- Posted October 04, 2011
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
State Supreme Court turns down Vioxx appeal
By Ed White
Associated Press
DETROIT (AP) -- The Michigan Supreme Court ruled in favor of drug maker Merck & Co. in a dispute over millions of state Medicaid dollars spent on an arthritis drug that was pulled from the market.
In a 4-3 decision released Saturday, the court declined to hear an appeal from the attorney general's office, which wants to recover at least $20 million spent on behalf of Medicaid recipients who used Vioxx.
The appeals court in March said Michigan can't sue because a state law grants immunity to companies if a drug has been approved by federal regulators. It's the only law of its kind in the country.
The Supreme Court's three Democratic justices wanted to take an appeal but the Republican majority prevailed. In a dissent, Justice Marilyn Kelly said Michigan's product-liability law doesn't fit the case.
The state is "attempting to recover money spent for a product that allegedly did not live up to defendant's representations. This case is not a product liability action because no physical injury is claimed," Kelly wrote.
Merck, based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., withdrew Vioxx from the market in 2004 after its own research showed the once-blockbuster drug doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke. The company paid $4.85 billion to settle most of the roughly 50,000 lawsuits alleging Vioxx harmed or killed users.
Justices Diane Hathaway and Michael Cavanagh also were in favor of accepting an appeal, though Kelly was the only justice to elaborate in a written statement. The majority said "we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this court," common language when a case is rejected.
Published: Tue, Oct 4, 2011
headlines Oakland County
- Whitmer signs gun violence prevention legislation
- Department of Attorney General conducts statewide warrant sweep, arrests 9
- Adoptive families across Michigan recognized during Adoption Day and Month
- Reproductive Health Act signed into law
- Case study: Documentary highlights history of courts in the Eastern District
headlines National
- Judge is accused of using racial slur, vulgar terms and ‘libtard’ label for employee offended by his comments
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Colorado Supreme Court considers whether habeas petition can free zoo elephants
- 4th Circuit upholds $1M sanction for law firm that tried to ‘sabotage’ federal court’s authority
- Don’t give money to law schools unless they teach originalism, conservative federal appeals judge says
- Average BigLaw partner compensation increased 26% in 2 years, reaching this high-water mark