Category: New Jersey pharmaceutical injury

How Can We Solve Generic Pharmaceutical Issue?

dangerous pharmaceuticals

New Jersey recently became grouped with a number of states whose judges have upheld the controversial Mensing ruling. The Mensing ruling refers to a Supreme Court decision reached last summer in which the justices ruled in favor of a generic pharmaceutical manufacturer that they cannot be held liable for harm caused to patients based on their labeling. The decision cited that these manufacturers are required to provide the exact labeling of their name-brand counterpart and therefore are not responsible for inadequate labeling.

For more background information surrounding this ruling, check out this article from the American Lawyer Academy.

The main issue with this entire debate lies with the fact that often times patients are given the generic brand of a medication from their pharmacy without being specifically informed. This is largely due to the fact that many health insurance companies will not cover the brand-name version of the medication and also that the generic-brand is more affordable.

Since the brand name manufacturers are responsible for the labeling, the problem then becomes that patients can be harmed by both the name-brand and the generic but only those who took the former will have the right to seek compensation. This is detrimental to the patient alone as the generic pharmaceutical company will not suffer in any way if the consumer cannot sue. The name-brand company does not suffer any hardships either as the patient who took the generic cannot sue them.

How is this fair? Who does this ruling really protect? The answer is that it is not fair and it only encourages the generic manufacturers to sell dangerous medications because they know they cannot be reprimanded for it.

Here is a scenario to highlight this unfair ruling: Say a generic manufacturer knows of a medication that has been linked to dangerous, adverse side-effects. They then decide they too want to market this drug even though they are aware it causes harm to their consumers. The harm is done to the patients, but the generic drug maker just gets to rake in the profits and not have to worry about the damage they have caused because it is the name-brand company that mislabeled or originally sold the medication.

There are currently bills in both the Senate and the House that seek to overturn the Supreme Court ruling, but with parties on opposing sides of the issue, it is unclear if or when these bills will come into effect. Pharmaceutical injury can be devastating. If you or someone you love has been injured as the result of taking a dangerous or defective drug, contact the New Jersey pharmaceutical injury attorneys at Console & Hollawell. Call us today for your free and confidential consultation at (866) 778-5500.

$4,100,000 Settlement for Man Who Overdosed On Stolen Drugs Sparks Controversy

Harding Pharmacy & Liquors

This New Jersey case raises some questions that may never be answered since it was settled out of court. The Record reported that on September 24, 2007 Saddle River resident, Scott Simon (then 17) attended a party at Donny Nuckel’s home. At the party another guest brought Xanax that he had stolen from Harding Liquor & Pharmacy (located in Ridgewood, NJ, pictured left) where he was previously employed.

Simon took the stolen medication which resulted in him slipping into a coma. The guests at the party did not call emergency responders; instead they waited a while and then drove him to the hospital. Simon suffered permanent nerve damage that has impaired his ability to walk and talk as the result of the pharmaceutical injury.

Simon’s lawyer, John Schepisi, said, “He stays at home now, trying to recuperate. He can’t walk without help. He has been declared incompetent.”

His lawyer also asserted that Simon’s doctors have said his injuries would not have been permanent had he received immediate medical assistant. Had the party guests called 911, he may not have ended up in this permanent state.

Simon brought suit against the pharmacy for not taking proper precautions to avoid the drugs being stolen, as well as Nuckel, Nuckel’s mother (who was away for the weekend at the time of the party), the guest who brought the stolen drugs, and other party guests who failed to call for help.

All parties involved decided to settle rather than go through the lengthy and expensive process of a trial. The pharmacy is to pay $1,900,000; Nuckel and his mother will pay $1,200,000; and the remaining $1,000,000 will be paid by the remaining defendants.
Simon’s other attorney, Silvana Raso, explained that he client does share some responsibility for ingesting the drugs.

This leaves the question of, just how much fault lies with the pharmacy? They are paying the most in the settlement, which means they do recognize some fault. It remains unknown to the media what position the person who stole the drugs was in. Was he a pharmacy worker or merely a cashier? If he wasn’t qualified to be in the pharmacy portion, how was he able to get a hold of the Xanax in the first place?

Also, it is unclear why the person who actually provided the stolen drugs wasn’t held more accountable. It is unknown as to how much of the million dollars he or she will pay. With so much gray area, who really is to blame for Simon’s tragic injury? What do you think?

Photo credit: Ridgewood Patch.