Buy this domain.
Consumers Lose in Medtronic Supreme Court Decision | cialis online

Consumers Lose in Medtronic Supreme Court Decision

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Consumers lost some of their rights to sue the makers of defective medical devices after the US Supreme Court sided with Medtronic Inc. and ruled that Food & Drug Administration (FDA) pre-market approval of a medical device shields companies from state product liability lawsuits. In the case considered by the Supreme Court, Medtronic had argued that the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that require FDA approval of medical devices preempt product liability lawsuits in state courts. That law clearly says that states can’t maintain requirements that are different from federal standards. But Congress didn’t specify if those federal standards preempted state common law claims. Medtronic and the Bush Administration asserted that allowing state personal injury lawsuits against the makers of defective medical devices amounts to a state “requirement” different from FDA requirements because such complaints are based on state laws.

Eight members of the Supreme Court agreed. In his majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that permitting state juries to impose liability on the maker of an approved device “disrupts the federal scheme,” under which the FDA has the responsibility for evaluating the risks and benefits of a new device. Justice Scalia wrote that state tort law amounted to such an additional requirement. He said the 1976 law “speaks clearly to the point at issue,” regardless of the federal government’s previous or current positions.

The sole dissenter on the court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, clearly disagreed. In her dissent, the Justice wrote that court had misread Congress’s intent in adding the pre-emption clause to the law. All Congress intended when it wrote the law was to prevent individual states from imposing their own premarket approval process on new medical devices, Justice Ginsberg argued.

Several lawmakers quickly voiced their disapproval of the Supreme Court’s decision and promised quick action to reverse it. “The Supreme Court’s decision strips consumers of the rights they’ve had for decades,” Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif) told The New York Times. “This isn’t what Congress intended, and we’ll pass legislation as quickly as possible to fix this nonsensical situation.”

It’s not clear how many current state medical device lawsuits might be barred as a result of this ruling, but it does not ban all of them. According to The New York Times, most medical devices now available reached the market through a different process, under which the FDA. found them to be “substantially equivalent” to those marketed before the 1976 law took effect. The Supreme Court ruled in 1996 that this approval process does not pre-empt state damage suits against manufacturers. The decision also does not ban state lawsuits against medical devices that are not manufactured according to FDA specifications, and lawsuits can still be brought under state laws that mirror federal laws.

According to The New York Times, the Supreme Court’s decision was one sought by the Bush Administration, which since 2004 has been trying to reverse longstanding federal policy that “premarket approval” of a new medical device by the FDA overrides most claims for damages under state law.  The Bush Administration is still not finished with the pre-emption issue. According to The New York Times, next Monday, the Supreme Court will hear another FDA. pre-emption case, Warner-Lambert Co. v. Kent. The issue in that case is whether a state lawsuit can be based on the claim that a drug maker committed fraud by misrepresenting or withholding information from the FDA during the approval process. The Bush Administration has taken the side of drug makers in that case. The Administration is also arguing in Wyeth vs. Levine – a case the Supreme Court is taking up next term – that, in the case of FDA approved drugs, a shield exists against state product liability lawsuits even though the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938 does not contain a pre-emption clause.

« »

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.




Defective Johnson & Johnson Depuy ASR Hip Implants

The Johnson & Johnson Depuy ASR Hip Implant is suppose to last 15 years, but can fail in only a few years after surgery. Victims with faulty hip implants endure excruciating pain, pain in the groin, death of tissue in the hip joint and loss of surrounding bone. GET ALL THE FACTS NOW! CLICK HERE!

CAT Scans Radiation Exposure

If you had a CT or CAT scan and now have a band of missing hair, skin reddening or any other problems possibly related to a radiation overdose, you may have been exposed to much radiation due to incorrect settings on these machines. CONTACT US TODAY!

Water Contamination From Fracking

Hydraulic Fracturing of Fracking a way to extract natural gas from shale is contaminating water supplies across the country. Get the facts to keep your drinking water safe for your family.

Overexposure to PCBs

Many people unknowingly have been exposed to high levels of PCBs. Recently 3 schools in NY City were found to have dangerous levels of PCBs throughout. Many workers for Monsanto, General Electric, and Westinghouse were exposed to high levels of PCBs. PCBs are a dangerous toxic substance that doesn't break down easily and can cause chloracne, bleeding and neurological disorders, liver damage, spontaneous abortions, malformed babies, cancer, and death. GET THE FACTS!
Overexposure to

Great Photography

Tallis Photo, the number one photographer for great corporate, wedding, and special occasion photos. CONTACT US TODAY!

Poligrip Lawsuit

Super Poligrip or Fixodent May Cause Nerve Damage. 800-LAW-INFO

Personal Injury Lawyer Nassau County

If you or someone you love was injured CONTACT US TODAY!

Nursing Home Blog

When a loved one is abused at a nursing home, it is time to take action. STOP nursing home abuse!

Car Accident Lawyer Nassau County

If you or someone you love was injured in an auto accident CONTACT US TODAY!

Suffolk County Auto Accident Lawyer

If you or someone you love was injured in an auto accident in Suffolk County, NY CONTACT US TODAY!

Don't Be Denied Veterans Benefits

If you or someone you love was denied veterans benefits CONTACT US TODAY!

Oil Rig Spills Lawyer

Oil Rig Spills harm the environment and cause heavy losses to coastal game and fishing industries, as well as a loss of waterway usage, resulting in a loss of income to individuals and businesses, and a loss of beach front usage. Don't let a spill cause you harm, CONTACT US TODAY!

Whistle Blower

Stand up and say what you think is right. See something, say something.