New Jersey Accutane Product Liability Verdict Provides Justice
Philadelphia users of Accutane will have interest in this product liability verdict. Have you heard that three Florida plaintiffs were awarded almost $13 million dollars by a jury in Atlantic City, New Jersey because they developed inflammatory bowel disease from taking Accutane when they were teenagers. The 8 person jury found that that pharmaceutical maker Hoffman-La Roche failed to provide an adequate warning. The jury award of $12.89 million is to be apportioned among the three victims, now aged in their mid-to-late 20s. It has been reported that Roche faces as many as 600 Accutane cases around the country.
I have found as a Philadelphia product liability and medical injury lawyer for 30 years that the only way to stop drug manufacturers from continuing to harm innocent victims is by the power of the lawsuit; especially the threat of a large jury verdict. If you have taken Accutane and now have bowel disease you should contact our office immediately. Get general information from the Pomerantz Perlberger & Lewis Philadelphia product liability lawyers.
These plaintiffs had taken Accutane almost ten years ago, while in their teens to relieve adolescent acne. All three developed various forms of IBD, including ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, while taking Accutane or shortly thereafter. One is expected to shortly undergo surgical removal of his colon. As a result of their disease, all suffer from a dramatic increased risk of colon cancer.
At first Roche told physicians about a possible association between Accutane and inflammatory bowel disease in 1984. but studies done by Roche and outside scientists later showed that the drug in fact induced inflammatory bowel disease. Evidence was brought at trial that Roche never published these studies and failed to strengthen its warnings either to patients or prescribing doctors.
In reaching their verdict, the jurors answered yes to four questions:
1. Did Roche fail to adequately warn plaintiffs' prescribing physician about the risk of IBD from Accutane that either Roche knew or should have known about prior to when the patients first began using the drug?
2. Is the use of Accutane a cause of IBD in some people who take it?
3. Would a stronger warning have prevented the plaintiff from taking Accutane?
4. Was Accutane a substantial factor in causing this plaintiff to develop IBD?
