MERCK WINS THIRD FEDERAL VIOXX CASE

Merck announced that a federal court jury in New Orleans found in favor of Merck, rejecting a claim that Vioxx caused the 2003 heart attack of a then 61-year-old Utah man. In the case, Charles Laron Mason claimed he took Vioxx for approximately 10 months before his heart attack. The Mason case was specifically selected by the plaintiffs' steering committee for this trial.

"The jury determined that Merck acted appropriately in the development and marketing of Vioxx, and that Vioxx did not substantially contribute to Mr. Mason's heart attack," Phil Beck, Merck's lead trial lawyer in the case, said.

"He also had multiple risk factors for a heart attack including significant coronary artery disease, a family history of cardiac problems, and he was considered medically obese," Beck said. "Unfortunately, Mr. Mason would have suffered a heart attack whether he was taking VIOXX or not."

Merck has now won three out of the four federal Vioxx cases to go to trial. Of the 16 cases that have now been scheduled for trial and are no longer pending, only four have resulted in a plaintiff's verdict. Juries have decided in Merck's favor in seven cases, and five cases have been dismissed. Another five cases, previously scheduled for trial, have been withdrawn by the plaintiffs before the claims could reach trial.

As for the four plaintiff's verdicts, Merck already has filed an appeal or sought judicial review in each of those cases, and in one of those four, a federal judge overturned the damage award shortly after trial. Additionally, a state judge set aside one of the seven Merck verdicts.