Request Legal Help Now - Free


Risperdal Lawsuits Favor Plaintiffs

. By
Philadelphia, PAThree recent Risperdal verdicts have given hope to more than 1,700 cases pending in Philadelphia court. One case found in favor of Janssen Pharmaceuticals, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, because a direct link could not be established between the plaintiff’s use of Risperdal and subsequent development of gynecomastia, or male breasts.

The 1,700 Risperdal lawsuits have been transferred to a single court and consolidated to form a mass tort program by the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia. All plaintiffs in the mass tort allege that gynecomastia and other adverse events were caused by the antipsychotic drug; that Janssen may have concealed knowledge of the side effects; and that Janssen failed to warn physicians and patients about potential Risperdal side effects, thereby claiming the drug company was negligent (Risperdal Litigation case number 100300296).

Janssen is also facing the Cherokee Nation in federal court. The tribe alleges that J&J and subsidiary Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc. failed to disclose information about Risperdal, including that the drug increases the risk of stroke and diabetes in the elderly. According to Law360, the suit, which was filed a year ago, seeks restitution for the allegedly misbranded Risperdal the tribe claims it purchased between March 2002 and December 31, 2003, a time when the drug companies (Johnson & Johnson and subsidiary company Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals) admitted to misbranding Risperdal as part of a plea deal with the US Department of Justice.

And in another lawsuit filed by the state of South Carolina claiming that J&J and Janssen illegally marketed Risperdal, the US Supreme Court said it will not hear the drug company’s appeal. As reported by Digital Journal, South Carolina Supreme Court Justice John W. Kittredge wrote the following regarding his decision:

“By 1997, Janssen also had information that Risperdal posed a serious risk of stroke, cardiac arrest, and sudden death in the elderly,” and, “Despite this clinical information, it was several years before Janssen updated the Risperdal label to accurately reflect the frequency and severity of the risk of hyperprolactinemia, weight gain and diabetes, or stroke, cardiac arrest, and sudden death in the elderly.”

Back in 2013, Johnson & Johnson and Janssen agreed to pay up to $2.2 billion to settle a federal investigation into its illegal practices - it marketed the drug to children and actually promoted the drug to doctors who treat children with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder before the FDA approved its use for that age group. The FDA’s approval for Risperdal to treat irritable 5- to 16-year-olds with autism and bipolar disorder has also come under fire by medical experts. And the federal government claims in the Risperdal gynecomastia lawsuits that J&J deliberately marketed its drug to the possibly lucrative child and adolescent market. Those cases consolidated in Los Angeles are slated to begin this June.


Risperdal Legal Help

If you or a loved one have suffered losses in this case, please click the link below and your complaint will be sent to a drugs & medical lawyer who may evaluate your Risperdal claim at no cost or obligation.


Posted by

Has seen my criminal records and knows what people hear are the pigs snooping around outside their home.

Posted by

Im a victim I want to see Johnsons ceo in prison want to see him lose everything he should have to take risperdal everyday let him play Russian rulet with his life see if he likes growing breast or chance having a stroke or dieing every time he takes risperdal as I did I'm so mad scared thinking every time I took that poison day after day I could of died now I live every day wondering if this life is worth living I have a case in California I think all us victims need to ask for prison for Johnson ceo and the others responsible for the crime they cummetted

Posted by

What's worse? Having the ability to take a medication you're not interested in, or finding a doctor that won't make you take a medication that is giving you such side effects. At some point it seems like someone would notice that this medication should not be "made" to take. I think for one that this is some-sort of conspiracy for doctors to make money off of. If it was a physical problem and it was a choice you would think there is a way to quit going to the doctor, and just see a physician. The doctors are bold, but still don't get drugs make the patient physically sick- not mentally.


Fields marked * are mandatory. Please read our comment guidelines before posting.


Note: Your name will be published with your comment.

*Email Address:

Your email will only be used if a response is needed.
*Your Comment:

Are you the defendant or a subject matter expert on this topic with an opposing viewpoint? We'd love to hear your comments here as well, or if you'd like to contact us for an interview please submit your details here.

Click to learn more about

Request Legal Help Now! - Free