Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the present climate of constant news reports of product recalls and runaway verdicts, pharmaceutical manufacturers are concerned about certain information that can infiltrate and unfairly influence product liability trials. Manufacturers should not have to worry that a court might permit a plaintiff to utilize the manufacturer's post-marketing surveillance data ' which is collected pursuant to governmental regulations and for the purpose of keeping manufacturers apprised of the possibility of an adverse effect associated with their product ' to prove actual causation. In addition, consumers should not have to worry about such legal disincentives impacting industry pharmacovigilance efforts. Post-marketing surveillance is absolutely critical to balancing the competing public policy concerns that favor speeding up the initial approval of useful drugs and assuring that only safe drugs reach the public.
Unfortunately, adverse drug reaction reports collected and causality assessments made in the course of post-marketing surveillance have increasingly become fodder for plaintiffs' attorneys attempting to prove causation. Courts, however, properly have precluded plaintiffs from presenting post-marketing surveillance materials, most recently refusing to allow plaintiffs to introduce company causality assessments based on adverse drug reaction reports as evidence of causation and from using these reports and assessments as bases for expert opinions on causation.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.