NOT LIABLE
A jury in New Jersey only needed around eight hours of deliberations to determine that Merck's Vioxx was not responsible for the heart attack of Frederick Humeston.
The jury also found that Merck did not engage in fraud in marketing the drug and did provide adequate warnings on the drugs health risks.
Early remarks from the jurors indicate that they believed that Humeston's prior medical history and work related stress played the major roles in contributing to his heart attack.
The jurors also indicated that they did not believe that Humeston took Vioxx long enough for it to have had any negative effects on his heart.
This victory for Merck is not completely surprising given that the trial was held in Merck's home state and that the jury was composed mostly of business professionals.
It remains to be seen how the Vioxx litigation will ultimately play out. Plaintiffs in the initial wave of asbestos litigation lost around ten cases before gaining their first victory. Also this case, along with the first case in Texas, were not particularly strong cases for the plaintiffs. There are plaintiffs awaiting trial who did take Vioxx for over two years and suffered heart attacks and strokes while having little or no prior risk factors.
There has already been discussion by Merck about reintroducing Vioxx.
The jury also found that Merck did not engage in fraud in marketing the drug and did provide adequate warnings on the drugs health risks.
Early remarks from the jurors indicate that they believed that Humeston's prior medical history and work related stress played the major roles in contributing to his heart attack.
The jurors also indicated that they did not believe that Humeston took Vioxx long enough for it to have had any negative effects on his heart.
This victory for Merck is not completely surprising given that the trial was held in Merck's home state and that the jury was composed mostly of business professionals.
It remains to be seen how the Vioxx litigation will ultimately play out. Plaintiffs in the initial wave of asbestos litigation lost around ten cases before gaining their first victory. Also this case, along with the first case in Texas, were not particularly strong cases for the plaintiffs. There are plaintiffs awaiting trial who did take Vioxx for over two years and suffered heart attacks and strokes while having little or no prior risk factors.
There has already been discussion by Merck about reintroducing Vioxx.
posted by David Stone | 9:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home