Torkie-Tork v. Wyeth
Case Number: 1:2004cv00945
Filed: August 13, 2004
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Office: Alexandria Office
Presiding Judge: T. S. Ellis
Presiding Judge: Thomas Rawles Jones
Nature of Suit: Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal-Personal Injury
Jury Demanded By: None
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
December 15, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 372 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 12/15/2010. (tche)
November 17, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 319 ORDERED that defendant's motions in limine are resolved as follows: a. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 1 [Doc. No. 124] concerning "marketing and promotional material" is DEFERRED. b. Defendant' s Motion in Limine No. 2 [Doc. No. 139] concerning the relationship between Premarin and endometrial cancer is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. c. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 3 [Doc. No. 127] regarding causality ass essments is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART . d. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 4 [Doc No. 131] concerning "excess breast cancers" allegedly caused by Prempro is GRANTED. e. Defendant's Motion in Lim ine No. 5 [Doc. No. 133] concerning changes in the Prempro label after the Women's Health Initiative ("WHI") study is DENIED. f. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 6 [Doc. No. 135] concerning the use of IMS data i s DENIED as moot, given the parties' stipulation [Doc. No. 213] that plaintiff will not present evidence or argument relating to the IMS data for plaintiff's prescribing physicians. g. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 7 [Doc. No. 137] concerning the defendant's "ghostwriting" Prempro articles is DENIED. h. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 8 [Doc. No. 142] concerning the profit margin on Prempro is DENIED. i. Defendant' s Motion in Limine No. 9 [Doc. No. 147] concerning reference to Pfizer is GRANTED j. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 10 [Doc. No. 150] concerning reference to the absence of defendant's corporate representative at tria l is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, insofar as plaintiff may not comment the presence or absence of defendant's corporate representative unless the corporate representative is absent for the entirety of the trial. k. Defendant' s Motion in Limine No. 11 [Doc. No. 152] concerning Wyeth's net worth, profits, employee salaries, and other financial information is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, insofar as plaintiff may introduce evidence concerning defend ant's net worth and profits may be probative on the question of punitive damages, and its probative value is not sustantially outweighted by the danger of unfair prejudice under Rule 403, Fed.R.Evid. l. Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 12 [Doc. No. 154] concerning defendant's alleged failure to test Prempro is DENIED.It is further ORDERED that plaintiff's previously-deferred motions in limine are resolved as follows: a. Plaintiff's previously-deferr ed Motion in Limine No. 10 [Doc. No. 160] concerning causality assessments in the HERS study is DENIED. b. Plaintiff's previously-deferred Motion in Limine No. 11 [Doc. No. 122], concerning the number of women who use and b enefit from hormone therapy is GRANTED, in light of the granting of defendant's Motion in Limine #4 supra, which excluded reference to "excess breast cancers" caused by Prempro. c. Plaintiff's previously-deferred Motion in Limine No. 12 [Doc. No. 140] is DENIED as moot. (See order for details) Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 11/12/2010. (nmcc)
November 4, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 285 MEMORANDUM OPINION re 252 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment as to Fraudulent Concealment by Wyeth. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 11/4/2010. (tche)
October 29, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 279 ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion in Limine: (D.E. 160) No. 1 is denied; No. 2 is denied as moot; No. 3 is denied as moot; No. 4 is denied; No. 5 is granted in part and denied in part; No. 6 is denied as moot; No. 7 is granted; No. 8 is denied as moot; No. 9 is denied as moot; No. 10 is deferred; (D.E. 122) No. 11 is deferred; (D.E. 140) No. 12 is deferred; (D.E. 156) No. 13 is denied; (D.E. 158) No. 14 is denied (see order for details). Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 10/29/2010. (nmcc)
October 4, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 235 MEMORANDUM OPINION re 97 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Wyeth. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 10/4/2010. (tche)
June 16, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 37 MEMORANDUM OPINION re 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Wyeth. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 6/16/2010. (tche)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Virginia Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Torkie-Tork v. Wyeth
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?