Once again, New Jersey has made the unflattering list of places where judges "systematically apply laws and court procedures in an inequitable manner, generally against defendants in civil lawsuits," according to the American Tort Reform Association, which compiles the annual ranking. And Alabama has landed on the watch list for the second consecutive year.
Why? The Superior Court of Atlantic County, which is located in the shadow of Atlantic City's hulking casinos, remains what ATRA calls "a center for mass tort actions, often directed at one of the state's own economic generators, pharmaceutical manufacturers." The group calculates 93 percent of plaintiffs in New Jersey's pharmaceutical mass torts come from outside the state and the court houses central case management for six mass torts in the state, each involving a different drugmaker. Of course, several big drugmakers have - or, until recent mergers, did have - US or global headquarters in New Jersey.
As for Alabama, Attorney General Troy King hired personal injury lawyer Jere Beasley to sue 70 drugmakers, claiming pricing practices known to federal and state regulators amounted to fraud. The ATRA notes there were three multimillion-dollar verdicts in Montgomery County, but in October, the Alabama Supreme Court stepped in to stop what it characterized as "regulation by litigation" and threw out all three verdicts.
As ATRA recounts, verdicts came in against AstraZeneca, which paid $215 million (including $175 million in punitive damages), but was later reduced to $160 million; and against GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis totaling $114 million. In February, a Montgomery County Circuit Court jury returned a $78.4 million verdict against Novartis' Sandoz generic unit, including $50 million in punitive damages. The state has also settled lawsuits against 16 drugmakers for $124 million.
As ATRA sees it, the issue doesn't do justice to Alabama taxpayers. As of September, private attorneys working on lawsuits against drugmakers on behalf of the state had earned about $13 million this year, while the state got $38 million in settlement money to finance its withering budget.
The Alabama attorney general is one of several "who have used private, contingency-fee lawyers to bring actions on behalf of the state, raising questions as to whether law enforcement is about profiting lawyers and campaign contributors or about the public interest. The practice also siphons from taxpayers millions of dollars that the state would otherwise recover had it used its own lawyers rather than outside counsel." Here is the full report.
However, Tom Dart, chairman of the Alabama Civil Justice Reform Committee, a group which advocates tort reform, says he shared some of the ATRF's concerns on the pharmaceutical lawsuits, but added that he felt King's record was "positive" on the issue. "His body of work has been positive for the business community and for tort reform in general," he tells The Mobile Press-Register. "He's done good things that far outweigh those issues."
8 Comments
Ah, some of my favorite reading. The Hellholes report is written in the style of someone who has had 33 too many cups of coffee and is probably off his, well, Zyprexa, for example. Lurid stuff! Great to keep by toilet.
But here is the more serious part. As a result of losing so definitively in Wyeth v. Levine, the preemption lobby--led by ATRA--has escalated its state-by-state strategy. The goal is to get other states to pass statutes similar to ours in Michigan, which provides, in practice, a full shield for drug companies against any liability suits.
The preemption lobby has had some success. And while it is unlikely that states like NJ, NY, CT, or MA will pass such bills--where most of the pharma headquarters are--Texas already has one that is close, and a number of other southern and western states will feel the press of initatives over the next few years (as GA will again).
So, if you don't want to live in a _real_ judicial hellhole, keep your eyes peeled.
Great post Ed!
As a non-attorney, I am gaining an appreciation of how product liability claims are a major means of redressing personal injuries to the public caused by the myriad of dangerous drugs in the marketplace. Every pharma should be compelled to disclose how much they pay the preemption lobby in each state on a year-by-year basis. It's sad to see more states moving in the direction taken by Michigan.
The truth is that these drug companies withhold important information about potential AEs (Adverse Events) for PROFIT. I remember speaking with a Prempro rep who had tons of material that was not appropriate and the company sent it to the reps according to this person. This drug is now a major issue in the courts.
Who is responsible? Likely those above the rep level as they decide who is in the know about threatening issues with the drug. Info is held back for the sake of great sales.
Its one of many. The Hell Holes exist due to the greed and the "profit at any cost mentality". Unless they hold executives to the fire things won't change. I mean high up executives too.
Don't forget the doctors that took the money and eagerly looked away from the obvious issues with their patients taking Vioxx either. The paid consultants were too busy cashing their checks to do no harm.
Batman
Batman, Ditto.
Patrons99 I think stated on another thread that you are a physician, but even if you're not, here's a question for all physicians: How many of you have compulsively filled out an online Medwatch Form each and every time whenever one of your patients has a potentially drug-related adverse event. Answer is very few of you take the 10-15 minutes or so to complete the forms. Most doctors have never even takenn the time tom learn about Medwatch. Therefore, if there is any under-reporting of AE's, doctors must shoulder at least part of the blame.
pharmavet,
I agree that doctors must shoulder at least part of the blame for under-reporting of AE's. However, the current system of drug and biologic safety monitoring is broken. Drug (drug, biologic, and device) safety must be completely independent of both FDA and pharma. Anything less is certain to fail. FDA became a client (shill) of pharma in 1992, with the initial enactment of the PDUFA. The public deserves an independent worldwide drug safety database, where both data entry and analysis are independent of pharma's influence. You cannot let a wolf (FDA and pharma) watch over a hen house. No one should really be surprised at the current drug safety crisis.
Patrons99 is correct as far as accurate safety information from FDA. Believe it or not, a few years ago I had to actually had to submit FOIA request on behalf of a pharmaceutical company to access safety data from the AERS database that was more than a few years old. The data were needed for a citizen's petition, which was submitted way overdue because of the FOIA delay. When we finally received the data, it looked as if had been cut and pasted from several of the FDA's ancient computer systems. Therefore maybe an independent group is one way to go. The CDC does a pretty good job with their databases. Maybe we should give the job to them.
Pharmavet, I strongly disagree. CDC might even be worse than FDA at managing drug safety. The WHO, CDC, EMEA, and FDA are all marching to the beat of the same drummer (pharma $$$). Their interests are all conflicted. I certainly do not consider the CDC to be independent of pharma.