WHITEHOUSE STATION, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 2, 2006--A jury in Los Angeles today returned a defense verdict in the first California VIOXX case to go to trial, Grossberg v. Merck.
“We are pleased that a state court jury in Los Angeles rejected the claims of a California man who blamed his 2001 heart attack on his intermittent, sporadic use of VIOXX,” said Thomas Yoo of Reed Smith, a member of the defense team in Grossberg v. Merck. “The verdict is consistent with what we have always said. Merck acted appropriately in providing information to the medical, scientific and regulatory communities. We firmly believed that VIOXX was not the cause of this heart attack because the data do not support that infrequent, sporadic use of VIOXX contributes to heart attacks. At the end of the day, the fact remains that the plaintiff was at high risk for a heart attack regardless of whether he was taking VIOXX.”
“Merck is pleased with the jury verdict,” said Kenneth C. Frazier, senior vice president and general counsel of Merck. “Today’s outcome demonstrates, again, why we will defend these cases on a case-by-case basis.”
It is the second time in the past month that plaintiffs were unsuccessful in their bid to blame their heart attack on their VIOXX use.
According to the evidence presented at trial, Stewart Grossberg of Northridge, Calif., took VIOXX from 1999 on a sporadic and intermittent basis before his heart attack at 66 on Sept. 18, 2001. He then continued to use VIOXX intermittently until about one month before Merck voluntarily withdrew the drug from market in September 2004.
During the trial, Merck produced evidence showing that Mr. Grossberg has high cholesterol levels, atherosclerosis and a family history of cardiac problems.
In addition, Merck presented evidence that it carefully studied VIOXX before and after receiving approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and consistently made the results of studies available to the FDA and the medical community.
Merck was represented by Ralph A. Campillo of Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold in Los Angeles, Tarek Ismail of Bartlit, Beck, Herman, Palenchar & Scott in Chicago, and Thomas Yoo of Reed Smith in Los Angeles. Bartlit Beck was the lead counsel in the first federal VIOXX case, which Merck won.
This is the eighth case that has gone to trial. In July, Merck won a case brought by Elaine Doherty, a New Jersey woman who claimed her heart attack was caused by her nearly three years of VIOXX use. Prior to that, in April, a New Jersey jury rendered a split verdict in a case involving two plaintiffs. The jurors rejected a claim by Thomas Cona that VIOXX contributed to his heart attack, and found in favor of John McDarby. Merck plans to appeal the portions of the verdict that it lost.
In February, Merck won the first federal case in New Orleans when jurors in Plunkett v. Merck rejected claims that VIOXX caused the heart attack of a Florida man. In November 2005, jurors in New Jersey ruled in favor of Merck, in Humeston v. Merck, the first N.J. case.
Finally, Merck intends to appeal last August’s plaintiff verdict in a Texas state court in Ernst v. Merck, as well as April’s plaintiff verdict in a Texas state court in Garza v. Merck.
A ninth case is under way in federal court in New Orleans, Barnett v. Merck.
About Merck
Merck & Co., Inc. is a global research-driven pharmaceutical company dedicated to putting patients first. Established in 1891, Merck currently discovers, develops, manufactures and markets vaccines and medicines to address unmet medical needs. The Company devotes extensive efforts to increase access to medicines through far-reaching programs that not only donate Merck medicines but help deliver them to the people who need them. Merck also publishes unbiased health information as a not-for-profit service. For more information, visit www.merck.com.
Forward-Looking Statement
This press release contains “forward-looking statements” as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based on management’s current expectations and involve risks and uncertainties, which may cause results to differ materially from those set forth in the statements. The forward-looking statements may include statements regarding product development, product potential or financial performance. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed, and actual results may differ materially from those projected. Merck undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. Forward-looking statements in this press release should be evaluated together with the many uncertainties that affect Merck’s business, particularly those mentioned in the cautionary statements in Item 1 of Merck’s Form 10-K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005, and in its periodic reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K, which the Company incorporates by reference.
Contact:
Merck & Co., Inc. Media: Maggie Brown, 206-390-2322 or
Investors: Graeme Bell, 908-423-5185
Source: Merck & Co., Inc.
