The Shifting Landscape of Marijuana Law

Trial attorneys are somewhat like first responders, meaning that it is frequently only after a lawsuit has been filed and litigated that lawmakers step in to enact statutes and regulations governing the subject activity or conduct. This is apparent in the nascent cannabis industry. A prime example is the recent line of cases dealing with competing land use rights of marijuana growers and their neighbors. In Momtazi Family, LLC v. Wagner, Et Al.[i],  pending in the Eastern District of Oregon, the parties are…
Continue reading...

A Deep(er) Dive into Allegations Brought Against CBD Companies: Part II

In our last article, we discussed the potential for litigation faced by CBD companies and analyzed a court’s handling of claims regarding fraudulent inducement. Today, we turn to that scary claim of RICO, or the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. For most, this term conjures images of mafia prosecutions. The federal government trying to bring down organized crime with wiretaps and FBI agents raiding social clubs as depicted in various movies. However, the RICO statute is also applied in civil litigation. We will address…
Continue reading...

Seventh Circuit Bars RICO Claims by Third-Party Payors Against Drug Companies Based on Off-Label Promotion

On October 12, 2017, in Sidney Hillman Health Center of Rochester v. Abbott Laboratories, —F.3d —-, 2017 WL 4544834 (7th Cir. 2017), the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a civil RICO class action by third-party payors against drug manufacturer Abbott Laboratories. The decision appears to completely foreclose payors’ suits against drug companies for off-label promotion under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and potentially signals a bar against tort claims of any kind by payors against drug companies for off-label…
Continue reading...

This Week’s Life Science Headlines

        Litigation …
Continue reading...

Green Light for Aetna in RICO Suit

On April 3, 2013, the First Circuit held that Aetna, Inc. can sue Pfizer, Inc. for its off-label marketing of Neurontin®.  Neurontin® was approved for the treatment of epilepsy, but was allegedly marketed for the treatment of bipolar disorder and neuropathic pain in the mid 1990’s.  Aetna brought RICO and Pennsylvania Insurance Fraud Statute claims based on the off-label marketing. In reinstating the case, the Court found that the plaintiffs were not required to prove that the doctor’s off-label prescriptions were caused by the off-label…
Continue reading...