On Thursday, May 16, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court examined the level of public awareness regarding the dangers of Risperdal, which can put potential plaintiffs on notice to investigate their claims.
Two men filed a lawsuit in 2014 against the antipsychotic drug alleging Janssen Pharmaceuticals failed to warn the side effects of the drug. The following year, however, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Arnold New dismissed their lawsuits determining that the Risperdal statute of limitations had begun tolling in August 2009, based on the framework of newspaper articles, medical literature, and attorney advertisements available at that time. The Court’s final decision will decide the fate of thousands of similar claims currently pending in Philadelphia. If the state’s Supreme Court upholds the statute of limitations ruling, about 40% of those claims would be dismissed.
There are around 7,000 gynecomastia lawsuits pending in the Pennsylvania mass tort program. Two coordinated actions have been filed for Risperdal cases: one in Los Angeles Superior Court (Risperdal and Invega Product Liability Cases, JCCP 4775, presided by Honorable William Highberger) and the other in Philadelphia (In Re: Risperdal Litigation, March 2010 Term, Case No. 100300296).
