Lawyer Pages

According to a federal jury in New Orleans jury on Dec. 13, 2006, Vioxx did not cause a Tennessee man's 2003 heart attack, giving the drugmaker its seventh victory in Vioxx lawsuit litigation over the drug.

Merck is the fourth-largest U.S. drug maker. It withdrew Vioxx from the market in 2004, after a study showed it significantly increased the risk of heart attack. Anthony Wayne Dedrick, a 51-year-old smoker who, according to his attorney, has diabetes, high cholesterol, a family history of heart disease and a history of cocaine use, suffered a heart attack six months after beginning his use of the painkiller Vioxx.

"The jury determined that Merck acted appropriately in the development and marketing of Vioxx, and that Vioxx did not substantially contribute to Mr. Dedrick's heart attack," said Merck's attorney, Phil Beck.

"He had multiple risk factors for a heart attack, including a family history of cardiac problems, heavy smoking for many years, and he had high blood pressure, high cholesterol and diabetes," Beck said. "In addition, he had significant atherosclerosis before he began taking Vioxx. Unfortunately, Mr. Dedrick would have suffered a heart attack whether he was taking Vioxx or not."

Merck has won seven cases and lost four since it initially began going to trial in 2005. An eighth Merck victory was overturned. Dedrick's is one of 7,450 federal lawsuits filed in New Orleans against the Vioxx manufacturer, where Merck and the Beck-led trial-team has won four of five cases. The company, based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., has set aside $1.6 billion to fight more than 23,000 Vioxx-related suits, which they say will be fought individually in court.

U.S. District Court Judge Eldon E. Fallon of the Eastern District of Louisiana, who is overseeing all of the federal court litigation, is expected to soon sit down with Merck attorneys and plaintiffs' lawyers now that the series of federal cases consolidated in the New Orleans district is completed.