Product Liability Lawyer Blog

December 19, 2013

Families Affected by Topamax Birth Defects Awarded Millions in Damages

Janssen Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of Topamax and a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, is facing more than 134 pending cases in a single court, as well as other claims nationwide, because of birth defects linked to the anti-seizure medication.

The company has had bad news in recent weeks as two claims that were brought to trial resulted in multi-million dollar jury verdicts for the plaintiff. The verdicts provide hope for plaintiffs with pending claims, but likely make Janssen Pharmaceuticals very nervous about the extent of liability that the company faces.

Our Topamax attorneys in Boston know that the FDA has warned of the increased risk of an oral cleft palate in infants whose mothers take Topamax during pregnancy. The outcomes of the recent claims against Janssen Pharmaceuticals suggest that juries recognize the link between and expectant mother’s dosage and facial defects in newborn infants land seek to provide sufficient compensation for families to cover medical costs and other losses caused by the dangerous drug.
Continue reading

December 13, 2013

Topamax Lawsuit Ends in $11 Million Verdict for the Plaintiff

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

A woman whose infant was born with facial deformations has successfully sued the maker of an anti-seizure drug she was prescribed while pregnant.

The case, Gurley v. Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceutical is part of a larger mass tort action in the Philadelphia district courts against the makers of Topamax, a drug used to treat epilepsy and migraines. The master case is In re Topamax Litigation.

The bellwether cases here involved a stay-at-home mother who was prescribed the drug Topamax for treatment of epilepsy. She continued to take the drug through her pregnancy, as she had been told by doctors was safe. However, what she didn’t know was that the manufacturer, Janssen Pharmeceuticals, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, had long known that the drug caused serious birth defects. The plaintiffs would later argue that this was information that Janssen intentionally kept from both doctors and patients.
Continue reading

December 10, 2013

Transvaginal Mesh Defendant Accused of Destroying Evidence

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Bloomberg news service reports that court documents filed recently In Re Ethicon Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation, a U.S. District Court Case in the Southern District of West Virginia, allege that a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary destroyed or misplaced documents related to its vaginal mesh implants.

As a result, transvaginal mesh plaintiff attorneys are requesting that the the subsidiary, Ethicon, be barred from launching certain types of defenses in a series of upcoming trials.

If you aren’t familiar, Ethicon was responsible for the manufacture of a type of implant known as the Gynecare Prolift. It was one of the four types of mesh products, used to treat urinary incontinence, that Johnson & Johnson decided to stop selling back in June of 2012. That decision came after two large groups of lawsuits were filed by women who claimed that implantation of the devices had caused them serious injury.
Continue reading

December 5, 2013

Atwell v. Boston Scientific Corp. Addresses Jurisdiction in Large Transvaginal Mesh Claims

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

For anyone involved in a civil lawsuit, the question of whether the case should be removed from state to federal court is an important one.

Technically, both parties should be able to expect a fair legal proceeding no matter the venue in which the case is heard. However, civil case defendants in large tort actions, such as transvaginal mesh claims, tend to view a federal court venue as a strategic advantage. They will often fight very hard to have a case removed from state court to federal court if there is an opportunity to do so.

When transvaginal mesh claims are filed as a class action or a mass action, it can improve the defendant’s odds of having the case removed to federal court, per the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005. The law expanded the criteria under which such claims must be removed to federal court.
Continue reading

December 3, 2013

GranuFlo Lawsuits Continue to Be Filed

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

More than 300 lawsuits have been filed against Fresenius Medical Care arising from problems with GranuFlo and NaturaLyte dialysis products. Both GranuFlo and NaturaLyte were subject to a Class I Recall after serious risks arose and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) became concerned about the link between GranuFlo/NaturaLyte and patients suffering cardiac arrest.

Our Boston dialysis drug lawyers know that the Class I Recall occurred in March of 2012 and included a voluntary change of the labels on both the NaturaLyte and GranuFlo products. This recall occurred months after an internal memo was sent out by Fresenius Medical Care on November 4, 2011, alerting physicians at Fresenius’ own dialysis clinics that GranuFlo and NaturaLyte could result in excess bicarbonate in the body if doctors did not specifically adjust for the fact that GranuFlo and NaturaLyte reacted differently than other alkaline substances used in dialysis treatment.
Continue reading

November 30, 2013

Mediation Scheduled to Work Towards Stryker Hip Settlements

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Plaintiffs throughout the United States have filed lawsuits against Stryker because of its Rejuvenate hip implant product. Many of these cases have been consolidated into a multi-county litigation in New Jersey State Court, and there are currently more than 430 cases pending in coordinated litigation before the New Jersey judge. Approximately ¼ of those cases were filed within the past three months.

In October, Judge Brian R. Martinotti issued a case management order to try to work towards resolving some of these pending cases. Our Boston defective hip implant lawyers know that defective medical device cases often settle outside of court if the device manufacturer and plaintiffs are able to agree on the value of the cases and the defendant offers to pay a reasonable sum to victims. The judge’s case management order is designed to help facilitate the parties reaching a settlement, as it outlines the process by which mediation will occur.
Continue reading

November 27, 2013

DePuy Announces U.S. Settlement to Compensate Hip System Victims

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Metal on metal hip implants manufactured by DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. caused serious complications for patients and had a high failure rate. Thousands of patients filed lawsuits against DePuy because they experienced metallosis, failure of their hip implant or replacement system, pain and discomfort, or other harm as a result of the metal replacement joint.

hip implant lawyers in Boston know that many patients were required to have a revision surgery performed within five years after the metal hip implant was installed, thus incurring significant expenses and suffering both economic and non-financial loss. Now, Johnson & Johnson has announced that DePuy Orthopaedics has agreed to a settlement to compensate eligible ASR patients in the United States who had surgery to replace their ASR hip implant as of August 31, 2013.
Continue reading

November 24, 2013

Transvaginal Mesh Litigation Update: Next C.R. Bard Trial Scheduled

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Transvaginal mesh caused thousands of women to experience serious complications after the surgical mesh was implanted in procedures designed to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). As many plaintiffs filed lawsuits against transvaginal mesh manufacturers, cases were consolidated into multi-district litigations.

Our Boston transvaginal mesh lawyers know that these multi-district litigations allow for a single judge to rule on issues that are relevant to all TVM cases, so that claims can move through the courts more quickly and plaintiffs won’t have to wait as long to get their cases resolved.

In addition to allowing one judge to make decisions on common issues in cases, multidistrict litigations also provide another benefit. Bellwether trials can be scheduled and can allow for plaintiffs and defendants to get a better idea of the strength of their respective cases so that there is a better chance of an out-of-court settlement being reached. The bellwether trials in transvaginal mesh cases have been moving forward, and the next case against C.R. Bard has been scheduled.
Continue reading

November 19, 2013

Bayer Spends Billions on Yaz Settlements While Cases Still Pending

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Bayer Pharmaceuticals has announced in the company’s stockholder newsletter that the company has spent almost $1.6 billion in settling cases arising from Yaz complications. Bayer manufactured both Yaz and Yasmin, two “fourth-generation” birth control pills that have been demonstrated to have serious unexpected side effects that Bayer failed to warn patients about. More than 10,000 women have filed lawsuits already, and despite the $1.6 billion settlement, estimates indicate that there are 9,873 claims still pending.

Bayer’s past settlements are good news for plaintiffs who wish to pursue claims against the drug company with the help of a Boston defective drug lawyer. Individuals who experienced harm as a result of Yaz or Yasmin can still come forward and take legal action against Bayer if they can prove that they were injured due to the use of these dangerous birth control products.
Continue reading

November 13, 2013

Stryker Lawsuits Moving Forward as Defective Device Allegations Mount

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Stryker hip replacement products continue to fail at high rates and cause serious complications for patients implanted with a hip replacement system that turned out to be much more dangerous than expected. Even as more patients continue to experience serious problems with Stryker products, cases are moving forward across the country with injured victims seeking to hold Stryker accountable for the damage the medical device company’s products have done.

The cases moving forward include claims that have been consolidated both into multi-county litigation and multi-district litigation. Our Boston Stryker hip lawyers know that many of these cases are proceeding on schedule and that plaintiffs may soon have the chance to be fully compensated for problems including metal toxicity, severe pain and failed hip replacements resulting in the need for revision surgery.
Continue reading