Jury Finds for Plaintiff In Xarelto Trial- Awards $27.8 Million

A Philadelphia jury last week found in favor Lynn Hartman against the manufacturers of the anticoagulant Xarelto. The jury came back from a little over a day of deliberations with an award of $27.8 million. The main defendants in the case were Johnson & Johnson and Bayer AG. The award included roughly $26 million in punitive damages. Hartman suffered serious gastrointestinal bleeding while on the medication. She was an Indiana resident who began taking the drug in 2013.

As part of her claims, Hartman argued that the defendants should have included additional warnings over excessive bleeding risks and that the warnings were inadequate.  The three-week trial centered around arguments that the drug's warning label originally excluded information that the rate of bleeds observed in a clinical trial was significantly higher among patients in the United States than patients elsewhere in the world. Her attorneys proffered evidence that the rate among participants in the United States was 8.1 percent annually versus 3.6 percent annually among participants globally. The information was later added to the drug's labeling in September 2015 as part of the FDA’s efforts to standardize labeling for all of the so-called novel oral anticoagulant medications that have been approved in recent years.

The plaintiff’s case was bolstered by testimony from former Food & Drug Administration chief David Kessler, who told jurors that he believed the Xarelto warning label had lacked key information about the severity of the potential bleeding risk associated with the drug.

Her case is one of about 1,500 pending as part of a consolidated mass tort program in Philadelphia County. The Bayer and Janssen defendants had won defense verdicts in three previous Xarelto injury cases tried out of a multidistrict litigation program in Louisiana federal court earlier this year. Those cases focused on arguments that drugmakers should have encouraged doctors to conduct laboratory testing on their patients to more precisely determine their risk of bleeding from Xarelto. The defense won those cases largely on the learned intermediary doctrine, under which drugmakers must provide all necessary warnings to prescribing physicians in order to properly weigh the risks and benefits of a medication.

The defendants in the Philadelphia trial have vowed to appeal and have already presented the learned-intermediary arguments to the trial court as part of a motion for a directed verdict in the case.

A second case in the consolidated actions is scheduled to go to trial in Philadelphia in January.

Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C., is currently investigating Xarelto cases. If you or a loved one were prescribed Xarelto and suffered an irreversible internal bleeding that lead to hospitalization and/or death, contact Booth Samuels at toll free 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmanudutton.com.

J&J Talc News

Ovarian cancer injuries are not the only injury of which plaintiffs have filed against Johnson & Johnson concerning their talcum based powder, generally known as baby powder. Earlier this month, a California jury on Thursday sided with Johnson & Johnson and its talc supplier of any liability for a woman’s terminal mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, holding that there was no evidence that the companies’ talcum powder was unsafe. The jury deliberated for nearly two days after an almost four-week trial.  The jury found that J&J did not negligently design or sell its talc, that the talc did not fail to perform as safely as a reasonable consumer would have expected, that the talc was not defective, and that J&J did not fail to warn of any potential risks, "known or knowable based on general scientific knowledge at time of sale." 

Most of the cases we have seen so far involve claims that the talcum-based powder causes ovarian cancer. In one of those cases, a Missouri state judge upheld a jury’s $110 million verdict against Johnson & Johnson for selling ovarian cancer-causing products, saying the conduct on which the claims are based occurred in Missouri even though the woman who brought them is from Virginia. 

Since J&J used a Missouri-based company, Pharma Tech, to "manufacture, mislabel and package" the talc products at issue, Judge Rex M. Burlison found that the verdict for the plaintiff was within the jurisdictional standards laid out by the U.S. Supreme Court in its June decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California. This finding means that non-Missouri plaintiffs may continue pursuing their cases in Missouri, which has been home to a large amount of talc litigation in recent years.

Booth Samuels and the attorneys at Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C. are currently accepting talc-injury cases. If you or someone you love is a female that regularly used J&J Baby Powder or Shower to Shower and, since the year 2000, have been diagnosed with ovarian cancer, please contact Booth Samuels at 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmandutton.com for a free consultation.

Pennsylvania Jury Deliberating in Xarelto Trial

The fourth Xarelto-related product liability case to go to trial went to the jury on Friday as attorneys accused Johnson and Johnson and Bayer of deliberately understating the risks of serious internal bleeding associated with the blockbuster drug. This case was tried in Pennsylvania state court, and not through the Federal MDL out of New Orleans.

The case is one of more than 1,500 Xarelto-related cases pending as part of a mass tort program in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. The prior three trials in the MDL resulted in verdicts for the Defendants.

The case centered on arguments that the drugmakers failed to include information in Xarelto’s warning label indicating that the rate of bleeding events observed in a clinical trial was significantly higher among patients in the United States than patients elsewhere in the world. According to evidence in the case, the rate among participants in the United States was 8.1 percent annually versus 3.6 percent annually among participants globally. The label was ultimately updated in September 2015 to include such information.

Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C., is currently investigating Xarelto cases. If you or a loved one were prescribed Xarelto and suffered an irreversible internal bleeding that lead to hospitalization and/or death, contact Booth Samuels at toll free 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmanudutton.com.

Johnson & Johnson Hit Third Time Over Pinnacle Metal-on-Metal Hips

A Dallas federal jury on Thursday found in favor of six plaintiffs and against Johnson & Johnson and its DePuy Orthopaedics unit. The $247 million verdict is the third loss J&J has had in four civil jury trials. The verdict includes $78 million in compensation for the plaintiffs’ injuries and more than $168 million in punitive damages.

J&J won the first Pinnacle test trial in 2014, but subsequent juries determined the companies to be liable. A jury in March 2016 awarded five Texas plaintiffs $500 million in damages. That award was later cut to $150 million. 

J&J and DePuy were also found liable at a trial in March, during which a jury awarded six California patients $1 billion - a verdict that was later reduced to $543 million. 

Six New York residents implanted with the devices said they experienced tissue death, bone erosion and other injuries they blamed on design flaws. The jury found that the metal-on-metal hip implants were defectively designed and that the companies failed to warn consumers about the risks. 

J&J faces more than 9,700 Pinnacle lawsuits in state and federal courts across the United States. It is more likely than not that J&J will appeal the verdict, as they have the other three. Three more bellwether trials have been scheduled. These gigantic losses could weaken the company’s position in any settlement talks with plaintiffs in the MDL. A previous DePuy hip-implant settlement cost the company billions. Johnson & Johnson agreed to resolve more than 9,800 lawsuits over DePuy’s ASR hip implants for $4.4 billion in 2013 and through a settlement extension in 2015.

The ASR model was recalled. The Pinnace model was never recalled, however DePuy ceased selling the metal-on-metal Pinnacle devices in 2013 after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration strengthened its artificial hip regulations.

Pittman, Dutton & Hellums is actively filing cases on behalf of individuals allegedly injured by both types of artificial metal-on-metal hip implants- ASR and Pinnacle models. If you would like a free case evaluation, please contact Booth Samuels toll free at 1-866-515-8880 or at booths@pittmandutton.com.

First Xarelto Trial in Consolidated Pennsylvania State Court Starts Today

The first state court trial in a lawsuit alleging Xarelto causes internal bleeding kicked off today in Philadelphia, following three federal cases in which Xarelto makers Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc and Bayer Pharma AG prevailed. The three previous trials were out of the federally consolidated MDL in New Orleans, although one trial took place in Mississippi.

There are approximately 1,400 Xarelto cases pending in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. There are close to 18,000 cases pending in the MDL. A lot of pretrial motions in October dealt with the exclusions of both sides’ experts, and a question of whether punitive damages would be allowed to be sent to the jury. Hopefully the plaintiff prevails in this case, although there are several other cases set in Pennsylvania.

Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C., is currently investigating Xarelto cases. If you or a loved one were prescribed Xarelto and suffered an irreversible internal bleeding that lead to hospitalization and/or death, contact Booth Samuels at toll free 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmanudutton.com

Brystal-Myers Squibb Consequences Reverberating Across the Country

The effects of the Supreme Court decision in Brystol-Myers Squibb that limited the jurisdictional reach of state courts from this summer is already having dire consequences in the real world. An Alabama woman, who died before her case was heard against Johnson & Johnson, had won a $72 million dollar verdict claiming that talcum powder caused her ovarian cancer. That verdict has now been set aside. 

Her case was filed in Missouri state court. The plaintiff, Jacqueline Fox, claimed Missouri courts had jurisdiction because the talcum products were sold in Missouri, or because the claims were joined with those of other plaintiffs injured in the state.

The court of appeals disagreed, citing the Supreme Court precedent as well as a Missouri Supreme Court case. The appeals court also said it was too late for plaintiffs’ lawyers to suggest a different basis for jurisdiction that was based on a Missouri company that allegedly manufactured talc products.

The award to Fox’s family is among $300 million in verdicts obtained by plaintiffs suing in Missouri state courts over cancer allegedly caused by talcum powder. All of these verdicts are now in jeopardy. 

NHTSA Releases Data For 2016

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently released the data for motor vehicle crashes in 2016.

Here are some of the key facts:

·        In 2016, there were 4,317 truck crash fatalities.

o   An increase of 28 percent since 2009 (3,380 truck crash fatalities)

·        In 2016, there were 722 truck occupant fatalities

o   An increase of 45 percent since 2009

·        In 2016, there were 369 pedestrians killed in large truck crashes

o   An increase of 42 percent since 2009

·        In 2016, there were 87 bicyclist killed in large truck crashes

o   An increase of 55 percent since 2009

·        In 2016, large trucks were involved in 27 percent of all fatal work zone crashes

If you or a loved one was injured in a car crash, contact Booth Samuels at 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmandutton.com for a free consultation.

BlueCross BlueShield of Alabama Fined $8M for Overcharging Small Groups

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama was hit by state regulators with an $8 million penalty for charging rates that differed from those approved by the Alabama Department of Insurance from 2005 to 2013. The difference in rates occurred in about 1,400 plans issued to small group employers - those with two to 50 employees - and some COBRA plans for former employees. Attorneys involved in an anti-trust violation case said the practice violated state laws that require rates to be filed and approved by insurance regulators.

The rate variances were mismatched, resulting in undercharges of almost $107 million and overcharges of almost $33 million, according to the order issued on August 16th by the Alabama Department of Insurance. The $8 million assessment, as it was described in the order, was levied because the company failed to inform the department of insurance about its methods for raising or reducing rates. The company must also pay $100,000 to the department for costs related to the investigation.

The Blue Cross Blue Shield statement reported that refunds have been made to more than 1,400 small business customers and 2,200 COBRA customers. The company will not seek reimbursement from customers who were undercharged. Customers who believe they were overcharged by the company can make a claim to the Alabama Department of Insurance within the next two years.

Ethicon Loses Mesh Case with $57.1M Verdict

Earlier this month, a Philadelphia jury awarded $57.1 million in damages to a woman who accused Johnson & Johnson of manufacturing a defective pelvic mesh implant that scarred her urethra and left her incontinent. The award included $50 million in punitive damages. The plaintiff claimed that a pair of negligently and defectively designed mesh devices, the TVT-Secur and the standard TVT product, had left her with little control over her urinary flow.

The plaintiff was implanted with the TVT-Secur mesh device in May 2007 to treat symptoms of stress urinary incontinence and ultimately received a second TVT implant after a few months when her condition did not improve. Unfortunately, the mesh had eroded into her urethra, causing incontinence and with strong pelvic pain.

Ethicon had previously lost four out of five jury trials in Philadelphia. A jury in the fifth case decided in June that while the TVT-Secur had been defectively designed, it was not the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. A judge, however, ruled a month later that the verdict was inconsistent and ordered a new trial on damages. Before this verdict, the largest verdict the company had faced in a mesh case in Philadelphia had been a $20 million award handed down in April. That award included $17.5 million in punitive damages.

Booth Samuels and the attorneys at Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C. are currently investigating mesh injury cases. If you or someone you love was implanted with a pelvic or vaginal mesh device after the year 2008 and have had revision surgery, please contact Booth Samuels at 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmandutton.com for a free consultation.

Equifax Suffers Massive Data Breach- Your SSN May Be In the Hands of Thieves

Equifax, one of the big three credit monitoring companies, has experienced one of the most shocking data breaches in U.S. history. The breach has exposed the Social Security numbers, names, birth dates, addresses, driver’s license numbers, and other sensitive information of approximately 143 million Americans. Although there have been larger breaches in the United States, they typically do not involve Social Security numbers. The breach eclipses a 2015 hack at health insurer Anthem that involved the Social Security numbers of about 80 million people.

In addition to the personal information stolen in its breach, Equifax said the credit card numbers for about 209,000 U.S. consumers were also taken, as were "certain dispute documents" containing personal information for approximately 182,000 individuals.

It is believed that the thieves accessed files between mid-May and July of this year. Equifax discovered the hack July 29^th, but waited until September 7^th to warn consumers. However, it is not unusual for the government to ask a company hit in a major hack to delay public notice so that investigators can pursue the perpetrators. It does sound as if three Equifax executives profited from this early knowledge by selling shares worth a combined $1.8 million just a few days after the company discovered the breach on July 29th, according to documents filed with securities regulators.

The irony that Equifax, who is in charge of securing our personal information and the company we go to when our identity has been stolen, has had a major data breach has not gone unnoticed. As many as 50 lawsuits have been filed so far against the credit bureau.

Booth Samuels and the attorneys at Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C. are currently investigating Equifax data breach cases. If you or someone you love has been a victim of this data breach, please contact Booth Samuels at 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmandutton.com for a free consultation.

California Jury Hits J&J in Talc Powder Case for $347 Million

A California jury awarded $417 million to the plaintiff in the first talcum powder case to go to trial in California. The Los Angeles County jury reached the verdict, which includes $347 million in punitive damages, on August 21 against Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. The trial lasted four weeks and the jury deliberated for more than two days. The jury awarded roughly $70 million in compensatory damages.

The plaintiff’s theory of the case was that there was a link between Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder products and ovarian cancer. The award surpassed large awards from earlier trials in Missouri.

The jury found that J&J had failed to warn consumers about the increased risk of ovarian cancer caused by its Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products, and that the plaintiff, Eva Echeverria’s terminal ovarian cancer was caused by her use of those products. Some of the claims included the defendants refusal to place a warning on its products. Echeverria’s lawyers showed jurors evidence that talcum powder products made by national companies like Wal-Mart are now sold with a warning about the association between genital talc use and ovarian cancer.

The Defendants have indicated that they will appeal the verdict.

Echeverria filed suit with six other women in Los Angeles County Superior Court in July 2016, alleging that for years she used talcum powder mined by Imerys Talc America Inc. and sold by J&J, and that she developed ovarian cancer in 2007. Echeverria is the first plaintiff to head to trial among nearly 300 cases in the complex litigation consolidating California claims against the companies. There are an estimated 4,500 other cases pending throughout the country.

J&J’s defense during the trial focused heavily on calling into doubt how Echeverria’s experts were interpreting the scientific evidence that purported to show genital talc use caused ovarian cancer. However, the plaintiff showed, by Johnson & Johnson's own documents, dating back to 1964, that the company knew there was a risk of ovarian cancer from using talcum powder for feminine hygiene. The plaintiff’s also cited a 1982 study that shows women who used talc on their genitals were at a 92% increased risk for ovarian cancer. The lead researcher, Daniel W. Cramer, later advised Johnson & Johnson to put a warning label on the product.

The plaintiff put on evidence to show that Echevarria used Johnson Baby Powder sometimes twice a day for 41 years, continuing to do so even after she was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2007. Ovarian cancer accounts for 1.3% of all new cancer cases in the U.S., according to the National Cancer Institute. But it is the eighth most common cancer and the fifth-leading cause of cancer-related death among women. Fewer than half of all patients survive five years after a diagnosis.

A St. Louis jury in May awarded $110.5 million to a Virginia woman who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2012. Three other juries in St. Louis reached similar conclusions, awarding a total of more than $300 million to the plaintiffs.

Booth Samuels and the attorneys at Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C. are currently accepting talc-injury cases. If you or someone you love is a female that regularly used J&J Baby Powder or Shower to Shower and, since the year 2000, have been diagnosed with any of the above forms of cancer, please contact Booth Samuels at 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmandutton.com for a free consultation.

Zimmer NexGen MDL Update

Judge Pallmeyer, the Illinois federal judge overseeing Zimmer NexGen knee MDL, has ordered that all bellwether trials must be completed before the end of 2018 and directed the parties to take steps toward mediation. There have been just two jury trials on the plaintiffs’ claims, both of which ended in victory for Zimmer. Judge Pallmeyer granted Zimmer's motion for summary judgment in another case last October. The Plaintiffs have argued for a consolidated trial involving several plaintiffs with similar claims.

The MDL, which began in 2011, is currently down to approximately 300 cases from a high of more than 1,500. Claims in the MDL are that the design problems of the devices caused failures leading to revision surgeries. Judge Pallmeyer recently ruled on several of Zimmer’s motions seeking to bar evidence, require more expert reports, and grant the company summary judgment in several cases.

Zimmer filed motion for summary judgment in 94 cases that included expert reports that Zimmer claimed did not involve a review of the plaintiffs' X-rays. The reports, which were required under Judge Pallmeyer's 2016 Lone Pine Order, could not be reliable without that review, Zimmer said. But Judge Pallmeyer declined to grant the motion, saying the question of the experts’ reliability would have to be determined through individual summary judgment motions.

Judge Pallmeyer also stated that the plaintiffs’ request for remand was likely to be approved. Attorneys for the plaintiffs asked for the cases to be sent back to their home courts in May, but the Judge said in an order that month she would like to try a few more before she gave her approval.

Zimmer’s counsel has conducted a scorched-earth approach to litigation, even proposing that the Court issue a $100,000 fine on each case that was dismissed after selection for the next round of trials. Plaintiffs’ counsel obviously strenuously opposed any type of sanctions.

Defense Verdict in 3rd Xarelto Bellwether Trial

This month, a jury in the third bellwether trial over the blood thinner Xarelto has sided with defendants Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Bayer. The jury deliberated for approximately three hours. Unlike the first two bellwether trials that took place in New Orleans, this one took place in Jackson, Mississippi. 

More than 18,000 cases have been filed in the MDL in New Orleans. Many more have been filed throughout the country in other state-consolidated actions. All lawsuits allege that Xarelto, an anticoagulant used to treat blood clots, caused plaintiffs to suffer from uncontrollable bleeding resulting in injury or death.

Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C., is currently investigating Xarelto cases. If you or a loved one were prescribed Xarelto and suffered an irreversible internal bleeding that lead to hospitalization and/or death, contact Booth Samuels at toll free 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmanudutton.com

Alabama Worker's Compensation Rates Some of the Lowest in Country

Alabama has probably the toughest worst worker’s compensation laws for an injured worker. We have some of the lowest payouts for injuries that are based on rates set in the 1980s. A recent case has come up in our courts that struck down some of the key elements of these laws. Those issues are currently on appeal. For an interesting read on some of the extremely low levels of compensation in Alabama, read this story posted on al.com recently:

http://www.al.com/business/index.ssf/2017/06/how_much_is_a_leg_worth_in_ala.html

Have a Safe 4th of July Weekend

Please be careful out there on the roads this long holiday weekend. The National Safety Council, an organization formed in 1913 and is a nonpolitical group that does not contribute to or support any political party or candidate, calculates that 582 people may be killed on the roads during the upcoming 4th of July holiday period. They also cited that an additional 66,900 may be seriously injured in crashes. This is the highest estimate the Council has issued since 2006 for a four-day July 4th holiday period.

Attentive driving, coupled with putting down your smart phone while driving, can help make the roads out there safer. Safe travels for all of those out there who are hitting the highways and roads this weekend. 

Anthem Reaches Settlement Over Data Breach Lawsuits

Anthem, which some estimate to be the largest health insurer in the country, has agreed to settle litigation over hacking in 2015 that compromised about 79 million people's personal information. The settlement amount is reported to be for $115 million, making the deal the largest settlement ever for a data breach. The settlement must still be approved by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, who is presiding over the case. Over one-hundred lawsuits filed against Anthem were consolidated in Judge Koh’s court.

The money will go to pay for two years of credit monitoring for people affected by the data breach. Victims are believed to include current and former customers of Anthem and of other insurers affiliated with Anthem through the national Blue Cross Blue Shield Association.

The credit monitoring in the settlement is in addition to the two years of credit monitoring Anthem offered victims when it announced the breach in February 2015. In February 2015 an unknown hacker had accessed a database containing personal information, including names, dates of birth, social security numbers, home addresses, email addresses, and employment and income information. The attack supposedly did not compromise credit card information or medical information.

The breach is just one of a series of high-profile data breaches over the last several years. Other large corporations that were hacked include Target, which agreed to pay $18.5 million to settle claims, and Home Depot which agreed to pay at least $19.5 million to consumers last year.

U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in Bristol-Myers Squib Case Already Having Devastating Effects on Mass Tort Litigation

A Supreme Court decision issued last week is already making it harder for large groups of plaintiffs to sue corporations in state courts for damages caused by manufacturers' products. This is just another win for the ‘tort reformers’ in their pursuit to limit access to justice.

Bristol-Myers Squibb (“BMS”) prevailed in its effort to get the Supreme Court to limit where patients can sue for harm caused by drugs. Justices ruled 8-1 for the drug company. The case centered around whether plaintiffs residing outside of the state who claim they were harmed by BMS' blood thinner Plavix could join in a lawsuit brought by California residents against the New York-based company in California. The out-of-state residents didn't buy the drug or take it in California, and the product wasn't manufactured in the state.

 Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion, stating that, "The mere fact that other plaintiffs were prescribed, obtained, and ingested Plavix in California — and allegedly sustained the same injuries as did the non-residents — does not allow the State to assert specific jurisdiction over the nonresidents' claims."
The main legal issue was whether the plaintiffs had standing to sue in California state court.

This ruling will affect many other state courts. For example, a large majority, nearly 95 percent, of the mass torts filed in Philadelphia are submitted by out-of-state plaintiffs. Under the Supreme Court BMS decision, plaintiffs could not file these suits in Pennsylvania unless the company was based in that state.

The lone dissenter, Justice Sotomayor, realized the real importance of the majority's opinion. She wrote,
"The effect of today’s opinion will be to curtail — and in some cases eliminate — plaintiff's ability to hold corporations fully accountable for their nationwide conduct." She went on to opine that the ruling "hands one more tool to corporate defendants determined to prevent the aggregation of individual claims and forces injured plaintiffs to bear the burden of bringing suit in what will often be far flung jurisdictions."

The opinion is already having drastic outcomes for other cases. A Missouri court set to oversee the seventh day of a multi-plaintiff talcum powder trial granted Johnson & Johnson's motion for a mistrial, which was brought in light of the BMS decision. Johnson & Johnson is also expected to use the BMS decision in their appeal of several large verdicts against them over their baby powder product.