Substantial Darvon and Darvocet settlements may be forthcoming for plaintiffs who have filed a Darvocet lawsuit. But for the time being, a pending decision from a judicial panel and a recent Supreme Court ruling have future Darvocet settlements waiting in a holding pattern.

A federal Supreme Court ruling in June 2011 determined that generic drug makers are not liable for incomplete or inadequate warning labels, as long as those labels are identical to the labels of the brand name drugs they replicate. Emboldened by this decision, generic drug makers may be less likely to consider a settlement with a plaintiff whose generic Darvocet lawsuit alleges inadequate warnings about side effects.

Darvocet lawyer pushes to get all Darvocet lawsuits consolidated

Meanwhile, the U.S. Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) heard oral arguments on July 28, 2011 from a Darvocet lawyer petitioning for every federal Darvon and Darvocet lawsuit filed anywhere in the U.S. to be centralized for pre-trial management under the oversight of a single judge. The JPML has yet to issue a decision on the matter, though one is expected to arrive by the end of August.

Multidistrict litigation is designated when multiple lawsuits filed by different plaintiffs all share basic common elements such as alleged injury, theories of cause, and a mutual defendant. In such cases, pre-trial procedures such as the collection of evidence and depositions, known as discovery, can be performed cooperatively to save time and money for plaintiffs, defendants and the judiciary alike. MDL also allows for the avoidance of inconsistent pre-trial rulings that might occur if hearings were held before different judges in multiple courts.

Traditionally, any case, such as a Darvon or Darvocet lawsuit, that is transferred into an MDL has a significantly increased chance to end with an out-of-court settlement before a trial even begins. Many would expect that a Darvocet lawyer who has filed a federal Darvon or Darvocet lawsuit will aggressively pursue pre-trial Darvocet settlements if MDL is instituted.

Benefits of pre-trial Darvocet settlements

Pre-trial settlements could have benefits for both sides in a Darvocet lawsuit. Plaintiffs would be afforded a quicker route to compensation for their injuries and reimbursement for medical costs. Defendant drug maker Xanodyne would be able to avoid exorbitant legal costs as well as the bad publicity that might come with a public trial.

Pre-trial Darvocet settlements will be easier to reach for plaintiffs who have no history of heart disease or vascular problems. For these plaintiffs not at previous risk of heart injury, the onset of known Darvon and Darvocet side effects such as heart arrhythmia, ventricular tachycardia, and “torsade de pointes,” an uncommon disorder that interferes with blood circulation, can likely only be attributed to use of the problematic painkiller.

As a result, Xanodyne might recognize the high probability of getting an unfavorable jury verdict, and so instead reach out to a plaintiff’s Darvocet lawyer to negotiate a Darvocet settlement.