Risperdal Plaintiff Allowed To Replead A Negligent Claim

Risperdal Plaintiff Allowed To Replead A Negligent Claim

Introduction

In an order issued on September 30, 2018, Judge Donald Cabell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, allowed the plaintiff to replead his negligent failure-to-warn claims linked to Risperdal side-effects. However, claims of consumer law violations, fraudulent concealment, and design defect against defendants Janssen Research & Development and Johnson & Johnson were dismissed.

The plaintiff started consuming Risperdal medication in 2007 to treat his personality disorder; however, he developed gynecomastia (increased breast tissue) and tremors as an alleged side-effect of the drug. Even after stopping the medication in 2016, the gynecomastia condition still prevailed.

More than 14,000 lawsuits have been filed over the drugs' gynecomastia side-effect. Two coordinated actions have been filed for Risperdal cases: one in Los Angeles Superior Court (Risperdal and Invega Product Liability Cases, JCCP 4775) and the other in Philadelphia (In Re: Risperdal Litigation, March 2010 Term, Case No. 100300296).

Last month, a $1 million Risperdal verdict was overturned indicating that the failure-to-warn claim made by a man against Janssen Pharmaceuticals stays preempted since the federal law bars the company from adding a gynecomastia warning label. The federal judge also stated that the ruling was passed considering the plaintiff's attorney's "inappropriate conduct" evident from his defensive tone of voice during the court hearing.