Vioxx Case Ends in Merck's Favor
Merck & Co., Inc., vowing to fight individually each of the 24,000 suits against it alleging that the company failed to adequately warn consumers about the harmful side effects of Vioxx, an arthritis drug, and that Vioxx caused heart attacks, received a favorable verdict from a New Orleans jury today. Vehemently opposing the claim that Vioxx caused Charles Mason's heart attack, attorneys for Merck argued that Merck complied with all reporting obligations and that other health factors were at the root of the cause of Mason's condition. Phil Beck, an attorney for Merck, reflected on the victory, stating, "We thought the evidence showed clearly that first, Mr. Mason had not taken Vioxx for several days before his heart attack, and second, that there was no (blood) clot that could have come from Vioxx."
Thus far, Merck has successfully won seven out of eleven cases that have gone to trial, though in one the court ordered a new trial because additional evidence subsequently surfaced. The Dean of Williams University School of Law David Logan has speculated that Merck will allow several more suits to go forward before deciding whether to settle with plaintiffs collectively.
News of the verdict hit before the NYSE closed. Merck finished off the day at 44.15, up slightly, but still down from the 52 week high of 46.37.
