Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Consumer Fraud Actions: The Applicability of the Learned Intermediary Doctrine
The learned intermediary doctrine has long been commonly used as a critical defense in personal injury pharmaceutical and medical device failure-to-warn claims. Under the established doctrine, recognized in nearly all states, a pharmaceutical or medical device manufacturer's duty to warn is fulfilled once it has educated the prescribing or implanting physician of the known risks and side effects associated with the product. See In re Norplant Contraceptive Prods. Liab. Litig., 215 F. Supp. 2d 795, 808 (E.D. Tex. 2002); Restatement (Third) of Torts: Prod. Liab. '6 (1998). The learned intermediary doctrine is premised on the principle that the physician has a 'duty to inform himself of the qualities and characteristics of those products which he prescribes for or administers to or uses on his patients, and to exercise independent judgment, taking into account his knowledge of the patient as well as the product.' Ecke v. Parke, Davis & Co., 256 F.3d 1013, 1018 (10th Cir. 2001). The learned intermediary doctrine provides a powerful defense in defeating elements of failure-to-warn claims, such as duty and causation. There is no doubt the learned intermediary doctrine remains an effective tool in defeating pharmaceutical and medical device failure-to-warn claims.
In response to pharmaceutical and medical device companies' mounting litigation successes ' based in large part on the learned intermediary doctrine ' plaintiffs have begun seeking creative ways to circumvent the difficulties they traditionally face in product liability personal injury suits. One new vehicle that is quickly gaining popularity is non-personal injury consumer fraud actions. In contrast to traditional product liability claims, consumer fraud claims usually are based on state statutory consumer protection statutes. Although consumer protection statutes vary from state to state, in most states, a plaintiff must generally allege facts demonstrating that: 1) plaintiff is a consumer; 2) the defendant engaged in acts that were false, misleading, or deceptive; 3) the plaintiff relied on these false, misleading, or deceptive acts; and 4) these acts were a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries. See 58 Food Drug L.J. 269, 282 (2003).
Due to the relative novelty of these types of claims, there is much uncertainty surrounding if and how well-established defenses to traditional product liability claims will translate in non-personal injury consumer fraud actions. At the forefront of this uncertainty is the applicability of the learned intermediary doctrine in consumer fraud actions involving pharmaceuticals or medical devices. Of course, due to the varying applications of state consumer protection statutes, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers may find themselves in situations where the learned intermediary doctrine will be limited or inapplicable. For example, some state consumer protection statutes do not require a showing of causation or reliance. However, for the most part, the learned intermediary doctrine remains a viable defense. Although there is by no means an abundance of case law on the issue at this time, the general trend appears to weigh in favor of the learned intermediary doctrine in consumer fraud actions.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Yachts, Jets, Horses & Hooch: Specialized Commercial Leasing Models
Defining commercial real estate asset class is essentially a property explaining how it identifies — not necessarily what its original intention was or what others think it ought to be. This article discusses, from a general issue-spot and contextual analysis perspective, how lawyers ought to think about specialized leasing formats and the regulatory backdrops that may inform what the documentation needs to contain for compliance purposes.
Hyperlinked Documents: The Latest e-Discovery Challenge
As courts and discovery experts debate whether hyperlinked content should be treated the same as traditional attachments, legal practitioners are grappling with the technical and legal complexities of collecting, analyzing and reviewing these documents in real-world cases.
Identifying Your Practice's Differentiator
How to Convey Your Merits In a Way That Earns Trust, Clients and Distinctions Just as no two individuals have the exact same face, no two lawyers practice in their respective fields or serve clients in the exact same way. Think of this as a "Unique Value Proposition." Internal consideration about what you uniquely bring to your clients, colleagues, firm and industry can provide untold benefits for your law practice.
Risks and Ad Fraud Protection In Digital Advertising
The ever-evolving digital marketing landscape, coupled with the industry-wide adoption of programmatic advertising, poses a significant threat to the effectiveness and integrity of digital advertising campaigns. This article explores various risks to digital advertising from pixel stuffing and ad stacking to domain spoofing and bots. It will also explore what should be done to ensure ad fraud protection and improve effectiveness.
Turning Business Development Plans Into Reality
This article offers practical insights and best practices to navigate the path from roadmap to rainmaking, ensuring your business development efforts are not just sporadic bursts of activity, but an integrated part of your daily success.