Merck expected to lose Humeston’s Vioxx lawsuit
Diane Sullivan, one of the top attorneys on the Merck legal team, has behaved in a manner in the ongoing trial in New Jersey that most lawyers will not describe as”professional.” Early on in the Humeston lawsuit trial, she came across as very combative and Judge Carol Higbee not only had to overrule several of her unreasonable demands, but also reject all of Merck’s five requests for declaring a mistrial.
Analysts predict that Merck will lose this second trial dealing a fatal blow to the company’s Vioxx legal strategy. That is why Merck’s lawyers have been desperately trying to avoid a decision in this case. In fact things took a rather comical turn early this week when Merck made, what many legal experts though was a joke, a request for a “directed verdict” – a decision by the judge that the plaintiff had done such a poor job of presenting Humeston’s case that the case should be closed right away and Merck should be declared as the winner. Such verdicts in high profile cases like this one are practically unknown since lawyers work for months before appearing in court.
But wait, there is more!
Merck attorneys had even more ridiculous ideas in their minds. For instance, to present Briggs Morrison, a vice president at Merck, as an expert on the safety of Vioxx while all he had done was to test the drug on mice and rats. In fact, Merck is being sued by Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) for abusing animal research data to justify safety of a drug.
Judge Carol Higbee was so offended that she said, “Quite frankly, I felt sick yesterday afternoon. I realized how I have got sucked into this. I feel that I was misled during the testimony.” These are very strong words from a judge during a trial.
Judge Higbee has thrown out the testimony by Morrison, but if you expected that Diane Sullivan will take the decision gracefully, you are wrong. On the other hand, she protested so loudly that the judge had to ask her to shut up and even had to threaten her that she will order Sullivan’s removal from the court if she did not stop.
It is very clear that Wall Street is expecting a defeat for Merck in this case. Since the trial began last month, the stock has dropped about 8%. Ed Stenson, an analyst, puts it in the most polite terms, “…the downside is the more attractive direction for Merck.”
Related article: Merck will find it extremely difficult to defend its position
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.