As reported in the Houston Chronicle, the jury in the second federal Vioxx trial is in their second day of deliberations.
The plaintiff is a 62-year-old male, Gerald Barnett, who underwent a quintuple bypass after a heart attack at the age of 58. He took Vioxx for 31 months before his heart attack in July 2002. He continued to take the painkiller for another two years, stopping one week before Merck pulled it from the market in September 2004, after a study showed it increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes. To quote from the article:
Jurors must agree unanimously on whether Merck failed to warn Barnett’s doctors about the dangers, or even lied or hid information — and whether this contributed to the heart attack he suffered in July 2002.
A set of “no” answers to all three questions on this topic would mean a fifth Merck victory in nine trials.
A “yes” would mean the first victory involving a patient who was not seriously disabled or killed by a heart attack. Barnett, of Myrtle Beach, S.C., has less energy and a shorter life expectancy because of the heart attack.
Barnett’s lawsuit is among more than 16,000 Vioxx-related suits against Merck in state and federal courts. U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon was appointed to handle pretrial matters for all the thousands of federal suits. He heard one before Barnett’s, and has three more scheduled for trials this fall.
Barnett’s lawsuit is among more than 16,000 Vioxx-related suits against Merck in state and federal courts. U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon was appointed to handle pretrial matters for all the thousands of federal suits. He heard one before Barnett’s, and has three more scheduled for trials this fall.
