November 3, 2005
An Atlantic City, New Jersey jury has sided with pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co., agreeing that the company fulfilled its requirements under the law when it warned consumers about the risks of taking its pain medication Vioxx. The company had been sued for liability in the 2001 fatal heart attack of a man who had taken the drug.
The jury debated less than eight hours before delivering the verdict, exonerating Merck of the charges. It follows a trial this past summer in Texas, where the drugmaker was found liable in the death of a Vioxx user.
In the New Jersey trial, Merck kept the focus on medical evidence. It called witnesses who testified the company believed Vioxx was safe before it abruptly pulled it from the market in September 2004.
The six-woman, three-man jury reached the conclusion that the companys disclosure about possible risks from Vioxx met its obligations, and that it could not be held responsible for the death of 60 year old Mike Humeston, who was taking Vioxx for pain from a Vietnam War injury.
The jury also ruled that Merck properly warned doctors about risks with Vioxx and voted unanimously on three counts that Merck did not mislead doctors about the drug's safety.
The stakes couldn't have been higher in the New Jersey case. More than half the 5,000 personal injury suits against Merck have been filed in New Jersey, where Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee certified a national class action covering every private third-party payer that allowed members of its health benefits plan to buy Vioxx.
Despite the latest victory, Merck lawyers will stay busy over the next few years. The pharmaceutical company faces at least 6,000 similar lawsuits.
