Merck suffers Vioxx setback
Attorney
(866) 735-1102 Ext 415
The jury in a federal trial held in New Orleans found Merck & Co
knowingly misrepresented or failed to disclose
information about Vioxx to the doctors of Gerald Barnett, a retired FBI agent. The jury said Mr. Barnett should receive $50 million in compensatory damages plus $1 million in punitive damages. The jury found that Merck "acted win wanton, malicious, willful or reckless disregard for the plaintiff's rights.
Also New Jersey State Superior court Judge Carol Higbee ruled that 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. Merck maintained throughout the trial of Frederick "Mike" Humseton, of Boise Idaho, that one had to take Vioxx for 18 months to be at an increased risk of heart attack.
Merck had data that showed people were reported to have heart attack within weeks of taking the medicine.
Additionally, on the verdict sheet the jury only assigned blame to Merck, even though the verdict sheet gave them a chance to assign percentages of falut to Merck and various physicians.
Mr. Barnett is 62 years old, and underwent a quintuple bypass after a heart attack at age 58. He exercised daily, ate a healthy diet and took drugs to control his cholesterol. Mr. Barnett took Vioxx 31 months before his heart attack in 2002, and continued taking Vioxx for two more years. He stopped taking Vioxx one week before it was pulled off the market in September 2004.
">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14392927/from/et/Merck suffers 2 setbacks over Vioxx,/a.article">