Legal News Update

Category Archives: Actos Lawsuit

Louisiana Actos Lawsuit Filed

Louisiana Actos Lawsuit Filed

Louisiana Actos Lawsuit Filed

(07/05/2012) Actos Lawsuit Complaint was recently filed in the United States District Court in the Western District of Louisiana in response to the adverse reactions suffered by Plaintiffs Charles Burtnett and Deborah Berry due to Charles Burtnett’s use of the pharmaceutical drug Actos. Charles Burtnett has contracted bladder cancer and because of his cancer his wife, Deborah Berry, has been deprived of his care, consideration, compassion, and consortium. The Actos Lawsuit Complaint discusses Defendants’ numerous alleged violations of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and demands that Plaintiffs recover punitive and monetary damages as a result of these and other violations allegedly committed by Defendants.

The CFR is the codification of rules that federal agencies have adopted. The Food and Drug section of these regulations is contained within Title 21 out of 50 possible Titles. The main violations cited by the Complaint which are applicable to Title 21 include failure to provide labeling that was informative and accurate; failure to update the label as new information became available; failure to provide information that is necessary for the safe and effective use of the drug; failure to identify specific tests needed for selection or monitoring of patients who took Actos; failure to describe serious adverse reactions and potential safety hazards, and failure of Defendants to utilize accurate, sensitive, specific, and reproducible test methods that have been properly established and documented. Due to all of these violations and other factors listed, Plaintiffs allege that Actos is not safe and effective for its intended use.

Actos was intended to be used in order to control glucose levels in Diabetes Type II patients. Type II diabetes occurs when the body does not produce enough insulin or does not efficiently utilize the insulin that it does produce. Actos was jointly launched for this purpose in 1999 by Takeda North America and Eli Lilly. Both of these entities, along with the other Defendants named in this Complaint, have had a role in the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of this drug.

Actos is not the only diabetes drug to face lawsuits recently. An ongoing Avandia Lawsuit is still in progress.

Technorati Tags:

Current information for those interested in the active pharmaceutical lawsuit cases.

It is part of our purpose to serve the public by providing current information for those interested in the active pharmaceutical lawsuit cases including:
The Actos Lawsuit
The Yaz Lawsuit
The Pradaxa Lawsuit
If you would like to see sample content from a real lawsuit, we have inserted an excerpt below.

Fraudulent Concealment Claim from an Accutane Lawsuit

Plaintiff pleads that California’s delayed discovery rule should be applied to toll the running of the statute of limitations until Plaintiff knew, or through the exercise of reasonable care and diligence should have known, of facts indicating that Plaintiff had been injured, the cause of the injury, and the tortuous nature of the wrongdoing that caused the injury.
Despite the exercise of reasonable diligence, which included consultation with Plaintiffs’ doctors regarding the cause of Plaintiffs injuries, the nature of Plaintiffs injuries and damages, and their relationship to Accutane, was not discovered, and through reasonable care and due diligence could not have been discovered, by Plaintiff, until a time less than two years before the filing of this Complaint. No health care provider stated to Plaintiff that Accutane may have caused, induced or exacerbated Plaintiff’s injuries, nor did Plaintiff read or see any media report of an association between Accutane and Plaintiff’s injuries, until a time within two years of the filing of this suit. Plaintiff learned for the first time of the possibility that Accutane could have caused Plaintiffs’ gastrointestinal injury when Plaintiff saw the advertisement that prompted Plaintiff to call legal counsel. That event occurred within two years of filing the present lawsuit. Therefore, under appropriate application of the discovery rule, Plaintiff’s suit was filed well within the applicable statutory limitations period.
The running of the statute of limitations in this cause is tolled due to equitable tolling, class action statutory tolling and/or tolling during the minority of the Plaintiff.
Defendants are estopped from asserting a statute of limitations defense because all Defendants fraudulently concealed from Plaintiff the nature of Plaintiff’s injury and the connection between the injury and all Defendants’ tortious conduct.

Technorati Tags: , ,