Children's Motrin is Focus of Product Liability Lawsuit Filed by 7-Year-Old Girl against Johnson & Johnson Claiming an Allergic Reaction to the Drug Caused Her Blindness

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 28, 2004--

Suit Alleges That Drug Maker's Failure to Warn the Public About the Possible Risk of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome Makes Children's Motrin Unsafe and Dangerous to Sell to Consumers

“Johnson & Johnson made a reckless, callous decision when it decided not to tell the public that Stevens-Johnson Syndrome is one of the adverse side effects of taking Children's Motrin”

Sabrina Brierton Johnson, age 7, filed suit today against Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) in Los Angeles Superior Court/Compton Division claiming that an allergic reaction to taking Children's Motrin (Stevens-Johnson Syndrome) caused her to become blind and photosensitive. Her complaint for damages alleges strict product liability, negligence, breach of express and implied warranties, and deceit by concealment. McNeil Consumer & Specialty Pharmaceuticals (a division of McNeil-PPC, Inc.); McKesson Corporation (NYSE:MCK); SAV-ON Drug Stores, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of Albertsons, Inc. (NYSE:ABS)); Cardinal Health, Inc. (NYSE:CAH); and Ralphs Grocery Company (a wholly owned subsidiary of The Kroger Company (NYSE:KR)) are also named as defendants. Sabrina's parents, Kenneth and Joan Brierton Johnson, are acting as her guardian ad litem. She is represented by Browne Greene and Geoffrey S. Wells with the Santa Monica, CA law firm of Greene, Broillet, Panish & Wheeler, LLP. Sabrina Brierton Johnson vs. Johnson & Johnson, et. al., Case Number TC018540.

Miss Johnson alleges that Johnson & Johnson and the other Defendants' failure to warn the public or educate the medical community about the possible risk of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TENS) or any other serious skin reactions associated with using Children's Motrin makes it an unsafe product and dangerous to sell to consumers. Since the late 1980s, the Plaintiff contends that the Defendants knew about the connection between Children's Motrin and these severe, potentially fatal reactions. Miss Johnson also alleges that the Defendants knew from their own clinical trials of Children's Motrin that it caused cases of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/TENS and that Defendants had warned about Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/TENS in their drug package insert for the prescription form of the drug before Children's Motrin began being distributed and sold over-the-counter (OTC) to the public.

Miss Johnson alleges that Defendants were put on notice of the high risk to consumers and users of Children's Motrin after the completion of a major clinical trial known as the Boston Fever Study, which was the basis of the FDA's approval of the OTC sale of the drug. She contends that the Defendants knew that there were cases of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and TENS in the clinical trials, but did not report them and misrepresented the true incidence of serious mucocutaneous reactions associated with the drug during the Boston Fever Study.

On September 8, 2003, Topanga, CA resident Sabrina Brierton Johnson, then age 6, came home from school complaining of a fever. Her parents gave her Children's Motrin in accordance with the materials and instructions included with the drug that afternoon and again that evening. On the morning of September 9, 2003, Sabrina still did not feel well and was taken to see her doctor. After being examined by her pediatrician, she was hospitalized and isolated in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, CA with a high fever, a redness of the sclera (commonly known as the white of the eye), a sore throat and a rash covering her back, trunk and other parts of her body. On September 10, 2003, Sabrina's eyes could only be forcibly opened by an ophthalmologist, causing her unbearable, excruciating pain.

By November 2003, Sabrina Brierton Johnson was completely blind. It was later discovered that she suffered a severe, adverse skin reaction known as Stevens-Johnson Syndrome as a result of ingesting Children's Motrin. Sabrina continues to have ongoing medical problems as a consequence, including photosensitivity. She is unable to independently open her eyes and has had nearly 20 eye surgeries in a continued effort to restore her vision.

"In the name of children everywhere, our family wants Children's Motrin taken off the market until it carries a warning label about the risk of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and describes its symptoms," said Joan Brierton Johnson. "Had there been appropriate warnings on the Children's Motrin that we gave Sabrina, we would have known what to look for and would have known to stop giving her the drug and call a doctor. Johnson & Johnson and the other Defendants never gave us that opportunity, and our precious little girl now lives literally and figuratively in the dark."

"Johnson & Johnson made a reckless, callous decision when it decided not to tell the public that Stevens-Johnson Syndrome is one of the adverse side effects of taking Children's Motrin," said Kenneth Johnson. "The pharmaceutical industry owes a duty to consumers to warn them of any and all potential risks in taking their drugs, whether they are prescription or over the counter. Not a day goes by that Joan and I don't say to ourselves, 'if we had only known, if we had only known.' We hope that this lawsuit will put an end to their indifference."

"This lawsuit is the only warning label that the public is going to get until Johnson & Johnson re-labels Children's Motrin," stated Browne Greene, "so that it carries a warning about the dangers of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome. We hope that families around the world will take heed and toss out any Children's Motrin that's in their medicine cabinets and demand that stores pull it off their shelves. The alleged benefits of Children's Motrin do not outweigh exposing any child to Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and its dire consequences. Better safe than sorry."

"The fact that even one child might react adversely to Children's Motrin is enough reason to require the makers of Children's Motrin's to provide full disclosure to consumers and their doctors about the risks of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome," said Geoffrey S. Wells. "Just ask Sabrina Johnson and her parents. We intend to marshal all of our resources to make sure that she has her day in court."

Editor's Note # 1

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome is a potentially devastating allergic reaction to ibuprofen that can result in serious gastrointestinal problems, blindness or death. Ibuprofen is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and is sold over-the-counter under such brand names as: Children's Motrin, Motrin, Advil, Genpril, Haltran, Medipren, Midol 200, Nuprin and PediaProfen.

Editor's Note #2

Plaintiff Sabrina Brierton Johnson is represented by Browne Greene and Geoffrey S. Wells with the Santa Monica, CA law firm of Greene, Broillet, Panish & Wheeler, LLP (www.gbpwlaw.com); Tel: [phone].

Defendant Johnson & Johnson is based in New Brunswick, NJ, and Roger S. Fine is its General Counsel; Tel: [phone].

Defendant McNeil Consumer & Specialty Pharmaceuticals (a division of McNeil-PPC, Inc., which is a subsidiary corporation of Johnson & Johnson) is based in Fort Washington, PA, and Michael B. McCulley is its Assistant General Counsel; Tel: [phone].

Defendant McKesson Corporation is based in San Francisco, CA, and Ivan D. Meyerson is its General Counsel; Tel: [phone].

Defendant SAV-ON Drug Stores, Inc. is based in Boise, ID, and John Sims is Executive VP and General Counsel of its parent corporation, Albertsons, Inc.; Tel: [phone].

Defendant Cardinal Health, Inc. is based in Dublin, OH, and Steven Alan Bennett is its General Counsel; Tel: [phone].

Defendant Ralphs Grocery Company (a subsidiary of The Kroger Company) is based in Compton, CA, and Matthew C. Kane is its Senior Attorney; Tel: [phone].