Comments on: Breaking: Merck wins two more Vioxx cases on appeal

By: Todd Rogers

Todd Rogers — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:11:58 +0000

Again, I paraphrased. He may not have used that actual term but as I recall it, I am inclined to believe I did hear him say it. I certainly recall the phrase regarding left field.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:11:19 +0000

“UNprecedented” – sorry! Wow, that was a bad typo.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:10:56 +0000

“precedented”?!? He either is too ignorant of the topic to be commenting on it, or he’s lying. (Probably both, actually.)

By: Todd Rogers

Todd Rogers — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:58:33 +0000

I heard Lanier on NPR today. His quote was (paraphrased) Appeals courts are for disputes on matters of law or procedure. In this case, the appeals court took the unprecedented (and “out of left field”) position to override a jury’s decision because they (the appeals court) didn’t like the verdict. I wonder if Lanier would sing the same tune if tables were turned? Would he be one to pursue an appeal if he didn’t like to outcome from a jury? Perhaps someone in the audience can cite such an example.

By: Ted Frank

Ted Frank — Thu, 29 May 2008 17:38:30 +0000

Benjamin Cooper is correct. The original AP story failed to convey the full thrust of the opinion. I’ve corrected the post.

By: Benjamin Cooper

Benjamin Cooper — Thu, 29 May 2008 16:43:49 +0000

As I read McDarby, the compensatory damages claims, although not the punitives claims, remain. So the jury verdict against Merck still stands.

By: Tracy

Tracy — Thu, 29 May 2008 16:26:57 +0000

Good lord, not another Merck story. Every time you post one the crazies come out in force.