In re Bendectin Litigation
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
857 F.2d 290 (1988)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Several hundred personal-injury actions were filed against Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (Dow) (defendant), alleging that its antinausea drug, Bendectin, had caused birth defects. The actions were consolidated, and, after considering the complexity of the issues and determining that a phased trial would save a substantial amount of time, the district court ultimately ordered the trifurcation of the trial. Causation was to be tried in the first phase. If the plaintiffs prevailed on the issue of causation, then liability would be tried in the second phase. If necessary, damages would be determined in the third phase of the trial. The judge instructed the jury to remember that people were involved on both sides of the abstract matters they would be deciding and allowed the plaintiffs’ counsel to remind the jury that the matter involved children. The jury in the first phase determined that the plaintiffs had not proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Bendectin caused birth defects. The plaintiffs appealed, arguing that the trial court had abused its discretion in trifurcating the case. Specifically, they claimed that severing the issue of causation made phase one of the trial more difficult for the jury to decide as well as creating a sterile trial atmosphere by excluding evidence of the human impact of Dow’s alleged actions.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Engel, C.J.)
Concurrence (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 797,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.