ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Consumer Law Blogs -> TortDeform.com

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

Consumer Law

: TortDeform.com

This Bextra lawsuit shows the injustice in preempting lawsuits against pharmaceuticals

By Justinian Lane

ADVERTISEMENTS

As regular Tortdeform readers know, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide the case of Wyeth v. Levine, a case involving a woman whose arm had to be amputated because of an anti-nausea drug.  Diana Levine?s lawsuit is called a failure-to-warn lawsuit; she argues that Wyeth should have included a stronger warning that administering the drug a certain way can cause gangrene.  Wyeth?s position is that since the FDA approved the warning label, Wyeth shouldn?t be liable for not putting more information on the label.  (When I say label, I mean the pamphlet that accompanies prescription drugs and is read mostly by doctors.)  If Wyeth gets its way, the Supreme Court will rule that the failure-to-warn lawsuits over drugs approved by the FDA are preempted by federal law.  In other words, no one will be able to file failure-to-warn lawsuits ? even if the pharmaceutical knowingly conceals information from the public or the FDA.  If preemption becomes the law of the land, the victims of the next Vioxx won?t have their day in court.

This Bextra lawsuit again reminded me of the injustice of preempting failure-to-warn lawsuits:

Dec. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Pfizer Inc., the world?s biggest drugmaker, must pay a research center $38.7 million for stealing data compiled by the foundation on its Bextra pain-killer drug, a California jury determined.

State court jurors in San Jose yesterday found that Pfizer stole the information from the Ischemia Research and Education Foundation, which for more than 20 years has collected data on post-surgery medications, reactions, and placebo effects, said Pat Harris, an IREF lawyer. Pfizer said its conduct was ?proper? and it will appeal the verdict. 

Source: Bloomberg.com: News

Does it seem right that if a pharmaceutical knowingly, purposely, and intentionally hides deadly side effects of a drug from the public, that pharmaceutical wouldn?t even have to pay the medical bills of those injured by the drug? but if that same pharmaceutical steals safety data about their own drug they can be liable for tens of millions of dollars?  Can we really call it a justice system if it won?t punish a pharmaceutical for killing people but will punish it for stealing information?

Full post as published by TortDeform.com on December 24, 2008 (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!






0.0026 secs (from cache 10/31/26 21:52:48)