|
Ambien May Cause Sleep Disorders |
A recently filed class action alleges that Ambien –
a popular prescription sleeping medication – caused users to enter
into trance-like states in which they recklessly drove cars, binged
on food and engaged in other activities they can’t remember.
The suit claims Sanofi-Aventis, which makes the
drug, inadequately warned users of the dangers of amnesic
sleep-eating, sleepwalking and sleep-driving.
The suit is seeking money damages and stronger
warnings about Ambien’s potential dangers.
Ambien first came onto the market in 1993 and its
popularity has soared in recent years, mainly due to intensive
consumer advertising. Last year, about 26.5 million prescriptions
were dispensed for the drug, more than double the amount in 2001,
making it the nation’s best-selling prescription sleeping pill.
Some of the sleep disorders have allegedly led some
users to engage in criminal activities that they have no memory of.
One woman, a Navy lieutenant in Florida, was
arrested for shoplifting DVDs from her naval base. She says she
doesn’t remember the thefts. She’s facing a dishonorable discharge.
Several drivers have landed in jail after
sleep-driving episodes.
One woman woke up in jail following one such
incident. She learned from the police report that she got out of bed
early one morning, left her house, then drove her mother’s car into
a parked vehicle. She left the scene of the accident and |
|
ran into another vehicle. She returned home,
had a conversation with her mother, and was arrested later that
morning in her bedroom. She claims she doesn’t remember either
accident, or anything else from that morning.
Sanofi-Aventis has denied any link between Ambien
and sleep disorders. It has reminded users that Ambien should only
be taken when the user can have eight hours of uninterrupted sleep,
and that it should never be taken with alcohol.
The Food and Drug Administration says the drug’s
current warnings are adequate.
A key part of failure-to-warn lawsuits is whether
the drug maker had documented the risk of sleepwalking and withheld
that information from physicians and consumers.
We’re available to help you assess your rights if
you’ve suffered any sleep disorders associated with Ambien.
|
|
Uninsured Motorist Claims Could Be Filed
After Deadline |
A number of insured drivers in Illinois were
involved in auto accidents and they filed personal injury lawsuits.
But the other drivers’ insurance companies were liquidated, forcing
the injured drivers to seek reimbursement from their own carrier.
In Illinois, a person injured in an auto accident by
an uninsured driver normally has two years from the date of the
accident to file an arbitration claim with his own insurance
company. Otherwise, the claim is barred.
The insurance company denied the claims for
uninsured motorist benefits on the basis that the claims were not
filed within two years of the accidents in question. |
|
But the Illinois Appellate Court sided with the
insured drivers, saying the two-year limit in the insurance policies
was unenforceable under the circumstances.
The court said the policy failed to make an
exception for policyholders who couldn’t discover the insolvency of
other insurance companies prior to the expiration of the two-year
limit.
This flaw violated Illinois insurance law and public
policy, the court said, because it undercuts uninsured motorist
coverage.
The court noted similar decisions from Iowa and
Ohio.
|
|
Vioxx Maker Hit With $9 Million Punitive
Verdict |
A New Jersey jury recently found the maker of Vioxx
liable for consumer fraud by failing to warn doctors of the
potential dangers of the popular painkiller.
The jury voted to impose $9 million in punitive
damages against Merck & Co., a New Jersey-based company. The
verdict against Merck in its home state is seen as a noteworthy loss
for the company. Coupled with $4.5 million in compensatory damages,
the total award was $13.5 million for a 77-year-old New Jersey man
who blamed his heart attack on long-term use of Vioxx.
Under New Jersey law, a punitive damages award
automatically triggers a government investigation into potential
criminal wrongdoing. The investigation |
|
could reveal new evidence against Merck.
This is the third jury verdict against Merck in the
numerous Vioxx lawsuits around the country. Last August, a Texas
jury awarded $253.5 million to the widow of a triathlete who died
four years ago of an irregular heartbeat. And in April of this year,
another Texas jury awarded $32 million to the estate of a
71-year-old man who died of a heart attack after taking Vioxx for a
short period of time.
Merck has so far defeated claims in three cases.
About 11,500 Vioxx suits have been filed to date
around the country. At least 12 are scheduled for trial this year.
|
|
Pharmacy Liable for Faulty Instructions
About How to Take Drug |
A Maryland jury recently ordered a pharmacy to pay
$250,000 to a woman after telling her she could take her medicine
with milk.
The woman was diagnosed with Lyme disease. She had a
prescription for doxycycline filled at a Rite Aid pharmacy.
Instructions with the prescription directed the woman to take the
medicine with food or milk if stomach upset occurred.
The woman claimed in her lawsuit that contrary to
the statements in the instructions, milk impairs the effectiveness
of doxycycline. She developed a chronic immune deficiency condition
after her initial course of treatment for Lyme disease failed
because she had used the drug with milk.
The woman sued Rite Aid and won a jury verdict. Rite
Aid appealed to the Maryland Supreme Court, but the court ruled in
favor of the woman. |
|
The court said the woman reasonably relied on the
instructions provided to her by Rite Aid.
Also, the court noted that the woman’s doctor
testified that he relied on the pharmacy to provide necessary
information about the prescription.
In other states, pharmacies have avoided liability
by arguing that they merely fill prescriptions and they shouldn’t be
held to the same standard of care as doctors and other medical
practitioners.
|
|
Family Collects More Auto Insurance for
Emotional Distress |
A man involved in a car accident died as a result of
his injuries. His wife and child were passengers in the car and they
suffered their own bodily injuries, including emotional distress
from witnessing his death.
The accident occurred in Alabama, which permits
lawsuits for emotional distress related to witnessing accidents
involving close family members.
The driver of the other car had insufficient
insurance to cover all of the family’s injuries. The family had a
policy with State Farm providing so-called “underinsurance” coverage
up to $100,000 “per person” and $200,000 “per accident.”
State Farm paid the maximum $100,000 |
|
“per person” amount to the man’s estate, and
claimed the payment ended its obligations under the policy. State
Farm argued the “per person” cap applied since the emotional
distress damages of the wife and child were derived from the
injuries suffered by the man.
The Florida Court of Appeals, however, disagreed and
ruled that the higher $200,000 “per accident” coverage applied. The
court noted that the mental anguish suffered by the wife and child
were independent claims, and were not derivative of the fatal
injuries suffered by the man.
Similar rulings have been issued by courts in
Louisiana and Montana.
|
|
Woman Can Sue Court-Ordered Psychologist
for Malpractice |
A Virginia woman allegedly suffered a brain injury
as a result of a car accident and she sued the other driver.
The driver obtained a court order requiring the
woman to undergo a psychological exam to verify her brain injuries.
The woman alleged that during the exam the
psychologist verbally abused her by falsely accusing her of being a
malingerer. She sued the psychologist for malpractice, alleging that
the exam caused her post-traumatic stress and aggravated her
preexisting brain trauma.
The psychologist asked the court to |
|
dismiss the woman’s lawsuit on the basis that
no doctor-patient relationship was created as a result of the
court-ordered medical exam.
But the Virginia Supreme Court disagreed, saying
that a “limited” patient-doctor relationship existed for purposes of
the examination.
The psychologist had a duty to examine the woman
without harming her while conducting the exam, the court ruled.
Similar rulings have been made by courts in Arizona,
Michigan and Minnesota.
|
|
Skier Can Sue Snowboarder For Reckless Run
|
Skiing can be a dangerous sport, and usually
participants are not liable if they injure someone else. The legal
theory is that participants assume the risks associated with the
sport.
But that’s not always the case.
In California, a woman finished a ski run and
stopped in a largely deserted area at the base of the mountain to
talk with her husband. But a high school snowboarder racing his
friends crashed into her at a high rate of speed severely injuring
her.
She sued him, claiming he was reckless and his
actions were totally outside the range of ordinary activity involved
with snowboarding.
He countered that she assumed the risk of injury on
a ski run. A trial court judge dismissed the woman’s claim before it
was heard by a jury. |
|
But a California appeals court reversed this ruling,
saying her claim should go to trial. The court said a jury could
find that the snowboarder rode his snowboard into a flat rest area
while not paying attention to his surroundings, and that the
accident was avoidable if he had exercised more caution.
Crashing into a stopped skier in a flat rest area is
not an activity that is integral to snowboarding, the court added.
|
|
Guidant Heart Devices Facing Many Lawsuits
|
More than 100 lawsuits have been filed claiming that
Guidant Corp. should not have waited three years to disclose defects
in its implanted heart defibrillators.
The suits claim that Guidant hid known defects in
the defibrillators and continued to represent them as safe products
to consumers.
In a case filed in Texas documents revealed Guidant
knew about problems with its devices in April 2002, but failed to
tell doctors or consumers for three years.
A risk analysis performed by Guidant, according to
the lawsuit, showed that the devices could possibly short-circuit,
which would likely cause death or serious injury.
Guidant also allegedly violated federal regulations
by redesigning the devices to eliminate the potential flaw without
informing the Food and Drug Administration. |
|
In June 2005, the company recalled 109,000 of its
Prizm 2 DR and Renewal defibrillators. The devices, which are
surgically implanted, deliver an electrical shock to the heart to
restore normal heart rhythm. Degraded insulation in the devices,
however, could short-circuit, making them unable to deliver the
required electrical shock during arrhythmia episodes.
According to the FDA, as of December 2005, Guidant
had reported 35 clinical failures and five patient deaths for the
Renewal defibrillators, and 32 clinical failures and two deaths
among patients with the Prizm devices.
Many patients now reportedly face the choice of
relying on a potentially defective device or having a replacement
fitted.
A key factor in these lawsuits will be whether
Guidant knew or should have known there was a potential for this
type of problem to occur.
|
|
|
This newsletter is designed to keep you
up-to-date with changes in the law. For help with these or any other
legal issues, please call our firm today.
The information in this newsletter is intended
solely for your information. It does not constitute legal advice,
and it should not be relied on without a discussion of your specific
situation with an attorney.
| |
