The California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, recently affirmed judgment in favor of a fruit snack manufacturer who claimed “fruit” was stated to be the first ingredient on a front label but listed “fruit puree”...more
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to alter ways of life across the globe, clinical trials must be adapted for participant safety while maintaining accuracy in the midst of the ongoing crisis. In September 2020, the U.S. Food...more
On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has in turn remanded the case to the district court to determine whether state law claims are preempted by federal law in the 500+...more
12/12/2019
/ Agency Disapproval ,
Clear Evidence Standard ,
Failure To Warn ,
FDA Approval ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Judicial Authority ,
Jury Trial ,
Manufacturers ,
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht ,
Preemption ,
Prescription Drugs ,
Question of Fact ,
Question of Law ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
State Law Claims ,
Vacated ,
Warning Labels
A judge, and not the jury, is the better-positioned and appropriate decisionmaker to determine whether a failure-to-warn claim is federally preempted, the U.S. Supreme Court held on Monday, May 20, 2019.
The Court also...more
5/22/2019
/ Agency Disapproval ,
Clear Evidence Standard ,
Failure To Warn ,
FDA Approval ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Judicial Authority ,
Jury Trial ,
Manufacturers ,
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht ,
Preemption ,
Prescription Drugs ,
Question of Fact ,
Question of Law ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
State Law Claims ,
Vacated ,
Warning Labels