Widow Awarded $253 Million in Nation's First Vioxx Trial
By Dave Wilson
Published on August 19, 2005
The jury awarded Carol Ernst, whose husband died from heart failure in May 2001, damages of more than $253 million. The total award included $229 million in punitive damages, which are typically assessed to punish defendants for negligence and egregious conduct.
Merck quickly announced that the company would appeal the verdict, stating that the plaintiff did not meet the criteria needed in Texas to prove that Vioxx was responsible for Mr. Ernst's death. Furthermore, the company maintained that it had acted responsibly, adding that punitive damages were unwarranted.
Robert Ernst, a former marathoner and triathlete, started taking Vioxx in 2000 to relieve arthritis in his hands. He died suddenly in his sleep one night, and the autopsy report listed cardiac arrhythmia as the cause of death. During the trial, the lawyers for Mrs. Ernst contended that the actual cause of death was likely a heart attack from a blood clot caused by Vioxx.
The lawyers defending Merck argued that there was no proof that Ernst died of anything other than cardiac arrhythmia, which Vioxx has not been shown to cause. Furthermore, Ernst had been taking the arthritis medicine for less than 18 months, the length of time needed for the risk of heart attack to increase.
Regardless, Merck's stock tumbled approximately 8% on the news of the verdict. Analysts predict the pharmaceutical giant stands to lose up to $18 billion in the thousands of lawsuits that have been filed so far.
Keyword Tags: