In an e-mail Tuesday, Weitz & Luxenberg partner Paul Pennock wrote that, "far from going away, Seroquel is about to reveal AstraZeneca as one of the worst managers of a mass tort litigation in history." In a follow-up phone call, Pennock told us why he thought we'd missed the big picture.
About 20,000 Seroquel users--who took the drug to manage schizophrenia and bipolar disorder--have sued AstraZeneca claiming that the drug caused their diabetes. Earlier this week, we reported that a Delaware state court judge dismissed the third Seroquel case in a row after plaintiffs' expert testimony on causation was struck on Daubert grounds. As we noted, Delaware superior court judge Joseph Slights wrote that, "it is appropriate to wonder aloud" about the future of the cases pending in his state.
But, Pennock stresses, only 700 cases are pending in Delaware. More importantly, roughly 13,000 cases are alive and well in New York and New Jersey state courts, where, Pennock believes, the law is more favorable to the plaintiffs. "We have little concern that we'll have the same Daubert problems" in New York and New Jersey, he said. The first trial in New Jersey is scheduled for January 18, 2010.
In addition, there are 6,000 Seroquel cases in multidistrict litigation that Pennock said will be remanded for trial in federal court in 41 districts. "This [litigation] is not just alive and kicking," Pennock said. "It's about to go into full sprint in district courts around the country.
As for AstraZeneca mismanaging the litigation, Pennock compared the company's strategy with that of Eli Lilly when it was sued over its own antipsychotic, Zyprexa. There, the company settled the first 8,100 cases for about $700 million. "AstraZeneca is three years into this and they've spent about $700 million on litigation," Pennock claimed. "If this gets out of hand and we start winning cases and banging trials for $4 or $5 million a case, how is anyone going to convince a client with diabetes to settle the remaining cases for anything that AstraZeneca could afford?"
Dechert, which is coordinating counsel for AstraZeneca, said they were not authorized to comment. But we did get a statement from AstraZeneca spokesperson Tony Jewell: "In the cases prepared for trial to date, plaintiffs have been repeatedly unable to prove their claims in court. The evidence--looked at fully and fairly--does not back up the allegations that Seroquel was responsible for the plaintiffs' alleged injuries. AstraZeneca is committed to a strong defense effort and will evaluate the remaining cases on their individual merits."
No comments:
Post a Comment