The Vioxx Settlement, the settlement industry has to step up.
Saturday, September 6, 2008 at 03:03PM When the history of the Mass Tort legal "business" is written some
day by some university professor with an interest in strategic and
organizational issues the chapter on The Vioxx Settlement should be
subtitled, The Day the Music died. Perhaps no other mass tort was
started with such high hopes by the trial lawyers involved and which at
the end of the day ended up being a massive repudiation of the
strategic thinking and legal strategy involved in prosecuting this
enormously complex mass tort.
From the start it looked as
if this was going to be a home run of epic proportions for trial
lawyers and an opportunity for the seriously ill and injured plaintiffs
to obtain some measure of economic and financial justice for what they
went through. You had clear and horrific injuries as a result of
strokes and heart attacks, you had hidden medical data and fudged
studies that strongly suggested that Merck knew early on that their
drug was a silent killer for a significant proportion of it's users and
you had the FDA yanking the product off the shelf as the evidence
became clear. Surely all that remained was to round up the injured
victims, put them into friendly legal jurisdictions, win a few early
trials and Merck would roll over and write that $30 billion check.
I
was there at the start, attending ATLA and MTMP meetings and the
excitement among the trial lawyers was only matched by the excitement
of the legal marketing and advertising firms convincing the trial
lawyers to spend massive amounts of money advertising to round up the
injured Vioxx clients. Oh and did they ever advertise and spend money,
all in the hope of an early, substantial settlement that would pay off
all that legal financing and advertising money, but when Merck did the
unthinkable and decided to spend close to $1 billion just to defend the
first early trials and contest every claim and case did their strategy
become clear. Bleed the trial lawyers white in a war of attrition that
Merck and it's brilliant general counsel Ken Frazier knew would end in
much the way the Civil War ended, with the rebels exhausted, out of
resources and desperate to simply strike a truce on the best terms
possible.
So what we got was the still significant, but
financially modest settlement, in which $4.85 billion is to be
allocated among the more then 50,000 injured and ill plaintiffs. Why do
I bring all this up? Largely because I started receiving the first of
my phone calls from Vioxx claimants this week as they start planning
what to do with the still to be determined money they will net in the
settlement. Many fear the loss of their governmental benefits if they
accept even the modest amounts they might receive and others are
wondering what they can do with the funds to some how rebuild their
lives that have been destroyed by their use of Vioxx.
I'm
not in any way criticizing the vast majority of lawyers who did their
best to find injured clients and put them into the litigation process
known as the Vioxx settlement. They are each working in the flawed
system that has evolved and they are pretty much swept along by the
tide and process, with little control over what goes on or how the case
is resolved. What I am critical of is a "justice" system where we have
legal war fare between a company fighting for it's very economic
survival due to a drug they made and sold going bad, and trial lawyers
who are vastly under funded and scattered across the country who are
attempting to obtain some measure of economic and legal justice for
horribly sick and injured people. The wasted time, money, resources and
lives now becomes clear, as I talk one on one with the people who are
struggling to live with some dignity after their lives were destroyed
by this drug.
The great Gerry Spence once said, "awarding
money is a poor measure of justice, but it is only measure we have in
the civil justice system". As I talk with people whose needs so far
outstrip any potential recovery they will receive, it only reinforces
what I believe, and that is that our system for handling mass torts is
badly damaged and that the only people who receive economic justice are
the lawyers who defend these matters and bill at $1000 per hour, and
the very few lawyers at the top of the mass tort food chain who control
the litigation.
Reader Comments (27)
Out youtube is the first of these three
.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch
...
if you have a few more minutes here's some more but they are not video...
MarketPlace
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/we...
WSJ
http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/01/18/vioxx-...
Thankx
NOTE: I suggest that the door is open for claiming civil rights violations and BUILDING YOUR COERCISON CASES...
... Merck's strategy, exploitation of the MDL process, riding the public's very much misunderstood thoughts on legal reform, and lobbying for Mass Tort reform turned into privatization, continues to work! … occurred with a major reason for an attorney to gain their clients participation (a very large $ payback versus the work done and virtually eliminating attorney risk), as well as much work done by the negotiating parties to ensure that most attorneys would simply recommend that their clients accept the terms of the settlement. At the same time, it seemed to be a goal of the settlement terms to make it as hard as possible to "opt-out" of the agreement. VPEG is strewn with "opt-ins" who assuredly did so only under undue stress. The artificial process of medical assessment (the GATE process) also provided a convenient method for attorneys to claim that they were being ethical.
Witnessing so many individuals, in spite of vehement objection and good reason not to accept the settlement, finally doing so, Mr. Harrison is reminded of the 5 stages of grief model
- denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance - are also transferable to personal change and emotional upset resulting from factors other than death and dying: Dr Elisabeth Kübler- www.businessballs.com/elisabeth_kubler_ross_five_stages_of_grief.htm
There is no doubt that too many "opt-ins", regardless of what they signed, in reality felt that they were boxed in from several directions. Much more often than not, they are convinced that this is by design, not via chance. "Coerced", "brow-beaten", "fear mongered" and "abandoned" became normal VPEG lexicon. In spite of the disgust and rage of the litigants, accompanied by vehement denial that they would ever accept this "pittance" most litigants go on to the last of the 5 stages of grief - ACCEPTANCE. However, this "acceptance' came with vows to somehow find a way(s) to make it known that "accepting" was basically the equivalent of being "pummeled". One is very hard pressed to find even just a few members that accepted based upon appropriate representation, let alone "happy" with the settlement. Acceptance is almost exclusively the domain of just giving up, feeling that something is better than nothing, having too many financial and other hardships (from their MI/stroked problems) to continue otherwise, and the realization that unfairly they were being effectively denied reasonable efforts to gain legal representation elsewhere.
bones
Dennis Harrison
Vioxx was like a magnifying glass. It magnified the chances of a heart attack or stroke, but the CAUSES of those problems were things like overweight, blood pressure, general health, family history, and LIFESTYLE (fried foods, smoking, drugs, alcohol, etc).
--- > PARTLY TRUE, PARTLY NOT, PARTLY VERY MISLEADING; Mr. xxxxxxxx has actually just made a VERY GOOD incriminating point. If one had one or more pre-existing conditions, they were indeed "magnified" by vIOXX - that is a major point AGAINST MERCK. They SHOULD NOT HAVE taken the poison. They SHOULD have been warned, as then their chances for survival were much worsened. Merck (allegedly, etc) knew this. IT WAS definitively considered as something that WOULD help the Plaintiffs in litigation. What happened? First, Merck has great lawyers, they used the pre-existing conditions to confuse the heck of jurors, and that is what Defense lawyers do very well. Good job Merck Defense, very tricky.
Second, since there (allegedly, etc. again) WAS collusion between the PSC, Merck and the biggie law firms; they decided not to utilize this great argument in their favor. No congrats here, that is shameful and immoral.
Merck admitted their mistake and offered to pay nearly 5 Billion dollars in compensation.
--- > They had to do something. First it had to come off the market as it was murdering and maiming WAY beyond what they had planned and allowed for profit sake. Such allegations, by the way are appropriate, as disgusting as it is, and is one reason of why RICO must enter the scene. They (alleged again) expected about 25,000 to die, but when approx. 100,000 did (and likely nearly 2x that - and that is USA only - yes YOUR fellow American Citizens), and about the same now maimed for life. If it had gone to one million, they would have had to go out of business, they just din't want that. Guilt, they have not technically done that, they ALWAYS just do NOT admit guilt. The $5B is merely a cost of doing business, that is all it is. And it comes to a disgusting 200K GROSS, and LESS THAN 100K NET on AVERAGE, and that is assuming they DO KICK OUT 50% going through the fraudulent "gate" process, which should have been medically and independently certified, NOT dominated by Merck, which it was. YES, Merck is really getting away on the cheap and if they get away with it will continue (here again allgedly) their (allegedly MURDEROUS, colluded, corrupted, neglectful, fraudulent, perverted and pervasive ways. Merck merely "offered" to pay a cost of doing busiess, and spit at everyone on the way out the door. I chose to look to STOP this NONSENSE NOW.
The money won't replace someone lost, or repair injury, but they are at least doing something.
--- > THEY are merely attempting to get aaway with as little $ for cost of doing busienss, that' all. $100k net for a heart attack or stroke? let alone a Pulmonary Embolism? Really? ... as (allegedly) the blood clotter drug does its thing and ruins many organs... would you take $100K for that? HEY even $1M and more? NOT ME!!! NO way, keep the money and stop the (allaged) MUREROUS, MAIMING ways.
They could have forced the plaintiffs to wait many more years, and spend a fortune in court. This settlement should be an example for corporations for years to come.
--- > IF it becomes an "example" WE are ALL really in trouble. It has been done in secrecy, no transparency. The courts allowed it to continue without a level playing field, and actually (allegedly) the courts sanctioned the collusion. It has been done in an attempt to STOP your CIVIL RIGHTS of having your day in court. It has been done via the collusion of Merck, the PSC, and the biggie law firms. I will (for now, let's see... but I have an opinion) not mention the courts... but let's see... Another reason by the way for R-I-C-0. Either come clean, substantially increase the net compensation (there are many ways), trash the "GATE" proess (get one independently medically certified), pay $1B+ on a one-time basis for the FDA to "fix itself" (many great people there want that I'm sure", BACK off corrupted drug company ifluence, and find a non-corrupted way of fuinding the FDA, AND provide the FDA with some real,independent teeth. Really, that is "all" it takes...
<--- wrong, we will keep it at "alleged" but genocide and planned murder do come to mind.. and evidence... by the way...
People should just get a job and stop trying to find a pot of gold from every company. No wonder they’re moving offshore.
< --- wrong: NO POT OF GOLD for people settling, a horrible pittance, would you accept a heart attack, stroke, P. Embolism, ruined kidneys, etc. FOR about 100K if you are lucky? Really, think aboutthat. OFF SHORE? the lousy $5B by 50,000 before they unfairly kick out 1/2 is garbage, it is not even 1/2 of the ill-gotten gains, and DOES NOT SERVE AS A DETERRMENT, it serves as a "voluntary fine", a mere business expense, something to just pay and get over withk, and at that, now with the corrupted, collusive, perverted, pervasive "settlement" DEAL announced, MERCK et al are holding that teeny carrot to the DAMAGED, wounded, and now poor.
Both the Merck in house attorneys and top finance people should resign in disgrace.
< --- NO, frankly, they WERE brilliant, and a few MURK people need to go to jail (read RICO, patterns, etc.)...
Perplexed…the settlement wasn’t about right from wrong. It was purely a business decision..
< -- YUP, as said before - further MURK always settles and NEVER admits guilt; no guilt, why keep settling? THEY ARE GUILTY AS ALL COULD BE, and the "settlement" is a colluded, corrupted, flawed piece of paper, and it was done in SECRECY, not ANY transparency; the PSC was not incompetent, they were (alleged) corrupt and collusive, and so (allegedly) were the big law firms as they jammed this down the throats of unwilling participants who received virtually -0- legal representation. Frankly, WE have the TRUTH, and I hope the PSC, biggie law firms, courts, AND Merck come to their senses, or maybe some should do some jail time - the RICO it seems more and more is EASY to prove... BE FAIR, admit GUILT, apologize, pay all atty fees, pay all subrogation, fix the lousy Merck dominated and corrupt GATE process which is an absolute JOKE and a SHAM (not even medially valid, it is "MURK valid"), give the FDA $1B to fix itself and back off; work with Congress to FIND A way to fund the FDA that is not corrupt, and give the FDA teeth, then maybe we are ok again... else, as in monopoly - please go to JAIL!
There is no evidence that Merck hid anything in their development and promotion of Vioxx.
< -- Huh, what have you been reading?
THEY KNEW, THEY DID NOT EVEN PROVIDE WARNING. HOW would you like to lose a son or daughter, let alone a parent? We know the score, we are there..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZFTN7eGNE0
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/08/04/vioxx_payouts/
Frankly - I have not even touched the surface and all can be PROVEN...
AvPEG http://groups.yahoo.com/group/A-VPEG/
RvPEG http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rpegplus/
vPEG http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MerckSettlement/
LvPEG ttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/MerckSettlementLaw/
By Been there, done that Have been coerced and under duress From Piscataway, NJ, 10/02/2008
THIS was provided, a while back to me. I am pro se, and do not need to worry about attorney recrimination, like so, so many I hear of all the time... So, I had requested if I could POST THIS concise, direct blog. And it DOES represent a majority view, by the way.
______________________________________
Subject: [MerckSettlement] My Post to - PUBLIC CITIZEN
Has your group looked at the so called VIOXX settlement at all? It seems like a cause that would interest you. They say it is the model for product liability cases if the future. The settlement is
horribly skewed towards Merck. It was "negotiated" by a small group of attorneys in a back room someplace. It forced is victims to sign away our rights and settle for "a pig in a poke" because we don't yet
have any idea of what if anything we'll be getting. We are penalized for any and just about all preexisting conditions - when in fact had there been appropriate warnings our doctors would not have Rx'd Vioxx. (Much like birth control pills of today and smokers.) So many of us have completely lost our lives as we knew them and now we are being victimized yet again by Merck aided and abetted by our lawyers who were supposed to be advocating for us. Personally? I am
in the MI group, bypass surgery, and several stents later I am still disabled (since 2001) and unable to work. I guess I must say that I am lucky - I still have my life and this drug killed and maimed (the
stroke folks) so many. The human toll is huge and Merck and the lawyers could care less. Merck wants to minimize what has happened to us and our lawyers are salivating in anticipation of a big payday for little to no work. There is a group on Yahoo where many of us
have told our stories - vPEG (vIOXX Plaintiff's Education Group), in addition to related goups AvPEG and RvPEG (Action, and RICO respectfully Plaintiff Education Group).
From xxxx, xx, 10/05/2008 - Mr. Harrison's most recent comment (below) confirms my earlier observation (see 9/21/08) that these illiterate tirades are symptoms of a person with uncontrolled mental difficulties.
It's very unfair to true victims of this medication that this one disturbed person may be seen by the general public as speaking for them.
Perhaps he should seek a judgement against Merck for causing his immature behavior and his child-like tantrums. He would be well advised to invest any recovery in mental health counseling.
• By Dennis Harrison
From Catskill, NY, 10/06/2008
Well that was a bit off key, now wasn't it? Update - I am now officially an op-out. Gee, 200 - 300 pts sure makes believe it is reasonable. It is absurd, and so is it for many others. We are mounting several actions against Merck. YOU just do not get it, you are either working for Merck (doubt it thought) or are very sympathetic of (alleged...,etc.) MASS MURDEDER’s, proven too have been magnificent at deceit by concealment, fraudulent marketing, and we can easily add some new allegations and even new alleged coherts (i.e. the PSC, large law firms? - I wish to leave the courts out of it, for now... of (collusion, coercions, CIVIL RIGHTS violations, PATTERNS (RICO loves patterns..), and there are so many nice fitting RICO allegations/accusations coming soon, and more... it is about time for Merck to really and earnestly meet some at the negotiating table for the 50,000+ who are in the process of surviving a MASS murder/maiming attempt and moving on to CIVIL RIGHT VIOLATIONS, collusion with the PSC, and I'm leaving out the courts for now as I do indeed pray for them...
Thank You for your continued concern.
Sincerely
OK this is not Q/A, but if you are a vIOXX Plaintiff – please feel free to request to request joining the vIOXX Education Plaintiff Education Group (that is MOM) and if you are really comitted, there are two off shoots; one is beginning real ACTION ITEMS by real maimed and wounded people (AvPEG) and one is considering filing a cluster of RICO lawsuits, we are now educating ourselves there. Hopefully, Merck will come to their senses and meet with some of us that KNOW HOW TO NEGOTIATE, unlike the hapless (or collusive>) PSC, and we feel that perhaps the courts know enough about our very honest and TRUE attempt with all of the information we have that they will be glad to help us.
YOU TUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZFTN7eGNE0
MarketPlace
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/08/04/vioxx_payouts/
MASS TORT DEFORM
http://www.tortdeform.com/archives/2008/06/taxpayers_paid_for_80_of_the_m.html
--- > please let us know is you are interested in a Amicus curiae to Writ of Certiorari. < -----
We have many things now going on, and we certainly are feeling worthy of 50,000+ civil right violations now being presented to the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
I’m sorry for getting a bit long, but I do have many more Merck Employees like the following, you may find it interesting.
From REAL MERCK people and VERY RECENT!
Re: Mrk is dysfunctional company?????
________________________________________
Merck needs a true messenger with credibility and trust. Currently there is no trust and lets make a case and point, this is not the right management team to do battle nor to turn things around. Too many arrogant losers with bad track record in high management positions (legacy of Vioxx). It is not just about one event regrettably it is an emerging pattern and series of missteps and poor decision making at the top. Current management team is rotting and dysfunctional on all fronts. Too much infighting and back stabbing, analysis paralysis and lets not forget the famous Merck bureaucracy and lack of accountability. Yes there is no accountability at the top. They have got the science wrong which cannot be forgiven. Take research for instance Kim and team cannot read the tea leaves from the FDA and one has to say he is a failure (Arcoxia was to be a sure thing too). Obviously there is a fundamental fatal flaw in the delivery of effective safe medicines. Look at the vaccine area they cannot manufacture their products to needed capacity and have quality control problem. The manufacturing area is a disaster. EPA citations on enviornmental hazard. Sales marketing and business decision making are totally a dismal. Public affairs disaster with Enhance. What a joke! Yes the press does not like Merck and pharma in large part due to the DTC and Vioxx litigation. The Company is under siege from the Feds. Subject to a new Compliance program . Litigation expenses continue (frazier may have saved the company but the misery and work enviornment is poor). Doctors have signs saying Merck reps not welcomed.. We are in the business of selling medicines and not defending about lies and sharing nice platitudes....take industry leadership. Top employees have no reason to stay and this is a far short of what Merck once used to be. Clark and team have squandered the core values of trust and credibility. It is a shameful disappointment to be an employee of the greatly admired company we called Merck. Cannot imagine that Mr. Clark has lowered that standards even lower than that of Mr. Gilmartinʼs legacy. What is surprising is that even with 35 plus years of service Clark has no connectivity with the grass roots of the organization. One would think employees would trust him since he is one of us. So far his new programs beyond cost cutting and to improve the companies integration and functionality (COMET and E2E) have failed. Pre Enhance stock price run up can be summed up as a mirage and not based on reality of what the company was truly capable of delivering. On all counts Clark and team are a failure.
Former celebrex/bextra rep here
________________________________________
Did anyone see the video clips of the "Vioxx V reps" on pharmalot? Don't hang your head in shame. Pfizer was just as stupid, and just as criminal in our promotion of bextra and celebrex as you guys were with Vioxx. I always asked why and how I was supposed to sell bextra for pre/post op analgesia without an indication. I always asked why and how I was to sample bextra 20 mgs to orthos when OA and RA were indicated for 10 mg each. The answer from Pfizer legal? "bextra is indicated at 20 mg BID for primary dysmenorhea" I said "I know. But orthos don't treat it" Then I got canned
i don't think thats the reason. come on, the data for cordaptive sucked, ok. it was a dog, and although you can bring a dog to market, you can't bring a dog to market that you can't answer the safety questions. we may have been able to give us reps the bullshit "we don't believe there are any long term safety problems with blocking the dp1 receptor" response (which if you remember was exactly what they said to us at training meetings) but you can't give that to the fda. if we could have proven long term safety data of the product, the fda would have said to us "approved, now go try to sell this dog for 5 bucks a pill when its no f'ing better than whats out there at 1/10th the cost". they don't care if we fail on the sales end, but they do have an interest in knowing if its safe or not, and we are not exactly operating from a position of trust with either the fda or the public. hell, do you trust us? I would love to but our track record is a bit shady
Re: FDA conflict of interest?
________________________________________
the fda promoting generics is nothing new-they have always favored non-branded products-not just for for medicare,medicaid but dod, va ect. and let's be real honest here-rightly so. zoc., vaso., priniv., fos. all now available as generics. merck should have gone into the generic buisness long ago and never dumped medco.
as for the fda being tougher on nda's we have merck and vioxx to thank. remember the fda was called in front of congress to testify as to why vioxx was ever approved in the first place. if there is one thing a gov. agency hates its to be called into congress and gov. agencies have long memories. what's funny is the merck attitude and hutzpah of expecting thier drugs to just sail thru. merck can expect "micro-scrutinity" and approval difficulties for many years to come.
Re: FDA conflict of interest?
________________________________________
The "chuzpah" displayed (and felt) by many involved in FDA submissions stems from our tradition (read that as "how we used to do it") of being so well prepared for, and for having so well pre-prepared, the FDA and it's Advisory Committees that Merck's "clear-sailing" through the process was, effectively, a given.
I remember hearing the stories about HOW ABSOLUTELY SUPERIOR we were in not only the science we did, but in how we packaged it for submission. Stories about off-the-wall questions being asked, and our ability to immediately produce a 3-inch thick file from banker's box #27b that directly addressed the question and showed that, if the "off-the-wall" issue were real, our science clearly demonstrated that the issue implied some additional benefit to our product.
Oh ... for the good old days.
From SLC, UT, 10/10/2008
Those doing research on the use of Vioxx should not mistake the rambling comments of Mr. Harrison as being representative of the majority of the plaintiffs in the Vioxx settlement.
< --- they are factual, I must say alleged. I would wager anything that it is a majority. I wonder if you were affected? I was, were you? What is your stake in this?
Those people have evaluated the effects of Vioxx on themselves or family members, and agreed to the negotiated monetary settlement offered by Merck.
< --- YOU have that wrong; the words COLLUSIVE and CORRUPTED DEAL and COERCISON and DURESS are well known to almost anyone but apparently you. I do not think you read, you look at 1-2 lines and form your “intellectually dawdling opinion”. It seems that you like to hear yourself “intellectualize”, do not you.
Google the words "Dennis Harrison Vioxx", and you will find that he has been posting this same nonsense all over the internet for years.
< --- Actually it is not the same, I have virtually the whole range from pre-“settlement” (including a very accurate description of what I felt the DEAL would be – i.e. my 1-13-07 description is startling similar to the ACTUAL Settlement (DEAL). Go ahead and find that, it will shock you as to the concepts, which in affect DID HAPPEN. Surely, I most know something, true. Please, anyone, please do the Google Mr. Solumn asks for.
He is suffering from compulsive behavior issues, and even displays symptoms of psychosis.
< --- you are suffering from being a lazy, dawdling, intellectual. Else, you are under the thumb of Merck somehow. Only by due vigilance of studying each and every move of Merck, the PSC, and the courts one would have any chance of being so stunningly on target from beginning to end. Not boasting, but you are attempting to place my credibility at risk. If you are so interested in Merck/vIOXX; what did you do?
The story of Vioxx, its use, side effects, and withdrawal should be researched and told.
I just hope that those doing that research can ignore those disturbed individuals who serve to only muddy the waters of an already complicated subject.
< --- VAST amounts of research DO exist. They fully support my position(s) by the way. Just those great philosophers of our time, such as yourself, chose to preach and evangelize individuals into being inactive and take the lousy “settlement” as is, along with are major CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS of denying fair access to the court. Which by the way, is also well known?
Mr. Solumn – YOU really don’t have a clue, do you? You may be the most unplugged person I have run into, certainly the most robust king of weird philosophy. Please, again, where is your interest in vIOXX lie? Please tell the truth and not philosophize.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/holdpharmaaccountable
_____________________________________
Shine a Light on Drug Industry Influence ...
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/sunshine
YOU TUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZFTN7eGNE0
DEAD JAW is what happens after oral surgery, especially a tooth extracted when bone (jaw) does not heal. FOSAMAX "works" by inhibiting the body's natural ability to regenerate bone. Bone theoretically gets denser (biophosphates are imbedded in the bone, NOT because of bone growth). The jawbone is particularly susceptible. It is very serious, requires major surgery, and often leaves one deformed and also invites very dangerous infections. Worse, FOSAMAX and similar stay in bones up to 10 years. I tried to warn about FOSAMAX two years ago. Especially concurrent use of any cox-2 inhibitor as there is quite a bit of concern that since they basically stop the bone from healing (inflammation is necessary), and FOSAMAX and similar stops natural bone regeneration - double whammy.
There are also studies revealing that long term use of FOSAMAX and similar can weaken and lead to broken femurs (like yours truly) and then the fracture never heals if on vIOXX (yours truly). Much more also. BG did try to slip “settlement” forms on me and I of course said NO. I asked the courts to help find a way to alert the public on Dec. 14, 2006. Merck successfully objected to my plea to notify the public and to extend the statute of limitations. I have studied the whole Merck vIOXX tragedy diligently. Along the way, I learned much about MI/stroke issues, the “settlement”, courts, PSC, you name it! Merck has (allegedly) hidden MAJOR vIOXX problem(s) behind even worse problems of MI/stroke. They have also failed to acknowledge pulmonary embolism, kidney damage and high blood pressure. (Allegedly), they have used the MI/stroke "admittance" to shield knowledge of the other problems - vIOXX is (allegedly) a poisonous drug WAY past the fraudulent GATE process suggestions. The $5B should be $10B, lawyer fees should be all paid by Merck, all subrogation by Merck, the GATE PROCESS needs real medical certification - not Merck’s (allegedly) fraudulent view which the PSC apparently did not even challenge. Why did the large law firms simply roll over? We all now really know. Simply put, fair access to the courts has been denied, CIVIL RIGHTS have been violated, and the “average” mi/stroke litigant is pigeon holed into a (allegedly) corrupt, colluded, and fraudulent “settlement”. This was an agreement without real negotiations, a self imposed ‘fine” by Merck which is really only a small cost of doing business.
In re to FOSAMAX - it gets worse, there are studies suggesting that the every day wear and tear "stress fractures" of feet and spines often will not heal because of vIOXX and/or FOSAMAX. It becomes noticeable as one ages. It HURTS and can be very debilitating.
There is a WHOLE WORLD OF issues Merck just will not admit, meantime people do not have a clue how to treat their conditions or what caused them. This is why I have so tried to warn the public, now going on two years by the way. I did ask the courts to intercede, they refused. I DID suggest to the courts that I would make the public aware by myself if I had to. I also chose to also use the knowledge I acquired to warn the “settlement” individuals that Merck/PSC (allegedly) is pulling another fast one. I am just fine in my own litigation. I am certainly not bitter of initially not being in the settlement (again, I refused). Almost like it is a duty to help others at this point so they may have a chance of being FAIRLY treated -nothing else behind it! Too bad a few loud voices try to drown me out - with the additional support (I have much though) this “settlement” (my opinion) could be improved more rapidly.
I do pray that you do not have Dead Jaw. I am finding out that I may have it also, but I am not sure yet.
Sincerely
Dennis Harrison in answer to DEAD JAW and other...
My name is Dennis Harrison - (nicknamed as "bones" formal yahoo handle as "badbonehealing"). I have been out of town and on the weekend I am now working a bit. Am taking this week off to recuperate my physical body and regroup on how to proceed to expose the massive collusion of the PSC, Merck, the large law firms and the courts.
In the meantime - I DO have something that you might find very interesting that was sent to Judge Fallon in 1st week of May, and by not acting on it as far as I am concerned opened the door to BIAS AND PREJUDICE. This is serious stuff, and even headed to the US SUPREME COURT via RICO(s).
Anyway, my vPEG/Harrison "report" to Judge Fallon (serviced properly, cover letter to Judge Fallon, and the report) are available to you if you wish provide your direct email. I may also provide it to another attorney who seems interested, and I have to another one yet who has definitely shown interest. Also, you are welcome to join our VPEG LAW group (I don't own it, but I am sure you would be welcome).
I have trust you and in two attorneys I have sent the document to. It is I some ways mind blowing and chilling. If you are interested in it and proceeding further with info that you may be interested in the a start would be:
1 - provide your email so I can send it (it would be great if you could send this back to me as I lose a record of it as it is not real email).
2 - read the document I send
3 - call me on phone (I'll send it with the document).
4 - go from there
Thank You
Sincerely,
ps - my view has grown more aggressive since the report was submitted. I do NO believe there has been widespread collusion and coercision, that is soft-touched in the report.
Wild crazy accusations, never. The truth – always and without breaking a sweat. That is my personal view point, all should follow their hearts, convictions, and personal views of what is cautious enough, or perhaps too cautious. Great to get into the battle if one can stand what is about to come; one cannot, then one should not. Suggest we will be around for all of 2009 as it is far from over. Especially looking back it appears that 2008 was a year for documenting the atrocities, and for some to begin to receive the crumbs to survive and yet fight another day. REAL ACTION for the “settlement” (DEAL) is too late, but that is ok and quite possibly better – maybe it will serve a purpose after all. One cannot appeal that which did not happen. Also feeding some starved is always a good thing, but does not mean it has to stop there. 2008/”settlement”/dialogue/other, etc. seems to have laid the groundwork for several challenges to Merck to come in 2009 (in earnest I mean). Doesn’t mean some ACTION building is not slowly creeping forwards, it is, but does imply that Nov-Dec is more a time for letting the “settlement’ (DEAL) do its thing, and more documenting within vPEG and Plaintiffs’ Point seems to surely make good sense also.
I’ll also suggest, looking into the future, that too tepid and cautious goes nowhere; the litigant’s lawyers would love that, the PSC moves on to their next pot of gold, Merck shreds it, eats it up, and spits it out, the courts unjustly cleared their Dockets by virtually throwing fairness out the window.
Want to stand up to the ((alleged)) < ---- always good) horrific intents of this DEAL – of course it must be done intelligently, but constant self doubt or fair of reprisal will get no-where except talk, then talk fades away like dust in the wind. Words of complaint, and even progress - are great to get on the record and need to continue. They are documented words of, pain, NOT being served fairly or protected by the courts, and CIVIL RIGHTS violations cast upon us. Others, the few that may be wholly satisfied, need a place to speak up also, they are being given that chance in vPEG and should take it.
Suggest that we should ALWAYS be telling/posting/venting the truth, what happened and what is happening – that’s why we have vPEG and why we segmented the group(s). The larger and more dialogue vPEG gets, the better for all. However, words of complaint (only), while having served as a GREAT foundation (in 2008) – will not serve us well if it is ONLY words in 2009. Looking back, though, we came from near ZERO and heavily stacked odds, to I’ll argue farily well positioned to REAL action to come…. it has only begun.
Have some thoughts later on I wish to place into AvPEG
( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/A-VPEG/ )
with that perspective.
I start off with some words to him; go into the table of contents of a document that has JUST SAT, no-where at the MDl-1657 exposing many problems, including CIVIL RIGHTS violations which are INCREASINGLY BECOMING FINALLY EMBRACED BY AT LEAST A FEW ATTORNEYS WHO WISH TO DO THE RIGHT THING (and perhaps band together).
IT then goes into words on MASS TORT REFORM, which is a sham by itself, and in which the vIOXX "settlement" is a "mere" staging ground for pharma - and for some like I and many more, a line in the sand...
_______________________________________________________
Mr. Wiseman - WE have the PROOF, BIG TIME - and this is just the beginning fellow. We have evidence that you are a MERCK (MURK) shill - $750 an hour is not bad, I guess that is why you break the code of humanity.
Anyway, this was filed/docketed with the MDL-1657 with MAJOR CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS DOCUMENTED. Funny, huh how the MDL-1657 has JUST SAT ON IT. Bad mistake there....
For this WEB site, my next POST will be about MASS TORT (D)eform actually, IT IS AS BIT LONG FOR A POST, so please just feel free not to read it if it is too long. I do know, Mr. Wiseman that you are merely full of a few one-liners here and there and I am growing weary of your same old bulloney and blah, blah, blah... mine are chock full of information - yours are just pernicious, mean spirited anti-humane remarks...
The VIOXX SETTLEMENT
Has its private nature resulted in an unacceptable level of attorney-client representation issues?
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I INTRODUCTION 3 - 7
II The VIOXX Plaintiff Education Group (VPEG) 8 - 13
III VPEG comments 14 - 19
IV VPEG letters 20 - 41
V VPEG ‘talking” points 42 - 43
Appendix
A - Merck’s strategy - an analysis on 1-13-2007; 45 - 49
nine months before settlement announced
B - MASS TORT REFORM excerpts & observations
50 - 54
C - Suggestions for going forward – food for thought
55 - 58
Posted by: bones | November 2, 2008 12:50 AM
Some MASS TORT REFORM excerpts and observations
Content Copyright 2007, Portfolio Media, Inc.
“The uptake of the settlement seems to confirm, and if the program does succeed, people will look at this and learn from this as a positive example,” said Ted Mayer, an attorney with Hughes Hubbard & Reed who is a member of Merck's coordinating defense counsel.
OBSERVATION: A program which has placed so many attorney-client relationships in such disarray cannot be considered successful. While a purposeful laissez faire methodology is often useful in a business environment/negotiations – the Vioxx settlement is not purely a business negotiation – it is the convergence of business and legal. Both interests must be preserved and not get “lost”. This will require active court involvement to define and protect the legal rights that are certainly at risk; the playing field will not be level without active court involvement.
The Vioxx settlement should be viewed (which is useful input) as a learning experience. It showcases what happens when active court involvement in defining the parameters is not a requirement. The Vioxx settlement can be viewed as a real life example of what can happen within private negotiations unbounded by the sheer broad strength of a major corporation, which has purely and simply maximization of profits in its soul – certainly not ensuring that the rights coming into the court system are not lost going out of the court system.
Profit motivation is the engine of innovation and motivation. However, it will clear all in its path solely in the name of profit, and often needs “optimal” (but not excessive) supervision. This not only ensures the ultimate goal of overall public interest, but paradoxically ensures the long term survival of the corporation itself. Mr. Harrison is and has always been a proponent of free markets, but recognizes the danger of an unbridled corporation.
“I propose Vioxx is the model for future cases, especially cases where you have a known injury,” said Edward Blizzard, an attorney with Blizzard McCarthy & Nabers LLP who was part of the plaintiffs' Vioxx Negotiating Committee.
OBSERVATION: how could the Vioxx settlement be a “model” at this point? It’s benefits clearly do no outweigh its risks to civil rights nor contribute towards proper corporate behavior. It is merely the first large scale effort at privatization fraught with the issues so common at first. Rather than “model”, the term “proto-type” seems more befitting. However, real people, with real problems are being severely and unfairly impacted, and that must also be dealt with. A prototype evolving into a model must be done in a manner befitting of a first attempt at privatization. This includes safeguards as mentioned, and must be followed up to assess both defendant AND litigant fairness before it could even conceivably be considered a model. This (proposing it as a “model”) seems to be a very rash statement at this stage, and sends a dangerous message to the public, to Merck and other drug companies seeking draconian measure of risk relief, and to attorneys across the land who can begin to enjoy much of their business being essentially paperwork.
“The big improvement is that this is a settlement that might actually deliver settlement,” said Richard Nagareda, a mass tort professor at Vanderbilt University Law School who wrote the book "Mass Torts in a World of Settlement." “The big difficulty the law has been encountering is developing some sort of framework, such as class settlement or bankruptcy, that brings some binding peace for litigation.”
OBSERVATION: Is it is a major improvement to deliver a settlement that “actually” delivers a very poor settlement? One where the Plaintiffs are not properly represented? One where the “reward” valuation is so low that thousands of coerced opt-ins so reluctantly accepted? One which in no way discourages the alleged behavior, and in fact encourages such errant behavior? It begs the question if goals include – justice, fairness, and incentive for good corporate behavior, or a settlement unto itself?
With the prospect of tens of thousands of cases overloading court dockets, judges overseeing Vioxx cases, including Judge Eldon E. Fallon of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana and Judge Carol Higbee of the New Jersey Superior Court, had appointed six trial attorneys to represent Vioxx plaintiffs in settlement negotiations with Merck. “One of the reasons the private settlement structure works so well is that it is not bogged down in appeals,” Blizzard said. “People can get their money relatively quickly.”
OBSERVATION: Statements imply that “the private settlement structure works so well”. are quite premature. The barrage of statements seems to be more of a sales pitch than a statement of facts. Of course the docket issue needs to be addressed; and perhaps privatization has a place. Yes, it would seem to need to minimize appeals – but not by what amounts to the equivalent of coercion to sign away rights. Work the appeal issues early, by gaining defendant AND litigant agreement up-front which would minimize the appeal issues – don’t spring such an unfair settlement on litigants who essentially have been forced into a situation to have no options except to agree to the terms and sign away their appeal grounds. “People can get their money relatively quickly” is not a good excuse for such very low valuations. The insurance industry is often known to leverage the desperate financial plight of an individual, and surely Merck has let time and financial desperation be a leveraging tool also.
“The fact it is a private settlement agreement is probably the most unique factor in my experience,” said Grant Kaiser, an attorney representing several Vioxx plaintiffs. “It removes obstacles presented by a class action settlement but give the benefits of a class action settlement.” For instance, he said a court under a class action could “put their finger on the scale for one side or another,” as part of the approval process for a class action deal.
OBSERVATION: “unique” means nothing unto itself. The reference to “finger on the scale…” is quite misleading. This would seem to suggest that it is better to entirely remove the court from the scale of justice. How can one come to terms with that concept? Vanishing the court from the scales of justice is unfair, unwise and dangerous. Most certainly would rather that the “finger” be the finger of justice rather than the finger of an interested, powerful corporation as Merck. The legal “obstacles” of a class action are there for reasons of justice and fairness – the speaker here doesn’t seem too interested in an environment which protects litigant’s rights.
Ronald Benjamin, an attorney representing more than 100 Vioxx plaintiffs, has filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit against the agreement, arguing that the settlement is illegal. “This is not a private settlement,” Benjamin said. “The people I represent never consented to attorneys in Louisiana consenting to an agreement on our behalf.”
OBSERVATION: Mr. Harrison has (above) presented the argument for proper litigant representation up-front in the negotiation parameter definition, safeguards throughout the negotiation, and follow-up and assessment as to the success of the agreement. Mr. Benjamin is right in vehemently protesting that his clients were not represented properly – i.e. they never consented, directly or properly indirectly, to have the NPC negotiate in their behalf. Proceeding without active involvement of Plaintiff’s directly approved counsel, who need to truly represent their clients is not consistent with the right for legal representation. The settlement was more oriented to just ending the litigation than to provide justice – the results are speaking for themselves.
He (Ronald Benjamin) said the plaintiffs' negotiating committee had no right to reach the settlement because the district court had rejected class certification in the case, which under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure would have allowed lead counsel to negotiate a settlement. “So they decided to simply ignore the rule and do it anyway, which as far as I'm concerned, is preposterous,” Benjamin said. “The issue the [appeals] court has to decide is whether they are going to let a group of private lawyers settle claims on behalf of clients they don't represent.
OBSERVATION: One can easily interpolate that the average litigant in whether opt-in or opt-out certainly does not feel that their legal rights were represented whether it be within the settlement definition/negotiation, or the decision to accept/reject the offer.
Benjamin said the deal was unfair because it excluded a large number of plaintiffs, such as those who suffered transient ischemic attacks, while also letting Merck off the hook when they could “easily” pay up to $70 billion. Anthony Sebok, a mass torts professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, said there would be questions about whether the recruitment of plaintiffs lawyers to reach a settlement will be permitted in the future.
OBSERVATION: part of the negotiations and seeking leverage by the litigant negotiating team should have been both what the fair reward should be and if Merck could afford the reward. This is one of the reasons why the business acumen and financial analysis capabilities, seeming to have been a missing resource within the PSC/NSC, should have been a requirement in the litigant negotiating team. The courts could assure this if private settlements do proceed are defined with active court supervision.
Mr. Harrison, with a major financial analysis background, has separately concluded that the estimates of Mr. Benjaim’s financial estimates are reasonable. Merck’s income statement continues to be very strong, and incredibly if the settlement is allowed to proceed, the cost will have been a minor blimp on Merck’s radar screen; merely a cost to be managed, not a penalty to be avoided in the future.Wall Street confirmed this. Proper financial insights within the NPC should have been concluded, and that should have been major leverage for the NPC.
…“I think the idea of plaintiffs lawyers making side deals with the defense is a very controversial idea,” Sebok said.
OBSERVATION: Agreed.
The Vioxx agreement also set up a system for pay claims based on several factors, including a plaintiff's health condition prior to the alleged injury, his age and how long he had been taking the drug. To be awarded damages, plaintiffs have to pass three gates: proof of injury, proof they took Vioxx within 14 days of their injury and proof they had been taking the medication for some time. “We wanted to design a program for the qualifying cases…
OBSERVATION: Merck does say “we” wanted to design a program for qualifying cases – that is a major part of the problem – there is too much “we” in “we”. While Merck is due input, they are not due such dominance in defining the artificial GATE process – they are too interested of a party. Proper legal safeguards could be put into place (and still can!) to ensure that the GATE process is represented upon more scientific background; post usage data could have been utilized by the NPC via statistical sampling, etc.. Merck’s biased opinion was not countered effectively by the PSC/NPC. If an active role had been defined for the court to supervise and ensure the litigants rights were not lost - then a more robust negotiating team (with the inclusion of finance, business, negotiating, statistical individuals) could have ensured that the ever so vital GATE process was at least fairly evaluated by an independent medical group, etc.
Mayer said. “We have no interest in a settlement that allows plaintiffs to cherry-pick plaintiffs, that encourages plaintiffs firms to sit on the sidelines even if the settlement is a good deal for their clients and hold up the company. “ Plaintiffs firms that initially had reservations about the settlement's details have since been converted.
OBSERVATION: “converted” in a sense that they (Plaintiffs firms) realized that it was primarily in their interests, not generally in their clients, and that they had tools available to “cover” their ethical duties…
Rein also believes the Vioxx system of evaluating injury and causation to arrive at a damage estimate would also likely be included in future settlements.
OBSERVATION: The concept of a GATE process seems to have validity. However, that said one would certainly hope that safeguards are put in place to ensure that this central go/no-go decision process was negotiated fairly as noted above, and then evaluated for fairness and supporting of a standard of medical science. There are no such real assurances in the Vioxx settlement. Also when new medical information becomes known, especially during the administration of a settlement, it is not fair to simply ignore it within a GATE process because of timing and technicality. New information must have a way to become part of the Gate definition.
Theodore Frank, the director of the American Enterprise Institute's Legal Center for the Public Interest, said Merck's strong position aided in reaching the deal. “Merck’s success in court and the lack of a smoking gun demonstrating wrongdoing meant they had a lot of leverage to negotiate favorable provisions,” Frank said. “To the extent future defendants can achieve such leverage in mass tort litigation, and to the extent the Vioxx settlement proves to be successful, we should see many elements be replicated.”
OBSERVATION: Yes Merck was very good at achieving “such leverage” – that is a point Mr. Harrison is trying to make – they saw the uneven playing field and went for the touchdown!
Until the court ensures fairness, one would hope that most of the elements are NOT repeated. Merck’s strong “leverage” existed because the PNC was not a competent negotiator in terms of having the proper team members and resources. The “lack of a smoking gun” is Mr. Frank’s opinion and seems to cloud the issue of weighing evidence. Must there be one single “smoking gun”?. One can certainly argue that there was some smoke here and there – that residual “smoke” came from somewhere.
Mr. Frank is a major proponent of TORT litigation reform and feels that the meager awards of the Vioxx victims are more than adequate. He has stated this in very unflattering terms. Mr. Frank seems to place much more value on the technical aspects of the legal field, and not goals of fairness and justice.
Trial experiences were not statistically valid, did not have the benefit of full discovery, were done at the peak level of Merck public sympathy, and were done before the issue of strategy consistency across (Vioxx, Fosamax, Vytorin…) and within drugs. Arguments that Mr. Frank has made in his blog that statistical reasonability is not necessary continue to perplex Mr. Harrison.
Remember the infamous PSC FORM letter? The one that "browbeat" attorneys all over the country to submit to the wishes of the PSC? The same one that MOST attorneys did not even bother to at least customize a bit (i.e. they just sent it on as is). The coercision and duress it created by vIOXX litigants is so darn obvious…. Please understand though, I am guessing/estimating about 5% of the attorneys involved DID/ARE trying to help their clients - but they are pigeon holed also and face their own constraints/bullies…. There are INDEED some great attorney's out there thank GOD – but they are hard to find the ones brave enough to go against the BAR which punishes them… nevertheless a few try, and I would only applaud them. The others fall into a range but likely their innate humanity still has a spark and they can yet help do the right thing….
I wish that the attorneys, the ones doing the RIGHT thing, the ones not doing the RIGHT thing but actually wish to, and even the ones doing the WRONG things join self (not a lawyer) and MANY others in turning this chapter of legal INJUSTICE - likely the WORST of all time in re to the massive insult it has imparted, around.
I am speaking for myself, but I so pray that it helps assist getting attorneys involved in gaining the nerve to stand up to their own masses. Shall enough attorneys stand up to this great wrong, and with SUCH SKILL so abundant, frankly the Merck/vIOXX coercision/duress/CIVIL RIGHTS issues can be turned around – including Exemption of the pharmaceutical industry (GOMEZ via MDL-1657 ruling provides a glimpse). The attorneys (strong opinion) will find their clients very welcoming shall they turn their opinions and efforts 180 degrees towards the direction they need to be - Merck, the PSC, and the COURTS. The (alleged) collusion is quite well known. There is evidence that NOW even the attorneys are getting shafted by Merck. Merck bullies and gets off on the CHEAP (10 cents to the dollar is quite well known also), but THEY are just so greedy, they are not stopping there… they seem to wish to go further and even seem to have no problem with giving grief to the same attorney’s who went along with the PSC commands. Merck just cannot get enough greed - the more they get, the more they want.
I am nearly 56. I have seen way too much tragedy in my life, self and others. I have an impeccable record, never been in legal trouble nor did wrong. Our Generation, self included, LET this happen (peeling away our CIVIL RIGHTS like ONIONS) by inaction and lethargy. I wish to spend how many years it NOW takes to stop it – for self a line in the sand has been drawn, big time. We need the legal field to help lead our way out of this legal AND pharmaceutical mess we allowed, implicitly and lethargically to happen. We can fix it, please attorneys, please help us regain the humanity we used to have….
An example of coercision - I will more than argue that this is very, very representative percentage wise of the 50,000+.... These questions, AND MORE – need to be sent out to the 50,000+ to GET TO THE TRUTH. I would even suggest that the litigants would be more than forgiving to the same attorneys that they are having major issues with, if ONLY the attorneys would finally (some are starting…) en mass say, enough is enough and true justice and humanity must prevail…
Take a look below…
I feel the SETTLEMENT was fair – 2
I do NOT feel the SETTLEMENT was fair - 26
I signed COMPLETELY free, willing and feeling it was fair – 0
I felt coerced for one of several reasons and felt that my CIVIL RIGHTS
were VIOLATED - 23
I feel I was represented appropriately - 3
I feel I was NOT reprsented appropriately - 23
That does not mean that locally one cannot sue for being run over by a car, but it WOULD mean that damage perpetuated by a drug company will have one heck of a hard time gaining any shred of adequate compensation for the rest of our lives, and our children’s also. It will allow the adequate testing needed to come out of the laboratory and into the public and will discourage proper pharma post-marketing tracking/analysis. It will make litigation merely a fixed, product life cycle cost. By providing fixed costs and capping risk, it will then permit other reckless and too risky behavior by the pharma industry. The ramifications get worse….
Really, I have spent the last 4 hours sickened by what I now see as a real possibility, unless MAJOR NOISE IS MADE, about to happen. It will complete the “loop” and it all fits very well. I am not a radical – in fact I have quite conservative values in re to family and right/wrong – but in re to CIVIL RIGHTS of MANY kinds, I would consider myself in the liberal camp, as I DO see movement towards as I say – “peeling away our CIVIL RIGHTS like onions”.
This DOES NOT mean it is over, it may mean that we vPEG http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MerckSettlement/ need to REALLY recognize that WE have just begun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_Action_Fairness_Act_of_2005
Then, along comes TORT REFORM - and since the PUBLIC DOES not understand what it really means, the PUBLIC thinks hot coffee/and near $50M (amt ?) award. SURE, the public opinion says, something must be done, let's support TORT REFORM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort_reform
OK, now along comes PHARMA. Things are starting to look great for Pharma.
TORT REFORM? what a great way to PUSH a private "settlement" (DEAL), surely the public at large will support such a brave effort...
OK, now we get the "settlement" (DEAL)....
The Public has been quoted with MANY mean spirited quotations (we are blood sucking thieves, we steal $ from the research for children, we steal $ from greater research efforts, etc...).
Merck poor mouths itself and declares that $5B is SUCH A LARGE amount (don't we know where that amount gets now a days divided by so many people?).
The COURTS say - sure, we have been instructed by our Congress and House to seek TORT REFORM;
The COURTS collude (sorry, I know a lot don't like that word...) with PHARMA and design/collude the referred "private settlement" (DEAL) that has, without question, stolen CIVIL RIGHTS up the kazoo....
BUT, then go further.... while at it... why not actually draft the MSA ("settlement" (DEAL)) so that we can then bring it to the legislative body for their signature? Sounds quick and easy enough...
And that is where it seems to be:
1 - pharma knew for a long time where this was going...
2 - the courts are only too glad to have a nice, easy way to wipe away their dockets...
3 - the legislative branch wishes (this is NOT an issue of which party) to look good to their consitutents and claim - SURE, we have WORKED VERY HARD AT TORT REFORM (i.e. signing what Merck DIRECTED for the entire industry).... By the way, they do so via illegal "bill of attainer"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder
Besides seeking JUSTICE AND FAIR COMPENSATION, a goal of 2009 needs to beat back this new realization.
An opinion, certainly backed up by a lot of step by step actions... I DO think this is what we are seeing...