We believe in personal responsibility.  That’s one reason why we’re even more offended about the Mirapex litigation than about most other pharma/medical device lawsuits.  These plaintiffs try to blame a drug for their own atrocious conduct.  Thus we’re pleased to note that in Scelta v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., slip op. (8th Cir. Dec. 17, 2010), the court refused to consider a drug responsible for the plaintiff’s “aggressive sexual contact” and “compulsive spending” among other indiscretions (for which his wife divorced him).  It’s an unpublished opinion, which is both unfortunate (it’s not binding precedent) and fortunate (meaning that plaintiff didn’t come anywhere close to proving a case).
The grounds for affirmance in Scelta:  (1) no expert testimony that the Mirapex label was inadequate; (2) no causation because the prescribing doctor knew full well about the purported risk, having conducted two studies on that precise subject (we note the citation of one of Bexis’s Bone Screw cases in this discussion – that litigation is truly the gift that keeps on giving) ; (3) no reliance on any alleged deception; (4) no comment k analysis was necessary where plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case at the outset.  Slip op. at 2-3.
The case was decided under Florida law.