Vioxx maker scores 4th legal victory
NEW ORLEANS -- A Tennessee man's claim that the maker of the painkiller Vioxx should be blamed for his 2003 heart attack was rejected yester day by a federal jury, the fourth victory for
The seven-member jury answered "no" when asked if evidence showed Merck failed to adequately warn Anthony Dedrick's doctors of any known risk, or that the lack of such a warning was a cause of Dedrick's heart attack.
Merck lawyers had attacked the credibility of Dedrick, 50, of Waynesboro, Tenn., who was seeking $200,000 from the company.
"The jury felt Merck acted appropriately and that Vioxx did not play a role in Mr. Dedrick's heart attack," said Merck's lead attorney Phil Beck. "And it only took them 90 minutes to do it."
Merck had won three previous federal cases and lost one. In state courts, the company has won three and lost three. Jurors in another state case decided in Merck's favor, but the judge later ordered a retrial.
Merck said earlier this week that it faces about 27,200 personal injury lawsuits over Vioxx, which is no longer sold.
Another 14,000 plaintiffs have entered agreements with Merck suspending the time limit for lawsuits. Suits by more than 3,000 plaintiff groups have been dismissed, although about two-thirds of those may be refiled later.
"Merck has the resources and the commitment to defend itself no matter how many cases it has to pursue," Beck said.
So far, Merck has reserved nearly $1.6 billion for legal costs but has resisted setting aside money to pay jury awards or settlements with plaintiffs.
Dedrick's lawyer, Andy Birchfield, acknowledged Dedrick had other risk factors for his heart attack, including tobacco use, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, and cocaine use. However, he said, Vioxx was also a risk factor and that -- as has been argued in other cases -- Merck failed to adequately warn doctors.
Birchfield anticipated, and sought to counter, arguments from Merck about Dedrick's past, acknowledging Dedrick had a criminal history and had used cocaine. That information was irrelevant, he told jurors.
"Going in we knew it was a most challenging case," Birchfield said. "Mr. Dedrick had every risk factor and other matters in his past. But we remain convinced that Vioxx was a factor."
Beck attacked Dedrick's credibility, noting five worthless-check convictions and allegations that Dedrick lied under oath at a disability hearing. Beck questioned whether Dedrick was telling the truth when he said he continued taking Vioxx even after being prescribed a narcotic painkiller.
