Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sinclair v. Merck & Co., Inc.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 4, 2008No. A-117 September Term 2006Published

1DissentJustice Long

The plaintiffs in this class action contend that they ingested a substantial amount of Vioxx, a toxic product; that as a result, their risk of undetected myocardial infarction (UMI) is statistically significant; that according to their experts, some members of the class have already suffered a UMI; and that there are medical procedures to detect the existence of the condition. Accordingly, they seek medical surveillance damages from the drug manufacturers, distributors, and advertisers who placed Vioxx in the stream of commerce and urged them to consume it.

The trial judge dismissed…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Suter v. San Angelo Foundry & MacHine CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
  2. Ayers v. Township of JacksonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
  3. Portee v. JaffeeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
  4. Heavner v. Uniroyal, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1973
  5. Dewey v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1990

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API