| What is RSS feed? | About Us |
 Search Score: 5/10
Source: www.msnbc.msn.com --- 35 days ago
Deceptive promotion of the drug Vioxx is costing drug company Merck & Co. $58 million in a judgment with 30 states, including $1.15 million that's going to Idaho. ... Source: abclocal.go.com --- 37 days ago
Appeals courts in New Jersey and Texas on Thursday scrapped verdicts against the drugmaker Merck & Co. Inc. stemming from some of the earliest trials involving its once popular painkiller Vioxx. ... Source: enews.earthlink.net --- 34 days ago
NEWARK, N.J. - Drugmaker Merck & Co. is not liable for the medical monitoring of Vioxx users not claiming injury, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Wednesday. ... Source: online.wsj.com --- 34 days ago
Drugmaker Merck isn't liable for the medical monitoring of Vioxx users not claiming injury, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled. ... Source: online.wsj.com --- 34 days ago
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that Merck isn't responsible for the medical monitoring of Vioxx users not claiming injury. The 5-1 ruling means a class-action lawsuit will be dismissed. ... Source: www.ctv.ca --- 11 days ago
Lawyers say more than 59,000 people have registered for drugmaker Merck & Co.'s settlement of lawsuits claiming injury from the painkiller Vioxx. Administrators have enough records to review about 9,100 of those claims. ... Source: www.upi.com --- 34 days ago
TRENTON, N.J., June 4 (UPI) -- The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Wednesday Merck is not obligated to pay for the medical monitoring of people who took Vioxx. ... Source: www.moreover.com --- 34 days ago
The Pink Sheet Jun 4 2008 10:53PM GMT ... Source: www.lexisnexis.com --- 2 days ago
TRENTON, N.J. - The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled June 4 that Merck & Co. Inc. is not liable to former Vioxx users for preventive cardiac care, saying the state's Products Liability Act (PLA) requires a demonstrable injury before damages may be assessed (Phyllis Sinclair, et al. v. Merck & Co. Inc., et al., No. A-117-06, N.J. Sup.; 2008 N.J. LEXIS 565; See January 2007, Page 10). Full story on lexis.com ... Source: www.lexisnexis.com --- 2 days ago
TRENTON, N.J. - A New Jersey appellate court has vacated as federally preempted a $9 million punitive damages award to a man who suffered disabling cardiac injuries while using Vioxx, as well as $3.7 million in attorney fees awarded in a consumer fraud action tried at the same time as the personal injury claims (John McDarby, et al. v. Merck & Co. Inc., No. A-0076-07T1, Thomas Cona, et al. v. Merck & Co. Inc., No. A-0077-07T1; N.J. Super., App. Div.; 2008 N.J. Super. LEXIS 116). Full story on lexis.com ...
Source: pipeline.corante.com --- 33 days ago
You may or may not have noticed, but slowly and quietly, Merck has been getting many of the large Vioxx judgments against it overturned on appeal . These cases made huge headlines when they were first tried, but the articles that tell the end of the story have not, for the most part, made the front page. This is one reason that the company was finally able to settle a huge number of pending lawsuits for much less than many people thought likely. Merck seemed to like its chances, considering the cases they’d won and the way things looked in the appeals courts, and the amount of money they were able to settle for finally became a better deal for them than the alternative of fighting out every case. Of course, now people are starting to wonder if the company settled too soon - opinions differ . It's important to note, though, that some of these reversals have been less than total victories for Merck. The first Texas case falls into that category, but the New Jersey punitive damages were thrown out based on the idea of pre-emption . A state jury, the appeals court ruled, can't decide if Merck defrauded the federal government when it got Vioxx approved. (We'll be revisiting that part of the argument when Wyeth v. Levine and Warner-Lamber v. Kent get decided). But in the end, what looked for a while like an avalanche that might sweep the company away has come down to . . .what? Twenty cases went to juries, and Merck has now prevailed, to ... Source: blog.lawinfo.com --- 2 hours ago
By: LISA R. WILSON The latest slew of overturned verdicts against Merck, the makers of the withdrawn painkiller Vioxx, is yet another indication of the increasing difficulty that plaintiffs’ lawyers are experiencing in winning lawsuits against big drug companies. The latest ruling overturned a $26 million jury verdict against Merck in Texas based on the [...] ... Source: www.thnt.com --- 11 days ago
(AP) More than 59,000 people hope to share in drugmaker Merck & Co.'s settlement of lawsuits claiming injury from the painkiller Vioxx, and administrators have enough records to review about 9,100 of those claims. ... Source: www.newsinferno.com --- 32 days ago
Merck & Co. was on the winning end of another Vioxx court decision this week, the third favorable ruling involving the deadly painkiller in the past month. This time, the New Jersey Supreme Court voted 5-1 that Vioxx users who had not shown signs of an injury are not entitled to medical monitoring paid for [...] ... Source: www.healthcentral.com --- 23 hours ago
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that Vioxx users who suffered no known harm from the withdrawn pain drug cannot sue Merck & Co Inc to pay for medical tests and treatment by heart doctors, the drugmaker said on Wednesday. ... Source: www.fiercepharma.com --- 35 days ago
SPOTLIGHT: Saskatchewan judge certifies Vioxx class action Read more... ... Source: www.dailyjournal.com --- 37 days ago
Charles C. Lifland was on the phone by 5:30 a.m. Thursday talking with business people, advisers and other lawyers about a significant new ruling that morning in favor of his client, Merck & Co. Inc., the maker of Vioxx. ... Source: www.injuryboard.com --- 8 days ago
More than 59,000 people have registered for the Vioxx settlement and it looks like plaintiffs will begin to see initial payments soon. Vioxx was approved for use in 1999 and eventually reached sales of over $2.5 billion. Since then, the FDA has ordered the drug to be taken off the market after it was linked to more than 27,000 heart attacks from 1999 to 2003. Merck announced last November that it would settle $4.85 billion in settlements with the thousands of unfortunate people who had filed Vioxx lawsuits. The settlements will be awarded on an individual basis and the amount of money each person receives will vary on a number of factors. Apparently, Tuesday is the deadline for submitting medical and pharmacy records to back up claims. Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeff Rasansky ... Source: www.fiercepharma.com --- 33 days ago
Slowly but surely Merck is working its way off the Vioxx hook. First, the successful fight-em-one-by-one strategy , then the Read more... ... Find more search results for Vioxx on RSSMicro.com |
Copyright © 2008 RSSMicro.com
Derek Lowe submits: You may or may not have noticed, but slowly and quietly, Merck (MRK) has been getting many of the large Vioxx judgments against it overturned on appeal . These cases made huge headlines when they were first tried, but the articles that tell the end of the story have not, for the most part, made the front page. This is one reason that the company was finally able to settle a huge number of pending lawsuits for much less than many people thought likely. Merck seemed to like its chances, considering the cases they’d won and the way things looked in the appeals courts, and the amount of money they were able to settle for finally became a better deal for them than the alternative of fighting out every case. Of course, now people are starting to wonder if the company settled too soon - opinions differ . Complete Story » ...