Search for: "STATE v BARTLETT"
Results 321 - 340
of 530
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
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]
30 Jan 2013, 5:55 am
Bartlett can be found here. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 12:47 pm
We’ve received the same bone-headed response from an appellate court in a branded case, seeWimbush v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 8:07 am
Justice Voigt respectfully dissented.Case Name: EDWARD VENARD v. [read post]
