Malpractice lawyers seek settlement on $25 million in drug liability

Medical malpractice attorneys are seeking $25.3 million from the California Medical Association to settle claims stemming from the drug maker’s failed marketing campaign that led to the death of an Oregon woman in 2015.

In a filing to the California Board of Directors, the attorneys say the drug company’s “failure to properly disclose the potential risk” of the drug’s use in pregnant women caused her death and “has contributed to her death.”

“Although the manufacturer and the medical malpractice experts are well aware of the risks of the [drug] and its potential use in pregnancy, the medical community is not adequately informed about the risks associated with the use of the product and its safety during pregnancy,” the attorneys wrote.

“The manufacturer’s failure to adequately disclose the risks in the product has caused the death and serious health harm of Ms. Zalman, whose death was caused by a drug-induced hemorrhage.

It is particularly troubling that the manufacturer has failed to disclose this risk, and that the medical professionals are not adequately trained to protect pregnant women.”

The medical malphabes filed suit in federal court in Santa Clara County, California, on March 1.

A spokesperson for the association said in a statement that the attorneys are representing themselves and their clients.

“The California Medical Board of Commissioners has long held that medical malformations are preventable,” the statement said.

“This is a case that challenges that belief, with the doctors challenging the claim that their knowledge of the dangers of this drug-related condition and its use in women of childbearing age was sufficient to authorize its use.

This is also a case about a doctor who, while fully aware of this issue, chose to market the drug to patients with whom they had little or no medical knowledge.”

According to the medical board, the drugmaker’s “misleading, deceptive, and misleading” advertising campaign “promised a safe, effective, and inexpensive solution to pregnant women’s health concerns.”

The drugmaker initially marketed the drug as a safe and effective way to help women who had difficulty breathing after giving birth and who had suffered from a medical condition that was considered potentially life-threatening.

The marketing campaign was widely criticized, particularly by women who felt that the drug could cause birth defects, including premature labor and stillbirth.

Zalman died of complications of the medication and the use, but her death was attributed to a blood clot that ruptured her placenta, according to the Medical Board.

The lawsuit says Zalmans death was a result of the company’s marketing campaign and that it has contributed to the “continued harm” of women who have used the drug in the past.

Zalammans death is among several that have been linked to the drug, which was first approved in the United States in 2002.

The medical board said in its complaint that the state medical board “did not adequately review the safety, efficacy, and effectiveness of Zalmann’s medication and did not have the authority to investigate and determine the appropriate legal remedy for Ms. Zelman’s death.”

The board said it had previously received more than 50 complaints about the drug since 2004.