Ethel Fay Long v. Rite Aid Corp
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE ETHEL FAY LONG and MELVIN ) LEROY LONG, husband and wife, ) No. 77695-9-I ) Appellants, v. ) RITE AID HEADQUARTERS CORP. ) UNPUBLISHED OPINION and RITE AID CORP., ) ) FILED: March 25, 2019 Respondents. VERELLEN, J. —When a physician prescribes medication for their patient, it is the physician—a learned intermediary—and not the pharmacist who has the duty to advise the patient of potential adverse effects. Because Rite Aid had neither a general common law nor a statutory duty to warn Ethel Long about the potential adverse side…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. BosleyWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Jones v. Allstate InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- Jones v. Allstate Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
- Smith v. Safeco Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2003
- Smith v. Safeco InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2003
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.