Another talcum powder lawsuit has seen favorable results in Missouri. Unlike in New Jersey, where Multicounty Litigation (MCL) Judge Nelson C. Johnson rejected the science linking talc to ovarian cancer claims, a Missouri court again ruled in favor of the plaintiff—this time to the tune of $70 million. The plaintiff, Deborah Giannecchini of Modesto, California was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2012. In April and May of 2016, a Missouri court awarded $72 million and $55 million, respectively, for claims against Johnson & Johnson for ovarian cancer linked to its talcum powder products.

Continue Reading Missouri Court Awards $70 Million in Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Lawsuit

In April and May 2016, a Missouri court awarded $72 million and $55 million, respectively, for claims against Johnson & Johnson for ovarian cancer linked to its talcum powder products. At that time, over 100 other cases were pending in Missouri, along with a growing number of cases in other states. The New Jersey Supreme Court had already ruled that the cases should be consolidated in a Multicounty Litigation (MCL), under Judge Nelson C. Johnson. However, unlike the judge in Missouri, who sent the cases to the jury, Judge Johnson disqualified the same expert witnesses used in those winning cases, ruling that, although the experts were “eminently qualified” to give testimony, the evidence was not grounded in “objective science.”

Continue Reading Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer Claims Take a Hit in NJ

On September 2, 2016, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Nelson Johnson issued an Order and Opinion barring Plaintiffs’ experts in the ongoing litigation involving claims against Johnson & Johnson, alleging ovarian cancer caused by the drug maker’s talc products. For those that follow Mass Tort litigation in New Jersey, that decision was significant, but not particularly surprising.

Continue Reading NJ’s Evolving Expert Opinion Standard and its Effect on Multicounty Mass Tort Litigation

The 5th District court in Texas recently denied a petition by defendants, Johnson & Johnson and DePuy Orthopedics, Inc., to grant an expedited appeal and to halt the next round of bellwether trials in the Pinnacle multidistrict litigation (MDL), which are currently scheduled to begin in early September 2016. The defendants filed the petition after losing the last bellwether trial earlier this year and getting hit with a jury award of $498 million dollars for five plaintiffs, who were injured from their metal-on-metal Pinnacle implants. The award was later reduced to $150 million dollars to meet the punitive damage caps in Texas.

Continue Reading Petition Denied for DePuy MDL Appeal

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 (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 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.