Despite lower court rulings in favor of Karen Bartlett that the drug she took is an unreasonably unsafe drug, SCOTUS sided with Mutual and decided that they cannot be held responsible for the design of their drugs.
WHEN:TODAY, Monday, June 24, 2013, at 2:30 p.m. EDT
WHO: Lou Bogradwith the Center for Constitutional Litigation Allison Zievewith Public Citizen Sue Steinmanwith the American Association for Justice David Fredrickargued this case for Bartlett in front of SCOTUS
Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett (argued March 19, 2013)
Karen Bartlett, of Plaistow, N.H, was prescribed a drug for shoulder pain that was filled with generic sulindac.
Soon after, two-thirds of her skin began shedding off and she spent months in a burn unit in a medically induced coma.
She endured 13 eye surgeries and numerous cornea implants.
She now has trouble walking, is legally blind and will need care for the rest of her life due to Stevens-Johnson syndrome which she developed as a result of taking the generic drug.
Lower courts concurred sulindac was unreasonably dangerous compared to similar drugs, awarding Karen $21 million in damages for her injuries.
Mutual argued it is only making a copy of the brand drug, and therefore it has no legal responsibility for its design or safety.
AAJ filed comments in support of Public Citizen's citizen petition asking the FDA to address the Mensing decision. Public Citizen also issued a new report today highlighting how many potential hazards are not discovered until years after drugs have been on the market and the risk this poses to patients.
As the world's largest trial bar, the American Association for Justice (formerly known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America) works to make sure people have a fair chance to receive justice through the legal system when they are injured by the negligence or misconduct of others--even when it means taking on the most powerful corporations. Visit http://www.justice.org.