TextSize -A+

11-CV-10671-DJC

  • print
  • FAQs

Case Summary: Maureen Calisi v. Abbott Laboratories, 11-CV-10671-DJC, (D. Mass.)

This is a products liability/personal injury case allegedly involving Humira (aka “Adalimumab,” an arthritis drug) induced cancer brought in federal court pursuant to diversity jurisdiction.

Plaintiff was prescribed the arthritis drug “Humira,” a TNF blocker biologic drug used to treat numerous auto-immune diseases, and received bi-monthly injections from late 2003 to February 2008 when, upon learning that she had a mass in her left breast, her prescribing physician instructed here to “hold Humira.” Ms. Calisi was subsequently diagnosed with Stage IE primary diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the breast, for which she underwent chemotherapy treatment and radiation. That treatment, in 2008 and early 2009, put the disease into remission; however, in February 2012, the cancer came back in her brain. Ms. Calisi alleges that Abbott and its agents failed to provide a legally proper warning regarding risks of Humira and that her injections caused the cancer.

This video is of a 2 hour hearing on Abbott Labs’ Motion to Exclude Causation Testimony, Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Certain Witnesses, Motion for Summary Judgment, & Motion to Impound Confidential Information and Exhibits. It is also on Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Abbott’s Learned Intermediary Defense. Simply put, this defense, under Massachusetts law, is that a manufacturer of prescription medications discharges its duty to warn users of the risks associated with its products by warning the prescribing physician of the proper use and risks of the manufacturer’s product. That is, the prescription drug manufacturer’s duty to warn runs to the doctor, not the patient or public.  The court denied this motion thereby allowing Defendant to present evidence on this defense, granted Defendant’s Motion to Impound, and took Defendant’s other 3 motions under advisement.

Watch Video Watch Video

 

Case Highlights

  • Case highlights for this case is not yet available.

 

Case-related documents, including those referenced above, are available via the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) service. For more information, visit Pacer.gov.