Author Archive

0
30
Mar

Supreme Court says companies responsible for their actions

Opinion Piece published in The Birmingham News

Sunday, March 29, 2009 ERNEST CORY and LEILA H. WATSON
Accountability. If a company manufactures what it knows to be a potentially dangerous drug and sells it without adequate instruction of how to use it safely, the manufacturer should be held accountable when a patient is harmed because the instructions were deficient.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision of Wyeth v. Levine, that this basic rule of accountability, which we were all taught, and which we have all passed on to our own children, also applies to corporate drug manufacturers: You are responsible for your own actions.

Diana Levine, suffering a migraine headache, went to a Vermont medical clinic for a treatment she had received many times: Demerol for pain and Phenergan for nausea. On this occasion, however, the medications were administered by “IV push.” The Phenergan was exposed to arterial blood, and caused swift and irreversible gangrene. Levine’s right hand and forearm had to be amputated. Wyeth, the manufacturer, knew that Phenergan should not be administered by IV push because of this very risk, yet failed to warn doctors against it.

Wyeth argued that the Food and Drug Administration is responsible for the labeling on Phenergan and all other pharmaceuticals sold in the United States, and therefore no drug company can ever be sued for mistakes and failures in the labels and warnings. Wyeth wanted legal immunity for any harm caused by its products, even in cases like Levine’s lawsuit, where the patient could prove Wyeth knew of the undisclosed risks.

The Supreme Court disagreed.

Recognizing that the FDA is underfunded and overworked, the Supreme Court said “the FDA has limited resources to monitor the 11,000 drugs on the market, and manufacturers have superior access to information about their (own) drugs.” The court specifically said drug manufacturers, not the FDA, bear the primary responsibility at all times to ensure that instructions and warnings are complete and accurate. Drug companies – corporate America – must live by the same rules we do: Each of us is responsible – and accountable – for our own actions.

By sweeping aside legal immunity and federal pre-emption, the Levine decision restored the important role of jury trials. Filing a lawsuit and trying your case to a jury has been the foundation of our civil justice system since the drafting of the Constitution. But over the past decade, there has been a concerted effort, mostly by insurance companies, big tobacco, oil companies, multinational corporations and the George W. Bush administration, to discredit juries and the verdicts they reach.

Wyeth argued to the Supreme Court that a civil jury should not undermine the work of the FDA to approve drug warnings, and that the FDA was an agency of experts and no civil jury of lay people should be allowed to second-guess the agency decisions to approve drug labels. In fact, as pointed out by the Supreme Court, the FDA relies on the civil justice system to provide “an additional, and important, layer of consumer protection that complements FDA regulation.”

Lawsuits and jury trials have produced evidence for public review of drug hazards even after the particular product has been approved by the FDA. Vioxx, the blockbuster pain reliever manufactured by Merck & Co. Inc. is just one such example of a drug whose dangers were uncovered after injured patients hired attorneys. The lawyers opened up millions of pages of studies, documents and memos to experts and discovered that Vioxx caused an increased risk of heart attack and stroke, all of which led to the removal of Vioxx from the market, and the addition of strong warnings on other drugs in the same class.

No one should be able to act irresponsibly, cause harm and never face a jury to answer for his conduct. The Levine decision puts drug companies on the same level as the people who are harmed by their products and as those who sit on the juries. Ernest Cory and Leila H. Watson are founding shareholders of Cory Watson Crowder & DeGaris, a Birmingham law firm known for its work as plaintiff attorneys in product liability and mass torts cases involving the pharmaceutical industry, medical device manufacturers and manufacturers of consumer products. E-mail: corywatson@cwcd.com.


© 2009 The Birmingham News. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

0
17
Dec

MONETARY CAPS ON COUNTY AND MUNICIPALITY LIABILITY

Let’s be clear on something.  If you are harmed by the wrongful act of a county or municipality, you need to make certain that all your damages can be paid for $100,000, or less.  This includes all your medical bills, lost wages, future lost wages and medical expenses, damaged limbs and other personal injuries and emotional distress.  It does not matter that you go to trial and prove the wrongful act and the jury awards you a verdict of $1,000,000.  You will only be paid $100,000 by the governmental entity and the judgment will be marked “satisfied” by the court. 

 In 1978, the Alabama Legislature passed a law that $100,000 would be the maximum amount that any Alabama county or municipality would have to pay to satisfy a judgment against it in an individual tort action.  The motivation for the act was to ensure that the public coffers would not be emptied to pay for tort actions.  This means that when a driver is caused to lose control of his or her vehicle due to dangerous and defective roadway conditions caused by a county or municipality, that the most the county or municipality will pay, regardless of the amount of any judgment against it, will be $100,000 to any individual.

 One of the most tragic cases to come through our office was a little boy who was crossing a street after his school bus dropped him off, and he was struck by an oncoming motorist.  He was left alive but brain damaged and was eventually discharged from the hospital to his parents’ care,  requiring around the clock care with feeding, bathing, moving, turning, diapering – everything.  His mother left her job to care for her son because they could not afford the nursing care that the doctors recommended.  His father assumed a second job to avoid eviction and to put food on the table.  The intersection where he had been hit was one of the most notorious and dangerous intersections in the city.  There were no signs requiring motorists to slow down on approach, there were no stop signs or traffic signals installed, and there was no crossing guard during school hours.  Any of these simple measures would have saved destruction of this family by this accident.  We filed a lawsuit against the municipality that had maintained the intersection for decades, and damages were sought for his paralysis, brain damage and medical expenses, just to start the list of damages.  But the only money the municipality was required to pay was $100,000. 

 I understand the thinking of the Alabama Legislature in 1978, and frankly, if I had been practicing back then, might have agreed.  But today, the reality is that nearly every county and municipality has purchased liability insurance and no accident is ever going to empty the public bank account to pay lawsuit damages.  The other reality is that the equivalent of $100,000 in 1978, is today about $300,000.  There was no provision in the law to account for inflation and the value of a dollar. Counties and municipalities are not being held responsible for all the harm that they cause.  In the case of my young client,the money the city paid made almost no difference in the life of that family.

 Our firm and other plaintiff law firms have argued to the courts that the cap on damages should not be applied for numerous reasons, and all efforts have failed because the courts do not have the authority to raise the limits set by the Legislature.  Only the Legislature can do that, and that requires a majority vote to protect a small proportion of people living and working in Alabama, including one little boy. So what do we do as plaintiff lawyers for people like the little boy?  We thoroughly investigate every accident on a county or city roadway or any public work, to see if the governmental agency partnered or contracted with the private sector to perform and complete the work.  We have to track down every responsible party for the public work.  We have to follow every lead.  But the real answer lies in the grasp of the Legislature, which alone has the power to update these limits.  The cost of medical care and the hourly rate of wages lost have risen in the thirty years since passage of this act, but the law has not kept pace.  The citizens are paying the cost, rather than the responsible government authority.

0
1
Dec

“Justice delayed is justice denied.” Wm. E. Gladstone (1809-1898)

“Justice delayed is justice denied.”  Wm. E. Gladstone (1809-1898)

 

            Imagine being traumatically harmed by a defective product or in a tractor trailer accident and seeking redress by the only means available – by the filing of a lawsuit against the business or person responsible.  Imagine the bills arriving every week for thousands of dollars for the hospitals, doctors, rehabilitation, and nursing services required to recover from the injuries, and imagine the days and months of unemployment and no paychecks to pay for medical care, utilities, food, and all the necessities of life.  And while this onslaught is crashing over you, you are waiting for a trial date, waiting for resolution and compensation from the responsible party, so you can move on with your recovery and your life.

 

            Read the rest of this entry »