Skip to main content

Levaquin Lawsuits Keep Piling Up: Add Two More Plaintiffs to the List

By August 19, 2011July 10th, 2019Uncategorized

Two more plaintiffs have filed Levaquin lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson. Just like many of the others, the plaintiffs are suing Johnson & Johnson, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical and Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development amid claims that Levaquin caused them to suffer from tendon problems. Levaquin is generally prescribed as an antibiotic treatment for upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infections, prostatitis and other bacterial infections.

Both of the plaintiffs, Francine Brown and Constance Coffan, are from New York and claim they didn’t know that Levaquin causes patients to suffer from tendon injuries before they started taking the drug. They also didn’t know that the chances of suffering from tendon ruptures was higher for patients older than 60 or if they were using corticosteroid therapy.

“Levaquin-induced tendon injury involves the degradation of the tendon tissue, leading to severe and permanent injuries,” the lawsuit states. “More disturbingly, Defendants’ promotional campaign was themed on Levaquin’s excellent safety profile and failed to disclose the risks of tendon injury.”

The plaintiffs in these cases are stating that their tendon injuries are permanent.

Levaquin lawsuits are not new. In fact, thousands of lawsuits have been filed against Johnson & Johnson and Ortho-McNeil. So far, only two of those cases have been ruled on. One case had plaintiff John Schedin winning almost $2 million for his injuries.

Back in July of 2008, Levaquin was issued a black box warning but the new label change that came with it still didn’t list proper warnings about the increased risk of tendon problems in comparison to other antibiotics that are similar. The new plaintiffs have listed 7 counts in their lawsuit, which include “strict liability, negligence, breach of implied warranties, breach of express warranty, common law fraud, violation of the Consumer Fraud Act and unjust enrichment.”