High Court’s Wyeth v. Levine Ruling Returns Pre-Emption Status Quo
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
The Supreme Court's ruling in Wyeth v. Levine dashes pharmaceutical industry hopes for broad protection from state product liability lawsuits, but is not expected to trigger a sea-change in current industry operations
You may also be interested in...
FDA Preemption Comment Could Sway California Against Prop 65 Warnings For Acetaminophen
Food and drug attorneys suggest it is unlikely California will require Prop 65 warnings on OTC acetaminophen products after FDA tells the state that warnings would violate federal regulations. FDA also says sciences doesn't support a conclusion acetaminophen can cause cancer and that the warnings would confuse consumers.
Children's Motrin Label Ruling Shows 'Genuine Confusion' On Pre-emption – J&J
J&J's attorneys argue that a state court ruling of inadequate warnings on Children's Motrin labels conflicts with a federal appellate court's ruling about the product that also swung on whether a manufacturer can be held liable for failing to include a label warning without “clear evidence” FDA would have approved the label.
Children's Motrin Label Ruling Shows 'Genuine Confusion' On Pre-emption – J&J
J&J's attorneys argue that a state court ruling of inadequate warnings on Children's Motrin labels conflicts with a federal appellate court's ruling about the product that also swung on whether a manufacturer can be held liable for failing to include a label warning without “clear evidence” FDA would have approved the label.