PLEASE SEE THE ACTUAL JURY SHEET IN KRISTUFEK, our most recent trial, below.
We thought it might be instructive to see what the jurors must decide related to the ultimate fate of the claim. There are slight differences in state law but these are are the general questions that have been used over and over again in the Miller Firm’s 6 trials to date.
1. NEGLIGENCE: Did Takeda fail to provide adequate warnings to Plaintiff’s physicians related to the dangers of Actos as to Bladder cancer?
The Miller Firm has prevailed on this question 4/5 times to date (one trial did not resolve the issue due to the jury finding for Plaintiff on another count).
2. CAUSATION: Was Takeda’s failure to warn a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s physician to prescribe Actos and causing Plaintiff to develop bladder cancer?
All juries finding failure to warn have supported Plaintiff’s causation.
3. DAMAGES: State the amount of damages sustained.
Juries have varied widely in the amount of economic and non-economic damages damages awarded ($155,000-$6,500,000)
4. PUNITIVE DAMAGES: Was Takeda’s conduct related to Actos outrageous, due to an evil motive or conscious indifference.
Kristufek was the first time in the Miller Firm’s 6 trials a Plaintiff prevailed on punitive damages. It was the 2nd time of 9 trials overall.