Lawyers and Judges Presiding over a Breakdown of Basic Justice

Christopher Alleva
The claims for injuries allegedly caused by the painkiller Vioxx have seemed rather dubious to me. It always felt like another example of justice run amok with the judges and lawyers involved subverting the process for personal gain.  A ruling by the Texas Court of Appeals yesterday overturning a  $32 million award to the widow of 71-year-old man whose death was linked to the drug appears to affirm this view. 

The judges ruled the widow did not prove that his brief use of Vioxx caused two blood clots that they claim triggered his heart attack. Also, they concluded that there was insufficient evidence to rule out his long-standing heart disease and other chronic ailments as the cause of his fatal heart attack. The man took Vioxx for less than a month.

This case doesn't even pass the laugh test. The man was 71 years old with a history of chronic heart disease and he only took the drug for a couple of weeks. You don't need to be a blood relative of Dr.Jonas Salk and Chief Justice John Roberts to immediately conclude the claim is frivolous.  At 71 after a near fatal heat attack this man was probably a walking specimen (that is if he was even ambulatory) of every disease and affliction known to man.

Lawyers that pursue this kind of perverted justice should be sanctioned and disbarred and judges that allow cases like this in their courtroom should be removed and disbarred. Clearly, the Superior courts have been much to lax in their supervision of the lower courts. Most states vest their highest court the power to oversee lower courts. At the Federal level the Chief Justice also has the responsibility to oversee the administration of the entire federal judiciary. In 1922, Congress established the
Judicial Conference of the United States, the governing body for the administration of the federal judicial system. As chair of the conference, the chief justice presides over the conference's biannual meeting, manages the agenda, and appoints committees.

Evidently, the Chief doesn't understand the serious and systemic problems afflicting the  courts that is undermining basic justice and the administration of laws. Other than some esoteric speech I can't recall any substantive action by this conference in my lifetime.
The claims for injuries allegedly caused by the painkiller Vioxx have seemed rather dubious to me. It always felt like another example of justice run amok with the judges and lawyers involved subverting the process for personal gain.  A ruling by the Texas Court of Appeals yesterday overturning a  $32 million award to the widow of 71-year-old man whose death was linked to the drug appears to affirm this view. 

The judges ruled the widow did not prove that his brief use of Vioxx caused two blood clots that they claim triggered his heart attack. Also, they concluded that there was insufficient evidence to rule out his long-standing heart disease and other chronic ailments as the cause of his fatal heart attack. The man took Vioxx for less than a month.

This case doesn't even pass the laugh test. The man was 71 years old with a history of chronic heart disease and he only took the drug for a couple of weeks. You don't need to be a blood relative of Dr.Jonas Salk and Chief Justice John Roberts to immediately conclude the claim is frivolous.  At 71 after a near fatal heat attack this man was probably a walking specimen (that is if he was even ambulatory) of every disease and affliction known to man.

Lawyers that pursue this kind of perverted justice should be sanctioned and disbarred and judges that allow cases like this in their courtroom should be removed and disbarred. Clearly, the Superior courts have been much to lax in their supervision of the lower courts. Most states vest their highest court the power to oversee lower courts. At the Federal level the Chief Justice also has the responsibility to oversee the administration of the entire federal judiciary. In 1922, Congress established the
Judicial Conference of the United States, the governing body for the administration of the federal judicial system. As chair of the conference, the chief justice presides over the conference's biannual meeting, manages the agenda, and appoints committees.

Evidently, the Chief doesn't understand the serious and systemic problems afflicting the  courts that is undermining basic justice and the administration of laws. Other than some esoteric speech I can't recall any substantive action by this conference in my lifetime.