Beginning Next Week: InsideCounsel will become part of Corporate Counsel. Bringing these two industry-leading websites together will now give you comprehensive coverage of the full spectrum of issues affecting today's General Counsel at companies of all sizes. You will continue to receive expert analysis on key issues including corporate litigation, labor developments, tech initiatives and intellectual property, as well as Women, Influence & Power in Law (WIPL) professional development content. Plus we'll be serving all ALM legal publications from one interconnected platform, powered by, giving you easy access to additional relevant content from other InsideCounsel sister publications.

To prevent a disruption in service, you will be automatically redirected to the new site next week. Thank you for being a valued InsideCounsel reader!


More On

Johnson & Johnson will pay $63 million in Motrin case

Young girl lost much of her skin after taking the company’s painkiller

Johnson & Johnson must pay tens of millions of dollars for the gruesome side effects its Motrin painkiller caused in a young girl.

In 2003, Samantha Reckis, who was then 7 years old, took Children’s Motrin and developed Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, causing her to go blind, lose 90 percent of her skin, suffer brain damage and lose 80 percent of her lung capacity. The Reckis family sued Johnson & Johnson in 2007, claiming the company failed to warn consumers about the life-threatening reactions associated with Motrin.

Yesterday, a Massachusetts jury said Johnson & Johnson must pay Reckis and her family $63 million as a result of Motrin’s effects. Although Johnson & Johnson says it disagrees with the jury’s decision, it did say in a statement that the Reckis family “has suffered a tragedy, and we sympathize deeply with them.”

Read ABC News and Thomson Reuters for more about the case.

For more recent InsideCounsel stories concerning drug-related litigation, read:

2nd Circuit decision throws FDA’s drug misbranding cases into question

Drug maker's legal battle with the FDA delays generic competition

Pay-for-delay deals rise

Supreme Court takes up design-defect drug case

Ashley Post

Bio and more articles

Join the Conversation

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.