TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — Merck & Co. is on the verge of settling most serious personal injury lawsuits over Vioxx, but the drugmaker still faces substantial litigation over the one-time blockbuster painkiller it yanked from the market in 2004 because of cardiovascular risks.
More than 44,000 plaintiffs have enrolled in a proposed $4.85 billion settlement for U.S. personal injury cases involving a heart attack, stroke or death, the company said.
But Merck still has Vioxx lawsuits coming from all directions — from patients in 18 foreign countries, from health providers and consumers who paid for Vioxx and want their money back, and from stockholders looking to recoup their loses. New lawsuits are still being filed.
The company’s chief Vioxx attorney, Ted Mayer, said yesterday that Merck will defend itself aggressively against the remaining suits.
Merck has set aside $6.773 billion to pay an army of lawyers handling all that litigation, plus the nearly 20 personal injury cases that went through trials before Merck proposed a deal in November.
However, thousands of former Vioxx users who claim other injuries — dangerous chest pains, abnormal heart rhythms and similar conditions — are excluded from the settlement and many of their cases continue.
Given all that, Vioxx litigation likely will persist for years — but experts say Merck’s legal tab should start declining.
“It’s not going to exceed what they’ve already spent,” said analyst Steve Brozak of WBB Securities. “By now, Merck has its legal systems probably as close to precision as a Swiss watch.”
Whitehouse Station-based Merck pulled Vioxx from the market on Sept. 30, 2004. On that day alone, stockholders lost a collective $28 billion.
A host of shareholder lawsuits have been consolidated under a federal judge in Newark. The plaintiffs — mutual funds, pension plans and individual investors — are suing Merck directly or, in “derivative suits,” suing to force the company to sue executives and board members to recover money stockholders lost. Attorney Peter Pearlman purports Merck made misleading statements “that artificially inflated the stock.”
A bigger liability could be lawsuits filed in New Jersey by union and other health plans, which argue they would have bought cheaper painkillers for their members had they known the risks of Vioxx.
A class-action suit approved for them was overturned by the state Supreme Court, but attorney Chris Seeger plans to coordinate about 100 cases for individual unions. Given that New Jersey allows triple damages in such cases, it could add up to a big award.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.