California’s First Vioxx Trial Begins

By EinsteinCMS Administrator

Published on June 28, 2006

Attorney Thomas Girardi is representing Stewart Grossberg, who alleges Vioxx caused his heart attack.

Grossberg’s lawsuit is one of more than 13,000 claims against Merck nationwide and one of 2,000 cases filed in California alone. In order to streamline the process, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Victoria G. Chaney consolidated California’s Vioxx caseload.

The outcome of Grossberg’s trial is expected to serve as a litmus test for California’s remaining Vioxx cases. The arthritis pain medication was initially placed on the market in 1999 as a remedy for acute pain, but was then pulled after only two years amid concerns it contributed to an increased risk of heart attack and stroke with long term use.

Girardi claims that the company acted in “careless disregard" for their patients safety by not informing doctors of the potential harm posed by Vioxx, and said that testing inadequacies such as the exclusion of patients with a history of heart disease clouded their experiments.

Instead, Merck hired 3,000 sales people and trained them to downplay the risks when talking to doctors, Girardi said.

Merck attorney Tarek Ismail said the defense intends to show that Grossberg had heart disease prior to taking Vioxx and that the drug was in no way responsible for his heart attack.

Grossberg’s lawyers concede that his cholesterol was slightly above normal, but say he was otherwise healthy.

“Vioxx, in fact, had no role in Grossberg’s heart attack," said Ismail.

Merck contends that it is the victim of frivolous lawsuits that snowballed after the company voluntarily pulled Vioxx off the shelves in 2004.

In the six Vioxx verdicts to date, the decisions are split with three in favor of Merck and three against the pharmaceutical giant.

Merck says it plans to appeal, and has vowed to fight each case it faces.

Comment on this article →