Alabama jurors sided with drug manufacturer Merck & Co. and rejected the claims of a 57-year-old man who blamed the painkiller Vioxx for his heart attack. Deliberations took only 1 1/2 hours; it was the second time in three days that a jury came back with a quick verdict for Merck in a Vioxx trial. Jurors said after the verdict that the plaintiff had too many health problems before his heart attack to blame Vioxx. "Juries continue to determine that Merck acted responsibly," a Merck executive said.
December 18, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
State court jurors sided with drug manufacturer Merck & Co. last week and rejected the claims of an Alabama man who blamed the painkiller Vioxx for a heart attack in 2001.
Attorneys for Gary Albright, 57, had told jurors he should receive as much as $5.75 million in his lawsuit, filed last year.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
