Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Pharmaceutical Products and Suicide Risks
In last month's issue, we noted that the federal government, drug companies and consumer watchdogs are increasing their efforts to find out whether a host of pharmaceutical products, when taken, can tend to render consumers susceptible to suicidal thoughts and/or actions.
Federal Preemption Poses A Major Sticking Point
Suits charging that someone became suicidal because of a prescription medication's use are generally based on a claim that the drug's manufacturer failed to warn users through adequate labeling of a known potential side effect. Such suits often fail to get past the summary judgment phase. The primary reason is that the plaintiffs' state law claims run afoul of the doctrine of federal preemption, embodied in the Supremacy Clause to the U.S. Constitution, which provides that the 'Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land.' U.S. Const. Art. VI, cl. 2. Therefore, 'any state law that conflicts with federal law is 'without effect.” Cipollone v. Ligget Group Inc., 505 U.S. 504 (1992) (citation omitted). The Medical Device Amendments (MDA) to the Food Drug and Cosmetics Act (FDCA) 21 U.S.C. ' 301 et seq., contain an express preemption provision, namely ' 360k(a), which prohibits states from imposing requirements different from, or in addition to, the specific federal requirements imposed on medical devices by FDA regulations. However, the rules on drugs are not so clear.
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?