• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

McCarter & English Logo

  • People
  • Services
  • Insights
  • Our Firm
    • Leadership Team
    • Social Justice
    • Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
    • Pro Bono
    • Client Service Values
    • Alumni
  • Join Us
    • Lawyers
    • Summer Associates
    • Patent Professionals
    • Professional Staff
    • Job Openings
  • Locations
    • Boston
    • Philadelphia
    • East Brunswick
    • Indianapolis
    • Stamford
    • Hartford
    • Trenton
    • Miami
    • Washington, DC
    • New York
    • Wilmington
    • Newark
  • Share

Share

Browse Alphabetically:

  • A
  • B
  • C
  • D
  • E
  • F
  • G
  • H
  • I
  • J
  • K
  • L
  • M
  • N
  • O
  • P
  • Q
  • R
  • S
  • T
  • U
  • V
  • W
  • X
  • Y
  • Z
  • All
Bankruptcy, Restructuring & Litigation
Blockchain, Smart Contracts & Digital Currencies
Business Litigation
Cannabis
Coronavirus Resource Center
Corporate
Crisis Management
Cybersecurity & Data Privacy
Delaware Corporate, LLC & Partnership Law
Design, Fashion & Luxury
E-Discovery & Records Management
Energy & Utilities
Environment & Energy
Financial Institutions
Food & Beverage
Government Affairs
Government Contracts & Global Trade
Government Investigations & White Collar Defense
Healthcare
Hospitality
Immigration
Impact Investing
Insurance Recovery, Litigation & Counseling
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Life Sciences
Manufacturing
Products Liability, Mass Torts & Consumer Class Actions
Public Finance
Real Estate
Renewable Energy
Sports & Entertainment
Tax & Employee Benefits
Technology Transactions
Transportation, Logistics & Supply Chain Management
Trusts, Estates & Private Clients
Venture Capital & Emerging Growth Companies
  • Broadcasts
  • Events
  • News
  • Publications
  • View All Insights
Search By:
Insights News Courtroom Podium
Main image for Justices Hear Arguments in $25 Million Accutane Verdict Appeal
News|Quote

Justices Hear Arguments in $25 Million Accutane Verdict Appeal

New Jersey Law Journal

10.14.2016

Lawyers argued before the New Jersey Supreme Court Thursday over whether an appeals court erred in overturning a $25 million verdict against a pharmaceutical company because the plaintiff violated the statute of limitations in the state where he lives.

A lawyer representing the plaintiff, Andrew McCarrell, asked the court on Oct. 13 to reinstate the verdict, saying New Jersey’s statute of limitations should apply because of the state’s interest in protecting consumers from injuries caused by products manufactured in New Jersey.

Conversely, the lawyer representing defendants Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. and Roche Laboratories said allowing plaintiffs such as McCarrell, who is from Alabama, to avail themselves of New Jersey’s statute of limitations would allow them to go forum shopping if their home states had more restrictive laws.

The New Jersey Civil Justice Institute also participated as amicus. Its attorney, David Kott, also urged the court to affirm the Appellate Division’s ruling.

A ruling to the contrary would have a detrimental effect “on our largest industry and largest employers, and also on companies that make the most important products,” said Kott, of Newark’s McCarter & English.

Kott said the only reason McCarrell sued in New Jersey was that he was barred from doing so in Alabama, because that state has more restrictive tolling rules.

sidebar

pdfemail

Related People

Media item: David R. Kott
David R. Kott

Partner

Related Services

Products Liability, Mass Torts & Consumer Class Actions
Class Action & Multidistrict Litigation
Appellate
Subscribe to our Insights
McCarter & English, LLP
Copyright © 2023 McCarter & English, LLP. All Rights Reserved.
  • Login
  • Attorney Advertising
  • Privacy
  • Awards Methodology
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
  • Sitemap

The McCarter & English, LLP website is for informational purposes only. We do not provide legal advice on this website. We can provide legal advice only to our clients in specific inquiries that they address to us. If you are interested in becoming a client, please contact us, but do not send any information about your specific legal question. We cannot serve as your lawyers until we establish an attorney-client relationship, which can occur only after we follow procedures within our firm and after we agree to the terms of the representation.

Accept Cancel