Supreme Court Clears Way for Zicam Investor Lawsuit To Proceed

The U.S. Supreme Court has indicated that a stock fraud lawsuit can move forward against the makers of the cold remedy Zicam, whom investors say misrepresented their companyโ€™s growth potential by hiding the fact that some users were reporting problems with loss of their sense of smell from Zicam.ย 

In a unanimous decision, justices rejected arguments by Matrixx Initiatives that manufacturers only needed to tell investors about complaints that are โ€œstatistically significant.โ€ The justices determined that Matrixx Initiatives investors had enough evidence to proceed with a Zicam class action lawsuit, affirming an earlier decision by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The lawsuit was filed about five years before a Zicam recall was issued in June 2009, when the FDA warned about reports of loss of smell with Zicam Cold Remedy Nasal Gel, Zicam Cold Remedy Nasal Swabs and Zicam Cold Remedy Swabs Kids Size.

Spinal-Cord-Stimulation-Lawsuit
Spinal-Cord-Stimulation-Lawsuit

Following that recall, FDA investigators determined that Matrixx Initiatives may have received as many as 800 reports of Zicam problems that were not properly turned over to the FDA as required by federal regulations. It is unclear how many of those reports came after 2004, or whether their existence contradicts Matrixxโ€™s claim that there were only a dozen or so reports during the time involved in the class action suit.

In the 2004 shareholder class action suit, Matrixx Initiatives argued that companies should not be forced to disclose to investors all complaints they receive from consumers, because it would flood investors with false and unconfirmed information. Attorneys for the cold remedy maker argued that the threshold for releasing such reports should be statistical significance.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that even if the allegations of loss of smell were false, investors were entitled to the information because allegations, true or untrue, could affect a companyโ€™s potential. However, the ruling should not be interpreted to mean businesses have to make public every adverse event report, Justice Sotomayor added.

To win their case, investors must show that Matrixx Initiatives held the information back intentionally as a form of damage control and to deceive investors about the state of the company and its products. Sotomayor said the investors had enough evidence to make a credible case in court.


0 Comments


This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Share Your Comments

This field is hidden when viewing the form
I authorize the above comments be posted on this page
Post Comment
Weekly Digest Opt-In

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

MORE TOP STORIES

Federal regulators have centralized at least 23 Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuits in a multidistrict litigation that excludes multiple similar claims involving Abbott and Nevro implants.
Regeneron and Sanofi-Aventis face a Dupixent injection lawsuit from a Louisiana woman who says the companies knew about the drug’s risks but downplayed them to doctors and patients.