Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Product Liability Law & StrategyFeaturesKickerLJN NewslettersNewsSections

Ending the Myth That Branded Drug Companies Cannot Benefit from Preemption

By Victor E. Schwartz and Phil S.Goldberg
February 29, 2016

A myth has surfaced over the past few years that federal drug law preempts product liability suits against generic drug companies, but not brand-name manufacturers. This myth stems from an over-simplification of three U.S. Supreme Court cases. Put simply, preemption applies when it would be impossible for a prescription drug manufacturer to comply with both the FDA's requirements and what a plaintiff's lawyer alleges as its duty under tort law, here changing a drug's warnings or design to address a finding of defect in a given case. It does not matter whether the defendant made a generic or brand-name drug.

In December 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit directly pierced this myth in Yates v. Ortho-McNeil-Janssen, No.15-31049 (6th Cir. Dec 11, 2015). The court issued a well-reasoned opinion applying the Supreme Court's doctrine of impossibility preemption to a design defect claim that the brand-name drug manufacturer should have changed the dosage of its drug's active ingredient. The Sixth Circuit held that impossibility preemption blocks any such design liability claim. The brand-name drug manufacturer could not abide by both FDA's approval for the specific design of that drug and sell an altered version of that drug.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Law Firms are Reducing Redundant Real Estate by Bringing Support Services Back to the Office Image

A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Bit Parts Image

Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights

Risks of “Baseball Arbitration” in Resolving Real Estate Disputes Image

“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.

Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel Image

'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.