Re: Tort system
From: Charlie Chambers (ricechaz@gorge.net)
Sat Apr 15 15:03:59 2006
I can appreciate that term "litogen". I think that is one of our
greatest epidemics is the enormous growth of litogens in medicine
whether it's silicone implants, benedectin, CAT scans, etc.
I think some of the public's view of risk can best be evidenced by
the recent "Sopranos" episode. While at a wedding, AJ's girlfriend
declines an offer of seafood since she doesn't want to take in any
toxins. Meanwhile, she's happily enjoying a cigarette.
On Apr 15, 2006, at 12:29 PM, Dean Huffman . wrote:
> .
>
> I was in Washington DC the day the Daubert case was argued. Kenneth
> W. Starr
> (former federal judge, former solicitor general, and former special
> prosecutor
> for (against) Clinton, argued the case for the pharmaceutical
> company, Merrill
> Dow. It was a birth defects case about Bendictin, but more to the
> point, was a
> case about the federal rules of evidence, introduction of "junk
> science" into
> testimony. Daubert v. Merrill Dow. <
> http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-102.ZS.html >.
>
> A case that had happened a few years before that was Wells v. Ortho <
> http://www.law.harvard.edu/publications/evidenceiii/cases/wells.htm
> >, a birth
> defects case where there was a claim that a sprmicide, made by
> ortho, casued
> birth defects in a newborn. The award was in the millions. And the
> award cannot
> be blamed on a run-away jury since the case was heard by a federal
> judge,
> sitting without a jury.
>
> There is a geneticist, I cannot remember his name at this time, who
> crated the
> term "Litogen" to describe a substance that did not cause birth
> defects, but
> DID cause litigation. Bendictin would most certainly fall into that
> category.
>
> - - - -
>
> Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:50:19 -0500
> Subject: Re: Tort system
>
> For those in Medicine who are unaware of scientific evidence in the
> court
> room(as I was before I started law school 4 yrs ago), Daubert and
> its progeny
> are alive and well in the US. The companion cases in Texas are
> Robinson and
> Havner v Merrill-Dowell.
>
> Plaintiff atty are very knowledgeable of what hoops they must go
> through to
> prevail in a case using scientific evidence. Having served as
> expert many times
> for both sides of the bar, the opposing atty will do what is called
> a Daubert
> challenge which is often a separate deposition or in some occasions
> in Court.
> The witness is grilled, frequently mercilessly, to determine
> whether he/she
> is/si not competent to testify. Having been challenged by both
> plaintidd and
> defense atty in different cases, the witness either knows there
> stuff and the
> literature or they are removed as a witness.
>
> If anyone is interested in some of the seminal cases, email
> separately and I
> will email the cases to you. The list has minimal capacity for sending
> downloaded legal opinions.
>
> Thanks Bob
>
> On 14 Apr 2006 at 23:09, Henry Gregor wrote:
>
> Robert J. Carpenter, Jr. MD
> 6624 Fannin, #2720
> Houston, TX 77030
> (O) 713-795-4600
> (F) 713-795-4422
>
> "Life is difficult"
> The Road Less Travelled
> by Scott Peck
************************************************************************
*
Charlie Chambers
--
Hood River, OR
cchamber@alumni.rice.edu
"No matter where you go...
there you are."
Dr. Buckaroo Banzai
************************************************************************
