A woman from Pennsylvania and her Fosamax lawyers failed to convince the jury last month that her jaw injuries were brought on by Fosamax, an osteoporosis drug manufactured by Merck & Co., and it would be a tremendous help to future complainants and their attorneys to study the details of this specific lawsuit. An Atlantic City, New Jersey jury decided on February 14, that the said drug was not the reason Alison Rosenberg, 67 years old, developed osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), or so-called “Dead Jaw,” a type of disease that causes bone tissue in the jaw to die.
In a statement to the jury prior to its decision, one of Rosenberg’s lawyers stated that, “We’re here because Fosamax killed part of Mrs. Rosenberg’s jaw.” The jury, however, did not agree. In the jury form, the first question posted was this: Was it more likely than not that Rosenberg had the condition she claimed? The jurors responded “no” by a count of 9 to 1. This resulted in a victory for the company and the panel did not need to answer the final 3 questions in the verdict form.
According to lawyers representing Merck, Rosenberg already has other health issues which may be a cause for jaw problems and she was taking medication that suppresses immune system function. In a statement made by one of Merck’s lawyers, he said, “The evidence showed the company acted properly and that Fosamax did not cause the plaintiff’s dental and jaw problems.”
Rosenberg’s case, a so-called “bellwether trial,” was the first of hundreds of Fosamax jaw bone injury lawsuits filed in state courts against Merck to be tried. The lawsuits all allege that the drug in question causes a patient’s bone jaw death and accuse Merck of failing to properly warn of the drug’s risks. A bellwether trial is one that is one of the first or the very first among similar cases to go to trial, and the outcome of which is expected to offer insight into how the remaining cases will be decided.
Using the Rosenberg case to see how a Fosamax femur fracture case , including femur fracture cases, will play out, a couple of points can be established. First, because the jury did not believe the Pennsylvania woman suffered from ONJ, and this was sufficient to allow Merck to prevail, it is vital that a plaintiff be able to prove they are suffering from the condition they claim to have developed. Secondly, and implicit in the arguments set forth by Merck’s lawyers, is that it must be evident that Fosamax indeed caused a plaintiff’s injuries. A person may develop both ONJ and femur fractures whether they took or are taking Fosamax or not.
You need to build a solid argument that is founded on strong evidence such as medical records and/or expert testimonies to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Merck’s Fosamax was the cause of your bone injuries. Should you desire to gain more insight on the ongoing Fosamax litigation, visit the Fosamax lawyer information site.
Tags: Womens World