Search for: "BARTLETT v. STATE"
Results 321 - 340
of 532
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2013, 11:38 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 5:13 am
And that’s what brings this within the ambit of PLIVA v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 9:34 am
The laws that apply to generic drugs recently shifted in favor of the manufacturers at the expense of injured consumers in 2011 when the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Pilva, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2013, 8:31 am
Allison Zieve, Director, Public Citizen Litigation Group/Director, FDLI Board Bartlett v. [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 4:00 am
The court, citing Jones v E. [read post]
22 Mar 2013, 10:36 am
Riegel v. [read post]
21 Mar 2013, 6:22 pm
Bartlett, a case testing whether the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (and in particular the Hatch-Waxman Act) preempts a state design-defect claim against a generic drug... [read post]
21 Mar 2013, 3:04 pm
Howard v. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 1:31 pm
The US Supreme Court has just heard arguments in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 6:58 am
Bartlett – that is to say Mutual Pharmacy Co. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 6:01 am
In Wyeth v Levine, the Court pointed out that “Congress did not intend FDA oversight to be the exclusive means of ensuring drug safety and effectiveness’ and that state law serves as a ‘complementary form of drug regulation. [read post]
15 Mar 2013, 4:41 am
Bartlett, in which the Court will consider whether federal law preempts state law design-defect claims brought against generic pharmaceutical products, here, and in Sebelius v. [read post]
12 Mar 2013, 6:47 am
Bartlett, scheduled for oral argument on March 19, in which the Court will consider whether federal law preempts a state-law design defect claim against a generic drug manufacturer. [read post]
11 Mar 2013, 9:05 am
United States (2012), to decisions about the safety of medical devices, Riegel v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 6:29 am
At The Volokh Conspiracy, Dale Carpenter discusses the amicus brief he filed in United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 2:30 pm
And drug companies are deep pockets, so these cases provide one instance after another (Bartlett was another SJS/TENS case) of courts leaning over backwards to justify liability. [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 3:42 pm
See Demahy v. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 9:42 am
The plaintiff in Arters asserted a “design defect”/“remove from the market” claim à la Bartlett v. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 7:40 am
Bartlett, decided on January 29. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 6:24 am
Perry, the challenge to California’s Proposition 8, while Scottie Thomaston of Equality on Trial covers the National Organization for Marriage’s brief in United States v. [read post]
