April 5, 2006
Vioxx - Round 4 - A Split Verdict
Less than two days after beginning its deliberations, a New Jersey jury returned verdicts in two Vioixx cases tried together. As to each plaintiff's claim, the jury determined that Merck had failed to warn of heart attack risks associated with use of its popular prescription drug Vioxx. John McDarby, 77, who took the drug for four years, was awarded $4.5 million in damages. However, in the companion case, the jury decided that Vioxx was not the cause of the Thomas Cona's heart attack. Cona claimed to have taken the drug for 22 months. Both plaintiffs took the drug for arthritis pain. Merck took the position that the plaintiffs were at risk for heart attacks because of clogged arteries before taking Vioxx. The trial was the first involving long-term use of the drug. See the story by John Curran for the Associated Press.
April 5, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Vioxx - Round 4 - A Split Verdict: