Vioxx Master Settlement Agreement

Vioxx MDL is still alive. But not really the kick. The transaction agreement put an end to the mass damage caused by this litigation and left a much smaller number of appeals that had decided not to be. The MDL court still handles some of these cases. But if Levitt v. Merck Sharp – Dohme Corp., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52756 (E.D. La. April 21, 2015), is a clue, it won`t be for long.

Payments to eligible applicants are made only after any appeals have been resolved and all claims have been completed. Please be patient, as this process will take time. In Levitt, the MDL court rejected Merck`s request for a summary decision and ordered the discovery to be reopened. Even if this does not resemble the decision of a court that wants to end its participation in the Vioxx process, it is certain that the case will be remanded in custody before the original transfer court for further proceedings. And that is what the MDL tribunal did. Id. at 30. In any case, the second basis of Merck`s application was that the plaintiff had altered at the last minute (from a multi-prolongation game) its alleged violation of plaque construction and heart disease by the two heart attacks she claimed in her complaint. Id. at 7, 10-11. In fact, it is not clear that she had a heart attack.

The court`s discussion of his medical history does not seem to mention heart attacks. Id. at 6. The complainant submitted that, regardless of what their complaint said, their profile profile (or, fact sheet, as some of us know) provided a detailed history of their plaque and heart disease. But she never changed her accusations. And while the plaintiff argued that it provided “only a more descriptive explanation of its injuries,” the main theory of the mechanics of the complainants in the Vioxx process had always been that Vioxx favoured clotting and the resulting heart attacks, something very different from the promotion of plaque and heart disease. The court noted that plaque and heart disease were “very closely related to the alleged injury [myocardial infarction] initially, but rejected Merck`s application.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.