Daniels-Feasel v. Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Background

This medical-products liability case concerns Lexapro, a prescription antidepressant sold and manufactured by the defendants Forest Laboratories Inc., Forest Laboratories, LLC, Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Allergan PLC. The plaintiffs—several mothers and their children—alleged that the mothers’ use of Lexapro during pregnancy caused the children to develop neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism spectrum disorder. The defendants removed the case from New York state court to the Southern District of New York based on diversity jurisdiction.

Earlier Expert-Evidence Ruling

The defendants moved to exclude the testimony of the plaintiffs’ three proposed experts on general causation under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and the standard established in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. General causation means evidence that exposure to a substance can cause a particular disease. On September 3, 2021, the court granted that motion in its entirety and excluded all three experts’ testimony as unreliable.

Summary Judgment Analysis

The defendants then moved for summary judgment. Summary judgment is a ruling entered when there is no genuine dispute about a material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law. The court explained that causation is required in products-liability cases and has both general and specific components. In complex medical-products cases, expert testimony is generally required to establish general causation.

Because the court had excluded all of the plaintiffs’ proposed causation experts, the plaintiffs had no expert testimony with which to prove general causation. The plaintiffs conceded that the earlier order prevented them from making a good-faith opposition to summary judgment and made summary judgment inevitable. The court therefore concluded that the plaintiffs could not establish an essential element of their claims and that no triable issue of material fact remained.

Disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ complaint. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment in the defendants’ favor and close the case.