Shares of Merck & Co. plunged again after a news report suggested the drug maker attempted to keep safety worries from hurting the prospects of Vioxx before the company finally recalled the painkiller.

Surveying the wreckage of the worst pharmaceutical tort litigations of the past, investors naturally want to know: Will Vioxx be the next Baycol, or Rezulin, or fen-phen? Our prediction is: yes, but bigger.

Plaintiffs' attorneys are predicting that Merck & Co.'s recall of Vioxx will significantly enhance their odds of convincing jurors that the popular arthritis medication caused their clients' heart attacks and strokes.

Merck's press conference was very disappointing, according to Andy Birchfield, "Instead of accepting responsibility for putting a dangerous drug on the market and keeping it there for so long, Merck spent an hour defending itself."

Lawsuits. Lawsuits. Lawsuits. And they're coming fast. The recall came after testing revealed the risk of heart attack or stroke doubled for those taking Vioxx.

The final bill for Merck's Vioxx is just beginning to be toted up before it pulled Vioxx off the market because of the cardiac risks the painkiller could pose to long-term users.

Evelyn Irvin Plunkett said she remembers the day her husband starting taking Vioxx for back pain. It was April 15, 2001.

Following Merck & Co.'s withdrawal of the blockbuster painkiller Vioxx, patients, shareholders and even the company began scrambling to figure out their next moves.

The flood of phone calls to plaintiffs' lawyers began soon after pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. announced that it would withdraw its painkiller Vioxx from the market because of safety concerns.

Merck could face legal liabilities of up to $10B following its worldwide withdrawal of the blockbuster pain drug Vioxx, according to some analysts' estimates.