News-Press
THE NEWS-PRESS
Saturday, August 20, 2005
Vioxx Widow Wins Verdict
Angleton, Texas – A jury Friday awarded more than $250 million in damages to the widow of a man who died after taking Vioxx, handing Merck & Co., maker of the painkiller, a loss in the first trial of what is expected to be a years-long legal battle.
The verdict came after the six-week trial of the first of more than 4,000 lawsuits against Merck & Co. Analysts said the outcome could cause more lawsuits to be filed, raising Merck’s potential liability nationwide as high as $20 billion.
It was met with whoops by family and friends of Carol Ernst, who blamed Vioxx and Merck for the sudden death in 2001 of her seemingly healthy husband, Robert.
Merck’s lawyers expressed disappointment with the verdict and said they were studying an appeal.
Ernst, of Keene, Texas, blamed Merck for the death of her husband after he took Vioxx for hip and hand pain for eight months. Studies have shown that Vioxx increases the risk of heart attack and stroke.
Merck had contended that the death of Robert Ernst, a marathoner who died in May 2001 at age 59, could not have been caused by Vioxx because a coroner attributed it to an irregular heartbeat, not a heart attack.
Local Lawyer Involved In National Case
Attorney Marcus Viles, of the Fort Myers law firm Viles & Beckman, recently was chosen to represent Floridians in the national Vioxx multidistrict litigation pending in U.S. District Court in New Orleans.
Viles said the outcome of the Texas case Friday bodes well for his approximately 1,000 clients as well as others suing the pharmaceutical giant.
“It’s the first time Merck has tested all of its so-called defenses,” Viles said. “A jury thoroughly heard all the evidence they had and obviously the jury was upset with Merck’s behavior, which is entirely what I would expect.
The problem for Merck is that they engaged in a reckless over promotion for Vioxx at the same time Merck was learning from the trials and studies that were being done that Vioxx posed an extraordinary risk of heart attack and stroke. Merck chose to ignore those risks.”