In a rare occurence in hormone replacement therapy litigation, a judge has rejected Wyeth's post-trial request for a new trial. Not only that, the case involved the biggest verdict in the litigation's history: $134.5 million for three breast cancer survivors.

To date, each plaintiff's verdict in hormone replacement therapy litigation has been in excess of $1 million, but has also been reversed by judges in Pennsylvania's Court of Common Pleas for Philadelphia County . 

Judge Robert Perry of Nevada's Washoe County District Court did not follow the trend in his Feb. 6 order.

In its motion for post-trial relief, Wyeth contended that the jury's inclusion of punitive damages in its initial award before hearing evidence on the matter warranted a new trial.  Judge Perry disagreed, explaining that the Nevada Supreme Court has held that defective jury awards should be returned to the jury for correction and not by ordering a new trial. In addition, he concluded that the jury's confusion about when to award punitive damages was caused in part "by the acts and inaction of the parties."

Judge Perry also overruled Wyeth's arguments regarding the use of certain jury instructions, the admission of "irrelevant, misleading and prejudicial evidence," alleged misconduct by plaintiffs' counsel and alleged improper comments by the court.

Although the majority of Judge Perry's ruling is favorable to plainitffs Arlene Rowatt, Jeraldine Scofield and Pamela Forrester, he did state that Wyeth's request for remittitur should be considered and that he will hear arguments on Feb. 14 over whether the amount in compensatory and punitive damages were excessive or justified.

What do you think? Who will be Judge Perry's valentine: Plaintiffs or Wyeth?