VIOXX -, Merck TO FIGHT ON NEW FRONT
October 28, 2005 06:30

As Vioxx testimony enters its final days in a New Jersey courtroom, a new legal headache could be brewing for Merck & Co. A group of plaintiffs attorneys are teaming up to put additional litigation pressure on Merck in state courts. The group, which claims to represent about 20,000 Vioxx cases, is expected to file court papers informing Merck and the federal judge overseeing Vioxx cases that it wants to battle Merck only in state courts and wants no part of the federal litigation set to begin next month. Merck withdrew the painkiller Vioxx in 2004 after it was linked with heart attacks and stroke in some patients after 18 months of daily use. Merck has said there are at least 5,000 legal cases filed against it in federal and state courts. The federal cases have been grouped under a multidistrict litigation umbrella overseen by Judge Eldon Fallon of U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The litigation oversight has been temporarily moved to Houston. A major goal of the breakaway group of lawyers is to try more cases faster, to keep Merck scrambling and, presumably, to collect more fees. Merck repeated its position that it acted responsibly in developing, testing and marketing Vioxx. Barbara Martinez, The Wall Street Journal, 10/24/2005.

A Chicago-based plaintiffs' law firm has filed class actions on behalf of citizens from 10 countries who allegedly suffered serious injury or death from the pain medication Vioxx. The latest action was filed recently on behalf of Polish citizens. In re Vioxx Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 1657, (E.D. La.). Similar litigation has been filed on behalf of Vioxx users in Italy, England, France, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, Germany and the Netherlands, according to Kenneth B. Moll of Kenneth B. Moll & Associates, who has filed the actions. The Vioxx litigation presents "no better case for foreign claimants to be represented in U.S. courts. The production, the testing, the warning, the design of the drug- everything occurred here in the U.S.," Moll said, adding that Merck distributed half the product to users abroad. "There's too much protection by the U.S. of companies whose [products] injure or kill foreigners who have no sufficient law to protect them in foreign countries," he said. Peter Geier, The National Law Journal, 10/24/2005