Ilena Rose
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2008 1:27 am Post subject: High court: Atlanta couple can sue over vaccination |
 |
|
News & notes from Health Lover, Ilena Rosenthal:
http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Certainly hope that the Vaccination Lobbyists and PR Team are not
crass enough to use disbarred attorneys such as Mark S Probert to try
to sway science on this case on Usenet. He was specifically ordered to
not give his opinions publicly ... yet continues (as of yesterday
providing discinformation for one of Barrett>s many SLAPP suits).
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/snake-oil.htm#Mark-S-Probert
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/SandraProbert.htm
Marcelo and Carolyn Ferrari can take case to court over son’s
disabilities
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Monday, October 06, 2008
An Atlanta couple’s lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers can go to
trial on claims a childhood vaccine caused neurological damage to
their young son, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled Monday.
In a landmark decision, the state high court unanimously ruled that
Marcelo and Carolyn Ferrari’s lawsuit is not barred by the 1986
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act. The court upheld a
prior decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals, which was the first
appellate court in the nation to make such a ruling.
Related links:
http://www.ajc.com/services/content/metro/stories/2008/10/06/vaccine_autism_lawsuit.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=13
When the Ferraris’ 18-month-old son, Stefan, received his vaccines, he
was a healthy verbal boy. Now 10, Stefan has not spoken since,
according to court records.
A year after Stefan received his vaccines, the American Academy of
Pediatrics recommended that thimerosal, a preservative used for
multi-dose vaccine vials, be removed from childhood vaccines. The
Ferraris filed suit, contending that the manufacturers should have
made vaccines without the preservative before Stefan was vaccinated.
The companies argued that the 1986 vaccine act shields manufacturers
from liability in civil lawsuits for damages caused by vaccines given
after Oct. 1, 1988.
In Monday’s ruling, written by Justice George Carley, the state
Supreme Court said the vaccine act “clearly does not preempt all
design defect claims against vaccine manufacturers.”
Instead, it provides “that a vaccine manufacturer cannot be held
liable for defective design if it is determined, on a case-by-case
basis, that the injurious side effects of the particular vaccine were
unavoidable,” the ruling said. |
|
