Statute Of Limitations In The Context Of Prescription Drug Addiction: Case Dismissed In Northern District Of New York

This weekend, we are traveling to Nashville, where, decades ago, we lived for a couple of years during a period of wanderlust. Nashville was to be a brief stop-off on a cross-country driving odyssey. But we never got any farther down the road, leaving Nashville only to reverse course and return to college (to our parents' great relief). All these years later, a huge part of our heart still lives at the intersection of Interstates 40 and 65, and we journey back as often as we can to visit friends we've treasured for as long as we can remember. The town has changed, to be sure. The tiny radio station on the hill, where we sat with a dear and now-departed friend during his late-night country music show, no longer broadcasts. There is a pro football team now. Buildings and highways and traffic have multiplied exponentially. And the old Ryman Auditorium, the "mother church of country music" and original home of the Grand Old Opry, has been reborn as a concert venue. (From the balcony of the current Opry House, looking down on the stage, patrons can see a large circle of wood that doesn't match the rest of the floor. This was taken from the Ryman when the new Opry House was built, to harness some of the sacred energy of that hallowed old place.)

But with all that has changed, going back still feels like going home, and the city still feels sweet and familiar, but with a twist. As does today's case, a familiar-feeling statute of limitations decision except for the twist created by the very modern context of prescription drug addiction. In Allen v. Indivior, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134279 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 9, 2018), the plaintiff, a college student and aspiring investment banker, became dependent on a narcotic pain-killing drug after a car accident. In an attempt to wean him off of the painkiller, his doctor prescribed a drug used as replacement therapy to treat painkiller dependency. He took the replacement drug daily for twenty months, until, his Complaint alleged, he became "completely addicted" to it. He tried to stop using the drug and enrolled in an in-patient program to help him deal with his withdrawal symptoms. After twenty-one days, he went home to his family, where, a short time later, he overdosed on heroin and died. His parents sued the replacement drug's manufacturer, asserting the usual product liability causes of action and alleging that, because of his addiction, "the only way" the plaintiff could treat his withdrawal "was with...