Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Personal Injury Law Blogs -> New York Legal Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Personal Injury Law
: New York Legal BlogU.S. Supreme Court Deals Blow to Lawsuits Against Defective Products
By Mark Siesel, Esq.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that private lawsuits against medical device manufacturers are not permitted when the device in question complies with federal requirements. Essentially, the Court's decision in Riegel v. Medtronic is another example of the U.S. Supreme Court's attack on consumer rights, and will have far reaching negative effects for those who are seriously injured by dangerous and defective products . Charles Riegel received a balloon catheter manufactured by Medtronic which ruptured due to over inflation. He developed a heart block and was forced to undergo emergency surgery to save his life.
The Riegels brought a claim in federal court in New York, which was dismissed by the court, and upheld by the U.S. Circuit Court as being preempted by the Medical Devices Amendments (MDA). The MDA precludes lawsuits against manufacturers where the device in question complied with federal requirements. The problem with the Court's decision, as noted by Justice Ginsberg in her dissenting opinion, is what if evidence of the product's defect becomes known after the product has received premarket approval?
The Court stated in no uncertain terms its belief that juries are not capable of evaluating the risks associated with dangerous devices, with such language by Judge Scalia as the following: "The Dalkon Shield failure and its aftermath demonstrated the inability of the common law tort system to manage the risks associated with dangerous devices." And this quote from the opinion is even more frightening for those who believe in our civil justice system as a means to hold manufacturers of defective products accountable: "A jury on the other hand, sees only the cost of a more dangerous design, and is not concerned with its benefits; the patients who reaped those benefits are not represented in court."
The Riegel decision should send a chill down the spine of citizens in this country who believe that the civil justice system is vital in the effort to require manufacturers to ensure that their products are safe for the public before they are placed on the open market.
Full post as published by New York Legal Blog on March 04, 2008 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Employee Lawsuits (An Introduction and Topic Overview)
How employers can cope with the siege of employee lawsuits
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
DEFECTIVE PRODUCTS: Bugaboo Strollers Recalled
Defective Products
Novara Trionfo Bicycles Recalled
Hormone Replacement Therapy Lawsuits See Multi-Million Dollar Settlements
HRT Lawsuits Pharma Faces Multi Million Dollar Settlements
Further Settlements Reached in Kitec Lawsuit
Kitec Pumbing Further settlements reached in Defective Products Lawsuit
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation

D.C. Justices Defend Rights of Defective Products
Dallas Defective Products Lawyer: Defective Products Can Cause Serious Injury
"Supreme Court Restricts Securities Lawsuits"









