In the spirit of fairness, I'll also post a PDF file of the Merck trial counsel's complaint letter.
Readers should bear in mind that -- as the loser of the $8 million jury verdict -- Merck's legal team may have some additional motivation, beyond simple courtroom decorum. A ruling imposing sanctions on the one plaintiff's lawyer might -- emphasis might -- be used to bolster Merck's arguments for a retrial of the Boles Fosamax® ONJ case (Boles III, anyone?).
To be clear, though, I think such an outcome (a third trial) is unlikely in the extreme. In any event, here's a bit of that letter:
. . . .[The attorney's] demeaning treatment of the witnesses presented by the defense and the deliberate mischaracterization of their testimony could, in other circumstances, create a serious impediment to the willingness of such witnesses to testify in the future. If that happened, suchconduct would hinder the pursuit of justice in those cases. It will not happen here because of the dedication, convictions, and professional integrity of the Merck witnesses. . . .
The manner in which the "outrageous summation" and other conduct affected the trial will be the subject of post-trial motions and I do not address it here. I mean this letter to set out only my views on the manner in which counsel's conduct has the potential lo affect our system of justice. . . .
That bolded bit (in the excerpted first paragraph's conclusion) may effectively undercut Merck's motions for a new trial, here.
As ever -- we'll see.
No comments:
Post a Comment