Get a FREE Case Review
Call Today: (855) 971-1114
Available 24 Hours, 7 Days A Week

North Carolina Invokana lawyers Auger and Auger have begun accepting cases for victims of type 2 diabetes medications including Invokana and similar medications Infokamet, Farxiga, Xigduo XR, and Jardiance. Just two months ago, the FDA released a warning to consumers that taking Invokana may lead to ketoacidosis, a condition that can cause serious complications including coma or death. Invokana and its potential risks and side effects are currently being investigated.

F.D.A. Warning

In May, the Food and Drug Administration issued a public warning regarding Invokana. In that warning, the FDA reported that anyone taking the drug should pay close attention to any side effects they experienced. Difficulty breathing, nausea, abdominal pain, confusion, and unusual fatigue should alert patients to seek immediate medical attention. The drug puts people at risk of developing ketoacidosis, an extremely serious condition that can be fatal if left untreated.

Invokana and Invokamet

These drugs are SGLT2 inhibitors. That is, when they are combined with a prescribed diet and exercise regimen, the drugs help the patient control their diabetes by lowering blood sugar and improving glycemic control. Invokamet differs slightly in that it is a combination of Invokana and metformin. It is utilized when either drug is not sufficient in controlling diabetes on its own.

In the United States, diabetes is seventh on the list of causes of death. Left untreated or unmanaged, type 2 diabetes can eventually lead to nerve damage, blindness, heart disease, kidney failure, high blood pressure, and other serious problems. These types of drugs help the kidneys remove excess blood sugar through the urine.

Recall

Although the FDA has released a warning about the potential dangers of Invokana and similar drugs, there has been no official recall issued. It is important to note that the investigation is in its early stages. Investigations such as this can take years to complete. It is when these investigations are completed that voluntary and involuntary recalls are issued. Even though there has been no official recall, patients taking the drugs are strongly urged to pay attention to their bodies for signs of ketoacidosis. Although potentially fatal, the condition can be treated if detected early enough.

Ketoacidosis

When your body is unable to produce enough insulin, your cells are unable to accept an adequate amount of glucose. Ketoacidosis is a condition in which your body begins to break down fat for fuel as an alternative to glucose.

Symptoms of ketoacidosis include fruit-scented breath, frequent urination, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, weakness, confusion, shortness of breath, hyperglycemia, and high ketone levels in the urine. While any of these symptoms should alert you to the need to seek medical attention, never ignore an inability to keep food or liquid down, blood sugar levels that do not respond to self-treatment, or urine ketone levels that are moderate to high.

Patients should seek immediate medical attention if blood sugar levels persist above 300 milligrams per deciliter, multiple symptoms of ketoacidosis are present, or excessive ketones are present in the urine. Remember that, when left untreated, ketoacidosis can be fatal.

Representation

Attorney and founding partner Herbert W Auger is heading the Invokana lawsuits at Auger & Auger. If you or a loved one has suffered any significant health issue or complication after taking Invokana or Infokamet, contact our offices at your convenience.

Your initial phone call is free and we do not charge you a fee unless we obtain compensation for you. Your call and information will be kept confidential. Each case will be handled on a contingency basis, meaning we do not accept a fee unless we settle your case in your favor. Call our offices today and tell us how we can help you.

Photo Credit

download (80)Sometimes even just a little difference in speed can make all the difference in the world between safe driving and having an accident. That is what some in the Morgantown City Council believe. They met to discuss the possibility of lowering the speed at what many consider a dangerous intersection in Monongalia County.

The request is for a lower speed limit at the intersection of Route 119 and Route 73 by 5 or 10 mph.  The current speed limit is 45 mph and there is one accident per week at this intersection on average.    There is also a request for a flashing yellow light to alert drivers of the intersection and the reduced speeds.

The City Council has decided to support the project.

Accidents usually happen because someone does something careless.  When driving along at a higher rate of speed, if a driver is unaware of what is going on around them, such as changes in the road, or increased traffic flow that they aren’t expecting, an accident can result.  Governments at the city, county and state level usually take care and try to insure the safety of their citizens and make adjustments in order to insure their safety.  Even with the best of intentions, accidents can and do happen.

If you have been injured in an accident of any kind, give our law offices a call. .  We have the resources to help you and we are the first, best step in any personal injury claim.

Call Auger & Auger today and let us help you get the compensation you need to get your life back on track after an accident. Call us today.

Facebook iconYour Posts Can Make Or Break Your Case

While your posts may seem harmless at the time, they can make or break your personal injury case. Recently, Courts have decided that the social media profiles of the parties to a legal action may be discoverable evidence, and that a person’s social media profiles can be requested by an opposing attorney as long as the profile and its contents are relevant to the legal action. What this means for you is that a defense lawyer has the right to ask to see your social media profiles and to examine the contents of those profiles up to and including any posts, messages, and pictures that are deemed to be relevant to your case.
Relevancy is interpreted broadly, and it is likely that any posts, pictures, or messages that
are located on your profile will be discoverable, meaning that the information will be able to be seen by defense lawyers and possibly a jury once your case goes to trial. It is the defense lawyer’s goal to portray the Plaintiff in a bad light and often times they will use any means necessary in order to do so. However, there are certain steps that you can take to avoid having your social media profiles negatively affect the outcome of your case. Following these easy tips will prevent any harmful post-injury information posted on your profile from becoming a tool that the defense can use against you.

“Privacy” Is Not A Valid Objection

When you join Facebook or other media sharing site, you are agreeing that your information is not private, even with the use of privacy settings. As a Facebook or other social media user, you are actively making information about yourself available on websites intended to be shared by other users. Even “non-public” sections of your profile will likely be discoverable as Courts favor a broad interpretation of what is relevant, and to conclude otherwise would excuse a plaintiff that tried to obscure information from self-imposed privacy settings.
Tips
-After you are injured or involved in an accident, freeze your account activity and change your privacy settings so that only you can post information to your profile and only friends may see your profile, this prevents anyone from posting to your accounts after the accident has occurred and also will prevent the general public from being able to access your profile from an internet search.
-Do not post anything regarding the injuries that you have sustained, how you are feeling, or any activities that you are doing, this includes “private messages” to friends, family, or co-workers.
-Do not post ANY pictures to your accounts following your injury as these pictures will be discoverable and may be used against you to show activity levels, your mood, or the extent of your injuries.
-Do not delete any old pictures or posts as this will look suspicious to defense lawyers. If deemed relevant, this information can and will still be found as it is backed up on the social media sites servers and by tampering with the information after your accident or injury you will raise suspicion as to why the post or pictures were deleted.
Following these four easy tips may prevent any post-injury information posted to your social media profiles from negatively affecting your case. Remember even though the information you post may seem private to you, once it is posted on the internet it no longer remains private and can be used against you.

Getting driver permitIn effort to reduce the number of North Carolina car accidents that involve newly licensed teenage drivers, a new law recently went into effect which requires that a driving log with evidence of at least 60 hours of driving be presented by teens between the ages of 16 and 18 when applying for their provisional license.

The new provision requires that all teens who obtain their limited learner’s permit on or after October 1, 2011, maintain a logbook detailing at least 60 hours driving, with at least 10 of those hours being nighttime driving. The supervising driver is required to sign the log, and the log book must be presented to the Division of Motor Vehicles at the time of the applicants road test. But beware-if the clerk thinks you have falsified your log book, you will not be permitted to take your road test, and will have another 6 months in which to complete a legitimate logbook.

Additionally, teens between the ages 16 and 18 who obtain their limited provisional license on or after October 1, 2011 will be required to keep a logbook detailing at least 12 hours, with at least 6 of those hours being at night, and must be signed by the supervising driver for the nighttime hours. As with the limited provisional license requirements, if the Division of Motor Vehicle thinks your logbook has been falsified, you will not be eligible for your full provisional license for another 6 months, during which you must complete a legitimate logbook.

These changes come on the heels of a study conducted by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety which found that newly licensed teens have a 50% greater likelihood of crashing during the first month of having a drivers license than they are following an entire year of solo driving experience.

The study identified specific areas in which parents can improve the safety of their teen driver:
-Continue practicing skills with their teen, and introduce them to more difficult driving conditions, such as heavy traffic and bad weather.
-Limit passengers. The risk of a teen driver crashing multiplies with additional teenage passengers.
-Limit driving at night. For a newly licensed, inexperienced teen driver, the decreased visibility at night increases risk of wrecking.

As the parents of two teenagers that will soon be getting their provisional drivers licenses, the Charlotte, North Carolina car accident attorneys at Auger & Auger are acutely aware of the dangers teenage drivers face, and urge you to stay involved with teaching your teen safe driving skills, even after they obtain their license.

 

The North Carolina truck accident attorneys at Auger & Auger are please to advise you that effective January 1, 2012, interstate truck drivers and bus drivers will be prohibited from using hand-held cell phones while driving. The rule was implemented in effort to prevent distracted driving, and was promulgated through a joint effort from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).

Drivers who violate the rule are subject to fines up to $2,750 per offense and potential prohibition from operating a commercial motor vehicle for multiple violations. Two or more violations involving cell phone use may result in state suspension of their commercial driver’s license.

Trucking companies and commercial bus companies that allow their drivers to use hand-held cell phones while driving can be fined up to $11,000. Trucking companies tried to fight the new rule, arguing that interstate commerce would be impeded if drivers had to pull over and stop in order to make a call. The Department of Transportation rejected that argument because alternatives are available other than stopping to pull over, such as use of hands free devices.

The new rule does allow for the use of hands-free devices equipped with speaker phone AND one-touch dialing as long as the phone is within reach of the driver while in a properly belted, seated position. The rule does prohibit, however, a mobile phone with a push-to-talk function, as this would mean the driver would have to hold the phone while driving.

This legislation was a necessary safety measure aimed at cracking down on distracted driving. In 2009, almost 500,000 people were injured in wrecks involving distracted driving, and almost 5,500 were killed. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 16% of traffic fatalities in 2009 were due to a distracted driver. Research by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has found that when the driver of a commercial vehicle searches and reaches for a cell phone, they are at three times greater risk of crashing, and the act of dialing the phone increase the risk of crashing by six times.

For drivers of passenger vehicles, use of hand held devices remains permissible for the time being. The NC General Assembly rejected House Bill 44 that would have prohibited the use of handheld cell phones by all drivers. Operators of private passenger vehicles are still banned from text messaging and using email and internet while driving, and drivers under 18 years of age who still have a provisional license may not use a cell phone at all while driving.

It is difficult to predict whether this new legislation will have any effect on interstate truckers use of cell phones, as police and troopers have had difficulty with enforcement on the ban of handheld phones in passenger vehicles in the states that prohibit it.

If you or someone you care about has been injured by a distracted driver, the experienced attorneys at Auger & Auger can help.

North Carolina Highway Patrol has found that 16 year old Taylor Clark was texting when she caused a head-on collision, killing 17 year old passenger, Seth Beaver. Clark has been charged with misdemeanor death by a motor vehicle, failing to yield, and texting while driving.

It has been illegal for drivers in North Carolina under the age of 18 to use a cell phone while driving since 2006, and for any driver to text while driving since December 1, 2009, but drivers such as Clark continue to ignore this law. In fact, a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has reported that even though North Carolina bans cell phone use by drivers under 18 years of age, cell phone use by this group actually increased since the law went into effect.

There are currently three bills pending in North Carolina, all aimed at curtailing the use of cell phones by all drivers. If passed, House Bill 31 will make it illegal to use a cell phone while driving, and House Bill 44, would allow use of hands free devices only. Senate Bill 36 is nearly identical to House Bill 31. If passed, these laws will go into effect on December 1, 2011.

Our experienced car accident attorneys encourage you to talk to your teen. Reinforce the rules. Sit down with your child and watch “Faces of Distracted Driving”. Real stories, about real teens, who paid the ultimate price when someone was texting while driving.

North Carolina State Senator Bob Rucho of Mecklenburg County recently introduced Senate Bill 33 which seeks to limit the amount of money that can be awarded for pain and suffering to victims of medical malpractice to a mere $250,000, and make emergency medical providers, such as the emergency department in a hospital, immune from liability unless found guilty of “gross negligence, wanton conduct, or intentional wrongdoing.” Under the present law, the medical malpractice victim must show that the medical provider did not meet the standard of care among medical providers with similar training and experience.

This bill comes on the heels of a recent study which found that a person has a 20% chance of being harmed by medical care in a North Carolina hospital. The study, which was conducted by Harvard Medical School and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, was reported in the New England Journal of Medicine on November 25, 2010. In addition to reporting a significant risk of becoming injured as the result of medical care, it also found that almost 14% of the injuries resulted in life-threatening injury or death. Most significant, however, was the finding that over 63% of the injuries caused by medical care were preventable.

What does this mean to the North Carolina hospital patient? It means that if you or a family member becomes one of the more than 4,000 deaths are preventable each year, or suffers one of the 6,000 preventable permanent injuries, your North Carolina lawmakers want to prevent you from recovering anything, if the medical malpractice was committed by an emergency medical provider, or limit your recovery to $250,000 if malpractice was committed in a non-emergent situation.

What can you do about it? The injury attorneys at Auger & Auger, and urge you to contact your North Carolina State Senator as well as your Representative, and tell them to vote “NO” on Senate Bill 33.

Scroll to the bottom of the page and enter your zip+4 zipcode. This will bring up links to your North Carolina State Senator, Representative, and our Congresswoman. From there, you can email, call or write your elected officials and tell them to vote “NO” on Senate Bill 33.

In its 2010 session, the North Carolina Senate will decide whether to put an end to the archaic doctrine of contributory negligence and adopt a form of comparative negligence. Presently, North Carolina is one of only 5 states that follows contributory negligence, meaning if an injured party is partially responsible for his injury, even if only 1%, he is prevented from recovering any damages from the party primarily at fault.

The proposed new law, HB 813, modeled after the Uniform Apportionment of Tort Responsibility Act (UATRA), passed the North Carolina House of Representatives in May, 2009. Under the proposed HB 813, an injured party will be prevented from recovering damages only if his contributory fault is greater than or equal to the other at fault party. In a situation where more than one party is at fault, as long as the plaintiff’s fault does not add up to more than that of the other at fault parties combined, the plaintiff may recover part of the damages caused by each at fault party.

How does this affect the average auto accident victim? Lets say you were involved in an auto accident in which the at-fault party made a left turn in front of you, causing you to collide with their vehicle. Assume you were traveling 45mph in a posted 35mph zone. Under the current system of contributory negligence, the insurance company for the left-turning vehicle could deny your claim due to your traveling above the speed limit. Under the proposed HB 813, a jury would determine your percentage of fault and apportion your damages accordingly, as long as you were less than 50% at fault.

If HB 813 passes, it will mean more injured parties will receive compensation they are rightfully entitled to. Often times, a police officer investigates an accident scene and is “unable to determine” fault. Passage of HB 813 will give greater leverage to people who find themselves in this situation.

Contact your NC Senator and tell them you want them to vote “YES” on HB 813. To find out who your senator is, go to the NC General Assembly Senate page.

PoolThe federal Pool and Safety Act went into effect in December 2008, yet hundreds of pool owners in North Carolina have still not complied with the law, and are at risk of having their pool closed. The federal law applies to public access pools, and state regulations that mirror the federal law have also been enacted.

These laws apply to public pools as well as those in hotels, gyms, apartment complexes, and subdivisions. They provide safety guidelines that require, among other things, that said pools be equipped with drain covers that prevent jewelry, hair, fingers, and toes from being sucked into a drain.

According to the NC Division of Environmental Health, as many as 1,000 pools statewide might be closed. Mecklenburg County has already received more than 1,000 public pool permit applications. While most have already been approved, some permits that were granted are now being revoked and pools are being closed, as random inspections are finding that the required changes were not actually made. Mecklenburg County Health Department will continue to conduct random inspections, and will close pools where necessary.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission reported 83 entrapments involving swimming pool drains from 1999 to 2008. Of those entrapments, 11 were fatalities, most involving children under the age of 15.

One of the most highly publicized swimming pool accidents in the country occurred right here in North Carolina. In that case, a young child sat on a drain at the bottom of the pool, as children often do, but the drain was missing its cover. The tremendous suction from the drain caused the child to lose a great portion of her intestines.

Our North Carolina injury attorneys are available to help if you or a family member is injured in a swimming pool accident.

DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this Website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. No recipients of content from this site, clients or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the site without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an attorney licensed in the recipient's state. The content of this Website contains general information and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. The Firm expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all the contents of this Website.