EFFEXOR: Police Officer Becomes Aggressive With Captain: Suit: NJ

Paragraph 10 reads:  “Czech’s report indicated Ruroede
suffers from a seizure disorder and as a consequence takes
Effexor, Xanex and Fludrocortisone, all of which
have side effects when combined with alcohol. The report also claimed
that an analysis of Ruroede by a psychologist suggested he is “at risk of over
aggressive expressions and over aggressive behaviors.”

SSRI Stories
Note:  The Physicians Desk Reference states that antidepressants can cause a craving for alcohol and
alcohol abuse. Also, the liver cannot
metabolize the antidepressant and the alcohol simultaneously,  thus leading
to higher levels of both alcohol and the antidepressant in the human
body.

http://www.northjersey.com/news/78389717.html

Former officer‘s suit gets a court date
Thursday, December 3, 2009


Community News (Lodi Edition)
STAFF WRITER

A former police
lieutenant’s civil suit against the borough is scheduled to go before the court
early next year.

Kelly Ruroede filed his suit against the borough, the
police department and the mayor and council earlier this year following his
termination from the Hasbrouck Heights Police Department on Dec. 9, 2008.
Ruroede’s case will go before Judge Estela De La Cruz at Bergen County Superior
Court on Jan. 5, 2010, according to borough officials.

Ruroede was fired
from his position as a lieutenant of the Hasbrouck Heights Police Department
following a report and recommendation by Hearing Officer Robert Czech, Esq. of
Sea Girt. Czech asserted in his report that Ruroede had provided “untruthful
responses during the course of the investigation” into his actions of March 23,
2008 during a physical altercation with Rutherford Police Capt. George Egbert.
Czech stated in his report that Ruroede was insubordinate, withheld information,
failed to comply with laws, had unauthorized absences and handled firearms while
unqualified to do so. According to Czech, a psychological evaluation determined
that Ruroede was “unfit for duty.”

In his lawsuit, Ruroede seeks to have
Czech’s decision overturned, a reinstatement to the police department and pay
lost due to his suspension.

The bulk of the charges against Ruroede stem
from a clash between Egbert and Ruroede at the Blarney Station bar in East
Rutherford. Czech’s report indicated both men had drinks at the bar prior to the
fight.

Egbert claimed Ruroede brandished a firearm during the course of a
verbal disagreement between the two men, stating that Ruroede lifted him “by the
jacket right below the throat and lifted [him] up off the ground.”

In
the report, Ruroede told Czech that Egbert made a derogatory remark about a
female friend of Ruroede’s while she was leaving the bar. Ruroede claimed Egbert
grabbed his arm first “and that is why he continued in the manner he
did.”

Eyewitness statements corroborate much of Egbert’s testimony,
according to the hearing officer‘s report.

Czech stated Egbert called
both the Rutherford Police Department and the Hasbrouck Heights Police

Department within an hour to report the altercation while Ruroede waited until
the next day to do so.

Czech’s report indicated Ruroede suffers from a

seizure disorder and as a consequence takes Effexor, Xanex and Fludrocortisone,
all of which have side effects when combined with alcohol. The report also
claimed that an analysis of Ruroede by a psychologist suggested he is “at risk
of over aggressive expressions and over aggressive behaviors.”

Following
the March 23 incident, Ruroede received notice of suspension without
pay.

Borough Administrator Michael Kronyak said Ruroede was “appealing
[the borough’s decision] to see if the termination was valid.” Kronyak indicated
that the borough would receive legal representation from Ruderman and Glickman,
who represent the borough in labor and contract litigation, and via the
borough’s insurance carrier, the New Jersey Intergovernmental Insurance Fund.

“We feel that we followed the correct procedure and that the path the
mayor and council took was right,” Kronyak said.

Attorney John Boppert
of Ruderman and Glickman declined to comment. Ruroede’s attorney, Albert Wunsch,
was unavailable for comment.

zaremba@northjersey.com

A
former police lieutenant’s civil suit against the borough is scheduled to go
before the court early next year.

Kelly Ruroede filed his suit against
the borough, the police department and the mayor and council earlier this year
following his termination from the Hasbrouck Heights Police Department on Dec.
9, 2008. Ruroede’s case will go before Judge Estela De La Cruz at Bergen County
Superior Court on Jan. 5, 2010, according to borough officials.

Ruroede
was fired from his position as a lieutenant of the Hasbrouck Heights Police

Department following a report and recommendation by Hearing Officer Robert
Czech, Esq. of Sea Girt. Czech asserted in his report that Ruroede had provided
“untruthful responses during the course of the investigation” into his actions
of March 23, 2008 during a physical altercation with Rutherford Police Capt.
George Egbert. Czech stated in his report that Ruroede was insubordinate,
withheld information, failed to comply with laws, had unauthorized absences and
handled firearms while unqualified to do so. According to Czech, a psychological
evaluation determined that Ruroede was “unfit for duty.”

In his lawsuit,
Ruroede seeks to have Czech’s decision overturned, a reinstatement to the police
department and pay lost due to his suspension.

The bulk of the charges
against Ruroede stem from a clash between Egbert and Ruroede at the Blarney
Station bar in East Rutherford. Czech’s report indicated both men had drinks at
the bar prior to the fight.

Egbert claimed Ruroede brandished a firearm
during the course of a verbal disagreement between the two men, stating that
Ruroede lifted him “by the jacket right below the throat and lifted [him] up off
the ground.”

In the report, Ruroede told Czech that Egbert made a
derogatory remark about a female friend of Ruroede’s while she was leaving the
bar. Ruroede claimed Egbert grabbed his arm first “and that is why he continued
in the manner he did.”

Eyewitness statements corroborate much of Egbert’s
testimony, according to the hearing officer‘s report.

Czech stated Egbert
called both the Rutherford Police Department and the Hasbrouck Heights Police

Department within an hour to report the altercation while Ruroede waited until
the next day to do so.

Czech’s report indicated Ruroede suffers from a
seizure disorder and as a consequence takes Effexor, Xanex and Fludrocortisone,
all of which have side effects when combined with alcohol. The report also
claimed that an analysis of Ruroede by a psychologist suggested he is “at risk
of over aggressive expressions and over aggressive behaviors.”

Following
the March 23 incident, Ruroede received notice of suspension without
pay.

Borough Administrator Michael Kronyak said Ruroede was “appealing
[the borough’s decision] to see if the termination was valid.” Kronyak indicated
that the borough would receive legal representation from Ruderman and Glickman,
who represent the borough in labor and contract litigation, and via the
borough’s insurance carrier, the New Jersey Intergovernmental Insurance
Fund.

“We feel that we followed the correct procedure and that the path
the mayor and council took was right,” Kronyak said.

Attorney John
Boppert of Ruderman and Glickman declined to comment. Ruroede’s attorney, Albert
Wunsch, was unavailable for comment.

zaremba@northjersey.com

590 total views, 2 views today

10/15/2000 – Attention: Legal action in Paxil withdrawal

Victims suffering withdrawal symptoms from Paxil are
encouraged to contact the attorneys who are currently
prosecuting a civil action suit (a wrongful death of a father
and his two children) against SmithKline Beecham, the
drug’s manufacturer. On August 18, 2000, three California
attorneys brought suit against SmithKline Beecham in Santa
Clara County Superior Court alleging that the drug maker has
kept hidden the addictive traits of Paxil in order to enhance the
drug’s worldwide sales, which now comes to approximately
$2 billion annually.

In the lawsuit it is alleged that SmithKline Beecham has
intentionally understated the drug’s addictive traits. (To say
the least!) And the plaintiffs in this suit have asked the court
to compel SmithKline Beecham to divulge all they know about
that hazard to the federal Food & Drug Administration. This is
being done with the intention that proper warning labels about
withdrawal might be included with Paxil prescriptions in the
future to warn new patients of this adverse effect.

Victims of Paxil withdrawal are encouraged to contact the
attorneys in order that statements can be obtained and
evidence put before the court that the alleged harm is very
real. Any of the three attorneys handling the case can be
contacted. They are as follows:

(1) Donald J. Farber, e-mail: (n3dgt@…)
(2) Vince D. Nguyen, e-mail: (lawvdn@…)
(3) Skip Murgatroyd e-mail (skip-tracy@…)

They will need a complete description of the victim’s problems
with Paxil, including particularly “whether or not the victim was
warned on the drug’s addictive characteristics when the drug
was initially prescribed.” (Most likely to be featured on the
television program “It’s a Miracle” if they were warned about
withdrawal when Paxil or any other SSRI was prescribed!)
And they will need to detail the circumstances surrounding
the victim’s discovery of the withdrawal problem.

The attorneys do emphasize that reporting the problem to
them will not result in damage awards to the reporting parties,
but that any success in the lawsuit they are currently pursuing
will ultimately hopefully result in warnings for all future Paxil
users – the warning you did not get.

Ann Blake-Tracy, Executive Director,
International Coalition for Drug Awareness
www.drugawareness.org

564 total views, 7 views today