Washington Post on the latest Vioxx trial:

Another trial is in progress in South Texas in the case of Leonel Garza Sr., a retired auditor who died in 2001. The facts in the case make it relatively defensible for Merck — Garza was 71, had a history of heart trouble and took samples of Vioxx for less than three weeks before his death, far less than the 18 months flagged by the study. But the proceeding is in the Rio Grande Valley, which has a history of awarding plaintiffs huge verdicts in product liability cases.

They also comment on the “NEJM effect“:

Two key developments have changed the landscape since the first three trials, lawyers agreed. First, the New England Journal of Medicine published an editorial that accused the drug company of withholding heart attack data from a 2000 article about Vioxx’s safety. “It’s just not going to play well with a jury,” said Charles Rhodes, a law professor at the South Texas College of Law in Houston. “If the jury’s not happy with you because they think you’re an irresponsible company” they are more likely to find for even a relatively weak plaintiff’s case, he said.

Though Merck’s lawyers played down the importance of the editorial, they are clearly taking it seriously — they got Fallon to grant permission to depose two of the journal’s editors before the next federal trial.

(via PointofLaw.com)