In recently surfaced court documents, a couple from Brazoria, Texas, a town one hour south of Houston, claim the anti-nausea drug Zofran caused their two children to develop major birth defects. Registered under case number 1:15-cv-00637-UNA, a copy of the court documents can be found at ZofranLegal.com.
The family’s complaint, filed on July 24, 2015 in the US District Court for the District of Delaware, tells the harrowing tale of two pregnancies marked by congenital abnormalities allegedly caused by Zofran.
Michael Monheit, Esquire, lead sponsor of ZofranLegal.com and managing partner at Pennsylvania’s Monheit Law says this recent lawsuit joins at least 33 other Zofran complaints filed in Federal Courts across the country. Monheit has formed a coalition of plaintiffs’ attorneys to investigate potential claims against GlaxoSmithKline. His firm is offering free consultations to any parent or birth defect survivor who suspects Zofran may have caused a child’s birth defects.
In the new Texas complaint, Plaintiffs describe two pregnancies, separated by almost three years, but joined by a common thread: both unborn babies were exposed to Zofran during the first trimester of fetal development.
The mother claims she suffered from the symptoms of morning sickness, nausea and vomiting, in both of her pregnancies. Like the US Department of Justice, she says GlaxoSmithKline promoted Zofran unlawfully as a “safe and effective” morning sickness treatment, without ever studying the drugs effects on unborn children. As a result of this alleged “off label” promotion, the mother was prescribed Zofran.
According to court documents, her first pregnancy began in November of 2000. After 20 weeks, a diagnostic test revealed that her child, named H.H. in the complaint, had developed “severe physical malformations,” including congenital heart defects. Classified a “high risk birth,” Plaintiff underwent a cesarean section in July of that year, under the watchful care of “pediatric cardiac specialists.”
Upon delivery, H.H. was transferred to Texas Children’s Hospital. Suffering from difficulty breathing, the child was placed on a mechanical ventilator. She would remain in the NICU for the remainder of her life. H.H. was diagnosed with a litany of severe congenital defects, according to her parents. The left side of her heart “was one-fifth of its normal size,” they say, likely referring to a condition known as hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Her aorta, the body’s largest artery, “was severely malformed,” doctors found.
She passed away on August 2, 2000, less than one month after birth.
Two years after H.H.’s passing, Plaintiff became pregnant with her second child. She was again prescribed Zofran during the first trimester. Her unborn daughter, B.H., was classified as a “high-risk birth,” just like her deceased sister, and delivered on February 18, 2003 in a Houston hospital. B.H. suffered from “excessive vomiting and reflux” immediately after birth. Restricted to the hospital, and unable to keep a sufficient amount of nutrition down, B.H. underwent “extensive testing” during her early life. Diagnosed with what court documents refer to as “urinary and kidney maladies,” B.H. was born with congenital kidney defects, her parents claim.
Plaintiffs claim their daughters’ congenital defects, which proved fatal for one child, were caused by prenatal exposure to Zofran.
As parents continue to file Zofran birth defect lawsuits, the litigation has begun to take shape. Facing at least 34 separate claims, GlaxoSmithKline has asked the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to “consolidate” the lawsuits, and transfer all Federally-filed complaints to the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs do not oppose the idea of consolidation, but have contested Glaxo’s choice of venue.
If granted, a motion to transfer would send the lawsuits to a single court for coordinated pretrial proceedings. Evidence gathering would be performed in common, and a single Federal Judge would be able to rule on shared questions of fact and law. But it remains to be seen whether the JPML will consolidate Zofran lawsuits at all.
As Plaintiffs wait for a hearing session of the JPML scheduled for October 1, 2015, Michael Monheit continues to provide free legal consultations to families interested in learning more about their own case eligibility. He can be reached at 1-877-620-8411.
###
Contact ZofranLegal.com:
Michael Monheit
1-877-620-8411
michael@monheit.com
1368 Barrowdale Road, Rydal, PA 19046
