Class Action Blog : Consumer Fraud, Consumer Protection, Securities and Antitrust Lawyer & Attorney : Meiselman, Denlea, Packman, Carton & Eberz

Meiselman Denlea is investigating cases involving persons injured by second-hand smoke.

There are many situations where people are unwillingly exposed to second-hand smoke. People who work in areas where smoking is permitted, such as casinos, bars or restaurants, are often subjected to other people’s second-hand smoke, which is referred to as “environmental tobacco smoke”.  Remember when it was legal to smoke on airplanes?  Stewardesses were unwillingly bombarded by second-hand smoke in the confined spaces, and as a result many of them developed illnesses such as cancer and respiratory ailments.  People who work in close quarters with smokers are often subjected to second-hand smoke, and may be unwilling to complain for fear of losing their jobs.  In one notable case, a railroad worker who never smoked was housed in a bunk trailer provided by the railroad, and regularly complained to his employer about his constant involuntary exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke from coworkers in the bunk trailers where he lived during the workweek.  He developed lung cancer and brought suit against the railroad, alleging that his work related second-hand smoke exposure doubled his odds of developing lung cancer.

Second-hand smoke cases are not limited to employment areas. People who live in apartment buildings often complain about second-hand smoke from their neighbors, which some courts have held to be a "private nuisance".  A private nuisance is the interference with the rights of certain people as opposed to the general public.  Courts have sustained private nuisance claims against smoking neighbors, and some people have even chosen to sue their landlords for failing to provide a safe and habitable place to live.  Realtors have even been sued by purchasers who alleged that the realtor failed to disclose the danger of a neighbor’s second-hand smoke.

Second-hand smoke cases obviously require scientific proof to show the causal link between exposure and illness.  Although this can be a difficult task, it is not insurmountable, particularly because of the now established link between second-hand smoke and illnesses such as lung cancer, emphysema, and other respiratory ailments.

If you or someone you know has been injured by second-hand smoke, please contact us to discuss your legal rights.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On May 31, 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization (WHO/IARC) issued a report based on its review of available scientific evidence regarding the association of cell phone radiation and brain tumors. The review, while not conclusive, did find that epidemiologic studies conducted to date showed an "increased risk," of glioma and other types of malignant brain tumors, in association with cell phone use. In other words, WHO found that cell phone radiation is "possibly carcinogenic." This finding by WHO represents a more negative determination than its previous finding that no adverse health effects had been established for mobile phone users. As a result, cell phones were placed in the carcinogenic category 2B, similar to chemicals such as DDT and gasoline engine exhaust. Other organizations have suggested an association between cell phone use and cancers of the salivary glands, as well.

It must be noted that, generally speaking, almost universal use of cell phones, particularly by increasingly younger individuals, is a relatively new phenomenon. 20 years ago, cell phones were used by a very small percentage of the American population (mostly business and medical professionals) used cell phones. According to CTIA, an international nonprofit membership organization representing the wireless communications industry, in December 1995, there were 33.8 million wireless connections, representing a wireless penetration of 13% (number of units divided by the total U.S. and territorial population). By December 2010, there were 302.9 million wireless connections, a penetration of 96%. Thus, industry assurances that there are no demonstrated relationships between cell phone use and brain or other cancers must be taken with a grain of salt, particularly with regard to children, whose brains are still forming and who likely have a less then 5-10 year exposure to cell phone radiation at this point in time.

If you, or someone you know, has contracted a cancer which you feel may be relate to cell phone use, please contact us to discuss your legal rights.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (7)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A civil lawsuit has been filed against Central United Life Insurance Company (“Central United”) alleging that the company illegally changed the terms of its cancer insurance policies in order to avoid paying thousands of dollars due to its policyholders who get treatment for cancer.  Central United sold insurance contracts known as “specified disease” policies which promised to pay policyholders the amount charged to them for their medical care if they are diagnosed with cancer, even if their treatment is actually paid for by health insurance.

The lawsuit, filed by the Missouri Department of Insurance, alleges that Central United changed its claims-handling practices to drastically reduce payments to policyholders with cancer.  It is alleged that Central United decided to pay policyholders based on treatment costs, rather than actual damages.  For example, when consumers with health insurance receive medical treatment, insurance companies pay a negotiated rate, which is less than the rate billed to the consumer.  Central United allegedly reimbursed its policyholders who got cancer the lower negotiated rate -- not the actual rate billed to the consumer -- thereby shortchanging its policyholders of thousands of dollars on their medical claims and saving itself thousands, if not millions, of dollars.

“The very essence of insurance is providing protection when life-changing events occur,” said John M. Huff, Missouri Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration, commenting on the civil lawsuit filed against Central United.  “There are few events more life-changing than cancer, and this arbitrary decision by Central United is an attempt to abandon its solemn responsibility to protect its policyholders facing a serious and sometimes deadly disease.”

If you are a consumer who purchased a Central United cancer policy, please contact us to discuss your legal options.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link