A Philadelphia Common Pleas Court judge has added $6.7 million in delay damages to the $70 million verdict awarded to a Risperdal gynecomastia plaintiff earlier this summer. Meanwhile, the company has lodged an appeal of a $500,000 verdict rendered in an earlier Pennsylvania case, asserting that the trial court admitted an improper expert opinion and gave flawed instructions to the jury.

Both cases were part of a mass tort litigation that currently includes more than 1,700 Risperdal lawsuits. Johnson & Johnson and its Janssen Pharmaceuticals unit are accused of downplaying the link between the medication and the growth of female-like breasts in men and boys. So far, five Risperdal gynecomastia claims have gone to trial in Philadelphia, four of which resulted in monetary damage awards for plaintiffs.

Most Recent Risperdal Trial Concluded in July

The most recent case concluded in July, with $70 million in compensatory damages awarded to a teenager who developed gynecomastia after he began taking Risperdal in 2003. According to Law360.com, the judge overseeing the lawsuit added $6.7 million to the total award last month, after the plaintiff’s attorneys argued that he was entitled to delay damages from April 16, 2014. The damages were calculated at 4.25% annually for years 2014 and 2015, and at 4.5T for 2016.

Just days later, Johnson & Johnson filed an appeal that seeks to have the litigation’s third Risperdal award of $500,000 tossed. The company’s brief to the Pennsylvania Superior Court argued that jury instructions had given the impression that defendants could be held liable for inadequate warnings, even if jurors believed the plaintiff’s treating physician had played a role in his alleged injury.  Among other things, the company pointed out that the plaintiff’s doctor had admitted in testimony to being aware of Risperdal’s association with elevated prolactin levels and gynecomastia.

“Because Dr. Kovnar took into account the potential risks of gynecomastia and high prolactin when deciding to prescribe for plaintiff, there was insufficient evidence to establish that a different warning would have changed the outcome,” the brief said.

Johnson & Johnson also asserted that the trial court had wrongly allowed the plaintiff’s expert witness to testify that Risperdal had caused his gynecomastia without using a “generally accepted scientific method” to rule out other possible causes.

Learn More about Filing a Risperdal Lawsuit

Bernstein Liebhard LLP continues to provide free, no-obligation legal reviews to men and boys who may be victims of Risperdal-induced gynecomastia. To learn more, please contact our office by calling 877-779-1414.

Published September 6, 2016 by