Posted on 05/30/2007 9:34:49 PM PDT by BenLurkin
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A U.S. judge in New Orleans threw out a Vioxx victory for Merck, citing misrepresentation by a key company witness and clearing the way for a third trial in the case of a widow who charges that the painkiller caused her husband's fatal heart attack. ADVERTISEMENT
U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon on Tuesday granted Evelyn Irvin Plunkett's motion for a new trial and vacated a jury judgment in favor of Merck (NYSE:MRK - News) "due to a misrepresentation by one of Merck's primary witnesses that prevented Ms. Plunkett from fully and fairly presenting her case."
Fallon, who oversees all federal Vioxx lawsuits, said in his ruling that Dr. Barry Rayburn misrepresented his credentials to the court and jury in the trial by testifying he was a board-certified cardiologist when he was not.
Rayburn, who teaches at a medical school and is in private practice in Alabama, is a "retained expert witness" for Merck and has since renewed his lapsed board certification, said Ted Mayer, an outside attorney who works on the Vioxx litigation.
Mayer said Merck will be ready if a third Plunkett trial should come and predicted the plaintiff will face an uphill battle in court.
"The fact is that this man had abundant risk factors which explain what happened to him," he said.
Mayer said Rayburn has testified in only one other case, a New Jersey trial in which plaintiff John McDarby alleged the company failed to warn consumers of the drug's cardiovascular risks. He was awarded damages of more than $13 million in April 2006. Merck's motion for a new trial is pending.
FATAL HEART ATTACK
Richard "Dickie" Irvin, Plunkett's husband, was 53 when he suffered a fatal heart attack in May 2001 after taking Vioxx for less than one month.
Plunkett filed her original lawsuit against Merck in a Florida state court in 2003. That suit was dismissed and refiled in August 2005 in federal court in New Orleans.
That case, the first federal lawsuit involving an alleged Vioxx death to go to trial, ended in a mistrial after the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. In February 2006, a new jury returned a verdict in favor or Merck.
Merck faces nearly 27,300 lawsuits from people who claim to have been harmed by the once $2.5 billion-a-year arthritis drug that was pulled from the market in 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients taking it for at least eight months.
Juries have now found in favor of Merck nine times and in favor of plaintiffs five times.
In its most recent quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the company said it had a reserve of $737 million set aside for future legal defense costs related to Vioxx as of March 31.
On December 13, a New Orleans jury deliberated for less than two hours before rejecting a claim that Vioxx was the primary cause of plaintiff Anthony Dedrick's 2003 heart attack.
Jurors in that case also found the drugmaker adequately warned of the heart risks associated with the medicine.
Shares of Merck ended down 1.3 percent, or 69 cents, at $52.71 on the New York Stock Exchange.
Whoop-de-doo ... they throw jury verdict out for that?
No wonder medicine is so expensive...............
Absolutely insane!
The judge is a Clinton appointee.
I took Vioxx for one month before they yanked it. I remember looking up at Mr G one day and saying “Wow, I feel like myself!”
((((sight)))) I wish they would bring it back.
And judges think they should be above being criticized.
.....just another judge with another agenda.
Have you tried Carlson’s Lemon Flavored Cod Liver Oil? 2 Tbsp a day....?? But, be careful if you are on blood thinners.....you might want to do some internet research....and see what you find.
I've got 3 bad disc (L-3/L-4, L-4/L-5, and L-5/S-1) and spinal stenosis, God do I miss Vioxx! I had a big box full of sample packs one of my Doctors gave me, but I ran out about 6 months ago. Since then I have put on almost 50 lbs because I hurt too much to do anything.
For pain? I’ve never heard of clo used for pain.
It is very discouraging to find something that works so well, and then have it yanked. This was the first pain reliever I found that didn’t kill my stomach and really worked. I totally understand where you are.
.
I take Celebrex, by Pfizer, but only when needed. It’s good....lasts all day. My back pain occurs only when standing or walking, so if I know I’ll be on my feet, I take it. That way I don’t fear the effects of a drug on the liver or heart if taken daily.
Yea, I tried that. Killed my stomach and didn’t work to boot! That’s why vioxx was so fabulous! It really worked!
My 85 y/o dad is in constant pain because these meds have been pulled from the market.
The way I read this is that the expert witness was apparently adequately qualified, but had let his certification "lapse" so he did not have the right piece of paper in his pocket at the time. I hope every "i" is dotted and every "t" crossed on his new certification.
“Fallon, who oversees all federal Vioxx lawsuits,”
If you’re right, Merck better be prepared to pay big.
The score stands at 9 to 5 with the bases loaded.
“Yea, I tried that. Killed my stomach and didn’t work to boot!”
That’s unfortunate. I have no problems. I use 200mg which is great....I can even take on an empty stomach. 100mg didn’t do anything even though some resident working with my doctor the day of a visit said that studies have shown that 100mg works just as well. No it doesn’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.