Vaccine Court Chronicles · 2008-06-02 06:30

An evolving series of articles about vaccine-injury and thimerosal litigation in the civil courts, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and Omnibus Autism Proceeding, and the attorneys and “experts” who promote speculative, marginally supported hypotheses of disability causation.

Doe v. Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics

Plaintiffs’ Gambit Failed, July 11, 2006
The full text of Judge James Beaty’s ruling deeming inadmissible the expert testimony offered by Dr. Mark Geier, Prof. Boyd Haley and Prof. George Lucier, in a case alleging that autism was caused by thimerosal in Rho(D) immune globulin.

Sykes v. Glaxo SmithKline

A Plaintiff in the Pulpit, April 12, 2007
A letter to the United Methodist Church reviewing the “judicial advocacy” campaign of Rev. Lisa Sykes, lead plaintiff in Sykes v. Glaxo SmithKline (later Sykes v. Bayer), a case alleging that autism was caused by thimerosal in vaccines and Rho(D) immune globulin.
A Stubborn Case of Selective Altruism, May 15, 2007
A subsequent exchange of email with the United Methodist Church regarding their continuing support of Rev. Sykes’ position in thimerosal litigation.

Redfoot v. Ascher

A Case of Good Gatekeeping, September 7, 2007
Excerpts from pleadings in a case alleging that thimerosal in saline nasal spray caused a child to become autistic, and the court’s exclusion of expert testimony from Dr. Mark Geier, Dr. Boyd Haley, Dr. Jeffrey Bradstreet, Dr. George Lucier and Dr. Arthur Krigsman.

Omnibus Autism Proceeding

OAP: Contested Expertise & A New Test Case, September 8, 2007
About developments in OAP test cases Cedillo v. HHS and Hazelhurst v. HHS.
A Recusal Refusal, September 15, 2007
Excerpts from Special Master Patricia Campbell-Smith’s order in Doe v. HHS, warning petitioners about the dangers of relying upon the scholarship of frequently-offered petitioners’ expert Dr. Mark Geier.
Pulling for an Early Paycheck, September 18, 2007
A report on Judge Bohdan Futey’s ruling in Iannuzzi v. HHS, denying interim fee payments and payments for non-case-specific expenditures to Omnibus Autism Proceeding petitioners’ attorneys.

Blackwell v. Sigma-Aldrich

Too Daunting a Hurdle to Scale, December 30, 2007
Full text of Judge Stuart Berger’s ruling in a case alleging thimerosal causation of autism, deeming inadmissible the expert testimony offered by Dr. Mark Geier. Dr. Stephen Siebert, Dr. Elizabeth Mumper, Prof. Richard Deth, and Prof. Boyd Haley.
Blackwell Case Dismissed, February 20, 2008

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program History

The Autism-Vaccine Courtroom Knockout Team, January 23, 2008
A review of recent judicial rejections of testimony offered by expert witnesses central to the Omnibus Autism Proceeding, who promote the hypothesis that autism is a consequence of iatrogenic, vaccine-induced mercury poisoning.
A Brief Introduction to Vaccine Court, January 30, 2008
A summary of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
Verdicts & Reversals, February 11, 2008
Synopses of six vaccine-injury lawsuits brought prior to the establishment of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Toner v. Lederle, White v. Wyeth, Hurley v. Lederle, Abbott v. American Cyanamid, Jones v. Lederle, and Graham v. Wyeth.
The New Testimonial Arena, February 25, 2008
A review of decisions made during the early years of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in cases in which Dr. Mark Geier served as a petitioners’ expert witness.
Raising the Bar, March 5, 2008
A synopsis of Haim v. HHS, including excerpts from the decision discussing the relevance to Vaccine Injury Compensation Program proceedings of the Supreme Court’s then-new ruling in Daubert v. Merrell-Dow Pharmaceuticals regarding the admissibility of scientific evidence.
A Not-So-Hidden History, March 11, 2008
A review of VICP cases in which awards of compensation were made to individuals diagnosed with autism or related conditions after sustaining a verifiable vaccine injury.
The Commerce in Causation, March 24, 2008
A discussion of Poling v. HHS, economic incentives driving the promotion of marginal vaccine-causation hypotheses, and fee awards in VICP cases both meritorious and nonmeritorious.
A Whale of an Expert, June 13, 2008
Describing a recent VICP case in which the petitioner’s medical expert relied upon antivaccinationist material obtained from the conspiracist website http://www.whale.to.
Billing the Adversary, July 9, 2008
A review of VICP fee and cost decisions discussing questionable billing practices by petitioners’ attorneys.
Inspecting the Outstretched Palm, July 12, 2008
The full text of the decision on attorney fees and costs in the VICP case, Carrington v. HHS.
A Critical Absence of Data, July 25, 2008
Excerpts from Dr. Elizabeth Mumper’s testimony in the VICP case, Dwyer v. HHS, about the tests used by DAN! doctors to diagnose “heavy metal toxicity.”
Gaming the System, August 31, 2008
A summary of fee and cost decisions in two recent VICP cases, revealing a pattern of overbilling and inadequate documentation by the petitioner’s attorney.
Repetition & Unreason, September 15, 2008
A summary of Barber v. HHS, in which the court gently excoriates petitioner’s expert Dr. Eric Gershwin for failing to duly consider relevant scientific evidence presented during a proceeding, and analyzes the petitioner’s attorney’s unreasonable billing practices.
“The Appalling Poling Saga”, October 3, 2008
A scientific publishing controversy erupts when an editor discovers that VICP petitioner Dr. Jon Poling failed to disclose relevant, litigation-related conflicts of interest in a 2006 case report.
A Motion to Conceal, October 22, 2008
After the court disallows nearly $150,000 in attorney fees and costs in the VICP case Sabella v. HHS, petitioner’s attorney Clifford M. Shoemaker files a motion to redact from the published decision the names of all paid professionals involved — including his own — and the amounts they sought and were paid by the court.

Sykes v. Bayer (previously Sykes v. Glaxo SmithKline)

Sykes Saga Continues, February 18, 2008
A review of pleadings and developments in Sykes v. Bayer after the case was removed from Pennsylvania to Virginia.
Subpoenaed, April 3, 2008
In which the Sykes v. Bayer plaintiffs’ team retaliates against me for reporting on their lawsuit on Neurodiversity.com, and I respond.
In Distinguished Company, April 18, 2008
Summary and excerpts from Dr. Marie McCormick’s Motion to Quash the nonparty subpoena served against her in Sykes v. Bayer.
Quashed!, April 21, 2008
The New Hampshire court’s response to the Sykes v. Bayer plaintiffs’ subpoena against Kathleen Seidel.
Mercury Fades: Sykes v. Bayer Dismissed, May 2, 2008
About the abrupt dismissal with prejudice of Sykes v. Bayer in the midst of the discovery process.
Debate or Defamation?, May 8, 2008
Mr. Clifford Shoemaker’s preliminary response to the New Hampshire court’s Order to Show Cause why he should not be sanctioned for issuing a burdensome subpoena, followed by a review of the 2006 defamation lawsuit, Geier et al. v. HHS et al..
Welcome to My Conspiracy, May 18, 2008
In which the Sykes v. Bayer‘s plaintiffs offer their rationale for misusing their authority to issue a subpoena in that case.
McCormick Motion Moot, May 23, 2008
About the court’s termination of Dr. Marie McCormick’s Motion to Quash the subpoena issued against her in Sykes v. Bayer.
Pure Hearts & Empty Heads, May 27, 2008
Full text of Public Citizen’s response to the court’s Order to Show Cause regarding the subpoena served upon me in Sykes v. Bayer.
Sanctioned, June 23, 2008
Full text of Judge James Muirhead’s order sanctioning Mr. Clifford Shoemaker for abusing judicial process to intimidate and harass a critic.

Comments


  1. The omnibus proceeding has been a long, strange trip for sure. It sounded as if petitioners’ counsel Tom Powers was almost conceding defeat in his closing argument in the Thimerosal Causes Autism trial the other day. This proceeding looks like a train wreck, and your series of articles is helpful in trying to piece together how it happened.

    — Anne    2008-06-04 01:59    #

  2. Ah, good to finally see the “train wreck” analogy used appropriately. Or maybe, the proceedings have been a “tsunami” or “epidemic” of failures for the mercury malicia? ;-)

    — Clay    2008-06-05 23:32    #