The 5-1 ruling by the state's highest court means a class-action lawsuit by people who used the once-popular painkiller will be dismissed. One justice did not participate.

The lawsuit was filed by Vioxx users who claim they have no immediate symptoms but that use of the drug gives them a greater risk of developing illness. So they want diagnostic testing to uncover any hidden or developing problems.

Because they aren't claiming they have an injury, they aren't eligible for the settlement Merck announced in November. Merck agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle thousands of U.S. personal injury lawsuits involving a heart attack, stroke or death. Some 45,000 eligible claimants had initiated enrollment as of March 31.

The high court said that since the Vioxx users in the case don't claim injury, they "cannot satisfy the definition of harm" in seeking medical monitoring under the state's Product Liability Act.

In dissent, Justice Virginia A. Long argued that the law encompassed a broad definition of harm, and includes the concept that an "increased risk of injury that creates a need for medical surveillance" is a recognizable harm.