Wyeth v. Levine

by GoozNews ~ 05 Mar 2009 11:26am

When it is top of the news everywhere, you don't have to read more about it here. But suffice it to say that the Supreme Court's decision yesterday in Wyeth v. Levine is a victory for consumers, and a recognition by even the business-friendly Roberts court that the duty to warn consumers about dangerous products -- when those dangers are known to manufacturers -- trumps federal regulation, which is a necessary but inevitably incomplete effort at protecting the public.

The duty to warn is one of the oldest precepts in the common law. It's the height of conservatism to insist on that business obligation, and, from a consumer's perspective, right.

Comments

Merrill
I am no friend of WSJ, but see below, as well as other link.

Frankly, odd test case for this law. Warning looks sensible and reasonable to me, and as a doc, the subtext is, WARNING, DONT ADMINISTER THIS WAY! This is negligence, not pre-emption.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123621345651335085.html?mod=todays_us_opinion

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_treatment/default.aspx

Brad