class actions, disabled rights, copyright, attorneys general, online speech, law schools, obesity, New York, mortgages, legal blogs, safety, CPSC, pharmaceuticals, patent trolls, ADA filing mills, international human rights, humor, hate speech, illegal drugs, immigration law, cellphones, international law, real estate, bar associations, Environmental Protection Agency, First Amendment, insurance fraud, slip and fall, smoking bans, emergency medicine, regulation and its reform, dramshop statutes, hotels, web accessibility, United Nations, Alien Tort Claims Act, lobbyists, pools, school discipline, Voting Rights Act, legal services programs


« Med-mal: certificates of merit | Advertising in Sports Illustrated »

December 31, 2004

Vioxx and workers' comp

Compensation claims over Merck's withdrawn painkiller could become a major issue for the workers' comp system, argues Joseph Paduda at Managed Care Matters. The logic: the drug was widely prescribed for muscle pain arising from workplace sprains and injuries; workers' comp law in most states has been "consistently interpreted" to treat as work-related injury the side effects of therapies addressing earlier work injury; and therefore workers may make claims against the workers' comp system over heart attacks, strokes and other cardiovascular events which they attribute to use of the drug (filing such suits would not in general bar them from also suing Merck). If workers' comp payers find themselves on the hook for such claims, they might in turn be entitled to sue Merck for reimbursement, but, writes Paduda, "this will be a long, messy, and expensive process."

Posted by Walter Olson at 12:12 AM | TrackBack (0)

Vioxx/Drug Litigation
Vioxx/Drug Litigation



Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.