Tag: Mass Torts

A large number of YAZ® lawsuits were designated as Mass Tort or Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) cases over the past several months. Just recently, the three initial bellwether trials in the federal MDL were scheduled. Courts utilize a bellwether approach when there are a large numbers of plaintiffs proceeding on the same theory or claim, such as in the Yaz ® cases. Typically, a group of plaintiffs are chosen to represent all the plaintiffs with the same alleged ailment.

The parties involved in the YAZ® Mass Tort litigation have been ordered file a Master Consolidated Complaint (“Master Complaint”). The Master Complaint will supplement the Complaints that have been filed in the individual cases, as well as serve as a reference for incoming plaintiffs. The Master Complaint will allege a variety of counts for Negligence, Fraud, and other causes of action.

The parties involved in the Mass Tort litigation have agreed upon the wording of a form called the Plaintiff Fact Sheet. In pharmaceutical cases with Mass Tort or MDL designations, plaintiffs are required to submit a detailed Plaintiff Fact Sheet. The Plaintiff Fact Sheet requires the plaintiff to supply medical, liability and general background information within a specified time period, usually subject to periodic updating and revision.

YAZ®, Yasmin® and Ocella® are the subject of mass tort litigation treatment in the state courts of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and MDL treatment in the federal courts, Southern District of Illinois. In many cases, based on the state of residence of the plaintiff, plaintiff’s counsel must make a determination as to which forum would be best for the plaintiff’s case. There are numerous factors that must be weighed in making this determination.

After receiving Mass Tort designation on February 9, 2010, in the New Jersey Superior Court, Bergen County, Judge Martinotti issued an Initial Order for Case Management on February 18, 2010. The Case Management Order (CMO) is the basis for how pending and future cases are managed leading up to trial.

The parties involved in the Mass Tort litigation (surrounding the defective birth control products YAZ®, Yasmin® and Ocella®) have been ordered to confer and reach an agreement on all issues regarding the preservation of documents and data. The goal of preservation is to maintain the integrity of all documents, data and tangible things pursuant to R. 4:10 through R. 4:19.

The NuvaRing® Mass Tort is presided over by Judge Brian R. Martinotti, in the New Jersey Superior Court – Bergen County. Previously, counsel for both plaintiffs and defendants had chosen ten initial bellwether cases for case specific discovery and trial. On, March 3, 2010, Judge Martinotti held a Case Management Conference. During that conference, Judge Martinotti determined that the discovery deadline on the initial bellwether cases would be March 15, 2011, culminating in proposed trial dates some time in May 2011.

As we have discussed in previous posts, pending lawsuits against the manufacturers of NuvaRing®, state that the birth control product has led to severe side-effects such as: heart attack, stroke, deep vein thrombosis (also known as DVT or blood clots), internal organ damage, myocardial infarction and pulmonary embolism.

As we have discussed in previous posts, studies have shown that the ingredients contained in the birth control products YAZ®, Yasmin® and Ocella® have been linked to various forms of severe side-effects. Reportedly, these side-effects include: heart attack, stroke, deep vein thrombosis (also known as DVT or blood clots), internal organ damage (including gallbladder damage), myocardial infarction and pulmonary embolism.

A large number of claims against the makers of defective birth control products, YAZ®, Yasmin® and Ocella®, for injuries ranging from internal organ damage to deep vein thrombosis have been designated as Mass Tort cases in state court, to be consolidated for case management and discovery purposes before Judge Moss in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. In the Mass Tort, counsel recently argued before Judge Moss regarding discovery issues.