William Ruskin Obtained Summary Judgment on Behalf of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals

William A. Ruskin of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. in New York obtained summary judgment on behalf of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals after oral argument before the Hon. Stefan R. Underhill in federal court in Bridgeport, Connecticut in the case of Swoverland v. GlaxoSmithKline. Co-Defendant GlaxoSmithKline, represented by King & Spalding, also obtained summary judgment.

The plaintiff alleged that his use in combination of Sunovion’s Lunesta, a sleep aid, and GSK’s Paxil, an anti-depressant, caused depression, erratic behavior and suicidal ideation, which resulted in an unsuccessful attempt to kill both himself and his daughter. As a result of the incident, plaintiff was sentenced to prison and forfeited his position as a prison guard. Sunovion defended the case on the basis that it adequately warned of the drug’s potential risks and that there was no causal connection between any alleged failure to warn and the treating physician’s prescription of the drug.

In granting summary judgment to Sunovion, the court reaffirmed Connecticut’s adherence to the learned intermediary doctrine. Further, the court rejected plaintiff’s assertion that the learned intermediary doctrine should not apply in this case either because Lunesta directly advertised to the patient or over-promoted the product. The court held that there was no factual basis in the record to support the application of either of these exceptions to the learned intermediary doctrine and that, as a matter of law, Connecticut did not recognize these exceptions.