2 total
Class action certification denied; proposed common issues on general teratogenicity and duty to warn lacked commonality.
The plaintiffs brought a motion to certify a class action against the manufacturers of the antidepressant Celexa, alleging it is a teratogen that causes congenital malformations.
The plaintiffs proposed common issues regarding general causation (whether Celexa is or may be teratogenic) and duty to warn.
The court dismissed the certification motion, finding that the proposed common issues failed to satisfy the commonality requirement under s. 5(1)(c) of the Class Proceedings Act, as they would not advance the litigation without individual trials for each specific congenital malformation.
The court also found that a class proceeding was not the preferable procedure due to the overwhelming number of complex individual issues.
Class action certification denied in Celexa birth defect case due to lack of commonality and preferability.
The plaintiffs brought a motion to certify a class action against the manufacturers of the antidepressant Celexa (citalopram), alleging the drug caused congenital malformations when ingested by pregnant women and that the defendants failed to warn of this risk.
The court found that while the pleadings disclosed a cause of action and there was an identifiable class, the proposed common issue regarding the duty to warn lacked commonality because the risk of birth defects varied widely and individual causation issues would dominate.
The court concluded a class proceeding was not the preferable procedure due to the inevitability of complex individual trials, and dismissed the certification motion.
