Case Name: In re: Risperdal Litigation Jonathan SAKSEK, Petitioner v. JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Johnson & Johnson Company, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Respondents In re: Risperdal Litigation Joshua Winter, Petitioner v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Johnson & Johnson Company, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2018-07-05
Citations: 189 A.3d 376
Docket Number: No. 75 EAL 2018; No. 76 EAL 2018
Parties: In re: Risperdal Litigation Jonathan SAKSEK, Petitioner
v.
JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Johnson & Johnson Company, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Respondents
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 189
Pages: 376–376

Head Matter:
In re: Risperdal Litigation Jonathan SAKSEK, Petitioner
v.
JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Johnson & Johnson Company, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Respondents
In re: Risperdal Litigation Joshua Winter, Petitioner
v.
Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Johnson & Johnson Company, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Respondents
No. 75 EAL 2018
No. 76 EAL 2018
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
July 5, 2018
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 5th day of July, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:
[S]hould summary judgment have been granted in Janssen's favor on statute of limitations grounds?