Ortho Evra Information
The Ortho Evra Litigation
While the Ortho Evra™ patch was initially marketed as an effective alternative that was as safe as the pill, after several years on the market, it became clear that women using the patch suffered greater risks of serious injury or death than women using the pill. In 2005, the Associated Press reported that in 2004, several women died while using the patch, and many more had been serious injured by blood clots associated with the patch.
While many deaths and injuries to Ortho Evra users were discovered in 2004, some women are just discovering their injuries. If your physician has diagnosed you with an injury related to your use of the patch, you need dedicated legal counsel like an attorney at Miller, Curtis & Weisbrod, L.L.P. in Dallas, Texas to pursue your claims for damages.
Litigation Begins After Associated Press Report in 2005
Almost immediately after the Associated Press report in July 2005, several injured women joined to sue Johnson & Johnson™ for damages. By March 2006, a judicial panel in the federal courts created a multi-district litigation venue in Ohio to handle all the lawsuits involving Ortho Evra. Since then, numerous claims with multiple plaintiffs have been pursued in the federal courts and state courts.
Johnson & Johnson, Ortho-McNeil™ and other defendants have attempted to remove some lawsuits filed in state courts to the federal court system based on a procedural rule that requires that citizens and businesses that reside in different states should have their claims heard in federal court, even if the claims involve state law. From research of available decisions, the defendants' efforts to remove cases to the federal district court to be tried with the multi-district litigation have yielded mixed results. Many federal cases have been returned to the state courts for further proceedings for lack of federal jurisdiction, but some suits have been threatened with dismissal for failure to establish proper jurisdiction.
Some Ortho Evra cases have even yielded new case law. For example, in Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson, the plaintiff argued that Ohio statutes limiting damages claims violate the Ohio Constitution. The Ohio Supreme Court declared that the statutory limits on damages do not violate the Ohio Constitution.
Resolution of Ortho Evra Claims
Some Ortho Evra claims have been settled by Johnson & Johnson and Ortho-McNeil in private settlements. The details of these agreements are not known to the public.
Resolution of the remaining plaintiffs' claims for injury stemming from use of the Ortho Evra patch may take a long time as the parties complete voluminous discovery and depositions.
As injured parties pursue their claims in federal and state courts, women are still using the Ortho Evra patch, and may face risk of death or injury from blood clots or other serious side effects. If you have been harmed by the use of Ortho Evra, do not hesitate to contact an attorney at Miller, Curtis & Weisbrod, L.L.P. in Dallas, Texas to learn more about your legal options.
Copyright ©2009 FindLaw, a Thomson Business
DISCLAIMER: This site and any information contained herein are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek competent legal counsel for advice on any legal matter.
