News + Font Resize -

Merck gets reprieve in Vioxx case
Whitehouse Station, New Jersey | Saturday, May 31, 2008, 08:00 Hrs  [IST]

Merck & Co., Inc. said that it is gratified that a Texas appeals court overturned the August 2005 verdict of a state court jury in Brazoria County and rendered a judgment in favour of Merck in the Vioxx product liability case Ernst v. Merck. It was the first Vioxx case to go to trial after the company voluntarily removed the medicine from the market.

Merck also said that a New Jersey appellate division has overturned the punitive damage and consumer fraud awards in the 2006 verdict in a two-plaintiff Vioxx trial involving Thomas Cona and John McDarby.

"We are gratified that the Texas appeals court correctly found that Vioxx did not cause Ernst's death and reversed the previous decision for the plaintiff in the first Vioxx case to go to trial. In addition, the New Jersey court correctly reversed the awards of punitive damage and consumer fraud. Today's decisions overturn almost $40 million of damages and attorneys fees previously awarded to plaintiffs at trial," said Bruce Kuhlik, executive vice president and general counsel of Merck & Co., Inc. "We intend to seek further review of the portion of the award that remains standing after the New Jersey decision. We continue to believe Merck acted responsibly."

The Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals found that Vioxx did not cause the death of Ernst, reversed the jury's verdict and rendered a judgment in favor of Merck.

Chief Justice Adele Hedges, writing for a unanimous panel, said in the ruling, "we find no evidence that Ernst suffered a thrombotic cardiovascular event, i.e., a myocardial infarction triggered by a blood clot. Accordingly, appellee failed to show that ingestion of Vioxx caused her husband's death."

The jury's original verdict on Aug. 19, 2005 included $24,450,000 in compensatory damages and $229,000,000 in punitive damages for a total of $253,425,000 against Merck. On June 23, 2006, based on relevant Texas law which limits the amount of punitive damages, the punitive damage verdict of $229,000,000 was reduced to $1,650,000.

In the Cona and McDarby cases, the New Jersey Appellate Division, an intermediate appellate court, overturned the punitive damage award as well as the consumer fraud award, and let stand the compensatory damages for personal injury to McDarby. In reversing the consumer fraud verdict, the court also rejected the attorneys fees granted to the plaintiffs' attorneys.

As a result, the court overturned more than $13 million in damages and attorneys fees.

In the trial, which resulted in a partial victory for Merck, the Company presented evidence that both of the heart attacks were caused, not by Vioxx, but by the pre-existing medical conditions of the two men. While the jury found that Vioxx did not cause Cona's heart attack, it found in favour of McDarby, awarding him both compensatory and punitive damages.

The jury awarded both men the out of pocket costs associated with their purchases of Vioxx under the consumer fraud statute.

Post Your Comment

 

Enquiry Form