Drug & Device News

Determining that the state of New Jersey had the greater interest in applying its law to a mass tort litigation concerning the drug Risperdal, Judge Arnold L. New, coordinating judge of the Complex Litigation Center, recently dashed the hopes of nearly 1,500 plaintiffs, most of whom were likely to have sought punitive damages against the manufacturer, Janssen Pharmaceuticals. The plaintiffs, all of whom claim they were not adequately warned of the risks of gynocomastia with use of the anti-psychotic drug, had argued that the law of Pennsylvania should apply. (Gynocomastia is a condition characterized by the development of enlarged breasts in young males.) In his opinion, released Oct. 23, Judge New explained that the “evidence, when read together, shows the decisions concerning the development and marketing of Risperdal were made in New Jersey, where the various directors and supervisors worked,” and this apparently held more sway with the judge than the fact that these decisions “were communicated to staff members at meetings and presentations at various locations, including restaurants and venues in Pennsylvania.”

The Risperdal plaintiffs are not likely to leave the issue alone, however. As explained by Thomas R. Kline of Kline & Specter, who is also representing a number of Risperdal plaintiffs, his clients and others “have been waiting for some time in this long continuum of Risperdal litigation to get the [choice of law] issue moved forward for appellate review with the hope and expectation that we'll try future cases with punitive damages in them, and the opportunity to add punitive damages in cases in which it has not been allowed.”