Class Action Cites Zetia & Vytorin

Recent Cases

In a shareholder's class action that neatly summarizes complaints about Schering-Plough Corp.'s sales of its cholesterol drugs Zetia and Vytorin, the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System claims: "Sixteen months after completion of a study showing that its two most profitable drugs had no greater health benefit than far cheaper generic competitors - and may even be harmful - Schering sold over $4 billion of its own securities to the investing without disclosing the results of the study. This lack of disclosure violated the securities laws."

    The complaint continues: "It took the Company another five months to disclose some of the study results and when it did, Schering's stock dropped precipitously and investors were harmed. Ten weeks after that initial disclosure, Schering disclosed the study results in their entirety, which caused the stock to drop even further.

    "Defendant Schering manufactures and markets two anti-cholesterol drugs called Zetia and Vytorin. Vytorin is a combination of Zetia and Zocor - in generic form, simvastatin - and is jointly manufactured and marketed with Merck & Co., Inc. Total sales of Zetia and Vytorin were $3.9 billion in 2006 and $5.2 billion in 2007. These drugs are Schering's most profitable, accounting for 70 percent of its profits, by one estimate."

    This is not the first such class action against Schering-Plough. Courthouse News reports it because its first six pages contain a clear and concise summary of the allegations, and the history of the medical trials that Schering allegedly failed to disclose.

    Plaintiffs are represented by James Cecchi with Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi, Stewart & Olstein of Roseland, N.J.

Related listings

  • Circuit Applies New Test for Declaratory Judgment

    Circuit Applies New Test for Declaratory Judgment

    Recent Cases 04/01/2008

    The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed a district court’s dismissal of a declaratory judgment action, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in MedImmune Inc. v. Genentech Inc., 127 S.Ct. 764 (2007). See Micron Technology, Inc. v. MO...

  • Supreme Court On Hall Street Assoc. v. Mattel, Inc.

    Supreme Court On Hall Street Assoc. v. Mattel, Inc.

    Recent Cases 03/31/2008

    The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U. S. C. §§9–11, provides expedited judicial review to confirm, vacate, or modify arbitration awards. Under §9, a court “must” confirm an award “unless” it is vacated, modified, or corrected “as prescribed” in §§1...

  • Icahn Plans More Legal Action Against Motorola

    Icahn Plans More Legal Action Against Motorola

    Recent Cases 03/24/2008

    Carl Icahn and his affiliates on Monday said it is filing a lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware seeking a court order requiring Motorola to make certain materials demanded by Icahn from Motorola available for inspection. The mat...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York Adoption and Family Law Attorneys Our attorneys have represented adoptive parents, birth parents, and adoption agencies. >> read