 |
|
Education and Honors
|
|
J.D., University of Kansas School of Law, 1981 Order of the Coif
Member, Kansas Law Review
B.S., journalism, University of Kansas, 1978
Defense Research Institute, Exceptional Performance Citation, 1995 Listed in the International Who's Who of Product Liability Defense Attorneys, published by Law Business Research Ltd., every year since 2001 Recognized by Law & Politics as a "Texas Super Lawyer," 2006 and 2008 - 2009 Listed in Chambers USA America's Leading Business Lawyers, 2007 - 2009 Listed in Who's Who Legal: Texas, 2008
|
|
Admissions and Affiliations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Practice Areas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Concentration Pharmaceutical and medical device litigation, including products liability, toxic tort, commercial and patent litigation. Summary Steve Scheve’s emphasis over the past 27 years has been in the pharmaceutical, medical device and chemical industries. Mr. Scheve has defended and tried cases throughout the country and has acted as national coordinating counsel for clients in multiple litigations, each involving lawsuits in over thirty states. In addition to his trial work, he has successfully argued appeals on issues of importance to manufacturers in multiple appellate courts. Mr. Scheve has handled numerous commercial disputes for pharmaceutical clients involving patents, royalty, supply, license, co-promotion, development and interference settlement agreements. These disputes have included several arbitrations, with controversies involving as much as $1 billion.Mr. Scheve has acted as national counsel in litigations involving five prescription drugs. He has acted as regional counsel in multiple other litigations. He has handled/supervised over 600 prescription drug cases and was the designated trial lawyer for a major tobacco manufacturer in smoking and health cases in Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma and New Mexico.In each of the past seven years, Mr. Scheve has been identified by the International Who's Who of Product Liability Defense Lawyers as one of the "best." He successfully argued against the adoption of market share liability in the Illinois Supreme Court in Smith v. Eli Lilly and Company, et al. He also successfully argued for application of comment k of §402A as a matter of law to all FDA-approved prescription drugs in the Utah Supreme Court in Grundberg v. The Upjohn Company.Mr. Scheve has provided counseling to multiple pharmaceutical companies in an effort to reduce product liability risks. These services have included pre-launch audits, pre-litigation audits, package labeling and riskMAP reviews, records retention policy reviews, company employee lectures on "product stewardship" and helping to shape evidence developed in parallel proceedings. Representative Engagements Practice Overview - 14 pharmaceutical companies – litigation in hundreds of cases involving anxiolytics, chemotherapeutic agents, hypnotics, benzodiazepines, injectable corticosteroids, hormone replacement therapies, blood products, pain relief medications, contrast media, anesthesia drugs, antibiotics, monoclonal antibodies, surgical devices and HIV test kits
- 6 major manufacturers – variety of toxic tort matters, including lead paint, organophosphates, animal food additives, aerosolized chemotherapeutic agents, cigarettes and synthetic estrogens
Trial and Appellate Experience - McMahon v. Eli Lilly and Company, N.D. Illinois (1984) Directed verdict in DES trial involving claim of adenosis and other non-cancerous injuries to reproductive tract of DES daughter
, N.D. Illinois (1984) Directed verdict in DES trial involving claim of adenosis and other non-cancerous injuries to reproductive tract of DES daughter - Bogorad v. Eli Lilly and Company, E.D. Michigan (1986) Directed verdict in DES case involving claim of adenosis and other non-cancerous injuries to reproductive tract of DES daughter
- Harley v. The Upjohn Company, Bexar County, Texas (1992) Defense verdict after two previous mistrials; claims of aberrant behavior and personal injury stemming from use of triazolobenzodiazepine sleeping pill (Halcion®)
- Freeman v. The Upjohn Company, Dallas County, Texas (1994) Jury verdict of $200,000 reversed and rendered in favor of defendant in Halcion® case involving claims of aberrant behavior/psychosis after high-dosage use of triazolobenzodiazepine sleeping pill
- Williams v. The Upjohn Company, S.D. Texas (1996) Defense verdict in Halcion® case involving claims of aberrant behavior stemming from long-term use of triazolobenzodiazepine sleeping pill
- Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. The Upjohn Company Three-week trial before three-judge arbitral panel in Atlanta, Georgia (1999) $150 million dispute over alleged breach of co-promotion agreement relating to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (Luvox®) and a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (reboxetine); favorable outcome for client in which no money changed hands
- NeoPharm v. Pharmacia and Upjohn Company Four-month trial before three-judge arbitral panel in Washington, D.C. (2003-2004) $1 billion dispute over alleged breach of license agreement relating to chemotherapy agents (paclitaxel and doxorubicin); panel awarded plaintiff zero damages
- Elan v. King Pharmaceuticals (2006) Two-week trial before three-judge arbitral panel in New York City involving breach of a license and development agreement; favorable outcome for client with a $50 million award
- Elan v. Abraxis Bioscience (2008) Two week jury trial involving patent infringement, invalidity and unenforceability claims. Jury found in favor of client, finding patents to be valid and enforceable. Jury also found infringement and awarded client $55.2 million in damages
Counseling Experience - Discovery in a mock lawsuit to discern "surprises" contained in company documents
- Pre-launch audits, including interviews of key employees (project management, clinical development, pre-clinical development, regulatory) and key documents (integrated summaries of efficacy and safety, riskMAP, labeling, MSDS sheets) to identify litigation risks and suggest "loop closing" solutions
- Product liability risk assessment of proposed language in physician and patient package inserts as well as informed consent forms (ICFs) and Investigator Brochures (IBs)
- Presentations to company employees on conduct that angers jurors and subjects companies to punitive damages
- Reviews of company-generated Q&As and "white papers," with an eye toward reducing product liability risks
- Multiple written point-by-point responses to Citizens Petitions, Establishment Inspection Reports (EIRs), FDA position/talk papers and Form 483 letters to ensure consistency of message to reduce product liability implications
- Working with company spokespersons to reduce liability risks from public statements/press releases
|
|
|
|
|