Lawsuit Against Zofran

Law

Zofran Birth Injury Class Action Lawsuit

Lawsuit Against Zofran is a direct marketing of a product by its creator, Zofran. Zofran’s main claim to fame is its “morning sickness relief formula”, which it claims can cure up to 95% of pregnancy morning sickness symptoms. Zofran advertises itself as a natural herbal formula that can be used by pregnant women who are trying to get rid of morning sickness symptoms. However, upon further investigation, it turns out that Zofran isn’t an herbal remedy at all but a food product. And despite the claims of being able to cure up to 95% of pregnant morning sickness symptoms, it is unable to do so. Instead, it just relieves pain and relaxation in the woman’s tummy.

The lawsuit was filed against Zofran after one of the plaintiffs (along with her husband) filed suit against Zofran for failing to guarantee that their pregnancy-related symptoms would go away during the first trimester of the pregnancy.

The plaintiffs were all diagnosed with colic, a condition that presents serious nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. The claim stated that Zofran’s product was ineffective and harmful to both the pregnant women and their unborn babies. According to the complaint filed in January, the plaintiffs were experiencing these symptoms when they took Zofran and when they stopped taking it, the symptoms did not go away. In addition, the lawsuit claims that Zofran continued to sell their product despite knowing that it was ineffective and harmful to the plaintiffs and their unborn babies. It is also claimed that Zofran did not provide warnings about the potential hazards of using the product during the first trimester.

In January, the lawsuit was denied by the courts, stating that it didn’t meet the standards needed to apply to a case of direct selling of a dietary supplement.

The plaintiffs however, don’t believe this. Instead, they argue that Zofran knowingly sold a product that was dangerous and ineffective, causing the damages and suffering experienced by the plaintiffs. They also claim that during the period of time that Zofran was selling its product, there were numerous reports of birth defects, including congenital defects. One birth defect was noted by the court and that was the severe facial defect which resulted in the premature death of one of the plaintiffs in the case.

Zofran was taken to court again in March of this year.

This time, the company was sued by a former Zofran distributor who was suffering from a heart disease. This individual had filed several lawsuits against Zofran due to his suffering from congenital defects, which occurred during the period of time that Zofran was distributing its product. The distributors claim that this lead to Zofran’s wrongful acts, such as failing to warn consumers about the possibility of birth defects. The lawsuits further claim that this caused them financial loss and a claim for compensation for their suffering.

The defense maintained that it was not liable for the damages and suffering experienced by these former distributors, due to the fact that Zofran was only a distributor and did not manufacture, distribute, or sell any products.

This is a common defense offered by manufacturers, because they do not hold themselves responsible for the actions or inactions of their distributors. It is important to remember that a Class Action lawsuit is filed on behalf of all individuals who have been directly affected by the defendant’s negligence. Class Action lawsuits are considered to be among the most powerful legal tools available to individuals who feel as though they have been wronged by another party.

On May 6th, the defense will begin its case. Plaintiffs will be able to submit expert witness reports which will further paint the defendant in a bad light.

After the discovery phase of the case is complete, a trial will take place. If the plaintiffs prove that Zofran’s use of the term “off-label” was deceptive and caused injury, a lawsuit can then be filed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.