Litigation

Recent Posts

Supreme Court: Generic Drug Makers Not Liable For Warnings
Posted on 24 Jun 2011 by LexisNexis Litigation Resource Community Staff

WASHINGTON, D.C. - (AP) The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that makers of generic drugs cannot be sued for failing to warn consumers of the possible side effects of their products if they copy the exact warnings on the brand-name equivalents of the medicines... Read More

U.S. High Court Denies Review Of Last Pending Appeal Of Generic Label-Update Claim
Posted on 18 May 2015 by Tom Moylan

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The U.S. Supreme Court on May 18 denied review in the last pending “failure-to-update-warnings” preemption appeal by generic drug manufacturers ( Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al. v. Paul E. Hassett... Read More

U.S. Supreme Court To Decide Whether Claims About Generic Drugs Are Preempted
Posted on 13 Dec 2010 by Tom Moylan

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- (Mealey's) The U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 10 agreed to decide whether the Hatch Waxman Act prevents manufacturers of generic drugs from adding new warnings to drug labels as new risks become known ( Pliva, Inc. v. Gladys Mensing... Read More

Split Supreme Court Says Generic Drug Warning Claims Are Preempted
Posted on 23 Jun 2011 by Tom Moylan

WASHINGTON, D.C. - (Mealey's) State tort law failure-to-warn claims involving the generic drug metoclopramide are preempted by federal law, the U.S. Supreme Court said June 23 in a 5-4 ruling ( Pliva, Inc., et al. v. Gladys Mensing , No. 09-993, Actavis... Read More