November 9th, 2009

Drug Wholesaler Found Peddling Mystery Medicine as Flue Vaccine (Pharmacy Liability)


Cape Cod Hospital has reported that a drug wholesaler approached it trying to sell purported flu vaccine for 8x the normal price. But in addition to profiteering during a vaccine shortage came this notable news: The wholesaler refused to say where the drugs came from.

The article in yesterdays Cape Cod Times (for which I was interviewed and quoted) should sound the liability alarms throughout the pharmacy community. For if the wholesaler won’t say where the drugs come from then they cannot be authenticated. A pharmacy that buys such product is therefore merely buying mystery medicine. Perhaps it came from a bona fide manufacturer, or perhaps the “drugs” originated in a Chinese factory that makes counterfeits, and the “medicine” has already changed hands a dozen or more times.

The sad truth is that we do a lousy job tracking pharmaceuticals and have a large gray market of secondary wholesalers. The pedigree of a drug — its chain of ownership from the time of its manufacture — is critical to determining the drug’s authenticity. But if the pedigree is hidden, as with the case of the flu vaccine offered to Cape Cod Hospital, there is no real way to know what is within the packaging thereby opening the door wide to injury and death from the product.

So make no mistake about it: Any pharmacy that buys such mystery medicine will be responsible if the drug isn’t the real deal. And I don’t think it would be a situation of just being responsible for the injury or death that occurs, but that a good case could be made for punitive damages for conduct that I view as clearly reckless. The problem of counterfeits within the pharmaceutical chain has been widely documented, and all pharmacies are duty-bound to be on high alert for suspicious activity.

I was interviewed for the piece last week as a result of my prior representation of Tim Fagan, a Long Island teen who had been injected in 2002 with counterfeit Epogen after an emergency liver transplant. Representative Steve Israel introduced Tim Fagan’s Law as a result, to toughen penalties against counterfeiters, and the FDA broader power to investigate, conduct recalls and spot check the market for counterfeits. (You can read more on it at the counterfeit drugs resource page at my web site, or by clicking the counterfeit drugs tag here.)

Cape Cod Hospital, to its considerable credit, refused to deal with the wholesaler. My only regret is that the company was not named so that others would know to be on the lookout for them.

Updated 11/12/09: See also Gray Market: I’m Not Dead Yet (Adam Fein @ Drug Channels)

Links to this post:

Health Wonk Review
Welcome to the Health Wonk Review. 2009 has been an exciting year for health care reform, and last Saturday’s passage of HR3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, has given us plenty to talk about. For anyone who hasn’t kept

posted by Louise @ November 12, 2009 2:58 AM

Grand Rounds Vol 6. No. 7
Hello and welcome to this edition of Grand Rounds! As I contemplated the possibilities for a cheeky theme and wracked my brains for something pithy or unique, my thoughts consistently fell on the fact that tomorrow is Veterans Day in
posted by Emily @ November 10, 2009 6:02 AM

 

November 5th, 2009

New Spam Comment Policy for Law Firms (You Will Be Exposed)


I’m getting tired of seeing spam in the comment area of my blog that comes from law firms and attorney search services. So if it comes in again I’m going to write a fresh post about them. I’ve done this a couple of times before but now I’m going to make a policy of it.

While I expect this nonsense from the drug hustlers (findrxonline seems to love spamming me) and the gold sites and others, I don’t see that I can really do much about them except keep the comments moderated and simply reject them.

But law bloggers can do something about the law field spammers. Because unlike the other sites, these folks generally have very little Google juice and should actually care about their reputations. So if a few blogs decide to out the spammers, this could have a pretty big effect on the firms. When their names are Googled by potential clients, the potential clients will see that they are spammers. And it will no doubt cause them to stop.

If it is the crappy search engine optimization companies that they hired that are doing it on their behalf, without their knowledge, then the attorneys will still suffer. Lawyers are responsible for the acts of their agents.

I came up with this little rule about lawyer advertising when it comes to solicitation, but it applies equally well here:

Outsourcing marketing = outsourcing ethics

Perhaps, if enough bloggers do this then the lawyers that get busted for this kind of slimy stuff will fire the people responsible. And if enough SEO companies are fired by their clients for having done this in their name, then the tactic will be used less often. I’m not so naive as to think it will stop, but if it gets cut in half that would be a huge victory.

You’ve been warned.

Addendum: The spammers are not just hired by free-standing marketing companies devoted to search engine optimization, but have been hired in the past by attorney search services both large (Martindale-Hubbell) and small (LegalX).

These are some of the blogs that seem committed to outing the malfeasors, in hopes of cleaning up the lawyers’ part of the web so that our collective reputation doesn’t sink further:

    I’ll continue adding to this list as I become aware of other posts on the subject. Links to this post: 

    Blawg Review #241
    Back on 7 December 2005, I posted under the title “Pearl Harbor Day Trivia” a throwaway comment about President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous “Day of Infamy” speech: December 7, 1941 was immortalized the next day in a speech by President  

    posted by Colin Samuels @ December 07, 2009 3:00 AM

    Outing Blog Comment Spammers, Starting with All States Public
    Over at the always excellent New York Personal Injury Law blog, Eric Turkewitz has adopted the policy of outing law firms’ blog comment spammers and their clients. Comment spammers troll the Internet and drop poorly written and usually  

    posted by Roy A. Mura @ December 03, 2009 10:21 AM

    Sixteen Rules for Lawyers Who (Think They) Want to Market Online
    1. If you’re looking for The Promised Land, you’re in the wrong place. This is the Wild West, Pilgrim. 2. There are clients online—sophisticated, moneyed clients—but they don’t find lawyers the way you think they do.  

    posted by Mark Bennett @ November 16, 2009 10:15 PM

    Blawg Review #238: Celebrating the International Day of Tolerance
    “We tend to idealize tolerance, then wonder why we find ourselves infested with losers and nut cases. — Patrick Nielsen Hayden “I have seen gross intolerance shown in support of tolerance.” — Coleridge. Cue the music.  

    posted by Joel Rosenberg @ November 16, 2009 1:00 AM

    Not Just Another Content Scraper. Emery Ledger’s Content Scraper
    The problem of running a blog that produces, to small small degree, original content about a topic of interest to many laypeople (in our case law) is that one gets so many sincere flatterers. Ordinary spammers are bad enough. though we
    posted by Patrick @ November 06, 2009 4:15 PM

 

November 4th, 2009

Suit Against Above the Law Quickly Dismissed


As quickly as it started with a bang, the lawsuit by Miami law professor Donald Jones against mega law blog Above the Law and its Editor in Chief David Lat), has been dropped.

The suit had been widely lampooned around the legal blogosphere, both for its lack of legal merit as well as the resulting public relations debacle.

In today’s post, Lat showed more than a bit of class with this offer:

We have offered Professor Jones a guest post on Above the Law in which to provide his side of the story, about either the lawsuit or the underlying facts. We have offered to keep the comments on that post closed or open, depending on his preference.

The case, in essence, ended pretty much the way I suggested yesterday. Jones bailed out of a poorly thought suit, and at the same time corrected the digital record that had last seen him being arrested on a prostitution solicitation charge. Those who Google him 5 years from now will no longer see an arrest of this type on Google’s first page.

Instead they will see this lawsuit. And if accepts the ATL offer, they will likely see his explanation.

As I noted in the comments yesterday, it was wise for Prof. Jones to drop quickly, since once ATL answered the suit, they would need ATL‘s permission to drop it. And ATL might have decided not to allow it without some other type of concession from Jones. (A tactic I used ten years ago defending one of the first internet defamation cases.)

First Amendment guru Marc Randazza was defending Above the Law, and “hoping to open up this can of whup ass I have lying around.” And if anyone has any thoughts about suing me for anything related to this blog, you should know I’ve got Randazza on my short list also.

 

November 4th, 2009

Halloween Blawg Review Gets Reviewed


I’m grateful to the many people who offered up their flattering comments and links regarding this week’s Halloween themed Blawg Review, starring The Bogeyman. Some came in the comments area, some came in by Twitter and some on blogs:

  • If you missed @turkewitz’s Halloween themed Blawg Review–go read it now. It is beyond clever (Rita Handrich @ The Jury Expert)
  • a super edition of Halloween Blawg Review (Kevin Underhill @ Lowering The Bar)
  • Eric Turkewitz does a bang-up job on a spooky Blawg Review #236 over at his New York Personal Injury Law Blog. Enjoy. (Ken @ Popehat)
  • @turkewitz & a scary Blawg Review #236 — murder, mayhem & protecting his kids (Doug Keene @ KeeneTrial)
  • Eric Turkewitz writes a ‘mean’ Blawg Review … and I mean that in the Cowboy Western ‘mean an ornery’ sense … manages to cover a wide range of blogs in a highly readable way … [more @ CharonQC]
  • Eric Turkewitz’ Halloween-themed Blawg Review #236, hosted at his New York Personal Injury Law Blog, was a real treat … Turkewitz is a perennial contender for Blawg Review of the Year honors. If this one doesn’t put him at the top of voters’ lists this year, there must be some trick. (Colin Samuels @ Infamy and Praise, who has won all four of the Blawg Review of the Year awards, so yes, there must be some trick)

As well as other links provided by: Above the Law; Point of Law; Blawg Review; montserratlj; Ron Coleman

If others come in, I’ll tack them on.

 

November 3rd, 2009

Above the Law Sued By Law Prof (And How It Should All End)


Above the Law has been sued by University of Miami law professor Donald Jones. Others are opining on the details of how the suit arose, but I’m here to tell you how I think it will (or should) end.

First, the back story: Prof. Jones was arrested on a misdemeanor charge of soliciting a prostitute. Above the Law picked up the story and, in its legal tabloid fashion, ran with it making him their “Lawyer of the Day” and publishing the police report. They did an update on the not guilty plea, and then followed up again with a post entitled “The Nutty Professor: A Commemorative Graphic.” He has alleged the graphic is racist.

He sued ATL for $22M for portraying him in a false light, invading his privacy and violating the university’s copyright on his faculty photo. (His claims are set forth in this Complaint.)

Others are opining on the merits of the suit and the First Amendment issues. The links to those posts are below. But I’m going to zoom right past all that and try to hit the crux of the case, why it was brought, and how I think it should be resolved without further litigation.

Prof. Jones, you see, has had the charges dismissed. Yet when you Google “University of Miami law professor Donald Jones,” up pops those ATL posts on the first page, since ATL has some pretty impressive Google juice. And nowhere are there any posts from ATL about the charges being dismissed, because that post hadn’t been written. So it’s pretty safe to say that Prof. Jones is steamed. Big time.

Jones has had his Google reputation pretty seriously impaired. If repairing that reputation was his true motive, then by bringing suit, he has taken one step toward fixing it. Blogs all over are covering the story and now everyone knows the criminal case was tossed. That solves one problem.

But it creates another problem, that of a law professor starting a lawsuit that might have some pretty dubious merit (see below). And that isn’t so hot if you’re working the law professor circuit.

Working under the assumption that what Jones truly wants is his name back, and not $22 million, then the resolution of this dispute would seem to be pretty straightforward.

First, ATL publishes an “oops” (assuming they knew about the dismissal). Not for posting the initial stuff, all of which is likely protected under the First Amendment. Rather, I’m going to guess that someplace in the pit of his stomach, ATL founder and editor David Lat probably feels that if he is going to skewer a law prof that was arrested in this manner, that he probably ought to update his readers with news that the charges were dismissed. That doesn’t go to any legal duty, but to human nature. It’s just the right thing to do. So it may be that a mea culpa is in order for not updating the story in a more timely fashion.

(Of course, if they didn’t know, that wouldn’t apply.)

Prof. Jones, it should be noted, also wants the old posts taken down. I don’t see ATL and Lat caving in to that demand. But, if they elect to write a new post updating the status of the criminal charges, then those old posts should probably have an updated link at the bottom referencing the new post. Bloggers run these types of updates all the time.

So I’m going out on a limb here to suggest that if ATL runs an update on the charges being dismissed with a mea culpa (if that part applies) on not telling its readers earlier, that would probably suffice. Since that is the type of update should probably be done anyway now, and there is no downside to ATL and Jones has his reputation updated.

On the flip side, if ATL makes a motion to dismiss (and I presume this is already being worked on) and Jones loses, he doesn’t look so hot as a law prof. So Jones has a pretty good motive to accept those terms.

And if the two of them want to talk this over in a local tavern, I’ll buy the beer.

Others opining on the subject:

—————-
Update (11/4/09) Prof Jones has wisely dropped the lawsuit

Links to this post:

Marc Randazza, My Weird, Scary Hero
We’d have covered the lawsuit filed by University of Miami law professor Donald Jones against the legal gossip site Above the Law yesterday, except that we were busy. And everyone else got to it first. Suffice it to say that the lawsuit

posted by Patrick @ November 04, 2009 5:04 PM

LAW PROFESSOR SUES ABOVE THE LAW BLOG FOR “NUTTY PROFESSOR” POST
Parody image reference–with apologies to Jerry Lewis and Eddie Murphy. University of Miami law professor D. Marvin Jones —who made the pages of this blog when he was arraigned on charges that he allegedly solicited a hooker—is back in
posted by Blogonaut @ November 03, 2009 12:07 PM