Opinion
Case No. 8:07-cv-1282-T-30TBM.
January 2, 2008
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants Hoffman-La Roche Inc.'s and Roche Laboratories Inc.'s (together, "Defendants") Motion for Summary Judgment on Warning Adequacy (Dkt. 16), and Plaintiff's response in opposition to the same (Dkt. 18). The Court, having considered the motion, memoranda, and supporting documentation, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, determines that Defendants' motion should be denied.
Defendants have moved for summary judgment based on this Court's disposition of a similar products liability action against Defendants. In Stupak v. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc., 2007 WL 2350561, *3 (M.D. Fla. August 27, 2007), this Court held the warnings provided by Defendants with the drug, Accutane, to be adequate as a matter of law regarding the drug's potential to cause certain psychiatric side effects (including suicide, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts). Defendants argue that because the same warnings are at issue in the instant case, Plaintiff's claims should be dismissed in their entirety.
Plaintiff argues that the Defendants motion is premature as the parties have not had the opportunity to conduct discovery in this case. The Court agrees. The Court's holding in Stupak relied, in part, on testimony from the treating physician regarding the warnings he received from the Defendants prior to prescribing the drug. Id. at *3. Moreover, the treating physician testified that even if he had known of additional case reports reporting suicide, and even if he had known Accutane could cause suicide without preceding signs of depression, he would have still prescribed the drug. Id.
In Stupak, the Court held the warnings provided to the physician were adequate as a matter of law. Id. Based on the physicians testimony that he would have prescribed the drug despite additional warnings or information, the Court also held the plaintiff failed to establish probable cause. Id.
In the instant case, the parties have not had the opportunity to depose the decedent's treating physicians or otherwise conduct discovery. Accordingly, the Court concludes Defendants' motion for summary judgment is premature and should be denied.
It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. Defendants Hoffman-La Roche Inc.'s and Roche Laboratories Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment on Warning Adequacy (Dkt. 16) is DENIED without prejudice.
2. Defendants may move for summary judgment once the parties have had the opportunity to conduct discovery in this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida.