Cottam v. CVS Pharmacy

A psychiatrist prescribed the antidepressant drug Trazodone for Robert L. Cottam. One of the drug's possible side effects is priapism (involuntary and persistent erection). Delay in treating the condition can result in permanent impotence. Mr. Cottam filled the prescription at a CVS Pharmacy, which had a computer system that provided customers with written information about the risks and side effects of prescription drugs. The computer produced this information in one of two ways: a short, condensed form or a longer, more inclusive form. Mr. Cottam later testified that his pharmacist gave him only the short form, which listed a number of side effects, not including priapism. Warnings about priapism were listed on the long form as well as on a manufacturer's package insert, which Mr. Cottam did not receive.

The day following his first dose of Trazodone, Mr. Cottam began experiencing symptoms of priapism. Mr. Cottam waited another day before consulting a physician, and in that time took another dose of the drug. He underwent emergency surgery, but because he had waited some 30 hours before seeking medical attention, the surgery left Mr. Cottam permanently impotent. Mr. Cottam sued CVS, claiming it was negligent in failing to warn him of the side effect and its seriousness. He argued that CVS voluntarily assumed a duty of care when it provided him with a list of Trazodone's side effects. A jury found CVS fifty-one percent negligent and awarded Mr. Cottam $357,000 in damages. CVS appealed.

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirms. While noting that in general a pharmacy has no duty to warn its customers of side effects, the court holds that CVS voluntarily assumed a duty by providing Mr. Cottam a list of side effects that he could reasonably interpret as complete and comprehensive. Where a pharmacy provides a list of warnings more detailed than a simple warning label, or promises in its advertising to provide customers with such information, 'it may thereby undertake a duty to provide complete warnings and information,' the court rules.