Guest guest Posted April 30, 2004 Report Share Posted April 30, 2004 In a message dated 4/30/2004 4:48:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, writes: --- In , " CINDI " <heinscsf@y...> Cindi, there are many doctors out there who have the maturity and good judgment to know that pain control is a vital part of the treatment program. I had to shop around just a bit but have found one. I have often thought that the docs who aren't concerned about pain management are the docs who have never dealt with severe chronic pain. I know, as I am sure you do, that just enduring the pain is not the only consideration......it drains off your energy and keeps you from having any real quality of life. Good luck to you and if you run out of energy I hope you have someone to give you the support to keep looking for the right doctor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2004 Report Share Posted August 25, 2004 Hi Sandy: Yes, that is what the Moss Order means. Well, let me elaborate just a bit. If you live in the states covered by the 5th Circuit, that is the law now, other Circuit may follow-we hope. The parents can sue Eli Lilly without going through the VICP, but cannot sue the manufacturers of the vaccine itself in civil court unless, we go through the VICP first. Lilly made Thimerosal and was not held to be a " VACCINE Manufacturer " under the VICP. Now, the parents claims on behalf of their injured child still go through the VICP first in this case--once the child's claims are resolved, then the next phase can begin against Lilly and the other " Non-Manufacturer " defendants. Two bites at the apple--See the last paragraph of the Order: " The case is therefore REMANDED with instruction to stay the proceeding pending a result in the Vaccine Court, and for any further proceedings that are not inconsistent with this opinion. " Hope this is clear--Bottom line--Moss will help us lawyers a whole bunch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Peacefully, Jeff Sell & Sell, L.L.P. 4309 Yoakum Blvd., Suite 2000 Houston, Texas 77006 713-874-6444 713-874-6445 (fax) 832-731-3145 (cell) JZSell@... www.JZSLAW.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ " This e-mail may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized or improper disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this e-mail and/or the attached document(s) is prohibited. The information contained in this e-mail and/or the attached document(s) is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the original e-mail and attached document(s). _______________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Message: 16 Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:24:24 -0400 From: " Sandy Rippetoe " <srippetoe@...> Subject: Re: MOSS V. MERCK & CO. (08/16/04 - No. 03-30958) Is this saying that these parents are allowed to pursue a lawsuit against the maker of thimerosal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2004 Report Share Posted August 25, 2004 Thanks for responding! Sandy Re: MOSS V. MERCK & CO. (08/16/04 - No. 03-30958) > > Is this saying that these parents are allowed to pursue a lawsuit against > the maker of thimerosal? > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.