Saturday, February 25, 2012

The AstraZeneca Seroquel diabetes litigation lawsuit: Interview with Attorney David Ennis

The AstraZeneca Seroquel diabetes litigation lawsuit: Interview with Attorney David Ennis

An interview with Attorney David Ennis from the law firm http://ennislaw.com/ Ennis & Ennis, P.A. a “plaintiff's national personal injury law firm concentrating on representing individuals who have been injured due to medication side effects, defective medical devices and defective products.”

For the purpose of this interview I emailed Mr. Ennis questions, and I have copied them directly into this post. My questions are italicized.

Hi David, thanks for agreeing to answer some questions regarding the AstraZeneca Seroquel litigation. In the last several months news reports have announced a settlement in the Seroquel diabetes lawsuits. Plaintiffs were mailed information packets that they were to sign and mail back within a set time bracket. The Seroquel Lawsuit blog http://seroquellawsuitblog.blogspot.com/ has reported that the Miller Firm has not met the required percentage for the settlement offer, based on the numbers required by AstraZeneca. (This was stated on the Miller Firm’s recent information recorded update)With less than the 93% of the plaintiffs packets returned, this leaves many questions as to the future outcome of these cases.

1.Due to the deadline passing for the clients to return their settlement offer packets what are you and other law firms doing to move the lawsuit toward final settlement?

I cannot speak for other law firms. Ennis&Ennis is assisting the Miller Firm in trying to locate clients we represent together who have moved from their last known address.


2.Will AstraZeneca continue to negotiate and receive late packet agreements from clients who missed the deadline? Has the deadline been extended?

We are working with AZ to meet the terms of the settlement agreement.

3.How many clients did you represent in the litigation, and how many returned and accepted the settlement offer?

Ennis&Ennis represents 187 clients. 122 have signed and accepted the terms. 5 others are sending in their packets. Very few have opted out. We located 5 more this week who are signing and sending their packets back to our office.

4.Did you have clients appeal the settlement offer? Did clients have an opportunity to reject the offer?

Clients had an opportunity to reject the settlement offer.


5.Does the lack of percentage of clients returning the packets indicate the client discontent with what was offered to them for a settlement in monetary terms?

In a settlement neither party is happy with the terms. Every litigation is different. The defendant always feels they should not pay at all and the plaintiff always feel the settlement amount is too little. There is a risk for both sides. The lack of percentage of clients not returning packets has been the result of plaintiffs not being at their last known address.


6.How long will you continue to search for clients that may have changed addresses? On that note, weren’t the packets mailed via certified mail for a record of receipt? Therefore could lack of returns represent a client not wanting to participate in the settlement?

There is no set time limit. Our office personally called 65 clients this week and unfortunately were only able to locate 6. Many phones are out of service or have been disconnected. The Miller firm has hired outside companies who specialize in this to try to locate these clients.


7.Some readers, as well as myself have opined that the settlement was “low-ball”, for a life time body damage of diabetes as a result of taking Seroquel. Do you feel the settlement terms were fair to the injured clients?

Again if you speak to most Plaintiff lawyers they are never happy with the settlement amount and if you speak to most Defense lawyers they feel they have paid too much. If you assume Seroquel was 100% responsible for someone's diabetes then one can argue no the settlement amount was low. But the evidence did not support that 100% was related to Seroquel. Both sides had qualified experts, but unfortunately the Florida Judge ruled 4 times against Seroquel plaintiff's and the Delaware judge ruled 3 times against Seroquel plaintiff's. Those 7 plaintiff's received no compensation. The parties were ordered to mediation which is very common and settlement agreements were reached.


8.Were all of the clients with all law firms involved offered the same amount of monetary settlement? If not, this does not seem fair; can you explain why for example, one law firm can offer a higher amount for settlement than another to their clients?

The settlement negotiations are confidential. I am not aware nor would we be privy to what other firms settled their clients claims for. What I can say is that AZ felt they should not have to pay anything since they had won 7 cases and had many more cases dismissed and the plaintiffs were not happy because they felt the compensation was not enough. When both sides are unhappy that is the definition of a settlement. Nobody wins in a settlement. The only time you have a clear cut win or lose is if a jury decides the case. As of the date of the settlement the Judges hearing these cases had dismissed all of the cases before them.



9.Do the attorneys representing the Seroquel victims get paid even though the required percentage was not met? If the required percentage of 93% is never met, will the attorneys be paid anything, or will they require payment from their clients?

We have not received any attorneys fees or reimbursement for costs. The lawyers do not get paid until the clients get paid. The clients who wish to opt out will not be responsible for attorneys fees or costs unless they agree to the settlement.



10.I have noticed many of the drug injury law firm websites no longer host information on Seroquel, or Seroquel litigation updates. Was that part of the agreement required of law firms by AstraZeneca?

No.


11.Have attorneys been threatened, or felt intimidated by the AstraZeneca legal teams?

No

12.What happens next with your and Miller Firm clients? (How are you associated with the Miller Firm, if at all?)Will any law firms be taking individual cases to court after the time is up and the 93% has not been met? Will you be representing clients individually in court if the 93% is not met?

Will you be representing clients individually in court if the 93% is not met? We are co-counseling our Seroquel cases with the Miller firm. Both firms have extensive experience in Mass Torts. As previously explained we are attempting to locate clients to communicate the settlement terms.


13.How many clients in the 26,000+ cases appealed or rejected the Seroquel settlement offer?

I do not know the answer to this question. I can only speak to the clients who retained our law firm as co-counsel with the Miller firm.


14.In the next 30-90 days what do you think the news will be regarding the lack of 93% required packets? How long will AstraZeneca be willing to wait for law firms to gather missing client packets? Have you or have other law firms pressured clients to take the offer?

I do not have a crystal ball. I can only say based on the clients we have located I expect the response to be similar to what we have already reported. If 93% are not reached then AZ will have to make a determination do they want to pay the clients who have accepted the terms of do they want to go back to court to defend the claims and incur additional defense costs. We are not at that stage at this point. No one is at fault here it is just a matter of locating the clients. As previously discussed this is a very transient population. I think in the next 90 days a lot of these issues will be cleared up. It is not is anyone' s best interests to be adversarial toward one another. The parties are working to resolve the issues.



15.What words of advice do you have for people injured by pharmaceuticals in the future? Will it be even more difficult to go up against “Big Pharma”?

People who have been injured by Big Pharma should not be discouraged by this outcome. We still live in a country where people who have been wronged have a right to hold the responsible party accountable. The problem is if you give away those rights you will be left with nothing. Big Pharma and other corporations always try to discourage litigation because it is in their best interest. Remember if the victim does nothing you get nothing and Big Pharma wins. As long as lawyers are willing to take the risk and we can get access to a jury we can equal the playing field. Over the last decade it has become more difficult due to political influences. We need major reform in this country against Medical Device manufacturers and generic drug makers. In the last 3 years patients have lost 2 major Supreme Court Decisions. One decision gave Medical Device manufacturers preemption for 360 device approvals. This must be changed in the legislature. Further this past summer the Supreme Court ruled Generic Drug Manufacturers Preemption if you took a Generic Drug. So if your neighbor took the Brand Drug and was injured he has a right to compensation, but if you took the same drug from a Generic Manufacturer you are barred from bringing a claim. This is a total injustice. Your readers need to call their Congressman and demand the Legislative Branch to overturn these terrible decisions. I recommend all of your readers to view the HBO documentary titled, "Hot Coffee" to really get a true understanding of what we are fighting against on a daily basis. It is a good fight and we will keep representing the victims unless our Political System shuts the door to the Court House's around our country. I hope this shed's some light to your readers on these issues. -David Ennis, Attorney

*I discovered David Ennis via Twitter when I noticed he was one of my "followers". Here's how the discussion began:



Addendum

Further reading:

By at
Reactions: 
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)