Re Vioxx

I want to sue the jury. And whoever these idiots are who would justify a lack of caps on jury awards.

Let's suppose that the company was just the absolute incarnation of guilt (as opposed to the reality, in which there was no direct tie between Vioxx and the meal-ticket's victim's head). Suppose that the event warrants liquidation of the corporation down to the very last dime. Does it not make sense to hold a little something back until you know how many people were harmed, so there can be some equity in the recovery?

Or if the first plaintiff is permitted to suck a corporation dry, then let subsequent defendants sue the first to get their fair shares. Whatever its' drawbacks, this at least has the benefit of siccing the jackals on one another, permitting the productive sector of the economy to go back to producing the wealth that pays for these asininities.