scotus U.S. Supreme court sides with consumers against preemptionOn March 4, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on the side of the consumer in a landmark pharmaceutical liability case against drug manufacturer Wyeth. The ruling may be the death knell in the argument for preemption – an effort to protect corporations from state tort litigation.

The case, Wyeth v. Levine, involved Vermont musician Diana Levine, who sued Wyeth when she lost her forearm in 2000 to gangrene because of improper administration of Phenergan. The labeling on the Wyeth-produced anti-nausea drug, she claimed, had failed to adequately warn medical personnel that the method used to give her the drug, an “IV-push,” was dangerous and could lead to gangrene.

The basis of the preemption argument, as put forth by drug and medical device manufacturers, is that if their product is approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA), they are protected from any future claims of harm from consumers. They say that because their product is approved by the federal government, they should be immune from any claims at the state level. Federal approval trumps state law, they said.

The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed.

Drug manufacturers are required to get approval from the FDA in order to sell their products, so if FDA approval implies preemption, the drug manufacturer would basically have built-in protection against any future legal actions. But, as is evident from the many stories in the news about defective drugs and products, FDA approval doesn’t guarantee safety or effectiveness. It only sets a minimum standard.

Many drugs are approved after only minimal testing on limited numbers of people. If, once they enter the general population, it turns out they have previously unknown serious side effects, there must be a factor to motivate the manufacturer to fix the problem. Litigation provides that motivation, and an additional safeguard, holding the manufacturer ultimately responsible for the safety of its product.

In their ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court justices noted that “State tort suits uncover unknown drug hazards and provide incentives for drug manufacturers to disclose safety risks promptly. They also serve a distinct compensatory function that may motivate injured persons to come forward with information.”

In other words, when consumers are allowed to hold drug manufacturers liable for the harm caused by their products, they motivate the drug companies to provide safe, reliable and well-tested products, and to quickly remove from the market or fix products identified as dangerous.



We're here to help!

We live by our creed of "helping those who need it most" and have helped thousands of clients get the justice they desperately needed and deserved. If you feel you have a case or just have questions please contact us for a free consultation. There is no risk and no fees unless we win for you.

Fields marked    may be required for submission.
  1. I'm an attorney

Two hands in a caring embrace in a hospital

January marks National Mentoring Month

Who do you believe most positively impacted your life? Some might say a family member—mom, dad, aunt...
Andy Birchfield

Andy Birchfield provides Law360 with the ‘Plaintiff...

Beasley Allen lawyer Andy Birchfield, who heads up the firm’s Mass Torts section handling cases...
Cole Ports, Frank Woodson - Legal Associations Presidents

Beasley Allen lawyers leading state associations

Frank Woodson was inducted as the President of the Alabama Association for Justice (ALAJ) and J. Cole...

Beasley Allen welcomes new attorney, Dr. Margaret M....

Beasley Allen is pleased to announce the addition of Dr. Margaret M. Thompson, Of Counsel in the...

Grant Enfinger scores first NASCAR win at Talladega in...

BeasleyAllen.com racecar driver Grant Enfinger claimed his first NASCAR Camping World Truck Series...
Gibson Vance accepting induction plaque for the American Board of Trial Advocates

Gibson Vance selected for ABOTA membership

Gibson Vance from our firm has been inducted into membership for the American Board of Trial Advocates...

A special thanks

A special thanks to your law firm and staff for all the work done on the Vioxx case. The settlement could not have come at a better time for my family and myself. I thank you for a job well done!

—George