Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | T | Trial

Courts disagree on who's liable for generic-drug injuries.

Article Excerpt
Deciding who is responsible for what is a standard tort issue. In typical pharmaceutical cases, that means courts must decide whether a drug company has manufactured a defective product or has met its duty to warn consumers of possible side effects. But in cases involving generic drugs--those chemical stand-ins for drugs branded with market-researched and consumer-friendly names--the question is, are the tort issues, like the drugs, identical?

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In a case of first impression in California, the appeals court ruled that a brand-name manufacturer can be held liable for negligent misrepresentation even though the plaintiff used only generic versions of its drug. (Conte v. Wyeth, Inc., 85 Cal. Rptr. 3d 299 (2008).)

Other state courts have generally followed a 1994 Fourth Circuit decision that ruled the opposite way. (Foster v. Am. Home Prods., 29 F.3d 165 (4th Cir. 1994).) And at press time, all sides were waiting to see whether Colacicco v. Apotex, Inc., in which the Third Circuit found that a name-brand drug manufacturer does not owe a duty to consumers of a generic equivalent, reaches the U.S. Supreme Court. (521 F.3d 253 (3d...

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!