A Pennsylvania state judge in a Risperdal verdict denied Johnson & Johnson’s request for a new trial over allegations that its drug, Risperdal, is linked to developing abnormal male breast growth.

According to Law360, Johnson & Johnson, along with Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., are fighting allegations raised by an Alabama boy who claims that he developed breasts, a condition known as gynecomastia, after taking Risperdal.

Risperdal is a drug prescribed to patients suffering from behavioral symptoms associated with autism. The plaintiff says he took the drug over the course of five years.

According to Law360, the judge, in a Risperdal verdict, maintained that Johnson & Johnson’s “extraordinary” defense tactics justified allowing a new expert witness to testify on behalf of the plaintiff.

Judge Ramy Djerassi presides over the case in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. According to the report, Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., which is currently facing these purported allegations of the link of abnormal breast growth to Risperdal, is attempting to evade the $2.5 million Risperdal verdict.

However, the company had allegedly waited until the last minute to raise concerns that the physician who had examined the Alabama plaintiff had violated the law by not being licensed in the state. The doctor is a Missouri-based physician.

“The timing of Janssen’s motion and the nature of their accusation were extraordinary and seemed calculated for maximum surprise,” Law360 quotes of the opinion. “If Janssen’s late motion were granted, plaintiff would have no choice but [to] move for voluntary nonsuit. If the motion were denied, then Dr. Goldstein would likely choose to take the Fifth Amendment or testify with predictable damage to his credibility. Either way, if the motion had been filed before trial, there would not have been extraordinary prejudice to plaintiff who would likely have moved for a continuance before undergoing the expense of trial.”

The plaintiff, who had taken the drug over the course of five years, began taking Risperdal in 2002, at the mere age of seven. At this time, Risperdal had only been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in adults only. Use in children was off-label at that time.

The drug was later approved by the FDA in 2006 to treat for certain symptoms of behavioral disorders such as autism in children.

The Risperdal label was updated to note that approximately 2.3% of pediatric patients have seen an association and development of gynecomastia. Prior to this time, the label had only indicated the condition rare as an adverse effect.

In February 2015, the jury had returned a $2.5 million Risperdal verdict for the plaintiff.

Janseen later filed a post-trial motion requesting a new trial based on its purported allegations that the plaintiff should not have been allowed to introduce a new expert witness after the boy’s physician withdrew from the case. This was after Janssen’s legal team questioned his doctor’s licensing in examining the plaintiff in Alabama.

Janssen’s spokesperson for the company, however, was quoted saying of the Risperdal verdict that “we continue to believe this verdict should be overturned, and we are appealing.” She stated, “Contrary to the impression the plaintiffs’ attorneys have attempted to create over the course of this litigation, Risperdal is an important FDA-approved medicine that, when used as part of a comprehensive treatment plan, continues to help millions of patients with mental illness and neurodevelopmental conditions.”