All the Breaking News Vioxx Users Must Know About

Looking for breaking Vioxx news? Weitz & Luxenberg is the law firm that won the second major Vioxx lawsuit against Merck for a Vioxx heart attack victim in Atlantic City, a jury verdict of $13.5 Million.

Judge Dismisses Vioxx Cases Filed by Brits

October 9, 2006, Courierpostonline.com

A New Jersey judge has dismissed about 50 Vioxx-related lawsuits against Merck & Co. filed in state court by British citizens, saying the cases should be heard in Britain.

However, the judge ordered that if British courts decline to accept them, the drugmaker must not prevent the suits from being refiled in New Jersey.

Merck Pushes for Painkiller Approval

August 28, 2006, UPI

Merck & Co. says it is pushing for U.S. approval of Arcoxia, a drug that could serve as successor to its painkiller Vioxx.

Arcoxia is already sold in 62 countries but has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the United States. There are concerns that it might have heart risks similar to those of Vioxx, which was withdrawn from the market in 2004, the New York Times reported.

Merck Suffers a Pair of Setbacks Over Vioxx

August 18, 2006

(Excerpt from New York Times article that mentions Weitz & Luxenberg attorney Robert Gordon)

If the jury believes that the person took Vioxx regularly, they will hold Merck liable for the heart attack, said Robert Gordon, a plaintiff's lawyer at Weitz & Luxenberg. Mr. Gordon helped try a Vioxx case in New Jersey this spring in which a jury in state court awarded $4.5 million to Thomas McDarby, a 77-year-old man who suffered a heart attack after taking Vioxx for almost two years.

New Orleans Jury Rules Against Merck

August 17, 2006, nytimes.com

A federal jury ruled that drug manufacturer Merck failed to warn doctors about the medical risks of its painkiller Vioxx, which was taken off the market in September 2004. The jury ruled that the company must pay a retired F.B.I. agent who suffered a heart attack while taking the drug at least $50 million in damages. Merck still faces some 14,000 lawsuits over Vioxx, involving about 27,000 plaintiffs, in federal and state courts.

In the Money, and in Court

nytimes.com, April 22, 2006

In each case, plaintiffs' lawyers are trying, at least rhetorically, to link their suits to the Vioxx litigation, asserting that the drugs have serious side effects that their makers did not disclose.

In two of the four Vioxx suits to reach trial, plaintiffs have won large verdicts.

"These companies just do it again and again and again," said Paul J. Pennock, a partner who leads litigation against drug makers for Weitz & Luxenberg, one of the largest plaintiffs' law firms. "They try to create much larger markets for these drugs than is warranted, particularly given what they know about the risks."

Jury awards $9M in punitive damages in Merck Vioxx case

April 11th, 2006 (marketwatch.com)

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (MarketWatch) -- A jury Tuesday ordered Merck & Co. (MRK) to pay $9 million in punitive damages to a 77-year-old man who had a heart attack after taking Vioxx, concluding the drug maker misled the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about the painkiller's heart risks.

Merck Loses $4.5 Million Vioxx Verdict in New Jersey

April 5th, 2006 (quote.bloomberg.com)

April 5 (Bloomberg) -- Merck & Co. must pay at least $4.5 million to a 77-year-old man who claimed its painkiller Vioxx caused his heart attack and nothing to another plaintiff for the same claim, a New Jersey jury ruled.

Merck Jurors Hear Doctor Who Took Vioxx, Had Attack

March 9, 2006 (bloomberg.com)

McDarby's attorney, Robert Gordon, told jurors that Braun got 220 visits from 17 Merck sales representatives about Vioxx between 1999 and 2004. Jurors heard testimony this week that thousands of sales representatives gave away millions of free samples of Vioxx during the biggest drug launch campaign in the history of Merck.

Merck Exec. Acknowledges Market Pressure

March 7, 2006 (ap.com)

Robert Gordon, a lawyer for McDarby, told the jury that McDarby a diabetic would never have had Vioxx prescribed for his arthritis pain if Merck had properly warned of its dangers. Merck, based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., sold the drug beginning in 1999 as a pain reliever for arthritis and osteoarthritis sufferers who found other pain drugs too harsh on the stomach. In his opening statement, Gordon said Merck sales representatives "falsely reassured" McDarby's doctor about Vioxx's safety and the lawyer sought to neutralize Merck's arguments about McDarby's medical problems by saying the drug was at least a contributing factor in his 2003 heart attack. The heart attack left McDarby's heart permanently damaged. The retired insurance agent went from being an active senior enjoying his golden years to a wheelchair-bound man who needs help from his wife to dress and use the toilet, his lawyer said.

Lawyers: Merck Concealed Vioxx Dangers

March 7, 2006 (washingtonpost.com)

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. - Back in its home court, Merck & Co. staked out familiar turf as another Vioxx trial got under way, its lead attorney telling jurors the company adequately investigated the drug's safety and asserting it was heart disease and other ailments - not Vioxx - that led to two former users' heart attacks. Robert Gordon, a lawyer for McDarby, told the eight-woman, two-man jury that McDarby - a diabetic - would never have had Vioxx prescribed for his arthritis pain if Merck had properly warned of its dangers.

Merck Withheld Vioxx Safety Information, Plaintiff's Lawyer Claims

March 7, 2006 (wallstreetjournal.com)

Mr. Lanier is trying the case along with Robert Gordon of Weitz & Luxenberg, who is representing Mr. McDarby. Mr. Gordon began his portion of the opening statements by explaining to jurors that, as a diabetic taking Vioxx, Mr. McDarby had a 510% higher risk of heart attack. The decision of Mr. McDarby's doctor to prescribe him Vioxx was critical, Mr. Gordon asserted. He said Merck sales representatives visited the doctor 220 times over five years, listing him in Merck documents as being among those that "can all be seen and influenced with the right messaging." Mr. Gordon said that, if the doctor had been properly warned about Vioxx's safety issues, he wouldn't have prescribed the painkiller to Mr. McDarby.

Double the dose

March 7, 2006 (bergenrecord.com)

Vioxx lawyers square off in A.C.

March 7, 2006 (starledger.com)

Gordon acknowledged that his client, McDarby, was diabetic, but said that made it all the more important that heart risks associated with Vioxx be adequately relayed. "That's the kind of person that needs to be protected by Merck," he said. McDarby's doctor was visited by Merck sales representatives 220 times in five years to talk up Vioxx and make sure he was stocked with samples of the drug, Gordon said. In a deposition for the case, the doctor said he later felt betrayed when he learned about Vioxx's link to elevated cardiovascular risks. "If he knew Vioxx was on the list of risk factors for heart attacks, he never would have put (McDarby) on the drug," Gordon said.

Medical Journal Criticizes Merck Over Vioxx Data

December 9, 2005 (nytimes.com)

In the editorial, "Expression of Concern," the New England Journal of Medecine said that the authors of the study had deleted some data about strokes and other vascular problems suffered by patients in the Vigor trial two days before it submitted the results to the publication.

The authors, some of whom worked for Merck, also underreported the number of heart attacks suffered by patients taking Vioxx, claiming that there were 17 heart attacks when there were actually 20, the journal said. The authors have been asked to correct the study, the journal said.

Ex-Merck Scientist: Some Data Not Disclosed

September 27, 2005 (biz.yahoo.com)

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) -- Alzheimer's disease patients who took Vioxx in two studies had higher death rates than those on a placebo, but Merck & Co. never notified physicians or its sales representatives, its former chief scientist conceded in testimony played in court Tuesday.

Edward Scolnick, former president of Merck Research Laboratories, said under questioning by a lawyer for a postal worker suing the Vioxx maker that doctors prescribing the popular arthritis drug should have been told about the data in 2001.

Former Merck Scientist Acknowledges Vioxx Death Data Was Not Made Public

September 24, 2005 (biz.yahoo.com)

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) -- Alzheimer's disease patients who took Vioxx in two studies had higher death rates than those on a placebo, but Merck & Co. never notified physicians or its sales representatives, its former chief scientist conceded in testimony played in court Tuesday.

Merck shares fall after jury verdict in Vioxx case

August 22nd, 2005 (today.reuters.com)

NEW YORK, Aug 22 (Reuters) - Shares of Merck & Co. fell on Monday as investors assessed the liability the company must overcome after a $253 million jury award, the first of possibly thousands of lawsuits it faces over pain killer Vioxx.

Merck (MRK.N: Quote, Profile, Research) was off 54 cents, or 1.92 percent, at $27.52 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

Merck Is Found Liable in First Vioxx Case

August 19, 2005 (nytimes.com)

In the first Vioxx-related personal-injury lawsuit to reach a verdict, a Texas jury awarded $253 million this afternoon from Merck, the maker of Vioxx, to the widow of Robert Ernst, who died in 2001 after taking the painkiller and arthritis medicine.

Merck hid Vioxx dangers for a decade

August 17, 2005 (reuters.com)

Merck & Co. Inc. for years hid clinical evidence that showed Vioxx posed a heart attack risk, said the lawyer for the plaintiff in the first state civil trial against drugmaker's popular painkiller.

U.S. Vioxx Trial Set for November

August 5, 2005 (nytimes.com)

The first federal trial over Vioxx, the painkiller made by Merck & Company, is scheduled to begin here on Nov. 28 and concerns whether the drug caused the fatal heart attack of a 53-year-old Florida man.

Widow of Vioxx Patient Is Pressed by Merck Lawyers

August 4, 3005 (nytimes.com)

The plaintiffs rested their case Thursday in the first Vioxx lawsuit to reach trial after the widow of Robert Ernst told jurors that she believed her husband would be alive if he had not taken Vioxx.

At Vioxx Trial, a Discrepancy Appears to Undercut Merck's Defense

July 20, 2005 (nytimes.com)

In a 2001 letter to doctors, Merck seriously understated the heart risks faced by patients taking its painkiller Vioxx, according to evidence presented Tuesday in the first Vioxx lawsuit to reach trial.

In First of Many Vioxx Cases, a Texas Widow Prepares to Take the Stand

July 12, 2005 (nytimes.com)

On Thursday, opening arguments will begin in a lawsuit Carol Ernst and Mr. Ernst's two children have brought against Merck, the giant drug maker, claiming that Merck's painkiller Vioxx caused Mr. Ernst's heart to stop.

Widow's suit against Vioxx maker to set tone for rest

July 4th 2005 Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com)

Her lawsuit against the company is set for trial in Angleton July 11, the first of thousands across the country involving the pain-killer drug Vioxx to go to court.

Millions, possibly billions, of dollars will be riding on the outcome of this and other cases headed to court.

Merck says the company, based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., believed Vioxx was safe. Merck Vice President Dennis Erb told Congress in May that the company quickly disclosed studies that first raised the possibility of heart repercussions, including the one that led to the drug's withdrawal.

Vioxx on trial

July 3rd, 2005 (bergen.com)

With thousands lined up for trials and hundreds more potential plaintiffs waiting in the wings, no one is sure how many lawsuits Merck may ultimately face and how much it may be liable for. From the time of its approval in 1999 as one of the new breed of "super-aspirins" to its withdrawal Sept. 30, more than 20 million pain-sufferers used Vioxx.

What's clearer are the emerging legal strategies: Plaintiffs' attorneys say they will hang Merck with its own documents and e-mails. Some leaked documents indicate that Merck knew of the risks and suppressed damaging findings even as it continued a huge Vioxx marketing campaign.

Merck Could Face 100,000 Vioxx Suits

May 24, 2005 (cbs11tv.com)

A federal judge told dozens of lawyers crowded into a courtroom here Monday that there could ultimately be up to 100,000 cases filed against Merck over its now-withdrawn pain reliever Vioxx, and that he could hear a case as early as the fall.

Top anti-arthritis drugs cause skin disease

April 4, 2005 (www.biomedcentral.com)

Members of the second most important family of drugs used to treat rheumatoid arthritis can cause serious dermatological conditions in a quarter of patients under treatment, reveals a study published today in the journal Arthritis Research and Therapy.

read more...

Whistleblower Warns of More Vioxx Risks

February 17, 2005 (news.yahoo.com)

Use of the painkiller Vioxx poses the risk of hundreds to thousands of additional heart attacks in older men, a Food and Drug Administration whistleblower told a panel reviewing the safety of painkillers on Thursday.

Merck Canceled an Early Study of Vioxx

February 8, 2005 (nytimes.com)

Previously undisclosed company documents show that the drug maker was poised to begin a major cardiovascular study of the drug in 2002, and abruptly dropped the project just before it was set to start.

Journal releases Vioxx study

January 26, 2005 (cnn.com)

"I was sent an e-mail by one of my supervisors threatening me with severe consequences" if the paper was published, Graham said in a telephone interview Monday. Believing he was threatened with dismissal, he said he asked the Lancet to withdraw the paper from publication in November.

Scientist May Up Vioxx Estimates

January 3, 2004 (mercurynews.com)

The Financial Times reports that Food and Drug Administration scientist David Graham has vowed to publish research that suggests up to 139,000 Americans died or have been seriously injured as a result of taking the drug.

FDA Urges Caution with COX-2 Drugs

December 28, 2004 (technewsworld.com)

The FDA issued a Public Health Advisory about the use of NSAIDs, including the COX-2 inhibitors such as Celebrex and Bextra, in light of recent study findings that these drugs can increase the risk of heart attack and stroke when taken for long periods of time or in large doses.

Advent Of Arthritis Alternatives

December 27, 2004 (cbsnews.com)

The withdrawal of the Cox-2 drug Vioxx by Merck & Co in 2004 and recent disclosures that other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may also raise risk of heart attack and stroke will continue to evolve and change the way aches and pains of some forms of arthritis are treated, says John H. Klippel, MD, president and CEO of the Arthritis Foundation. The brouhaha "has created an interesting dialogue about risks and benefits, and every time a consumer chooses to take a drug, they have to understand the risks and accept them."

More heart risks found for COX-2 inhibitors

December 27, 2004 (ama-assn.org)

Pfizer Inc., which markets the COX-2 inhibitors Celebrex (celecoxib) and Bextra (valdecoxib), released new information on Dec. 17, 2004, indicating that Celebrex, like Merck & Co.'s Vioxx (rofecoxib), appears to pose an increased cardiovascular risk.

Celebrex, Vioxx Scandals Prompt AIDS Group to Call for Ban on Consumer Drug Advertising

December 17, 2004 (biz.yahoo.com)

LOS ANGELES, Dec. 17 /PRNewswire/ -- On the heels of the latest drug industry debacle -- serious safety concerns raised earlier today on Pfizer's blockbuster drug, Celebrex -- AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF), the largest AIDS organization in the United States which operates free AIDS treatment clinics in the US, Africa, Central America and India, will call upon the US government to implement an emergency ban on direct-to-consumer advertising by the pharmaceutical industry. Earlier this week AHF had also called for the creation of a new, independent blue ribbon commission or panel to review all drug research in light of several recent other drug industry scandals roiling the nation's public health and raising serious questions about the US bodies that license and regulate the industry.

Vioxx plan transfers burden

December 14, 2004 (oregonlive.com)

Oregon regulators announced Monday that drug maker Merck has agreed to simplify and extend the nationwide refund program for consumers who had taken its recalled pain drug Vioxx.

State Makes it Easier to Get Vioxx Refund

December 14, 2004 (wlns.com)

People looking to get refunds for their unused Vioxx may find it a little easier here in Michigan. Attorney General Mike Cox announced that drug manufacturer Merck has agreed to alter its refund program.

Vioxx users in action against drug company

December 10, 2004 (theadvertiser.news.com.au)

MORE than 500 South Australians are considering joining a class action over the controversial painkiller Vioxx.

Victims of arthritis drug to join class action

December 10, 2004 (theaustralian.news.com.au)

MORE than 600 Australians who suffered heart attacks, strokes and blood-related illnesses after taking the recalled arthritis drug Vioxx will join a multi-billion-dollar class action against US pharmaceutical giant Merck and Co.

Merck's 2005 Earnings Will Fall After Loss of Vioxx

Dec. 8 (Bloomberg)

Merck & Co., the No. 2 U.S. drugmaker, said 2005 earnings will fall without sales of its Vioxx painkiller, withdrawn in September because of heart risks.

Merck sets up new Vioxx review

Wednesday December 8, 2004 (The Guardian, UK)

Drugmaker Merck has set up an independent committee to review the firm's actions prior to the withdrawal of its painkiller Vioxx from the market in September.

Higher Risk for Heart Attack With Vioxx Than With Celebrex

Wednesday, December 8, 2004 (Ivanhoe Newswire)

A new study reveals a greater risk of heart attack associated with Vioxx (rofecoxib) than with Celebrex (celecoxib), although neither drug shows a statistically significant elevated risk of heart attack relative to people who did not use the drugs.

FDA under pressure for rehab, Scrutiny after Vioxx focuses on turf battles, independence

Wednesday, December 8, 2004 (CBS.MW)

WASHINGTON The recent fiasco over the Vioxx recall has exposed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to broad-based charges that the agency is less an independent regulatory body than an old-guard bureaucracy where senior officials snuff out dissenting voices among its scientific staff members.

The FDA denies it tried to silence Vioxx warnings from Dr. David Graham

Tuesday, Dec. 7, 2004 (Newstarget.com)

The US Food and Drug Administration denied charges it tried to suppress a safety official's findings that painkiller Vioxx, which was pulled from the market last week, raised heart attack risks.

Vioxx Recall Sparks Safety Concern, Doctors Say

Yahoo News - Nov 23, 2004

By Toni Clarke and Bill Berkrot.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - "I don't think it's easy at all to get a new drug approved, and if you start being extremely conservative you stand the risk of taking good medicines from people."

Doctors Ponder FDA Drug Controversy

ABC News

By ALI MOHAMADI. Nov. 22, 2004

- Startling testimony by an FDA drug safety reviewer about five popular medications has the medical ... "Some in the medical world believe the agency needs to use the recent controversy over Vioxx, the arthritis drug that was found to increase risk of heart disease and was subsequently withdrawn by Merck, as a sign that it needs to become even more aggressive in the way it evaluates drug safety."

If you or a loved one has suffered due to a side effect of Vioxx, you can fill out this simple form for a free case review within 24 hours.

Weitz & Luxenberg is no longer accepting Vioxx cases.

see also:

Vioxx Lawsuit Update Vioxx Breaking News: Merck Files Appeal in Texas Lawsuit
Vioxx Breaking News: Merck Files Appeal in Texas Lawsuit After Loss

Vioxx News Update Vioxx News Update: More Risks Found
Vioxx News Update: More Risks Found in JAMA Analyses

Breaking News Breaking News and updates you must know regarding Vioxx and the recall
Affected by Vioxx? Get all the Breaking News you need right here