Boston Scientific Settlement Concerning Guidant Defibrillators
Boston Scientific Corp. recently settled approximately 4,000 lawsuits concerning defibrillators recalled in June 2005 by Guidant Corp., which Boston Scientific acquired earlier this year. The plaintiffs in the settled cases, which include certain suits consolidated into a multidistrict litigation in the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota, alleged that their risk of heart attack was increased because Guidant waited until 2005 to recall the devices even though it allegedly knew of product defects as early as 2002. As part of the settlement, Guidant agreed to pay $195 million.
New Trial Denied Concerning Duragesic Pain Patch Verdict
Judge Daniel T.K. Hurley of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida recently denied motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial by the manufacturer and distributor of the Duragesic pain patch. Hendleson v. Johnson & Johnson Co., et al., C.A. No. 05-81116 (July 10, 2007). On June 22, 2005, the Florida jury had found two Johnson & Johnson subsidiaries, Alza Corp. (the designer and manufacturer of the patch) and Janssen Pharmaceutica (the patch’s marketer and distributor), liable for allegedly concealing known manufacturing defects that caused the 28-year-old decedent’s death. Alza and Janssen had argued at trial and in their post-trial motions that the dangers of the product had been fully disclosed in the product’s insert and to the decedent’s prescribing physician, that no evidence had been presented to substantiate the product defect claim or to show that the decedent would have chosen not to use the patch if otherwise notified of its risks, and that the evidence showed that other drugs in the decedent’s system had contributed to his death. Notwithstanding these arguments, the jury awarded the decedent’s estate $500,000 in lost “net accumulations” and $5 million in non-economic damages. Despite denying the post-trial motions, Judge Hurley reserved decision on the question of whether the damages awarded were excessive or speculative.
Avandia Allegedly Caused Fatal Heart Attack
A Texas woman recently filed the first known federal lawsuit alleging that the diabetes drug Avandia caused a patient’s death, which comes in the wake of personal injury suits, a class action and a shareholder suit filed in other federal courts. Stanford, et al. v. GlaxoSmithKline plc, C.A. No. 07-254 (E.D. Tex. June 19, 2007). The decedent’s wife alleges that GlaxoSmithKline concealed problems with Avandia’s risk profile from the public and the medical community, problems that caused her husband’s fatal heart attack. The decedent’s estate seeks in excess of $75,000 in compensatory damages as well as punitive and exemplary damages based upon causes of action for defective design and marketing (strict liability), negligence, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, unjust enrichment, and breach of express and implied warranties. The case has been assigned to Judge David Folsom.