LOS ANGELES, Aug. 2 (AP) — A state court jury here found Merck & Company not liable Wednesday for causing an elderly man’s heart ailments after he took the painkiller Vioxx.

After deliberating several hours, the jury of 12 ruled that Merck was not negligent, that it did not conceal information and that the drug did not cause Stewart Grossberg’s health problems.

Mr. Grossberg, 71, had sought compensatory and punitive damages, as well $214,000 for medical bills.

Merck argued that Vioxx had no role in his heart problems.

Afterward, its general counsel, Kenneth C. Frazier, said in a statement: “Merck is pleased with the jury verdict. Today’s outcome demonstrates, again, why we will defend these cases on a case-by-case basis.”

The drug maker potentially faces as many as 16,000 lawsuits involving Vioxx, which it withdrew in September 2004 after a study found that it increased the risk of heart attacks among patients taking it for 18 months or more. Merck has now won five Vioxx cases, including one last month in New Jersey, and has lost three. Another trial began this week in federal court in New Orleans.

Lawyers called about 20 witnesses during the four-week trial in Los Angeles Superior Court. Many of those were medical experts who provided complicated testimony on pharmacology and statistics.

Mr. Grossberg, who began taking Vioxx in 1999 to manage pain in his knees, hands and elsewhere caused by osteoarthritis, had a heart attack in 2001. He sought damages on the grounds that the company was negligent and failed to warn users of the drug’s dangers.

Mr. Grossberg testified last month that he used Vioxx for a number of years, but took it “as needed” and not daily. He said he took Vioxx during a pain flare-up and suffered a heart attack a few weeks later, which caused him to miss time from his job as a construction-site supervisor.

Doctors placed a stent in one of his arteries, and he was eventually released from the hospital and put on medication to reduce his lipid levels.

Mr. Grossberg resumed taking Vioxx two years later, but in late August 2004 decided to stop after hearing about problems with the drug. Three months later, he experienced chest pains and had a second stent placement.

Wednesday’s decision was issued three weeks after a New Jersey jury decided that Vioxx did not cause the heart attack of Elaine Doherty, 68. That case was the first in which jurors considered whether Merck failed to warn patients about the drug’s cardiac risks.

More than 2,000 Vioxx lawsuits filed in California have been consolidated in Los Angeles by Judge Victoria G. Chaney.