John R. Davis leads the firm’s class action and pharmaceutical and device litigation team. John focuses on complex litigation with an emphasis in pharmaceutical, medical device, class action and environmental cases. Prior to joining Slack & Davis, John spent two years as a law clerk for two federal district court judges and three years at a high profile class action and environmental law firm in New Orleans. John is licensed to practice law in Texas, Alabama, Louisiana and California, and has been featured in New Orleans CityBusiness Magazine, “Law Firms: Ones to Watch.”
- J.D., Boston College Law School, 2010
- B.A., Trinity University (Recipient of Trinity University’s Trustees’ Scholarship; Dean’s List; National French Honors, 2007
- W. Keith Watkins, Chief United States District Judge (M.D. Ala.) (2010-2011)
- Mark E. Fuller, fmr. United States District Judge (M.D. Ala.) (2011-2012)
Louisiana ex rel. James D. “Buddy” Caldwell, Attorney General v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC (La.)
The State of Louisiana alleged that its Medicaid program reimbursed excess prescriptions for Avandia on account of GSK’s fraudulent misrepresentations of the drug’s safety profile. The case settled before trial for $42.5 million.
Barba et al. v. Shire US Inc. et al. (S.D. Fla.)
The class of Adderall XR consumers allege that Shire acquired weak patent protection on Adderall XR, asserted those patents against would be generic competitors, and then entered into anticompetitive reverse payment settlement agreements whereby Shire paid the generic companies to delay marketing of generic versions of Adderall XR. The case settled for close to $15 million.
Medical Mutual of Ohio et al. v. AbbVie Inc., et al. (N.D. Ill.)
The RICO class of health insurance companies allege that AbbVie, Auxilium, Eli Lilly, Endo, and Actavis fraudulently marketed their respective testosterone prescription drugs, causing health insurers to reimburse excess and inappropriate prescriptions. The case is pending in the In re Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation MDL in the Northern District of Illinois.
New Jersey v. ExxonMobil (N.J.)
The State of New Jersey asserted environmental natural resource damages (“NRD”) claims against ExxonMobil pertaining to two of Standard Oil’s (ExxonMobil’s predecessor-in-interest) first oil refineries in operation since the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The case settled for $225 million after a nine month trial.
- State Bar of Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, California