New Jersey State Vioxx Jury Finds Merck Failed to Warn of Heart Attack Risks
The second New Jersey state trial, involving two plaintiff's cases in the same trial, ended yesterday with the jury finding that Merck failed to properly warn of Vioxx's risks of heart attack and stroke. The jury awarded the 77 year old plaintiff $4.5 million in compensatory damages, finding that Vioxx substantially caused his heart attack. The jury only awarded the 60 year old plaintiff in the trial $45, compensating him for money spent on Vioxx prescriptions. The nominal amount was awarded as the jury found that Vioxx was not the cause of the 60 year old's heart attack.
This is a big victory for those injured by Vioxx across the country. Not only did the jury find that Merck failed to properly warn of the cardiovascular risks of Vioxx, but they found the drug to be a substantial cause of a 77 year old's heart attack; a man who suffered from diabetes and had many other complicating risk factors in his medical history. This finding could not have been more correct. People with risk factors for heart attack and stroke are exactly the group that should not have been on Vioxx, and if Merck would have acted responsibly and timely warned people of the dangers, many lives would have been saved.
Under New Jersey law, a separate trial immediately begins to determine if Merck's actions should be punished, and if so, the amount of punitive damages to award.