Merck loses Vioxx trial
In a devastating blow to Merck’s position that Vioxx did not kill as many as 60,000 Americans (according to FDA estimates), a jury in New Jersey has ruled that the aggressively marketed (but highly dangerous) painkiller did cause the heart attack of John McDarby.
The case is an indicator of where litigation is headed. Based on only a handful of cases that have gone to trial, it is obvious that if you have taken the drug for more than 18 months and you had none or only few other reasons for cardiovascular problems (e.g. obesity, diabetes, etc.) then you have a strong chance to prove that Vioxx was the cause. If you have taken it for less than that period and you have other health problems, then you must speak to your attorney and doctor for advice.
While Carol Ernst, the widow of Robert Ernst, received as much as a quarter billion in damages, the amount that Mr. McDarby is likely to receive is approximately $13.5 millions. In awarding such high damages to the victim, the jury has ruled that not only did the company withheld critical data, it also held that the company’s actions were deliberately meant to harm.
What is Merck’s response to the verdict?
The company is attacking the Vioxx victims with the same ferocity that it has used since the drug was recalled in September of 2004. A spokesman for the company’e legal team is quoted as saying that they will continue to deal with each case individually and will appeal this decision.
Vioxx class action lawsuit to go forward
In another major blow to the company, a New Jersey appeals court has ruled that the nationwide class action lawsuit against Merck should go ahead. This lawsuit has been filed by non-governmental health plans that paid for their members’ Vioxx prescriptions.
While no accurate estimates are available for what Merck’s Vioxx liability will eventually turn out to be but some estimates put it as high as $65 billion.
Related article:
Medical Journal proves that Merck lied about Vioxx safety
Merck massaged Vioxx safety data with an intention to mislead
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.