The Avas Flowers lawsuit was filed by plaintiffs’ attorney, Michael J. Schaffer, against Dr. Richard B. Stallings, the manufacturer of the “Rice Scar”, a product which is used to treat herpes with an ingredient derived from rice. Dr. Stallings has been described as an expert in the field of sexually transmitted diseases, has been a practicing chiropractor for many years. However, none of this has been established as being related to the subject of this lawsuit. The claim is that Dr. Stallings failed to disclose that he was a practicing chiropractor, and consequently encouraged patients to use therice scar as a remedy for their genital herpes.

Avas Flowers Lawsuit

In addition, the Avas Flowers lawsuit names Dr. William J. Rice, the current owner of Avas Flowers, LLC, and defendants’ agent, Mark S. Taylor. A phone number associated with the company’s main headquarters is listed as the contact number on the Avas Flowers website, and the website contains no other information pertaining to the owner or agent of that company. Further, there are no other records of any of the companies involved in this case being involved in litigation, or of any settlements or awards being given. Thus, there are strong suspicions that this case may be nothing more than a public relations stunt by the defendant’s attorney.

In the Avas Flowers lawsuit, the plaintiff’s attorney stated that the defendant’s omitted this fact when advising the plaintiff’s girlfriend and wife to use the plant as a remedy for herpes.

Specifically, the defendant’s attorney told the plaintiffs’ girlfriend and wife that the plant would help to alleviate the plaintiff’s herpes symptoms. Specifically, the attorney stated that the plant would give the plaintiff’s body “minor pain, like that one he feels after shaving”. Such statements are highly questionable, as even if the Avas Flowers lawsuit is ultimately proven untrue, as it is unlikely the pain will subside without the ingestion of the plant, and any such relief will only be temporary.

There also seems to be an apparent lack of understanding as to why exactly the plant was used as a remedy for the plaintiff’s pain.

Again, the Avas Flowers lawsuit reveals a lack of knowledge concerning exactly how the plant was used to relieve the pain, which makes it difficult to determine what was not meant by the defendant’s attorney when advising his client to use the plant in this fashion. Further, many plaintiffs have found that the plant has caused them problems in other ways, such as sleep loss, nausea, diarrhea, and general weakness. The fact that these problems are caused by the plant itself should not be overlooked. Even if the Avas Flowers lawsuit is ultimately false and the plant is not responsible for these problems, the plaintiffs still have to prove their harm was caused by the plant, which may make it difficult for them to prove that the plant is dangerous.

For this reason, it is extremely important that plaintiffs seeking damages from defendants must carefully research the plant and the circumstances surrounding its use.

In fact, every single piece of evidence relating to the plant that is used in a court of law, or even deposition evidence that is introduced into a lawsuit should be evaluated with great care to ensure that the plaintiff actually has a case against the defendant based on the facts that are discovered. Even if the plaintiff’s attorney believes that the plant in question causes the plaintiff’s harm, this evidence may not support the amount of damages sought by the plaintiff, due to the fact that many other factors may affect the final settlement amount.

Finally, it should be noted that trial attorneys are often hesitant to work on settlements that are too small due to the potential costs of defending these cases in a court of law.

As a result, it is always important to talk to several trial attorneys prior to making any claims regarding damages. This is due to the fact that the cost of a lawsuit can quickly skyrocket if the case proceeds to trial, causing many plaintiffs to give up in hopes of reaching a settlement that is too low. If this occurs, however, it is important to realize that it is important to request more than just a small settlement in this type of lawsuit, in order to ensure that the plant manufacturer pays for the harm caused. While the costs of a lawsuit are not necessarily tied to the amount of damage that was inflicted, many lawyers advise clients to seek much higher compensation than is generally expected in exchange for their claims.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *