What Happened In The MassTorts World Last Week? 2019-Apr-15
J&J Wins California Trial Linked To Talc-Cancer Claim
On Friday, April 5, a jury in Long Beach, California, rejected a talcum powder lawsuit brought by a 65-year-old retired teacher, who claimed that Johnson & Johnson's baby powder was contaminated with asbestos and was the reason for his cancer.
The plaintiff who used J&J’s baby powder daily for personal hygiene was diagnosed with mesothelioma in July 2017, and he blamed asbestos exposure from the talcum powder for his disease and filed a complaint two months later. At the end of the five-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of J&J Consumer Inc., rejecting the plaintiff’s claims. The talcum giant asserted that its baby powder was free from asbestos and did not cause the plaintiff’s disease. The plaintiff's attorney confirmed the jury verdict and told they still believe J&J's talc-based products are contaminated with asbestos, considering the hundreds of historical test results proving the presence of carcinogens in its talc. The verdict came in a week after the company settled three similar cases linked to its baby powder and a rare form of cancer, mesothelioma. Two of those cases were settled during their trial in Oklahoma and California, and another one in New York was settled just less than two weeks before the trial.
There are more than 13,000 lawsuits filed against J&J linking its talc products to ovarian cancer or mesothelioma. The company will face more than two dozen trials in different U.S. courts this year.
Status Conference Schedule Out For Valsartan Recall Lawsuits
According to a case management order dated April 2, valsartan lawsuits can proceed in the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, where federal claims, arising because of the generic drug recall, are currently undergoing pretrial proceedings.
The order stated the litigation would assemble a two-part status conference on the fourth Wednesday of every month. The first session of each conference, beginning at 10 a.m., will look into the discovery matters linked to valsartan lawsuits. The second part beginning at 1.30 p.m. will address various case management and scheduling issues. A telephonic conference with the lead counsel will be arranged by the Plaintiffs' counsel two weeks before each status conference at 4.00 p.m. The litigation will call for its next status conference on April 24, when the court will address various issues, including the appointment of attorneys to plaintiffs’ leadership committees. By April 10, Plaintiffs’ Leadership Counsel must inform all attorneys with valsartan lawsuits regarding their desire to join a committee earliest by April 10. The attorneys are supposed to respond to the inquiry by April 18, after which the lead counsel will submit a list of nominations by close of business on April 22. Valsartan recall was initiated last year following numerous reports that the blood pressure drug contains cancer-causing nitrosamines in it. Since then, dozens of generic drug makers recalled the medication.
As of March 15, 43 valsartan lawsuits were pending in the federal multidistrict litigation, which includes individual as well as class action complaints alleging that the drugs cause cancer.
Purdue Hit With Illinois Attorney General’s Lawsuit
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed a lawsuit against Purdue Pharma L.P. and Purdue Pharma Inc. (Purdue) blaming them of following deceptive marketing techniques to explode the prescription rates of opioids.
Raoul's lawsuit asserted that even as communities throughout Illinois and across the country were facing the trauma of the opioid epidemic, Purdue promoted the painkiller using misleading marketing tactics. Raoul stated that between 2008 and 2017, Purdue dispatched sales representatives to Illinois several times and informed doctors and patients that the addiction risks could be controlled, despite knowing that the painkillers were highly dangerous and addictive. The company also funded third-party publications under the illusion of educational materials to increase the sales of opioids and downplay its risks.
Purdue recently settled Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter's opioid lawsuit for $270 million. Just a week after that, on Thursday, Hunter indicated dropping some claims against the drugmakers and told the move was made to relook the lawsuit before the May 28 trial. Hunter's office filed a motion that dismissed claims of fraud and deceit, unjust enrichment and violations of the state’s Medicaid laws against the opioid drugmakers. The motive was to reduce the number of damages the state is seeking. However, Oklahoma will continue to pursue allegations that the opioid makers were responsible for the national epidemic.
Jury Hears News Study Linked To Glyphosate-Cancer
Jurors heard testimony about a new study, in the latest Roundup trial underway in California’s Alameda County Superior Court, involving claims filed by an elderly couple that glyphosate exposure from the popular weed killer caused them cancer.
This was the first time a compelling piece of evidence regarding glyphosate's carcinogenic nature was presented during the trial. The testimony was based on a recently published meta-analysis that glyphosate-based herbicides can increase the risk of cancer by as much as 41%. The authors of the paper analyzed all earlier studies linking glyphosate to cancer, including the Agricultural Health Study, which Monsanto frequently cited as proof of the weed killer's safety. The epidemiologist who testified for the plaintiffs said, she trusted the findings and asserted that the study published by the Agricultural Health Study was flawed as it involved data manipulation to hide glyphosate's carcinogenicity.
The couple regularly used Roundup weed killer between 1971 and 2011 and alleged that their cancer was a result of glyphosate exposure. They filed a lawsuit against Monsanto in 2017 seeking compensation for the damages. Bayer AG is facing more than 13,000 Roundup lawsuits throughout U.S. courts.
Colon Cancer Lawsuit Filed Over Contaminated Valsartan Drug
According to a recently filed product liability lawsuit, exposure to valsartan drugs containing impurities caused a Mississippi man colon cancer.
The lawsuit was filed by a plaintiff in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi against Aurobindo Pharma and Acetris, LLC. The plaintiff stated that he was prescribed valsartan for the treatment of high blood pressure in February 2017. He was diagnosed with colon cancer, and in February 2018, he discovered that the pills he consumed were recalled due to contamination reports. The lawsuit stated that the manufacturers purposely concealed that the drug contained carcinogens, such as N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) or N-Nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), until the FDA issued its recall in July 2018. These chemicals have been reported to cause liver cancer, colon cancer, stomach cancer, and other digestive tract cancers.
This case is one among the growing number of valsartan recall lawsuits filed in recent months by individuals who were affected by the drug contamination.
Opioid Manufacturers Debate Over Jury Trial in Oklahoma Suit
Opioid manufacturers sued by the state of Oklahoma were divided in their opinion over whether the state’s case must be tried before a judge or a jury.
After Oklahoma Attorney General, Mike Hunter, dropped some of the state's claims last week, Johnson & Johnson filed a motion in Cleveland County District Court on Tuesday, requesting for a jury trial. However, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA and Allergan filed a motion in favor of a trial before a judge, if the state agrees to certain conditions. A hearing session on these differing motions will be held soon.
Last month, Purdue Pharma and its owners, the Sackler family agreed to pay $270 million to settle claims filed by the state of Oklahoma, which blamed the company and its owners for the national opioid crisis. A majority of the settlement amount will go towards creating a new center for opioid addiction treatment and research in Tulsa.
Third Circuit Reinstates Asbestos Claims Against Ship Owners
A group of ship owners will face maritime asbestos exposure lawsuits, filed by the estates of two merchant marines, reinstated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on April 9, 30 years, after thousands of lawsuits were filed against shipowners.
According to the opinion submitted by Chief Judge D. Brooks Smith, the dispute triggered from an order passed by an Ohio federal judge in 1989, which granted the defendants (shipowners) the option of either agree about jurisdiction transfer to Pennsylvania or waive their personal jurisdiction defense and stay in the Northern District of Ohio. The third circuit found that, although the shipowners did not particularly waive their defense, their consequent actions indicated waiving that defense. "The district court's conclusion that the shipowners did not waive that defense was an improper application of law to fact," told Judge Smith. The shipowners indicated the chances of waiving the defense in October 1989 and asked for additional time to make a decision between jurisdiction transfer and waiving personal jurisdiction. But, they failed to pursue the defense in that court.
FDA Warns Against Sudden Termination of Opioid Treatment
On Monday, the FDA issued a drug safety communication for new label warnings on opioid drugs, alerting that suddenly quitting the addictive painkillers can lead to devastating withdrawal conditions including the use of illicit drugs, recurring pain, and other complications.
The federal regulators received various reports of serious side-effects affecting patients who abruptly quit the medications. The agency asked changes to be implemented to the prescribing information for any opioids intended for outpatient use. The information must include the risks of sudden discontinuation of the medication and a guide for doctors on how to safely reduce and gradually stop the opioid treatment for the patients. Dr. Douglas Throckmorton, deputy director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, told, "the FDA has received reports of serious harm, withdrawal symptoms, uncontrolled pain, and suicide among patients who were physically dependent on opioids, but not considered addicted." The FDA instructed health care professionals to develop a patient-specific plan to tone down the dosage of opioids, and eventually cut-off the treatment, by considering the duration and type of pain involved. Soon, the FDA will chart out new policies to address the national opioid crisis, including prescribing guidelines and fixed-quantity packaging for immediate-release formulations.
Direct Filing of Valsartan Cases into the MDL Granted
U.S. District Judge Robert B. Kugler, presiding over all federal valsartan recall lawsuits, allowed the direct filing of new cases into the multidistrict litigation(MDL) established in New Jersey, where all similar claims are consolidated for pretrial proceedings.
Judge Kugler issued a case management order on April 9, in which the process for the direct filing was outlined. There are nearly 50 product liability lawsuits filed against generic valsartan drug manufacturers and distributors, each with similar claims that the blood pressure drug distributed all these years were tainted with cancer-causing impurities, including N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and N-Nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), which are supposedly by-products of the drug's manufacturing process.
Pa. Court Stands By $13.5M Ethicon Pelvic Mesh Award
On Thursday, April 11, a Pennsylvania state appellate court upheld a $13.5 million pelvic mesh verdict awarded to a New Jersey woman in a lawsuit filed against Johnson & Johnson's subsidiary, Ethicon Inc.
The plaintiff was treated for stress urinary incontinence and uterine fibroids in 2005 when she was implanted with Ethicon's TVT, after which she went through a few more corrective surgeries. The plaintiff stated in her complaint that Ethicon's transvaginal tape, or TVT, caused her constant pain and sexual dysfunction. In February 2006, a jury ruled in favor of the woman holding J&J and Ethicon responsible for her complications. Superior Court Judge Victor P. Stabile rejected J&J and Ethicon’s argument that the award given to the plaintiff was unjustified and that the firm did not receive a fair chance during a Philadelphia civil trial. Judge Stabile found the evidence presented at the trial indicated that Ethicon promoted TVT as a treatment for stress urinary incontinence even after being aware of its possibility of causing vaginal, muscular pain, and sexual problems. The Superior Court's decision said that the company downplayed the risks of the defective mesh and misinformed doctors about the size of the adverse event reports.
Ethicon pelvic mesh lawsuits are consolidated as a part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 2327; In Re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation) before U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia.