Jackson v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Jackson v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

208 So. 3d 881, 2017 La. LEXIS 3

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided January 9, 2017·No. No. 2016-CC-1767·Published

Opinion

JOHNSON, Chief Justice,

would grant the writ application.

hi find the district court correctly denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment in this case. I agree with the district court that a disputed issue of material fact exists concerning whether plaintiffs prescribing physicians were adequately warned of Risperdal’s potential side effects, particularly in non-schizophrenic, elderly patients such as Ms. Jackson. Additionally, as plaintiffs effectively argue, the credibility of the prescribing physicians is clearly at issue in this case thereby rendering summary judgment premature.

Accordingly, I would grant the plaintiffs’ writ application.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JOHNSON, Chief Justice,

would grant the writ application.

hi find the district court correctly denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment in this case. I agree with the district court that a disputed issue of material fact exists concerning whether plaintiffs prescribing physicians were adequately warned of Risperdal’s potential side effects, particularly in non-schizophrenic, elderly patients such as Ms. Jackson. Additionally, as plaintiffs effectively argue, the credibility of the prescribing physicians is clearly at issue in this case thereby rendering summary judgment premature.

Accordingly, I would grant the plaintiffs’ writ application.

Jackson v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 208 So. 3d 881, 2017 La. LEXIS 3 (La. 2017).

Pincite

208 So. 3d 881 (Jackson v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.