Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> How Appealing

Litigation

: How Appealing

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania grants review to determine what types of negligence claims can be brought against the manufacturer of a dangerous prescription drug

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania grants review to determine what types of negligence claims can be brought against the manufacturer of a dangerous prescription drug: In this case, known as Lance v. Wyeth, both the plaintiff and the defendant had sought Pa. Supreme Court review of various aspects of the Pa. Superior Court's ruling, which you can access here.

By means of an order entered today, the Pa. Supreme Court granted each side's petition for allowance of appeal, accepting for review the issues as phrased by the each side.

Defendant Wyeth phrased the issues on which it sought review as follows:

(1) Whether the Superior Court erred in creating a new claim for "negligent design defect" of a prescription drug, despite Plaintiff-Respondent Patsy Lance's repeated waiver of that claim?

(2) Whether the Superior Court's creation of a new cause of action for "negligent design defect" conflicts with this Court's settled precedent limiting product liability claims against manufacturers and sellers of prescription drugs?

(3) Whether the Superior Court's creation of a new cause of action for "negligent design defect" should properly be argued before this Court because it may affect hundreds or thousands of cases and ignores that: (a) plaintiffs in design defect cases must plead and prove a "feasible alternative design"; and (b) there should be deference to regulatory authorities?

Plaintiff Lance phrased the issues on which she sought review as follows:

(1) Did the Superior Court err in holding, in an acknowledged conflict with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit's prediction of Pennsylvania law, that Pennsylvania law would not recognize a claim against a prescription drug manufacturer for negligent failure to test to discover a prescription drug's actual harmful side-effects?

(2) Did the Superior Court err in holding that Pennsylvania law would not recognize claims against a manufacturer of a prescription drug, which the federal Food and Drug Administration ultimately ordered withdrawn from the market as too dangerous for any potential users, for negligently marketing that drug and for negligently failing to withdraw that drug from the market?

I served as plaintiff's appellate lawyer on appeal to the Pa. Superior Court and will be continuing to serve as plaintiff's appellate lawyer before the Pa. Supreme Court. I previously linked to online copies of the opposing parties' petitions for allowance of appeal in this earlier post. Plaintiff's answer in opposition to Wyeth's petition for allowance of appeal can be accessed here.

Finally, the Pa. Supreme Court's docket entries evidencing today's grants of review in this case can be accessed here.

Update: The Pa. Supreme Court's order granting review can now be accessed online at this link.

Full post as published by How Appealing on March 15, 2011 (boomark / email).