Search for: "MERCK" Results 701 - 720 of 3,309
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Mar 2010, 6:58 pm by brettb
The Food and Drug Administration raised the issue with Merck in 2008. [read post]
12 Mar 2007, 4:24 pm
An Atlantic City jury returned a plaintiff's verdict today against Merck & Co. to the tune of $47.5 million after its arthritis drug Vioxx lead to an Idaho postal worker's heart attack. $20 of the $47.5 million was awarded for compensatory damages and the remaining $27.5 million was awarded as punitive damages in order to punish Merck & Co. for their failure to warn about the cardiovascular risks associated with the use of Vioxx. [read post]
13 Aug 2009, 7:32 am
Merck faces the first trial due to lawsuits based on its osteoporosis drug Fosamax allegedly causing the death of jawbone tissue. [read post]
30 May 2008, 10:03 am
Yesterday we blogged about Merck's appellate victories in two Vioxx cases that involved large punitive damages awards. [read post]
11 Aug 2009, 1:06 pm
According to the plaintiff's lawyer, Timothy O'Brien, "Merck had notice through adverse reports starting in 1996. [read post]
30 Nov 2009, 2:37 pm
United States and here for Merck & Co., Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2020, 9:43 am by Sabrina I. Pacifici
This is an interview with Angela Pagliaro, Global Content Librarian at Merck Animal Health and formerly a Knowledge Services Consultant at ETS, done by Naomi House of INALJ. [read post]
17 Sep 2007, 1:11 pm
This just in from Newsday: Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bloomberg are suing Merck for Medicaid fraud for hiding heart attack risks associated with Vioxx. [read post]
17 Sep 2007, 1:11 pm
This just in from Newsday: Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bloomberg are suing Merck for Medicaid fraud for hiding heart attack risks associated with Vioxx. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 8:38 am
Merck (Houston, TX) 5/21/07 . . . [read post]
12 Mar 2007, 2:39 pm
Humeston already had his day in court back in 2005 and had lost when an Atlantic City jury found in favor of Merck. [read post]
26 May 2009, 7:07 am
Docket: 08-905 Title: Merck & Co., Inc., et al., Petitioners v. [read post]
28 Jun 2006, 9:56 am
That assertion, published as one of the 2004 article's conclusions, has been at the center of Merck's defense against lawsuits filed by people who say Vioxx, the brand name for the drug rofecoxib, caused their heart attacks and strokes.The whole "must have used the drug for 18 months" statement is an important part of Merck's defense in these Vioxx cases. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 2:21 pm by info@thomasjhenrylaw.com
The men who filed suit are charging Merck with failure to warn, negligence, strict product liability, and breach of warranty. [read post]