|
|
Article: Full disclosure: why strict liability is the only acceptable standard for failure to warn of pharmaceutical risks.(California)
- Article from:
- Trial
- Article date:
- July 1, 1997
- Author:
CopyrightCOPYRIGHT 1997 American Association for Justice, formerly Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA®). This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information)
|
The California Supreme Court in Carlin v. Superior Court (Upjohn Co.) recently held that drug manufacturers are subject to strict liability, rather than simple negligence, for failure to warn of known or knowable pharmaceutical risks.1 In doing so, the court recognized the distinction between design defect and failure to warn claims, and it laid to rest the question of whether its decision in Brown v. Superior Court (Abbott Laboratories)l had abolished all strict liability claims for pharmaceutical products.
The court, applying existing law as articulated in Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.,(3) also recognized the distinction between strict liability ...