ATLANTIC CITY, NJ – Opening statements are scheduled for March 1st in the second lawsuit to go to trial in state court involving the widely-prescribed drug Fosamax.

Plaintiffs Amelia Flores and Jo Ann Sessner filed lawsuits against the drug’s manufacturer, Merck & Company (NYSE: MRK), alleging they suffered jawbone injuries after taking Fosamax to treat osteoporosis, a disease that causes a loss of bone density.

Merck faces a number of lawsuits after patients taking Fosamax, also known as as a bisphosphonate or alendronate sodium, developed osteonecrosis of the jaw. This condition results in death of the actual jaw bone, which can cause serious dental problems and require surgery. In New Jersey, a number of individual cases were consolidated into a mass tort overseen by Judge Carol Higbee, which also includes Teva Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: TEVA) and Bayer Pharmaceuticals, who marketed generic versions of the drug.

Merck denies the allegations, and during earlier trials claimed other underlying health conditions caused patient’s jaw problems, and that the company provided adequate warnings about potential side effects to physicians and patients. Last year, in the first New Jersey state court trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Merck, determining Fosamax did not cause osteonecrosis.

Besides the cases in state court, a number of Fosamax cases were consolidated in federal court before U.S. District Judge John Keenan in New York City. So far five cases have gone to trial, resulting in three verdicts for Merck, one plaintiff’s verdict and one mistrial. In the sole plaintiff’s victory, jurors initially awarded a Florida woman $8 million dollars, but Judge Keenan later reduced that to $1.5 million.

The current trial is scheduled to last at least three to four weeks and will be webcast live, gavel to gavel, by Courtroom View Network. CVN also recorded the only other New Jersey Fosamax trial so far, Rosenberg v. Merck in March of last year.

The cases are Jo Ann Sessner v. Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp., ATL-L-3394-11 and Amelia Flores v. Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp., ATL-L-744-09 in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Atlantic County.

Watch In re Fosamax live on Courtroom View Network starting February 27th for jury selection or March 1st for opening statements.

Here at Courtroom View Network we spend all day watching video of real trials in real courtrooms across the country. For a quick break, here are our Top 10 favorite fictional (or re-enacted) courtroom scenes, some of them more realistic than others…

1. Ghostbusters II – 1989
Sadly cameras aren’t allowed at trials in New York state courts, so if Peter Venkman, et al., really were on trial we wouldn’t be able to watch, but that’s hardly the craziest thing that happens in this scene. Renowned character actor Harris Yulin steals the show as Judge Stephen “The Hammer” Wexler.

2. Inherit the Wind – 1999 (remake)
The original version of this Spencer Tracy classic often appears on similar lists, and rightly so, but the overlooked 1999 remake with Jack Lemmon and George C. Scott (who both passed away shortly afterwards) holds up on its own.  The Scopes Monkey Trial obviously holds a special place in our hearts here at CVN, being one of the first trials broadcast live over the radio.

3. Anatomy of a Murder – 1959
After seeing George C. Scott in a courtroom scene at the very end of his career, here he is 40 years earlier at the beginning, across from opposing counsel Jimmy Stewart. The original best-selling novel was written under a pseudonym by a justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, and starting a movie tradition of interesting cameos on the bench in courtroom scenes, the judge is played by actual attorney Joseph Welch, an active participant in the McCarthy Hearings.

4. The People vs. Larry Flynt – 1996
Yep, that’s the real Larry Flynt playing former Ohio state judge William J. Morrissey, who presided over Flynt’s criminal obscenity trial in the early 1980′s. And no, your eyes aren’t playing tricks on you, that’s actually Democratic strategist James Carville, still with some hair, playing the prosecutor.

5. My Cousin Vinny – 1992
Believe it or not, this is one of the most realistic courtroom movies out there in terms of criminal procedure. Strip away the comic performance, and the actual attorney arguments aren’t (that) different from what you’d find at a real trial. On the bench is of course Fred Gwynne, known for playing Herman Munster, as Judge Chamberlain Haller. 

6. Bananas – 1971
In this Woody Allen classic we find Fielding Melish, a nebbishy New Yorker who accidentally becomes president of a small fictional South American county, on trial for fraud. The scene features very memorable testimony from “J. Edgar Hoover” and in a preview of courts increasingly adopting alternative sentencing, all charges are dropped on the condition Melish doesn’t move into the judge’s neighborhood. 

7. Amistad – 1997
Sir Anthony Hopkins portrays John Quincy Adams arguing before the United States Supreme Court in the famous 1841 “freedom suit” of United States v. The Amistad Africans, 40 U.S. (15 Pet.) 518 (1841). Adams, who won the case for his clients, was at the time of the oral arguments both a former President of the United States and current member of the House of Representatives.

8. Monty Python – “Court Charades” – 1970
For anyone who’s ever sat through the lengthy reading of a complex, multi-count verdict, this comedy sketch set in London’s Central Criminal Court shows how it could always be much, much worse. 

9. A Few Good Men – 1992
You can’t make a list of awesome courtroom scenes without including this one, because if you don’t then everyone will ask, “What about the scene from ‘A Few Good Men’ with Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson?” So here it is. 

10. To Kill A Mockingbird – 1962
Gregory Peck gives a seminal performance as Atticus Finch, arguably the most famous fictional lawyer in American history. This dramatic scene from closing arguments, with Finch begging the jury to do their duty, has likely been the inspiration for countless future attorneys to go to law school. 

In Dade County Courthouse’s first Engle progeny trial of the year, jurors heard opening statements in the Larkin v. RJ Reynolds trial in front of Judge Valerie Manno-Schurr.  By the end of the first day, a theme developed in the courtroom around the nature of choices, made both by individuals who smoke cigarettes, and the companies that manufacture them.

Born in 1944, Carole Larkin was a daily smoker by the age of nineteen, smoking on average one pack per day for thirty five years until she quit in 1988. Prior to her quitting, she developed pre-cancerous cells on her tongue which later led to Dysplasia and ultimately to floor-of-mouth cancer. She died in 2000. 

Plaintiffs contend that Larkin was a member of the Engle Class, that she was addicted to cigarettes containing nicotine, and that the negligence of RJR was a legal cause of loss, injury, and damage.   However, according to Larkin’s attorney, Phillip M. Gerson of Gerson & Schwartz, “we don’t say that the smoker has no responsibility.  It’s not a hundred percent her fault.  It’s a shared responsibility”. 

At the close of his opening statement, Gerson asked jurors to consider “the choices that this ordinary housewife made over her lifetime compared to the choices that this large corporation that conspired with other companies to conceal the truth made just so they could make more money”.

“Any smoker can quit. Three thousand quit every day” claimed defense attorney Anthony Upshaw, of McDermott Will & Emery.  In addition, Upshaw contends Larkin was not a member of the Engle class since she quit in 1988, prior to the class’s 1990 beginning and that she was not addicted to nicotine.  In one of the more memorable lines regarding nicotine addiction, Upshaw declared “each time she decided to quit smoking she was successful”.  Larkin stopped smoking once for a year, resumed, then ultimately quit for good in 1988.

Picking up on the theme of personal responsibility and choice introduced by plaintiff’s counsel, Upshaw asked jurors: “Mrs. Larkin accepts some responsibility for her smoking, but only some, right?  Nobody but Carole Larkin could have made the choice, not ten percent, not twenty percent.  A hundred percent, only she could have made that choice”. 

Larkin v. RJ Reynolds, available live on Courtroom View Network, is set to run through the beginning of February.