NEWARK, N.J. – A state judge threw out a victory for Merck & Co. on Thursday and ordered a new trial for a postal worker who blamed his heart attack on taking the company’s Vioxx pain medicine for two months, the man’s lawyer said.

Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee ruled evidence uncovered since the November verdict showed that Merck withheld information showing heart attacks could come with use of Vioxx for less than 18 months, said the lawyer, Christopher Seeger.

“Merck consistently said throughout the trial that you had to be on Vioxx for 18 months to be at increased risk of a heart attack,” Seeger said. “And that was false. They had data that people were having heart attacks within weeks.”

It was the second legal blow of the day for Whitehouse Station-based Merck. The company also lost a federal trial in New Orleans over the withdrawn painkiller and was ordered by a jury to pay $51 million to a retired FBI agent who had a heart attack after taking the drug for more than two years.

In the New Jersey ruling, the judge overturned the verdict in a case brought by Seeger’s client, Frederick “Mike” Humeston, 60, of Boise, Idaho, who had a heart attack in September 2001. A jury in Atlantic City on Nov. 3 found Merck provided adequate warning of risks linked to Vioxx.

Seeger said judge planned to have the retrial on Humeston’s lawsuit in January, probably along with another case. More than 16,000 Vioxx-related suits have been filed against Merck in state and federal courts.

In state courts, Merck had won four cases in New Jersey and California, and lost two cases in Texas and one in New Jersey. Higbee’s ruling removes one of the New Jersey wins.

In federal court, the company now has one win and one loss.

Merck pulled Vioxx from the market in September 2004 when its own study showed the painkiller could double risk of heart attack or stroke if taken for 18 months or longer.

Ruling from the bench in Atlantic City, Higbee based her decision on new depositions and a letter published in the New England Journal of Medicine asserting that Merck withheld “very important heart attack data from the public, and also that they didn’t correctly state the data in the trial,” Seeger said.

Merck had no immediate comment on the ruling, but scheduled a teleconference to discuss Vioxx matters.

Merck shares fell $1.77 cents, or 4.3 percent, at $39.41 on the New York Stock Exchange on Thursday afternoon. It had traded from $25.50 to $41.78 over the past year.

 



We're here to help!

We live by our creed of "helping those who need it most" and have helped thousands of clients get the justice they desperately needed and deserved. If you feel you have a case or just have questions please contact us for a free consultation. There is no risk and no fees unless we win for you.

Fields marked    may be required for submission.
  1. I'm an attorney

Merck to pay $830 million to settle investors’ Vioxx...

Merck announced Friday it will pay $830 million to settle investor complaints accusing it of committing...

Merck to pay nearly $1 billion for illegal marketing...

American pharmaceutical company Merck, Sharp & Dohme has agreed to pay $950 million to resolve criminal...

Merck paying more than 3,100 vioxx death claims

Merck & Co. is paying claims by the families of more than 3,100 users of its Vioxx painkiller who...

Settlement limits insurers' claims in Vioxx deal

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- Former Vioxx users getting part of a $4.85 billion settlement ending most personal...

Persistence pays in Vioxx litigation

Plaintiffs get close to $5B, but Merck could have done a lot worse. Attorneys who spent nearly one year...

Vioxx settlement payments to begin in August

Merck & Co., manufacturer of Vioxx, announced it will make the first payment of $500 million on Aug....

Number one firm

I really appreciate the law firm, they look into every detail, they review everything with you not just once but several times to make sure everything is correct. They are a very good law firm and I would highly recommend them. They'll always call you back when you call with questions. They're number one in my book.

—Melva