Frey v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting argument that without discovery, plaintiff could not specify the specific manufacturing defect in the drug
• dismissing design defect claim brought under OPLA because the plaintiffs “simply provided a formulaic recitation of the elements of a claim under the statute”
• dismissing design defect claim brought under OPLA because the plaintiffs “simply provided a formulaic recitation of the elements of a claim under the statute”
• dismissing plaintiff’s claim for relief under supplier liability because the drug’s manufacturer fell outside the statutory definition of “supplier”
• dismissing § 2307.78 claim where the plaintiffs “unequivocally” alleged in the complaint that the defendant was the manufacturer of the drug at issue
• “Plaintiffs’ design defect claim must ... be dismissed because plaintiffs have once again simply provided a formulaic recitation of the elements of a claim under the [relevant state products liability] statute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).