Phila. Jury Returns $8 Billion Verdict Against Johnson & Johnson Over Risperdal
The Philadelphia jury deliberating in the first punitive damages trial over Johnson & Johnson's conduct in marketing the antispychotic drug Risperdal has slammed the company with an $8 billion verdict.
October 08, 2019 at 06:07 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Legal Intelligencer
The Philadelphia jury deliberating in the first punitive damages trial over Johnson & Johnson's conduct in marketing the antispychotic drug Risperdal has slammed the company with an $8 billion verdict.
The award comes after more than three weeks of trial in the case Murray v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals. The award is the largest to date in the Risperdal litigation, which consists of nearly 7,000 cases pending in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.
According to Thomas R. Kline of Kline & Specter, who tried the case along with Houston attorney Jason Itkin of Arnold & Itkin, the jury ruled 10-2 in awarding the multibillion-dollar verdict against the company, which he said is worth $60.7 billion.
"This jury resoundingly told Johnson & Johnson that its actions were deliberate and reckless. And the conduct that the jury saw in this courtroom, clearly and convincingly, which is our legal standard, [was] a company that disregarded the safety of the most vulnerable of children," Kline said. "This is an important moment, not only for this litigation, but for J&J, which is a company that has lost its way."
Sheller P.C. attorney Stephen Sheller is also counsel in the litigation.
|
Related coverage: Jury Told to 'Send a Message' in First Risperdal Punitive Damages Trial
The verdict came less than five hours after attorneys made closing arguments, with Kline telling jurors to "send a message," and defense counsel, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius attorney Ethel Johnson of Houston, telling jurors the plaintiffs failed to meet their burden.
The case was tried before Judge Kenneth Powell. It marked the first time a Pennsylvania jury has been able to consider awarding punitive damages in a Risperdal case. Although the case initially came to a $1.75 million compensatory damages verdict in 2015, Murray was allowed to proceed to a punitive damages phase after the Pennsylvania Superior Court last year reversed a lower court's ruling that barred recovery on punitive damages claims.
According to a review of The Legal's archives, the award is the largest verdict since 1994, when The Legal began tracking each year's largest verdict and settlement. The only higher award came in 2000, when Pennsylvania received $11.3 billion as part of its share of the nationwide $206 billion settlement to end tobacco litigation.
In a statement to the press, J&J spokesman Andrew Wheatley said the award was "grossly disproportionate" to the compensatory award and the company "is confident it will be overturned."
"The company was precluded from presenting a meaningful defense due to the court's exclusion of key evidence. As a result, the jury did not hear evidence as to how the label for Risperdal clearly and appropriately outlined the risks associated with the medicine, or the benefits Risperdal provides to patients with serious mental illness," Wheatley said. "Further, the plaintiff's attorneys failed to present any evidence that the plaintiff was actually harmed by the alleged conduct."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump and Latin America: Lawyers Brace for US's Hardline Approach to Region
People and Purpose: AbbVie's GC on Leading With Impact and Inspiring Change
7 minute readConsumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
4 minute read'Nuclear Option'?: Eli Lilly Taps Big Law Firms in Federal Drug Pricing Dispute
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Friday Newspaper
- 2Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 3Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 4NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 5A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250