Daily News: Disease

Actos Lawsuit News: January Conference Scheduled for Federal Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports

NewsRx.com

01-03-14

By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Lab Law Weekly -- The federal multidistrict litigation established for Actos lawsuits (http://www.consumerinjurylawyers.com/actos/Actos-Lawsuit.html) that allege use of the Type 2 diabetes drug caused patients to develop bladder cancer continues to move forward in U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Bernstein Liebhard LLP reports. According to court documents, the proceeding's next Status Conference has been scheduled for January 23, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. (In re: Actos Product Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2299)

"We continue to hear from alleged victims of Actos bladder cancer, even as the number of claims filed in this proceeding continues to mount. We are pleased to see this litigation moving forward, and look forward to more progress in the new year, especially the start of bellwether trials next month," says Bernstein Liebhard LLP, a nationwide law firm representing the victims of defective drugs and medical devices. The Firm is currently offering free Actos lawsuit evaluations to long-term users of the medication who have been diagnosed with bladder cancer (see also Bernstein Liebhard Llp).

Actos Bladder Cancer Litigation

According to court documents, at least 2,675 Actos bladder cancer lawsuits have been filed in the Western District of Louisiana. All of the complaints allege that long term use of the Type 2 diabetes drug increases the risk that patients will develop bladder cancer. The first bellwether trial in the federal proceeding is expected to begin on January 27, 2014. The Court has also scheduled a pretrial conference for January 13(th).

At the state level, two Actos lawsuits have already gone to trial. In September, a Maryland State Court jury awarded $1.7 million to the family of a man who died of bladder cancer following long-term use of Actos. However, according to court records, the judge overturned the verdict because the jury also found that the decedent's decades-long smoking habit contributed to the development of the disease. (An v. Nieberlein, 24-C12003565, Circuit Court for the City of Baltimore, State of Maryland.)

In April a Los Angeles Superior Court jury awarded $6.5 million to a plaintiff who was diagnosed with bladder cancer after taking Actos for four years. However, the judge overseeing the case granted Takeda Pharmaceuticals' request to set aside the verdict. (Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc., CGC-12-518535, California Superior Court). Plaintiff has appealed the judge's ruling.

The nation's third trial of an Actos bladder cancer lawsuit is now underway in the Eighth Judicial District Court of Nevada for Clarks County. (Case No. A-12-665708-C)

Actos lawsuits have been mounting since June 2011, when the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) ordered Takeda to add new bladder cancer warnings to the drug's label, after a study found that long-term use of Actos for a year or more increased the risk for the disease. That same month, Actos was also pulled from the market in Germany and France because of its association with bladder cancer.

Actos users who developed bladder cancer may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and more. Learn more about filing an Actos bladder cancer lawsuit by visiting Bernstein Liebhard LLP's website. For a free case review, please call (888) 340-4807.

Keywords for this news article include: Cancer, Oncology, Legal Issues, Bernstein Liebhard Llp.

Our reports deliver fact-based news of research and discoveries from around the world. Copyright 2014, NewsRx LLC

To see more of the NewsRx.com, or to subscribe, go to http://www.newsrx.com .

Articles featured in Life Extension Daily News are derived from a variety of news sources and are provided as a service by Life Extension. These articles, while of potential interest to readers of Life Extension Daily News, do not necessarily represent the opinions nor constitute the advice of Life Extension.