Courts Reject Two Major Vioxx Verdicts
Court Alerts
[##_1L|1197047857.jpg|width="140" height="103" alt=""|_##]Two major court victories for Merck on Thursday pushed the litigation over the painkiller Vioxx closer to conclusion and highlighted the increasing difficulty that plaintiffs’ lawyers were having in winning lawsuits against big drug companies. A state appeals court in Texas overturned a $26 million jury verdict against the company in a lawsuit brought by Carol Ernst, whose husband, Robert, died in 2001 after taking Vioxx. In reversing the verdict, the appeals court found that plaintiffs had not proved that Vioxx caused Mr. Ernst’s death.
Separately, an appeals court in New Jersey sharply reduced a verdict in another Vioxx case. The court ruled that the jury should not have been allowed to award punitive damages against Merck or to find that Merck had committed consumer fraud. Only compensatory damages of $4.5 million were permitted, the court said.
The rulings on Thursday leave lawyers for plaintiffs with just three victories, all with relatively small awards, in the nearly 20 Vioxx cases that have reached juries. Mark Lanier, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who was involved in both cases decided Thursday, criticized the decisions and promised appeals. But plaintiffs face an uphill battle.
Bruce Kuhlik, Merck’s general counsel, said the company was pleased with the rulings.
“Our faith in the judges and the fairness of the process has been well placed,” he said.
Thursday’s ruling may further discourage lawyers from pursuing lawsuits against drug makers. Already, plaintiffs’ lawyers are nervously awaiting a Supreme Court ruling in a case that will be heard this fall and could bar most lawsuits against companies for injuries said to be caused by prescription medicines approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
Related listings
-
Ex-SEAL trainee's case back in Va. court
Court Alerts 05/29/2008A former Navy SEAL trainee convicted of killing a Georgia college student is headed back to a Virginia court to try to clear his name.Dustin Turner is hoping to overturn his conviction based on a confession by a fellow trainee who also went to prison...
-
Court OKs suits on retaliation in race, age cases
Court Alerts 05/28/2008An unexpected blend of liberal and conservative Supreme Court justices gave workers more leeway Tuesday to sue when they face retaliation after complaining about discrimination in the workplace.In two employment cases, one involving race and the othe...
-
Court OKs suits on retaliation in race cases
Court Alerts 05/27/2008The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that workers who face retaliation after complaining about race discrimination may sue their employers under a Civil War-era law.The court said in a 7-2 ruling that retaliation is another form of intentional, unlawful d...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.