Rights of Mesothelioma Victim Protected by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that, under the 2 disease rule, a plaintiff should be permitted to file a second claim for a second asbestos-related cancer.  The plaintiff previously had a claim for lung cancer, from which he recovered, but then developed mesothelioma.  The defendants had argued that the two disease rule was limited to one claim for a non-cancerous disease, and one claim for an asbestos-related cancer.Congratulations to my friend Ed Nass for securing this important victory.

 


 


The First Amendment v. Cancer

Yesterday DC Federal Judge Leon struck down the FDA rule, authorized by Congress, requiring stronger warnings on cigarette packages. In so ruling, the court reasoned that the new labeling requirement violates Big Tobacco’s freedom of speech. According to the court, because tobacco is a legal product, the proposed image warnings on cigarette packages were too strong. Are you kidding me? On the same day, the US Supreme Court ruled that asbestos companies could not be held liable for failure to warn because the asbestos was allowed to be used by the federal government on railroad cars. Taken together these two rulings are ominous for their implications. Reading decisions like this that give corporations the right to sell dangerous products without adequate warnings coupled with holdings like Citizen’s United is scary stuff. Are these courts really implying that so long as products are sold legally on the open market, the manufacturers should be protected no matter how many people are killed and no matter what the manufacturer knew about the product’s ability to injure and kill? That is not the law and for good reason.  Decisions like those handed down in the nation’s capitol yesterday that place the rights of corporations over those of individual citizens are not good for America.

New Jersey Supreme Court Sides With Consumer in Accutane Lawsuit

A user of Accutane who had no reason to think the acne drug was the cause of her irritable bowel disease when diagnosed was not bound by the two-year statute of limitations for product liability suits. The state Supreme Court on Monday, in Kendall v. Hoffman-LaRoche Inc., A-73-10, rejected manufacturer arguments that warnings approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration and defenses provided by New Jersey's Products Liability Act barred use of the discovery rule. The discovery rule states that even if someone is injured, it is not until the person learns of the cause of the injury that the 2 year statute of limitations applies. Although FDA-approved warnings have a presumption of validity, they "may be overcome by evidence that tends to disprove the presumed fact," the Court said.

Johnson and Johnson Depuy Hip Lawsuits Reveal the Truth

depuy hip recall lawyerPeople often complain and sometimes rightfully so about there being too much litigation. Unfortunately it often takes the power of a lawsuit to uncover the truth about defective products. This happens time and time again as evidenced by lawsuits involving asbestos, breast implants, defective drugs and unsafe cars. Here is another example. Johnson and Johnson, once the model for a company that takes pride in marketing only safe products, has apparently taken a different turn in recent years. For many months our office has been working diligently on lawsuits involving defective hip implants which have forever altered the lives of our clients. Today’s NYT offers a look inside the truth about the implant debacle.

Flawed DePuy Hip Implant Had Early F.D.A. Notice – NYTimes.com

A year before recalling an artificial hip, an executive at Johnson & Johnson reported in an internal e-mail that the Food and Drug Administration had refused to approve the device, after reviewing company studies that showed it had failed prematurely in “significant” numbers, requiring repeat surgeries for patients.  The statements in that e-mail contrast with those made by the company in recent years about the all-metal hip. Before recalling the device amid rising failure rates in 2010, Johnson & Johnson insisted it was safe and maintained that its’ internal studies refuted complaints by surgeons and regulators abroad that the device was flawed. The device turned down by the F.D.A. was only sold overseas, but a companion version that was recalled at the same time by Johnson & Johnson was used in 30,000 patients in the United States

Related articles, courtesy of Zemanta:

Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits on the Rise: ASK QUESTIONS

transvaginal mesh lawyersOver the last few months our law office has been contacted almost every day by women who have been devastated physically and emotionally as a result of the consequences of defective transvaginal mesh. We are now representing literally hundreds of women seeking compensation for their injuries. If you are experiencing any of the difficulties referred to in the FDA notice below, please go see your doctor. Remember the best way to protect yourself and your family is to ASK QUESTIONS!!

FDA Safety Communication: UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

J&J Cited for Not Playing Fair

According to an article that was published by the Associated Press on December 21, 2011,

“A South Carolina judge has upheld a $327 million civil penalty against health giant Johnson & Johnson, which in March was found guilty by a jury of overstating the safety and effectiveness of its former blockbuster antipsychotic drug, Risperdal.
Attorneys for the state said Wednesday that it’s the biggest verdict in the country over the marketing of Risperdal. The pill for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder once brought J&J more than $3.4 billion in annual sales.”

To read the entire article, click here.

New Jersey Yaz Litigation- This is Scary stuff

risperdal lawyerBayer Witheld Yasmin Data From U.S., Former Agency Chief Tells Court

By Margaret Cronin Fisk and Jef Feeley - Dec 6, 2011 12:01 AM ET

A Bayer AG unit withheld from U.S. regulators findings by company researchers of increased reports of blood clots in users of its Yasmin birth-control pills, the former head of the Food and Drug Administration said.

David Kessler, the former FDA commissioner, in a document unsealed yesterday in federal court in Illinois, said Bayer didn’t include an analysis “that demonstrated an increase in the U.S. reporting rate” for venous thromboembolism, or clots, in a 2004 review of Yasmin’s safety provided to the agency.

The report also didn’t include an earlier draft opinion by company researchers that “spontaneous reporting data do signal a difference in the VTE rates for Yasmin” compared with other oral contraceptives, Kessler said, quoting the draft.

“Bayer presented a selective view of the data, and that presentation obscured the potential risks associated with Yasmin,” Kessler said. The company also promoted the oral contraceptive for unapproved uses, particularly for treatment of premenstrual syndrome, Kessler said.

Kessler’s report and four other expert opinions were released yesterday by lawyers representing former users of Bayer’s Yasmin family of contraceptives. The experts were paid by the plaintiffs’ lawyers, who submitted the reports to the FDA, which is considering safety findings on Yasmin and its sister product Yaz at a hearing Dec. 8.

‘Matters of Litigation’

Rose Talarico, a U.S.-based spokeswoman for Bayer, said the company doesn’t comment on ongoing lawsuits. “We have nothing further to add as these are matters of litigation,” she said in an e-mailed statement. “We expect them to be addressed further at trial.”

Morgan Liscinsky, an FDA spokeswoman, didn’t immediately comment on the unsealed documents about the drugmaker’s handling of the contraceptives.

The FDA didn’t accept the documents for the hearing, according to an e-mail sent to plaintiffs’ lawyer Ned McWilliams late yesterday.

“The deadline for all written submissions was on November 23, 2011,” Kalyani Bhatt, of the FDA’s Division of Advisory Committee and Consultant Management, wrote. “We will not be able to accept any written submission at this time.”

McWilliams said in an e-mail response to Bhatt, “I think the American public would want to know why the FDA has refused to consider important safety information that Bayer did not consent to be released to the public or the FDA until after the submission deadline.”

“Why not look at the documents and make your own independent objective evaluation?” McWilliams said.

Bhatt didn’t return a call after regular business hours yesterday seeking comment on that e-mail.

10,000 Yaz Lawsuits

Bayer faces more than 10,000 lawsuits over injuries allegedly caused by the contraceptives. Lawyers suing the drugmaker cited FDA reports of at least 50 deaths tied to the pills from 2004 to 2008. The first trials are scheduled for next month in federal court in Illinois and state court in Philadelphia.

Bayer’s contraceptives generated $1.58 billion (1.17 billion euros) in sales last year, making them the company’s biggest-selling drugs after Betaseron, a multiple sclerosis medication. The contraceptives, which contain the hormone drospirenone, have been the focus of regulators who question their safety. Bayer’s Yasmin was the No. 4 oral contraceptive in the U.S. this year as of September, with 4.6 percent of the market, according to data from IMS Health.

In October, the FDA warned that women taking the pills were 74 percent more likely to suffer blood clots than women on other low-estrogen contraceptives. The FDA examined data on 835,826 women who took pills containing the hormone, including Bayer’s Yasmin line of birth-control pills, according to the FDA report. The agency set the Dec. 8 hearing to discuss the findings.

Health Risks

The lawsuits claim Bayer didn’t sufficiently warn patients of the health risks of the Yasmin family of birth-control pills. They also claim Bayer’s Berlex Laboratories Inc., acquired in the 2006 purchase of Schering AG, marketed the drug for unapproved uses.

This marketing campaign, according to the documents unsealed yesterday, included paying $450,000 to Los Angeles gynecologist Judith Reichman to sponsor a tour for a book she was writing on women’s health issues, among other items, Kessler said.

Kessler said the Bayer unit withheld information about Yasmin’s risks of clots before the drug was approved by the FDA in 2001.

Internal Study

Bayer didn’t report to the FDA details on the risks of clots from an internal study and two cases of clots in patients on the pill prior to the drug’s approval by the agency, Kessler said.

“Had I, or a medical review officer, known these facts prior to approval, further investigation would be warranted before a decision on Yasmin’s NDA could be made,” he said, referring to the company’s new drug application.

“These facts would impact the agency’s risk-benefit equation about the drug and whether it could be approved,” Kessler said.

The FDA told Bayer in June 2003 that it was “very concerned” about the number of adverse events, particularly deaths, reported in Yasmin users, Kessler said, citing an agency letter to the company. This included six deaths in the U.S., five of which were first reported to the FDA after April 2, 2003, the agency said.

“Because of these recent reports, we believe that a change in Yasmin labeling and possibly additional actions are now warranted,” the FDA wrote to Bayer, according to the Kessler report.

‘White Paper’

Bayer responded that its data didn’t show a higher risk for Yasmin. Internally, the company decided to produce a “White Paper,” to the FDA, which would be “a scientific write-up that lays out the issues,” according to a Bayer document quoted by Kessler.

The white paper would compare Yasmin to other oral contraceptives, or OCs, covering multiple adverse events including venous thromboembolism (VTE) and pulmonary embolism (PT).

In an early draft of that report, Bayer employees wrote, according to Kessler, “Compared to the three other OCs, Yasmin has a several fold increase in the reporting rates for DVT, PE, ATE and confirmed VTEs.”

In this draft, the employees added: “When considering only serious AEs (adverse events), the reporting rate for Yasmin was 10 fold higher than with the other products.” The total rate of confirmed VTEs per year was three or four times higher than the other three oral contraceptives reviewed, according to the data in the draft, Kessler said. The raw numbers were 6.9 per year for Yasmin and 1.5 for two of the other pills, according to the draft.

‘Spontaneous Reporting’

In a later draft, the Bayer employees said that “spontaneous reporting data do signal a difference in the VTE rates for Yasmin and other OC users.”

Such data wasn’t the “preferred approach to assess the safety of a single product,” the researchers wrote. They said data from a direct comparison, such as two then-ongoing studies “should provide more insight.”

“The spontaneous reporting do NOT signal a difference in VTE rates for Yasmin,” another Berlex employee wrote to company colleagues in commenting on the draft, Kessler said. “Those comments were not accompanied by any additional data,” Kessler said.

Media Attention

Kessler agreed that spontaneous reporting of incidents has limitations, because of the voluntary nature of the reports, effects of media attention, different times of introduction for drugs, among other factors. The information still should have been included, he said.

“Even with its limitations, analysis of spontaneous reporting data is an important, recognized and vitally used tool by the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry for detecting safety signals” Kessler said in his report.

“Bayer’s spontaneous reporting analysis demonstrated a safety signal about Yasmin and VTE risk,” he said. “Bayer had a duty to present a full and balanced view of all the data and analysis concerning Yasmin to the FDA and health-care professionals and failed to do so.”

Women suing Bayer over its line of birth-control pills contend the company and its units went to unusual lengths to market the medication for unapproved uses, according to court papers.

Marketing Drugs

Bayer’s Berlex unit came up with a plan to hire Judith Reichman, a Los Angeles-based gynecologist who writes a blog about women’s health issues, “to engage in off-label promotion” of the Yasmin line of contraceptives, John Abramson, a Harvard medical school professor, concluded in his report.

Abramson was hired by plaintiffs’ lawyers to review materials Bayer turned over about the marketing of the drugs. His report was also unsealed yesterday by a federal judge in Illinois who is overseeing a consolidation of Yaz cases.

Berlex officials said in an e-mail they’d agreed to pay Reichman $450,000 in return for her willingness to “mention off-label benefits of our products,” Abramson noted. The doctor was planning an upcoming book on women’s health issues.

The company also planned to purchase 10,000 copies of the book, which contained “off-label claims” about the Yasmin line of contraceptives, the doctor noted. The purchase was part of a “strategy to have the book appear on the New York Times bestseller list,” Abramson added.

In her 2005 book, “Slow Your Clock Down,” Reichman wrote that Yasmin may help women with PMS-related symptoms such as “fluid accumulation and bloat,” or with depression.

Publicity

The FDA approved Yasmin only as a contraceptive. The regulator hasn’t cleared it as a treatment for any form of PMS or other ailments, according to the agency’s website. Reichman was unavailable to comment about her work with Bayer because her husband died, her assistant, Deborah Cannon, said in an e-mail.

Berlex officials understood the value of such publicity, Abramson noted. For example, Talarico, a then-spokeswoman for Berlex, flagged a copy of a 2006 story about Yaz in Allure magazine that touted the benefits of Yaz for treating PMS.

Richard Salem, Berlex’s vice president for communications, congratulated Talarico for getting the article placed in the magazine.

“The value of these placements is astronomical,” Salem said in an e-mail, according to court filings.

Commercial Success

Internal e-mails also show officials of Bayer and its Berlex unit engaged in an extensive public relations campaign to market Yaz that was “designed to circumvent FDA restrictions on marketing” because they saw the limits “as a threat to the commercial success of Yaz,” Abramson said in his report.

The Kessler and Abramson reports were sent to the FDA by McWilliams, a lawyer with Levin, Papantonio, Thomas, Mitchell, Rafferty & Proctor PA in Pensacola, Florida.

“Although these reports were prepared for litigation, they contain relevant information obtained from Bayer that has not been previously provided to the FDA that will assist the committee and the FDA in its own evaluation of the benefits and risks of drospirenone-containing oral contraceptives,” McWilliams wrote to the agency.

The case is In re Yasmin and Yaz (Drospirenone) Marketing, Sales Practices and Product Liability Litigation, 09-md-02100, U.S. District Court, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois (East St. Louis).

 

Honda Recalls 300,000 Additional Vehicles for Air-Bag Issue

Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Honda Motor has announced a recall of 304,000 vehicles due to a problem with the air-bags, which may inflate with too much pressure during a crash. The recall covers vehicles manufactured in 2001 and 2002 across the globe. There have been 20 reported related accidents, including two fatalities in the U.S. and this is an expansion of 2008 and 2009 recalls for the same issue.  Yuri Kageyama, USA Today  12/02/2011
Read Article: USA Today    

Think twice before complaining about no meals on American Airlines

A lawsuit has been filed against American Airlines and Sky Chefs by the family of a man who allegedly died from contaminated chicken consumed on his flight from Spain to New York. The suit is seeking more than $1 million and accuses the defendants of “failing to properly maintain or prepare the food” and American Airlines of being “negligent in allowing Othon to board the domestic flight, failing to provide medical attention, and waiting too long to (opt for) an emergency landing.”  Ben Mutzabaugh, USA Today  12/02/2011
Read Article

NO REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY ON FACEBOOK, JUDGE SAYS


Even without appellate case law to provide guidance on the discoverability of information on Facebook, the standard is becoming clear: Post at your own risk. Three courts in Pennsylvania have now decided that, if a party in a civil case posts information on his or her Facebook page that appears to contradict statements in discovery or testimony, then the party’s Facebook page falls within the scope of discovery. In the most recent case, Largent v. Reed, a judge ordered a plaintiff in an auto accident case to turn over her Facebook username and password to the defendant, on the ground that her postings brought up questions about the extent of her injuries.