Vioxx case set in Starr County
The nation’s fourth lawsuit against Merck & Co.’s Vioxx painkiller, linked to heart problems, is set for jury selection Jan. 24 in a Starr County courtroom.
The family of Leonel Garza sued the New Jersey pharmaceutical company, two McAllen doctors and a Harlingen clinic in March 2003 after the 71-year-old Rio Grande City man died of a heart attack one month after taking Vioxx. The 12-member jury that Merck’s and Garza’s lawyers will select from Starr County residents is expected to render a tie-breaking verdict against the nation’s fifth-largest pharmaceutical company, which faces more than 9,000 lawsuits over the painkiller recalled in 2004 after studies showed it increased the risk of heart disease and stroke.
So far, Merck has lost one case, won another and had a third end in a mistrial.
In August, a Brazoria County jury found the company responsible in the drug’s first case and ordered Merck to pay $253 million to the family of a Wal-Mart manager who died of heart problems after taking Vioxx for about eight months. The company is appealing the verdict. In November, an Atlantic City, N.J., jury found the company not responsible in the nonfatal heart attack of an Idaho postal worker. Then, in December, a federal judge in Houston declared a mistrial after a jury could not decide if a Florida man’s monthlong use of the drug led to his fatal heart attack.
Most of the plaintiffs claim that Merck knew of Vioxx’s potential danger long before recalling the drug but did not act on concerns so they could keep the profitable drug on the shelves. The company claims it did not act irresponsibly and disclosed its research on the drug.
The third case heard in Texas is set in 259th state District Judge Alex Gabert’s courtroom. Garza’s case could take a month to present all the evidence to the jury, according to the family’s attorneys, the McAllen law firm of Hockema, Tippit & Escobedo.
They claim the company has tried to stall the case, originally set for trial Feb. 14, 2005, employing state legislators with law practices to file continuances and asking that a federal judge hear the case.
"Merck has done everything in its power to deny the Garza family their day in court. This included two remands to federal court and the hiring of multiple state representatives for the sole purpose of stalling this trial," said Joe Escobedo Jr., a lead attorney representing the Garza family.
"We look forward to representing the Garza family and exposing Merck’s greed and corruption in relation to Vioxx."
In January, state Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa, D-McAllen, entered Merck’s defense team for one day and the company filed a motion of legislative continuance, allowing the trial to stall until after the session ended. However, the next day, Hinojosa withdrew that motion, claiming Merck’s lawyers never told him that they had planned to file a motion of continuance. Hinojosa said he did not read the affidavit he signed attached to the motion and later withdrew from the case.
The next day, the company hired Rep. Rene Oliveira, D-Brownsville, and filed a second legislative continuance. Oliveira is a partner in the Brownsville law firm of Roerig, Oliveira & Fisher LLP and originally joined the defense team as lead counsel.
However, on Dec. 5, Merck filed a motion adding Ricardo Cedillo of the San Antonio firm Davis, Cedillo & Mendoza as lead counsel.
Oliveira said he is actively participating in the case and preparing for trial.
"We’re confident that any fair jury will find that Merck and the product Vioxx had nothing to do with the unfortunate passing of Mr. Garza," Oliveira said.
Merck’s defense team includes Baldemar Garza in Rio Grande City and Houston lawyer Richard Josephson of Baker & Botts.
The family of Leonel Garza sued the New Jersey pharmaceutical company, two McAllen doctors and a Harlingen clinic in March 2003 after the 71-year-old Rio Grande City man died of a heart attack one month after taking Vioxx. The 12-member jury that Merck’s and Garza’s lawyers will select from Starr County residents is expected to render a tie-breaking verdict against the nation’s fifth-largest pharmaceutical company, which faces more than 9,000 lawsuits over the painkiller recalled in 2004 after studies showed it increased the risk of heart disease and stroke.
So far, Merck has lost one case, won another and had a third end in a mistrial.
In August, a Brazoria County jury found the company responsible in the drug’s first case and ordered Merck to pay $253 million to the family of a Wal-Mart manager who died of heart problems after taking Vioxx for about eight months. The company is appealing the verdict. In November, an Atlantic City, N.J., jury found the company not responsible in the nonfatal heart attack of an Idaho postal worker. Then, in December, a federal judge in Houston declared a mistrial after a jury could not decide if a Florida man’s monthlong use of the drug led to his fatal heart attack.
Most of the plaintiffs claim that Merck knew of Vioxx’s potential danger long before recalling the drug but did not act on concerns so they could keep the profitable drug on the shelves. The company claims it did not act irresponsibly and disclosed its research on the drug.
The third case heard in Texas is set in 259th state District Judge Alex Gabert’s courtroom. Garza’s case could take a month to present all the evidence to the jury, according to the family’s attorneys, the McAllen law firm of Hockema, Tippit & Escobedo.
They claim the company has tried to stall the case, originally set for trial Feb. 14, 2005, employing state legislators with law practices to file continuances and asking that a federal judge hear the case.
"Merck has done everything in its power to deny the Garza family their day in court. This included two remands to federal court and the hiring of multiple state representatives for the sole purpose of stalling this trial," said Joe Escobedo Jr., a lead attorney representing the Garza family.
"We look forward to representing the Garza family and exposing Merck’s greed and corruption in relation to Vioxx."
In January, state Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa, D-McAllen, entered Merck’s defense team for one day and the company filed a motion of legislative continuance, allowing the trial to stall until after the session ended. However, the next day, Hinojosa withdrew that motion, claiming Merck’s lawyers never told him that they had planned to file a motion of continuance. Hinojosa said he did not read the affidavit he signed attached to the motion and later withdrew from the case.
The next day, the company hired Rep. Rene Oliveira, D-Brownsville, and filed a second legislative continuance. Oliveira is a partner in the Brownsville law firm of Roerig, Oliveira & Fisher LLP and originally joined the defense team as lead counsel.
However, on Dec. 5, Merck filed a motion adding Ricardo Cedillo of the San Antonio firm Davis, Cedillo & Mendoza as lead counsel.
Oliveira said he is actively participating in the case and preparing for trial.
"We’re confident that any fair jury will find that Merck and the product Vioxx had nothing to do with the unfortunate passing of Mr. Garza," Oliveira said.
Merck’s defense team includes Baldemar Garza in Rio Grande City and Houston lawyer Richard Josephson of Baker & Botts.
posted by Chris Placitella at 6:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home