Vioxx Lawsuit Loans

Have a Settled Vioxx Lawsuit But Need Cash Now?

TriMark Legal Funding provides post-settlement funding on settled Vioxx lawsuits nationwide.

Post-Settlement Funding on
Vioxx Casess

TriMark Legal Funding is one of America’s leading personal injury accident loan companies. We provide pre-settlement funding and post-settlement funding (lawsuit loans) to injured plaintiffs nationwide while they wait for their lawsuit settlements.

At TriMark Legal Funding, we offer non-recourse lawsuit funding cash advances to plaintiffs who are involved in either pending or settled legal claims, often in 24 hours or less.

Lawsuit loans are a discreet, sensible way to keep your head above water until your attorney has finished negotiating your lawsuit settlement.

Let’s Talk!

Call us at (877) 932-2628 or send us your details & we’ll call you.

    Have Questions?
    Call and speak with one of our funding experts today.

    Important Notice About Vioxx Lawsuit Funding

    TriMark Legal Funding only offers settled case funding on settled Vioxx lawsuits at this time

    This means that to qualify for funding consideration, you must have already signed your settlement agreement and know either

    1. The gross amount of your settlement OR
    2. The actual net amount you will be receiving after all deductions (attorney fees, case costs, medical liens, etc.)

    If you have a settled Vioxx lawsuit and would like to apply for settlement funding, please apply here.

    How Lawsuit Loans Work

    TriMark Legal Funding specializes in helping personal injury accident victims.
    Our non-recourse legal funding is a simple 3-step process:

    1. Apply for Funding

    You can either apply online or call us toll-free at (877) 932-2628. We’ll answer all of your questions and gather some basic facts about your case.

    2. Review & Approval

    Our team will work directly with your attorney to review your case. Approvals can happen as quickly as 1 hour after receipt of all required information.

    3. Receive Cash

    A funding agreement is sent via DocuSign. After signed copies are returned, your cash is sent to you by wire transfer or FedEx Overnight.

    Vioxx Lawsuit Funding

    TriMark Legal Funding LLC is one of the few lawsuit funding companies still offering settlement funding on Vioxx cases. The Merck Vioxx settlement will go down in history as one of the largest multidistrict litigation pharmaceutical cases in American legal history.

    In 2007, Merck agreed to a $4.85 billion settlement which it expects to resolve nearly 50,000 Vioxx lawsuits. The decision marked the beginning of the end of the four-year Vioxx legal fight, which started when Merck voluntarily removed Vioxx from the market in September 2004 after massive numbers of cardiovascular side effects began surfacing.

    The Merck Legacy

    Merck & Co. holds a sinister and dubious record among drug giants; it currently holds the world record for the largest, most widespread and most reprehensible act of unbridled corporate greed and irresponsibility in the history of American pharmaceuticals. Why? Merck knowingly put profits before people; it stood by for 6 years and raked in tens of billions of dollars in profits while hundreds of thousands of people suffered strokes, heart attacks and/or died from Vioxx.

    Merck possessed clear evidence prior to even receiving FDA approval to market Vioxx that it increased the risk of heart attack by almost 700%, but instead of doing the responsible thing and withdrawing or reformulating Vioxx, Merck took it to market anyway and reaped tens of billions of dollars in profit for six years. Merck finally withdrew the product in 2004 amid tens of thousands of deaths and a firestorm of litigation, but by then the catastrophic damage had already been done.

    The obvious rationale was that Merck planned to offset the inevitable multi-billion dollar litigation expenses with the billions of dollars it earned by continuing to sell more of it’s lethal product. Merck disclosed revenue for Vioxx’ declining years at $2.5 billion in 2003 and $1.3 billion in 2004 before it was withdrawn. Merck has refused to disclose revenue from prior years except to acknowledge that Vioxx was one of it’s best selling and most popular products … EVER.

    Merck and the Vioxx Debacle
    28,000 Dead
    160,000 Injured
    BILLIONS In Profit For Merck

    In one estimate by the FDA, 140,000 personal injuries are attributable to Vioxx in the US alone, but no one knows for sure how many people have actually been injured from it.

    World-renowned FDA scientist Dr. David Graham stunned the world with his incredible testimony against Vioxx and the FDA: Some excerpts include:

    “Prior to [FDA] approval of Vioxx, a study was performed by Merck named 090. This study found nearly a 7-fold increase in heart attack risk with low dose Vioxx. The labeling at approval said nothing about heart attack risks. In November 2000, another Merck clinical trial named VIGOR found a 5-fold increase in heart attack risk with high-dose Vioxx.”

    “Dr. Eric Topol at the Cleveland Clinic recently estimated up to 160,000 cases of heart attacks and strokes due to Vioxx, in an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine.”

    “Today, in 2004, you, we, are faced with what may be the single greatest drug safety catastrophe in the history of this country or the history of the world. We are talking about a catastrophe that I strongly believe could have, should have been largely or completely avoided. But it wasn’t, and over 100,000 Americans have paid dearly for this failure.”

    The problem you are confronting today is immense in scope. Vioxx is a terrible tragedy and a profound regulatory failure. I would argue that the FDA, as currently configured, is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx. We are virtually defenseless.”

    Vioxx Litigation & Merck Settlement

    Rofecoxib settlement amounts can range from a minimum of $5,000 up to several million dollars. Payments are determined by a complicated formula that factors in how serious a claimant’s injury was, how much of the drug was taken and how many other risk factors the person had that might have contributed to, or aggravated, their injuries.

    In the meantime, it is becoming commonplace for people who have been injured by, or who have lost a family member to, Vioxx to find themselves in need of extra money due to loss of income from being out of work (or loss of the primary breadwinner’s income) to pay for bills, medical care and basic living expenses. Pre settlement funding or a lawsuit cash advance can give plaintiffs the money they need now to get by until their full settlement comes through, whenever that is.

    What is Vioxx (Rofecoxib)?

    Vioxx (Rofecoxib) belongs to the nonsteroidal anti inflammatory class of drugs (NSAID). It works by reducing inflammation, pain and fever.

    Merck announced a voluntary worldwide Vioxx recall in 2004 when evidence began emerging that Vioxx significantly increased the risk of life-threatening cardiovascular events such as heart attack and stroke.


    • Abilify
    • Accutane
    • Actonel
    • Actos
    • Androgel
    • Avandia
    • Avelox
    • Baycol
    • Belviq
    • Bextra
    • Boniva
    • Celebrex
    • Cipro
    • Coumadin
    • Crestor
    • Darvocet
    • Darvon
    • Dexatrim
    • Dexilant
    • Eliquis
    • Ephedrine
    • Fen-Phen
    • Fluoroquinolones
    • Fosamax
    • Gadolinium Dye
    • GranuFlo & NaturaLyte
    • Heparin
    • Invokana
    • Levaquin
    • Lipitor
    • Lipobay
    • Losartan
    • Meridia
    • Nexium
    • Paxil
    • Pergolide
    • Permax
    • Plavix
    • Prempro
    • Prevacid
    • Prexige
    • Prilosec
    • Propulsid
    • Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI)
    • Protonix
    • Prozac
    • Raptiva
    • Ranitidine
    • Reglan
    • Rezulin
    • RotaShield
    • Seldane
    • Seroquel
    • Taxotere
    • Testosterone
    • Topomax
    • Trasylol
    • Trovan
    • Truvada
    • Valsartan
    • Vioxx
    • Warfarin
    • Yasmin
    • Yaz
    • Zantac
    • Zelnorm
    • Zocor
    • Zofran
    • Zoloft
    • Zyban
    • Zyprexa

    Medical Devices

    • Bair Hugger
    • ERCP Scope
    • Guidant Heart Device
    • IUD Litigation
      • Mirena IUD
      • Paragard IUD
    • Kugel Mesh Patch
    • Medtronic
      • Infuse Bone Graft
      • Marquis Defibrillator
      • Sprint Fidelis
    • NuvaRing
    • Ortho Evra Patch
    • Phillips CPAP
    • Power Morcellator
    • Surgical Robot
      • Da Vinci Robot

    Products / Other

    • 9/11 First Responder Settlements
    • Big Tobacco
    • Class Action Lawsuits
    • Commercial Litigation Funding
    • Deepwater Horizon MDL 2179
    • Dow Corning Breast Implant
    • DuPont C-8 (Teflon) MDL 2433
    • E-Cigarettes
      • JUUL
    • FIU Bridge Collapse
    • Hertz False Arrest Lawsuit
    • Iraq War Hostages
    • Paraquat Weedkiller
    • PG&E Wildfire Lawsuits
    • Sports Injury Lawsuits
      • NCAA Concussion
      • NFL Concussion
      • WWE Concussion
    • Takata Airbag Settlement

    Apply For Vioxx Lawsuit Settled Case Funding

    Lawsuit Funding FAQ Apply Now

    To qualify for an Accutane lawsuit cash advance, you must have a settled Vioxx lawsuit. Pending lawsuits are not eligible at this time.

    To qualify, you must have an already signed Vioxx settlement agreement which clearly shows either the gross amount of your settlement or the actual net amount you will be receiving after all deductions (attorney fees, case costs, medical liens, medical hold-backs, etc.) have been made.

    If you have a settled Vioxx lawsuit and need funding, either:

    Call Us At (877) 932-2628 or

    Latest Developments in the Vioxx Litigation…

    Merck should have known Vioxx was deadly years before they pulled the drug from the market, a study of Merck's own data suggests. The study, published in the current issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine, is by Joseph S. Ross, MD, of Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and colleagues. The study authors were paid consultants to plaintiffs' lawyers in Vioxx lawsuits — in which much of the Merck data first was revealed. "By our analyses, the association is clear that by June 2001 — more than three years before the drug was eventually taken off the market — the risk could have been known," Ross tells WebMD. Merck took Vioxx off the market in November 2004, after the "APPROVe" study conclusively demonstrated that Vioxx users had more heart attacks and strokes than patients receiving a placebo. In their study of data from Merck-sponsored clinical trials, Ross and colleagues found… Read more
    Partial payments for people claiming withdrawn painkiller Vioxx caused heart attacks will go out starting Aug. 28 under the $4.85 billion settlement between drugmaker Merck & Co. and plaintiffs' lawyers, the claims administrator said today. Those payments will amount to about 40 percent of each plaintiffs' estimated total payout, but it's unclear how many people will be getting checks in the first batch going out. The settlement, meant to end the bulk of personal injury lawsuits against Whitehouse Station-based Merck, was reached in November. Merck pulled Vioxx from the market on Sept. 30, 2004, after its own research showed the once-blockbuster arthritis pill doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke. During the monthly status conference with the federal judge in New Orleans coordinating most of the massive Vioxx litigation, Orran Greer of claims administrator BrownGreer PLC said 49,954 eligible claimants have now registered for a settlement. That amounts to… Read more
    Two major court victories for Merck on Thursday pushed the litigation over the painkiller Vioxx closer to conclusion and highlighted the increasing difficulty that plaintiffs’ lawyers were having in winning lawsuits against big drug companies. A state appeals court in Texas overturned a $26 million jury verdict against the company in a lawsuit brought by Carol Ernst, whose husband, Robert, died in 2001 after taking Vioxx. In reversing the verdict, the appeals court found that plaintiffs had not proved that Vioxx caused Mr. Ernst’s death. Separately, an appeals court in New Jersey sharply reduced a verdict in another Vioxx case. The court ruled that the jury should not have been allowed to award punitive damages against Merck or to find that Merck had committed consumer fraud. Only compensatory damages of $4.5 million were permitted, the court said. The rulings on Thursday leave lawyers for plaintiffs with just three victories, all… Read more
    Vioxx was a best-selling drug before Merck pulled it from the market in 2004 over evidence linking it to heart attacks. Last fall the company agreed to a $4.85 billion settlement to resolve tens of thousands of lawsuits filed by former Vioxx patients or their families. The lead author of Wednesday’s article, Dr. Joseph S. Ross of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, said a close look at the Merck documents raised broad questions about the validity of much of the drug industry’s published research, because the ghostwriting practice appears to be widespread. “It almost calls into question all legitimate research that’s been conducted by the pharmaceutical industry with the academic physician,” Dr. Ross said, whose article, written with colleagues, was published Wednesday in JAMA, the journal of the American Medical Assocation…. Read more
    If you listen to brainy law professors who have been studying big injury cases, you will learn that lawyers no longer owe their clients a duty of loyalty. They say this approvingly, even enthusiastically. The idea that lawyers must represent one client at a time, give independent advice, follow instructions and, in general, act with fierce and single-minded loyalty is, these professors say, a lovely idea but an outmoded one. It is something out of the Age of Chivalry, or at least the 20th century. “Speaking of individualized notions of lawyer loyalty is sort of like the mindset of the French military in 1940,” said Richard A. Nagareda, a law professor at Vanderbilt and the author of a recent book called “Mass Torts in a World of Settlement.” Professor Nagareda was speaking at a forum at the American Enterprise Institute this month, and he was explaining why a proposed $4.85… Read more
    Shortly before the FDA approved Vioxx in 1999, drug maker Merck launched a study it hoped would prove that Vioxx was superior to older painkillers, because it caused fewer gastrointestinal problems. Instead, the study would eventually show Vioxx could be deadly, causing heart attacks and strokes. Five years after Vioxx's launch, Merck withdrew the drug from the market. By that time, Merck had sold billions of dollars of the drug worldwide. A timeline of Vioxx's rise and fall: November 1998: Merck asks the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of Vioxx, having tested the drug on 5,400 subjects in eight studies. January 1999: Merck launches the Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research study (VIGOR). With more than 8,000 participants, it is the largest study ever done of the drug. Half take Vioxx and the other half take naproxen. The clinical trial is designed to see whether Vioxx is safer for the digestive system… Read more
    Three years after withdrawing its pain medication Vioxx from the market, Merck announced today that it will pay $4.85 billion to settle 27,000 lawsuits by people who contend they or their family members suffered injury or died after taking the drug. The settlement, one of the largest ever in civil litigation, comes after nearly 20 Vioxx civil trials over the last two years from New Jersey to California. After losing a $253 million verdict in the first case, Merck has won most of the rest of the cases that reached juries, giving plaintiffs little choice but to settle. The settlement will help put Vioxx behind Merck, as well as sharply reduce its Vioxx-related legal defense fees, which are now running at more than $600 million annually. Judges in Louisiana, New Jersey and California, who oversee nearly all the lawsuits, had pressed for a deal before a new wave of trials… Read more
    Three years after withdrawing its pain medication Vioxx from the market, Merck has agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle 27,000 lawsuits by people who claim they or their family members suffered injury or died after taking the drug, according to two lawyers with direct knowledge of the matter. The settlement, one of the largest ever in civil litigation, comes after nearly 20 Vioxx civil trials over the last two years from New Jersey to California. After losing a $253 million verdict in the first case, Merck has won most of the rest of the cases that reached juries, giving plaintiffs little choice but to settle. The settlement will help put Vioxx behind Merck, as well as sharply reduce its Vioxx-related legal defense fees, which are now running at more than $600 million annually. Judges in Louisiana, New Jersey and California, who oversee nearly all the lawsuits, had pressed for… Read more
    In Carol Ernst’s eyes, two years ago she won a measure of justice. On Aug. 19, 2005, a Texas jury awarded Mrs. Ernst $253.5 million after concluding that Merck & Company and its painkiller Vioxx had caused the death of her husband, Robert, in 2001. At a news conference after the verdict, Mrs. Ernst said she was pleased that jurors had punished Merck for hiding Vioxx’s heart risks. “This has been a long road,” she said. “I just know that it was a road that I had to run and I had to finish.” But her comfort was premature. Merck, the third-largest American drug maker, appealed the verdict — which Texas laws on punitive damages automatically reduced to $26.1 million. Until higher courts rule on the appeal, Merck is not obligated to pay. So Mrs. Ernst, 62, has yet to receive any money. In fact, none of the 45,000 people… Read more
    Merck was found not liable in the seventh lawsuit over Vioxx, the arthritis painkiller that it pulled from the market because of heart attack risk, the company announced Thursday. The jury of five men and two women found Vioxx was not a substantial factor in the heart attack of a 68-year-old New Jersey woman, a court clerk said. The trial was held at New Jersey Superior Court in Atlantic City. The jury decided that although Merck failed to warn the plaintiff, Elaine Doherty, about the heart risks of taking Vioxx, it did adequately warn her doctor of such risks, the clerk said. The panel also found that Merck did not commit consumer fraud or misrepresent Vioxx in marketing the drug to physicians or to the plaintiff, the clerk said. Jim Fitzpatrick, an outside counsel for Merck, said in a press conference that the verdict "reiterates our strategy to defend these… Read more
    Merck's stock price is starting to climb out of its hole this year, but the drug giant still faces a long uphill climb fraught with obstacles if it ever plans to get to its pre-Vioxx scandal levels…. Read more
    In 2004, Merck pulled its painkiller Vioxx from the market. The drug was causing heart problems, strokes and deaths among patients in a large study that was under way at the time. Merck stopped the study early when those results became clear. Thousands of former Vioxx patients and their families are suing the company. Now, documents obtained by NPR show that five years earlier, in 1999, during another large Vioxx study, patients had similar heart problems. But that study was not stopped. Q&A: Monitoring Patient Safety To learn more about data safety monitoring boards and their role in protecting patients who participate in drug studies, NPR turned to statistician David DeMets. He says the current watchdog system is a good one, but that there are practical limits on the extent to which drug safety can be monitored. Read the Q&A. June 8, 2006 During those five years, millions of Americans took… Read more
    In August 2001, a Seattle pharmacist called a radio show on which Jeffrey Drazen, the top editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, was appearing. On the air, the pharmacist, Jennifer Hrachovec, begged Dr. Drazen to update an article in the journal that touted the benefits of the painkiller Vioxx while playing down its heart risks. Dr. Hrachovec had been reviewing data on a Food and Drug Administration Web site indicating that patients in a Vioxx clinical trial had suffered more heart attacks than the journal article about the trial reported. "It bothers me there is more data from the trial than has ever been published and the New England Journal still hasn't published an editorial or any kind of update," she said. "My concern is that doctors are still using this and exposing their patients to higher risks of heart problems and they just don't even know that… Read more
    The controversial painkiller Vioxx (rofecoxib) may cause heart attacks within just two weeks of starting the drug treatment, a study of Canadian patients claims. The finding could influence the outcome of the many thousands of lawsuits filed against Vioxx manufacturer Merck, because it suggests that the once-popular arthritis drug could have contributed to a heart attack or stroke even among patients who took it for very brief periods. Vioxx was pulled from the market in 2004 after a large clinical trial showed that taking the drug for 18 months nearly doubles the risk of heart attack and stroke1. There has been intense medical and legal debate about whether these problems actually kick in much earlier. Linda Lévesque of McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and her colleagues tackled this question by scouring the computerized health records of 125,000 Quebec residents aged 66 or older. They identified people who had taken Vioxx… Read more
    Bad facts. Plaintiffs' lawyers love that term. Merck may grow to hate it. On Friday, a Texas jury found Merck liable for the death of Robert C. Ernst, who died in May 2001 after taking Vioxx, a painkiller made by the company. After two days of deliberations, the jury said that Carol Ernst, Mr. Ernst's widow, should be awarded $253.5 million. In interviews after the six-week trial, jurors said they had concluded from the testimony and documents presented by Mrs. Ernst's lawyers that Merck was long aware of Vioxx's potential heart risks but hid those risks from patients. To the jurors, the evidence added up to a mass of damaging bad facts that overwhelmed the company's defense. Merck's stock price fell almost 8 percent Friday … Read more
    Merck has been held liable by a Texas jury in the first lawsuit involving its former blockbuster drug Vioxx, in a case that could have a profound effect on thousands of other cases filed against the company. Plaintiff Carol Ernst has won her lawsuit in Texas Superior Court in Angleton, which blames Vioxx for the 2001 death of her husband, Robert Ernst, a 59-year-old marathon runner and Wal-Mart worker who was taking the arthritis painkiller at the time of his death. Ernst died of a heart attack. The verdict held Merck liable for the death. Jurors voted 10-2 in favor of Ernst. The jury awarded more than $250 million in total damages — $24 million to Carol Ernst for mental anguish and loss of companionship, and $229 million in punitive damages. Ernst's Houston-based lawyer, Mark Lanier, said the punitive-damages figure was based on "the money Merck made and saved by… Read more
    In the first verdict of a Vioxx-related personal-injury lawsuit, a Texas jury found the drug's maker, Merck, liable and awarded $253.5 million to the widow of Robert Ernst, who died in 2001 after taking the painkiller and arthritis medicine. After deliberating for a day and a half, the jury of seven men and five women awarded Mr. Ernst's widow Carol $24.5 million for mental anguish and economic losses. The jury also awarded an additional $229 million in punitive damages after finding that Merck had acted recklessly in selling Vioxx with knowledge of the risks associated with taking the drug. Two jurors dissented from the verdict, which did not have to be unanimous. Merck plans to appeal the verdict, and such large judgments are typically reduced by higher courts. Judge Ben Hardin of the Texas District Court announced the verdict on the fourth floor of the Brazoria County Courthouse in Angleton,… Read more
    There is a lot at stake for Merck in the Vioxx lawsuits. The first Vioxx trial is set to start in Texas. Analyst says Merck's liability could hit $25 billion. One Wall Street analyst, Chris Shibutani at J.P. Morgan Securities, estimated that Merck's liabilities from Vioxx range from $8 billion to $25 billion, far higher than the $4 billion to $18 billion estimated by Merrill Lynch analyst David Risinger in November. Shibutani rates the company "neutral." "The first case has a lot of impact on what comes afterward," Chip Babcock, a partner at Houston law firm Jackson Walker LLP, told Reuters. Babcock said the lawsuit could influence impending litigation in state courts in New Jersey, California and Texas, as well as the U.S. federal court in New Orleans, the news agency reported. Merck pulled Vioxx, a $2.5 billion arthritis painkiller, off the market on Sept. 30, 2004, in response to… Read more
    In 2000, amid rising concerns that its painkiller Vioxx posed heart risks, Merck overruled one of its own scientists after he suggested that a patient in a clinical trial had probably died of a heart attack. In an e-mail exchange about Vioxx, the company's most important new drug at the time, a senior Merck scientist repeatedly urged the researcher to change his views about the death "so that we don't raise concerns." In later reports to the Food and Drug Administration and in a paper published in 2003, Merck listed the cause of death as "unknown" for the patient, a 73-year-old woman. The discussion of the death is contained in several previously undisclosed Merck records, including e-mail messages from Dr. Edward M. Scolnick, Merck's top scientist from 1985 until 2002, and from Dr. Alise S. Reicin, a vice president for clinical research, that indicate Merck's concerns about data contradicting its… Read more

    See More