Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On April 8, 2008, the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a significant decision concerning the authority of federal regulatory agencies to pre-empt state tort claims, Colacicco v. Apotex Inc., No. 6-5148. The decision, authored by the former chief judge of the Third Circuit, holds that when the Food and Drug Administration (the 'FDA') publicly concludes that a specific warning is unnecessary for a prescription pharmaceutical, state tort law cannot supply a cause of action for failure to include the rejected warning in the product's labeling.
The plaintiffs in the two cases consolidated for appeal were the husband and daughter, respectively, of two adults who committed suicide after taking anti-depressant drugs known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ('SSRIs'). The drugs in question were Zoloft', Paxil', and the generic drug containing the active ingredient in Paxil, paroxetine hydrochloride. The plaintiffs argued that, under state law, the manufacturers should have warned physicians of the association between these drugs and an increased risk of suicidal thoughts and behavior ('suicidality'). The FDA, however, had repeatedly rejected the scientific basis for the warning suggested by the plaintiffs. The defendants argued that the FDA's actions pre-empted the plaintiffs' state-law failure-to-warn claims.
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
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.
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.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.
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.