Not Accepting Cases

Pradaxa Lawsuits

Pradaxa lawsuits blame the blood thinner for serious injuries, including uncontrollable bleeding. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals faces more than 2,400 Pradaxa lawsuits in state court. The first two cases went to trial in March and May 2018. Two more trials are set for September 2018 and February 2019. Lawyers continue to file Pradaxa lawsuits. Boehringer Ingelheim settled more than 4,100 Pradaxa lawsuits in 2014. The company said it would pay $650 million to resolve the cases pending at the time.

Pradaxa
Pradaxa Lawsuit Facts
  1. Injuries Sudden uncontrollable gastrointestinal, rectal and brain bleeding
  2. Manufacturer/Defendant Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals
  3. Top Settlement The company announced in 2014 that it would settle thousands of cases for $650 million.
Fact-Checked

Editors carefully fact-check all Drugwatch content for accuracy and quality.

Drugwatch has a stringent fact-checking process. It starts with our strict sourcing guidelines.

We only gather information from credible sources. This includes peer-reviewed medical journals, reputable media outlets, government reports, court records and interviews with qualified experts.

Related Pages

*Update: Pradaxa lawsuits started going to trial in 2018. The last of four scheduled trials is set to start in February 2019. The outcome of the trials can affect the more than 2,400 Pradaxa lawsuits still pending in state court. Pradaxa lawyers continue to accept new cases.

Pradaxa lawsuits blame the drug for thousands of injuries and hundreds of deaths. Affected patients and their surviving family members are suing the drug’s maker, Boehringer Ingelheim.

Pradaxa lawyers are filing lawsuits in state court in Connecticut. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals’ U.S. headquarters are in that state.

The Connecticut courts have consolidated the cases into a complex litigation. Claims in the Connecticut lawsuits are similar or identical to thousands of Pradaxa lawsuits settled in 2014. Many of the current cases involve injuries that happened after the $650 million settlement.

The blood thinner Pradaxa is linked to dangerous side effects, including uncontrollable bleeding. Marketing campaigns pushed the idea that Pradaxa was easy to take and didn’t require monitoring. But internal company documents showed employees tried to quash a research paper. They feared it would lead to a blood test requirement.

In all, more than 6,500 people have filed Pradaxa filed lawsuits against Boehringer Ingelheim.

Status of Pradaxa Lawsuits

The first Pradaxa trials are underway in Connecticut. These so-called bellwether trials can give the parties an idea of how the rest of the cases may proceed.

The first two bellwether trials concluded in March and May 2018. Both yielded jury verdicts in favor of Boehringer Ingelheim. The next two trials are set for September 2018 and February 2019.

Pradaxa Trial
The first Pradaxa bellwether trial involved a woman who died after taking the drug.
Source: Superior Court Judicial District of Hartford

Mary Boone’s estate filed the first case to go to trial. Boone died on March 24, 2014, from an uncontrolled gastrointestinal bleed. Her doctor prescribed Pradaxa to lower her risk of stroke from atrial fibrillation.

Boehringer Ingelheim argued in court documents that the drug’s warnings were adequate. The company maintained that Boone’s doctor understood the risks.

On March 23, 2018, jurors handed up a verdict siding with the drug company.

The second bellwether trial involved Mary Lou Gallam’s lawsuit. Gallam’s doctor prescribed Pradaxa for atrial fibrillation in 2011. She suffered a “major bleeding event” on April 9, 2014, according to court filings.

On May 7, 2018, jurors in the Gallam case handed up their verdict in favor of Boehringer Ingelheim.

Why People File Pradaxa Lawsuits

People are filing Pradaxa lawsuits because they blame the drug for uncontrollable bleeding and death.

Pradaxa injuries include:
Gastrointestinal bleeding icon
Gastrointestinal bleeding
Rectal bleeding icon
Rectal bleeding
Brain bleeding icon
Brain bleeding
Death icon
Death

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Pradaxa in 2010. More than 540 people who took Pradaxa died in 2011. Thousands of other people reported suffering from serious side effects that year.

Emergency room doctors and trauma surgeons reported patients suffering life-threatening bleeding that was difficult to reverse. Boehringer Ingelheim sold Pradaxa for five years without a bleeding remedy.

Pradaxa Adverse Events
One year, people reported more adverse events for Pradaxa than for any other drug.

How to File a Pradaxa Lawsuit

An important step to file a Pradaxa lawsuit is to contact an experienced Pradaxa lawyer. Most qualified Pradaxa lawyers will review cases for no charge.

If a Pradaxa attorney concludes a consumer has a viable claim, the attorney can work with the consumer to file a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit. Typically, Pradaxa lawyers don’t collect any fees until they win a case.

Accusations against Boehringer Ingelheim

Pradaxa lawsuits say Boehringer Ingelheim developed a bleeding remedy in 2010. But the company didn’t seek approval from the remedy until Feb. 19, 2015. The FDA first approved Praxbind, a fast-acting Pradaxa antidote, in October 2015.

Boehringer logo

Pradaxa is only effective if dosed properly for individual patients. Lawsuits assert that there is no accurate test to check Pradaxa levels.

The lawsuits further claim Boehringer Ingelheim misled patients and their doctors about Pradaxa’s risks and benefits. Patients say Boehringer Ingelheim endangered the public through deceptive marketing practices. Lawsuits claim Pradaxa’s manufacturer did not adequately label the drug.

Pradaxa Lawsuit Settlement Amount

Boehringer Ingelheim announced a Pradaxa settlement plan on May 28, 2014. It said it would pay $650 million to settle 4,100 Pradaxa lawsuits that were pending at the time.

Pradaxa Settlement Amount
The average individual Pradaxa settlement was for about $160,000.

People are no long able to file Pradaxa bleeding lawsuits in federal court as a result of the settlement.

Before the settlement, people filed thousands of Pradaxa lawsuits in federal court. A judicial panel consolidated most of the lawsuits into a multidistrict litigation (MDL).

MDLs allow a single judge to oversee the court proceedings for similar complex cases. A judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois managed the Pradaxa MDL.

U.S. District Court Judge David Herndon planned to conduct four Pradaxa trials. The trials were to happen between August 2014 and February 2015.

Herndon selected the cases to help attorneys determine the effectiveness of their arguments. Two were wrongful death lawsuits. Two blamed Pradaxa for severe injuries.

But the trials never started. Boehringer Ingelheim settled the cases instead. Herndon closed the MDL in December 2017 after the last of the case was resolved.

Pradaxa Class Action

There are no known Pradaxa class action lawsuits. Instead, Pradaxa lawyers are filing individual personal injury lawsuits.

Class action lawsuits represent large groups of individuals against the same defendants. Federal and state laws restrict these cases. They are not as common as many believe.

Instead, lawyers will file individual lawsuits. If a large number of people claim the same drug injured them, a judicial panel may group the cases.

On a federal level this is multidistrict litigation. In state courts, it’s complex litigation.

Please seek the advice of a medical professional before making health care decisions.

Related Pages

Did you find Drugwatch helpful?

17 Cited Research Articles

  1. Husten, L. (2014, May 28). Boehringer Ingelheim Settles US Pradaxa Litigation For $650 Million. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2014/05/28/boehringer-ingelheim-settles-us-pradaxa-litigation-for-650-million/#44f36a982ae6
  2. Field, E. (2018, May 7). Boehringer Scores 2nd Bellwether Win In Conn. Pradaxa Suit. Retrieved from https://www.law360.com/articles/1041102/boehringer-scores-2nd-bellwether-win-in-conn-pradaxa-suit
  3. Gallam, Mary Lou v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. (2018, June 1). Docket for case number HHD-CV16-6067874-S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=HHDCV166067874S
  4. Gallam, Mary Lou v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. (2018, January 29).Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on Plaintiff’s First Count for Violation of the Connecticut Products Liability Act. Case number HHD-CV16-6067874-S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=13839318
  5. Gallam, Mary Lou v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. (2016,November 17). Short Form Complaint for case number HHD-CV16-6067874-S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=11384723
  6. Gallam, Mary Lou v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. (2018, January 11). Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s First Count for case number HHD-CV16-6067874-S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=13727025
  7. In Re: Pradaxa (Dabigatran Etexilate) Products Liability Litigation. (2017, December 11). U.S. District Court Southern District of Illinois. Case 3:12md02385. Order Recommending Termination of Multidistrict Litigation. Document 719. Retrieved http://www.pacer.org
  8. In Re: Pradaxa (Dabigatran Etexilate) Products Liability Litigation. (2014, January 23). U.S. District Court Southern District of Illinois. Case 3:12md02385. Case Management Order Number 52. Document 386. Retrieved from http://www.aboutlawsuits.com/wp-content/uploads/2014-01-23-Pradaxa-CMO-52.pdf
  9. In Re: Pradaxa (Dabigatran Etexilate) Products Liability Litigation. (2015, April 30). U.S. District Court Southern District of Illinois. Case 3:12md02385. Transcript of Proceedings Status Conference April 28, 2015. Document 655. Retrieved from http://www.pacer.org
  10. In Re: Pradaxa (Dabigatran Etexilate) Products Liability Litigation. (2014, December 29). U.S. District Court Southern District of Illinois. Case 3:12md02385. Case Management Order Number 88. Document 611. Retrieved from https://www.masstortnexus.com/upload/39/366/7583/Pradaxa%20MSA.pdf
  11. Southern District of Illinois, U.S. District Court. (n.d.). Multidistrict Litigation. MDL 2385 – Pradaxa (Dabigatran Etexilate) Products Liability Litigation. Retrieved from http://www.ilsd.uscourts.gov/mdl/mdl2385.aspx
  12. Southern District of Illinois, U.S. District Court. (2012, June 20.). Multidistrict Litigation. MDL 2385 – In Re: Pradaxa Products Liability Actions. Retrieved from https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilsdce/3:2012cv00612/57740/26/0.pdf
  13. Connecticut Pradaxa Litigation v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. (2018, June 1). Docket for case number HHD-CV13-5036974-S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=HHDCV135036974S
  14. Geralynn Boone, Individually as Next of Kin & as Personal Representative of the Estate of Mary Boone v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (2017, November 21). Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Plaintiff’s First Count for Violations of the Connecticut Products Liability Act. Case number HHD-CV-16-6067796S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=13420636
  15. Geralynn Boone, Individually as Next of Kin & as Personal Representative of the Estate of Mary Boone v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. (2018, June 1). Docket. Case number HHD-CV-16-6067796S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=HHDCV166067796S
  16. Geralynn Boone, Individually as Next of Kin & as Personal Representative of the Estate of Mary Boone v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (2016, October 26). Short Form Wrongful Death Complaint. Case number HHD-CV-16-6067796S. Retrieved from http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=11271377
  17. Stearley-Hebert, R. (2018, May 31). Email from Connecticut Judicial Branch to Drugwatch.
View All Sources
Who Am I Calling?

Calling this number connects you with Wilson and Peterson, LLP or one of its trusted legal partners. A law firm representative will review your case for free.

Wilson and Peterson, LLP funds Drugwatch because it supports the organization’s mission to keep people safe from dangerous drugs and medical devices.

(888) 645-1617

To contact Drugwatch Managing Editor Kevin Connolly, call (855) 839-9780.