IBJNews

Lilly wins reversal of class action in Zyprexa suit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Eli Lilly and Co. on Friday won reversal of a ruling that granted class-action status to a lawsuit by pension funds, unions and insurers who alleged that improper marketing of Zyprexa, its schizophrenia treatment, raised their costs.

A U.S. appeals court in New York threw out a September 2008 ruling by U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein in Brooklyn. He had said the plaintiffs could pursue as a group claims that Indianapolis-based Lilly’s Zyprexa marketing caused them to pay more for the drug than what it was worth. The plaintiffs were seeking $6.8 billion in damages.

Weinstein had ruled in favor of the unions, pension funds and insurance companies, known as third-party payors, rejecting Lilly’s argument that their claims were too different to be tried together. The appeals court reversed, finding that the link between marketing Zyprexa to doctors and the injury claimed by the payors was “attenuated.”

“Crucially, the third-party payors do not allege that they relied on Lilly’s misrepresentations—the misrepresentations at issue were ‘directed through mailings and otherwise at doctors,’” the appeals court said.

Marni Lemons, a spokeswoman for Lilly, and Samuel Issacharoff, who argued the appeal on behalf of the plaintiffs, didn’t immediately return voice-mail messages seeking comment.

Zyprexa was Lilly’s top-selling drug last year with $4.92 billion in sales, according to a regulatory filing. It’s approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

The plaintiffs said Lilly’s allegedly excessive claims about Zyprexa’s usefulness violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

In his 2008 ruling, Weinstein certified the case as a class action on the racketeering claims for all plaintiffs except individual patients who bought the drug. He denied class status to the individuals because he found their proposed leaders couldn’t properly represent the proposed class.

He also limited the time frame for damages to June 20, 2001, to June 20, 2005, when the suit was filed. The third-party payors had claimed damages for as far back as 1996.

Institutions covered by Weinstein’s ruling included the Philadelphia-based United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund; Mid-West Life Insurance; and the Sergeant Benevolent Association Health and Welfare Fund, which represents current and retired New York City Police sergeants and their families.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. "And the success of the Indiana GOP to not allow an expansion of Medicaid had nothing to do with Indiana hospitals' financial woes? Fixed that for you; editorial bias rebalanced. Seriously, there are so many things wrong with Obamacare that the only way one can view it as a success is to assume that it was designed to fail our way into a government single payor healthcare system. The system is complex, creates huge regulatory burdens and overhead and yet still does not have adequate means to control escalating health care costs. But then when you elect a 10th grade math drop out with no quantitative reasoning skills to be President of one of the world's most important economies in troubled times, you can't really be surprised by blatant stupidity.

  2. No NIMBYs here to chase off a decent development. We don't need tons of parking and we'd happily play the role of host to a downtown Whole Foods.

  3. Whatever you do, don't change a single thing about Broad Ripple. I want it to look just like it did in the late '70s, with 30% of the north side of Broad Ripple Avenue burned out and plenty of places to park. That's right Broad Ripple, NEVER CHANGE. Let the world pass you by, don't improve your empty, abandoned lots full of weeds. Someday someone will want to film a zombie movie here.

  4. Hollywood could step in and make a movie about the history about this forlorn series. It could be a full celebrity cast of characters. WOW. http://www.advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2013/02/indiana-taxpayers-forced-to-pay-for.html

  5. This shouldn't come as a shock to many. Austin is a great city, and Indy needs to take some notes. Austin invests in decent transit options, has a highly educated workforce, embraces a creative class, and --despite being the state capital-- is not micromanaged by rural and suburban legislators. Want Indy to grow? Invest in the city (i.e. spend money). Raise taxes a bit, and use the money to improve education. And keep the state legislature out of Indy the other 9 months of the year.

ADVERTISEMENT