Third Amended Master Long Form Complaint - Dispute Resolution ...

easonably but unjustifiably believing the information to be true, prescribed for the Plaintiffs theuse of Reglan and/or generic metoclopramide for a prolonged and unwarranted period of timeand they used, per those prescriptions, metoclopramide products, leading to their toxicoverexposure to metoclopramide.220. Liability under this Count X is not predicated on the ingestion, if any, by thePlaintiffs, of either Reglan as distributed by defendants or generic metoclopramide products asdistributed through ESI Lederle as a division of Wyeth, nor by Schwarz or Alaven.221. As asserted in this claim, the Plaintiffs’ injuries, are due physically to theiringestion of name brand or generic metoclopramide products, and were caused directly andproximately by these defendants’ either consciously or negligently disseminating to doctorsfalse statements about the properties and dangerous propensities of metoclopramide, and not dueto any defect in the products manufactured by these defendants. Accordingly, the claim statedhere is not a claim against a manufacturer or seller for harm allegedly caused by its product..COUNT XI – CIVIL CONSPIRACY222. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully setforth herein.223. The DRUG COMPANY DEFENDANTS, in a combination of two or morepersons, acted with a common purpose to do an illegal act and/or to do a lawful act by unlawfulmeans or for an unlawful purpose. Specifically, they violated safety standards established by theFDCA, FDA regulations, and parallel state statutes and regulations, by selling and distributing adrug product that was misbranded within the intendment of those laws.- 76 -Case ID: 100101997