ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> JURIST - The Paper Chase

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal News

: JURIST - The Paper Chase

Supreme Court rules state law not preempted in drug labeling case

By Bernard Hibbitts (editor) and University of Pittsburgh School of Law students.

ADVERTISEMENTS
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Wednesday in Wyeth v. Levine that the drug labeling requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) do not preempt state products liability laws. The case was initiated by a Vermont woman who brought a negligence and failure-to-warn products liability suit against pharmaceutical company Wyeth, arguing that the company's failure to indicate the dangers of intravenously injected migraine and anti-nausea drug Phenergan eventually led to the amputation of her arm. Wyeth argued that any state-requested changes to the drug label would have violated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requirements because FDA approval is based partly on the label, and that allowing state-requested changes to drug labels would contradict legislative intent by allowing an agency other than the FDA officially to determine drug safety. Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said that a drug manufacturer and not the FDA bears primary responsibility for product labeling, and that a manufacturer may itself initiate strengthened warning labels to comply with state and federal requirements. Stevens concluded that: If Congress thought state-law suits posed an obstacle to its objectives, it surely would have enacted an express preemption provision at some point during the FDCA's 70-year history. ... Its silence on the issue, coupled with its certain awareness of the prevalence of state tort litigation, is powerful evidence that Congress did not intend FDA oversight to be the exclusive means of ensuring drug safety and effectiveness.The decision upholds the Vermont Supreme Court affirmance of a $6.7 million jury award for the plaintiff.

Full post as published by JURIST - The Paper Chase on March 04, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0196 secs (new cache)