In the first three months of 2017, new Risperdal lawsuits numbering in the thousands were filed in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas against Risperdal’s manufacturer, Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc. – a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary. To date, it is estimated that there has been a total of 5,500 such lawsuits filed.

Risperdal, a pharmaceutical agent categorized as an atypical antipsychotic, is used to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, autism, and other mental and mood disorders. Plaintiffs seek Risperdal gynecomastia verdict in court, in the hopes of receiving damages for unanticipated side effects either they or a loved one experienced because of taking the drug.

Gynecomastia is the abnormal growth of female breast tissue in males. It sometimes affects boys and men who take Risperdal.

Risperdal Gynecomastia Verdict Reaches $70M

So far, eight cases in the Philadelphia Risperdal litigation have been tried all the way to a jury verdict. The following four cases were judged in favor of the plaintiff:

Andrew Y. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – July 2016, Andrew Y. was awarded $70 million in damages after developing gynecomastia following treatment with Risperdal for psychiatric issues. The court awarded a record-setting amount after finding the defendant had falsified, concealed and destroyed records. Andrew Y. was from Tennessee.

Austin P. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – February 2015, Austin P. was awarded $2.5 million because of damages resulting from development of gynecomastia after using Risperdal prescribed by his physician. Austin P. was from Alabama.

Nicholas M. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – November 2015, Nicholas M. was awarded $1.7 million after being treated with Risperdal for autism. Nicholas M. claimed the pharmaceutical company didn’t warn his physician of the side effect of gynecomastia, and he says he grew breast tissue with continued treatment. Nicholas M. was from Maryland.

Timothy S. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – December 2015, Timothy S. was awarded $500,000 in damages after being treated for three years for Tourette’s Syndrome. He sought a Risperdal gynecomastia verdict after developing gynecomastia to such a degree as to need a double mastectomy. Timothy S. was from Wisconsin.

The other four cases were judged in favor of the defendant, Janssen Pharmaceuticals:

William C. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – March 2015, the evidence did not convince the jury of a causal connection between  William C.’s gynecomastia and his Risperdal treatment, and they ruled in favor of Janssen. William C. was from Pennsylvania.

C.W. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – October 2016, David W. sought a Risperdal gynecomastia verdict on behalf of his son, C.W., following the development of breast tissue after taking the drug, but the jury ruled in favor of the defendant. C.W. was from Florida.

Tommy M. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – December 2016, eleven days into court proceedings, the judge dismissed the case because of what he felt to be insufficient expert medical evidence. Tommy M. was from Nebraska.

P.D. v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals – February 2017, Barbara D. sought Risperdal gynecomastia verdict on behalf of her son, P.D., but the judge ruled in favor of Janssen in this case.

The Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas has set up a special mass tort program to host the large number of Risperdal lawsuits being filed in Philadelphia. It is believed that the increase in Risperdal cases filed in Philadelphia are the result of Johnson and Johnson Inc. actually waiving its right to claim a statute of limitations. Some feel that this is a legal strategy designed to overburden the courts.