A federal judge overseeing more than 1,600 federal Lipitor lawsuits in South Carolina has thrown out an argument by Pfizer’s legal team that would have had 10 Lipitor diabetes lawsuits from Texas dismissed.

Lipitor is a drug that’s designed to improve cholesterol levels by interfering with the body’s ability to produce LDL or “bad” cholesterol. Since the level of cholesterol in a person’s blood is determined partly by diet and partly by their own physiology, drugs like Lipitor can help patients whose cholesterol levels do not respond to diet and exercise.

However, it has been alleged that Lipitor can increase the risk of developing type-2 diabetes, especially in older women taking Lipitor. This allegation is supported by epidemiological studies and several theoretical models that could explain Lipitor diabetes.

This has resulted in more than 1,600 Lipitor lawsuits against pharmacological giant Pfizer, the makers of Lipitor. So many individual Lipitor lawsuits have been filed that the legal system has centralized them into multidistrict litigation (MDL) to bring about a faster resolution.

In the Lipitor MDL, the court system has coordinated individual Lipitor lawsuits together, so precedents set in earlier Lipitor lawsuits, called bellwether cases, can be applied to other cases in the MDL. A favorable outcome in bellwether Lipitor lawsuits could also cause Pfizer to agree to a settlement rather than dragging out the litigation. Since the Lipitor diabetes lawsuits make nearly identical claims and hinge on similar evidence to each other, they are well-suited for inclusion in an MDL.

In the South Carolina District Court, where the Lipitor MDL has been organized, Pfizer had filed a motion to have 10 cases from Texas dismissed. These Lipitor lawsuits invoked a Texas law, and Pfizer argued that federal law had supremacy over the state statute, preventing people from filing Lipitor lawsuits based on this law.

US District Judge Richard M. Gergel, who is presiding over the Lipitor MDL, rejected Pfizer’s argument, saying:

“As the Supreme Court has repeatedly noted, Congress did not provide a federal remedy for consumers harmed by unsafe drugs, and that Congress is well aware of the prevalence of such state tort litigation. The court finds no reason to believe Congress intended to preempt Texas products liability claims simply because the Texas legislature has allowed a plaintiff to negate a statutory affirmative defense by showing that the defendant withheld or misrepresented information to the FDA.”

Lipitor Lawsuit Allegations

The various Lipitor lawsuits make similar allegations: that the cholesterol drug was the cause of the plaintiffs’ diabetes, despite a healthy lifestyle and diet.

Plaintiffs further allege that not only was Lipitor the cause of their type-2 diabetes, but that Pfizer knew—or reasonably should have known—about the serious risk of type-2 diabetes allegedly linked to Lipitor.

Under U.S. law, drug makers like Pfizer are legally obligated to monitor peer-reviewed publications and postmarket reports for signs that their drugs are potentially dangerous.

Lastly, the Lipitor lawsuits allege that Pfizer actively downplayed the risks associated with Lipitor to enrich the company, endangering the health of millions.

Lipitor lawsuits typically seek to recoup the costs of lifelong medical care as type-2 diabetes is a chronic, lifelong condition, as well as legal fees, punitive damages, and other costs allegedly linked to Lipitor diabetes.

The Lipitor MDL is In re: Lipitor (Atorvastatin Calcium) Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation (No. II), MDL No. 2502, U.S. District Court of Southern Carolina.