Plaintiff in First Paxil Case Fights Against Nonsuit Ruling

As a result of his serious medical condition, Braden had to undergo two open-heart surgeries since his birth in 2004. Rader alleged that officials at GlaxoSmithKline, the manufacturers of the drug, were aware of the dangers the drug posed to unborn children, and yet did not inform the medical community of the risks.

 In the post-trial motion, Plaintiff’s counsel argued that Judge Powell misinterpreted the 2010 case management order governing the Paxil mass tort cases when he granted GlaxoSmithKline’s motion for nonsuit. In his ruling, Powell determined that the plaintiff failed to establish proximate causation and held that the case management order precluded all evidence of Defendant’s conduct after physician, Dr. Robert Kiehn, prescribed Paxil to Plaintiff’s mother, Elizabeth Rader. Attorneys for the plaintiff stated that Judge Powell’s evidentiary ruling could impact the remaining Paxil cases; as such, they requested that Judge Arnold New, who is supervising the Paxil mass tort litigation, place a stay on the remaining eight cases pending in the Philadelphia mass tort program, the first of which is scheduled to start jury selection in mid-May.

The Case is: Rader v. SmithKline Beecham

Counsel Financial provides working capital credit lines up to $5 million exclusively for the plaintiffs' bar in all states except California, where credit lines are issued by California Attorney Lending. Explore all of our financial solutions designed for contingent fee practice.