2nd Annual

Drug and Medical Device On Trial

The lauded, highly interactive trial skills event for leading litigators and in-house counsel

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

About

Eliminating the risk and cost of a trial in a drug or medical device products liability case, whether by motion to dismiss or summary judgment, is the goal. However, sometimes this is not possible; sometimes fighting it out at trial is the only recourse.

At trial you don’t know the results until the jury speaks and they have spoken loudly in the past 18-24 months, delivering verdicts of $134 million, $51 million, $32 million, and $13 million. It's no secret that these verdicts have a significant impact on a company's bottom line. And as plaintiff attorneys use sympathetic plaintiffs, media bias, and poor juror perception of the drug and device industries to their advantage in high-risk and costly products liability trials, there’s no room for error in the courtroom.

ACI’s publication from the 2nd Annual Drug and Medical Device On Trial offers information on the ultimate trial skills and jury communication for pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers and their counsel. Drawn from this event this title features top defense litigators who are in the trenches making news and setting precedents demonstrating and offering novel jury communication strategies on the most challenging aspects of drug and device products liability trials, including:

  • jury selection
  • opening and closing statements
  • cross-examination of the plaintiff; prescribing/treating physician; and the plaintiff's epidemiologist, regulatory/FDA expert, and pharmacologist
  • direct examination of the company witness; in-house scientist; company regulatory professional; and the defense epidemiologist, FDA expert, and pharmacology expert
    *witnesses to be played by actors, lawyers and actual scientific experts

Contents & Contributors

About

Eliminating the risk and cost of a trial in a drug or medical device products liability case, whether by motion to dismiss or summary judgment, is the goal. However, sometimes this is not possible; sometimes fighting it out at trial is the only recourse.

At trial you don’t know the results until the jury speaks and they have spoken loudly in the past 18-24 months, delivering verdicts of $134 million, $51 million, $32 million, and $13 million. It's no secret that these verdicts have a significant impact on a company's bottom line. And as plaintiff attorneys use sympathetic plaintiffs, media bias, and poor juror perception of the drug and device industries to their advantage in high-risk and costly products liability trials, there’s no room for error in the courtroom.

ACI’s publication from the 2nd Annual Drug and Medical Device On Trial offers information on the ultimate trial skills and jury communication for pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers and their counsel. Drawn from this event this title features top defense litigators who are in the trenches making news and setting precedents demonstrating and offering novel jury communication strategies on the most challenging aspects of drug and device products liability trials, including:

  • jury selection
  • opening and closing statements
  • cross-examination of the plaintiff; prescribing/treating physician; and the plaintiff's epidemiologist, regulatory/FDA expert, and pharmacologist
  • direct examination of the company witness; in-house scientist; company regulatory professional; and the defense epidemiologist, FDA expert, and pharmacology expert
    *witnesses to be played by actors, lawyers and actual scientific experts

Contents & Contributors

CONDUCTING VOIR DIRE AND SELECTING THE RIGHT JURY
Jan E. Dodd, Partner, Kaye Scholer LLP (Los Angeles, CA)

CRAFTING A COMPELLING OPENING STATEMENT – THE PRELIMINARY CASE FOR THE PRODUCT
Andrea Roberts, Partner, Baker & Daniels LLP (Indianapolis, IN)

CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE PLAINTIFF
Lori G. Cohen, Shareholder, Greenberg Traurig, LLP (Atlanta, GA)

CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE PRESCRIBING/TREATING PHYSICIAN
Gary J. Spahn, Partner, Troutman Sanders LLP (Richmond, VA)

CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE PLAINTIFF’S REGULATORY/FDA EXPERT
Phoebe A. Wilkinson, Partner, Chadbourne & Parke LLP (New York, NY)

DIRECT EXAMINATION OF THE COMPANY WITNESS
Stephen A. Wood, Partner, Kelley Drye & Warren LLP (Chicago, IL)

DIRECT EXAMINATION OF IN-HOUSE SCIENTIST
Milton C. Spaulding, Partner, Spencer Fane Britt & Browne LLP (St. Louis, MO)

DIRECT EXAMINATION OF THE DEFENSE EPIDEMIOLOGIST
Joseph J. Ortego, Partner, Nixon Peabody LLP (New York, NY)

DIRECT EXAMINATION OF THE DEFENSE FDA EXPERT
Joseph K. Hetrick, Partner, Dechert LLP (Philadelphia, PA)

CLOSING ARGUMENTS
John E. Hall, Partner, Covington & Burling LLP (Washington, DC)



DOCUMENT TYPES: PRESENTATIONS AVAILABLE: 0