So, here we are again, the latest in the on-going defence of GlaxoSmithKline in relation to Paxil inducing the suicide of an adult, the adult, Stewart Dolin, jumped in front of a train after experiencing akathisia caused by Paxil. His wife, Wendy, filed suit and Glaxo have, it appears, been doing their utmost to disrupt the trial by filing motion after motion. Thus far their attempts have fallen on deaf ears by the trial Judge.
As reported on this blog back in September, the trial Judge has since changed. The previous trial Judge, Judge, James B. Zagel, being replaced for reasons unknown.
Zagel had heard, and tossed, previous arguments and motions from GSK and it now appears that they are going to try, once again, to make an effort to get the new Judge to consider their motions. This just gets better and better!
The motions, known as Motions in Limine (“MIL”) have had me in a state of complete apoplexy, so much so that I've decided to rewrite a Motown classic, more on this later.
Let's take a look at some of these MILS.
To exclude from trial any evidence of, or reference to, alleged conduct by GSK or Paxil® (“Paxil”) labeling that predates 2004.
You see, prior to 2004, GSK never mentioned anything about Paxil causing some people to kill themselves.
GSK are arguing that, "Nonetheless, GSK anticipates that Plaintiff will attempt, if permitted, to try this case as if Mr. Dolin had committed suicide many years before he did." (Insert laughter here) Maybe GSK's hired attorneys, King & Spalding, should change their name to McFly LLC.
Defendant GlaxoSmithKline LLC (“GSK”) hereby files this Motion in Limine to preclude: (1) any evidence or argument alleging that GSK could have changed the language in the Boxed Warning for Paxil® (“Paxil”) concerning suicidality without prior approval from the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”); (2) any evidence or argument alleging that GSK “misled” FDA or violated the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), 21 U.S.C. §§ 301, et seq., and/or its implementing regulations
So, lets get this straight. GSK don't want a Judge or jury to see evidence that they misled the FDA? Nor do they want the Judge or jury to be witness to any evidence that they (GSK) could have changed the labelling for Paxil without approval from the FDA.
Defendant GlaxoSmithKline LLC (“GSK”) moves the Court in limine for an order excluding any argument, testimony, or evidence that GSK had a duty to directly warn patients of the risks of taking paroxetine.
Defendant GlaxoSmithKline LLC (“GSK”) hereby files this Motion in Limine to Exclude Any Evidence of or Reference to Its Marketing and Promotion of Paxil®(“Paxil”)
They probably don't want the Judge or jury to see these two internal memos they circulated amongst staff when Paxil was earning them billions in revenue.
Defendant GlaxoSmithKline LLC (“GSK”) moves this Court in limine for an order precluding Plaintiff from introducing certain testimony or evidence relating to the use of Paxil® (“Paxil”) by pediatric patients.
Well, they wouldn't want to answer to evidence about Paxil killing kids now, would they? That would make them out to look bad and we all know tht GSK are squeaky clean when it comes to Paxil studies in children, right? Nor that they hired a ghostwriter to make it look as if Paxil was safe for kids.
Okay, as promised, it's time for a musical interlude. Hopefully you're all still following and haven't yet left the comfort of your computer chair to dry your eyes from the uncontrollable laughter.
Here's the original. (Instrumental)
Sing-a-long with the words below video.
Part II coming soon.
Dolin v GSK