The Darvon and Deflazac lawsuits are pending in federal district courts across the country. As part of multidistrict litigation, these cases will be consolidated before one judge. The lawsuits may include thousands of similar claims, including heart issues. Read on to learn your legal rights and entitlements. You may also be entitled to recover damages from generic manufacturers. This article outlines what you can expect from a Darvon or Deflazac lawsuit.
Darvon and Darvocet lawsuits
The pharmaceutical companies are facing legal action over the dangers of drugs such as Darvon and the related pain reliever, ibuprofen. These drugs have been linked to dangerous side effects, including an increased risk of heart problems. The FDA found that the drug’s use increased the risk of heart problems. It also increased the risk of suicide. A group called Public Citizen warned the FDA in 1978 about the potential dangers of the drug, which increases heart rate and can cause suicidal tendencies.
The Darvon and related lawsuits are currently moving forward in court, even though the drug is no longer on the market. Although settlements can be difficult, the case may be easier to win since the drug is no longer available on the market. Drug companies often are less interested in defending themselves after a recall, because they are no longer making profits from the drug. Therefore, a successful settlement for victims is likely.
Class action lawsuits filed in federal district court
The FDA has ruled that the narcotic propoxyphene, which is in both Darvon and the more popular drug Darvocet, is unsafe and has prompted thousands of class action lawsuits against the manufacturers of the drugs. The narcotic is made from propoxyphene, a chemical that can cause harmful toxins to accumulate in the heart. The recalled drugs were released back onto the market after a consumer group petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to ban their use. Despite this, the drugs are still available in the U.S. – 32 years after their initial release.
The cases in the Federal District Court against Darvon and the drug are similar to those filed in state courts in California. Both of these lawsuits cite the alleged injuries caused by propoxyphene, an ingredient in Darvon and Darvocet. The plaintiffs’ claims include pain and swelling caused by the drug. The two lawsuits that were consolidated in federal court had multiple plaintiffs, which was not enough to meet the 100-plaintiff threshold. But when they are considered as a whole, the numbers exceed 100.
Plaintiffs’ legal rights and entitlements
The Darvon and/or the generic Darvocet lawsuits were consolidated into MDL 226 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Both products contain the active ingredient propoxyphene. In February 2005, the FDA ordered manufacturers of Darvon and Darvocet to pull their products from the market because they were linked to heart irregularities.
Although the generic equivalents of these drugs were widely used in the United States, the recalled products were made by the same company. Darvon lawsuits have alleged that the manufacturers failed to adequately research the product, failed to provide adequate warnings, and didn’t recall the drug quickly enough to protect the public. These lawsuits are difficult to win but are possible if the drug manufacturer knowingly obstructed public health and safety.
Claims against generic manufacturers
Even though both generic and brand names are similar, the plaintiffs in the Darvon and Darvocet lawsuit have different arguments to make. The generic drug claim, in this case, does not allege sufficient facts to support a parallel misbranding theory. Plaintiffs, in this case, have also failed to identify specific wrongful marketing claims in the state in question, even though those claims contain many of the same elements as the federal misbranding claim.
The generic drug maker Mylan was named in the lawsuits, which allege that the drug caused dangerous heart rhythm effects. The generic drug manufacturer was designated as the RLD holder for a combination product containing 100 milligrams of propoxyphene napsylate and 650 milligrams of acetaminophen, after the brand-name manufacturer, Lilly, left the market. The generic drug maker is defending itself by asserting that it did not comply with the standards in Levine and Mensing.