Newsletter

Plaintiffs seek $1.5 million in federal Vioxx suit


Three Illinois residents who claim they suffered damages as a result of taking Vioxx filed suit in federal court each seeking damages in excess of $1.6 million.  The case has been assigned to Chief District Judge G. Patrick Murphy.  Each Plaintiff is seeking $600,000 in compensatory damages and $1 million in punitive damages.

The plaintiffs, Charles F. Stalnaker of Flora and Loren E. Navel and Mildred N. Grisko of Effingham, claim they were prescribed Vioxx for the treatment of pain.


They claim Merck negligently designed, manufactured, and marketed a defective and unreasonably dangerous drug that increases the risk of adverse cardiovascular events when a safer alternative design was available.  They also claim Merck negligently failed to adequately test Vioxx for adverse cardiovascular events when the risks associated with Vioxx were or should have been known to it and negligently failed to withdraw Vioxx from the market when it knew or should have known that it caused adverse cardiovascular occurrences.

Vioxx was introduced in the United States in 1999. Vioxx is a Cyclo-Oxygenase-2 (cox2) inhibitor and was used to treat arthritis and is in the class of drugs called NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory). Other NSAID drugs include Ibuprofen, Celebrex and Aleve.

Merck withdrew Vioxx on Sept. 30, 2004, after a study confirmed that it increased the risk of heart attack and stroke in its users if taken for more than 18 months. Within days of the withdrawal, lawsuits were filed across the country against Merck & Co.

The plaintiffs claim Merck caused the Vioxx users to be prescribed and to ingest Vioxx and to suffer adverse cardiovascular occurrences, causing the Plaintiffs permanent bodily injury, past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, and past and future disability.

The plaintiffs also claim Merck negligently failed to make any reasonable attempts to warn the FDA, physicians, and consumers of the increased adverse cardiovascular events associated with Vioxx.

The complaint states, "Merck's failure to warn of the cardiovascular dangers of Vioxx caused Plaintiffs to be prescribed and to ingest Vioxx."

Vioxx Lawyer | NEWS FLASH: Billions on tap for Vioxx victims | Merck settles Vioxx suits for $4.85B - From cnn.com | Vioxx, Ketek and crug safety reform | New Vioxx, old tricks | Verdicts for two Vioxx cases | Merck wins 7th Vioxx lawsuit | Vioxx's heart risk linked to clotting effect | Jury gets federal Vioxx case in New Orleans |Second class action suit against Vioxx | Prexige, cousin of Vioxx, approved for use in Canada | Is Merck's new pain drug safer than Vioxx? | Vioxx class action cleared without including all users | NEJM promotes nNew vision of drug safety in the wake of the Vioxx Scandal | Judge dismisses Britain Vioxx cases | Vioxx lawsuits swamp courthouses | Texas widow awarded $253 million in first Vioxx wrongful death suit | Merck supports Arcoxia, successor to Vioxx | Verdict for Merck in L.A. Vioxx trial |NEJM confirms existence of Merck's Vioxx memos | Bextra and Vioxx controversy reveals bigger problem |Proof of Vioxx Cover Up Found | Mercks Win Not Necessarily Loss for All Vioxx Victims | Approval Trial Prompts Vioxx Withdrawal | Vioxx: The FDA Report | Vioxx: Anatomy of a Disaster | The Problem with Vioxx | How Does Vioxx Increase Heart Problems? | Heart Problems Caused by Vioxx: | Did Merck Know Vioxx Could Kill?