[NASDAQ: OHRP]; based in New York, New York; incorporated in Delaware
Deadline: 04/16/2018
Case #: 18-cv-1284
Court: USDC, Southern District of New York
Lead or Derivative; Class Period is 6/24/2014 to 1/4/2018
More than 6 months after Hurricane Irma destroyed homes and businesses throughout the state, many Floridians continue the fight to have their insurance claims paid.
“We have received not a cent,” Peter Rosa, a resident of Turkey Creek in Alachua, recently told his local ABC affiliate.
Every room in Rosa’s home had to be gutted because of Irma’s flooding. He has paid out-of-pocket for repairs, hoping to be reimbursed by his homeowners and flood insurance carriers.
So far, that hasn’t happened and Rosa is now less than certain that he’ll ever see reimbursement.
“I would tell you right now that there’s other people who don’t have the money in the bank to do the work themselves and then get reimbursed so they’re probably living with the damage in the house.”
Insurance companies are for-profit enterprises, and they’re facing massive losses thanks to an active Atlantic hurricane season that spawned 17 named storms, including catastrophic hurricanes like Irma, Harvey and Maria.
Unfortunately, some insurers may engage in bad faith tactics to limit their losses, such as:
In the wake of Hurricane Irma, some Florida insurers appear to be employing yet another means to limit payouts to their policyholders.
In January, the Sun-Sentinel reported that the settlement checks being issued by some companies – including Universal P&C, the state’s largest property insurer – included language stating that acceptance on the part of the policyholder released the company from any further obligations connected to the claim.
Consumer advocates are worried that this could keep many property owners from seeking payment for additional costs that come up during repairs – a fairly common occurrence.
Many legal experts believe this language is unenforceable, as Florida law stipulates that insurance companies, after paying “actual cash value” for an insured loss minus any applicable deductible, “shall pay any remaining amounts necessary to perform such repairs as work is performed and expenses are incurred.”
The attorneys at Gilman Law LLP, many of whom have lived and worked in Florida for decades, have extensive experience assisting policyholders with hurricane damage, including claims for:
If your business, home or condo was damaged in Hurricane Irma, and you believe your insurance company is acting in bad faith by unjustly denying, delaying or low-balling your claim, our attorneys can help.
For a free, no-obligation review of your case, please fill out our free consultation form or call us direct to speak with one of our attorneys at (888) 252-0048.
March 2, 2015
Securities Class Action Lawsuit Against Lumber Liquidators
Gilman Law LLP is pursuing a securities class action lawsuit against Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc. (“Lumber Liquidators” or the “Company”) and certain officers and/or directors of the Company.
According to a filing in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (No. 4:13-cv-00157) (“Virginia Case”) on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Lumber Liquidators common stock (NYSE:LL) between February 22, 2012 and July 9, 2014, certain false and/or misleading statements were made by Lumber Liquidators in violation of federal law.
According to Lumber Liquidators’ website, the Company is headquartered in Toano, Virginia, has stores in 46 states, and is the nation’s largest retailer of hardwood flooring.
The Virginia Case against Lumber Liquidators is generally focused on two key areas of alleged misconduct. First, the plaintiff alleges that Lumber Liquidators made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that certain of Lumber Liquidators’ products did not comply with applicable laws and regulations pertaining to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products.
Second, the Wall Street Journal previously reported, and the Company confirms in its securities filings, that federal authorities, including agents from the Department of Homeland Security Investigations and the Department of Justice, executed search warrants at the headquarters of Lumber Liquidators on September 26, 2013 looking for information relating to the importation of certain of its wood flooring products. The Virginia Case alleges that Lumber Liquidators violated the Lacey Act, which bans the import and trade of illegally sourced wood products. The Company notes in a recent securities filing that the Department of Justice is contemplating seeking criminal charges against Lumber Liquidators under the Lacey Act.
On March 1, 2015, 60 Minutes ran a story focusing on the excessive formaldehyde levels contained in certain laminate flooring Lumber Liquidators purchased from manufacturers in China. As reported by 60 Minutes, certain of those manufacturers admitted that certain flooring manufactured for Lumber Liquidators was not CARB Phase 2 compliant even though it was labeled as such. CARB Phase 2 compliant refers to compliance with certain California formaldehyde emissions standards.
If you are an investor who purchased Lumber Liquidators common stock on or after January 1, 2011, and continues to hold any of the stock purchased as of the present date, and suffered a loss or would like more information concerning Lumber Liquidators’ products, then please contact Gilman Law LLP today, at 1-888-252-0048 or www.investment-losses.com, to ensure your legal rights are not forfeited.
About Gilman Law LLP
Gilman Law LLP, a leading financial law firm, has been recognized for delivering successful results to their clients across a broad range of claims stemming from securities class actions and derivative actions to consumer product injury lawsuits. For over 40 years, the Gilman Law LLP team of highly experienced lawyers has earned renown for tireless work on behalf of their clients on many of today’s most challenging and important legal issues.
Contact: Kenneth G. Gilman
1-888-252-0048
Eli Lilly and Endo Pharmaceuticals have reached tentative agreements to settle hundreds of testosterone lawsuits involving Axiron, Testim and other male hormone replacement treatments.
The claims, which are among more than 6,000 testosterone lawsuits centralized before U.S. District Judge Matthew Kennelly in the Northern District of Illinois, where filed on behalf of men who suffered heart attacks, strokes, and blood clots (including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) allegedly due to the side effects associated with prescription testosterone replacement therapy.
The proposed Axiron settlement was disclosed in December. While no details of the agreement have been made public, the Court has stayed all proceedings involving Axiron cases until March 31st to facilitate settlement discussions.
The tentative agreement to resolve Testim lawsuits and other claims involving Endo Pharmaceutical’s testosterone products was announced in February. The proposed settlement would also cover claims pending against Endo’s Auxilium subsidiary and GlaxoSmithKline, which co-promoted Testim from 2012 through 2015. In addition to Testim, Endo’s other testosterone replacement drugs include Foresta, Testopel, and Striant.
All testosterone lawsuits involving the Endo defendants have been stayed for 45 days while the parties work to finalize the settlement agreement.
While terms of the proposed Endo testosterone settlement remain confidential, the company recently announced that it had increased its legal reserves by $200 million, in part due to the proposed agreement.
Millions of men have been prescribed these drugs to relieve symptoms associated with age-related drops in testosterone, including low libido, weight gain, fatigue and reduced muscle mass. However, the medications have never been approved for this purpose, and are only indicated to treat men who have been diagnosed with hypogonadism (low testosterone) secondary to another medical condition.
Plaintiffs who have filed testosterone lawsuits claim that sales of AndroGel, Testim and other drugs in this class were driven by misleading advertisements that characterized prescription testosterone replacement therapy as a safe and effective remedy for age-related symptoms. They further claim that the drugs’ manufacturers concealed their association with serious cardiovascular problems and failed to adequately warn doctors and patients about their possible heart risks.
In March 2015, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) required all testosterone drug manufacturers to update their product labels with information about a possible increased risk of heart attack and stroke. The mandate followed the agency’s review of several studies, including one that linked testosterone replacement therapy to a 40% increased risk for heart attack, stroke or death. In men aged 65 and older, the risk more than doubled within the first 90 days of treatment. The risk almost tripled in men under 65 who had a history of heart disease.
Gilman Law LLP is aggressively investigating testosterone lawsuits involving heart attacks, strokes and blood clots. For a no-obligation evaluation of your case, or to learn if you might qualify to participate in a potential testosterone settlement, please fill out our free consultation form or call us direct to speak with one of our attorneys at (888) 252-0048
You could be entitled to significant compensation if you purchased or leased one of the following Volkswagen or Audi automobiles (the “VW Defective Automobiles”):
| Model Year | Make and Model(s) |
| 2009 | Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen |
| 2010 | Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen, or Audi A3 |
| 2011 | Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen, or Audi A3 |
| 2012 | Volkswagen Beetle, Volkswagen Beetle Convertible, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen, Jetta Sportwagen, Audi A3 or Volkswagen Passat |
| 2013 | Volkswagen Beetle, Volkswagen Beetle Convertible, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen, Audi A3, or Volkswagen Passat |
| 2014 | Volkswagen Beetle, Volkswagen Beetle Convertible, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen, Audi A3, or Volkswagen Passat |
| 2015 | Volkswagen Beetle, Volkswagen Beetle Convertible, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Golf Sportwagen, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Passat, or Audi 3 A3 |
It was recently announced that a former FBI director was appointed by a California federal court to serve as a settlement master for hundreds of cases already filed on behalf of victims of Volkswagen’s illegal activities used to cheat U.S. emissions standards in the VW Defective Automobiles.
Volkswagen Defect Settlement Alert
The attorneys at Gilman Law LLP are committed to ensuring that the victims of Volkswagen’s admitted use of a “defeat device” to avoid emissions testing in the VW Defective Automobiles obtain the justice they deserve. Our Firm is already representing individuals who were allegedly harmed by, and our legal staff is aggressively pursuing claims involving these vehicles.
Our attorneys are ready to assist you if you or own or lease one of these VW Defective Automobiles.CONTACT US NOW! Do Not Delay!
For a no-obligation evaluation of your potential VW Defective Automobile please fill out our free consultation form, call us direct to speak with one of our attorneys at (888) 252-0048, or email us at kgilman@gilmanlawllp.com.
You could be entitled to significant compensation if you or a loved one were harmed because of a vehicle manufacturer’s defective part. Every year, defective automobiles and parts are responsible for a substantial number of vehicular accidents. Yet all too often, automakers fail to inform the public of these issues in a timely matter. Even when an auto recall is issued, consumers must wait months for inadequate repairs. These delays may result in serious injury or cost lives! And they may rob affected individuals of valuable legal rights, as many of these companies only announce their recall after applicable statutes of limitations have purportedly expired.
The attorneys at Gilman Law LLP are committed to ensuring that the victims of faulty automobiles and defective vehicle parts obtain the justice they deserve. Our Firm is already representing individuals who were allegedly harmed by, and our legal staff is aggressively pursuing claims involving:
Our attorneys are ready to assist you if you or a loved one own or lease one of these vehicles and have been harmed as a result of their defects, including serious personal injury. Filing an auto defect lawsuit may be the only way to bring these types of problems out into the open and force companies to take necessary corrective action. CONTACT US NOW! Do Not Delay As The Applicable Statute Of Limitations May Result In A Complete Bar To Your Claim Regardless Of Its Merit!
If you or a loved one own or lease one of the following vehicles and have suffered harm, including personal injury from a vehicle accident that may have been the result of the listed faulty part or equipment, it is important to contact Gilman Law LLP today to ensure your rights are protected. Our Firm is aggressively pursuing a number of auto defect cases, including:
The attorneys at Gilman Law LLP are available now to provide free legal consultations to anyone who suffered serious harm due to defective automobiles or vehicle parts. For a no-obligation evaluation of your potential automobile defect lawsuit, please fill out our free consultation form, call us direct to speak with one of our attorneys at (888) 252-0048, or email us at kgilman@gilmanlawllp.com.
According to a complaint filed on July 2, 2015, Johnson & Johnson falsely mislabels its Bedtime Bath and Bedtime Lotion products as being clinically proven to help babies sleep better.
If you or a family member have purchased Johnson & Johnson’s Bedtime Bath and/or Bedtime Lotion and did so relying on the assertion that it helps babies sleep better, you may be entitled to compensation.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON LAWSUIT
CONTACT US NOW! Do Not Delay As The Applicable Statute Of Limitations May Result In A Complete Bar To Your Claim Regardless Of Its Merit.
A Class Action complaint was filed against Johnson & Johnson Consumer Co., Inc. on July 2, 2015 in the Superior Court of New Jersey in Camden County alleging the defendants engaged in false and misleading advertising when it labeled Bedtime Bath and Bedtime Lotion products as being clinically proven to help babies sleep better when the product or products when used in conjunction with a soothing bedtime routine. The complaint states these assertions are present not only on the products’ labels but also on television, magazines and the internet. Plaintiff contends that she relied on the “clinically proven” benefits listed on the label when paying $1 more than other Johnson & Johnson baby products.
Plaintiff alleges Azor, used to treat high blood pressure, caused sprue-like enteropathy including severe diarrhea, weight loss and malnutrition.
If you or a family member has used Azor and have been injured, you may be entitled to compensation.
AZOR ALERT
CONTACT US NOW! Do Not Delay As The Applicable Statute Of Limitations May Result In A Complete Bar To Your Claim Regardless Of Its Merit.
Azor (olmesartan/amlopidine) is a combination of the drugs Benicar and Norvasc and is used to treat high blood pressure. Azor is manufactured by Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. and was approved by the FDA in 2007 for the treatment of high blood pressure. In 2013, the FDA issued a warning that Azor, and other drugs that contain olmesartan, may increase the risk of sprue-like enteropathy.
In 2014, a complaint was filed against Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The plaintiff alleges Azor caused him to develop sprue-like enteropathy which included severe diarrhea with substantial weight loss and malnutrition. Plaintiff claims the company failed to adequately research the possible side effects of Azor or warn the public of the risks associated with the drug.
Black-Box Warning Issued By the FDA for Secondary Exposure to AngroGel in Women and Children
If you or a family member has experienced secondary exposure to AndroGel and have been injured, you may be entitled to compensation.
CONTACT US NOW! Do Not Delay As The Applicable Statute Of Limitations May Result In A Complete Bar To Your Claim Regardless Of Its Merit
AndroGel is used to treat low testosterone (“Low T”) and is prescribed as a testosterone-replacement drug, mostly to men who cannot produce enough amounts of the male hormone. It is a synthetic hormone in gel form that is absorbed through the skin and increases the total amount of testosterone in the body to a normal range.
AndroGel contains a Black-Box warning for secondary exposure to women and children. This warning states that women and children should avoid contact with any unwashed application sites or unwashed clothing of men using the drug. Women and children may show symptoms of secondary exposure to AndroGel including:
We are currently investigating what is a suspected defect causing the sunroofs of 2011-2015 Kia Sorento, Optima, Soul, Cadenza and Sportage to suddenly shatter.
If you or a family member have or have had any of the Kia models listed above and have experienced the spontaneous shattering of the sunroof, you may be entitled to compensation.
KIA PANORAMIC SUNROOF ALERT
CONTACT US NOW! Do Not Delay As The Applicable Statute Of Limitations May Result In A Complete Bar To Your Claim Regardless Of Its Merit.
Gilman Law, LLP is currently investigating the claims made by owners of 2011-2015 Kia vehicles of a defect which causes the panoramic sunroofs to shatter unexpectedly. There have been more than 80 drivers who have reported their sunroofs suddenly exploding since 2009. These events are occurring while the drivers were operating their vehicles and under ordinary weather conditions. This event could lead to injuries from the scattered glass and lead to a crash causing devastating injuries to the driver and others on the road. The defect is believed to be caused from the unlaminated tempered glass used in the sunroofs. According to drivers’ reports, the sunroofs are shattering when the cars are relatively new and still under the manufacturer’s warranty. Amazingly, Kia cannot guarantee that the replacement sunroof will not suffer the same fate.
