Because of the lack of confidential settlement agreements and the existence of a schedule, plaintiffs had some assurance that they were not being treated substantially differently than other claimants for
reasons that were unrelated to the injury they marked contrast to the conventional settlement
This is in
such as the skill and reputation of the plaintiffs’ and defendant’s trial attorneys, the jurisdiction in which the plaintiff filed suit, the judge to which the case is assigned can greatly affect the
Plaintiff’s counsel John Ruiz commented that “it
didn’t matter who you were” and contrasted the cerivastatin experience
with other pharmaceutical settlements.
In this respect it partially
resembled a private sector version of the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund
and incorporated some of this approach’s strengths.
$100,000; Level IV: Rhabdomyolysis contemporaneously with ingestion
permanent dialysis on an ongoing basis or died of a cause directly attributed to rhabdomyolysis Under 30 years of age: $175,000; 31-40 years of age: $165,000; 41-54 years of age $155,000; 55-69 years of
$145,000; 70 years of age or more: $130,000; Level V: Rhabdomyolysis contemporaneously with ingestion of Baycol which caused other serious
injury not contemplated in Levels I-IV or claims where cause of rhabdomyolysis is disputed: Claims will be subject to mediation
by binding (“Baycol”) Action.
arbitration if necessary.
Notice to Users of Cerivastatin
46 The perception of horizontal equity, in addition to substantive horizontal equity, is independently important to the perceived
legitimacy of the legal system. Interview with John Ruiz 47 48 , February 19, 2008. Comparing the nature of the transparency that resulted from the VCF to the transparency that resulted from the Bayer settlement strategy
is interesting and illustrates the priorities of the structuring
among eligible claimants, but did
not attempt published a
to use the schedule as preliminary table that
served as an initial bargaining position.
confidentiality amounts agreed upon.
In contrast, Bayer sought to use the schedule had no desire for publicity for its own sake.
as a commitment tool but It therefore did the
exact opposite of the but generally used no
special master – it did not publish the schedule confidentiality agreements following agreement.