Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States
1DissentJustice Ginsburg
The Medical Device Amendments, of 1976 (MDA or Act), 90 Stat. 539, as construed by the Court, cut deeply into a domain historically occupied by state law. The MDA’s preemption clause, 21 U. S. C. § 360k(a), the Court holds, spares medical device manufacturers from personal injury claims alleging flaws in a design or label once the application for the design or label has gained premarket approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); a state damages remedy, the Court instructs, persists only for claims “premised on a violation of FDA regulations.” Ante, at 330.1 I dissent from today’s…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.