Felix v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “the drug manufacturer could not be penalized for the failure of the doctor to impart knowledge concerning the dangers of the drug of which the doctor had been warned and was aware”
• determining that while drug companies have the duty to warn of a drug’s dangerous side effects, that duty to warn is directed to physicians rather than patients under the “learned intermediary” doctrine
• holding no proximate cause when intermediary understood warnings and knew of warned danger
• addressing adequacy of the warning language and whether the allegedly inadequate warning was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury
• addressing adequacy of the warning language and whether the allegedly inadequate warning was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury
• affirming the appellate affirmation of the trial court’s entry of summary judgment for defendants

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).