Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Gudeman Group
1 follower -
Inspire Rather Than Respond
Inspire Rather Than Respond

1 follower
About
Posts

Post has attachment
Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer Breaking News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=590ymi2UH3c
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Talcum Powder Lawsuit News: Allegations Against Defendant Remain

Defendant Imerys Talc America, a talc mining company, has been denied its Motion to Dismiss for a second time, remaining a defendant facing ovarian cancer allegations in St. Louis, according to attorneys representing the plaintiffs from the Onder Law Firm.

In a national talcum powder lawsuit currently underway in St. Louis, a chief defendant has been retained, according to the most recent court documents. Imerys Talc America is a talc mining company that supplies raw material to the manufacturer, Johnson & Johnson, according to court documents.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit allege they have developed ovarian cancer as a result of using talcum powder products made by Johnson & Johnson for feminine hygiene in the perineal region, according to court documents. The lawsuit cites numerous peer-reviewed research studies indicating a link between ovarian cancer and talcum powder dusting, according to court documents. Plaintiffs allege they or their loved ones would not have used talcum powder for this application had they been aware of the alleged risk, according to court documents.

Imerys Talc America first filed a Motion to Dismiss plaintiffs claims for lack of personal jurisdiction on October 24, 2014, according to the official court record. On March 17, 2015, the judge at the time, the Honorable John F. Garvey, ordered the motions Denied, according to the official court documents.

Imery's Talc America filed a Motion to Reconsider the Order Denying the Motion to Dismiss, asking the judge to reconsider the original motion, on July 8, 2015, according to court documents. The recent Denial was in response to the Motion to Reconsider, meaning the current judge, the Honorable Rex M. Burlison confirmed Judge Garvey's original decision on the matter, according to court documents.

This particular talcum powder lawsuit involves more than fifty plaintiffs from across the nation, all of whom are being represented by the Onder Law Firm. A representative of the Onder Law Firm had this to say on the pending talcum powder lawsuit:

“When the court denied Imerys Talc America its Motion to Dismiss a second time, our clients were relieved. As the mining company responsible for supplying the raw material to the manufacturer, our clients allege the company had a responsibility to consumers. Our clients allege they have been harmed by talcum powder, either directly or through the suffering or loss of a family member to ovarian cancer. No one likes to be involved in a lawsuit, but when American families believe they have been harmed by a consumer product, our firm is committed to pursuing justice on their behalf.”

The St. Louis talcum powder lawsuit is set for trial on Monday, February 1, 2016 at 9 AM, according to official court records.

The talcum powder lawyers at the Onder Law Firm are accepting inquiries and providing no-cost talcum powder lawsuit consultations to persons around the United States through their Talcum Powder Cancer Lawsuit Center website. These attorneys are investigating inquiries for possible

baby powder lawsuits. The Onder Law Firm has won major settlements for clients in the areas of drug and medical device recalls, as well as product and family safety. The firm is nationally-renowned for its work on window blind strangulation, and has notable expertise in fighting on behalf of individuals against powerful corporations. Women and family members of women who have been diagnosed with ovarian cancer and have used baby powder are eligible for a free evaluation with a talcum powder attorney, and may contact the firm through its website.

The Onder Law Firm also welcomes baby powder lawsuit inquiries from other law firms, either to handle these inquiries or work as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson has represented clients throughout the United States, and other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation and pharmaceutical litigation. The Onder Law Firm’s talcum powder cancer lawyers provide information to the public at www.TalcumPowderCancerLawsuitCenter.com
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Talcum Powder Lawsuit News: Ovarian Cancer Experts Called Forward

Talcum powder attorneys report leading ovarian cancer epidemiologists from Harvard Medical School called to the stand to testify on the findings of their research on the link between talcum powder use and ovarian cancer.

In a national talcum powder lawsuit currently underway in St. Louis, leading ovarian cancer experts Drs. John Godleski, MD and Daniel Cramer, MD have been summoned to give depositions, according to the most recent court documents.

This talcum powder lawsuit is one of the largest in the nation currently underway in which plaintiffs allege they developed ovarian cancer as a result of using talcum powder for perineal dusting, according to court documents. The plaintiffs include more than fifty women from around the country who are being represented by the Onder Law Firm. The defendants include Johnson & Johnson (the producer of the talcum powder products in question, which include Johnson's Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower), Imerys Talc America (a talc mining company), and Walgreens (a talcum powder retailer), according to court documents.

The plaintiffs involved in the case, who include women who have suffered from ovarian cancer and family members of women who have died of ovarian cancer, say they or their family members would not have used talcum powder had they been aware of the alleged connection between talcum powder and ovarian cancer.

The two doctors who have been summoned to give depositions have both concluded that the use of talcum powder for feminine hygiene can increase a woman's risk of ovarian cancer, according to court documents. Together, Dr. Cramer and Dr. Godleski published a study entitled, “Presence of talc in pelvic lymph nodes of a woman with ovarian cancer and long-term genital exposure to cosmetic talc" in the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology in August of 2007, according to court documents.

On his Harvard Medical School physician profile page, Cramer cites “cosmetic talc powder use” as one of “three events which increase risk for ovarian cancer”. Talc particles “increase risk for ovarian cancer that are associated with chronic inflammation affecting the lower or upper genital tract”.** Cramer also was involved in the first talcum powder lawsuit to find a link between ovarian cancer and talc use, which according to court documents concluded in South Dakota in 2013 in the favor of the plaintiff, Deane Berg.* The St. Louis talcum powder case is set for trial on Monday, February 1, 2016 at 9 AM, according to official court records.

The talcum powder lawyers at the Onder Law Firm are accepting inquiries and providing no-cost talcum powder lawsuit consultations to persons around the United States through their Talcum Powder Cancer Lawsuit Center website. These attorneys are investigating inquiries for possible

baby powder lawsuits. The Onder Law Firm has won major settlements for clients in the areas of drug and medical device recalls, as well as product and family safety. The firm is nationally-renowned for its work on window blind strangulation, and has notable expertise in fighting on behalf of individuals against powerful corporations. Women and family members of women who have been diagnosed with ovarian cancer and have used baby powder are eligible for a free evaluation with a talcum powder attorney, and may contact the firm through its website.

The Onder Law Firm also welcomes baby powder lawsuit inquiries from other law firms, either to handle these inquiries or work as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson has represented clients throughout the United States, and other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation and pharmaceutical litigation. The Onder Law Firm’s talcum powder cancer lawyers provide information to the public at www.TalcumPowderCancerLawsuitCenter.com 
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Talcum Powder Lawsuit News from National Ovarian Cancer Attorneys

Lawyers representing plaintiffs in a St. Louis talcum powder lawsuit alleging ovarian cancer provide an update on the case's developments, from the Onder Law Firm.

National talcum powder attorneys provide the latest news on a talcum powder lawsuit they currently have pending in St. Louis.* According to the firm, the case is advancing quickly toward the date of its jury trial with important advancements:

“In the past week, several important developments have occurred. While they may sound mundane or difficult to decipher for the average reader, we can report that the case is still on track and moving forward. Other talcum powder lawsuits around the country have been dismissed early in their proceedings, but this St. Louis talcum powder lawsuit, filed on behalf of approximately fifty plaintiffs from around the United States, continues to hold water.

“For the women and families we are representing in this case, we do hope a positive conclusion will be reached as soon as possible. However, as attorneys committed to achieving justice even in the most complex of cases, we are committed to following this litigation through as long as it takes. We are working with a strong team of litigators and we have committed our firm's significant resources to a favorable outcome,” explained a representative of the Onder Law Firm.

In the past week, court documents reflect the following developments in this talcum powder lawsuit pending in the City of St. Louis District Court: On October 20, an Affadavit of Service of Subpoena was filed for Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. A Motion for Admission of W. Mark Lanier Pro Hac Vice was filed electronically on the same day. On October 22, Martin J. Buckley appeared for Janssen Pharmaceuticals, according to the court record. On October 24, Buckley & Buckley appeared on behalf of Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and a Motion to Quash Deposition Subpoena Duces Tecum was also filed on behalf of Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc..

This talcum powder lawsuit is presided over by Judge Rex M. Burlison. This particular case represents more than sixty women or families of women who allege their diagnosis of ovarian cancer is linked to their routine use of talcum powder for feminine hygiene in the perineal region, according to court documents. The plaintiffs allege the women would not have used talcum powder in this manner had they been warned of the alleged risk, according to court documents. Furthermore, this talcum powder lawsuit alleges that the defendants, including Johnson & Johnson, knew of the alleged link between talcum powder and ovarian cancer and engaged in marketing campaigns to intentionally deceive potential customers, according to court documents.

The court case cites numerous studies that have been conducted over the past four decades which conclude the regular use of talcum powder for female genital dusting can result in an increased risk of ovarian cancer of 33-41%, depending on the frequency of use, according to court documents.

For more talcum powder lawsuit news and information, please visit the firm's talcum powder lawsuit website. The Onder Law Firm is currently accepting inquiries from women and the family members of women who developed ovarian cancer and have used talcum powder for feminine hygiene. Talcum powder lawyers are investigating these inquiries for possible talcum powder

lawsuits. For a free, no-obligation talcum powder lawsuit evaluation with an experienced attorney, please contact the firm..

The Onder Law Firm also welcomes talcum powder lawsuit inquiries from other law firms, either to handle these inquiries or work as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm

Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson has represented clients throughout the United States, and other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation and pharmaceutical litigation. The Onder Law Firm’s talcum powder lawyers provide information to the public at www.TalcumPowderCancerLawsuitCenter.com
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
News on Talcum Powder Lawsuit in St. Louis

The Onder Law Firm provides an update on a pending talcum powder lawsuit alleging ovarian cancer in St. Louis.

A pending talcum powder lawsuit in St. Louis is progressing toward its court date, scheduled for February 1, 2016, according to attorneys representing the plaintiff. Jury trials are scheduled early in a case's progress; the pretrial conference, which always takes place prior to the trial, has recently been scheduled. The pretrial conference will take place on January 21, 2016 at 1pm, according to recent court documents. The presiding judge is the Honorable Rex M. Burlison.

“Of course we hope to settle cases without the need for a jury trial,” explained a representative of the Onder Law Firm. “But that is not always possible, and so our attorneys meticulously prepare each case for trial in the eventuality that a settlement cannot be reached. Our goal is to provide the best talcum powder lawsuit representation available in St. Louis.”

This talcum powder lawsuit alleges that the plaintiffs and their loved ones suffered from the ill effects of ovarian cancer resulting from the use of talc-based body powders for perineal hygiene, according to court documents. The case cites research studies dating back to the 1970s which provide evidence supporting a connection between the regular use of talcum powder for feminine hygiene and higher rates of ovarian cancer, according to court documents.

The plaintiffs assert they were not warned of the alleged link between the use of talcum powder and higher rates of ovarian cancer, according to court documents. They say they would not have used the products in questions had they been made aware of the alleged risk, according to court documents.

This talcum powder lawsuit also alleges that the makers and distributors of talcum powder knew of connection yet intentionally deceived consumers over the course of decades, according to court documents. The allegations have been made against the pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson, the talc mining company Imerys Talc America, and Walgreens retail stores, according to court documents.

These St. Louis talcum powder lawyers offer regular news updates at their website and are now reviewing claims from women and the family members of women for possible talcum powder lawsuits. For a free, no-obligation talcum powder lawsuit evaluation with an experienced attorney, please contact the firm.  http://www.talcumpowdercancerlawsuitcenter.com/

The Onder Law Firm also welcomes talcum powder lawsuit inquiries from other law firms, either to handle these inquiries or work as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm

Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson has represented
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Zofran Lawsuit News: National Zofran Lawsuits Consolidated as MDL

Attorneys handling national Zofran lawsuits for the Onder Law Firm provide information and commentary on the recent order by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to consolidate national Zofran lawsuits alleging birth defects.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ruled last week that Zofran lawsuits alleging children exposed to the drug in utero have suffered birth defects have been consolidated as multidistrict litigation, according to recent court documents.* Attorneys handling national Zofran lawsuit claims provide this news update and the following commentary:

“The consolidation of national Zofran lawsuits by order of the JPML came as no surprise. These are very serious allegations made against a popular drug. Multidistrict litigation is a legal system that allows for the consolidation of complex litigation such as cases involving allegations of serious injury and wrongful death from a pharmaceutical drug or medical device. When numerous lawsuits have cropped up around the country making these same serious allegations about a particular product, consolidation is likely.

“While the initial transfer order includes only twelve cases, we expect to see many more actions transferred for pretrial proceedings. MDL is good for plaintiffs because it allows leading attorneys to join forces to build their case against a significant corporation, in this case GlaxoSmithKline. The process also expedites the resolution of these cases and prevents contradictory rulings.

“Zofran lawsuits around the country have been paused awaiting this decision from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Now it is the decision of each set of plaintiffs whether they will seek transfer or pursue their litigation individually. When a multidistrict litigation is consolidated, new cases will continued to be accepted for some time. Our firm is reviewing new cases daily for possible inclusion in the Zofran MDL.”

Zofran lawsuits have been consolidated in U.S. District Court in the District of Massachusetts, according to court documents. This location was proposed by the plaintiffs involved in the twelve initial actions, according to the Transfer Order. The defendant, GlaxoSmithKline, had proposed consolidation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, according to court documents.

The consolidated Zofran lawsuits share common questions of fact related to allegations that Zofran causes birth defects in children if ingested by a pregnant mother, according to court documents. The allegations range from serious injury to wrongful death, according to court documents. According to the FDA, Zofran is not approved for use in pregnant women based on the fact that no adequate safety testing has been conducted on the effects of Zofran on pregnancy.** The Zofran lawsuit claims allege GSK knew or should have known of risks to pregnant mothers and fetuses posed by Zofran use during pregnancy, yet failed to adequately warn consumers. Furthermore, the plaintiffs allege GSK knowingly promoted the drug for a variety of off-label conditions, the subject of a 2012 settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice for $3 billion, according to court documents.

Attorneys handling national Zofran lawsuits for the Onder Law Firm are currently offering no-cost, no-obligation Zofran lawsuit case review for parents and families whose child was born with birth defects and was possibly exposed to Zofran during prenatal development. Individuals and families who match this description may be entitled to compensation through a Zofran lawsuit.

Nationally-renowned for groundbreaking work in drug and product safety litigation against multi-billion dollar corporations, the Onder Law Firm’s Zofran lawyers have committed their significant resources to providing expert legal representation to women, children and families who believe they may have grounds to file Zofran lawsuits. The firm provides regular Zofran lawsuit news updates at their website in order to inform the public of current pending litigation on the subject.

The Onder Law Firm welcomes Zofran lawsuit case inquiries from law firms in regards to handling them or working as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm

Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The pharmaceutical and medical device litigators at The Onder Law Firm have represented thousands of Americans in lawsuits against multinational conglomerates from products liability for manufacture of defective or dangerous products to deceptive advertising practices. Other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is also a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation. The Onder Law Firm offers information from attorneys handling talcum powder lawsuits at www.ZofranBirthDefectsLawsuitCenter.com.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Testosterone Lawsuit News: Defendants Push Back Against RICO Claim

Testosterone lawyers for the Onder Law Firm provide a testosterone lawsuit news update, with the most recent information on developments in the multidistrict litigation for national testosterone lawsuits alleging heart attack and stroke.

National testosterone attorneys report a Motion to Dismiss has been filed in the testosterone multidistrict litigation known as Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2545, which is currently underway in U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Illinois. The Motion to Dismiss was filed by the defendants, who include AbbVie and Eli Lilly, among a handful of other pharmaceutical companies that product testosterone replacement products for men, according to court documents.

"We don't know exactly what the outcome will be with MMO's RICO claim," a representative of the Onder Law Firm explained. "But we do know that pharmaceutical companies involved in this litigation are taking testosterone lawsuits very seriously - and that the bulk of the claims are moving forward to the bellweather trials. We expect the outcomes in the bellweather trials will give us some indication of how the rest of the testosterone lawsuits will conclude, but we can say now that a settlement is likely at some point."

The Motion to Dismiss concerns a particular claim, just one of many that comprise the testosterone lawsuits, which was filed by Medical Mutual of Ohio (MMO), according to court documents. MMO is a health insurance company based in Cleveland that provides national health insurance. MMO's claim cites the RICO Act (the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a United States federal law that gives extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action to companies or groups that are found guilty of racketeering, ongoing criminal activities or organized crime), alleging pharmaceutical companies conspired to deceive the public regarding the usefulness of testosterone replacement therapy, while undermining the risks of the drug, according to court documents. The claim alleges the companies knowingly and in concert engaged in fraudulent activities by marketing testosterone replacement therapies to men who do not necessarily have hypogonadism, according to court documents. The FDA has only approved testosterone replacement therapy products for use in men who have been diagnosed with hypogonadism, a condition where the body does not make adequate testosterone naturally that can have serious health implications, according to court documents.

By filing the Motion to Dismiss MMO's RICO claim, defendants are arguing that the claim is baseless, according to court documents. The Motion states that MMO failed to provide concrete or specific evidence regarding the alleged fraudulent activities, and therefore the claim should be dismissed, according to court documents. Furthermore, while the defendants allow that testosterone replacement therapy has only been FDA approved for genuine cases of hypogonadism, the Motion to Dismiss asserts that because physicians may legally prescribe drugs for any use they choose, men who were prescribed testosterone replacement therapy without a verifiable diagnosis of hypogonadism should not be able to blame the purveyors of testosterone replacement therapies, according to court documents.

These testosterone lawsuits have been filed by persons around the United States who suffered a heart attack, stroke, or another serious health condition they allege is linked to testosterone replacement therapy products, according to court documents. Plaintiffs say they were not fairly warned of the alleged health risks, and state pharmaceutical companies knew or should have known of the alleged risks, according to court documents. Defendants include more than ten pharmaceutical companies who produce and market a wide range of testosterone replacement products, the most popular of which are Androgel, Androderm, and Testim, according to court documents.

These testosterone attorneys provide timely testosterone lawsuit news updates and testosterone side effects research at their website, the Androgel Testosterone Lawsuit Center. The firm is nationally renowned for its representation of American families and individuals against major corporations through pharmaceutical, product liability, and personal injury lawsuits. Persons who believe they may have grounds to file a testosterone lawsuit alleging heart attack or stroke may contact the firm for a free case review through the website.

Lawyers handling testosterone lawsuit claims for the Onder Law Firm believe qualifying persons may be entitled to real compensation and offer no-cost, no-obligation case review to persons or family members of those who have suffered heart attack, stroke, or another serious health problem possibly related to Androgel or another testosterone product.

The Onder Law Firm welcomes testosterone lawsuit inquiries from law firms in regards to handling them or working as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm

Onder, Shelton, O'Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The pharmaceutical and medical device litigators at The Onder Law Firm have represented thousands of Americans in lawsuits against multinational conglomerates from products liability for manufacture of defective or dangerous products to deceptive advertising practices. Other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is also a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation. The Onder Law Firm offers information from attorneys handling testosterone lawsuits at www.AndrogelTestosteroneLawsuitCenter.com.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Talcum Powder Lawsuits: Plaintiffs Suggest Middlesex County Transfer

In national talcum powder lawsuits which are under consideration for consolidation in New Jersey Supreme Court, plaintiffs have suggested an alternate court for transfer; attorneys for the Onder Law Firm provide timely talcum powder lawsuit news at their website.

In the most recent talcum powder lawsuit lawsuit news, attorneys handling national talcum powder lawsuits filed against Johnson & Johnson report that a new location for pretrial proceedings is under consideration, according to court documents. Talcum powder lawyers provide regular news updates and cancer warning information at their website, the Talcum Powder Cancer Lawsuit Center.

The defendant, Johnson & Johnson, proposed that all filed in New Jersey be consolidated for pretrial proceedings under the Honorable Nelson C. Johnson in Atlantic City Superior Court in a May 2015 request, according to court documents. At the time of the application for consolidation, 70 talcum powder lawsuits were listed, according to court documents. A group of plaintiffs has responded favorably to consolidation, yet suggesting an alternate location, according to court documents - Middlesex County, where the talcum powder lawsuits would be assigned to the Honoroable Jessica R. Mayer.

Consolidation for pretrial proceedings would constitute a multi-court litigation, or MCL. The legal procedure is intended to prevent duplicative discovery, prevent conflicting rulings, and advance the efficiency of the handling of this case, according to court documents. All future talcum powder lawsuits filed against Johnson & Johnson in New Jersey that share common questions of fact - namely, that allege plaintiffs developed ovarian cancer as a result of using talcum powder for regular feminine hygiene - would be transferred for pretrial coordination as well, should the transfer be confirmed, according to court documents. Should consolidation move forward, the cases may end in settlement or would go to jury trial on an individual basis, according to court documents.

The talcum powder lawsuits under consideration for consolidation in New Jersey mirror those filed by plaintiffs around the nation against Johnson & Johnson, the bulk of which have been filed I St. Louis, Missouri by the Onder Law Firm, according to court documents. All of these talcum powder lawsuits have been filed by individuals or the family members of individuals who allege they have developed ovarian cancer as a result of using talcum powder for perineal dusting over the course of years, according to court documents. The lawsuit allege that Johnson & Johnson has been aware of research indicating a link between talcum powder and ovarian cancer for decades, yet has failed to warn consumers of the alleged risk, according to court documents. Plaintiffs in these talcum powder lawsuits contend they would not have made regular use of talcum powder for feminine hygiene had they been warned of the alleged risk, according to court documents.

These talcum powder attorneys offer free, no-obligation baby powder lawsuit case review to women and the family members of women who were diagnosed with ovarian and have a history of using one or more talc-based body powders or hygiene products. Persons who match this description may contact a lawyer to discuss their individual circumstances and see if they qualify to file a talcum powder lawsuit. The firm's talcum powder attorneys for cancer allegations believe persons who match this description may be entitled to real compensation.

The Onder Law Firm welcomes talcum powder case inquiries from law firms in regards to handling them or working as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm

Onder, Shelton, O'Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The pharmaceutical and medical device litigators at The Onder Law Firm have represented thousands of Americans in lawsuits against multinational conglomerates from products liability for manufacture of defective or dangerous products to deceptive advertising practices. Other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is also a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation. The Onder Law Firm offers information on talcum powder lawsuits at www.TalcumPowderCancerLawsuitCenter.com
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Testosterone Lawsuit News: Androgel Lawsuit Conference Held

Lawyers handling for the Onder Law Firm provide a testosterone lawsuit news update, reporting on a recent case management conference in the multidistrict litigation Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation.

In the most recent testosterone lawsuit news related to the multidistrict litigation* currently underway in U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Illinois, Androgel testosterone attorneys report that a "Mini Status Conference" was held recently, according to court documents. On Monday, July 20, a docket entry was made recording the minutes of the status conference, which was held that day, according to court documents. While the agenda of the conference were not made public, the judge, the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly, did report that all items on the agenda were addressed.

"The recent topic under consideration in the testosterone lawsuit multidistrict litigation is the establishment of bellwether cases. These are cases that are carefully chosen as representative of the larger group of lawsuits. These particular cases will be tried in the near future, and establish a precedent for resolving the bulk of the testosterone lawsuits," explained a representative of the Onder Law Firm.

"The testosterone lawsuit multidistrict litigation is more complex than some others because there are a large number of defendants, which include pharmaceutical companies who market a range of testosterone replacement therapy products. The court has decided that bellwether trials will be limited to a narrow field, selected only from among cases filed against the pharmaceutical company AbbVie, and related only to allegations of heart attack, stroke, or another cardiac problem in a patient who took Androgel. The court is still in the process of selecting bellwether cases from among those that meet the qualifications. The complicate matters further, new testosterone lawsuits are still be accepted to join the multidistrict litigation," the testosterone attorney from the Onder Law Firm says.

When testosterone lawsuits were first proposed for consolidation as a multidistrict litigation, the cases included only those related to Androgel and AbbVie, according to court documents. However, the MDL was soon expanded to include similar allegations against a number of different companies for drugs such as Testim, Androderm, and others, and a new name for the MDL was adopted to reflect the wider reach of the litigation: Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation, according to court documents.

Each of the testosterone lawsuits consolidated in the MDL shares common questions of fact - namely that the plaintiffs or their loved one allegedly suffered from a stroke, heart attack, or other serious injury as a result of taking Androgel or another testosterone drug, according to court documents. In the initial Complaint, an official court document, plaintiffs allege they were not adequately warned of the risks associated with testosterone replacement therapy, and furthermore, that drug company advertising led to self-diagnosis "Low-T". In reality, testosterone replacement therapy has only been approved by the FDA to treat men who suffer from verifiable hypogonadism - a condition that can only be diagnosed through a blood test, that is distinguished by the absence of serum testosterone in the body, and that can result in other harmful health conditions, according to court documents.

These testosterone lawyers provide timely Androgel lawsuit news updates and testosterone side effects research at their website, the Androgel Testosterone Lawsuit Center. The firm is nationally renowned for its representation of American families and individuals against major corporations through pharmaceutical, product liability, and personal injury lawsuits. Persons who believe they may have grounds to file a testosterone lawsuit alleging heart attack or stroke may contact the firm for a free case review through the website.

Lawyers handling testosterone lawsuit claims for the Onder Law Firm believe qualifying persons may be entitled to real compensation and offer no-cost, no-obligation case review to persons or family members of those who have suffered heart attack, stroke, or another serious health problem possibly related to Androgel or another testosterone product.

The Onder Law Firm welcomes testosterone lawsuit inquiries from law firms in regards to handling them or working as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm

Onder, Shelton, O'Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The pharmaceutical and medical device litigators at The Onder Law Firm have represented thousands of Americans in lawsuits against multinational conglomerates from products liability for manufacture of defective or dangerous products to deceptive advertising practices. Other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is also a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation. The Onder Law Firm offers information from attorneys handling testosterone lawsuits at http://www.AndrogelTestosteroneLawsuitCenter.com.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Syngenta Lawsuit News: Common Benefit Work Protocols in Syngenta MDL

Attorneys handing Syngenta Viptera corn lawsuits for the Onder Law Firm provide a Syngenta lawsuit news update regarding the recent establishment of a Protocol for Common Benefit Work and Expenses; more information is available at the firm’s Syngenta Viptera Corn Lawsuit Center website.

The multidistrict litigation which has consolidated national Syngenta corn lawsuits has progressed to the point of establishing protocols for common benefit work and expenses and a common benefit fee and expense fund, according to recent court documents.

"The establishment of this particular set of protocols basically provides for the compensation of the plaintiffs' counsel providing leadership for essential aspects of the multidistrict litigation, such as serving as Co-Lead Counsel, Executive Committee representatives, Interim Class Counsel, and Liaison Counsel. The protocol establishes how all the plaintiffs' counsel will share the burden of this expense. While this particular matter may not seem like an exciting development, to us it signals that Syngenta corn lawsuits are moving forward routinely, as this is an essential part of any complex litigation," explained a representative from the Onder Law Firm.

In other Syngenta lawsuit news, the most recent case to be transferred for coordinated pretrial proceedings came from U.S. District Court in the Western Louisiana district. The case, Miller et al v. Syngenta AG et al**, filed 7/21/15, bring the count of Syngenta corn lawsuits above 1,866, according to court documents. Syngenta corn lawsuits have been filed by farms, grain distributors, and other agricultural entities around the United States that allege they suffered economic injuries stemming from Syngenta's release and marketing of Viptera corn seed, according to court documents.

An initial group of 493 Syngenta Viptera lawsuits was consolidated in December of 2014, according to court documents. These and the subsequent cases that have been added to the MDL share common questions of fact, alleging economic losses that resulted from "Syngenta's decision to commercialize the MIR162 genetically modified corn trait in the absence of Chinese approval to import corn with that trait," according to court documents. The Viptera corn lawsuits allege that because Syngenta released the genetically modified seed prior to a major export market approving the resulting corn product, the U.S. corn market suffered widespread losses; both farmers who planted the seed in question and those who did not have filed claims as part of the Syngenta lawsuit MDL, according to court documents.

Syngenta corn lawyers for the Onder Law Firm are now accepting inquiries from corn farms and grain elevators, distributors, and exporters who allege they suffered economic losses related to corn or other grain farming, distribution, domestic sales, or export, whether they grew Syngenta Viptera corn or not. The Onder Law Firm is a recognized leader in multi-district litigation and complex cases such as products liability and failure to warn cases. The firm is nationally-renowned for its work on window blind strangulation, and has notable expertise in fighting on behalf of individuals against powerful corporations. American grain entities that have sustained losses are eligible for a free evaluation with a Syngenta corn lawyer for possible inclusion in the national multidistrict litigation, and may contact the firm through its Syngenta Viptera Corn Lawsuit Center website.

The Onder Law Firm also welcomes Syngenta Viptera inquiries from other law firms, either to handle these inquiries or work as co-counsel.

About The Onder Law Firm

Onder, Shelton, O'Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis based personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. Onder, Shelton, O'Leary & Peterson has represented clients throughout the United States, and other firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation. It is a recognized leader in products liability cases such as window blind cord strangulation and pharmaceutical litigation. The Onder Law Firm's Syngenta Viptera corn lawyers provide information to the public at http://www.syngentavipteracornlawsuitcenter.com.
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded