Recent verdicts involving Vioxx |
|
|
|
Published
:
Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:51 |
(AP) - Some recent outcomes of trials against Merck & Co. and its now-discontinued arthritis treatment Vioxx:Jan. 18, 2007: In Los Angeles, A hung jury forced a mistrial in the cases of two men who blamed their heart attacks on Vioxx. The men argued that Vioxx was a substantial factor in their heart problems and that Merck failed to give sufficient warning of potential safety hazards of the drug.Dec. 21, 2006: A judge in a Texas widow's lawsuit over Vioxx reduced a $32 million jury award to about $7.75 million so that it conformed to state law. A state jury in April found Merck liable for the death in 2001 of a 71-year-old man who had a fatal heart attack within a month of taking the since-withdrawn painkiller.Dec. 15, 2006: In Birmingham, Ala., Merck won its second Vioxx trial in less than a week when jurors rejected the claims of a 57-year-old man who blamed the drug for a 2001 heart attack. The jury deliberated just 90 minutes before siding with Merck in the lawsuit filed in 2005.Dec. 13, 2006: In New Orleans, a federal jury ruled for Merck in rejecting a claim by a 50-year-old Tennessean who blamed Vioxx for his 2003 heart attack. Jurors answered 'no' on a verdict questionnaire when asked if evidence showed that Merck failed to adequately warn the man's doctors of any known risk posed by Vioxx, or that the lack of such a warning was a cause of the man's heart attack.Nov. 15, 2006: In New Orleans, a federal jury cleared Merck in the 2003 heart attack suffered by a Utah bank credit manager who had taken Vioxx for 10 1/2 months.Sept. 26, 2006: In New Orleans, a federal jury deliberated three hours after a two-week trial before siding with Merck, finding there wasn't enough evidence to link Vioxx to a Kentucky man's heart attack in 2003.April 21, 2006: In Rio Grande City, Texas, a state jury deliberated about seven hours over two days before finding Merck liable for the death of a 71-year-old man who had a fatal heart attack within a month of taking Vioxx and ordered the company to pay $32 million. The man had suffered from heart disease for more than 20 years.Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
|
|
|
|