Friday, February 06, 2009

Wyeth Letter to Supreme Court re Pfizer Acquisition

The blogosphere has raised an issue about the possible effect of Pfizer's acquisition of Wyeth on the pending Supreme Court case of Wyeth v. Levine.

To keep our readers abreast of the situation, we post here a link to Seth Waxman's letter to the Supreme Court (on behalf of Wyeth) explaining that Pfizer and Wyeth "expect the transaction to close at the end of the third quarter or during the fourth quarter of 2009," and that the proposed acquisition does not warrant "amendment of the corporate disclosure statement in [Wyeth's] previously-filed briefs."

As a practical matter, the justices presumably voted on Wyeth v. Levine during their conference immediately after the argument on November 3, and later developments are thus unlikely to create an appearance of impropriety.


Anonymous said...

Impressive. You managed to post on the possibility of Justice Roberts' recusal without mentioning either Justice Roberts or recusal.

laura said...

Canon 2 of the "Code of Conduct for United States Judges" is: "A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities".
The test for this is, as stated: "The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances that a reasonable inquiry would disclose, a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality, and competence is impaired."
The integrity of the Supreme Court is far too precious to risk losing because Chief Justice Roberts holds stock in Pfizer. Even though Wyeth's lawyers think that this is insignificant, the American public would probably think otherwise. A decision in favor of Wyeth would, almost certainly affect Pfizer's stock value. Therefore, Chief Justice Roberts should recuse himself from the Wyeth v Levine decision.