News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Warning Labels

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Troutman Pepper

Industry Urges SCOTUS to Consider FDA Graphic Cigarette Warnings

Troutman Pepper on

In August, a group of tobacco companies filed a petition for certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking review of a lower court’s holding that the First Amendment does not prohibit the U.S. Food and Drug Administration...more

ArentFox Schiff

Prop 65 Round-Up - February 2023

ArentFox Schiff on

PFAS-Containing Consumer Products Under Attack in California - Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are present in a variety of consumer products. PFAS have been increasingly targeted in laws and regulations and...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Third Circuit Clarifies Next Steps in Fosamax Decision

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has in turn remanded the case to the district court to determine whether state law claims are preempted by federal law in the 500+...more

Epiq

New Supreme Court Decision Offers Guidance for Mass Tort Preemption Defense

Epiq on

After years of limited guidance, the Supreme Court has finally provided direction to lower courts on the issue of preemption when they delivered their opinion in Merck v. Albrecht. “Preemption” is a common defense used by...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Worth the Wait? Some Semi-Mature Thoughts on Albrecht

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

For some long-awaited events, a little time and distance can add a measure of clarity. Not always – many still are processing the Game of Thrones finale, with no end in sight. But over the past few weeks pharmaceutical...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Supreme Court Decides Prescription Drug Preemption Case in Favor of Drug Manufacturer

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed on

The United States Supreme Court finally clarified its 11-year-old “clear evidence” standard for pharmaceutical preemption.  In its much-anticipated opinion delivered by Justice Breyer, the Court unanimously reversed the Third...more

Morgan Lewis

Supreme Court Clarifies Judges Must Decide Impossibility Pre-Emption

Morgan Lewis on

The US Supreme Court held on May 20 that a judge, not a jury, must decide the question of whether federal law prohibited drug manufacturers from adding warnings to the drug label that would satisfy state law. To succeed on a...more

Hogan Lovells

U.S. Supreme Court rules judges must decide whether preemption applies, and clarifies when it does

Hogan Lovells on

Opinion highlights importance of a "clear" record at FDA - On 20 May the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal preemption questions arising under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) are for a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

US Supreme Court Refines Impossibility Preemption Doctrine, Changes Litigation Dynamics

McDermott Will & Emery on

Following confusion from a 2009 decision, the US Supreme Court on May 20, 2019, decided a significant impossibility preemption case. This new decision will change the dynamics of litigation involving the impossibility...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Sides with Merck in Unanimous Fosamax® Product-Liability Decision

Jones Day on

The Situation: Name-brand pharmaceutical manufacturers are often sued with claims that they should have strengthened the warnings on their labels, even where (as here) the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") would not allow...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht (2019)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

Last week, in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, the Supreme Court continued its explication of the balance between state law tort liability that can be imposed on drug makers and the extent to which this liability can be...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Supreme Court Reiterates That Federal Law Preemption For Product Warnings Is A Matter For Judge, Not Jury

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court found that a judge is better suited than a jury to decide if consumers’ tort claims are preempted by federal regulations. In the case, Merck Sharp & Dome, Corp. v. Albreecht, the...more

Troutman Pepper

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Implied Preemption in Prescription Drug Cases

Troutman Pepper on

On May 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its latest opinion on preemption in cases involving prescription medications, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290 (U.S. May 20, 2019). ...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Judges to Decide Whether Manufacturers Meet “Clear Evidence” Impossibility Preemption Standard, Supreme Court Says

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its potentially most significant preemption decision in several years, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albright, 587 U.S. ____ (2019), reversing what some had dubbed the worst drug and device...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

On May 20, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290, holding that the judge, not the jury, must decide whether state-law failure-to-warn claims are preempted by...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Labeling Preemption Questions are for the Court, not the Jury, Holds U.S. Supreme Court in Fosamax Decision That Clarifies the...

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

A judge, and not the jury, is the better-positioned and appropriate decisionmaker to determine whether a failure-to-warn claim is federally preempted, the U.S. Supreme Court held on Monday, May 20, 2019. The Court also...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - May 20, 2019

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions this morning: Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, No. 17-1657: In this bankruptcy-related case, Tempnology, LLC entered into an agreement with...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Skadden's 2019 Insights: Significant Rulings Expected for Ongoing Mass Tort, Consumer Class Action Issues

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

In 2019, significant developments are expected on issues that have been percolating in the mass tort and class action litigation arena for several years. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on cases relating to...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Still Waiting—FDA Delays Rulemaking

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed on

The FDA recently announced that it would once again delay promulgation of its proposed rule for generic drug labeling obligations. This action followed introduction of a spending bill that would have blocked funding for the...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Wyeth v. Levine’s ‘Clear Evidence' Language: Clearly Misunderstood

Foley Hoag LLP on

In 2009, the United States Supreme Court in Wyeth v. Levine affirmed a judgment rejecting a prescription drug manufacturer’s contention that plaintiff’s claim that the manufacturer should have strengthened its U.S. Food and...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Product Liability Alert: Failure-To-Warn Suit Against Generic Drug Maker Proceeds Despite Argument of Federal Preemption

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on

On January 20, 2015, the U.S Supreme Court denied cert in Teva v. Superior Court of California, Orange County, refusing to review a California state court ruling allowing patients to proceed with claims that Teva...more

Cozen O'Connor

Pre-Emption of State-Law Design-Defect Claim Against Generic Drug Company

Cozen O'Connor on

On June 24, 2013, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett held that state-law design-defect claims based on the inadequacy of a generic drug’s labeled warnings are pre-empted...more

Baker Donelson

U.S. Supreme Court Bartlett Decision in Favor of Generic Drug Manufacturers

Baker Donelson on

In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court held that state law design defect claims against manufacturers of generic pharmaceuticals are preempted by federal law when the claim hinges on the adequacy of the drug's...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Mutual v. Bartlett Further Shields Generic Drug Manufacturers from Liability

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in the much-anticipated Mutual Pharms. Co. v. Bartlett, No. 12-142 (on appeal from the First Circuit Bartlett v. Mutual Pharms. Co., 678 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2012)). As we...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Breaking Down The Bartlett Oral Argument

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court has heard oral argument in the much-anticipated Mutual Pharmaceuticals v. Bartlett case, No. 12-142 (on appeal from the First Circuit Bartlett v. Mutual Pharms. Co., 678 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2012)). The...more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide