Have There Been Any Lawsuits Involving Xarelto?

Have There Been Any Lawsuits Involving Xarelto?

Xarelto: Blood Thinner or Menace?

Have There Been Any Lawsuits Involving Xarelto? In 2011, Johnson & Johnson received permission from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to market and distribute Rivaroxaban, commonly branded and known as Xarelto. The drug is actually produced by Bayer Pharmaceuticals and focuses on blood thinning and blood clot prevention. After oral consumption and absorption within the gut, relief can be felt within a few hours for up to almost half of a day. Initially, it was prescribed for doctors in the limited circumstances of hip and knee replacement surgery. Since then, Johnson & Johnson has tried and successfully appealed to the FDA for a broader application of its product.

Since first releasing the drug, Johnson & Johnson has come under fire for the claims and effectiveness regarding Xarelto. Doctors, agencies, and the government have all questioned the substance and form of its supporting documentation backing up many of the supposed claims of the drug. Also, initial concerns regarding the health of patients prescribed Xarelto have turned into actual and frequent side effects felt by them. From severe bleeding and blood clots, to wound and other prescription complications, the medicine has not had the results has intended.

In Re Xarelto

After patients or their loved ones were prescribed Xarelto and suffered painful and damaging side effects, many decided to file suit against Johnson & Johnson and Bayer to receive compensation for their injuries. Eventually, dozens of different plaintiffs sought to consolidate their individual trials into one larger action, known as a new multidistrict litigation proceeding. To do this, they had to petition the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. This body within the federal court system has the authority to bring various civil actions into one district for a combined proceeding. Securing this motion requires the group to establish that all causes of action have a common set of facts. Once this threshold has been cleared, the Panel will pick a district and a judge to handle the consolidated the case. The goal of this process is to save court resources, speed up the process of all cases, and reduce the costs of all parties involved.

This group of plaintiffs tried to accomplish this centralization in the case In Re: Xarelto (Rivaroxaban) Products Liability Litigation. MDL No. 2592 (Filed Dec. 12, 2014). There, eight plaintiffs from Illinois tried to add their case to a pool of approximately one dozen others (two from Florida, two from Kentucky, one from Louisiana, five from New York, one from Utah, one from Vermont, and one from West Virginia). In response to this action, the defendants (Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, etc.) unsuccessfully argued that consolidation was unnecessary because of factual inconsistencies, alternative means to reduce redundant discovery, a lack of merit within some of the individual cases, and the dangerous precedent set that might encourage many other filings. The court rejected these proffers and stated that all the cases shared fundamental, common issues such as the possibility of an inadequate warning as well as an unreasonably unsafe medication. The mere fact that each case may have had different causal circumstance should not be trumped by these commonalities, according to the judge. Therefore, the Panel selected a district in Louisiana to hear this combined group and any more that might be filed in the future.

However, even with the advancement of the MDL proceeding, every individual case will be decided on its own two feet. The MDL only resolves common questions. Thus, it might be helpful for you to review the cases themselves. Below, we have assembled many Xarelto cases to give you a good variety of litigation to choose from and to align with your own circumstances.

Florida

NICHOLSON v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 5:14–00173
PACKARD v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 0:14–61448

Illinois

LEMP, ET AL. v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–00987
HANEY v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–00988
LEACH v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–00989
RUCKER v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–01026
PENNELL, ET AL. v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–01040
McMUNN v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–01042
BIVEN v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–01050
MULRONEY v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–01073

Kentucky

BOLTON, ET AL. v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 0:14–00146
COX v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 3:14–00579

Louisiana

BRASWELL v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 2:14–02258

New York

JEFFCOAT v. JANSSEN REASEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 1:14–04524
GRIGGS, ET AL. v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 1:14–04841
BOYNTON, ET AL. v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 1:14–05133
USELTON v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 1:14–05728
GREEN, ET AL. v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 1:14–05871

Utah

ARMSTRONG, ET AL. v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, ET AL., C.A. No. 2:14–00599

Vermont

McGOWAN v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 2:14–00159

West Virginia

DALRYMPLE v. JANSSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET. AL., C.A. No. 5:14–25893

Back to the Top

For additional information please visit the following links:

Client Reviews
Jonathan Rosenfeld was professionally objective, timely, and knowledgeable. Also, his advice was extremely effective regarding my case. In addition, Jonathan was understanding and patient pertaining to any of my questions or concerns. I was very happy with the end result and I highly recommend Jonathan Rosenfeld.
★★★★★
Extremely impressed with this law firm. They took control of a bad motorcycle crash that left my uncle seriously injured. Without any guarantee of a financial recovery, they went out and hired accident investigators and engineers to help prove how the accident happened. I am grateful that they worked on a contingency fee basis as there was no way we could have paid for these services on our own. Ethan Armstrong, Google User
★★★★★
This lawyer really helped me get compensation for my motorcycle accident case. I know there is no way that I could have gotten anywhere near the amount that Mr. Rosenfeld was able to get to settle my case. Thank you. Daniel Kaim, Avvo User
★★★★★
Jonathan helped my family heal and get compensation after our child was suffered a life threatening injury at daycare. He was sympathetic and in constant contact with us letting us know all he knew every step of the way. We were so blessed to find Jonathan! Giulia, Avvo User
★★★★★
Jonathan did a great job helping my family navigate through a lengthy lawsuit involving my grandmother's death in a nursing home. Through every step of the case, Jonathan kept my family informed of the progression of the case. Although our case eventually settled at a mediation, I really was impressed at how well prepared Jonathan was to take the case to trial. Lisa, Avvo User
★★★★★
Contact Us for a Free Consultation (888) 424-5757
Chicago Office Map