Healthcare Litigation Cases

Niaspan Antitrust Litigation

Wexler Wallace LLP is one of the Co-Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs in an antitrust class action case against AbbVie Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. (and their related companies) on behalf of End-Payors who purchased the cholesterol drug Niaspan. The plaintiffs allege that AbbVie and Teva (and their predecessors) agreed among themselves to keep a generic version of Niaspan off the market for more than eight years. The Plaintiffs have alleged that the defendants’ conduct caused consumers and drug benefit plans to pay more for Niaspan than they otherwise would have paid. Read more.

Opana ER Antitrust Litigation
Wexler Wallace LLP (along with our co-counsel Gustafsen Gluek PLLC and Spector Roseman Kodroff & Willis) filed two class actions against Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Endo Health Solutions Inc. (among others). The complaints seek damages on behalf of end-payors of Opana ER (a painkiller), alleging that the defendants violated antitrust and consumer protection laws. Plaintiffs allege that defendants paid money to a generic manufacturer to delay the start of generic competition for Opana ER, and then used that delay to introduce a new formulation -- called Opana ER CRF -- as part of an unlawful “product hop” scheme. As a result of defendants’ conduct, market entry of a generic version of Opana ER was delayed for a number of years, forcing the proposed class to pay more for Opana ER than they would have in the absence of defendants’ anticompetitive conduct. Read more.

FDB/McKesson Litigation -- New England Carpenters Health Benefit Fund v. First DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corp.
Wexler Wallace was Co-Lead Counsel in this massive class action against pharmaceutical wholesaling giant McKesson Corporation ("McKesson") and pharmaceutical pricing publisher First DataBank, Inc. ("FDB"). Medispan, another pharmaceutical pricing publisher, was later named as a defendant in a separate case. The case addressed an unlawful 5% mark-up in the Average Wholesale Prices (“AWPs”) of various drugs, causing consumers and third party payors to overpay for pharmaceuticals. The case against McKesson settled for $350 million. In a separate settlement, FDB agreed to roll back AWPs, saving the Class many millions of dollars. Read more.

AndroGel Antitrust Litigation
Wexler Wallace LLP, along with co-counsel Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, represents a class of End-Payor Plaintiffs against the brand name manufacturer of AndroGel 1% and two potential generic entrants. In this case, the End-Payor Plaintiffs seek damages, other monetary relief, and equitable relief for violations of federal and state antitrust laws, state consumer protection laws, and state common law principles of unjust enrichment against Defendants Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc., now known as Abbvie, Inc., Unimed Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., now known as Actavis, Inc., Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc., and Paddock Laboratories, Inc., now known as Perrigo Company (all collectively “Defendants”). Read more.

Synthroid Marketing Litigation
Filed originally by Ken Wexler’s previous firm, this case was successfully prosecuted on behalf of consumers of the pharmaceutical Synthroid against its brand name manufacturer. The Synthroid case was one of the first, if not the first, cases brought against a brand name pharmaceutical manufacturer for attempting to suppress generic competition, a practice that significantly raises consumer drug prices. The Synthroid case settled in 2000 for an aggregate amount of $87.4 million. Read more.