December 20, 2006
Updated: Judge Tries to Unring Bell Hanging Around Neck of Horse Already Out of Barn Being Carried on Ship That Has Sailed
"Hey!" says Judge
Weinstein Cogan, "Stop distributing documents in contravention of the PTO!" The order:
Of note, the motion for injunction is a joint one, brought by both the PSC and the defendants:
(See my earlier post on not-so-protective protective orders.)
The documents, the basis for front-page articles on Sunday and Monday, were provided to a Times reporter and to organizations and individuals interested in mental health issues by James B. Gottstein. Mr. Gottstein, who is not involved in the Lilly lawsuits, is a lawyer representing mentally ill patients. He has sued the State of Alaska, accusing it of forcing patients to take psychiatric medicines against their will.
Gottstein apparently subpoenaed the documents from Egilman, who was, as an expert in the litigation, presumably subject to the PTO.
Gottstein, on his website, is not shy about flagging his involvement in the Zyprexa documents.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Updated: Judge Tries to Unring Bell Hanging Around Neck of Horse Already Out of Barn Being Carried on Ship That Has Sailed:
» Zyprexa protective order enforcement from PointOfLaw Forum
Give Judge Weinstein credit: he's taking steps to enforce his protective order in the Zyprexa MDL (Dec. 18; Dec. 19). (Bill Childs post with order; Julie Criswell, "Court Orders Lawyer to Return Documents About an Eli Lilly Drug", NY Times,... [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 20, 2006 6:30:58 AM
» Eli Lilly sues to hide Zyprexa documents (updated x 3) from Pure Pedantry
The Eli Lilly leaked documents story has exploded. Just to recap, on Dec. 17th last year the NYTimes reported on documents leaked from Eli Lilly that show that the company tried to play down the side effects of Zyprexa, a... [Read More]
Tracked on Jan 19, 2007 7:57:19 AM
The fun part: speculating why the PSC joined the motion. Were they worried that Weinstein was going to blame them? Or is Gottstein competing with them for clients?
Posted by: Ted | Dec 20, 2006 6:33:08 AM
I think the first. Gottstein doesn't look like a products guy (and I can't imagine the competition for clients in Alaska can be all that vigorous), though he's clearly no fan of pharma.
Posted by: Bill Childs | Dec 20, 2006 6:59:55 AM
Awesome post title. I laughed outloud upon reading it in the NYTimes article.
Posted by: Faceword | Jan 14, 2007 8:35:17 PM
In his book "Individual Justice in Mass Tort Litigation" Judge Weinstein says:
"[p]rotective orders may have a legitimate role when there is no public impact or when true trade secrets are involved. But we can strike a fairer balance between privacy interests of corporations and the health and safety of the public. A publicly maintained legal system ought not protect those who engage in misconduct, conceal the cause of injury from the victims, or render potential victims vulnerable. Moreover, such secrecy defeats the deterrent function of the justice system."
Posted by: Justing | Jan 15, 2007 2:03:28 AM
You win first prize for the "Block That Metaphor" contest!
Posted by: Debra | Jan 15, 2007 2:20:56 PM