the types of damages eligible for exclusion
under IRC Sec. 104(a)(2). The language was changed to only allow exclusion for compensatory damages
received on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness. Damages received for emotional
distress or other nonphysical injuries are not considered physical injury or physical sickness for purposes of
this code section and are not excludable. The only hope a taxpayer has in trying to exclude damages
received as a result of nonphysical injuries is to show they had their origin in a physical injury. Damages
received for loss of consortium due to physical injury or physical sickness of a spouse are an example.
These damages would be excludable because they originate from physical injury or physical sickness of the
spouse.
A second change to IRC Sec. 104(a)(2) requires punitive damages to always be taxable. It is no longer
possible to exclude punitive damages from taxable income, even if they relate to personal physical injury
or physical sickness. This was a sharp change from prior law that allowed punitive damages to be excluded
if they related to personal injuries.
The changes to IRC Sec. 104(a)(2) are effective for all damages received (whether by suit or by
agreement) after August 20, 1996. The taxation of compensatory and punitive damages received before
August 20, 1996, in tax years ending before that date, is determined by the old law. The old rules are
heavily influenced by two United States Supreme Court cases involving the interpretation of that section.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Schleier. In this case, a former pilot was fired by United Airlines
when he reached age 60. He sued United Airlines under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
The purpose of the ADEA is to prohibit age discrimination in the workplace. The act makes it illegal to
discharge any employee between the ages of 40 and 70 because of age. After litigation, the parties ended
up settling the dispute and Schleier received $145,629. Half of the award was attributed to “backpay” and
half to “liquidated damages.” The airline did not withhold any payroll or income taxes from the portion of
the settlement attributed to liquidated damages.
When Schleier filed his income tax return, he included as gross income the backpay portion of the
settlement and excluded the portion attributed to liquidated damages. The commissioner of the IRS issued
a deficiency notice, asserting Schleier should have included the liquidated damages as gross income. The
Tax Court held in favor of Schleier, ruling the entire award was excludable as “damages received on
account of personal injuries or sickness” under IRC section 104(a)(2). After the 5th Circuit agreed and held
for Schleier, the matter was heard by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court disagreed with the lower courts and held the entire award was taxable. The court took
a very narrow view as to exclusions from income. The court felt that a claim based on being laid off work
because of age discrimination is not a claim on account of personal injury or sickness. To clarify its
interpretation of “personal injury or sickness,” the court set forth a hypothetical typical tort claim. The
court used an example where a victim is injured in an automobile accident. The victim suffered medical
expenses, lost wages, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. If this victim settled for $30,000, the court
indicated all of the award would be excluded from gross income. The medical expenses and the pain and
suffering would clearly be the result of personal injuries. The lost wages would be excluded, also, as long
as “the lost wages resulted from time in which the taxpayer was out of work as a result of the injuries.”
The court noted that in this hypothetical, each element of the settlement was received on account of
personal injuries or sickness.
Since the court felt age discrimination was not a personal injury or illness, neither the backpay nor the
liquidated damages could be excluded. In discussing the backpay portion of the case, the court did agree
that Schleier may have suffered psychological or “personal” injury by the employment termination that may
even be comparable to that suffered by an accident victim. In the court’s view, this did not entitle Schleier
to exclude the backpay because there was no link between the psychological injury and loss of wages. By
contrast in the car accident case, the court felt there was a direct link between the car accident and loss of
wages. With regard to the liquidated damage portion of the settlement, the court felt this too was taxable
since it was punitive in nature and was not granted on account of injury or sickness. In reaching this
conclusion, the court set up a twostep
test for excluding settlements, first the claim had to be based
upon tort or tort type rights and, secondly, the claim had to be based on personal injuries or sickness. In
deciding if the claim was a torttype
claim, the court looked to the type of remedies recoverable under
ADEA. If a claim is a tort type claim, the court expected to see recoveries allowable for pain and suffering,
emotional distress, harm to reputation, or other consequential damages. Since ADEA does not provide for
remedies commonly associated with personal injury, the court concluded such claims are not tort type
claims.
wages. With regard to the liquidated damage portion of the settlement, the court felt this too was taxable
since it was punitive in nature and was not granted on account of injury or sickness. In reaching this
conclusion, the court set up a twostep
test for excluding settlements, first the claim had to be based
upon tort or tort type rights and, secondly, the claim had to be based on personal injuries or sickness. In
deciding if the claim was a torttype
claim, the court looked to the type of remedies recoverable under
ADEA. If a claim is a tort type claim, the court expected to see recoveries allowable for pain and suffering,
emotional distress, harm to reputation, or other consequential damages. Since ADEA does not provide for
remedies commonly associated with personal injury, the court concluded such claims are not tort type
claims.
C.O’Gilvie v. United States. In O’Gilvie, a woman died of toxic shock syndrome. Her husband and two
children commenced a tort action against the maker of a Playtex tampon that caused the death. The jury
awarded $1,525,000 actual damages and $10 million punitive damages. The family paid income taxes on
the punitive damages and then sought a refund. The children actually received a refund. The lawsuit
combined the claim of the father for a refund of taxes he paid and the government’s claim for the return of
the refund paid to the children of the deceased victim. The central issue of the case was whether punitive
damages were taxable or not. The lower court had found in favor of the taxpayers holding that the punitive
damages were received on account of personal injuries and were, therefore, nontaxable under IRC section
104(a)(2). The Court of Appeals disagreed and held the punitive damages were taxable.
The Unites States Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals and held the punitive
damages were taxable, even though this case involved a tort action to recover for personal injuries. In a
sweeping decision, the court stated that punitive damages are issued not to compensate for injuries, but
to punish reprehensible conduct and to deter its future occurrence. Since the punitive damages are issued
for punishment of a wrongdoer, the damages were not received “on account of a personal injuries or
sickness” and therefore had to be taxable.
The Supreme Court struggled briefly with justifying the exclusion of compensatory lost wages while taxing
noncompensatory punitive damages. The court noted that while not taxing compensatory lost wages
seems to give the taxpayer a windfall, this is justified since the receipt of lost wages is in response to the
personal injuries suffered by the taxpayer. The receipt of punitive damages is not received because of
personal injuries, but rather because of the reprehensible conduct of the defendant.
The dissenting opinion argued that the punitive damages issued in this case were issued because of the
personal injuries suffered by the toxic shock victim. In the dissent’s opinion, it was the personal injury
suffered by the victim that led to the issuance of punitive damages.
Structuring Settlement Agreements
The new rules regarding the taxation of damages makes structuring of settlement agreements a more
important issue. The brightline
tests provided by amended IRC section 104(a)(2) and the two Supreme
Court decisions create a new set of incentives for taxpayers. The first incentive is to avoid punitive
damages that are now always taxable. This will make voluntary settlements more attractive to plaintiffs in
cases involving significant punitive damages. Instead of leaving the allocation between compensatory and
punitive damages in the jury’s hands, the plaintiff can ensure that no damages will be labeled as punitive
by settling out of court. In voluntary settlement agreements, defendants never acknowledge fault anyway,
so they clearly would not be interested in classifying damages as punitive since this indicates they
engaged in reprehensible activities. Only juries will issue damages that are specifically categorized as
punitive.
A second incentive is to allocate as large a portion of the damages as possible to personal physical
injuries or physical sickness. In cases involving multiple claims, including personal physical injuries, this is
a definite issue. In cases involving emotional distress or other nonphysical injuries, the challenge to the
plaintiffs will be to show some type of physical injury resulting from stress. Examples of physical injuries
resulting from emotional distress might include ulcers, headaches, insomnia, or other related maladies.
Once again, plaintiffs will have an incentive to determine their own fates by settling the case and taking
the decision away from the court.
The allocation of damages between compensatory and punitive, and between physical and nonphysical
injuries, will surely be a heavily litigated area, as the IRS fights to limit taxpayers’ creativity. It is
important for the settlement to be very specific in the allocations. Allocations that are unclear are usually
interpreted against the taxpayer. Another important factor is the setting in which the allocation is made.
Based on prior Tax Court cases, it is clear that taxpayers have the greatest level of success when
allocations are made in an adversarial setting. *
Randall K. Hanson, JD, LLM., is a
professor of business law and James K. Smith, PhD, JD, LLM, CPA, an
assistant professor of accountancy
at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington.
now more limited thanks to Uncle Sam.
Home

Posted in: Accident/Injury Advice at 6:34 pm | Comments (0)

A winter wonderland may be fun to sing about–especially on Christmas eve–but, if you are negotiating a treacherous parking lot covered with ice,  bursting into song is the last thing on your mind.

Slipping on ice is no laughing matter and, although falls may be funny in some slapstick type comedies, they can be downright deadly in real life.

To mind comes the case of diet founder Robert Atkins who on April 8, 2003, at age 72, slipped on the ice while walking to work, hitting his head and causing bleeding around his brain.

After losing consciousness on the way to the hospital, where he spent two weeks in intensive care, he died of “blunt impact injury of head with epidural hematoma.”

Fortunately, most falls–though painful–are not this deadly.  You may be wondering, if you’ve fallen on the property of another, if you have a claim.  I’ve responded to that issue in the following question which was originally posed at LawGuru.com.

Q.  My mother slipped on the ice at her apartment complex and injured her shoulder and back. The complex assistant manager witnessed her fall. She has been off of her job at Walmart from the beginning of December and cannot go back until January. She is 85 and supplements her Social Security with her job at Walmart.

Does she have any recourse?

A.  Slip and fall cases can be tough.

The key is “duty”.

Did the apartment complex have a duty to remove ice from the spot where your mother fell?   Whether they had such a duty depends on the facts.   It depends on where she fell.

If she fell in the parking lot she might not have a claim.  It’s just not feasible, in cold climates, to maintain parking lots completely free of ice and snow. On the other hand, if ice had accumulated to a dangerous degree in the parking lot and the owners knew or should have known about it and took no steps to fix it then they could be liable.

If she fell on the steps to her apartment her claim might be stronger.  Apartment complexes normally have a duty to remove ice and snow that accumulates on stair steps.

If she fell on a sidewalk her claim might be stronger still.  Some Utah counties and cities have ordinances which require a landowner to remove snow from the sidewalk within 24 hours.  You can often find those ordinances on-line, at your local public library or, if that fails, at a nearby law library.

Law libraries are found at law schools, and, often, adjacent to court complexes.  Most law libraries are open to the public and, during business hours, they frequently have a reference librarian or other assistants to help you find what you are looking for.

And, if you want to know exactly when the snow last fell, consult the National Weather Service at its website, for weather info on your locality.

Conclusion

Slips on ice are a peril of life in a cold climate.  Many people fall without negligence on the part of the property owner. Whether you have a claim will depend on the law and the facts of the case.

Disclaimer

This article is intended for information purposed only.  If you have a specific question about the law in your state consult an experienced injury attorney who has experience with slip and fall cases.  He or she will  help you sort out the facts.

Posted in: Accident/Injury Advice at 4:07 pm | Comments (0)

With the recent injury and death of Natasha Richardson from an injury to her brain after striking her head in a ski accident it behooves all of us to learn the symptoms of closed head injury so that we may be alert to their presence in a friend or loved one after an accident.

Brain injury can occur from a minor impact to the skull.  It can also happen without impact to the skull.

This latter is known as a contrecoup concussion.  Rapid movement of the head forward and backward can cause the brain to move forcibly against the front of the skull causing injury to the delicate organ.

SYMPTOMS

Some of the common symptoms of a brain injury are as follows:

1.  Vomiting–if you observe someone throwing up after an accident get them to a doctor right away.

2.  Unconsciousness–a reduced state of consciousness is often caused by a head injury.  Doctors have developed the Glasgow coma scale to gauge the severity of loss of consciousness:

“The system involves three responses: eye opening, verbal response and muscle response.  These responses are graded in range from mild to severe loss of consciousness.  For example, the five grades of verbal response range from correctly answering the questions ‘Who are you? Where are you? What day and month is it?’ (Mild) to not responding at all…. (Severe)” From the Mosby Medical Encyclopedia.

Other symptoms of a brain injury include:

3.  Headaches
4.  Fatigue
5.  Dizziness
6.  Blurred vision
7.  Trouble concentrating
8.  Bothered by noise
9.  Bothered by noise
10.  Irritability, lack of patience
11.  Loss of temper easily
12.  Memory difficulty
13.  Anxiety
14.  Insomnia

There is a way to use these last 12 to ascertain the presence of brain trauma.  First check those that apply after an accident.  Next, answer honestly whether any were present before the accident.  For example, I sometimes get irritable when I’m hungry.  Is that evidence of head injury?  Obviously not.

Once you have determined that a symptom is present after an accident but also before the accident ask yourself “is it the same?  or is it worse?”  Worsening of a pre-existing symptom may be evidence of a head injury.

You then total up the number of symptoms that were not present before the accident or, if present, were worse following.  The greater the number of symptoms, the greater the likelihood of a head injury.

Discuss the results with your primary doctor and, if he deems it appropriate, get a referral to a neuropsychologist who can interview you and, as necessary perform a battery of tests to objectify the injury and its effects on your cognitive functioning.

Note: Credit for the development of this list goes to Sureyya Dikmen, PH.D. and the work he performed for his research project: “Behavioral Outcome in Head Injury.”

Conclusion

Brain injury is a common result from many types of accident.  It can vary widely in manifestations.  Car accidents with their “whiplash” type influence on passengers can produce a contrecoup concussion where there is no visible damage to the skull.  Brain injuries can have devastating impact on the lives of their victims.  If you have any of the telltale signs of a brain injury be sure to get checked out by a physician with skill and experience in dealing with these symptoms.

Posted in: Accident/Injury Advice, Auto Accidents at 2:35 pm | Comments (0)

If you are using Seroquel please do so advisedly by reading the warning labels and discussing their symptoms and side-effects with your treating physician.

If you experience any of the following symptoms you should seek medical attention immediately because they could be signs of more serious side effects of Seroquel:

* fever
* sweating
* severe muscle stiffness
* confusion
* fast or irregular heartbeats

Conclusion

There are many risk factors for diabetes such as age, obesity, and ethnicity.  However, the use of atypical anti-psychotic medicine appears to be one of them.  Given the history of related medication Zyprexa, it would behoove anyone considering Seroquel to proceed with caution.

Posted in: Drug and Medical Device Claims at 1:38 pm | Comments (0)

Early in my career as a Utah injury attorney, a young, Air National Guardsman came to me.

He was watching a softball game near the Salt Lake City Airport, when a gust of wind picked up a piece of plywood from land owned by the government.

The wind carried the plywood one hundred feet and dropped it on the young man’s wrist.

A highly respected Salt Lake City attorney told him the case was, at best, worth nuisance value of one thousand dollars.

The attorney was experienced but not in injury law.

In the law of “Torts”, (injury law) injuries caused by nature are known as “Acts of God”.  )

Was this an Act of God?  “Not if it could have been predicted,” says Utah injury law.

Research from the National Weather Service showed wind gusts were common near the Salt Lake City Airport.

Therefore, the Federal government should have tied down the plywood.

Claims against the federal government come under a special law passed by Congress called the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).  Our claim under the FTCA, resulted in a settlement thirty six (36) times that predicted by the other attorney.

AN FTCA CLAIM MUST BE FILED WITHIN TWO YEARS

Under the FTCA a claimant must file a written administrative claim with the applicable Federal agency within two years of the accrual of the claim.

TIME OF ACCRUAL

Accrual occurs when the government violates a persons rights and he or she is damaged because of it.  If a postman drives over your foot while you are checking your mail, for example, accrual would be the moment his tire hits your foot.

INITIATING A CLAIM

To start the claim, the man with the injured foot would typically file United States Government Standard Form 95 (SF-95) with the appropriate Federal agency.

SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNT REQUIRED

The claimant must ask for a specific dollar amount or the claim will not be considered valid.

APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCY

If the claim is filed with the wrong federal agency, it may be forwarded to the appropriate one if known.  However, if it is not clear which federal agency caused the injury, then the claim will be returned to the claimant and will not be considered timely filed.

SIGNATURE OF CLAIMANT

The SF Form 95 must be signed by the person making the claim for by his representative.  If signed by a representative such as a lawyer then proof of the relationship (such as a fee agreement) must be attached.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE CAUSE

The written claim must clearly spell out the circumstances which gave rise to the injury and why the government is at fault.  This allows the agency’s claims personnel to investigate the claim.

AGENCY HAS SIX MONTHS TO INVESTIGATE THE CLAIM

If the federal agency fails to investigate the claim within six months then suit may be filed.  Suit may be filed before expiration of the six months if the agency has completed “final administrative action”.  This occurs when the agency either 1) denies the claim, or 2) makes its final settlement offer.

SUIT TAKES PLACE IN FEDERAL COURT

The lawsuit against the federal government, if it becomes necessary, takes place in United States District Court (federal court) where the injured person lives or where the government’s act or omission took place.

There is no right to a jury in federal tort claims, the case is tried and decided by a federal judge.

DISCLAIMER

This article is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.  Please consult relevant legal treatises and authorities or an experienced injury lawyer for specific legal advice on your FTCA claim.

Posted in: Uncategorized at 1:55 pm | Comments (2)

Thoroughness is the key when preparing a settlement brochure or demand package to attempt settlement of an injury case.

Here are 32 tips gleaned from over 20 years experience that comprise a checklist or template to make sure your booklet is as complete as possible.

(Note:  in this checklist the “settlement brochure” is sometimes called the “demand.”)

1. Order PIP/MedPay payments ledger from your insurance company (the company of the car you were in at the time of the accident.)

2. Receive the PIP/MedPay payments ledger.

3. Check the ledger for any other doctors, clinics, prescriptions, etc. that you had overlooked.

4. Make a complete list of all of your doctors, hospitals etc.

5. Request impairment rating or final narrative report letter from one of your treating doctors.

6. Obtain all Medical Bills.

7. Obtain all Medical Reports and records.

8. Mail or fax to your employer a LOST WAGES REQUEST LETTER.  This asks your employer’s human resources department for 1) your hourly wage at time of accident, and 2) how many hours were missed because of the accident.

9. Once you have received lost wages information from employer calculate lost wages.

10. Check dates of service on ALL med. bills, presc., reports,records,etc. Make sure bills are current & include all services to date.

11. Arrange medical bills in chronological order, keeping all of one dr’s/clinic’s bills together, then list each dr/clinic, and total expenses from that clinic, on MEDICAL SPECIALS SUMMARY in same order.  Note:  in injury cases, medical bills are known as “medical specials.”

12. Check for prescriptions. Add to MEDICAL SPECIALS SUMMARY.

13. Have any of the doctors predicted a specific need for future treatment?  If so, add to bottom of MEDICAL SPECIALS SUMMARY. (Place a copy of future medicals documentation in future medicals section of demand.)

14. Read medical records & reports to identify any problem areas. (In reading,  if another dr./clinic is mentioned check on it to see if there are more med. bills.

15. Organize medical records & reports in reverse chron. order.

16. If this is an uninsured/underinsured motorist case, gather information that is evidence of uninsured/underinsured motorist.

17. Obtain liability or jury verdict research.  Note:  if there is an issue as to liability it is helpful to enclose legal research that supports your position.  This may be obtained from a law library.

18. Draft DEMAND LETTER.  This is the cover letter for your brochure that summarizes all of the information.

19. Type DEMAND LETTER; MEDICAL SPECIALS SUMMARY, FUTURE MEDICALS SUMMARY, and LOST WAGES SUMMARIES.

20. Proofread DEMAND LETTER; MEDICAL SPECIALS SUMMARY, FUTURE MEDICALS SUMMARY, and LOST WAGES SUMMARY. Check date of accident on accident report against the date in letter.

21. Check verdict amounts in comparable verdicts with what is typed in demand letter.

22. Check spelling on medical terms, doctor’s, client and adjusters names.

23.  Check to see that all dollar amounts and numbers are correct numbers.

24.  Check all dollar totals with adding machine.  This may seem trivial but your accuracy will reflect on your credibility.

25.  Check names and amounts on MEDICAL SPECIALS SUMMARY with the bills.

26. Place divider sheets in appropriate places within documents in folder.

27. Finalize DEMAND LETTER; MEDICAL SPECIALS SUMMARY, FUTURE MEDICALS SUMMARY, and LOST WAGES SUMMARY.

28. Make sure letter is signed before copying. Copy entire demand package, make EXACT copy of what you send to the insurance company.

29. Make sure divider tabs are “in” for each section & labeled in demand & copy.

30. After copying “demand” go thru page by page, to see that every page got copied, and that pages are facing out. Be sure highlighted items get highlighted on copy.

31. Mail or hand deliver the demand package/settlement booklet to insurance company.

32. Calendar for follow up in five days with adjuster.

Summary

The care and thoroughness of your settlement booklet will be reflected in the size of the offer.  Build credibility and trust by being complete and accurate.  Good luck!

Disclaimer

This article does not constitute legal advice but is merely a summary of the experience of one attorney in one jurisdiction.  Seek legal advice from a competent attorney in your state or perform your own legal research as to any relevant legal issues.

Posted in: Uncategorized at 12:45 pm | Comments (2)

Sixteen year old Sally is southbound on I-5 near Eugene, Oregon. She hears a ring and knows she has just received a text message. After rustling through her purse, she finds her phone and checks the message. Her best friend Jane, back in Washington, has just seen Steven, Sally’s latest crush, at the Vancouver Mall.

“Should I talk to him?” Jane wants to know.

Sally has to be in Ashland in three hours so stopping is out of the question. And besides, she has no problem texting and driving. She could do it blindfolded.

Minutes later Farmer Tom, who is harvesting ryegrass seed, is blindsided by Sally’s red VW bug. Farmer Tom spends five weeks in the hospital and misses the high point of the seed harvesting season.

Back home in Vancouver Sally peruses her State Farm insurance policy and wonders: “BI–Bodily Injury, what does this cover?”

The policy says it will “pay damages which an insured becomes legally liable to pay because of bodily injury to others caused by accident resulting from the ownership or use of your car.”

Hmm…thinks Sally…what are “damages?”

DAMAGES DEFINED

Black’s Law Dictionary defines damages as “a sum of money awarded to a person because of the [wrongful act] of another.”

“Ok, so “damages” just means money,” Sally rightfully concludes.

“But how do the courts decide what money to award?”

TYPES OF DAMAGES

Damages, says the Blacks Law Dictionary, come in three broad classes: actual, nominal and punitive

Nominal damages are those awarded where a right has been violated but there is no substantial injury. When Sally drove on to the farmer’s field that was a trespass. Had she done so with no loss to the land or equipment or farmer that would have entitled the farmer to nominal damages (usually one dollar) for trespass.

Punitive damages also known as exemplary damages are intended to punish the defendant. They may be awarded where the conduct of the defendant was particularly wicked. Had Sally intentionally drove off the road to run over the farmer a jury in Lane County, Oregon might award punitive damages against her.

Actual damages also known as compensatory damages are those awarded for actual or real loss or injury. This is what bodily injury insurance most commonly covers. In most auto accident cases, actual damages break down into general damages and special damages.

SPECIAL DAMAGES

These, says Blacks Law Dictionary, are the “actual result of the injury complained of, by reason of special circumstances or conditions.” Special damages are easily quantifiable. In a bodily injury case three important special damage components are medical, lost income, and household services.

Medical Expenses

This includes hospital visits, prescriptions, and neck braces. Medical expenses need to be reasonable and necessary. Juries may trim down the medical expenses they consider excessive. If Farmer Tom ran up a $10,000 chiropractic bill the jury might decide he overtreated and cut the bill down to $3,000.

Farmer Tom might have a hard time sleeping after the crash and insist on a new Vera Wang bed prescribed by his family doctor. This would be a hard sell to convince a jury that this was a necessary medical expense relating to the accident.

Lost Income

Farmer Tom hired family members and friends to complete the seed harvest so the crop was not lost. The additional expenses he incurred reduced his profits and so he would have a claim against Sally for lost income. This would be covered by her bodily injury policy.

Household Services

Farmer Tom and his wife are very progressive and so divide up the household tasks. He is responsible for mowing the lawn and washing the cars on Saturday. To replace himself in these tasks Tom had to hire a neighbor boy. The money paid for these services would be recoverable by Tom in a personal injury claim against Sally so this would be covered by her bodily injury policy.

GENERAL DAMAGES

These are the difficult to quantify side of bodily injury damages. What is commonly known as “pain and suffering” comes under this category. Loss of enjoyment of life also falls under this category. General damages is often roughly calculated using a multiplier such as 1x, 2x, 3x times the reasonable and necessary medical expenses.

ATTORNEY FEES

If you are sued by someone after an accident, your bodily injury coverage will also pay for an attorney to defend you. These lawyers, known as “insurance defense attorneys” will be hired by your insurance company for you.

SUMMARY

Bodily injury coverage protects you if you are sued after causing physical injury to another. The coverage extends to anyone using your car with your permission. Your coverage also protects you if you are driving someone else’s car with permission.

The basic elements covered include medical expenses, lost wages, household services, pain and suffering, and attorney fees to hire an attorney to defend you.

About the Author: Rex Bush is founder of Bush Law Firm near Salt Lake City, Utah where he handles personal injury cases in Utah and throughout the United States and Canada. For information on personal injury issues visit his website: Utah Personal Injury Attorney

Posted in: Accident/Injury Advice at 11:08 am | Comments (1)

U.S. manufacturers, including major drug makers, have legally released at least 271 million pounds of pharmaceuticals into waterways that often provide drinking water — contamination the federal government has consistently overlooked, according to an Associated Press investigation.

Hundreds of active pharmaceutical ingredients are used in a variety of manufacturing, including drug making: For example, lithium is used to make ceramics and treat bipolar disorder; nitroglycerin is a heart drug and also used in explosives; copper shows up in everything from pipes to contraceptives.

Federal and industry officials say they don’t know the extent to which pharmaceuticals are released by U.S. manufacturers because no one tracks them — as drugs. But a close analysis of 20 years of federal records found that, in fact, the government unintentionally keeps data on a few, allowing a glimpse of the pharmaceuticals coming from factories.

As part of its ongoing PharmaWater investigation about trace concentrations of pharmaceuticals in drinking water, AP identified 22 compounds that show up on two lists: the EPA monitors them as industrial chemicals that are released into rivers, lakes and other bodies of water under federal pollution laws, while the Food and Drug Administration classifies them as active pharmaceutical ingredients.

The data don’t show precisely how much of the 271 million pounds comes from drug makers versus other manufacturers; also, the figure is a massive undercount because of the limited federal government tracking.

To date, drug makers have dismissed the suggestion that their manufacturing contributes significantly to what’s being found in water. Federal drug and water regulators agree.

But some researchers say the lack of required testing amounts to a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy about whether drug makers are contributing to water pollution.

“It doesn’t pass the straight-face test to say pharmaceutical manufacturers are not emitting any of the compounds they’re creating,” said Kyla Bennett, who spent 10 years as an EPA enforcement officer before becoming an ecologist and environmental attorney.

Pilot studies in the U.S. and abroad are now confirming those doubts.

Last year, the AP reported that trace amounts of a wide range of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in American drinking water supplies. Including recent findings in Dallas, Cleveland and Maryland’s Prince George’s and Montgomery counties, pharmaceuticals have been detected in the drinking water of at least 51 million Americans.

Most cities and water providers still do not test. Some scientists say that wherever researchers look, they will find pharma-tainted water.

Consumers are considered the biggest contributors to the contamination. We consume drugs, then excrete what our bodies don’t absorb. Other times, we flush unused drugs down toilets. The AP also found that an estimated 250 million pounds of pharmaceuticals and contaminated packaging are thrown away each year by hospitals and long-term care facilities.

Researchers have found that even extremely diluted concentrations of drugs harm fish, frogs and other aquatic species. Also, researchers report that human cells fail to grow normally in the laboratory when exposed to trace concentrations of certain drugs. Some scientists say they are increasingly concerned that the consumption of combinations of many drugs, even in small amounts, could harm humans over decades.

Utilities say the water is safe. Scientists, doctors and the EPA say there are no confirmed human risks associated with consuming minute concentrations of drugs. But those experts also agree that dangers cannot be ruled out, especially given the emerging research.

No regulations violated

Two common industrial chemicals that are also pharmaceuticals — the antiseptics phenol and hydrogen peroxide — account for 92 percent of the 271 million pounds identified as coming from drugmakers and other manufacturers. Both can be toxic and both are considered to be ubiquitous in the environment.

However, the list of 22 includes other troubling releases of chemicals that can be used to make drugs and other products: 8 million pounds of the skin bleaching cream hydroquinone, 3 million pounds of nicotine compounds that can be used in quit-smoking patches, 10,000 pounds of the antibiotic tetracycline hydrochloride. Others include treatments for head lice and worms.

Residues are often released into the environment when manufacturing equipment is cleaned.

A small fraction of pharmaceuticals also leach out of landfills where they are dumped. Pharmaceuticals released onto land include the chemo agent fluorouracil, the epilepsy medicine phenytoin and the sedative pentobarbital sodium. The overall amount may be considerable, given the volume of what has been buried — 572 million pounds of the 22 monitored drugs since 1988.

In one case, government data shows that in Columbus, Ohio, pharmaceutical maker Boehringer Ingelheim Roxane Inc. discharged an estimated 2,285 pounds of lithium carbonate — which is considered slightly toxic to aquatic invertebrates and freshwater fish — to a local wastewater treatment plant between 1995 and 2006. Company spokeswoman Marybeth C. McGuire said the pharmaceutical plant, which uses lithium to make drugs for bipolar disorder, has violated no laws or regulations. McGuire said all the lithium discharged, an annual average of 190 pounds, was lost when residues stuck to mixing equipment were washed down the drain.

No testing required

Pharmaceutical company officials point out that active ingredients represent profits, so there’s a huge incentive not to let any escape. They also say extremely strict manufacturing regulations — albeit aimed at other chemicals — help prevent leakage, and that whatever traces may get away are handled by onsite wastewater treatment.

“Manufacturers have to be in compliance with all relevant environmental laws,” said Alan Goldhammer, a scientist and vice president at the industry trade group Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

Goldhammer conceded some drug residues could be released in wastewater, but stressed “it would not cause any environmental issues because it was not a toxic substance at the level that it was being released at.”

Several big drug makers were asked this simple question: Have you tested wastewater from your plants to find out whether any active pharmaceuticals are escaping, and if so what have you found?

No drug maker answered directly.

“Based on research that we have reviewed from the past 20 years, pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities are not a significant source of pharmaceuticals that contribute to environmental risk,” GlaxoSmithKline said in a statement.

AstraZeneca spokeswoman Kate Klemas said the company’s manufacturing processes “are designed to avoid, or otherwise minimize the loss of product to the environment” and thus “ensure that any residual losses of pharmaceuticals to the environment that do occur are at levels that would be unlikely to pose a threat to human health or the environment.”

One major manufacturer, Pfizer Inc., acknowledged that it tested some of its wastewater — but outside the United States.

The company’s director of hazard communication and environmental toxicology, Frank Mastrocco, said Pfizer has sampled effluent from some of its foreign drug factories. Without disclosing details, he said the results left Pfizer “confident that the current controls and processes in place at these facilities are adequately protective of human health and the environment.”

It’s not just the industry that isn’t testing.

FDA spokesman Christopher Kelly noted that his agency is not responsible for what comes out on the waste end of drug factories. At the EPA, acting assistant administrator for water Mike Shapiro — whose agency’s Web site says pharmaceutical releases from manufacturing are “well defined and controlled” — did not mention factories as a source of pharmaceutical pollution when asked by the AP how drugs get into drinking water.

“Pharmaceuticals get into water in many ways,” he said in a written statement. “It’s commonly believed the majority come from human and animal excretion. A portion also comes from flushing unused drugs down the toilet or drain; a practice EPA generally discourages.”

His position echoes that of a line of federal drug and water regulators as well as drug makers, who concluded in the 1990s — before highly sensitive tests now used had been developed — that manufacturing is not a meaningful source of pharmaceuticals in the environment.

Pharmaceutical makers typically are excused from having to submit an environmental review for new products, and the FDA has never rejected a drug application based on potential environmental impact. Also at play are pressures not to delay potentially lifesaving drugs. What’s more, because the EPA hasn’t concluded at what level, if any, pharmaceuticals are bad for the environment or harmful to people, drug makers almost never have to report the release of pharmaceuticals they produce.

“The government could get a national snapshot of the water if they chose to,” said Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, “and it seems logical that we would want to find out what’s coming out of these plants.”

Ajit Ghorpade, an environmental engineer who worked for several major pharmaceutical companies before his current job helping run a wastewater treatment plant, said drug makers have no impetus to take measurements that the government doesn’t require.

“Obviously nobody wants to spend the time or their dime to prove this,” he said. “It’s like asking me why I don’t drive a hybrid car? Why should I? It’s not required.”

Codeine in the Delaware

After contacting the nation’s leading drug makers and filing public records requests, the AP found two federal agencies that have tested.

Both the EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey have studies under way comparing sewage at treatment plants that receive wastewater from drug-making factories against sewage at treatment plants that do not.

Preliminary USGS results, slated for publication later this year, show that treated wastewater from sewage plants serving drug factories had significantly more medicine residues. Data from the EPA study show a disproportionate concentration in wastewater of an antibiotic that a major Michigan factory was producing at the time the samples were taken.

Meanwhile, other researchers recorded concentrations of codeine in the southern reaches of the Delaware River that were at least 10 times higher than the rest of the river.

The scientists from the Delaware River Basin Commission won’t have to look far when they try to track down potential sources later this year. One mile from the sampling site, just off shore of Pennsville, N.J., there’s a pipe that spits out treated wastewater from a municipal plant. The plant accepts sewage from a pharmaceutical factory owned by Siegfried Ltd. The factory makes codeine.

“We have implemented programs to not only reduce the volume of waste materials generated but to minimize the amount of pharmaceutical ingredients in the water,” said Siegfried spokeswoman Rita van Eck.

Another codeine plant, run by Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Noramco Inc., is about seven miles away. A Noramco spokesman acknowledged that the Wilmington, Del., factory had voluntarily tested its wastewater and found codeine in trace concentrations thousands of times greater than what was found in the Delaware River. “The amounts of codeine we measured in the wastewater, prior to releasing it to the City of Wilmington, are not considered to be hazardous to the environment,” said a company spokesman.

In another instance, equipment-cleaning water sent down the drain of an Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc. factory in Denver consistently contains traces of warfarin, a blood thinner, according to results obtained under a public records act request. Officials at the company and the Denver Metro Wastewater Reclamation District said they believe the concentrations are safe.

Warfarin, which also is a common rat poison and pesticide, is so effective at inhibiting growth of aquatic plants and animals it’s actually deliberately introduced to clean plants and tiny aquatic animals from ballast water of ships.

“With regard to wastewater management we are subject to a variety of federal, state and local regulation and oversight,” said Joel Green, Upsher-Smith’s vice president and general counsel. “And we work hard to maintain systems to promote compliance.”

Baylor University professor Bryan Brooks, who has published more than a dozen studies related to pharmaceuticals in the environment, said assurances that drugmakers run clean shops are not enough.

“I have no reason to believe them or not believe them,” he said. “We don’t have peer-reviewed studies to support or not support their claims.”

Associated Press Writer Don Mitchell in Denver contributed to this report.

Posted in: Uncategorized at 3:45 pm | Comments (1)

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers not to eat Queso Fresco Fresh Cheese Mexican style soft cheese (two specific lots) or any Queso Cotija Molido Mexican style grated cheese manufactured and distributed by Peregrina Cheese Corp. of New York City. These products could be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes, an organism which can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in pregnant women, young children, frail or elderly people, and others with weakened immune systems.

Posted in: Uncategorized at 12:35 pm | Comments (0)

Kevin H. is a computerized graphic design professional from Baton Rouge, Lousiana who experienced partial, permanent blindness in his right eye within thirty nine hours after taking Viagra.

Reading on the computer is a requirement of his job, however Kevin reports that “I now read with difficulty and it is becoming harder for me to be effective in my work.”

Kevin may be suffering from nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), which is decreased blood flow to the optic nerve.

NAION  can cause blindness.

VIAGRA, CIALIS AND LEVITRA

Viagra, produced by Pfizer Inc., has been used by 23 million men around the world. Some of these men have suffered from NAION while taking Viagra.

Other side effects associated with Viagra are intraocular pressure, retinal vascular disease and other eye problems such as increased sensitivity to light and blurry vision.

Viagra is one of three drugs that have been approved by the FDA  for Erectile Dysfunction (ED).  The other two are Cialis, which is produced by Eli Lilly, and Levitra, which is manufactured by Bayer Pharmaceuticals.

Both Cialis and Levitra have also been linked to loss of vision caused by NAION.

Here is a quote from the official product information for Cialis:

In rare instances, men taking prescription ED tablets (including CIALIS) reported a sudden decrease or loss of vision or hearing (sometimes with ringing in the ears and dizziness).

It’s not possible to determine if these events are related directly to the ED tablets or to other factors.

If you have a sudden decrease or loss of vision or hearing, stop taking any ED tablet, including CIALIS and call your doctor right away.

ZENCORE PLUS

Bodee LLC announced recently it is conducting a nationwide voluntary recall of all the company’s supplement product sold under the name Zencore Plus.

According to ad copy at Zencore.com:

Zencore Plus is a natural herbal supplement that enhances male sexual performance.   Zencore Plus contains a combination of powerful natural herbs that enhances long lasting, hard and firm erections and boost sexual stamina and energy. … You take Zencore Plus 45 minutes before sexual activity and you’ll experience powerful and fast acting results and it lasts up to 24 hours!… Take Zencore Plus and enjoy a great time of passion and sexual fulfillment.

Bodee LLC is conducting this recall after being informed by representatives of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that lab analysis by FDA of Zencore Plus samples found the product contains benzamidenafil.

Benzamidenafil may have some of  the same pharmacological properties as sildenafil, tadalafil and vardenafil, which are the active ingredients of  Viagra (Sildenafil), Levitra (Vardenafil) and Cialis (Tadalafil).

The use of Zencore Plus by an unsuspecting user of organic nitrates (such as nitroglycerin) may pose a life-threatening risk of sudden and profound drop of blood pressure.  As such,  it may pose a public health risk when used as a dietary supplement.

Neither the likelihood nor the rate of occurrence of  this dangerous side effect is known.

Zencore Plus is sold in health food stores and by mail order on the internet nationwide.  The official Zencore Plus website is still up and displays an apparently active order page where you can get a “Free Supply” by entering your Visa information.

I did not enter my Visa information to see if the order page is still functioning.

Also still found on the internet, as of the date of this article, are numerous pay-per-click ads (at top and left of search results pages) for the product.

The Zencore Plus product is sold as a 2-capsule blister pack packaged in a retail booklet with five booklets in a box or as a 10-capsule blister pack in a retail box.

The capsules were supplied by Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Norcross, GA.   Hi-Tech offers on its website a number of male sexual performance enhancers under the trade name Stamina-Rx.  It is not known if these products contain benzamidenafil.

Consumers with questions may contact Bodee LLC Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 5:00 pm at 800-935-0296 or elp@zencoreplus.com.

CONCLUSION

Erectile dysfunction drugs and supplements can produce miraculous results  in a person’s sex life.  However, to those of you considering Viagra, Levitra,  Cialis  or  Zencore Plus,  please read the warning labels and other product information carefully.  Discuss the risks with your personal physician.

CREDITS:

The author  thanks The Californian and Bodee LLC for helpful information contained in this post.

Posted in: Drug and Medical Device Claims at 5:05 pm | Comments (5)