Skip to main content
Second Circuit· 10/5/2006

Desiano v. Warner-Lambert & Co.

Citations

  • 467 F.3d 85
  • 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 25108
  • 2006 WL 2846454

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • recognizing that “State-based tort liability falls squarely within [a state’s] prerogative to regulate matters of health and safety, which is a sphere in which the presumption against preemption applies, indeed, stands at its strongest” (quotation and modification omitted)
  • recognizing a fraud-based exception to Michigan law immunizing pharmaceutical companies from products liability claims
  • allowing Michigan fraud claims to proceed when premised on “allegations of wrongdoing apart from the defendant’s purported failure to comply with FDA disclosure requirements”
  • applying Buckman and concluding that plaintiffs’ claims were not preempted because they were 22 “asserting claims that sound in traditional state tort law”
  • allowing state law action requiring plaintiff to plead fraud-on-the-FDA merely as a means of overcoming drug manufacturer’s presumption of immunity
  • noting the standard for a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss “is not akin to a ‘probability requirement,’ but [rather] asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.” (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Calabresi, Feinberg, Parker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

77 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Desiano v. Warner-Lambert & Co.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.