Status Update on the Recent Coumadin Blood Thinner Lawsuit
A Coumadin Blood Thinner lawsuit is a case that has been set for trial in the Federal Court of California. The lawsuit revolves around the drug Coumadin, which was used by many dentists to treat acute gout pain, and to ease other symptoms associated with the condition. According to the official complaint, plaintiff Robert L. Jackson is a retired pharmaceutical salesman, who lives in California. He is owed approximately forty-five thousand dollars by GlaxoSmithKline, which is the manufacturer of Coumadin. Mr. Jackson, along with four other plaintiffs, filed the lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline due to their negligence in promoting and selling the drug known as Coumadin without warning the public of the potential risks associated with its use.
Mr. Jackson’s lawsuit is one of the first of several related to the case and was filed in early 2021.
In this case, the plaintiffs’ main contention is that GlaxoSmithKline did not warn the public of the possible side effects of using Coumadin, as early as the time that it was introduced into the market. The plaintiffs also claim that GlaxoSmithKline did not inform them of the possible outcomes of its use, such as the increased risk of bleeding and liver damage. While there are many reasons to believe that these allegations may be true, as there have been other recent cases involving similar allegations brought against dentists, the plaintiffs in this case present a strong case that they have substantial evidence to support their claims of injury and suffering.
A second lawsuit that was recently brought against GlaxoSmithKline was brought on behalf of a woman who is suffering from severe hemorrhoids. The internal bleeding caused by the use of Coumadin is said to be causing her serious pain and suffering. If internal bleeding is part of the symptoms you are suffering from, then a blood thinner lawsuit is likely to be a welcomed settlement in your case.
It is also important to remember that the time periods outlined in the above paragraph, pertain only to those plaintiffs who have suffered direct injuries due to the use of the drug.
The original lawsuit was brought on behalf of a woman who has suffered serious hemorrhoids due to taking Coumadin. As mentioned in the second lawsuit, the results of the original trial dates have shifted dramatically, as a result of new evidence being submitted by the plaintiffs. There are many plaintiffs who have been able to recoup substantial sums through trial dates set within the statute of limitations.
Many doctors feel that the recent spike in mass tort litigation is simply an example of the general deterioration of the medical profession. These mass tort lawsuits are often launched in response to negligence on the part of physicians or pharmacists. Because these physicians are generally older, their abilities to give expert witness testimony and defend their colleague have diminished due to age. This trend has also affected the way that physicians decide which drugs to prescribe for their patients. One of the many challenges faced by plaintiffs’ attorneys is determining whether or not a physician’s negligence has caused them harm or monetary damage.
Whether or not you agree with the timing of the coumadin blood thinner lawsuit, it must be noted that this is a very complex case. The plaintiff’s attorney is attempting to put this lawsuit into the public domain in an effort to force a mandatory status update. The plaintiffs may ultimately receive a percentage of the overall settlement, but any attempts to make this happen without the aid of an expert will be fruitless. It is important to keep this in mind when reviewing the merits of any legal action.