Legal Opinion

Samuels v. American Cyanamid Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 6, 1985PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

David B. Saxe, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

In a recent strict product liability case that was tried before me and a jury, the applicability of New York’s "informed intermediary doctrine”, requiring a pharmaceutical manufacturer to warn only the prescribing physician and not the ultimate user of the side effects and possible risks of prescription drugs was at issue.

I considered the rationale for this doctrine and case authority from this and other jurisdictions, and, based upon the facts of this case, I refused to apply the informed intermediary doctrine. So, I charged the jury that…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Clark v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  2. Codling v. PagliaNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
  3. Robinson v. Reed-Prentice Division of Package Machinery Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Terhune v. A. H. Robins Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1978
  5. MacDonald v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Perez v. Wyeth Laboratories Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1999
  2. Yates v. Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
  3. NIEMIERA BY NIEMIERA v. SchniederSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1989
  4. DiBartolo v. Abbott LaboratoriesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2012
  5. Lacy v. G.D. Searle & Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1989

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API