Bextra recall lawsuits filed in Canada
Vioxx and Bextra class action lawsuits are not limited to the United States. Since Pfizer is a truly global company and almost all of its drugs are sold worldwide, the implications of Bextra recall are global as well. As Bextra related lawsuits are being filed here at home, our next-door neighbors are doing the same. Toronto law firm McPhadden Samac Merner Barry has launched a national class action against both Pfizer Canada and Pfizer U.S. The lawsuit is on behalf of Canadians who have suffered negative effects, including heart attack and death, from taking Bextra.
The lead plaintiff in the action is a gentleman by the name of Jesse Voutour of Mississauga who was taking Bextra because of his degenerative back condition. The amount claimed in the action is a total of $550 million. The claim is made by Voutour on his own behalf and on behalf of all those Canadians similarly affected. Legal counsel for Jesse Voutour, Bryan C. McPhadden says, "There appear to be serious problems with COX-2 inhibitors and it looks like Bextra is no exception." Zoran Samac, another lawyer with the firm added: "If the manufacturers of these drugs knew about the potential dangers or failed to properly investigate the risks, they should be held legally responsible, particularly given the considerable profits made."
Another personal injury lawyer Greg Monforton today announced that his firm is also evaluating more than 3,000 Vioxx-related inquiries from across Canada and that he expects to file hundreds of lawsuits against Merck in the coming months. Monforton is a senior partner at Greg Monforton & Partners and Vice-President of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association. According to him, virtually all of his firm's Vioxx clients have suffered either heart attack or stroke, resulting in serious injuries and in many cases, death. He says, "As our investigation unfolds, it is becoming clearer every day that the conduct of Merck has resulted in the needless deaths of literally thousands of people in North America. We believe Merck misled its own shareholders, the medical community and the public by marketing and distributing a drug that it knew carried significant risk for stroke and heart attack. We also believe that Merck pursued profit at the expense of the safety and well being of the general public."
Until it was withdrawn from the market by Merck, Vioxx was a highly popular and heavily advertised arthritis drug. It was heralded as an improvement over older drugs like Ibuprofen and Naproxen because of marketing claims of less stomach irritation. However, recently published data calls into question this advantage of Vioxx and also raises questions of "serious cardiovascular events" related to Vioxx. (Related article: Vioxx side effects confirmed in yet another study)
Monforton said that he and his law firm are now part of a consortium of plaintiffs' firms which is alleging that in selling Vioxx, "the conduct of Merck was far below the standard expected of a reasonable and prudent pharmaceutical manufacturer". He said plaintiffs' firms are banding together because there is "significant work to be done and a lot is at stake for our clients." Thus far Monforton has not asked for class-action status for any of his cases, saying he is not surprised Merck is talking of battling the cases one by one. "We are prepared to do this patient by patient, case by case," Monforton said. In a demonstration of this approach in a case in Alabama, Merck asked the judge yesterday to throw out the case of a widow whose husband died after taking Vioxx on the ground that she is lying.
Recommended articles
Bextra recall prompts law change in Michigan
Bextra recall is no gain for Celebrex
Bextra ban makes FDA look incompetent
Sources
