The first lawsuit against Merck and the drug Vioxx was declared a mistrial by a judge this week. The jury in Houston were unable to agree on whether the drug had caused a man's fatal heart attack.
The jury reached a unanimous agreement after three days.
Alexander Harris has issued 24 cases in the US state of New Jersey and has a further 50 waiting in the wings.
Used as a painkiller for conditions such as osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, Vioxx was withdrawn by pharmaceutical giant Merck in September 2004 due to concerns over its safety.
"We are pleased to be progressing these cases" said law firm Alexander Harris, who filed the first UK case in the US in June 2005. "For many of our clients it has been a very difficult time and it is important that they can see something happening."
"These people deserve access to justice. And recent decisions in the UK mean that claims are now unlikely to be able to be pursued here. I am pleased with the progress we have made to date in the USA for our UK clients"
Fred Myers, 67 from Norfolk is one of Alexander Harris' clients whose case has been issued in the US. "I kept fit all my life and I never had any heart problems" said Fred who suffered a heart attack on the 16th December 2003 whilst he was taking Vioxx. "Since the heart attack my life has changed completely for the worse as I was always fit and active for my age."
Alexander Harris, who have now heard from more than 600 people who believe they have suffered as a result of taking Vioxx said: "We took the decision to bring these cases in the States as we believe that this is in the best interests of our clients. We may not be able to pursue the claims to conclusion if we fail on what is known as the forum argument. This decides whether you are allowed to bring a case in a different country to your own. It will be a decision for the Judge as to whether non us residents will be allowed to pursue their claims in the US court."
"In bringing these cases in the US we are working with a leading US firm who are also used to handling health related cases. As such we have been able to pool our expertise for the benefit of our clients."
"It is important to remember that this is not a class action. Each case is being brought individually and will be assessed on its own merits. That is why it is vital that anyone who wishes to pursue a claim passes in the first instance our strictly defined criteria."
"We are currently looking at cases where an individual has suffered either a heart attack or stroke and where they have been taking Vioxx for a minimum of 3 weeks before the event. It is important that they have no past medical or family history and that they should still be taking Vioxx when the incident occurred or have stopped for no more than 3days."
"We have taken this step to be responsible. We have received over 600 enquiries and we are still reviewing medical records and passing cases through to our US partners. However we don't wish to either encourage any spurious claims nor do we wish to dangle carrots for others whose cases we don't believe will succeed. To drag someone through the courts and put them through the examinations and exposure that this will bring, when we feel that their claim would in our opinion not succeed, would be irresponsible."
Vioxx more recently hit the news following a trial in Texas which resulted in an award of compensation of £253.4million to the widow of a marathon runner who suffered a vioxx induced heart attack which led to his fatal arrhythmia.
Notes to editors
Vioxx Background
Merck pulled Vioxx, a $2.5 billion seller, from the market in September 2004 when a long-term study showed it could double risk of heart attack or stroke if taken for 18 months or longer.
Vioxx inhibits an enzyme known as Cox-2, which thins the blood. That feature allows it and other drugs in its class - Pfizer's Bextra and Celebrex - to relieve acute pain and arthritis without causing stomach bleeds or ulcers, as painkillers such as aspirin can.
An FDA panel concluded in February that Vioxx, Celebrex and Bextra all pose heart risks but should be available to consumers. But in April, Pfizer withdrew Bextra from the market at the FDA's request when the agency said it carries risk of serious and sometimes fatal skin reactions in addition to heart attacks and strokes.
The FDA also said that all prescription non steroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs, not just Cox-2 inhibitors, should carry a so-called ''black box'' warning label about cardiovascular risk.
Contact
For further information please contact us on 08700 778877.
The first lawsuit against Merck and the drug Vioxx was declared a mistrial by a judge this week. The jury in Houston were unable to agree on whether the drug had caused a man's fatal heart attack.
The jury reached a unanimous agreement after three days.
Alexander Harris have issued 24 cases in the US state of New Jersey and have a further 50 waiting in the wings.
Used as a painkiller for conditions such as osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, Vioxx was withdrawn by pharmaceutical giant Merck in September 2004 due to concerns over its safety.
"We are pleased to be progressing these cases" said lawyer Ann Alexander who filed the first UK case in the US in June 2005. "For many of our clients it has been a very difficult time and it is important that they can see something happening." "These people deserve access to justice. And recent decisions in the UK mean that claims are now unlikely to be able to be pursued here. I am pleased with the progress we have made to date in the USA for our UK clients"
Fred Myers, 67 from Norfolk is one of Ann Alexander's clients whose case has been issued in the US. "I kept fit all my life and I never had any heart problems" said Fred who suffered a heart attack on the 16th December 2003 whilst he was taking Vioxx. "Since the heart attack my life has changed completely for the worse as I was always fit and active for my age."
Ann Alexander, who has now heard from more than 600 people who believe they have suffered as a result of taking Vioxx said: "We took the decision to bring these cases in the States as we believe that this is in the best interests of our clients. We may not be able to pursue the claims to conclusion if we fail on what is known as the forum argument. This decides whether you are allowed to bring a case in a different country to your own. It will be a decision for the Judge as to whether non us residents will be allowed to pursue their claims in the US court."
"In bringing these cases in the US we are working with a leading US firm who are also used to handling health related cases. As such we have been able to pool our expertise for the benefit of our clients."
"It is important to remember that this is not a class action. Each case is being brought individually and will be assessed on its own merits. That is why it is vital that anyone who wishes to pursue a claim passes in the first instance our strictly defined criteria."
"We are currently looking at cases where an individual has suffered either a heart attack or stroke and where they have been taking Vioxx for a minimum of 3 weeks before the event. It is important that they have no past medical or family history and that they should still be taking Vioxx when the incident occurred or have stopped for no more than 3days."
"We have taken this step to be responsible. We have received over 600 enquiries and we are still reviewing medical records and passing cases through to our US partners. However we don't wish to either encourage any spurious claims nor do we wish to dangle carrots for others whose cases we don't believe will succeed. To drag someone through the courts and put them through the examinations and exposure that this will bring, when we feel that their claim would in our opinion not succeed, would be irresponsible."
Vioxx more recently hit the news following a trial in Texas which resulted in an award of compensation of £253.4million to the widow of a marathon runner who suffered a vioxx induced heart attack which led to his fatal arrhythmia.
Notes to editors
Vioxx Background
Merck pulled Vioxx, a $2.5 billion seller, from the market in September 2004 when a long-term study showed it could double risk of heart attack or stroke if taken for 18 months or longer.
Vioxx inhibits an enzyme known as Cox-2, which thins the blood. That feature allows it and other drugs in its class - Pfizer's Bextra and Celebrex - to relieve acute pain and arthritis without causing stomach bleeds or ulcers, as painkillers such as aspirin can.
An FDA panel concluded in February that Vioxx, Celebrex and Bextra all pose heart risks but should be available to consumers. But in April, Pfizer withdrew Bextra from the market at the FDA's request when the agency said it carries risk of serious and sometimes fatal skin reactions in addition to heart attacks and strokes.
The FDA also said that all prescription non steroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs, not just Cox-2 inhibitors, should carry a so-called ''black box'' warning label about cardiovascular risk.
Contact
For further information please contact Ann Alexnader 07836 622744; Emma Smith/Rachel Brown at national health law firm Alexander Harris on 08700 778877.
Related news stories
If you believe that you might have a legal claim relating to this story, please complete the online enquiry form or call 0870 024 0558. Your enquiry will be forwarded to a solicitor who specialises in this area.
If you have any comments in relation to this story, please use the online discussion forum.
This news section contains stories of interest to our clients from publicly available news sources. Where we are representing the clients referred to in the news material we will say so. Where we do not represent individuals or bodies mentioned or quoted, the inclusion of the news story in our news section is not intended nor should it be taken to imply that we act for the individual or body concerned.
Related Areas
The memory of your help to us will stay with us and we wish you and Alexander Harris well in the future. Anon, West Midlands.
