Filed: Dec. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 27, 2017
Summary: ORDER SAM E. HADDON , District Judge . On December 22, 2017, the Court conducted a hearing, on the record, with counsel for the parties by telephone conference call. Upon the record made at the hearing, 1. Defendants' Motion to Apply New Jersey Law to Plaintiff's Request for Punitive Damages and to Preclude Punitive Damages as Preempted 1 is DENIED. 2. Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine No. 1 to Admit Evidence Related to Reports of Adverse Events Similar to Those Suffered by the Decedent 2
Summary: ORDER SAM E. HADDON , District Judge . On December 22, 2017, the Court conducted a hearing, on the record, with counsel for the parties by telephone conference call. Upon the record made at the hearing, 1. Defendants' Motion to Apply New Jersey Law to Plaintiff's Request for Punitive Damages and to Preclude Punitive Damages as Preempted 1 is DENIED. 2. Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine No. 1 to Admit Evidence Related to Reports of Adverse Events Similar to Those Suffered by the Decedent 2 ..
More
ORDER
SAM E. HADDON, District Judge.
On December 22, 2017, the Court conducted a hearing, on the record, with counsel for the parties by telephone conference call.
Upon the record made at the hearing,
1. Defendants' Motion to Apply New Jersey Law to Plaintiff's Request for Punitive Damages and to Preclude Punitive Damages as Preempted1 is DENIED.
2. Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine No. 1 to Admit Evidence Related to Reports of Adverse Events Similar to Those Suffered by the Decedent2 is RESERVED, subject to potential limited purpose admission of particular evidence at trial, upon further consideration, and upon Plaintiffs establishing admissibility in evidence of the specific exhibits identified and proffered by Plaintiffs in support of the motion.
3. Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine No. 2 to Admit Evidence Related to Foreign Health Authorities3 is RESERVED, subject to potential limited purpose admission at trial of particular evidence, upon further consideration, and upon Plaintiffs establishing admissibility in evidence of the specific exhibits identified and proffered by Plaintiffs in support of the motion.
4. Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine No. 3 to Admit Defendants' Admissions Related to Causation4 is RESERVED, subject to potential limited purposed admission at trial of particular evidence upon Plaintiffs establishing admissibility in evidence of specific exhibits as proof of notice known to Defendants of adverse effects arising from administration of Tasigna, the Court having declined to rule or determine that such exhibits could be considered as an admission by Defendants of evidence of a causal connection between use of the drug Tasigna and any injuries upon which Plaintiffs claims are founded.
5. Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine No. 4 to Admit Evidence Related to Defendants' Financial Motive5 may be GRANTED, in part, for the limited purpose of supporting Plaintiffs' claim for punitive damages.
6. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 1 to Exclude Evidence and Argument About Labeling Issues Controlled by the FDA6 is DENIED.
7. Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 2 to Exclude Evidence or Argument Concerning Foreign Regulatory Actions7 is DENIED.
8. Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 3 to Exclude Evidence that Post-Dales Mr. Lauris' Use of Tasigna,8 is DENIED unless it is demonstrated by Plaintiffs that evidence establishes that Defendants had specific knowledge of particular risks from Tasigna that were known to Defendants before use of the drug was discontinued.
9. Defendants' Motion in Limine No.4 to Exclude Loss of Chance Arguments9 is GRANTED.
10. Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 5 (Omnibus)10 is GRANTED in part, DENIED in part, and RESERVED in part as follows:
a. Part I Exclude Discussion of Other Atherosclerotic Events Beyond Cerebrovascular Events is DENIED;
b. Part II Exclude Discussion of Tasigna as a First-Line Therapy is DENIED;
c. Part III Exclude Evidence and Argument Intended to Support Plaintiffs' Requested Punitive Damages Relief is DENIED;
d. Part IV Exclude Evidence and Argument Concerning NPC's Motive, Intent or State of Mind is GRANTED;
e. Part V Exclude Legal Conclusions from Expert Witnesses is GRANTED:
f. Part VI Exclude Reference to "Severe Rapidly Progressing Atherosclerosis" is DENIED;
g. Part VII Exclude Reference to Internal Labeling Deliberations Regarding Irrelevant Side-Effects is GRANTED;
h. Part VIII Exclude Reference to Sales of Tasigna is RESERVED, as stated on the record;
i. Part IX Preclude Plaintiff from Arguing that a "Warning" can only Appear in the Warnings and Precautions Section of the Label is DENIED;
j. Part X Preclude Opinions based on Assumption of Normal Lifespan is RESERVED; and
k. Part XI Preclude Evidence of Discovery Disputes at Trial is GRANTED.
