Legal Opinion
PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 23, 2011No. 09-993; No. 09-1039; No. 09-1501PublishedCited by 414 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
[564 U.S. 608]
Justice Thomas
delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part III-B-2.*
These consolidated lawsuits involve state tort-law claims based on certain drug manufacturers’ alleged failure to provide
[564 U.S. 609]
adequate warning labels for generic metoclopramide. The question presented is whether federal drug regulations applicable to generic drug manufacturers directly conflict with, and thus pre-empt, these state-law claims. We hold that they do.
I
Metoclopramide is a drug designed to speed the movement of food through the digestive system. The Food and Drug…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Wyeth v. LevineSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Crosby v. National Foreign Trade CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by414 opinions
- Kisor v. WilkieSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
- Gibbons v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2019
- Mut. Pharm. Co. v. BartlettSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Arthur Drager v. PLIVA USACourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2014
- Schrock v. Wyeth, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
409 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.