Carey Danis & Lowe St. Louis attorneys

Carey Danis & Lowe is a St. Louis based plaintiff’s litigation firm

Carey Danis & Lowe (“CD&L”) is a St. Louis-based plaintiff litigation firm with offices in Missouri and Florida.  The firm focuses its practice on complex litigation, with particular focus on pharmaceutical product liability litigation and class action lawsuits.

The experienced attorneys at CD&L have achieved over $1 billion in recoveries on behalf of their clients.  These results are both nationally recognized verdicts and monumental settlements on behalf of thousands of injured clients.

The successful track record of CD&L stems from our experienced team of individuals committed to achievement of the greatest possible result for our clients.  The team includes both experienced attorneys and professional staff.  The firm employs fulltime medical doctors, nurses, and information technology personnel to handle the most complex medical mass tort cases.

Recognition of its success has been demonstrated in the firm’s leadership appointments as Lead, Co-Lead, and Management Committee members in highly recognized national cases.  The firm is actively involved in community and political issues on behalf of its clients and their interests.

*Carey Danis & Lowe has settled many additional cases for their clients. Unfortunately, this information cannot be made public due to confidentiality clauses and the sensitive nature of personal cases. We work for our clients – Privacy, Confidentiality, and Satisfaction is our goal.

Pharmaceutical Product Liability Litigation

Over the last decade, CD&L attorneys have obtained over $500 million in relief on behalf of their clients in cases against manufacturers of pharmaceutical products.  These results have been achieved through trial verdicts and settlements, in both state and federal courts throughout the United States.  The firm and its members have been appointed to serve as Lead and Co-Lead Counsel in numerous Multi-District Litigation cases.  Dozens of firms representing clients in virtually every state have retained the services and experience of CD&L to assist them in pharmaceutical product liability.

  • Fen-Phen Litigation, MDL No. 1203.  In 1997, the drug manufacturer Wyeth withdrew its diet drugs Fenfluramine (part of the “fen-phen” diet drug combination) and Dexfenfluramine (“Redux”) from the market after discussions with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  Reports connected Fen-Phen and Redux with valvular heart disease and primary pulmonary hypertension (PPH), a deadly lung disease.
  • Since 1997, CD&L has been involved in representing thousands of diet drug victims and their families.  At both the state and federal court levels, CD&L has played a leading role in helping the victims of Fen-Phen recover damages for their injuries.  These cases have resulted in dozens of multi-million dollar individual settlements over the last decade.  In addition to resolving cases through settlement, CD&L has achieved results in diet drug litigation through trial and verdicts.  Members of CD&L have tried diet drug cases in both state and federal courts throughout the last decade.  More recently, CD&L tried to jury verdicts the only diet drug cases in federal court throughout the United States.  To date, the firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of individuals injured by Fen-Phen.
  • Baycol Litigation, MDL No. 1431.  CD&L represented over two hundred individuals who were injured as the result of taking “Baycol”, a cholesterol-lowering  drug manufactured by Bayer that is linked with rhabdomyolysis, a condition that causes muscle cell breakdown (atrophy) and results in, among other symptoms, muscle pain, weakness, and tenderness.  In the aggregate, these cases settled for many millions of dollars.
  • Trasylol Litigation, MDL No. 1928.  CD&L is on the Plaintiffs Management Committee of this Multi-District litigation involving the drug “Trasylol,” which has been linked to renal failure.  Over the past three years, CD&L’ attorneys have engaged in extensive discovery, including taking multiple depositions and retaining expert witnesses in the prosecution of this litigation.  CD&L represents an individual client whose case has been set as one of the first cases to go to trial in the Spring of 2010.
  • Vioxx Litigation, MDL No. 1657.  In October, 2004, Merck voluntarily recalled its prescription painkiller drug, “Vioxx.”  CD&L represented over 2,200 individuals and their families who were injured or killed as a result of taking Vioxx.  Our firm was Lead Trial Counsel in multiple cases pending in Madison County, Illinois.   Donahoo v. Merck, Case No. 05-L-118.  To date, the firm has recovered well over $130 million for its clients.
  • Bextra/Celebrex Litigation. MDL No. 1699. CD&L represents 330 individuals who ingested the painkiller drugs Bextra and Celebrex manufactured by Pfizer.  Studies have shown that these drugs increased the risk of heart attack and stroke.  Recently, CD&L settled its claims on behalf of its individuals injured by Bextra and Celebrex for a confidential amount.
  • Rezulin Litigation.  MDL No. 1348.  CD&L represented dozens of individuals throughout the Midwest who incurred serious liver damage as a result of ingesting Rezulin.  The cases were actively litigated in federal court which eventually led to a multi-million dollar settlement on behalf of CD&L’ clients.
  • Levaquin Litigation, MDL. No. 1943.  Levaquin, a powerful antibiotic used to treat sinus, skin and urinary tract infections, has been linked to serious side effects, including increased risk of tendonitis and tendon rupture.  CD&L currently represents over 1,500 individuals who have had a serious injury while taking the drug Levaquin.
  • Yaz/Yasmin Birth Control Pill Litigation, MDL No. 2100.  In August 2009, two epidemiological studies were published showing a significant increased risk of injuries and disease among women taking the birth control pill/ Yaz/Yasmin.  CD&L represents individuals who were seriously injured as a result of taking Yaz and/or Yasmin, including women who suffered stroke, pulmonary embolism, heart attack, deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and gall bladder disease.   In October 2009, all personal injury claims claiming injury as a result of taking Yaz/Yasmin pending in federal courts throughout the country were transferred to Judge David Herndon in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.  Judge David Herndon named CD&L to the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee of this litigation, giving the firm a significant leadership role in obtaining recovery for clients across the nation.
  • Yvonne Haltom v. Medical Engineering Corporation,Defective breast implant, $4.5 million jury verdict.

Consumer Fraud

Since its inception, CD&L attorneys have represented plaintiffs nationwide in a variety of high profile complex consumer class actions.  CD&L attorneys have taken the leading role in many of the largest state and federal consumer fraud cases throughout the United States.  These cases related to deceptive sales practice in virtually every industry in the United States.  Examples of current and prior cases include:

  • Health Insurance Co-Pay Litigation.  CD&L was Lead Counsel in multiple consumer class action lawsuits against health insurance companies’ method for calculating co-payments on health insurance policies.  In particular, these cases alleged that health insurance companies entered into secret discounting relationships with healthcare providers which were not passed on to the insureds.  As Lead Counsel, CD&L achieved tens of millions of dollars in relief on behalf of their clients.  More importantly, CD&L was instrumental in changing the method in which health insurance companies calculate co-payments and lifetime maximums on behalf of its subscribers.  Kelly, et al. v. Blue Cross/BlueShield, et al.,, filed in the Circuit Court of St. Louis City, Cause No. 952-01990; Farthing v. United Healthcare of the Midwest, U.S.D.C. for the Western District of Missouri; McHugh v. United Healthcare of the Midwest, Circuit Court City of St. Louis; Sinclair v. United Healthcare of Georgia, U.S.D.C. for the Northern District of Georgia; Cassidy v. Physicians Health Plan of South Carolina, U.S.D.C. for the District of South Carolina.
  • In re: Telephone/Inside Wire Maintenance Litigation.  CD&L served as Co-Lead counsel in several class action suits filed in state and federal courts alleging violations of consumer protection laws in Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas by Southwestern Bell relating to deceptive billing practices with respect to an optional insurance products.   This litigation resulted in a $300 million settlement for over 10 million class members.  CD&L handled the dissemination of notice and administration of over 10 million claims in this monumental case.
  • Cable Television Late Fees Litigation.  CD&L served as Lead Counsel in dozens of suits against cable/television companies throughout the United States.  In these cases, it was alleged that cable rate fees were an illegal liquidated damage that violated both state and federal consumer protection laws.  Charter Cable, Cox Communications and Marcus Cable are just a few of the dozens of defendants that CD&L litigated against in these cases.  Ultimately, CD&L negotiated over $200 million in refunds to cable customers throughout the United States in the late 1990s.  The settlements changed the way these cable companies calculate late fees.
  • Truck Bed Liner Burn Risk Litigation.  CD&L was Lead Counsel in a consumer class action alleging that manufacturers of truck bed liners failed to warn of increased risk of severe burn injuries associated with their products.  CD&L alleged that because the bed liners were not properly grounded, a static electric charge could build up through the plastic of the bed liner, creating the potential for explosion when flammable items were hauled in truck beds containing defendants’ bed liners.  A settlement was reached with defendants mandating warnings of explosion and burn injury be added to the dangerous products.
  • Maytag Neptune Series Washer Litigation.  CD&L was selected amongst hundreds of lawyers to serve as Lead Counsel in a national class action suit that was litigated in St. Clair County, Illinois Circuit Court.  Kenneth Mink, et al., v. Maytag Corporation, 03-L-47.  In this case, hundreds of thousands of consumers filed cases and claims alleging that the Maytag Neptune Series front-loader washer was defective and caused problems relating to mold.  After years of litigation, CD&L negotiated a settlement with Maytag resulting in a massive recall of this defective product.  Additionally, $30 million in economic relief was set aside to pay economic damages relating to this defective washer.
  • In re: MCI Non-Subscriber Litigation. MDL No. 1275.  CD&L was selected to serve as Co-Lead Counsel in this Multi-District litigation consolidated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois alleging that MCI charged illegal long distance rates with respect to contracted customers.  Ultimately, the case was settled for an amount in excess of $90 million.  This landmark settlement is one of the largest in telecommunications history.
  • SmithKline Billing Fraud Litigation. MDL No. 1210.  CD&L served as Co-Lead Counsel in a class action against SmithKline Clinical Beecham Laboratories alleging billing fraud and deceptive sales practices.  The case was settled for an amount in excess of $200 million.  CD&L represented all Non-ERISA claims through a case filed in Madison County, Illinois.  Smithkline settled a national class action in Madison County, Illinois on behalf of all non-ERISA subscribers in 1999.
  • Bank Fee Litigation.  CD&L served as Co-Lead Counsel in a highly publicized case that challenged the manner in which one of the country’s largest banks processes checks so as to increase its fee revenues.  In January 1999, the Circuit Court of St. Clair County, Illinois certified a nationwide class of individuals adversely affected by the practice.  CD&L ultimately settled the bank fee litigation cases.
  •  In re: Bank of America Credit Protection Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation.  MDL No. 2269.  CD&L was selected to serve on the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in this Multi-District litigation involving Bank of America’s marketing and sales practices relating to its debt suspension/debt cancellation product Credit Protection.  This case is currently pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

Antitrust

  • In re: Microsoft Antitrust Litigation. MDL No. 1350.  CD&L was selected to serve as Co-Lead Counsel in this Multi-District litigation involving alleged price fixing by Microsoft.  As Co-Lead Counsel, CD&L was responsible for coordinating and managing over 150 separate antitrust suits brought against the computer operating system manufacturer throughout the United States.  The case was litigated before Judge Frederick Motz in the District Court for the District of Maryland.
  • In re: K-Dur Antitrust Litigation. MDL No. 1419.  CD&L was selected as Co-Lead Counsel in a case alleging that Schering-Plough Corporation, manufacturer of the brand name prescription drug “K-Dur,” entered into illegal agreements with two manufacturers of generic versions of the drug to keep the generic products off of the market, thereby injuring consumers and others who were forced to pay artificially inflated prices for the brand name drug.  The case was litigated in the United States District Court of the District of New Jersey.
  • In re: Buspirone Antitrust Litigation. MDL No. 1410.  CD&L served on the Executive Committee of this Multi-District litigation case involving allegations of antitrust violations by the manufacturer of a popular brand-name anti-anxiety medication.  The case was settled, on behalf of consumers and third party payors (so-called “indirect purchasers”), in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for over $90 million.
  • In re:  Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation. MDL No. 1663.  CD&L is serving as Class Counsel in this Multi-District litigation regarding allegedly widespread illegal conduct in the payment of contingent commissions by numerous insurance brokers and insurance companies.  The case is pending in the District of New Jersey.
  • In re: Commercial Explosives Antitrust Litigation. MDL No. 1093.  CD&L was selected to serve on the Plaintiffs’ Counsel Steering Committee of this Multi-District litigation case regarding price fixing against several major commercial explosive manufacturers.  CD&L filed the first case of this nature and many subsequent similar suits followed.  The case settled for over $77 million.
  • In re: Vitamins Price Fixing Litigation. MDL No. 1285.  CD&L served as Class Counsel in this Multi-District litigation regarding price fixing against several major vitamin manufacturers.  The litigation resulted in settlements in excess of $1 billion on behalf of the class.
  • In re: Bromine Antitrust Litigation. MDL No. 1310.  CD&L served on the Executive Committee of this Multi-District case regarding alleged price fixing against the manufacturers of Bromine.  The case was settled in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

Negligence

  • McKichan v. St. Louis Hockey Club, 1997, $2.5 million jury verdict for Steve McKichan who was a goalie on a minor league hockey game when he was knocked unconscious and his career ended by Tony Twist who was playing for the St. Louis Hockey Club farm team.
  • Maldonado v. Regal Riverfront Hotel, In October 2003, $13.5 million verdict upheld on appeal for the boxer who suffered brain damage due to the failure to have an ambulance at the boxing match.

Medical Malpractice

  • Parks v. Dr. Daake, et al. – alleged negligent laparoscopic gallbladder removal. Defendant doctor clipped and transected the common hepatic duct during a laparoscopic cholesectomy. Settled with defendant immediately prior to trial for a confidential amount in 1997.
  • Lee v. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, et al., failure to diagnose deep vein thrombosis which led to a fatal pulmonary embolism for a 35 year old woman. Her husband and children settled for a confidential amount at mediation in 2001.
  • Vaughn v. Dr. Yzadi, alleged negligent laparoscopic gallbladder removal. Defendant doctor misidentified the common hepatic duct for the cystic duct and the hepatic artery for the cystic artery and clipped and transected the common hepatic duct and right hepatic artery. The surgeon further cut the ducts a second time where they went into the liver while dissecting the gallbladder away from the liver. This also caused a thrombosis in the portal vein which stopped the flow of blood to the liver and led to the eventual death of the patient. The case settled immediately prior to trial for a confidential amount in 2002.
  • Karr v. Dr. Cassady, defendant mistakenly clipped and transected the common bile duct during a laparoscopic cholesectomy and the failed to identify the error during surgery. Settled with defendant doctor prior to trial for a confidential amount in 2004.
  • Mottaz v. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, et al. – plaintiff was provided the incorrect medication, Loxipine, an anti-psychotic drug, instead of Raloxine (a medication for osteoporasis). The prescription was misfilled by the pharmacy and the mistake was not caught by the hospital. In 2005, the case settled for a confidential amount.
  • Fordham v. Dr. Choi and Mendota Community Hospital – plaintiff developed cervical cancer and had routine pap smears which were misread by the pathologist. The hospital settled in 2006 for a confidential amount and the case against the pathologist, Dr. Choi, is still pending.

Class Action/Commercial Litigation

  • Jack Henry & Associates v. Unisys Corporation. This was a $15,000,000 breach of contract action regarding the research, development, and marketing of JHA/USA software on Unisys computers. After a jury verdict in favor of Jack Henry & Associates, the case settled in 1992 for a confidential amount.
  • Israel v. Citicorp Mortgage Co., et al., consumer class action case, alleging miscalculation of adjustable rate mortgages. In 1992 the case settled for $1,650,000 in refunds to the class members.
  • Warmann Oil v. Rubin Brown & Gornstein. This was an accounting malpractice case brought by Warmann Oil Co. against their accountant, Rubin, Brown & Gorstein as a result of alleged inaccurate audits of Warmann Oil’s financial statements. The case settled in 1993 for a confidential amount.
  • Kelly, et al. v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield, et al. This consumer class action challenged Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Missouri’s method for calculating co-payments on health insurance policies. In 1995, the case settled for $5,000,000. The defendants were also required to re-calculate co-payments and lifetime maximums and were enjoined from engaging in the discounting practices in the future.
  • Schrand v. Orkin Exterminating Company, Inc. This was a consumer class action alleging breach of contract and fraud in the sale and application of termite exterminating services. In 1995, a settlement was reached in which the plaintiffs received services estimated to be worth approximately $7,000,000 with an additional $2,100,000 awarded as attorney’s fees and payment of $1,000,000 to Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act revolving fund.
  • Aboussie v. Chicago Title Insurance Company. In the lawsuit 10 plaintiffs alleged that they had title defects on property insured by Chicago Title Insurance Company, and that it breached its title insurance policies with Plaintiffs and was negligent. In 1995, a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs for approximately $455,000.
  • John Belden, et al. v. Chicago Title Insurance Company. Eleven plaintiffs alleged that they had title defects to property that they owned in which Chicago Title Insurance Company breached its contract or was negligent. In 1996 the jury awarded aggregate damages of over $800,000.
  • Metzler v. Nationwide Insurance, consumer class action alleging that certain underinsured motorist coverage was worthless. In 1996 settled – class members received premiums they paid plus a separate amount paid for attorney’s fees.
  • Uptegrove v. American States Insurance Co. – consumer class action for purchase of underinsured coverage when there is no coverage based on definition of underinsured motor vehicle. In 1996 settled for return of premiums and separate payment of attorney’s fees.
  • Fenn, et al. v. Chicago Title Insurance Company. This action was similar to Aboussie and Belden, and involved approximately 60 Plaintiffs. The case settled in 1997 immediately before trial for approximately $2,100,000.
  • Vessel Structure Container System v. Procter & Gamble. This case alleged misappropriation of trade secrets, tortious interference with business expectations by VSC against P&G. The plaintiff alleged that after showing an invention to Procter & Gamble, P&G claimed that they were the inventors of the invention and patented it in the United States as well as numerous foreign companies. In 1999 the case was settled for a confidential amount.
  • Sinclair v. United Healthcare of Georgia, ERISA class action for improper calculation of copayments on health insurance. The case was settled in 1999 for approximately $5,000,000 after class certification was granted.
  • Luwemba v. United Healthcare of Georgia, breach of contract for improper calculation of health insurance copayments. The case was settled in 2000 after class certification was granted.
  • McHugh v. PHP of Greater St. Louis, class action challenging the calculation of health insurance copayments. The case was settled in 1999 after the class was certified.
  • Randy Dorman v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.Exploding tire rim, $105 million jury verdict.
  • Arbuthnot v. Northern Insurance Company of New YorkCourt entered $1,000,000 judgment in favor of injured man whose insurance carrier denied coverage.
  • Gaskin, et al. v. WyethSix plaintiffs suffered valvular heart disease after taking the diet drug Fen Phen. The case settled for a confidential amount after eight days of trial.
  • Shelbourne v. Jackson Life Insurance Company, et al.Plaintiffs’ daughter was murdered by her husband to collect life insurance. Plaintiffs sued seven life insurance companies for negligently issuing life insurance policies that acted as the motivating factor for murder. At a mediation in 2003, the case settled for a confidential amount.
  • Elliott v. Kelly Trucking, et al.. Trucking accident, $2.1 million settlement for death of 17 year old daughter.
Experienced Attorneys who fight for Justice & your Well-being
If you have been wronged, we can help