3 Million Accutane Crohns Disease Case Remanded
Emma Gonzalez | April 27th, 2012
In March 2012, a New Jersey Accutane Crohn’s disease lawsuit was remanded to state court. The issue in question is whether Kendall v. Hoffman-La Roche, a recent court decision that established new standards regarding equitable tolling and time limitations, may affect the case’s 3 million verdict. The plaintiffs state that equitable tolling applies, and that their case is not time-barred, but the state court will make the ultimate decision.
3 million Accutane IBD verdict
In November 2008, Lance Sager, Kelly Mace, and Jordan Speisman received nearly 3 million in damages for their Accutane inflammatory bowel disease – Accutane Crohns disease and Accutane ulcerative colitis – and health issues resulting from their conditions. At the time, the Atlantic County Superior Court of New Jersey ruled that Hoffman-La Roche had not adequately informed the plaintiffs, who were teenagers when they first began taking the acne medication, of potential side effects and risks associated with Accutane. The court also agreed with the plaintiffs’ assertions that, had the pharmaceutical company provided stronger warnings of Accutane side effects, they may have never taken the medication and, as a result, would never have suffered from Accutane IBD.
Accutane Crohns disease claims to be evaluated for time limitations
However, almost 3.5 years later, on March 19, 2012, a New Jersey appeals court sent the 3 million verdict back to state court. The question at hand is whether the case was time-barred, as defined by new standards recently established in Kendal v. Hoffman-La Roche. In the Kendall case, the court took into account the New Jersey Product Liability Act’s presumption of adequacy and applied them to FDA-approved warnings. The court decided that Kendall’s claims were not time-barred, even when accounting for public policies on the statutory presumption of adequacy.
Accutane lawyer will take new standards into account for future cases
When New Jersey Superior Court remanded the 3 million verdict, Sager, Mace and Speisman stated that their cases were not time-barred, and that equitable tolling applies. If a plaintiff discovers an alleged injury after the statute of limitations has expired, equitable tolling may come into play: this legal principle states that the statute of limitation cannot bar a legal claim that could not have been discovered before time expirations. Hoffman-La Roche, however, states that Florida state law, and not that of New Jersey, should apply to this case. The Kendall standards for equitable tolling and time limitations will apply to all future New Jersey cases of Accutane Crohns disease, Accutane ulcerative colitis, and similar claims.
- Accutane Lawsuit Remanded to State Court
- Kendall Accutane Lawsuit is Timely, New Jersey Court Says
- Victims of Accutane Crohns Disease Awarded Millions