Eli Lilly Agrees to $1.4 Billion Zyprexa Settlement
Drug maker Eli Lilly & Company agreed Thursday to pay federal and state governments more than $1.4 billion for its improper off-label marketing of Zyprexa.
January 14, 2009 at 07:00 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Drug maker Eli Lilly & Company agreed Thursday to pay federal and state governments more than $1.4 billion for its improper off-label marketing of Zyprexa, a popular schizophrenia medicine. Lilly will pay $800 million to settle civil charges, while $515 million will be paid as part of a guilty plea to a misdemeanor violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The Department of Justice called it the largest corporate criminal fine in history.
The pharmaceutical giant marketed the drug to treat disruptive children and Alzheimer's disease in seniors, even though the Food and Drug Administration only approved Zyprexa for schizophrenia and a certain type of bipolar disorder. In fact, the medicine caused increased risk for heart failure and pneumonia in seniors and weight gain and diabetes in children.
Six whistleblowers, former Lilly employees who brought the complaint, will share approximately 18 percent of the settlement. In the complaint, they alleged Lilly illegally pushed off-label use of the drug with tactics that included planting employees to ask questions at lectures and conferences and downplaying the risk of diabetes from using Zyprexa with a video that cited scientific studies of “questionable integrity.”
As part of the settlement, Lilly does not admit to the civil allegations.
“Every day and with every interaction we strive to operate in a responsible and compliant manner,” said Lilly's chairman, president and CEO, John Lechleiter, in a statement. “Doing the right thing is non-negotiable at Lilly, and I remain personally committed to all of us at Lilly maintaining the highest standards of conduct.”
Drug maker
The pharmaceutical giant marketed the drug to treat disruptive children and Alzheimer's disease in seniors, even though the Food and Drug Administration only approved Zyprexa for schizophrenia and a certain type of bipolar disorder. In fact, the medicine caused increased risk for heart failure and pneumonia in seniors and weight gain and diabetes in children.
Six whistleblowers, former Lilly employees who brought the complaint, will share approximately 18 percent of the settlement. In the complaint, they alleged Lilly illegally pushed off-label use of the drug with tactics that included planting employees to ask questions at lectures and conferences and downplaying the risk of diabetes from using Zyprexa with a video that cited scientific studies of “questionable integrity.”
As part of the settlement, Lilly does not admit to the civil allegations.
“Every day and with every interaction we strive to operate in a responsible and compliant manner,” said Lilly's chairman, president and CEO, John Lechleiter, in a statement. “Doing the right thing is non-negotiable at Lilly, and I remain personally committed to all of us at Lilly maintaining the highest standards of conduct.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Policy Wonks' Obsession: What Will Tuesday's Election Mean for FTC Firebrand Khan?
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250