Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois

April 23, 2018

IN RE TESTOSTERONE REPLACEMENT THERAPY PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION This Document Relates to: Mitchell
v.
Abbvie,

          David M. Bernick Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP Counsel for AbbVie Inc.

          DEFENDANTS' RENEWED MOTION AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW UNDER RULE 50(b) OR, ALTERNATIVELY, FOR A NEW TRIAL OR REMITTITUR UNDER RULE 59

          MATTHEW F. KENNELLY JUDGE.

         TABLE OF CONTENTS

         ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................. 2

         I. THE JURY'S NEGLIGENCE AND STRICT LIABILITY VERDICTS CONFLICT ..... 2

         II. PLAINTIFF FAILED TO PROVE INADEQUATE WARNINGS ................................... 5

A. Reasonable Evidence of a Causal Association Did Not Exist as Required to Avoid Preemption ........... 5
B. Plaintiff Failed to Prove Inadequate Warnings Under Oregon Law ....................... 7

         III. PLAINTIFF FAILED TO PROVE CAUSATION OF USE .............................................. 8

         IV. PLAINTIFF FAILED TO PROVE THAT ANDROGEL CAUSED HIS HEART ATTACK OR THAT HIS INJURY WAS REASONABLY FORESEEABLE ................. 9

A. Plaintiff Did Not Establish General Causation ....................................................... 9
B. Plaintiff Did Not Establish Specific Causation ..................................................... 11
C. Plaintiff Failed to Satisfy the Oregon Law Requirement of Showing that He Would Not Have Had a Heart Attack But For AndroGel ..................................... 12
D. The Causation Instructions Were Improper .......................................................... 13
E. The Court Erroneously Excluded Additional Evidence Showing that AndroGel Did Not Cause Plaintiff's Heart Attack ........................................ 13

         V. THE COURT SHOULD REDUCE THE DAMAGES AWARD .................................... 15

A. State Law Bars Any Punitive Damages Award .................................................... 15
B. The Punitive Damages Award Violates Due Process ........................................... 17
C. The Compensatory Damages Award Went Beyond the Evidence at Trial ........... 19
D. The Punitive Damages Award Exceeded Constitutional and Illinois State Law Limitations IDED AND REACHED A VERDICT THAT WAS NOT REALLY UNANIMOUS ........................................................................................ 24

         CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 25

         TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

         Page(s) Cases

         Adams v. Fuqua Indus., Inc., 820 F.2d 271 (8th Cir. 1987) ........................................... 9

         Allbright v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., No. 17-CV-61800, 2017 WL 5971720 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 1, 2017) ................. 5

         Allison v. McGhan Med. Corp., 184 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 1999) ............................................ 10

         Bains LLC v. Arco Prod. Co., Div. of Atl. Richfield Co., 405 F.3d 764 (9th Cir. 2005) ......................................... 22

         In re Bayside Prison Litig., 331 Fed.Appx. 987 (3d Cir. 2009) .............................................. 22

         United States v. Blitch, 622 F.3d 658 (7th Cir. 2010) ................................................................................................... 24

         BMW of N. Am., Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559, 583 (1996) ...................................................... 22

         Bowman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 350 F.3d 537 (6th Cir. 2003) ............................................ 14

         Brown v. Burlington N. Santa Fe Ry. Co., 765 F.3d 765 (7th Cir. 2014) .............................................. 12

         Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal Comm., 531 U.S. 341 (2001) ....................................................... 7

         United States v. Byrski, 854 F.2d 955 (7th Cir. 1988) .............................................. 25

         Chlopek v. Fed. Ins. Co., 499 F.3d 692 (7th Cir. 2007) .................................................. 9

         Clausen v. M/V NEW CARISSA, 339 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2003) .................................................... 11

         Conway v. Pac. Univ., 924 P.2d 818 (Or. 1996) (en banc) ............................................... 5

         Dallas Ceramic Co. v. United States, 598 F.2d 1382 (5th Cir. 1979) ............................................ 9

         Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 43 F.3d 1311 (9th Cir. 1995) ............................................... 10

         Ervin v. Johnson & Johnson, Inc., 492 F.3d 901 (7th Cir. 2007) ............................................. 11

         Fathera v. Smyrna Police Dep't, 646 Fed.Appx. 395 (6th Cir. 2016) ............................................ 13

         In re Fosamax Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 06 MD 1789 JFK, 2013 WL 174416, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2013) .............................. 18

         United States v. Fossler, 597 F.2d 478 (5th Cir. 1979) ............................................................................................. 24, 25

         Frain v. Andy Frain, Inc., 660 F.Supp. 97 (N.D. Ill. 1987) ............................................ 2, 4

         United States v. Gabriel, 597 F.2d 95 (7th Cir. 1979) ....................................................... 25

         Gen. Leaseways, Inc. v. Nat'l Truck Leasing Ass'n, 830 F.2d 716 (7th Cir. 1987) .................................................... 24

         Giles v. Wyeth, Inc., 556 F.3d 596 (7th Cir. 2009) ..................................................................................................... 9

         Hagen v. Richardson-Merrell, 697 F.Supp. 334 (N.D. Ill. 1988) ................................................... 21

         Hazelwood v. Ill. Cent. Gulf R.R., 450 N.E.2d 1199 (Ill.App.Ct. 1983) ............................................................. 23

         Higgins v. Koch Dev. Corp., 794 F.3d 697 (7th Cir. 2015) ................................................................ 11

         Joshi v. Providence Health Sys. of Or. Corp., 149 P.3d 1164 (Or. 2006) ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.