Search for: "People v. Ingram (1981)"
Results 1 - 5
of 5
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Sep 2016, 12:20 pm
People v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
STATE V. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
A warning about an inherent risk – a so-called “risk warning” – serves an entirely different purpose.With inherent risks, people are warned so they can decide whether that risk outweighs the benefits that might be gained from using the product. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 1:49 pm
Briefly, courts have adopted the learned intermediary rule because:Warnings go to physicians because they are the only people who know both a particular patient’s medical history as well as the risk/benefit profile of the drug/device being prescribed.Limiting warning duties to physicians makes the common law consistent with warning duties imposed by the FDA.Routing prescription drug/device information through the doctor preserves the physician/patient relationship from outside… [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
Nail v. [read post]