Phila. Jury Slams Makers of Xarelto With $27.8M Verdict
A Philadelphia jury awarded nearly $28 million to the plaintiffs in the first bellwether trial to take place in state court over the blood thinner Xarelto. The verdict came after three straight losses for plaintiffs in federal court.
December 14, 2017 at 07:25 PM
9 minute read
Hartman v. Janssen
Date of Verdict:
Dec. 5.
Court and Case No.:
Philadelphia C.P.
Judge:
Michael Erdos.
Type of Action:
Products liability.
Injuries:
Bleed.
Plaintiffs Counsel:
Gary Douglas of Douglas and London, New York; Ned McWilliams of Levin Papantonio, Pensacola, Florida; Michael Weinkowitz of Levin Sedran & Berman, Philadelphia. Defense Counsel:
Beth Wilkinson of Wilkinson, Walsh + Eskovitz, Washington, D.C. Plaintiffs Expert:
David Kessler, labeling. Defense Expert:
Tanya Dutta, Hawthorne, New York.
Comment:
A Philadelphia jury awarded nearly $28 million to the plaintiffs in the first bellwether trial to take place in state court over the blood thinner Xarelto. The verdict came after three straight losses for plaintiffs in federal court.
The jury handed up the verdict against Bayer and Janssen Pharmaceuticals on Dec. 5, awarding plaintiff Lynn Hartman $1.8 million in compensatory damages and $26 million in punitive damages. The verdict came after nearly one month of trial before Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Michael Erdos.
Hartman was the first bellwether trial to begin in state court. Over the summer, defendants won all three cases that went to trial from the consolidated litigation being handled in federal court. More than 18,000 cases are pending in the federal multidistrict litigation over Xarelto, which makes it the second largest litigation nationwide, second only to the consolidated pelvic mesh litigation. More than 1,500 Xarelto cases are pending in Philadelphia.
The mass tort is focused on claims that the drugmakers failed to adequately warn about the danger of suffering a severe bleed, especially when patients took Xarelto in combination with Aspirin.
Hartman was closely watched by attorneys given the difficult time plaintiffs have had in federal court, and, although most of the trial focused on the label and the drug's ability to cause Hartman's bleed, the litigation took a few contentious and unexpected turns over the past month.
The start of the trial was delayed after the plaintiffs alleged a Janssen sales representative had improperly contacted a witness prior to an important deposition. Although the judge allowed parties to depose the sales rep, the judge ultimately denied the plaintiffs' requests, and declined to block the witness' testimony.
Also, during closing arguments, the trial took a political turn, with attorneys from both sides referencing fake news, growing xenophobia and even a quote from Michelle Obama. Lead trial counsel for the plaintiffs, Gary Douglas of Douglas and London, said the verdict was “vindication.”
“This was a great verdict for Mrs. Hartman and a great win for exposing the pharmaceutical industry,” he said.
In an emailed statement, Levin Sedran & Berman attorney Michael Weinkowitz, a lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said he was pleased with the verdict.
“The serious health complications suffered by thousands of patients could have been avoided if physicians were properly instructed about the risks, and if patients were given the choice to switch to Eliquis and Pradaxa, which are safer and far more effective,” he said.
Bayer spokesman Christopher Loder said in an emailed statement that the company plans to appeal.
“Bayer stands behind the safety and efficacy of Xarelto, believes there is no basis in fact for the verdict, including the punitive award, and plans to appeal,” he said. “Xarelto's safety and efficacy is supported by both real-world experience with 31 million patients and expert health regulators in 130 countries, and its FDA-approved label provides accurate and science-based information on the medicine's benefits and risks.”
A spokeswoman for Janssen, Sarah Freeman, said in an emailed statement that Janssen also plans to appeal.
“This verdict contradicts years of scientific data and the FDA's repeated confirmation of Xarelto's safety and efficacy,” she said. “Hartman is the fourth Xarelto trial and the first state trial to date. In each of the three federal multidistrict litigation Xarelto trials, juries returned decisions in favor of the company.”
The defendants were represented at trial by Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz attorney Beth Wilkinson.
—Max Mitchell, of the Law Weekly
Hartman v. Janssen
Date of Verdict:
Dec. 5.
Court and Case No.:
Philadelphia C.P.
Judge:
Michael Erdos.
Type of Action:
Products liability.
Injuries:
Bleed.
Plaintiffs Counsel:
Gary Douglas of
Beth Wilkinson of Wilkinson, Walsh + Eskovitz, Washington, D.C. Plaintiffs Expert:
David Kessler, labeling. Defense Expert:
Tanya Dutta, Hawthorne,
Comment:
A Philadelphia jury awarded nearly $28 million to the plaintiffs in the first bellwether trial to take place in state court over the blood thinner Xarelto. The verdict came after three straight losses for plaintiffs in federal court.
The jury handed up the verdict against Bayer and
Hartman was the first bellwether trial to begin in state court. Over the summer, defendants won all three cases that went to trial from the consolidated litigation being handled in federal court. More than 18,000 cases are pending in the federal multidistrict litigation over Xarelto, which makes it the second largest litigation nationwide, second only to the consolidated pelvic mesh litigation. More than 1,500 Xarelto cases are pending in Philadelphia.
The mass tort is focused on claims that the drugmakers failed to adequately warn about the danger of suffering a severe bleed, especially when patients took Xarelto in combination with Aspirin.
Hartman was closely watched by attorneys given the difficult time plaintiffs have had in federal court, and, although most of the trial focused on the label and the drug's ability to cause Hartman's bleed, the litigation took a few contentious and unexpected turns over the past month.
The start of the trial was delayed after the plaintiffs alleged a Janssen sales representative had improperly contacted a witness prior to an important deposition. Although the judge allowed parties to depose the sales rep, the judge ultimately denied the plaintiffs' requests, and declined to block the witness' testimony.
Also, during closing arguments, the trial took a political turn, with attorneys from both sides referencing fake news, growing xenophobia and even a quote from Michelle Obama. Lead trial counsel for the plaintiffs, Gary Douglas of
“This was a great verdict for Mrs. Hartman and a great win for exposing the pharmaceutical industry,” he said.
In an emailed statement, Levin Sedran & Berman attorney Michael Weinkowitz, a lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said he was pleased with the verdict.
“The serious health complications suffered by thousands of patients could have been avoided if physicians were properly instructed about the risks, and if patients were given the choice to switch to Eliquis and Pradaxa, which are safer and far more effective,” he said.
Bayer spokesman Christopher Loder said in an emailed statement that the company plans to appeal.
“Bayer stands behind the safety and efficacy of Xarelto, believes there is no basis in fact for the verdict, including the punitive award, and plans to appeal,” he said. “Xarelto's safety and efficacy is supported by both real-world experience with 31 million patients and expert health regulators in 130 countries, and its FDA-approved label provides accurate and science-based information on the medicine's benefits and risks.”
A spokeswoman for Janssen, Sarah Freeman, said in an emailed statement that Janssen also plans to appeal.
“This verdict contradicts years of scientific data and the FDA's repeated confirmation of Xarelto's safety and efficacy,” she said. “Hartman is the fourth Xarelto trial and the first state trial to date. In each of the three federal multidistrict litigation Xarelto trials, juries returned decisions in favor of the company.”
The defendants were represented at trial by Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz attorney Beth Wilkinson.
—Max Mitchell, of the Law Weekly
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 AllMatt's Corner: RPC 8.4(d)—Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice
2 minute readWhile Data Breaches May Lead to Years of Legal Battles, Cyberattacks Can Be Prevented
4 minute readThe Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
9 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Jones Day Client Seeks Indemnification for $7.2M Privacy Settlement, Plus Defense Costs
- 2Elections Have Consequences: Some Thoughts on Labor and Employment Law Topics in 2025 and Beyond
- 3Law Firm Associates, Staffers Continue to Put a Premium On Workplace Flexibility, Study Finds
- 42 Carter Arnett Litigators to Join Baker & Hostetler in Dallas
- 5People in the News—Nov. 27, 2024—Flaster Greenberg, Tucker Arensberg
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