This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Product Liability
Design and Manufacturing Defect

Allen L. Thomas v. Abbott Laboratories, Fournier Laboratories Ireland Limited, Abbott Pharmaceuticals PR Ltd., Merck/Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co. Inc., and Does 1 through 500

Published: Oct. 25, 2014 | Result Date: Jul. 29, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:12-cv-07005-MWF-CW Bench Decision –  Defense

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Sivi G. Pederson
(Thomas Law Firm Inc.)

Allen L. Thomas


Defendant

Rebecca W. Gutierrez

Brian J. Mooney

Rockney S. Taveau

Charles F. Morrow

David M. Cohen
(David M Cohen APC)

James K. Holder
(Gordon & Rees LLP)


Facts

Allen Thomas sued Abbott Laboratories, Fournier Laboratories Ireland Ltd., Abbott Pharmaceuticals PR Ltd., Merck/Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals, and Merck & Co. Inc., concerning the drugs Tripilix and Zetia.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged that, on June 2004, his primary care physician, Dr. Steven Lake, diagnosed him with high cholesterol, and initially placed him on Lipitor, a statin drug. However, because plaintiff was statin-intolerant, Dr. Lake took him off Lipitor and placed him on the drugs Tripilix and Zetia.

Plaintiff alleged that Abbott manufactures Tripilix, which is used to treat cholesterol, while Merck manufactures Zetia, another drug used as an adjunct to diet, to reduce levels of total cholesterol. Plaintiff alleged that he continued to take the drugs until March 24, 2010 when he was admitted to the hospital with acute pancreatitis. Plaintiff alleged that he developed pancreatitis as a result of the drugs. Plaintiff then asserted claims against Abbott and Merck for strict liability, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, untrue or misleading advertising, untrue or misleading advertising, unfair competition, and negligence.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendant Merck denied plaintiff's allegations, and asserted various affirmative defenses. Defendant Abbott moved to dismiss plaintiff's claims for breach of express warranty, untrue or misleading advertising, and unfair competition. Defendant Abbott's motion was granted, and plaintiff subsequently agreed to dismiss those claims against Merck. Then, defendants Abbott and Merck moved for summary judgment on plaintiff's remaining claims against them.

Result

The court granted defendant Abbott's motion to dismiss several of Thomas' claims. As such, the remaining claims pending against Abbott and Merck included the first claim for strict liability, the fourth claim for breach of implied warranty claim, and the seventh and tenth claims for negligence. Ultimately, the court found that Thomas' failure to demonstrate medical causation was fatal to his claims, and the court granted summary judgment in favor of both Abbott and Merck on the remaining claims against them.


#125625

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390