Judge Fallon decides that the jury's $50M award is a bit much for a heart attack in which the guy is still alive and well. He leaves in place $1M punitive damage award. (The $50M was compensatory damage.)
I also refer you to the PointofLaw blog, in which is observed the inconsistency of the jury's verdict: no, they aren't strictly liable for failing to warn about and causing the MI; and yes, they were negligent in failing to warn and causing the MI. How can you be negligent if you weren't liable?
negligent= "careless in not fulfilling responsibility" (from law.com). There was a duty toward the person AND you didn't do what a reasonable person would have done AND what you did actually caused the damage