Jury decides $253mil verdict against Vioxx but it won't last

Local laws, plus likely appeals could sink case....

Thanks to local laws in Texas (where the case was decided), and the nature of the case itself (and the evidence there-in), this looks like a decision that may eventually be completely wiped out.

Texas Law alone will severely reduce the verdict (if allowed to stand), but just a cursory glance at the article (linked below) and the nature of the evidence (the autopsy and speculative nature there-of) seems to imply that an appeal will likely eventually completely overturn the decision.

Headline is linked.





Jury Awards Widow $253.4M in Vioxx Trial

By KRISTEN HAYS and THERESA AGOVINO

ANGLETON, Texas (AP) - A Texas jury found pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. (MRK) liable Friday for the death of a man who took the once-popular painkiller Vioxx, awarding his widow $253.4 million in damages in the first of thousands of lawsuits pending across the country.
The panel deliberated for 10 1/2 hours over two days before returning the verdict in a 10-2 vote. But the damage award is likely to be drastically cut to no more than $26.1 million because Texas law caps the punitive damages that made up the bulk of the total.
Plaintiff Carol Ernst began to cry when the verdict was read while her attorneys jumped up and shouted, "Amen!"
Jurors in the semi-rural county rejected Merck's argument that Robert Ernst, 59, died of clogged arteries rather than a Vioxx-induced heart attack that led to his fatal arrhythmia. Ernst, a produce manager at a Wal-Mart store, ran marathons and taught aerobics classes on the side.
The case drew national attention from pharmaceutical companies, lawyers, consumers, stock analysts and arbitrageurs as a signal of what lies ahead for Merck, which has vowed to fight the more than 4,200 state and federal Vioxx-related lawsuits pending across the country. Merck said it plans to appeal.
Ernst called the verdict a "wake-up call" for pharmaceutical companies. "This has been a long road for me," she told reporters later. "But I felt strongly that this was the road I needed to take so other families wouldn't suffer the same pain I felt at the time."
After news of the late-afternoon decision, Merck shares fell 7.7 percent to close at $28.06, wiping away almost $5.2 billion in market capitalization.
Merck lawyer Jonathan Skidmore said the appeal would center on what he termed "unreliable scientific evidence."
"It'll be based on the fact that we believe unqualified expert testimony was allowed in the case; there were expert opinions that weren't grounded in science, the type that are required in the state of Texas," he said. "We don't believe they (plaintiffs) met their burden of proof."



... more at linked article
453 views 1 replies
Reply #1 Top
This is an unfortunate verdict. Comments made by jurors after the verdict was announced clearly indicate that they were not at all objective. The problem is that there is a huge difference between increased risk and cause/effect. The evidence made public would in no way support a conclusion that Vioxx "caused" this man's death, any more than breathing air @ 5000 feet "caused" the 49er lineman to die the other day. Either way, any medication worth taking has the potential for adverse effects. If this kind of verdict becomes commonplace, we'll have no further advances in medicines - no company will be willing to take the risk. This verdict, unsupported by even the thinnest of evidence, has the potential to literally kill off Merck if upheld, because of the avalanche of "me, too" cases already in the pipeline & guaranteed to follow. Just another case of legalized extortion & some lyers (sic) scoring a big lotto hit.

Cheers,
Daiwa