|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 3379 | Drugs / Medical | 05/07/2004
A class action has been filed against pharmaceutical company Abbott Laboratories on behalf of persons who have paid out-of-pocket expenses for Norvir (ritonavir), and who allege that the company used its virtual monopoly over the AIDS drug to raise prices 478%, in violation of state and federal antitrust laws. The action seeks unspecified compensatory and triple punitive damages.
This latest suit in California over Norvir was brought by residents of San Francisco and Georgia who use the drug as a booster to a protease inhibitor (PI). PIs are considered the most powerful weapons to date against HIV because they block the action of protease, an enzyme needed for HIV to reproduce and infect other cells. The action alleges that Norvir is "indispensable for virtually all PI therapies." Nine out of 10 PI drugs depend on Norvir to boost the antiviral effect of protease inhibitors against even resistant strains of HIV and reduce the toxic side effects. In December 2003, Abbott allegedly raised the price for Norvir from $205.74 to $1,028.71 for 120 100-mg capsules after competitors GlaxoSmithKline and Bristol-Myers Squibb introduced PIs that began to make inroads on the market of Abbott's own boosted protease inhibitor, Kaletra. The action alleges that Abbott did not raise the price of the Norvir used in its own Kaletra. As a result, Kaletra became the least expensive boosted regimen on the market. By leveraging its power in the booster market, Abbott allegedly maintained and even extended its monopoly in the boosted market. The proposed class includes all persons and entities who purchased Norvir and paid all or part of the increase from December 3, 2003, to the present. Attorneys general in New York and Illinois have opened antitrust investigations into the price increase. Abbott is currently defending itself in two other lawsuits in California. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation in a March 2004 lawsuit filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court alleges that Abbott is defrauding the public by claiming that the price hike will not affect state Medicaid programs (AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. Abbott Laboratories, No. BC312305, filed 3/17/04). That action alleges that Abbott's assertions that state Medicaid programs would be unaffected by the increase are fraudulent, false and misleading, and constitute unfair business practices that induce consumers--including AHF--to continue buying its products, despite its contemptible conduct. The other lawsuit, filed in February 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California seeks damages and an injunction for monopolization, attempted monopolization, conspiracy to restrain trade, and unfair competition. (AIDS HealthCare Foundation v. Abbott Laboratories, C.D. Cal., No. CV04-919 RCx, 3/10/04). At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Drugs / Medical Cases of Interest Ten women filed a lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Ortho McNeil on July 25, 2005, claiming the birth control device the company manufactures caused them to suffer strokes and blood clots.
Kahn Gauthier Swick is seeking to file a lawsuit on behalf of persons that have certain Medtronic implantable heart devices. These products were surgically implanted in persons that are either prone to life-threatening heart rhythms, congestive heart failure or a combination of both. WellPoint Inc., the nation's biggest publicly traded health insurer, said July 11, 2005 it will pay up to $198 million to settle two class-action lawsuits brought by representatives of more than 700,000 doctors over alleged unfair payment practices. A class action has been filed against pharmaceutical company SmithKline Beecham Corporation on behalf of all persons who purchased the antidepressant Paxil or Paxil CR (paroxatine) for children under the age of 18 between November 19, 1998, and the present. The suit alleges that the company committed fraud by suppressing clinical study data that indicated Paxil was ineffective for children. Several class actions have been filed against online pharmacy drugstore.com, Inc., (Nasdaq:DSCM) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between January 20, 2004, and June 10, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. Several class actions have been filed against health information purveyor NDCHealth Corporation (NYSE: NDC) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 1, 2003, and March 31, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. |
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
