Fecho v. Eli Lilly & Co.

Decision Date21 December 2012
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 11–10152–MBB.
PartiesMichele FECHO, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

914 F.Supp.2d 130

Michele FECHO, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 11–10152–MBB.

United States District Court,
D. Massachusetts.

Dec. 21, 2012.


[914 F.Supp.2d 132]


Paula S. Bliss, Bubalo Goode Sales & Blisse PLC, Louisville, KY, Aaron M. Levine, Brandon J. Levine, Julie Oliver–Zhang, Dylan J. Nelson, Aaron M. Levine & Associates, Washington, DC, Juliet A. Davison, Davison Law, LLC, Boston, MA, for Plaintiffs.

Michelle R. Mangrum, Ericka L. Downie, John Chadwick Coots, Shook, Hardy and Bacon, LLP, George Alexander Lehner, Pepper Hamilton, LLP, Washington, DC, Caroline S. Donovan, Daniel L. McFadden, Elizabeth M. Holland, James J. Dillon, Foley Hoag LLP, Richard M. Zielinski, Jonathan E. Small, Goulston & Storrs, Robert A. Curley, Jr., Curley & Curley P.C., Matthew A. Holian, DLA Piper US LLP, Catalina E. Azuero, Goodwin Procter LLP, Brad W. Graham, Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC, Gregory P. Gaines, McGivney & Kluger, P.C., Alexa H. O'Keefe, Nelson G. Apjohn, Nutter, McClennen & Fish, LLP, Boston, MA, David W. Brooks, Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP, Kansas City, MO, John F. Brenner, Pepper Hamilton LLP, Princeton, NJ, Samuel J. Abate, Jr., Pepper Hamilton LLP, David M. Covey, Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP, Soo Y. Kim, Sedgwick, LLP, Sheila Annmarie Moeller, Gilbride, Tusa, Last & Spellane, LLC, Thuy T. Bui, Drinker, Biddle & Reath LLP, Jessica C. Wilson, DLA Piper LLP, Jordan D. Weiss, Goodwin Procter, LLP, Abbie Eliasberg Fuchs, Rosevelie Marquez Morales, Harris Beach PLLC, New York, NY, Michelle M. Fujimoto, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Michael Broughton MacWilliams, Venable LLP, Malcolm S. Brisker, Sidney G. Leech, Goodell, Devries, Leech & Dann, LLP, Baltimore, MD, Robert N. Kelly, Jackson & Campbell, P.C., Brianna L. Silverstein, Jeffrey J. Lopez, Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Eric I. Goldberg, Goodwin Procter LLP, Washington, DC,

[914 F.Supp.2d 133]

Robert D. Wilson, Jr., Littleton Joyce Ughetta Park & Kelly LLP, Purchase, NY, Craig Crandall Reilly, Sean C.E. McDonough, Hudgins Law Firm, PC, Alexandria, VA, Daniel W. Whitney, Sandra T. Carson, Gerald S. Gaetano Whitney & Bogris, LLP, Towson, MD, Heidi Hilgendorff, Thomas F. Campion, Thomas F. Campion, Dinker Biddle & Reath LLP, William David Sanders, McGivney & Kluger, P.C., Florham Park, NJ, Harold M. Walter, Offit Kurman, PA, Fulton, MD, James A. Ruggieri, Higgins, Cavanagh & Cooney LLP, Providence, RI, Jonathan E. Small, Goulston & Storrs, Cathryn Spaulding, Zizik, Powers, O'Connell, Spaulding & Lamontagne, P.C., Welstwood, MA, for Defendants.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR FAILURE TO PROVE PROXIMATE CAUSATION (DOCKET ENTRY # 324); MOTION TO STRIKE EXHIBITS TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR FAILURE TO PROVE PROXIMATE CAUSATION (DOCKET ENTRY # 337)

BOWLER, United States Magistrate Judge.

Defendant Eli Lilly and Company (“Lilly”) moves for summary judgment on a negligent failure to warn claim in the second amended complaint (Count I). (Docket Entry # 324). Lilly submits there is an absence of admissible evidence that the breast cancer experienced by plaintiffs Andrea Andrews (“Andrews”), Michele Fecho (“Fecho”), Donna McNeely (“McNeely”) and Francine Melnick (collectively: “plaintiffs”) was proximately caused by Lilly's failure to warn that maternal ingestion of Diethylstilbestrol (“DES”) increases the risk of breast cancer in the mother's female offspring. (Docket Entry # 324). Lilly separately moves to strike three affidavits (Docket Entry 331–4, 331–5 & 331–6) filed by plaintiffs to support their opposition to the partial summary judgment motion (Docket Entry # 337). After conducting a hearing on November 19, 2012, this court took the motions (Docket Entry 324 & 337) under advisement. Because the content of the summary judgment record depends upon whether to include the three affidavits, this court initially turns to the motion to strike.

I. MOTION TO STRIKE

Lilly seeks to strike the affidavits of: (1) Victor Greco, M.D. (“Dr. Greco”), a board certified physician in the specialty of general surgery; (2) Irene Makowiec (“Makowiec”), a former patient of the late Richard Bonacci, M.D. (“Dr. Bonacci”); and (3) Clare Ritz (“Ritz”), another former patient of Dr. Bonacci. Dr. Bonacci was a general practitioner with an office located in Tresckow, Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs' mother, the late Frances Melnick (“Melnick” or “plaintiffs' mother”), was under Dr. Bonacci's care during the pregnancies of her five children. For purposes of the partial summary judgment motion, Lilly acknowledges that Melnick ingested Lilly's DES. (Docket Entry # 325, n. 2).

Plaintiffs offer the affidavits to show that Dr. Bonacci's routine prescribing practice was to read and heed warnings from drug manufacturers and to share the information with his patients. (Docket Entry 333 & 350). Lilly maintains that Dr. Greco's testimony is hearsay because he lacks personal knowledge of Dr. Bonacci's practice and is not testifying as an expert.1 (Docket Entry # 325, n. 9; Docket Entry # 338). Lilly further posits

[914 F.Supp.2d 134]

that the testimony is not admissible to show Dr. Bonacci's character or his “habit” of heeding drug manufacturers' warnings and advising his patients of such warnings.2

Lilly seeks to strike the remaining two affidavits as inadmissible habit evidence for the same reasons. As with Dr. Greco's testimony, Lilly argues that Ritz's and Makowiec's testimony constitutes inadmissible character evidence under Rule 404, F.R.E. (“Rule 404”). Lilly's additional argument that the subject matter of the witnesses' testimony (Dr. Bonacci's practices regarding warnings) constitutes a new statement is unavailing. The identity of these individuals is not a surprise. Plaintiffs filed previous statements on July 6, 2012, identifying them as former patients of Dr. Bonacci. 3 The change in the import of their testimony does not warrant striking it from the summary judgment record.

BACKGROUND

As set forth in Dr. Greco's deposition, he graduated from Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1951. After graduation, he remained in Philadelphia where he served his surgical residency at the Jefferson Medical College Hospital. After completing his residency, he moved to Drums, Pennsylvania in 1956. McNeely, Andrews, Fecho and Francine Melnick were born in 1952, 1953, 1955 and 1958. Dr. Greco therefore moved to the area after the births of three of the four plaintiffs.

Drums, Tresckow and Hazleton, Pennsylvania are located in the same general area.4 Dr. Greco began practicing surgery in the Hazleton area in 1956. The nature of his practice covered “everything from remov[ing] toenails to operating on hearts.” (Docket Entry # 327–8). At the outset of his practice, he had “free time” and, in an attempt to build his practice, he made one or two social visits to Dr. Bonacci's office in 1956 or 1957 to introduce himself. (Docket Entry # 327–8). Dr. Greco did not have the opportunity “to see” Dr. Bonacci during these social visits

[914 F.Supp.2d 135]

because “he was always very busy.” (Docket Entry # 327–8).

Dr. Greco became more familiar with Dr. Bonacci during monthly staff meetings at the two local hospitals, “St. Joseph's and Hazleton General.” (Docket Entry # 327–8). The discussion at these educational staff meetings among the small community of local doctors covered “anything and everything.” (Docket Entry # 327–8). Dr. Greco remembers discussing “mutual problems” as well as advances in surgery, medical treatment for hypertension and antibiotics with Dr. Bonacci. (Docket Entry # 327–8).

In addition to seeing Dr. Bonacci twice a month at these staff meetings, Dr. Greco saw him at the hospitals. Dr. Greco customarily did his rounds at 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. A family physician such as Dr. Bonacci would also conduct rounds when he had patients at one of the hospitals. In addition, Dr. Greco estimated that he received “anywhere from one to four surgical referrals” from Dr. Bonacci per month. (Docket Entry # 327–8). Dr. Greco usually consulted with Dr. Bonacci about all of the patients he referred. The two also discussed “advances in surgery” and in antibiotics. (Docket Entry # 327–8).

Dr. Greco did not treat patients in Dr. Bonacci's office. He never attended any of the house calls Dr. Bonacci made and he never shared an office with Dr. Bonacci. Dr. Greco, a general surgeon, did not practice medicine with Dr. Bonacci, a family practitioner. The relevant portion of the deposition testimony reads:

Q. ... Dr. Bonacci made house calls did he not?

A. Yes he did.

Q. Did you ever go on any house calls with him?

A. No, I didn't. If you're going to ask me what is Dr. Bonacci's practice, I don't know, I didn't practice with him. I know the type of physician he was, if you want to ask me that.

(Docket Entry # 327–8, pp. 101–102). Dr. Greco is, however, familiar with Dr. Bonacci's character. He depicts:


Dr. Bonacci's character as being conservative, very compassionate and almost anal retentive as far as the care of his patients was concerned. And his patients always came first. And I am sure that if he read any warning on any drug, if he thought it was bad enough, he certainly would not dispense it, because that's the type of individual he was.

(Docket Entry # 327–8).


Dr. Greco does not recall talking to Dr. Bonacci about DES. He does remember seeing “a prescription” for DES written by Dr. Bonacci.5 In addition, he “would imagine” that Dr. Bonacci wrote prescriptions for antibiotics because “very few doctors stocked antibiotics in their office[s].” 6 (Docket Entry # 327–8). “[T]he common drugs that most doctors stocked” in their offices included sedatives, sleeping capsules,

[914 F.Supp.2d 136]

aspirin and codeine because they “treat[ed] the most common complaints that people coming into a family doctor had.” (Docket Entry # 331–7). Like Dr. Bonacci, Dr. Greco prescribed drugs from...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • United States v. Peavy-Wright
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maine
    • November 14, 2019
    ...distances reflected on mapquest.com).2 I take judicial notice of this undisputed geographical fact. See Fecho v. Eli Lilly & Co. , 914 F. Supp. 2d 130, 134 n.4 (D. Mass. 2012) (noting that "[g]eography has long been peculiarly susceptible to judicial notice for the obvious reason that geogr......
  • Tashjian v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • March 13, 2020
    ...Pharm., 436 Mass. 316, 321 (2002); see also Coyle v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc., 526 Pa. 208, (1991), quoted in Fecho v. Eli Lilly & Co., 914 F. Supp. 2d 130, 145 (D. Mass. 2012) ("It is the duty of the prescribing physician to be fully aware of (1) the characteristics of the drug he is presc......
  • Dopson-Troutt v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • September 23, 2013
    ...in diversity likewise held that Pennsylvania applies no heeding presumption to prescription drug failure-to-warn claims. 914 F.Supp.2d 130, 147 (D.Mass.2012). The Fecho court acknowledged that Pennsylvania asbestos cases have applied the heedingpresumption. However, unlike prescription drug......
  • Silver Line Bldg. Prods. LLC v. J-Channel Indus. Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • March 24, 2014
    ...of promoting judicial efficiency and avoiding duplicative litigation that underlie the first-to-file doctrine.” Parallel Iron, 914 F.Supp.2d at 130. As the District of Massachusetts has noted, if the second-filed court were to determine that an exception to the first-to-file rule applied, “......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT