- Janice Hopkins Tanne
- New York
Merck will appeal against the decision that a New Jersey state court jury made on 12 March to award compensatory and punitive damages of $47.5m (£24.4m; €35.7m) to an Idaho man, Frederick Humeston, and his wife Mary, for a heart attack he had in 2001, when he was 56.
The damages, awarded after the retrial of an earlier case that Mr Humeston lost, were $18m to Mr Humeston, $2m to his wife, and $27.5 in punitive damages. The jury decided that Merck was negligent in not warning Mr Humeston of the risk of taking rofecoxib (Vioxx).
Merck voluntarily withdrew rofecoxib, a cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor, from the market on 30 September 2004 because it increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes (BMJ 2005;329:816).
Merck faces more than 27 000 …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27