Lawsuit Update Center

Clinical studies have conclusively shown that baby formula made from cow’s milk, such as Similac and Enfamil, is dangerous to premature infants because they significantly increase the risk of a dangerous infection called necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). Over the last year, a growing number of product liability lawsuits have been filed against the manufacturers of Similac and Enfamil by parents of premature babies who developed NEC. These NEC formula lawsuits allege that the formula makers knew their products were dangerous to preemies and deliberately failed to warn about the risk of NEC.

In this post, we will look at the current status of the infant formula NEC lawsuits against the manufacturers of Enfamil and Similac. We will look at where these NEC formula lawsuits are being filed, how many are currently pending, who the major players are on both sides (plaintiff and defendant), and other details.

UPDATES:

A new study has revealed that Neptazane, a popular prescription drug used for the treatment of glaucoma, can cause some users to develop a serious and extremely painful skin condition called Stevens-Johnson Syndrome. This could potentially lead to some product liability lawsuits by individuals who used Neptazane and developed SJS.

What is Neptazane?

Neptazane (methazolamide) is a prescription drug that is often used to treat specific types of glaucoma and other ophthalmologic abnormalities. Glaucoma is a condition of the eyes that causes visual loss in one or both eyes by damaging the optic nerve. Fluid buildup behind the eye is the most common cause of this condition.

Several studies have found an association between cow’s milk-based infant formulas and necrotizing enterocolitis. As a result, plaintiffs have filed NEC infant formula lawsuits against Mead Johnson and Abbott Laboratories, the manufacturers of Enfamil and Similac, respectively. They allege that these formulas cause necrotizing enterocolitis.

This is what you need to know about infant formulas, necrotizing enterocolitis, the studies on the relationship between the two, and the recently filed baby formula lawsuits.

Infant formula types

This week the MDL Judge in the Paragard IUD lawsuits will consider a motion to dismiss filed by the manufacturers of the defective birth control device. The Paragard MDL has grown to include over 500 individual cases by plaintiffs alleging that their Paragard IUD fractured during removal resulting in severe pain and sometimes emergency surgery to remove the broken pieces inside their uterus.

About the Paragard Lawsuits

The Paragard is an intrauterine device (IUD) used for birth control. It is a small plastic device shaped like a Y with a copper coil around the center. The device is inserted at the base of the uterus where is provides continuous protection against pregnancy for up to 10 years. The Paragard was designed to be easily removed at the doctor’s office.

Hundreds of farmers and agriculture workers have filed paraquat lawsuits alleging that their exposure to paraquat caused them to develop Parkinson’s disease. Back in June, a new Paraquat MDL was created and it already has around 200 pending cases. Last week, the MDL judge ordered all incoming plaintiffs to complete a Plaintiff’s Assessment Questionnaire (PAQ).

In this post, we will take a close look at the PAQ because it is essentially an outline of the key issues that will shape the paraquat litigation moving forward. It also gives prospective plaintiffs an idea of what type of facts they will need to support their case.

About the Paraquat Lawsuits

A lawsuit recently filed in the U.S. District Court District of New Jersey alleges that someone received stomach cancer because of taking proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) Prilosec, Nexium, and the variations of both drugs.

PPIs are used to treat many stomach conditions but can create even worse problems in the stomach as well. Before informing yourself about these lawsuits, you must first inform yourself on PPIs, specifically Nexium and Prilosec. You must also inform yourself about their potential side effects.

Continue Reading

The FDA is now requiring the makers of two prescription topical testosterone gel products to include a boxed warning on the labels. The move comes after reports of inadvertent exposure to eight children, aged nine months to five years. The drug is topically applied on the shoulders, arms, or abdomen. When transferred to children through secondary exposure (for example, children touching skin covered in the gel), the drug can cause enlargement of the genitalia, premature development of pubic hair, advanced bone age, and aggressive behavior.

The manufacturers of these products, Solvay Pharmaceuticals (AndroGel 1%) and Auxilium Pharmaceuticals (Testim 1%), already warn against exposure to the drug by children; however, the black box warning will enhance the visibility of the warning on the package inserts. Black box warnings are among the strongest safety measures the FDA can take, being reserved for medications with serious or life-threatening dangers.

There’s nothing to indicate that the companies did anything wrong—the dangers of secondary exposure are clearly noted in PDR guides, which warn against allowing others to come into contact with gel-covered skin. And of course, doctors who prescribe the medication should warn their patients about these risks.