In February 2015, sixteen plaintiffs sued Pfizer, the maker of Viagra, alleging that their ingestion of Viagra between 1998 and 2013 caused them to develop melanoma. Plaintiffs asserted the following cause of actions: breach of implied warranties, breach of express warranties, fraudulent concealment, gross negligence, loss of consortium, negligence, reckless and/or negligent misrepresentation and concealment, strict liability, unjust enrichment, and wrongful death.

Viagra may cause melanoma.

Pfizer removed the case to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction and then moved to dismiss the action, arguing that the claims of the fifteen out of state Plaintiffs should be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction. Plaintiffs moved to remand the case to state court asserting their claims had been properly joined.

Judge Shaw determined that “As alleged in the petition, the claims here all arise from injuries allegedly suffered by plaintiffs as a direct and proximate result of defendant’s actions when it ‘intentionally, recklessly, and/or negligently, advertised, promoted, marketed, sold, and/or distributed Viagra as a safe prescription medication when, in fact, defendant had reason to know, and/or did know, that Viagra was not safe for its intended purposes.'”

Judge Shaw concluded, “Because the plaintiffs all alleged injuries arising out of the use of Viagra and the connection to melanoma, the court cannot say plaintiffs’ claim have no real connection to each other such that the joinder of any plaintiff in this action ‘is so egregious and grossly improper’ that it constitutes misjoinder ‘bordering on a sham.'” He therefore remanded this Viagra case to state court.