Updating my federal cases trial report of Wednesday, the verdict was handed down -- after hours last night -- per the Maryland Daily Record online edition:
. . . .A Baltimore jury has awarded $555,000 to a former Merck & Co. saleswoman who claimed she was fired two years ago in retaliation for reporting her supervisor’s violations of corporate policies.
The panel deliberated about three hours Friday afternoon before finding in favor of Jennifer Scott, a 47-year-old Ellicott City woman who worked at Merck from 1992 to 2008. . . .
Scott had complained to Merck’s ethics office in July 2007 concerning William Liberato’s insistence that she allow a co-worker to use her credit card to cover dinners with doctors, and about Liberato’s support of unauthorized sales pitches. Scott had worked at the pharmaceutical giant for 16 years and won several awards before she was sacked. . . .
Asked about the possibility of an appeal, [Scott's lawyer] said he viewed the case “as a credibility issue, which is what a jury decides” and that “had we lost, we would not have appealed.”“But they have a lot more resources than Ms. Scott does,” [Scott's lawyer] noted. . . .
According to the parties’ pretrial memorandum, the company’s Office of Ethics determined that Liberato had mishandled the credit card controversy and that he had improperly encouraged sales reps to use unapproved promotional messages. . . .
Among the people who supported Scott’s version of events were a former boss and a physician customer. . . .
Since credibility was the central issue here, the jury's determination will stand, unless it is deemed against the manifest weight of the evidence. So, New Merck will very likely ultimately lose, here. Even so, it is just shameful that Merck is going to force this woman to wait another year, while that appeal is sorted out, to see the money. Perhaps the judge will require that Merck at least post a bond, in order to file the appeal. We will follow the appeal -- that I can promise the readership.
No comments:
Post a Comment