Author: Antonio Tanner

Is Pfizer Inc. Vulnerable to Lawsuits Because of Their Birth Control Pill Mix Up?Is Pfizer Inc. Vulnerable to Lawsuits Because of Their Birth Control Pill Mix Up?


| | 0 Comment| 7:02 am

On February 1, 2012, Pfizer, Inc. announced that it is recalling 14 lots (roughly one million packets) of birth control medication, Lo-Ovral-28, Norgestrel, and Ethinyl Estradiol. The company says the ratio of active to inactive pills in these packets is incorrect due to labeling errors, a fact which will render the pills useless.

Obviously it is not unusual for a woman to miss a pill now and then; and often it is ok as long as she takes the pill as soon as the error is noted. In the case of the Pfizer fiasco, however, there is no way to know which pills in the pack were faulty. Pfizer has released the lot numbers of the affected medication on their website, a step which will help customers to figure out if they in fact have been taking the ineffective drug.

In addition, the corporation is urging women who have used the product to begin using a non-hormonal form of contraception immediately. The FDA is also recommending that all women potentially affected by the mishap should call their doctors immediately.

Regardless, the damage is done, and the big question remains: Is Pfizer Inc. vulnerable to hefty damage claims because of this mishap? Despite what some pundits have said on the news, the answer is maybe. Any such lawsuit would have to be brought in a jurisdiction that permits these types of causes of action. While it is possible that class action lawsuits might be filed in other states, Pennsylvania law is explicit when it comes to wrongful birth and wrongful life cases.

Pennsylvania law does not recognize damages in a wrongful life action. A wrongful life action amounts to a child plaintiff suing a doctor or other medical provider for failing to prevent the child’s birth. It is a complex matter which many agree relies heavily on the question of “life versus non-existence.” And as attorney Sean Wajert wrote, the question of whether a child should have been born is an issue “more properly to be left to philosophers and theologians.” In fact, ten states–including Pennsylvania–have banned civil actions for wrongful life.

Nor does Pennsylvania recognize damages in a wrongful birth action. In this type of action, it is the parents who are suing, rather than the child. The issue here is if they had known that the child would be born with a birth defect, for instance, the parents may have aborted the pregnancy. Not having sufficient information of the health of the baby in vitro deprives the parents of the choice of having or not having the child.

The applicable Pennsylvania statutes that apply are 42 Pa. C.S. Sections 8305 and 8306.

Damages in these cases, in state that do allow them, are measured by the lifetime cost to care for the child.

In short, most states, Pennsylvania included, disfavor wrongful birth and wrongful life causes of action. And while it is entirely possible that Pfizer will face litigation for its errors, even if a woman gets pregnant these will be difficult cases to win against the pharmaceutical company.


Jury Trials In Personal Injury CasesJury Trials In Personal Injury Cases


| | 0 Comment| 6:13 am

Our founding fathers did not foresee subprime mortgages, credit swaps, collateralized debt obligations, and the housing bubble, but they did foresee the need to preserve the rights of citizens to have jury trials in civil cases. The Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows:

Amendment VII: Rights in Civil Cases

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. 

In today’s legal community are citizens getting their day in court in front of a jury of their peers? The answer is generally no. There are several reasons for the lack of use of the jury trial as a means to resolve dispute is civil cases.

  • Rise of contractually mandated arbitration clauses. For example, take a look at the typical automobile insurance policy. It usually contains a clause to the effect that in uninsured or underinsured motorist cases, each party will choose an arbitrator, and the two arbitrators will select a neutral. (In Pennsylvania, since the holding in Insurance Federation vs. Koken, auto carriers are no longer required to have arbitration clauses in their policies. The implications of Koken, and whether the ruling was more favorable to claimants or to insurance carriers will be left for another article.)
  • Greater use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as a means of resolving claims for damages.
  • Court mandated settlement conferences.
  • Impossible time requirements and notice of trial imposed on litigants by the Courts. For instance, it is not uncommon in Philadelphia and Montgomery County to be on twenty four hour notice, or less, of an upcoming trial. So while litigants are made aware that their case may be called for trial in any particular month, the litigants are not given anything close to a date certain for trial. This can place severe constraints on parties, witnesses and expert witnesses. It is no surprise, therefore, that some counties impose these constraints on parties as a method of clearing their dockets of cases by forcing the parties to settle.
  • Lack of trial experience of counsel. ADR is a good way to resolve some personal injury cases. But, with the increase of the use of ADR, and mandated arbitration, fewer and fewer personal injury lawyers are gaining actual jury trial experience.

Trial lawyers represent people who can least afford lawyers, which is why the contingent fee system in personal injury cases is so important to ensuring access to the court system. It evens the playing field. While alternative means of resolving disputes is useful, helpful and appropriate in some cases, other cases require a hearing in front of a jury as a means of maximizing a client’s claim. As long as the client is informed of the trial risks and related expenses, counsel must be ready to utilize the jury system.


Is the recession affecting my personal injury practice?Is the recession affecting my personal injury practice?


| | 0 Comment| 6:13 am

Yes, but not the way the recession is affecting everyone else.

What I’ve notice is this: Vendors I deal with are more willing to negotiate prices with me. Many of my clients are more anxious and hope that the courts will give them earlier trial dates, (they won’t). Anecdotally I’ve noticed that insurance companies are stingier with their settlement offers, and are slow in delivering settlement checks.

However, personal injury law practices are much more affected by changes in the law than the public is aware of. Washington, Harrisburg as well as the state and federal courts are constantly making changes in the law that affect the rights of injured plaintiffs. Attacks on victim’s rights are cyclical, as are changes in the economy. Those cycles usually do not go up and down at the same time. I certainly hope to ride out the recession like everybody else. What’s coming down the pike to attack my clients’ rights is as of now an unknown, but whether or not we are living through a recession; there will certainly be attacks of the rights of accident victims.