Tag

California Superior Court Archives - Carey Danis & Lowe

Cooper v. Takeda Jury Presented with Plaintiff Closing Argument Linking Actos and Bladder Cancer

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

takeda_actos_bladder_cancer_lawsuit_litigation_settlements_trial_filing_risk_cancerTakeda Pharmaceuticals, the Japanese pharmaceutical giant responsible for the development and marketing of the diabetes drug Actos, concealed the association between Actos and bladder cancer, a jury was recently told in an Actos trial.

ccording to a Bloomberg Businessweek report on the Actos trial being heard in Los Angeles, as early as 2004, Takeda knew about the associated between Actos and bladder cancer. Furthermore, with this awareness, the Japanese pharmaceutical company failed to inform the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), according to the plaintiffs lawyer in the case, Michael Miller.

Closing arguments in the Actos lawsuit were delivered from Miller on April 15, with the jury moving into deliberation on or after April 16 following closing statements from Takeda’s lawyers.

Due to Cooper’s ailing state, Takeda’s lawyers have pointed again and again to Cooper’s health being to blame for his bladder cancer, not Actos. It will be interesting to see if this argument holds any weight during jury deliberation.

The case is Cooper v. Takeda, and is being heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles by Judge Kenneth Freeman. As the plaintiff, Jack Cooper, is in poor health, his Actos lawsuit was given priority in going to trial. Once Cooper’s case is settled, Takeda still faces approximately 3,000 more Actos lawsuits, according to a Bloomberg Businessweek report.

The FDA approved Actos in 1999, and since then has ordered Takeda to continually update the drug’s label in order to provide adequate warnings about various health risks associated with Actos use. The current Actos drug label lists a warning about bladder cancer noting that in patients who have used Actos for longer periods, the risk of bladder cancer has increased considerably.

Carey Danis & Lowe Actos lawyers believe that the Cooper Actos case will be representative of and influence future Actos trials and lawsuits. With the evidence brought before the jury in the Cooper case about the dangers of taking Actos, our Actos lawyers believe that injured parties deserve justice and compensation, especially in cases where patients take a drug believing there to be minimal risks, but in reality, these risks have been concealed, resulting in serious harm and injury.

If you or a loved one has been injured by Actos, contact a Carey Danis & Lowe Actos lawyer by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

Carey Danis & Lowe Actos Cancer Lawyers Optimistic Following Cooper v. Takeda $6.5 Million Compensatory Award

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

actos_bladder_cancer_lawsuits_settlements_diabetes_litigation_fda_warningA California jury recently awarded a compensatory package of $6.5 million to a plaintiff in an Actos bladder cancer lawsuit. The case, Cooper v. Takeda, was heard over a two month period in a California Superior Court.

The jury arrived at their decision agreeing with Cooper’s claim that Takeda Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of the diabetes drug Actos, did not supply adequate safety information about the association between Actos and bladder cancer.

The plaintiff in the case, Jack Cooper, was presented with a $5 million compensatory award. The jury also bestowed a $1.5 million compensatory award upon Cooper’s spouse. Takeda did not have to pay punitive damages in the Actos case.

Carey Danis & Lowe Actos cancer lawyers believe that the jury’s ruling in Cooper’s Actos case delivers much optimism to individuals who have been injured by Actos, and have subsequently filed lawsuits against Takeda.

With the first case having been settled, Takeda faces more than 3,000 Actos lawsuits, according to a Thomson Reuters report. Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc. was heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles, case number CGC-12-518535.

Actos cancer lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are currently offering free legal evaluations of Actos cases. If you or someone you love has been injured by Actos, contact a Carey Danis & Lowe Actos cancer lawyer today by phone at 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

Urologist Testifies in Cooper v. Takeda Actos Lawsuit about Bladder Cancer in California Superior Court

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

Urologist Testifies in Cooper v. Takeda Actos Lawsuit about Bladder Cancer in California Superior CourtTestimony provided in late March by a urologist in an Actos trial taking place in a Los Angeles court presented an expert’s opinion about the link between Actos and bladder cancer. A urologist, Dr. Norm D. Smith, testified in Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc., a case being heard in a California Superior Court.

According to Dr. Smith, after examining all of the plaintiff’s health factors, it appeared to him that the cause of the plaintiff’s bladder cancer had a more significant connection to a prolonged use of Actos.

The plaintiff in the Actos case, Jack Cooper, took the diabetes drug Actos for five years, and discovered in December 2011 that he had bladder cancer. According to Law360, Cooper filed his Actos bladder cancer lawsuit alleging that Takeda, the Japanese pharmaceutical company responsible for the development and marketing of the drug Actos, neglected to inform healthcare providers about the health complications associated with Actos.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been reviewing data collected in a collaborative study conducted by Takeda and Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Their data show that patients who ingest high dosages of Actos for a long period of time, usually more than one year, have a significantly increased risk of developing bladder cancer.

Carey Danis & Lowe Actos bladder cancer lawyers are encouraged by Dr. Smith’s testimony, as it supplies the court and the jury with strong evidence from an expert that, despite the plaintiff’s other health problems and lifestyle choices, the primary reason for the development of his bladder cancer lies in the use of Actos for a long period of time.

Carey Danis & Lowe urges individuals who have been injured by Actos to contact one of our Actos bladder cancer lawyers today for a free legal evaluation about your Actos case, and for assistance in filing an Actos bladder cancer lawsuit.

Contact Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

DePuy President Testifies in Strum v. DePuy: DePuy Defense Asserts DePuy ASR Hip Recall about Revision Rates not Defective Product

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

DePuy President Testifies in Strum v. DePuy: DePuy Defense Asserts DePuy ASR Hip Recall about Revision Rates not Defective ProductDePuy President, Andrew Ekdahl, delivered testimony during day three of Strum v. DePuy, a case being heard in a Chicago state court. The DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit involves Carol Strum, whose lawsuit against DePuy is the second of 10,750 DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit to go to trial.

According to Ekdahl, DePuy initiated the DePuy ASR Hip recall due to the high rates of revision associated with the metal-on-metal hip implant. However, according to a Businessweek article about the Chicago case, the medical device manufacturer’s defense attorney, Richard Sarver, has continued to argue that DePuy does not consider the ASR Hip implant to be a defective device, despite the high revision rate.

DePuy’s steadfast adherence to the belief in their hip implant not being a defectively designed product comes in light of a Health Hazard and Risk Evaluation Review Board document signed by senior DePuy executives shortly before the DePuy ASR Hip recall, according to Businessweek.

The document supplied three reasons for recalling a product, one of which was about a defective product that had the potential to cause injury and health complications. This option was the one selected by the DePuy senior executives as the reason for the DePuy ASR Hip recall.

Clearly, then, the internal discussions and decisions made by DePuy do not align with their public effort to assert that their metal-on-metal hip implant, though having a significantly high revision rate, is not a defective product.

Defective medical device lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are closely watching the DePuy ASR Hip case in Chicago to determine if any new evidence will come to light, which may influence the jury to order Johnson & Johnson and DePuy to pay punitive damages. In the first DePuy ASR Hip case heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles, the jury awarded the plaintiff, Loren Kransky, compensatory damages but not punitive damages.

The case being heard in Chicago is Strum v. DePuy, 2011-L-9352, Circuit Court of Cook County.

If you or someone you love has been injured by the DePuy ASR Hip implant, contact an experienced defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe. Receive a free legal evaluation by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

Second DePuy ASR Hip Trial Begins in Chicago Court

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Second DePuy ASR Hip Trial Begins in Chicago CourtOn the heels of Johnson & Johnson’s loss in a California Superior Court case regarding their DePuy ASR Hip implant, the second DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit started on March 11 in the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Illinois.

The case is Strum v. DePuy, and involves the plaintiff, Carol Strum, a 54 year old nurse and Illinois resident. After receiving a DePuy ASR Hip implant, Strum claims that her implant proved defective after only three years.

Strum’s case is the second DePuy ASR Hip Replacement lawsuit to go to trial of approximately 10,750 cases, according to a Bloomberg report. The first lawsuit to go to trial, Kransky v. DePuy, was lost by Johnson & Johnson, and resulted in the jury ruling that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy would have to pay $8.3 million in compensatory damages to the plaintiff, Loren Kransky.

Furthermore, the jury decided that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy would not have to pay punitive damages to the plaintiff. The case was heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles.

In opening statements delivered on March 11, Johnson & Johnson’s lawyer argued that the DePuy ASR Hip implant is not a defectively designed medical device, and that the recall of the hip device in 2010 was unrelated to any defect.

Conversely, in his opening statements to the jury, Strum’s lawyer provided details about the defective nature of the metal-on-metal design of the DePuy ASR Hip. Strum’s lawyer emphasized how the metal ball and metal cup knocked against one another during movement causing the release of metal ions into surrounding tissue, muscles, bone, and the bloodstream.

In addition to claiming that Strum suffers from metal poisoning, Strum’s lawyer stated that DePuy neglected to sufficiently inform Strum, Strum’s healthcare provider, and her surgeon about the health risks associated with the DePuy ASR Hip implant.

The Johnson & Johnson lawyer stated that the plaintiff’s body rejected the DePuy ASR Hip implant. The cause of Strum’s health complications, according to the defendants, is related to Strum’s biological response to the hip implant, and has nothing to do with her surgeon nor the hip implant itself. As this case moves forward, it will be interesting to see how Johnson & Johnson and DePuy supports this claim.

In Kransky v. DePuy, the plaintiff was seeking punitive damages in the amount of $179 million. In her case, Strum is also seeking punitive damages along with compensatory damages.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe have been closely watching the Chicago DePuy ASR Hip trial to see if this time around the jury will award punitive damages to the plaintiff to punish Johnson & Johnson and DePuy for their negligence.

To file a DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit and for a free legal evaluation about your DePuy ASR Hip case, contact a defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

Kransky v. DePuy Jury Awards Plaintiff $8.3 Million Compensatory Award

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Kransky v. DePuy Jury Awards Plaintiff $8.3 Million Compensatory AwardOn March 8, the jury in Kransky v. DePuy awarded the plaintiff in the case a compensatory award of $8.3 million. The compensatory damages to be paid to the plaintiff, Loren Kransky, by Johnson & Johnson cover Kransky’s pain and suffering after receiving an implant of the DePuy ASR Hip.

However, the jury decided against awarding punitive damages because they believe that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy had supplied sufficient warning about the health risks involved with the use of the DePuy ASR Hip implant.

Kransky v. DePuy was the first DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit to go to trial in approximately 10,750, according to a Bloomberg article about the case.

Kransky filed his DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit alleging that the hip implant designed and developed by DePuy, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, created a defective medical device. In addition, Kransky claimed that the defective design of the DePuy ASR Hip caused severe pain, numerous revision surgeries, and other serious health complications.

Furthermore, Kransky claimed that the metal-on-metal design of the DePuy ASR Hip caused metal ions to enter into his bloodstream resulting in metallosis, or metal poisoning.

Kransky v. DePuy was heard over a five week period in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles.

Following the jury’s ruling, a DePuy spokesperson stated that the medical device manufacturer plans to appeal the ruling in regard to the hip implant’s faulty design citing the company’s belief that the ASR Hip Replacement system works correctly. Furthermore, DePuy stated that the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) review of the DePuy ASR Hip was not provided to the jury.

The next ASR Hip lawsuit to go to trial is a case being head in an Illinois state court in Chicago. The Illinois DePuy ASR Hip trial started on March 11, and involves the plaintiff, Carol Strum.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe who work in trials involving defective medical devices believe that the $8.3 million compensatory award bestowed upon Kransky is a testament to the damages that the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system has caused for individuals. Though no punitive damages were awarded to Kransky in his trial, Carey Danis & Lowe is interested in seeing if Strum’s trial will involve payment by Johnson & Johnson and DePuy of compensatory and punitive damages.

If you or someone you love has been injured by an implant of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe. For a free legal evaluation and to file a DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit, contact a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or submit a legal claim form.

Carey Danis & Lowe Optimistic About DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuits Following Johnson & Johnson Loss

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Published March 19, 2013 by PR Web

St. Louis, Missouri (PRWEB) March 19, 2013

Carey Danis & Lowe Optimistic About DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuits Following Johnson & Johnson LossWith defective medical device lawyers currently investigating DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system cases, Carey Danis & Lowe is optimistic about the future of DePuy ASR Hip lawsuits that go to trial. Kransky v. DePuy, a case being heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles, involved the plaintiff, Loren Kransky, and resulted in Kransky receiving a compensatory award of $8.3 million, according to a New York Times report on the [DePuy trial].

Though the 12-person jury in Kransky v. DePuy did not award the plaintiff with a punitive damages, as detailed in the New York Times article, a second DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit has gone to trial in Chicago. The trial in Chicago presents another opportunity for a jury to award a plaintiff with compensatory and punitive damages.

Defective medical device lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are closely following the Chicago trial, known as Strum v. DePuy, 2011-L-9352, Circuit Court of Cook County. Carey Danis & Lowe will watch the case to see what evidence will be brought before the jury, and if this evidence persuades them that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy should be punished through payment of punitive damages for malicious and negligent business practices regarding the development and marketing of the DePuy ASR Hip.

A Bloomberg article on Strum v. DePuy states that the trial began with opening statements on March 11, so there remains much more information to be brought forth before the jury.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are hopeful that individuals who have been injured by the DePuy ASR Hip implant will be compensated for undergoing numerous revision surgeries, pain resulting from a defective metal-on-metal hip, and other losses resulting from the hip implant. Carey Danis & Lowe is encouraging injured parties to contact the law firm about DePuy ASR Hip cases, especially in light of the Kransky v. DePuy verdict.

For more information about contacting Carey Danis & Lowe about a DePuy ASR Hip case, visit https://www.careydanis.com.

Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuit News: Pharmacologist Points to Takeda’s Fixation on Profits Over Consumer Safety

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuit News: Pharmacologist Points to Takeda's Fixation on Profits Over Consumer SafetyThe first trial in more than 3,000 Actos lawsuits filed in the U.S. is currently being heard in a Los Angeles court. Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe reported last week that the first Actos trial began with revelatory information about Takeda Pharmaceutical’s misleading marketing strategy.

Apparently, the Japanese pharmaceutical company was knowledgeable of the health problems associated with Actos ingestion, but decided to hide that information in order to market the diabetes drug.

Since Carey Danis & Lowe’s update last week, the trial involving plaintiff, Jack Cooper, has convened again for opening arguments from both sides, and expert testimony from a pharmacologist.

Jack Cooper filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of Actos, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, citing that the pharmaceutical company failed to warn Actos users and healthcare providers about the risks of using the diabetes medicine, especially about the link between Actos and bladder cancer.

A Bloomberg article about the trial states that Cooper developed bladder cancer in 2011. Though Cooper alleges his bladder cancer is a result of ingesting Actos for four years, a lawyer representing Takeda pointed to the plaintiff’s lifestyle to explain his current health condition.

On March 4, Howard Greenberg, a clinical pharamacologist, delivered expert testimony about Takeda’s priorities regarding Actos. Greenberg noted that upon analyzing internal Takeda emails, it became clear that profits from Actos took precedence over consumer safety.

The content of these emails reveals that Takeda executives were concerned about the drug’s viability on the market if pharmaceutical regulators, like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, ordered that the Actos drug label include information about bladder cancer. These emails go on to express that a bladder cancer warning would be a “worst-case scenario”, according to Bloomberg.

Cooper’s case is being heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles, and has been filed as Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc.

The worst-case scenario being poor drug sales resulting from a bladder cancer warning illustrates Takeda’s egregious disregard for consumer safety. Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe work diligently for our clients to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable for the harm their products cause consumers.

If you or someone you love has been injured by the use of Actos, and as a result, has developed bladder cancer, you and your loved one may be eligible to receive compensation.

For a free legal evaluation and for more information about filing an Actos bladder cancer lawsuit, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe today by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

First Actos Trial in California Uncovers Takeda’s Deceptive Actos Marketing Tactics

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

First Actos Trial in California Uncovers Takeda's Deceptive Actos Marketing TacticsIn 2003, Takeda Pharmaceuticals Inc. expressed concerns about whether Actos users could develop cancer. These reservations on the part of the Japanese pharmaceutical company came to light in court documents filed in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles.

The internal documents reveal that Takeda Pharmaceuticals went so far as to survey doctors about whether a diabetes drug with a label warning about the risk of developing bladder cancer would prevent them from writing a prescription for the drug. After reviewing responses, Takeda Pharmaceuticals concluded that a bladder cancer warning on the Actos label would have a debilitating impact on Actos sales.

Undertaking such a measure is a clear illustration of Takeda Pharmaceuticals’ market-driven philosophy wherein profits far surpass consumer safety in matters of importance.

These internal Takeda documents were filed in the first Actos lawsuit to go to trial. The case is Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. According to a Bloomberg News report on the Actos trial, there are currently 3,000 Actos lawsuits pending across the country.

These Actos lawsuits including Takeda losing its Actos patent last year are certain to factor in to the company’s reliance on the diabetes drug to be a big moneymaker in 2013. In March 2011, Bloomberg recorded that Actos comprised 27 percent of Takeda’s revenue. Though, this high revenue trend will likely change as Actos has developed a tarnished reputation due to its link to bladder cancer.

In another revealing court filing, Takeda relayed special instructions to its U.S. sales representatives. Essentially, the internal document stated that if safety concerns are not raised, then do not reveal anything about the risk of bladder cancer, and instead, focus on selling the drug.

In response to these documents, a Takeda representative has stated that these documents have been taken out of context.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe have been paying close attention to the court proceedings in this first Actos lawsuit to go to trial. For those who have been injured by Actos, and especially Actos users who have developed Actos bladder cancer, Carey Danis & Lowe is currently accepting Actos claims, and offering free legal evaluations.

For more information about filing an Actos lawsuit, contact an experienced defective drug lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe today by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form

First Actos Trial is Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc.

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

First Actos Trial is Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc.The first Actos lawsuit has gone to trial in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles, known as Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc. Cooper v. Takeda is being heard by Judge Kenneth Freeman in California. The plaintiff in the case claims that Takeda failed to warn that one of the risks connected to the diabetes drug is bladder cancer.

To date, there are over 3,000 Actos bladder cancer lawsuits that have been filed against Takeda across the United States in states like California, Illinois, and Louisiana.

In Louisiana, approximately 1,200 Actos lawsuits have been consolidated into a multi-district litigation (MDL). Actos MDL court documents show that the first Actos MDL trial is scheduled for November 2014.

In a report from Bloomberg News, a Takeda representative has publicly stated that the pharmaceutical company has acted appropriately in its response to reports of patients developing bladder cancer linked to Actos ingestion.

However, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) analyses of a ten year study conducted by Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Kaiser Permanente Northern California illustrates “increased risk of bladder cancer among patients with the longest exposure to Actos”. Furthermore, the FDA also cited an increased risk of developing bladder cancer in those individuals who ingest high doses of Actos.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe encourage individuals who have been injured by Actos to contact the law firm for a free legal evaluation and to file an Actos lawsuit. Carey Danis & Lowe believes that it is important to protect consumers and hold negligent pharmaceutical companies, like Takeda, responsible for releasing a harmful drug onto the market.

Contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or by filling out the Carey Danis & Lowe legal claims form.