Legal Opinion
Wyeth v. Levine
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided March 4, 2009No. 06-1249PublishedCited by 1,254 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stevens
Directly injecting the drug Phenergan into a patient’s vein creates a significant risk of catastrophic consequences. A Vermont jury found that petitioner Wyeth, the manufacturer of the drug, had failed to provide an adequate warning of that risk and awarded damages to respondent Diana Levine to compensate her for the amputation of her arm. The warnings on Phenergan’s label had been deemed sufficient by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) when it approved Wyeth’s new drug application in 1955 and when it later approved changes in the drug’s labeling. The question we must decide is…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,254 opinions
- Arizona v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Teva Pharm. United States, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
- Learjet, Inc. v. Oneok, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Wigod v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
1,249 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.