New Jersey Supreme Court Dismisses Medical Monitoring Suit Filed by VIOXX® Plaintiffs |
WHITEHOUSE STATION, N.J., June 4, 2008 - The N.J. Supreme Court ruled today that VIOXX users who suffered no known personal injury could not sue the Company to pay for electrocardiograms and follow-up consultations with cardiologists. In May 2005, a trial court dismissed the suit, but an appellate court ruled that the dismissal was premature. "We believe this is the right decision," said Ted Mayer, Hughes, Hubbard & Reed, outside counsel for Merck. "The N.J. Supreme Court has made it clear that you cannot bring a medical monitoring claim unless you allege you were injured by a product. The plaintiffs in this suit sought to recover from Merck even though VIOXX has been off the market for almost four years and they do not claim that it ever injured them." Today's ruling states that individuals cannot pursue claims for medical monitoring under N.J. law unless they can show that they first suffered an injury. Specifically, the Court said, "Here, it is not disputed that plaintiffs do not allege a personal physical injury. Thus, we conclude that because plaintiffs cannot satisfy the definition of harm to state a product liability claim under the Product Liability Act, plaintiffs' claim for medical monitoring damages must fail." Merck also asserted that there is no medical science supporting the plaintiffs' position that they need to be monitored for cardiovascular conditions almost four years after VIOXX was voluntarily taken off the market. John Beisner of O'Melveny & Myers argued the case on behalf of Merck. The case is Sinclair v. Merck. Status of Litigation Merck has entered into an agreement to resolve state and federal myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke claims filed or tolled by Nov. 9, 2007. The settlement program is progressing in a satisfactory manner. Because of the large number of enrollments received so far, Merck is confident that the number of verified enrollments will exceed the thresholds that will obligate the Company to pay $4.85 billion into a resolution fund. About Merck Forward-Looking Statement |
| # # # |
N.J. Supreme Court Decision in Medical Monitoring Case |
|
| Sinclair Decision (PDF* 76Kb) | |