Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow
2.1K views | +0 today
Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow
RI Divorce, Family Law, Child Custody, Personal Injury & Car Accident Lawyer
Curated by David Slepkow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by David Slepkow

Unrestrained Motor Vehicle Fatality Stats In Rhode Island

Unrestrained Motor Vehicle Fatality Stats In Rhode Island | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
 Car accidents are an unfortunate part of life, occurring all over the U.S. without warning. While many accidents are unavoidable, many are preventable. By taking the extra time to buckle their seat belt, drivers may reduce their risk of fatal injuries significantly. Below is an overview of Rhode Island fatal accident statistics involving drivers and …
David Slepkow's insight:
Unrestrained Motor Vehicle Fatality Stats In Rhode Island

 Car accidents are an unfortunate part of life, occurring all over the U.S. without warning. While many accidents are unavoidable, many are preventable. By taking the extra time to buckle their seat belt, drivers may reduce their risk of fatal injuries significantly. Below is an overview of Rhode Island fatal accident statistics involving drivers and passengers who were not restrained at the time of the crash. If you have been injured in a car accident, it may help you to speak with a Rhode Island personal injury attorney to discuss your options.

The Importance Of Seat Belts

According to the Center For Disease Control or CDC, more than half of all people who die in motor vehicle accidents are unrestrained at the time of impact. In 2014, over 2 million people were treated in emergency rooms for accident injuries. Statistics also show that drivers ages 18 to 24 are less likely to wear their seat belts while driving or riding as a passenger. In addition, those who are riding in the back seat are less likely to put on their seat belt and are hurt more often than those driving or riding in the front seat.

Rhode Island Statistics

The total number of traffic fatalities in Rhode Island over the last several years are as follows:

  • 83 In 2009
  • 67 In 2010
  • 66 In 2011
  • 64 In 2012
  • 65 In 2013
  • 52 In 2014

The total number of those who died in Rhode Island accidents while being unrestrained are:

  • 32 In 2009
  • 26 In 2010
  • 23 In 2011
  • 20 In 2012
  • 19 In 2013
  • 14 In 2014

The state of Rhode Island had the following percentage of people for restraint use while riding in the front seat:

  • 75 Percent In 2009
  • 78 Percent In 2010
  • 80 Percent In 2011
  • 78 Percent In 2012
  • 86 Percent In 2013
  • 87 Percent In 2014

Police all over the United States have been enforcing seat belt laws more strictly in the last several years, which has resulted in fines and penalties for drivers. If you have been hurt in a car accident due to the negligence of another driver, contact a  Providence personal injury attorney at once to discuss your case.


Legal Notice per Rules of Professional Responsibility: The Rhode Island Supreme Court licenses all lawyers and attorneys in the general practice of law, but does not license or certify any lawyer / attorney as an expert or specialist in any field of practice. While this firm maintains joint responsibility, most cases of this type are referred to other attorneys for principle responsibility.

No comment yet.
Rescooped by David Slepkow from California Personal Injury Attorney Information

Can I get fired for filing a workers compensation case in California?

Can I get fired for filing a workers compensation case in California? | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Can I get fired for filing a workers compensation case in California? The answer is no. Los Angeles work injury lawyer explains your legal rights to file a work comp claim and be free from retaliation or discrimination including being terminated from your job. | Steven M. Sweat, APC 866-252-0735

Via Steven M. Sweat
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Important Evidence to win your RI Truck Accident Case

Important Evidence to win your RI Truck Accident Case | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Rhode Island truck accident attorney David Slepkow 401-437-1100. RI fatal trucking crash wrongful death lawyers. RI personal injury attorneys.
David Slepkow's insight:


No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Personal Injury FAQs in Rhode Island

Personal Injury FAQs in Rhode Island | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Injured in an accident in RI? CALL Rhode Island personal injury attorneys. Ask for RI injury lawyer David slepkow 401-437-1100.
David Slepkow's insight:
Personal Injury FAQs in Rhode Island

When you hire a Rhode Island personal injury attorney, you likely expect that you are hiring a lawyer who will abide by the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Responsibility. Unfortunately, there are some instances in which you are unhappy with your Rhode Island personal injury lawyerperformance as your legal counsel in your case. Perhaps you are at the point in which you may even be considering the filing of an action against a former lawyer.

Rhode Island personal injury attorneys

You should always be aware that you have the right to hire a new lawyer for your case at anytime. There is no way in which a personal injury lawyer can force you to continue to use his or her legal advice and services. Every citizen has the right to find new representation at any point in a trial. Once you decide to move forward in hiring a new lawyer, your old lawyer will have to forward any case materials to the new lawyer.

Can a rescuer who is alleged to be negligent be liable to the victim in RI?

“We are of the opinion, however, that the comparative-negligence doctrine does not fully protect the rescue doctrine’s underlying policy of promoting rescue. No common-law duties changed as a result of the enactment of Rhode Island’s comparative-negligence statute, and there is nothing other than an individual’s moral conscience to induce a person under no legal duty to undertake a rescue attempt. The law places a premium on human life, and one who voluntarily attempts to save a life of another should not be barred from complete recovery. Only if a person is rash or reckless in the rescue attempt should recovery be limited; accordingly we hold that the rescue doctrine survives the adoption of the comparative-negligence statute and that principles of comparative negligence apply only if a defendant establishes that the rescuer’s actions were rash or reckless. See Allison v. Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc., 738 S.W.2d 440 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987). In adopting this reasoning we recognize that the oft quoted words of Justice Cardozo apply now as they did in 1921:

“Danger invites rescue. The cry of distress is the summons to relief. The law does not ignore these reactions of the mind in tracing conduct to its consequences. It recognizes them as normal. * * * The risk of rescue, if only it be not wanton, is born of the occasion. The emergency begets the man. The wrongdoer may not have foreseen the coming of a deliverer. He is accountable as if he had.” Wagner v. International Railway, Co., 232 N.Y. 176, 180, 133 N.E. 437, 437-38 (1921).  612 A.2d 687 (1992) Beverly OUELLETTE v. Orin V. CARDE et al. No. 90-367-Appeal.Supreme Court of Rhode Island. July 9, 1992.

Searches related to personal injury

  • types of personal injury cases
  • personal injury case examples
  • personal injury law basics
  • personal injury examples
  • famous personal injury cases
  • personal injury law definition
  • what is considered to be a personal injury
  • personal injury insurance definition

Hiring a new RI car accident lawyer

You may be wondering about the process of repaying the old attorney who was working on your case.  Perhaps you do not want to pay the attorney due to his or her performance. If you do not pay the attorney, then he or she will likely try to file a statutory lien against the negligence case that you have. This means that at the moment in which you receive a settlement or monetary compensation from a negligence case, the old attorney will also receive a portion of these funds. The good news is that if you decide to hire a new lawyer, then the old lawyer will not be able to collect these funds.

All unintentional injury deaths by the CDC

  • “Number of deaths: 135,928
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 42.6
  • Cause of death rank: 4

Unintentional fall deaths

  • Number of deaths: 31,959
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.0

Motor vehicle traffic deaths

  • Number of deaths: 33,736
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.6

Unintentional poisoning deaths

An injury verdict in Providence

When a verdict is entered for a personal injury case, both of the lawyers who worked on the case will divide the fees that they receive. They will need to divide the funds in an equitable fashion. Typically, each attorney will decide upon a private agreement that is fair in regards to the contributions that were made to a personal injury case.

What this means for a client is that he or she will not have to pay any new funds in order to hire a lawyer for a case. The client can be assured that the new lawyer will divide a portion of the settlement proceeds with a prior lawyer. This can be a great stress reliever to the client who may be in a tight financial position. He or she may be stressed out about having an incompetent lawyer currently working on a negligence case. This client can be relieved in knowing that it is possible to hire a new Rhode Island lawyer  or Rhode Island personal injury attorneys to work on his or her personal injury case.

A negligence cause of action in Newport Superior Court

Your old  Rhode Island personal injury attorneys may be unhappy that you have decided to quit your agreement with them. Even if the lawyer tries to talk you out of it, you should not let this deter you from obtaining the competent representation that you need.   .

When you are filing a negligence action, it is vital to hire a lawyer who will stand up for your rights. You want to ensure that your lawyer will be able to approach the handling of your legal issues in a diligent manner. If you have begun to notice that the work ethic of a current lawyer is below these standards, then you have every right to consider the possibility of hiring a new lawyer for your case. You can get in touch with a new Rhode Island personal injury lawyer or Rhode Island personal injury attorneys  today.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Firing my injury lawyer if I need a new RI personal injury attorney

Firing my injury lawyer if I need a new RI personal injury attorney | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Obtaining a new negligence and tort lawyer in Rhode Island can be a stressful process. It is crucial that you retain one of the top Rhode Island personal injury lawyers. High powered Rhode Island personal injury lawyers  or hernia mesh attorneys will fight to get you the compensation that you deserve for your injuries resulting from …
David Slepkow's insight:
Firing my injury lawyer if I need a new RI personal injury attorney

Obtaining a new negligence and tort lawyer in Rhode Island can be a stressful process. It is crucial that you retain one of the top Rhode Island personal injury lawyers. High powered Rhode Island personal injury lawyers  or hernia mesh attorneys will fight to get you the compensation that you deserve for your injuries resulting from a vehicular crash.

Obtaining new Rhode Island personal injury lawyers

If I am a victim of an accident in Rhode Island and I am dissatisfied with my  Rhode Island personal injury lawyers who I am paying to handle my case, do I have the right to get a new attorney to handle my case?

If you are the victim of an auto accident or have a personal injury claim due to someone else’s negligence, you deserve to be compensated. You also deserve good representation from a lawyer who will fight hard in court for your cause. Rhode Island law states that if you are unhappy with the services of a lawyer, you can obtain different legal counsel to handle your claim. You are not required under any circumstances to remain with an attorney that you do not feel is handling your case adequately. It is also required that the first attorney (or the old attorney) turn over your case information to the new legal team. Your entire case file will travel to the new lawyer with you, it is the law.

Who will pay my discharged Rhode Island personal injury lawyers?

Who will pay the bill for the services that I received from my old Rhode Island personal injury lawyers if i find a new lawyer who is licensed in Rhode Island to handle Personal Injury?

In a nutshell, you do not have to worry about paying your old attorney if you switch counsel but if you win a settlement, that might change. He can put a lien on your property and get paid for his services that he provided during the time of his representation if you win your claim. If you do not, you do not have to pay him. Payment would only occur after a settlement and never when you change to a new lawyer.

  • “Nearly 1.3 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day.
  • An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled.
  • More than half of all road traffic deaths occur among young adults ages 15-44.
  • Road traffic crashes rank as the 9th leading cause of death and account for 2.2% of all deaths globally.
  • Road crashes are the leading cause of death among young people ages 15-29, and the second leading cause of death worldwide among young people ages 5-14.
  • Each year nearly 400,000 people under 25 die on the world’s roads, on average over 1,000 a day.
  • Over 90% of all road fatalities occur in low and middle-income countries, which have less than half of the world’s vehicles.
  • Road crashes cost USD $518 billion globally, costing individual countries from 1-2% of their annual GDP.
  • Road crashes cost low and middle-income countries USD $65 billion annually, exceeding the total amount received in developmental assistance.
  • Unless action is taken, road traffic injuries are predicted to become the fifth leading cause of death by 2030.” http://asirt.org/initiatives/informing-road-users/road-safety-facts/road-crash-statistics

Car accident lawyers will split the fee

Once the case has been decided and settled in court, the two attorneys who have worked on your case will split the legal fee as they see fit. You, as the victim, do not have to worry about how to split up the funds because the lawyers handle it. This means, in other words, that you do not have to pay an extra legal fee if you switch to a new Rhode Island Personal Injury attorney during your case. The new lawyer and old lawyer meet and make an agreement about how funds will be split up, which will probably be based on how much work each one actually did while representing you.

The common legal fee for an attorney in this type of case is thirty three percent (33%). This means that once a verdict is made and you receive your judgement, the lawyer will get 33% of your money. In the case of two attorneys rendering representation during the case process, they will split this fee, which is the common fee and is paid on a contigency basis. A contigency basis means that they do not get paid unless you win and also get paid for the injury that you incurred. This means that if the victim loses, they often do not have any out of pocket costs for the lawsuit. In the case of two attorneys, which is what has been discussed on this page, they split the thirty three percent contigency fee.

Searches related to personal injury lawyers

  • top rated personal injury lawyers
  • personal injury lawyer reviews
  • how to find a personal injury lawyer in RI
  • questions to ask personal injury lawyer
  • injury attorney near me
  • tips for hiring a personal injury lawyer
  • top 10 personal injury lawyers
  • do i have a personal injury case
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

A hernia mesh mess | Bard Davol hernia mesh lawsuit timeline - Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Individual Lawsuits

A hernia mesh mess | Bard Davol hernia mesh lawsuit timeline - Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Individual Lawsuits | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Complications from defective hernia mesh? Contact a hernia mesh lawyer to get justice and compensation (401) 648-3580. Bard / Davol hernia mesh timeline
David Slepkow's insight:

Below you will find a timeline of important dates and events concerning Hernia Mesh manufactured by Bard / Davol. This hernia mesh lawsuit timeline is very complicated and convoluted, to say the least. This post was authored by a hernia mesh lawyer. Thousands of mesh victims filed lawsuits against Bard and their corporate subsidiary Davol seeking compensation by way of settlements or legal judgment as a result of purported defective hernia mesh and hernia patches. These victims are seeking settlements or legal judgments from Bard Davol as a result of the alleged defective surgical mesh. Bard’s hernia mesh medical devices have been subject to numerous mesh recalls. Will there be a hernia mesh recall in 2018? Will there be a Bard Davol hernia mesh lawsuit settlement 2018? No one can accurately predict whether such a hernia mesh settlement will occur.

Bard Davol hernia MESH LAWSUIT


On August 5th, 1996 Surgical Sense Inc. from Arlington Texas submitted a 510(k) application pursuant to 21 CFR 807.9  for the “Kugel™ Hernia Patch.” Surgical Sense Inc. classified this medical device as “surgical mesh.” Surgical Sense Inc. alleged that the “Kugel Hernia Patch” was substantially equivalent to: “Atrium Polypropylene mesh.”They asserted to the FDA that the “intended use of the Kugel hernia Patch is a surgical mesh for reinforcement of a hernia defect” Federal Drug Administration (FDA), Kugel Hernia Patch 510 (k) summary


“In 1997, Davol released the Composix™ hernia patch, a forerunner to the CK Patch.The Composix patch is composed of two layers of

Hernia mesh settlement 2017

polypropylene mesh for tissue ingrowth on the abdominal side, and a layer of ePTFE on the other side to prevent bowel adhesion to the mesh. The Composix patch does not contain a ring. Prior to placing the Composix patch on the market, Davol conducted animal testing by implanting the patch into the abdominal cavity of pigs. Davol submitted the testing results in a so-called 510(k) application to the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in order to get clearance to market the Composix patch.” CHRISTOPHER THORPE and LAURE THORPE, Plaintiffs v.  DAVOL, INC. and C.R. BARD, INC., Defendants. C.A. No. 008-463ML MDL Docket No. 07-1842ML In Re: Kugel Mesh Hernia Repair Patch Litigation  https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/articles/kugel-mesh/interview-kugel-mesh-lawsuit-patch-20010.htm


Bard Davol is a frequent flier using and abusing the shady and controversial FDA 510(k) Premarket Notification process. Over and over again, Bard Davol utilized mesh with an extensive, known history of victim complications as a predicate device to get allegedly defective hernia mesh to the market without proper clinical trials. It is apparent that the FDA 510(k) application process is the root of the problem for defective hernia mesh. The FDA 510(k) application is a controversial process which allows medical device manufacturers to fast track medical devices while evading FDA testing protocol. see also: SAY IT AIN’T SO! : FDA ALLOWS RELEASE OF DEFECTIVE HERNIA MESH 


Bard Davol hernia mesh settlement 2018

“Davol acquired the Kugel™ hernia patch from Surgical Sense Inc., which marketed the Kugel™ patch for several years.”  Id. “Eventually, the CK Patch was designed with two layers of polypropylene mesh, a layer of ePTFE, and a PET memory recoil ring welded between the layers of polypropylene mesh. The XL CK Patch featured larger sizes, two PET rings, and placement pockets for easier deployment of the patch.”  Id. “Because Davol considered the XL CK Patch products a modification to an existing product (the one-ringed CK Patch in small and medium sizes), it made an internal determination that a 510(k) submission to the FDA was not warranted.” http://lawyersusaonline.com/wp-files/pdfs-3/thorpe-v-davol.pdf

On 03/02/2000 the FDA gave clearance to Genzyme to market SEPRAMESH pursuant to the controversial 510(k) premarket approval process. The 510k summary was required pursuant to 21 CFR 807.92 Read the  510(k) summary here. Genzyme asserted that Sepramesh was substantially similar to other hernia mesh that was on the market at that time: Bard Mesh, Bard Composix Mesh and Mersilene Mesh manufactured by Ethicon.  (In 2007 Bard essentially became the owner of Sepramesh.)

August 25, 2000:  Davol /Bard submitted an application to the FDA for  the Composix E/X Mesh Patch. “On August 25, 2000, Davol / Bard submitted an application to the Federal Drug Administration to notify of its intent to market the Composix E/X Mesh Patch for use in the reconstruction of soft tissue deficiencies, such as for the repair of hernias and chest wall defects. Thereafter, the 510k Application was approved by the FDA and the Composix E/X Mesh Patch was classified as a Class II medical device.” Id.  Beasley Allen 

“The Composix E/X Mesh Patch was designed, manufactured, sold and distributed by DAVOL to be used by surgeons for hernia repair surgeries and was represented by DAVOL to be an appropriate, cost-effective and suitable product for such purpose.” http://www.beasleyallen.com/news/federal-court-expands-scope-of-kugel-mesh-hernia-patch/


In 2002 the XL CK  Patch medical device was sold for the first time Id. In 2002, medical doctors began reporting problems with the Composix Kugel Mesh Patch. “a growing number of physicians began to report major abdominal injuries in their patients which stemmed from broken memory recoil rings in the patches.” Legal tube

On July 16th 2002, the FDA  approved the premarket notification submitted by Davol for the Ventralex Patch.  Bard got the Ventralex Patch approved by using the Bard Composix Kugel Mesh as the predicate device.  Davol asserted that the Ventralex patch was substantially similar to the Bard Composix Kugel Mesh. In 2006 Bard recalled the Kugel Mesh.   Davol asserted that “The Ventralex Patch is intended for use in all hernia repairs requiring reinforcement with a nonabsorbable support material.”

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Atrium C-QUR Mesh Lawsuit 2017: What, Where, Why, & How? - Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Individual Lawsuits

Atrium C-QUR Mesh Lawsuit 2017: What, Where, Why, & How? - Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Individual Lawsuits | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
This hernia mesh post about Atrium C-QUR™ mesh was written to provide hernia mesh victims information about hernia mesh litigation and lawsuits. If you have further questions about Atrium C-Qur hernia mesh, please contact a hernia mesh attorney at the number on this site. WHO is pursuing Atrium C- QUR™ lawsuits in Federal Court? We are …
David Slepkow's insight:

This hernia mesh post about Atrium C-QUR™ mesh was written to provide hernia mesh victims information about hernia mesh litigation and lawsuits. If you have further questions about Atrium C-Qur hernia mesh, please contact a hernia mesh attorney at the number on this site.


Hernia mesh settlement 2017

We are reviewing Atrium C-QUR™ claims (Lap – no FX) for potential individual lawsuits in United States Federal Courts. These Atrium C-QUR™ cases are pending before the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.

The Honorable United States District Judge Landya McCafferty is presiding over these medical device product liability claims. The Court is located at the U.S. District Court District of New Hampshire. The Court is located at 55 Pleasant Street Room 110 Concord, NH 03301, 603.225.1423.

The official case caption for the MDL is: In Re: Atrium Medical Corp. C-QUR™ Mesh Products Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2753)  MDL Docket No. 16-md-2753-LM

The Atrium C-QUR™ causes of action have been consolidated “for pretrial purposes” as multi-district litigation. (otherwise known as an “MDL”)


According to the Case Management Order #1, The Court ordered that: “The actions listed in Attachment A are consolidated for pretrial purposes. Any “tag-along” actions later removed to or transferred to this court, or directly filed in this court, will automatically be consolidated with this action without the necessity of future motions or orders. This consolidation, however, does not constitute a determination that the actions should be consolidated for trial, nor does it have the effect of making any entity a party to any action in which he, she, or it has not been named, served, or added in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”  CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NUMBER 1,  January 13, 2017

The 2nd Case Management order declares that, “In order to eliminate delay and to promote judicial efficiency, any plaintiff whose case would qualify for transfer to MDL No. 2753 under the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s December 8, 2016 transfer order (doc. no. 1) may file his or her complaint directly in MDL No. 2753 in this court. Defendants reserve the right to object to the inclusion of any such action in this MDL.”  CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 2 (Direct Filing and Waiver of Service)


“Multi-district Litigation is litigation comprised of multiple civil cases involving one or more common questions of fact which have been transferred by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation from multiple federal district courts across the country to a single federal district court for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings under 28 U.S.C. Section 1407.” United States District Court District of New Hampshire, MDL 


The C-QUR™ hernia mesh victims who have filed lawsuits in Federal Court are asserting that the Atrium C-QUR™ device is defectively designed. They also alleged that they were not properly warned of the device’s dangers. These litigants allege that such medical devices caused them certain complications including:

  • Pain and suffering
  • Swelling
  • Adhesions
  • Obstructions
  • Mesh migration
  • Bacterial infections
  • Hernia recurrence
  • Additional surgeries to treat hernia recurrence


You can file a hernia mesh claim after you retain a top hernia mesh attorney




No the Atruim C-QUR™ claims are individual lawsuits with each victim represented by their own hernia mesh attorney. It is important that you retain one of the best hernia mesh lawyers in the United States.


Atrium utilized the controversial 510(k) Premarket Notification process to get C-QUR™ approved.  On  03/31/2006 the FDA determined  that ATRIUM MEDICAL CORPORATION C-QUR MESH aka “C-QUR™ Mesh”  is “Substantially Equivalent (SESE)” to another type of mesh marketed years prior.  By using the 510 (k) process Atrium avoided the strenuous testing protocol usually required by the FDA.

On March 31, 2007 the FDA wrote a letter to Atrium stating, “We have reviewed your Section 5 10(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act.”  https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/K050311.pdf 

What is a 510 (k) pre-market notification process?

“Section 510(k) of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act requires device manufacturers who must register, to notify FDA of their intent to market a medical device at least 90 days in advance. This is known as Premarket Notification – also called PMN or 510(k). This allows FDA to determine whether the device is equivalent to a device already placed into one of the three classification categories. Thus, “new” devices (not in commercial distribution prior to May 28, 1976) that have not been classified can be properly identified. Specifically, medical device manufacturers are required to submit a premarket notification if they intend to introduce a device into commercial distribution for the first time or reintroduce a device that will be significantly changed or modified to the extent that its safety or effectiveness could be affected. Such change or modification could relate to the design, material, chemical composition, energy source, manufacturing process, or intended use.” FDA,  https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/510kClearances/default.htm 

What is C-QUR™ Mesh?

“C-QUR™ Mesh is indicated for use in hernia repair, chest wall reconstruction, traumatic or surgical wounds, and other fascial surgical intervention procedures requiring reinforcement with a non-absorbable supportive material.”  More information

Atrium C-QUR is a mesh material that is used mainly in the surgical repair of hernias. It has also been used in chest wall reconstruction and in the repair of traumatic or surgical wounds. It is manufactured by Atrium Medical Corporation. The use of Atrium C-QUR has been found to cause serious injuries to some patients. As a result, legal action has been taken against the manufacturer in some instances. Patients may encounter adverse reactions to the product immediately or, more typically, after the product has been in use for some time.

How much of a settlement can I expect?

No one can predict the amount of settlement or judgment a victim will receive as a result of  bringing a hernia mesh claim. The amount of a settlement in 2017 depends on the severity of pain and suffering and symptoms as well as:

  • Amount of medical bills, medication costs and medical device expenses
  • Number of  revision surgeries or other surgical procedures
  • The skill, expertise and aggressiveness of the hernia mesh victim’s medical device attorney
  • The financial resources of the manufacturer to pay thousands of claims, Does the defendant have deep enough pockets
  • The nature, extent and longevity of the pain and suffering of the victim
  • other factors not set forth above
  • Hundreds of mesh victims are searching the internet seeking justice and accountability for their suffering. Many of these victims are searching for the following keywords: Hernia mesh settlement 206, Mesh settlement 2017, hernia mesh settlement amounts, hernia mesh lawsuit 2017, hernia mesh lawsuit settlement amounts 2017, “know before you file hernia mesh lawsuit” and “average settlement for hernia mesh.”

History of the Atrium C-QUR

Atrium C-QUR is a brand of mesh that is utilized for the treatment and repair of a hernia. Hernias occur a portion of the intestine or nearby tissues force through a weakened portion of the nearby muscle or connective tissue. Surgical mesh is typically used of synthetic materials that is woven together to form a non-absorbable barrier that can be used in surgical procedures.

Mesh patches are not necessarily designed to provide a long-term solution but instead offer a basis for the body to grow tissue that will strengthen the area. However, medical complications can occur that may be very serious. One such complication occurs when the loops of the intestines adhere to the mesh or to each other. This can create a serious medical emergency or obstruction which requires immediate surgery.

Symptoms of Adverse Reactions to Atrium C-QUR

Not everyone experiences problems with mesh implants. However, if a patient notices any adverse reactions, it is imperative to seek immediate medical attention. Your doctor will make a determination as to whether the mesh implant has failed or has caused or contributed to the complication.

Symptoms include:

  • Pain or swelling
  • Diarrhea or vomiting
  • Infection
  • Recurrence of the hernia
  • Mesh adherence to the intestines
  • Bowel obstruction
  • Damage to an organ, nerves or blood vessels

These complications may occur at any time after the original surgery has taken place. If the mesh material begins to break down before the body has naturally repaired the area, the individual will likely experience some complications. These may range from minor to severe, but often require additional surgery to repair the area. In some instances, complications can be life-threatening. The most common complications that occur with the use of Atrium C-QUR are migration and erosion.

Treatment for Mesh Implant Complications

There are various treatments that may be necessary for mesh implant complications. The University of Mississippi Medical Center, the treatment plan may include topical treatments, oral medications to treat pain or muscle spasms and injections to reduce inflammation and pain. Surgery is likely the most common method of treatment.

It is important to note that generally, mesh implants usually cannot be completely removed once they have been implanted. The body grows tissue in and around the mesh rendering it impossible to fully remove without causing major internal damage. Therefore, surgical repair methods must be used which may include partial removal and the further use of mesh if necessary.

Reporting Complications

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration, FDA, has provided communication regarding safety concerns for some types of mesh implants. Patients who experience complications from the use of surgical mesh should report the problem to the FDA through the MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program. This may be done online or by mail or fax. Doctors are also encouraged to report complications. It is important that all those who experience medical problems report them to the FDA so that proper steps are taken to prevent further injuries from occurring. The FDA may require a company to recall products that are reported to be dangerous to patients.

Recall of  hernia Mesh Implants

In 2013 Atrium Medical Corporation issued a recall of their C-QUR products with lot numbers 10405513 and higher. The recall was made due to humidity concerns with product packaging. When exposed to high levels of humidity the fish oil coating on the mesh can cause the product to adhere to the packaging. The recall applied to packaging concerns only and did not directly address medical problems associated with surgical use.


Unfortunately, there have been complications reported that involve defects in the product after it is implanted in the body. Those who have suffered a complication due to a faulty Atrium C-QUR mesh implant should report the problem to the FDA. The physician should also report the injury. Legal action may be necessary against the manufacturer because of the failure to warn of possible injuries and complications and their lack of response in resolving the reported problems. The company should be responsible for any injuries that occurred because of a defect in their product or lack of warning to patients.

Litigation History and Current Status

Lawsuits have been filed against Atrium Medical Corporation for poor design of the product and for inadequate manufacture. The company has a duty to fully test their products before they are sold, and they must also warn consumers of the potential risks involved in using the products. A number of lawsuits have been filed against AMC for injuries that resulted from the use of C-QUR mesh products. These lawsuits have not yet been resolved. You may be able to file a lawsuit if you had hernia repair which utilized Atrium C-QUR after May 2006 and suffered complications that required additional surgery or other medical treatment.

How to Take Legal Action

Those who have suffered medical complications due to the use of Atrium C-QUR mesh may be entitled to compensation. Litigation may be needed in order to receive compensation for medical costs, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other expenses directly caused by faulty mesh implants.  A diagnosis must show that the patient’s injury is due to the use of an Atrium C-QUR mesh implant. Patients should obtain medical records that provide information regarding the specific type of mesh implant that was utilized in their original hernia surgery. A patient should take action as soon as possible after learning about the injury because there are legal time limits to file a legal claim. Multiple cases may be combined in a class action lawsuit.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Hernia mesh medical devices that we are reviewing for lawsuits ~ Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney

List of hernia mesh medical devices we are reviewing on behalf of hernia mesh victims including Ethicon Physiomesh™ individual lawsuits. Hernia mesh lawyers
David Slepkow's insight:

Hernia mesh devices that we are reviewing for Hernia Mesh victims


Covidien:(Formerly Tyco)

  • Parietex


  • C-Qur (Lap – no FX)

Bard/ Davol

  • Visilex
  • Composix
  • Composix EX
  • Spermatex
  • 3D Max (no 3D Max Lite)
  • Sepramesh
  • Perfix Plug
  • Ventralex
  • Kugel (criteria – confirmed ring break and revision)

You may be eligible to file a hernia mesh lawsuit if you have been harmed by this type of medical device set forth above. You may also be eligible to be a member of a class action or file a lawsuit based on other types of defective or unsafe hernia mesh medical devices or patches.


Cases we are not reviewing for hernia mesh victims surgically implanted with the following types of Mesh:

Marlex and Ventrio S/T only cases –  must involve revision surgery

Cases we are not reviewing for hernia mesh victims:

  • AlloMax
  • Composix L/P
  • Dual Mesh
  • Gore-Tex
  • Mylar
  • Proceed
  • Prolene
  • ProLite
  • Strattice
  • Surgipro
  • Surgisis
  • UltraPro
  • Ventralight


“Based on FDA’s analysis of medical device adverse event reports and of peer-reviewed, scientific literature, the most common adverse events for all surgical repair of hernias—with or without mesh—are pain, infection, hernia recurrence, scar-like tissue that sticks tissues together (adhesion), blockage of the large or small intestine (obstruction), bleeding, abnormal connection between organs, vessels, or intestines (fistula), fluid build-up at the surgical site (seroma), and a hole in neighboring tissues or organs (perforation).”FDA

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

“The most common adverse events following hernia repair with mesh are pain, infection, hernia recurrence, adhesion, and bowel obstruction. Some other potential adverse events that can occur following hernia repair with mesh are mesh migration and mesh shrinkage (contraction).” https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/ImplantsandProsthetics/HerniaSurgicalMesh/default.htm 

Ethicon Psyiomesh™ individual lawsuit update:

(Editor’s  hernia mesh product liability litigation note | update 6/2/17 :  The Panel on Multi District Litigation ordered that “IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the actions listed on Schedule A and pending outside the Northern District of Georgia are transferred to the Northern District of Georgia and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Richard W. Story for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.  Transfer order)



Filed Under: Hernia Mesh Claims

Primary Sidebar

Hernia Mesh Victims Legal Hotline

(401) 648-3580
Speak with an Attorney Today!

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ Hernia Mesh individual lawsuits: Information ~ Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney

ETHICON PHYSIOMESH™ Hernia Mesh individual lawsuits: Information ~ Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Suffered complications as a result of defective hernia mesh? CALL for a free hernia mesh lawsuit consultation | Individual lawsuits in federal Court
David Slepkow's insight:

The hernia mesh victim’s attorneys are asserting that all Ethicon Physiomesh™ claims should be consolidated, heard and decided before one court and one justice in the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida. Id.  Among other arguments, The Plaintiff’s counsel argue that the first physiomesh™ causes of action was filed in that district. The deep pocketed Plaintiff’s attorneys also argue that the most amount of  Physiomesh™ claims are pending before the US Middle District of Florida. Id.

Ethicon’s corporate counsel oppose lawsuit and state following:

Ethicon’s high powered lawyers opposed the victims motion to transfer. “Johnson & Johnson and subsidiary Ethicon Inc. on April 13 opposed a motion by nine plaintiffs to centralize federal lawsuits alleging injury from the Physiomesh™ Flexible Composite hernia patch (In Re: Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2782, JPMDL).”  Lexis legal news

Ethicon’s lawyers appears to want to challenge whether Physiomesh™ caused each injury for each victim

“Centralization is not warranted because individualized factual inquiries predominate over common issues. ” DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TRANSFER PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1407  – Source “Moreover, the fundamental question of whether a defect in the design and/or warnings of PHYSIOMESH caused each of the plaintiffs’ purported injuries requires an individualized determination unsuitable for centralized supervision.” Id.

Ethicon’s attorneys’  apparent legal strategy: other factors may have caused injuries such as obesity, age or medical history

In Ethicon’s memorandum, Ethicon’s lawyers state: “For instance, each of the claimed conditions, including recurrence, has many different accepted potential causes (e.g., surgical technique) and different risk factors (e.g., medical history, concomitant injuries, obesity, smoking, age, genetics, size of hernia, infections, and chronic cough) that could independently explain the patient’s alleged injuries. The Panel has denied centralization in such instances where there are “differences in the health risks alleged.” Id.

Apparently, Ethicon’s lawyers are trying to find a more favorable venue for these causes of action

Ethicon’s hernia mesh attorneys argue that: “Should the Panel determine that centralization is appropriate, the Panel should assign the MDL to one of several experienced MDL judges in the District of New Jersey, or alternatively, in the Eastern District of Kentucky or the Northern District of Georgia. The Panel should reject Plaintiffs’ venue requests of the Middle District of Florida or the Southern District of Illinois. “Id.

What is the status of litigation in Canada?

According to CTV News, as many as 30,000 Canadians may have received Physiomesh™  Flexible Composite Mesh during hernia repair surgery. – See more here

Canada class action

“Some Canadian hernia surgery patients have launched a class-action lawsuit against the maker of a now-recalled surgical mesh, claiming they weren’t warned of its dangers.” CTV

“In June 2016, Health Canada issued a recall for Physiomesh after the manufacturers learned that the recurrence and reoperation rates after hernia repair using the mesh were higher than the average rates of other meshes” Id.

“Ethicon is recalling the product following an analysis of unpublished data from two large independent hernia registries. Recurrence/reoperation rates (respectively) after Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair using ETHICON PHYSIOMESH Flexible Composite Mesh were higher than the average rates of the comparator set of meshes among patients in these registries. Ethicon is unable at this time to characterize all factors contributing to higher rates and is, therefore, removing the product from the global market.” http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/recall-alert-rappel-avis/hc-sc/2016/58846r-eng.php

What are complications of hernia mesh:

When complications from hernia mesh repairs do occur, they can be severe and potentially life-threatening. Hernia mesh side effects may include:

  • Pain
  • Swelling
  • Adhesions
  • Obstructions
  • Mesh migration
  • Bacterial infections
  • Hernia recurrence
  • Additional surgeries to treat hernia recurrence

Some complications may be so severe that they may even lead to death.

“with or without mesh—are pain, infection, hernia recurrence, scar-like tissue that sticks tissues together (adhesion), blockage of the large or small intestine (obstruction), bleeding, abnormal connection between organs, vessels, or intestines (fistula), fluid build-up at the surgical site (seroma), and a hole in neighboring tissues or organs (perforation).” FDA

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Rhode Island Divorce From Soup To Nuts by RI Divorce Attorney David Slepkow - Slepkow Law (Est. 1932)

(401-437-1100) This article explains the Rhode Island divorce process from pre- filing considerations through trial including Rhode Island divorce law strategy. Finding a Rhode Island Divorce attorney / lawyer. The first step in obtaining a divorce from your spouse is finding a Rhode Island attorney who you are comfortable with. Many attorneys give free initial …
David Slepkow's insight:

Cost of Rhode Island Divorce

It is often impossible to determine how much a divorce will cost from beginning to end. However, it is a good idea to get an educated estimation of the eventual fee. This will never usually be more than a estimation because the cost of the divorce usually depends on several factors. Those factors could include how quickly a settlement is reached, the number of motions that each party will file, the amount / nature and complexity of assets to be equitably divided, the amount of documents involved in the case, the animosity of the parties to each other, the waiting time while you are in court and many other potential issues.

The Golden Rule is that the longer it takes to reach a settlement the more the divorce will cost because the lawyers will spend a lot more time working on the case. If there is no settlement and the case goes to trial or the day of trial, the divorce could get very expensive. If everything is agreed or nearly agreed to and the parties are relatively amicable then the divorce should take a lot less time and therefore be much less expensive.

Uncontested divorces in Rhode Island should be much less expensive then contested divorces. However, there are many different types of uncontested divorces. There are uncontested divorces with no real assets and uncontested divorces with assets to divide. If the divorce is uncontested and there are assets then the lawyer may need to prepare a property settlement agreement, deeds, qualified domestic relation orders etc. Therefore, the cost of an uncontested divorce could vary depending on the circumstances. For example if a lawyer has to draft a property settlement agreement , the lawyer will devote more time to the case.

I believe that a fair price for an uncontested divorce from soup to nuts in Rhode Island with no assets and no property settlement agreement is about $900 flat fee plus costs. The typical costs are a filing fee of $100 and service of process fees of approximately $40.

Intake process and drafting Rhode Island divorce Documents.

After you have retained the lawyer there is typically an intake process in which the lawyer gets the basic information so that he or she can properly represent you. The lawyer typically drafts the divorce documents and you sign them in front of him/her or another notary. These documents include a divorce complaint, DR(6) financial statement, statement of children of the marriage, counseling statement, report of divorce, summons and automatic divorce order etc. It is important that the DR6 form otherwise known as financial statement is accurately filled out.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Residency Requirements to Obtain a Rhode Island Divorce - Slepkow Law (Est. 1932)

In order to obtain an absolute divorce in Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Family Court, either the husband or wife must be a domiciled inhabitant and resident of RI for one year next prior to to the filing of the complaint for divorce in RI Family Court. If the Plaintiff is not able to meet …
David Slepkow's insight:

In Rogers v. Rogers the Rhode Island Supreme Court determined that “The Family Court was established by the General Assembly as a court of limited jurisdiction. G.L. 1956 § 8-10-3. Under § 8-10-3(a), the Family Court has the authority to “hear and determine all petitions for divorce[.]” Specifically, subject-matter jurisdiction with respect to petitions for divorce is governed by § 15-5-12(a), which provides in pertinent part: “No complaint for divorce from the bond of marriage shall be granted unless the plaintiff has been a domiciled inhabitant of this state and has resided in this state for a period of one year next before the filing of the complaint * * *. Barbara A. Rogers v. Robert F. Rogers, Rhode Island Supreme


“Section 15-5-12(a) plainly states that a divorce complaint will not be granted unless a plaintiff “has been a domiciled inhabitant of this state and has resided in this state for the period of one year next before the filing of the complaint * * *.” (Emphases added.) This language does not require that the party remain a domiciled inhabitant or resident of the state for the petition to be granted; rather, the statute refers to the domicile and residence of the plaintiff at the time the divorce complaint is filed” Id.


(There are statutory exceptions pursuant to RI law for people in the armed forces (army, navy, air force, marines, military) who are stationed in other states or countries)

In the event that you do not meet the residency requirements to get divorce in Providence Family Court then you need to consult with a lawyer in a State where you do meet the residency requirements.

In the event that you are actually residing in RI but do not satisfy the residency requirements to obtain an absolute divorce in RI, you still may be able to obtain the benefits and protections of The Rhode Island Family Court. There are other causes of action that do not require 1 year residency. A complaint for separate maintenance without filing for divorce may allow you to deal with issues concerning: temporary alimony, property rights, child custody, child support, child visitation, payment of marital expenses, payment of the mortgage, restraining orders, etc. A Complaint for Separate Maintenance without filing for divorce is the closest thing that RI has to a legal separation. A divorce from bed and board and future cohabitation, which is rarely filed, may be another option of evading residency requirements.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Reasons parents fall behind on RI child support

Child Support in Rhode Island
David Slepkow's insight:

Loss of hours
Many parents want to work full-time, but with the changed economy, they’re relying on part-time job status along with any governmental benefits they might be able to get. If the child support obligation was set when the parent was working full-time, and their job was reduced to part-time status, they fall into arrears on their obligation. This includes those who are self-employed, but it’s also easier for them to hide money, particularly if cash is involved.

When a person pays child support, they have no control on how the money is spent. Children might not be aware of the fact that the non-custodial parent is contributing to their support. The recipient of the payments might even be using that income for purposes other than caring for the kids. The person with the child support obligation might ignore it, but they’ll buy things like toys, clothes or other material things for their children instead of giving the custodial parent money. That act of love is distinguished from the act of providing. A judge might consider this, but it doesn’t pay the rent or put food on the table on non-parenting time days.

Willful refusal
Some people wholly and completely refuse to recognize any moral duty to provide for their children. These are the people that usually end up being jailed for their willful refusals to pay child support in Rhode Island.

Providence family Court judges would rather see children provided for than cut off any chance of support by jailing a parent for child support arrearages. Most will work with you on arrearage issues, particularly if you have the benefit of an experienced  Rhode island family law attorney or Rhode island child support lawyer representing you.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Post Divorce Tips Article in Providence Family Court

Rhode Island divorce lawyer, David Slepkow 401-437-1100. RI divorce attorney. Post divorce motions and litigation. Child Custody and Support in RI.
David Slepkow's insight:
Mistakes to avoid in Providence Family Court:

(1) Posting, tweeting, pinning or scooping about your Rhode Island divorce, custody or Family law cause of action. These posts anger Providence Family Court judges who do not see them as helping to resolve the matter. Also these posts could be detrimental to the child who may see them online. Win your divorce or custody case in the Courtroom and not on Facebook.

(2) Failure to file a motion to modify child support when you become unemployed or have a decrease in income. Child support in Rhode Island only is modified retroactively to the date you file your motion and serve the other litigant with notice of the claim.

(3) Do not interrupt a judge in Court or dress inappropriately. Providence Family Court is not a beach, gym or nightclub.  Remember: Perception is reality.

(4) If you are involved in a contested custody or visitation war, make sure you do not use illegal drugs such as marijuana. In a custodial matter, you are always subject to drug testing upon a moment notice.

(5)  Never treat clerks, court personnel, sheriffs or court investigators inappropriately. Judges will be very angry about this as they will always try to protect their staff.

(6) Never make important rash divorce or family law related decisions to get things over with or when you are angry.

(7)  Never directly or indirectly disparage the other parent when the minor children are present or can hear the communication. Never argue or fight with your spouse of the other parent while the children are present.

Marriage and divorce are both common experiences. In Western cultures, more than 90 percent of people marry by age 50. Healthy marriages are good for couples’ mental and physical health. They are also good for children; growing up in a happy home protects children from mental, physical, educational and social problems. However, about 40 to 50 percent of married couples in the United States divorce. The divorce rate for subsequent marriages is even higher.” American Psychological Association, Marriage and Divorce http://www.apa.org/topics/divorce/

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Rhode Island Auto Accident Attorney

Rhode Island Auto Accident Attorney | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Auto accident attorney Slepkow provides a free case evaluation if you have been injured as the result of a car, truck, bicycle or motorbike accident within the state of Rhode Island.
No comment yet.
Rescooped by David Slepkow from Personal Injury Attorney News

Back Injuries Can Leave People Debilitated - Dolman Law Group

Back Injuries Can Leave People Debilitated - Dolman Law Group | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
The back is one of the most complicated parts of the body, made up of muscles, bones, joints, nerves, and other tissues. If you were in a catastrophic acci

Via Matthew A. Dolman
Matthew A. Dolman's curator insight, January 16, 10:35 AM
 The back is one of the most complicated parts of the body, made up of muscles, bones, joints, nerves, and other tissues. If you were in a catastrophic accident, then a back injury can cause intense pain and potentially render you immobile. To recover, you’ll need the responsible party to pay for medical expenses and rehabilitation, and to replace lost wages. At Dolman Law Group, we help back injury victims fight back and get the compensation they deserve.

Common Back Injuries

Because of your back’s complexity, any number of things can go wrong with it. But people involved in slips and falls or automobile accidents tend to suffer the following injuries:

(click on this article to learn more)



Scooped by David Slepkow

Providence personal injury attorney | U-turn accident in RI

Providence personal injury attorney | U-turn accident in RI | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Injured in a Providence car accident? CALL a Providence personal injury attorney, David Slepkow 401-437-1100. Providence car accident lawyers.
David Slepkow's insight:
Providence personal injury attorney | U-turn accident in RI

Unless drivers are careful, they may be liable for damages in an accident caused by a U-turn they made. Though the laws governing U-turns vary by state, this way of changing direction is prohibited under certain circumstances. These sometimes include making a turn at an intersection where there is a traffic light; where a police officer is directing traffic; on a curve; from a middle lane; where the vehicle cannot be seen by another motorist from a distance of 500 feet in either direction; and where a traffic sign prohibits the turn.

If you were injured in a u-turn accident in Rhode Island and Providence Plantations,you need to contact a Providence personal injury attorney. A top Providence personal injury attorney will fight the insurance company to get you the compensation you deserve. A Providence personal injury attorney who is also a Providence car accident lawyer will help you get the justice and compensation you are entitled to. U-turn accidents is RI can be complicated and a top personal injury lawyer in RI will help you get the compensation you deserve.

U turn accident statistics- Providence injury attorney

In instances where an injured party pursues legal action against the U-turn driver, the case rests on establishing negligence. It’s defined as not acting in a careful manner like a reasonable person would under the circumstances. In some cases, plaintiffs bear some burden for negligence because their actions contributed to the accident.

The article “Liability for U-Turn Collisions” on the Legal Match website explained that there are five components to negligence. Drivers have the responsibility of duty of care, meaning that they should have foreseen that their action could result in injury. The second factor in establishing negligence is breach of duty, which is failing to use due care when knowing others were being put at risk or not acting as a reasonable person would.

Fall River man charged in drunken U-turn and crash on I-95 in Rhode Island

“A Fall River man was arrested and charged with drunken driving after he allegedly made a U-turn on Interstate 95 in Rhode Island early Saturday morning and crashed into an oncoming car as he traveled in the wrong direction, according to Rhode Island State Police. Nathaniel Roberts, 20, was driving on the southbound side of the highway near the Thurbers Avenue curve in Providence when he turned around and began traveling north on the same side around 4:30 a.m. Roberts collided with an oncoming car, sending its driver and passenger to Rhode Island Hospital with injuries described as not life threatening in a statement from State Police.” https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/09/23/fall-river-man-charged-drunken-turn-and-crash-rhode-island/mUsuNWLBT5l48SBWAyu6GI/story.html

Proximate causation- car accident lawyer in Providence

Negligence could also rest on proving that it was only the driver’s failure to perform the duty of due care that the accident happened. Under proximate cause, the fourth consideration in negligence, the law does not put the driver in jeopardy for every occurrence that resulted from the incident. For instance, a motorist may collide with a truck that he or she did not know was carrying explosives. It explodes and a projectile from the blast injures a pedestrian a mile away.  During the emergency surgery, the surgeon commits medical malpractice and amputates the wrong leg. The negligent tortfeasor could not have reasonably foreseen that an accident would lead to emergency surgery and surgical malpractice. Therefore, the negligent motorist could argue that they are not responsible for the negligent physicians’ actions.

Being awarded a monetary settlement for that injury could be difficult. Finally, negligence requires that there be physical injury to a person, damage to property or loss of income. On the Nolo website, the article “Car Accidents: Proving Fault” said cases arguing negligence may be strengthened by police reports of the accident and being able to point to state traffic laws that were violated. Victims of U-turn accidents are advised to seek legal advice from a Providence personal injury attorney as soon as possible after the accident. A Providence personal injury lawyer will investigate the facts and strive to build a case that could result in compensation for the client.

Searches related to u-turn accident statistics

  • national motor vehicle crash causation survey
  • national motor vehicle crash causation survey 2016
  • causes of car accidents statistics
  • human error car accidents
  • what percent of crashes are due to driver error
  • u turn accident fault
  • causes of car accidents statistics 2016
  • causes of car accidents essay

Providence is the capital and most populous city in the U.S. state of Rhode Island, founded in 1636, and one of the oldest cities in the United States.[4] It is located in Providence County and is the third most populous city in the New England region, after Boston and Worcester. Providence has a city population of 179,154; it is also part of the Providence metropolitan area which extends into southern Massachusetts. The Providence metropolitan area has an estimated population of 1,604,291, which exceeds that of Rhode Island as a whole by about 60%.[5] This can be considered, in turn, to be part of the Greater Boston commuting area, which contains 7.6 million people. Providence was founded by Roger Williams, a religious exile from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. He named the area in honor of “God’s merciful Providence”, which he believed was responsible for revealing such a haven for him and his followers to settle. The city is situated at the mouth of the Providence River, at the head of Narragansett Bay. Providence was one of the first cities in the country to industrialize and became noted for its jewelry and silverware industry. Today, the city of Providence is home to eight hospitals and seven institutions of higher learning which have shifted the city’s economy into service industries, though it still retains significant manufacturing activity. The city was once nicknamed the “Beehive of Industry”; it began rebranding itself as the “Creative Capital” in 2009 to emphasize its educational resources and arts community.“ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence,_Rhode_Island 

“In a 1967 study of divided urban and rural highways in North Carolina, Cribbins et al. (11) found that median openings do not necessarily experience high accident rates under conditions of low volumes, wide medians, and light roadside development. However, as traffic volumes and roadside development increase, the frequency of median openings does affect accident potential significantly. Specifically, Cribbins et al. found the following relationships: • As traffic volumes increase, median openings experience a sharp increase in accident frequency. When combined with intensive roadside development, this increase in accident frequency becomes even more pronounced. • Signalization of median openings does not necessarily reduce accident experience under high-volume conditions, but it makes the traffic flow more efficiently by distributing time for each movement. • As roadside development increases, and crossovers of any type are permitted, accidents will increase.” https://transportation.ky.gov/Congestion-Toolbox/Documents/NCHRP%20524%20UTurn%20Safety.pdf

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Ethicon Prolene Hernia System and Prolene 3D Patch lawsuit information

Ethicon Prolene Hernia System and Prolene 3D Patch lawsuit information | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Are you a victim of Prolene Hernia System or Prolene 3D Patch hernia mesh? CALL a top hernia mesh attorney. Looking for a hernia mesh settlement 2017?
David Slepkow's insight:

Prolene mesh is manufactured by Johnson and Johnson’s corporate subsidiary Ethicon Inc. Prolene mesh is made of polypropylene. A Prolene Hernia system is a nonabsorbable Synthetic Surgical Mesh.  Many victims who were implanted with Ethicon Prolene Hernia System and Prolene 3D Patch have suffered severe complications and injuries which may have necessitated hernia revision surgical procedures.

These complications could include: infection, severe and debilitating pain, sexual dysfunction, removal of a testicle, hernia recurrence, mesh rejection, revision surgery, mesh erosion, scarification, infection, adhesion to organs, nerve damage, tissue damage, death, mesh migration as well as other severe complications.


  • Prolene Hernia System (PHS) 
  • Prolene 3D Patch

It is extremely difficult to find a hernia mesh attorney willing to file a lawsuit against Ethicon Inc. as a result of allegedly defective Prolene Hernia System (PHS) and Prolene 3D Patch. If you are looking for hernia mesh lawyers to get justice, contact an attorney on the phone number on this website.


It is impossible to predict whether there will be a Prolene 3D Patch settlement 2018 or a Prolene Hernia System settlement 2017. It is also impossible to say what an average settlement will be for any hernia mesh lawsuit.


Many victims are seeking all pertinent information about Prolene Hernia System (PHS) and Prolene 3D Patch. Below you will find some information.


Primary use of mesh: Hernia repair surgery

How to serve Johnson and Johnson: All service of process must be through their Registered Agent of Service, CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201-3136.

How to serve Ethicon Inc: Registered Agent of Service, CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201-3136

According to Ethicon’s website: “For open inguinal hernia repair Bilayer design proven to combine anterior and posterior repair

  • First bilayered mesh device with low reported recurrence rate406
  • Reduced operative and recovery time when compared to the Lichtenstein patch repair technique407″

“PROLENE Hernia System offers secure posterior repair from a simple anterior approach and has three points of protection. It demonstrates reproducible outcomes with different surgeons.126 Additionally, it allows tissue to grow through its interstices, thereby incorporating the mesh into adjacent tissue.For complete indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, and adverse reactions, please reference full package insert.” http://www.ethicon.com/healthcare-professionals/products/hernia-repair-and-fixation/hernia-mesh-devices/prolene-polypropylene-hernia-system#!description-and-specs 

Scholarly article:  Comparative Study of Prolene Hernia System and Lichtenstein Method for Open Inguinal Hernia Repair

“Prolene Hernia System (PHS) is a bi-layered polypropylene mesh with a connector that combines the anterior and posterior inguinal hernia repair, but still not very popular in this part of the country. Hence a prospective & randomized comparative study was undertaken to compare PHS with the already popular Lichtenstein Hernia Repair (LHR) and determine the post-operative outcome. Mayank Badkur1 and Nitin Garg


  • prolene mesh complications
  • prolene mesh hernia
  • ethicon prolene hernia mesh recall
  • prolene mesh mri safety
  • prolene mesh price
  • prolene mesh class action
  • prolene mesh sizes
  • prolene mesh lawsuit
  • prolene hernia mesh settlement
  • mesh settlement 2018
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Vehicle Accident Reconstruction Explained - Slepkow Law (Est. 1932)

Vehicle Accident Reconstruction Explained - Slepkow Law (Est. 1932) | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Injured in a vehicle or motorcycle accident in Rhode Island? CALL RI injury lawyers 401-437-1100. David Slepkow | RI injury attorney
David Slepkow's insight:

When a minor car accident occurs, the parties typically exchange information and work with the insurance companies to get the damage fixed. But when the crash is more serious in nature and causes significant damage and/or injuries, accident reconstruction may be necessary in order to get more information to determine liability by reviewing how the accident occurred.  Reconstruction experts are typically hired by insurance companies and plaintiff’s lawyers. Accident experts are used by attorneys in both Rhode Island and Massachusetts as well as across New England

Injury attorneys often utilize experts in serious accident and negligence claims

RI motorcycle accident

Hiring accident reconstruction experts is a common practice among personal injury lawyers. Jeffrey Nadrich, a Palm Springs Personal Injury Attorney, notes that his firm uses  accident reconstruction experts for “catastrophic cases, where liability is disputed.”  In complex vehicle accident cases, an accident reconstruction expert may be required in order to win a client’s case.

What Is Accident Reconstruction?

Accident reconstruction is a very detailed process that analyzes various elements of a car crash. It involves gathering known information about the accident through various means, including vehicle damage, skid marks, police reports, traffic reports, weather conditions, estimated speeds, photos and witness accounts.

Accident engineer

A reconstruction expert may also perform a mechanical inspection of the vehicle and determine if everything was in working order at the time of the accident. This is because tires, brakes and steering can become defective and cause crashes. If the accident involved a big rig, the driver log book and the truck’s black box – which contains data about elements such as speed and braking – may also be examined to see if anything points to the cause of the accident.

This data is gathered using electronic surveying equipment. Once all the known data is inputted, the expert then works backwards to fill in the missing pieces. This involves advanced knowledge of friction, angle of impact, weights of the vehicles, the direction of travel and other principles of physics.

Who Can Perform Accident Reconstruction?

Accident reconstruction can only be performed by an expert. An expert must have the requisite experience and skills which can only be acquired through specialized training. It’s not uncommon for law enforcement or automotive experts to perform accident reconstruction.

“Accident reconstruction experts have extensive, constant training in all areas relating to motor vehicle accidents including forensic mapping, crash simulation and 3D animation as well as determining the identity of driver and occupants.” https://www.dolmanlaw.com/accident-reconstruction/

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Ventralex hernia mesh lawsuit 2017 | Hernia Mesh settlement 2018

Ventralex hernia mesh lawsuit 2017 | Hernia Mesh settlement 2018 | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Suffering complications from a Ventralex Hernia patch manufactured from Bard / Davol? Contact a hernia mesh lawsuit attorney now to discuss legal options.
David Slepkow's insight:

It strains credulity to believe that Bard and its subsidiary Davol Inc. continue, to this day, to manufacture and market Ventralex hernia mesh patches. Bard is facing hernia mesh lawsuits as a result of its allegedly defective hernia mesh patch medical device, Ventralex. The hernia mesh litigation seeks damages against Bard and of course its subsidiary, Davol Inc.

Hernia Mesh Victims Legal Hotline

(401) 648-3580

Speak with an Attorney Today!

Despite the known dangers of polypropylene mesh and the fact that Bard is facing thousands of lawsuits as a result of different types of polypropylene mesh, Ventralex is still being implanted in victims by surgeons! Ventralex is a polypropylene hernia mesh patch. Not surprisingly, Bard’s transvaginal mesh and bladder sling products also are made using polypropylene mesh. Bard and its subsidiary Davol ignore and overlook the dangers and risks of polypropylene mesh.


Ventralex hernia patch lawsuit

According to Bard’s website “The Ventralex™ Hernia Patch is a self-expanding polypropylene and ePTFE patch that allows for an intraabdominal, tension-free repair. This technique is designed to eliminate the lateral dissection typically required for preperitoneal placement, which may help minimize post op pain. Deep placement of the prosthetic also allows for a strong repair and less chance of recurrence.”  Davol company propoganda

C.R. BARD, INC. of 100 Sockanossett Crossroad, Cranston Rhode Island submitted an FDA  510(k) Premarket Notification on 05/28/2002.

In 2002, the FDA approved Bard’s application clearing Ventralex to be sold in United States markets. The controversial 510k process utilized by Bard allowed Bard / Davol to fast track Ventralex without human testing.


Device Classification NameMesh, Surgical, Polymeric510(K) NumberK021736Device NameBARD VENTRALEX HERNIA PATCH, MODELS 0010302, 0010301ApplicantC.R. BARD, INC.100 Sockanossett CrossroadCanston,  RI  02920Applicant ContactBrain A KanervikoCorrespondentC.R. BARD, INC.100 Sockanossett CrossroadCanston,  RI  02920Correspondent ContactBrain A KanervikoRegulation Number878.3300Classification Product CodeFTLDate Received05/28/2002Decision Date07/16/2002DecisionSubstantially Equivalent (SESE)Regulation Medical SpecialtyGeneral & Plastic Surgery510k Review PanelGeneral & Plastic SurgerySummarySummaryTypeTraditionalReviewed By Third PartyNoCombination ProductNoRecallsCDRH Recalls


FDA 510(k) Applications Submitted by C.R. Bard, Inc.

Scholarly articles on mesh:

Retrospective analysis of umbilical, epigastric, and small incisional hernia repair using the Ventralex™ hernia patch.

Can infected composite mesh be salvaged?

Open intraperitoneal mesh repair for umbilical hernias. A technical note.


This is not Bards first rodeo by any means as far as mesh medical device litigation settlement is concerned.

Bard settles vaginal mesh claims:

“Bard has agreed to settle almost 3,000 vaginal mesh lawsuits filed against the medical device manufacturer by women who claim the transvaginal mesh systems caused them to suffer perforation in their pelvic floor as well as sustaining other damages to the tissue surrounding the mesh. Although one woman won a $2 million vaginal mesh verdict in 2014, it is expected that the majority of plaintiffs represented in these transvaginal mesh lawsuits will take the proposed Bard settlements rather than continue with further litigation.” Top Class actions

Bard settles Kugel hernia mesh causes of action:

““C.R. Bard has reportedly reached an agreement to settle Kugel hernia mesh lawsuits brought by about 2,600 people who experienced severe internal injuries caused by problems with their hernia repair patches, with in an average payout of about $70,000 for each plaintiff. However, the settlement still leaves around 1,000 claims unresolved….” Id. These settlements were negotiated by top hernia mesh product liability attorneys. The Kugel hernia mesh multi district litigation has been dismantled and cases are still pending in State and federal Courts. About lawsuits



Hernia mesh victims including Bard Ventralex hernia patch victims are desperately searching google for information concerning: “Hernia mesh settlement 2017.” Victims are also searching for information about the following:

  • hernia mesh lawsuit settlement amounts 2017
  • hernia mesh lawsuit 2017
  • abdominal hernia mesh lawsuit
  • surgical mesh 
  • lawsuit settlements- average settlement for hernia mesh
  • hernia mesh lawsuit settlement 
  • amounts 2016 hernia mesh settlement 
  • average hernia mesh settlement 2017
  • hernia mesh problems years later
  • hernia mesh failure symptoms
  • hernia mesh lawsuit settlement




We are reviewing the following types of hernia mesh manufactured by Bard and its subsidiary Davol for potential hernia mesh lawsuits:

Bard/ Davol:
 Visilex
 Composix
 Composix EX
 Spermatex
 3D Max
 Sepramesh
 Perfix Plug
 Ventralex
 Kugel
 Composix Kugel
 Ventrio
 Ventrio ST
 Marlex



Sept 2015: Umbilical Hernia Repair: Analysis After 934 Procedures.

Jan 2014: Intraperitoneal Tension-Free Repair of a Small Midline Ventral Abdominal Wall Hernia: Randomized Study with a Mean Follow-up of 3 Years.

Oct 2011: Retrospective Analysis of Umbilical, Epigastric, and Small Incisional Hernia Repair Using the Ventralex Hernia Patch.

Jan 2011: Open Intraperitoneal Versus Retromuscular Mesh Repair for Umbilical Hernias Less Than 3 cm Diameter.

Dec 2010: Can Infected Composite Mesh Be Salvaged? 

Jul 2009: Open Intraperitoneal Mesh Repair for Umbilical Hernias. A Technical Note.


Please contact us to consult with Attorney David Slepkow about a Ventralex hernia mesh lawsuit. We will review your Ventralex hernia mesh claim and help you get started to obtain justice and compensation for your injuries and complications. We do not review cases for class actions. All cases are reviewed by hernia mesh lawyers for the suitability of an individual lawsuit utilizing a top hernia mesh attorney. There is no cost or expense for a consultation.





No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Individual lawsuits

Attorneys fighting for justice & compensation for victims of defective mesh & mesh recalls: Ethicon Physiomesh™, C.R. Bard Patches, Atrium C-QUR & More


Hernia Mesh Recall Attorneys

Top product liability lawyers across the United States are filing hernia mesh lawsuits. These lawsuits have been filed on behalf of aggrieved victims suffering from injuries caused by defective hernia mesh medical devices. We started this hernia mesh liability information center to address a real lack of reliable information on the internet about defective hernia mesh particularly Ethicon Physiomesh™. Victim’s across the United States and Canada are seeking good, current and real information concerning hernia mesh claims.

Seeking Justice and Compensation on behalf of victims of defective surgical mesh

Defective medical device attorneys are seeking justice and compensation on behalf of innocent victims who have suffered serious pain and suffering. We are helping victim's hold Johnson and Johnson' corporate subsidiary Ethicon and other corporate entities liable for the pain and suffering they have caused victims in the United States and Canada.

Hernia Mesh Cases we are reviewing:

We are currently reviewing potential cases of the following types of hernia mesh, made of non-absorbable polypropylene that may have caused injuries and pain and suffering:

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Answers to defective hernia mesh lawsuit questions ~ Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney

Answers to defective hernia mesh lawsuit questions ~ Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Rhode Island Lawyer, David Slepkow | Scoop.it
Below you will find answers to several FAQS concerning defective hernia mesh and hernia mesh lawsuits. You have questions about mesh and we have answers.
David Slepkow's insight:

How do I find out what type of hernia mesh device was surgically implanted into my body?


Hernia Repair and hernia mesh lawsuit FAQS

You need to contact your surgeon and inquire as to which hernia mesh medical device was utilized by the surgeon in your surgery.  You can also request your medical records from the hospital medical records department where the hernia mesh surgery occurred. Send a medical authorization to disclose protected health information (release of medical records) pursuant to HIPAA privacy regulations. (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996)

Get a medical authorization to disclose protected health information

It is crucial that you find out what hernia mesh medical device surgeons implanted in your body during your hernia mesh surgery. If you want to pursue a lawsuit and obtain a settlement or judgment as a result of defective and unsafe hernia mesh, it is imperative that you conclusively determine what type of mesh was used. This will also allow you to determine whether there was a recall or market removal of the hernia mesh medical device that your surgeon implanted.

How do I file a hernia mesh lawsuit seeking compensation for my hernia mesh complications?


You can also contact one of the best hernia mesh attorneys in the United States. That hernia mesh lawyer will obtain your medical records for you. The attorney will decide whether you have a valid mesh claim and whether he or she will represent you. Of course, you will need to sign a HIPAA release allowing your attorneys to obtain you medical records. Your hernia mesh product liability counselor will pursue a lawsuit in Federal Court on your behalf.

Is there such a thing as an average settlement for hernia mesh claims?


There is no such thing as an average settlement amount that a victim will receive. If your hernia mesh individual lawsuit settles, the amount of settlement will likely be dependent on several factors including:

  • The severity of your complications
  • Whether additional revision surgeries were required
  • your pain and suffering
  • your medical bills
  • the skill and aggressiveness of your hernia mesh product liability lawyers.

What do I need to know before I file a hernia mesh lawsuit?


You need to contact a hernia mesh litigation lawyer and determine whether that law firm is litigating claims for the type of hernia mesh implanted in your body. Typically, the hernia mesh lawyer will request your medical records to determine exactly what product was implanted. The law firm will send you a questionnaire package for you to fill out. You need to fill out that form as soon as possible and return it to the law firm. The hernia mesh lawyers will ask you to sign a retainer agreement.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Hernia Mesh Recall Attorney | Individual lawsuits

Attorneys fighting for justice and compensation for victims of defective mesh and mesh recalls.
David Slepkow's insight:

Defective medical device attorneys are seeking justice and compensation on behalf of innocent victims who have suffered serious pain and suffering. We are helping victim's hold Johnson and Johnson' corporate subsidiary Ethicon and other corporate entities liable for the pain and suffering they have caused victims in the United States and Canada.

Hernia Mesh Cases we are reviewing:

We are currently reviewing potential cases of the following types of hernia mesh, made of non-absorbable polypropylene that may have caused injuries and pain and suffering:

  • Ethicon Physiomesh™
  • Atrium C-QUR
  • Composix® Kugel® mesh patches (manufactured by C.R. Bard subsidiary Davol)
  • All C.R. Bard mesh patches made of Marlex polypropylene
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Rhode Island Child Support Law FAQS - Daycare, Overtime, Modification, College, Termination, motions to modify - Slepkow Law (Est. 1932)

1) What if my child’s parent works overtime? Will overtime be included in child support? There is no standard law or rule in Rhode Island regarding whether or not the non-possessory parent’s overtime will be used to calculate child support. One Judge in Rhode Island consistently rules that overtime compensation cannot be used to calculate …
David Slepkow's insight:

Judges may also look at other factors such as the needs and expenses of both parties and any extraordinary expenses for the child. At least one Judge has suggested that the possessory parent get a percentage of the overtime that is worked by the non-possessory parent. Other Judges in Rhode Island believe that overtime should always be a factor in child support. Often the issue of overtime is negotiated by the lawyers prior to any formal ruling by the Judge.

2) My child is about to turn 18 but is still in high school and living at home, can I still get child support?

Under Rhode Island Law, child support should end when a child turns 18 and graduates high school. If the child is still in high school, then child support will continue until the child turns 19.

Child support in Rhode Island automatically continues even after the child turns 18 unless a Motion to terminate child support is filed. If you are a non-possessory parent, your best option is to contact a lawyer to file a Motion to Terminate Child Support approximately 40 days prior to your child turning 18 and graduating high school. This will mean that the motion will be heard on a court date soon after the child turns 18. Please note that the non-possessory parent can still be found in contempt for failure to pay child support even after the child turns 18 if there is no motion granted to terminate the child support. If a child is seriously disabled, child support shall continue until the child turns 21 years old.

3) Can I get my child’s father to be ordered to pay for my child’s college education?

In Rhode Island the Court has no jurisdiction to order a parent to pay for the college education of his/her child. However, if pursuant to a Property Settlement Agreement or other contract, one party agrees to pay for a child’s education, then that agreement may be enforced by a court of law. Therefore, if you seek to have your child’s parent pay for your child’s college education, then you must negotiate payment of college expenses as part of a global settlement of the divorce or custody agreement or other similar agreement.

4) Who is going to pay for my child’s daycare?

The Rhode Island minimum child support guidelines take into account both the importance and expense of daycare. The child support guidelines and worksheet are used to determine the proper amount of child support to be paid by the non-possessory parent. The bottom line is that a party will be ordered to pay approximately the same percentage of the daycare that the party makes in relation to that party’s percentage of the combined gross income of both parties.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow


David Slepkow's insight:

[*244] Suttell, Justice. Huahine 1 – “Garden of Eden * * * with its lush forests, untamed landscape, and [*245] quaint villages, is one of Polynesia’s best-kept secrets.” 2 Huahine – its very name evokes images of endless white sand beaches, azure blue and emerald green waters and soft caressing breezes – a true tropical paradise. Unfortunately, our interest in Huahine is not for travel or adventure. Our interest in the island is rather more pedestrian, yet nevertheless of vital significance. In this appeal from a judgment of the Family Court, Huahine is the focal point of a contested dispute between two divorced parents, both of whom are fit and caring parents, over the appropriate placement of their two children.

Relocation is a perplexing problem under the best of circumstances. Few cases, however, present the issues so acutely as this appeal. Not only do the parties enjoy joint legal custody, but also they were awarded joint physical placement [**3] by the terms of a property settlement agreement that was incorporated into the decision pending entry of final judgment. Of particular significance to our inquiry are the logistical challenges facing the parties and their two children. Father resides in Jamestown, Rhode Island, and mother in Huahine, more than 6,400 miles and twenty-four hours travel time distant. Even in an age of instant communications and global transportation, the logistics are daunting.

We also recognize that neither statutory nor previous Rhode Island case law provides much guidance in this very troublesome area. Here, after finding that “mother would best serve the emotional and physical needs of the children,” the Family Court ruled that she had failed to show “a compelling reason” to reside in Huahine. It therefore denied her request to move the children there, and awarded placement to father. Because we conclude that the Family Court incorrectly applied a compelling-reason standard, we vacate the judgment and remand the case for further proceedings.

Facts and Travel

Robert E. Dupre, Jr., (Robert or plaintiff) and Melanie S. Dupre (Melanie or defendant) were married in 1987 in the south of France. [**4] Before their marriage, they had lived together for approximately seven months in 1979 in French Polynesia, both in Papeete, Tahiti, and on the island of Moorea. In September 1979, they moved to Aix-en-Provence in France, where they resided for approximately one year.

No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow

Private School Education & College - Child Support - Slepkow

CALL Rhode Island child Support Attorney, David Slepkow 401-437-1100. Providence Family Court lawyers. RI divorce laws.
David Slepkow's insight:

Can I get the other parent to be ordered to pay their fair share of the college education of my child in Rhode Island?

No, Unless there is a marital settlement agreement (msa) or property settlement agreement (psa) in which the parties agreed to such obligations. Under Rhode Island law, support of a child  is eligible to be terminated when a child turns 18 and graduates high school but in no event after the child turns 19. (If the child has a sever disability then child support could  continue indefinitely)

The  RI Family Court has no jurisdiction to order any payments or support for a child beyond the designated termination set forth above. The  Providence Family Court cannot order payment of university, community college, technical college, or post high school education but  the Providence Family Court  will enforce a  property settlement agreement (psa) between the husband and wife obligating payment of college.

If you have further questions, please contact a Rhode Island child support lawyer or a RI Divorce attorney.

Citation and resources:

Akron Law Review Volume 19 | Issue 2 Article 1 1986 Parents’ Support Obligations To Their Adult Children Marvin M. Moore http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1771&context=akronlawreview

National Conference of State Legislators, TERMINATION OF SUPPORT-COLLEGE SUPPORT BEYOND THE AGE OF MAJORITY http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/termination-of-support-college-support.aspx 

No comment yet.