Document Type
Article
Publication Date
9-5-2011
Abstract
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in PLIVA Inc. v. Mensing will immunize generic drug manufacturers facing failure-to-warn claims from state-law liability, and may also have implications for preemption jurisprudence more generally, says attorney Brian Wolfman and co-author Dena Feldman in this BNA Insight. The authors analyze the ruling, and offer their views on the questions that PLIVA raises about the ongoing vitality of the presumption against preemption, the standard for determining ‘‘impossibility’’ preemption, and the propriety of deference to an agency’s views on preemption.
Publication Citation
39 Prod. Safety & Liab. Rep. (BNA), at 972-982 (Sept. 5, 2011)
Scholarly Commons Citation
Wolfman, Brian and Feldman, Dena, "PLIVA v. Mensing and Its Implications" (2011). Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works. 1073.
https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1073
Comments
Reproduced with permission from Product Safety & Liability Reporter, 39 PSLR 972 (Sept. 5, 2011). Copyright 2011 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bna.com