| trudawg wrote:|
Holding: The Supreme Court, Justice Alito, held that design defect claim under New Hampshire law, based on generic drug manufacturer's failure to strengthen warnings on inflammatory pain reliever's label to advise of risks of toxic epidermal necrosis and Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and to ensure that pain reliever was not “unreasonably dangerous” to users, was preempted by federal law that expressly prohibited manufacturers of generic drugs from making any unilateral changes to drug's label.
Justice Breyer dissented and filed opinion, in which Justice Kagan joined.
Justice Sotomayor dissented and filed opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined.
Mut. Pharm. Co., Inc. v. Bartlett, 133 S. Ct. 2466 (2013)
interesting...so if i am reading this correctly the generic brand printed warnings on the label precisely as the brand name version has printed as required by fed law...and this is why the generic company is not being held liable?
so the root cause is, in fact, faulty labeling on the part of the brand name actually, correct?
but the patient can't sue the brand name directly because they took the generic brand which is a carbon copy down to the labeling as legally required by same said fed govt??????
this is some circular bullshyt for sure...