A Vioxx lawsuit stems from reports of side effects including blood clots, heart attacks, and stroke. A Vioxx lawsuit attempts to recover funds related to damages suffered due to the use of Vioxx. Vioxx lawsuits fall under a category known as �products liability???, claiming that the manufacturers of Vioxx (Vioxx lawsuit defendants) or their distributors, knew that the drug could cause harm. In a Vioxx lawsuit, as in any products liability suit, there must be proof that the defendants named in the Vioxx lawsuit failed to properly provide for the safety of the plaintiff, and that the person filing the Vioxx lawsuit was harmed as a result of the action or inaction of the manufacturer. Pursuing a Vioxx lawsuit can be a tricky task; most drug companies either attempt to settle, and while a Vioxx lawsuit can mean bad publicity if it goes to trial, it is possible that if the company drags Vioxx lawsuits out indefinitely, the plaintiff will be drained of resources and be forced to settle. A Vioxx lawsuit is therefore generally best handled by an attorney who has previous experience with Vioxx lawsuits, and who knows when to go to trial, and when the point of the Vioxx lawsuit would be better served by a settlement out of court. Remember, the point of a Vioxx lawsuit is to recover financially the damages you and your loved ones have suffered. Filing a Vioxx lawsuit is a commitment on the part of yourself and your attorney. Finding an experienced Vioxx lawsuit attorney greatly increases your chances for success, and most Vioxx lawsuit attorneys will provide a free case consultation to help you determine if a Vioxx lawsuit is the best course of action for you.Vioxx Recall News Study Adds New Threat to Vioxx Health Risks September 13, 2006 A new study offers more evidence highlighting the already known cardiac dangers associated with the notorious painkiller Vioxx but also adding kidney problems as a potential health threat. Researchers at Harvard Medical School analyzed 114 studies involving approximately 116,000 patients and found that Vioxx �was associated with increased renal and (heart) arrhythmia risks.??? Merck, the maker of Vioxx , withdrew the drug from the market in 2004 after an extensive, long-term study showed it doubled the risk of a serious cardiac event � particularly heart attack and stroke � after 18 months of use. However, several more recent studies have confirmed that Vioxx increases the risk of heart attack as early as two to four weeks after use. An article based on the Harvard analysis was published in this week's issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association . More than 11,000 product liability lawsuits have been filed against Merck, each of which the company plans to defend on an individual basis. $51 Million Verdict in Latest Vioxx Trial August 18, 2006 Merck lost another Vioxx case yesterday after a jury ruled in favor of a former FBI agent who suffered a heart attack in 2002 as a result of taking the defective drug. The jury decided that Merck was liable for Gerald Barnett's heart attack and also that the company misrepresented the safety of Vioxx. Barnett was awarded $51 million in damages, including $1 million in punitive damages. This case marks Merck's fourth loss in the nine cases that have thus far gone to trial. The company, which plans to try each of the 16,000 Vioxx lawsuits it faces separately, has set aside $1 billion for legal expenses but nothing for liabilities. Vioxx was pulled from the market in 2004 after evidence surfaced linking the popular painkiller to an increased risk of strokes and heart attacks. Since that time, Merck has been at the center of controversy surrounding the safety of Vioxx. The pharmaceutical giant claimed that Vioxx only increased cardiovascular risks after long-term use. However, recent evidence has shown that Vioxx increases the risk of heart attack early on - sometimes within weeks.
|
