Vioxx Lawsuit and Attorney Information

The  Melbourne doctor who prescribed Vioxx to a man suing the manufacturer on the grounds the anti-arthritis drug allegedly triggered a heart attack, was visited 124 times in three years by drug company representatives spruiking the product.

Documents tendered to the Federal Court reveal US pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co bombarded general practitioner John Dickman with salesmen and samples of the drug, but failed to mention any links to increased risks of heart attacks and stroke.

Dr Dickman - a GP since 1972 - prescribed Vioxx to former navy officer Graeme Peterson for his arthritis and back pain until the drug was voluntarily recalled from sale in 2004 due to safety concerns.

Mr Peterson is the lead plaintiff in a class action against Merck and its Australian subsidiary Merck, Sharp and Dohme for compensation, claiming that Vioxx caused his heart attack in December 2003.

Vioxx was launched in 1999 and at its height was used by 80 million people worldwide, because it did not cause stomach problems as did traditional anti-inflammatory drugs.

It was voluntarily withdrawn from sale in October 2004 after concerns were raised that it caused heart attacks and strokes.

Merck last year settled thousands of lawsuits in the US over the effects of Vioxx for $US4.85billion but made no admission of guilt. The company is fighting the class action in Australia.

Read More

Merck & Co. need not defend a lawsuit in which the company is accused of defrauding millions of users of its painkiller Vioxx, a New Jersey judge ruled, dealing a “death knell” to class-action claims by consumers.Consumers who sued didn’t meet the legal requirements for such a group claim under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee said today in Atlantic City. “Problems with individualized issues of proof would be unmanageable,” such as how much each consumer paid for the drug and everyone’s reason for taking it, she said.

“There may not be an alternative, superior form of resolution for these claims, considering the small size of the damages alleged for each member of the class,” Higbee ruled. “This decision may indeed be a death knell to the claims of most individual consumers. However, the court cannot find that a class action is a superior form of resolution, either.”

Lawyers sought to recoup the cost of the drug for all consumers outside California who bought Vioxx from June 1999, when it went on the market, to October 2004, when Merck withdrew it over safety concerns. Consumers also sought punitive damages.

Merck agreed in 2007 to pay $4.85 billion to resolve lawsuits by people claiming Vioxx caused heart attacks and strokes. The consumer case was aimed at recovering money for economic losses, not personal injuries.

“We are pleased that the court agreed this was not an appropriate case to proceed as a class action,” Ted Mayer, a Merck attorney at Hughes, Hubbard & Reed, said in a statement.

Earlier Merck Victory

Merck, based in Whitehouse Station, New Jersey, also won a ruling in 2007 from the New Jersey Supreme Court, which refused to certify a national class-action lawsuit over claims it misled health insurers about the safety of Vioxx.

Plaintiffs claimed Merck knew of the drug’s cardiovascular risks and failed to disclose them, Higbee said today in an 18- page opinion. They also sought to prove that Merck trained its sales force to avoid answering questions about the risks, and that its advertising campaign misled consumers.

Higbee said a class-action would be an appropriate way to show whether Merck defrauded consumers by orchestrating a campaign to misrepresent the cardiovascular risks.

Still, she dismissed the case saying the plaintiffs couldn’t show a “causal nexus” between Merck’s unlawful conduct and the “ascertainable loss” of what consumers paid for the drug.

That failure “creates an insurmountable barrier to class action,” she ruled.

Differences in Patients

The decision on whether to prescribe a drug is based on “a host of individualized factors,” such as a patient’s health risks and whether other drugs were effective, Higbee wrote.

“An individualized determination would be required for each plaintiff to determine if the concealment of the CV risk information had a causal relationship on the decision” to take the drug, she ruled. Such factors “differ from consumer to consumer,” forcing a jury to weigh “facts applicable to each plaintiff,” she said.

The ruling disappointed plaintiffs, Jeffrey Kodroff, a Philadelphia-based lawyer for former Vioxx users, said in a phone interview.

“We’re going to consider all our options as to what our next step should be,” Kodroff said.

Article source Bloomberg.

Merck & Co said on Monday that it has been advised it is a target of a U.S. grand jury investigation involving its withdrawn pain drug Vioxx.The company had previously disclosed the government probe, which has been ongoing since 2004. But it only last week received a letter from the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Massachusetts informing the drugmaker it is a target of the grand jury investigation, Merck said.

The probe involves Merck’s research, marketing and selling activities regarding Vioxx, the once $2.5 billion a year drug that was pulled from the market in September 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in long-term users.

Merck said it has responded and will continue to respond to requests from the U.S. Attorney for documents and information in connection with the probe. The investigation includes subpoenas for witnesses to appear before a grand jury, the company has said in securities filings.

The New Jersey-based drugmaker was sued by tens of thousands of former Vioxx users who claimed to have been injured by the arthritis medicine.

After winning the majority of product liability trials that reached a jury, Merck agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle personal injury claims from former users who had suffered heart attacks and strokes.

In a separate release, Merck said it and JP Morgan completed primary syndication of $7 billion of new Merck credit facilities with commitments from eight other banks as part of the financing for its $41.1 billion acquisition of rival Schering-Plough Corp.

The other banks are Bank of America, BNP Paribas, Citi, Credit Suisse, HSBC, The Royal Bank of Scotland, Santander and UBS, Merck said.

The drugmaker also said it has secured commitments for the amendment of its existing $1.5 billion revolving credit facility to allow it to remain in place after the merger.

Written by Reuthers on 3/29/2009.

Merck & Co. said Friday it will pay $4.85 billion to end thousands of state and federal lawsuits over its painkiller Vioxx in one of the largest drug settlements ever.

Company officials estimated the deal, if accepted, would end 45,000 to 50,000 personal injury lawsuits involving U.S. Vioxx users who suffered a heart attack or ischemic stroke, the type in which blood flow to the brain is blocked.

“Without this settlement, the litigation might very well stretch on for years,” Merck executive vice president Kenneth Frazier said during a conference call.

He called the agreement “responsible and reasonable” and allows Merck to better quantify its liability, once estimated as high as $50 billion.

Negotiating teams met more than 50 times in eight states and spoke hundreds of times by telephone over many months to hammer out the deal, according to attorneys.

“I’m very happy with it,” said Chris Seeger, one of the six plaintiff lawyers who helped negotiate the settlement. “It’s a tremendous way to resolve this litigation.”

Merck pulled Vioxx from the market Sept. 30, 2004 after its researchers determined the blockbuster arthritis treatment, then pulling in about $2.5 billion a year, doubled risk of heart attacks and strokes.

To qualify for a settlement, plaintiffs must have filed claims by Thursday and meet several criteria, including medical proof that they suffered a heart attack or stroke, that they received at least 30 Vioxx pills and that they received enough pills to support a presumption that they were ingested within two weeks before injury.

That is a big concession by Merck, which has long claimed that Vioxx caused harm only after 18 months of use. Those claims were dismissed by independent scientists and plaintiffs lawyers.

Merck stressed that the agreement is not a class action settlement and that it is not admitting fault.

Company executives and attorneys said as recently as last month that every case would be fought individually.

But on Friday, they said several factors made this “the right time” for the deal, including the expiration of the statute of limitations in 42 states.

Merck said it will take a pretax charge for the full $4.85 billion in the current quarter. It would not say whether insurance will cover any of that, but said much of the charge will be tax deductible.

Analyst Steve Brozak of WBB Securities called Merck’s handling of the litigation “a Harvard casebook study of how to deal with a problematic product.”

Investors seemed to agree, as Merck shares trading jumped nearly 5 percent, or $2.67, to $57.44 — near their 52-week high of $58.36.

After losing its first case in a $253 million verdict that was later sharply reduced, Merck has won a string of civil cases. It has won 10 of 15 court verdicts to date. Some of those cases will be excluded from the settlement, but appeals in others continue.

The company said last month it had added $70 million to its reserves for defending lawsuits. As of Sept. 30, Merck had reserved a total of $1.92 billion for legal expenses and spent a total of $1.2 billion.

The deal becomes binding only if 85 percent of the plaintiffs in key categories agree to the deal: all pending heart attack and ischmic stroke cases, all cases involving deaths and all cases alleging more than 12 months of Vioxx use.

“I’m not in the least bit of doubt that we’ll do it,” said Russ Herman, a New Orleans attorney who served as chairman of the plaintiffs negotiating committee. “This was a really, really tough litigation for both sides; this way you have some certainty.”

The deal was finalized in the early morning hours after attorneys for Merck and the plaintiffs met with three of the four judges overseeing nearly all Vioxx claims.

Seeger said the deal was put in motion last December when three key judges pushed the parties to open out-of-court talks.

“Every claimant is going to be compensated” once their claim is validated, he said.

Seeger said this deal is larger that the original settlement in cross-state rival Wyeth’s diet drug litigation, which was $3.75 billion initially but ballooned past $20 billion with repeated revisions.

Merck lawyers said they had closely scrutinized that and other cases to find ways to ensure that its settlement does not exceed the $4.85 billion, of which $4 billion will go to heart attack claimants and the rest to stroke claimants.

Among other things, potential claimants will have to have prior medical documentation of a heart attack or stroke, and they will not be able to later opt out of the settlement. Also, all law firms involved in the “steering committees” directing pretrial discovery and other coordination of both state and federal cases must get every one of their clients to settle.

Payments would vary, depending on severity of injuries, length of time that Vioxx was used and each person’s risk factors for cardiovascular disease. A complex system would assign points to each claimant. Payments could start as early as August 2008.

Lawyers fees are to come out of the $4.85 billion fund, based on the percentage in their contingency agreements with clients; additional fees will go to the law firms that together amassed more than 50 million pages of documents for use by all plaintiffs’ lawyers.

Attorneys for both sides presented the deal Friday morning to U.S. District Judge Eldon E. Fallon in New Orleans.

A total of about 60,000 personal injury cases have been filed, including thousands on hold under agreements suspending the statute of limitations, plus about 265 potential class action cases, some of which allege shareholder losses.

The deal does not include people in foreign countries, any with different injuries, any with stock-related claims or a group with no evident injuries that is suing for Merck to pay for medical monitoring.

This may finally take a hurdle off of Merck’s back as shares went up almost 3.00. To all the victims this was defiantly a day of victory.

Drug maker Merck & Co. Inc. said Friday the jury in a Florida liability case involving its painkiller Vioxx decided in the company’s favor.

Merck has been fighting lawsuits since pulling the drug off shelves in 2004 and has not won them all. The company could lose a predicted 50 billion soon as the dust settles which does not have a clear ending in sight.  The drug causes an  increased risk of heart attack and stroke that prompted massive litigation

The Jury favored Merck saying they were not liable for plaintiff Refik Kozic’s heart attack. Mr. Kozic alleged that he used Vioxx for about nine weeks before suffering his heart attack in April 2001 at 50 years old, according to Merck. This was the first Vioxx case in Florida to go to trial.

The company has had their share of victories in teh heap of lawsuits. Most notably when they claimed victory in two multibillion-dollar class-action lawsuits, on behalf of shareholders and private insurers seeking to recoup what they paid for Vioxx prescriptions.

Side effects cannot be anticipated. If any develop or change in intensity, inform your doctor as soon as possible. Only your doctor can determine if it is safe for you to continue taking Vioxx.

More common side effects may include:

Abdominal pain, diarrhea, dizziness, headache, heartburn, high blood pressure, indigestion, nausea, respiratory tract infections, stomach discomfort, swelling of the legs and ankles.

Less common side effects may include:

Back pain, bronchitis, fatigue, flu-like symptoms, sinus inflammation, urinary tract infections, weakness.

Rare side effects may include:

Abdominal bloating or tenderness, allergies, anxiety, appetite change, arm pain, asthma, back strain, baldness, black-tarry stool, blisters, bloody nose, blurred vision, boils, bursitis, cartilage problems, cavities, chest congestion, chest pain, chills, confusion, conjunctivitis (pinkeye), constipation, cough, cysts, decreased levels of sodium in the blood, decreased mental alertness, dental pain, depression, dermatitis, difficulty breathing, drowsiness, dry mouth, dry throat, ear infection, ear pain, ear ringing, ear wax, fainting, fever, fluid in the lungs, flushing, fungal infection, gas, gastrointestinal infection, gastrointestinal inflammation, hallucinations, heartbeat irregularities, hemorrhoids, hepatitis, hernia of the diaphragm, herpes infection, hives, impaired sensitivity to touch, inability to urinate, increased nighttime urination, increased potassium in the blood, infection, insect bite reaction, insomnia, itching, joint pain and swelling, kidney failure, laryngitis, liver failure, low blood cell counts, menopausal symptoms, menstrual disorder, migraine headache, mouth infection, mouth and throat sores, muscle aches and pains, muscle stiffness, muscle spasms, muscle weakness, nail problems, nasal congestion, numbness, pain, painful urination, pelvic pain, pneumonia, rapid or slow heartbeat, rash, runny nose, sciatic pain, severe increase in blood pressure, severe skin peeling, skin dryness, skin inflammation, skin tingling or burning, sore throat, sweating, swelling, taste disturbances, tendon inflammation, tingling sensation, tonsillitis, vaginal inflammation, vein problems, vomiting, weight gain, wheezing, yellow skin and eyes.

If you develop swelling of the face, tongue, and throat, or begin to have difficulty breathing after taking a dose of Vioxx, seek medical help immediately. You may be having a serious allergic reaction to the drug.

Vioxx occasionally causes liver problems. Warning signs include nausea, fatigue, rash, itching, right upper stomach pain, flu-like symptoms, and yellowing of the skin and eyes. If you develop these symptoms, stop taking Vioxx and call your doctor immediately. Don’t take the drug at all if you have a history of liver disease. Also avoid Vioxx if you have severe kidney disease. Long-term use of NSAIDs such as Vioxx can interfere with the kidneys, especially in people with heart failure, poor kidney function, or liver problems. Also at higher risk of a problem are older adults and people taking water pills or ACE inhibitors for high blood pressure. If any of these factors apply to you, make sure the doctor is aware of it.

Vioxx is more likely to cause serious gastrointestinal side effects if you’ve had a problem with ulcers or stomach bleeding in the past. Older adults and those in poor health are also more vulnerable, as are people being treated with steroids such as prednisone and blood thinners such as aspirin and warfarin. Other factors that increase your risk include smoking, alcoholism, and long-term use of NSAIDs. Use Vioxx with extreme caution if you meet any of these criteria.

Caution is also warranted if you have asthma. Vioxx could trigger an attack, especially if you are also sensitive to aspirin. You should also use Vioxx cautiously when suffering from dehydration.

Vioxx sometimes causes water retention, which can aggravate swelling, high blood pressure, and heart failure. Use this drug with caution if you have any of these conditions. Report any unexplained swelling or weight gain to your doctor immediately.

Vioxx may also cause a slight increase in the risk of dangerous blood clots, and should be used with caution if you have a history of clogged arteries, angina, or heart attack. Alert your doctor without delay if you develop chest pain. If you’ve been taking a steroid medication for arthritis, do not discontinue it abruptly when you begin therapy with Vioxx. Vioxx is not a substitute for such drugs. Because Vioxx relieves inflammation, fever, and pain, it may hide signs of an infection. Let any doctor you’re seeing know that you’re taking this drug. The safety and effectiveness of Vioxx in children below the age of 18 have not been evaluated.

The drug Vioxx was developed by Merck Inc. and approved by the FDA is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) that was approved by FDA in May 1999 for the relief of the signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis, for the management of acute pain in adults, and for the treatment of menstrual symptoms. Vioxx quickly became one of the most popular was taken by millions of people and created sheer panic when it was pulled from the shelves in April 7th 2005 because deadly side effects were found to be related to its use. If you have taken Vioxx and suffered from many of the complications such as a heart attack or stroke, contact a qualified Vioxx attorney to ensure your rights are protected and fulfilled. Due to the increasing number of people showing symptoms that have taken the drug there has been several vioxx class action lawsuits. Vioxx class action lawsuits are brought in federal or state court by one or more people on behalf of others who have been harmed in the same way by the same defendant. In these when a judgment is reached the individual members that are part of the class action lawsuit split the money awarded. In most cases companies end up having to shell out hundreds of millions to compensate the large number of lawsuits. With the overwhelming amount of evidence against them it is hard for the companies to find a solid defense in a short amount of time. To compensate this Merck has set aside close to a billion dollars to pay for its Vioxx related legal expenses. The drug makers are hoping that you remain silent and do not take the next step to hire a vioxx attorney to represent you. Those that have done wrong need to held accountable for their actions and face the consequences for not taking the necessary safety precautions. If you are still unsure about some of the facts regarding this case please read the articles and wealth of information that we have provided for you.

This website has been created to provide victims and those interested in learning more about the case with all the information at their fingertips. Whether you are trying to find a local vioxx attorney or just researching details of a past vioxx lawsuit we want to be the website that you use!

Merck & Co., Inc. voluntarily pulled Vioxx off the shelves after a clinical study confirmed concerns that it raises the risk of heart attack, stroke, and other cardiovascular problems which can lead to serious and permanent injuries and possibly sudden death. Vioxx was one of the most popular drugs on the market being used by more then two million worldwide.

The company has set aside $675 million to fight them, but Merck may need to reserve funds to pay for verdicts. If you have been suffering from any of the vioxx symptoms and have a prior history using this drug.