Howard Bashman rounds up many newspaper links. Evan Schaeffer at Legal Underground has a podcast on the topic of Merck's financial future; he thinks suggestions of bankruptcy are overblown. Gordon Smith at Conglomerate says the jury was being invited to attempt an ad hoc fix of deeper social problems relating to drug marketing, and also says a video shows Merck's team getting out-lawyered by Lanier. On a related topic, Rethink(IP) discusses Lanier's use of PowerPoint. Bill Dyer offers some in-state perspective, and warns against hasty second-guessing of Merck's trial counsel.
Prof. Bainbridge says that "nothing since the OJ criminal verdict has shaken my faith in juries as much as the details coming out of the recent verdict against Merck in the first Vioxx suit"; in particular, "if the WSJ($)'s reporting is to be believed, the jurors basically didn't understand -- and, indeed, didn't even try to understand -- the science". Larry Ribstein recalls the demagogy of the plaintiff's case, its "resentment-mongering against executive pay and corporate profits, and exploitation of the average lay jury's innumeracy"; in a second post, he remarks on the "Oprah juror" and the speed with which the jury deliberations swept past issues of causation. Reason "Hit and Run" bats around the case here. And at Overlawyered, I've got a roundup about Vioxx users who like the drug and wish they could go on using it (some links via Blawg Review #20, hosted this week by MommyBlawg).