By: LISA R. WILSON

The latest slew of overturned verdicts against Merck, the makers of the withdrawn painkiller Vioxx, is yet another indication of the increasing difficulty that plaintiffs’ lawyers are experiencing in winning lawsuits against big drug companies. The latest ruling overturned a $26 million jury verdict against Merck in Texas based on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence to link use of Vioxx to a plaintiff’s fatal heart attack. The initial lawsuit was brought by Carol Ernst, whose husband, Robert, died in 2001 after taking Vioxx. The verdict reversal came after the appeals court found the plaintiffs had not proven that Vioxx caused Mr. Ernst’s death.

“The appellate court recognized that there was insufficient evidence supporting the jury’s verdict and, accordingly, rendered a final judgment in the case in favor of Merck,” said Ted Mayer, outside counsel for Merck.

Separately, an appeals court in New Jersey overturned a verdict in another Vioxx case. The court ruled that the jury should not have been allowed to award punitive damages against Merck or to find that Merck had committed consumer fraud.

These overturned rulings now leave lawyers for plaintiffs with just three victories, all with relatively small awards, in the nearly 20 Vioxx cases that have reached juries. And plaintiffs are likely to face a continued uphill battle, as these rulings may act to discourage lawyers from pursuing lawsuits against drug makers—even though the two sides have already agreed to a $4.85 billion settlement that will largely end the Vioxx litigation.

  • Richard Przybylski

    I believe that Merek knowingly caused medical issues that could have been avoided to gain profit. My wife used Vioxx for joint replacement in 2002 and has now had the joint relaced 4 times. She is in more pain now then ever before. She is taking a number of narcotic drugs to supress the pain. The top surgeons in the world are baffled as to why the joint has fallen apart 3 additional times. I am not sure if they have examined the possibility of Vioxx being the cause and if my wife will actually lose her arm due to what I believe is Vioxx caused bone issues. She had to have her shoulder replaced due to a sports injury from many years prior. She had no bone issues prior to the use of Vioxx and the surgery. I have no doubt that the surgeons that performed the surgery knew what they were doing. They are the BEST. Ainsworth Allen in New York did th first and I believe him to be an authority on Shoulder Replacement. Now we face what may be the most devastating truth, the loss of total movement in th arm and maybe even removal. What will Vioxx do to help us there? My wife has also experienced recently some noticeable loss in movement of her knees. This issue has compromised her skeleton structure strength. Now where do I go? I need help. I am out of a job, we can’t afford drugs to contain the pain, and it is obvious that she will have to have yet another surgery that will be in excess of $60,000 to 80,000 not to mention the rehabilitation to get her back to the way she was. However, there is no guarantee because something is not right with her bone structure. Bone density tests have been performed with a negative outcome. So what does this mean for us? We need help!!!! I mean now and not if the courts feel it is necessary or Lawyers want money. We need her to be one piece and relievedfrom the current pain.

Posting tweet...

Powered by Twitter Tools

Archives