Significant Cases Details


PERSONAL RIGHTS

Toxic/Chemical Exposure
Agent Orange — Stephenson v. Dow
273 F.3d 249 2d cir.2001
When we fought for the rights of Vietnam Veterans exposed to Agent Orange, the case established a precedent that allows people diagnosed with Agent Orange-related illnesses after 1994 to make claims against the manufacturers.

Chemical Contamination Case — Merry v. Westinghouse
684 F.Supp. 847 (M.D. Pa. 1988)

Contaminated Drinking Water — Fishel v. Westinghouse
When the disposal of toxic chemicals at a plant owned by a Fortune 500 company polluted the groundwater used by families living nearby, we won the first-ever summary judgment in favor of a private plaintiff under the federal Superfund Law.

Lead Poisoning — Armezzani v. Gould Inc.
In northeastern Pennsylvania, we represented hundreds of families whose homes and lawns were contaminated with lead from a nearby battery facility. Many of their children had learning disabilities. The ultimate settlement of the case included compensation for the victims, and a unique "medical monitoring" program designed to safeguard against future illness.

Metalworking Fluids — Kropp v BP Oil et al
In Central Pennsylvania, we secured compensation for several machinists who had contracted cancer from their exposure to metalworking fluids. The case was brought against more than 25 manufacturers, some of them among the largest companies in America.

PCBs — Brewer v. Monsanto et al
In one toxic chemical case, we used an ancient, but pertinent, legal theory to find a novel way to make a company in Tennessee accountable for the long-term exposure of its unsuspecting employees to PCBs in the workplace

Pollution — Toole v. Gould
764 F.Supp. 985 (M.D. Pa. 1991)
A court in one of our cases was one of the first to hold that the Pennsylvania Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act could be used to hold polluters strictly liable for certain damages suffered by individual citizens.

Harm Caused by a Pharmaceutical or Medical Product
Fen Phen
The Fen-Phen litigation refers to the rash of past and ongoing claims involving some popular diet drugs. These drugs, manufactured by American Home Products Corporation and known by the brand names Redux and Pondimin, were removed from the U.S. market in response to claims that they created a serious risk for permanent heart damage. Because of the widespread use of these drugs, many lawsuits were filed nationally, both from people already experiencing cardiac problems, as well as from people demanding medical monitoring to protect them from future disease. One of our Fen-Phen cases, Vadino v. American Home Products, was the first Fen-Phen class action in the nation to go to trial, and ultimately led to the settlement of claims on a national level.

PPA  in Cold Medications and Diet Pills — PPA Litigation
In a pharmaceutical liability case, medical studies show that many over-the-counter drugs, especially cold remedies and diet pills, contained PPA, a chemical that pharmaceutical companies knew caused strokes, but used anyway. We are now representing many stroke victims who took PPA in suits against these companies.

Propulsid
Propulsid was a drug sold by Janssen Pharmaceutica, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. It was used to treat patients with severe cases of nighttime heartburn associated with acid reflux disease. It has since been removed form the U.S. market because it has been linked to abnormalities in the heart rhythms of hundreds of patients, with a significant number of cases even ending in death. There is ongoing litigation throughout the country in response to the health problems attributed to Propulsid. We are currently representing numerous clients in many Propulsid lawsuits.

Rezulin
Rezulin, a medication produced by Parke-Davis, a division of Warner Lambert, was prescribed, and widely used, for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes. It has since been withdrawn from the U.S. market because it has been associated with a significant number of cases of severe liver damage, many resulting in death. These serious health concerns have spurred the filing of numerous lawsuits around the country, and our firm is actively involved in the litigation of some of these Rezulin cases.


Personal Injury
Contractor Negligence — Reed v. HVAC Contractor
In a professional negligence case, we successfully represented lab workers at a hospital in which a contractor had placed the air intake system above the loading dock, causing exhaust fumes to pour into the workplace.


CIVIL RIGHTS

Harassment
Bianchi v. City of Philadelphia
Our client, a lieutenant in Philadelphia's Fire Department, complained about illegal harassment. He suffered retaliation as a result of his complaints, was forced into "medical leave," and was ultimately dismissed from his position, after 18 years of meritorious service. The case went to trial, and the jury awarded 1.2 million dollars in back pay, "front pay" and compensatory damages.

The Third Circuit Court has affirmed the verdict and post-trial orders in their entirety. To view the opinion of the court, click here.

Right to Privacy
Doe v. East Stroudsburg School District
In a case in which several sixth grade girls in a public school in a Pocono Mountains community were forced to undergo physical examinations in school without proper parental consent, Williams, Cuker and Berezofsky attorneys successfully argued that the girls' civil rights and their right to privacy had been violated. After the suit against the school district was litigated successfully, Williams, Cuker and Berezofsky also effected a settlement with the physician who was involved.

Whistleblower
Perry v. City of Philadelphia
Williams, Cuker and Berezofsky represented an African-American policewoman in Philadelphia who was falsely charged with violating department policies after she blew the whistle on the improper activities of several policemen and refused to cover up the arrest she had made of an off-duty policeman for drunk driving. The case went to trial and she won a substantial verdict. In addition, the judge ordered that the disciplinary action against her be expunged from her record and that she be returned to her rightful place in line for promotion. Several weeks after the trial, she was promoted to a higher rank.

Police Misconduct
Daniels v. State of Delaware et al
Representing a female inmate in the Delaware state prison system who had been impregnated by a guard, Williams, Cuker and Berezofsky successfully argued that the guard had taken advantage of his position and should be barred from arguing that his victim had "consented" to his advances. A jury found in the inmate's favor and awarded her a substantial verdict.


CONSUMER RIGHTS

Managed Care and HMO Disputes
Denial of Medical Care
A major managed care company cut short treatment to an emotionally disturbed teenage boy, who committed suicide shortly afterwards. Working with another law firm, Williams, Cuker & Berezofsky helped obtain a substantial settlement for the boy's family.

Unfair and Deceptive Business Practices
Builder — Strawn v. Canuso et al

A major builder marketed "luxury homes" that were near a toxic landfill without making full disclosure. Williams, Cuker & Berezofsky helped win a landmark decision requiring developers to disclose material information about off-site environmental hazards.

Financial Institutions — Merchants National Charge Card Company A major charge card company misrepresented the quality of jewelry it sold to its card members as the "finest there is" when its quality was of the lowest grade. After a class action suit filed by Williams, Cuker & Berezofsky, the company settled and each customer received hundreds of dollars in cash refunds.

Retail Merchants — Major National Television Retailer
In a class action suit against a major television retailer, Williams, Cuker & Berezofsky alleged consumer fraud in the sale of jewelry containing diamonds and cubic zirconia. After years of Major National Television Retailer hard fought litigation, the case reached a court approved $2.5 million settlement and thousands of Pennsylvanians received cash rebates.

Retail Merchants — Slioupkidis v. CVS; Walker v. Rite-Aid
These class actions allege that retail pharmaceutical chains in Pennsylvania overcharged auto accident victims for their medications, in violation of the state's motor vehicle insurance law.

Lenders — Milligan v. Sentry Exteriors, et al.
This class action suit alleges that mortgage bankers and brokers, working together with home improvement contractors, deprived homeowners of their right under the Trust in Lending Act and Consumer Fraud Act. (current)

Cell phone Companies — Beckermeyer v. AT&T Wireless
This class action suit alleges that AT&T Wireless and cell phone manufacturers breached their warranty to consumers because they sold cell phones that could not be used on any other network but AT&T Wireless.

What's New

Related Links

$109 MILLION RENT-A-CENTER CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT FOR NEW JERSEY CUSTOMERS

An agreement has been reached to settle a class action lawsuit by New Jersey consumers against Rent-A-Center, Inc., for $109 million. This class action settlement will fully reimburse those customers who entered into contracts with Rent-A-Center during the period April 23, 1999 through March 16, 2007 for the amounts that they paid Rent-A-Center in excess of that permitted under the New Jersey law as resolved by the New Jersey Supreme Court in this case. Approximately 100,000 Rent-A-Center customers will each receive, on average, almost $800.00, although individual amounts may vary considerably.

Please call 1-866-963-9974 if you believe you are a class member. It is absolutely critical that you give us your current address and phone numbers.

Mark Cuker of Williams Cuker Berezofsky, along with Seth Lesser of the Locks Law Firm and Bill Riback are counsel for the Plaintiff’s Settlement Class of New Jersey consumers.