"A New Jersey jury found Friday that Merck failed to warn about the cardiovascular risks of the painkiller Vioxx in the case of a man who had a heart attack in 2001.
But the same jury found that Merck did properly warn of Vioxx's heart risks in the case of a second man, who had a fatal heart attack in 2002.
The jury also found Merck violated a New Jersey consumer-protection law, but hasn't yet assessed damages.
The trial in Atlantic City, N.J., now moves onto a second phase to determine whether Vioxx was a primary cause of Frederick Humeston's heart attack in September 2001. If the jury finds in Humeston's favor, it can award compensatory and punitive damages. In Friday's verdict in favor of Humeston, who survived his heart attack, the jury concluded that Merck failed to warn his prescribing physician of Vioxx's risks."
Read the full article at WSJ.com.