|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 4016 | Drugs / Medical | 12/07/2004
A settlement valued at 65 Million dollars has been reached in the consolidated action concerning alleged efforts by drug manufacturer Smith Kline Beecham to delay or impede the release of generic versions of the antidepressant drug Paxil, in order to continue selling the name brand drug at higher cost. On November 18, 2004 court ordered notification of potential claimants began. Notices will be mailed, and are scheduled to appear in newspapers and magazines all over the United States, leading up to a hearing on March 9, 2005, when the Court will consider whether to approve the settlement.
The lawsuit includes people who paid for Paxil or a generic paroxetine, from January 1, 1998 through September 30, 2004. The Class includes consumers who paid any portion of the cost of Paxil or a generic paroxetine, as well as insurers and Employee Welfare Benefit Plans that paid on behalf of patients and insureds. Governmental entities are included only to the extent that they purchased prescription drugs as part of a health plan for their employees. This lawsuit claims that GlaxoSmithKline broke antitrust and consumer protection laws by keeping lower cost generic versions of Paxil off the market. The lawsuit and the settlement do not relate to any claims about the safety or effectiveness of Paxil. The story starts more than 20 years ago, when SmithKline licensed the right to test and manufacture Paxil from a British company that had won an original patent on Paxil's active chemical compound, paroxetine hydrochloride, in 1977. That first patent expired in 1992, after which generic drug manufacturers might have been able to begin production of less expensive generic versions of paroxetine hydrochloride if not for SmithKline's alleged behavior. The action alleges that through highly questionable activities, SmithKline managed to prevent entry into the market of generic Paxil until September 2003. Those affected by this settlement can send in a claim form to ask for a payment, or they can ask to be excluded from or object to the settlement and its terms. The deadline for exclusion is January 20, 2005 and the deadline for objections is February 15, 2005. Payment amounts will depend on the amount of Paxil(R) that was purchased and the number of valid claims filed. The deadline to file claims is April 15, 2005. 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 A class action has been filed against Washington Hospital Center for failing to provide a reasonable volume of free or reduced priced medical care to poor, uninsured patients and from conditioning emergency treatment on a patient's payment or ability to pay agreement. The issue of corporate health plan prescription contraceptive coverage is a hot-button item lately. The parties have apparently reached a settlement in a nationwide action filed against supermarket chain Albertson's, Inc. on behalf of female employees who allege that the store and its subsidiaries have discriminated against them by refusing to pay for their prescription contraceptives, in violation of their civil rights.
On May 5, 2005 the Court issued a permanent injunction against Creaghan A. Harry, who does business as Hitech Marketing, Scientific Life Nutrition, and Rejuvenation Health Corporation, by the Federal Trade Commission, on behalf of persons who have purchased bogus “human growth hormone” products over the Internet. The action alleged that Harry is responsible for millions of illegal spam email messages, all of which violate the FTC Act and the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pronography and Marketing Act of 2003 (CAN-SPAM Act). A class action lawsuit has been filed in the Middle District Court of Florida against Mayo Clinic Jacksonville for violations of Florida's Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Class members seek monetary damages, injunctive and equitable relief, attorney's fees and costs of the litigation. Children are especially susceptible to lead poisoning, which can result in permanent brain damage. A class action has been filed against the Washington, D.C. Water and Sewer Authority (WASA) on behalf of District residents who allege that the Authority has known that their drinking water was contaminated with lead since the summer of 2001, but didn't take any remedial action or notify the public, in violation of federal environmental law. A class action has been filed against Tripos, Inc. (Nasdaq: TRPS) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between January 9 and July 1, 2002. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
