To Get Help Now
Click Here
 
Today's Date:

NJ Court Rules FDA Warnings Don’t Always Start Statute of Limitations Clock

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Law360 reports that the New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled that the New Jersey Product Liability Act’s two-year statute of limitations does not necessarily begin with an FDA warning.

The ruling centers on a lawsuit filed in December 2005 by Kamie Kendall against Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., alleging that the acne drug Accutane caused her to suffer ulcerative colitis. Kendall was diagnosed with the bowel disorder in 1999, after taking Accutane for two years. According to Kendall, she did not know about the link between the medicine and bowel disorders until she saw an ad for Accutane in 2004.

Though Roche argued that the issuance of an FDA warning should begin the countdown on the statute of limitations, the Court found that “a reasonable person in Kendall’s circumstances would not have known by December 2003 of the relationship between Accutane and her condition,” especially since her gastroenterologist and her dermatologist both signed off on her continued used of Accutane even after her bowel issues began.

“Roche is disappointed in today’s New Jersey Supreme Court decision to the extent it did not dispose of this matter, but is pleased that the court preserved the ‘superpresumption’ of adequacy for FDA-approved warnings, stating that ‘only in the ‘rare case’ will damages be assessed against a manufacturer issuing FDA-approved warnings,” Law360 reported Roche as saying.

 

 

breakinglawsuitnews.com disclaimer: This article: NJ Court Rules FDA Warnings Don’t Always Start Statute of Limitations Clock was posted on Tuesday, February 28th, 2012 at 8:19 pm at breakinglawsuitnews.com and is filed under Defective Drug Lawsuits.

« »

Comments are closed.