Search for: "People v. Searle (1989)" Results 1 - 14 of 14
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jul 2008, 5:31 pm
Searle & Co., 567 A.2d 398, 400-01 (Del. 1989).Georgia: McCombs v. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 4:29 am
Schneider, 555 A.2d 1112, 1117 (N.J. 1989); and White v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm by Bexis
Searle & Co., 567 A.2d 398, 400-01 (Del. 1989) (applied to medical device). [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]
9 Jan 2014, 1:37 pm
Supp. 26, 29-30 (N.D.N.Y. 1989) (“[p]lacing every potential warning or use requirement onto the label could operate to dilute the most important instructions”), aff’d, 874 F.2d 115 (2d Cir. 1989).Overwarning has also been the subject of a fair amount of scholarly treatment. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 6:02 am by Bexis
Aren’t there a bunch of plaintiffs out there suing Eli Lilly because its anti-schizophrenia drug, Zyprexa supposedly causes diabetes – at least in obese people who would probably contract the disease anyway? [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 1:15 pm by Bexis
  Because of such risks, the FDA forces people to jump through the hoop of visiting a doctor before these products are made available to them. [read post]
24 May 2007, 10:40 am
Schneider, 555 A.2d 1112, 1118-19 (N.J. 1989); Ellis v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 5:29 am by Schachtman
Med. 997 (1989); Troyen A. [read post]