Patients who suffered no provable physical harm from use of the painkiller Vioxx may not sue its manufacturer for medical monitoring costs, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday.
The justices held, 5-1, that the perceived need for monitoring, based on enhanced risk of heart attacks and strokes that led Merck & Co. to pull Vioxx from the market in 2004, does not fall within the definition of “harm” as required by the New Jersey Products Liability Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:55C-1 to -11.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
