Frequent guest and contributor, Attorney Jim Orr of the Dallas, TX based Heygood, Orr, Reyes, Pearson and Bartolomei firm, joins Speaking of Justice host Scott Drake to discuss the recent recall of a generic based copy of the Duragesic patch.  The product defect recall by Actavis Inc, the U.S based arm of the international drug manufacturing company Actavis Group hf, is important to note in that it is a total recall of ALL patches manufactured during significant time frame.

You may link to the FDA press release on the recall with all the lot and information numbers by clicking here.  

As listeners to LBN know, we have been following the Duragesic/Fentanyl patch litigation and recalls closely, including some video and audio podcasts with Jim Orr in the past. Important news in this particular podcasts covers the scope of the recall of the generic fentanyl patch, updates on the depositions that have recently been taken with the inventor/designer of the patch and further discussion of the manufacturing defect known as a fold over defect that dramatically increases the chances of leaks in the patch. If you are an attorney investigating or looking to get involved in Fentanyl patch litigation you should listen in to this podcast with Jim Orr, one of the nations leading experts in Duragesic or Fentanyl patch liability cases.

Click here to listen to the entire podcast with Attorney Jim Orr on the recall of the Actavis generic Fentanyl patch. 

In today's edition of Speaking of Justice, the daily LBN show that features news makers, commentators and experts in all area of the law, Scott Drake is joined by Attorney Roberta Ashkin, one of the nations leading experts in the area of HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) litigation, also known as Prempro litigation. 

Just last week in the Scroggin vs Wyeth case that was being argued in U.S. District Court in Little Rock, AK a jury returned compensatory damages on a Prempro trial of $2.7 million to plaintiff Donna Scroggin. The case is currently still in the damages phase on potential punitive damages, so this initial award is simply for compensatory damages.

Roberta and Scott discuss the facts and issues in both this case but also the landmark verdict in Reno, NV that was tried to a $150 million verdict by Zoe Littlepage of the Houston firm of Littlepage Booth. This was recently reduced by the trial judge to $50 million, still an outstanding amount and a substantial victory for the three plaintiffs.

Listen in to this podcast that gives a current update for trial lawyers and ordinary citizens on the topic of hormone replacement therapy, Prempro as well as the recent Supreme Court ruling on the Rezulin preemption case.  

This podcast is a very good synopsis of the duragesic patch litigation and the two attorney's who successfully brought in a verdict on this area of mass torts. If you are currently handling these cases or just wish to know more about Attorney Angel Reyes or Attorney Jim Orr this is a very solid video podcast.

At what point in time are the trial lawyers in the United States going to wake up and realize the mass tort/class action law suit model is badly flawed and rife with conflicts, back door deals and potential for abuse?

Todays article in the Sunday NY Times profiling Dickie Scruggs and the allegations being leveled against him in Federal Court regarding an alleged bribe made to a state court judge is sickening to read.  

I have no idea if the allegations are true and I have no doubt that Attorney Scruggs and the other defendants will put up a vigorous defense. They are portraying this as a situation where a rogue attorney in the Scruggs firm was acting on his own and when busted is turning states evidence in order to mitigate his own sentence. That very well may be true and only time will tell.  I sincerely hope for the sake of trial lawyers nation wide that this case turns out to be a witch hunt and the allegations are proved to be false because quite frankly the mass tort lawyers and the trial lawyers in general have been taking a beating for the better part of the last six years and the profession is definitely hurting at the moment.

As the article outlines quite clearly, there has been a string of high profile cases where mass tort or class action lawyers have corrupted judges, lied to the court, lied to their clients, paid kick backs to lead plaintiffs, stolen client money, cheated co-counsel, filed fraudulent medical records to the court, etc, etc, etc.

It's sickening, it's criminal and the attorney's who have engaged in this conduct have disgraced not only themselves but have created ammunition for the tort reform movement that is systematically stripping US citizens of their rights and access to the courts. Just read the quotes in today's NY Times article from the lobbying arm of the US Chamber of Commerce about how they are going to take these cases and headlines and use it to validate the wave of state and federal tort reform legislation that is about to hit the profession again.

What really makes me sick is that there are vehicles and processes that are far better, far more transparent and avoid the temptation of corrupt attorneys to enrich themselves at the expense of their clients, co-counsel and others then the hopelessly broken class action process. My question for the day is when will the trial lawyers of this country realize the class action model is hopelessly flawed and begin to use some of the innovative and client friendly methods that have been developed over the last few years as opposed to the miserably flawed process used in cases like Vioxx.

Quite frankly, at the moment the trial lawyers biggest enemies are themselves and the sloppy and often criminal business practices they have engaged in over the last decade or so. The tort reform movement shouldn't say a word right now but just follow the maxim " that if your enemy is destroying him self, don't stop him."

The Legal Broadcast Network features  Vanderbilt Professor Richard Nagareda, the author of the recently published " Mass Torts in a world of Settlements." This book, available on Amazon by clicking here, covers the evolution of Mass Tort litigation through the asbestos cases, pharmaceutical litigation and up to the recently announced Vioxx settlement.

You can listen to the entire podcast interview with Professor Nagareda on " Mass Torts in a world of Settlements" by clicking here.  

In his interview with Scott Drake, host of LBN's " This week in the Law", Professor Nagareda outlines how we are now looking at torts that are too big to litigate but essentially evolve into highly complex and politically charged business transactions between big business and "big law".

A fascinating interview, the first of our new features here on The Legal Broadcast Network, and particularly timely given the recent Vioxx settlement.

You can also check out the WSJ blog that features Professor Nagareda by clicking here.  

I don't think there is any other way to cut or spin this deal then to say that the $4.85 billion settlement announced yesterday between Merck and the trial lawyers representing Vioxx claimants is a huge win for Merck and the legal team representing them.

Mark Wahlstrom of The Settlement Channel has an excellent break down of the numbers behind this deal. He points out that after the 8% payment is taken off the top of the fund, the attorneys are paid and the medical liens and expenses are resolved that the average claimant in a MI case is probably going to net around $50,000 and the average IC, or stroke victim, can expect about $17,500. I don't think most people realize just how small an amount is going to be available for the actual victims of these injuries if this settlement is affirmed in January but given the realities facing the trial lawyers in this situation it might be the best they can hope for.

There is no other way to spin this deal other then a total and complete victory for the "bleed them white" tactics employed by Merck. By adopting a take every case to trial and then appeal every loss stance they might have spent north of $2 billion defending the cases over the last three years, but as pointed out by The Settlement Channels analysis they probably saved Merck over $15 billion in claims paid in addition to another $3 to $4 billion in defense costs during the next 5 to 7 years. To say Merck got out keep in this matter is an understatement.

The average Vioxx settlements are going to be far below those of a comparable case, the Phen Fen litigation, in which the total settlement ended up closer to $20 billion for the heart damage those drugs caused. However, given the tactics, negotiating strength and realities of moving forward this deal clearly appealed to a significant segment of the trial bar. The question now is going to be whether or not the 85% threshold of claimants can be reached and if all Vioxx claimants and attorneys will be happy with the relatively meager amounts they will receive in this settlement.

The Legal Broadcast Network will be doing a series of podcasts on the Vioxx and Merck settlement, it's impact on trial lawyers, the decision to be made by claimants and what comes next in this process. Be sure to be watching these pages and listening to these important podcasts to be up to date on the choices that both trial lawyers and claimants will be needing to make in the coming months are regards their vioxx damage claims.  

 

 Last week on Civil Action Radio guest host, Attorney Roberta Ashkin of the Ashkin Law Office, was joined by the trial lawyer team that won the nationally publicized verdict in the first Federal Fentanyl Patch case. Roberta is a frequent guest and commentator on The Legal Broadcast Network and her commentary on legal issues and areas of interest to trial lawyers can be found exclusively on LBN channels and podcasts.

The 25 minute podcast featured Attorney Jim Orr of Dallas, TX and a partner in Heygood, Orr, Reyes & Bartolomei, and Attorney Ike Gulas of Birmingham, AL and a partner in the firm of Gulas & Stuckey. This podcast is a bit longer then our typical 15 minute editions but this case has been reported in virtually every major national publication and legal magazine and this interview with two key members of the trial team will give you an inside glimpse into the facts and issues that brought this verdict in for the plaintiffs.
 

 Jim Orr focuses his practice on complex business litigation and personal injury matters and over the course of his career he has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in a variety of civil litigation matters and has tried over 60 cases to verdict. He is AV rated by Martindale Hubbell and has been voted several times by his peers one of the "Super Lawyers" in the State of Texas. Also representing the client for Heygood, Orr, Reyes and Bartolomei in this case were Attorney Angel Reyes and Charles Miller as part of the trial team and you can find their bio's and more information about the firm by clicking the link above.

 

 

 Ike Gulas has built an impressive reputation in mass tort litigation and class action suits brought against the pharmaceutical manufacturers of Rezulin, Fen-Phen, Serzone and Baycol. His firm is known through out the south as one of the premier mass tort trial firms and this verdict in a difficult federal case will only further cement that reputation.  

The podcast discusses the $5.5 million wrongful death verdict against two subsidiaries, Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, LP and ALZA Corp, both subsidiaries of pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson, in the nations first federal court trial involving the patch form of the narcotic painkiller fentanyl, also known and sold under the name "Duragesic patch".  In this particular case the plaintiffs were the estate of the late Adam Hendelson who died on December 17, 2003 as a result of the leakage of the patch which put fatal levels of fentanyl into his system, killing him at home.

This is a significant verdict and fascinating case that will be of interest to trial lawyers nationally and settlement professionals who have clients that work in pharmaceutical litigation.

You can listen to the entire podcast by clicking here. 

In a major story released on Thursday May 10th, Attorney Jan Schlichtmann's Whistleblower case against Johnson & Johnson was profiled in a major story in the Wall Street Journal.

The WSJ is subscription based but the link to the story is here.

You can also access the Health Blog on the WSJ Online site by clicking here to get a summary and read postings and reactions to the article.  

This article details how Johnson & Johnson, in the marketing of their anemia drug Procrit had created an elaborate rebate and sales incentive scheme to promote the off label use of the drug, allow for rebates in the millions of dollars as well as game the system on average wholesale pricing. 

Of course the big story that the article hardly touched on was the looming whistleblower case on the off label marketing of Procrit and submission of false claims to medicare and medicaid during a 6+ year period before the FDA halted the practice.

All of this was followed by the FDA hearings the next day that indicated that the recommendations are likely to be a major curtailment of using the drug for anything other then very specific situations, instead of the " Red Bull for chemo patients" marketing approach that was used in television advertising.

You can keep up to speed on this entire case and anemia drugs by going to the the Civil Action Center blog by clicking here.  

In a front page story today the New York Times exposed a little known, but long practiced, policy by which anemia drugs are marketed to doctors, oncologists and other medical professionals through a series of payments, sales incentives and other inducements.

You can read the entire NY Times article by clicking this link.

As you know the Civil Action Center and LBN have been following this story closely for the last 2 months and will continue to report on these developments, particularly with the long awaited hearing tomorrow at the FDA on the safety issues surrounding this particular class of drugs who are marketed under names such as Procit, Epogen and Aranesp. The two major manufacturers of these drugs are Johnson & Johnson through their Ortho subsidiary and by Amgen.

Today Attorney Jan Schlichtmann had as his guest on Civil Action Radio nationally renown trial lawyer Roberta Ashkin of New York, NY., discussing the NY Times article, the marketing abuses and also the ESA trust which has been formed to begin the process of discovering what injuries might have occurred due to the over use of this class of injectable anemia treatments.

You can listen to the entire podcast by clicking here.

This is going to be a major and continuing story so subscribe to our RSS feed or podcasts to stay abreast of this information.  

This video, accessed at either the Yahoo video page for LBN, or by clicking on our video archive section, or just watching the TV box below, is a discussion by Attorney Jan Schlichtmann and Mark Wahlstrom of The Settlement Channel and Wahlstrom & Associates about the recent innovation being used on multi-claimant and mass tort cases, a 468b qualified settlement trust. While the tax law and use of 468b is well established, it's use as an accumulator of claims and negotiation tool is an innovation designed jointly by Wahlstrom and Schlichtmann and if your curious about how it could be used in environmental cases, property cases like the shade tree trust or mass torts like epogen, procrit, aranesp and vioxx, this is a great video to watch. Short and too the point and it gives you the highlights on a fresh and innovative approach to handling mass tort claims and cases.

All this week and weekend I'll continue to release our video podcasts from the recent Mass Torts Made Perfect conference featuring a wide array of speakers and commentators of interest to trial lawyers, settlement professionals, citizens and journalists.  Remember, all of the LBN Channel content is delivered free of charge and is available 24 hours a day. All we ask is if you post it or share our videos that you link back to our blog page or pass the word about us.

These two video's feature two unique individuals, the Reverend Al Sharpton, who is a nationally known civil rights activist and advocate for civil justice, and the legendary Jock Smith, the partner of the late Johnnie Cochran in forming the Cochran law firm. Both of these men have labored hard and long in the fight for civil justice, civil rights and areas that protect the environment and the rights of ordinary citizens.

Reverend Sharpton's video is a 5 minute discussion of his speech to the convention as well as the impact on him personally of the recent discovery that Strom Thurmond's family at one time were the slave owners of Rev. Sharpton's great grandfather. A fascinating interview.

  Attorney Jock Smith joins Jan Schlichtmann to discuss many of the projects he is currently involved in such as the Rosa Park's Foundation litigation, environmental issues and many of the other big cases on the national scene such as Vioxx, Asbestos, Procrit and others.