For more information or confidential assistance
Call 800-306-3180

New Complaint in Illinois Pradaxa MDL

Pradaxa-Cerebral-HemorrhageDorothy M. Champagne filed a Pradaxa lawsuit on November 15, 2012, in the United States’ District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. This lawsuit, like other Pradaxa lawsuits, names drug maker Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. as the defendant in the case. Plaintiff Champagne’s lawsuit joins dozens of others in the ongoing multidistrict litigation case, which is being presided over by Judge David R. Herndon. A multidistrict litigation case combines the pretrial processes in similar cases in an effort to help speed up the litigation process, which is often lengthy.

Defendant failed to warn of risks

Pradaxa is a blood thinner that was first approved by the Food and Drug Administration in October of 2010. The medication was only on the market for 2.5 months and Boehringer Ingelheim had already spent $67 million in order to promote the medication. This number increased to a staggering $464 million in 2011. Many Pradaxa lawsuits claim that as a result of this, the defendants overstated the effectiveness of the drug with respect to the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism. In addition, they allegedly failed to adequately disclose to patents that there isn’t an agent that aids in the reversal of Pradaxa-related bleeding.

Plaintiff Champagne claims in her lawsuit that she was prescribed the medication in October of 2011 in order to treat non-valvular atrial fibrillation. She says that on November 18, 2011, she suffered from a severe gastrointestinal bleed–as well as bleeding ulcers. These events required the plaintiff to be hospitalized for 6 days with uncontrollable bleeding that was either caused or worsened by her use of the widely used blood thinning medication.

Lawyers seek compensation for plaintiffs

The Pradaxa lawyer Champagne hired to help with her lawsuit are leveling charges of failure to warn, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, design defect, breach of express and implied warranties, fraudulent concealment, and punitive damages, among other charges, against the defendant drug maker. Champagne is seeking compensatory and punitive damages that would help cover costs related to her injuries.