Washington, DC (PRWEB) June 20, 2011
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule shortly on whether generic drug companies must adequately warn doctors about new or revised risks to patients who have taken the drugs they make. (Pliva v Mensing (09-993), Actavis v Mensing (08-3850) and Actavis v Demahy (09-1501)) All three cases involve patients who took metoclopramide, the generic version of the brand-name drug Reglan.
An estimated 10,000 Reglan-metoclopramide lawsuits would be directly affected by the ruling, which also is expected to impact generic manufacturers well beyond metoclopramide.
Interviews may be arranged with Brian Glorioso (attorney for plaintiff Julie Demahy) and Michelle Schwartz, a metoclopramide victim and spokesperson for the Reglan Metoclopramide Victims Organization. Mrs. Demahy is undergoing medical treatment and is not likely to be available. Also available for interview is Ralph Pittle, legal director of The Conte Foundation / Victims Seeking Corporate Responsibility.
The Conte Foundation was created last year by Elizabeth Conte, herself a metoclopramide victim. Conte dedicated all the money from her settlement to create a foundation that would work to keep unnecessary drug injuries from happening to other people. Ms. Conte’s case* also established the right in California of victims who take only the generic version of a drug to be able to sue the brand-name manufacturer. As a result, more Reglan lawsuits are filed in California than any other state.
To arrange an interview or receive a news release following the ruling, call Wiley Brooks at (206) 963-2230 (cell available 24/7) or via email at wiley(at)wileybrooks(dot)com.
*2008 WL 4823066 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. Nov. 7, 2008)
# # #