The state Supreme Court has declined to consider a novel theory that a plaintiff may show that a drugmaker failed to warn of all the harmful risks from its drug, rather than directly showing that the drugmaker failed to warn of the specific harm that ultimately caused the plaintiff’s injury.

When the Superior Court considered Cochran v. Wyeth , the front-line appellate court treated it as an apparent case of first impression, and affirmed the current scope of the failure-to-warn theory.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]