Articles Posted in Featured Lawsuits

Published on:

testosteroneTestosterone therapy lawsuits are quickly gaining steam.  These cases seemed like a plaintiffs’ lawyers reach just a few months ago.  Now the science on these cases is coming together faster than anyone could have imagined.

Weeks ago, the FDA announced that it is investigating potential testosterone therapy risks.  This is a big deal.  The FDA does not stick its nose into an approved product unless it is pretty concerned.

Testosterone is approved for the treatment of hypogonadism due to known diseases of the testes, pituitary and hypothalamus. Although the use of testosterone therapy is increasing, the FDA indicated that the products were never approved for any use other than to treat men who have medical conditions resulting in lower testosterone than normal.

In response to the recent developments, a group of endocrinologist experts is calling for large scale studies of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) medications such as AndroGel, Testim, and AndroDerm.  Recent developments include a  just published November 2013 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that testosterone drug side effects were linked to increased risks of hearth attacks, strokes, and even death among older men with certain pre-existing heart problems.  That study was followed by another one, published in PLOSOne, that indicated that low testosterone treatments may double the risk of heart attack for younger men with heart disease and men over the age of 65, regardless of their prior heart conditions.

The experts, Endocrine Society, are calling for the development of more large-scale randomized controlled trials to determine the true risks and benefits of testosterone therapy in older men.  They have released a statement recommending that middle-aged and older men who are considering testosterone supplementation for age-related declines should be informed of the potential cardiovascular risks.  They are further concerned that it may be prudent not to administer testosterone therapy to men who have had a cardiovascular event (such as myocardial infarction, stroke or acute coronary syndrome) in the preceding six months.

What was known about testosterone replacement therapy?

Critics of TRT have suggested that the manufacturers of these medications knew or should have known about the risks, and as such, conducted additional studies.  A study in 2009, comprised of more than 200 older, frail men, was ended early after researchers determined that individuals receiving TRT had a spike in heart attacks. While this information was discovered in 2009, millions of men who have been taking hormonal treatments are learning for the first time of the extent of the risk between this medical treatment and these sometimes fatal heart conditions.

TRT is big business.  The use of these drugs has exploded in the last few years, with nearly $2 billion in sales in 2012 alone.  Over 5.3 million prescriptions were written for these drugs in 2011.  As such, we anticipate the number of injury lawsuits filed will be huge.  How many men would not have had the treatment if they had known of the potential side effects?  The exact answer is unknown.  But if you assume as at least one study has suggested that it doubles the risk of a heart attack, the number of claims are going to be extraordinary.

What should you do now?

If you suspect that you or a loved one has had an adverse reaction from any of these medications, our attorneys are currently reviewing potential lawsuits that allege that these companies knew that the risks greatly outweighed the benefits for many patients and failed to adequately warn doctors and patients of the potential risks. If you believe you may have a case, call our attorneys at 1.800.553.8082 or online here.

Published on:

TestosteroneTestosterone replacement drugs are ubiquitous.  It is hard to sit through an afternoon of TV without hearing a commercial for a drug that helps men fight “Low T” or “Low Testosterone.”   We are seeing even more commercials now.  These new commercials are from lawyers talking about testosterone replacement lawsuits.  Probably not the best way to find a lawyer.  Call 800-5538082 for a free consultation or reach out to us confidentially online.

The Passion for Testosterone

Getting older, I can testify, is not fun.   We are easy prey to the lure of testosterone supplements.   These drugs promise to inject, if you will, a sense of youthful vigor back into both the physicality and sexuality of men.  It is, as the commercials say, for energy and libido, among other things. 

These advertisements, which market familiar brands such as AndroGel, Androderm Testim and Axiron, have been extremely effective.  Accordingly, the use of these drugs has exploded in the last few years, with nearly $2 billion in sales in 2012 alone.  In fact, over 5.3 million prescriptions were written for these drugs in 2011.  At present, nearly 4% of men over 60 are taking a testosterone booster.  Men cite the fact that these drugs are effective in treating bone density issues and muscle mass deficiency, as well as with sexual performance  But are they aware that these drugs may cause heart attacks? Continue reading →

Published on:

A new process is now in place for the filing of new Stryker Rejuvenate hip lawsuits.  The new procedure will streamline the process of filing a lawsuit utilizing a Master Complaint and Short Form Complaint to standardize the process of filing additional lawsuits directly into the current federal MDL.

What does this mean to victims?  Nothing.  This is all logistical stuff for the lawyers to worry about.  But some people like to stay more informed than others about these cases.  If you are one of those “want to be informed” people, this post is for you.

The Master Complaint

The Master Complaint addresses all of the common allegations already raised in the Stryker Rejuvenate hip lawsuits and ABG II hip failures.   You might ask, “What is a Master Complaint?”  A complaint is legal document in which you file a lawsuit.  In mass tort cases like this one, there are some allegations that are common to all of the plaintiffs bring clams against the manufacturer.    Obviously, an individual lawsuit includes other allegations: who they are, the product, and other case specific information. Continue reading →

Published on:

humirajudgeopinionFiling for St. Jude Riata defibrillator lead lawsuits is alive after a critical ruling by U.S. District Court Judge James V. Selna.

The background of this motion was ominous for plaintiffs.  The court had previously kept their claims alive by a shoestring and struck many of the key “failure to warn” claims that were made in the lawsuits.   Plaintiffs received an opportunity to cure the defects in the Complaint which they, thankfully, did.

Judge Selna denied a motion to dismiss that was filed in multiple product liability lawsuits filed on behalf of individuals who experienced problems from the leads. These suits allege the manufacturer improperly designed and sold a defective product. Although St. Jude attorneys maintained that the product was FDA approved, Judge Selna determined the allegations were based on violation of FDA regulations.

Continue reading →

Published on:

lipitor, lawsuits and profits

Lipitor Statute of Limitations

If you took Lipitor and developed diabetes, you could be facing a deadline (or what is known as a statute of limitations) to file a product liability claim against Pfizer.

What am I talking about?  Different states have different rules for how long the statute of limitations is and different rules for what triggers the running of the statute.  For some states that have a two year SOL, it is possible that limitations could be found to run in February which is the two year anniversary of Pfizer putting a strong diabetes warning on its it product in February, 2012.

No one knows how the SOL issues will flush out in any case.  But the take home message is clear:  if you are sitting home wondering whether to file a claim, the clock is ticking on your claim (and it could have already struck midnight).  The best way to be safe is to call a lawyer immediately and let them investigate what the deadline is for bringing your claim. Continue reading →

Published on:

simply thickSimplyThick, LLC is facing over 20 different lawsuits from parents of children who have experienced serious injuries or death from the food thickening agent. These lawsuits claim that the infants were severely ill and/or died after experiencing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). Continue reading →

Published on:

infuseA Missouri federal district court judge has ordered a Medtronic bone graft lawsuit back to state court.

The case stems from an off-label spinal fusion procedure. Plaintiff sued Medtronic and his surgeon claiming that Infuse bone graft was used in a manner that had not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and was therefore an unauthorized off-label use.

Continue reading →

Published on:

metalonmetalApproximately five days prior to trial, and one day after a judge denied Defendants’ attempt to dismiss, a settlement was reached in a pending Wright Profemur lawsuit.  This is one of at least two Wright Profemur hip settlements that have been reached just before trial.   The terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

I don’t know what they are, either.  But let me tell you how much I think this case settled for: more than the market value for the claim.  Why?  Because the attorneys handling these case for Wright are pretty smart.  They know full well the best way for the settlement value of these cases to get completely out of hand is to let plaintiffs start seeing jury verdicts.  Right now, Wright can pretend that they are someone situated different than DePuy.   Everyone who is in these cases – on both sides – knows the real score.  But the last thing Wright needs at this point is a big verdict to get plaintiffs’ expectations soaring through the roof.
Continue reading →

Published on:


Boehringer Ingelheim hit with a million dollar fine

As the result of litigation wrongdoings a federal judge called egregious, Pradaxa manufacturer, Boehringer Ingelheim, was hit with a fine in the amount of $931,500, approximately $500 per case.  Let me tell you: this does not happen every day.  This is a harsh sanction and it underscores that this company is either negligently or intentionally failing its discovery obligations.  Will this benefit Boehringer Ingelheim more than the measly, in the general scheme of things, million bucks?  It might.

Continue reading →