Next Vioxx case will be tough for Merck, lawyers say

AP Business Writer Linda A. Johnson reports:

TRENTON, N.J. - The next Vioxx product-liability case to come to trial in New Jersey will likely be a tougher battle for manufacturer Merck & Co., which last week got its first courtroom victory in a case involving short-term use of the now-withdrawn painkiller.

New Jersey Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee, who is overseeing about 3,500 Vioxx lawsuits filed in New Jersey — half the suits filed to date — has told attorneys she wants the next group of trials to involve plaintiffs who took the drug for 18 months or more. Plaintiff lawyers said the judge appears to want to determine how such cases will play out in an attempt to encourage the settlement of some lawsuits.

Whitehouse Station-based Merck has admitted Vioxx doubled risk of heart attacks and strokes after use for 18 months or longer; it pulled the blockbuster arthritis pill from the market in September 2004 after its own research showed that.

Cases with such long-term use will be harder for Merck to defend, although plaintiffs still have the heavy burden of proving Vioxx caused them harm, plaintiff lawyers say.

“If there’s any case that should truly be indefensible, it’s the 18 months and over (case) because Merck has conceded that,” said lawyer Chris Seeger.

Cases involving long-term use of Vioxx make up about 60% of the cases on Higbee’s docket. One lawyer was quoted as saying he still thinks “cases involving short-term Vioxx use are winnable, partly because one Harvard study showed cardiac risks developed within 30 days of Vioxx use.”