Merck's Not Backing Down

Merck (MRK) has both the resources and the resolve to mount a defense to each Vioxx case, and the company believes science is ultimately on its side with respect to the blockbuster painkiller, the drugmaker's general counsel said Friday.

Kenneth Frazier held a conference call ahead of Merck's next trial over Vioxx, which will start Monday in Atlantic City, N.J. In the upcoming case, an Idaho man is alleging that Vioxx caused him to have a heart attack four years ago.

"We intend to defend this case in the courtroom and not in the media," Frazier said. He said the evidence will show the Merck product wasn't to blame for the heart attack suffered by Frederick Humeston, a Boise postal worker who took the drug for about two months.

Merck has said Humeston's lawyers haven't presented evidence revealing the heart attack was caused by anything other than "preexisting medical conditions." The Atlantic City case will find that Merck behaved responsibly in its research and marketing of Vioxx, Frazier said.

Frazier said he's confident future court verdicts will be based on "sound science."

"These are all individual cases involving very different circumstances," he said. "We must look at each case one by one."

As such, the company doesn't plan to enter into a global settlement, Frazier said. "We are in this for the long haul," he said, adding that Merck has the ability to address the cases over a number of years.

Last month, Merck lost a $253.4 million verdict in a case that was heard in an Angleton, Texas, courtroom. The company is planning to appeal and the $229 million punitive-damage award likely will be reduced substantially because it exceeds state law.

In the Texas case, Carol Ernst, the widow of Robert Ernst, sued Merck for wrongful death. Her husband died of an irregular heartbeat in 2001 at the age of 59. He had been taking Vioxx for eight months.