Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 JULY 2014

The Ghosts Of Litigation Holds Past

Morrison Foerster
Morrison Foerster
Contributor
Morrison Foerster

Morrison Foerster

With approximately 1,000 lawyers in 19 offices, Morrison & Foerster is a preeminent global law firm...

View firm profile
Explore more from Morrison Foerster

Earlier this year, a Louisiana federal jury ordered a drug manufacturer to pay $6 billion in punitive damages and $1.5 million in actual damages.

United StatesConsumer Protection

Earlier this year, in the widely followed In re: Actos (Pioglitazone) Products Liability Litigation matter, a Louisiana federal jury ordered a drug manufacturer to pay $6 billion in punitive damages and $1.5 million in actual damages.1 An adverse ruling and instruction from the judge regarding spoliation of evidence likely played an important role in the verdict. The spoliation ruling stemmed from a litigation hold imposed in a separate lawsuit almost ten years earlier. Below we suggest a number of steps that can help prevent a similar outcome for manufacturers in future cases.

THE SPOLIATION RULING

Even though the Actos MDL did not begin until 2011, the spoliation ruling focused on a litigation hold issued by the manufacturer in 2002 that involved the same drug. The broadly worded hold required the manufacturer to retain "any and all documents and electronic data which discuss, mention or relate to Actos." The hold had never been lifted and had been

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from