2007

Volume 26, No. 7
August

• Failure to warn of inflammatory bowel disease risk from Accutane

• Failure to warn of breast cancer risk from Provera

• No federal preemption of inadequate warning claim against generic drug manufacturer

• Vaccine Act claimant need not eliminate alternative causes of injury

• Drug manufacturer’s “causality assessments” are not admissible in lawsuit against manufacturer

• No federal preemption of claims over defective cardiac defibrillator

Volume 26, No. 4
May

• Availability of medical monitoring in Vioxx case not dependent solely on existence of manifest disease

• Failure to adequately warn of Vioxx risks

Volume 26, No. 3
April

• Federal law does not preempt failure to warn claim involving prescription skin medication

• Joinder of sales representatives in lawsuit against drug manufacturer was proper

• Requirement that negligence of all parties be decided in one action bars fraudulent joinder claim

• Product designer may be liable to foreseeable user despite lack of manufacturing role

• Court erred in limiting treating physicians’ testimony to information contained in medical record

Volume 26, No. 2
March

• No preemption of claim alleging inadequate warning of dangers of intravenous drug administration

• Publicity over drug’s dangers was insufficient to trigger limitations statute

Volume 26, No. 1
February

• Plaintiff raised fact question as to whether manufacturer failed to adequately warn of drug’s long-term use risk

• Common law claims alleging injuries from diabetes drug Rezulin are not preempted

• Federal jurisdiction lacking where manufacturer failed to prove “federal officer” provision applied

• Plaintiff raised fact questions regarding whether nerve lesioning device was unreasonably dangerous

2006

Volume 25, No. 10
December

• Inadequate warnings of infant cold drug’s dangers

• Fact issues regarding fraudulent concealment preclude dismissal based on limitations statute

Volume 25, No. 9
November

• Vaccine act claim for child’s rare reaction to measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine

• Failure to warn of high-risk patient profile for use of electrothermal surgical device

• Defective design of percutaneous sheath introducer

• No federal preemption of failure to warn claims against latex glove manufacturer

Volume 25, No. 8
October

• Learned intermediary doctrine does not bar failure to warn claim

• Improper marketing of Baycol

• Court properly denied defendant’s request for venue change based on pretrial publicity

• No federal preemption of failure to warn claim

Volume 25, No. 7
August

• Drug manufacturer is not entitled to summary judgment based on assumption of risk defense

• Plaintiff may use circumstantial evidence to prove strict liability claim against device manufacturer

• Court erred in failing to grant plaintiffs voluntary dismissal after expert’s unexpected withdrawal

Volume 25, No. 6
July

• Plaintiff in Rezulin suit raised fact question about when she discovered injury, link to drug

• Plaintiff in DES case raised fact question as to whether drug taken by her mother was made by defendant

• Inadequate warning claim would be preempted based on new FDA regulatory language

Volume 25, No. 5
June

• Concealment of risks of Vioxx

• New Jersey law, rather than Michigan law, applied to Michigan resident’s Accutane lawsuit

• Court used wrong standard to decide whether plaintiff exercised reasonable care in discovering claim

Volume 25, No. 4
May

• Intentional withholding of information about risks of Vioxx

• Wrongful conduct rule bars suit for addiction to painkiller

• No removal of class action where amended pleading related back to original filing

• Plaintiff did not improperly join drug company’s sales representative to defeat diversity jurisdiction

• Knee implant manufacturer had post-sale duty to warn of delamination risk after extended shelf life

Volume 25, No. 2
March

• Dental amalgam maker need not comply with “safe harbor” notice method best suited to reach patients

Volume 25, No. 1
February

• Plaintiffs’ expert evidence in Parlodel case was reliable

• Two-disease rule does not apply to fen-phen litigation

2005

Volume 24, No. 10
December

• Vaccine Act claimant was not required to show peer- reviewed literature in support of “off-table” injury

• Patient package insert created express warranty

• No extension of removal period where defendant could have timely ascertained case value but failed to do so

• Increased risk of harm from device sufficient to require medical monitoring was injury in fact

Volume 24, No. 8
October

• Federal law does not preempt state law failure to warn claim against antidepressant manufacturer

• Concealment of Vioxx health risks

Volume 24, No. 7
August

• New trial warranted where expert failed to disclose scientific basis for opinion on fen-phen

Volume 24, No. 6
July

• Federal drug labeling law does not preempt state failure to warn claims

• Federal law preempts failure to warn, but not design defect, claim against latex glove manufacturer

Volume 24, No. 5
June

• Fact questions exist as to whether claim against DES maker fits within exception to repose statute

• Judgment n.o.v. proper where plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily assumed risk of using diet drug

• Plaintiffs raised genuine issues of material fact for jury to decide whether hip prosthesis was defective

• Federal law does not preempt nurse’s failure-to-warn claim against manufacturer of latex gloves

Volume 24, No. 3
April

• Pondimin, Redux users develop heart valve problems

• Plaintiff raised material fact questions precluding summary judgment on drug warning claim

• Blood-salvaging machine manufacturer not entitled to summary judgment on inadequate warning claim

• Summary judgment improper on claim alleging surgical device manufacturer concealed warning

• Corporation was citizen in state where it conducted its day-to-day activities, managerial decisions

• Unreasonably dangerous cold medicine containing phenylpropanolamine

• Failure to warn that anesthesia machine could produce carbon monoxide

• Inadequate warning of possibility of surgical staple failure

Volume 24, No. 1
February

• Michigan statute immunizing drug manufacturers from liability based on FDA approval constitutional

• Plaintiff adequately pleaded fraud claim against ephedra supplement manufacturer

• Complete preemption of pacemaker claim inapplicable where no showing of federal private right of action

• Improper sterilization process during manufacture of artificial knee

2004

Volume 23, No. 10
December

• Top-heavy design of medical supply cart

• Federal law preempts state law claims alleging defective design, manufacture of heart pump

Volume 23, No. 9
November

• Kentucky high court adopts learned intermediary doctrine

• Failure to warn of risks associated with weight loss drug Pondimin

• Vaccine manufacturers must show compliance with FDA regulations to gain presumption of proper warnings

• Vaccine Act does not bar parents' tort claims against thimerosal manufacturer

• Summary judgment improper where plaintiff’s affidavit inconsistent with only some portions of prior testimony