‘You understand, I understand, having spent time at the pundit's table prior to my life here, you know, you may make predictions all of the right time that come out not to be true,’ he said . Related StoriesGreater evidence-based help needed for depressed employees – New report from The Work FoundationWHO focused on helping Nepal deliver healthcare to its residents, says WHO South-East Asia Regional DirectorNeurological tests accessibility and affordability: an interview with Dr Joseph Higgins The Hill: Obama Allies Cast Question On Mandate ‘It's a little portion of the law.The court ruled that the plaintiffs did not confirm that Merck violated condition consumer fraud laws . The courtroom also reversed a judgment that awarded $2.27 million in legal fees to lawyers for McDarby and a second plaintiff, Thomas Cona, who experienced a heart attack after he took Vioxx for 22 months . However, the courtroom upheld area of the jury verdict that awarded $4.5 million in compensatory damages to the estate of McDarby, who passed away last year . In the Texas lawsuit, the condition 14th Courtroom of Appeals reversed a 2005 jury verdict that would have required Merck to pay $26.1 million in damages to plaintiff Carol Ernst, whose husband Robert died of arrhythmia after he took Vioxx for eight months. A lesser court previously reduced the jury verdict from $253 million to $26.1 million due to a condition cap on damages .