Xarelto Litigation Continues to Grow

Posted in Defective Drugs, Xarelto

Xarelto (Rivaroxaban) is a blood thinner that was approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) in July 2011, to prevent strokes in patients who received hip and knee replacements. In November 2011, the approval was expanded to any patients with atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat). Xarelto has been widely prescribed, with millions of people taking the medication since it entered the market.

Since its approval, there have been numerous reports of increased risk of injury when taking Xarelto, including, but not limited to:

  • Brain hemorrhage
  • Hemorrhagic stroke
  • Gastrointestinal bleeding

These events can be life threatening since, unlike warfarin, there is no antidote for Xarelto to stop the bleeding.

As we have previously reported, many of the pending lawsuits are centralized in federal court before the Honorable Eldon E. Fallon in the Eastern District of Louisiana as part of MDL 2592. In addition to these cases, the filing of Xarelto cases in state courts, such as Pennsylvania, continues to rise.

If you feel you have experienced any side-effects from taking Xarelto, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the Xarelto manufacturers.

Zofran Litigation Continues to Grow Across the Country

Posted in Defective Drugs, Zofran

Zofran (ondansetron), manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), is a member of a class of drugs known as 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, which work by blocking the actions of serotonin. Zofran was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January 1991, to treat chemotherapy-related nausea, and the approval was later expanded to treat postoperative nausea and vomiting. Since then, it has been increasingly prescribed for off-label uses, such as use by pregnant women suffering from morning sickness. Studies show that Zofran use by pregnant women can lead to a heightened risk of severe birth defects, including heart development irregularities, cleft lip and cleft palate.

In 2012, GSK agreed to pay the United States Department of Justice $3 billion to settle numerous civil and criminal allegations, including the illegal marketing of Zofran. The company is now facing lawsuits filed on behalf of children born with heart defects or craniofacial birth defects because their mothers took Zofran during pregnancy.

If you or your child has suffered any injury as a result of taking Zofran, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the Zofran manufacturers.

$3.6 Million Verdict in Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuit

Posted in Actos

As we have previously reported, thousands of lawsuits have been filed against Takeda Pharmaceutical Company for its medication Actos after studies revealed that diabetics taking the drug may be at an increased risk of developing bladder cancer. In 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned that use of the diabetes medication Actos (pioglitazone) for more than one year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer.

A plaintiff, alleging Actos caused his bladder cancer, was recently awarded $2.3 million in compensatory damages by a jury in Pennsylvania state court. The jury found that Takeda showed “reckless indifference” to the plaintiff’s health by hiding Actos’ risks and awarded another $1.3 million in punitive damages. There are approximately 8,000 other similar lawsuits currently pending in federal and state courts across the country.

If you believe you have experienced adverse side-effects from taking Actos, contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the manufacturers of Actos.

Zofran Injuries Continue To Be Reported

Posted in Zofran

Zofran (ondansetron), manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, is a member of a class of drugs known as 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, which work by blocking the actions of serotonin. Zofran was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January 1991, to treat chemotherapy-related nausea, and the approval was later expanded to treat postoperative nausea and vomiting.

According to recent allegations, it is believed that Zofran has also been marketed and prescribed for off-label uses, such as use by pregnant women suffering from morning sickness. According to a recent article published by the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, “Presently 97.7% of prescriptions for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy in the United States are with medications not labeled for use in pregnancy, not indicated for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy, and not classified as safe in pregnancy by the Food and Drug Administration.”

Studies show that Zofran use by pregnant women can lead to a heightened risk of severe birth defects, including heart development irregularities, cleft lip and cleft palate.

If you feel you have experienced any side-effects from taking Zofran, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the Zofran manufacturers.

Xarelto Cases Consolidated in New Orleans, Louisiana

Posted in Defective Drugs, Xarelto

The United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (MDL) recently convened to determine whether the cases, known as IN RE: XARELTO (RIVAROXABAN)

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, should be given MDL treatment. Granting MDL treatment consolidates all federal lawsuits filed across the United States into one centralized district. This consolidation streamlines the pretrial discovery process, allowing the parties to avoid duplicative discovery and inconsistent rulings from different judges.

The Judicial Panel granted MDL status and signed a Transfer Order on December 12, 2014. The cases will be consolidated and transferred to the Eastern District of Louisiana and presided over by the Honorable Eldon E. Fallon. The Judicial Panel decided the Eastern District of Louisiana was appropriate given the number of filings potential tag-along cases in that district and the fact that Judge Fallon is an experienced transferee judge with a willingness and ability to manage the litigation efficiently.

If you feel you have experienced any side-effects from taking Xarelto, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the Xarelto manufacturers.

Xarelto Injuries Continue To Be Reported

Posted in Defective Drugs, Xarelto

Xarelto (Rivaroxaban) is a blood thinner that was approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) in July 2011, to prevent strokes in patients who received hip and knee replacements. In November 2011, the approval was expanded to any patients with atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat).

Since its approval, there have been numerous reports of increased risk of injury when taking Xarelto, including, but not limited to:

  • Brain hemorrhage
  • Hemorrhagic stroke
  • Gastrointestinal bleeding

These events can be life threatening since, unlike warfarin, there is no antidote for Xarelto to stop the bleeding.

If you feel you have experienced any side-effects from taking Xarelto, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the Xarelto manufacturers.

Xarelto Allegedly Not Safer Than Warfarin

Posted in Defective Drugs, Xarelto

Xarelto is marketed as an anticoagulant prescribed to reduce the risk of stroke, deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. It is manufactured in the United States by Bayer and Johnson & Johnson’s New Jersey-based division, Janssen Pharmaceuticals. Lawsuits have been filed nationwide based on claims that Xarelto is responsible for injuries in some individuals.

Lawsuits allege that Xarelto was marketed as safer than warfarin, another anticoagulant, but recent studies, including from the Canadian Journal of Cardiology (December 2014 – Volume 30, Issue 12), suggest otherwise. The study allegedly found that the safety profiles of the drugs were nearly identical when it came to bleeding risks and other side effects common to blood thinners used to treat patients with atrial fibrillation.

If you feel you have experienced any side-effects from taking Xarelto, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the Xarelto manufacturers.

Judge Denies C.R. Bard’s Request to Delay Trials

Posted in Medical Devices, Transvaginal Mesh

The litigation against manufacturers of pelvic mesh devices continues to increase nationwide. A pelvic mesh implant is a synthetic material implanted and tied to ligaments or bone to lift and support internal organs. The implants were introduced over a decade ago, and can serve as an alternative to a hysterectomy. Thousands of women, who were allegedly uninformed about the dangers involved with the mesh implants, have since complained of injuries, including severe pain, infections and bleeding that often require follow-up surgeries.

There are over 10,000 lawsuits pending against C.R. Bard for the Avaulta device. The majority of these cases are consolidated as part of a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) before U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia. As we previously reported, C.R. Bard agreed to settle 500 of those cases for an undisclosed amount.

Judge Goodwin has urged C.R. Bard to seriously consider a global settlement. As Bloomberg reported, Judge Goodwin told attorneys for C.R. Bard “I can’t imagine a corporation facing potentially billions of dollars in verdicts wouldn’t find it advisable to try and achieve a settlement for a much lesser sum.” Despite this warning, the remaining C.R. Bard cases are being prepared for trial. Attorneys for C.R. Bard recently asked Judge Goodwin to delay the upcoming trial by one month, arguing that his comments regarding a settlement unfairly prejudiced the jury pool. Judge Goodwin denied the defendant’s application, finding the trials should proceed as planned.

If you or a loved one has experienced any injury from the use of a vaginal mesh implant, please contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against a manufacturer of the vaginal mesh device.

Boston Scientific To Pay Millions Following West Virginia Mesh Trial

Posted in Transvaginal Mesh

Trials against vaginal mesh device manufacturer, Boston Scientific Corp. (“Boston Scientific”), continue in West Virginia. Only one week after a jury in Miami’s federal court ordered Boston Scientific to pay $26.7 million to 4 plaintiffs, the company has now been ordered to pay another $18.5 million to an additional 4 plaintiffs. The plaintiffs in the recent West Virginia federal trial claimed injuries, including nerve damage, pain during sex and infection, as a result of the company’s Obtryx device. The jury not only awarded each of the plaintiffs several million dollars in compensatory damages, but also awarded each woman an additional one million dollars in punitive damages, finding the company acted with “gross negligence” in failing to adequately warn consumers and doctors about the risks involved with the device.

If you or a loved one has experienced any injury from the use of a vaginal mesh implant, please contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against a manufacturer.

Boston Scientific To Pay Millions Following First Federal Trial

Posted in Transvaginal Mesh

In November 2014, Boston Scientific Corp. was ordered to pay $26.7 million to 4 plaintiffs who allege injury as a result of the company’s transvaginal mesh devices. Following an eight-day trial, a jury in Miami’s federal court found that Boston Scientific Corp. had defectively designed the Pinnacle pelvic-organ implant and had failed to properly warn doctors and patients about the implant’s risk. Risks often include erosion leading to pain and organ damage. A representative for Boston Scientific Corp. denied the device suffered from design flaws and indicated that the company had strong grounds to overturn the verdict. More than 14,000 mesh cases are currently pending nationwide against Boston Scientific Corp.

If you or a loved one has experienced any injury from the use of a vaginal mesh implant, please contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against a manufacturer.