Martin P. Schrama

Martin P. Schrama is a Shareholder and member of the Stark & Stark Mass Tort Litigation Group. Mr. Schrama has extensive experience prosecuting and defending class actions involving securities, employment and consumer fraud claims. Currently, Mr. Schrama is Co-lead Trial Counsel representing numerous plaintiffs in the mass tort environmental contamination case of In Re Bristol-Myers Squibb Environmental Contamination Litigation. Mr. Schrama is also supervisory counsel for numerous Stark & Stark Litigation Teams. Mr. Schrama has extensive experience litigating on both the trial and appellate levels of the federal and state courts of New Jersey and New York, as well as numerous other jurisdictions throughout the nation.

Posts by Martin P. Schrama

Federal Judge Appoints Plaintiffs’ Leadership Team in Actos Litigation

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Actos®, Defective Drugs

The Honorable Rebecca F. Doherty, who is overseeing the federal Actos cases centralized in Louisiana, has appointed 19 plaintiffs’ attorneys to manage the litigation. As we have previously reported, recent studies allegedly show that diabetics taking Actos may be at an increased risk of developing bladder cancer. A recent Bloomberg article stated that Takeda Pharmaceutical… Continue Reading

Judge Asked To Consider Possible FDA Conflicts of Interest in YAZ Litigation

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Defective Drugs, Yaz® Yasmin® and Ocella®

Recently, the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in the Yaz and Yasmin litigation opposed a motion to exclude the opinions of former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner, David Kessler, concerning possible conflicts of interest.  The Plaintiffs’ attorneys have asked Judge Herndon, who is overseeing the federal Yaz and Yasmin cases, to allow in evidence showing that… Continue Reading

Multi-District Litigation Granted in Actos Bladder Cancer Litigation

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Actos®, Defective Drugs

The United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (MDL) met on December 1, 2011, in Savannah, Georgia, to hear arguments regarding whether all federal Actos cases should be consolidated into multi-district litigation (MDL) and, if so, where the cases should be consolidated. As we have previously reported, recent studies allegedly show that diabetics taking Actos… Continue Reading

Multi-District Litigation Granted in Darvocet Litigation

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Darvocet® and Darvon®, Defective Drugs

As we previously reported, the United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (MDL) met in March 2011, in San Diego, CA, to hear arguments regarding whether the Darvocet and Darvon cases should be given MDL treatment. In April 2011, the Panel announced that it needed more time to consider the arguments for and against consolidating the federal cases. As such, the Panel scheduled an additional hearing for July 2011, in San Francisco, CA, to consider further arguments.

DePuy Pinnacle Hip Implant Consolidated in Texas

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in DePuy ASR®, Medical Devices

As we previously reported, in March 2011, a petition was filed to consolidate all federal DePuy Pinnacle cases in either the Southern District of Texas or the Central District of California. Alternatively, the petition also asked that the United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation consider adding the Pinnacle cases to the already pending DePuy ASR MDL, which is centralized in the Northern District Court of Ohio. On May 16, 2011, a hearing was held by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) to consider the consolidation.

Should Darvocet Cases Be Given MDL Treatment?

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Darvocet® and Darvon®, Defective Drugs

As we previously reported, the United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (MDL) met on Wednesday, March 30, 2011, in San Diego, CA, to hear arguments regarding whether the Darvocet and Darvon federal cases should be given MDL treatment. One of the main sources of contention among the parties is where to centralize the cases. The proposed locations include: the Eastern District of New York, the Northern District of Illinois, the Eastern District of Louisiana, the Western District of Louisiana, the Southern District of Ohio and the Eastern District of Kentucky.

Disagreements Continue Over Yaz Depositions

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Defective Drugs, Yaz® Yasmin® and Ocella®

In November 2010, U.S. District Judge David Herndon, who is overseeing the federal Yaz lawsuits, ordered three executives from Bayer to fly to the United States for their depositions. Joachim Marr, Hartmut Blode and Ilka Schellschmidt, who work at Bayer’s headquarters in Germany, were selected to represent the company regarding the pre-clinical and clinical development processes.

NuvaRing® Case Management Conference Scheduled

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Medical Devices, NuvaRing®

Judge Martinotti, who presides over the NuvaRing® mass tort cases in the Superior Court of New Jersey – Bergen County, will hold a case management conference on March 11, 2011. At this conference, the judge will hear Defendants’ motion to dismiss Millian v. Organon. Defendants claim the statute of limitations has expired and the action is barred. Underlying the statute of limitations issue in this motion is a choice of law issue. The Court will address whether to apply the statute of limitations of Virginia, the plaintiff’s home state where her injuries were diagnosed, or New Jersey, the state where the action is filed. The Court’s decision will likely apply to the remaining matters filed in this mass tort.

Multi-District Litigation granted in DePuy Hip Recall

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in DePuy ASR®, Medical Devices

In December 2010, the United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (MDL) ruled to consolidate all federal district cases in the Northern District Court of Ohio. The MDL 2197, In re DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. ASR Hip Implant Products, will be handled by Judge David A. Katz who will manage all pre-trial issues for all federal DePuy hip implant recall cases.

YAZ® Mass Tort Litigation Ordered To File Master Consolidated Complaint

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Defective Drugs, Yaz® Yasmin® and Ocella®

The parties involved in the YAZ® Mass Tort litigation have been ordered file a Master Consolidated Complaint (“Master Complaint”). The Master Complaint will supplement the Complaints that have been filed in the individual cases, as well as serve as a reference for incoming plaintiffs. The Master Complaint will allege a variety of counts for Negligence, Fraud, and other causes of action.

YAZ®, Yasmin® Mass Tort Litigation Update – Preservation of Documents

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Defective Drugs, Yaz® Yasmin® and Ocella®

The parties involved in the Mass Tort litigation (surrounding the defective birth control products YAZ®, Yasmin® and Ocella®) have been ordered to confer and reach an agreement on all issues regarding the preservation of documents and data. The goal of preservation is to maintain the integrity of all documents, data and tangible things pursuant to R. 4:10 through R. 4:19.

What is the status of currently pending litigation against YAZ® manufacturers?

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Defective Drugs, Yaz® Yasmin® and Ocella®

Studies have shown that the ingredients contained in YAZ®, Yasmin® and Ocella® (including the synthetic progestin, drospirenone), have been linked to various forms of internal organ damage (including gallbladder damage), as well as deep vein thrombosis, or blood clots. These blood clots can form in the deep veins of the legs, pelvis, or arms causing major discomfort. It has been found that, if the clot dislodges, it can lead to sudden, and many times fatal, stroke, heart attack, myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism.

Defendants in NuvaRing® Litigation Files Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claims

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Medical Devices, NuvaRing®

As we have discussed in previous posts, NuvaRing®, the combined contraceptive vaginal ring that is supposed to provide month-long birth control, is currently involved in a Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Recently, defendants filed numerous motions to dismiss certain plaintiff’s claims for failure to provide a timely or complete “Plaintiff Fact Sheet” (also known as a “PFS”). In pharmaceutical cases with Mass Tort or Multi-District Litigation designations, plaintiffs are required to submit a detailed PFS.

What is the status of currently pending litigation against bisphosphonate manufacturers?

By Martin P. Schrama on Posted in Defective Drugs

Currently, a large number of cases against bisphosphonate manufacturers have been designated as Mass Tort or Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) cases. Mass Tort cases (in State courts) and MDL’s (in federal courts) are methods of organizing and managing cases involving the same or similar injuries and common defendants. These methods of case management offer an expedient, cost-effective manner for the plaintiffs to pursue their claims.