Big win for Merck in Vioxx 2

[Snide]

I don't know if this will give any comfort to those who had a hissy fit over the first Vioxx case verdict ($253 million to the plaintiff, but in reality $26 million plus interest), but for what it's worth, Merck is now 1-1. Interesting comments from attorney Mark Lanier about "dirty hands" plaintiffs.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/03/news/fortune500/merck_humeston/index.htm?cnn=yes

 

[Just thinking]

Unfortunately I can't reveal what I know about what actually happened in this case due to personal involvement -- but if you knew what the plaintiff Humeston was doing and just how much Vioxx he had taken (not to mention his likelihood for a heart attack) your cries would be to have the judge disbarred for not initially throwing this case out of court.

 

[Snide]

Unfortunately I can't reveal what I know about what actually happened in this case due to personal involvement -- but if you knew what the plaintiff Humeston was doing and just how much Vioxx he had taken (not to mention his likelihood for a heart attack) your cries would be to have the judge disbarred for not initially throwing this case out of court.

Sure, get me all curious and you can't tell me more!!

(I probably shouldn't post on this case either, but for different reasons...so there!)

 

[Just thinking]

I would like nothing more than to spell things out -- but I can't. I do feel your frustration, as unlikely as you are to believe me.

ETA: PS -- have you taken note of my location?

 

[Snide]

I would like nothing more than to spell things out -- but I can't. I do feel your frustration, as unlikely as you are to believe me.

ETA: PS -- have you taken note of my location?

Is that you, judge??

(Or better yet...Juror #4??)

My location is of little help, but I suppose I could be "found out" with some Googling.