If you or someone you know is considering filing an Effexor lawsuit, there are a few things you should know before you do so. There are numerous different types of lawsuits that can be filed. The main ones include birth defects, product liability lawsuits, and anticompetitive acts. Read on to learn more. There are Effexor lawsuits that have a common theme: the drug caused birth defects. If you or someone you know has a birth defect, you may be able to file a lawsuit.
Effexor lawsuits resulted in birth defects
Effexor has been linked to several birth defects. The first lawsuit to link the drug to birth defects was filed in Pennsylvania in February 2012. A mother from Ohio claimed that Effexor caused her daughter’s heart defects, which caused her to die shortly after birth. Another lawsuit was filed in Illinois, where a couple claimed Effexor caused their daughter to be born with a rare congenital heart defect called hypoplastic left heart syndrome. While hypoplastic left heart syndrome is not fatal, it does require expensive medical treatment and surgery.
If your child suffered a birth defect as a result of taking Effexor during pregnancy, you may have a case against the manufacturer of the drug. A successful lawsuit can award you damages, including medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. In some cases, you may be able to receive punitive damages as well. If you or someone you love suffered a birth defect due to Effexor, contact a drug injury attorney for legal advice.
Many plaintiffs in Effexor birth defect lawsuits claim that a warning label on the drug didn’t warn women of the risks of Effexor during pregnancy. The manufacturer is liable for any damages that resulted from the birth defects caused by Effexor. These lawsuits seek compensation for past and future medical costs associated with birth defects. If you or a loved one was affected by Effexor during pregnancy, you may qualify to file a class action lawsuit.
Effexor lawsuits resulted in product liability lawsuits
Effexor lawsuits result in product litigation because women taking the drug experienced serious birth defects. Defendants failed to warn women of the risks associated with Effexor use during pregnancy, and they misrepresented the safety of the drug. In addition to the risk of birth defects, Effexor was also linked to serious heart and lung problems and even birth defects. A successful lawsuit may result in compensation for pain, suffering, and medical expenses.
The first Effexor lawsuit was filed in state court in Pennsylvania in February 2012. The Ohio woman who filed the suit claimed that Effexor caused her daughter to have heart defects. Another case involving Effexor and birth defects involved an Illinois couple whose daughter was born with a congenital heart defect. The Illinois couple alleged that Effexor exposed their daughter to birth defects that resulted in costly surgeries.
Effexor is a common treatment for depression. In addition, many women who take Effexor are pregnant. The drug has been linked to birth defects, including hypoplastic left heart syndrome and craniosynostosis. The defect prevents the brain from forming properly. If it leads to birth defects, the risks are substantial enough to make the drug unfit for use.
Effexor lawsuits resulted in anticompetitive acts
In January 2014, two couples filed Effexor lawsuits claiming that the drug caused their daughters’ birth defects, including hypoplastic left heart syndrome. The Adamczyk family alleges that Effexor caused the birth defects by causing their daughter’s left heart to be severely underdeveloped. The Adamczyk family’s lawsuit contends that the drug did not adequately warn consumers of the risks of birth defects. They claim that the company did not adequately warn them of the risks and potential birth defects caused by Effexor.
The agreement between Teva and Wyeth included a provision allowing generic versions of Effexor XR to enter the market earlier than generic versions would. It also included an exclusive license to sell generic versions of Effexor XR and IR. This resulted in anticompetitive acts. The agreement included provisions that allowed generics to enter the market seven years before the branded version.
Plaintiffs in the Effexor lawsuits contend that Wyeth engaged in an anticompetitive scheme by delaying the entry of generic versions of the drug. In the past, this would have cost the company about $400 million in sales. However, plaintiffs point out that this comparison does not adequately quantify the value of the no-authorized generic agreement in the instant case. The plaintiffs in the suit claim that the delay in allowing generic versions of Effexor has caused them to pay higher prices for their prescriptions.
