A Lexapro Lawsuit Could Lead to Compensation For Your Suffering

A Lexapro Lawsuit Could Lead to Compensation For Your Suffering

Side effects of Lexapro can be life-changing for an individual or their family. If you or a loved one has suffered from these side effects, you may be entitled to compensation. Some attorneys specialize in Lexapro lawsuits and have been holding corporations accountable for decades. Read on for more information. A Lexapro lawsuit could lead to compensation for your suffering. To learn more, contact a Lexapro lawyer today.

Birth defects

A Lexapro lawsuit for birth defects claims that the drug caused severe birth defects in babies who were taken by women while pregnant. These plaintiffs are mothers who used the drug during pregnancy and gave birth to a child with a congenital defect. As a result, they believe the drug was defective and should be held accountable. The manufacturers of Lexapro are named in these lawsuits. But is this a viable legal claim?

According to a study, four to five percent of all birth defects are linked to harmful medications. These medications are called teratogens. They are present in prescription, over-the-counter, and street drugs. Medication birth defects can cause permanent and lifelong medical problems, and a family may be entitled to compensation. If a Lexapro lawsuit is appropriate for your family, contact an attorney today. A skilled attorney can determine whether you or your child may qualify for compensation.

Developmental delays

A development delay is when a child fails to meet developmental milestones by age three. Children with developmental delays often require early intervention services to prepare them for school. It has been found that pregnant women who took SSRI antidepressants during their pregnancy had a greater risk of developing a child with developmental delays or birth defects. The drug makers are being sued by many mothers who have suffered developmental delays or birth defects.


Lorraine Sheridan is appealing the August 8, 2014 order dismissing her medical malpractice lawsuit against Lexapro. She died two weeks after being prescribed Lexapro by Dr. Frederic Lehman, who had failed to monitor Sheridan’s condition. The plaintiff claimed that the doctor failed to give Sheridan adequate information before prescribing Lexapro and that a lack of informed consent caused her death.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit claim that Forest Laboratories failed to provide adequate warnings about the drug’s risks, including the possibility of suicidal thoughts. They allege that Forest Laboratories failed to disclose this risk to consumers. In 2004, they failed to warn patients about suicidal behavior or birth defects. Now, their lawsuit seeks over $50 million in damages. The judge noted that Forest Laboratories failed to provide adequate warnings to consumers about the risks associated with Lexapro.

Forest Laboratories has denied liability for the deaths of its customers. The company sold defective Lexapro and failed to warn patients about the risk of suicide. The company has responded by arguing that its failure to warn the public about the risk of suicide violated federal law and FDA regulations. However, in the MDL court, Forest Therapeutics settled most cases, dismissing the remaining claims. And it is unclear whether the FDA will impose a settlement with the plaintiffs.

Forest Laboratories

The United States ex rel. Constance Conrad v. Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. case, which stems from the recall of Lexapro, is the latest lawsuit in the ongoing legal battle over the drug. Although the case is largely civil, the Justice Department has begun an investigation of the company’s illegal off-label marketing practices. Here’s what you should know about the latest developments. This article will outline the major issues surrounding the case, and what you can do to support your claim.

In the case of the two sons who died from suicide, the manufacturer of Lexapro knew of the risks associated with taking the drug. But they failed to warn physicians and patients of this potential side effect. Although the drug’s maker, H. Lundbeck, knew of the risk, the company did nothing to warn patients and physicians of it. Ultimately, the FDA issued a public health advisory on the drug in 2004.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *