Shutterstock.com

The recent Xarelto trial that ended in a nearly $28 million plaintiffs verdict took an unexpected political turn during closing arguments. But, according to the defendants, the turn wasn't as unexpected as it might have seemed.

Defendants Bayer and Janssen Pharmaceuticals said in a post-trial motion filed Friday that social media posts by members of the plaintiff's trial team using the hashtag #KillinNazis showed that the plaintiffs' attorneys had a “premeditated plan” to connect Bayer with Nazis in the minds of the jurors.

Bayer, which developed Xarelto, is based in Berlin. On Dec. 5 a jury determined that Bayer and Janssen, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, needed to pay $27.8 million to plaintiff Lynn Hartman over claims that they failed to warn about the risk of bleeding associated with the blood-thinner.

Noting references the plaintiff's trial team made during closing arguments about Germany, a joint post-trial motions filed Friday by counsel for Bayer and Janssen referenced Instagram posts from a member of the trial team that used the hashtag #KillinNazis, and said the plaintiffs' counsel had made “highly prejudicial inflammatory, xenophobic, and unconstitutional arguments in closings.”

“Plaintiff's counsel's argument was so likely to have inflamed the jury's passions that the only appropriate remedy is to order a new trial,” said the motion, which was filed by Drinker Biddle & Reath attorney Chanda Miller, who is representing Janssen, and Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott attorney Albert Bixler, who is representing Bayer.

A motion filed by plaintiffs' counsel late Friday dismissed the issue as ”hyperbole,” and something that could not have affected the jury's decision.

A motion defendants filed Monday asking to “supplement and correct the record” detailed the Instagram posts using the hashtag.

According to that motion, an account with the username “nedmcwilliams” made six posts using #killingnazis in posts connected with events in the Xarelto litigation dating back to January, an account with the username “de_bess0725″ used the hashtag in two posts in early December when Hartman was being tried, and an account with the username “thegarydouglasband” made one post using the #killinnazis hashtag the day after the Hartman verdict.

The motion said the “nedmcwilliams” account appeared to be maintained by Ned McWilliams of Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Rafferty Proctor, the “de_bess0725″ account appeared to be maintained by Anne E. DeVaughn of Herman Herman & Katz, and the ”thegarydouglasband” account appeared to be maintained by Gary Douglas of Douglas and London, who, along with McWilliams, was lead trial counsel in Hartman.

“This new evidence bears directly not just on plaintiffs' counsel's calculated litigation strategy, candor and credibility, and fundamental fairness—but more importantly on the likely effect counsel's improper closing argument had on the jury,” the motion said.

McWilliams, Douglas and DeVaughn each did not return a call seeking comment Friday morning.

Late Friday, the plaintiffs filed a motion saying the defendant's request to add the posts to the official court record was based on “hyperbole” and was “nothing more than a desperate attempt to create an appellate issue, to harass and intimidate, and to to attempt to to color the court's view of plaintiff's counsel prior to the filing of defendants' post-trial motions.”

The motion, filed by Michael Weinkowitz of Levin Sedran & Berman also stressed that there was no evidence jurors were exposed to the posts, and said the comments made during closing arguments were proper, factual and were not intended to conjure up any connection with Nazis. The motion also McWilliams has been using the hashtag since 2013, the hashtag stemmed from the 2009 Quentin Tarantino film ”Inglourious Basterds,” and is a popular hashtag on social media.

The motion also said raising the issue was an invasive tactic that could have a “chilling effect on the personal lives of lawyers, their right to use social media and their First Amendment rights to free speech.”

“It is clear that the present motion masquerades as a substantive post-trial motion, but is nothing more than a half-hearted attempt to personally attack plaintiff counsel and inflame the court,” the motion said.

In an emailed statement, Weinkowitz said plaintiffs counsel plan to file a full response soon.

“The post-trial motion does not address any activities of Levin Sedran & Berman and we were unaware of the Instagram hashtags until the post-trial motion was filed by defendants,” Weinkowitz said.

A spokesman for Bayer and a spokeswoman for Janssen each did not return a message seeking comment about the motion.

Louisiana Defense Win Upheld

In a related matter, the judge who oversaw the third bellwether Xarelto trial in federal court has rejected attempts to overturn the defense verdict in that case.

In August a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana handed up the third-straight defense win for the federal win of the litigation. On Friday, Judge Eldon E. Fallon denied a motion seeking a new trial in the case plaintiff Dora Mingo had brought.

An emailed statement from Janssen spokeswoman Sarah Freeman said the company will continue to defend against the litigation.

“We believe the court correctly denied plaintiff's motion for a new trial and have full confidence that the verdict returned by the jury in Mingo was amply supported by the evidence,” she said.