Category Archives: Legal

E-cigarettes

aaj

This article is from my American Association for Justice monthly magazine –


Trial

Theme Article

E-cigarettes spark litigation

November 2016 – Annesley H. DeGaris

Since hitting the market several years ago, e-cigarettes have rapidly become a popular alternative to cigarettes. But they raise safety questions—from product defects to chemical exposure.

E-cigarette use has surged among all age groups, with proponents hailing the devices as a safer alternative to cigarettes. But continuing research raises increasing safety concerns. As more cases alleging product defects and other claims are being filed, it is important to have a basic understanding of ­e-cigarettes and their safety issues.

An e-cigarette is a device that releases vaporized nicotine that is then inhaled—a process known as “vaping.” Typical e-cigarettes include a battery, atomizer, nicotine cartridge, LED light, and sensor. The sensor determines when the consumer starts to inhale and causes the battery to power the atomizer, which heats up the “e-liquid” and turns it into a vapor. The nicotine cartridge holds the e-liquid, a fluid that typically consists of nicotine, a diluent such as propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin, and a flavoring.1

E-liquids come in many flavors, with names targeted to appeal to children, such as “Strawberry Fields” and “Smurfberry.” E-liquid manufacturers also offer tobacco- and menthol-flavored e-liquids to help market the device for smoking cessation.

In 2008, e-cigarette companies raked in $20 million in sales.2 The 2016 e-cigarette­ market is projected to be worth more than $4 billion.3 And experts believe that e-cigarette sales will eclipse cigarette sales within 10 years.4

Between 2010 and 2013, the percentage of adults using e-cigarettes more than doubled.5 Between 2013 and 2014, the percentage of teens in middle school and high school using e-cigarettes tripled.6 One study found that 24.6 percent of high school students surveyed reported current use of a tobacco product, with e-cigarettes being the most common.7

E-cigarettes have become so widespread that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has considered banning their use in public housing units,8 the U.S. Department of Transportation treats the devices as cigarettes and prohibits vaping on airplanes, and the FDA recently issued new regulations.9

Hazards: Known and Unknown

Several safety hazards have been associated with e-cigarettes, including exploding devices and potential toxic chemical exposure. Although the FDA recognizes some particles in e-vapor as generally safe for ingestion, no studies have determined the particles’ effects when inhaled.10 But reports of adverse health events include hospitalization for pneumonia, congestive heart failure, disorientation­, seizure, hypotension, and nicotine poisoning.11 Early studies suggested that vaping is as safe as breathing normal air,12 but more recent studies show that the cancer risks are similar to those of traditional cigarettes.13

E-cigarettes with variable voltage pose an additional risk. Vaping at a high voltage has an estimated cancer risk five to 15 times as high as the risk associated with long-term cigarette smoking.14 Most variable-voltage e-cigarettes use 3.7 volt batteries, as do standard e-cigarettes. The difference is that a variable-voltage e-cigarette has a circuit that stores and regulates power from the battery, delivering it to the atomizer tank at the voltage the consumer chooses.

The higher the voltage, the greater the nicotine kick—but also a greater exposure to certain chemicals.15 Specifically, the e-cigarette’s battery heats the propylene glycol and glycerin in the e-liquid to the point of decomposition, causing the formation of carcinogens such as formaldehyde.16

Diacetyl is another concerning chemical. It is used to flavor e-cigarettes and has been found in more than 75 percent of the devices and their refill liquids.17 Diacetyl is linked to severe respiratory disease such as bronchiolitis obliterans—also known as “popcorn lung” because of its diagnosis in workers at microwave-popcorn-processing factories who inhaled the chemical, used in artificial butter flavoring.18

Recent research has called attention to other health concerns: e-cigarettes may lead to tumor growth;19 high levels of inhaled nanoparticles can cause inflammation and are linked to asthma, stroke, heart disease, and diabetes;20 and accidentally ingesting the e-liquid may lead to nicotine poisoning. This year, poison control centers have received more than 1,000 reports of potential liquid nicotine poisoning.21 In 2014, more than 50 percent of liquid nicotine poisoning calls involved children under age six.22

Another source of injury is exploding devices. The culprit is the lithium-ion battery. Similar to problems seen in laptops and cellphones, the batteries are prone to overheating. Extreme temperatures can cause the batteries to malfunction.23 When overheated, the cylindrical shape of e-cigarettes may propel the device, contributing to the risk of explosion and fire.24

FDA Regulations

Although e-cigarettes have been on the market for several years, the FDA only introduced regulations earlier this year; they became final on Aug. 8, 2016.25

The regulations already placed on traditional cigarettes—such as disclosing all ingredients, including health warnings on product packages, and requiring that all purchasers (online and in stores) be at least 18—are now applicable to all e-cigarettes.26 As part of the regulations, the agency must approve all tobacco products, which includes e-cigarettes, that were not commercially marketed by Feb. 15, 2007.27

The regulations apply to all manufacturers, distributors, sellers, and anyone else involved with the e-cigarette industry. Manufacturers will have to register with the FDA and provide a list of ingredients that the agency will review for approval. Manufacturers have argued that only those few businesses that can afford to comply will survive.28 At least one manufacturer lawsuit has been filed against the FDA seeking to have the rules vacated and declared unlawful.29

Emerging Litigation

E-cigarette litigation is varied and still in the early stages. Plaintiffs have brought cases alleging false advertising, lack of health warnings, and personal injuries—including lung disease, nicotine poisoning, and combustion of devices and batteries that caused severe burns.

Some causes of action, such as consumer fraud and deceptive trade practices, depend on the vagaries of state law, with some states—such as California—being more advanced in the nature and range of applicable consumer protection statutes. Products liability actions include claims for defective design and inadequate warnings.30

The first e-cigarette explosion lawsuit was tried in September 2015. The jury awarded the plaintiff nearly $1.9 million after the device exploded in her car, causing second-degree burns.31 Other cases involve an e-cigarette exploding in the plaintiff’s mouth, requiring doctors to surgically repair the plaintiff’s tongue and amputate a finger;32 and an e-cigarette that exploded and set a room on fire, creating a large hole in the plaintiff’s cheek.33

Several class actions also have been filed, including one in California alleging dangerous levels of diacetyl and other chemicals34 and lack of warning labels about the known links to popcorn lung, emphysema, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.35 Other class actions have alleged false advertising and marketing claims about e-cigarettes’ ability to help users quit smoking, failure to warn or inform consumers of associated health risks, and misleading consumers about e-liquid ingredients and their safety.36

Although litigation is still developing, when screening a potential case, plaintiff attorneys should consider issues that are common to products liability cases. Preservation of the device—including the battery and charger, which are sometimes sold separately from the device—and establishing a proper chain of custody in an explosion case, for instance, must be scrupulous. The early and careful gathering of all of a plaintiff’s medical records will be key, regardless of whether the plaintiff was injured by an exploding device or from exposure to chemicals.

As in any case, client screening is crucial. Ask potential clients about any modifications they made to the device. Selecting causation experts will require careful research—especially in exposure cases given the emerging science of e-cigarette toxins and the strictures of Daubert. Although device manufacturers are obvious defendants, many are located outside the United States. You should look into bringing defective design and inadequate warning claims against local retailers and distributors.

The e-cigarette is a nicotine-delivery device, and its growing popularity has revealed major products liability issues. Although FDA regulation of these devices should be applauded, history shows that the civil justice system often can create the necessary change faster than government regulation. With this device, both are needed.


Annesley H. DeGaris is a partner at DeGaris & Rogers in Birmingham, Ala. He can be reached at adegaris@degarislaw.com.

My newsletter

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here to view newsletter online +SUBSCRIBE
October 2016
Photo
Osler “Pete” Peterson
617-969-1500 – Newton
508-359-9190 – Medfield
Dear Subscriber,The number of people suffering, and all too often dying, from prescription drug abuse is staggering. And the epidemic is growing exponentially, fueled by the prevalence of opiate painkillers. Here’s an overview on cause and prevention.

Information that makes us safer
These newsletters are based on a simple idea – the more each one of us knows, the better off each us will be. Each newsletter focuses on a topic that relates to the health, wellness, and safety of each of us, our families, and our friends. I hope that you will find the information both interesting and informative, and that each month you can take away at least some nugget, that can make you or your family more secure.

Remember, the safer you remain, the less likely is that you will need the courts, as legal claims are generally only needed when proper safety measures were missing.

Pete

“You Should Know” Risk and Prevention Guide

Opiate Drug Abuse, Deaths Soar Along with Drug Company Profits

Tribute
Opioid abuse has killed 165,000 Americans since 1999, including legendary musician Prince. Learn more.

In April, musician and icon Prince died in his home from an accidental overdose of the prescription opioid fentanyl. In September, U.S. soccer superstar Abby Wambach revealed her long struggle with substance abuse and prescription drug addiction after an arrest for driving under the influence.

High-profile stories like these are waking up all Americans to an exploding public health crisis. Overdose deaths from prescription opiates have quadrupled since 1999, claiming the lives of an estimated 165,000 people. At the same time, sales of these prescription drugs have also quadrupled, generating record profits for drug companies.

Wading through the dangers of addiction while also dealing with serious pain can be an overwhelming challenge. You should know how to protect yourself and your loved ones from those who may have profits – not your well-being – as their top priority.

Investigate further here >>>

BY THE NUMBERS /
4x
Increase
Overdose deaths involving prescription opioids have quadrupled since 1999, killing 14,000 people in 2014 alone.
1,000
Per Day
Every day, more than 1,000 people are treated in emergency rooms for misusing prescription opioids. Overdose rates were highest among people aged 25 to 54 years.
$1.98
Billion
Sales of opioids reached an estimated $1.98 billion in 2014. Meanwhile, drug companies spent $880 million nationwide since 2006 fighting restrictions on opioids.
BOOKMARK FAVORITES /

The Politics of Pain

The heroin addiction that eventually killed Cameron Weiss started when the 18-year-old was prescribed painkillers for a wrestling injury. Jennifer Weiss-Burke, Cameron’s mother, is now hoping to change state laws and prevent tragedy for others. View video.

Pain Pill Dangers: Dispelling the Myths

Consumer Reports investigates the myths surrounding prescription opioids, including misinformation about the risk of addiction. View video.

Obama Calls for More Recovery Services

President Obama teams up with Grammy winner Macklemore to speak about opioid addiction and present solutions for those looking to curb this epidemic.  
View video.

What’s Your Prescription Painkiller Experience?

Take our survey on prescription opioid use, and we’ll enter your name into a drawing for a free iPod Shuffle.

Survey here

MD On Our Love Affair with Drugs

Dr. David Johnston has watched attitudes about prescription drugs shift dramatically during his 30 years in practice.

Listen now

You Should Know is a copyrighted publication of Voice2News, LLC, and is made possible by the attorney shown above. This newsletter is intended for the interest of past and present clients and other friends of this lawyer. It is not intended as a substitute for specific legal advice. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, click here to unsubscribe from this newsletter, and your request will be honored immediately. You may also submit your request in writing to: Steven L. Miller, Editor, 4907 Woodland Ave., Des Moines, IA 50312. Be sure to include your email address.
Click here to unsubscribe from this newsletter.

SJC allows same sex parentage amongst separated unmarrieds

SJC

A decision  by the Supreme Judicial Court today allows an unmarried same sex, non-biological parent, after a separation, to establish parental rights the same as heterosexual couples may.  The case involves a failed relationship between two women, where the non-biological parent seeks to establish parental rights to the children of the relationship.The court noted:

On the
basis of these allegations, Partanen’s complaint sought a
declaration of parentage pursuant to, among other things, G. L.
c. 209C, § 6 (a) (4). That statute provides that “a man is
presumed to be the father of a child” born out of wedlock if
“he, jointly with the mother, received the child into their home
and openly held out the child as their child.”

 

And the court then held:

In addressing Partanen’s claims on direct appellate review,
we consider the question whether a person may establish herself
as a child’s presumptive parent under G. L. c. 209C,
§ 6 (a) (4), in the absence of a biological relationship with
the child. We conclude that she may. We conclude further that,
here, the assertions in Partanen’s complaint are sufficient to
state a claim of parentage under G. L. c. 209C (statute).

 

 

Good news for our legal rights

aaj

Dear AAJ Members,

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has finalized a rule that will ban nursing homes and long term care facilities from requiring their residents to “agree to” pre-dispute arbitration as a condition for receiving federal money through Medicare and Medicaid. We expect the practical impact of this rule to be that the overwhelming majority of nursing homes will cease their practice of forcing residents to sign pre-dispute arbitration agreements.

This rule is a major breakthrough in our work with you, and so many of your clients, to end forced arbitration. Our work together against forced arbitration clauses buried in the fine print has been ongoing, building, and producing results. It includes:

Advocacy for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to issue a final rule to curb fraud and abuse in the financial sector by limiting the use of class action waivers as part of forced arbitration clauses;
Advocacy for the Department of Labor’s final rule (issued April 4, 2016) requiring that contracts between investors and a financial adviser/firm acting as a fiduciary are prohibited from including provisions that would limit liability or waive the investor’s right to participate in a class action in court;
Advocacy for the Department of Education to issue a final rule that prohibits the use of forced arbitration and class action waivers by schools receiving federal funds under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965;
Advocacy for the Department of Labor’s final rule (issued August 24, 2016) implementing President Obama’s Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order (July 2014) that prohibits corporations with federal contracts of $1 million or more from subjecting their employees to forced arbitration for claims arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or civil suits related to sexual assault or harassment.

Thank you for working with us to protect consumers from forced arbitration. We will share additional news with you as rules are finalized by other agencies.

Jeep Grand Cherokee shifter

From my American Association for Justice daily news – the design of this shifter sounds like it goes against things I use to queue myself, namely the physical position of the shifter.


Parents of Star Trek star crushed by faulty car file wrongful death suit against Fiat Chrysler.

News that Star Trek actor Anton Yelchin’s parents announced through their attorney Tuesday that they have filed a wrongful death and product-liability suit against Fiat Chrysler generated significant media coverage. ABC News (8/2, Messer, 4.15M) reports online that Gary Dordick, Victor and Irina Yelchin’s attorney, said at a press conference Tuesday the couple had filed suit seeking an undisclosed sum in “punitive damages because we believe Fiat Chrysler, ZF North America, that made and manufactured and sold this product, knew that it was defective.” Yelchin’s 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee rolled down his driveway on June 19, pinning the young actor against his entry gate and ultimately killing him. Citing an AP report, ABC adds the vehicle was one of “more than 1 million vehicles recalled by Fiat Chrysler because its gear shift did not clearly indicate whether or not it was in park.” Dordick showed the press “a recall letter that Fiat Chrysler sent to the late actor seven days after his death.” An NHTSA report indicated that the “defect led to almost 700 complaints, 266 crashes and fires, and 68 injury incidents” as of June 24. The lawsuit also includes retail chain AutoNation and the company that made the gear shifter, ZF North America, according to Rolling Stone (8/2, Blistein, 14.65M).

CBS Evening News (8/2, story 9, 0:25, Rose, 11.17M) broadcast coverage of the announcement, reporting the car model was “recalled because its gear shifter was confusing to drivers” – some thought the vehicle was it park when it was actually in neutral. Consumerist (8/2, Kieler, 45K) explains that the vehicles’ electronic gear shifter differs from a traditional shifter because it “is simply moved forward and backward to select gear” and, “once the gear has been selected, the shifter returns to the centered position.” This design “lacks the typical grooves and sensation of moving the car into Park, Drive, or Reverse” associated with the traditional gear shifter.

According to the AP (8/2, McCartney), Fiat Chrysler offered Yelchin’s family its sympathies but declined to comment on the suit. The company will accelerate the recall and, along with the NHTSA, is urging affected drivers to “set their parking brakes before getting out of their vehicles.” The company is also facing a suit filed by law firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLC, CNN Money (8/2, Melas, 3.1M) reports, on behalf of “owners of these particular models and seeking unspecified damages.”

TIME (8/2, Chan, 17.97M) reports the actor’s father, Victor Yelchin, said at the press conference, “In spite of our unbelievable grief, we decided to come here to prevent other families from the same tragedy. …Anton was our only son, and he was a remarkable human being – very modest, very simple, very honest, generous, loving.” He added, “It is wrong, it’s against nature, when the parents bury its own child. That’s why we hope that this lawsuit will make [another] family never go through the same hell we’re going through right now.”

Sources offering similar coverage of the accident and lawsuit include Reuters (8/2, Sinha-Roy), AFP (8/2), and Ars Technica (8/2, Farivar, 1.17M).

Legal case update

This is from my daily legal news update from the American Association for Justice.  This case makes one appreciate the government regulations that keep us safe, as that chemical cannot be used here.

 

Family sickened by pesticide in Virgin Islands may receive $87 million payout.

ABC News (8/1, 4.15M) reports that “a Delaware family severely poisoned by pesticides while on a vacation to the Virgin Islands could receive as much as $87 million in a settlement from ServiceMaster, the parent of pest control company Terminix, according to the company’s recent financial filings.” ABC adds that “teenagers Sean and Ryan Esmond both suffered seizures and landed in the hospital in critical condition after exposure to methyl bromide – a powerful, nearly odorless neurotoxin that was banned from indoor residential use by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1984 – according to the agency.” Their parents, Stephen Esmond and Theresa Devine, “were also severely injured from the exposure and required rehabilitation therapy, according to a statement last year by the family’s lawyer.” ABC notes that “in financial statements filed July 28,” ServiceMaster “noted that it entered into a plea agreement on July 21 after a Department of Justice investigation.”

My AAJ on our jury trial right

AAJ-forced arbitration

Wall Street might finally lose its favorite get-out-of-jail free card, but it’s not giving up without a fight.  Take Action

In May, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposed a rule that would restrict the abusive use of forced arbitration and restore consumers’ ability to bring class actions when Wall Street engages in widespread wrongdoing.  But this long-awaited and widely supported proposal is facing well-financed attacks from powerful corporate interests.

Tell Congress to prioritize consumer rights over corporate interests and support the CFPB’s forced arbitration rule!  Take Action

Consumer rights champions in Congress are circulating letters to the CFPB expressing strong support for the forced arbitration rule. Tell your elected officials to join them by signing the letter! Take Action

If Wall Street is not accountable, our financial security is at risk!

Learn more about Wall Street’s fine print tricks.

My newsletter

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here to view newsletter online +SUBSCRIBE
June 2016
Photo
Osler “Pete” Peterson
617-969-1500 – Newton
508-359-9190 – Medfield
Dear Pete,Drinking remains the number one cause of accidents and deaths from impaired driving. However, an increasing number of drivers are testing positive for marijuana. Here are the latest reports on this growing public safety concern.

Information that makes us safer
These newsletters are based on a simple idea – the more each one of us knows, the better off each us will be. Each newsletter focuses on a topic that relates to the health, wellness, and safety of each of us, our families, and our friends. I hope that you will find the information both interesting and informative, and that each month you can take away at least some nugget, that can make you or your family more secure.

Remember, the safer you remain, the less likely is that you will need the courts, as legal claims are generally only needed when proper safety measures were missing.

Pete

Elizabeth Kemble, a widely admired advocate for kidney health in Oregon, was out for a walk following her third kidney transplant when she was killed by a driver who admitted to smoking marijuana minutes earlier. Debra Majkut, an Ohio mother of two, was sitting on her couch with her children and a nephew when a woman high on pot crashed into Majkut’s home, killing her and seriously injuring her infant son.

Nightmare scenarios like these are exactly what safety advocates predict will become commonplace on our nation’s roads as the list of states legalizing marijuana for either recreational or medicinal use continues to grow. But instead of clearing the smoke, conflicting studies and a patchwork of state laws have complicated this issue for all of us concerned about impaired driving.

Learn the latest here. >>>

BY THE NUMBERS /
50%
More

The number of drivers with marijuana in their systems grew nearly 50 percent from 2007 to 2014, according to a national roadside survey.

1 in 8
Seniors

A recent study of high school seniors showed that one in eight admitted to using marijuana before driving.

18%
Drugged

Nationwide in 2009, 3,952 fatally injured drivers were tested for the presence of drugs; 18 percent tested positive. [Download report]

BOOKMARK FAVORITES /

Couric Follows the Path to Legalization

Katie Couric walks us through the change of mindset and laws surrounding the legalization of marijuana. 
View video.

New Simulator Tests Drivers on Pot

A new, first-of-its-kind driving simulator is helping researchers study the effects of marijuana use on driving. View video.

Fatal Crashes Involving Marijuana Double

According to a new AAA study, fatal crashes involving a driver who recently used marijuana nearly doubled in the year since legalization in Washington state. View video.

Sneak Peek: Let’s Ride Safely

Statistics show that the percentage of intoxicated motorcycle riders in fatal crashes is greater than the percentage of intoxicated drivers on U.S. roads. Next month: motorcycle safety.

Learn more

More Drivers Using Marijuana

An NPR investigation finds that more drivers are using marijuana, but experts can’t agree on what that means for traffic safety.

Listen now

You Should Know is a copyrighted publication of Voice2News, LLC, and is made possible by the attorney shown above. This newsletter is intended for the interest of past and present clients and other friends of this lawyer. It is not intended as a substitute for specific legal advice. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, click here to unsubscribe from this newsletter, and your request will be honored immediately. You may also submit your request in writing to: Steven L. Miller, Editor, 4907 Woodland Ave., Des Moines, IA 50312. Be sure to include your email address.
Click here to unsubscribe from this newsletter.

Monthly legal & safety newsletter

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here to view newsletter online +SUBSCRIBE
May 2016
Photo
Osler “Pete” Peterson
617-969-1500 – Newton
508-359-9190 – Medfield
Dear Subscriber,Forced arbitration is considered by many as a dire and growing threat to our constitutional right to an open and unbiased hearing in court. Yet most Americans have never even heard of it. Take a minute and learn how this issue effects all of us.

Information that makes us safer
These newsletters are based on a simple idea – the more each one of us knows, the better off each us will be. Each newsletter focuses on a topic that relates to the health, wellness, and safety of each of us, our families, and our friends. I hope that you will find the information both interesting and informative, and that each month you can take away at least some nugget, that can make you or your family more secure.

Remember, the safer you remain, the less likely is that you will need the courts, as legal claims are generally only needed when proper safety measures were missing.

Pete

Businesses Use Loophole to Deny Day in Court

Tia
Tia was sexually harassed by her boss at Circuit City for months. Her story here.

Injustice, Thy Name Is Forced Arbitration

Tia’s employment case against Circuit City was thrown out of court even though her boss sexually harassed her for months, once even exposing his genitals. Javier lost his job when he was deployed overseas despite federal laws protecting employment for members of the Armed services. Alan and other small business owners were told they couldn’t take American Express to court for charging exorbitant exchange rates.

Debbie and several of her classmates tried to hold a trade school accountable for questionable loan practices and substandard instruction but were instead stuck paying the school’s legal fees. Marjorie, Roberta, Richard, Dean, Frances, Beulah, Horace and Mary all suffered terribly and died from nursing home neglect, yet their families were not able to sue the nursing home companies.

How could injustices like these be allowed to exist in America where everyone has the right to take wrongdoers to court? It’s called forced arbitration, and you or a loved one may be next to lose your rights.

More on this growing scam here.

BY THE NUMBERS /
80%
Upheld

Forced arbitration clauses with class-action waivers were upheld in 132 out of 164 federal cases in 2014, preventing Americans from taking on big companies for predatory lending, wage theft and discrimination.

3 of 4
Unaware

A 2015 study found that three out of four consumers didn’t know if they were subject to a forced arbitration clause, and less than 7 percent were aware that they were stripped of their right to go to court.

30
Million

An estimated 15 to 25 percent of U.S. employers use forced arbitration in employment contracts, which means more than 30 million employees have given up their right to go to court.

BOOKMARK FAVORITES /

Companies Make Rules In Secret

America Tonight uncovers the pervasive use of forced arbitration clauses in the fine print of just about every product, service or employment contract. View video.

Forced Arbitration “Isn’t Open, Isn’t Fair”

Rep. Hank Johnson, a sponsor of the Arbitration Fairness Act, speaks to the House of Representatives about the injustice of mandatory arbitration. View video.

Young Couple Feels Robbed

This New York Times video tells how a young couple felt robbed by mandatory arbitration when a used car dealership arbitrarily repossessed their car. View video.

Trapped By The Fine Print

Businesses are using forced arbitration to deprive Americans of their constitutional rights. The American Association for Justice outlines how you could be signing away your rights – and what you can do to fight back.

Learn more

AAJ Calls Out Businesses

Corporations are using forced arbitration to hide wrongdoing, says Gary M. Paul, former president of the American Association for Justice.

Listen now

You Should Know is a copyrighted publication of Voice2News, LLC, and is made possible by the attorney shown above. This newsletter is intended for the interest of past and present clients and other friends of this lawyer. It is not intended as a substitute for specific legal advice. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, click here to unsubscribe from this newsletter, and your request will be honored immediately. You may also submit your request in writing to: Steven L. Miller, Editor, 4907 Woodland Ave., Des Moines, IA 50312. Be sure to include your email address.
Click here to unsubscribe from this newsletter.

Security deposit violations are a defense to evictions

SJC

The Supreme Judicial Court this morning decided that a landlord’s violation of the highly complex security deposit law may be asserted as a defense to an eviction. I counsel all but full time professional landlords to take last months rent instead of a security deposit, because of the complexities required by that law.


We conclude that a violation of the security deposit
statute is encompassed within the definition of “counterclaim or
defense” in G. L. c. 239, § 8A, and that a counterclaim or
defense on that basis may be asserted as a defense to a
landlord’s possession in a summary process action under G. L.
c. 239, § 1A. Therefore, we reverse the Housing Court judgment
granting possession to the landlord and remand for a hearing in
accordance with the provisions of G. L. c. 239, § 8A, fifth par.

GARTH MEIKLE vs. PATRICIA NURSE