VioxxTM Recent News

Vioxx Information

Vioxx information from Merck & Co., Inc
Drug manufacturer's website containing information on Vioxx.

Vioxx information from the FDA
From the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research

Aug. 17, 2006: Merck Found Guilty of Failing To Warn Doctors About Vioxx

In a federal trial, a jury found that Merck failed to warn doctors about the risks of its painkiller Vioxx. It ruled that Merck must pay a retired FBI agent $50 million in compensatory damages, and another $1 million punitive damage award, for the heart attack he suffered in 2002 after taking the drug for several years.

August 2, 2006: California Jury Clears Merck in Vioxx Case

A Los Angeles jury found Vioxx manufacturer Merck & Co., Inc. not liable for an eldery man's heart problems, determining that the drugmaker did not wrongfully conceal information about the painkiller. The 71 year-old plaintiff began using Vioxx in 1999, and suffered a heart attack in 2001. Vioxx was withdrawn from the marketplace in 2004.

July 13, 2006: Merck Cleared in N.J. Vioxx Case

A jury in New Jersey cleared Vioxx manufacturer Merck & Co., Inc. of liability for the heart attack of a 68 year-old woman who had taken the painkiller for approximately two years, marking the fourth victory for Merck in seven completed court trials over the safety of Vioxx.

April 21, 2006: Family of Vioxx User Awarded $32M

A Texas jury found Vioxx manufacturer Merck & Co., Inc. liable for the fatal heart attack of a 71 year-old man who had used the painkiller for approximately one month prior to his death. The jury awarded $32 million ($7M as compensatory damages and $25M as punitive damages) to the man's family, after two days of deliberation.

April 11, 2006: N.J. Jury Awards $13.5M After Split Verdict in Vioxx Trial

A New Jersey jury awarded an additional $9 million as punitive damages for a former Vioxx patient, after finding a link between Vioxx use and the plaintiff's heart attack. On April 5th, 2006, the same jury found Merck & Co., Inc. liable for the 77 year-old plaintiff's illness, awarding him $4.5 million in compensatory damages based on the drug manufacturer's failure to properly warn of the painkiller's safety risk. The jury had cleared Merck of liability in connection with a second plaintiff's heart attack, finding that use of Vioxx was not a factor in the 60 year-old's illness.

February 17, 2006: Victory for Merck in First Federal Vioxx Trial

The jury in the first Vioxx trial in federal court cleared Vioxx manufacturer Merck & Co., Inc. of any liability in connection with the heart attack and death of a 53-year old Florida man who had taken the prescription painkiller for less than a month. A mistrial in the same case had been declared in December 2005, after the first jury was unable to reach a verdict.

December 12, 2005: Mistrial Declared in Federal Vioxx Trial

A mistrial has been declared in the first federal court trial over the safety of prescription painkiller Vioxx (pulled from the market in September 2004), after the jury was unable to reach a verdict despite three days of deliberations. The lawsuit was brought against Merck (manufacturer of the painkiller) by the widow of a man who died of a heart attack in 2001, after he had used Vioxx for approximately one month. The mistrial declaration means that the case can be re-tried before a new jury, or the parties can attempt to reach a settlement.

November 3, 2005: Merck Found Not Liable in Second Vioxx Trial

In a victory for Vioxx manufacturer Merck & Co., Inc., a New Jersey jury found the company not liable for a postal carrier's non-fatal heart attack in 2001. The plaintiff had claimed that his use of Vioxx (and Merck's alleged failure to warn Vioxx users of the painkiller's safety risks) caused a blood clot to form in his leg, resulting in a heart attack. The New Jersey jury disagreed, finding no such failure to warn, and insufficient proof of any fraud or misrepresentation committed by Merck.

August 19, 2005: $253.5M Verdict in First Vioxx Trial

A Texas jury awarded $253.5M to the widow of a Vioxx user, in the first trial among thousands of personal injury lawsuits seeking to hold drug manufacturer Merck & Co., Inc. liable for health problems caused by the painkiller. Vioxx was pulled from the worldwide market in September of 2004. Following the verdict, Merck & Co., Inc. announced that it intends to appeal the decision.

July 11, 2005: Jury Selection in First Vioxx Trial

Jury selection began in the first Vioxx trial in the U.S., as a pool of more than 100 possible jurors completed questionnaires in a Texas courtroom. The case, brought by the widow of a Vioxx user, is the first to go to trial among thousands of civil suits against Merck & Co., Inc., manufacturer of Vioxx. The painkiller was withdrawn from the market in September 2004, due to health dangers associated with its use, including risk of stroke and heart attack.

November 18, 2004: U.S. Senate Holds Vioxx Drug Safety Hearings

The U.S. Senate Finance Committee conducted a hearing called "FDA, Merck and Vioxx: Putting Patient Safety First," to consider allegations of mismanagement by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Merck pharmaceutical company regarding the safety of Vioxx, a painkiller withdrawn from the worldwide drug market in September 2004.

More information:

  • Testimony before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee

September 30, 2004: Vioxx Pulled from Drug Market Worldwide

Merck & Co., Inc., the manufacturer of Vioxx, announced a voluntary withdrawal of the arthritis and pain relief drug from the worldwide drug market, after results from a recent clinical trial indicated that Vioxx users may have an increased risk of suffering a heart attack, stroke, or other cardiovascular event. Merck's action was not ordered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but was initiated by Merck based on its own findings from the clinical trial.
Approved by the FDA in 1999 for the treatment of osteoarthritis and forms of acute pain (and later, for relief of rheumatoid arthritis), Vioxx is a member of the "Cox-2 inhibitor" family of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

More information:

Free VioxxTM Case Evaluation

Please fill out the form below to have your case evaluated.

Please provide as much information as possible about your case. If you do not provide adequate case information, including injuries or damages sustained it may take us longer to process your inquiry.

*Items are required.
There is no charge for this evaluation.

Contact Information:

*Title: *First Name: MI: *Last Name:
 
*E-mail Address:
Home Phone:
- -
Mobile Phone: - -
Work Phone: - - ext.
  *Provide at least 1 phone number.
*Street Address:
Apt/Suite:
*City:
*State/Zip: /
 
What is the best way to reach you?
Please provide the best place, time and method for contacting you.
 
Additional Contact Information:
Use this area to add country codes, foreign addresses, special instructions, etc.

Injured Person Information:

Date of Birth:
Whom are you inquiring on behalf of?
If you are NOT inquiring on your own behalf,
what is your relationship?
Is the person deceased? Yes No

If deceased, the cause of death
as stated on the death certificate: 

Date of Death:
Was there an autopsy performed? Yes  No  n/a
Did you take VioxxTM within one year of your injury? Yes  No

Case Information:

During what period of time was VioxxTM prescribed?
Start End

Why was VioxxTM prescribed?

What dosage of VioxxTM were you prescribed daily? (i.e. 25mg, 50mg, 75mg)

List names/addresses of any doctors who prescribed VioxxTM:

Did effects from VioxxTM include:

Stevens Johnson Syndrome Yes No
Heart Attack Yes No
Stroke Yes No
Deep Vein Thrombosis Yes No
Blood Clots Yes No
Pulmonary Embolism Yes No
Death Yes No

Other medical problems since VioxxTM usage:

Date medical problem(s) first occurred:

Other Information:

Disclaimers:

Yes No - I agree that this matter may be referred to an attorney in my area who may contact me.

Yes No - I agree that by submitting this question, I will not be charged for the initial response. I understand that I am forming only a semi-confidential relationship.

Yes - I agree that the above does not constitute a request for legal advice and that I am not forming an attorney client relationship by submitting this question. I understand that I may only retain an attorney by entering into a fee agreement, and that I am not hereby entering into a fee agreement. I agree that the information that I will receive in response to the above question is general information and I will not be charged for the response to this e-mail question. I further understand that the law for each state may vary, and therefore, I will not rely upon this information as legal advice. Since this matter may require advice regarding my home state, I agree that local counsel may be contacted for referral of this matter.

By Clicking the appropriate box below, I agree to:

Security Image
For purposes of security, please type the letters from above in the space provided.