U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Shook, Hardy & Bacon attorneys won dismissal of a Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA) putative class action against GlaxoSmithKline alleging that the company had misrepresented the effectiveness of Avandia. A court overseeing multidistrict litigation in Pennsylvania determined that the plaintiff had failed to state an ascertainable loss.
The plaintiff began taking GlaxoSmithKline's Avandia to treat her type 2 diabetes in 2007, and she filed a lawsuit in 2012 alleging that the pharmaceutical company had misrepresented the risks associated with the product and inflated its value. Shook attorneys moved to dismiss the case and the court agreed, finding that Avandia worked to treat the plaintiff's condition and did not cause her any injury. "Plaintiff received all the benefits of taking Avandia without any harm, and therefore suffered no loss," the court noted, dismissing the case with prejudice.
Shook also represented GlaxoSmithKline on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The court affirmed the dismissal, finding that the plaintiff "received the drug she was prescribed, the drug did the job it was meant to do (i.e., controlled her blood sugar levels), and it caused no apparent physical injuries."
Laurino v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., No. 12-3683 (E.D. Penn. 2015) (consolidated into In re Avandia Mktg. Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 07-1871).